On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 10:23:42 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/25/2017 10:12 PM, rbowman wrote:


(And "afford to drive" is not the same thing as "paying $X for a car",
which is why the use of
"chump change" isn't valid. I'll leave it to you to figure that out.)

Figure this out. Who will feel a greater impact, Richy Rich paying $1000
to have his $200,000 ride serviced or Joe Sixpack paying $500 for his
Kia service?

If he is truly Richy Rich.
different scenario if he is Mr. Max Mortgage that does not have two
dimes in his pocket..

Ladies and gentleman, we have a winner!

On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 10:29:49 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 18:38:51 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 9:20:10 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:31:04 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 4:35:47 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
On 07/25/2017 10:17 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
Hubby's former boss during the 1960s bought a Lamborghini (or equivalent
-- the James Bond car at the time) and sold it as soon as he found out
that a simple tuneup (we remember what those were, right?) cost $1,000.


'Simple tuneup' and 'Italian engine' in the same sentence is an oxymoron
waiting to happen. You're probably thinking of the Aston Martin DB5
though. That's the iconic Bond car although others showed up in the
movies over the years.

I don't know what the inflation adjusted cost for the '60s DB5's would
be but the new models are about $200,000. Pay that for a car and a $1000
oil change is just chump change.

That sounds like the old "If he can afford that much yard, he can afford to have
someone mow the lawn" argument.

Of course you realize that that is not a valid argument.
And yet it is. Which is why I've always maintained "of you cANNOT
AFFORD TO DRIVE A NEW ONE, YOU CERTAINLY CANNOT AFFORD A USED ONE"
WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE "EXOTICS"

Why are you yelling?
Accidentally hit the cap lock and hit send without looking.

(And "afford to drive" is not the same thing as "paying $X for a car", which is why the use of
"chump change" isn't valid. I'll leave it to you to figure that out.)
Not saying it's chump change, but there is SOME truth to the idea of
"if you can afford to buy it, you can afford to pay the stupid prices
for maintenance" in that "if you can't afford the maintenance you
can't afford the car" - and the same is true of the used car - which
"will" require more maintenance.

And yet we all know someone who drives too much car or lives in too much house.

Just cuz you can pay for it doesn't mean you can afford it.

On 7/25/17 10:09 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 07/25/2017 06:31 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 4:35:47 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
On 07/25/2017 10:17 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
Hubby's former boss during the 1960s bought a Lamborghini (or
equivalent
-- the James Bond car at the time) and sold it as soon as he found out
that a simple tuneup (we remember what those were, right?) cost
$1,000.


'Simple tuneup' and 'Italian engine' in the same sentence is an oxymoron
waiting to happen. You're probably thinking of the Aston Martin DB5
though. That's the iconic Bond car although others showed up in the
movies over the years.

I don't know what the inflation adjusted cost for the '60s DB5's would
be but the new models are about $200,000. Pay that for a car and a $1000
oil change is just chump change.

That sounds like the old "If he can afford that much yard, he can
afford to have
someone mow the lawn" argument.

Of course you realize that that is not a valid argument.


No, I do not realize that at all. The rich are different, or so I've heard.

Indeed, we are ;-)

--
You cant get rich in politics unless youre a crook.
- President Harry Truman

On 07/25/2017 09:05 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 10:23:42 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/25/2017 10:12 PM, rbowman wrote:


(And "afford to drive" is not the same thing as "paying $X for a car",
which is why the use of
"chump change" isn't valid. I'll leave it to you to figure that out.)

Figure this out. Who will feel a greater impact, Richy Rich paying $1000
to have his $200,000 ride serviced or Joe Sixpack paying $500 for his
Kia service?

If he is truly Richy Rich.
different scenario if he is Mr. Max Mortgage that does not have two
dimes in his pocket..

Ladies and gentleman, we have a winner!


If they can't afford the maintenance on their Bimmer and it breaks down
in the middle of a BLM riot, that's natural selection at work.

On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 21:20:07 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:31:04 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 4:35:47 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
On 07/25/2017 10:17 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
Hubby's former boss during the 1960s bought a Lamborghini (or equivalent
-- the James Bond car at the time) and sold it as soon as he found out
that a simple tuneup (we remember what those were, right?) cost $1,000.


'Simple tuneup' and 'Italian engine' in the same sentence is an oxymoron
waiting to happen. You're probably thinking of the Aston Martin DB5
though. That's the iconic Bond car although others showed up in the
movies over the years.

I don't know what the inflation adjusted cost for the '60s DB5's would
be but the new models are about $200,000. Pay that for a car and a $1000
oil change is just chump change.

That sounds like the old "If he can afford that much yard, he can afford to have
someone mow the lawn" argument.

Of course you realize that that is not a valid argument.
And yet it is. Which is why I've always maintained "of you cANNOT
AFFORD TO DRIVE A NEW ONE, YOU CERTAINLY CANNOT AFFORD A USED ONE"
WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE "EXOTICS"

When I steamed in the merchant marine I had a cab inmate who had a '65 DB5.
This was in 1971.
I remember he told me he had just done about $8k in engine work. Couldn't get my mind
around that. I went with him to Detroit to get the car, and bring it back to Toledo, where
our ship was home ported. I took the wheel it for a short stretch coming back.
Steered like a go-cart, and I recall I had a little trouble controlling it, so he ended my
stint at the wheel. I was happy for that.
I don't know how he could afford it, and didn't ask. It had a sweet sound. Left that ship
a couple weeks later and didn't see him again.

On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 20:05:45 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 10:23:42 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/25/2017 10:12 PM, rbowman wrote:


(And "afford to drive" is not the same thing as "paying $X for a car",
which is why the use of
"chump change" isn't valid. I'll leave it to you to figure that out.)

Figure this out. Who will feel a greater impact, Richy Rich paying $1000
to have his $200,000 ride serviced or Joe Sixpack paying $500 for his
Kia service?

If he is truly Richy Rich.
different scenario if he is Mr. Max Mortgage that does not have two
dimes in his pocket..

