HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: essbaum@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Alexander Essbaum)
Subject: Re: Car phones
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 18:41:37 GMT
Distribution: usa
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester

In article <BzoIy2.F4n@newsflash.concordia.ca>, smw@trm.concordia.ca ( Steven Winikoff ) writes:
|> In article <1992Dec22.163427.18691@dg-rtp.dg.com>, goudreau@batman.rtp.dg.com
|> (Bob Goudreau) writes:
|> > 
|> > So I trust that you also never engage in driver-passenger conversation
|> > while in a moving vehicle?  And if you do, please explain the
|> > fundamental difference between that and hands-free phone use.
|> 
|> Actually, that's easy.  The fundamental difference is that passengers
|> (at least those who aren't too young/blind/stupid to be aware of
|> anything going on around them) can see what's happening on the road.
|> 
|> A passenger knows that you may not be able to respond immediately during
|> any situation that demands your full attention.  The person on the other
|> end of the phone, on the other hand, doesn't know that you're merging
|> into heavy traffic, trying to make a left turn against heavy oncoming
|> traffic, or whatever.
|> 
|> There is a difference.

in my experience, a pretty small difference.  the vast majority of people
i know don't pay nearly enough attention when they're driving (i think).
putting them in the passenger seat certainly doesn't help.  witness the
number of people who have no idea how to drive from point A to point B
even though they've made the trip 10 times as a passenger.  i think most
passengers would have no idea you were going to rear-end a stopped semi
until you actually hit it.

|> I don't have a cellular phone (and won't until the *operating* costs are
|> substantially lower than they are now), but when I eventually pop for
|> one I expect to do what the previous poster did:  namely, purchase a
|> portable unit and simply not use it while moving.

i'd use it while moving, but i'd be going the speed limit on a straight
freeway in the right lane with no traffic anywhere near me before i made
any sense to the person i was talking to.
 
|>     - Steven 
|> ________________________________________________________________________
|> Steven Winikoff      |       smw@         | "I don't want to run the
|> Software Analyst     | alcor.concordia.ca | world; I merely want to own
|> Computing Services   |                    | a substantial portion of the
|> Concordia University | (514) 848-7619     | preferred stock" - Alan Dean
|> Montreal, QC, Canada | (10:00-18:00 EST)  | Foster,  Cat-A-Lyst

axel
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: essbaum@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Alexander Essbaum)
Subject: Re: Car Phones
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 18:58:17 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester
Keywords: Hand free operation

In article <1992Dec23.152743.5420@dg-rtp.dg.com>, goudreau@batman.rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes:
|> In article <22965@drutx.ATT.COM> klf@druwa.ATT.COM (FranklinKL) writes:
|> >
|> >
|> > There is a good deal of difference.
|> > In the first place, I don't EVER recall having to dial a code and press
|> > "SEND" to gain access to a passenger in my car.  The act of dialling
|> > is the kind of thing that can distract the driver from his most
|> > important function, controlling the car...

disagree.  i would say dialling is a lot less distracting that talking.
talking requires more cpu than dialling a phone, even if you're looking
through the windshield while talking.  i'd rather have drivers take their
eyes off the road for a split second to press 2 buttons on a phone or mess
with the heater controls (when you do this is determined by
driving conditions.  if there's stuff going on that requires attention
the other thing WAITS.) than have them looking out the windshield while
their brain is doing something else.

i'd say a driver looking at the road while his brain is occupied
is not much better than a driver not looking at the road.

axel
Organization: Senior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 10:06:14 -0500 
From: Jinmo Ahn <ja2f+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Lexus LS400 Prices in NY/NJ/CT area


I'll be purchasing a LS400 before the end of the month.

I've got prices from two dealers in NJ so far.  One dealer gave a price
of $47,700 and the other dealer gave $46,000. This is on a '93 LS400
with traction control, cd-player, and seat memory.  

Both dealers said 'come back to us if you get a better price from
somewhere else'.  I have a feeling I can get as low as $44k on this car
if I play it right.

This 'purchasing experience' as lexus dealers call it is really painful.
If you are aware of the going sales prices of these cars, I would be
interested in hearing from you.  Also, any suggestions or warning in
dealing with the salespeople during the negotiation process are welcome.

