Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Stalwart on April 19, 2011, 10:41:53 PM
-
I was watching the thread about the liquid driven engine cooling fan. I'm not an engine guy or even a good automotive consumer, but I still have an opinion, and I have a question for you guys that know.
Would it be possible to build a car today that doesn't require all the computer gadgetry, where you could take care of it yourself in your garage with a decent set of hand tools? If so, I want one.
-
(http://www.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/sfmoms/2009/09/10/little-tikes-cosy-coupe-ii-toy-car-1.jpg)
-
ill ponder you this...
Everyone says we have to lower emmissions of our engines. We burn more fuel trying to lower the emissions than if we just left the engines alone. Semi trucks used to get relatively good mileage, now they are lucky to get 6 miles/gallon.
My school buses have some system on them to lower emissions. But you have to burn off all the crap that is left in the exhaust system every now and then. And if you dont, then the engine shuts off. It takes 45min to run the cleaning system and if you are on the road and it stops, STBY. That happened to my driver when he got his bus. Started his route in the morning and his bus just stopped moving.
So we are so concerned about lowering emissions and getting better mileage that we have complicated the entire vehicles to the point where they are worse than before.
Now thats my non-mechanic opinion, but its based off of all the conversations i have had with my two uncles who are mechanics.
-
lol Jayhawk. :rofl Got a family varient? :aok
-
Would it be possible to build a car today that doesn't require all the computer gadgetry, where you could take care of it yourself in your garage with a decent set of hand tools? If so, I want one.
Yes and No. I'm not positive but I think thanks to CARB and other government agencies all new cars are required to conform to some sort of standards with regards to OBD, which ties in with emission controls. The other thing is I'm almost positive that some cars are intentionally a pain in the bellybutton to fix so that you spend more money at the dealership(ever looked under the hood of an Audi?).
The good news is you can still own a car that you can work on yourself at home, it will just have to come from the early 90s or previous.
-
lol Jayhawk. :rofl Got a family varient? :aok
http://www.mobilette-us.com/models/business/family1.jpg
-
I was watching the thread about the liquid driven engine cooling fan. I'm not an engine guy or even a good automotive consumer, but I still have an opinion, and I have a question for you guys that know.
Would it be possible to build a car today that doesn't require all the computer gadgetry, where you could take care of it yourself in your garage with a decent set of hand tools? If so, I want one.
I can't think of anything that you can do with a "decent set of hand tools" because each job requires a specific took. But it is perfectly possibly to work on your car in your garage, sure it will take you time to learn everything but it can be done (in the end it's fun and very rewording). I don't think there are any modern cars that are completely without computers, but I'm sure you can find something that's a "few" years old.
I do most of the work on my car myself, not a big fan of trusting mechanics. I also know that there are a good number of people on the forum who do everything themselves.
Computers can also be reprogrammed and tuned the way you like it. No need the keep the manufacturer's settings.
-
Would it be possible to build a car today that doesn't require all the computer gadgetry, where you could take care of it yourself in your garage with a decent set of hand tools? If so, I want one.
Yes.
They're called kit cars.
Like this one
(http://www.auto-power-girl.com/photo-gallery/factory-5-mk-3-roadster/factory-five-mk3-roadster-6.jpg)
If your talking about an auto company making a car without a computer, (ECU) it ain't gonna happen.
-
I was watching the thread about the liquid driven engine cooling fan. I'm not an engine guy or even a good automotive consumer, but I still have an opinion, and I have a question for you guys that know.
Would it be possible to build a car today that doesn't require all the computer gadgetry, where you could take care of it yourself in your garage with a decent set of hand tools? If so, I want one.
It would be very possible, but it wouldn't sell all that well. The general consumer does not want a car that's easy to work on. They want a car that's comfortable, reliable and is a good value. Also as technology evolves so will the car. Any car is easy to work on if you have the information, space, and understanding of how the vehicle works. Now days as with anything a strong understanding of electrical circuits is very important as many of these cars are using multiplex and CAN communications.
With that being said, cars are not made purposely difficult for repair, but in order for the consumer to get roomier cabins, better fuel econs, and more features on the inside it does seem like it. Lets face it, electronic controlled cars are more efficent than the old fashioned carburated cars.
70 BOSS Mustang
(http://image.mustangmonthly.com/f/9318255/mump_0708_01_z+1970_ford_mustang_boss_302+side.jpg)
1970 Boss 302 Mustang
Engine Type: V8
Displacement: 5000 cc
Horsepower: 290 bhp @ 5800 rpm
Torque: 290 lb-ft @ 4300 rpm
Performance 0-60 mph: 6.9 sec
0-100 mph: --.- sec
Quarter Mile: 14.6 sec @ 98 mph
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iFI3Fpb_DGY/TV-C4iKhcHI/AAAAAAAAC04/2AHrUqX_hPQ/s1600/2011%2BFord%2BMustang%2BBoss%2B302%2B2.jpg)
2012 Boss 302 Mustang
Engine Type: V8
Displacement: 302.1 cu in/4951 cc
Horsepower:444 hp @ 7500 rpm
Torque: 380lb-ft @ 4500 rpm
Performance 0-60 mph: 4.0 sec
0-100 mph: 9.2 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.3 sec @ 115.8 mph
LATERAL ACCELERATION: 0.98 g (avg)
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH: 108 ft
You have to admit, technology is nice. The Lateral accel and braking the 70 would never be able to keep up.
-
Why would you want to take care of your car with your own tools??? Just imagine all the dirt and stuff you would get on your clothes, hands and UNDER your fingernails. What if your iphone rings while you have all that filth on your hands?
Yuck.. no thanks! :frown:
-
1989 Lada 2107
4 cilinders, 75 hp, 1497 ccm
max speed: 100mph
0-60mph: 16 secs
rear wheel drive, weights 850kgs, about 1900 pounds /so much fun in the winter/
Cost: around 500-700 bucks
(http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m601/Debrody/sonstige-15781.jpg)
Anything newer? i dont think so.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ3juM6vHwg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ3juM6vHwg)
What about this... = )
-
Why would you want to take care of your car with your own tools??? Just imagine all the dirt and stuff you would get on your clothes, hands and UNDER your fingernails. What if your iphone rings while you have all that filth on your hands?
Yuck.. no thanks! :frown:
:rofl
-
Why would you want to take care of your car with your own tools??? Just imagine all the dirt and stuff you would get on your clothes, hands and UNDER your fingernails. What if your iphone rings while you have all that filth on your hands?
Yuck.. no thanks! :frown:
:rofl :aok
Mustangs are rather "simple" cars to work on IMO. most jobs on my '03 take relatively little time
-
DeBrody has it. LOL, old Ladas, all manual, not so reliable, but fun to drive and easy to fix. I had 3 of those.
I did get one to 110 mph, and would do the 70 mph on a gravel road only 500 m. long. 13 secs to the 60 mph.
But if there will be an arrival of a SIMPLE car, I'll be all ears. Even the blimming tractors are too complicated.
