Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations

driver100 · September 2015

abacomike said:
@driver100:

Driver, one does not need flood insurance if you live on the second floor of a 4-story building! If the water ever got 15 feet high, I would gather the animals two-by-two and slowly float away. I live 8 miles west of the beach so I usually do not worry about 15 foot total waves.

lol...does your car have flood insurance on it?

snakeweasel · September 2015

driver100 said:

Talking about speed and curves. How about the new Jaguar F-Pace doing the largest loop ever! Makes me want to go out and buy one, you never know when you may want to do a loop.

My understanding with those loops is that the speed has to be accurately calculated to fast or to slow will bring disaster.

Speaking about speed and curves brownie points for identifying this picture.

snakeweasel · September 2015

abacomike said:

cdnpinhead said:

abacomike said:
I only have 6780 miles on my current car.
How does that compare to your last few vehicles? Seems to me you've held on to this one longer, but I could be mistaken.

The CLS 550 (2014) I had for 12 months and it had 9880 miles on it when they took it in trade. This E 400 will turn 1 year old on December 12th and will have less mileage on it. I expect that it will be another year before I consider trading again, if at all. I like my current vehicle and it isn't always wise to buy a new model with new engines and new technology in the first few months after it is introduced.

Maybe I am just getting wiser in my old age? NAH!!!

Geeze and I traded my last car with around 180K miles on it and I just recently got to 100K on my current ride. Is one of us doing something wrong?

snakeweasel · September 2015

abacomike said:

ab348 said:

I always thought Florida drained almost too well because it is mostly on sand. What do I know...

If you dig down a few feet, you hit water here on the coastal areas.

That's because most of the state is only a few feet above sea level.

fezo · September 2015

Flood insurance on the car? Part of comprehensive. Would be shocked if Mike didn't have it.

I'm not in a flood zone but have had two flood claims on the cars, None on the house.

roadburner · September 2015

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

Talking about speed and curves. How about the new Jaguar F-Pace doing the largest loop ever! Makes me want to go out and buy one, you never know when you may want to do a loop.
My understanding with those loops is that the speed has to be accurately calculated to fast or to slow will bring disaster.

Speaking about speed and curves brownie points for identifying this picture.

Squid debris from The Dragon.
The Law of Natural Selection functioning properly.

oldfarmer50 · September 2015

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

Talking about speed and curves. How about the new Jaguar F-Pace doing the largest loop ever! Makes me want to go out and buy one, you never know when you may want to do a loop.
My understanding with those loops is that the speed has to be accurately calculated to fast or to slow will bring disaster.

Speaking about speed and curves brownie points for identifying this picture.

Looks like what would happen if I tried to drive a motorcycle.

driver100 · September 2015

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

Talking about speed and curves. How about the new Jaguar F-Pace doing the largest loop ever! Makes me want to go out and buy one, you never know when you may want to do a loop.
My understanding with those loops is that the speed has to be accurately calculated to fast or to slow will bring disaster.

Speaking about speed and curves brownie points for identifying this picture.

One day's worth...of car parts collected along I-75!

snakeweasel · September 2015

oldfarmer50 said:

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

Talking about speed and curves. How about the new Jaguar F-Pace doing the largest loop ever! Makes me want to go out and buy one, you never know when you may want to do a loop.
My understanding with those loops is that the speed has to be accurately calculated to fast or to slow will bring disaster.

Speaking about speed and curves brownie points for identifying this picture.

Looks like what would happen if I tried to drive a motorcycle.

Good guess, it is called the Tree of Shame. It's in Deals Gap, NC at one end of the Tail of the Dragon which is a road that got its name from all the twists and turns in it, on a map it sort of looks like a dragons tail. It's an 11 mile stretch of road that has 318 curves (or at least that's what they claim) and is supposed to be the most twisted road in the U.S. I have been down it and there are plenty of areas where you keep coming out of one turn right at the beginning of the next. The road runs along the southern boundary of the Smokie Mountains National park so there is no developed areas or cross roads along the entire 11 mile strip. Because of this it has become a mecca for motor sport enthusiasts testing their skill. It is an extremely dangerous road to speed on and it is rare for them to go a year without any deaths and accidents are a common occurrence due to people "testing" themselves.

Any way the Tree of Shame is covered with parts of cycles that have crashed along the road. It is a good reminder to keep it slow on that road.

