You are here:
Forums
Maintenance & Repair
To Fix Up or Trade Up, That is the Question

536 messages, Last post on Jul 24, 2009 at 9:12 AM
You are in the Maintenance & Repair Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright
|
Replying to: srs_49 (May 06, 2009 9:00 am) http://carfamily.wordpress.com/category/hummer/ What did GM say years ago? Something to the effect of "If safety was all that mattered we'd build a tank that floats, wouldn't go over 25 mph and forced everyone to be strapped down when in motion --- but it would never sell. It's not what people want." I tend to think completely opposite of what some are saying concerning "perception". Reality is the goal. A teen driving a V-6 Honda with its yawn image probably has no idea his car is powerful so he might have no idea how fast he is going. He might feel the need to prove his car has muscle via the accelerator. The SHO OTOH has the perception of being nastier and faster than it really is by today's standards so his ego is satisfied and he thinks he is going faster than he really is and has nothing to prove. "Slow" cars tend to have smaller engines so they weigh less -- not good in a multiple vehicle accident. Little cars lack metal and weight which can act to protect in accidents. Talk to your insurance man and he will have tons of stories about some family who gives their kid an Escalade only to have them total it the next week. Many teens roll SUV's. Most of the fatalities I've heard of involving teens happened when they were driving some type of SUV. And unless mom and dad are made of money gas mileage needs to be considered. My sons have driven the SHO for a few years and who is the one who wrecks it? Mom, the experienced driver, of course. Won't be buying the new SHO though -- this one really IS a beast: http://njection.com/blogs/jalopnik/archive/2009/02/11/2010-ford-taurus-sho-live-- - and-with-a-ridiculous-torque-curve-ford-taurus-sho.aspx Makes my SHO look like a pansy: http://www.shotimes.com/php-bin/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&mo- de=thread&order=0&thold=0&sid=22
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: maryh3 (May 06, 2009 10:26 am) Oddly enough the best car statistically for a teenager is one without a back seat! That's not off-color---what it means is that he/she can only carry one passenger---less distraction, trouble, etc.
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 06, 2009 10:44 am) |
|
|
Replying to: maryh3 (May 06, 2009 10:56 am) By the time he's saved the money, and actually gotten the thing to run, he'll be 22 I rest my case, ladies and gentlemen of the jury. |
|
|
Replying to: maryh3 (May 06, 2009 10:26 am) Hell, I'd love to drive a tank. If they can build a 48 ton Sherman series tank for under 20 grand, and get 26 mpg hwy on it... sign me up! Wouldn't matter if it only got 25mph... the shortest distance between 2 points thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jipster (May 06, 2009 12:14 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: maryh3 (May 06, 2009 10:56 am) The car did have some maintenance items. It also had only a 12/12,000 factory warranty, probably just before manufactors went to the 36/36,000 warranty. So, I was happy I had purchased an extended warranty. But actually, even with a few 'issues', I think I only broke even on what the repairs cost verse the cost of the warranty. But, it still had over a year left on the warranty, and I strongly suggested to the guy I sold it to that he should pay the $50 transfer fee so he could have about 18,000 mile and 18 months of warranty on the car. Overall, the car was very nice. The interior looked great. Ours was black, and looked nice outside until the paint started to evaporate off. It was very quiet and stable at speed. I actually compared it to a Lexus - until you slamed a door - then it sounded like a Ford. But driving the car - it was great. Problems - various things failed, I actually don't remember what at this time - AC clutch failed and leaked, motor mount loose, etc. The biggest problem was the clutch, an even bigger problem on the 1989 models. It just required more and more effort to push as the car aged. We drove it from the midwest to NJ area one summer, hitting some extended traffic slowdowns on the trip, and the clutch was terrible, inching along in trafffic with constant upshifts/downshift with high effort for miles and miles of construction zones, heavy traffic, etc. This trip made me decide the car had to go. And, this motor had no torque at all. To get any speed, you had to really get it into the higher rpms, or it was dead. At 3,500rpm the valves on the secondary set of intake runners opened, and the engine came to life. But cruising on a two lane, even with a long passing opening, you better drop down from 5th to 4th, or you would take forever to pass at 65mph. Several times at more moderate speeds, like 45 or 50, I got the car into a place where it was almost dangerous because it had no acceleration available in the gear I had it in - you had to downshift, at times more than one gear, and go to full throttle to get it to move. And then the torque steer jumped up. You just can't beat big iron, high torque motors for these situations. And, this is why I don't really like to drive a manual, you have to be thinking about what you need to be doing with the gears and throttle all the time - with an automatic you just mash to throttle and let the auto tranny decide how far down it can downshift. It was fast. I can attest to 135mph and this was not topped out. A car that was nice to own, but I was happy to sell.
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 06, 2009 12:59 pm) Well, of course. Without any ammunition, the marketabillity of the things go waaaaaayyyy down.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jipster (May 06, 2009 2:06 pm) I would certainly run a CARFAX on any used tank. You just don't know where they've been.
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 06, 2009 2:18 pm) |
|
You are here:
Forums
Maintenance & Repair
To Fix Up or Trade Up, That is the Question
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle


Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats