my neon is cursed

didnt look that hard at the matrix-doesnt appeal to me-
if i want to be looked at while i drive i will roll the ole 62 polara out,everyone and i mean everyone looks at you when you drive it-
 
Real men drive German diesels.

I drive one, too.

:)

(Real men don't mind paying $2.60+ a gallon for fuel around here either, evidently. Please excuse me while I have a good cry as I'm thinking about my 2.5 hour daily commute.)
 
Dave Rishar said:
Real men drive German diesels.

I drive one, too.

:)

(Real men don't mind paying $2.60+ a gallon for fuel around here either, evidently. Please excuse me while I have a good cry as I'm thinking about my 2.5 hour daily commute.)
Click to expand...

That's what my wife drove before we bought her the Civic. It was a 1996 hand-me-down Audi that her parents gave her when they bought their new car. It was great because we didn't have any payments. It was not-so-great because it had 100,000+ miles on it, and when something broke what would have been $200 fix turned out to be $800:grumpy:
I kept making Ralph Kramden threats that if one more thing...just one more thing broke on the car, we were going to get something different. The O2 sensor went out and I had a Fred Flintstone melt-down. I wanted to push it into a ditch, splash on some gasoline, toss a match and sing German drinking songs while I watched it flame to ash. The wife wanted to trade it in for a $3000 credit toward our new car...she won out, but it a while to talk me into it.

Jake
 
Audi/VW is certainly not known for reliability, among experts. It's rather unfortunate, because I find the R32 rather appealing. A bit overpriced though. If they can do another R32 esque car with their new GTI platform, I'll be interested...

As for the Matrix, with the exception of the AWD model (if they even still offer that) it uses the very common 1.8l toyota/yamaha engine, that, off the top of my head, is used in the celica, MR2 and Pontiac Vibe (identical to the Matrix). Things could have changed though, my information is years old.

When the 1.8 liter engine came out, I forget its name, it was rather noteworthy because I do believe it was the first car to offer "VVTl-I" which was a variation on Honda's VTEC that was pretty interesting. Between you and me, VTEC and etc--makes such a little difference. I suppose it's nice, but I don't expect to see ANY notable improvement in 0-60 or fuel efficiency or any other way you want to guage performance (on it alone--note that cars with and without VTEC, I believe, have different camshaft profiles, to which we owe what little performance gains that are apparnet). Note that most professional race cars from Honda do not have something like VTEC, nor to the amature (Non honda employed) racers, not any of the serious ones anyway. I always thought it was so amusing when kids came up next to me talking about their DOHC, VTEC engine with this and that power to weight ratio, when the actual professional drag racers had old SOHC non VTEC "low tech" engines.
 
I totally agree with you, AM. Sometimes i feel myself getting sucked into all the jazz they are naming engines these days. Then I remember it doesn't really matter to me:) I mean, i'm not a car fanatic. If that were the case I would be hunting down the rare stuff or putting crazy fast/powerful add-ons under the hood. All i need is a daily driver that gets good fuel economy because i'm a bit of a cheap bastid;) To be honest, the Audi was a good car. I was about 10 years old and had 100,000 plus miles on it. However, it was just too expensive to fix something then have another thing break in 2 weeks. The Hondas and Toyotas aren't as cheap to fix as American cars, but that doesn't bother me any when it takes 50,000 miles before something wears out:D Another plus is that the Audi got maybe 18mpg once the O2 sensor went out. The Civic gets around 35:)
I have heard that the German cars are starting to slip down the tubes a bit. My friend who works at Ford shows me numbers all the time about how Ford has lower defect ratios and Ford engines under standardized tests with oil "x" run longer and smoother than Honda engines and much longer than a German engine. Blah Blah Blah. I know he knows what he's talking about, but i have never seen any of this crap happen in the real world. I know that I have a 1986 Chevy Scotsdale with a 305 V8 that I have babied and nursed and fed a little oil to counteract the traditional Chevy "Good mornin' Blue Smoke". It still breaks down. It's old. However, I had a friend that took a celica that is about the same age as my truck, drove it off road into a corn field where it dropped about 20" down going 20mph, then he took a stick to get all mud and corn stalk out from the tailpipe, put it into drive, and drove it home. He's an idiot, but that's a great car:) Apples and oranges with today's cars compared to yesterday's car, and furthermore comparing his car to my truck. However, I don't see any real change in the gap between American and Japanese cars today than there was 20 years ago, but i'm not very educated in the matter. My trucks will be American. My cars are going to be Japanese unless I can see some real world proof that doesn't rely on hundredths of a point in a lab setting;)
I like fast little cars that aren't expensive and are fun to drive. However, I almost feel like I should stay away from the DOHC just because I feel too old to drive something like that. I don't want people to look at my car and think that I'm saving up for a spoiler and ground FX so I can be Fast and Furious:) Honestly, i'll probably just keep the Civic once it's paid off. It'll go forever. I'll stay with my motorcycle for my thrills...plus it gets better mpg than the car:)

