Born suckers
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
In article <6ZzJh.4002$8o1.1007@trndny01>,
Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 05:55:15 +0000, Some O wrote:
>
> > In article <IcdJh.40873$6P2.17747@newsfe16.phx>,
> > "JoeBillyBob" <JoeBillyBob@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> but I sure do miss that LHS...
> >
> > I still have my '95 Chrysler LH, which is my only car. Runs and looks like
> > new.
>
> Mine had afew bumps and groans; one dent in the trunk, a leaky trans
> cooler line and leaky valve cover gaskets. Other than that, that car was
> COOL! And when I first got it, fuel economy was as good as my Scion! It
> started slipping the second year...I was only getting 23 MPG overall!
I just did a 1,000 km highway drive and my LH still gets
8.0 L/100 (US 29 mpg)at 65mph as it always has. It only has about 90K
miles on it.
I've treated the transmission well and it shifts as new.
The 3.3L engine will probably continue as new forever. I've never had an
engine that continues as new for so long.
Neither the engine or engine have had any unusual maintenance problems.
Even though I drive on winter roads to the ski hills the body is still
excellent.
Thank goodness it is standing up so well, because what is available in
the car market doesn't impress me. I've set a 25% fuel mileage
improvement as my objective. Some new models are interesting, but I'll
give them two years to mature.
I'm now trading maintenance for depreciation and don't know what I'll do
with all the money I'm saving.
Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 05:55:15 +0000, Some O wrote:
>
> > In article <IcdJh.40873$6P2.17747@newsfe16.phx>,
> > "JoeBillyBob" <JoeBillyBob@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> but I sure do miss that LHS...
> >
> > I still have my '95 Chrysler LH, which is my only car. Runs and looks like
> > new.
>
> Mine had afew bumps and groans; one dent in the trunk, a leaky trans
> cooler line and leaky valve cover gaskets. Other than that, that car was
> COOL! And when I first got it, fuel economy was as good as my Scion! It
> started slipping the second year...I was only getting 23 MPG overall!
I just did a 1,000 km highway drive and my LH still gets
8.0 L/100 (US 29 mpg)at 65mph as it always has. It only has about 90K
miles on it.
I've treated the transmission well and it shifts as new.
The 3.3L engine will probably continue as new forever. I've never had an
engine that continues as new for so long.
Neither the engine or engine have had any unusual maintenance problems.
Even though I drive on winter roads to the ski hills the body is still
excellent.
Thank goodness it is standing up so well, because what is available in
the car market doesn't impress me. I've set a 25% fuel mileage
improvement as my objective. Some new models are interesting, but I'll
give them two years to mature.
I'm now trading maintenance for depreciation and don't know what I'll do
with all the money I'm saving.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
In article <u%zJh.4004$8o1.3134@trndny01>,
Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
> I need a wagon or a van. I have a really nice Mazda 626 Winter beater, but
> I would like a Subaru AWD wagon, or a Toyota Corolla All-Trac, but a
> decent Sable or Taurus would make the list, too...
>
> My preferences are: Toyota, then Subaru, then Ford. Actually, Ford kinda
> ranks higher than Subaru, but I like AWD without having to drive an SUV...
I also have my eyes set on a SW.
As for AWD I rented a Fusion AWD V6 for 24 hrs, doing a fast highway
drive.
It's highway handling was not as good I'm used to with FWD as it
wandered on curves and required two hands to keep it on track.
FWD my vehicles hold the track much better.
Otherwise the Fusion impressed me and although I go to ski hills I have
no need for more than FWD.
As for Subaru their fuel mileage is significantly less than other
similar sized vehicles. I would have about a 20% increase in fuel
mileage if I went to an Outback or more for a Forester.
Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
> I need a wagon or a van. I have a really nice Mazda 626 Winter beater, but
> I would like a Subaru AWD wagon, or a Toyota Corolla All-Trac, but a
> decent Sable or Taurus would make the list, too...
