(Anecdotal) Fit only getting 27 MPG?
07-17-2007 | 11:57 PM
#91
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (Anecdotal) Fit only getting 27 MPG?
Tegger wrote:
> "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
> news:3bmdnehpZ5gS3QHbnZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@sedona.net:
>
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:eJ6dnQh03rvDpgHbnZ2dnUVZ_o3inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:lb6dnUd64f2crgHbnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>>> that's not going to happen. remember 5mph bumpers? the auto
>>>>> industry killed those asap because the fender bender repair
>>>>> business suddenly disappeared overnight! frequent costly repairs
>>>>> for minor damage is "good for america"!
>>>>>
>>>> I think a bigger factor was that the bumpers actually increased the
>>>> mean cost of repair for low speed collisions. The problem was that
>>>> the bumpers were damaged beyond repair at higher speeds, and a whole
>>>> lot of collisions were between 5 and 10 mph. The 5 mph bumpers
>>>> became another fragile, expensive piece to repair.
>>> i don't get it. modern 2.5mph bumpers are /less/ expensive to repair
>>> in a 10mph collision?
>>>
>> Yes - the 5 mph bumpers could run over $1000 on a $3000 car. The ones
>> I saw had multi-stage hydraulics as opposed to the simple hydraulic
>> mounts of today's bumpers.
>
>
>
> Canada is the only country in the world that has 5mph bumpers (and one
> of only TWO countries in the world with any sort of bumper standards at
> all).
>
> There are no hydraulic rams anymore, just styrofoam atop a rigidly-
> mounted steel beam. The rams were too heavy and were a casualty of CAFE-
> derived weight-saving measures.
>
>
>> The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>> stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>> over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>
>
>
> The whole point of the energy absorbing bumpers was to protect the car's
> "safety systems" from damage in a collision at that speed. "Safety
> systems" primarily means the headlights.
>
> The automakers were able to have the US standard reduced in the mid-'80s
> because they were able to show that there wasn't much practical
> difference in damage between 2.5mph and 5mph bumpers.
>
> 2.5mph bumpers were supposed to be able to be less costly to produce and
> carry less of a weight penalty.
which is a crock.
>
> Also, rigid bumpers tend to carry more of the stress of the collision to
> the body shell, meaning damage is more likely to go deeper than just the
> cosmetic.
also a crock. whatever the propaganda that was used to rationalize this
downgrade, it came down to one simple thing. corporate welfare.
5mph bumpers meant that the usual parking lot dings and bumps weren't
causing damage, thereby causing a sudden and substantial loss in revenue
for repair shops, and most importantly, manufacturers. so it was
reduced, with b.s. reasons cited like you say, but they're untrue.
and "deeper" damage, is by design, not accident. the initial yield
point of a crumple zone is easily designed, as is the point at which it
occurs. frod are ruthless exploiters of this. where's the first point
to buckle behind the bumper at 5mph on frontal impact? the bit /behind/
the radiator perhaps? no. the bit in front of the engine perhaps? no.
the bit behind the engine and suspension, where repair becomes
uneconomic? youbetcha. a necessity of design? no way. profitable?
amazingly so.
> The old non-impact bumpers tended to keep the damage out at
> the cosmetic sheet metal.
indeed. and they reduced write-offs substantially too. not as
profitable to detroit repair as it is to sell a new car.
> "Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
> news:3bmdnehpZ5gS3QHbnZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@sedona.net:
>
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:eJ6dnQh03rvDpgHbnZ2dnUVZ_o3inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:lb6dnUd64f2crgHbnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>>> that's not going to happen. remember 5mph bumpers? the auto
>>>>> industry killed those asap because the fender bender repair
>>>>> business suddenly disappeared overnight! frequent costly repairs
>>>>> for minor damage is "good for america"!
>>>>>
>>>> I think a bigger factor was that the bumpers actually increased the
>>>> mean cost of repair for low speed collisions. The problem was that
>>>> the bumpers were damaged beyond repair at higher speeds, and a whole
>>>> lot of collisions were between 5 and 10 mph. The 5 mph bumpers
>>>> became another fragile, expensive piece to repair.
>>> i don't get it. modern 2.5mph bumpers are /less/ expensive to repair
>>> in a 10mph collision?
>>>
>> Yes - the 5 mph bumpers could run over $1000 on a $3000 car. The ones
>> I saw had multi-stage hydraulics as opposed to the simple hydraulic
>> mounts of today's bumpers.
>
>
>
> Canada is the only country in the world that has 5mph bumpers (and one
> of only TWO countries in the world with any sort of bumper standards at
> all).
>
> There are no hydraulic rams anymore, just styrofoam atop a rigidly-
> mounted steel beam. The rams were too heavy and were a casualty of CAFE-
> derived weight-saving measures.
>
>
>> The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>> stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>> over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>
>
>
> The whole point of the energy absorbing bumpers was to protect the car's
> "safety systems" from damage in a collision at that speed. "Safety
> systems" primarily means the headlights.
>
> The automakers were able to have the US standard reduced in the mid-'80s
> because they were able to show that there wasn't much practical
> difference in damage between 2.5mph and 5mph bumpers.
>
> 2.5mph bumpers were supposed to be able to be less costly to produce and
> carry less of a weight penalty.
which is a crock.
>
> Also, rigid bumpers tend to carry more of the stress of the collision to
> the body shell, meaning damage is more likely to go deeper than just the
> cosmetic.
also a crock. whatever the propaganda that was used to rationalize this
downgrade, it came down to one simple thing. corporate welfare.
5mph bumpers meant that the usual parking lot dings and bumps weren't
causing damage, thereby causing a sudden and substantial loss in revenue
for repair shops, and most importantly, manufacturers. so it was
reduced, with b.s. reasons cited like you say, but they're untrue.
and "deeper" damage, is by design, not accident. the initial yield
point of a crumple zone is easily designed, as is the point at which it
occurs. frod are ruthless exploiters of this. where's the first point
to buckle behind the bumper at 5mph on frontal impact? the bit /behind/
the radiator perhaps? no. the bit in front of the engine perhaps? no.
the bit behind the engine and suspension, where repair becomes
uneconomic? youbetcha. a necessity of design? no way. profitable?
amazingly so.
> The old non-impact bumpers tended to keep the damage out at
> the cosmetic sheet metal.
indeed. and they reduced write-offs substantially too. not as
profitable to detroit repair as it is to sell a new car.
07-18-2007 | 12:03 AM
#92
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '86 Civic Si for Sale (was: 5 MPH Bumpers)
Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>
>
>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Where are you?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>
>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>
>
>
> WHOA! Very Nice!
>
> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>
> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>
> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>
>
A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
even find, much less fix...
I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
Sedan I replaced it with.
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>
>
>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Where are you?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>
>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>
>
>
> WHOA! Very Nice!
>
> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>
> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>
> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>
>
A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
even find, much less fix...
I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
Sedan I replaced it with.
07-18-2007 | 12:03 AM
#93
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '86 Civic Si for Sale (was: 5 MPH Bumpers)
Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>
>
>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Where are you?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>
>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>
>
>
> WHOA! Very Nice!
>
> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>
> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>
> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>
>
A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
even find, much less fix...
I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
Sedan I replaced it with.
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>
>
>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Where are you?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>
>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>
>
>
> WHOA! Very Nice!
>
> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>
> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>
> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>
>
A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
even find, much less fix...
I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
Sedan I replaced it with.
07-18-2007 | 12:03 AM
#94
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '86 Civic Si for Sale (was: 5 MPH Bumpers)
Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>
>
>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Where are you?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>
>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>
>
>
> WHOA! Very Nice!
>
> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>
> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>
> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>
>
A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
even find, much less fix...
I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
Sedan I replaced it with.
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>
>
>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Where are you?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>
>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>
>
>
> WHOA! Very Nice!
>
> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>
> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>
> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>
>
A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
even find, much less fix...
I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
Sedan I replaced it with.
07-18-2007 | 12:11 AM
#95
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '86 Civic Si for Sale
mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>> stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>> over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>> http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
>> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250
>> beaters.
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
> color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
> go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
> seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
> wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
> flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
> the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
> even find, much less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX Sedan
> I replaced it with.
did you ever do the power/weight ratio calculation?
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>> stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>> over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>> http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
>> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250
>> beaters.
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
> color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
> go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
> seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
> wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
> flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
> the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
> even find, much less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX Sedan
> I replaced it with.
did you ever do the power/weight ratio calculation?
07-18-2007 | 12:11 AM
#96
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '86 Civic Si for Sale
mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>> stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>> over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>> http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
>> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250
>> beaters.
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
> color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
> go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
> seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
> wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
> flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
> the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
> even find, much less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX Sedan
> I replaced it with.
did you ever do the power/weight ratio calculation?
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>> stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>> over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>> http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
>> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250
>> beaters.
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
> color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
> go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
> seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
> wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
> flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
> the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
> even find, much less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX Sedan
> I replaced it with.
did you ever do the power/weight ratio calculation?
07-18-2007 | 12:11 AM
#97
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '86 Civic Si for Sale
mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>> stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>> over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>> http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
>> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250
>> beaters.
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
> color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
> go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
> seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
> wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
> flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
> the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
> even find, much less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX Sedan
> I replaced it with.
did you ever do the power/weight ratio calculation?
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>> stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>> over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>> http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested!
>> Right now I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250
>> beaters.
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable
> color - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may
> go that route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't
> seem to appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here
> wants to buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm
> flexible on the price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with
> the car is a driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never
> even find, much less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX Sedan
> I replaced it with.
did you ever do the power/weight ratio calculation?
