The Drive-a-Toyota Act

Page 10 of 15  
On Jul 29, 6:01 pm, snipped-for-privacy@12.usenet.us.com wrote:


ok, sounds reasonable

well if kragen is the "advance" brand... a two year battery has lasted 5 years.. so.. guess i'll stay tied to the product.

honestly, the year is irrelevant. I didn't particularly care for the "decor" of the 79 celica when i first acquired the thing, but now it doesn't bother me.. It's merely a way to get from tab A to slot B.

well, i'm not claiming any astronomical mpg.. 28-30 is what i get on I-95 over a 400 mile stretch of highway at 75 mph.. granted, it gets less when i have to get off for food or "rest" stops.. The car has a 2-bbl carburetor, manual steering, no a/c. Five speed manual. The trans is from an '83 celica which has a much higher overdrive than the original transmission. The car could not originally boast 28-30 mpg.
As for getting out of its own way.. it will do that at low speeds as well as speeds that are fast enough to be unsafe in any car when driven by the incorrect driver. You can't carry 1000 pounds in the rear of it, but you can carry a good 500 without too much reduction in gas mileage or uphill ability. As I remember reading, the ww2 jeeps for the gummint needed to carry two dudes and 500 lbs of gear..
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nza wrote:

But that is not true of all warranties. When you have your car fixed, often the warranty on the parts says, "... as long as you own your car." Warranty doesn't transfer to new owners.
Hyundai dealers in Northeast PA and possibly other places are doubling the manufacturer's 10 yr/100,000 mi warranty. But the doubled warranty (actually an insurance policy that the dealer buys) only covers the original owner. Likewise, Chrysler has a lifetime powertrain warranty (after the 5/60 warranty expires) This warranty only covers the original owner.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nza wrote:

One of my first cars was a 1979 GT. Is yours the Hatchback or Coupe? (mine was the Coupe)
Really nice, fun to drive, & plenty of pep for a 4-cylinder of that time.
God I miss that car...
--
Don't drink water, fish have sex in it!

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This one is a GT Hatchback. It is very predictable on the road and it may not walk off from everything, it will walk off from a lot of things on the highway.. The car has 245,739 miles on it right now.. i got it when the odometer read 00503.. (doesn't have hundred-thousands place). The tranny has about 260,000 on it.. and the motor has 45,000 since rebuild. Like someone else pointed out, it's not modern inside.. oh well.. honestly, when people give me crap about my car, it says a lot about them.. my car is transportation, not my wee-wee. usually it's someone who probably has never held any kind of tool in his or her hand (no pun intended!) at any time and never will either. Anyone who has ever owned a 20R or 22R -engined vehicle gives the appropriate nod when they note the absence of blue smoke coming from the tailpipe of a vehicle that "should have been crushed years ago"..
Don't get me wrong... I'd allow someone to *give* me a newish car or i'd purchase a broken one for next to nothing (like our 1999 ram 1500 van for $1000 + $500 to buy a new spindle for me to install), but i'm not going to contribute (for as long as i am able to not contribute) to the silly idea that everyone needs to be driving a new car and that what i'm driving is unsafe merely due to its age. I have seen lots of younger cars that were totally unsafe.. For instance, the aforementioned van.. when i "test drove" it, i drove about 50 feet before i parked the thing.. the outer wheel bearing on the driver's side was completely destroyed and the inner race was riding halfway down on the spindle.
The only time my car becomes a rolling death trap is when i drive at unsafe speeds... but then any car could be considered such.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nza wrote:

If it wasn't for an unfortunate encouter with a '76 MonteCarlo, It might even be on the rod...
Sigh... I miss that car. Simple, elegant, handling was very precise and it had a nervous engine, even for a car from that era. Those things were nicely built, and way better than newer junk :)
If I could find one in a not-so-bad shape (I live in Canada), It might be a really nice project to rebuild one...
--
Don't drink water, fish have sex in it!

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are the illogical reader that's blind to the big picture. The Prius costs thousands of dollars more comparable non-hybrid autos its size. If Congress forces such high fuel mileage ratings on the entire fleet of new cars (large and small), the hybrid version of the Chevy Silverado will cost thousands of dollars more the non-hybrid Chevy Silverado.
The bottom line is this. Almost everyone is for lower cost energy supplies with a smaller CO2 footprint. But, we will never get something from nothing no matter how hard we wish upon a star with federal government decrees. The Europeans and especially the Japanese have been producing high fuel mileage cars for many years thanks to sky high fuel taxes. In the short term, the most efficient means of achieving a higher fuel mileage is to pass a large fuel tax and then let the free market decide the rest. In the long term, the most efficient means of lowering energy cost and CO2 footprint is basic research on battery technology, solar, etc. paid for my the United States federal government.
Blind, politically motivated, federal decrees requiring higher fuel mileage will only decimate the American auto industry.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Jul 30, 5:22 pm, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