Ladies and gentleman, we have a winner!
Mr Max Mortgage "can't afford to drive" the car = can''t really
afford to pay the money for it either.

On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 20:09:45 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 10:29:49 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 18:38:51 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 9:20:10 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:31:04 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 4:35:47 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
On 07/25/2017 10:17 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
Hubby's former boss during the 1960s bought a Lamborghini (or equivalent
-- the James Bond car at the time) and sold it as soon as he found out
that a simple tuneup (we remember what those were, right?) cost $1,000.


'Simple tuneup' and 'Italian engine' in the same sentence is an oxymoron
waiting to happen. You're probably thinking of the Aston Martin DB5
though. That's the iconic Bond car although others showed up in the
movies over the years.

I don't know what the inflation adjusted cost for the '60s DB5's would
be but the new models are about $200,000. Pay that for a car and a $1000
oil change is just chump change.

That sounds like the old "If he can afford that much yard, he can afford to have
someone mow the lawn" argument.

Of course you realize that that is not a valid argument.
And yet it is. Which is why I've always maintained "of you cANNOT
AFFORD TO DRIVE A NEW ONE, YOU CERTAINLY CANNOT AFFORD A USED ONE"
WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE "EXOTICS"

Why are you yelling?
Accidentally hit the cap lock and hit send without looking.

(And "afford to drive" is not the same thing as "paying $X for a car", which is why the use of
"chump change" isn't valid. I'll leave it to you to figure that out.)
Not saying it's chump change, but there is SOME truth to the idea of
"if you can afford to buy it, you can afford to pay the stupid prices
for maintenance" in that "if you can't afford the maintenance you
can't afford the car" - and the same is true of the used car - which
"will" require more maintenance.

And yet we all know someone who drives too much car or lives in too much house.

Just cuz you can pay for it doesn't mean you can afford it.
Lots of them. And when they get out of either the car OR the house,
it's generally not a deal for the new owner

On 07/26/2017 05:40 PM, wrote:
Lots of them. And when they get out of either the car OR the house,
it's generally not a deal for the new owner

Sometimes getting out of the car involves a repo man...

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:49:28 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:


We just bought a new car last week, if fact it is still in production
at the factory. I know we paid more for it than what we had planned
on, but is still within our budget, both purchase and maintenance.

We had not planned to buy a car until October, but the dealership and
factory were offering very good incentives which would not occur
again until the end of the year, and the interest rate was next to
nothing.
Since moving into retirement mode, I may eventually break my
self-imposed rule not to buy new cars. When the Taurus dies, if there
is a good deal at 0% or close, it would make more sense to buy new,
taking the payments out of the RIFF , than to take the tax hit pulling
money from RRSP to pay for a used one.

On 7/27/2017 11:38 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:49:28 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:


We just bought a new car last week, if fact it is still in production
at the factory. I know we paid more for it than what we had planned
on, but is still within our budget, both purchase and maintenance.

We had not planned to buy a car until October, but the dealership and
factory were offering very good incentives which would not occur
again until the end of the year, and the interest rate was next to
nothing.
Since moving into retirement mode, I may eventually break my
self-imposed rule not to buy new cars. When the Taurus dies, if there
is a good deal at 0% or close, it would make more sense to buy new,
taking the payments out of the RIFF , than to take the tax hit pulling
money from RRSP to pay for a used one.


Just learned a couple of Canadian abbreviations.
Often of hear folks retiring and buying their last car, usually a pricey
one, to be stuck with an old car 10 years later.
I buy new and run until a repair cost is more than the book value of the
car. Did it last year.
Find a lot of us old folks buying new cars cannot or don't try to use
all the new electronic bells and whistles. Blue tooth, gps's and the
like are Greek to them. This key fob would also be Greek to them.

On 7/27/17 11:56 AM, Frank wrote:
On 7/27/2017 11:38 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:49:28 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:


We just bought a new car last week, if fact it is still in production
at the factory. I know we paid more for it than what we had planned
on, but is still within our budget, both purchase and maintenance.

We had not planned to buy a car until October, but the dealership and
factory were offering very good incentives which would not occur
again until the end of the year, and the interest rate was next to
nothing.
Since moving into retirement mode, I may eventually break my
self-imposed rule not to buy new cars. When the Taurus dies, if there
is a good deal at 0% or close, it would make more sense to buy new,
taking the payments out of the RIFF , than to take the tax hit pulling
money from RRSP to pay for a used one.


Just learned a couple of Canadian abbreviations.
Often of hear folks retiring and buying their last car, usually a pricey
one, to be stuck with an old car 10 years later.
I buy new and run until a repair cost is more than the book value of the
car. Did it last year.
Find a lot of us old folks buying new cars cannot or don't try to use
all the new electronic bells and whistles. Blue tooth, gps's and the
like are Greek to them. This key fob would also be Greek to them.

I'm an old fart and pretty tech-savvy. I really like all the electro
bells and whistles on my new top-of-the-trim-line ride.

I especially like the rear cross traffic radar, the lane departure
warning (signal every lane change or you get a beeping serenade), the
collision warning/avoidance braking system, and the adaptive cruise
control that slows you down if you get too close to the car in front of you.

I'm ambivalent about voice-controlling the Nav and radio and answering
phone calls with buttons on the steering wheel

What I can do without is 600+ small print pages in the "main" owner's
manual and another 350 in the "electronics" manual.

--
Have you ever looked into a mirror and thought....hell no, that cant be
right.

On 7/27/2017 12:27 PM, Wade Garrett wrote:


I'm an old fart and pretty tech-savvy. I really like all the electro
bells and whistles on my new top-of-the-trim-line ride.

I especially like the rear cross traffic radar, the lane departure
warning (signal every lane change or you get a beeping serenade), the
collision warning/avoidance braking system, and the adaptive cruise
control that slows you down if you get too close to the car in front of
you.

I'm ambivalent about voice-controlling the Nav and radio and answering
phone calls with buttons on the steering wheel

What I can do without is 600+ small print pages in the "main" owner's
manual and another 350 in the "electronics" manual.