Thanks
From: tim.burton@cutting.hou.tx.us (Tim Burton) 
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Info on Dodge Stealth
Date: 2 Jan 93 03:33:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Cutting Edge - Houston, TX - 713-466-1525
Reply-To: tim.burton@cutting.hou.tx.us (Tim Burton) 

IA.        I am looking into the purchase of a Dodge Stealth and would like to
  .know as much as possible about it ( performance, problems, prices new & used, etc).
  .        Please send any info to me at 'lazorisa@udel.edu' or just post it in this
  .group.

  
 They are fast, although not quite as fast as the LT1 Vette, or 300ZX 
turbo, and the '93 RX7 twin turbo - twin rotory engine. The good points 
include, all wheel drive, four seats (Even though the back seats are 
small).  Bad points are: Funky interior (Dash), non-power seats, & they 
weigh a lot too)  They also do not handle quite as well as the others 
stated above.  This is due they got the frame is originally from the 
four door Gallant.  (Same frame for 3000GT, Eclipse, Talon, 
Laser, Diamante) It is hard for them to get such a plat-form to handle 
as well as ones designed originally as sports cars.  As for looks, I 
think they are one of the best looking cars for the price.  If this is 
your first "true" sports car, it is the one you should pick.  The AWD 
is good for the first time sports car buyer - very forgiving.  The 
Vette would be the least reliable....and a toss up for the 300ZX & 
Stealth.  This information, and ideas come from me reading several car 
magazines.  (C&D, MotorTrend, Hot Rod, etc.)  Well, that's me $0.02 
worth. :)  Let me know what your final choice is.  
 
  - Tim 
    Internet: Tim.Burton@Cutting.hou.tx.us

 P.S. I would also test drive the '93 LT1 Vette, 3000GT, and most of 
all the new '93 RX7 before deciding on which one to buy. (Even though 
the RX7 looks like a Miata on steroids - how fast and how it handles 
may win you over)   
---
 . 1st 1.01 #1199s . It's SHO time!
                                                                                                 
----
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The Cutting Edge BBS (cutting.hou.tx.us)    A PCBoard 14.5a system  |
| Houston, Texas, USA    +1 713 466 1525          running uuPCB       |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: eacj@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Julian Vrieslander)
Subject: Integra handles like pig on skates - what tires to get?
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 04:49:55 GMT

Sorry if this is FAQ material, but I have not been monitoring rec.autos or
the car mags recently.

My 88 Acura Integra has just about chewed through its original Michelin MXV
tires.  I was utterly unimpressed with these tires.  The steering response
on dry surfaces was slow and squishy, with little warning near the breakaway
point.  Traction in rain and snow was terrible.  Scary even.

This car is not a great handler to begin with, so it needs all the help it
can get from the tires.  I would be very grateful for suggestions, especially
from other Integra owners.  Bear in mind that my days of ripping around
corners with a screech are past.  These days my concern with handling is
more related to safety than autocrossing, so plus-2 conversions and $200
gumballs are out of the question.  Rest of the car is box stock.
-- 
Julian Vrieslander 
Neurobiology & Behavior, Mudd Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca NY 14853    
INTERNET: eacj@theory.tc.cornell.edu     BITNET: eacj@crnlthry
UUCP: ..cornell!batcomputer!eacj
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe)
Subject: Re: Want to buy a sporty car under $15000
Organization: Miners for a Heart of Gold
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 22:53:10 GMT

In article <BzuqIy.LBJ@news.iastate.edu> twba3@isuvax.iastate.edu writes:
>I need advice for a sporty car(new) under $15000 with automatic 
>transmission, A/C, Stereo. Don't consider any 2 seaters. 
>Please send personal mail to me since I don't read this newsgroup very often.

If this person insists on buying "foreign-made", then I recommend the

                      Acura Integra,

which J. D. Powers assures to be very reliable after 5+ years.

If this person insists on buying "American-made", then I recommend the

                      Honda Civic Coupe EX,

which J. D. Powers assures to be very reliable.  In fact, J. D. Powers
assures us that Honda is the #2 make in reliability (just after Mercedes-
Benz) after _5_ years of ownership.

A lot of the people on this newsgroup talk about vehicles from the viewpoint
of those in the DINKs[1] class.  Buy the latest car.  Use it.  Abuse it.
Get another "hot rod" after 3 years or less.  Just gotta get the hottest
stuff out there.  48 values.  Engine that breathes fire.  Suspension that
hugs the ground like skin to velcro.  yeah.  YEAH!

