In article , says...


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.

There are always companies trying to bet the tax system or some
government rule. Seems to me that in the 60's or so England (maybe
another country) had an added cost on cloths. Something about how long
or large they could be. Maybe adult sizes. Anyway not sure if the mini
dress was created for that, or if it was just used to beat the rules.

At one time some car companies were making the gas hogs out of the
country and importing them or classifying the SUV types as trucks to
beat the gas miles per gallon tax or rule.

I remember even some of the small boat engines were rated as 9.9 HP to
beat a registration rule of them having to be registered if 10 hp and
over.

On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 12:05:23 -0400, Ralph Mowery
wrote:

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.

No, both net and gross HP are measured at the flywheel. However, net
HP was with fulll exhaust , fan installed, water pump and alternator
installed, while gross HP was a bare engine on optimized free flowing
exgaust with no fan or waterpump or alternator, and adjusted to
standard atmosphere at sea level - in other words, under "ideal"
conditions - or "theoretical" maximum HP.
Net is real world horsepower.

see:
https://ateupwithmotor.com/terms-tec...et-horsepower/
for more REAL information.

In article ,
says...



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.

No, both net and gross HP are measured at the flywheel. However, net
HP was with fulll exhaust , fan installed, water pump and alternator
installed, while gross HP was a bare engine on optimized free flowing
exgaust with no fan or waterpump or alternator, and adjusted to
standard atmosphere at sea level - in other words, under "ideal"
conditions - or "theoretical" maximum HP.
Net is real world horsepower.

see:
https://ateupwithmotor.com/terms-tec...et-horsepower/
for more REAL information.


That means there are 3 ways to measure the HP in the US. It is easy for
anyone to put a car on a dyno and see what the wheel HP is but not so
easy for the 'engine ' HP where the engine is on a test stand with and
without all the items like fan belts and exhaust system with the
mufflers.

Then there is a metric HP. Not sure if the cars like Toyota and Honda
use that or not. The US is about 745 watts per HP and the metric is
about 735. That would give one a few percent advantage over the other.

Sometimes the factory just pulled the numbers out of the air. Some for
insurance pricing and some for drag racing in years past.

On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 18:08:02 -0400, Ralph Mowery
wrote:

In article ,
says...



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.

No, both net and gross HP are measured at the flywheel. However, net
HP was with fulll exhaust , fan installed, water pump and alternator
installed, while gross HP was a bare engine on optimized free flowing
exgaust with no fan or waterpump or alternator, and adjusted to
standard atmosphere at sea level - in other words, under "ideal"
conditions - or "theoretical" maximum HP.
Net is real world horsepower.

see:
https://ateupwithmotor.com/terms-tec...et-horsepower/
for more REAL information.


That means there are 3 ways to measure the HP in the US. It is easy for
anyone to put a car on a dyno and see what the wheel HP is but not so
easy for the 'engine ' HP where the engine is on a test stand with and
without all the items like fan belts and exhaust system with the
mufflers.

Then there is a metric HP. Not sure if the cars like Toyota and Honda
use that or not. The US is about 745 watts per HP and the metric is
about 735. That would give one a few percent advantage over the other.

Sometimes the factory just pulled the numbers out of the air. Some for
insurance pricing and some for drag racing in years past.


All cars sold today in North America are rated by the same net
horsepower rating. In the Japanese Domestic Market they are rated in
Metric (Din) horsepower.

The "under-rating" of domestic muscle cars was often
(semi-legitimately) achieved by rating at lower RPM than Max HP. IF
you rate an engine producing 606 ft lb of torque at 5200 RPM it is a
600HP engine. If that same engine produces 595 ft lb at 6000 RPM it is
a 680 HP engine (within a fraction of a HP), ad at 6500 RPM and 575 Ft
Lb it is a 710HP engine.

If the car is sold with a 5200 RPM "red line", as far as the
government is concerned, and the insurance company - it is a 600 HP
engine. (but wink wink - everyone else (at rthe drag strip, anyway)
KNOWS it's a 700+ HP engine.

On 7/28/2017 9:15 PM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:

I'm ashamed to admit it, but what I know about engines you could fit
in a thimble. Our dealer actually talked us out of a V-6 engine,
that we wouldn't really need it for about-town driving and the
occasional freeway driving. What we ended up with is a 2.4L 16-Valve
DOHC i-VTEC I4, 189 HP. The car is a Honda Accord 4-door Sedan. If
you can tell me anything more that would be good for me know, I would
appreciate it.