My guess is that the Chinese might come up with something, maybe an old design, and small enough to pass basic regulations. Or the Indians....
-
It would be very possible, but it wouldn't sell all that well. The general consumer does not want a car that's easy to work on. They want a car that's comfortable, reliable and is a good value. Also as technology evolves so will the car. Any car is easy to work on if you have the information, space, and understanding of how the vehicle works. Now days as with anything a strong understanding of electrical circuits is very important as many of these cars are using multiplex and CAN communications.
With that being said, cars are not made purposely difficult for repair, but in order for the consumer to get roomier cabins, better fuel econs, and more features on the inside it does seem like it. Lets face it, electronic controlled cars are more efficent than the old fashioned carburated cars.
70 BOSS Mustang
(http://image.mustangmonthly.com/f/9318255/mump_0708_01_z+1970_ford_mustang_boss_302+side.jpg)
1970 Boss 302 Mustang
Engine Type: V8
Displacement: 5000 cc
Horsepower: 290 bhp @ 5800 rpm
Torque: 290 lb-ft @ 4300 rpm
Performance 0-60 mph: 6.9 sec
0-100 mph: --.- sec
Quarter Mile: 14.6 sec @ 98 mph
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iFI3Fpb_DGY/TV-C4iKhcHI/AAAAAAAAC04/2AHrUqX_hPQ/s1600/2011%2BFord%2BMustang%2BBoss%2B302%2B2.jpg)
2012 Boss 302 Mustang
Engine Type: V8
Displacement: 302.1 cu in/4951 cc
Horsepower:444 hp @ 7500 rpm
Torque: 380lb-ft @ 4500 rpm
Performance 0-60 mph: 4.0 sec
0-100 mph: 9.2 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.3 sec @ 115.8 mph
LATERAL ACCELERATION: 0.98 g (avg)
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH: 108 ft
You have to admit, technology is nice. The Lateral accel and braking the 70 would never be able to keep up.
give me a 911 GT2 or 3 anyday over a Boss Stang... although a GT500 wouldnt be bad... :aok
-
http://www.factoryfive.com/
at the risk of going political.......one of the biggest problems, at least here in the us, is the epa. they are closley followed by the carb.
-
having stripped, cleaned, rebuilt, failed to balance, restripped, recleaned, rebuilt and rebalanced a twin set of webers ... sod that, I'll take EFI and a CPU anyday :aok
-
saggs and CAP1 have it right, but there is more information. California allows a certain number of cars a year to be registered that do not need to pass any type of emissions testing. These cars have to be built by the owner. The registration is first come, first serve.
Most states allow kit cars to be registered and will not require emissions testing. Some states register the Cobras as 1966 year model, while others have a special code in the registration which indicates no emission tests are required.
Many of the Cobra kit builders are dropping in the new 5.0 V-8 Ford sells as a crate motor, complete with engine management. At around 412HP, it offers a nice reliable performance package, when dropped into a 2200 pound kit car. It also gets pretty decent gas mileage when paired with a reasonable rear axle ratio (3.23:1, as an example) and a 6 speed transmission.
-
IIRC Lazs builds street legal 600 HP machines for 10k$ or so. Not that youd have to have 600 HP, but at that price it's gotta be bare bones, and should leave you 5-15k$ in custom interior comfort.
-
ill ponder you this...
Everyone says we have to lower emmissions of our engines. We burn more fuel trying to lower the emissions than if we just left the engines alone. Semi trucks used to get relatively good mileage, now they are lucky to get 6 miles/gallon.
My school buses have some system on them to lower emissions. But you have to burn off all the crap that is left in the exhaust system every now and then. And if you dont, then the engine shuts off. It takes 45min to run the cleaning system and if you are on the road and it stops, STBY. That happened to my driver when he got his bus. Started his route in the morning and his bus just stopped moving.
So we are so concerned about lowering emissions and getting better mileage that we have complicated the entire vehicles to the point where they are worse than before.
Now thats my non-mechanic opinion, but its based off of all the conversations i have had with my two uncles who are mechanics.
Uhm, cars are not worse than before. Just about everything is magnitudes of times better including engines, safety, millage etc. Making a car simple so some guy can work on it is not more important than emissions. As for emissions hurting millage why don;t you compare a decent car of today with a car of the 80s and see for yourself what gives you more horse power for less gas. I said decent so that kind of takes Detroit out of the picture muahahahaha
-
1989 Lada 2107
4 cilinders, 75 hp, 1497 ccm
max speed: 100mph
0-60mph: 16 secs
rear wheel drive, weights 850kgs, about 1900 pounds /so much fun in the winter/
Cost: around 500-700 bucks
(http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m601/Debrody/sonstige-15781.jpg)
Anything newer? i dont think so.
Even the 2107 has some electric emission control crap in the carburetor (mostly makes it stall on idle and spend more fuel). Plug off the cable and car runs better :D
-
As a sidenote anyone complaining about the complexity of modern engines should do two things:
First strip off the plastic cover of the engine - you'll see old fashion mechanics just like it used to be.
Second get yourself a portable OBD II scanner and voila you can self diagnose and fix things again with no mystique.
-
Cars are more simple today than they were in the 80s and 90s.
The huge bundle of snakes called vacuum hoses has been replaced by one or two hoses and ports with engine management doing the heavy lifting.
The old vacuum hoses were a mechanical computer anyway so replacing it with an electronic digital computer that is reprogrammable through the data link connector makes for much easier changes to the runtime algorithm.
Before you had to change spring pressures against vacuum diaphragms, weights in the distributor, jet sizes, metering rod heights and taper....etc.
Check out a toyota corolla which gets 30mpg easy no matter how you drive and the systems are unbelievably simple.......as well as being very easy to troubleshoot.........if you have access to wiring diagrams and resistence values of actuators and sensors. (all on the internet)
-
Cars are more simple today than they were in the 80s and 90s.
The huge bundle of snakes called vacuum hoses has been replaced by one or two hoses and ports with engine management doing the heavy lifting.
The old vacuum hoses were a mechanical computer anyway so replacing it with an electronic digital computer that is reprogrammable through the data link connector makes for much easier changes to the runtime algorithm.
Before you had to change spring pressures against vacuum diaphragms, weights in the distributor, jet sizes, metering rod heights and taper....etc.
Check out a toyota corolla which gets 30mpg easy no matter how you drive and the systems are unbelievably simple.......as well as being very easy to troubleshoot.........if you have access to wiring diagrams and resistence values of actuators and sensors. (all on the internet)
Yes, but don't forget that some people need DVD Re-winders because they are used to the simple times of having to re-wind a tape :rofl
-
It would be very possible, but it wouldn't sell all that well. The general consumer does not want a car that's easy to work on. They want a car that's comfortable, reliable and is a good value. Also as technology evolves so will the car. Any car is easy to work on if you have the information, space, and understanding of how the vehicle works. Now days as with anything a strong understanding of electrical circuits is very important as many of these cars are using multiplex and CAN communications.
