« October 2005 | Main | December 2005 »
November 30, 2005
Comments Deux
Sometimes, someone other than Buck leaves a comment for me.
Reader Tolovemoon writes:
Hi, I think you have all the right ideas for buying a used car. I really like your point about the car stereo being replaced and how it will give you a better idea to if the car will have electric problems... I had a Ford Taurus station wagon that had many grimlins..inside lights, radio, or the dinger would all dim and sometimes not come on. A few cars I have owned even had weather temperamental problems with the electircal things. So the electrical in cars today are a big top priority for me when I am looking to buy a car or to give my opinion to wether I feel comfortable driving. Anyways enjoyed your normal entries. I was searching for tools or things to upgrade my husbands garage in the technology aspect like testers and such when I found this link.
Thank you for your nice comment. If I can help just one person...
Reader Sarah McBride adds:
When your car in not functioning properly it means only one thing that it is not in good condition. You have to check your car regularly. You must also be sensitive to know your car needs, 90 percent of vehicles show that motorists or auto users need some more consumer education on proper use and maintenance of vehicles.
Aiding my fellow consumers is the goal here. If anyone has a specific question please be sure to ask and I will answer as best I can. Or I will make something up that sounds like I know what I am talking about.
Jay Stevens contributed this in response to my comments on how a driver's personality changes behind the wheel of a car:
In fact, most drivers on the road don't fully realize the responsibility they take on every time they get behind the wheel of a car. We've all been on the freeway, stopped by an accident. Well, those accidents are common and caused by a variety of irresponsible behaviors.
Who can argue with that?
What would one of my ease to write, respond to comments, articles be without something from Buck? He also has something to say about personality change while driving.
I think that AJ(my 16-year-old son who is about to start driving) may be upset at this comment but...
I have seen a radical change in my driving as I migrated from a wimpy 1.8 with a turbo to a smile-inducing 3.5 280HP engine.
Now if your hobby car has this type of affect on your, what will it do to the mind and emotions of a 16-year-old boy in LA? I know what I was like behind the wheel of a '69 Firebird convertible. Fortunately, I have another 8 years before I have to worry about this in earnest.
Careful with that powerful Infiniti Sedan, someone in the soccer car pool may call child protective services on you for doing burn outs in the school pick up line.
Posted by Scott at 11:46 AM | Comments (0)
November 29, 2005
I love geting comments
I get comments, which means someone other than pornographers looking to link my blog to their site is reading this stuff.
In response to my article about weird GM engines, Reader Terry Brown writes:
No matter what kind of vehicle you have, make sure that the engine that supports your car is truly a tough one. Engine play a very important parts for us to control the vehicle.
Umm, OK.
Frequent Reader and commentator Buck writes in regard to my personal daily driver:
There was such promise at the beginning. I thought that Little Leadfoot (my fiancee) was having a positive impact on your automotive sensibilities (or potential lack thereof). You crushed my hope.
If my personal choice for transportation crushes what little hope you have left in your life, I suggest you get help before you hurt yourself.
Regarding my suggestion that the New Mustang is a glorified Girl Car and not worthy of consideration as a proper Sporting Sedan, Buck Writes:
While I had my summer flirtation with the Mustang (thanks again for your review, it was dead on) I went for Chocolate Chip ice cream (actually, I think it was Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough) and got the G35 Sedan. It's fun! And it works with kids. As the rear seats don't fold down (and Little Leadfoot has the G35 Coupe) it wouldn't be the right car for you.
I am going to resist the temptation to say, "I told you so," when I counseled Buck not to buy a New Mustang for his commuting needs and occasional family hauling. I also told him to consider other alternatives beside the G35 Sedan as I feel that the Nissan/Infiniti engineering quality and construction materials are at the trailing edge of Japanese automobile standards (only surpassed by Mitsubishi for the worst of a good bunch). The G35 Sedan and coupe share the same platform and power train as the Nissan 350Z which has enough power and torque to overwhelm the stock tires with the standard traction control system turned off. Power-induced over steer, yahoo!!! For a suburban, commuting, drudge, shackled with family responsibilities a little rear tire spin is about as exciting as it can get I suppose.
Buck keeps writing:
There has to be a car out there that meets your needs and has some style. Honda seems to be losing market share as its cars have absolutely no style. They are franks and beans (not even chicken in my book). Toyota is gaining and will soon pass GM as the world leader. Toyota brought us Lexus which used to have style and Scion which has style (whether you like its cars or not, they are not like anything else). Plus, Toyota leads with the Prius in the hybrid market.
If "popular" meant good, then McDonalds would be the epitome of fine dining. Toyota is going to take GM to school on being the world's leading supplier of cars for a variety of reasons; largely by never resting on their well deserved laurels like GM has done for the last 40 years. I have explained this before and I will say it again: Honda makes the best engines and transmissions in the world. Honda makes more internal combustion engines than any other company in the world (including motorcycles, generators and car engines) and they get it right.
The Toyota Prius and similar hybrid technology cars are an interesting experiment, Prius' have a nasty habit of shutting down for no apparent reason and refusing to restart. I am willing to allow other people to be real world guinea pigs while the technology gets developed. Perhaps one day when the technology has a few generations of evolution under its belt I may consider purchasing a hybrid. But even if the price of gas remained at $3 per gallon, it would take nearly 200,000 miles of usage to recoup the extra cost of purchase for an under powered Corolla on skinny tires. Modern gasoline powered Hondas are essentially pollution free and my 3,400 lbs. four door 2003 Accord gets 20mpg in hard city driving. So get back to me when the hybrids are more than a Volvo substitute for the Birkenstock crowd.
That Buck, he loves to write:
Scott, you, unlike our presidents, are a Car Guy. You have rebuilt several Mustangs and other vehicles. There has to be something for you other than an Accord!
Let's add this up, shall we? The Accord is well screwed to together, economical to operate, and is capable of completing the tasks I assign it. It is clean, comfortable and paid for. I am secure in my masculinity so I do not need a car to reconfirm my position in the social food chain. If I fail to become a slavish consumer whose choice is shaped by the expectations of others, I can live with that decision.
Keep those comments coming.
Posted by Scott at 11:31 AM | Comments (1)
November 22, 2005
Driver Personality Change
Does your personality change behind the wheel? I know that mine does. I like to think of myself as an easy going, even tempered, rational person who can see the good in everyone. But once I get behind the wheel of a car all I can see are morons out to murder me with their incompetence as drivers. When I am driving it never fails to amaze me how the shallow end of the gene pool has been allowed to continue to breed and become licensed drivers. I am continually searching for the next knuckle dragger who will run a red light or make a left turn from the right lane. Not a day goes by that I have to save my life with superior driving skills to compensate for the lack of ability of those who surround me on the road.
I also think of myself as an emotional chameleon; my aggressiveness behind the wheel is dictated by the vehicle I am driving. If I am driving my boring family car daily driver (a '03 Honda Accord LX four door) I drive like the gray-haired suburban dad. I am cautious and courteous on the road and I drive within the speed limit. I would never dream of dicing with other drivers nor would I ever weave through traffic.
But if I am driving my hobby car, a 1987 Honda CRX Si that has been modified for performance driving, I change into a much more aggressive driver. Freeway on ramps are an opportunity to feel the power of my performance-built engine and twisting roads allow me to test the lateral adhesion of my upgraded suspension. I am always take care to never push the limits of the car, the road conditions or my abilities on the public road; testing the limits of a car belongs in a controlled environment like a race track. It could be argued that I dance right up to the limits of safe driving behavior in my hobby car while on the street, but I do not break the law when driving on the street.
Posted by Scott at 6:03 AM | Comments (2)
November 21, 2005
Car Troubles?
Of all the troubles in the world to have, trying to decide if I should replace my perfectly good three year-old automobile with a new car should be the least of anyone's problems. But I have been struggling to find a way to justify buying a new car even though my current daily driver is working well and is completely paid for.
My current ride is a 2003 Honda Accord LX four door, which I have owned since new. It delivers reasonable economy (slightly better than 20 mile per gallon in my heavy-footed stop and go driving routine) combined with enough size to haul four or five people and their luggage. The trunk will swallow a $40 dollar load of firewood and the rear seat back folds down to allow the large flea market purchase to come home in our car. But best of all, I paid cash for the car and it costs me nothing other than routine maintenance and fuel. The only replacement that the car will need in the next 55,000 miles is a pair of tires, which are approaching the end of their service life right now (I replaced the other pair about a year ago). So there is really no logical reason to ditch this car.
Ah, logic. The decision to purchase a car is not always based on logic. Emotion is as great an inducement to change your mobility method as any form of logic, maybe more so. My boring four door Accord screams out to the world "Mediocrity!" If this car were an item on a fancy dinner menu, it would be the chicken dish. If it were a suit in a Men's Store it would be grey flannel. Of the 31 Flavors, it would be Vanilla.
The kinfolk told Jed to move away to the hills of Beverly, the Jefferson's moved on up to a deluxe apartment in the sky and maybe it is time for me to shed my dowdy feathers and fly... a little bit. My kids are nearly out of the nest, the fiancee would like to see me sporting a higher profile ride, and I am good enough and smart enough to deserve a car more in keeping with current station in life. By golly I DESERVE a great, stylish car. A car that shouts out, "Here I come! Get out of my way for I am truly a special person who drives a truly special car."
So let's crunch some numbers: My current car is probably worth slightly better than $10K as a trade in, and even a entry level Style-mobile is going to cost something in the range of $35k, so we are talking about a cash hit of $25K or financing costs of about $750 per month. A lease would bring the monthly down considerably, but that is all money down the drain because I could not deduct a lease from my income taxes. With my son rapidly approaching college, my daughter rapidly approaching any shopping mall and my fiancee planning a lavish wedding celebration for us plus shopping for a new house for our blended families to share in the white hot California real estate market is this the best time to be buying a new car?
Rhetorical questions aside, what exactly would I buy? Two doors or four? Some people have a real phobia about being seen in a sedan rather than a coupe. Me, I am secure enough in my masculinity to drive anything. I have owned a Triumph Spitfire and a VW Cabriolet so obviously I am not afraid to be seen in any kind of vehicle.
Is there a manufacturer that I should be concentrating on? Lexus? Boring. Mercedes? Common as dirt out here in LA. BMW? Yawn. Acura? Not much cache. Audi? Too expensive for a upscale VW. VW? Been there, done that, not going back. American made? No way.
I use my car primarily for solo commuting ten miles to work and ten miles back on the mean streets of LA's rush hour crawl. But from time to time I need to haul a bag of planter mix, or a couple of lawn chairs or some other cargo so I need something that can handle a load. If I got a cute little roadster like a Lotus Elise, or a Porsche Boxster I would also need to buy a used pick up truck to hold in reserve when I need to carry something larger than an overnight bag.
Back to my food analogy comparing my boring Accord to a chicken dinner, a grey suit or vanilla ice cream. I like chicken, I own a grey suit and I always order Vanilla ice cream. So in a sense, the Accord is perfect for me. The out of pocket expense is low and it has all the features I need in a car.
There is an old saying, "Happiness in not having what you want. Happiness is wanting what you have."
Posted by Scott at 6:01 AM | Comments (4)
November 20, 2005
Presidential Car Guys?
Have there been any US presidents that we would consider a "car guy?" The last US presidential election fostered a lot of discussion about which of the two major party candidates the average American would like to sit down and have a beer with. But there has never been any discussion in the popular press about whom the average gear head would want to talk cars with. Presidents, and those who aspire to become president, will often go to great pains to show through photo-ops that they are men of the people, you would expect to see a candidate hanging out in a garage talking cars. Motor sports and home mechanics are popular American pursuits, but it seems to me that we have not had any potential candidates who could be realistically expected to differentiate between a differential and a drive shaft.
Woodrow Wilson was the first President to be driven to his inauguration so he gets Honorable Mention as a Car Guy. But I am willing to bet that the Washington DC sanitation department was tired of sweeping up horse poop and lobbied to have the new president make the change to cars rather than the traditional horse-drawn carriage.
Colonel Ike Eisenhower led a convey of Army vehicles from Washington DC to San Francisco in the early 1930's to determine how long it would take to reinforce the West Coast in the event of enemy attack. He discovered that it took nearly a month to make the transcontinental journey on the deplorable roads that spanned the country. One the first things he did when he became president 20 years later was to sign the legislation that created the national highway system that gave birth to the Interstate highway system that we take for granted today.
Lyndon Johnson liked to drive his Secret Service Lincoln limousine around his huge Texas ranch to check on his cattle. And it was rumored that Richard Nixon would take his Lincoln for high speed blasts up and down the Interstate highway just outside his San Clemente California "Western White House" late at night to relieve the pressures of office.
Jerry Ford's first speech as President was to modestly declare that he was "... just a Ford, not a Lincoln." The only driving he did was on the golf course and he was famously inept at that.
Jimmy Carter was a farm boy so it is certain that he grew up with a wrench in his hand to repair farm machinery. He became a Propulsion Officer on a Nuclear submarine and in his retirement he builds houses for the less fortunate through Habitat for Humanity, so he is the most mechanical president so far. But he walked back to the White House from his inauguration so he loses any Car Guy points for that.
Ronald Reagan was photographed driving his jeep on his California ranch and made the pilgrimage to Dayton to see Richard Petty win his 200th stock car race. But both gestures seemed more like ploys to shape his image rather than real interests.
Bill Clinton was a Ford man; prior to marrying Hillary he owned a Mustang convertible and a Ranchero truck with an Astroturf carpet in the bed. When asked why the working end of the Ranchero was lined with the fake grass, the president responded with a wink, "Don't ask."
The current administration certainly seems to be automotively involved. Between George W. Bush and his Vice President Dick Cheney, they possess three convictions for driving under the influence. And toss in the president's wife Laura who was behind the wheel when her high school boy friend was killed in an automobile accident. In the interests of political balance it is important to mention that the handguns that most Americans possess legally in their home have killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.
It seems to me that our presidents have only been tangentially connected to automobiles. An interest in things automotive or mechanical does not seem to be an important political qualifier for public office, which puzzles me because Americans have a demonstrated interest in all things automotive. NASCAR draws more fans than any other sport, car magazines are amongst the most popular periodicals and nearly every American relies upon a car for transportation.
The only public figure that admits to working on his own cars is General Colin Powell, former Secretary of State, who made a nice side business of buying and fixing up used Volvo's for resale during his military career. Not afraid to get his hand greasy, General Powell has publicly stated that he does not want the dirty job of being the President of the United States. I think that proves that car guys are a lot smarter than we are given credit for.
Posted by Scott at 5:56 AM | Comments (0)
November 5, 2005
Weird GM engines
I have known and loved some strange automobile engines in my lifetime. I suppose is part of my obstinate nature to embrace the odd or the unusual, it is far too easy to run with herd, I do not roll that way. Me, I prefer to stand out in the crowd, follow the path least traveled, and explore new territory. In my view a 400 hp small block Chevy is boring; seen one, seen a million of them.
I look for innovation in engine design and I like to recognize engineering daring. Good old General Motors is sometimes viewed as resting on their engine design laurels. What other automobile company would celebrate that their mainstay engine, the small block V8, has been in production for 50 years? But GM used to be in the cutting edge of automobile engine design.
In the 1950's, GM responded to the success of Volkswagen/Porsche and Renault selling millions of cars with air-cooled, aluminum-cased, opposed four cylinder engines by creating their own air-cooled aluminum block opposed six cylinder engine for the ill-fated Corvair. You have to give GM credit for trying by eventually selling a version of that engine with a factory turbo charger. But even though that engine used lightweight alloys to reduce weight, it still came to market heavier than a similar displacement Ford inline six of a more conventional design.
Expanding upon their investment in lightweight engine designs, GM introduced a 3.2-liter aluminum V8 based upon their cast iron block small block design. Regrettably, the US buying public made larger displacement iron engines their primary choices and GM sold off the aluminum V8 to Britain's Leyland Motors where it got stuffed successfully into a succession of saloons (sedans to us Americans), Land Rover products, and even into the MGB.
GM engineers still had faith in aluminum allow engines and were unwilling to let their greater production cost to deter their attempts to put it into regular production. GM's large block engines were powerful but heavy so an aluminum-alloy version was created for specialty (racing) usage. But the limited demand could not justify the costs and the large block GM V8 faded away just as another GM aluminum engine came into production.
The all-new Chevrolet Vega was GM's answer to the rising tide of smaller foreign cars taking market share in America at the end of the 1960's. Looking like a scaled down version of the Camaro, the Vega used an overhead cam in-line four with an aluminum block. The revolutionary breakthrough made by this engine was that it used no iron sleeves to prevent excessive wear between the pistons and the cylinder walls. Previous aluminum block engines need to be fitted with the iron sleeves, but GM and Reynolds Aluminum claimed that they had created a newer, stronger alloy that eliminated the need for the extra expense. It certainly kept cost down... for GM. Vega owners discovered that the engines would hand grenade at about 50,000 miles.
The Vega engine was actually a pretty good design, if you discount that nasty habit of wearing pistons through the cylinder wall. Famous engine building company Cosworth eventually was commissioned by GM to build a double overhead cam version of the Vega engine with mechanical fuel injection. Part of the Cosworth conversion was to add a set of iron sleeves to preserve the engine.
GM currently has an inline 5-cylinder engine that is exclusive to their small and mid-sized trucks. This engine has earned praise for its high torque capability and appears to be selling well. But long before this engine, GM stole market share from industry leader Ford in the late 1920's by offering in line six cylinder engines when you could only get a four in a Model T. Perhaps the most famous inline six cylinder from GM was the "Stove Bolt" six that powered nearly everything in the bottom end of the GM offerings starting from the early 1930's. The Stove Bolt powered the very first Corvettes and remained in production mainly for truck use until very recently in a series of continually updated versions.
But my all time favorite version of the GM inline six-cylinder engine was a Pontiac offering in the 1960's with an overhead cam design. Only sold for a few years because Americans preferred V8 to inline six, no matter how sophisticated the design, the over head cam GM six was America's answer to the Jaguar and Mercedes OHC six cylinder engines that were so successful for those manufacturers. There was an effort to used the OHC six in performance applications, but there was never much interest and Pontiac quietly dropped the engine.
A friend is restoring a 1967 Chevy Nova with a 200 cubic inch inline six. I have urged him to drop a late model 300 cubic inch GM inline six into the car or maybe even a Pontiac OHC six. But he prefers to be a member of the herd and drop in just another small block V8. Ho hum, so boring.
Posted by Scott at 2:52 PM | Comments (4)