Roadburner gets the brownie points. remember brownie points are totally worthless and can be redeemed at fine stores everywhere.

imidazol97 · September 2015

snakeweasel said:
Good guess, it is called the Tree of Shame. It's in Deals Gap, NC at one end of the Tail of the Dragon which is a road that got its name from all the twists and turns in it, on a map it sort of looks like a dragons tail. It's an 11 mile stretch of road that has 318 curves (or at least that's what they claim) and is supposed to be the most twisted road in the U.S. I have been down it and there are plenty of areas where you keep coming out of one turn right at the beginning of the next. The road runs along the southern boundary of the Smokie Mountains National park so there is no developed areas or cross roads along the entire 11 mile strip. Because of this it has become a mecca for motor sport enthusiasts testing their skill. It is an extremely dangerous road to speed on and it is rare for them to go a year without any deaths and accidents are a common occurrence due to people "testing" themselves. .

.

I've been on that road! And then on Highway 28 that crosses over Fontana Dam. I made the mistake of going around the west side of the park (Smokey Mountains) to get to Bryson City to catch a train. I thought we were going to be late because the road was so difficult to drive. I didn't want to go over the top of the park on 411 because it'd be slow that time of year because of tourists.

I was driving a 93 leSabre. LOL We made the train with about 15 minutes to spare. I think I'd allowed 2 hrs for the trip from Pigeon Forge around the park on the west. Beautiful scenery.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Deals+Gap,+Forneys+Creek,+NC+28771/@35.4741844,-83.8853645,14z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x885ebe3cb100b5ed:0x9ec5d298af01c9c4

driver100 · September 2015

snakeweasel said:

oldfarmer50 said:

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

Talking about speed and curves. How about the new Jaguar F-Pace doing the largest loop ever! Makes me want to go out and buy one, you never know when you may want to do a loop.
My understanding with those loops is that the speed has to be accurately calculated to fast or to slow will bring disaster.

Speaking about speed and curves brownie points for identifying this picture.

Looks like what would happen if I tried to drive a motorcycle.
Good guess, it is called the Tree of Shame.

Any way the Tree of Shame is covered with parts of cycles that have crashed along the road. It is a good reminder to keep it slow on that road.

.

I thought speed didn't matter?

imidazol97 · September 2015

driver100 said:

I thought speed didn't matter?

\
\
Good point. I've been hearing that the faster you go the safer it is!!! LOL

Streetview link to map.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4761157,-83.9180659,3a,75y,337.16h,77.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqn2rjIGlICyVYlVptJPFwg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

andres3 · September 2015

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

1) 95 MPH isn't near the traction limit in a straight line. There's a theory about the Circle of available friction/traction with each of the 4 tires. If the front tires aren't being asked to accelerate or turn, then very little traction is actually being used. It is when you have to accelerate or brake hard that you are using your traction, and therefore the amount of force to make a turn is reduced while taking those actions.
Actually there is a significant amount of traction when the front tires are not being asked to accelerate or turn, maybe not as much as in other conditions but it is significant. First of all their has to be enough traction to keep the car going, remember there has to be enough traction to overcome the effects of drag and friction that will slow down a car. Not to mention that they have to keep the car in a straight line against such forces as cross winds.
andres3 said:
2) Absolutely correct about the "speed kills" crowd designing studies to support their preconceived assumptions. In particular, when the data doesn't support their theories, they resort to tricky word play such as "INCREASED ACCIDENT FREQUENCY" which conveniently can lead one to the conclusion higher speed limits led to more accident "frequency." Why the word "frequency?" Well, it is because when you take into account additional traffic volume (vehicle miles traveled is the best equalizer), it isn't surprising that you had more accidents per hour, never mind if the accident "RATES" went down.
Really? I could very well say the same thing about those in your camp. You have preconceived notions and you grab onto any study that supports them while ignoring any theory that disproves their beliefs. How many times have you stated that nothing has disproven the Solomon curve after I have given a few studies that do not support it? And as for word play what about those who talk about how traffic deaths went down after Congress removed the national speed limit? What they don't tell you is that is that is for all roads but the speed limit went up on less than 1% of the nations roads carrying less than 10% of the nations traffic. Studies have shown that the accident rate went up on the interstate highways where the speed limit was increased even when taking into account any change in miles driven.
andres3 said:
4) Heard a story of a Toyota Tacoma passing a TTRS and GT3 at 125+ MPH (they said he must of been "local" and knew the road well). Which leads me to another point, if you know the road well, I think that allows you to focus on other things more, such as potential unusual hazards that might not always be present. How much safer does that make the Local at XXX MPH vs. a first-time traveler on that same road at 65 MPH?
Well it may be true that there car be a road where a local who knew the road well and was going 125 MPH was being safer than a first time traveler doing 65 MPH. But I will say this; I have driven on every type of road in every environment in this land. I have driven on interstate highways, four lane blacktops, two lane paved roads and dirt roads. Through mountains, across the plains, long straight aways and twisty winding roads. I have driven the highest road and the lowest road in this country, I have driven narrow dirt roads hugging the side of a mountain in Hawaii and I have driven ruts in the ground across the Alaskan tundra. And I will say this: I cannot think of one road where an adequately competent driver in a adequately maintained car driving 65 MPH his first time down a road is being less safe than a local driving that same road at 125 MPH regardless of how well that local knows the road and how competent a driver he is.

In order for the local driving at 125 MPH to be even remotely safe the curves would have to be gentle enough for him to stay in his lane and have sight lines that would allow him to stop safely and reasonably. Not to mention a lack of cross traffic and traffic turning on and off the road, and enough cleared area to the sides to see such things as wild animals coming. Not to mention other things such as lack of pedestrians, cyclists and development. All these things would make it very safe for a first time traveler going 65 MPH down that same road,

The 125 MPH was an exaggerated example; which is why I posed the question with XXX MPH. Certainly some drivers could be safer on some roads at 90 or 95 MPH vs. a first timer at 65 MPH. Even a race car driver won't be very good at a track on their first lap if they don't know the layout. The same applies in the real world. Knowing the track is more than half the battle really.

Studies have shown that the accident rate went up on the interstate highways where the speed limit was increased even when taking into account any change in miles driven.

That statement taken from @snakeweasel post above is blatantly 100% false. First, when equalizers are taken into account, accident rates generally go down with increased speed limits. This is a good general rule of thumb because most all of the speed limits that are going up are the speed limits that were set dangerously too low under the 85th percentile rule.

People that avoided the interstates when speed limits were too low (taking back roads, side roads, alternate highways), are now welcome to join interstates when speed limits became realistic. To select certain roads or certain highways or certain freeways to fit your ill-conceived assumptions is just plain wrong. Better to look at the aggregate. The "unsafe or speedy" drivers can just find new roads if the penalties become too abusive.

Not to mention that there have been countless studies showing that lowering and raising speed limits does little to change actual speeds of travel. Finding alternate roads is preferable to people than slowing down to 55 or facing heavy enforcement.

imidazol97 · September 2015

All this about speed limits is repetitive. When the logic involved has to use all kinds of if's, and's, and but's to try to maneuvre (British spelling?) the outcome to be what someone wants indicates the Law of Parsimony is not being followed. It becomes as manipulated as global warming data was. Most people can figure out that faster means less control and shortened reaction times along with exponentially higher kinetic energy to be dissipated during a collision.

Instead the KISS method works. Indeed, Ohio is trying to figure out why the death and accident rate has gone up. A couple years back the interstate speed limits rose in rural areas in Ohio for trucks and cars both. Duh. Faster causes more accidents, partly because of people who think they know how to drive better than and have better cars for driving too fast than everyone else who are members of the "little people" group who should just stay off the roads that were built for the people-who-know-how-to-drive-fast. --And they should just stay out of the lanes that are dedicated for the people-who-know-how-to-drive-fast.

http://forums.edmunds.com/discussion/11304/general/x/improving-our-drivers-roads-speed-limits-and-enforcement

There's already an Edmunds topic on speed limits and enforcement of same. That sounds like a good place for the discussion.

andres3 said:
e for a first time traveler

That statement taken from @snakeweasel post above is blatantly 100% false. First, when equalizers are taken into account, accident rates generally go down with increased speed limits. This is a good general rule of thumb because most all of the speed limits that are going up are the speed limits that were set dangerously too low under the 85th percentile rule.

People that avoided the interstates when speed limits were too low (taking back roads, side roads, alternate highways), are now welcome to join interstates when speed limits became realistic. To select certain roads or certain highways or certain freeways to fit your ill-conceived assumptions is just plain wrong. Better to look at the aggregate. The "unsafe or speedy" drivers can just find new roads if the penalties become too abusive.