07-18-2007 | 12:14 AM
#98
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (Anecdotal) Fit only getting 27 MPG? RPM @ 70 MPH
mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:JYidnT1B84vlXAfbnZ2dnUVZ_vzinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>>> mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hZomi.4158$225.3840@trndny03...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was at a gas station/convenience store getting a cuppa and
>>>>>> flirting with
>>>>>> the 20 year olds behind the counter when a Fit came in. At fisrt I
>>>>>> thought
>>>>>> it was an Si and then saw the 4 doors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Nice Car"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Honda lied"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "How so?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The guy had driven from Connecticut to near the Vt border at highway
>>>>>> speeds, a trip of 75 miles, and had to put in 2.76 gallons of gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 75/2.76=27.17 MPG HUH?! I get 21 MPG overall with an older Supra
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> isn't quite running 100% and has a marginal AT besides!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said jokinigly that he should keep his foot out of it! He said
>>>>>> he barely
>>>>>> gets over 30 MPG overall, and since this is his first real trip
>>>>>> with the
>>>>>> car he expected to at least be in the high 30's. It wasn't that
>>>>>> warm and
>>>>>> he didn't have the AC one when he pulled in for gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, with an '87 Corolla Carb'd on a 95 degree day, I got 45 MPG
>>>>>> at 75 MPH
>>>>>> with the AC on full blast, back in the day!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He also said when it's cold he barely makes it to 28 MPG...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, since we are talking anecdotal mileage, I should report that
>>>>> so far I have averaged 35.69 MPH with just over 1065 miles. I have
>>>>> a Fit Sport 5 speed manual transmission. I'm always conscious of
>>>>> driving for economy, and I try to time the stoplight, whenever
>>>>> possible and practical. I am more than satisfield with my mileage,
>>>>> but it would be less if I drove with a heavy foot. Consumer
>>>>> Reports averaged 34 MPH overall with their 5 speed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I drove a Fit, and it seemed like an OK, car, but the Civic LX
>>>> *automatic* parked next to it was rated at 40mpg highway, while the
>>>> 5 speed Fit I drove was rated at 36. I think it's short gearing at
>>>> fault. Ironically, my '95 Civic EX has gearing that is way too tall,
>>>> but at least it gets great mileage...
>>>
>>> you keep posting that opinion, but you won't answer the question.
>>> what rpm's are you pulling at 70mph?
>>
>>
>> Well, I'm not the guy that you posted the question to about the RPMs
>> at 70 MPH, but I purposely ran my Fit up to 70MPH, which is not easy
>> to do on L.A.'s crowded freeways, and the tachometer indicates around
>> 3,400 RPM at 70 MPH. My Fit is a 5 speed manual transmission. Hope
>> this helps.
>>
>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>
>
> I don't know where that intermediate comment came from, but I'm the
> one who suggested short gearing, and I think I'm right. A car geared for
> freeway cruising in overdrive should be running at about 2500-2800 RPM
> at that speed.
"should"??? rpm's depend on the ratio that best balances motor output
with the best point on its economy curve with the wind resistance/weight
for that vehicle. so the number varies from car to car, motor to motor!!!
> This reminds me of something that Volvo pulled with the
> 140 series, way back when: you could get an optional overdrive unit for
> the manual shift cars, but if you got stuck with a basic 4 speed, it
> would be running 3500RPM at *60* MPH. Honda obviously wanted the car to
> be responsive in 5th, even at the expense of fuel economy.
rubbish.
> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:JYidnT1B84vlXAfbnZ2dnUVZ_vzinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>>> mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hZomi.4158$225.3840@trndny03...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was at a gas station/convenience store getting a cuppa and
>>>>>> flirting with
>>>>>> the 20 year olds behind the counter when a Fit came in. At fisrt I
>>>>>> thought
>>>>>> it was an Si and then saw the 4 doors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Nice Car"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Honda lied"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "How so?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The guy had driven from Connecticut to near the Vt border at highway
>>>>>> speeds, a trip of 75 miles, and had to put in 2.76 gallons of gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 75/2.76=27.17 MPG HUH?! I get 21 MPG overall with an older Supra
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> isn't quite running 100% and has a marginal AT besides!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said jokinigly that he should keep his foot out of it! He said
>>>>>> he barely
>>>>>> gets over 30 MPG overall, and since this is his first real trip
>>>>>> with the
>>>>>> car he expected to at least be in the high 30's. It wasn't that
>>>>>> warm and
>>>>>> he didn't have the AC one when he pulled in for gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, with an '87 Corolla Carb'd on a 95 degree day, I got 45 MPG
>>>>>> at 75 MPH
>>>>>> with the AC on full blast, back in the day!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He also said when it's cold he barely makes it to 28 MPG...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, since we are talking anecdotal mileage, I should report that
>>>>> so far I have averaged 35.69 MPH with just over 1065 miles. I have
>>>>> a Fit Sport 5 speed manual transmission. I'm always conscious of
>>>>> driving for economy, and I try to time the stoplight, whenever
>>>>> possible and practical. I am more than satisfield with my mileage,
>>>>> but it would be less if I drove with a heavy foot. Consumer
>>>>> Reports averaged 34 MPH overall with their 5 speed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I drove a Fit, and it seemed like an OK, car, but the Civic LX
>>>> *automatic* parked next to it was rated at 40mpg highway, while the
>>>> 5 speed Fit I drove was rated at 36. I think it's short gearing at
>>>> fault. Ironically, my '95 Civic EX has gearing that is way too tall,
>>>> but at least it gets great mileage...