actually it has been proven over and over that CO2 is not a big deal. It is the sun that is the big deal and the thing that is the most uncontrollable about "global warming"... elevated levels of CO2 have been proven to follow higher temperatures instead of dictating higher temperatures. C02 is less than *ONE PERCENT* of the total atmosphere of the earth. Actually, God should go ahead and turn this place into a fricking fireball with all the treachery that is occurring all the time...
I remember learning when i was about 9 years old from Mr. Wizard that if you have a glass of ice water ... when the ice melts, the water is not going to run out onto the table. it's just a fact of *PHYSICS*. Try it sometime if you don't believe me. The ice caps melting doesn't cause a rise in sea level. it's actually changes in the land that cause the "rise" in sea level.
And as for "decimating the auto industry". The auto industry is in cohoots with the government as well as the companies that refine oil into gasoline.
Someone said earlier in this thread, "a car is not a train..."..
Well try running a diesel train with a tranny connected to the wheels. See what happens.. The efficiency of the train goes to shit when directly geared to the wheels. They have tried it. And perhaps a tiny fraction of pusher engines that are easier to keep running than replace are still running direct drive. However. Diesel-electric is the answer to this "gas mileage crisis" for right now, anyway.. but as i've said earlier.. the companies and the gov't will not let us have it because it means less dependence on not only foreign oil but domestic production as well. Who's going to make money if we're all getting 80mpg ? Well.. they'll increase it to $7,00 a gallon and cut production even more than they already have.
It's so sad to see everyone jumping on the bandwagon about "saving the earth" when the very people dictating this "saving of the earth" are still consuming at the same rate or even more than they were before (Al MoFuking Gore)... anyone who preaches this shit to me i immediately write off as a liberal sheep who really couldn't think his or her way out of a wet paper bag. They really need a bullet through the brain, post haste. There's a term for people like that... "USEFUL IDIOT"
it is easy to understand why Atlas Shrugged
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nza wrote:

By that reasoning, why don't close the garage door with the car engine running and read a book. Don't worry about the CO. It will be less than 1% of the air when you are stone cold dead from CO poisoning.
And your brain power wouldn't go down one bit.

Why don't you do this? Get a big bowl. And put a small bowl inside the big bowl upside down. Then put some ice on the top of the small bowl. Does the water rise on the big bowl? Of course it does. Same thing with the ice caps, because the ice is not floating in the water. The ice is on land. For the ice not to effect the sea level, it has to be floating in the ocean. It isn't.

Actually, the problem is the huge amount of torque required to get the wheels turning.

Just because trains work better with electric motors doesn't mean cars will. Cars have the advantage that they are much smaller, requiring far less torque to get going. Transmissions are able to handle this very well.

At least liberals are not stupid enough to think that when ice that is on top of land melts, it doesn't cause the ocean to rise.
"Useless idiot" seems to describe you pretty well.

If brain power or clues were weight, Atlas wouldn't even feel you when you climbed on.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ok thanks, you must be correct, eh?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wrong.
Wrong. Try googling. Read the IPCC report. Read what the National Acaemy of Sciences says, or the Royal Society, or NASA.

Wrong.
Irrelevant.
There's plenty of ice on land -- Greenland, Antarctica.

Diesel is already more expensive than gas, and you want to add electric to that?

Who's going to make money when we run out of oil?

Probably anybody preaching science to you, you write off.

Have a mirror?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
on Wednesday 01 August 2007 10:39 am, someone posing as Lloyd took a rock and etched into the cave:

Diesel is only "more expensive" in some areas because of Supply and Demand. They don't make as much diesel so they can jack the price up, even though it costs far less to produce.
In any case, take a look at diesel from coal.
Though I should learn more, from what I've read, we've got enough to last the next 50 years or more without even bothering to import if we switched some percentage of our cars/trucks to diesel and utilize our coal reserves.
--
www.perfectreign.com

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The Camry is the best selling car in the U.S., right? Yet it costs a little less, as much as, or more than a Prius, depending on the pkg. the Prius comes with, & the model of the Camry. So... IMO, that theory sort of goes down the drain...
Cathy

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually a base Camry costs a lot less than a Prius and is a much roomier car with better performance (and decent fuel economy too). If you are talking strictly economics, a Corolla is a much better buy. If you are trying to impress your neighbors with your "green-ness" then the Prius is the way to go. I don't agree with the Wall Street Journal on this, but I think if you check the demographics of who is buying Priuses (?), you will find that they are overwhelmingly purchased by upper middle class Americans.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The very same smart Americans that trade their new car on another new car in three to four years, with 30K to 45K on the clock, yet pay a premium price that will buy ALL of the fuel for a Corolla for three or four years LOL
mike

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Hunter wrote:

I tend to buy used cars and keep them until they are pretty much worn out, so I don't do either of those things. But in your two scenarios, look what you have at the end of the 3 or 4 years: In one, a brand new car, in the other a 3 or 4 year old minimum capability car with new batteries.
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Lets compare apple to apples. The Camry is a bigger car than the Prius.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 13:00:51 -0600, Fred wrote:

You will be interested in this article from the UK
http://tinyurl.com/2szf56
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Bump
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"George Orwell" ...

Why?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

He is a Troll.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.