Last post on Dec 26, 2006 at 9:00 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
Ford Taurus, Toyota Camry, Pontiac Grand Prix, Automotive News
#37 of 56 Re: Speedos [john_324]
Dec 19, 2006 (10:56 am)
The speedo on the 2006 Xterra is similar:
I mean, it has a pretty powerful engine and all, but would you really WANT to take something that upright and tall up to 140 mph, even if it could theoretically do it?!
One thing I don't like about the Xterra's gauges is the way the speedo and tach only take up half of the gauge face. That forces the numbers to all get crunched together, and isn't the best for visibility. Also, when you turn the car on, those little chunks in the lower left corner of the speedo and tach face glow orange. Took me the longest time to stop associating that with an idiot light!
Also, the oil pressure gauge always catches my eye before the temp gauge, because it's actually in the face for the tach. At a quick glance, I'll see the oil pressure needle creeping up toward "H", and my first thought is "damn, this thing is running hot". Until I realize that it's NOT the temp gauge.
#38 of 56 Re: Speedos [andre1969]
Dec 19, 2006 (11:17 am)
I know what you mean re mistaking gauges. My father's old 911 has 3 different oil gauges...temp, pressure and level, all clustered together.
While oil temp and pressure always read properly when the car is on, oil level only reads properly when the car is running, but stopped and on a level surface.
This has led (more than once, I'll add) a heart-stopping situation where I'm motoring along at a good clip, only to glance down and see a needle in the red! I freak out for a few seconds before realizing which gauge it is.
The little pictograms don't help much either, as they all feature the same oil can, just with different things happening to it...
#39 of 56 Geeze...
Dec 19, 2006 (11:23 am)
...my 1988 Buick Park Avenue has similar-sized speedo and tach with the numeral placed approximately the same distance. The speedo is on the left and the tach on the right. They should be the other way around as the tach is more in my line of sight. Aside from that, I like that the car has full instrumentation - something very unusual for a late '80s domestic luxury sedan.
#40 of 56 Re: Okay, here's another [andre1969]
Dec 19, 2006 (1:53 pm)
I will chime in to say I am kinda sick of white-faced gauges too. Once all the Chrysler Group minivans have them, the trend has gone too far!!
Apart from that, most things about speedos never bother me, except when they are.......digital! GAWD, no, please! Honda, are you listening???
#41 of 56 Re: Okay, here's another [nippononly]
Dec 20, 2006 (11:09 am)
Apart from that, most things about speedos never bother me, except when they are.......digital!
Digital speedometers can be fun sometimes, though. Back when my uncle had his '88 LeBaron turbo coupe, before he sold it to my wife and me, I remember driving my grandmother in it once or twice. Just for kicks, out on the highway, I set the display for Metric, so it didn't take much to get it to register over 100!
Scared the h-e-double-hockey-sticks out of her!
#42 of 56 Re: Okay, here's another [andre1969]
Dec 20, 2006 (11:31 am)
My 1994 Cadillac DeVille had a digital speedo. I played the same trick on my girlfriend and she was like "Aaaah! Slow down!" In reality 100kph is more like 62mph. What I like about my Seville is it has both an analog and digital speedo.
#43 of 56 Re: Okay, here's another [lemko]
Dec 20, 2006 (1:25 pm)
While I'm a fan of normal analog gauges in most circumstances, some of the digital ones aren't too bad.
Those "video game" dash setups of the late 1980s Corvettes still seem kinda cool to me (showing my age I guess), and the Honda S2000's is growing on me.
There's a sorta "pure functionality" feel that paring a digital speedo with an analog tach gives on a performance car... A lot of sportbikes feature this set-up.
#44 of 56 Looking back...
Dec 20, 2006 (1:41 pm)
I think the earliest car I can remember seeing that had a digital dash was the 1980 Ford T-bird. I remember them showing it in the commercials for it, and thinking how cool it would be if Mom bought one of those.
But now, looking back, I'm glad she didn't get it, because it would've been my first car. And I know she would've picked the smallest engine they had, which I think at that point was a 4.2 V-8 with something like 112 hp. I don't think they were sticking 6-cylinders under the hood of them yet, unless that 200 straight-six was a credit option? Shudder the thought!
#45 of 56 Re: Looking back... [andre1969]
Dec 20, 2006 (1:49 pm)
Good thing she didn't buy an '80 T-Bird. That generation ('80-'82) as well as the previous one ('77-'79) were hideous-looking! Motor Trend called the latter "aesthetically forlorn" (not when they were new of course).
#46 of 56 Re: Looking back... [210delray]
Dec 20, 2006 (1:53 pm)
I always liked the '77-79 T-bird, but agree, the '80-82 wasn't so hot. For some reason though, I like the style of the 80-82 Cougar XR-7. The Cougar looks a bit sportier than the T-bird from that era (although that ain't saying much, I guess).
Anyway, Mom ended up with a 1980 Malibu V-6, which turned out to be a pretty good car. No digital dash or hidden headlights (another thing I loved as a kid) but it served her well (and me, when she gave it to me in 1987)