>>>
>>> you keep posting that opinion, but you won't answer the question.
>>> what rpm's are you pulling at 70mph?
>>
>>
>> Well, I'm not the guy that you posted the question to about the RPMs
>> at 70 MPH, but I purposely ran my Fit up to 70MPH, which is not easy
>> to do on L.A.'s crowded freeways, and the tachometer indicates around
>> 3,400 RPM at 70 MPH. My Fit is a 5 speed manual transmission. Hope
>> this helps.
>>
>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>
>
> I don't know where that intermediate comment came from, but I'm the
> one who suggested short gearing, and I think I'm right. A car geared for
> freeway cruising in overdrive should be running at about 2500-2800 RPM
> at that speed.
"should"??? rpm's depend on the ratio that best balances motor output
with the best point on its economy curve with the wind resistance/weight
for that vehicle. so the number varies from car to car, motor to motor!!!
> This reminds me of something that Volvo pulled with the
> 140 series, way back when: you could get an optional overdrive unit for
> the manual shift cars, but if you got stuck with a basic 4 speed, it
> would be running 3500RPM at *60* MPH. Honda obviously wanted the car to
> be responsive in 5th, even at the expense of fuel economy.
rubbish.
07-18-2007 | 12:14 AM
#99
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (Anecdotal) Fit only getting 27 MPG? RPM @ 70 MPH
mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:JYidnT1B84vlXAfbnZ2dnUVZ_vzinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>>> mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hZomi.4158$225.3840@trndny03...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was at a gas station/convenience store getting a cuppa and
>>>>>> flirting with
>>>>>> the 20 year olds behind the counter when a Fit came in. At fisrt I
>>>>>> thought
>>>>>> it was an Si and then saw the 4 doors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Nice Car"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Honda lied"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "How so?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The guy had driven from Connecticut to near the Vt border at highway
>>>>>> speeds, a trip of 75 miles, and had to put in 2.76 gallons of gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 75/2.76=27.17 MPG HUH?! I get 21 MPG overall with an older Supra
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> isn't quite running 100% and has a marginal AT besides!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said jokinigly that he should keep his foot out of it! He said
>>>>>> he barely
>>>>>> gets over 30 MPG overall, and since this is his first real trip
>>>>>> with the
>>>>>> car he expected to at least be in the high 30's. It wasn't that
>>>>>> warm and
>>>>>> he didn't have the AC one when he pulled in for gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, with an '87 Corolla Carb'd on a 95 degree day, I got 45 MPG
>>>>>> at 75 MPH
>>>>>> with the AC on full blast, back in the day!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He also said when it's cold he barely makes it to 28 MPG...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, since we are talking anecdotal mileage, I should report that
>>>>> so far I have averaged 35.69 MPH with just over 1065 miles. I have
>>>>> a Fit Sport 5 speed manual transmission. I'm always conscious of
>>>>> driving for economy, and I try to time the stoplight, whenever
>>>>> possible and practical. I am more than satisfield with my mileage,
>>>>> but it would be less if I drove with a heavy foot. Consumer
>>>>> Reports averaged 34 MPH overall with their 5 speed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I drove a Fit, and it seemed like an OK, car, but the Civic LX
>>>> *automatic* parked next to it was rated at 40mpg highway, while the
>>>> 5 speed Fit I drove was rated at 36. I think it's short gearing at
>>>> fault. Ironically, my '95 Civic EX has gearing that is way too tall,
>>>> but at least it gets great mileage...
>>>
>>> you keep posting that opinion, but you won't answer the question.
>>> what rpm's are you pulling at 70mph?
>>
>>
>> Well, I'm not the guy that you posted the question to about the RPMs
>> at 70 MPH, but I purposely ran my Fit up to 70MPH, which is not easy
>> to do on L.A.'s crowded freeways, and the tachometer indicates around
>> 3,400 RPM at 70 MPH. My Fit is a 5 speed manual transmission. Hope
>> this helps.
>>
>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>
>
> I don't know where that intermediate comment came from, but I'm the
> one who suggested short gearing, and I think I'm right. A car geared for
> freeway cruising in overdrive should be running at about 2500-2800 RPM
> at that speed.
"should"??? rpm's depend on the ratio that best balances motor output
with the best point on its economy curve with the wind resistance/weight
for that vehicle. so the number varies from car to car, motor to motor!!!