>
> My preferences are: Toyota, then Subaru, then Ford. Actually, Ford kinda
> ranks higher than Subaru, but I like AWD without having to drive an SUV...
I also have my eyes set on a SW.
As for AWD I rented a Fusion AWD V6 for 24 hrs, doing a fast highway
drive.
It's highway handling was not as good I'm used to with FWD as it
wandered on curves and required two hands to keep it on track.
FWD my vehicles hold the track much better.
Otherwise the Fusion impressed me and although I go to ski hills I have
no need for more than FWD.
As for Subaru their fuel mileage is significantly less than other
similar sized vehicles. I would have about a 20% increase in fuel
mileage if I went to an Outback or more for a Forester.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
In article <Y2AJh.4006$8o1.3348@trndny01>,
Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
> My Supra is a powerful car, but think how much more powerful it would be
> without all the weight the bells and whistles added to it!
Todays cars are much heavier than in the past.
Things like increased body stiffness, 6 spd transmissions, huge tires
and multi valve engines add a lot of weight.
Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
> My Supra is a powerful car, but think how much more powerful it would be
> without all the weight the bells and whistles added to it!
Todays cars are much heavier than in the past.
Things like increased body stiffness, 6 spd transmissions, huge tires
and multi valve engines add a lot of weight.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote:
> They were decent cars if you maintained them.
> I need a wagon or a van. I have a really nice Mazda 626 Winter beater, but
> I would like a Subaru AWD wagon, or a Toyota Corolla All-Trac, but a
> decent Sable or Taurus would make the list, too...
>
> My preferences are: Toyota, then Subaru, then Ford. Actually, Ford kinda
> ranks higher than Subaru, but I like AWD without having to drive an SUV...
Sounds like we think a lot alike. No SUV's here either, I'll take a
wagon or a van if I actually need to move something big, but I would
like AWD on a car, especially if I move to snow country.
The Taurus also had/has a great crash rating, one that was tested when a
friend's Taurus got T-boned by a truck at an intersection with his
elderly grandfather on the impact side.
There were some injuries, nothing too serious, but it probably would
have been a fatality if he had been the passenger in my car in that
situation.
Pat
> They were decent cars if you maintained them.
> I need a wagon or a van. I have a really nice Mazda 626 Winter beater, but
> I would like a Subaru AWD wagon, or a Toyota Corolla All-Trac, but a
> decent Sable or Taurus would make the list, too...
>
> My preferences are: Toyota, then Subaru, then Ford. Actually, Ford kinda
> ranks higher than Subaru, but I like AWD without having to drive an SUV...
Sounds like we think a lot alike. No SUV's here either, I'll take a
wagon or a van if I actually need to move something big, but I would
like AWD on a car, especially if I move to snow country.
The Taurus also had/has a great crash rating, one that was tested when a
friend's Taurus got T-boned by a truck at an intersection with his
elderly grandfather on the impact side.
There were some injuries, nothing too serious, but it probably would
have been a fatality if he had been the passenger in my car in that
situation.
Pat
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:24:50 +0000, Some O wrote:
> In article <6ZzJh.4002$8o1.1007@trndny01>,
> Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 05:55:15 +0000, Some O wrote:
>>
>> > In article <IcdJh.40873$6P2.17747@newsfe16.phx>,
>> > "JoeBillyBob" <JoeBillyBob@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> but I sure do miss that LHS...
>> >
>> > I still have my '95 Chrysler LH, which is my only car. Runs and looks
>> > like new.
>>
>> Mine had afew bumps and groans; one dent in the trunk, a leaky trans
>> cooler line and leaky valve cover gaskets. Other than that, that car was
>> COOL! And when I first got it, fuel economy was as good as my Scion! It
>> started slipping the second year...I was only getting 23 MPG overall!
> I just did a 1,000 km highway drive and my LH still gets 8.0 L/100 (US 29
> mpg)at 65mph as it always has. It only has about 90K miles on it.