Everyone is different. Millions of people have an equivalent to your
car and engine and are perfectly happy with them. I've never been
reckless, but I've done my share of street racing and high speed driving
and I'd not be happy with the smaller engine. My father, brother, and I
have almost always had fast cars. You pay more buying the car and you
pay more every week for fuel. The price of "spirited driving"

The highway near me has a 65 mph speed limit. When I reach the end of
the ramp, merging is easy as I'm doing 75 mph when I get there.

In city traffic, high horsepower is meaningless. You can't go any
faster than the car 20 feet ahead of you.

On 07/28/2017 10:05 AM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
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.

The turbos I've driven all redlined at 1800 rpm

On Sat, 29 Jul 2017 01:15:06 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Fri 28 Jul 2017 07:03:03a, Ed Pawlowski told us...

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.

I'm ashamed to admit it, but what I know about engines you could fit
in a thimble. Our dealer actually talked us out of a V-6 engine,
that we wouldn't really need it for about-town driving and the
occasional freeway driving. What we ended up with is a 2.4L 16-Valve
DOHC i-VTEC I4, 189 HP. The car is a Honda Accord 4-door Sedan. If
you can tell me anything more that would be good for me know, I would
appreciate it.
Bulletproof torque monster in a small box - and likely every bit as
smooth as the six

On 07/28/2017 07:53 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
Everyone is different. Millions of people have an equivalent to your
car and engine and are perfectly happy with them. I've never been
reckless, but I've done my share of street racing and high speed driving
and I'd not be happy with the smaller engine. My father, brother, and I
have almost always had fast cars. You pay more buying the car and you
pay more every week for fuel. The price of "spirited driving"

I've done my share of spirited driving in '60s era British sports cars.
Sadly a current run of the mill Japanese economy sedan would smoke most
of them. I prefer bikes though. I'm the guy on the ramp behind you
wishing you'd get out of the way -- and that's with a 650 cc engine that
gets about 50 mpg if I don't get too crazy.

On 7/28/2017 8:15 PM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
On Fri 28 Jul 2017 07:03:03a, Ed Pawlowski told us...

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

[snip]


I'm ashamed to admit it, but what I know about engines you could fit
in a thimble. Our dealer actually talked us out of a V-6 engine,
that we wouldn't really need it for about-town driving and the
occasional freeway driving. What we ended up with is a 2.4L 16-Valve
DOHC i-VTEC I4, 189 HP. The car is a Honda Accord 4-door Sedan. If
you can tell me anything more that would be good for me know, I would
appreciate it.

Honda Accords with a 2.4L are quick as a scalded cat. I lucked into a
deal and picked up a 2006 Accord EX-L with the V-6. Good friend out on
the east coast told me I'd have been better off with the 4 cyl which is
what he had in his 2005 Accord as the 4 was plenty quick and more
economical.

Turned out he was correct. While I had decent gas mileage with the V-6
I felt the car was actually over powered with the 6. Any wet to the
pavement and you could set the drive wheels spinning. The car was
horrible in snow due to the heavy torque. Really did wish I'd gotten the 4.

Picked up a 2013 Honda CR-V EX-L AWD and the only engine available is
the i-VTEC 4. All the get up and go off the line you'd ever really need
and plenty of guts for passing at 50+. Gas mileage chasing around town
with a mix of highway is a consistent 26+. Highway trips at 60mph if I
keep my foot light on the gas starting out, will usually be around 30 to
31 or better.

I think that your dealer did you a solid. Go thank him if you haven't
already.

On 07/28/2017 09:13 PM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
On Fri 28 Jul 2017 07:06:29p, rbowman told us...

On 07/28/2017 07:53 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
Everyone is different. Millions of people have an equivalent to
your car and engine and are perfectly happy with them. I've
never been reckless, but I've done my share of street racing and
high speed driving and I'd not be happy with the smaller engine.
My father, brother, and I have almost always had fast cars. You
pay more buying the car and you pay more every week for fuel.
The price of "spirited driving"

I've done my share of spirited driving in '60s era British sports
cars. Sadly a current run of the mill Japanese economy sedan would
smoke most of them. I prefer bikes though. I'm the guy on the ramp
behind you wishing you'd get out of the way -- and that's with a
650 cc engine that gets about 50 mpg if I don't get too crazy.