> This reminds me of something that Volvo pulled with the
> 140 series, way back when: you could get an optional overdrive unit for
> the manual shift cars, but if you got stuck with a basic 4 speed, it
> would be running 3500RPM at *60* MPH. Honda obviously wanted the car to
> be responsive in 5th, even at the expense of fuel economy.
rubbish.
> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:JYidnT1B84vlXAfbnZ2dnUVZ_vzinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>>> mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hZomi.4158$225.3840@trndny03...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was at a gas station/convenience store getting a cuppa and
>>>>>> flirting with
>>>>>> the 20 year olds behind the counter when a Fit came in. At fisrt I
>>>>>> thought
>>>>>> it was an Si and then saw the 4 doors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Nice Car"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Honda lied"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "How so?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The guy had driven from Connecticut to near the Vt border at highway
>>>>>> speeds, a trip of 75 miles, and had to put in 2.76 gallons of gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 75/2.76=27.17 MPG HUH?! I get 21 MPG overall with an older Supra
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> isn't quite running 100% and has a marginal AT besides!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said jokinigly that he should keep his foot out of it! He said
>>>>>> he barely
>>>>>> gets over 30 MPG overall, and since this is his first real trip
>>>>>> with the
>>>>>> car he expected to at least be in the high 30's. It wasn't that
>>>>>> warm and
>>>>>> he didn't have the AC one when he pulled in for gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, with an '87 Corolla Carb'd on a 95 degree day, I got 45 MPG
>>>>>> at 75 MPH
>>>>>> with the AC on full blast, back in the day!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He also said when it's cold he barely makes it to 28 MPG...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, since we are talking anecdotal mileage, I should report that
>>>>> so far I have averaged 35.69 MPH with just over 1065 miles. I have
>>>>> a Fit Sport 5 speed manual transmission. I'm always conscious of
>>>>> driving for economy, and I try to time the stoplight, whenever
>>>>> possible and practical. I am more than satisfield with my mileage,
>>>>> but it would be less if I drove with a heavy foot. Consumer
>>>>> Reports averaged 34 MPH overall with their 5 speed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I drove a Fit, and it seemed like an OK, car, but the Civic LX
>>>> *automatic* parked next to it was rated at 40mpg highway, while the
>>>> 5 speed Fit I drove was rated at 36. I think it's short gearing at
>>>> fault. Ironically, my '95 Civic EX has gearing that is way too tall,
>>>> but at least it gets great mileage...
>>>
>>> you keep posting that opinion, but you won't answer the question.
>>> what rpm's are you pulling at 70mph?
>>
>>
>> Well, I'm not the guy that you posted the question to about the RPMs
>> at 70 MPH, but I purposely ran my Fit up to 70MPH, which is not easy
>> to do on L.A.'s crowded freeways, and the tachometer indicates around
>> 3,400 RPM at 70 MPH. My Fit is a 5 speed manual transmission. Hope
>> this helps.
>>
>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>
>
> I don't know where that intermediate comment came from, but I'm the
> one who suggested short gearing, and I think I'm right. A car geared for
> freeway cruising in overdrive should be running at about 2500-2800 RPM
> at that speed.
"should"??? rpm's depend on the ratio that best balances motor output
with the best point on its economy curve with the wind resistance/weight
for that vehicle. so the number varies from car to car, motor to motor!!!
> This reminds me of something that Volvo pulled with the
> 140 series, way back when: you could get an optional overdrive unit for
> the manual shift cars, but if you got stuck with a basic 4 speed, it
> would be running 3500RPM at *60* MPH. Honda obviously wanted the car to
> be responsive in 5th, even at the expense of fuel economy.
rubbish.
07-18-2007 | 12:14 AM
#100
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (Anecdotal) Fit only getting 27 MPG? RPM @ 70 MPH
mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:JYidnT1B84vlXAfbnZ2dnUVZ_vzinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>>> mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hZomi.4158$225.3840@trndny03...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was at a gas station/convenience store getting a cuppa and
>>>>>> flirting with
>>>>>> the 20 year olds behind the counter when a Fit came in. At fisrt I
>>>>>> thought
>>>>>> it was an Si and then saw the 4 doors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Nice Car"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Honda lied"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "How so?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The guy had driven from Connecticut to near the Vt border at highway
>>>>>> speeds, a trip of 75 miles, and had to put in 2.76 gallons of gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 75/2.76=27.17 MPG HUH?! I get 21 MPG overall with an older Supra
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> isn't quite running 100% and has a marginal AT besides!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said jokinigly that he should keep his foot out of it! He said
>>>>>> he barely
>>>>>> gets over 30 MPG overall, and since this is his first real trip
>>>>>> with the
>>>>>> car he expected to at least be in the high 30's. It wasn't that
>>>>>> warm and
>>>>>> he didn't have the AC one when he pulled in for gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, with an '87 Corolla Carb'd on a 95 degree day, I got 45 MPG
>>>>>> at 75 MPH
>>>>>> with the AC on full blast, back in the day!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He also said when it's cold he barely makes it to 28 MPG...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, since we are talking anecdotal mileage, I should report that
>>>>> so far I have averaged 35.69 MPH with just over 1065 miles. I have
>>>>> a Fit Sport 5 speed manual transmission. I'm always conscious of
>>>>> driving for economy, and I try to time the stoplight, whenever
>>>>> possible and practical. I am more than satisfield with my mileage,
>>>>> but it would be less if I drove with a heavy foot. Consumer
>>>>> Reports averaged 34 MPH overall with their 5 speed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I drove a Fit, and it seemed like an OK, car, but the Civic LX
>>>> *automatic* parked next to it was rated at 40mpg highway, while the
>>>> 5 speed Fit I drove was rated at 36. I think it's short gearing at
>>>> fault. Ironically, my '95 Civic EX has gearing that is way too tall,
>>>> but at least it gets great mileage...
