Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

Mr_Shiftright

Last time I did 200 miles a day?-----Today! In California, we'd drive 100 miles for a good taco.

abacomike

@Mr_Shiftright‌ said:

"Last time I did 200 miles a day?-----Today! In California, we'd drive 100 miles for a good taco."

I used to live in Palm Desert, San Diego and Chatsworth - and I know what you are saying is so true. Often we'd drive 100 miles just to find a decent In-'N-Out Burger!

driver100

Q In the Olds 442 what does 4-4-2 stand for?

A: 4 barrel carburetor, 4 speed transmission, and dual exhaust.

driver100

One more for today;

Q: What U.S. production car has the quickest 0-60 mph time?

A: The 1962 Chevrolet Impala SS 409. Did it in 4.0 seconds.

Does this sound possible....nothing faster since then??????

ab348

@driver100 said:
Q In the Olds 442 what does 4-4-2 stand for?

A: 4 barrel carburetor, 4 speed transmission, and dual exhaust.

True for the original 1964 model. Of course later years let you order an automatic transmission.

ab348

@driver100 said:
One more for today;

Q: What U.S. production car has the quickest 0-60 mph time?

A: The 1962 Chevrolet Impala SS 409. Did it in 4.0 seconds.

Does this sound possible....nothing faster since then??????

The only way a 409 '62 Impala could do 0-60 in 4 seconds is by dropping it off a tall building... maybe with jet-pack assist.

imidazol97

@ab348 said:
The only way a 409 '62 Impala could do 0-60 in 4 seconds is by dropping it off a tall building... maybe with jet-pack assist.

Especially not with those tires on the rear of the car in the picture. Not much grip happening there for full
power burnouts.

driver100

@ab348 said:
The only way a 409 '62 Impala could do 0-60 in 4 seconds is by dropping it off a tall building... maybe with jet-pack assist.

lol..sounds a bit exaggerated. I would think the new 707 hp Dodge Challenger would be faster.

driver100

@imidazol97 said:Especially not with those tires on the rear of the car in the picture. Not much grip happening there for full power burnouts.

One article said the SS 409 had a light weight body....not sure about that either.

snakeweasel

> @stickguy said:
> one problem with the slow route is that in many cases, including the trip I was on, it doesn't really exist. unless you want to turn a 4 hour trip into an 8 hour one!

I would think that in most cases it does exist and only puts on between 20 and 35% extra time. Now on a long trip that's not really doable but on shorter ones it is plus it let's you see things you can't while Wizzing by at 75 MPH.

stever

@snakeweasel, is it my imagination (or my pc?) but are a lot of your recent posts getting double-posted?

snakeweasel

> @driver100 asked:
> Does this sound possible....nothing faster since then??????

Sorry I don't believe it no way that car did 0 to 60 in 4 seconds. As for nothing faster doesn't the corvette ZR 1 do it in under 3.5?

snakeweasel

Stever I think that a few were double posted but I think it has something to do with posting from my phone.

roadburner

If a "stock" 409 did 0-60 in four seconds you can bet that the car was fitted with dual quads, slicks, a numerically high rear axle ratio, and an uncorked exhaust.
Most likely it was an ultra-rare Super Stock(not the same as an SS) car.

stever

@snakeweasel, k, thanks, no biggie. Never sure if it's the site or me.

graphicguy

@snakeweasel said:
Sorry I don't believe it no way that car did 0 to 60 in 4 seconds. As for nothing faster doesn't the corvette ZR 1 do it in under 3.5?

I agree. If it is doing 4 sec 60 runs, it's not street legal. I don't care how much displacement, how "lite" the body was (let's admit it, that thick gauge steel was anything but "lite", how little exhaust restrictions the car had, muscle cars of yore weren't nearly as fast as some of today's sportier cars (let alone today's up-to-date muscle cars).

roadburner

@graphicguy said:
I agree. If it is doing 4 sec 60 runs, it's not street legal. I don't care how much displacement, how "lite" the body was (let's admit it, that thick gauge steel was anything but "lite", how little exhaust restrictions the car had, muscle cars of yore weren't nearly as fast as some of today's sportier cars (let alone today's up-to-date muscle cars).

