HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: morton@gaul.csd.uwo.ca (Brent Morton)
Subject: Re: volvo
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Univ. of Western Ontario, London, Canada
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 04:15:42 GMT

In article <n12cat@ofa123.fidonet.org> Larry.Mc.Donald@ofa123.fidonet.org writes:
>
> > 1. the 240 series has remained essentially unchanged for over
> > 20 years, starting from the 140-series i think from the late
> > 1960's.  it is available in sedan and wagon form.  and having
> > driven a 240, I can assure you it is a tank.  The engine is the
> > classic Volvo four-cylinder:  absolutely bulletproof but
> > underpowered, and Volvo scrapped the turbo 240 series years
> > ago.  The 240 can be had for just under $20K, although with
> > used models you don't really sacrifice much quality at all, and you
> > get a reasonable price.
>
> Here's a good trivia point for the net. I've read, some years 
> ago, that the Checker Cab was the longest running production car 
> ever built, at 26 years in production.  The Volvo 140 came out in 
> 1967 and with the 1993 model year has tied the Checker for 
> longest production. Suppose that Volvo doesn't kill the 240 this 
> year and comes out with a 1994 model? I'll then be longest run 
> car. I wonder if Volvo would want that distinction if they 
> realised it was coming? Personally, I won't buy any new Volvo but 
> the 240. In fact, we're going out today to look at a new one.

My family has owned two 240's and it's absolutely true; they are the most
"bulletproof" car you could want. 

However, I think you'll find that the VW Beetle holds the distinction of
the longest production (and still going). Its 40th anniversary edition came
out a couple of years back.

-- Brent
morton@prolix.gaul.csd.uwo.ca
From: mills@athena.lkg.dec.com (George Mills)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: WHAT GM to Buy?
Date: 21 Dec 92 16:42:20 GMT

rjwade@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J. Wade) writes:

>In article <BzHns7.B9I@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cka52397@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Slartibartfast) writes:
>>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.
>>>
>>	Maybe a LeSabre, or a Park Avenue, depending on $$ concerns.
>>	Even a Regal sedan.  Olds 88 or 98 too.

>i wouldn't buy an OLDmobile...i doubt they will be around 2 years from now...
>let alone 10.>

I did not think so many of those boats would be around either back
in 1974 during the gas crunch. But they still are and probably will
be for a long time. Even the foreign luxury cars are getting incredibly
big. It seems mostly older folk buy them (and not because of price).

If she must buy a boat, I believe it was the LeSabre which was rated as
one of the top cars (second to Infinity?) in customer satisfaction.

Achieva (spelling?) is a really nice V6 size car at a good price.
From: holowczk@rwja.umdnj.edu (Richard Holowczak)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Car phones
Date: 23 Dec 92 04:13:54 GMT
Organization: Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway NJ

rhaar@albert.cs.gmr.com (Bob Haar) writes:

>In article 2761@schbbs.mot.com, ACUS05@waccvm.corp.mot.com (Paul Anderson) writes:

>And I would recommend that anyone considering a cellular phone
>for use in a vehicle get a hands-free model.  

>My personal observation suggests an epidemic of drivers devoting
>so much of their attention to using a car phone while driving
>that they have no idea where they are in the lanes or what other
>traffic  is around them. And they certainly don't signal
>lane changes or turns because one hand is occupied by the
>phone handset. The worst is someone flying down the highway
>at 80 mph with one hand hold the phone and the busy dialing it

>Look Ma - no hands. Oh, now look, no head!!

       I think in some states you can get a ticket for using a car phone
       while driving.  Not sure which ones though. Pennsylvania seems
       to ring a bell but I might be wrong.

       Rich H.
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: trev@quads.uchicago.edu (margaret catherine trevor)
Subject: Re: Towing a car behind a moving van
Reply-To: trev@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 18:30:19 GMT
From: z-car-request@dixie.com (Z-car mailing list)
Subject: Z-car Mailing List Monthly Posting.
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 00:23:04 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
Reply-To: z-car-request@dixie.com


This is the monthly posting of the Z-car mailing list.

The Z-car mailing list operates for the benefit of those interested in
Datsun/Nissan Z cars and any of the L-series engined sedans.  (Hey you
510 owners, you know who you are!) The interest base is primarily for the
original Z, though all discussion regarding the entire line of Z cars
cars is welcome. 