>>>
>>> you keep posting that opinion, but you won't answer the question.
>>> what rpm's are you pulling at 70mph?
>>
>>
>> Well, I'm not the guy that you posted the question to about the RPMs
>> at 70 MPH, but I purposely ran my Fit up to 70MPH, which is not easy
>> to do on L.A.'s crowded freeways, and the tachometer indicates around
>> 3,400 RPM at 70 MPH. My Fit is a 5 speed manual transmission. Hope
>> this helps.
>>
>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>
>
> I don't know where that intermediate comment came from, but I'm the
> one who suggested short gearing, and I think I'm right. A car geared for
> freeway cruising in overdrive should be running at about 2500-2800 RPM
> at that speed.
"should"??? rpm's depend on the ratio that best balances motor output
with the best point on its economy curve with the wind resistance/weight
for that vehicle. so the number varies from car to car, motor to motor!!!
> This reminds me of something that Volvo pulled with the
> 140 series, way back when: you could get an optional overdrive unit for
> the manual shift cars, but if you got stuck with a basic 4 speed, it
> would be running 3500RPM at *60* MPH. Honda obviously wanted the car to
> be responsive in 5th, even at the expense of fuel economy.
rubbish.
> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:JYidnT1B84vlXAfbnZ2dnUVZ_vzinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>>> mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Robert A. Cunningham wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hZomi.4158$225.3840@trndny03...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was at a gas station/convenience store getting a cuppa and
>>>>>> flirting with
>>>>>> the 20 year olds behind the counter when a Fit came in. At fisrt I
>>>>>> thought
>>>>>> it was an Si and then saw the 4 doors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Nice Car"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Honda lied"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "How so?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The guy had driven from Connecticut to near the Vt border at highway
>>>>>> speeds, a trip of 75 miles, and had to put in 2.76 gallons of gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 75/2.76=27.17 MPG HUH?! I get 21 MPG overall with an older Supra
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> isn't quite running 100% and has a marginal AT besides!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said jokinigly that he should keep his foot out of it! He said
>>>>>> he barely
>>>>>> gets over 30 MPG overall, and since this is his first real trip
>>>>>> with the
>>>>>> car he expected to at least be in the high 30's. It wasn't that
>>>>>> warm and
>>>>>> he didn't have the AC one when he pulled in for gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, with an '87 Corolla Carb'd on a 95 degree day, I got 45 MPG
>>>>>> at 75 MPH
>>>>>> with the AC on full blast, back in the day!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He also said when it's cold he barely makes it to 28 MPG...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, since we are talking anecdotal mileage, I should report that
>>>>> so far I have averaged 35.69 MPH with just over 1065 miles. I have
>>>>> a Fit Sport 5 speed manual transmission. I'm always conscious of
>>>>> driving for economy, and I try to time the stoplight, whenever
>>>>> possible and practical. I am more than satisfield with my mileage,
>>>>> but it would be less if I drove with a heavy foot. Consumer
>>>>> Reports averaged 34 MPH overall with their 5 speed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I drove a Fit, and it seemed like an OK, car, but the Civic LX
>>>> *automatic* parked next to it was rated at 40mpg highway, while the
>>>> 5 speed Fit I drove was rated at 36. I think it's short gearing at
>>>> fault. Ironically, my '95 Civic EX has gearing that is way too tall,
>>>> but at least it gets great mileage...
>>>
>>> you keep posting that opinion, but you won't answer the question.
>>> what rpm's are you pulling at 70mph?
>>
>>
>> Well, I'm not the guy that you posted the question to about the RPMs
>> at 70 MPH, but I purposely ran my Fit up to 70MPH, which is not easy
>> to do on L.A.'s crowded freeways, and the tachometer indicates around
>> 3,400 RPM at 70 MPH. My Fit is a 5 speed manual transmission. Hope
>> this helps.