If you look back at the muscle car tests from 1964-1970 you'll find that a lot of the press cars were seriously "massaged." On top of that, the drag race oriented mags such as Hot Rod and Car Craft would often remove the air cleaner, power steering belt, advance the timing, and throw on a set of "cheater" slicks.

snakeweasel

> @graphicguy said:
> I agree. If it is doing 4 sec 60 runs, it's not street legal. I don't care how much displacement, how "lite" the body was (let's admit it, that thick gauge steel was anything but "lite", how little exhaust restrictions the car had, muscle cars of yore weren't nearly as fast as some of today's sportier cars (let alone today's up-to-date muscle cars).

In the late 70's I had a short love affair with a Mustang Boss 429 (she just cost to much on gas and insurance) and if I remember correctly that thing did 0 to 60 in just over 6 seconds. The current Mustang V6 with an engine half the size beats that.

Mr_Shiftright

At best, with all the goodies you could buy, a low 6 second car.

@graphicguy said:
I agree. If it is doing 4 sec 60 runs, it's not street legal. I don't care how much displacement, how "lite" the body was (let's admit it, that thick gauge steel was anything but "lite", how little exhaust restrictions the car had, muscle cars of yore weren't nearly as fast as some of today's sportier cars (let alone today's up-to-date muscle cars).

laurasdada

For those Costco gas buyers here, to get the best price at a Costco station, do you have to be a member? Or is the best price available for the hoi polloi?

Mr_Shiftright

Have to be a member and swipe your member card.

henryn

I can't speak for Costco (not a member), but for Sam's Club you can't buy gas until you swipe your membership card. From the above (Mr_Shiftright), it sounds like Costco is the same.

bwia

@abacomike said:
I took my Illinois Pension starting at age 62, or 3 years sooner than full retirement. I figured it out that I would break even at age 71, and then I would begin losing ground after that. I reach 71 in October of 2015. So, I've been collecting retirement benefits for quite some time and COLA increases each year, as well.

For Social Security, I took it at age 64, or 2 years earlier. The way the SSA figured out for me, I would break even at age 74.

Very good rational for starting benefits early. A restaurant owner friend of mine started taking social security benefits at 62 while he continues to work full-time.

*Snake probably can explain the tax angle better, but to me it does not seem to make sense to take a reduced social security benefit, be taxed on 85% of the amount received, and invest the net proceeds at 1/10 of 1% interest. He said, he wanted to get back every penny he contributed. Fair enough, but isn't that an overly conservative strategy? Besides, don't most people get back all of their contributions in three years?

laurasdada

Thanks, Mr. Shift and Henry! Guess I'll have to start considering a Costco membership...

graphicguy

@laurasdada said:
Thanks, Mr. Shift and Henry! Guess I'll have to start considering a Costco membership...

LD....for the savings in gas alone (and it's TOP TIER, too), it's worth the membership. Then, you can stop being "hoi poloi"

robr2

@graphicguy said:
LD....for the savings in gas alone (and it's TOP TIER, too), it's worth the membership. Then, you can stop being "hoi poloi"

But driving 20 miles to the nearest Costco sort of defeats the purpose...

wlbrown9

@bwia said:
Besides, don't most people get back all of their contributions in three years?

I looked at my Social Security stuff on-line just now. If I retire next year at 64 and start drawing, it will take about 4.5 years for me to get back MY contribution. It will take about another 4.9 years to get back my employer contribution. Those two amount to about $222,000 so far. That does not include the $26,000 ($52,000) total that I and my employers have paid on Medicare.

My first payment into SS was 1963. The chart shows Medicare started in 1966 so I did not pay into that for the first 3 years.

driver100

That 62 Impala isn't even close to being the fastest production made car 0 to 60.

See the top 10 (all under 3 seconds)

Top 10 Production model cars 1 1/2 minutes

This is what one guy said about the 64 Impala SS 409;
This car available with 2 transmission. The Muncie M20 wide ratio with 3.08 final and Muncie M21/M22 close ratio with 4.11 and 4.56 final. It also has same suspension like 2 door SS version. It's enough to hit 146 mph with wide ratio and hit 0-60 mph close to 5 sec with close ratio. However, it has heavier body than the 2 door SS so it's slower than 2 door SS in acceleration. But, even you can't run into 150 mph, but this car proven faster than Galaxie on drag strip due to lighter body.