I like all those goodies too. In May we went away for a while and took
a 4,000 mile trip. Adaptive CC makes it so much nicer. I set the
climate control when I got the car 22 months ago and have not touched it
since.

Do you have the "auto hold" system for brakes? When you stop you can
take your foot off the brake pedal and the brakes stay on until you
touch the gas. It sets the parking brake when you shift into park.
Really nice in stop and go traffic that is more stop than go.

On 7/27/2017 12:27 PM, Wade Garrett wrote:
On 7/27/17 11:56 AM, Frank wrote:
On 7/27/2017 11:38 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 03:49:28 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:


We just bought a new car last week, if fact it is still in production
at the factory. I know we paid more for it than what we had planned
on, but is still within our budget, both purchase and maintenance.

We had not planned to buy a car until October, but the dealership and
factory were offering very good incentives which would not occur
again until the end of the year, and the interest rate was next to
nothing.
Since moving into retirement mode, I may eventually break my
self-imposed rule not to buy new cars. When the Taurus dies, if there
is a good deal at 0% or close, it would make more sense to buy new,
taking the payments out of the RIFF , than to take the tax hit pulling
money from RRSP to pay for a used one.


Just learned a couple of Canadian abbreviations.
Often of hear folks retiring and buying their last car, usually a
pricey one, to be stuck with an old car 10 years later.
I buy new and run until a repair cost is more than the book value of
the car. Did it last year.
Find a lot of us old folks buying new cars cannot or don't try to use
all the new electronic bells and whistles. Blue tooth, gps's and the
like are Greek to them. This key fob would also be Greek to them.

I'm an old fart and pretty tech-savvy. I really like all the electro
bells and whistles on my new top-of-the-trim-line ride.

I especially like the rear cross traffic radar, the lane departure
warning (signal every lane change or you get a beeping serenade), the
collision warning/avoidance braking system, and the adaptive cruise
control that slows you down if you get too close to the car in front of
you.

I'm ambivalent about voice-controlling the Nav and radio and answering
phone calls with buttons on the steering wheel

What I can do without is 600+ small print pages in the "main" owner's
manual and another 350 in the "electronics" manual.

Few years ago one son had a BMW with all the bells and whistles.
Thought it near he could just say, call Dad and call me or tell it to
give him directions. System failed and fixed under warranty and they
told him at dealer, it was good that it was under warranty as it would
have cost him $3,000 to repair.

On 7/27/17 1:18 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/27/2017 12:27 PM, Wade Garrett wrote:


I'm an old fart and pretty tech-savvy. I really like all the electro
bells and whistles on my new top-of-the-trim-line ride.

I especially like the rear cross traffic radar, the lane departure
warning (signal every lane change or you get a beeping serenade), the
collision warning/avoidance braking system, and the adaptive cruise
control that slows you down if you get too close to the car in front
of you.

I'm ambivalent about voice-controlling the Nav and radio and answering
phone calls with buttons on the steering wheel

What I can do without is 600+ small print pages in the "main" owner's
manual and another 350 in the "electronics" manual.


I like all those goodies too. In May we went away for a while and took
a 4,000 mile trip. Adaptive CC makes it so much nicer. I set the
climate control when I got the car 22 months ago and have not touched it
since.

Do you have the "auto hold" system for brakes? When you stop you can
take your foot off the brake pedal and the brakes stay on until you
touch the gas. It sets the parking brake when you shift into park.
Really nice in stop and go traffic that is more stop than go.

Nope, it doesn't have that. Sounds like a nice feature though. Wish it did.

My wife's ride will jam the brakes on if you're about to back into
something like the garbage can, a light pole or another car in the
parking lot.

--
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time or money
making it.

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 18:41:06 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Thu 27 Jul 2017 10:18:47a, Ed Pawlowski told us...

On 7/27/2017 12:27 PM, Wade Garrett wrote:


I'm an old fart and pretty tech-savvy. I really like all the
electro bells and whistles on my new top-of-the-trim-line ride.

I especially like the rear cross traffic radar, the lane
departure warning (signal every lane change or you get a beeping
serenade), the collision warning/avoidance braking system, and
the adaptive cruise control that slows you down if you get too
close to the car in front of you.

I'm ambivalent about voice-controlling the Nav and radio and
answering phone calls with buttons on the steering wheel

What I can do without is 600+ small print pages in the "main"
owner's manual and another 350 in the "electronics" manual.


I like all those goodies too. In May we went away for a while and
took a 4,000 mile trip. Adaptive CC makes it so much nicer. I
set the climate control when I got the car 22 months ago and have
not touched it since.

Do you have the "auto hold" system for brakes? When you stop you
can take your foot off the brake pedal and the brakes stay on
until you touch the gas. It sets the parking brake when you shift
into park. Really nice in stop and go traffic that is more stop
than go.

We are both retired and our present car is 10 yeas old. We didn't
want to think about the possibility of having an expensive repair
within the next couple of years. We just ordered a new car from the
factory with all the bells and whistles that both you and Wade
mentioned, plus a few more goodies. I"m very tech savvy and David is
not, but I'm a good teacher. :-)

We decided within the net 10 years that one or both of us might not
be driving or not be allowed to drive, or worse yet, dead. It seemed
prudent to buy something now that we will enjoy.

I downloaded the users manual because it's in much larger print than
the book you get with the car, the same with the navigation manual.
I've already memorized most of the features in the manuals so there
should be a minimal learning curve. :-)
So far I've been able to balance the "stuff I enjoy" on a car with
the "pain of high cost"
I buy nice, low mileage, relatively loaded mid-line cars for a good
price and maintain them, driving them 'till I either no longer want
them because they are getting ugly from rust etc, or they are no
longer economical to maintain. I strayed from that formula 5 years ago
when I bought my truck - a high milage, lightly optioned 16 year old
creme puff at a price I couldn't refuse. When I can no longer do the
maintenance myself, that's when the formula will HAVE to change - but
it might change sooner depending how much longer the 15 year old
Taurus lasts (only 1010,000km on it) or how fast the paint peals off
of it.Ugly cars don't get to sit on my driveway very long - and if
making them look good costs too much money or work - they are GONE.