> I've treated the transmission well and it shifts as new. The 3.3L engine
> will probably continue as new forever. I've never had an engine that
> continues as new for so long. Neither the engine or engine have had any
> unusual maintenance problems.
>
> Even though I drive on winter roads to the ski hills the body is still
> excellent.
>
> Thank goodness it is standing up so well, because what is available in the
> car market doesn't impress me. I've set a 25% fuel mileage improvement as
> my objective. Some new models are interesting, but I'll give them two
> years to mature.
> I'm now trading maintenance for depreciation and don't know what I'll do
> with all the money I'm saving.
Hmmm...3.3L? Mine had a 3.5. Made in Canada...
I was getting about 29MPG when I got it, but after a year and a half it
was slipping to 22-23. Never did figure out why.
I also had mine sprayed with hydraulic oil before it's first full New
England winter. It was from Florida. Don't ask me how a Canadian built car
wound up so far south!!
> In article <6ZzJh.4002$8o1.1007@trndny01>,
> Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 05:55:15 +0000, Some O wrote:
>>
>> > In article <IcdJh.40873$6P2.17747@newsfe16.phx>,
>> > "JoeBillyBob" <JoeBillyBob@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> but I sure do miss that LHS...
>> >
>> > I still have my '95 Chrysler LH, which is my only car. Runs and looks
>> > like new.
>>
>> Mine had afew bumps and groans; one dent in the trunk, a leaky trans
>> cooler line and leaky valve cover gaskets. Other than that, that car was
>> COOL! And when I first got it, fuel economy was as good as my Scion! It
>> started slipping the second year...I was only getting 23 MPG overall!
> I just did a 1,000 km highway drive and my LH still gets 8.0 L/100 (US 29
> mpg)at 65mph as it always has. It only has about 90K miles on it.
> I've treated the transmission well and it shifts as new. The 3.3L engine
> will probably continue as new forever. I've never had an engine that
> continues as new for so long. Neither the engine or engine have had any
> unusual maintenance problems.
>
> Even though I drive on winter roads to the ski hills the body is still
> excellent.
>
> Thank goodness it is standing up so well, because what is available in the
> car market doesn't impress me. I've set a 25% fuel mileage improvement as
> my objective. Some new models are interesting, but I'll give them two
> years to mature.
> I'm now trading maintenance for depreciation and don't know what I'll do
> with all the money I'm saving.
Hmmm...3.3L? Mine had a 3.5. Made in Canada...
I was getting about 29MPG when I got it, but after a year and a half it
was slipping to 22-23. Never did figure out why.
I also had mine sprayed with hydraulic oil before it's first full New
England winter. It was from Florida. Don't ask me how a Canadian built car
wound up so far south!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:56:47 -0600, pws wrote:
> Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote:
>
>> They were decent cars if you maintained them. I need a wagon or a van. I
>> have a really nice Mazda 626 Winter beater, but I would like a Subaru
>> AWD wagon, or a Toyota Corolla All-Trac, but a decent Sable or Taurus
>> would make the list, too...
>>
>> My preferences are: Toyota, then Subaru, then Ford. Actually, Ford kinda
>> ranks higher than Subaru, but I like AWD without having to drive an
>> SUV...
>
>
> Sounds like we think a lot alike. No SUV's here either, I'll take a wagon
> or a van if I actually need to move something big, but I would like AWD on
> a car, especially if I move to snow country.
>
> The Taurus also had/has a great crash rating, one that was tested when a
> friend's Taurus got T-boned by a truck at an intersection with his elderly
> grandfather on the impact side.
>
> There were some injuries, nothing too serious, but it probably would have
> been a fatality if he had been the passenger in my car in that situation.
>
> Pat
I used to sell used cars, and I had a loyal customer that used to buy all
my beaters. He picked up a '94 LHS for $600, stored it for a year, and
then GAVE it to me. Didn't have a use for it!