Not to mention that there have been countless studies showing that lowering and raising speed limits does little to change actual speeds of travel. Finding alternate roads is preferable to people than slowing down to 55 or facing heavy enforcement.

[Deleted User] · September 2015

I thought the plastic oil pans were bad, but VW has apparently been caught falsifying their diesel emissions to US regulatory agencies:

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/volkswagen-charged-with-hacking-482000-diesels-to-129357726737.html

This is outrageous behavior from a manufacturer and I hope they're fined the maximum if this proves to be true. If they falsify and lie about the emissions, what else are they lying about?

ab348 · September 2015

imidazol97 said:

There's already an Edmunds topic on speed limits and enforcement of same. That sounds like a good place for the discussion.

Indeed!

abacomike · September 2015

About an hour ago, I saw this bright yellow sphere/orb glowing in the western sky. I said to myself, "...are we under attack from aliens or did the Russians explode a Hydrogen bomb in the Gulf of Mexico? No, they wouldn't do that. I wonder what that bright light is from? Oh! The sun!!! I forgot what that looked like!"

We ended up with 8" of rain over the past three days. I guess the drought is over here in south Florida.

andres3 · September 2015

imidazol97 said:
All this about speed limits is repetitive. When the logic involved has to use all kinds of if's, and's, and but's to try to maneuvre (British spelling?) the outcome to be what someone wants indicates the Law of Parsimony is not being followed. It becomes as manipulated as global warming data was. Most people can figure out that faster means less control and shortened reaction times along with exponentially higher kinetic energy to be dissipated during a collision.

Instead the KISS method works. Indeed, Ohio is trying to figure out why the death and accident rate has gone up. A couple years back the interstate speed limits rose in rural areas in Ohio for trucks and cars both. Duh. Faster causes more accidents, partly because of people who think they know how to drive better than and have better cars for driving too fast than everyone else who are members of the "little people" group who should just stay off the roads that were built for the people-who-know-how-to-drive-fast. --And they should just stay out of the lanes that are dedicated for the people-who-know-how-to-drive-fast.

http://forums.edmunds.com/discussion/11304/general/x/improving-our-drivers-roads-speed-limits-and-enforcement

There's already an Edmunds topic on speed limits and enforcement of same. That sounds like a good place for the discussion.

Keeping it simple for the stupid people, if you drive slower, you are on the road for a longer period of time, Common sense dictates there is risk in every drive you take, and extending and prolonging that risk enhances the risk you are taking with more time and more exposure.

The slower you go the more people and motorists you'll encounter on the highway as multitudes of people are passing you. If you drive with the flow, you won't encounter too many different vehicles on your drive, but if you are being passed every 3 seconds, you could be exposed to 100X the amount of potential collisions (every vehicle out there) than if you drove with the flow. It's all common sense, yet some feel compelled to argue common-sense and studies that don't support their flawed viewpoints.

The same applies if you go too fast, but at least you are in control vs at the mercy of others.

Also, no one said the faster you go the safer you are, just read the data on the SOLOMON curve, it is a curve for a reason, with the safest speed being that about 5 to 10 over the average pace of traffic. No one ever claimed it was a straight line. Also notice that no one could explain why faster forms of travel have better safety records than our roadways. It is because they don't want to admit that without conditions, speed is irrelevant.

It is you who are arguing the what if's, butt's and other outrageous ideas. What if there's a rock? What if there's a hurricane cross-wind? What if your tire blows out? There are a lot of what if's in the world.

The truth is my last accident wouldn't have happened if I had been speeding, because it was a "timing" accident. I was going about 25, slow by anyone's standards; yet the accident was unavoidable. The only way to avoid it would have been to have gone faster from A to B so that I was closer to B at the time of the accident.

imidazol97 · September 2015

abacomike said:
We ended up with 8" of rain over the past three days. I guess the drought is over here in south Florida.

You shouldn't need a car wash this week.

abacomike · September 2015

imidazol97 said:

We ended up with 8" of rain over the past three days. I guess the drought is over here in south Florida.
You shouldn't need a car wash this week.