>>
>> Robert A. Cunningham
>>
>
> I don't know where that intermediate comment came from, but I'm the
> one who suggested short gearing, and I think I'm right. A car geared for
> freeway cruising in overdrive should be running at about 2500-2800 RPM
> at that speed.
"should"??? rpm's depend on the ratio that best balances motor output
with the best point on its economy curve with the wind resistance/weight
for that vehicle. so the number varies from car to car, motor to motor!!!
> This reminds me of something that Volvo pulled with the
> 140 series, way back when: you could get an optional overdrive unit for
> the manual shift cars, but if you got stuck with a basic 4 speed, it
> would be running 3500RPM at *60* MPH. Honda obviously wanted the car to
> be responsive in 5th, even at the expense of fuel economy.
rubbish.
07-18-2007 | 06:52 AM
#101
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '86 Civic Si for Sale (was: 5 MPH Bumpers)
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:03:25 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>>
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested! Right now
>> I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>>
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>>
>>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable color
> - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may go that
> route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't seem to
> appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here wants to
> buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm flexible on the
> price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with the car is a
> driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never even find, much
> less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
> Sedan I replaced it with.
If I ever get a real job again...
Can I fit a matress in it?
I have an '85 Corolla GTS (I'd like to put them up against each other...)
an '88 Supra
an '89 Mazda 626
an '89 Subaru GL Hatch
and an '05 Scion tC.
I got told "One more friggin car, and it better be something you can
*sleep* in!"
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>>
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested! Right now
>> I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>>
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>>
>>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable color
> - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may go that
> route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't seem to
> appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here wants to
> buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm flexible on the
> price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with the car is a
> driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never even find, much
> less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
> Sedan I replaced it with.
If I ever get a real job again...
Can I fit a matress in it?
I have an '85 Corolla GTS (I'd like to put them up against each other...)
an '88 Supra
an '89 Mazda 626
an '89 Subaru GL Hatch
and an '05 Scion tC.
I got told "One more friggin car, and it better be something you can
*sleep* in!"
07-18-2007 | 06:52 AM
#102
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '86 Civic Si for Sale (was: 5 MPH Bumpers)
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:03:25 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>>
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested! Right now
>> I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>>
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>>
>>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable color
> - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may go that
> route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't seem to
> appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here wants to
> buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm flexible on the
> price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with the car is a
> driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never even find, much
> less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
> Sedan I replaced it with.
If I ever get a real job again...
Can I fit a matress in it?
I have an '85 Corolla GTS (I'd like to put them up against each other...)
an '88 Supra
an '89 Mazda 626
an '89 Subaru GL Hatch
and an '05 Scion tC.
I got told "One more friggin car, and it better be something you can
*sleep* in!"
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>>
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested! Right now
>> I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>>
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>>
>>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable color
> - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may go that
> route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't seem to
> appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here wants to
> buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm flexible on the
> price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with the car is a
> driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never even find, much
> less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
> Sedan I replaced it with.
If I ever get a real job again...
Can I fit a matress in it?
I have an '85 Corolla GTS (I'd like to put them up against each other...)
an '88 Supra
an '89 Mazda 626
an '89 Subaru GL Hatch
and an '05 Scion tC.
I got told "One more friggin car, and it better be something you can
*sleep* in!"
07-18-2007 | 06:52 AM
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: '86 Civic Si for Sale (was: 5 MPH Bumpers)
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:03:25 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>>
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested! Right now
>> I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>>
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>>
>>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable color
> - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may go that
> route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't seem to
> appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here wants to
> buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm flexible on the
> price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with the car is a
> driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never even find, much
> less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
> Sedan I replaced it with.
If I ever get a real job again...
Can I fit a matress in it?
I have an '85 Corolla GTS (I'd like to put them up against each other...)
an '88 Supra
an '89 Mazda 626
an '89 Subaru GL Hatch
and an '05 Scion tC.
I got told "One more friggin car, and it better be something you can
*sleep* in!"
> Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:12:56 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hachiroku 繝上メ繝繧ｯ wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:41:17 +0000, mjc13<REMOVETHIS> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>The cars I had at the time, a 1970 Capri and a 1969 Lotus Europa, had
>>>>>>stamped steel bumpers. I think the modern bumpers are an improvement
>>>>>>over those but the 5 mph bumpers probably weren't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> My '86 Civic Si (still for sale!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Where are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Upstate NY. Here's the as:
>>>
>>>http://albany.craigslist.org/car/345979338.html
>>
>>
>>
>> WHOA! Very Nice!
>>
>> If I ever get a job that *PAYS* again, I might be interested! Right now
>> I'm doing newspapers in between and am looking for ~$250 beaters.
>>
>> I certainly would NOT use that on a paper route!!!
>>
>> And I know where mechanicsville is. I used to live in Pittsfield MA and
>> used to go to Lebanon Valley a lot. Also, many trips through to Toronto
>> ans Selkirk and Waterford when I worked for GE.
>>
>>
>>
> A somewhat similar '86 was up on Ebay last month: nicer body but
> original clutch, which must be worn. It was also the least desirable color
> - white. The bidding stopped at $2500, the reserve not met. I may go that
> route, and put up a 'buy it now' price of $1995. People don't seem to
> appreciate these cars enough around here. Anyway, if anyone here wants to
> buy it and restore it, or at least treat it gently, I'm flexible on the
> price, as long as it's cash. The biggest problem with the car is a
> driver's side rainwater leak that the dealers could never even find, much
> less fix...
>
> I'm still amazed that this 91HP car would outdrag the 125 HP EX
> Sedan I replaced it with.
If I ever get a real job again...
Can I fit a matress in it?
I have an '85 Corolla GTS (I'd like to put them up against each other...)
an '88 Supra
an '89 Mazda 626
an '89 Subaru GL Hatch
and an '05 Scion tC.
I got told "One more friggin car, and it better be something you can
*sleep* in!"
07-18-2007 | 08:28 AM
#104
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (Anecdotal) Fit only getting 27 MPG?
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:P8Wdnc7eXpZbEgDbnZ2dnUVZ_remnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>
> 5mph bumpers meant that the usual parking lot dings and bumps weren't
> causing damage, thereby causing a sudden and substantial loss in revenue
> for repair shops, and most importantly, manufacturers. so it was reduced,
> with b.s. reasons cited like you say, but they're untrue.
>
Consider the collisions you have known. Some of them have been at very low
speeds - parking lots, creeping traffic that suddenly jolted - but the rest
have probably been at much more than 5 mph. Except for the 1-2 mph dings I
can't think of a single collision I've ever witnessed that was under 15 mph.
Proposed bumper height standards were the rage for a while because bumpers
are pointless if they aren't used. Dunno if any standards were actually
passed. The big problem there was (and is) that rear end collisions are
notorious for bumper heights not matching. Each car in line nosedives as it
brakes, so the lead car raises its rear bumper and the following car lowers
its front bumper.
Mike
news:P8Wdnc7eXpZbEgDbnZ2dnUVZ_remnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>
> 5mph bumpers meant that the usual parking lot dings and bumps weren't
> causing damage, thereby causing a sudden and substantial loss in revenue
> for repair shops, and most importantly, manufacturers. so it was reduced,
> with b.s. reasons cited like you say, but they're untrue.
>
Consider the collisions you have known. Some of them have been at very low
speeds - parking lots, creeping traffic that suddenly jolted - but the rest
have probably been at much more than 5 mph. Except for the 1-2 mph dings I
can't think of a single collision I've ever witnessed that was under 15 mph.
Proposed bumper height standards were the rage for a while because bumpers
are pointless if they aren't used. Dunno if any standards were actually
passed. The big problem there was (and is) that rear end collisions are
notorious for bumper heights not matching. Each car in line nosedives as it
brakes, so the lead car raises its rear bumper and the following car lowers
its front bumper.
Mike
07-18-2007 | 08:28 AM
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (Anecdotal) Fit only getting 27 MPG?
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:P8Wdnc7eXpZbEgDbnZ2dnUVZ_remnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>
> 5mph bumpers meant that the usual parking lot dings and bumps weren't
> causing damage, thereby causing a sudden and substantial loss in revenue
> for repair shops, and most importantly, manufacturers. so it was reduced,
> with b.s. reasons cited like you say, but they're untrue.
>
Consider the collisions you have known. Some of them have been at very low
speeds - parking lots, creeping traffic that suddenly jolted - but the rest
have probably been at much more than 5 mph. Except for the 1-2 mph dings I
can't think of a single collision I've ever witnessed that was under 15 mph.
Proposed bumper height standards were the rage for a while because bumpers
are pointless if they aren't used. Dunno if any standards were actually
passed. The big problem there was (and is) that rear end collisions are
notorious for bumper heights not matching. Each car in line nosedives as it
brakes, so the lead car raises its rear bumper and the following car lowers
its front bumper.
Mike
news:P8Wdnc7eXpZbEgDbnZ2dnUVZ_remnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>
> 5mph bumpers meant that the usual parking lot dings and bumps weren't
> causing damage, thereby causing a sudden and substantial loss in revenue
> for repair shops, and most importantly, manufacturers. so it was reduced,
> with b.s. reasons cited like you say, but they're untrue.
>
Consider the collisions you have known. Some of them have been at very low
speeds - parking lots, creeping traffic that suddenly jolted - but the rest
have probably been at much more than 5 mph. Except for the 1-2 mph dings I
can't think of a single collision I've ever witnessed that was under 15 mph.
Proposed bumper height standards were the rage for a while because bumpers
are pointless if they aren't used. Dunno if any standards were actually
passed. The big problem there was (and is) that rear end collisions are
notorious for bumper heights not matching. Each car in line nosedives as it
brakes, so the lead car raises its rear bumper and the following car lowers
its front bumper.
Mike