He also gave me a Grand Voyager AWD van. It was rough, but had few real
problems and had no heat. The engine sounded like it was going to explode
any second, but ran flawlessly! (Broken rocker tower, common on the 3.3L)
I finally killed it when I tried removing the water pump and broke a bunch
of different bolts off. I would have just yanked the engine and put in
another (I found an 80,000 mile motor for $200!) but the rack and pinion
was also on the way out, so I gave it to a guy down the street that has 4
of them...
> Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote:
>
>> They were decent cars if you maintained them. I need a wagon or a van. I
>> have a really nice Mazda 626 Winter beater, but I would like a Subaru
>> AWD wagon, or a Toyota Corolla All-Trac, but a decent Sable or Taurus
>> would make the list, too...
>>
>> My preferences are: Toyota, then Subaru, then Ford. Actually, Ford kinda
>> ranks higher than Subaru, but I like AWD without having to drive an
>> SUV...
>
>
> Sounds like we think a lot alike. No SUV's here either, I'll take a wagon
> or a van if I actually need to move something big, but I would like AWD on
> a car, especially if I move to snow country.
>
> The Taurus also had/has a great crash rating, one that was tested when a
> friend's Taurus got T-boned by a truck at an intersection with his elderly
> grandfather on the impact side.
>
> There were some injuries, nothing too serious, but it probably would have
> been a fatality if he had been the passenger in my car in that situation.
>
> Pat
I used to sell used cars, and I had a loyal customer that used to buy all
my beaters. He picked up a '94 LHS for $600, stored it for a year, and
then GAVE it to me. Didn't have a use for it!
He also gave me a Grand Voyager AWD van. It was rough, but had few real
problems and had no heat. The engine sounded like it was going to explode
any second, but ran flawlessly! (Broken rocker tower, common on the 3.3L)
I finally killed it when I tried removing the water pump and broke a bunch
of different bolts off. I would have just yanked the engine and put in
another (I found an 80,000 mile motor for $200!) but the rack and pinion
was also on the way out, so I gave it to a guy down the street that has 4
of them...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:35:15 +0000, Some O wrote:
> In article <Y2AJh.4006$8o1.3348@trndny01>,
> Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
>
>> My Supra is a powerful car, but think how much more powerful it would be
>> without all the weight the bells and whistles added to it!
> Todays cars are much heavier than in the past. Things like increased body
> stiffness, 6 spd transmissions, huge tires and multi valve engines add a
> lot of weight.
The Supra is an '88, but has the Sport Roof! Weighs in at an impressive
4400 lbs!!! No pushing this thing if it breaks down!
> In article <Y2AJh.4006$8o1.3348@trndny01>,
> Hachiroku ÉnÉ`ÉçÉN <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
>
>> My Supra is a powerful car, but think how much more powerful it would be
>> without all the weight the bells and whistles added to it!
> Todays cars are much heavier than in the past. Things like increased body
> stiffness, 6 spd transmissions, huge tires and multi valve engines add a
> lot of weight.
The Supra is an '88, but has the Sport Roof! Weighs in at an impressive
4400 lbs!!! No pushing this thing if it breaks down!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
Wrongggggg. . Check the frame (if it has one) for the thickness of the steel. How much plastique did you see in older cars?
Christ they even had metal dashboards. And let's talk about new vehicle's bumpers.... if they have one. New cars are much
lighter than those from the 60's, 70's or even 80's.
"Some O" <SO@nospam.net> wrote in message news:SO-06A18C.10351513032007@news.telus.net...
: In article <Y2AJh.4006$8o1.3348@trndny01>,
: Hachiroku �n�`�ç�N <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
:
: > My Supra is a powerful car, but think how much more powerful it would be
: > without all the weight the bells and whistles added to it!
: Todays cars are much heavier than in the past.
: Things like increased body stiffness, 6 spd transmissions, huge tires
: and multi valve engines add a lot of weight.
Christ they even had metal dashboards. And let's talk about new vehicle's bumpers.... if they have one. New cars are much
lighter than those from the 60's, 70's or even 80's.