I usually drive about 5 mph over the speed limit. I'd probabaly get in
you way. :-)



I seldom drive over the speed limit but I also seldom waste any time
getting to it. Putting a few hundred thousand miles on a big rig alters
your perspective. The limits around here typically are 70 on 2 lane
rural roads and 80 on the interstate. Back when there was no daytime
speed limit other than 'reasonable and prudent' traffic often moved at
90 or 95. I wasn't all that comfortable on a bike sharing the road with
90 mph soccer moms.

On 7/29/2017 5:06 AM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:



The highway patrol and police are extremely vigilant with speeders.
When we first moved to the Phoenix areaa we lived about 30 miles out
of the city. There was a 2 lane road that I had to travel on the
final leg of route home where the limit was 35. I was clocked at 45
and paid a $300 fine. They will generally overlook 5 mph oveer the
limit regardless of the limit, but if they clock you they'll always
get you for a substantial fine.


Potential fines is what keeps me under control but that is steep. It
has been a while since I was nabbed at 10 over (I was daydreaming) but
it was only $50. What ****ed me off is that I travel that road 5 days a
week, know where the cops sit and usually set the cruise control at 5
over and never had a problem.

There is a section of the highway that temps everyone to speed It is a
valley where you can see well ahead if anyone is watching and you can
get run over at 75. My top speed in that section is 125 but normally is
about 85 to 90 and coast back to 75 at the top of the hill.

On 7/27/17 3:54 PM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
On Thu 27 Jul 2017 12:46:28p, Wade Garrett told us...

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


That's a great sig!


Thanks :-)

I learned that during my years as a management consultant...

On Sat, 29 Jul 2017 09:06:50 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Fri 28 Jul 2017 10:24:40p, rbowman told us...

On 07/28/2017 09:13 PM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
On Fri 28 Jul 2017 07:06:29p, rbowman told us...

On 07/28/2017 07:53 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
Everyone is different. Millions of people have an equivalent
to your car and engine and are perfectly happy with them. I've
never been reckless, but I've done my share of street racing
and high speed driving and I'd not be happy with the smaller
engine. My father, brother, and I have almost always had fast
cars. You pay more buying the car and you pay more every week
for fuel. The price of "spirited driving"

I've done my share of spirited driving in '60s era British
sports cars. Sadly a current run of the mill Japanese economy
sedan would smoke most of them. I prefer bikes though. I'm the
guy on the ramp behind you wishing you'd get out of the way --
and that's with a 650 cc engine that gets about 50 mpg if I
don't get too crazy.



I usually drive about 5 mph over the speed limit. I'd probabaly
get in you way. :-)



I seldom drive over the speed limit but I also seldom waste any
time getting to it. Putting a few hundred thousand miles on a big
rig alters your perspective. The limits around here typically are
70 on 2 lane rural roads and 80 on the interstate. Back when there
was no daytime speed limit other than 'reasonable and prudent'
traffic often moved at 90 or 95. I wasn't all that comfortable on
a bike sharing the road with 90 mph soccer moms.



The two cities I've lived in most of my life have been Cleveland and
Phoenix. Speed limits on 2 lane rural roads ranged from 45 to 55.
Ohioi freeways for about 10 years the speed limit was 80, then it was
immediately dropped to 55 during the fuel crisis, was gradually
increased to 65 and 75 depending on the area. Currently in AZ the
speed limit is 75 on major freeways, although some are 65. None of
the speed limits have ever returned to 80 or exceeded it.

The highway patrol and police are extremely vigilant with speeders.
When we first moved to the Phoenix areaa we lived about 30 miles out
of the city. There was a 2 lane road that I had to travel on the
final leg of route home where the limit was 35. I was clocked at 45
and paid a $300 fine. They will generally overlook 5 mph oveer the
limit regardless of the limit, but if they clock you they'll always
get you for a substantial fine.
I remember driving across the top corner of Montana or Wyoming in
1971/72 with the'69 dart at 104 MPH. Didn't take long

On 7/27/17 5:20 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
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.


You'll be far better informed that the sales droids you encounter in
most car dealerships.

My wife has a car shopping rule that she immediately dismisses any sales
guy who asks "And what color does the little lady like" before she's
even specified a model and trim line.

I consider it a small victory convincing her to back down to that-
rather than punching him out ;-)

--
NSA-- The only agency in the government that actually listens to you.

On 7/27/17 8:30 PM, wrote:
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

A 4 cylinder is fine....as long as you don't mind that buzzy sound when
you stomp on the gas while you're desperately trying to get up to speed
and smoothly blend from the access lane onto the 70 MPH interstate :-)

Never mind trying to safely pass that loaded-down 1959 Ford pickup on a
2-lane country back road!

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 9:13:46 AM UTC-5, Wade Garrett wrote:
On 7/27/17 5:20 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:

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.


You'll be far better informed that the sales droids you encounter in
most car dealerships.

My hopes is to snag the 2017 vehicle I want with about $10,000
knocked off the price due to it being 'last years model' as well
at the end of the month and year. They may kick me to the curb
because I've insulted them.

My wife has a car shopping rule that she immediately dismisses any sales
guy who asks "And what color does the little lady like" before she's
even specified a model and trim line.

That would **** me off to no end. It's also a good reason I dread
this shopping excursion as I feel like they'll see a woman come in
and they think they can just jerk me around. I don't HAVE to have
a new vehicle as what I'm driving runs like a top but it will be a
treat for me and congratulating myself that I have made it to
retirement.

I consider it a small victory convincing her to back down to that-
rather than punching him out ;-)

Yes, it is hard sometimes to keep from knocking their lights out
or giving them a dog cussin' they deserve.

In article , says...


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

A 4 cylinder is fine....as long as you don't mind that buzzy sound when
you stomp on the gas while you're desperately trying to get up to speed
and smoothly blend from the access lane onto the 70 MPH interstate :-)

Never mind trying to safely pass that loaded-down 1959 Ford pickup on a
2-lane country back road!

That is exectally why I bought a car with a 6 in it. I live in NC and
there are lots of back roads I travel and many times there will be a
farmer with a tractor going about 10 mph. There may only be a very
small ammount of streight road to pass him on . I drove a 1991 Camry
for many years and that 4 cylinder did not have enough punch to get
around things like that. In years past I had several of the mussle
class cars. When one is used to that kind of get up and go, that 4
cylinder just does not make one happy.

I remember the first time driving a 4 cylinder. It was a friends small
Datsun. He told me to drive as I knew where we were going. There were 3
cars of us going to the same place. Somehow I wound up as the 2 nd car
in line just a we were about to get off the intestate. He told me to go
around the first car. I told him I had been trying to. He said to put
it to the floor. I told him I already had it to the floor. It was a
manual so the it di dnot down shift. Another time we were playing
around with the cruse control. Set at 60 mph. Going up and down some
small hills, the speed would drop to about 40 mph..

I know the newer 4s are much beter, but just not that good for me.

Someone mentioned color. The wife and I both wanted a red car, so that
is one of the first things we told th esales man. It had to be a 6 cyl
and red. Nothing else.

On 7/29/2017 12:08 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:


My hopes is to snag the 2017 vehicle I want with about $10,000
knocked off the price due to it being 'last years model' as well
at the end of the month and year. They may kick me to the curb
because I've insulted them.

My wife has a car shopping rule that she immediately dismisses any sales
guy who asks "And what color does the little lady like" before she's
even specified a model and trim line.

That would **** me off to no end. It's also a good reason I dread
this shopping excursion as I feel like they'll see a woman come in
and they think they can just jerk me around. I don't HAVE to have
a new vehicle as what I'm driving runs like a top but it will be a
treat for me and congratulating myself that I have made it to
retirement.

I'm sure there are many male salesmen that still treat women like that,
but the enlightened ones know that about half the car buyers today are
women and better informed than our mother's were about cars.

You potentially can get $10k off if it is a reasonably nice car, not on
a $15,000 list compact model.

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 2:31:56 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/29/2017 12:08 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:

My hopes is to snag the 2017 vehicle I want with about $10,000
knocked off the price due to it being 'last years model' as well
at the end of the month and year. They may kick me to the curb
because I've insulted them.

You potentially can get $10k off if it is a reasonably nice car, not on
a $15,000 list compact model.


The one I have my eye on is listed at $55,234. A lot could happen
between now and the end of December but so far I haven't been
dissuaded.

On 7/29/2017 3:40 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 2:31:56 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/29/2017 12:08 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:

My hopes is to snag the 2017 vehicle I want with about $10,000
knocked off the price due to it being 'last years model' as well
at the end of the month and year. They may kick me to the curb
because I've insulted them.

You potentially can get $10k off if it is a reasonably nice car, not on
a $15,000 list compact model.


The one I have my eye on is listed at $55,234. A lot could happen
between now and the end of December but so far I haven't been
dissuaded.


Then it could happen. My car stickered within a couple of hundred of
that and I got $6500 off sticker. Good luck, everyone deserves a treat
at some point in life.

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 4:00:19 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/29/2017 3:40 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:

The one I have my eye on is listed at $55,234. A lot could happen
between now and the end of December but so far I haven't been
dissuaded.


Then it could happen. My car stickered within a couple of hundred of
that and I got $6500 off sticker. Good luck, everyone deserves a treat
at some point in life.


Thanks! I'm figuring they will balk when I make my offer but I plan
on spending as much time as possible to get them down. But it will
be accomplished in one day; I'm not going to be playing phone tag
with them. Or if we can't agree on a sale price then I won't be
running back and forth from my house to the dealership letting them
try to wear me down.

On 7/29/2017 7:21 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 4:00:19 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/29/2017 3:40 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:

The one I have my eye on is listed at $55,234. A lot could happen
between now and the end of December but so far I haven't been
dissuaded.


Then it could happen. My car stickered within a couple of hundred of
that and I got $6500 off sticker. Good luck, everyone deserves a treat
at some point in life.


Thanks! I'm figuring they will balk when I make my offer but I plan
on spending as much time as possible to get them down. But it will
be accomplished in one day; I'm not going to be playing phone tag
with them. Or if we can't agree on a sale price then I won't be
running back and forth from my house to the dealership letting them
try to wear me down.



Last car I used Truecar.com for a price. It was the quickest and
easiest car buying experience ever. Two cars ago I went to a dealer and
made an offer. It was turned dows so I left. From there I went to
another dealer where I bought in the past. After some back and forth we
struck a deal. Two days later the first guy called and wanted to take
my deal. Sorry, you had your chance.

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 6:42:44 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Last car I used Truecar.com for a price. It was the quickest and
easiest car buying experience ever. Two cars ago I went to a dealer and
made an offer. It was turned dows so I left. From there I went to
another dealer where I bought in the past. After some back and forth we
struck a deal. Two days later the first guy called and wanted to take
my deal. Sorry, you had your chance.


Years ago a friend's brother had a hankering for a new pickup truck
and went shopping. He and a local dealership salesman couldn't
come to terms so he went to another dealership the next week. He
got just what he wanted at a fair price. About a week or so after
that the first salesman called him and ready to deal. He told him
he bought the truck that he wanted about 2 weeks prior. He said
you could audibly see his face falling over the phone he was so
disappointed. Friends brother told him he was ready the day he
came to the dealership but first salesman wanted to play games so
he left and got what he wanted elsewhere.

On Sat, 29 Jul 2017 10:23:55 -0400, Wade Garrett
wrote:

On 7/27/17 8:30 PM, wrote:
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

A 4 cylinder is fine....as long as you don't mind that buzzy sound when
you stomp on the gas while you're desperately trying to get up to speed
and smoothly blend from the access lane onto the 70 MPH interstate :-)

Never mind trying to safely pass that loaded-down 1959 Ford pickup on a
2-lane country back road!
I had no problem with either with my 2.4 PT Cruizer - and no, it was
NOT the turbo model. It handled 4 adults from Waterloo Ontario to PEI
and back without a single complaint (not counting the passengers).I
wouldn't try to tow a 17 foot trailer behind it, butit was capable of
producing painfull speeding tickets on the open road - - -

On Sat, 29 Jul 2017 16:21:12 -0700 (PDT), ItsJoanNotJoann
wrote:

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 4:00:19 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/29/2017 3:40 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:

The one I have my eye on is listed at $55,234. A lot could happen
between now and the end of December but so far I haven't been
dissuaded.


Then it could happen. My car stickered within a couple of hundred of
that and I got $6500 off sticker. Good luck, everyone deserves a treat
at some point in life.


Thanks! I'm figuring they will balk when I make my offer but I plan
on spending as much time as possible to get them down. But it will
be accomplished in one day; I'm not going to be playing phone tag
with them. Or if we can't agree on a sale price then I won't be
running back and forth from my house to the dealership letting them
try to wear me down.
Tell them they have one chance for their lowest price. SOMEONE is
going to sell you a car - it's up to them whether it is them or
someone else. Then stick to it. Don't let them play the"i'll beat the
other guy's price" game.
Best price. Now. Or walk.
Usually works.