Nope - no car wash this week!

abacomike · September 2015

@andres3:

Can we call a truce please on speed! I am tired of the bickering. Enough is enough!!!

dino001 · September 2015

tyguy said:
I thought the plastic oil pans were bad, but VW has apparently been caught falsifying their diesel emissions to US regulatory agencies:

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/volkswagen-charged-with-hacking-482000-diesels-to-129357726737.html

This is outrageous behavior from a manufacturer and I hope they're fined the maximum if this proves to be true. If they falsify and lie about the emissions, what else are they lying about?

It's even worse in Europe, because the officials over there were complicit by "doctoring" emission tests to make diesels look superior and justify their current tax preferences. However, they now found out their NOx pollution did not go down despite newer emission standards being in place for years by now. I guess US tests were too tough, so they had to find a "workaround".

[Deleted User] · September 2015

abacomike said:

@andres3:

Can we call a truce please on speed! I am tired of the bickering. Enough is enough!!!

I just skip over any comments starting with a certain poster's name. I haven't read a single one and couldn't tell you what the bickering is about. I figure I'll be a happier person :-)

explorerx4 · September 2015

@tyguy, We're bothers, we have the same philosophy.

[Deleted User] · September 2015

explorerx4 said:

@tyguy, We're bothers, we have the same philosophy.

Thanks explorer!

Good news today. I managed to get my knee to 115 degrees flexion in physical therapy, and the staples have been removed. While the therapist was measuring my flexibility, he pulled the surgery records and found the surgeon measured 140 degrees flexion potential. I actually got a little emotional. I never thought I could see that kind of improvement and I was hit with some positive energy thinking about the possibilities. It's been a good day.

imidazol97 · September 2015

tyguy said:

explorerx4 said:

@tyguy, We're bothers, we have the same philosophy.

Thanks explorer!

Good news today. I managed to get my knee to 115 degrees flexion in physical therapy, and the staples have been removed. While the therapist was measuring my flexibility, he pulled the surgery records and found the surgeon measured 140 degrees flexion potential. I actually got a little emotional. I never thought I could see that kind of improvement and I was hit with some positive energy thinking about the possibilities. It's been a good day.

Congratulations. The degree of flex you're at now means you can easily do stairs. Wife's doctor
explained that people with less than what you now have are less satisfied with their life
after knee replacement. So you're doing well. You've clearly worked through a lot of pain
to do that stretching the scar tissue.

snakeweasel · September 2015

abacomike said:
@andres3:

Can we call a truce please on speed! I am tired of the bickering. Enough is enough!!!

I'll agree to that, I had a few more posts to reply to andres3 but I'll let it slid, I don't think he is interested in the facts anyway.

Anyway I have been out doing some preliminary looking today.

nyccarguy · September 2015

@tyguy - I wish you a strong & healthy recovery. Glad to hear you are making progress. Physical Therapists do remarkable things (I'm still shocked the PT I've been married to for close to 11 years said yes to a second date).

imidazol97 · September 2015

I see a whole lot of problems and irony with all the VW/Audis out there polluting more than they should have been doing. And the fix is to lower the fuel economy from what I'm reading. So Audi/VW sold the vehicles under false pretenses to the customer, fooled the government with data manipulation, and who knows what else.

So the penalty should be to fix the vehicles with proper emissions control. If they don't then the EPA needs to back off making my electric bills go up with higher cost because they don't like the minor emissions from coal-powered electric plants. I expect them to make these cars perfectly EPA compliant just like the other manufacturers had to be with theirs.

Further, I wonder how VW/Audi's gas engines and pollution are working. Did they fudge there too?

How many other companies fudged on the fuel mileage vs emissions for tests. In these days where a few people base their choices of one car over another because the EPA estimates of fuel mileage are 1 mile per gallon different, I don't doubt many of those choices were based on false givens. I think there need to be some audits of compliance for past models. It would be ironic to find some of those who chose one car over another based on 1 mpg difference for supposed higher mileage actually was based on fudged figures.

And then there are the crash tests.

oldfarmer50 · September 2015

tyguy said:
I thought the plastic oil pans were bad, but VW has apparently been caught falsifying their diesel emissions to US regulatory agencies:

https://www.yahoo.com/autos/volkswagen-charged-with-hacking-482000-diesels-to-129357726737.html

This is outrageous behavior from a manufacturer and I hope they're fined the maximum if this proves to be true. If they falsify and lie about the emissions, what else are they lying about?

