waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
Hi, I need your help with a problem I have with a 1989 Mitsubishi Galant GS transmission.  The car has a 5 speed manual tranmission. Since the car was bought new, while shifting from 2nd to 3rd,  unless  I do it SLOWLY and carefully, it makes a "popping" or "hitting" sound. The dealer and Mitsubishi customer service (reached by an 800 #) say  this is NORMAL for the car.  IS IT? And about a year ago, at 35Kmiles, the stick shift handle got STUCK while attempting to put it in reverse:    1- The shifter would not budge.  The clutch had no effect.    2- The front tires would not budge, even when the clutch is       fully depressed.    3- If the clutch is released the engine would die.    4- Assuming that some gear was engaged while the shifter was       stuck, I could not make the car move.  It acted as if       it were in Neutral(except for dying when clutch is released.)    5- I finally was able to release the shifter by having        someone rock the car back and forth (less than an inch),       while I depressed the clutch and jiggled the shifter.    6- The shifter acted normally after that.  When this happened, I took it to the dealer, they checked the  clutch, it was o.k. They checked the transmission, it was o.k.  I had the exact problem a couple of months ago, and again last week.  The dealer says there is nothing they can do because  Mitsubishi (the 800 #) says they have never heard of the problem, and the dealer could not reproduce the problem while they had the car.   In all three occurances, the car was parked head first in a garage, and since the front wheels were stuck, the car could not be towed to the dealer before releasing the shifter (hence temporarily solving the problem).  And the dealer, and Mitsubishi, refused to send someone to check the car while it was stuck.  I KNOW there is smething wrong with the transmission (shifting  from 2nd to 3rd), and getting stuck at random, but I can't get  the dealer to fix it. I need your help with the mechanical problems,  and with how to handle Mitsubishi.   All hints and suggestions are greatly appreciated, and sorry to bore you with the long post.
In article <1993Apr22.145940.1@skcla.monsanto.com> mas@skcla.monsanto.com writes: >If you put a locking lugnut on your tires, do you need to have your >tires rebalanced?? > >John Mas > > >E-Mail Address     ::     MAS@SKCLA.MONSANTO.COM >  Well, it depends on what kind of locking lugnuts you have.  My previous car had locking lugnuts that weighed about 2.5oz. more than the others.  The locking lugnuts were factory equipment, and according to the factory service manual, after tire balancing the technician/mechanic was supposed to put a 1/2 oz. counterweight on the rim opposite the locking nut.  I always had vibration problems with those stupid lugnuts since no one ever did the service correctly. I eventually got rid of the locking lugnuts and replaced them with the standard lugnuts.  Unfortunately, I found out about the counterweighting technique 6 months after I got rid of the locking nuts. :-(  My present car, a Saturn SC, has locking lugnuts that I bought at the dealer and are made specifically for the Saturn.  They have been made to be exactly the same weight as the non-locking lugnuts (said so on the package and I verified it myself).  I haven't had any vibration problems with the tires at all (due to the nuts) in 12,000 of ownership.  I did have some other vibration problems, but it was due to a poor job of tire balancing.
I test drove a Mazda 626 LX this past weekend and  liked it.  The dealer offered it for $15K.  1) Is this a good price? 2) Any comments on 626 in general?   Please use email. Thanks
In article <66758@mimsy.umd.edu> davew@cs.umd.edu (David G. Wonnacott) writes: >I'm considering switching to Geico insurance, but have heard that >they do not assign a specific agent for each policy or claim.  I was >worried that this might be a real pain when you make a claim.  I have >also heard that they try to get rid of you if you have an accident.
In article <C5t3B2.DG@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cka52397@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (OrioleFan@uiuc) writes: >boyle@cactus.org (Craig Boyle) writes: > >>In article <C5sxI4.J9B@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cka52397@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (OrioleFan@uiuc) writes: >>>gibbonsa@fraser.sfu.ca (Darren Gibbons) writes: >>>>I'm looking for information on Opel cars.  Now you ask, which model? >>>>Well, the sad truth is, I'm not entirely sure, but it's a two-seater, >>>>with roll-over headlights, hard top, and really sporty looking.  My >>>>friend has one sitting in his yard in really nice condition, >>>>body-wise, but he transmission has seized up on him, so it hasn't run >>>>for a while.  Does anyone have any info on these cars?  The engine >>>>compartment looks really tight to work on, but it is in fine shape and >>>>I am quite interested in it. >>>>Thanks! >>>>Darren Gibbons >>>>gibbonsa@sfu.ca >>>	 >>>	This would be the manta, would it not???  Sold through Buick dealers in the mid '70's as the price leader???? > >>Sounds a lot more like an Opel GT to me. I'd guess that this is on the same >>chassis as the Kadett, rather than the bigger Manta - but I could easily >>be wrong.  I think the later Kadett's were sold here as Buick Opels. > >>Craig > >	I think the Manta is the European name for the "GT."  I'm pretty sure Well the European Manta and US GT have entirely different bodies. There is little or no chance that they are the same. The Manta went through several generations as the coupe version of the Ascona and was OK in its time.  >that the only Kadett's sold here were/are the Pontiac LeMans.  I think the  Not true. The Kadett has been in and out of the US market over the years. The LeMans (old Kadett) is only the latest version.   Craig >GT is just an early '70s to mid '70s Manta.    Different Cars. One looks like a sports-car, the other is a coupe.
jahonen@cc.lut.fi (Jarmo Ahonen) writes:  >kissane@black.Berkeley.EDU (John G. Kissane) writes:  >>As a matter of interest does anyone know why autos are so popular in the US   >>while here in Europe they are rare??? Just wondering..... >>--   >Many cars sold here in Finland are *small* and *cheap* cars (at least when >compared to other cars --- note that we have over 120 % car tax). >And you couldn't expect a good auto mated to a 1.3 L engine? >Most of the bigger cars are, however, sold with autos.  Here in Australia most cars are manual (privately owned anyway).  Why? Not sure, I think it has something to do with the fact that our car industry in the past was more closely aligned with Europe than the US in the past. Now it's aligned with Asia.  Scott. _______________________________________________________________________________ Scott Fisher [scott@psy.uwa.oz.au]  PH: Aus [61] Perth (09) Local (380 3272).                                                                              _--_|\       N Department of Psychology                                    /      \    W + E University of Western Australia.      Perth [32S, 116E]-->  *_.--._/      S Nedlands, 6009.  PERTH, W.A.                                      v         Joy is a Jaguar XJ6 with a flat battery, a blown oil seal and an unsympathetic  wife, 9km outside of a small remote town, 3:15am on a cold wet winters morning.
In article <1993Apr15.222254.6651@rtfm.mlb.fl.us>, gwalker@rtfm.mlb.fl.us (Grayson Walker) writes: |> Why crawl under the car at all? I have a machine I got for my boat that  |> pulls the oil out under suction through the dip stick tube. It does an |> excellent job and by moving the suction tube around, you can get more  |> old oil out than by using the drain plug. I think I paid $25 at E&B Marine. |> The oil goes into a steel 3 gal can - wait until it cools and decant into |> your favorite device. I use soft drink bottles. Easy to take them down to |> the local oil recycle center.  This does sound good, but I heard it tends to leave more grit, etc in the  oil pan.  Also, I've been told to change the old when it's hot before the grit has much time to settle.  Any opinions?
According to a LoJack representative I saw recently, LoJack must be installed by an authorized LoJack dealer, and is placed in one of (roughly) 30 spots in the car...  >Thanks, >Steve M.  att.com!mantic!srmal
In article <C5sxI4.J9B@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cka52397@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (OrioleFan@uiuc) writes: >gibbonsa@fraser.sfu.ca (Darren Gibbons) writes: > >>I'm looking for information on Opel cars.  Now you ask, which model? >>Well, the sad truth is, I'm not entirely sure, but it's a two-seater, >>with roll-over headlights, hard top, and really sporty looking.  My >>friend has one sitting in his yard in really nice condition, >>body-wise, but he transmission has seized up on him, so it hasn't run >>for a while.  Does anyone have any info on these cars?  The engine >>compartment looks really tight to work on, but it is in fine shape and >>I am quite interested in it. >>Thanks! >>Darren Gibbons >>gibbonsa@sfu.ca >	 >	This would be the manta, would it not???  Sold through Buick dealers in the mid '70's as the price leader????  Sounds a lot more like an Opel GT to me. I'd guess that this is on the same chassis as the Kadett, rather than the bigger Manta - but I could easily be wrong.  I think the later Kadett's were sold here as Buick Opels.
tvervaek@col.hp.com (Tom Vervaeke) writes:  >My wife and I looked at, and drove one last fall. This was a 1992 model. >It was WAYYYYYYYYY underpowered. I could not imagine driving it in the >mountains here in Colorado at anything approaching highway speeds. I >have read that the new 1993 models have a newer, improved hp engine.   >I'm quite serious that I laughed in the salesman face when he said "once >it's broken in it will feel more powerful". I had been used to driving a >Jeep 4.0L 190hp engine. I believe the 92's Land Cruisers (Land Yachts) >were 3.0L, the sames as the 4Runner, which is also underpowered (in my >own personal opinion).   >They are big cars, very roomy, but nothing spectacular.   >( ___ )-----------------------------------------------------------( ___ ) > | / | Tom Vervaeke           Email: tvervaek@cs.itc.hp.com        | \ | > | / | Hewlett Packard Co.    Phone: 719-590-2133                  | \ | > | / |                                                             | \ | > |___|          I love animals. They taste delicious.              |___| >(_____)-----------------------------------------------------------(_____)
I have had good luck with my Ranger and Yokohama 371 S+M tires.    The tires have been wearing well and even the few times i have hauled    heavy loads they have done well.
kissane@black.Berkeley.EDU (John G. Kissane) writes:  >As a matter of interest does anyone know why autos are so popular in the US while  >here in Europe they are rare??? Just wondering..... >--   Many cars sold here in Finland are *small* and *cheap* cars (at least when compared to other cars --- note that we have over 120 % car tax).  And you couldn't expect a good auto mated to a 1.3 L engine?
In article <3090@shaman.wv.tek.com> andrew@frip.wv.tek.com writes: >So is cocaine.  What's your point?
Their number is 1-800-541-4716 	they are based in Chicago, IL in case 	you need to call dir assistance.  	Their prices are more down to earth than 	ANY other source for car innards/outers.  	They will send you a free catalog.
ssave@ole.cdac.com (The Devil Reincarnate) writes:   >>.... These >>lit up cars make non-illuminated things LESS visible (like pedistrians and >>bikes). Hopefully we're not going to mandate DRL's for people and bikes  >>too.  Well, DRL's are already mandatory for motorcycles...
amh2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ALOIS M. HIMSL) writes: >be worthwhile?  Or how about something like the old MGB with new technology? >Just think about it - the old style with upgraded safety features and perhaps a >natural gas operated engine for less than 10K. I think it would go over well. >What is your opinion?????? >Al H  Well, the MGB is currently in production for the English market, built by Rover. It now has a V8, improved suspention, and a slightly updated body. Too bad it's only available in GB and would set one of us back about $42,000+.
daubendr@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Darren R Daubenspeck) writes:  >> they are pretty much junk, stay away from them.  they will be replaced next >> year with all new models.    >Junk?They've made the C&D lists for years due to their excellent handling and  >acceleration.They have been around since about, oh, 85 or 86, so they're not   >the newest on the lot, and mileage is about five to eight MPG under the class >leader. You can get into a 3.0 L v-6 (141 hp) Shadow for $10~11K (the I-4   >turbo a bit more), and a droptop for $14~15K.    How can car be any good that has            S     N     A    C              U     D     N    E  written on the back with crooked letters as if a 2-year-old had written it?  Hehhehehehahaha!  (About as silly as Crysler's attemps to make the label on the back of some of their other cars appear like they are Mercedes.)  Sorry, I couldn't resist...
Just found a great deal on a Clifford Delta car alarm, $450 installed.   Comes with glass break sensor, motion detector, and shock detector.  Does  anyone have one of these alarms?  Are they any good?  From the looks of it, its about the best on the market for the price.  It's also on sale, so that's  another reason to get it.  I think I'll be saving almost $200.  Any opinions?
In <pwe.735571191@slipknot.mit.edu> pwe@slipknot.mit.edu (Paul W. Emery) writes:  >On the subject of the V4,Ford in the UK used V4 engines exstensively in >their Ford Transit vans.This brings back a memory from the seventies.I >played in a band at the time and for something like 180 pounds four of >us bought a 1967 "tranny" to cart the gear around in.It was in terrible >shape (cosmetically) because it's last owner was a pig farmer.We spent >days cleaning it up and putting in a partition and more seating but 'til >the day it died everytime you turned on the fan to the defroster dried >pig shit came flying out the vents!!!. >    Back to the engine if I remember right it was a 1600cc V4 and that >thing could haul,we could fill it with equipment and up to 8 people and >it went like a bat out of hell,of course there were no pollution controls >on the engine and the gas was leaded and higher octane than we get now. >    When the mechanical fuel pump quit we put in an electric one from a  >Morris Minor that worked great. Ah fond memories.  Saab Sonnet III too I believe.   >--  >pwe@slipknot.mit.edu                 "I'd like to own a squadron of tanks" >Paul W. Emery                       Ron Nasty--The Rutles >M I T Magnet Lab Cambridge Mass U.S.A.    >COSTELLOBEATLESSPINALTAPFAWLTYTOWERSMUTTSAVENGERSSTARTREK.TNGENGLANDRUTLES
rfelix@netcom.com (Robbie Felix) writes: >How about the thousands of kind teenagers who volunteer at local >agencies to help children, seniors, the homeless?  Hear, hear!  Thanks, Robbie.  You also don't read that much about violence *against* teenagers, such as George Bush burying alive tens of thousands of unarmed Iraqi 17-year-olds, who were trying to surrender, with bulldozers.
In article <1qll56INNp9r@uwm.edu>, qazi@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Aamir Hafeez Qazi) writes: |> From article <eabu288-140493210752@dialin33635.slip.nts.uci.edu>, by eabu288@orion.oac.uci.edu (Alvin): |> > |> > Is there going to be a BMW 328 in 1994? |>  |> --Could be.  Isn't the 2.5 liter six supposed to be enlarged to 2.8 liters |>   in the not-too-distant future? |>   Makes sense, since the new Mercedes Benz engines go from 2.2L-4 to a 2.8L-6. Nothing in between.  BTW, I beleive the numbers on those MB engines are 156 and 225 hp respectively.  The one-upmanship in hp might induce BMW to create a larger six.  Also, the 2.6 190E has lagged behind the 3-er 2.5 for some time wrt hp.   I am sure the Bavarians wouldn't want to be "shown-up" by the Schwabians.  PS- those MB engines haven't been released over here yet.
In article <1993Apr15.193712.25996@news.cs.brandeis.edu> andyh@chaos.cs.brandei s.edu (Andrew J. Huang) writes: >In article <1993Apr15.020356.28944@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> sorlin@magnus.ac s.ohio-state.edu (Steven J Orlin) writes: >>I take the electrodes of the Amp/Ohm/Volt meter whatever and connect one >>to each earlobe.  Then, symmetrically insert my fingers in each of the >>spark plug boots. No cheating guys!  both hands must be used! > >I have just a couple of questions about this technique. > >First, what firing order should I use?  Do I start with my pointer >finger or my pinky?  Left hand or right?  Place your hands flat on a table, and arrange the firing order from left to right.  >And secondly, I have a 12cyl and there are two cylinders unaccounted >for.  Any suggestions?
In article <66758@mimsy.umd.edu> davew@cs.umd.edu (David G. Wonnacott) writes: >I'm considering switching to Geico insurance ...
In article <foo> Brad Thone <C09615BT@WUVMD> writes: Well, there *is* a difference.  I don't happen to have my SAE manual handy, but oil viscosity in general _decreases_ with temperature.  The SAE numbers are based on a `typical' curve that oils used to all have, running from (say) the viscosity of a room-temperature 90-weight at 0C, down to (say) that of a room-temperature  5-weight at 20C, for a typical 40-weight oil.  Oils that are designed for operation in `normal' temperatures just have a weight specification.  Oils that are designed for operation in exceedingly cold temperatures have a `W' tacked on the end, so in winter in a cold place, you'd stick 10W in your car in the winter and 40 in it in the summer, to approximate the appropriate viscosity throughout the year.  Modern multi-viscosity oils change viscosity much less with temperature. As a result, their viscosity graphs cross over several curves.  A multi-vis specification pegs the curve at two temperatures, a `normal' operating temperature and a `cold' one (though I can't remember the numbers...).  In any event, the weights do indicate a significant difference.  Remember that your engine is temperature-regulated (by the thermostat and radiator or air fins) most of the time -- unless you overheat it or something.  Any weight of oil is better than no oil, or than very old, carbonized oil.  Thin oil won't (in general) lubricate as well at temperature, thicker oil will (like a 20W50) will lubricate better at temperature,  but not as well during startup, when most engine wear occurs.    If you're planning on making long drives, the 20W50 is probably fine (esp. in the summer) in your 10W40 car.  But if you're making short drives, stick to the 10W40.
In article <9833@dirac.physics.purdue.edu> lovall@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Daniel L. Lovall) writes: >In article <CONRADIE.40.734872761@firga.sun.ac.za> CONRADIE@firga.sun.ac.za (Gerrit Conradie) writes: > >..... > >>However, if I were to design a BMW's electronics, I will use a counter to  >>count the number of times the car passed 1 million miles (or whatever), and  >>store it in the car computer's memory. This could be read when doing a  >>diagnostics test. Ditto for the date of the odometer. As easy as this is, I  >>don't know why manafucturers don't do it (don't they?) to prevent illegal  >>odometer tampering. >> >>But as a previous writer said, it will in any case take aeons to reset an  >>odometer, mechanic or electronic by simulating a driving car. It will be  >>easier to reprogram it. How, I don't know. > >It shouldn't be THAT hard if you know much about digital electronics.  If the >counter is made with standard TTL chips, all you should need to do is find >the chip(s) used for counting, figure out what mileage you want to put in, >and preset it but wiring the preset pins directly to low/high (you'd also have >to know what the conventions are for low and high).  It might be a little more >involved than this, but it shouldn't be beyond someone with a BSEE or BS EET. >All the display does is convert what the counter chips say into digits using >a "translation table" stored in ROM. > >selah, > >Dan > But, those chips are probably inside a custom chip, (to make it smaller and use less power) and the preset/data pins are not going to be available. It would probably not be TTL but might be CMOS  (wider operating voltage range), not that the tecnology would make  much difference. Plus the custom chip would probably be potted (encapsulated with epoxy). Good luck.  --  --garyl------------------------------------------------------------------------- 		"Any shark that gets to be 11 or 12 feet long with  	      300 big teeth can be considered dangerous" - 'Shark Bowl '92'
newton@convex.com (Vicki Newton) writes:  >i am in the process of buying a new auto.  i haven't decided yet whether >i should sell my current car myself or trade it in as part of the new >auto purchase.  >i know that the "blue book" value for the car is $2825.  an acquaintence >has offered to give me blue book value for the car.  i am just wondering >if this is a standard measure for negotiating a resale price or if i >can hope to get more money from someone else.  what exactly is blue book >value based on?  i know that for its year (88) my car has low mileage >(< 50,000).  it is in excellent working condition but does have a few >dings on the exterior (nothing major).  do any of these facts alter the >fair selling p[rice of the car?  i am not looking to rip anyone off, i >just naturally want to get the best price for the car.  >thanks a million, >veek  	I think the Blue Book is the NADA handbook for used car prices, no? 	Is the Blue Book value given the retail or wholesale value???  The  	Blue Book value isn't set in stone, though.  Low milage, extra addons 	and stuff like that there can increase the resale price of the car, you 	may want to head on over to the local library or borrow your friends 	Blue Book and read up on that sort of stuff.  I paid ~$400 under BB 	(retail) for my '87 Civic in 1990, and it was in perfect condition and 	had only ~14.5K miles on it.  The guy was desparate to sell, new kid on 	the way, etc., but it was a good price.  Remeber, both you and the  	buyer, if he has any sort of brains at all, are using the Blue Book, so 	you should pick a fair price.     				Chintan Amin 				llama@uiuc.edu
We were at a dealership today looking at buying a car and the salesman was showing us something he was calling a "buy back".  Is that a car that was fleeted and then given back for the new model the next year?  If that is so, how many miles is a good number to have on it and are these types of cars generally a good buy?
schludermann@sscvx1.ssc.gov writes:  >I'm wondering if anybody else out there is a clutchless shifter? I've been >doing it my self over 200,000 miles, on my current toyota truck I've got >over 150k. I've heard people talk about how doing this can damage a >transmission. My experiences suggest otherwise. What techniques do you use?  	Yeah.  I don't use the clutch all the time either.  I've done it with Fords, BMW, Datsun, and Chevy and it works fine.  I can't think of any reason that it would damage the tranny.  Essentially you are just doing what the synchros do anyhow - match the engine speed with the tranny speed and slip it into gear.   >On some old pieces of junk I drove, the transmission was so >worn that pumping the clutch was the only way to shift, except clutchless. >To date I've driven rabbits, datsuns, comets, fords & a chevy. Some where >harder than others to shift but generally the higher the milage the smoother >quicker & easier they where to shift.  >My technique is to ease back off the throttle and at the same time gently >wrist back on the shift lever. If for some reason I miss the shift window, >I lightly press the accelerator & try agian. I've found that clutchless >shifting is eaiser/quicker at high rpms (4000-7000). I also skip gears some >times using 1-3-5 ,1-2-4-5.   	Sounds about right.  I usually slip it out during throttle-down and then blip the throttle and wait until it feels like things are right (usually about a second) and then slip it into gear...  >krispy --  -------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon "You obviously don't know who you're dealing with" Gross jong@halcyon.com