On Sat, 29 Jul 2017 18:31:14 -0700 (PDT), ItsJoanNotJoann
wrote:

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 6:42:44 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Last car I used Truecar.com for a price. It was the quickest and
easiest car buying experience ever. Two cars ago I went to a dealer and
made an offer. It was turned dows so I left. From there I went to
another dealer where I bought in the past. After some back and forth we
struck a deal. Two days later the first guy called and wanted to take
my deal. Sorry, you had your chance.


Years ago a friend's brother had a hankering for a new pickup truck
and went shopping. He and a local dealership salesman couldn't
come to terms so he went to another dealership the next week. He
got just what he wanted at a fair price. About a week or so after
that the first salesman called him and ready to deal. He told him
he bought the truck that he wanted about 2 weeks prior. He said
you could audibly see his face falling over the phone he was so
disappointed. Friends brother told him he was ready the day he
came to the dealership but first salesman wanted to play games so
he left and got what he wanted elsewhere.
When it's even MORE fun is when you buy the very same vehicle, off
the first guy's lot - from the second dealer (on a dealer trade). That
REALLY burns 'em!!.

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 10:31:52 PM UTC-5, wrote:

Tell them they have one chance for their lowest price. SOMEONE is
going to sell you a car - it's up to them whether it is them or
someone else. Then stick to it. Don't let them play the"i'll beat the
other guy's price" game.
Best price. Now. Or walk.
Usually works.


Good advice.

On 07/29/2017 09:21 PM, wrote:
I had no problem with either with my 2.4 PT Cruizer - and no, it was
NOT the turbo model. It handled 4 adults from Waterloo Ontario to PEI
and back without a single complaint (not counting the passengers).I
wouldn't try to tow a 17 foot trailer behind it, butit was capable of
producing painfull speeding tickets on the open road - - -

Similarly I haven't had a problem with a 1500 cc Yaris. It's an
automatic and on the long mountain passes I'll drop to 3rd. It pulls
them at the legal 80 mph speed but tends to hunt between 3rd and 4th if
the grade flattens a bit.

As far as cars go I've had I4's, I6's, V6's, I8's. and V8's. They all
got me where I was going.

Ralph Mowery posted for all of us...



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.

I tell the dealer what WE want and let them do a dealer search. Settle on
price and they acquire it off the other dealer. Go to two different local
dealers as sometimes dealers have different sources.

--
Tekkie

posted for all of us...



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

+1 Seems like most manufacturers offer turbos. Nothing beats the boot in the
butt when merging...

--
Tekkie

posted for all of us...



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.

Yes, thank you. I found it on my own after your prompting. I love the
location of the ignition key slot.

--
Tekkie

In article ,
says...



Mass produced for the most part. But we did one better, and did not
accept any car off any dealer's lot. We were ready to walk until the
dealership's general manager made a calll to the factory. The was
that we did want the leather seats, but we did not want the V-6
engine. We had also specifiede virtually option that could be had.
The color we wanted was the factory's lowest priority on requested
colors. The agreement they arrivd at included all our wants and
needs, and nothing we didn't want. They put the order in at the
beginning of the productioin line and, in effect, we will end up with
a "cusom" built car. This reminded me ofthe 1970s when you could
custom order a car exactly the way you wanted it.


I am glad you were able to do that. Had I been after the 2018 year car I
probably could have done that, or searched around and waited a while as
I did not need to trade as the car was in great shape and had just over
30,000 miles on it.

However the 2018 is so ugly we did not want that one, the 2017 is not
that much better, but the 18 will probably be around for about 3 or more
years as it was a major design change for Toyota. The 17 is out of
production I am sure, so have to take what is out there. The main
reason to trade is there is a 0% finance option. I could afford to buy
it without financing, but why not take advantage of the 7 year 0 % and
'make' about 3 or 4 thousand off the deal if the stock market keeps
going up ?

I remember getting a 1972 Dodge ordered like I wanted. Last time I had
a chance to do that. Got married and had to settle for what we could
afford for a number of years.

On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 22:52:44 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Mon 31 Jul 2017 12:05:38p, =?iso-8859-15?Q?Tekkie=AE?= told us...

posted for all of us...



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

+1 Seems like most manufacturers offer turbos. Nothing beats the
boot in the butt when merging...


The car we ordered is a 2.4L turbo DOHC. It will have enough kick
for us.
It will have roghly the same "kick" as a 4.6 liter V8