Probably isn't true that their cars attract girls either. :@

I had my first challenge to race while driving the Mustang tonight. Was coming home from an 11 hour shift when I hear chirping tires next to me as I left a light. It was some sort of souped up Lexus or Mercedes ( couldn't tell in the dark) with nice fat tires. Might have even been an older BMW M.

Too tired to even care.

oldfarmer50 · September 2015

Watching the Meachem auctions and I need an explanation.

They auctioned off a 2008 Mustang Rouch stage 3 for $30,000. It was supercharged and only had 427 hp. That's less than my stock 2015.

Granted $30k is a little cheaper but this one had 13k miles.

Why so much for a used car?

explorerx4 · September 2015

@oldfarmer50, You should read up on Edmunds 1966 Corvette. Some auction houses are not very trust worthy.
That is a mild description.

verdugo · September 2015

explorerx4 said:
@tyguy, We're bothers, we have the same philosophy.

Add one more to the family.

stever · September 2015

imidazol97 said:
I see a whole lot of problems and irony with all the VW/Audis out there polluting more than they should have been doing. And the fix is to lower the fuel economy from what I'm reading.

How many other companies fudged on the fuel mileage vs emissions for tests.

I don't want to steal @houdini1's thunder but "Apparently, when the EPA tested these vehicles, the emissions systems were working as advertised, and those results were used to calculate the mpg. If this is the case, the EPA estimates should not change."

The other mpg fudging companies are Kia/Hyundai and Ford.

driver100 · September 2015

explorerx4 said:
@tyguy, We're bothers, we have the same philosophy.

Make that triplets.

explorerx4 · September 2015

@stever, After making that claim about those brands, please back that up with 'something' that shows the EPA test was intentionally circumvented by some software programming.
Cadillac does come to mind.
With diesels, it's all about particulates, not NOX.

[Deleted User] · September 2015

stever said:

I see a whole lot of problems and irony with all the VW/Audis out there polluting more than they should have been doing. And the fix is to lower the fuel economy from what I'm reading. How many other companies fudged on the fuel mileage vs emissions for tests.
I don't want to steal @houdini1's thunder but "Apparently, when the EPA tested these vehicles, the emissions systems were working as advertised, and those results were used to calculate the mpg. If this is the case, the EPA estimates should not change." The other mpg fudging companies are Kia/Hyundai and Ford.

Good info. I think this case involves more than fudging, though. In the mpg fudging, there was a different interpretation of testing methodology. In the case of VW/Audi, they wrote a set of code to detect when the car was being emission tested, and intentionally changed the emission performance to provide false data during the test. The actual results in real world testing are up to 40 times worse than the falsified test. That's much more egregious in my opinion.

driver100 · September 2015

verdugo said:

explorerx4 said:
@tyguy, We're bothers, we have the same philosophy.
Add one more to the family.

Oh Oh, make it quadruplets then.

explorerx4 · September 2015

@tyguy, I'm thinking they stuck to old school probe up the tailpipe by mistake, then 'Boom went the dynamite',

abacomike · September 2015

tyguy said:

abacomike said:

@andres3:

Can we call a truce please on speed! I am tired of the bickering. Enough is enough!!!

I just skip over any comments starting with a certain poster's name. I haven't read a single one and couldn't tell you what the bickering is about. I figure I'll be a happier person :-)

It's difficult to "skip" over his posts - they measure a foot long!!! I probably am at fault here - I responded with my own opinion and since I cannot cite empirical studies from a multitude of sources to substantiate my "opinion", my "ship" sank.

SOS! SOS! SOS!

berri · September 2015

Aren't many of those left anymore. I remember when there would be different names for Big Boys in different regions like Bob's. Shoney's. etc.

abacomike · September 2015

I read a long article on that VW fiasco - tampering with tests results designed to measure emissions from combustion of the gasoline in the engine. I guess the emissions were many, many times greater than reported.

IMHO, that is as dastardly as GM's ignition switch and Toyota's sudden acceleration fiascos. This, too, is a safety issue. Think of the tons of CO2 being exhausted into our atmosphere and the consequences of this charade to asthmatics and sufferers of COPD.

How does the EPA monitor emissions? Was there collusion? I don't know how they get away with this.

ab348 · September 2015

explorerx4 said:

Cadillac does come to mind

Excuse me? WTH are you implying?

cdnpinhead · September 2015

I just skip over any comments starting with a certain poster's name.

Excellent policy. I get through many of the posts in the board in very short order using a similar approach.

stever · September 2015

explorerx4 said:
@stever, After making that claim about those brands, please back that up with 'something' that shows the EPA test was intentionally circumvented by some software programming.
Cadillac does come to mind.
With diesels, it's all about particulates, not NOX.

Ah, sorry, I guess I just treated the question as what other companies mislead the public about their mpg. I don't know how the three I named "fooled" the EPA test. That's been a "fox in the henhouse" complaint about the EPA tests for years, since the EPA just sets the parameters and the automakers do their own testing. The EPA just spots check.

"Outside of a data processing error related to the coastdown testing method by which Hyundai calculated resistance or “road load,” it was Hyundai’s regulatory interpretation within this broad latitude that was responsible for the ratings restatement. Hyundai has corrected the error, and the EPA in October 2012 approved the automaker’s new fuel economy testing program." (hyundaimpginfo.com)

"An internal review has concluded that a set of procedural misinterpretations and errors at the joint Hyundai/Kia technical centers led to overstated miles per gallon (MPG) ratings" (kiampginfo.com)

"At Ford, the recent mileage claims were based on poor testing conditions and faulty engineering practices, including wind tunnel and other laboratory measurements." (autonews.com)

Back to the VW story, this was an interesting blurb from the Washington Post:

"Automakers have a long history of using defeat devices. In 1998, the EPA reached a $1 billion settlement with diesel-engine companies such as Caterpiller, Renault and Volvo for installing equipment that defeated emission controls. It was, at the time, the largest U.S. civil penalty for violating environmental law. The EPA said the firms installed the devices in an estimated 1.3 million engines in tractor trailers and large pick-ups.

That same year, Honda and Ford settled EPA cases also accusing them of using defeat devices. With Ford, the problem was found in 60,000 Econoline vans, allowing for excessive pollution at highway speeds. Honda was found to have disabled the misfire monitoring device on 1.6 million cars, depriving emission control inspectors of that information."

All these statements makes me believe that all quarterbacks deflate their balls.

dino001 · September 2015

explorerx4 said:
@stever, After making that claim about those brands, please back that up with 'something' that shows the EPA test was intentionally circumvented by some software programming.
Cadillac does come to mind.
With diesels, it's all about particulates, not NOX.

You're right, it is mostly the particulates, also NOx and sulfur ("clean diesel" program was to remove remove sulfur from the fuel). For example, Euro V limits NOx to 180 mg/km for diesel and 60 for gasoline. Euro VI tightens NOx further. Chech Selective Catalythic Reduction on the Wikipedia.

driver100 · September 2015

stever said:

explorerx4 said:
@stever, After making that claim about those brands, please back that up with 'something' that shows the EPA test was intentionally circumvented by some software programming.

All these statements makes me believe that all quarterbacks deflate their balls.
Could countries cheat on their nuclear tests too!

jpp75 · September 2015

robr2 said:
We don't eat out much but we do grill a lot in the summer - and in the winter as well.

I have a a 5 year old Kenmore dryer that completes its cycle in about 30 minutes and 7 year old 40 gallon water heater set at 120. My 15 YO daughter empties that nightly. We are considering going tankless on the next water heater.

Our new home came with a tankless water heater, by far one of the best energy saving features ever.

imidazol97 · September 2015

stever said:
Honda was found to have disabled the misfire monitoring device on 1.6 million cars, depriving emission control inspectors of that information."

Honda? Not THE Honda. They wouldn't ever have done such a thing. LOL

EPA needs to do retroactive testing on vehicles from new to several years old
to verify the data given by
the manufacturers. If the car don't meet expectations as advertised to the
EPA, then financial penalties need to be applied to the cars, paid by owners
or manufacturers for the misrepresentation. Faked mileage data affects the
CAFE standards too for the companies.

Many people bought cars from certain companies because their cars are
better, based on getting 1 mpg more than a similar vehicle from another
company! So the misrepresentation has tentacles that reach beyond a
simple number on a page.

thebean · September 2015

berri said:

Aren't many of those left anymore. I remember when there would be different names for Big Boys in different regions like Bob's. Shoney's. etc.

This was my very first Big Boy burger. Marked one item off my bucket list. My life is not exciting.

Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles