HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bphdarcy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (SJ Roc D'Arcy, MBP)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Japanese auto industry
Date: 13 Apr 92 13:59:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr13.075825.27634@leland.Stanford.EDU>, tedebear@leland.Stanford.EDU (Theodore Chen) writes...
>In article <1992Apr10.121127.17156@acsu.buffalo.edu> bphdarcy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (SJ Roc D'Arcy, MBP) writes:
>>The Democrats in congress are trying to push through a bill that prevents
>>companies (such as Catapillar) from firing striking workers.  Can't say
>>I've seen a stupider law (or one more unconsitutional) in a while.
> 
>be careful saying stuff like "unconstitutional".
>economic due process/equal protection has been dead since
>the mid-30s.  and as far as i know, the supreme court has no
>interest in reviving economic due process.

Who ever said the Supreme Court was "constitutional?"  It hasn't
been since FDR rearranged things.  They are now just another political
group of sloths.  It seems if one reads the duties of the supreme courts
one will find the supreme court is not doing the job it is supposed to
at all.  They are one great failure.

>in my view, economic due process would be incompatible with
>the modern welfare state.)

Ah, quite true.

>the standard to be applied would probably be whether the
>law had a "rational relationship to a legitimate government objective."

In other words, who bought what votes.  

>by the way, note that what i said above does not mean that i
>think the law should be passed.  as for seeing dumber laws,
>i'm not so sure about that.  how about about that proposal
>(discussed in this group) to require using replacement parts
>from the manufacturer?  for the record, i'm not so sure that
>it's stupid to prevent employers from firing striking workers.
>there, you have it.  my position on this is "maybe".
>i have a problem with everbody putting the blame on the workers
>when the management is pulling down obscene salaries and laying
>off people at the same time.


I do not think this law is stupid for ethical reasons as much as logical
ones.  It is simply another reason for companies to leave the United States
and seek labor elsewhere.  It used to be that the US had the superior labor
force (in my opinion), but that has begun to change (not do to our decline
but other catching up).  Right now (if the article I read is not mistaken)
35% of the UAW membership is unemployed.  Says something about them.
They won't let their secretarial pool unionize (they're not dumb).

In the good old days unions were very much needed.  But, that was back
when rights were violated and the required labor was scarce.  Look at
Catapilar.. 40,000 applications for those jobs.  Does America really
support unions??  I think not.  Once again its someone buying off votes
in congress.  

SJRD
From: johne@hp-vcd.vcd.hp.com (John Eaton)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 15:18:56 GMT
Subject: Re: Sales tax on cars
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Vancouver, WA, USA
Newsgroups: rec.autos

<<<
< While purchasing a new car I noticed that one has to pay state
< sales tax only on the difference between the new car price and the
< trade-in price.
----------
This is known as the "Auto Dealers Relief Act". Think you can get a better
deal by selling your trade-in yourself? Think again sucker.


John Eaton
!hp-vcd!johne
From: alan@lancaster.nsc.com (The Hepburn)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Engine Braking - what causes it?
Date: 15 Apr 92 19:22:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: berlioz.1992Apr15.192224.15247
Organization: National Semiconductor Corporation

In article <5440@otc.otca.oz>, elson@otc.otca.oz.au (Elson Markwick) writes:
|> 
|> The difference is that during acceleration, you have another cylinder which is
|> firing, to overcome compression.  Even in a one cylinder engine, the energy
|> which is put into the moving parts of the motor, by firing, is enough to compress
|> a cylinder full of air.  Sure it will slow down as it's compressing, but then
|> once it fires, it speeds up again.

Except that in a diesel engine there is no spark to fire the next cylinder.  Just
enough fuel is injected to keep it spinning.  If you look at the specs on a diesel
engine you will notice a large difference in the air/fuel ratios between idle and
load.  Any engine, gas or diesel, has friction to overome, and a charge to compress.
That's why compression is not a factor in engine braking;  if it were then diesels
would have a lot of engine braking - which they don't.
|> 
|> As I mentioned in a previous post - try turning the engine over by hand with
|> the throttle butterfly propped open.  I'll betcha it's just as hard as with it 
|> closed.
|> 
|> 

As I mentioned in several previous posts (I'll go slow this time):

D i e s e l    e n g i n e s    d o    N O T    h a v e   t h r o t t l e

b u t t e r f l y    v a l v e s !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've looked at Navistar, Cummins, and Detroit diesels.  I have yet to see one
with a throttle butterfly valve.  The only restriction in the air intake from
the outside world is the air cleaner.  Engine speed is regulated by the amount
of fuel injected AFTER compression, not by the amount of air fed in during the
intake stroke.


-- 
Alan Hepburn           "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
National Semiconductor       a little temporary safety deserve neither
Santa Clara, Ca              liberty nor safety."
alan@berlioz.nsc.com                              Benjamin Franklin
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: kenny@juniorx.osf.org (Kenneth Crudup)
Subject: Re: Turbo-Revving
Keywords: OUCH!!!
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 17:16:50 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.044951.18317@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>
awds_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Clark Kent) writes:
>The strangest thing happened to me today, while driving my newly-acquired
>1988 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe.

Welcome to the wonderful world of Ford EEC-IV idle headaches.

>I was accelerating fairly quickly in first
>gear(5 speed), when I tried to shift to second, the engine nearly red-lined

This is caused by either:
 - a bad throttle position sensor
 - the accelerator cable sticking to the hood liner (don't laugh, it's happened
     to me)
 - f*cked-up Ford engine electronics
 - f*cked-up Ford engine electronics
 - f*cked-up Ford engine electronics
 - f*cked-up Ford engine electronics

>It remained like this, I instinctively turned off the cruise control(but
>I was only going 30).

(Cruise control in at 30 MPH????) 

>I turned to my last resort, and shut off the ignition.  About 2 seconds
>later, I turned on the key, the car ran normally.

Sounds like it's either the engine electronics, or the air bypass valve 
(unlikely) or the TPS. Have a Ford guy (or even better, an indie mechanic
who also knows, Ford Dealer service sucks) check out the EEC-IV stored codes.

p.s. - I'd be more worried about your engine at those RPM's than your turbo.
Redline at idle puts almost no strain (and therefore, boost) on your turbo.
That engine won't rev that fast in a hurry if the turbo's needed anywhere
near its limits.

	-Kenny
-- 
Kenneth R. Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA
OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142	+1 617 621 7306
kenny@osf.osf.org	OSF doesn't make me say any of the above.
Xref: sparky rec.autos:11065 rec.autos.driving:2275 rec.autos.tech:5664
From: rjwade@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J. Wade)
Newsgroups: rec.autos,rec.autos.driving,rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: BF Goodrich Touring T/A- Opinions Sought
Date: 9 Apr 92 21:48:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: noose.1992Apr9.214825.26928
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network


my personal experience with goodyear gt and gt+4 and comments from people i talke to lead to these conclusions:
goodyear eagle gt or gt+4=shit.  great on dry..bad on anything else and they go bald quick no matter how much you rotate.
b.f. goodrich=good good good.
uniroyal gt-type tires=good.
-king bob
From: peterco@eff.org (Peter A. Cohen)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Fabulous New RX7
Date: 14 Apr 92 14:41:00 GMT
Organization: ON Technology, Inc.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1a2

In article  David Johnson, johnson@wrs.com writes:

>Now, if only they would transplant a rotory into it we'd have something!

Have you seen the Rollerskate?  It's an open-air roadster that's been
featured in a few car magazines and the MotorWeek program.  It's got a
shorter wheelbase than the Miata, and, admittedly, isn't as "finished"
(no airbag, typical kit car trim, etc).  It uses a Mazda 13B rotary for a
powerplant, tho- all the reviews I've read and seen say that it's a
hysterically fun car to drive.


- Peter
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: matt@world.std.com (Matt Saucier)
Subject: Re: Using the horn
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
	<MATT.92Apr10133140@world.std.com> <11799@sail.LABS.TEK.COM>
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 16:00:26 GMT

In article <11799@sail.LABS.TEK.COM> vinay@sail.LABS.TEK.COM (Vinay Sathe) writes:
>	There are some signals here 
>	in Beaverton which are 'car triggered'.


Now that I think about it, *I* also use my horn at lights where the
light will NEVER turn green 'cause the idiot in front of me doesn't
pull up enough to hit the trigger under the road....  They ALWAYS get
confused when I toot, (they assume I want them to go thru the red, but
all I want is for them to pull up to the line!) so about half of the
time I have to just sit there, waiting...  (I have waited a full five
minutes) before the idiot in front of me decides to go thru the red...
And then it invariably, immediately, turns green....  And NEXT time
someone is behind that person they will have to wait 6 minutes...
Because the idiot figures that he didn't wait long enough...

It's not so bad at most lights, because the sensors go back about 20
feet, but some of them only get triggered when you pull ALL the way up
to the line.... And those are the lights where you could wait forever.

Matt
-- 
Matt Saucier|matt@world.std.com|CI$:72371,3101|h:508-756-3397|w:508-753-2385
USnail:36 Harlow St Worcester MA 01605-3323   "Always Look On The Bright
Side Of Life. Always Look On The Right Side Of Life" -Monty Python  
"Honi soit qui mal y pense"    wu+9
From: lharris@hubcap.clemson.edu (Larry Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: <<< Mustang Powered Miata >>>
Date: 12 Apr 92 18:58:02 GMT
Organization: Clemson University

kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown) writes:

>>>This is one of the most important (to me) aspects of the Mustang.  The
>>>engine in it has been around for almost 30 years.  There are *lots*
>>>of aftermarket products for it, and it's real easy for someone with
>>>a relatively small budget to get incredible performance out of the
>>>Mustang.
>>30 years exactly if I'm not mistaken!

>If you start with the 221, then yeah, exactly 30 years.  I think the
>302 itself has been around since 1969 (perhaps a little earlier.  I
>think they raced them before they put them in the Boss 302).

They first appeared in '68 mustangs and gradually replaced the 289 that
year.  

>I think one of the best things about the current engine is that it's
>relatively easy to tinker with.  I'm concerned that the "modular"
>won't be as easy to tinker with (Ford came out with a SOHC version 
>of the 429 back in the 60's, and the timing chain was HUGE.  I can
>imagine that it was a real pain to work on).  4 camshafts instead of
>one!  That alone will make it a lot more expensive to tinker with the
>valvetrain, and rebuilds will be a lot more expensive.

I think the advance in technology will be a trade off for tinkerability.
It seems everytime technology takes another leap forward, to keep in
touch with it, you must know more and more details about what your
working on.  This is true with just about anything.  I think Ford
realizes that in order to be competative, they must keep up with
technology so they can sell more cars.  It saddens me to see that for
'91 Ford sold the least amount of Mustangs in history.  I'm hoping this
market is just stagnating, because people are waiting for the new one in
addition to the fact that so many people bought '87-90 models when the
5.0 sales really took off.  I think the '93 Cobra Mustang should boost
sales to the whole line of Mustangs.

>The only engine type in which it doesn't make sense to have a centrally
>located camshaft is an inline engine.  For those engines, it makes much
>more sense to use an overhead cam (preferably DOHC).  But for a V-type
>or flat engine, a centrally-located camshaft makes a *lot* more sense,
>and reduces complications.

>I hope, too, that a good aftermarket gets built for the new modular V-8.
>Since I haven't seen what one looks like, I can't say how easy it'll be
>to play with them.  I just hope it's as easy as playing with the current
>V-8.

It will probably come with time.  I think the market will need about 5
years to establish itself, though.

-- 
-Larry Harris-                |  '86 Mustang lx 5.0 notchback
lharris@hubcap.clemson.edu    |  Meyer's Tow'd Dune Buggy
lharris@clemson.bitnet        |  OS-9, a leaner meaner UNIX
Clemson Computer Engineering  |  RUSH, YES, R.E.M, The Who
Organization: Fifth yr. senior, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.autos,rec.autos.driving
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 11:17:19 -0400 
From: David Ka-Yiu Lam <dl2h+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Stealth Twin Turbo...FAST!

>Having had the opportunity to drive a Stealth this last weekend I can
>only but be impressed by the quickness, the speed, and the handling
>that this car possesses.  Taking it on a nice, country road at 6 a.m.
>going 120 MPH was a rather sweet feeling.

>Anyone else out there get a chance to drive a Stealth?  If so let
>me know how you like them.  I seriously think that it is a world
>wide competitor as a sports car, especially for its price tag.

>Oh, and being able to push it to 50 MPH in first gear is a rather
>sweet feeling, too.

>John

Sorry but I have to disagree with you on a lot of it:-)

First I don't think it handles that great.  Set the suspension setting on
"Touring" gives you adequate handling, and adequate comfort.  Setting it
to "Sport" gives you better handling (although in my opinion, still no as
good as a 300ZX), but you lose all comfort.  Second, it suffers from brake
fade very easily.  Just 2 or 3 hard braking and you get it(300ZX suffers
from that too....)  The gear box is a disgrace.  Not only does it rattle a
lot, its extremely tail gearing make accelerating say from 100-120mph an
embarassment.  My "Sedan" had repeatly blown the Stealth away in high speed
acceleration.  Try to do a 70-90mph pick up with a Mustang (I did) and you
will see what I mean.  Also Its steering is way to light to handle well at
high speed.
The sad fact is that, a good friend of mine who used to own a Stealth Turbo,
totally agrees with me on what I just said.

-Dave
-dl2h@andrew.cmu.edu
From: rjwade@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J. Wade)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Oil recommendations sought.
Date: 17 Apr 92 16:39:30 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network


the entire 'which oil is best' debate is mute if you just change oil and filter every 3k or 3 months.  buy whatever major brand name is on sale and make sure it is the recommended weight etc.
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: zenith89@bwdlh130.bnr.ca (Chris Van Fleet)
Subject: Re: American engines oversized,underpowered ?
Reply-To: zenith89@bwdlh130.bnr.ca (Chris Van Fleet)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd., Ottawa, CANADA
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 18:53:17 GMT

You call a Seville *big*? Try looking at a Buick Roadmaster
("the mother of all cars") sedan or wagon sometime. GIANT --
like a real car should be. You guys can stick to your 
lawnmowers -- some of here want to drive something SUBSTANTIAL.

Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: Women & Cars (Was: Re: Should I buy an Eclipse?)
Reply-To: kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown)
Organization: Minimal.
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 03:46:11 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.213010.29755@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com> sharen@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com (Sharen A. Rund) writes:
>In article <1992Apr8.174410.9917@menudo.uh.edu> kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr6.131551.14089@b11.ingr.com> lester@naomi.b23b.ingr.com writes:
>>>In article <BM1wz3.Jpy@world.std.com>, kenny@world.std.com (Kenneth R Crudup) writes:
>>>|> In article <CARL.92Apr1112937@atlantis.Cayman.COM> carl@Cayman.COM
>>>|> (Carl Heinzl) says:
>>>|> >WOW!  I disagree with this 100%.  I cannot always anticipate what my
>>>|> >future needs will be and for me to buy something that is more than
>>>|> >what I need right now is not waste.  It would be more wasteful for me
>>>|> >to have to buy something and buy it again in 6 months because I
>>>|> >outgrew it.
>>>|> 
>
>This reminds me of so many IS/MIS departments that buy a big computer
>and run out of space sooner than predicted....

You'd think that with many years of experience buying and using computers,
these places would finally figure out that (a) there's no such thing as
too much power, and (b) there's no such thing as too much disk space.

But nooooo....

>>>|> I  included an "out" for such conditions- "...or more than you can under-
>>>|> stand to need..." which is just saying getting something way over your head.
>>>|> There's nothing wrong with planning for the future, but don't get a
>>>|>  [ stuff deleted ]
>>>
>>>The extrapolation to buying cars, etc. is left as an exercise for the
>>>reader.
>>
>>Hmm...you mean like buying a 300ZX twin turbo because you plan on buying
>>a top-notch radar detector in the future?  :-)
>>
>all I know is that in an emergency situation I _want_ a car that will
>_perform_, e.g., I want to have the power to move out of the way, maneuver,
>or whatever - I've been driving tooo long out on the roadways with way tooo
>many dupas that do tooooo many dumba** things, e.g., overshoot an exit
>ramp & try to back up to get to it, shoot across 4-lanes of traffic to 
>take an exit ramp, start up an exit ramp and change their minds? and cross
>over medians/white lines/etc to get back on the thouroughfare, loose
>control of the car so one has to quickly maneuver out of the way of not 
>only them but other people also trying to avoid Mr/Ms Dupas....
>need I continue???

Oh, believe me, I don't have a problem with the idea of buying more than
you're going to use in everyday situations (why do you think I put the
smiley after my comment?).  I'd much rather buy something that's
overengineered than underengineered, and in most cases it's damned
difficult to know what the exact right combination will be.  So you
err on the side of caution and buy more than you expect to need.

But let's face it: one of the reasons you want a car that will perform is
that such a car is fun to drive, right?  Be honest, now.  :-) :-)



		Kevin Brown (kevin@taronga.taronga.com)
From: gajewski@ug.cs.dal.ca (Andy)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Experience purchasing 1992 VW GTI 16v (long)
Date: 10 Apr 92 19:36:58 GMT
Distribution: dal
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <3920@airs.com> andrew@airs.com (Andrew Evans) writes:

>jhamill@bbn.com (John Hamill) writes:

>>German cars tend to need to be understood better than the average
>>American Buick. I dare anyone to try to figure out the heating controls
>>in a Porsche 911 without reading the manual twice!

>Ok John, I'll take you up on that.  Just give me a 911 for a week
>(turbo preferred) without any owner's manual, and I'll have those
>heater controls figured out by the time I give the car back to you!
>That is, if I manage to survive the first time I get sideways deep in
>a corner...

Yeah, me too, I'll take a targa with a whale tail....
Andy
-- 
---....-------------****----*******-) GTI FUN-atic                      o  
--. \/ .-----GTI---******--*********)         Don't forget to bike:     ,-\
--.\/\/.-----------******--*********)  (and sail and windsurf and ski)  0\-0
---....-------------****----*******-) gajewski@ug.cs.dal.ca,goaway@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: jonl@rb-csd.SanDiego.NCR.COM (jon.lafrance)
Subject: Re: Are all Americans Stupid ??
Reply-To: jonl@rb-csd.SanDiego.NCR.COM (jon.lafrance)
Organization: NCR Corporation, Rancho Bernardo
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 22:12:10 GMT

In article <SHANTANU.92Apr16091803@poseidon.oakhill.uucp> shantanu@poseidon.oakhill.uucp (Shantanu Ganguly) writes:
>In article <8dv73bC00Uh784Fc55@andrew.cmu.edu> sh50+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sam Hui) writes:
>
>    As for drivers education, I had to take a US driving test in order to
>   obtain a PA licence and to be truthful, it was pretty lame. The English
>   driving test is far tougher and you get to drive on a real road with
>   other real drivers and real situations, not in an obstacle course (
>   again, I am quoting from personal experience...this may not be the case
>
>Since each state has it's own license and driving test, the standards
>tend to vary a lot. The NJ test is pretty lame too, its conducted
>entirely in a parking lot. If you had taken the N.Y. test, you'd have
>to drive on a real road with real traffic and do a real parallel park.
>I've heard that the California driving test is quite extensive too.

Well the California test used to be adequate but now it's just a joke!
What I would like to see is tougher written and road test every time
everyone is up for renewal. This gets around the fight that one age
group or another are the only bad drivers. This would cost more and
need to be included in the fee, but it is a service to the individual
and the individual needs to carry thier share. Also if it was harder to 
get your license people might think twice before doing something that
could cost them thier license. 

Just my opinion and not NCR's or ATT's.

+==========================================================================+
| Jon LaFrance       Corporate Customer Services       PM&S E&M San Diego  |
| NCR - 440-2805    (jon.lafrance@sandiego.ncr.com)    FAX  (619) 485-3400 |
From: fierro@uts.amdahl.com (Doug Fierro)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Double clutching & Toe-heel shifting
Date: 7 Apr 92 21:55:28 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

>* So just to be redundant (and repetetive :-) the sequence you would
>* suggest is:
>*     - brake
>*     - clutch pedal down
>*     - shifter in neutral
>*     - clutch pedal up
>*     - blip throttle (to get shafts matched)
>*     - clutch pedal down
>*     - shifter in lower gear (without waiting at the gate like I suggested)
>*     - clutch pedal up quickly before things start slowing down
>*     - back on the gas to drive the corner
>
>In article <1992Apr6.125213.19579@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> asl@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (albert.s.lew) writes:
>
>>Can anyone tell me if there is any difference with the sequence described above
>>and the following sequence:
>>     - brake
>>     - clutch pedal down
>>     - blip throttle
>>     - shifter in lower gear
>>     - clutch pedal up quickly before things start slowing down
>>     - back on the gas to drive the corner


  Geez, I must have been doing it wrong all this time:

       - brake
       - blip throttle
       - clutch pedal down
       - pull E-brake
       - clutch pedal up
       - hit the high beams
       - put your left toe on the gas pedal
       - hit the FM button with your right knee
       - shifter in neutral
       - release brake
       - pull the hood release with right hand
       - match RPMs to your radio station
       - back on the gas
    
   Oh well... 

      :-)

  Doug
-- 
                                                     Doug Fierro
                                      |\             UTS System Software
  O                         __________|_\______      CASE tools development
  \_.______________________| * * * * * * * * */      fierro@uts.amdahl.com
 __\____                   |=================/       (408)746-7102
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~