Here is some info about the 63 SS 409 which could explain the light weight:

Chevrolet offered the 409 with solid lifters and a single four bbl carb good for 400 bhp and a solid lifter 409 with two four barrel carbs good for a whooping 425 bhp. As if that wasn't enough, Chevrolet introduced a new engine, the Z-11 in mid 1963. This was a 427 cid V8 loosely based on the existing 409 but featured a smaller bore and a longer stroke. It featured angled valves and was nicknamed the "porcupine head motor." Although it was officially rated at 430 bhp, it easily made close to 500 bhp and was an instant sucess at the drag strip. Unfortunately, it was only available to factory approved customers through Chevrolet's RPO (Regular Production Option). It was usually coupled with the optional factory fitted lightweight front end - aluminum panels and bumper.

You guys knew your stuff....4 seconds was off and there are faster cars. Maybe that was the fastest production car in 1964.

laurasdada

@robr2 said:

Actualamente, there's a Costco right around the corner from me, and they're in the process of putting in a gas station. Hmmm, wonder if they're hiring!? My fave job of my long, lost youth? Pumping gas! Favorite parts: Got a $.10 commission for every quart of oil I sold! And, regular tips from Linda Blair. Least favorite part? The regular customer whose Austin Marina I had to spoon feed gas. In February. In New England.

qbrozen

its still wrong, but to be fair and clear, the statement was "American car"

stickguy

Nearest Costco to me is also about 13 miles/20 minutes away, and not someplace I normally ever go by. So, have never joined.

rbirns1

I had friends in high school who worked at gas stations (said they were in the oil business), This was back in the day of full service. One used to get tips from rich ladies for lubing the muffler bearings and tightening the zorch, no charge.

ab348

How much is a Costco membership these days? Do they check your tank before you pull away from the pumps like they do after the checkout lines?

graphicguy

@ab348 said:
How much is a Costco membership these days? Do they check your tank before you pull away from the pumps like they do after the checkout lines?

LOL!

I've got an "exec" membership. I think it's $100 and change. But, I get some amount back each year based on how much I spent. So, I think mine pays for itself, several times overt.

Regular membership is about $50, I think....give or take?

Just got a call from my older sister. She's about 30 minutes away from my house (she's from Indy). She wants to look at a Mercedes C Class. She doesn't like the redesign of the E class (which rules out the '15 C Class as they look about the same). She didn't like the way the CLA drove (don't blame her....MB has a lot of work to do on that car's suspension).

Then, we're swinging by the BMW dealership.

Should be a fun night.....spending her money.

driver100

@qbrozen said:
its still wrong, but to be fair and clear, the statement was "American car"

You are correct, I did say fastest **U.S. production car **0 to 60. Very astout of you qb (not to mention there's always one)......just joking

So, I went back to the drawing boards and came up with a pretty good list, Top 10 U.S. fastest, 0 to 60 production cars. It is pretty interesting and I was surprised to find a Jeep on the list.
10-fastest-american-cars

driver100

@graphicguy said:Then, we're swinging by the BMW dealership.

Should be a fun night.....spending her money.

That does sound like a fun evening. One friend I meet for coffee during the week was telling me the 2015 Gennesis has about every option available. If you stand behind it for a few seconds the trunk will open. When you walk away it closes. Huge double sunroof. Beautiful 2 color leather seats with beautiful stitching. Comparable to my 535 with way more options for $20000 less. Thats over 300 hp, and the V8 with just under 500 hp is about $10K more.

Next week I am going to meet him at the Hyundai/Genesis dealer to check it out, then go for our coffee. He thinks it won't be long and they will spin Genessis away to be on it's own. Said the 2015s don't say Hyundai anymore, and they have a new wing insignia like Rolls Royce.

GG, maybe check it out tonight too!

isellhondas

I once owned a 1964 Impala SS with the 400 HP 409 and a four speed.

It was VERY fast but not THAT fast.

And, no, 409's never had a "light weight" body.

I loved the wonderful SOUNDS that came from the dual glasspacks!

explorerx4

@abacomike Sorry for the loss of your daughter. I guess she wanted you to remember her the way you remember her.
@driver100 The Genesis badge looks more like Aston Martin than Rolls Royce. I just put you on a quest to post more pictures. ‌

robr2

Further the Genesis wing badge has been an option since the Genesis was launched. Hyundai's original plan was to launch it as a distinct brand with it's own sales channel. But the economic dump made them reconsider the idea.

driver100

@driver100 The Genesis badge looks more like Aston Martin than Rolls Royce

OK, here you go:

I did say looked like a Rolls but that was wrong, should be a Bentley (it was a seniors thing),

Personally, I think the 3 look similar.

driver100

@robr2 said:
Further the Genesis wing badge has been an option since the Genesis was launched. Hyundai's original plan was to launch it as a distinct brand with it's own sales channel. But the economic dump made them reconsider the idea.

Hyundai has been a brilliant company. They started out with those garbage Pony's but they never left their customers completely high and dry. They built on their mistakes and got stronger because of them. Now they have a car comparable to the luxury leaders, with a 10 year 100K mile warranty.
They were smart to wait and launch Genesis on it's own...the time has come. The car can stand on it's own now.

Would I buy one? Probably not, I have worked too hard and I can't buy too many more new cars, I don't know if I can give up a G3 car, or possibly a Indian/British Jaguar. But, stranger things have happened.

Mr_Shiftright

2015 Mercedes C Class isn't even in the showrooms yet, so that's not a player. I think the 2015 C class is a much better value than the E class, from what I can see so far.

oldfarmer50

@driver100 said:

They all look like Chrysler's logo.

BTW, a black Jaguar F type convertible passed me yesterday. Very nice.

http://latest-car.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/jaguar-f-type-price-2-1.jpg

driver100

@oldfarmer50 said:They all look like Chrysler's logo.

I think there is a resemblance;

How come all these logos look the same........it must be a conspiracy!

jsyodes

@abacomike said:
I took my Illinois Pension starting at age 62, or 3 years sooner than full retirement. I figured it out that I would break even at age 71, and then I would begin losing ground after that. I reach 71 in October of 2015. So, I've been collecting retirement benefits for quite some time and COLA increases each year, as well.

I assume then that you have been following the pension reform battles going on up here in Illinois. The State lost the first round a couple weeks ago. Also, condolences on the loss of you daughter.

Steve

laurasdada

Costco membership around here is $55 base, $110 Exec w/2% cash back. I'd probably do base, can't imagine I'll recap the extra $55 in cash back. Looking forward to the gas station coming online, checking out the prices. Unless the 2% includes gas purchases? XF is actually doing pretty well on mpg, given it's power/weight, I've been averaging over 23mpg over the last 4500 miles, per the OBC.

bwia

@laurasdada said: Costco membership around here is $55 base, $110 Exec w/2% cash back. I'd probably do base, can't imagine I'll recap the extra $55 in cash back. Looking forward to the gas station coming online, checking out the prices. Unless the 2% includes gas purchases?

If you live in the Greater Boston area, get yourself a Stop & Shop card and nix the Costco idea.

With the Stop & Shop card (which is free) you accumulate points that can be used to buy Shell or Stop & Shop brand gas. I believe the lowest discount is 5 cents per gallon, but I typically get $1.20 off a gallon and the last time I filled up I got $2.40 off a gallon of Shell V-Power.

There is only one catch, you are limited to 35 gallons per fill-up. No worries for me as my gas tank capacity is 18.5 gallons.

driver100

@bwia said:
There is only one catch, you are limited to 35 gallons per fill-up. No worries for me as my gas tank capacity is 18.5 gallons.

I must have missed something. You get $1.20 off per gallon...so gas costs just over $2 a gallon with the card?

laurasdada

BWIA, wow, you must really Stop! And Shop! Indeed, I am in your neighborhood (Boston) and have a S&S card. But, given my situation, not a lot of points accumulating, the most I've gotten is .10/gallon off PUG. The stations I use are less expenseve or equal to S&S with the discount.

Won't make a Costco decision until I see the actual pricing. But, I wandered over to Costco last night, just to check out the store. And, had dinner! $1.50 for a big dog and unlimited fountain drink! I actually had the Turkey sandwich/soda. Might try the pizza tonight, see how it compares to Papa Ginos.

But, heading to LA tomorrow, so all my bags are packed, I'm ready to go. Leavin' on a jet plane.

bwia

@driver100 said:
I must have missed something. You get $1.20 off per gallon...so gas costs just over $2 a gallon with the card?

Yes, $1.20 and more off a gallon. Honestly, I don't know how they can justify and sustain this arrangement with Shell, but hey, I am not complaining.