HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: K.Buck@ma30.bull.com (Ken Buck)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.antique
Subject: Re: Open vs Closed cars
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:07:18 GMT
Reply-To: K.Buck@ma30.bull.com
Organization: Bull HN Information Systems Inc.
Originator: buck@granite.ma30.bull.com

In article <If=C5FW00Uh7I4E1gV@andrew.cmu.edu> "Daniel U. Holbrook" <dh3q+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>Well, the convertibles made nowadays, almost all if not all of them, are
>originally built as closed cars, then shipped to some other outfit
>(American Sunroof Corp is the largest, I believe) to make them into
>convertibles.  The premium, then, comes not from the manufacturer having
>to retool, but from the costs of this aftermarket manufacturing.

that just explains a reason for premium _original selling prices_
(it costs more to make), but it doesn't address desirability.

(for the record, some convertible manufacturers actually do make the whole
car, the Mazda Miata and the 2ng gen. RX7 convertible being 2 examples.
in the case of the RX7, higher cost was somewhat due to added complexity,
but was also due to added standard features that didn't come with the
closed-roof versions; i think if you adjusted for features, the costs were
fairly close.  in the case of the Miata, there _is_ no closed-roof version
to compare against...)


> Also, isn't it at some level just a matter of supply and demand?

yes.  but wasn't the original question "Why the demand?"

i'm not convinced there IS a great demand, that is, _compared_ to the
volume of closed-roof cars that are sold.  there are always some idiots
like myself that will want convertibles, but the VAST majority of car owners
opt for closed-roof cars.  so convertibles cost more because the market is
smaller, the manufacturing and marketing costs are higher on a per-car basis,
and the cars are perceived as "desirable" to the relatively small enthusiast
market.
Newsgroups: rec.autos.antique,alt.autos.antique
From: adh@cbnews.cb.att.com (andrew.d.hay)
Subject: Re: Thelma & Louise
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 11:23:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.192410.15986@MorningStar.Com> dean@MorningStar.Com (Dean Schell) writes:
"I've always wondered about what they use in a movie when a really nice
"classic car gets destroyed.  Tom mentions a duplicate - is this a
"mock-up that just looks like the real thing?  Do they ever really
"destroy a classic just to make sure that the movie seems authentic?

hollywood has strange values -- when columbo went back into
production, the company paid top $$ to buy the car back from a
collector, then *DE-restored* it...

i guess you can't be bothered with the mundane when you're creating
art.	;^>

-- 
		+--------------------------------------------------------------+
Andrew Hay	|	one step beyond the outer limits of the twilight       |
a_d_hay@att.com	|	zone in the darkened room at the night gallery	       |
		+--------------------------------------------------------------+
Xref: sparky rec.autos.antique:328 alt.autos.antique:2401
From: brooks@mcnc.org (Ted Brooks)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.antique,alt.autos.antique
Subject: Re: Thelma & Louise
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:35:06 GMT
Organization: MCNC Center for Microelectronics, RTP, NC

In article <1992Dec16.192410.15986@MorningStar.Com> dean@MorningStar.Com (Dean Schell) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.142607.8179@athena.cs.uga.edu> tom@athena.cs.uga.edu (Tom Root) writes:
>
>[Stuff about a 1969 Ford Thunderbird, like the one in Thelma & Louise
>deleted.]
>
>>movie car was a '66.   I'll bet it was a duplicate that went over the
>I've always wondered about what they use in a movie when a really nice
>classic car gets destroyed.  Tom mentions a duplicate - is this a
>mock-up that just looks like the real thing?  Do they ever really
>destroy a classic just to make sure that the movie seems authentic?
>
IMHO, moviemakers are interested in making a movie, and the subsequent
return on investment (box office receipts vs. production costs). These 
folks seem to look at destroying cars as nonrecoverable investment in
props. I'm sure they don't trash a $50,000 car when a $1000 clunker with
a paint job will act as a suitable stand-in for the wreck scene. But the
cars are still just props.

I base my opinion on my experience having my car - and several friends'
cars - as "extras" in a movie being filmed here. We were promised that
nothing would be done to endanger our car. Yet, there was a getaway scene,
which required the stars to quickly back up a full size Chevy wagon next
to my friend's pristine '57 Thunderbird. They shot that scene at least a 
dozen times, and once almost hit his car. Another time I was standing 
near my car, and the transportations props director hopped in my car and 
wheeled it up onto the set. He could have asked me, but he was too busy
doing his job to give a damn about asking the owner to move it. While 
this is only one sample point, I doubt I will ever have my car in another
movie, because of the attitude displayed by these Hollywood a**holes.

As far as trashing junkers, someone on the net pointed out in "American
Grafitti", the '55 chevy that races the '34 Ford had chrome reverse 
wheels at the starting line, yet the "same" car that rolls and burns has
spray-painted silver wheels. I rented the movie recently, and sure 
enough, he's right. Obviously, the car sitting upside down that catches
fire is a junker, and the "good" one was either sold or returned to its
owner at the end of filming.
 
Ted Brooks
 ______________________________________________________________________
| Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are my own, and do not reflect    |
| those of my employer. Advice is free, but you get what you pay for.  |
|                               ________                               |
|                         _____|  1955  |_______                       |
|                        /      Chevrolet      /                       |
|                       /______  BelAir  _____/                        |
|                              |________|                              |
|______________________________________________________________________|
Newsgroups: rec.autos.antique
From: msinerka@lesti.hut.fi (Marko Sinerkari)
Subject: Re: Avanti
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: 18 Dec 92 08:14:39 GMT

In <168BFDA2B.KAPLAN@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu> KAPLAN@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu writes:

...
>     289 cid V8 with 0 (model R1), 1 (model R2), or 2 (model R3)
>     superchargers. Many R1s and R2s, 5 (I think) R3s made
...						   ^^^


	I recall the R3 with twin superchargers putting out some 550 HP.
	Is this true? 

	
			.Marco

Newsgroups: rec.autos.antique,alt.autos.antique
From: adh@cbnews.cb.att.com (andrew.d.hay)
Subject: Re: Thelma & Louise
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 11:28:28 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.213506.29716@mcnc.org> brooks@mcnc.org (Ted Brooks) writes:
[]
"As far as trashing junkers, someone on the net pointed out in "American
"Grafitti", the '55 chevy that races the '34 Ford had chrome reverse 
"wheels at the starting line, yet the "same" car that rolls and burns has
"spray-painted silver wheels. I rented the movie recently, and sure 
"enough, he's right. Obviously, the car sitting upside down that catches
"fire is a junker, and the "good" one was either sold or returned to its
"owner at the end of filming.

i also noticed that the '55 rod had dual exhausts, and the wreck had a
single...  looked like a 6 from underneath.
so it wasn't the 'nice' car -- still cuddabin restored.

-- 
		+--------------------------------------------------------------+
Andrew Hay	|	one step beyond the outer limits of the twilight       |
a_d_hay@att.com	|	zone in the darkened room at the night gallery	       |
		+--------------------------------------------------------------+
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Monday, 14 Dec 1992 18:04:56 EST
From: Troy D. Veilleux <VEILLEUX@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.antique
Subject: Re: 1969 Ford T-Bird
Distribution: usa
 <Bz9I4D.n3F@news.iastate.edu> <1992Dec14.201032.10928@viewlogic.com>
 <1992Dec14.212521.28946@spdc.ti.com>

Plan on paying Big bucks for one in any kind of restorable condition.  If
you'd settle for a had top, my uncle has one for sale in good condition
that has low miles and is loaded with options.  E-mail me for more info.
He also has a 55 Chevy 2-door in real nice condition for sale.

Troy Veilleux
Newsgroups: rec.autos.antique
From: paisley@iastate.edu (Dr. Martin Paisley)
Subject: 1969 Ford T-Bird
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:31:21 GMT

	I am looking for a car to restore, in particular a 1969 Ford
Thunderbird, like the one in Thelma & Louise.  Can anyone give me
an idea of where to start, or perhaps how much I will have to pay
to acquire one of these autos?  I am planning on restoring it myself


thanks!
paisley@iastate.edu
-- 
******************************************************************************
* Dr. Martin Paisley  * It's clear, is it not, how the    *You label me, I'll*
*  Iowa State Univ.   * American Sheep really don't mind  *   label you.     *
* paisley@iastate.edu * getting fleeced? --Matthew Melmon *   -- Metallica   *
Newsgroups: rec.autos.antique
From: wesf@boi.hp.com (Wes Fujii)
Subject: Re: DONT FLAME ME< FUTURE ANTIQUE?
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 15:41:43 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

I've got a friend that had a 1970-1/2 Trans Am, Ram Air III motor 
and automatic.  The more popular option was a 4-speed.

Since he didn't feel the car was that valuable with the automatic,
he used it as a "driver" and drove it pretty hard, lots of miles,
abused speeds, raced it often, and wrecked it twice (the last 
wreck was a guard rail @ 90 mph racing on a hillclimb).  This car
was beat.

Well, while he was on the phone to back East getting parts, he
was chatting with the person on the other end who got interested
in what he had.  He was also asked if he had all of the original
(no matter what shape) body parts, engine, etc.  The answer was yes.

It turns out that this car was one of only a handful that was made 
with the automatic.  The person bought the car sight unseen, sent
$16K with instructions to pack everything up and ship it back to
him.

Both parties were happy:

     Original owner - needed money for his new family
     New owner - got a rare vehicle to restore and add to his
                 collection

Wes Fujii
________________________________________________________________
      ___   ___ ___ 
     /  /  /  //  /
    /  /__/  //  /    A real motor is an Oldsmobile Rocket 455
   /  HURST //  /    "This is NOT the new generation of Olds"
  /  /  /  //  /_________
 /__/  /__//  //  _____  \
          /  //  /    /  /      Wes "BANZAI" Fujii
         /  //  /OLDS/  /          Boise, Idaho
        /  //  /____/  /      wesf@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com
       /__/ \_________/ 

Xref: sparky rec.autos:29759 rec.autos.tech:16650
From: jimf@centerline.com (Jim Frost)
Newsgroups: rec.autos,rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Do SPOILERS Really Work???
Date: 14 Dec 1992 21:42:18 GMT
Organization: CenterLine Software, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.239.3.202

aefron@cornerstone.com (Andrew Efron) writes:
>The earliest use of the spoiler that I know of is on the 1962 Ferrari 250 
>GTO, the first of which had a duck-tail spoiler bolted onto the rear deck to 
>make the car stick better in the corners.  They found that it worked quite 
>well and the rest of these cars had the spoiler integrated into the bodywork.

You may be right for production cars but I believe the first use of a
spoiler on a car was in Can-AM racing in the fifties (I used to have a
book with the name of the team that did it, but God only knows where
that lives nowadays).  They were quickly prohibited because many teams
didn't build them sturdy enough and they'd fly off during the race,
creating a lot of debris on the track.

Several Can-AM cars were novel in the ways they tried to increase
downforce.  One of 'em was a big vacuum cleaner -- active aerodynamics
taken to the limit. :-)

jim frost
jimf@centerline.com
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: alc@gdstech.GRUMMAN.COM (Al Chang)
Subject: Re: Toyota Previa
Organization: Grumman Corporation
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 22:27:43 GMT

In article <18393@mindlink.bc.ca> John_Greer@mindlink.bc.ca (John Greer) writes:


   I don't know about Toyotas new suppository on wheels but my 84 LE (Toy) will
   pack more stuff than the big 3 American modles. I have placed 4 X 8 sheets of
   plywood in the back with about 6" to spare when I close the rear door. When
   the mini vans first came out the Toy was the smallest (88" wheel base) but
   hard the most cargo area. All the other vans have the engine sticking out
   front. The Toys and Maz. all have crash protection around the bodies and
   built in roll bars. Yes my 2 litre 4 banger is GUTLESS but who else offers an
   ice MAKER as an option? :-)) But it's faster than a VW.

As far as I know the Mazda MPV has no crash protection around the
bodies. When I was looking at it in '90, there wasn't even a bumper
underneath what looks like a bumper in the front or rear. Its amazing
how some people really thought there was one underneath. 
The MPV did extremely poor in Consumer's 5 MPH bumper test because of it.

The Previa was a very smooth riding vehicle when I drove it except
when you had to really stomp on the gas to get going. Then your butt
would be buzzing because of the engine beneath you. 

I think the new Nissans are Chrysler's only real threat. It has the
crash protection and smooth powerful engine. To bad it doesn't have as
much room inside considering its almost as long Chrysler's Grand
minivans. Also it doesn't have airbags, but how much good would it be
when you have 6 kids in the vehicle with you. 

It also  a bit more pricey than Chrysler.



--
******************************************************************************
Al Chang (516)346-6757,  FAX: (516)575-0965, email: alc@calvin.grumman.com
Grumman Data Systems, 111 Stewart Avenue, MS D12/25, Bethpage, New York 11714
******************************************************************************
-- 
******************************************************************************
Al Chang (516)346-6757,  FAX: (516)575-0965, email: alc@calvin.grumman.com
Grumman Data Systems, 111 Stewart Avenue, MS D12/25, Bethpage, New York 11714
******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Mike S.)
Subject: Re: RADAR DETECTOR
Organization: BITS, St. Louis, MO
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:50:19 GMT

chuang@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Chi Huang) writes:

>1. What is ka wideband? Is this only use by the photo-radar, or not?

>2. What is stalker radar?

stalker radar=ka wideband

Mike
-- 
mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu
Xref: sparky rec.autos:29660 rec.autos.tech:16592
From: malc9336@miller.cs.uwm.edu (Brian Malcolm)
Newsgroups: rec.autos,rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Do SPOILERS Really Work??? no.
Date: 13 Dec 1992 20:44:54 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.9.13

(Eric Youngblood) writes:
>Wings have to be designed with enough surface area to generate a negative lift
>force. Imagine an airplane with narrow wings, it will never generate enough 
>lift to get off the ground.

Which is one reason the wings of airplanes are swept.  This way, the air 
passing over them views the wing as being much wider.

-brian


Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: Christopher J. Born
Subject: Re: HELP! Problem with Toyota Corolla 
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 17:08:15 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14g by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: born@vnet.ibm.com
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research

In <1992Dec14.150801.7497@bcrka451.bnr.ca> hemi@bcrkd12.bnr.ca (Hemi Thaker) writes:
>       I'm having a problem with my '86 Toyota Corolla SR-5.
>The first time the problem happened, I was driving at 120Km/hr
>when all of a sudden my engine died on me.  I still had electrical
>power, and could crank the engine, but it wouldn't start.  The
>engine did not sputter or cough when it died.
>
>       This problem has reoccured a few more times.  Every time,
>I have either been driving faster than 100Km/hr, or standing still.
>Again, after the engine dies, I can crank as much as I want, but the
>car won't start.  However, after 1 hour and 15 to 20 minutes
>later (yes, this exact), I can start the car, and it behaves as
>if nothing had happened.
>
>       As per Murphy's laws, this "feature" of my car is impossible
>to reproduce in front of or by the mechanic.  He had originally
>thought it was a faulty fuel pump, and replaced that, but the problem
>resurfaced two weeks later.
>
>       Got any advice for me?
>

Same symptoms happened to my car a few years back and it ended up being the
fuel filter.  Has it been replaced recently?  

-Chris
From: hanxg@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Xiaoping Han)
Subject: wax used by car-wash machine
Organization: University of Cincinnati
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 23:45:58 GMT

Some coin-operated machines have a wax procedure. Is the wax good
or not? It saves a lot of labour and dose shine car. Some wash-by-
yourself stations also have the wax procedure. How about wax underbody
to prevent salt?

Thanks.
Han.

Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: hvu@bnr.ca (Big North)
Subject: Re: WHAT GM to Buy?
Reply-To: hvu@bnr.ca (Big North)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 16:02:10 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.025053.1@vax.sonoma.edu>, oberland@vax.sonoma.edu writes:
|> I need help.
|> 
|> My father has a friend who is in her 70's(should be around for 10-15 more
|> years, though).  She wants a nice car.
|> Problems:
|> She will only consider GM cars.
|> V-6 is a plus
|> Luxury cars are OUT, as she wants to spend as little as possible.
|> Small cars are out as well, a are sporty cars(she's no rece-car driver,
|> BUT she still drives competantly.
|> 
|> She needs a vehicle that will last 10 years, or about as long as she will.
|> 
|> 15-18K is an acceptable range.(not including tax and such)ie:price without
|> a ton of options/avg price
|> 
|> Anti-lock brakes and Air-bag are a MAJOR plus to her.
|> 
|> Must be able to get out of its own way, but no hot-rod.
|> 
|> Any suggestions?(I told her to get an import or a 1-2 year old Volvo sedan)
|> She won't buy an import, and won't buy anything but GM.
|> 
|> Thanks, and I need ideas before the 24th(vax here goes down for 2 weeks).
|> Joe
How about a well equiped Saturn sedan. Soup it up with ABS, air-bag
and the works. Buying it will be a hassle free transaction for a matronly,
albeit stubborn lady like your father's friend.

And tell her it is as GM as a GM car can be lest she thinks it's an import.
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: po-tai@hprisc-23.cae.wisc.edu (Po-Tai Cheng)
Subject: SUZUKI SIDEKICK
Organization: Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering 
Distribution: usa
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:32:21 CST

  Hi..... I am going to buy a used SUZUKI SIDEKICK (1989, auto, cruise control
Originator: po-tai@hprisc-23.cae.wisc.edu


, power window).... it's not bad except that it has no automatic wheeling hub

(you have to get out of the car to turn the knob every time you want to switch 

into 4WD mode) and the dealer asks $7500 for it. Is there anybody can tell me

how to push the dealer to lower down the price? Or Do you have a better

suggestion about buying a used 4WD?  I'll appreciate it . THANKS.
From: f_ludorfmr@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: NEED HELP BUYING A 78 SUBURBAN
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:38:50 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

HELP!!!
I am thinking about buying a 1978 Chevy Suburban with the following specs:


91K miles
4 new tires
broken radio
faulty rear air conditioner
cracked windshield

A couple more things about the truck and the circumstances surrounding
the purchase.  The truck is on the used car lot of the local dealer.  It
has sat there since the latter part of October, probably because the guy
wants *$4000* for it.  Another thing is that I happen to know the 
previous owner and he took very good care of his baby.  I also know
that as part of a trade in he got $2100 for it.  And I forgot to mention
that it has an oil leak (could be from the plug or the pan gasket).
What I need from all of you experts is a reasonable and fair price to
offer the dealer.  My best guestimate is somewhere from 1800-2400, but
that's only my guess.  If you have some ideas or input please reply by
e-mail to

f_ludorfmr@ccsvax.sfasu.edu

Thanks in advance for your help.  

P.S.  I want to make a decision in the next day or two so your immediate
      input is appreciated.
Mark Ludorf
454 engine

Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: mchaffee@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (REAL LIFE?!?!  HA!!)
Subject: Re: Vector Sex Wax 2000 or whatnot (was Re: >>>>Best undercover car)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 23:15:57 GMT

jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov (Ad absurdum per aspera) writes:

>In article <92345.082202HAHN@UCF1VM.BITNET>, <HAHN@UCF1VM.BITNET> writes...
>> Pretty hard to compare any car to the vector....Claimed 1000 HP.  

>Sorry, folx.  No slur on the bright boys at Vector Aeromotive, but I
>doubt they know any laws of physics that the bright boys at JaguarSport,
>Ferrari, etc. don't know.  

Well, I'm not sure one way or the other, but I don't think Vector's unable to
pull that one off.  They're using a Chevy V-8 (>454 ci if I remember correctly)
pressurizing the thing at astronomical levels, and using 32V heads for proper
breathing etc.  No magic here, just a lot of money.  I must say I will be in-
terested to see about the longevity of the engine, but then they ARE using 
military-spec components for everything....

BTW, I'm referring to the NEW Vector.  I saw a brief article on it somewhere.
The OLD Vector, of course, only puts out 600 bhp, due no doubt to the fact
that it's a pushrod engine.

And as for engines putting out huge amounts of power, BMW has an engine racing
now that puts out 1000-1200 bhp.  It's a 1.8L four.  Admittedly, this is not a
street engine, but if you can pull that much power out of a four, seems to me
a V-8 with four times the displacement should be able to do it w/o too much
strain.

The Vector is a perfect example of one of mankind's great truths:  With enough
brains and enough money, you can accomplish anything.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael T. Chaffee        | mchaffee@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu  |  ______    
                                                       |  \    /   HATE
"I chased a rainbow down a one-way street.  Dead end." |   \  /  is not a
     - S. P. McCall                                    |    \/  FAMILY VALUE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: tedebear@leland.Stanford.EDU (Theodore Chen)
Subject: Re: 1993 Ford Probe GT - a good buy?
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 09:20:02 GMT


i'd take the probe GT over the integra GS-R any day.
that V-6 is sweet, and the car is loads of fun to drive.
not that the integra GS-R doesn't have a nice engine,
but it's a 4-cylinder... not as smooth and it's peaky.
if the integra GS-R cost much less than it does now,
it'd be a good buy.  the probe GT is more performance-oriented,
too.  buy the probe GT.

-teddy