From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Before Buying Japanese.
Date: 8 Jan 93 16:40:55 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Distribution: na
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.autos, bhjelle@carina.unm.edu writes:
>In article <1993Jan6.185357.28923@oakhill.sps.mot.com> rvkl60@aus18a25.sps.mot.
>com (Tom Mathes) writes:
>>Thank goodness it's not another Accord.  What an overpriced, overhyped
>>car.  A car in that price class should have more power, and a better
>>suspension (too soft in my book).  Looks boring to boot.  The LH and

>Perfect customer for an American auto, especially circa 1970.

Sorry, 1970 cars don't even come close in the handling department. (a
lot of them were boring, too)

>Some of us aren't counting horsepower, looks or the "growl" of
>the engine as highly as you. If so, we would all buy Corvettes

Horsepower, an adequate amount anyway, is important, esp if you live
in a place like the DC area, where freeway traffic is often closely
spaced and moving at 70+ with an inadequate entrance/exit ramp setup.

As for growls, whines, or wimpers, I'd prefer total silence. (Unrealistic,
but hey, it is the end desire)

>or similar. Some of us are looking for reliability, safety,
>good MPG, low maintenance costs. I have a Honda Civic that

Get bumped at 5 mph in you car by any other car, and see how cheap that
maintenance is. Try it again in an Escort. (The numbers are, roughly,
something like $500/0 respectively)

As for reliability, good mpg, etc. *including* power and handling, I'll
recommend an American car, the Ford Thunderbird TurboCoupe. My mom (that's
right) owns one, has 92K miles on it, has only had to have the emergency
brake cable attachment replaced, has roughly 190 HP, handles fairly
well (it's a really big car, attested to by the fact that she got rear
ended by a Mack truck hard enough to shove her 10 feet into the car
in front of her and total it (I believe it was a Honda, btw) and still
be repairable [no, they didn't total it, not even close])

It also happens to get about 35 mpg on the highway, and something like
25-28 in the city. It is also fairly quite, esp inside.

>I am very happy with. In 2.5 years, if has never failed to
>start (even a single attempt!), or needed any repairs of
>any kind. It gets close to 40 mpg. I wouldn't trade it for yours.

She's had hers 5 years. The only real problem being the incompetence
of the truck driver. I wouldn't have wanted to be in your Civic when
that truck hit, though....

As an aside to slam Honda in general, the reason they get such good
gas mileage is by cutting a lot of weight from the car, including some
necessary structural weight. Not a single Honda meets the 5 mph crash
specs. Further more, if you need more convincing, go to a junkyard and
look at Hondas involved in front or rear end accidents. Notice how the
passenger compartment in all have started collapsing. Notice how Fords,
VWs, Toyotas (at least the Celica I owned and totaled a Ford full-sized
pick-up with at about 50-60 mph speed differential and walked away)
and others seem badly damaged *except* for the passenger compartment?
(BTW, I know this about Hondas, as well as the fact that their seat
belts were inadequate, because my roommates girlfriend died in a 82
prelude in a wreck under 45 mph when she T-boned a pick-up. The steering
wheel must have moved 6-8 inches, impalling her. You can keep your bloody
Honda)

Ron  Honda - we make you pay more for your death-trap
Newsgroups: rec.autos