With that being said, cars are not made purposely difficult for repair, but in order for the consumer to get roomier cabins, better fuel econs, and more features on the inside it does seem like it. Lets face it, electronic controlled cars are more efficent than the old fashioned carburated cars.
70 BOSS Mustang
(http://image.mustangmonthly.com/f/9318255/mump_0708_01_z+1970_ford_mustang_boss_302+side.jpg)
1970 Boss 302 Mustang
Engine Type: V8
Displacement: 5000 cc
Horsepower: 290 bhp @ 5800 rpm
Torque: 290 lb-ft @ 4300 rpm
Performance 0-60 mph: 6.9 sec
0-100 mph: --.- sec
Quarter Mile: 14.6 sec @ 98 mph
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iFI3Fpb_DGY/TV-C4iKhcHI/AAAAAAAAC04/2AHrUqX_hPQ/s1600/2011%2BFord%2BMustang%2BBoss%2B302%2B2.jpg)
2012 Boss 302 Mustang
Engine Type: V8
Displacement: 302.1 cu in/4951 cc
Horsepower:444 hp @ 7500 rpm
Torque: 380lb-ft @ 4500 rpm
Performance 0-60 mph: 4.0 sec
0-100 mph: 9.2 sec
Quarter Mile: 12.3 sec @ 115.8 mph
LATERAL ACCELERATION: 0.98 g (avg)
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH: 108 ft
You have to admit, technology is nice. The Lateral accel and braking the 70 would never be able to keep up.
the problem with the original boss 302 engines was that they were not street engines.........they couldn't make low end power. 69's had 2.25" intaKE VALVES. IN 70 they cut them to 2.19", but it was still too much.
-
California allows a certain number of cars a year to be registered that do not need to pass any type of emissions testing. These cars have to be built by the owner. The registration is first come, first serve.
They also allow any gasoline powered car 1975 year model or older. smog exempt
the 60 and early 70's cars are about as simple as it gets. There are still many of the old chevy trucks running around but the prices are going up.
-
I was watching the thread about the liquid driven engine cooling fan. I'm not an engine guy or even a good automotive consumer, but I still have an opinion, and I have a question for you guys that know.
Would it be possible to build a car today that doesn't require all the computer gadgetry, where you could take care of it yourself in your garage with a decent set of hand tools? If so, I want one.
It is possible to build but it probably won't pass emissions. Today's engines have the ability, through their computers, to adjust on the fly to humidity, pressure, and temperature changes. They even adjust based on your driving habits.
You would not be able to match the efficiency or power across the rpm range meaning more fuel consumption.
-
Actually, there are a few good aftermarket fuel injection systems for the do-it-yourselfer. The good ones allow you to match the fuel delivery to the engine based on exhaust oxygen content, barometric pressure, air flow, vacuum, engine temperature, exhaust temperature, and ambient air temperature.
You can map fuel to air ratios based on all the above parameters. The only thing the aftermarket ones do not do is dynamic adjustments based on the octane and ethanol content of the fuel.
It is not a cheap solution, but it works really well, once you get it all dialed in.
-
out of all of them though, the fuel tanks are sealed. no air allowed in them,. :devil
-
IN GENERAL cars are actually becoming easier to work on... at least the mechanical aspects of it all. At the same time they are becoming many times harder on the electrical side of things, and yes I agree.. they are also going crazy with the entire "overengineering" aspect.
I remember several years ago working on a Trailblazer with a Check Engine light on. It had set a code for "cooling fan overspeed" and while looking at it I saw a traditional-looking fan clutch attaching the radiator fan to the engine, and yes it was locked up. The fan sounded like a jet engine!
Anyway, I couldn't believe the price of a replacement. I found one aftermarket brand that was making them at the time and while about 40% cheaper than what GM wanted for one I let the customer make up his mind which one to have me install. The prices were (parts and labor) either $1000 or $750. He chose the $750 option.
Keep in mind, this is for a FAN CLUTCH!
The replacement was relatively simple, even though the fan shroud was a bit of a PITA, but I've dealt with much worse over the years. After I got it out while looking at the parts I realized why the price was so high. This was not a normal fan clutch.. this was an electro-viscous design that used an electric charge to change the viscosity of the fluid, thus changing the fan speed. Also one of the fan blades had a small magnet installed, and there was a sensor on the fan shroud itself to determine how fast the fan was spinning. On one hand I was thinking this was pretty smart and ingenious but then it occurred to me... why go through all of this hassle using such an expensive design when they could have just simply installed an electric fan???
And I see this sort of thing all of the time. Power windows for example no longer have simple wiring going from one switch to another and then to the motor... oh no.. there is a computer module in EACH DOOR that controls the window motor. When you press DOWN the switch tells the module you want the window to go down. The driver's module communicates with the passenger module (using protocols not much different than computer networks) so if you want the passenger window down, the drivers switch tells the drivers module you want the passenger window down and the drivers module tells the passenger module and the passenger module lowers the window.
Also cars have front and rear lighting modules, vans have sliding door (and power liftgate) modules, climate control modules... security modules... power seat modules.. restraints modules... the list goes on and on and while some of it I completely agree with, much more of it makes little sense at all. Most of it is there to accommodate "luxury" systems such as keyless entry, automatic headlights, GPS, automatic doors.. etc. and people being the SHEEPLE they are have falling victim to the huge advertising campaigns over the last decade or so and actually feel a need for a lot of this stuff. They've become addicted to it and can't imagine a life without it.
Two quick stories:
1> Older woman (looked to be in her 70's) came into a Ford dealer I used to work at just before closing with two small children in a Toyota Sienna, complaining that the DVD player quit working. As a courtesy I took a quick look and noticed the unit was turning on, but there was no picture and no sound. I explained to her that since it was a Toyota and we were a Ford dealer that there wasn't anything I could do being we didn't have any diagnostic information or wiring diagrams or anything for it. Then she got irate and demanded I start checking fuses and I told her.. no it has power so it isn't a fuse problem, and that the problem is probably in the unit itself and she'll need to visit Toyota. She then get extremely angry and started cussing me out and yelling (in front of the kids) and said "You have no <censored> idea what it is like to travel with two children with a broken <censored> DVD player!" I told her to have a nice day and simple turned around and walked away.
2> A young man (early 20's) came into my shop for an oil change with a late-model Chevy and also asked me to program it to automatically unlock the doors when it is put in PARK. It was set up to automatically lock the doors when driving but there was no way to set it to automatically unlock them once the vehicle was parked. I told him I could disable the auto-lock feature altogether but that's it. He then started getting angry because he could set his Ford up to do that, and then went on throw a huge fit in front of my other customers about how he'll never buy another GM product again because it is ABSURD for people to expect him to have to press the unlock button to get out of the vehicle!!! After that I simply pulled his car out, went inside and in front of my customers told him I didn't want his business and to take the car elsewhere for his oil change.
I have many other similar stories, but these two were the first to come to mind.
