Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
05-10-2008 | 02:16 AM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
I was planning on taking my soon to take possession Pilot on a trip
which will consist mostly of highway driving of about 3000mile drive
and been told that that's not such a good idea because you don't want
to drive a brand new car on the highway for any extended amount if you
can help before the car's properly broken in.
The seals, rings and the machine just needs to set in properly, which
happens during the break in period and before that, I was told you
should avoid any long highway trip.
What do you guys think? If this was your car, would you do it or put
off the trip until after the car's broken in properly? Thanks.
which will consist mostly of highway driving of about 3000mile drive
and been told that that's not such a good idea because you don't want
to drive a brand new car on the highway for any extended amount if you
can help before the car's properly broken in.
The seals, rings and the machine just needs to set in properly, which
happens during the break in period and before that, I was told you
should avoid any long highway trip.
What do you guys think? If this was your car, would you do it or put
off the trip until after the car's broken in properly? Thanks.
05-10-2008 | 03:56 AM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
On 5/10/2008 1:16 AM Bow Wow spake these words of knowledge:
> I was planning on taking my soon to take possession Pilot on a trip
> which will consist mostly of highway driving of about 3000mile drive
> and been told that that's not such a good idea because you don't want
> to drive a brand new car on the highway for any extended amount if you
> can help before the car's properly broken in.
>
> The seals, rings and the machine just needs to set in properly, which
> happens during the break in period and before that, I was told you
> should avoid any long highway trip.
>
> What do you guys think? If this was your car, would you do it or put
> off the trip until after the car's broken in properly? Thanks.
The break-in period admonitions still apply; you were told correctly.
You can make the trip, but you'll want to vary the RPMs of your engine,
which can be annoying and even dangerous to others - because of the
unpredictability.
If this was my car, I would in fact avoid a long trip until after I had
*at least* 1000 miles of variated driving.
RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
"Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when
the government's purpose is beneficent." -- Supreme Court Justice Louis
Brandeis
> I was planning on taking my soon to take possession Pilot on a trip
> which will consist mostly of highway driving of about 3000mile drive
> and been told that that's not such a good idea because you don't want
> to drive a brand new car on the highway for any extended amount if you
> can help before the car's properly broken in.
>
> The seals, rings and the machine just needs to set in properly, which
> happens during the break in period and before that, I was told you
> should avoid any long highway trip.
>
> What do you guys think? If this was your car, would you do it or put
> off the trip until after the car's broken in properly? Thanks.
The break-in period admonitions still apply; you were told correctly.
You can make the trip, but you'll want to vary the RPMs of your engine,
which can be annoying and even dangerous to others - because of the
unpredictability.
If this was my car, I would in fact avoid a long trip until after I had
*at least* 1000 miles of variated driving.
RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
"Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when
the government's purpose is beneficent." -- Supreme Court Justice Louis
Brandeis
05-10-2008 | 06:48 AM
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
If you have not yet gotten the car, go by the dealer and look at one
of the owner"s manuals for that model. There is no problem on taking a
long trip that I know of. Of course you vary the speed, which means
you may run at 65 for a while then ease off to 55 for another 10
minutes and back up to 65. That doesn't create a danger to other cars.
Don't forget, pulling in for gas or food also varies the speed. I
don't think you will have any problem with the trip. The last two
Hondas I've owned were on long trips immediately after purchase and I
never saw any degradation of the cars performance because of that.
Enjoy
On Sat, 10 May 2008 00:16:59 -0600, Bow Wow <Bow@Wow.com> wrote:
>I was planning on taking my soon to take possession Pilot on a trip
>which will consist mostly of highway driving of about 3000mile drive
>and been told that that's not such a good idea because you don't want
>to drive a brand new car on the highway for any extended amount if you
>can help before the car's properly broken in.
>
>The seals, rings and the machine just needs to set in properly, which
>happens during the break in period and before that, I was told you
>should avoid any long highway trip.
>
>What do you guys think? If this was your car, would you do it or put
>off the trip until after the car's broken in properly? Thanks.
of the owner"s manuals for that model. There is no problem on taking a
long trip that I know of. Of course you vary the speed, which means
you may run at 65 for a while then ease off to 55 for another 10
minutes and back up to 65. That doesn't create a danger to other cars.