Mike_Duffy posted for all of us...



On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:15:27 -0400, Tekkie® wrote:

If that does not work, try wrapping aluminum foil around the transponder.
(It is not clear if having a transponder in the car causes your problem.)

That's not the problem. If a transponder is in the car then it can't be
locked from outside. The is nowhere to inert a metal key as there are no
metal keys.

Did you actually try wrapping the spare transponder in aluminum foil?

Please reply to the original poster. I'm not trying anything. Why would I?

I only put aluminum foil hats on. Stop all the alien radio waves.

--
Tekkie

Vic Smith posted for all of us...



On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 21:20:07 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:31:04 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 4:35:47 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
On 07/25/2017 10:17 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
Hubby's former boss during the 1960s bought a Lamborghini (or equivalent
-- the James Bond car at the time) and sold it as soon as he found out
that a simple tuneup (we remember what those were, right?) cost $1,000.


'Simple tuneup' and 'Italian engine' in the same sentence is an oxymoron
waiting to happen. You're probably thinking of the Aston Martin DB5
though. That's the iconic Bond car although others showed up in the
movies over the years.

I don't know what the inflation adjusted cost for the '60s DB5's would
be but the new models are about $200,000. Pay that for a car and a $1000
oil change is just chump change.

That sounds like the old "If he can afford that much yard, he can afford to have
someone mow the lawn" argument.

Of course you realize that that is not a valid argument.
And yet it is. Which is why I've always maintained "of you cANNOT
AFFORD TO DRIVE A NEW ONE, YOU CERTAINLY CANNOT AFFORD A USED ONE"
WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE "EXOTICS"

When I steamed in the merchant marine I had a cab inmate who had a '65 DB5.
This was in 1971.
I remember he told me he had just done about $8k in engine work. Couldn't get my mind
around that. I went with him to Detroit to get the car, and bring it back to Toledo, where
our ship was home ported. I took the wheel it for a short stretch coming back.
Steered like a go-cart, and I recall I had a little trouble controlling it, so he ended my
stint at the wheel. I was happy for that.
I don't know how he could afford it, and didn't ask. It had a sweet sound. Left that ship
a couple weeks later and didn't see him again.

His ship had sailed...

--
Tekkie

posted for all of us...



On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:15:27 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:

Mike_Duffy posted for all of us...



On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 13:43:58 -0400, Tekkie® wrote:

On my cars one cannot lock the transponder in the car. It does not have a
conventional metal key. I don't know how to handle it.

I had an issue with the sensor for the rear hatch always sensing "door
open" even when it was closed AND locked. Any attempt to lock a different
door would result in the computer unlocking all the doors to 'remind' you
that a door is open. Presumably this is to help prevent someone from
accidentally locking the keys in the car.

In order to lock all doors, I needed to either:

(1) Roll down the driver window, and enter the code to lock all doors.

(2) Turn everything off by removing the key from the switch, then pressing
the interior 'lock all doors' button.


In your case, since you need to be outside of the car after it is locked, I
would opt for (1), except put the window up first.

If that does not work, try wrapping aluminum foil around the transponder.
(It is not clear if having a transponder in the car causes your problem.)

That's not the problem. If a transponder is in the car then it can't be
locked from outside. The is nowhere to inert a metal key as there are no
metal keys.
No metal key hideden within the fob? You are CERTAIN?
No key cyl concealed under a cap in the door handle that can be popped
off with the key? You are 100% certain?

Exactlt what year ond model do you have?

2017 Pacifica I will look again. I could not find any slot. I'll look
again.

The Volvo has a metal key.

--
Tekkie

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:11:21 -0400, Tekkie® wrote:

I only put aluminum foil hats on. Stop all the alien radio waves.

Even if you don't believe about the aliens, it's still a good idea to line
your hat with foil. That way, you always have some if you ever need it.

I suppose that I did get you mixed up with someone else, but if he is
following the thread, he should see my suggestion anyway. It's certainly
not worth my time to track him down. I just tried to re-load the prior
messages, but either retention quota on this NG has been exceeded, or the
OP is in my kill-file. Either obviates my need to seek further.

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:32:33 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:

posted for all of us...



On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:15:27 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:

Mike_Duffy posted for all of us...



On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 13:43:58 -0400, Tekkie® wrote:

On my cars one cannot lock the transponder in the car. It does not have a
conventional metal key. I don't know how to handle it.

I had an issue with the sensor for the rear hatch always sensing "door
open" even when it was closed AND locked. Any attempt to lock a different
door would result in the computer unlocking all the doors to 'remind' you
that a door is open. Presumably this is to help prevent someone from
accidentally locking the keys in the car.

In order to lock all doors, I needed to either:

(1) Roll down the driver window, and enter the code to lock all doors.

(2) Turn everything off by removing the key from the switch, then pressing
the interior 'lock all doors' button.


In your case, since you need to be outside of the car after it is locked, I
would opt for (1), except put the window up first.

If that does not work, try wrapping aluminum foil around the transponder.
(It is not clear if having a transponder in the car causes your problem.)

That's not the problem. If a transponder is in the car then it can't be
locked from outside. The is nowhere to inert a metal key as there are no
metal keys.
No metal key hideden within the fob? You are CERTAIN?
No key cyl concealed under a cap in the door handle that can be popped
off with the key? You are 100% certain?

Exactlt what year ond model do you have?

2017 Pacifica I will look again. I could not find any slot. I'll look
again.

The Volvo has a metal key.
Page 15 and 16 of your Pacifica owners manual.

On Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 2:46:33 PM UTC-5, Wade Garrett wrote:

On 7/27/17 1:18 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/27/2017 12:27 PM, Wade Garrett wrote:


I'm an old fart and pretty tech-savvy. I really like all the electro
bells and whistles on my new top-of-the-trim-line ride.

I especially like the rear cross traffic radar, the lane departure
warning (signal every lane change or you get a beeping serenade), the
collision warning/avoidance braking system, and the adaptive cruise
control that slows you down if you get too close to the car in front
of you.

I'm ambivalent about voice-controlling the Nav and radio and answering
phone calls with buttons on the steering wheel

What I can do without is 600+ small print pages in the "main" owner's
manual and another 350 in the "electronics" manual.


I like all those goodies too. In May we went away for a while and took
a 4,000 mile trip. Adaptive CC makes it so much nicer. I set the
climate control when I got the car 22 months ago and have not touched it
since.

Do you have the "auto hold" system for brakes? When you stop you can
take your foot off the brake pedal and the brakes stay on until you
touch the gas. It sets the parking brake when you shift into park.
Really nice in stop and go traffic that is more stop than go.

Nope, it doesn't have that. Sounds like a nice feature though. Wish it did.

My wife's ride will jam the brakes on if you're about to back into
something like the garbage can, a light pole or another car in the
parking lot.


I am *planning* on buying a new car in late December and the one
I want has all those bells and whistles on it like yours and Ed's.
Also, the 'evil' key fob as well. But I have read so much about
the car I want, dozens (I'm not kidding) videos and reviews, too,
that I almost feel like I could get a job at the dealership and
sell the car.

On 7/27/2017 3:32 PM, Tekkie® wrote:
posted for all of us...



On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:15:27 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:


[snip]

In your case, since you need to be outside of the car after it is locked, I
would opt for (1), except put the window up first.

If that does not work, try wrapping aluminum foil around the transponder.
(It is not clear if having a transponder in the car causes your problem.)

That's not the problem. If a transponder is in the car then it can't be
locked from outside. The is nowhere to inert a metal key as there are no
metal keys.
No metal key hideden within the fob? You are CERTAIN?
No key cyl concealed under a cap in the door handle that can be popped
off with the key? You are 100% certain?

Exactlt what year ond model do you have?

2017 Pacifica I will look again. I could not find any slot. I'll look
again.

I certainly hope Tekkie can read. Check your owner's manual. Pages 12
and 15 specifically. Your remote fob contains and emergency key so you
can open the driver's door and also lock the glove compartment. If
you're speaking about starting the car (if you have the push button
start) keep reading the manual. Most likely if the battery to the fob
is weak or. . . you will find that holding the fob to the start button
will get you going.

Hopefully the pen name "Tekkie" was not adopted to suggest that you are
technically proficient in, ah, er, anything

In article ,
says...


I am *planning* on buying a new car in late December and the one
I want has all those bells and whistles on it like yours and Ed's.
Also, the 'evil' key fob as well. But I have read so much about
the car I want, dozens (I'm not kidding) videos and reviews, too,
that I almost feel like I could get a job at the dealership and
sell the car.

I wanted to buy a 2018 Toyota, but they changed the design and it is
butt ugly. Decided to get the 2017. It is missing a couple of things I
wanted,but they do not offer some of them in the only version that has
the V6 in it. Had to get the leather seats and hate them. Also could
not find one in the color we wanted with the lane and back up warnings.

This just seemed like a good time to trade as there is zero financing
for 7 years. I could pay for it now, but why not make about 3 to 5
thousand off of the money if the stock market keeps going up. Did not
have to trade as the car we had only had about 32,000 miles on it, but
was 10 years old. Someone is going to get a very nice used car.

I really hate it that I can not order a car sort of like I want to. I
remember getting one in 1972 and could add many things by waiting about
a month. They quit doing that years ago.

In article t,
says...

In article ,
says...


I am *planning* on buying a new car in late December and the one
I want has all those bells and whistles on it like yours and Ed's.
Also, the 'evil' key fob as well. But I have read so much about
the car I want, dozens (I'm not kidding) videos and reviews, too,
that I almost feel like I could get a job at the dealership and
sell the car.

I wanted to buy a 2018 Toyota, but they changed the design and it is
butt ugly. Decided to get the 2017. It is missing a couple of things I
wanted,but they do not offer some of them in the only version that has
the V6 in it. Had to get the leather seats and hate them. Also could
not find one in the color we wanted with the lane and back up warnings.

This just seemed like a good time to trade as there is zero financing
for 7 years. I could pay for it now, but why not make about 3 to 5
thousand off of the money if the stock market keeps going up. Did not
have to trade as the car we had only had about 32,000 miles on it, but
was 10 years old. Someone is going to get a very nice used car.

I really hate it that I can not order a car sort of like I want to. I
remember getting one in 1972 and could add many things by waiting about
a month. They quit doing that years ago.

Doesn't make much sense to buy a vehicle that doesn't have the amenities
you want, seats you don't like, color you didn't want, etc... Sounds like
an impulse buy to me.

--
RonNNN

In article ,
says...



Doesn't make much sense to buy a vehicle that doesn't have the amenities
you want, seats you don't like, color you didn't want, etc... Sounds like
an impulse buy to me.

It is just like any mass produced item. There are only so many choices
and one has to compromise on them. As the V6 was at the top of the
list, I had to get leather seats, there was no way not to and stay with
the Camra. Just as I went with the 2017 as the 2018 is butt ugly and
they will probably make that for the next 3 or 4 years.
I did like the color.

My wife really like the Corolla, but they do not offer a V6 in it.

It was not an impulse buy. We even took the car home overnight to give
it a test ride and look before buying. Checked the internet and that
was the only Toyota with in 50 miles that was even close to what we
wanted.

On 7/27/2017 6:13 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:

I really hate it that I can not order a car sort of like I want to. I
remember getting one in 1972 and could add many things by waiting about
a month. They quit doing that years ago.

They have it down pat for efficient production. Basic, mid, fully
loaded. Sure, you want one item from the next package up but you have
to buy six items in the package.

Does not bother me because the cars I buy have it all. Not the best
value, but I like the goodies. If pure economics of transportation
drove my choice of car buying it would be a 2 year old ****box with low
miles. Instead, I have a full sized premium with the Ultra package.

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 17:04:09 -0500, Unquestionably Confused
wrote:

On 7/27/2017 3:32 PM, Tekkie® wrote:
posted for all of us...



On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:15:27 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:


[snip]

In your case, since you need to be outside of the car after it is locked, I
would opt for (1), except put the window up first.

If that does not work, try wrapping aluminum foil around the transponder.
(It is not clear if having a transponder in the car causes your problem.)

That's not the problem. If a transponder is in the car then it can't be
locked from outside. The is nowhere to inert a metal key as there are no
metal keys.
No metal key hideden within the fob? You are CERTAIN?
No key cyl concealed under a cap in the door handle that can be popped
off with the key? You are 100% certain?

Exactlt what year ond model do you have?

2017 Pacifica I will look again. I could not find any slot. I'll look
again.

I certainly hope Tekkie can read. Check your owner's manual. Pages 12
and 15 specifically. Your remote fob contains and emergency key so you
can open the driver's door and also lock the glove compartment. If
you're speaking about starting the car (if you have the push button
start) keep reading the manual. Most likely if the battery to the fob
is weak or. . . you will find that holding the fob to the start button
will get you going.

Hopefully the pen name "Tekkie" was not adopted to suggest that you are
technically proficient in, ah, er, anything
The emergency key is used to pop the cover off the pushbutton start,
where you can insert the emergengy key to start the engine.

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 19:49:13 -0400, Ralph Mowery
wrote:

In article ,
says...



Doesn't make much sense to buy a vehicle that doesn't have the amenities
you want, seats you don't like, color you didn't want, etc... Sounds like
an impulse buy to me.

It is just like any mass produced item. There are only so many choices
and one has to compromise on them. As the V6 was at the top of the
list, I had to get leather seats, there was no way not to and stay with
the Camra. Just as I went with the 2017 as the 2018 is butt ugly and
they will probably make that for the next 3 or 4 years.
I did like the color.

My wife really like the Corolla, but they do not offer a V6 in it.

Unless you both weigh 400 lbs or you want to tow a trailer, you don't
NEED a V6

It was not an impulse buy. We even took the car home overnight to give
it a test ride and look before buying. Checked the internet and that
was the only Toyota with in 50 miles that was even close to what we
wanted.

Not every car on the lot is on the internet - sometimes your dealer
will do a "dealer trade" with a dealer even out of your "zone" to get
you what you want.

On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 01:29:32 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Thu 27 Jul 2017 01:02:08p, told us...

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 18:41:06 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Thu 27 Jul 2017 10:18:47a, Ed Pawlowski told us...

On 7/27/2017 12:27 PM, Wade Garrett wrote:


I'm an old fart and pretty tech-savvy. I really like all the
electro bells and whistles on my new top-of-the-trim-line ride.

I especially like the rear cross traffic radar, the lane
departure warning (signal every lane change or you get a
beeping serenade), the collision warning/avoidance braking
system, and the adaptive cruise control that slows you down if
you get too close to the car in front of you.

I'm ambivalent about voice-controlling the Nav and radio and
answering phone calls with buttons on the steering wheel

What I can do without is 600+ small print pages in the "main"
owner's manual and another 350 in the "electronics" manual.


I like all those goodies too. In May we went away for a while
and took a 4,000 mile trip. Adaptive CC makes it so much nicer.
I set the climate control when I got the car 22 months ago and
have not touched it since.

Do you have the "auto hold" system for brakes? When you stop
you can take your foot off the brake pedal and the brakes stay
on until you touch the gas. It sets the parking brake when you
shift into park. Really nice in stop and go traffic that is more
stop than go.

We are both retired and our present car is 10 yeas old. We didn't
want to think about the possibility of having an expensive repair
within the next couple of years. We just ordered a new car from
the factory with all the bells and whistles that both you and Wade
mentioned, plus a few more goodies. I"m very tech savvy and David
is not, but I'm a good teacher. :-)

We decided within the net 10 years that one or both of us might
not be driving or not be allowed to drive, or worse yet, dead. It
seemed prudent to buy something now that we will enjoy.

I downloaded the users manual because it's in much larger print
than the book you get with the car, the same with the navigation
manual. I've already memorized most of the features in the manuals
so there should be a minimal learning curve. :-)
So far I've been able to balance the "stuff I enjoy" on a car
with
the "pain of high cost"
I buy nice, low mileage, relatively loaded mid-line cars for a
good price and maintain them, driving them 'till I either no
longer want them because they are getting ugly from rust etc, or
they are no longer economical to maintain. I strayed from that
formula 5 years ago when I bought my truck - a high milage,
lightly optioned 16 year old creme puff at a price I couldn't
refuse. When I can no longer do the maintenance myself, that's
when the formula will HAVE to change - but it might change sooner
depending how much longer the 15 year old Taurus lasts (only
1010,000km on it) or how fast the paint peals off of it.Ugly cars
don't get to sit on my driveway very long - and if making them
look good costs too much money or work - they are GONE.


Luckily we never see car rust in AZ unless it's come here from some
other part of the country.
Up here in the "interlaken" area of central Ontario more cars rust
out than wear out - even with the much better rust resistance of
today's cars, Not NEARLY as bad as it used to be though.

On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 01:48:24 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Thu 27 Jul 2017 03:13:19p, Ralph Mowery told us...

In article
,
says...


I am *planning* on buying a new car in late December and the one
I want has all those bells and whistles on it like yours and
Ed's. Also, the 'evil' key fob as well. But I have read so much
about the car I want, dozens (I'm not kidding) videos and
reviews, too, that I almost feel like I could get a job at the
dealership and sell the car.

I wanted to buy a 2018 Toyota, but they changed the design and it
is butt ugly. Decided to get the 2017. It is missing a couple of
things I wanted,but they do not offer some of them in the only
version that has the V6 in it. Had to get the leather seats and
hate them. Also could not find one in the color we wanted with
the lane and back up warnings.

This just seemed like a good time to trade as there is zero
financing for 7 years. I could pay for it now, but why not make
about 3 to 5 thousand off of the money if the stock market keeps
going up. Did not have to trade as the car we had only had about
32,000 miles on it, but was 10 years old. Someone is going to get
a very nice used car.

I really hate it that I can not order a car sort of like I want
to. I remember getting one in 1972 and could add many things by
waiting about a month. They quit doing that years ago.


We came across a similar problem. There was no car in the color we
wanted that was the exact model we wanted and had the exact features
we wanted. Our dealership did find two, one in Florida and the other
in Iowa. Neither of those dealerships were willing to agree to
transport to AZ. Ready to walk out and call it quits, the general
manager of our dealership called the factory and discussed it with
someone there. The end result was that the factory punched in all
the specs for the exact car we wanted and put it into the production
line. We've been told delivery should be 4-5 weeks maximum.

Sometimes you do win.
The essence of the "copo camaro"

On 07/27/2017 04:13 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
I really hate it that I can not order a car sort of like I want to. I
remember getting one in 1972 and could add many things by waiting about
a month. They quit doing that years ago.


The last Toyota I bought I originally ordered to my preferences and it
would take a couple of months for delivery. I went home and thought
about it that night and called the dealer the next day to find out what
he had available there and then. That was in March 2011 and the model I
wanted was manufactured in Japan. I wasn't sure Japan was going to be
around long enough to build any cars. I would much rather have a
standard transmission and 'arrest me red' isn't my favorite color but
it's been a good ride.

No key fobs, no lane warning, no electric windows, no backup cameras, no
nuttin'. Someday when i get old I might want that stuff. Of course I
said that about baggers too. Going on '70 and none of the bikes in the
driveway are baggers. I don't think it's going to happen.

In article ,
says...

did like the color.

My wife really like the Corolla, but they do not offer a V6 in it.

Unless you both weigh 400 lbs or you want to tow a trailer, you don't
NEED a V6




With only 32,000 miles on a car, I did not need to trade it either.

I just wanted to and the V6 was just a want,not a need. Just as I
wanted a red car. After all, paint is just paint, especially if the car
is kept in a garage most of the time like mine is.

Speaking of towing a trailer, Toyota does not recommend using the Camry
to tow a trailer of any size.

I did a quicl look at the Hondas, and the small and mid size cars did
not seem to even offer a v6. Just a 4 and a turbo 4. I don't care for
the turbos on a street car.

On 7/27/2017 11:17 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:

I just wanted to and the V6 was just a want,not a need. Just as I
wanted a red car. After all, paint is just paint, especially if the car
is kept in a garage most of the time like mine is.

Speaking of towing a trailer, Toyota does not recommend using the Camry
to tow a trailer of any size.

I did a quick look at the Hondas, and the small and mid size cars did
not seem to even offer a v6. Just a 4 and a turbo 4. I don't care for
the turbos on a street car.


Why?
My last car was a 2.0 turbo. I was quite happy with the performance.

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 23:29:21 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/27/2017 11:17 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:

I just wanted to and the V6 was just a want,not a need. Just as I
wanted a red car. After all, paint is just paint, especially if the car
is kept in a garage most of the time like mine is.

Speaking of towing a trailer, Toyota does not recommend using the Camry
to tow a trailer of any size.

I did a quick look at the Hondas, and the small and mid size cars did
not seem to even offer a v6. Just a 4 and a turbo 4. I don't care for
the turbos on a street car.


Why?
My last car was a 2.0 turbo. I was quite happy with the performance.

Today's turbos are a far cry from the Corvair or Jetfire of the
sixties, or the old SVO Mustang!!! Rven the Saab turbos of rhe
seventies and eighties were very crude by today's standards and were
considered consumeables. Today's turbos should last the life of the
car

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 23:29:21 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/27/2017 11:17 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:



I did a quick look at the Hondas, and the small and mid size cars did
not seem to even offer a v6. Just a 4 and a turbo 4. I don't care for
the turbos on a street car.


Why?
My last car was a 2.0 turbo. I was quite happy with the performance.

Today's turbos are a far cry from the Corvair or Jetfire of the
sixties, or the old SVO Mustang!!! Rven the Saab turbos of rhe
seventies and eighties were very crude by today's standards and were
considered consumeables. Today's turbos should last the life of the
car

I admitt that I do not understand the whole thoughs on the street
turbos. Back in the 1960's many engines had a compression ratio of
about 10:1 or more. Then came the air polution acts and the compression
ratios were droped to well under that. I know there is a practical
limit on the compression ratio for engines.

Wouldn't the turbos on the low compression engines be just about like
going back up on the compression ratio ? Forcing more air into the
engine is all that the turbo does doesn't it ?

My thinking is the turbo is just more junk added to an engine to beat
the polution rules.

All this is for stree cars and not ones ran on the tracks where even
with the high compression ratios are not good enough to produce the
maximum power.

Not checking out the turbos, do they require the higher octain (higher
price ) fuel ?

While not really the case, my thoughts are like one I read years ago in
that there is no subistute for cubic inches.

On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 09:05:08 -0400, Ralph Mowery
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 23:29:21 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/27/2017 11:17 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:



I did a quick look at the Hondas, and the small and mid size cars did
not seem to even offer a v6. Just a 4 and a turbo 4. I don't care for
the turbos on a street car.


Why?
My last car was a 2.0 turbo. I was quite happy with the performance.

Today's turbos are a far cry from the Corvair or Jetfire of the
sixties, or the old SVO Mustang!!! Rven the Saab turbos of rhe
seventies and eighties were very crude by today's standards and were
considered consumeables. Today's turbos should last the life of the
car

I admitt that I do not understand the whole thoughs on the street
turbos. Back in the 1960's many engines had a compression ratio of
about 10:1 or more. Then came the air polution acts and the compression
ratios were droped to well under that. I know there is a practical
limit on the compression ratio for engines.

Wouldn't the turbos on the low compression engines be just about like
going back up on the compression ratio ? Forcing more air into the
engine is all that the turbo does doesn't it ?

My thinking is the turbo is just more junk added to an engine to beat
the polution rules.

All this is for stree cars and not ones ran on the tracks where even
with the high compression ratios are not good enough to produce the
maximum power.

Not checking out the turbos, do they require the higher octain (higher
price ) fuel ?

While not really the case, my thoughts are like one I read years ago in
that there is no subistute for cubic inches.


What turbos do is increase the efficiency of the engine by recouping
some of the waste energy in the exhaust to compress the air going into
the engine. In effect, this increases the "displacement " of the
engine when required for more power under boost, while running a small
low compression engine for economy when extra power is not required.
Many turbo engines do require premium fuel, while some "recommend"
premium fuel.
The old "there is no replacement for displacement" is kinda true -
but a 2.5 liter engine running 1 atmosphere of boost IS a 5 liter
engine - but has the advantage of high compression as well, making it
more efficient than a 5 liter normally aspirated engine.
With doday's sophisticated engine controls, and particularly with
GDI, the octane requirement penalty of high compression is mitigated
to a large degree.

On 7/28/2017 9:05 AM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 23:29:21 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/27/2017 11:17 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:



I did a quick look at the Hondas, and the small and mid size cars did
not seem to even offer a v6. Just a 4 and a turbo 4. I don't care for
the turbos on a street car.


Why?
My last car was a 2.0 turbo. I was quite happy with the performance.

Today's turbos are a far cry from the Corvair or Jetfire of the
sixties, or the old SVO Mustang!!! Rven the Saab turbos of rhe
seventies and eighties were very crude by today's standards and were
considered consumeables. Today's turbos should last the life of the
car

I admitt that I do not understand the whole thoughs on the street
turbos. Back in the 1960's many engines had a compression ratio of
about 10:1 or more. Then came the air polution acts and the compression
ratios were droped to well under that. I know there is a practical
limit on the compression ratio for engines.

Wouldn't the turbos on the low compression engines be just about like
going back up on the compression ratio ? Forcing more air into the
engine is all that the turbo does doesn't it ?

My thinking is the turbo is just more junk added to an engine to beat
the polution rules.

All this is for stree cars and not ones ran on the tracks where even
with the high compression ratios are not good enough to produce the
maximum power.

Not checking out the turbos, do they require the higher octain (higher
price ) fuel ?

While not really the case, my thoughts are like one I read years ago in
that there is no subistute for cubic inches.



Turn out there is a substitute for cubic inches. My 2.0 engine is a
mere 122 cubic inches. Puts out close to the same power as the old 283
Chevy block. Remember when it was a big deal to get 1 hp for 1 cu in?
My Sonata was 245 hp.

My Genesis is 232 cu in (3.8 ltr) and puts out 311 HP with no turbo but
you can get a 3.3 liter turbo with 365.

In spite of pushing the compression up, turbos today run just fine on
regular 87 octane and regular oil. They don't have the turbo lag of the
past. I had a '83 Mercedes with the turbo diesel. It took a few
seconds for the turbo kick in. I live on a holl and it was an annoyance
when I turned out of my driveway to go up the hill.

On 07/27/2017 09:17 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
Speaking of towing a trailer, Toyota does not recommend using the Camry
to tow a trailer of any size.

A little oddity showed up on the Yaris forum. In Canada a Yaris can tow
up to 800 pounds. In the US it can't tow anything. The Canadians must
get the stronger cars off the production line

In article , says...



My Genesis is 232 cu in (3.8 ltr) and puts out 311 HP with no turbo but
you can get a 3.3 liter turbo with 365.

In spite of pushing the compression up, turbos today run just fine on
regular 87 octane and regular oil. They don't have the turbo lag of the
past. I had a '83 Mercedes with the turbo diesel. It took a few
seconds for the turbo kick in. I live on a holl and it was an annoyance
when I turned out of my driveway to go up the hill.


I have never driven a turbo, so do not know how well they do. My
thinkig in that knowing sort of how they work is like your 83 Mercedes.
I am thinking that at low engine rpm there is not enough ehaust gas to
spin up the turbo. That would not let it develop as much low end torq
as a larger engine, then as the rpm went up it would develop more high
end horsepower.

I often wonder how the horse power ratings of the cars bult in the late
1960's compair to the ratings now. With every thing being fudged over
the years. Like the 1969 Dodge I had with the 340 cuin engine. They
said the factory rated it at 275 HP to get it in a drag racing class,
but it was more like 320 hp the way the car ran. I don't recall seeing
or have forgotten what an independant test would have shown.


I know there were at least two 'standards' of HP ratings. One was the
engine on a test stand under optimal conditions and the other was to put
the car on a dynometer and running it. That showed up all the losses in
the transmission and other things.

On 7/28/2017 12:05 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:


In spite of pushing the compression up, turbos today run just fine on
regular 87 octane and regular oil. They don't have the turbo lag of the
past. I had a '83 Mercedes with the turbo diesel. It took a few
seconds for the turbo kick in. I live on a holl and it was an annoyance
when I turned out of my driveway to go up the hill.


I have never driven a turbo, so do not know how well they do. My
thinkig in that knowing sort of how they work is like your 83 Mercedes.
I am thinking that at low engine rpm there is not enough ehaust gas to
spin up the turbo. That would not let it develop as much low end torq
as a larger engine, then as the rpm went up it would develop more high
end horsepower.

I often wonder how the horse power ratings of the cars bult in the late
1960's compair to the ratings now. With every thing being fudged over
the years. Like the 1969 Dodge I had with the 340 cuin engine. They
said the factory rated it at 275 HP to get it in a drag racing class,
but it was more like 320 hp the way the car ran. I don't recall seeing
or have forgotten what an independant test would have shown.


I know there were at least two 'standards' of HP ratings. One was the
engine on a test stand under optimal conditions and the other was to put
the car on a dynometer and running it. That showed up all the losses in
the transmission and other things.



If you get the opportunity, drive a turbo. You won't notice anything
different other than smooth acceleration.

It does not matter much here, but Europe has some restrictions or tax on
engines larger than 1 and then 1.6 liters. The turbo is a good way to
get power without displacement tax.

As for HP rating, I do recall they made changes a while back. Detroit
exaggerate? Nah.