"Some O" <SO@nospam.net> wrote in message news:SO-06A18C.10351513032007@news.telus.net...
: In article <Y2AJh.4006$8o1.3348@trndny01>,
: Hachiroku �n�`�ç�N <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
:
: > My Supra is a powerful car, but think how much more powerful it would be
: > without all the weight the bells and whistles added to it!
: Todays cars are much heavier than in the past.
: Things like increased body stiffness, 6 spd transmissions, huge tires
: and multi valve engines add a lot of weight.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:25:36 -0700, Fuller Rath wrote:
> Wrongggggg. . Check the frame (if it has one) for the thickness of the
> steel. How much plastique did you see in older cars? Christ they even had
> metal dashboards. And let's talk about new vehicle's bumpers.... if they
> have one. New cars are much lighter than those from the 60's, 70's or
> even 80's.
That is moslty mandated by Cafe standards rather than the market. But,
losing weight means better economy...
>
>
> "Some O" <SO@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:SO-06A18C.10351513032007@news.telus.net...
> : In article <Y2AJh.4006$8o1.3348@trndny01>,
> : Hachiroku �n�`�ç�N <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
> :
> : > My Supra is a powerful car, but think how much more powerful it would
> : > be without all the weight the bells and whistles added to it!
> : Todays cars are much heavier than in the past. Things like increased
> : body stiffness, 6 spd transmissions, huge tires and multi valve engines
> : add a lot of weight.
> Wrongggggg. . Check the frame (if it has one) for the thickness of the
> steel. How much plastique did you see in older cars? Christ they even had
> metal dashboards. And let's talk about new vehicle's bumpers.... if they
> have one. New cars are much lighter than those from the 60's, 70's or
> even 80's.
That is moslty mandated by Cafe standards rather than the market. But,
losing weight means better economy...
>
>
> "Some O" <SO@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:SO-06A18C.10351513032007@news.telus.net...
> : In article <Y2AJh.4006$8o1.3348@trndny01>,
> : Hachiroku �n�`�ç�N <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote:
> :
> : > My Supra is a powerful car, but think how much more powerful it would
> : > be without all the weight the bells and whistles added to it!
> : Todays cars are much heavier than in the past. Things like increased
> : body stiffness, 6 spd transmissions, huge tires and multi valve engines
> : add a lot of weight.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
Oddly enough, Ford and GM both make AWESOME rear wheel drive V8 cars
for Australia, and they both make highly regarded subcompact cars for
Europe.
I would crap my pants with glee if we could get a Holden Commodore
(GM) or a Ford Falcon over here in America. Hell, I'd even buy a euro-
spec Focus. Unfortunately, for some reason, Ford and GM won't sell
their best cars here and we have to put up with crap like the Mondeo
and the Equinox. Blech.
for Australia, and they both make highly regarded subcompact cars for
Europe.
I would crap my pants with glee if we could get a Holden Commodore
(GM) or a Ford Falcon over here in America. Hell, I'd even buy a euro-
spec Focus. Unfortunately, for some reason, Ford and GM won't sell
their best cars here and we have to put up with crap like the Mondeo
and the Equinox. Blech.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Born suckers
"Will" <baslock@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1173876408.665784.35300@o5g2000hsb.googlegrou ps.com...
| Oddly enough, Ford and GM both make AWESOME rear wheel drive V8 cars
| for Australia, and they both make highly regarded subcompact cars for
| Europe.
|
| I would crap my pants with glee if we could get a Holden Commodore
| (GM) or a Ford Falcon over here in America. Hell, I'd even buy a euro-
| spec Focus. Unfortunately, for some reason, Ford and GM won't sell
| their best cars here and we have to put up with crap like the Mondeo
| and the Equinox. Blech.
|
It's getting closer than you think... for a holden at least.
http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...eID=28748&vf=1
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
honda video
Honda Videos
0
Dec 19, 2007 02:27 PM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