The sad truth here is that automakers don't build 'simple' cars anymore because people don't WANT simple cars anymore. They've been conditioned to believe that without Airbags, they'll die.. and that without GPS they'll get lost.. without ABS they'll crash.. and without traction control they'll get stuck in the rain... and without an automatic parallel parking system they won't be able to park on the street! It's pretty sad really and automakers have done a really good job creating a demand for these luxury options.. so much that the average price of cars has increased so much that we think $20k for a new car is now a pretty good deal!
On the up-side... I have seen it become a lot easier to actually work on the mechanical systems of cars. Tune-ups for the most part are easier requiring only the replacement of spark plugs and an occasional coil or two (except some V6 and V8 engines may require you to remove the upper intake to access the rear bank of plugs). Belts and hoses rarely require replacement anymore and suspension/brakes parts are much easier to replace. Exhaust almost never fails these days.. ever since they switched to low grade stainless in the 90's.
As far as engine management goes.. that has improved dramatically over the years. I don't feel that computers are our enemies as far as that is concerned. You can invest in a $200 scanner and diagnose about 90% of driveability issues yourself... it's those 10% that you can't that can get you into trouble!
If you want a simple, cheap car check out the Tata Nano for about $3000 brand new http://youtu.be/3sZitve3SUw (http://youtu.be/3sZitve3SUw) but I doubt it would meet US safety and emissions regulations. If they were smart, someone should come up with something under $8000 here that gets 50+ MPG in a true no-frills car. I was hoping the new Fiesta would fit that bill, but apparently not. It blows my mind that the little "smart car" still only gets 36MPG combined.
In the mean time, I'll be tooling around in my $500 Escort and my $800 Windstar...
-
Those the same doors that unlock as soon as you pull the handle to open? :confused: And what does a DVD player have to do wit complicated cars? Nice stories though :aok
-
Actually, there are a few good aftermarket fuel injection systems for the do-it-yourselfer. The good ones allow you to match the fuel delivery to the engine based on exhaust oxygen content, barometric pressure, air flow, vacuum, engine temperature, exhaust temperature, and ambient air temperature.
You can map fuel to air ratios based on all the above parameters. The only thing the aftermarket ones do not do is dynamic adjustments based on the octane and ethanol content of the fuel.
It is not a cheap solution, but it works really well, once you get it all dialed in.
Without a computer to monitor all those variables, you can only find a happy medium that will change in efficiency as weather and conditions change.
-
LATERAL ACCELERATION: 0.98 g (avg)
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH: 108 ft
You have to admit, technology is nice. The Lateral accel and braking the 70 would never be able to keep up.
I'm shocked that that Mustang, (according to specs you posted) can hold nearly 1G through the corners. :aok
That is VERY impressive for a car model that is typically not know for it's cornering. Still I'd imagine it would be pretty easy to get a little frisky on the skinny pedal and go around a corner sideways, or backwards.
-
I'm shocked that that Mustang, (according to specs you posted) can hold nearly 1G through the corners. :aok
That is VERY impressive for a car model that is typically not know for it's cornering. Still I'd imagine it would be pretty easy to get a little frisky on the skinny pedal and go around a corner sideways, or backwards.
just an FYI......THAT mustang owns the bmw m3 on the road courses. the standard gt gives the beemer a run for its money. :aok
-
Without a computer to monitor all those variables, you can only find a happy medium that will change in efficiency as weather and conditions change.
Those systems do come with a computer. There are several on the market available (FAST (http://www.fuelairspark.com/) is very popular, but not the most sophisticated). They monitor and change the variables in real-time. Most of the computer allow you to specify ranges for any change to be made.
I am not talking about a mechanical fuel injection system. These aftermarket systems are full blown computer driven systems, made for high performance engines. Even Ford sells an aftermarket system for the high performance crate engine they just released.
-
Those systems do come with a computer. There are several on the market available (FAST (http://www.fuelairspark.com/) is very popular, but not the most sophisticated). They monitor and change the variables in real-time. Most of the computer allow you to specify ranges for any change to be made.
I am not talking about a mechanical fuel injection system. These aftermarket systems are full blown computer driven systems, made for high performance engines. Even Ford sells an aftermarket system for the high performance crate engine they just released.
It was my understanding that the OP wanted to get away from complicated cars. Which I took as away from computers and such. Take the computer away and it pretty much is a simple machine again. Except for that bolt behind that whatchamacallit under the thingamajig. :D
-
Those systems do come with a computer. There are several on the market available (FAST (http://www.fuelairspark.com/) is very popular, but not the most sophisticated). They monitor and change the variables in real-time. Most of the computer allow you to specify ranges for any change to be made.
I am not talking about a mechanical fuel injection system. These aftermarket systems are full blown computer driven systems, made for high performance engines. Even Ford sells an aftermarket system for the high performance crate engine they just released.
most of the afertmarket systems i've seen are pretty dam good, and complete.
now, here's something i bet most here don't know......the ford EEC4 control system(which was years ahead of the same era gm control systems in my opinion) is a stand alone system.
it is actually VERY easy to wire that system into pretty much any old ford v-8.
-
most of the afertmarket systems i've seen are pretty dam good, and complete.
now, here's something i bet most here don't know......the ford EEC4 control system(which was years ahead of the same era gm control systems in my opinion) is a stand alone system.
it is actually VERY easy to wire that system into pretty much any old ford v-8.
Which is fine except you still just have a ford. :P
-
Which is fine except you still just have a ford. :P
but it's a COOL ford.
-
It was my understanding that the OP wanted to get away from complicated cars. Which I took as away from computers and such. Take the computer away and it pretty much is a simple machine again. Except for that bolt behind that whatchamacallit under the thingamajig. :D
Using electronics to replace the analog counterparts makes the system simpler, more reliable, and more efficient. After market systems can be fixed in your garage. The computers expose all the operations, and allow you to be really creative in tuning the system to match, not just the engine, but your driving style as well.
Nice thing about them is once they are all setup, you never have to touch them again. You cannot say that about a carburetor. Here is something else most folks forget about. The Ethanol fuel we have to live with will eat away at a carburetors viton needles. Even some of the gaskets are not safe to use for long as they will dissolve.
And if the carb has an aluminum body, you can expect the aluminum oxides to clog up the works over time, requiring a new carb to fix it. Ethanol will eat up aluminum, over time.
-
Go find yourself a late 70's early 80's Chevy, GMC, Ford, or Dodge truck with a straight frame. Nothing else matters more than that. The body can be in decent shape, those trucks are easy to do body work on. Anyway you should be able to find one that's not running for several hundred bucks. Pull the motor and transmission and buy a Crate motor with a carb instead of fuel injection. Small V8 like the 302 or 305, maybe a straight or slant 6, bolt a new transmission to it and drop the works into the truck.
For around $8000 you can buy and restore an old truck like that. It will be rock solid, simple to work on yourself, you don't have to screw with emissions, and you have a cool ride when your done that will lst for years. It's cheaper than buying a new car that will only depreciate after driving off the lot, your "old" truck fully restored will increase in value as long as you take care of it.
My old neighbor does this all the time. Buys old trucks dirt cheap, restores them himself over 5-6 months and sells them for a nice proffit but he still dirves a 74 Ford F-250 crew cab 4X4 that he's owned for 15 years as his daily driver.
-
Using electronics to replace the analog counterparts makes the system simpler, more reliable, and more efficient. After market systems can be fixed in your garage. The computers expose all the operations, and allow you to be really creative in tuning the system to match, not just the engine, but your driving style as well.
Nice thing about them is once they are all setup, you never have to touch them again. You cannot say that about a carburetor. Here is something else most folks forget about. The Ethanol fuel we have to live with will eat away at a carburetors viton needles. Even some of the gaskets are not safe to use for long as they will dissolve.
And if the carb has an aluminum body, you can expect the aluminum oxides to clog up the works over time, requiring a new carb to fix it. Ethanol will eat up aluminum, over time.
Not saying I don't agree. Just that the OP wants simple.... from what I get from his post, getting away from computers, and all the peripheral add-ons for emissions. Just an engine with a coolant system. The epitome of simplicity.
I may have read more into it than what he actually meant. That would upset me as I have a perfect record on understanding what I read on these boards up to this point. :P
-
Go find yourself a late 70's early 80's Chevy, GMC, Ford, or Dodge truck with a straight frame. Nothing else matters more than that. The body can be in decent shape, those trucks are easy to do body work on. Anyway you should be able to find one that's not running for several hundred bucks. Pull the motor and transmission and buy a Crate motor with a carb instead of fuel injection. Small V8 like the 302 or 305, maybe a straight or slant 6, bolt a new transmission to it and drop the works into the truck.
For around $8000 you can buy and restore an old truck like that. It will be rock solid, simple to work on yourself, you don't have to screw with emissions, and you have a cool ride when your done that will lst for years. It's cheaper than buying a new car that will only depreciate after driving off the lot, your "old" truck fully restored will increase in value as long as you take care of it.
My old neighbor does this all the time. Buys old trucks dirt cheap, restores them himself over 5-6 months and sells them for a nice proffit but he still dirves a 74 Ford F-250 crew cab 4X4 that he's owned for 15 years as his daily driver.
And don't forget the big tars :D
-
Those systems do come with a computer. There are several on the market available (FAST (http://www.fuelairspark.com/) is very popular, but not the most sophisticated). They monitor and change the variables in real-time. Most of the computer allow you to specify ranges for any change to be made.
I am not talking about a mechanical fuel injection system. These aftermarket systems are full blown computer driven systems, made for high performance engines. Even Ford sells an aftermarket system for the high performance crate engine they just released.
Check out this Tuning setup. http://www.dynamicefi.com/ Ive been running it on mt 383 stroker and boy you could get a GREAT TUNE . Mines in a 1988 Suburban. 22 MPG Highway ans 15 - 16 City. 350 HP . Ive surprised many Newer trucks with the performance.
(http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj212/skerlock/DSCN0112.jpg)
(http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj212/skerlock/DSCN0109.jpg)
(http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj212/skerlock/DSCN0231.jpg)
-
Check out this Tuning setup. http://www.dynamicefi.com/ Ive been running it on mt 383 stroker and boy you could get a GREAT TUNE . Mines in a 1988 Suburban. 22 MPH Highway ans 15 - 16 City. 350 HP . Ive surprised many Newer trucks with the performance.
That 22MPH would surprise any one :neener:
-
Check out this Tuning setup. http://www.dynamicefi.com/ Ive been running it on mt 383 stroker and boy you could get a GREAT TUNE . Mines in a 1988 Suburban. 22 MPH Highway ans 15 - 16 City. 350 HP . Ive surprised many Newer trucks with the performance.
(http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj212/skerlock/DSCN0231.jpg)
The new Duramax Diesels are 397 hp and 765 tq :D
-
I feel the chrysler and GM ecus to be the most advanced ECUs but they are hampered by inferior components or assembly methods.
I can pull a pretty detailed datalist on my carbured 80s GM station wagon.
-
That 22MPH would surprise any one :neener:
LOL MPG
-
I feel the chrysler and GM ecus to be the most advanced ECUs but they are hampered by inferior components or assembly methods.
I can pull a pretty detailed datalist on my carbured 80s GM station wagon.
being able to pull datastream doesn't make a more advanced system. it helps create a PHD system more than anything.
-
I feel the chrysler and GM ecus to be the most advanced ECUs but they are hampered by inferior components or assembly methods.
I can pull a pretty detailed datalist on my carbured 80s GM station wagon.
Once the TBI came about Domestic engine life jumped up considerably due to better fuel mixtures. 14.7:1 a 128 BLM is the target. Something a Carb cant compensate for Like temp, weather, humidity, Barometric pressure, etc.
-
LOL MPG
hehe
-
being able to pull datastream doesn't make a more advanced system. it helps create a PHD system more than anything.
As general manager of Blue Streak's ECU testing and rebuilding facility, I repaired and tested all makes ECU's and spent plenty of time on EEC IV ecus as well as writing test routines for our car simulators.
If you ever bought or sent in an ECU for testing at Autozone, Bennet, BWP, Standard, Pep Boys and most every other auto parts dealer that wasn't an A1 cardone unit, then it's about 75% likely that my facility rebuilt/tested that ecu.
If there were difficulties that more attention with a customer's ecu, then there is a 100% probability that I personally tested that ecu and either affected repairs myself or instructed one of our technicians on what proceedure to follow in order to best satisfy the customer.
I stand by my comments on GM and chrysler ecus being the most advanced though toyota and nissan are getting close to surpassing them as well as having superior build quality.
-
As general manager of Blue Streak's ECU testing and rebuilding facility, I repaired and tested all makes ECU's and spent plenty of time on EEC IV ecus as well as writing test routines for our car simulators.
If you ever bought or sent in an ECU for testing at Autozone, Bennet, BWP, Standard, Pep Boys and most every other auto parts dealer that wasn't an A1 cardone unit, then it's about 75% likely that my facility rebuilt/tested that ecu.
If there were difficulties that more attention with a customer's ecu, then there is a 100% probability that I personally tested that ecu and either affected repairs myself or instructed one of our technicians on what proceedure to follow in order to best satisfy the customer.
I stand by my comments on GM and chrysler ecus being the most advanced though toyota and nissan are getting close to surpassing them as well as having superior build quality.
NOW THE funny thing about that.......autozone, pep boys, etc.....they are the absolute worst to deal with for computers.
i've replaced more chrysler computers(friggin LOVE the " this computer is specific to this model/year bs from the chrysler dealers) and gm computers than anything.
i really loved the old replacing the chip.....dam....what the hell was it called again?....the chip on the gm computers, because it had been updated.
yet the ford computers have(at least since eec4) been able to "learn", whereas the gm computers only had what was on that chip.
THAT'S IT!! the PROM!!!
what a friggin POS setup.
do you not think there was a reason that they started using "piggyback" controllers on the fords way back in the 80's? or why you needed a reprogrammed ecu with that 70mm MAF, and 36# injectors? it was/is because if you did those with the stock ecu, it would learn, and readjust to what it was supposed to in the first place.
now.....i admit you may know a lot more than me about some of these systems.......but i speak from 27 or so years of diagnosing these things. and to be honest, i actually liked doing the fords, because they were a challenge. i actually had to think to figure them out.
look at how the obd2 systems work. they work just like a ford computer, 'cept they have datastream and standardized connectors now. and THAT messes up a lot of folks, who see 3 or 5 codes, and lose their minds looking for them.....because they don't think to figure out which code caused the other 4.
in my time working on these things, i've lost to one car. it was a tempo, and i missed a bad ground(the orange wire). to this day, that is the only car i've ever lost to. :aok
oh yea........i always either buy my ecu's from the dealer(i've know idea who makes em for the different manufacturers though) or through napa, who uses cardone(or at least they used to.)
one more "oh yea"
i didn't lose to that car either.....i learned from it, so technically speaking, it wasn't a loss.
people that i used to ask for help way back then now call me when they need/want help. :aok
-
NOW THE funny thing about that.......autozone, pep boys, etc.....they are the absolute worst to deal with for computers.
i've replaced more chrysler computers(friggin LOVE the " this computer is specific to this model/year bs from the chrysler dealers) and gm computers than anything.
i really loved the old replacing the chip.....dam....what the hell was it called again?....the chip on the gm computers, because it had been updated.
yet the ford computers have(at least since eec4) been able to "learn", whereas the gm computers only had what was on that chip.
THAT'S IT!! the PROM!!!
what a friggin POS setup.
do you not think there was a reason that they started using "piggyback" controllers on the fords way back in the 80's? or why you needed a reprogrammed ecu with that 70mm MAF, and 36# injectors? it was/is because if you did those with the stock ecu, it would learn, and readjust to what it was supposed to in the first place.
now.....i admit you may know a lot more than me about some of these systems.......but i speak from 27 or so years of diagnosing these things. and to be honest, i actually liked doing the fords, because they were a challenge. i actually had to think to figure them out.
look at how the obd2 systems work. they work just like a ford computer, 'cept they have datastream and standardized connectors now. and THAT messes up a lot of folks, who see 3 or 5 codes, and lose their minds looking for them.....because they don't think to figure out which code caused the other 4.
in my time working on these things, i've lost to one car. it was a tempo, and i missed a bad ground(the orange wire). to this day, that is the only car i've ever lost to. :aok
oh yea........i always either buy my ecu's from the dealer(i've know idea who makes em for the different manufacturers though) or through napa, who uses cardone(or at least they used to.)
one more "oh yea"
i didn't lose to that car either.....i learned from it, so technically speaking, it wasn't a loss.
people that i used to ask for help way back then now call me when they need/want help. :aok
None of the manufacturers rebuild thier own ecus they're all done by A1 cardone or blue streak.....maybe one more reman. company.
GM computers haven't had the prom since the mid 90s.............the same year that ford traded in the prom for flash memory.
Chrysler did so way earlier.
GM ecus are more diverse with the exact same hardware being able to run a V8 or a V6 and only the flash determined application........again this happened while ford was still using application specific ecus.
I had six thousand ford ecus at my disposal and millions of dollars worth or equipment that we used to test every single bit of functionality of an ecu.
EECIV was not a miracle ecu and EECV is far and away better.
If you want to discuss modifications, sure, ford had a connector on the back but the same type of interfacing was available on most other ecus....it just wasn't conveniently located on the rear.
I'm not trying to argue....I'm stating what I have learned of the state of engine management from the late 70s to current hardware.
-
After working with Honda R&D Americas for 9 years...I'd go out on a limb and say that Honda ECUs (For a passenger car to passenger car comparsion) may be some of the most advanced. Its nice to see the American mfg finally catch on to the benefits of vct...
As far as stand alone units...I prefer F.A.S.T. Very easy to use, nice interface.
http://www.fuelairspark.com
-
Modified stock ecus are always a good bet up to a certain performance/functionality but you will spend a ton of money having someone wire up a stand-alone setup.
Once you start going with boost by gear or nitrous by gear, you have to go aftermarket
We've had good luck with Motec, Big Stuff3 (former developer of Accel's "DFI and "F.A.S.T."), and megasquirt.
-
I don't know, it may be my age, but plugging a computer into the eec Tweecer in my 95 gt is a heck of a lot more simple than trying to tune a carb. I never even figured out how to tune the carb on my friggen dirt bike. :D
-
And I see this sort of thing all of the time. Power windows for example no longer have simple wiring going from one switch to another and then to the motor... oh no.. there is a computer module in EACH DOOR that controls the window motor. When you press DOWN the switch tells the module you want the window to go down. The driver's module communicates with the passenger module (using protocols not much different than computer networks) so if you want the passenger window down, the drivers switch tells the drivers module you want the passenger window down and the drivers module tells the passenger module and the passenger module lowers the window.
This is exactly the crap I'm dealing with in my minivan. I've got a broken something that makes my driver side window stay up, and my passenger side window stay down. I replaced the switches, and holy hell they're complicated bastards. I guess they over engineer them like that so they can justify the outrageous prices I paid for them. Anyways, after I installed the new switches it only fixed the passenger side.
Crap like this makes me long for a crank handle windows.
-
Go find yourself a late 70's early 80's Chevy, GMC, Ford, or Dodge truck with a straight frame. Nothing else matters more than that. The body can be in decent shape, those trucks are easy to do body work on. Anyway you should be able to find one that's not running for several hundred bucks. Pull the motor and transmission and buy a Crate motor with a carb instead of fuel injection. Small V8 like the 302 or 305, maybe a straight or slant 6, bolt a new transmission to it and drop the works into the truck.
For around $8000 you can buy and restore an old truck like that. It will be rock solid, simple to work on yourself, you don't have to screw with emissions, and you have a cool ride when your done that will lst for years. It's cheaper than buying a new car that will only depreciate after driving off the lot, your "old" truck fully restored will increase in value as long as you take care of it.
My old neighbor does this all the time. Buys old trucks dirt cheap, restores them himself over 5-6 months and sells them for a nice proffit but he still dirves a 74 Ford F-250 crew cab 4X4 that he's owned for 15 years as his daily driver.
I'm not a rich guy with dough for a kit car or muscle car.
This idea, I like.
-
None of the manufacturers rebuild thier own ecus they're all done by A1 cardone or blue streak.....maybe one more reman. company.
GM computers haven't had the prom since the mid 90s.............the same year that ford traded in the prom for flash memory.exactly as i said. mid 90's= 1996, the year that OBD2 was required. ford was running the EEC4 system since 1983 or 1984. no PROM on the EEC4, and if i recall, none onn the EEC3 either in all my years, i haven't replaced a ford computer since 1993.
Chrysler did so way earlier.i've replaced at least 3 chrysler computers in the last 4 years.
GM ecus are more diverse with the exact same hardware being able to run a V8 or a V6 and only the flash determined application........again this happened while ford was still using application specific ecus.until OBD2, gm computers were using PROMS. i gotta admit though, i never tried swapping a 2.8 computer into a 5.0 car, although i've done that with fords. if i suspected a computer as the cause(on a ford) for the car to not start, i'd go grab another computer, and plug it in. i tested this after someone told me any EEC4 computer would run any EEC4 car. they were right. i could use a computer out of a 2.3 tempo to start a 5.0 crown vic. granted it only ran on 4 cylinders, but it ran.
so i started making that part of my testing.
I had six thousand ford ecus at my disposal and millions of dollars worth or equipment that we used to test every single bit of functionality of an ecu.
EECIV was not a miracle ecu and EECV is far and away better.i never said EEC4 was a miracle system. i said it was a stand alone that can easily be fitted into an older ford....and it was years ahead of gm and chrysler.
if i recall, one of the biggest changes in EEC5 is/was the ignition system control. it allowed the ecu to control spark timing, duration,and intensity individually per cylinder, and in real time. this gave ford nearly 30% increase in power, as well as fuel mileage. it was also in 1994, BEFORE OBD2. and yes, although it is very similar to the EEC4, it is a LOT better of a system.
If you want to discuss modifications, sure, ford had a connector on the back but the same type of interfacing was available on most other ecus....it just wasn't conveniently located on the rear.the service port(your connector on the back) is not what i was referencing.
since it was known that ford computers would "learn, and adjust things to bring readings into the realm of what they "wanted" to see, several aftermarket companies, along with ford motorsports developed a "piggyback" system. you disconnected the 104 pin connector, and placed the connector for this programmer in its place, then plugged the 104 pin connector in to that.
now you have full control of the fuel timing maps, spark timing maps, etc. the early systems like the ones accel made were basic. the ford PMS(yes, they really did call it that) was pretty dam complete.
one thing i don't know, as i've never looked into it.....is if the EEC5 is a stand alone system like the EEC4 was. it would be very interesting, and could be very fun if it was.
I'm not trying to argue....I'm stating what I have learned of the state of engine management from the late 70s to current hardware.
nor am i trying to argue. it's actually a pretty fun discussion. i state what i do, from so dam many years of diagnosing and repairing these dam things. i really don't like chryslers computer systems...and don't forget....i drive a jeep, and a dakota right now....but my least favorite thing is their use of the pcm and bcm to control the charging system. bad idea in my opinion. i don't see nearly as many problems as i used to with that, but it used to be horribly common.
a local alternator rebuilder used to install voltage regulators into those alternators, so we could avoid the expense(for the customer) of replacing the computer when absolutely nothing else was wrong.
other than that, i think i've replaced nearly as many chrysler computers(including one on a 93 jeep wrangler last summer) as i have gm computers.
to be honest, i know nothing about the actual control systems from the 70s. i can easily diagnose and repair them though, as they're stupidly simple compared to what we work on every day.
80's up i know, and i know very well. i've taken very few "classes" though. my classrooms have always been my work bay, and a 12" thick book. my first diagnosis(it was that tempo i mentioned in the last post), the shop owner told me to push it in, told me where the mitchells manuals(dam i miss actual books) were, and said if ineeded help, to go get mike(he taught me 2/3 of what i know. now he asks me for advice. :devil we were slow.....they let me go at that car for 2 days.
that's how i've always learned.....by doing. the only drawback to that, is that sometimes i may have to look further for the technical reasons of a failure. but i do know what i find bad, and i never replace a part without being 100% sure of myself.
-
I don't know, it may be my age, but plugging a computer into the eec Tweecer in my 95 gt is a heck of a lot more simple than trying to tune a carb. I never even figured out how to tune the carb on my friggen dirt bike. :D
i had at one point become VERY good at tuning holley carbs.
that being said......i will never EVER build a street performance car with a carb again.
-
This is exactly the crap I'm dealing with in my minivan. I've got a broken something that makes my driver side window stay up, and my passenger side window stay down. I replaced the switches, and holy hell they're complicated bastards. I guess they over engineer them like that so they can justify the outrageous prices I paid for them. Anyways, after I installed the new switches it only fixed the passenger side.
Crap like this makes me long for a crank handle windows.
what kind of minivan? year/make/model? what exactly is the window doing that it shouldn't, or isn't it doing that it should>?
-
Check out the Dacia brand, I don't know if it's being sold in the US tho. Modern yet simple (carburator) and cheap cars.
-
Check out the Dacia brand, I don't know if it's being sold in the US tho. Modern yet simple (carburator) and cheap cars.
carbs are only good on race cars. anything on the street.....modern that is.......fi is the way to go. period.
-
IN GENERAL cars are actually becoming easier to work on... at least the mechanical aspects of it all. At the same time they are becoming many times harder on the electrical side of things, and yes I agree.. they are also going crazy with the entire "overengineering" aspect.
I remember several years ago working on a Trailblazer with a Check Engine light on. It had set a code for "cooling fan overspeed" and while looking at it I saw a traditional-looking fan clutch attaching the radiator fan to the engine, and yes it was locked up. The fan sounded like a jet engine!
Anyway, I couldn't believe the price of a replacement. I found one aftermarket brand that was making them at the time and while about 40% cheaper than what GM wanted for one I let the customer make up his mind which one to have me install. The prices were (parts and labor) either $1000 or $750. He chose the $750 option.if i recall, there's also an electrical connector on that clutch. i just had a customer traded in his trailblazer because he wasn't going to spend that kind of money on the fan clutch.
Keep in mind, this is for a FAN CLUTCH!
The replacement was relatively simple, even though the fan shroud was a bit of a PITA, but I've dealt with much worse over the years. After I got it out while looking at the parts I realized why the price was so high. This was not a normal fan clutch.. this was an electro-viscous design that used an electric charge to change the viscosity of the fluid, thus changing the fan speed. Also one of the fan blades had a small magnet installed, and there was a sensor on the fan shroud itself to determine how fast the fan was spinning. On one hand I was thinking this was pretty smart and ingenious but then it occurred to me... why go through all of this hassle using such an expensive design when they could have just simply installed an electric fan???
And I see this sort of thing all of the time. Power windows for example no longer have simple wiring going from one switch to another and then to the motor... oh no.. there is a computer module in EACH DOOR that controls the window motor. When you press DOWN the switch tells the module you want the window to go down. The driver's module communicates with the passenger module (using protocols not much different than computer networks) so if you want the passenger window down, the drivers switch tells the drivers module you want the passenger window down and the drivers module tells the passenger module and the passenger module lowers the window.
Also cars have front and rear lighting modules, vans have sliding door (and power liftgate) modules, climate control modules... security modules... power seat modules.. restraints modules... the list goes on and on and while some of it I completely agree with, much more of it makes little sense at all. Most of it is there to accommodate "luxury" systems such as keyless entry, automatic headlights, GPS, automatic doors.. etc. and people being the SHEEPLE they are have falling victim to the huge advertising campaigns over the last decade or so and actually feel a need for a lot of this stuff. They've become addicted to it and can't imagine a life without it.
Two quick stories:
1> Older woman (looked to be in her 70's) came into a Ford dealer I used to work at just before closing with two small children in a Toyota Sienna, complaining that the DVD player quit working. As a courtesy I took a quick look and noticed the unit was turning on, but there was no picture and no sound. I explained to her that since it was a Toyota and we were a Ford dealer that there wasn't anything I could do being we didn't have any diagnostic information or wiring diagrams or anything for it. Then she got irate and demanded I start checking fuses and I told her.. no it has power so it isn't a fuse problem, and that the problem is probably in the unit itself and she'll need to visit Toyota. She then get extremely angry and started cussing me out and yelling (in front of the kids) and said "You have no <censored> idea what it is like to travel with two children with a broken <censored> DVD player!" I told her to have a nice day and simple turned around and walked away.
2> A young man (early 20's) came into my shop for an oil change with a late-model Chevy and also asked me to program it to automatically unlock the doors when it is put in PARK. It was set up to automatically lock the doors when driving but there was no way to set it to automatically unlock them once the vehicle was parked. I told him I could disable the auto-lock feature altogether but that's it. He then started getting angry because he could set his Ford up to do that, and then went on throw a huge fit in front of my other customers about how he'll never buy another GM product again because it is ABSURD for people to expect him to have to press the unlock button to get out of the vehicle!!! After that I simply pulled his car out, went inside and in front of my customers told him I didn't want his business and to take the car elsewhere for his oil change.
I have many other similar stories, but these two were the first to come to mind.
The sad truth here is that automakers don't build 'simple' cars anymore because people don't WANT simple cars anymore. They've been conditioned to believe that without Airbags, they'll die.. and that without GPS they'll get lost.. without ABS they'll crash.. and without traction control they'll get stuck in the rain... and without an automatic parallel parking system they won't be able to park on the street! It's pretty sad really and automakers have done a really good job creating a demand for these luxury options.. so much that the average price of cars has increased so much that we think $20k for a new car is now a pretty good deal!
On the up-side... I have seen it become a lot easier to actually work on the mechanical systems of cars. Tune-ups for the most part are easier requiring only the replacement of spark plugs and an occasional coil or two (except some V6 and V8 engines may require you to remove the upper intake to access the rear bank of plugs). Belts and hoses rarely require replacement anymore and suspension/brakes parts are much easier to replace. Exhaust almost never fails these days.. ever since they switched to low grade stainless in the 90's.youi really think changing plugs is easier? taking the intake off makes it easier? :devil
As far as engine management goes.. that has improved dramatically over the years. I don't feel that computers are our enemies as far as that is concerned. You can invest in a $200 scanner and diagnose about 90% of driveability issues yourself... it's those 10% that you can't that can get you into trouble!
If you want a simple, cheap car check out the Tata Nano for about $3000 brand new http://youtu.be/3sZitve3SUw (http://youtu.be/3sZitve3SUw) but I doubt it would meet US safety and emissions regulations. If they were smart, someone should come up with something under $8000 here that gets 50+ MPG in a true no-frills car. I was hoping the new Fiesta would fit that bill, but apparently not. It blows my mind that the little "smart car" still only gets 36MPG combined.
In the mean time, I'll be tooling around in my $500 Escort and my $800 Windstar...
-
Go find yourself a late 70's early 80's Chevy, GMC, Ford, or Dodge truck with a straight frame. Nothing else matters more than that. The body can be in decent shape, those trucks are easy to do body work on. Anyway you should be able to find one that's not running for several hundred bucks. Pull the motor and transmission and buy a Crate motor with a carb instead of fuel injection. Small V8 like the 302 or 305, maybe a straight or slant 6, bolt a new transmission to it and drop the works into the truck.
For around $8000 you can buy and restore an old truck like that. It will be rock solid, simple to work on yourself, you don't have to screw with emissions, and you have a cool ride when your done that will lst for years. It's cheaper than buying a new car that will only depreciate after driving off the lot, your "old" truck fully restored will increase in value as long as you take care of it.
My old neighbor does this all the time. Buys old trucks dirt cheap, restores them himself over 5-6 months and sells them for a nice proffit but he still dirves a 74 Ford F-250 crew cab 4X4 that he's owned for 15 years as his daily driver.
if ya wanna do something like this, go to the 60's, to early 70's.
mid/late 70's to the early 80's are the absolute worst american cars/trucks ever built.
-
Modified stock ecus are always a good bet up to a certain performance/functionality but you will spend a ton of money having someone wire up a stand-alone setup.
Once you start going with boost by gear or nitrous by gear, you have to go aftermarket
We've had good luck with Motec, Big Stuff3 (former developer of Accel's "DFI and "F.A.S.T."), and megasquirt.
Ice.... we Camaro folks would like to crack the dang chip on the V6s. They have yet to be able to tune a 2010/2011 V6 Camaro. ARD, Hennessey, both sponsors of our club, and many others are working on it.
-
Ice.... we Camaro folks would like to crack the dang chip on the V6s. They have yet to be able to tune a 2010/2011 V6 Camaro. ARD, Hennessey, both sponsors of our club, and many others are working on it.
'cause that's the only way they're gonna keep up with the v-6 mustangs. :devil :neener:
-
if ya wanna do something like this, go to the 60's, to early 70's.
mid/late 70's to the early 80's are the absolute worst american cars/trucks ever built.
Oh I don't know about that. Had an 82 GMC Suburban with the Heavy Half option that was an absolute tank. Rock solid, simple to work on, was actually pretty good on gas for such a heavy truck and being 4X4. What's nice with those year trucks is that so many parts are interchangeable between models. If I needed a part I'd normally go to a junk yard and pull them. If they had a vehicle (van, blazer, suburban, or pickup) based on a Chevy or GMC truck frame, the parts were all interchangeable. Ford and Dodge gets a little harder to find some parts for late 70's early 80's trucks. Now I'll admit that the body styles for the 60's to early 70's trucks look better, but finding parts can be a problem and they tend to be more expensive. The biggest problem trucks from that time frame have is rust. Mechanically they were pretty solid but the body panels would rust like no tomorrow and the plastic trim pieces would crack if you looked at them wrong. Restoring one today with new aftermarket body panels and trim pieces, new manufactured crate motor and tranny, apply new paint and underbody coating, the thing will last for another 30-40 years.
-
'cause that's the only way they're gonna keep up with the v-6 mustangs. :devil :neener:
lol well the 2010 and 2011 camaro have more hp (312). The new one for 45th anniversary is rated 323hp. :p hehe
-
lol well the 2010 and 2011 camaro have more hp (312). The new one for 45th anniversary is rated 323hp. :p hehe
i somehow don't suspect ford'll have any problems topping that. they always have, and always will. :aok
-
We got 80hp more than vinciperformance did out of the crane cams street shark the other day.
(http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/180415_490848001967_171544071967_6550127_7161341_n.jpg)
-
We got 80hp more than vinciperformance did out of the crane cams street shark the other day.
(http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/180415_490848001967_171544071967_6550127_7161341_n.jpg)
i used crane once. only once. didn't like it.