Don't forget, pulling in for gas or food also varies the speed. I
don't think you will have any problem with the trip. The last two
Hondas I've owned were on long trips immediately after purchase and I
never saw any degradation of the cars performance because of that.
Enjoy
On Sat, 10 May 2008 00:16:59 -0600, Bow Wow <Bow@Wow.com> wrote:
>I was planning on taking my soon to take possession Pilot on a trip
>which will consist mostly of highway driving of about 3000mile drive
>and been told that that's not such a good idea because you don't want
>to drive a brand new car on the highway for any extended amount if you
>can help before the car's properly broken in.
>
>The seals, rings and the machine just needs to set in properly, which
>happens during the break in period and before that, I was told you
>should avoid any long highway trip.
>
>What do you guys think? If this was your car, would you do it or put
>off the trip until after the car's broken in properly? Thanks.
05-10-2008 | 08:18 AM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
Bow Wow wrote:
> I was planning on taking my soon to take possession Pilot on a trip
> which will consist mostly of highway driving of about 3000mile drive
> and been told that that's not such a good idea because you don't want
> to drive a brand new car on the highway for any extended amount if you
> can help before the car's properly broken in.
A brand new 1975 Ford Pinto, perhaps, but today's cars are machined to
higher standards. Taking the truck (the Pilot is a truck, not a car) on
a 3000-mile trip is just fine. The only problem you will have is paying
for the fuel.
> The seals, rings and the machine just needs to set in properly, which
> happens during the break in period and before that, I was told you
> should avoid any long highway trip.
By whom?
> What do you guys think? If this was your car, would you do it or put
> off the trip until after the car's broken in properly? Thanks.
Yes. But, in this case, that's when the truck comes off the dealer lot.
Jeff
> I was planning on taking my soon to take possession Pilot on a trip
> which will consist mostly of highway driving of about 3000mile drive
> and been told that that's not such a good idea because you don't want
> to drive a brand new car on the highway for any extended amount if you
> can help before the car's properly broken in.
A brand new 1975 Ford Pinto, perhaps, but today's cars are machined to
higher standards. Taking the truck (the Pilot is a truck, not a car) on
a 3000-mile trip is just fine. The only problem you will have is paying
for the fuel.
> The seals, rings and the machine just needs to set in properly, which
> happens during the break in period and before that, I was told you
> should avoid any long highway trip.
By whom?
> What do you guys think? If this was your car, would you do it or put
> off the trip until after the car's broken in properly? Thanks.
Yes. But, in this case, that's when the truck comes off the dealer lot.
Jeff
05-10-2008 | 08:29 AM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
In article <NogVj.71$ll1.35@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> Taking the truck (the Pilot is a truck, not a car)
It's a car.
It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
it's a car.
wrote:
> Taking the truck (the Pilot is a truck, not a car)
It's a car.
It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
it's a car.
05-10-2008 | 08:31 AM
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <NogVj.71$ll1.35@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Taking the truck (the Pilot is a truck, not a car)
>
> It's a car.
>
> It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
> it's a car.
>
You can drive a 18-wheeler like a car if you want. But, it's still a
truck. A Pilot meets the safety requirements of a truck, not a car. It
is licensed like a truck. It gets gasoline mileage like a truck.
It's a truck.
Jeff
> In article <NogVj.71$ll1.35@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Taking the truck (the Pilot is a truck, not a car)
>
> It's a car.
>
> It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
> it's a car.
>
You can drive a 18-wheeler like a car if you want. But, it's still a
truck. A Pilot meets the safety requirements of a truck, not a car. It
is licensed like a truck. It gets gasoline mileage like a truck.
It's a truck.
Jeff
05-10-2008 | 10:35 AM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in news:elmop-
FFB1B4.08291210052008@nntp9.usenetserver.com:
> In article <NogVj.71$ll1.35@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Taking the truck (the Pilot is a truck, not a car)
>
> It's a car.
>
> It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
> it's a car.
>
>
I suspect it's classified as a "light truck".
Just like the PT Cruiser used to be classified,before they made a ragtop
version.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
FFB1B4.08291210052008@nntp9.usenetserver.com:
> In article <NogVj.71$ll1.35@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Taking the truck (the Pilot is a truck, not a car)
>
> It's a car.
>
> It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
> it's a car.
>
>
I suspect it's classified as a "light truck".
Just like the PT Cruiser used to be classified,before they made a ragtop
version.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
05-10-2008 | 01:37 PM
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
In article <Xns9A9A6BD122317jyanikkuanet@64.209.0.83>,
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
> > It's a car.
> >
> > It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
> > it's a car.
> >
> >
>
> I suspect it's classified as a "light truck".
Classified by whom?
The only classification that matters is the guy who bought it.
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
> > It's a car.
> >
> > It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
> > it's a car.
> >
> >
>
> I suspect it's classified as a "light truck".
Classified by whom?
The only classification that matters is the guy who bought it.
05-10-2008 | 01:38 PM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
In article <HAgVj.72$ll1.48@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> > It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
> > it's a car.
> >
>
> You can drive a 18-wheeler like a car if you want. But, it's still a
> truck.
That doesn't make any sense.
However, these things that you call "trucks" are used as cars, not as
trucks.
End of story.
wrote:
> > It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
> > it's a car.
> >
>
> You can drive a 18-wheeler like a car if you want. But, it's still a
> truck.
That doesn't make any sense.
However, these things that you call "trucks" are used as cars, not as
trucks.
End of story.
05-10-2008 | 01:48 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <HAgVj.72$ll1.48@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
>>> it's a car.
>>>
>> You can drive a 18-wheeler like a car if you want. But, it's still a
>> truck.
>
> That doesn't make any sense.
>
> However, these things that you call "trucks" are used as cars, not as
> trucks.
>
> End of story.
They are classified by the government as trucks, have safety
requirements that are different from cars and handle differently than cars.
End of story.
Jeff
> In article <HAgVj.72$ll1.48@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
>>> it's a car.
>>>
>> You can drive a 18-wheeler like a car if you want. But, it's still a
>> truck.
>
> That doesn't make any sense.
>
> However, these things that you call "trucks" are used as cars, not as
> trucks.
>
> End of story.
They are classified by the government as trucks, have safety
requirements that are different from cars and handle differently than cars.
End of story.
Jeff
05-10-2008 | 04:22 PM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
news:elmop-361145.13383010052008@nntp9.usenetserver.com:
> In article <HAgVj.72$ll1.48@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> > It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a
>> > car, it's a car.
>> >
>>
>> You can drive a 18-wheeler like a car if you want. But, it's still a
>> truck.
>
> That doesn't make any sense.
>
> However, these things that you call "trucks" are used as cars, not as
> trucks.
>
> End of story.
>
>
there's a guy who built a semi's tractor into a pickup truck;I bet he calls
it a truck even though he uses it as a "car".and US Fedgov
considers("classifies") it a "truck",just like the original PT Cruiser.
"End of story".
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
news:elmop-361145.13383010052008@nntp9.usenetserver.com:
> In article <HAgVj.72$ll1.48@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> > It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a
>> > car, it's a car.
>> >
>>
>> You can drive a 18-wheeler like a car if you want. But, it's still a
>> truck.
>
> That doesn't make any sense.
>
> However, these things that you call "trucks" are used as cars, not as
> trucks.
>
> End of story.
>
>
there's a guy who built a semi's tractor into a pickup truck;I bet he calls
it a truck even though he uses it as a "car".and US Fedgov
considers("classifies") it a "truck",just like the original PT Cruiser.
"End of story".
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
05-11-2008 | 09:49 PM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
On 2008-05-10, Elmo P. Shagnasty <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <Xns9A9A6BD122317jyanikkuanet@64.209.0.83>,
> Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>
>> > It's a car.
>> >
>> > It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
>> > it's a car.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I suspect it's classified as a "light truck".
>
> Classified by whom?
>
> The only classification that matters is the guy who bought it.
>
No, the only classification that matters is the one the government
makes, since they determine the safety ratings and the licensing and
registration fees.
In NY, a Ridgeline is registered Commercial. It has lower safety
requirements and higher bumpers than a car. Ergo, it is not a car.
--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X
> In article <Xns9A9A6BD122317jyanikkuanet@64.209.0.83>,
> Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>
>> > It's a car.
>> >
>> > It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
>> > it's a car.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I suspect it's classified as a "light truck".
>
> Classified by whom?
>
> The only classification that matters is the guy who bought it.
>
No, the only classification that matters is the one the government
makes, since they determine the safety ratings and the licensing and
registration fees.
In NY, a Ridgeline is registered Commercial. It has lower safety
requirements and higher bumpers than a car. Ergo, it is not a car.
--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X
05-11-2008 | 10:13 PM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
"Joe" <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com> wrote in message
news:slrng2f8na.47l.joe@barada.griffincs.local...
>
> In NY, a Ridgeline is registered Commercial. It has lower safety
> requirements and higher bumpers than a car. Ergo, it is not a car.
Ten years ago maybe that was the required registration class (in NY).
Half-ton pick-ups are eligible for Passenger plates these days.
news:slrng2f8na.47l.joe@barada.griffincs.local...
>
> In NY, a Ridgeline is registered Commercial. It has lower safety
> requirements and higher bumpers than a car. Ergo, it is not a car.
Ten years ago maybe that was the required registration class (in NY).
Half-ton pick-ups are eligible for Passenger plates these days.
05-11-2008 | 10:19 PM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
Seth wrote:
> "Joe" <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com> wrote in message
> news:slrng2f8na.47l.joe@barada.griffincs.local...
>>
>> In NY, a Ridgeline is registered Commercial. It has lower safety
>> requirements and higher bumpers than a car. Ergo, it is not a car.
>
> Ten years ago maybe that was the required registration class (in NY).
> Half-ton pick-ups are eligible for Passenger plates these days.
>
But it is not the states that set the safety standards. It is the
Federal Gov't. They do require that cars meet different standards than
trucks. And they also have different mileage requirements.
I remember years ago that Subaru imported the Brat as trucks, so that
they could get around some tarrifs, too, rather than import them as cars.
Jeff
> "Joe" <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com> wrote in message
> news:slrng2f8na.47l.joe@barada.griffincs.local...
>>
>> In NY, a Ridgeline is registered Commercial. It has lower safety
>> requirements and higher bumpers than a car. Ergo, it is not a car.
>
> Ten years ago maybe that was the required registration class (in NY).
> Half-ton pick-ups are eligible for Passenger plates these days.
>
But it is not the states that set the safety standards. It is the
Federal Gov't. They do require that cars meet different standards than
trucks. And they also have different mileage requirements.
I remember years ago that Subaru imported the Brat as trucks, so that
they could get around some tarrifs, too, rather than import them as cars.
Jeff
05-11-2008 | 10:25 PM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Plan on driving a new car on a 3000mile highway trip. Bad idea?
Joe wrote:
> On 2008-05-10, Elmo P. Shagnasty <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>> In article <Xns9A9A6BD122317jyanikkuanet@64.209.0.83>,
>> Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>>
>>>> It's a car.
>>>>
>>>> It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
>>>> it's a car.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I suspect it's classified as a "light truck".
>> Classified by whom?
>>
>> The only classification that matters is the guy who bought it.
>>
>
> No, the only classification that matters is the one the government
> makes, since they determine the safety ratings and the licensing and
> registration fees.
>
> In NY, a Ridgeline is registered Commercial. It has lower safety
> requirements
the federal requirements may be lower, but i think you'll find that the
ridgeline meets all requirements, both car and truck.
> and higher bumpers than a car. Ergo, it is not a car.
>
>
> On 2008-05-10, Elmo P. Shagnasty <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>> In article <Xns9A9A6BD122317jyanikkuanet@64.209.0.83>,
>> Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>>
>>>> It's a car.
>>>>
>>>> It's intended to be a car, he drives it like a car, he calls it a car,
>>>> it's a car.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I suspect it's classified as a "light truck".
>> Classified by whom?
>>
>> The only classification that matters is the guy who bought it.
>>
>
> No, the only classification that matters is the one the government
> makes, since they determine the safety ratings and the licensing and
> registration fees.
>
> In NY, a Ridgeline is registered Commercial. It has lower safety
> requirements
the federal requirements may be lower, but i think you'll find that the
ridgeline meets all requirements, both car and truck.
> and higher bumpers than a car. Ergo, it is not a car.
>
>