To subscribe to the list, send mail to:

z-car-request@dixie.com or
emory!rsiatl!z-car-request
     if that bounces, mail to 
jgd@dixie.com

Include in the body of your message a line specifying a fully qualified
uucp address or a domain address of the form:

Address: foo!bar!gak    or
		 foo@bar.uucp   or
		 foo@bar.edu    etc.

To post to the list, send your posting to:

z-car@dixie.com      or
emory!rsiatl!z-car

******************************************************************************
****************************** Please READ ***********************************

Because usenet/internet mailing is at best moderately unreliable and because
people and accounts tend to go away without notification, the following
mailing list policy is in effect.

If you are on the mailing list and mail bounces to your site 2 times in
a row, your name will be deleted from the list without further ado.  If 
you have requested subscription to the Z-car mailing list and have not
received any mail, it is probably because you did not supply a known good
address.  If you request a subscription, you should receive as a minimum,
a subscription acknowledgment.  You should also receive a monthly 
mailing from the list.  If you have received nothing, contact me
at jgd@dixie.com and we'll try to work out something.

******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************

For questions or inquiries, send email to jgd@dixie.com

John

John De Armond, WD4OQC         | Grand Poobah of the Z-car mailing list.
Rapid Deployment Systems, Inc. |
Atlanta, Ga                    | 
jgd@dixie.com                  |
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: alter@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Eric Alter)
Subject: Re: J. D. Powers Survey:  The 5+ Years of Ownership Experience
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 15:56:50 GMT
Reply-To: alter@rchland.vnet.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester Mn

<stuff deleted>

|> Conclusion:
|> 
|> If you can afford it, buy Honda.  It is a symbol of American excellence in 
|> engineering and manufacturing.
|> 
|> ------------------------------------------------------------------+------------
|> Jinsei no imi wa nan desu ka.                Sister, can you      |   \|  |`
|> Shitte itara oshiete kuremasen ka.           spare a coin?        |    | -+-
|>                                                                   |   /| / \
|> Copyright 1992.  Disclaimer:  1 + 1 = 3                           |
|> ------------------------------------------------------------------+------------

Excuse me, but I believe this is WRONG!  The Honda's are built in America with
parts made in Japan.  Very little is done except exploit The manufacturing
capability of the US.  Very little is added to our economy by building these
cars here.  They have to be engineered here to add to our economy.


-- 

Eric Alter
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: colombo@bronco.fnal.gov
Subject: Re: Anti-Lock Brakes makes stopping SAFER?
Organization: Fermilab Computing Division
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 19:26:24 GMT

> johns@trident.datasys.swri.edu (Stephen Johns) writes:
> 
>>I have rarely, if ever, had the ABS system kick in on dry/normal road
>>conditions.  An exception is when your cruising about 80, not watching where
>>you are all that closely, and notice the road you want to turn on is 20 ft in
>>front of you, hit the brakes and throw the car into the corner, the ABS will
>>keep you from sliding sideways through the intersection.  Without ABS your
>>only option would be to not turn.
> 

One of the important *features* of ABS is that you CAN turn the front wheels
WHILE the ABS is in operation.  Failure to do so is not the fault of the ABS.

 ___________________________________________________________________________
 *****  *   *  From the e-net desk of: Rick Colombo CD/DCD/DSG    *    *
 *      **  *  Fermi Nat'l Acc'l Lab   708-840-8225 Fermilab     * *   *
 ***    * * *  P.O. Box 500   MS 369   Feynman Computer Center  *****  *
 *      *  **  Batavia, Ill. USA 60510 Colombo@fnal.fnal.gov    *   *  *****
 *    Of course I speak for: Fermilab, Congress and the President... NOT!!!
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: K.Buck@ma30.bull.com (Ken Buck)
Subject: Re: Car phones
Reply-To: K.Buck@ma30.bull.com
Organization: Bull HN Information Systems Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 12:24:12 GMT
Originator: buck@granite.ma30.bull.com

In article <102651@netnews.upenn.edu> tony@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu
(Anthony Olejnik) writes:
>My wife wants a car phone for Christmas.

In article <1992Dec21.210929.5263@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com>
sharen@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com (Sharen A. Rund) writes:
>whatever model you finally decide on, PLEASE make sure its a model that
>doesn't require the use of hands to use - 

i'm all in favor of that, but let's add "PLEASE make sure its a model that
doesn't require the use of a BRAIN to use"...
in my opinion, phone conversations risk devoting too much attention from
the task of driving, even with hands-free operation.  i wouldn't mind
having a car phone for emergencies and/or occasional convenience, but i
wouldn't use it while moving.  encourage responsible use!
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: rjwade@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J. Wade)
Subject: Re: Honda Del Sol
Keywords: Honda Del Sol, Miata
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 13:54:52 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.214200.19656@midway.uchicago.edu> epc1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Dec19.050419.20374@samba.oit.unc.edu> Mary.Daniel@launchpad.unc.edu (mary elizabeth daniel) writes:
>>In article <BzBCwJ.21sy@austin.ibm.com> adil@austin.ibm.com (Adil Soofi) writes:
>>>
>>>I am considering buying the new Honda Del Sol. Any words of wisdom from 
>>>rec.autos readers?
>>>
>>
>>The only thing I know about a Del Sol is what it looks like; so, obviously
>>I'm not here to give you info on them.  
>>
>>I have a 1991 Miata & my advice to you would be to BUY ONE!  I've had
>>loads of fun in it!  It's peppy, handles great, gets really good
>>road-trip gas mileage (32mpg-36mpg), not to mention how cute it looks. 
>
>I don't own a Miata.  However, I have heard that in serious accidents 
>involving Miatas, the driver will sustain very heavy injury or death.

but...then they just bury you in the car which is roughly the size of a 
casket.
From: koziarz@halibut.nosc.mil (Walter A. Koziarz)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Pickup Toppers
Date: 27 Dec 92 14:51:14 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego

In article <1992Dec26.132050.23506@gagme.chi.il.us> russ@gagme.chi.il.us (Russell J. Price) writes:
>Does anyone have any recommendations for/against particular pickup caps?  I'm
>looking for one for a '92 GMC Sonoma (aka Chevy S-10).

mind if I ask something I've wondered about for a *long* time?  just *why* do
people put those 'things' on a pickup, anyway?  if it's for 'covered-storage',
then why not buy a van or SUV or Suburban?  I am just curious as to why so many
people deface a new pickup with one of those hideous things...

Walt K.
From: Harv@cup.portal.com (Harv R Laser)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: CB Walkie-Talkie
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 92 09:30:32 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Dec24.160854.5886%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu>

>walsh@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Edward E Walsh) writes:
>
>>I want to buy a 40 Channel CB Walkie-Talkie that could also be used in
>>a car.  Can anyone give me recommendations on any brand/model and features?
>>Are there any mail-order outfits?  Radio Shack has this model TRC-222 on sale
>>for $70.  However, it only has 2.5 watt RF output.  Is this sufficient? 
>>Has anyone heard of a brand called "Mid Land"?  Is it a reputable brand?
>>Any info is greatly appreciated.
>
>I have one of the Radio Shack models (it might even be this one).
>The only major problem I have with it is when powered through
>a cigarette lighter with the engine on, you get A LOT of static.
>So much so that it is unusable in this situation.
>
>Mike
>-- 
>mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu

I bought a 12V-DC powered one of these CB gizmoz from DAK a few years
ago. Plugs into the cig lighter and I've used it both in my own cars and
in many rental cars and never got any static on it whatsoever. Paid
about $40 for it.. don't remember what brand it is. 

Although I really have to question the usefulness of even carrying
the thing around on trips. Once when visiting a friend in Reno, NV,
I had the thing hooked up with the magnetized antenna stuck on the
roof of my car. I was following him home to his house in the evening,
thru a construction zone on Hwy 80 near downtown Reno, he was driving
about 5 car lengths in front of me and he hit an aluminum ladder
which was laying the long way in the fast lane. It ripped up one of
his tires. Luckily I bypassed the ladder, and follwed him slowly to
the shoulder of the highway where we stopped. 

It was about 20 degrees outside, our hands were freezing, and he
couldn't get the lugnuts off his wheel to change to his spare tire.
So I said "Hey, Joe, let's try my CB and see if we can get the CHP
or an auto-club driver to respond for help." So for about 15 mins
he stood there trying to raise someone on the "help" channel #19.
(Joe's a pilot and knows how to converse on radios). 

Well, no one responded. Until after about 15 mins some drunken fool
started yelling obscenities in channel 19. We gave up on the CB
and I threw it back in the trunk. Drove him home and used the phone.

I've carried it with me during numerous trips, mainly LA > Vegas 
and back, sometimes LA > Sacramento and back, and maybe once in
a blue moon I'll hear something intelligible on it. Mostly what
I get are idiots babbling incoherancies and on a rare occasion
or two, I'll hear a trucker say something I actually understand.

When CB was a popular fad in the 70s you'd find a lot of people
to talk to on the channels. Now it seems like it's been relegated
to the realm of expensive static and drunks.

A cellular phone is probably the way to go, but at about 10x the price
of a CB.

Harv
From: jmess@pdx.csd.mot.com (John Messman)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: toyota trucks
Date: 22 Dec 92 19:30:06 GMT
Organization: Motorola, Beaverton, OR
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

I think the T100 is under powered, and I would not buy one. A Dodge Dakota
with the Magnum V6 would be a better truck as far as performance goes. As far 
as reliability goes I would say that Toyota is hard to beat.

I have a 91 Toyota SR5 extra cab V6 2WD (same motor as the T-100 has) and pull 
a race car and trailer weighing about 2500 lbs + about 500 lbs in tools, fuel, 
and etc.. Starting out on hills from a dead stop, the truck has a hard time 
getting all that weight moving again (not enough torque in the 3.0 V6). In my 
opinion the same motor in a bigger truck is going to be much worse. Once I get 
everything moving, the power is adequate to pull the load but you would be 
much more comfortable pulling it with a bigger motor. The nice thing about my 
truck is that it is more manuverable than a big truck and it gets 17 MPG 
towing at 65-70 MPH. It will also fit in my garage. I looked at the Dodge
but they didn't have the port injection (Magnum) engine at that time, which
might have changed my mind. In general I didn't like the Dodges interior and
found the seats to be uncomfortable.

The reason the T-100 doesn't have a bigger motor is purely political and is
based on the Japanese not wanting to hear the big three cry about about 
losing some of their bread and butter market for bigger trucks.

If you wait a year or so they will put a bigger motor in the T100 and also
come out with an extra cab model (a must have, as far as I am concerned).
Now the problem will be that a real T-100 will cost around $20,000 which
isn't worth it IMHO when compared to a Dakota for $15K-$17K.
-- 
John Messman                          Motorola Inc., Commercial Systems Division
jmess@pdx.csd.mot.com                 . . . . tektronix!nosun!cvedc!mcspdx!jmess
Voice: (503) 643 6247                 . . . . uunet!apple!motcsd!mcspdx!jmess
From: sylvia@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Sylvia Budak)
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:31:18 GMT
Subject: Help/advice on Toyota valve problem
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Loveland, CO
Newsgroups: rec.autos



Once again I am going to the net for help on a valve problem my Toyota 4
cylinder truck has.  It has a 22-RE engine in it.  The number 4 intake valve
makes a lot of noise.  It sounds like there is too much clearance in that
valve.  Right after a new adjustment has been made however, it remains 
noisy.  I had a cylinder leakage test done in June ~ 25K miles.  It did not 
show any problems.  The mechanic told me what leakage was occuring was through 
the cylinder walls not the valves.  So at least I am confident none of the 
valves surfaces are burnt.  I suspected this might be the case because at
the start of all these problems (~15K miles) none of the valves had any
clearance.  Now I have about 30K miles on the truck.  I continues to run
well although the gas milage has dropped slightly.  I suspect this is from the 
slightly larger tires I put on, and some from the bug shield on the hood.  
Both were added this summer.  The cylinder head bolts have been checked for 
minimum torque.  They are all at least as tight as they should be.  We didn't 
loosen them though, so I don't know if any may be too tight.  

Next time I open things up for a look I will re-check the wear on the cam
shaft, and pull the rocker-arm over to the side to take a look at the valve
stem.  I will be looking from mushrooming on the tip on the stem compared 
to the valves which do not make noise.  By the way, I know it is the #4 
intake valve because I listened with a stethoscope.  It is also the one that
is the farthest out of adjustment every time I open things up to take a look.

Does anyone out there have any suggestions,  similary experiences?  I did 
not take it to the dealership because problems I have had with my previous
truck and having them "fix" it.  I ended up trading that truck in on this one 
after they messed it up.

I am trying to remain optomistic about the future of this engine largely based
on its continued good performance and the good leakage test results.  I am 
not being overly picky about the level of noise.  It is so loud, I get em-
barrased anytime the engine is running and someone is standing anywhere near
the truck.

Thanks in advance for any advice.  Please e-mail your replys for I will not
have access to notes for the next week and a half.

Sylvia   sylvia@hplvla.lvld.hp.com

Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: todd@crayola (Todd Katz)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: mercedes
Date: 24 Dec 92 00:09:14 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

Is there a Mercedes discussion group (similar to the rx7 group)? Thanks.
Organisation: European Space Operation Centre (E.S.O.C)
Date: Tuesday, 22 Dec 1992 11:02:07 CET
From: <SROWELL@ESOC.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Car bras
 <1992Dec18.162108.2426@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com>
 <1992Dec18.200018.16114@u.washington.edu>

The US seems to be the only country in the world that uses these 'Car
Bras' (correct me if I'm wrong). Whenever I see a car with one of these
vinyl sheets strapped to the bonnet, it's often one of those cars that
have those parking sensor probes sticking out of it, the hifi blaring out
through heavily tinted windows and driving conspicuously slowly so everyone
can notice 'the wheels'.The owner probably still has the polythene wrappers
on the front car seats!

No, Car Bras are very silly and if you don't tailgate (as has already been
pointed out by some sensible gentleman)you are very unlikely to need one.

Save your money and buy a small pot of touch-up paint...

Simon
Newsgroups: rec.autos,rec.autos.vw
From: gould@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (EWD)
Subject: Re: 1990 Audi 100 S...
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 02:07:22 GMT

In article <Dec21.095150.21665@engr.washington.edu> eliot@lanmola.engr.washington.edu (eliot) writes:
>
>>In article <UfB_V8200iV081Ib0S@andrew.cmu.edu> "Joseph D. Mazza" <mazz+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>>>As to the 100LS engine, the inclined, straight 5 cyl (Or was it 4? Can't
>>>remember.) was originally developed and abandoned by MB.  Good thing. 
>>>It was a dog. 

The 100LS never had a five cyl engine, they all had four cyl engines of
84.4mm stroke, the final and largest displacing 1871cc.  The Coupe S version
put out 121 HP SAE net from 114.9 cu.in. at a fairly leisurely 5600 rpm.
The more quotidian single carb versions put out 115 SAE net, hardly a
dog by any standards in terms of specific output.  I believe if you
look up dog in the dictionary you will find a picture of a Mercedes
Benz 220D.

There was some mention of its being a weirdo design abandoned by MB.
I'm not sure what this would refer to.  I can assure you that the 100LS
mill is quite normal in appearance, overhead valves in a cross flow aluminum
head, normal dished pistons.  I'm fairly sure it then gave rise to an
overhead cam version, owing to the fact that the subsequent engine shared
the same stroke, main bearing, and con rod bearing dimensions as the
predecesor, but being punched out to 86.5mm from 84.0mm.  The OHC
version was susequently turbocharged by Porsche, and was used by Audi
in various European models, and by AMC in some Pacers.  It's possible
the 1984cc engine just introduced to the US in the newest Jetta (or
whatever VW calls it) derives from the same heritage.

>just to clear things up, the audi 5 banger never appeared until the
>mid 1970s in the second generation 100/5000.  this engine is not a
>relative of the one found in the 100LS; it is a relative of the 1781
>cc OHC VW/Audi 4.  it has a fine reputation of being one of the most
>bulletproof engines on the market today.  racing variants of this
>engine have produced in excess of 600 bhp and the current one found in
>the audi s4 produces over 100 bhp/liter and max torque at 1950 rpm at
>the same time.

>eliot

Eliot