Jake
 
thoughts on cars...

o my dad doesn't like repairs, or buying new tires, or ... so he buys a car, and keeps it shiny, and at the first sign of something more expensive time consuming than he's willing to deal with, he sells it. as he's retired, his miles are low, and he always manages to get high trade in value. it's sick. most people wouldn't fair so well, but as it's also a game for him, he's patient. it's like they pay him to drive new cars. hell, he traded down from a mercedes last time, got TWO vehicles out of it, and cash. i love it. so does his wife, as she has a car as well.

o me? my first car, an impala was $500, and lasted until 100,000 but one year of ownership from me, and it just died. if it hadn't died, it was going to be scrapped soon anyway. everything was rusting. the roof/windows leaked, and it would have 5-6 inches of water in it after a good rain - until i used a railroad spike to perforate the bottom under the carpet ;) parts of engine held on with bailing wire (actual bailing wire) :> was paid $35 to haul it away.

o second car, bought new from a dealership about to close, 1989 acura integra - very much like the same year honda accord, but with better engine, and less power swoop features (windows, seats, etc). no a/c - that was $1k more. are you insane? first car with f/w drive. hah. stick - yay. except NONE of my friends could drive stick, which meant no help on long road trips in my car. oh well. 225,000 miles before i retired it - was going to cost more than it was worth to have engine pulled, various simple things replaced, and put back. traded in and got $500 from dealer for "respect to new customer". the manual i had for the car sold on CL for about $50 ;)

o current car, a secret, 181,000 miles. more reliable than its current kin by far. costs about the same to repair as anything japanese - i DID just have a bunch of work done, which by coincidence of the timing chain being done meant it cost more than usual, but i'm surprised if i have to put more than $1-1.5k a year into it otherwise (which doesn't seem like a lot). will drive it into the ground if i can. compare to prior cars, it has no rust except some paint chips - acura had SOME rust which i had to fix, impala WAS rust. has a/c and heated seats (everything should have heated seats!)

other thoughts... there was a video floating around on the net showing a toyota truck being tested to destruction. they tried, but it KEPT GOING. they didn't actually destroy it until they blew up a building with the truck ON it. even then, it ran (just cracked the frame). no, you wouldn't want to use it, but if you have to explode a building to kill your truck, i'm there.

MPG ... VW has these spiffy diesels - were i to buy a new car, assuming the prices were reasonable - i'd go for one. 50 mpg? i'm there. most of the people i know have had very good luck on their VW diesels, compared to gas models. the 1.8/1.9 turbo engine despite the oil clogging issue is easier to fix than then 2.8 and up straight engine (more room to work on 1.8 esp). diesel is around $2.50 here, lowtest gas is $2.10, 2x mileage from the diesel compared to "most cars" same weight/size. in canada/europe there is a VW "lupo" that gets **75** mpg by virtue of being lighter, smaller.

hybrid - cute but what happens when the batteries wear out? who pays for new ones, and disposing the old ones? what happens in accidents? 800-1000 lbs of battery means a bit more stopping time. if they are AGM types, they won't leak, but still, scary.

SUVs - please - there's no excuse. none.

HUMMER or REAL offroad things? if you live or work in the woods, fine. keep them off the roads please ;)

TRUCKS? a good cheap truck will last a long time, but shouldn't be your daily commuter - keep it on the farm unless you're hauling grain luke :>

just my silly biases :>

bladite
 
I used to own a Dodge Aries - It had a noisy tranny. The district manager told me to drive with the windows up and the radio on loud. I have bad hearing in one ear, so you know how bad the whine was.
They tried to put a tuning fork on the transmission, since that worked for the Caravan. It didn't work, so they replaced the ring gear in the transmission 2X. This was all in the first few months.
The thermostat went out and I overheated on the Bronx River Parkway in the south Bronx at 11 at night. That should have been a cue.
I replaced all sorts of stuff in that car. I learned that the model engine I had was designed with soft camshafts the year before I got mine, but of course, CU said that the engine was reliable.

I have had more expensive grief from my last Amercian car, a Ford Windstar. The transmission died at about 82,000 miles - shortly after the warranty ran out and before I finished paying for it.

After $3000 on a transmission, I have been getting Toyotas (Camry) and a Honda (CRV). The earlier model Camry was designed with a sludge problem and inadequate lubrication for the top of the engine. Toyota responded with an extended warranty goint to 100,000 miles. My car has 97,000...
 
just signed for my blue corolla-now i have to wait till it arrives-
btw my salesman was fired halfway thru my purchase-dont know why-
 
Our 2005 Camry SE just rolled 10K over on it a couple three weeks ago, we've had it since November 2004.;) :D It's a damned nice car even though it looks exactly like all the other imports with a spoiler and is the same old dull silver/gunmetal grey that 90% of them seem to be.:rolleyes: :(

The 160 Horse 4 banger gets around 22-25 around town depending on who's driving. Even though I drive a little faster than my Barbie I'm the one who generally gets the better mileage, probably because I use the cruise control more and keep the speed at an even keel instead of up and down etc.

And with that kind of mileage around town I'm pondering the idea of trading it in when the new 2007's come out.
The new 2007 V-6 Camry is gonna have 268 horses!!!!:thumbup: :cool: :D
I'm sorta thinking that if we don't get any better than the 22-25 anyway why not have something I can lay a little rubber with, of course if I had a manual instead of the 5 speed automatic I'd be able to lay more down on a quick takeoff with the 4 banger I have.;) :thumbup:
And I can't se the V-6 getting much less than 30-32 mpg on the road at 70-75 mph which is as fast as I drive anyway.
When I was looking for a new car I was pretty hot on the Nissan Altima and they have a SR5 I think it is that has a 260 horse V-6.
But I pretty much went with the Camry 4 cylinder because of a salesman that has been with Jimmy Norton Buick and Toyota since 2 years before G-d and he recommended the 4 for longevity over the V-6.

But anyway the little 4 banger we have now is comparable to the '57 Chevy BelAir with the 265 V-8 that was rated at 162 horses at 4400 rpm.
The 4 banger is 157 horses at 5600 rpm. And who knows maybe reason will end up being the end result but the 268 horses really do sound appealing.
Maybe I'll just go drive one a couple three times or so.;)
 
Say, was your neon by chance a 1996 model?
My wife's had an endless assortment of problems, too. Then the mechanic found out that they had been recalled by the factory. Not because of one specific faulty part, but because of shoddy workmanship throughout. At least that's what he said.
 
Always a good idea to ignore horsepower accept when theorizing or testing against your own car. If you dyno your car, modify it and dyno it again (on the same dyno), then it's meaningful. But no amount of horsepower does a fast car make.

I've seen a Supra twin turbo (switched to single), heavily modified, very nearly racing tires, sequential gearbox, dyno at about 700 horsepower to the rear wheels. The driver was a professional racecar driver.

It pulled consistent 12.6s. Which means it would get beaten by the old Z06s (and the new Z06s would destroy it) which had three hundred horsepower less. And real street tires, a real street transmission, no weight reducing, etc. No pro driver either.

The situation only gets worse when you switch to FWD. Now you're going to need something like 600+ horsepower to be reasonably fast because you'll just spin at the line forever.

Only one stock FWD seems to return decent times, and that is, ironically, the SRT4. Good prices, too. But the faster you want to go, the more expensive it gets, and no place is this truer than with FWD.

The best deals in performance right now are the Mustang GT, which is about 25k and runs high 13s, the Evo is about 30k and runs mid 13s and the STi is 30 and runs mid/low 13s. The latter two are four doors with all wheel drive, that you could really drive every day and it would be great.

If you have the cash though, the best deal out there period is the Corvette. I believe they run for 50k now, but return both high 12 second quartermiles (very high, to be fair) and can pulled almost a G on the skidpad. They also exceed the fuel efficiency of both the STi and Evo.

You may be wondering now how a 400 horsepower car with an engine that displaces about three times as much and that weighs about the same as these others two, but has a "low tech" OHV v8 engine (designed in the late 40s) significantly exceeds the fuel efficiency.

Well, the weird truth is, there isn't a real connection between peak horsepower and fuel efficiency. Or engine type, for that matter. I mean, ultimately, there's a theoretical maximum yield from gas, but that's definitely not going to happen in real life.

It appears that "low tech" V8s are quite a bit more efficient than most four cylinders. Exceeding the fuel efficiency with 70% more horsepower. This is also the engine that one the LeMans for Chevy five years in a row. Beating out the highest end Porsches and Ferraris--which didn't stand a chance. Not only did the Corvette win, it usually won first AND second place.

So go ahead, get the Vette. You won't regret it.
 
Artfully Martial said:
So go ahead, get the Vette. You won't regret it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I would, even if I could afford a Vette.:p
Always did think Vettes were over rated and still do although they are nice, as well as decent cars, just not my cuppa tea.

And I agree about the horsepower and fast and miles per gallon.
I had a '57 Ford 312 V-8 that had a small cam, bored .030 over and the heads milled so that you had to retard the timing to get it to run on regular leaded gas.
This was all powered with a little Holley 2 Bbl and would get right at 22 mpg on the road at 70 mph and better, didn't do worth a squat in town though, too much fun at the stoplights.;) :D
When I got the car it had a 272 V-8 with the same carb and only got 13 mpg on the road.:(

Then in '68 I bought a little Opel Rallye Kadet with the 1.9 litre engine. There was nothing that I ever ran against that would take it in a block and I ran 383 Mopars, 283, 302, and 327 Chevies and the 360 ci Ford V-8, even ran a 426 Hemi once. Granted they might be even with me in a block but they couldn't pass me.
Also granted that in a block and a few feet they were pulling ahead quickly.
The fastest car I ever had it up against was a 305 Chevy that a friend of mine built from a 283. He had it in an old rusty Biscayne and talk about a sleeper!!!!
That old Chevy would pull the front wheels off the ground going from first to second with a four speed tranny!!!!

I'd like to put my Camry SE 4 banger up against a stock 265 ci 162 horse V-8 just to see how it would do as an experiment.:cool:
The little Toyota is really pretty quick, it's just that you don't see old fogeys like me driving them like that very often.;)
I think it would pretty well hold its own but I could be mistaken.

I do know the 225 horse V-6 that the Camry SE had in 2005 was pretty quick but I wasn't that impressed with its takeoff compared to the 160 horse 4 banger although it's dayumed hard to tell unless you're running one against the other and I'd want to drive one and then the other with the same driver swapping cars with me.

But it all may be moot anyway and I may come to my senses before I seriously get the trading bug again.
I did opt for longevity, dependability and mileage over speed and a quick getaway before and with my age I'd probably do the same again.:o
And if a person just has to drive a dayumed old stodgy Camry then I think they need the SE to get away from some of the stodginess.
The 2007 Camry SE is indeed a purty little thang.
I will drive one with the new 268 horse V-6's in it just too see if I can't live without it.
A dangerous move I know.;) :p :D
 
Well, I do indeed hope the car works out for you, I'm sure it's not a bad car. But in the end, when you pull through the lights, you'll be lucky to run a low 15 or pull .8 Gs on the skidpad.

Which isn't bad at all for a family car, really. But ultimately, still a family car. You might take a look at the VW R32, which they don't make this year, but I believe it made 230 horsepower and ran mid/low 14s with AWD and some nice luxury items. Definitely not bad at all.

But the Vette owns everything above and beyond. The new Z06 has been clocked running high 11 second quarter miles stock, which is absolutely obscene. The new Z06s out run my RACE car. Out handle it too.

If you spend enough on an Italian car, you can eventually beat it. A 600,000 dollar Enzo, for instance. The new Porsche 911 Turbo (at about 40k more) will drag with it, but get outhandled.

The only thing "wrong" with the Corvette is that it's so easily available to the middle class and it offers so much that everyone buys them. Just walking to class, I must walk by at least 10 Corvettes. Thus, they haven't nearly the exotic factor of Ferraris/Lamborghinis and certain Porsches (not the Boxster).

Tell us how your Camry experience goes, but do try to step into an Evo, STi, Mustang GT (MUST be a GT) or Corvette if only for the fun of it. Quite an experience.

I forgot to mention a couple other cars that might interest you. The new subaru legacy pulls low 14s I think and there's a new Mazda AWD car out that pulls mid 14s. Definitely look into those.
 
I live in flatlands,and have 4 cyl in both my cars, a Camry and a CRV. The only time I care about acceleration is when I am passing on those country state roads. Both cars are fine.
If I lived in the mountains, I would not consider a 4 cyl., at least not in my cars.

The Camry has 98,000 miles on it with the only problem involving a fuel tank valve.
The Honda has 24,000 miles on it and not a problem at all....yet. The Honda is an 05. I drive too much.
 
Well, the four cylinders I suggest are very different than what you're used to. These put out 300 horsepower stock--which is more than a 1999 Mustang GT with a 4.6 liter V8 puts out, or the same as the Mustang Cobra of that year, or the same amount as a Firebird Trans Am (non WS6) with a 5.7 liter LS1 V8 puts out in the same year.

But again, to be successful, you've got to stop thinking about engines and horsepower--these will lead you to the dark side.

The ONLY thing that matters is performance, however you define it. If it's a small four cylinder economy engine and it doesn't get great gas mileage (most don't, by the way, at least compared to V8s) then it's still failing you. If it's a huge 427 V8 and you can only pull a high 14 in the quarter, it hasn't gotten you anywhere. Reliability can be considered a form of performance too.

The only time these things need to be thought about is when you're designing a new car, which I assume none of us are planning to do soon, or when you're building a race car (because you have to make those decisions). Horsepower doesn't even actually mean anything at all. A car that puts out 500 horsepower on one dyno might put out "only 489" on another. So the situation is yet worse--not only is horsepower relevant only between your car (past) and your car (modified), it has to be on the exact same dyno. The gains aren't absolute, consider them relative.
 
I've got a '92 Civic that I'm giving to my brother's family that features four kids getting awfully close to that learners permit. Been a damned fine car and will replace it with a new one. I have complete confidence that it will give them good service as well.
Looked into the Hybrid, but pretty certain that they aren't worth the premium sticker price. The no frills DX model seems to be my style.

I cut my teeth on a '72 Dart with a slant six. A fantastic 225 CID engine if I recall our metallic green, bomb correctly. That engine was amazing. I think the rest of the car fell apart around that workhorse by the time dad sold it off. I have this wierd feeling that that old slant is still out there toiling away powering a boat or a wood chipper. I'd be willing to be the rest of that car was recycled and sold to the Asian market twenty years ago.
 
I have always wished life itsownself had not intruded as I was close to finishing the installation of a dual-quad 327, with accompanying header boxes, set back 10 inches, with Muncie 4-speed SS trans, in a '51 Ford body. We figured about 300 H.P. minimum (probably more) in a 2,000 pound body. Had to jerry-rig a ?Ford, if I remember correctly? radiator to fit. Guy down the street built a tunnel out of stainless steel for the intrustion of the transmission into the passenger compartment. He worked for Walgreens, back in the day when all Walgreens had a stainless steel kitchen and back counter space. Moving the engine back helped with the power transfer. In those days, J.C. Whitney (or Warshawsky's, as those of us in Chicago knew it) had engine mounts and hydralic clutches for such conversions out of the catelog.

One of the second generation hot rods, post WWII; the first being Lincoln and Caddy engines in light-weight ford and merc bodies.

Ah, probably would have killed myself.


Best wishes and safe driving with the Toyota.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top