get some good snow tires, you wont have a problem with the sonata unless its
passed the bumper deep..
<pdp11@techie.com> wrote in message
news:1137801839.780674.133060@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>> Keep in mind that traction control only helps maximize the traction
>> available to the FWD car, it isn't magic and certainly can't match the
>> traction that the additional two wheels will provide in an AWD vehicle.
>
> Yes, I do understand that, I'm just trying to determine whether the
> Sonata with traction control would be 'good enough' for our purposes.
> The Eagle was an extra vehicle, not used for everyday driving, so gas
> mileage was not all that much of a concern with it. However if we
> purchase a new (or late model used) vehicle, we'll be selling or
> trading the wife's 2000 Sonata and the new car will be a daily driver,
> so gas consumption is something we have to be a little mindful of. I
> checked some owner reviews of the Subaru Legacy/Outback (another
> obvious choice for 4WD), and people were complaining about the gas
> mileage and performance, just like I've seen with the Tucson! Obviously
> 4-wheel-drive is going to carry a penalty in those departments, but I'm
> surprised that all the modern tech is not delivering much more
> efficiency than our old Eagle did.
>
>> Also, the Eagle had very good ground clearance for a car, almost as
>
> The AMC Eagle was way ahead of its time. We're really going to miss
> ours, even though in recent years it had become a real challenge to
> keep its nightmare emissions system serviced, and the dreaded tinworm
> was really starting to get the best of it.
>
>> I've not driven the Hyundai SUVs, so I can't comment about them, but
>
> The in-laws have a 2004 4WD Santa Fe with the 2.7 V6. They love it, but
> don't drive very much so gas mileage is not a big factor for them.
>
>> I'll bet you a steak dinner that they will go much better in deep snow
>> than will a Sonata with traction control ... unless you put chains on
>
> I have no doubt! Even the Eagle with its fairly primitive 4WD system
> was like a mountain goat in the snow. (And our '86 had an open center
> differential, power went to the wheel that slipped! They just didn't
> slip much. Other years used a viscous coupling.)
>
> Of course it would also be possible to buy a new Sonata and look for
> another inexpensive Eagle or an old Jeep to do winter 4WD duty.
> (Eagles are not very common any more, but they are still out there.
> Actually saw one on the road yesterday. No "for sale" sign, though.)
>
> Decisions, decisions...
>

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On 22 Jan 2006 08:40:51 -0800, pdp11@techie.com wrote:

>gerry wrote:
>> I was in\ Maynard, small 11 development.
>
>I worked in Software Services, primary job was doing custom software
>development for DEC's customers, secondary was going out on pre-sales
>calls with the sales droids. (That was always a picnic!) In those days
>it was IBM that was the "evil empire."
>
>I miss DEC a lot, really a shame what happened to that company;

Well Compaq sure worked over DEC employees, you might be interested in

http://gogood.com/once_dec/index.html

>
>> It amazes me how many of today's security flaws couldn't happen on most of
>> the later 11's. Those 11's had stacks managed by hardware so no chance of
>> a buffer overrun. Add I and D space and you can't execute data anyway!
>
>I remember when I started working with separate I & D space machines,
>the freedom of all that extra address space!! I always dreaded getting
>the TKB message that the task was too large, as setting up overlays was
>always a PITA. Today's software in incredibly bloated, I remember
>fighting for every byte that could be conserved. I've toyed with the
>idea of trying to find an old Micro-11 to play around with, it would be
>fun.

It sort of bugs me I tossed out 3 11/23s and 1 one 11/83 with enough stuff
to put together 2 systems in working order.

re memory - I recall the 11/04 bootstrap that had to work with RX01 and
RX02s with 32 words! (64 bytes). It took 8 authors!

>
>DEC's systems have not died off completely. I have a friend working in
>a shop that still runs VMS (actually OpenVMS) on Alpha hardware. There
>certainly are still PDP-11s out there, quietly doing their jobs. That
>segment of DECs business was sold to Mentec (www.mentec-inc.com) which
>still provides hardware and software support for the PDP-11 line.

I don't recall the company but a German outfit had the right to build
11/83 class systems and used it at least until 1999 so you can be sure
they still are in use. Unfortunately I lost my contact during the Compaq
changeover.

An interesting recent Alpha article

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20060123PR200.html

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On 22 Jan 2006 08:40:51 -0800, pdp11@techie.com wrote:

>gerry wrote:
>> I was in\ Maynard, small 11 development.
>
>I worked in Software Services, primary job was doing custom software
>development for DEC's customers, secondary was going out on pre-sales
>calls with the sales droids. (That was always a picnic!) In those days
>it was IBM that was the "evil empire."
>
>I miss DEC a lot, really a shame what happened to that company;

Well Compaq sure worked over DEC employees, you might be interested in

http://gogood.com/once_dec/index.html

>
>> It amazes me how many of today's security flaws couldn't happen on most of
>> the later 11's. Those 11's had stacks managed by hardware so no chance of
>> a buffer overrun. Add I and D space and you can't execute data anyway!
>
>I remember when I started working with separate I & D space machines,
>the freedom of all that extra address space!! I always dreaded getting
>the TKB message that the task was too large, as setting up overlays was
>always a PITA. Today's software in incredibly bloated, I remember
>fighting for every byte that could be conserved. I've toyed with the
>idea of trying to find an old Micro-11 to play around with, it would be
>fun.

It sort of bugs me I tossed out 3 11/23s and 1 one 11/83 with enough stuff
to put together 2 systems in working order.

re memory - I recall the 11/04 bootstrap that had to work with RX01 and
RX02s with 32 words! (64 bytes). It took 8 authors!

>
>DEC's systems have not died off completely. I have a friend working in
>a shop that still runs VMS (actually OpenVMS) on Alpha hardware. There
>certainly are still PDP-11s out there, quietly doing their jobs. That
>segment of DECs business was sold to Mentec (www.mentec-inc.com) which
>still provides hardware and software support for the PDP-11 line.

I don't recall the company but a German outfit had the right to build
11/83 class systems and used it at least until 1999 so you can be sure
they still are in use. Unfortunately I lost my contact during the Compaq
changeover.

An interesting recent Alpha article

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20060123PR200.html

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On 22 Jan 2006 08:40:51 -0800, pdp11@techie.com wrote:

>gerry wrote:
>> I was in\ Maynard, small 11 development.
>
>I worked in Software Services, primary job was doing custom software
>development for DEC's customers, secondary was going out on pre-sales
>calls with the sales droids. (That was always a picnic!) In those days
>it was IBM that was the "evil empire."
>
>I miss DEC a lot, really a shame what happened to that company;

Well Compaq sure worked over DEC employees, you might be interested in

http://gogood.com/once_dec/index.html

>
>> It amazes me how many of today's security flaws couldn't happen on most of
>> the later 11's. Those 11's had stacks managed by hardware so no chance of
>> a buffer overrun. Add I and D space and you can't execute data anyway!
>
>I remember when I started working with separate I & D space machines,
>the freedom of all that extra address space!! I always dreaded getting
>the TKB message that the task was too large, as setting up overlays was
>always a PITA. Today's software in incredibly bloated, I remember
>fighting for every byte that could be conserved. I've toyed with the
>idea of trying to find an old Micro-11 to play around with, it would be
>fun.

It sort of bugs me I tossed out 3 11/23s and 1 one 11/83 with enough stuff
to put together 2 systems in working order.

re memory - I recall the 11/04 bootstrap that had to work with RX01 and
RX02s with 32 words! (64 bytes). It took 8 authors!

>
>DEC's systems have not died off completely. I have a friend working in
>a shop that still runs VMS (actually OpenVMS) on Alpha hardware. There
>certainly are still PDP-11s out there, quietly doing their jobs. That
>segment of DECs business was sold to Mentec (www.mentec-inc.com) which
>still provides hardware and software support for the PDP-11 line.

I don't recall the company but a German outfit had the right to build
11/83 class systems and used it at least until 1999 so you can be sure
they still are in use. Unfortunately I lost my contact during the Compaq
changeover.

An interesting recent Alpha article

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20060123PR200.html

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots