Author Topic: Cars (Read 64663 times)

RickyJ · « **Reply #200 on:** Wed, 08 December 2010, 17:00:02 »

Quote from: ripster;259553

Damn. I looked on a map...

And you are RIGHT!

P.S. How come you guys gave up Alaska? After Sarah Palin I for one am willing to give it back.

What are you looking at us for, talk to the Russkies about that. You twits bought it for a mirrion dorras, so you get to keep Palin.

turbocharged · « **Reply #201 on:** Wed, 08 December 2010, 20:05:11 »

3 cars, 6 seats, and only 6-cylinders total....

'93 Mazda RX-7 (Track Car), '92 Acura NSX (Daily Driver), '83 Mazda RX-7 GSL (Backup)

D-EJ915 · « **Reply #202 on:** Wed, 08 December 2010, 21:45:13 »

Your neighbors must hate that you take up 3 spots lol, nice cars though (not a fan of old RX7s though)

RoboKrikit · « **Reply #203 on:** Wed, 08 December 2010, 21:52:45 »

Ooh, I'm jealous of all three. I don't have any rotaries right now. My first two cars were RX-7s. Right now I have a Miata.

turbocharged · « **Reply #204 on:** Thu, 09 December 2010, 10:43:11 »

Quote from: D-EJ915;259934

Your neighbors must hate that you take up 3 spots lol, nice cars though (not a fan of old RX7s though)

We had plenty of parking...plus I only lived there for 7 months. Other than that 7 months they are kept at my house...both the black RX-7 and NSX stay in the garage, silver RX-7 in the street, and my gf's Element in the driveway.

Quote from: RoboKrikit;259937

Ooh, I'm jealous of all three. I don't have any rotaries right now. My first two cars were RX-7s. Right now I have a Miata.

Miata's are good fun. I was originally looking at a early 90's Miata instead of the '83 RX-7, but they were about 5 time more expensive and I wanted both about equally...so FB RX-7 it was.

PikachuDX · « **Reply #205 on:** Thu, 09 December 2010, 16:21:32 »

Gw%D6;oJWi^f_{[q%^vkh}O.@ACOi.bL3B8sUY'G5#zUMBsbgj

turbocharged · « **Reply #206 on:** Thu, 09 December 2010, 16:41:34 »

Quote from: PikachuDX;260309

This is the most jealous I've ever been of someone on a forum. I'll implode with happiness if I ever land myself an AE86. Especially a Trueno! How much did you get it for?

Currently driving an old BMW e30 316 touring. 134k miles, no brake fluid, ruined gearbox, every panel dented.

Sniff

I would take a good condition E30 over a AE86 most days of the week....probably 4/7 days

D-EJ915 · « **Reply #207 on:** Thu, 09 December 2010, 18:49:54 »

Isn't that one of those cars which is cheap and easy to get as to why it is popular?

RoboKrikit · « **Reply #208 on:** Thu, 09 December 2010, 22:00:54 »

It is popular because DORIFTOOOOOOOOOO!!! OUAAAAAaAAAaA.

PikachuDX · « **Reply #209 on:** Fri, 10 December 2010, 08:59:01 »

!m,x18P[FU-9W_hgZpk%s6tCXY5h%90c3lc.'MF]XI~x+j.^u%

turbocharged · « **Reply #210 on:** Fri, 10 December 2010, 12:52:57 »

Quote from: PikachuDX;260657

Don't say that

Something about the classic lines of the E30 BMW's....I would kill for an E30 M3...absolutely one of my favorite cars ever. Plus, I love inline six engines...the only engine I love more than 13B/20B rotaries is the Nissan RB26.

I never was a big fan of 4-cyl engines...even though I work on them every day.

PikachuDX · « **Reply #211 on:** Fri, 10 December 2010, 13:07:05 »

w1Qv4O0,yuixH,vD%-ig9v3;K9tz-FL~C[&uxs_!TjPctWs~'}

turbocharged · « **Reply #212 on:** Fri, 10 December 2010, 15:56:01 »

Yes...I do like it...that thing is awesome looking.

AndrewZorn · « **Reply #213 on:** Fri, 10 December 2010, 21:59:23 »

Quote from: turbocharged;259898

3 cars, 6 seats, and only 6-cylinders total....

'93 Mazda RX-7 (Track Car), '92 Acura NSX (Daily Driver), '83 Mazda RX-7 GSL (Backup)

AN NSX, the car I wish my MR2 was

LUCKY

But I've shifted my focus for now, I am currently frustrated with my car and currently identify more with my new vehicle:

Not mine specifically, but it's what I have.

Shawn Stanford · « **Reply #214 on:** Sun, 12 December 2010, 04:34:14 »

My brother had an E30 M3. It was a nice car, but not any better than my 89 SHO.

turbocharged · « **Reply #215 on:** Mon, 13 December 2010, 01:16:51 »

Quote from: Shawn Stanford;261624

My brother had an E30 M3. It was a nice car, but not any better than my 89 SHO.

I guess it depends on your definition of better.

Shawn Stanford · « **Reply #216 on:** Mon, 13 December 2010, 05:04:47 »

It wasn't faster or more comfortable, and the SHO had more room for folks and their stuff. It might have been able to carve a better line in an autocross, but on the road it couldn't get away. Looks are subjective; the M3 was a very handsome car, but I preferred my SHO.

Shawn Stanford · « **Reply #217 on:** Mon, 13 December 2010, 06:50:45 »

If it's red, it's a 1989; that's the only year they made them in red.

itlnstln · « **Reply #218 on:** Mon, 13 December 2010, 07:05:56 »

My GF's mom has an M-series Z3. She always lets us drive it when we come up. Too bad Chicago just got dumped on. No Z3 this trip.

itlnstln · « **Reply #219 on:** Mon, 13 December 2010, 08:43:38 »

Mom's everyday car is an X3; I don't like it as much as my Edge, though. They have the hook-up now that her brother works for BMW as a tech.

KillerBee · « **Reply #220 on:** Mon, 13 December 2010, 09:38:03 »

Quote from: PikachuDX;260309

This is the most jealous I've ever been of someone on a forum. I'll implode with happiness if I ever land myself an AE86. Especially a Trueno! How much did you get it for?

Currently driving an old BMW e30 316 touring. 134k miles, no brake fluid, ruined gearbox, every panel dented.

Sniff

I paid 2,100 back in 2006 and its taken me 4 years to get her to look like that

bhtooefr · « **Reply #221 on:** Wed, 15 December 2010, 12:01:32 »

Of course, the funny thing is, the E30 M3 actually is a four-cylinder - a modified version of the old M10 4-banger. (Of course, the M10 itself was quite beastly, in the correct trim - BMW used M10 blocks in their turbo Formula 1 cars, with rumors of them hitting 1500 hp in qualifying trim by the end of the turbo era.)

And, handling is important, too... and not just in an autocross.

itlnstln · « **Reply #222 on:** Wed, 15 December 2010, 12:14:24 »

Good to see you, bhtooefr.

bhtooefr · « **Reply #223 on:** Thu, 16 December 2010, 06:08:21 »

Never got around to making an adapter for it, my interest went other directions. (Happens a lot with me.)

panda-R · « **Reply #224 on:** Thu, 16 December 2010, 10:36:15 »

I just took delivery of my McLaren MP4-12C. Unfortunatel my paws are too big for the steering wheel and I might have to sell it at a loss. PM me for details.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #225 on:** Thu, 16 December 2010, 11:07:44 »

I'll take it for 12,000 bamboo shoots.

panda-R · « **Reply #226 on:** Thu, 16 December 2010, 11:19:58 »

Quote from: keyboardlover;264035

I'll take it for 12,000 bamboo shoots.

how many metric tons is that? I'd let it go for 100 Metric Tons.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #227 on:** Thu, 16 December 2010, 11:27:08 »

Quote from: panda-R

I'd let it go for 100 Metric Tons.

Deal! ...oh wait...how much is insurance on that bad boy?

Better ask your buddy.

mr_a500 · « **Reply #228 on:** Sun, 13 March 2011, 17:48:58 »

bhtooefr · « **Reply #229 on:** Sun, 13 March 2011, 17:52:59 »

The 2.5 eats timing chains, the 2.0 TDI eats high pressure fuel pumps and has intercooler icing problems, so that leaves the low end 2.0 gasser, which is basically a 1974 design, and works great, albeit slowly.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #230 on:** Sun, 13 March 2011, 17:54:20 »

Lol...well it looks nice!

I'm a huge Consumer Reports fan. Here's what they say:

Looks to be above average. Congrats mate!

mr_a500 · « **Reply #231 on:** Sun, 13 March 2011, 18:09:17 »

bhtooefr · « **Reply #232 on:** Sun, 13 March 2011, 18:12:16 »

The US gets a very similar lineup to Canada.

Anyway, I've heard of the timing chains going as early as 50,000 miles. They're a rather flimsy system. And, when they go, pistons crash into valves. Repairing the engine at that point is more expensive than replacing it with a good used one.

(One general rule with VW is never get one with a timing chain, because they suck at chains.)

Best preventative maintenance for the timing chain is to run the correct oil (I'm guessing it'll be a synthetic meeting VW's 502.00 standard, maybe 504.00), and change it out at the correct interval (usually on VWs, at 5,000, 10,000, and every 10,000 miles thereafter).

woody · « **Reply #233 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 06:31:15 »

Quote from: mr_a500;311254

What do you think? Did I make the right choice? (...now that it's too late)

At least it's manual gear shift.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #234 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 06:36:00 »

I prefer Automatic. In most modern cars Manual offers no advantage.

bhtooefr · « **Reply #235 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 06:41:11 »

Except maintenance cost advantages, repair cost advantages, and real-world (as opposed to EPA) fuel economy advantages.

mr_a500 · « **Reply #236 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 08:26:58 »

bhtooefr · « **Reply #237 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 08:45:53 »

Well, at least it's a conventional automatic, and not the DSG.

(The DSG is really, really nice to drive when it's tuned properly (some models were, 2009 TDIs were not), but it's a maintenance hog.)

keyboardlover · « **Reply #238 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 08:46:19 »

Quote from: bhtooefr;311473

Except maintenance cost advantages, repair cost advantages, and real-world (as opposed to EPA) fuel economy advantages.

In most modern cars this is a non issue. Most automatic transmissions these days shift just as efficiently and are super reliable. Especially the Japanese and German made ones. Manual offers no advantage unless you think its "more fun".

mr_a500 · « **Reply #239 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 09:28:26 »

Quote from: ripster;311509

Bwahahaha. Jetta? You DID check with Click and Clack first didn't you?

It has also been my observation. But in my drug dealer infested neighborhood they quickly move up to Audis. Douchebag in a an Audi cut me off yesterday.

Yes, I already read that, thanks. I found it in another post you made when I searched, "geekhack +jetta *******". (...I occasionally put "*******" in my searches, just for the hell of it)

That must only apply to the USA. In Canada, all the ******* drivers are either:

1. Young "white trash" guys in monster pickups
2. Young bimbo *****es in huge SUVs
3. Chinese drivers in Toyota Camrys or Honda Civics (...or any other car, actually)
4. Old people driving Buicks

bhtooefr · « **Reply #240 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 11:06:33 »

Even modern dual-clutch automatics do, in real world (again, not EPA test cycle) driving, still use more fuel. They can't predict a lot of driving conditions, they're purely reactive.

And, yes, the Japanese automatics are super reliable, when maintained.

The German ones, on the other hand... some of them are, some of them aren't at all. (VW's actually been using Japanese automatics more and more, lately, when they use a conventional torque converter automatic.)

bhtooefr · « **Reply #241 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 11:12:27 »

Oh, and as for Jetta drivers being douchebags... here, they're usually sorority girls. Bad at driving, but not necessarily douchebags. The douchebags all have GTIs. (And Golfs are just downright rare.)

(Either that, or they're TDIs, and they're hypermiling. Then again, my Golf TDI, I'm often driving it hard, to keep the turbo from sooting up. But, I don't dart back and forth, pass on the right, that crap.)

woody · « **Reply #242 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 11:23:40 »

Quote from: keyboardlover;311500

Manual offers no advantage unless you think its "more fun".

You're just a commuter, aren't you?
Translated to Keyboard Land, this should be similar to saying other types than rubber domes are there just for fun.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #243 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 12:00:48 »

I have a 2006 Infiniti g35x with a dual clutch auto tranny (NOT the poker model). It's very reliable and fuel efficient and I don't have to use an annoying clutch =)

bhtooefr · « **Reply #244 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 13:07:26 »

Nope, it's got an Aisin (that's some funny **** right there, a Nissan using an Aisin trans instead of a JATCO) 5-speed torque converter automatic.

Reliable, yes.

Fuel efficient, relative to a properly driven manual, no.

Annoying clutch... some are annoying, some aren't.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #245 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 14:11:44 »

Ehh...whatever, I bet the fuel efficiency difference is negligible and not worth the trouble. I can't drink a milkshake whilst driving a manual

bhtooefr · « **Reply #246 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 14:42:28 »

For that matter, in the cars I've owned with manuals (one Jetta, two Golfs, and a Miata - I've only owned one automatic car), accidentally fondling a girl's legs, when she's got them held away from the shifter, and you're being careful, is still easy.

mr_a500 · « **Reply #247 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 14:43:35 »

Hell, you can do it with an automatic if she's not paying attention. The tricky part is finding an excuse to accidentally remove her clothes.

keyboardlover · « **Reply #248 on:** Mon, 14 March 2011, 16:00:14 »

Let's not forget the joys of roadhead folks...

keyboardlover · « **Reply #249 on:** Sat, 19 March 2011, 10:33:45 »

Today my car is getting inspected and Infiniti gave me a loaner car. But not just any loaner.

A 2011 Infiniti G37x with 49 (yes 49) miles. 328 horsepower. This thing is FAST!!

News:

Author Topic: Cars (Read 64663 times)

woody

woody