Well, these people aren't into the 5+year ownership experience like
people with families and other such weighty responsibilities.  (People who
write those silly articles in Road & Track magazine and the like rarely
ever talk about the 5+year ownership experience).

So, take my advice.  Want a car that lasts long for under $15,000?  Buy the
Integra or the Coupe.  Ya ain't gonna lose.

>Thank you for your help.

Your welcome.

[1] DINKs = double income no kids

------------------------------------------------------------------+------------
Jinsei no imi wa nan desu ka.                Sister, can you      |   \|  |`
Shitte itara oshiete kuremasen ka.           spare a coin?        |    | -+-
                                                                  |   /| / \
Copyright 1992.  Disclaimer:  1 + 1 = 3                           |
------------------------------------------------------------------+------------
From: gregb@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Greg Begay)
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 14:20:43 GMT
Subject: Re: toyota trucks
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.autos

>
>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.
>-- 

Checked out the T100 at the local Toyota place.  All the trucks I
say were *already* going for around $20K.


>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
>----------

GregB
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Four wheel drive Autos
Date: 22 Dec 92 16:52:07 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.autos, erkamp@janus (Bob Erkamp) writes:
>In article <92349.151334CJOHNSON@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>, <CJOHNSON@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> w
>rites:

>Eagle Talon AWD

Has potential timing belt problems due to a too small pulley...

>Dodge Stealth R/T AWD
>Most (all?) Subaru's have 4WD

Subarus are truly 4wds, and should not be driven on dry pavement in 4wd.

>There used to be a Toyota Celica with 4WD

Still is, I own a '88. They only make 5,000 a year, so they are a bit
hard to find, especially later in the year. Also, this is AWD, a fulltime
system.

>I remember seeing in C&D or R&T that Porsche had an AWD vehicle (911?)

It is a Carrera 4, I believe. There is also the gizmo 959. (and I would
still love to drive one just once, to see if all those stats are real.:)

>If you don't have to have a car there are many new vans now that are availble
>with 4WD. Or you can get a Suzuki Sidekick (sorry I had to put a plug in for
>this as it's what I drive).

If milelage is a concern, get a shoftable 4wd. It will save you $$$.
If you like performance, get ready to shell out some bucks for monthly
gas bills. Mine runs on super (plus just seems to sap power) and gets
a measly 20 mpg if I drive it mostly with the traffic flow. The Ecclipse
does about the same, and the oxygenated crap they sell these days in
the north will further reduce your mileage by about 10%.

Believe it or not, there are also Ford Tempo AWDs. I've seen two around
the DC area.

Ron  
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: serafin@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Mike Serafin)
Subject: Re: RFI:Is radar accurate in rain/drizzel/fog?
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 17:25:01 GMT

In article <_1qrmlb@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>schludermann@sscvx1.ssc.gov writes:
>
>> Can anyone inform me of the reliability/accuracy of RADAR when it is used
>>in high humidity situations rain/drizzel/fog? I recall that the validity
>>of radar in those situations is not reliable. But That was some years ago that
>>I heard of this. 
>
>In my experience with my units, the X-band unit almost quits working in 
>actual hard rain.  The K-band unit seems hardly affected.  Fog or  high
>humidity has no discernable effect.  When a reading is displayed, I've
>had no indication that the error rate, as judged by estimating the speed
>of targets vs the displayed speed, increases.

I wouldn't think that you would see an increase in error rate.  The thing that
rain does is to absorb the microwave energy.  It would make sense that the
longer wavelength X-band would lose effectiveness quicker that K-band.  The
fact that the X-band "almost quits working" can be attributed to the almost
complete absorption of microwave energy by the water drops.
From: stecz@pencom.com (John Steczkowski)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Honda struts
Date: 28 Dec 92 18:46:20 GMT
Reply-To: stecz@pencom.com
Distribution: austin
Organization: Pencom Software

In article <1992Dec21.133805.5398@mwhhlaw.uucp> jim@mwhhlaw (James P. Cavanaugh  
III) writes:
> 
> 	Don't get me wrong - this Honda has been a wonderfully reliable  
> car, with not a single non-scheduled repair.  But this experience fits  
> with what has become my belief: Although US cars may be somewhat less  
> reliable than their Japaneese counterparts, this advantage is  
> outweighed by the higher costs of maintenance and repair.
> 	REAL cars have 4 shocks that cost maybe $15 apiece, and I can  
> install all 4 in an hour (or pay $10 each to let the mechanic do it).   
> REAL cars DO NOT cost $500 to replace such mundane things as shocks.   
> To one raised on US cars, $500 is the range of a major repair, not  
> routine maintenance.  Jeeeze, I once got a whole Torqueflite rebuilt  
> for $350 (and that was at well over 100k miles).  I guess the only good  
> news is that this car doesn't have ABS.  Arrrrgggghhhh!

Let's keep this in perspective...name 5 four door sedans ('88 or newer) that  
DON'T have Macpherson struts on at least 2 corners.  My point is practically  
all cars, foreign and domestic) use strut type suspension.  Your Honda costs  
about the same as any other car to replace the struts.

--
  John Steczkowski                        stecz@pencom.com
  "Achilles raised his spear, took careful aim, and hurled."
  					    from the Iliad
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: ycheah@hamp.hampshire.edu
Subject: Sudden acel and Audis (Was: Audi sucks)
Organization: Hampshire College
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 11:59:09 GMT

In article <1281@xlnt.COM>, david@elwood.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (David Johnson) writes:
> mills@athena.lkg.dec.com (George Mills) writes:
>>SROWELL@ESOC.BITNET writes:
>>>I think the US gives Audi a bad press (oh by the way although I live in
>>>Germany I am English) - it reminds me of the furore a few years ago when
>>>one of your TV programmes 'discovered' that Audi 100s had a tendency to
>>>surge backwards all of a sudden 'for no reason'. Apparently the problem
>>>was traced to the fact that the foot pedals in the Audi were smaller than
>>>standard US feet were used to, and people were stamping on the accelerator
>>>rather than the brake. That 'publicity' did Audi a lot of harm in the US
>>>when it was really a user problem (having big feet). I do not remember
>>>hearing any similar stories in Europe (perhaps it's a matter of media
>>>power?).
> 
>>That's bull. It was the AUDI-5000 automatic hear and there was something
>>very wrong with that car. I saw a few "special programs done" (yes,
>>by the media) it was very convincing something was wrong with the car.
>>So what, even if it was the peddles, THAT CAR KILLED people.
> 
> A former coworker of mine bought one of the Audi models that supposedly
> had the unintended acceleration problem.  After driving the car
> for awhile he was convinced that it was people stepping on the
> accelerator by mistake.  He said the pedals were small and also
> misplaced.  I think it is a flaw on Audi's part, not a mechanical
> or computer control flaw, but in ergonomic design.  Audi contended that
> drivers were stepping on the accelerator rather than the brake.  My
> former coworker confirms that the pedal placement and design
> lends itself to this.  My question is, why didn't Audi change the design?
> If there is a tendency to press the accelerator when the brake is
> intended (which they _almost_ admitted),
> that is a design flaw in my book.  Audi did not seem to be
> all that reponsive in fixing it.
> 
> About the "special programs," I thought I remember "60 Minutes" later
> admitting or it was discovered that they "fudged a bit" when
> they did the story.  Yes, it was a convincing story but "60 Minutes"
> has been known in the past to twist the facts to convince viewers
> to believe a certain viewpoint.  A story being convincing
> does not necessarily mean it is true.
> 
> -- 
> David Johnson
> XLNT Designs, Inc. (XDI)
> david@xlnt.com


Also, it later surfaced that there were a few other car models (some of then
American) which also has this "sudden unintended acceleration" "problem". All 
of them were traced to user stomping on the wrong pedal. Audi was, IMO, wrongly
singled out for bad press.

Yin-chai

Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: jdt@ulysses.att.com (Jonathan D. Trudel[ftd])
Subject: Re: 1990 Audi 100 SUCKS !!!!!!!!!!!!e+10
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 19:08:08 GMT
Reply-To: jdt@ulysses.att.com
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ

In article <1h7qojINNj8u@transfer.stratus.com>, cdodson@beast.cac.stratus.com (R. Craig Dodson) writes:

|> > >Apparently the problem
|> > >was traced to the fact that the foot pedals in the Audi were smaller than
|> > >standard US feet were used to...

|> > So what, even if it was the peddles, THAT CAR KILLED people.
|> 
|> The National Highway and Traffic Safety Aministration later issued a several
|> hundred page paper absolving Audi of any claimed "problems" with the cars.
|> In their words, the cause of the problem - "pedal misapplication".  

|> In every
|> case, the brakes of the wrecked Audi were found to be in perfect working order.

Um, look, did you see anything in the article you're replying to that mentions
the poster's belief that it wasn't the pedals?  He specifically said that
he agreed that it was a pedal misapplication.  Case closed on that.

|> Another classic case of poor driving skills, greedy lawyers and shoddy
|> TV journalism.

No.  Considering the frequency of the "sudden acceleration", I genuinely feel
that Audi shares part of the blame - they designed the pedals smaller than
Americans were used to.  

If anything, Audi should've been aware of the human factors issues, and 
taken steps to point out the differences.  Just a simple "Thanks for buying
an Audi, and by the way, you should be aware that the pedals are smaller."  
Granted, "human error" is the real cause, but it's not the only contributing
factor.

Now, of course, it's common to see new cars with automatics have the the shift
interlock as a standard feature.
						Jon
Newsgroups: rec.autos
From: mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Mike S.)
Subject: Rock chips/Clearcoat (was Re: Car bras)
Organization: BITS, St. Louis, MO
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 16:04:07 GMT


>In article <4924@ceylon.gte.com> hhd0@newshost.gte.com (Horace Dediu) writes:

>>two weeks of operation breaks my heart.  Some enterpreneur should consider
>>a solution which will not detract from the appearance of the car.  In the
>>meantime I'll grit my teeth and bear it.  Touch-up paint will retard rust, but
>>the appearance of the clearcoat is gone forever (and the car is black...sigh...)
>>

A while back I heard Nissan had come up with a new formulation for
a clearcoat finish which was supposed to be MUCH harder than current
clearcoat.  Nissan said it nicely resisted rock chips, scratches,
etc.

Anyone else hear this or have updated information?

Mike
-- 
mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu
From: david@elwood.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (David Johnson)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: 1990 Audi 100 SUCKS !!!!!!!!!!!!e+10
Date: 23 Dec 92 18:35:20 GMT

mills@athena.lkg.dec.com (George Mills) writes:
>SROWELL@ESOC.BITNET writes:
>>I think the US gives Audi a bad press (oh by the way although I live in
>>Germany I am English) - it reminds me of the furore a few years ago when
>>one of your TV programmes 'discovered' that Audi 100s had a tendency to
>>surge backwards all of a sudden 'for no reason'. Apparently the problem
>>was traced to the fact that the foot pedals in the Audi were smaller than
>>standard US feet were used to, and people were stamping on the accelerator
>>rather than the brake. That 'publicity' did Audi a lot of harm in the US
>>when it was really a user problem (having big feet). I do not remember
>>hearing any similar stories in Europe (perhaps it's a matter of media
>>power?).

>That's bull. It was the AUDI-5000 automatic hear and there was something
>very wrong with that car. I saw a few "special programs done" (yes,
>by the media) it was very convincing something was wrong with the car.
>So what, even if it was the peddles, THAT CAR KILLED people.

A former coworker of mine bought one of the Audi models that supposedly
had the unintended acceleration problem.  After driving the car
for awhile he was convinced that it was people stepping on the
accelerator by mistake.  He said the pedals were small and also
misplaced.  I think it is a flaw on Audi's part, not a mechanical
or computer control flaw, but in ergonomic design.  Audi contended that
drivers were stepping on the accelerator rather than the brake.  My
former coworker confirms that the pedal placement and design
lends itself to this.  My question is, why didn't Audi change the design?
If there is a tendency to press the accelerator when the brake is
intended (which they _almost_ admitted),
that is a design flaw in my book.  Audi did not seem to be
all that reponsive in fixing it.

About the "special programs," I thought I remember "60 Minutes" later
admitting or it was discovered that they "fudged a bit" when
they did the story.  Yes, it was a convincing story but "60 Minutes"
has been known in the past to twist the facts to convince viewers
to believe a certain viewpoint.  A story being convincing
does not necessarily mean it is true.

-- 
David Johnson
XLNT Designs, Inc. (XDI)
david@xlnt.com