Daimler-Chrysler Divorce Negotiations Underway

From : comments4u

Q: daimler-chrysler divorce negotiations underway it seems the humorous but ultimately ineffective doctor z advertising campaign was the last effort by german management to make something of their acquisition of chrysler. negotiations are currently underway with at least four private equity companies for sale of the chrysler unit. http//.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070223/bsnm/daimlerchryslerprivateequitydc recently the economist observed very little integration had occurred between mercedes and chrysler. this of course will make the divorce easier but may also have contributed to the failure of the marriage. still it should be easy to unravel the assets. the germans mostly treated chrysler as a captive parts customer most evident in the move to rear drive with the current chrysler 300 and dodge charger which use rear suspensions and transmissions from previous mercedes rear drive applications. but while that was good for jobs in germany the decision took chrysler out of the mainstream market for large front drive cars. the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. yet most of the 300s and chargers come with 2.7s and 3.5s which although large in the germans experience are in the us only premium mid sized engines. lack of front wheel drive has probably depressed chrysler and dodge sales in states with significant snowfall. this likelyhood should have been evident in advance to the germans. in places like minnesota and new hampshire a subaru outback shares the garage space with the tri-star bejeweled motor car. the subaru is used to arrive places. the mercedes is used in good weather to demonstrate the owner has arrived. but it wasnt just keeping chrysler at arms length concerning product development that caused this marriage to fail. while the germans were right to move chrysler and dodge upmarket they failed to realize that volume comes from lower priced cars - despite the in house example provided by the c class - and that volume is necessary. and so discontinuing plymouth was a huge error tacitly acknowledged by their refusal to sell the neon as a chrysler and by eventually eliminating it from the dodge line. the real answer was to badge the pt cruiser as a plymouth according to the original plan keep the neon sell the four cylinder sebring/stratus as plymouths assign the short wheelbase vans to plymouth and sell plymouths at both chrysler and dodge dealers. yet this obvious solution to multiple problems was ignored. while the germans may hope to obtain a decent price for chrysler their bargaining position appears weak because their own good reputation will work against them. both the recent doctor z ad campaign and the previous short lived campaign claiming wwii german rocket scientists were responsible for the early successes of the us space program true enough but not known or accepted by most americans displayed an attitude of nationality based management and engineering superiority. those potential buyers who believe it will be hesitant to step in where the germans with their celebrated skills failed. those who believe it is a myth will use the german reputation for skill to overstate the difficulty and risks of the situation and reduce their offers for the chrysler unit. the auto industrys most peculiar marriage they didnt even live in the same house is nearly over. and for that both owner groups have plenty to cheer about. .

Replies:

From : miles

stormin mormon wrote its my understanding that the lds has no paid clergy. we do however have paid custodians. thats not the issue. the lds owns numerous corporations as a major part of its funding source. do the very wealthy lds leaders get their money mostly form non-lds operated methods .

From : 223rem

gordon hudson wrote i got a lincoln towncar that says different. now that is a good american car. i hope youre joking. .

From : some o

ted mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com wrote thats the car. i used to own a 1981 dat 210 rwd. excellent car in the snow using all weather tires. its all in the suspension and weight distribution. those older cars didnt have good suspensions. ted i had one too. good car but with snow tires not even close to my fwd cars with all season tires for snow travel. .

From : who

nate nagel njnagel@roosters.net wrote you only do 180s under braking if the rears lock first. youve got to be kidding! .

From : miles

brent p wrote the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. not true at all. fwd cars with strong engines often suffer from torque steer. ill take fwd in a small car for snow over rwd. .

From : eeyore

miles wrote one of the problems is the more stringent emission and mpg standards in the usa. more stringent mpg standards you have to be joking ! graham .

From : fred w

comments4u comments4u@nospam.mindspring.com.invalid wrote in message ... the mercedes is used ... to demonstrate the owner has arrived. ... dori a schmetterling wrote whereas a bmw shows that the owner is still trying to get there... anyone that believes they have arrived probably didnt know where they were going to begin with... -- -fred w .

From : brent p

the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. lack of front wheel drive has probably depressed chrysler and dodge sales in states with significant snowfall. actually id point to the ugly front ends they keep putting on cars especially that fugly truck one more that people affraid of rwd in the snow. .

From : eeyore

miles wrote brent p wrote comments4u wrote the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. not true at all. fwd cars with strong engines often suffer from torque steer. ill take fwd in a small car for snow over rwd. it was indeed driving in snow in a fwd car that totally won me over to the idea. graham .

From : brent p

brent p wrote the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. not true at all. very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. these apply if you have a wimpy 4 cylinder or a monster v8. fwd cars with strong engines often suffer from torque steer. my experience with powerful fwd cars was a car known for its torque steer. but i had to stomp on it pretty hard for that to happen. i understand in the last 18 years thats been sorted out for the most part for normal street driving. ill take fwd in a small car for snow over rwd. ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. .

From : gordon hudson

yet most of the 300s and chargers come with 2.7s and 3.5s which although large in the germans experience are in the us only premium mid sized engines. yes but american car manufacturers extract much lower bhps from their engines. therefore you should not compare european engines with american ones using the cylinder capacity. for example my mercedes 3.5l v6 puts out 285 bhp and thats without any turbo or supercharger. equivalent to 81 bhp per litre. the ford taurus 3l v6 i drive in the usa how i hate that car is only 152 bhp. equivalent to 50 bhp per litre. therefore what you consider a medium sized engine in a mercedes is generally putting out as much power as a large engine in most american manufactured cars. .

From : ed h

doctor z is in reality the chairman of daimler-chrysler. dc commercials never exploited that little known fact making him look a lot like joe isuzu. daimler-chrysler divorce negotiations underway it seems the humorous but ultimately ineffective doctor z advertising campaign was the last effort by german management to make something of their acquisition of chrysler. negotiations are currently underway with at least four private equity companies for sale of the chrysler unit. http//.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070223/bsnm/daimlerchryslerprivateequitydc recently the economist observed very little integration had occurred between mercedes and chrysler. this of course will make the divorce easier but may also have contributed to the failure of the marriage. still it should be easy to unravel the assets. the germans mostly treated chrysler as a captive parts customer most evident in the move to rear drive with the current chrysler 300 and dodge charger which use rear suspensions and transmissions from previous mercedes rear drive applications. but while that was good for jobs in germany the decision took chrysler out of the mainstream market for large front drive cars. the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. yet most of the 300s and chargers come with 2.7s and 3.5s which although large in the germans experience are in the us only premium mid sized engines. lack of front wheel drive has probably depressed chrysler and dodge sales in states with significant snowfall. this likelyhood should have been evident in advance to the germans. in places like minnesota and new hampshire a subaru outback shares the garage space with the tri-star bejeweled motor car. the subaru is used to arrive places. the mercedes is used in good weather to demonstrate the owner has arrived. but it wasnt just keeping chrysler at arms length concerning product development that caused this marriage to fail. while the germans were right to move chrysler and dodge upmarket they failed to realize that volume comes from lower priced cars - despite the in house example provided by the c class - and that volume is necessary. and so discontinuing plymouth was a huge error tacitly acknowledged by their refusal to sell the neon as a chrysler and by eventually eliminating it from the dodge line. the real answer was to badge the pt cruiser as a plymouth according to the original plan keep the neon sell the four cylinder sebring/stratus as plymouths assign the short wheelbase vans to plymouth and sell plymouths at both chrysler and dodge dealers. yet this obvious solution to multiple problems was ignored. while the germans may hope to obtain a decent price for chrysler their bargaining position appears weak because their own good reputation will work against them. both the recent doctor z ad campaign and the previous short lived campaign claiming wwii german rocket scientists were responsible for the early successes of the us space program true enough but not known or accepted by most americans displayed an attitude of nationality based management and engineering superiority. those potential buyers who believe it will be hesitant to step in where the germans with their celebrated skills failed. those who believe it is a myth will use the german reputation for skill to overstate the difficulty and risks of the situation and reduce their offers for the chrysler unit. the auto industrys most peculiar marriage they didnt even live in the same house is nearly over. and for that both owner groups have plenty to cheer about. .

From : art

brent p wrote wrote the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. not true at all. very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. these apply if you have a wimpy 4 cylinder or a monster v8. fwd cars with strong engines often suffer from torque steer. my experience with powerful fwd cars was a car known for its torque steer. but i had to stomp on it pretty hard for that to happen. i understand in the last 18 years thats been sorted out for the most part for normal street driving. ill take fwd in a small car for snow over rwd. ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. having lived many years in rochester ny and driving first a 1971 dart swinger and later a 78 malibu rear wheel drive was just about useless on snow even with 4 snow tires compared to front wheel drive. although we live in nc now we happened to have a 20 inch snow storm a few years ago when i had a 94 lhs. virtually no snow plows and the temperature was below freezing for a week. we stayed in the house for several days but eventually needed to go food shopping the snow came without warning. the streets were all snow except for some ruts from 4wd vehicles. especially true in the cul d sac where we lived. fwd lhs had absolutely no problems. in fact it was fun to drive it in the snow. tires were just all weather tires. .

From : brent p

ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. having lived many years in rochester ny and driving first a 1971 dart swinger and later a 78 malibu rear wheel drive was just about useless on snow even with 4 snow tires compared to front wheel drive. 1971 snow tires are not proper tires. although we live in nc now we happened to have a 20 inch snow storm a few years ago when i had a 94 lhs. virtually no snow plows and the temperature was below freezing for a week. we stayed in the house for several days but eventually needed to go food shopping the snow came without warning. the streets were all snow except for some ruts from 4wd vehicles. especially true in the cul d sac where we lived. fwd lhs had absolutely no problems. in fact it was fun to drive it in the snow. tires were just all weather tires. i suppose that may be the same storm that dumped on chicago earlier. i just went to work normally with a 97 mustang gt. and driving in snow is fun if all the morons stay home. actually id drive in the snow that is falling right now if the roads were empty. .

From : some o

wrote not true at all. fwd cars with strong engines often suffer from torque steer. well i assume you dont feel my concords 3.3 engine is strong. well i do its a real stump puller with great low end torque. as for torque steer there is none with its engine layout. my wifes sebring has a bit of torque steer but its only noticeable under flat out acceleration which we seldom do. ill take fwd in a small car for snow over rwd. small can be ok to a point. you want the track to be wide enough to follow the track of most vehicles. ive seen small vehicles having great difficulty because the track is to narrow. also a reasonable wheel base is desirable for directional stability. ive driven them all small to mid sized rwd small rwd rear engine the vw beetle small fwd mid sized fwd and big mid sized fwd lh cars. in the horrible snow conditions we get particularly driving up mountains to our western canada ski hills the large mid size has given me the best drive in all snow and ice conditions. .

From : dave gower davegow removethis magma ca

brent p tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com wrote ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. boy you sure dont drive in the same kind of snow we have here in ontario. .

From : dori a schmetterling

whereas a bmw shows that the owner is still trying to get there... das for direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- ... the mercedes is used ... to demonstrate the owner has arrived. ... .

From : dori a schmetterling

havent the rubber mixes changed das for direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- ... you have to get all terrain tires now in order to get real snow tires. i know because i have 4 all terrain tires on my jeep and theyre pretty much the same as my dad was buying for his cars in 1971. dave head .

From : some o

comments4u comments4u@nospam.mindspring.com.invalid wrote daimler-chrysler divorce negotiations underway it seems the humorous but ultimately ineffective doctor z advertising campaign was the last effort by german management to make something of their acquisition of chrysler. negotiations are currently underway with at least four private equity companies for sale of the chrysler unit. a very good article which brings out a lot of the things i saw wrong with the dc takeover. however i do believe there was a bit of chrysler production going back to mercedes; a few engines. i have the feeling dc was using chrysler for their macho trucks and cars which look like they were designed by the truck designers. mercedes then sold the nice conservative looking cars which they hoped the lh buyers would go for. what dc didnt appreciate is the mercedes cars are far to expensive for those who were buying the chrysler mid size cars so there they didnt go. even the chrysler 300 car line was quite a jump up in price for those who had been driving the lh cars. when i rejected my chrysler dealers nth attempt to try out a 300 they suggested i go look at the toyota camry at their other dealership. i recently heard that my dealer sold his chrysler dealership over a year ago but kept his toyota dealership. wasnt my fault! several years ago i read a german dc executive say they wanted to move chrysler up in price level. well they certainly did for the lh buyers but the customers werent there. then we had the sudden jump in gas prices and the lh customers had to go elsewhere for reasonable fuel economy in a mid sized car. yes there is the sebring but it has front seat space problems due to its low and rounded shape. the 300s excessive weight to support the hemi engine removes it from the economical car category. i hope chrysler survives this draining by mercedes but they will need hard work by managers tuned into our na market needs to get the company back on track. .

From : imethisguy

i suppose it would be bad optics if they took part of the money they get for the chrysler division assuming they got any money at all and spent it on buying the part of mclaren they dont already own. http//www.grandprix.com/ns/ns18051.html john m. i wonder if alonso drives a 94 e320 .

From : some o

really what vehicles do you own that dont have the service brake working on the rear wheels -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : some o

stormin mormon wrote oy! he deferred! you made an assumption that was wrong so i had to defer your question to someone else who may know. .

From : 223rem

geekboy wrote have you ever owned or driven one have driven a rental one. although it has good torque it is ponderous gives you no feel for the road the steering is very soft and handles badly. .

From : gpsman

on feb 23 956 pm tetraethylleadremovet...@yahoo.com brent p wrote brevity snip actually id point to the ugly front ends they keep putting on cars especially that fugly truck one more that people affraid of rwd in the snow. i think you need a new keyboard... ----- - gpsman .

From : brent p

geekboy wrote have you ever owned or driven one have driven a rental one. although it has good torque it is ponderous gives you no feel for the road the steering is very soft and handles badly. the town car is supposed to be a boat that isolates one from the road. thats the demographic its marketed towards. i would hate driving one but that doesnt make it a bad car just one i wouldnt like. .

From : brent p

youre very much in the minority. most of us have learned that the combination of steering and traction in one set of wheels gives slippery-condition traction benefits that can only be bettered by 4wd. wrong. you only have more traction in fwd cars where the engine and transmission are mounted over the front wheels. its simply because of weight over the drive wheels. and if you think that your 300e cannot break loose boy have you got a surprise coming. if you think a fwd car cant have either or both ends break loose youve got a surprise coming. .

From : some o

eeyore wrote more stringent mpg standards you have to be joking ! in conjunction with emission standards yes. in most other countries emissions arent of such concern. where gas is $6+/gallon consumer demand for fuel economy is what drives the industry to follow. .

From : some o

tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote that is because the superior handling characteristics of the fwd give people a false sense of security and cause them to make stupid decisions. a rwd vehicle gives far more warning that you are pushing it to hard. so if thats the case i wonder why most of the vehicles i see off the road in winter conditions are rwd and 4wd .

From : edward ohare

on sat 24 feb 2007 124316 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. most people dont drive like you do. in that i make an effort to drive properly yep. oh yea you drive properly as far as extracting most of what a car has to offer from it. but you need to be doing that on a private track not out in public. for them reasonable ride and handling combined with greater interior and trunk space makes fwd a better system. properly designed trunk space and interior space differences are negligible. lets start with a flat floor as close to the ground as possible. with rear drive you have to provide for the transmission. you can have a very long engine compartment and house it there but you end up with a very long car. so following what has been common practice for decades you raise a portion of the floor to clear the transmission. i cant imagine putting the transmission in a long engine compartment qualifies as being properly designed for any aspect other than to support your idea it can be done. extra vehicle length extra weight increased turning radius you name it they all get worse. of course you can get the transmission out of the passenger compartment space by mounting the engine transversely. hey theres the ticket. and the motion is already in the right plane just at the wrong end of the car for rwd. so lets.... hey! all you need is a chain and sprocket on each side and run them directly to sprockets on each rear wheel... just like a motorcycle... right through the rockers. but then the rockers are kinda tall high entry height. but youd have an excuse for gull wing doors that woudl probably leak when exposed to a heavy dew. well none of this works so lets accept transmission encroachment into the passenger compartment space. now we have the differential to be concerned with. a fairly large item and with a live axle it has to move. so now we have another deviation from a flat floor. and if you put in irs thats fine the differential doesnt move but now the irs will encroach substantially unless you consider something like semi-trailing arms or swing axles to be properly designed rear suspensions. what control do you have when the rear wheels spin and the rear fishtails look at what theyve spent on abs to prevent this from happening under braking. yet you think its ok under power. i have no problem with proper tires. and what control do i have its called a throttle and a clutch. how do you control the rear of a fwd car the only control system over the rear wheels of such a car is the parking brake. all the control youre talking about does is let you increase or decrease the spin rate after rwd has caused a spin. with fwd loss of traction to the drive wheels doesnt cause a spin. theres no need to control the rear wheels. the car goes straight and they remain under control. .

From : geekboy

yet most of the 300s and chargers come with 2.7s and 3.5s which although large in the germans experience are in the us only premium mid sized engines. yes but american car manufacturers extract much lower bhps from their engines. therefore you should not compare european engines with american ones using the cylinder capacity. for example my mercedes 3.5l v6 puts out 285 bhp and thats without any turbo or supercharger. equivalent to 81 bhp per litre. the ford taurus 3l v6 i drive in the usa how i hate that car is only 152 bhp. equivalent to 50 bhp per litre. that is why when i bought a taurus i got the 3.8l version. you could burn the tires off the wheels with that engine. the 3.0l and 3.8l put out the same power just the 3.8l put out a lot more torque. shortly after they stopped putting them in the taurus and put them in the windstar vans instead which was about 96 therefore what you consider a medium sized engine in a mercedes is generally putting out as much power as a large engine in most american manufactured cars. .

From : dave head

on fri 23 feb 2007 235106 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. having lived many years in rochester ny and driving first a 1971 dart swinger and later a 78 malibu rear wheel drive was just about useless on snow even with 4 snow tires compared to front wheel drive. 1971 snow tires are not proper tires. 1971 snow tires were great. they were better than a lot of snow tires they sell today. todays snow tires are often poorly treaded compared to those in 1971 because today there are so many front wheel drive cars the tire companies apparently think they can engineer them for quitness rather than grippiness. you have to get all terrain tires now in order to get real snow tires. i know because i have 4 all terrain tires on my jeep and theyre pretty much the same as my dad was buying for his cars in 1971. dave head .

From : guenter scholz

dave gower davegow.removethis.@magma.ca wrote brent p tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com wrote ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. boy you sure dont drive in the same kind of snow we have here in ontario. well im in ontario and enjoy the snow recently not! and have a cavalier and a 300e in my driveway. both cars do well in the snow both have good snow tires. hwoever i also find the 300e better since the weight is better distributed than in the cavalier.... no rear braking lose. all in all i also would chose rwd over fwd as long as good snow tyres are mounted. cheers guenter ps the 190e is another story though. not enough weight in the rear without the advantage of fwd. on the other hand great car for learning how to drift .

From : steve lusardi

no one has talked about the real reason rwd is better than fwd. sure the fwds are better in snow. sure rwds are better balanced. the real reason to avoid fwd is maintenance cost. fwd vehicles were introduced to allow greater use of robotics and lower cost of construction. this benefited the manufacturer not the owner. the labor cost of fwd is twice that for similar jobs of rwds when working in the front. tire wear is twice that of rwd. cv joint failures are not-existant on rwd and the list goes on. ps the biggest difference between summer and winter tires is compound not tread design. its all about tire heat. steve daimler-chrysler divorce negotiations underway it seems the humorous but ultimately ineffective doctor z advertising campaign was the last effort by german management to make something of their acquisition of chrysler. negotiations are currently underway with at least four private equity companies for sale of the chrysler unit. .

From : roy

no one has talked about the real reason rwd is better than fwd. sure the fwds are better in snow. sure rwds are better balanced. the real reason to avoid fwd is maintenance cost. fwd vehicles were introduced to allow greater use of robotics and lower cost of construction. this benefited the manufacturer not the owner. the labor cost of fwd is twice that for similar jobs of rwds when working in the front. tire wear is twice that of rwd. cv joint failures are not-existant on rwd and the list goes on. true. one other thing is the amount of roll overs that happen with the fwd autos. going back before they became common one hardly ever read or heard of a roll over. ps the biggest difference between summer and winter tires is compound not tread design. its all about tire heat. partly correct imo. the compund has a lot to do with the winter tire but all the sticky in the world wont move you with out a aggressive tread. small blocks and sipes create the surfaces to provide traction. eoy steve daimler-chrysler divorce negotiations underway it seems the humorous but ultimately ineffective doctor z advertising campaign was the last effort by german management to make something of their acquisition of chrysler. negotiations are currently underway with at least four private equity companies for sale of the chrysler unit. .

From : miles

gordon hudson wrote my mercedes 3.5l v6 puts out 285 bhp and thats without any turbo or supercharger. equivalent to 81 bhp per litre. the ford taurus 3l v6 i drive in the usa how i hate that car is only 152 bhp. equivalent to 50 bhp per litre. youre trying to compare a mercedes to a ford taurus the two cars are not in the same market at all. one of the problems is the more stringent emission and mpg standards in the usa. which engine are you referring to the 2006 ml350s v6 is rated at 268hp. im finding the american engines generally have more torque than their european counterparts. none the less the american designed and built nissan vq-series v6 puts out 306hp. gms 2007 l32 v6 produces 260hp and 280ft-lb torque compared with the ml350 v6s 250ft-lbs. .

From : edward ohare

on fri 23 feb 2007 230623 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote brent p wrote the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. not true at all. very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. most people dont drive like you do. for them reasonable ride and handling combined with greater interior and trunk space makes fwd a better system. ill take fwd in a small car for snow over rwd. ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. what control do you have when the rear wheels spin and the rear fishtails look at what theyve spent on abs to prevent this from happening under braking. yet you think its ok under power. .

From : dori a schmetterling

i thought the main reason was that mercedes buying its way into the us market and tripling its car output. chrysler sales were already double mercedess worldwide. crossfire is made in germany at the karmann factory a contract manufacturer in osnabrck or was when i visited it just as the crossfire was being launched. das for direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- ... i have the feeling dc was using chrysler for their macho trucks and cars which look like they were designed by the truck designers. mercedes then sold the nice conservative looking cars which they hoped the lh buyers would go for. ... .

From : 223rem

brent p wrote the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. lack of front wheel drive has probably depressed chrysler and dodge sales in states with significant snowfall. actually id point to the ugly front ends they keep putting on cars especially that fugly truck one more that people affraid of rwd in the snow. i dont get it. rwd chryslers were and still are hot. everybody seems to dream of a hemi. and if you can afford a hemi you can surely afford snow tires. the dodge rams sell very well too. ford and gm have nothing on chrysler imo. so wtf is going on the snow theory is just dumb. .

From : edward ohare

on sat 24 feb 2007 215008 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote that reminds me of something i forgot with rwd in snow the throttle can be used to steer ; oh yes at the cost of loosing driving traction. you do want to go somewhere dont you not just spin in circles. .

From : dave gower davegow removethis magma ca

brent p tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com wrote if you think a fwd car cant have either or both ends break loose youve got a surprise coming. i said no such thing. he made such a claim i did not. .

From : ted mittelstaedt

brent p wrote wrote the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. not true at all. very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. these apply if you have a wimpy 4 cylinder or a monster v8. fwd cars with strong engines often suffer from torque steer. my experience with powerful fwd cars was a car known for its torque steer. but i had to stomp on it pretty hard for that to happen. i understand in the last 18 years thats been sorted out for the most part for normal street driving. ill take fwd in a small car for snow over rwd. ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. having lived many years in rochester ny and driving first a 1971 dart swinger and later a 78 malibu rear wheel drive was just about useless on snow even with 4 snow tires compared to front wheel drive. thats the car. i used to own a 1981 dat 210 rwd. excellent car in the snow using all weather tires. its all in the suspension and weight distribution. those older cars didnt have good suspensions. ted .

From : highcountry

it is very difficult for me to believe that anyone interested in the ability to travel during limited traction conditions such as snow ice or mud would even consider buying a vehicle that is not four wheel drive. in my life it is either 4x4 or rear wheel drive. a front drive vehicle is totally unacceptable for a person that loves to drive and knows how. there are none parking in my garage and there wont be in the future. bruce .

From : geekboy

on fri 23 feb 2007 230623 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote brent p wrote wrote the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. not true at all. very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. most people dont drive like you do. for them reasonable ride and handling combined with greater interior and trunk space makes fwd a better system. i got a lincoln towncar that says different. ill take fwd in a small car for snow over rwd. ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. what control do you have when the rear wheels spin and the rear fishtails look at what theyve spent on abs to prevent this from happening under braking. yet you think its ok under power. .

From : brent p

on fri 23 feb 2007 235106 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. having lived many years in rochester ny and driving first a 1971 dart swinger and later a 78 malibu rear wheel drive was just about useless on snow even with 4 snow tires compared to front wheel drive. 1971 snow tires are not proper tires. 1971 snow tires were great. they were better than a lot of snow tires they sell today. todays snow tires are often poorly treaded compared to those in 1971 because today there are so many front wheel drive cars the tire companies apparently think they can engineer them for quitness rather than grippiness. sorry no they werent. they were just crappy bias-ply tires with big knobby treads. you have to get all terrain tires now in order to get real snow tires. i know because i have 4 all terrain tires on my jeep and theyre pretty much the same as my dad was buying for his cars in 1971. big nobby things... ill take modern compounds and tread design thanks. .

From : brent p

very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. most people dont drive like you do. in that i make an effort to drive properly yep. for them reasonable ride and handling combined with greater interior and trunk space makes fwd a better system. properly designed trunk space and interior space differences are negligible. ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. what control do you have when the rear wheels spin and the rear fishtails look at what theyve spent on abs to prevent this from happening under braking. yet you think its ok under power. i have no problem with proper tires. and what control do i have its called a throttle and a clutch. how do you control the rear of a fwd car the only control system over the rear wheels of such a car is the parking brake. .

From : gordon hudson

i got a lincoln towncar that says different. now that is a good american car. .

From : gordon hudson

gordon hudson wrote my mercedes 3.5l v6 puts out 285 bhp and thats without any turbo or supercharger. equivalent to 81 bhp per litre. the ford taurus 3l v6 i drive in the usa how i hate that car is only 152 bhp. equivalent to 50 bhp per litre. youre trying to compare a mercedes to a ford taurus the two cars are not in the same market at all. one of the problems is the more stringent emission and mpg standards in the usa. which engine are you referring to the 2006 ml350s v6 is rated at 268hp. the bhp varies depending how they set it up. the one in my slk350 is 285 bhp. the reason american cars use so much more petrol is that they run them inefficiently like we used to back in the 80s. because fuel prices in europe got so high all the manufacturers had to look at using the engines more efficiently. my 1.8l kompressor is about 143bhp from a 1.8l engine. american cars are cheap in the us but over here are expensive. the chrysler 300c is about the same price as a bottom end e class mercedes and they are often sold through the same dealers. as a result the chrysler does not sell. i have seen two on the road here yet i see many more new mercedes e class cars on the road round here. the dealers cant sell t

From : gordon hudson

. 222 331119 45e0a51e$0$762$5a6aecb4@.aaisp.net.uk no one has talked about the real reason rwd is better than fwd. sure the fwds are better in snow. yes thats a serious problem especially if you cant turn the traction control totally off for a reverse hill start in the snow. two years ago i couldnt get out of my driveway because of the esp stopping me reversing up the drive out of the house. meanwhile my wife got off to work in her 1l nissan micra with no problems. i spent the moprning digging and gritting. all i succeeded in doing was mocving the car 15 feet sideways! .

From : geekboy

gordon hudson wrote i got a lincoln towncar that says different. now that is a good american car. i hope youre joking. why would he be have you ever owned or driven one that is a nice car. it drives nice and looks good. it sure does drive better than most of the mercedes-benz i have driven and the v8 is has can really get that car moving quick. the continental had only a v6 and has since been discontinued. though i have the older model which is the most popular due to its larger size and nicer looks and the trunk space is huge. 4 body size ;- i also get lots of compliments on it. it looks almost new. the newest ones are too rounded and much smaller than the previous generation. gonna keep this one a long time. .

From : philthy

i have a fwd mini van and a rwd car and the car is way better in the snow steve lusardi wrote no one has talked about the real reason rwd is better than fwd. sure the fwds are better in snow. sure rwds are better balanced. the real reason to avoid fwd is maintenance cost. fwd vehicles were introduced to allow greater use of robotics and lower cost of construction. this benefited the manufacturer not the owner. the labor cost of fwd is twice that for similar jobs of rwds when working in the front. tire wear is twice that of rwd. cv joint failures are not-existant on rwd and the list goes on. ps the biggest difference between summer and winter tires is compound not tread design. its all about tire heat. steve daimler-chrysler divorce negotiations underway it seems the humorous but ultimately ineffective doctor z advertising campaign was the last effort by german management to make something of their acquisition of chrysler. negotiations are currently underway with at least four private equity companies for sale of the chrysler unit. .

From : dave gower davegow removethis magma ca

guenter scholz scholz@sciborg.uwaterloo.ca wrote well im in ontario and enjoy the snow recently not! and have a cavalier and a 300e in my driveway. both cars do well in the snow both have good snow tires. hwoever i also find the 300e better since the weight is better distributed than in the cavalier.... no rear braking lose. all in all i also would chose rwd over fwd as long as good snow tyres are mounted. youre very much in the minority. most of us have learned that the combination of steering and traction in one set of wheels gives slippery-condition traction benefits that can only be bettered by 4wd. and if you think that your 300e cannot break loose boy have you got a surprise coming. .

From : edward ohare

on sat 24 feb 2007 230544 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote for the feet and legs of middle passengers is that the same mythical middle passenger that people claim they need suvs for on some cars the trans hump affects the driver and passengers. there have been some designs in which the accelerator pedal was uncomfortably far to the left... generally small cars but i think the xj6 was that way. in any case when i started getting fwd company cars i realized that in the previous rwd cars id been resting my right foot against the trans tunnel. and without that tunnel i had to retrain myself not to use the crutch of it to guide my right foot to the gas pedal. .

From : brent p

on sat 24 feb 2007 230544 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote for the feet and legs of middle passengers is that the same mythical middle passenger that people claim they need suvs for on some cars the trans hump affects the driver and passengers. there have been some designs in which the accelerator pedal was uncomfortably far to the left... generally small cars but i think the xj6 was that way. in any case when i started getting fwd company cars i realized that in the previous rwd cars id been resting my right foot against the trans tunnel. and without that tunnel i had to retrain myself not to use the crutch of it to guide my right foot to the gas pedal. of course nobody could design a front wheel drive car poorly in any aspect..... and your driving habbits arent everyones. i manage to keep my size 14s from rubbing on the carpet without even thinking of it and never noticed any difference going from a fwd car to rwd car or vise versa in that regard. .

From : edward ohare

on sat 24 feb 2007 202439 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote on sat 24 feb 2007 124316 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote i see this was your lame attempt at personal attack to try and protray me as some sort of boy racer. me surely not! no need... years of your posts establish something to that effect. well it doesnt change that rwd is better than fwd and it can be realized in normal street driving. .... by a highly skilled individual who has a peculiar definition of normal street driving. i know of no fwd car that has said flat floor. they still have a hump its just slightly smaller. its a lot smaller. compare 80 pinto to 81 escort. compare 81 malibu to 82 celebrity. and yet that hump is still there in fwd cars. because in fwd cars the shifter linkage exhaust etc are still run through the center. actually its a matter that the structure of the car wouldnt be very good with a completely flat floor and once a very small hump is created its convenient to use the space. i cant imagine putting the transmission in a long engine compartment qualifies as being properly designed for any aspect other than to support your idea it can be done. extra vehicle length extra weight increased turning radius you name it they all get worse. nice strawman. baloney. **you** figure out a layout for a rwd car that doesnt cut interior and trunk room. my examples were just to show you how silly your assertations were. of course you can get the transmission out of the passenger compartment space by mounting the engine transversely. hey theres the ticket. and have shitty weight distribution because of it and still have a hump in the passenger compartment just a bit smaller of a hump. this is the second time youve stated the hump with fwd is smaller. and yet youre still saying rwd doesnt cut interior space. you seem to like building absurd senarios and then knocking them down. completely and utterly meaningless. im not the one with the absurd idea that you can package a transmission and differential under the floor pan/trunk and not cut interior room. spoken like someone who has never crawled under a fwd car. i havent been under a fwd car that didnt have enough space under there for a differential. in fact many front wheel drive cars have a structural beam for the suspension right where a live axle would be on a rear wheel drive car and its nearly as big as one. nearly. there you go again. and its not nearly .

From : brent p

i see this was your lame attempt at personal attack to try and protray me as some sort of boy racer. me surely not! no need... years of your posts establish something to that effect. then it should be easy for you to back that up with some cites. well it doesnt change that rwd is better than fwd and it can be realized in normal street driving. ... by a highly skilled individual who has a peculiar definition of normal street driving. nothing peculiar about having better weight distribution and all the benefits that come with it. i know of no fwd car that has said flat floor. they still have a hump its just slightly smaller. its a lot smaller. compare 80 pinto to 81 escort. compare 81 malibu to 82 celebrity. so you admit the floor isnt flat. and yet that hump is still there in fwd cars. because in fwd cars the shifter linkage exhaust etc are still run through the center. actually its a matter that the structure of the car wouldnt be very good with a completely flat floor and once a very small hump is created its convenient to use the space. and now you admit the floor isnt flat and go further to say it shouldnt be flat. the difference with regards to usable space is trivial. baloney. **you** figure out a layout for a rwd car that doesnt cut interior and trunk room. my examples were just to show you how silly your assertations were. youre entirely hung up on just a few cubic inches of space that isnt used anyway. of course you can get the transmission out of the passenger compartment space by mounting the engine transversely. hey theres the ticket. and have shitty weight distribution because of it and still have a hump in the passenger compartment just a bit smaller of a hump. this is the second time youve stated the hump with fwd is smaller. and yet youre still saying rwd doesnt cut interior space. obviously you have a problem reading. i stated the difference was negilible insignficant small. a few cubic inches of hump doesnt change the interior space in any significant way. you seem to like building absurd senarios and then knocking them down. completely and utterly meaningless. im not the one with the absurd idea that you can package a transmission and differential under the floor pan/trunk and not cut interior room. again your strawman or you just cant read. spoken like someone who has never crawled under a fwd car. i havent been under a fwd car that didnt have enough space under there for a differential. in fact many front wheel drive cars have a structural beam for the suspension right where a live axle would be on a rear wheel drive car and its nearly as big as one. nearly. there you go again. and its not nearly so what do you use this additional hump space in your front wheel drive car for why is it so important i certainly didnt have any use for the space gained when i had the torqueless wonder car. .

From : ken weitzel

brent p wrote i see this was your lame attempt at personal attack to try and protray me as some sort of boy racer. me surely not! no need... years of your posts establish something to that effect. then it should be easy for you to back that up with some cites. well it doesnt change that rwd is better than fwd and it can be realized in normal street driving. ... by a highly skilled individual who has a peculiar definition of normal street driving. nothing peculiar about having better weight distribution and all the benefits that come with it. i know of no fwd car that has said flat floor. they still have a hump its just slightly smaller. its a lot smaller. compare 80 pinto to 81 escort. compare 81 malibu to 82 celebrity. so you admit the floor isnt flat. and yet that hump is still there in fwd cars. because in fwd cars the shifter linkage exhaust etc are still run through the center. actually its a matter that the structure of the car wouldnt be very good with a completely flat floor and once a very small hump is created its convenient to use the space. and now you admit the floor isnt flat and go further to say it shouldnt be flat. the difference with regards to usable space is trivial. baloney. **you** figure out a layout for a rwd car that doesnt cut interior and trunk room. my examples were just to show you how silly your assertations were. youre entirely hung up on just a few cubic inches of space that isnt used anyway. of course you can get the transmission out of the passenger compartment space by mounting the engine transversely. hey theres the ticket. and have shitty weight distribution because of it and still have a hump in the passenger compartment just a bit smaller of a hump. this is the second time youve stated the hump with fwd is smaller. and yet youre still saying rwd doesnt cut interior space. obviously you have a problem reading. i stated the difference was negilible insignficant small. a few cubic inches of hump doesnt change the interior space in any significant way. you seem to like building absurd senarios and then knocking them down. completely and utterly meaningless. im not the one with the absurd idea that you can package a transmission and differential under the floor pan/trunk and not cut interior room. again your strawman or you just cant read. spoken like someone who has never crawled under a fwd car. i havent been under a fwd car that didnt have enough space under there for a differential. in fact many front wheel drive cars have a structural beam for the suspension right where a live axle would be on a rear wheel drive car and its nearly as big as one. nearly. there you go again. and its not nearly so what do you use this additional hump space in your front wheel drive car for why is it so important i certainly didnt have any use for the space gained when i had the torqueless wonder car. for the feet and legs of middle passengers .

From : brent p

brent p tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com wrote if you think a fwd car cant have either or both ends break loose youve got a surprise coming. i said no such thing. he made such a claim i did not. didnt say you did. try putting it back into context of what statement it was a reply to. now think real hard. get it .

From : brent p

for the feet and legs of middle passengers is that the same mythical middle passenger that people claim they need suvs for .

From : dave gower davegow removethis magma ca

brent p tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com wrote didnt say you did. try putting it back into context of what statement it was a reply to. now think real hard. get it yeah i get it. you were grasping for a reply and missed. nice try. .

From : brent p

brent p tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com wrote didnt say you did. try putting it back into context of what statement it was a reply to. now think real hard. get it yeah i get it. you were grasping for a reply and missed. nice try. go grow a clue. .

From : who

dori a schmetterling ng@nospam.co.uk wrote whereas a bmw shows that the owner is still trying to get there... however with idrive the bmw driver is very confused as to where to go. .

From : geekboy

gordon hudson wrote i got a lincoln towncar that says different. now that is a good american car. i hope youre joking. why would he be have you ever owned or driven one that is a nice car. it drives nice and looks good. it sure does drive better than most of the mercedes-benz i have driven and the v8 is has can really get that car moving quick. the continental had only a v6 and has since been discontinued. though i have the older model which is the most popular due to its larger size and nicer looks and the trunk space is huge. 4 body size ;- i also get lots of compliments on it. it looks almost new. the newest ones are too rounded and much smaller than the previous generation. gonna keep this one a long time. i used to rent lincoln towncars a decade ago when one company had them cheap. could not believe the windnoise. ba

From : bjn

on sat 24 feb 2007 205731 -0500 edward ohare edwardohare@nospam.yahoo.com.invalid wrote on sun 25 feb 2007 011905 gmt imethisguy imethisguyno@spamtelus.net wrote i suppose it would be bad optics if they took part of the money they get for the chrysler division assuming they got any money at all now thats an interesting idea. what **is** the value of a car company that is losing money losing market share is non-competitive in the bread and butter midsize segment i thought the previous sebring/stratus were terrible cars very much like the large current gm cars and the new ones arent getting good reviews and basically has a lineup other than the pickups and minivans of niche models oh yea it has old factories an old workforce huge obligations to retirees and the only market it does reasonably well in north america is one that every auto maker in the world wants a piece of. could it be theyll have to **pay** someone to take chrysler dont know about that. ; http//money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/moneymag/0701/gallery.largecars/5.html .

From : edward ohare

on sun 25 feb 2007 083537 -0500 bjn elvis@example.com wrote could it be theyll have to **pay** someone to take chrysler dont know about that. ; well theyre going to have to make some concessions. at minimum to provide the trans and rear suspension for the 300/charger/magnum on the cheap. new management possibly wont care much about the sprinter. http//money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/moneymag/0701/gallery.largecars/5.html nice article. i skimmed the info on the other cars. they claim the cadillac torque steers because it has too much power. wonder what theyd say if someone pointed out the lh cars didnt but the 4 cyl chevy citation did. they need to blame that on gm not on engine power. .

From : fred w

bjn wrote on sat 24 feb 2007 205731 -0500 edward ohare edwardohare@nospam.yahoo.com.invalid wrote on sun 25 feb 2007 011905 gmt imethisguy imethisguyno@spamtelus.net wrote i suppose it would be bad optics if they took part of the money they get for the chrysler division assuming they got any money at all now thats an interesting idea. what **is** the value of a car company that is losing money losing market share is non-competitive in the bread and butter midsize segment i thought the previous sebring/stratus were terrible cars very much like the large current gm cars and the new ones arent getting good reviews and basically has a lineup other than the pickups and minivans of niche models oh yea it has old factories an old workforce huge obligations to retirees and the only market it does reasonably well in north america is one that every auto maker in the world wants a piece of. could it be theyll have to **pay** someone to take chrysler dont know about that. ; http//money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/moneymag/0701/gallery.largecars/5.html dont forget they make these too http//www.caranddriver.com/previews/11572/2007-jeep-wrangler-and-wrangler-unlimited.html -- -fred w .

From : r mark clayton

bjn wrote on sat 24 feb 2007 205731 -0500 edward ohare could it be theyll have to **pay** someone to take chrysler dont forget they make these too http//www.caranddriver.com/previews/11572/2007-jeep-wrangler-and-wrangler-unlimited.html which is part of the problem. outside the us suvs are increasingly seen as anti-green anti pedestrian and un-cool. london probably about half the new car market in the uk has recently introduced a special 25 $50 charge for suvs to drive in - three times that for ordinary cars. -- -fred w .

From : Annonymous

so am i damaging my engine with old oil or is the # of miles more important jmc .

From : brent p

a new engine. why did you ask is cheap to be wrong. .

From : brent p

here it is the end of feb. and we get our first truly plowable storm a whole 4 inches! shut up denny and i dont have a plow. going to have to get one of my friends over here. i tried to move the charger out of the garage just for the hell of it. who but dc would make a 425hp car without ls posi or something. the traction control works to a point but... roy .

From : dave head

yes some but very few snow tires today use a hydrophilic compound that is markedly better on ice. save that the compound doesnt mean nearly as much as the tread pattern. ive driven the old snow tires and the new snow tires and theres basically no difference between the old snow tires and what are now called all terrain tires with the new snow tires being markedly worse than the old snow tires. dave head on sat 24 feb 2007 154838 -0000 dori a schmetterling ng@nospam.co.uk wrote havent the rubber mixes changed das for direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- ... you have to get all terrain tires now in order to get real snow tires. i know because i have 4 all terrain tires on my jeep and theyre pretty much the same as my dad was buying for his cars in 1971. dave head .

From : dave head

on sat 24 feb 2007 123843 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote on fri 23 feb 2007 235106 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. having lived many years in rochester ny and driving first a 1971 dart swinger and later a 78 malibu rear wheel drive was just about useless on snow even with 4 snow tires compared to front wheel drive. 1971 snow tires are not proper tires. 1971 snow tires were great. they were better than a lot of snow tires they sell today. todays snow tires are often poorly treaded compared to those in 1971 because today there are so many front wheel drive cars the tire companies apparently think they can engineer them for quitness rather than grippiness. sorry no they werent. they were just crappy bias-ply tires with big knobby treads. er yes they were. bias / radial ply dont mean squat when youre attempting to power out of a snowdrift. you have to get all terrain tires now in order to get real snow tires. i know because i have 4 all terrain tires on my jeep and theyre pretty much the same as my dad was buying for his cars in 1971. big nobby things... ill take modern compounds and tread design thanks. you go right ahead. you will be stuck in the snow way before i will. dph .

From : brent p

on sat 24 feb 2007 123843 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote on fri 23 feb 2007 235106 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. having lived many years in rochester ny and driving first a 1971 dart swinger and later a 78 malibu rear wheel drive was just about useless on snow even with 4 snow tires compared to front wheel drive. 1971 snow tires are not proper tires. 1971 snow tires were great. they were better than a lot of snow tires they sell today. todays snow tires are often poorly treaded compared to those in 1971 because today there are so many front wheel drive cars the tire companies apparently think they can engineer them for quitness rather than grippiness. sorry no they werent. they were just crappy bias-ply tires with big knobby treads. er yes they were. bias / radial ply dont mean squat when youre attempting to power out of a snowdrift. well i suppose you could carry an extra 4 tires around and change them every time it starts snowing and when the snow ends. you have to get all terrain tires now in order to get real snow tires. i know because i have 4 all terrain tires on my jeep and theyre pretty much the same as my dad was buying for his cars in 1971. big nobby things... ill take modern compounds and tread design thanks. you go right ahead. you will be stuck in the snow way before i will. get yourself a model t or a horse drawn wagon while youre at it. .

From : highcountry

brent p you made good normal sense to me. i also learned how to drive in emergency situations by practicing before i was involved in one. ever wonder why police cruisers tend to be rwd they have a few others but they seldom use them for pursuit or high speed because the lives of their officers depend on it. honda s2000 mazda mx5 miata top line lexus top line infinity etc.; which end does the powering in these cars even the purveyors of fwd haulers of the masses know how to make a better car. subaru solves the dilemma by powering both ends. not trying to offend you folks bruce .

From : scott en aztln

tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p said in rec.autos.driving the town car is supposed to be a boat that isolates one from the road. thats the demographic its marketed towards. i would hate driving one but that doesnt make it a bad car just one i wouldnt like. i wouldnt mind riding in one but i would not enjoy driving one. -- im a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! .

From : tbone

the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. that is a load of crap. they only apply if you know how to use it and most dont. just about any idiot can drive a fwd in the snow which is simply not the case with rwd and it is easier to pull a car threw slippery conditions than it is to push it especially when most of the weight is in the front. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

no one has talked about the real reason rwd is better than fwd. sure the fwds are better in snow. sure rwds are better balanced. the real reason to avoid fwd is maintenance cost. fwd vehicles were introduced to allow greater use of robotics and lower cost of construction. this benefited the manufacturer not the owner. the labor cost of fwd is twice that for similar jobs of rwds when working in the front. tire wear is twice that of rwd. cv joint failures are not-existant on rwd and the list goes on. true. one other thing is the amount of roll overs that happen with the fwd autos. going back before they became common one hardly ever read or heard of a roll over. that is because the superior handling characteristics of the fwd give people a false sense of security and cause them to make stupid decisions. a rwd vehicle gives far more warning that you are pushing it to hard. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

brent p wrote wrote the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. not true at all. very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. these apply if you have a wimpy 4 cylinder or a monster v8. all this shows is that you dont know how to drive a fwd. the control of the axles are the same only reversed. you have acceleration and brake control of the front axle and brake control of the rear axle iow control over both axles and i prefer more control over the steering axle. my nissan is a rwd and is almost worthless in slippery conditions unless you really know what you are doing which is fine for me but not so much for my wife. her fwd intrepid can run circles around me in bad conditions and got her home in snow conditions that had most rwd and even some 4wd vehicles in ditches and on the side of the road. fwd cars with strong engines often suffer from torque steer. my experience with powerful fwd cars was a car known for its torque steer. but i had to stomp on it pretty hard for that to happen. i understand in the last 18 years thats been sorted out for the most part for normal street driving. ill take fwd in a small car for snow over rwd. ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. then you are a fool. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : roy

no one has talked about the real reason rwd is better than fwd. sure the fwds are better in snow. sure rwds are better balanced. the real reason to avoid fwd is maintenance cost. fwd vehicles were introduced to allow greater use of robotics and lower cost of construction. this benefited the manufacturer not the owner. the labor cost of fwd is twice that for similar jobs of rwds when working in the front. tire wear is twice that of rwd. cv joint failures are not-existant on rwd and the list goes on. true. one other thing is the amount of roll overs that happen with the fwd autos. going back before they became common one hardly ever read or heard of a roll over. that is because the superior handling characteristics of the fwd give people a false sense of security and cause them to make stupid decisions. a rwd vehicle gives far more warning that you are pushing it to hard. do ya think weight distribution might come into play .

From : tbone

no one has talked about the real reason rwd is better than fwd. sure the fwds are better in snow. sure rwds are better balanced. the real reason to avoid fwd is maintenance cost. fwd vehicles were introduced to allow greater use of robotics and lower cost of construction. this benefited the manufacturer not the owner. the labor cost of fwd is twice that for similar jobs of rwds when working in the front. tire wear is twice that of rwd. cv joint failures are not-existant on rwd and the list goes on. true. one other thing is the amount of roll overs that happen with the fwd autos. going back before they became common one hardly ever read or heard of a roll over. that is because the superior handling characteristics of the fwd give people a false sense of security and cause them to make stupid decisions. a rwd vehicle gives far more warning that you are pushing it to hard. do ya think weight distribution might come into play not really. how would front to back weight distribution cause more rollovers and unless you are talking about a mid-engine car the difference in weight distribution between a the fwd and rwd is not all that huge anyway. the way i see it a fwd vehicle is just easier to drive at high speeds which means people with much less skill are driving faster than ever and when something goes wrong they dont have the skills to recover and the higher speeds make it easier to roll the car. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : roy

no one has talked about the real reason rwd is better than fwd. sure the fwds are better in snow. sure rwds are better balanced. the real reason to avoid fwd is maintenance cost. fwd vehicles were introduced to allow greater use of robotics and lower cost of construction. this benefited the manufacturer not the owner. the labor cost of fwd is twice that for similar jobs of rwds when working in the front. tire wear is twice that of rwd. cv joint failures are not-existant on rwd and the list goes on. true. one other thing is the amount of roll overs that happen with the fwd autos. going back before they became common one hardly ever read or heard of a roll over. that is because the superior handling characteristics of the fwd give people a false sense of security and cause them to make stupid decisions. a rwd vehicle gives far more warning that you are pushing it to hard. do ya think weight distribution might come into play not really. how would front to back weight distribution cause more rollovers and unless you are talking about a mid-engine car the difference in weight distribution between a the fwd and rwd is not all that huge anyway. the way i see it a fwd vehicle is just easier to drive at high speeds which means people with much less skill are driving faster than ever and when something goes wrong they dont have the skills to recover and the higher speeds make it easier to roll the car. okay. .

From : who

tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote i have no problem with proper tires. and what control do i have its called a throttle and a clutch. how do you control the rear of a fwd car the only control system over the rear wheels of such a car is the parking brake. they follow. come with me for a drive in the real snow driving we get in our western canadian mountains and ill teach you something about fwd. .

From : tbone

wrote very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. most people dont drive like you do. in that i make an effort to drive properly yep. is that what you call it. for them reasonable ride and handling combined with greater interior and trunk space makes fwd a better system. properly designed trunk space and interior space differences are negligible. now that depends on the size of the car. ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it is on dry pavement. what control do you have when the rear wheels spin and the rear fishtails look at what theyve spent on abs to prevent this from happening under braking. yet you think its ok under power. i have no problem with proper tires. and what control do i have its called a throttle and a clutch. how do you control the rear of a fwd car the same way you control the front wheels of a rwd vehicle with the brake. the only control system over the rear wheels of such a car is the parking

From : some o

tbone wrote as much as i didnt want to get into this yes miles the n.y. times has a reputation to uphold so i would consider it a credible site. i asked whether everything printed in the nytimes and its owned outlets such as about.com had to be true because they said it was yes all media outlets have a reputation they want to create and maintain. that has nothing to do with being truthful or not. fox also has a reputation to uphold so its a credible source as well right .

From : miles

gordon hudson wrote american cars are cheap in the us but over here are expensive. the chrysler 300c is about the same price as a bottom end e class mercedes and they are often sold through the same dealers. as a result the chrysler does not sell. i have seen two on the road here yet i see many more new mercedes e class cars on the road round here. the dealers cant sell the chryslers. where is here in the usa the 300c outsells the mercedes which is to be expected. however sales are dropping in the usa for the 300c because its a car with little market but then so are other cars in its class. .

From : just facts

highcountry highcountry2000@hotmail.com wrote ever wonder why police cruisers tend to be rwd they have a few others but they seldom use them for pursuit or high speed because the lives of their officers depend on it. nope not according to what our police in western canada say. they also use big heavy rdw cars for most urban activity because as they say they often ram a car they are chasing and it usually is less expensive to repair a rwd car after this activity. i out of urban country areas our police usually use awd & 4wd vehicles. .

From : miles

stormin mormon wrote miles quotes friends he knew. for me it is far better than quotes from someone you nor i know. . 222 331213 vqneh.19072$gj3.8194@fe18.lga just facts wrote so if thats the case i wonder why most of the vehicles i see off the road in winter conditions are rwd and 4wd i see mostly 4x4s slid off the road here. mostly because of drivers who think since they have a big ol 4x4 they can drive 65mph on ice. ive always owned a 4x4 of some sort and on frozen solid roads i usually drive about 35mph if traffic is light and clear visibility. .

From : miles

tbone wrote her fwd intrepid can run circles around me in bad conditions and got her home in snow conditions that had most rwd and even some 4wd vehicles in ditches and on the side of the road. has more to do with driver skills tires gearing etc. name a 4wd that wont perform as well as the fwd intrepid on snow packed roads. there are some 2wd vehicles with limited slip or locker equipped diffs that in certain cases can perform better than some pt 4x4s. .

From : guenter scholz

dave gower davegow.removethis.@magma.ca wrote guenter scholz scholz@sciborg.uwaterloo.ca wrote well im in ontario and enjoy the snow recently not! and have a cavalier and a 300e in my driveway. both cars do well in the snow both have good snow tires. hwoever i also find the 300e better since the weight is better distributed than in the cavalier.... no rear braking lose. all in all i also would chose rwd over fwd as long as good snow tyres are mounted. youre very much in the minority. most of us have learned that the combination of steering and traction in one set of wheels gives slippery-condition traction benefits that can only be bettered by 4wd. and if you think that your 300e cannot break loose boy have you got a surprise coming. dave you are probably correct re being in the minority. however personally i like rwd more. sure the 300e breas lose... but the point is that i can easily feel it starting and can control it.... drifting its called i believe. on the other hand the cavalier probably sticks to the road a bit better but once it breaks lose watch out... i end up spinning around my front wheels.... the rwd is more balanced and provides more control. if you are a driver that enjoys driving rwd is the way to go... if you are drivi

From : tbone

tbone wrote her fwd intrepid can run circles around me in bad conditions and got her home in snow conditions that had most rwd and even some 4wd vehicles in ditches and on the side of the road. has more to do with driver skills tires gearing etc. name a 4wd that wont perform as well as the fwd intrepid on snow packed roads. damn miles talk about posting just to start an argument or just to bitch. there are some 2wd vehicles with limited slip or locker equipped diffs that in certain cases can perform better than some pt 4x4s. and when that 2wd limited slip happens to be the front wheels such as traction control it does even better and i guess that you answered your own question above. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : matthew t russotto

just facts jfact@intnet.wrld wrote tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote that is because the superior handling characteristics of the fwd give people a false sense of security and cause them to make stupid decisions. a rwd vehicle gives far more warning that you are pushing it to hard. so if thats the case i wonder why most of the vehicles i see off the road in winter conditions are rwd and 4wd because the fwd vehicles never made it out of the driveway. -- theres no such thing as a free lunch but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. .

From : tbone

tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote that is because the superior handling characteristics of the fwd give people a false sense of security and cause them to make stupid decisions. a rwd vehicle gives far more warning that you are pushing it to hard. so if thats the case i wonder why most of the vehicles i see off the road in winter conditions are rwd and 4wd what exactly are you trying to say i am pro fwd for the most part but they are not perfect either. they do have superior handling characteristics but the problem with that is that they will hold the road to their maximum capability with little skill required from the operator so once they are pushed beyond their ability there is little chance of recovering especially by a driver with little skill to begin with. a rwd vehicle otoh tends to require more skill as the speed increases which for most with a functioning brain prevents them from pushing the vehicle beyond its capability. as for your winter weather example with the rwd like said above it requires more skill to get the vehicle moving than with a fwd which is why you see more of them off of the road. as for the 4wd that is more due to idiots driving them that for some reason think that snow and slippery conditions dont apply to them. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

tbone wrote and when that 2wd limited slip happens to be the front wheels such as traction control it does even better and i guess that you answered your own question above. yep a fwd with traction control can in some cases such as sand do better than some pt 4x4s. it wont do better in snow. however i dont know many pt 4x4s manufactured for the usa market in the past number of years. my 2004 has switchable pt 4wd but otherwise is awd. .

From : dave plowman news

some o so@nospam.net wrote chryslers dealer network alone is of great value. dc didnt take full advantage of it. local one in this part of london closed and is now a lidl german owned supermarket. they marked down all the stock heavily before closing but still couldnt shift it. most ended up at auction. -- *how many roads must a man travel down before he admits he is lost dave plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk london sw to e-mail change noise into sound. .

From : miles

tbone wrote what exactly are you trying to say i am pro fwd for the most part but they are not perfect either. in small cars i am as well. they do better in snow that most rwd cars. overall id rather have a 4x4 though. reliability and cost of repairs in many fwd cars is a bit much. they do have superior handling characteristics depends on the circumstances. torque steer issues plague many fwd cars. .

From : brent p

the main advantage of rear drive over front drive occurs when very powerful engines are installed. only if you are into drag racing. for street driving the advantages of rwd apply regardless of engine size. that is a load of crap. they only apply if you know how to use it and most dont. just about any idiot can drive a fwd in the snow which is simply not the case with rwd and it is easier to pull a car threw slippery conditions than it is to push it especially when most of the weight is in the front. they only apply to street driving if youre a competent driver. that means the advantages apply. just because most people dont have a friggin clue what they are doing doesnt make my statement invalid in the least. .

From : some o

highcountry highcountry2000@hotmail.com wrote it is very difficult for me to believe that anyone interested in the ability to travel during limited traction conditions such as snow ice or mud would even consider buying a vehicle that is not four wheel drive. in my life it is either 4x4 or rear wheel drive. a front drive vehicle is totally unacceptable for a person that loves to drive and knows how. there are none parking in my garage and there wont be in the future. bruce i agree 4wd or awd is best in very snowy conditions. but most of us need very good handling in dry road conditions as well. my recent experience with a 2007 awd ford fusion at high highway speeds mostly 60 to 80 mph told me i didnt want that specific model even though i like the fusion very much. it had a significant tendency to drift into the banked curves like oversteer something that caught me off guard since my current car is fwd and i dont experience such a handling problem. ill have to try the fwd fusion to see if it avoids this problem. i looked at the new model 2007 honda cr-v and discussed at length with the dealer the 4wd situation. seems honda found not all people cared for the awd in the previous cr-v so they now have both fwd and part time 4wd systems for their new cr-v. their part time awd system seems sensible. it is fwd until driving wheel slip is detected then it becomes awd. although awd would be nice to have i know from my fwd experiences going to our mountain ski hills i dont need it however its only the bottom cr-v model which i dont desire that has fwd. ill need a day or so to try out this part time awd system. ive not owned an awd or 4wd vehicle although i learned to drive on 4wd army trucks. i can assure i do know how to drive in all conditions and those who drive far too fast with 4wd/awd vehicles in poor conditions are driving me and many other drivers off the road when conditions are slippery. because of very good straight ahead traction they become over confident but in fact many of those vehicles dont handle as well as a mid sized fwd car. just to accommodate these too fast drivers when they often lose it increasingly our highways are being built with a very expensive center barrier. what id like to have with my next fwd car is slightly higher ground clearance. regardless of the method of driving wheels good ground clearance to reduce the bottom dragging the snow is most important. my concord has slightly higher than normal clearance which must be part of its success in deep snow but a few inches more as have vehicles such as the cr-v the subaru forester and outback i feel would be desirable. inadequate ground clearance for deep snow is a strike against the chrysler 300 and magnum. their owners obviously know this as ive not seen one of those cars driving in deep snow. i seldom see mercedes and bmws in snow either. the last significant snow storm we had i had to maneuver past a bmw that bogged down to a complete stop in deep snow at an uphill left turn. my fwd drive wheels didnt slip one bit as i passed him. im sure he stayed home the next snow storm. .

From : brent p

very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. these apply if you have a wimpy 4 cylinder or a monster v8. all this shows is that you dont know how to drive a fwd. the control of the axles are the same only reversed. how do you control the rear alone. you have acceleration and brake control of the front axle and brake control of the rear axle iow control over both axles and i prefer more control over the steering axle. you have two brake pedals in your front wheel drive car or do you yank on the parking brake the only control that you have for the rear wheels alone is the parking brake. my nissan is a rwd and is almost worthless in slippery conditions unless you really know what you are doing which is fine for me but not so much for my wife. well too bad for her. her fwd intrepid can run circles around me in bad conditions and got her home in snow conditions that had most rwd and even some 4wd vehicles in ditches and on the side of the road. buy some decent tires or maybe youre not as good of a driver as you think you are. ill take a rwd car over a fwd car in snow provided i have proper tires. control over all four wheels is more important in snow than it

From : brent p

pavement. then you are a fool. just because you dont know what youre doing doesnt make me a fool. something for you to read http//www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/articleaid=/20070126/free/70122004 heres the key part fwd advantages front-drive is generally benign in the snow usually understeering continuing on a straight path rather than oversteering sliding sideways or spinnin when driven beyond the adhesion limit though oversteer is possible. because the driven wheels are also the steered wheels most drivers can better judge the traction limit which allows them to modulate throttle and steering more easily than in a rear-drive car. controlling understeer is more intuitive than catching oversteer. disadvantages the driver cannot control the cars attitude with the throttle as with rear-drive. also it helps to stay on the throttle in oversteer situations which is counterintuitive. what to do understeer dial out some steering. maintain or slowly come off the throttle while left-foot braking. this transfers weight to the front wheels and aids traction. what to do oversteer countersteer and maintain throttle. dont slam on the brakes as this transfers weight off the rear tires. also by maintaining throttle you allow the front wheels to pull the vehicle straight. biggest myth front-drive is better in snow because more weight sits over the driven wheels. this is true in some cases but it depends on the vehicles weight distribution. rwd advantages for experienced drivers rear-drive cars can be a lot of fun because of the seperation of driven wheels and steered wheels. throttle steering can allow a greater window of control - if you know what you are doing. disadvantages theres a tendency to oversteer when driving too hard for the amount of grip available. sliding sideways is not a common experience for most. what to do understeer the same steps apply as with front-drive though skilled drivers might find a quick throttle jab rotates the rear end and counters the understeer. dont try this until youve learned the technique in a controlled environment. what to do oversteer countersteer ease off throttle and dont brake - in that order. be careful not to overcorrect as youll snap in the opposite direction when the rear tires hook up. biggest myth rear-drive is useless in snow. the no. 1 way to improve your cars traction and handling is to install a good set of winter rubber. learning to drive properly in winter conditions is also at the top of the list. and since most modern rear-drive vehicles feature traction and/or stability control youll amaze your passengers with how easily your car handles old man winter. . 222 331236 tlgdnbjerlqw23ynz2dnuvzrvinz2d@comcast.com tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote i have no problem with proper tires. and what control do i have its called a throttle and a clutch. how do you control the rear of a fwd car the only control system over the rear wheels of such a car is the parking brake. they follow. come with me for a drive in the real snow driving we get in our western canadian mountains and ill teach you something about fwd. how about a chicago ice storm .

From : brent p

the same way you control the front wheels of a rwd vehicle with the brake. i control the front wheels of a rwd drive car with the steering wheel. the braking system works on all four at the same time. the only control system over the rear wheels of such a car is the parking brake. really what vehicles do you own that dont have the service brake working on the rear wheels the service brake operates all four there is no independent control. grow a clue. .

From : bill putney

some o wrote ...concord... ...concord... ...concord... ...concord... ...concord... its concorde. bill putney to reply by e-mail replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter x .

From : edward ohare

on sun 25 feb 2007 202931 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote how about a chicago ice storm take a cooked piece or spaghetti and try to move it by pushing on the end. what happens now try to move it by pulling on the end. what happens. can you apply this information to fwd versus rwd on snow .

From : some o

tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote i have no problem with proper tires. and what control do i have its called a throttle and a clutch. how do you control the rear of a fwd car the only control system over the rear wheels of such a car is the parking brake. they follow. come with me for a drive in the real snow driving we get in our western canadian mountains and ill teach you something about fwd. how about a chicago ice storm tame i said in the mountains hills with ice snow and rain included. im in vancouver bc. in the winter driving to whistler to ski it is common to start out in temperatures a few degrees above freezing and finish in temperatures several degrees below. its usually raining at vancouver and progresses through hail freezing rain wet snow and dry snow all within the 2 hr drive. of course there are lots of curves and several significant hills as the elevation rise is to 2000 ft in the last 35 miles. a few times each winter there are heavy falls of wet snow over 30cm in several hours 40 to 50cm in 8 to 10 hours occasionally. ive seen it all on this road and many 4wd vehicles are a big safety problem due to their inferior handling compared to a mid sized fwd car. they shouldnt drive as fast as the car traffic but they try to drive faster often with disastrous results. ive seen 4wd vehicles suddenly lose a curve even while just going along with the traffic. the evidence is left on the road side unfortunately with loss of life. the jeep cherokee is the best handling 4wd ive never seen one in trouble. the bronco explorer trooper and pathfinder are among the worst. vans arent so great either the mazda 4wd van of the 90s being very bad for handling. following these vehicles on dry curves i often see the drivers having trouble maintaining a constant track having to correct the track often. in the late 80s i hit glare ice braking to turn into the whistler village my chrysler lebaron without abs locked its wheels on the slightest touch of the brakes but it maintained its straight ahead track and i was able to slow enough to turn off the highway. i had to speed up a bit just as i was turning right because i noticed in my rear view mirror the rear of a dam bronco which had done a 180 and was closing on me. .

From : richard sexton

edward ohare edwardohare@nospam.yahoo.com.invalid wrote on sun 25 feb 2007 202931 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote how about a chicago ice storm take a cooked piece or spaghetti and try to move it by pushing on the end. what happens now try to move it by pulling on the end. what happens. can you apply this information to fwd versus rwd on snow ill keep this in mind if i ever try to drive in spaghetti. in the emantime dont underestimate 5000 lbs and good big-ass tires in snow. i swear the 300sd will drive through snow banks slowly chugging away. -- need mercedes parts http//parts.mbz.org richard sexton | mercedes stuff http//mbz.org 1970 280se 72 280se | home pages http//rs79.vrx.net 633csi 250se/c 300sd | http//aquaria.net http//killi.net .

From : scott en aztln

ive seen it all on this road and many 4wd vehicles are a big safety problem due to their inferior handling compared to a mid sized fwd car. they shouldnt drive as fast as the car traffic but they try to drive faster often with disastrous results. ive seen 4wd vehicles suddenly lose a curve even while just going along with the traffic. thats nice... trendy suv driving idiots in the ditch... yes weve all heard and seen it before. in the late 80s i hit glare ice braking to turn into the whistler village my chrysler lebaron without abs locked its wheels on the slightest touch of the brakes but it maintained its straight ahead track and i was able to slow enough to turn off the highway. and somehow you think this due to some fwd magic.... heres a hint it wasnt. the rear of your fwd lebaron is even more lightly loaded and thusly more prone to locking before the front wheels than that of a rwd car. the difference is proportioning in whatever far older vehicle that you expected to have the ass swing around with the slightest touch of the brakes in and has nothing to do with which end is the drive wheels. .

From : gordon hudson

i should say we tried a 1 1/16 12 point socket. i see a size 1 1/16 socket listed as a sending unit socket. will a 1 1/16 six point socket work on mon 26 feb 2007 083314 -0600 joe@aol wrote can anyone tell me what size socket fits the oil pressure sending unit on a 94 dakota 3.9 we are guessing it is a 26mm deep but no one has one to try. i hate to buy the wrong size. thanks i cant tell if the old one is the same as the new one or i would buy one to fit the new. we tried a 1 too small and 1 1/6 too big on the one in there. is there a special socket needed .

From : matthew t russotto

ive got a 91 w250 and am wondering if an inline injector pump will bolt on in the place of the old rotary pump without having to change the gears or housing plate im trying increase performance and as far as i can see nobody sells high performance rotary pumps. .

From : just facts

tbone wrote and thats the main problem with the 1500 they use a mid-sized drive train in a full sized truck. and we wonder why toyota is starting to kick the american manufacturers asses. a hemi 1500 ram will easily run away from a v8 nissan titan or v8 toyota tundra pulling up a moderate to steep grade. as a hemi ram owner i sadly have to admit my neighbors nissan titan kicks my trucks ass in about every way performance wise. the titan is a pos truck but it does run great. dodge should copy or buy the nissan tranny and they could drop the gear ratio to say 3.5 or so and have better performance than either truck does now with a slight milage gain. my truck is faster than most hemis as i have 17 wheels with the 3.92 gears and runs better than any other stock hemi i have driven. bdk .

From : some o

can anyone tell me what size socket fits the oil pressure sending unit on a 94 dakota 3.9 we are guessing it is a 26mm deep but no one has one to try. i hate to buy the wrong size. thanks i cant tell if the old one is the same as the new one or i would buy one to fit the new. we tried a 1 too small and 1 1/6 too big on the one in there. is there a special socket needed there is a special socket for these. you need the particular socket for it its not a standard 6 8 or 12 point. if you can get to it with an open end wrench thats never happened to me with the engine in the vehicle one of the larger wrenches will work cant recall the size off hand. .

From : brent p

suddenly without warning craig c. exclaimed 27-feb-07 1246 am on feb 26 552 am jmc nogroupss...@nojodibody.homeus wrote so am i damaging my engine with old oil or is the # of miles more important as max said synthetic is your best option. as a side note ... youre in australia correct no shipping restrictions on auto-parts that im aware of. id be happy to help you get the parts you need and send them to you if that will help any. may cost a bit more with shipping and all but as has been said better to be safe than sorry. craig c. thanks for the offer craig but that sort of thing id normally get from partsamerica... cept ill be in the us for a bit coming up so i can get the parts while im there. gotta get some air filters too. planning on doing *lots* of shopping; the auto parts store is only the tip of the iceberg. i love australia but the shopping in this small outback town gets very same old same old very quickly incidentally id already made the decision to go synthetic. with what it costs for an oil change here ill probably save $$ in the long run used to do my own but i forgot one slight factor when i bought this truck arm length. really hard to reach the filter! and before you ask hubbys not much taller than i jmc .

From : just facts

on mon 26 feb 2007 084605 -0500 roy roy@home.net wrote here it is the end of feb. and we get our first truly plowable storm a whole 4 inches! shut up denny and i dont have a plow. going to have to get one of my friends over here. i tried to move the charger out of the garage just for the hell of it. who but dc would make a 425hp car without ls posi or something. the traction control works to a point but... roy yeah i shoveled 4 to 5 inches of its only going to rain myself. with all the computers and satalites you would think they could get it right. but it could be worse they could call for partly cloudy. ya have to get out ther backhoe to shovel that. beekeep . 222 331288 jfact-13fd97.15284326022007@.telus.net tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote you just dont want to accept facts too bad your brain is locked in reverse. its not my fault you are too stupid to understand that the rear brakes locking up first has *nothing* to do with which wheels are driven but only with the braking system of the car and its weight distribution. if you knew anything about the physics of the problem its the fwd car that should lock up its rears first if anything because of a tendency towards a more front biased weight distribution. he told you a bronco did a 180 trying to slow down behind him and on ice all 4 wheels would lock up very easily like immediately. who is the stupid one here .

From : nate nagel

just facts wrote tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote you just dont want to accept facts too bad your brain is locked in reverse. its not my fault you are too stupid to understand that the rear brakes locking up first has *nothing* to do with which wheels are driven but only with the braking system of the car and its weight distribution. if you knew anything about the physics of the problem its the fwd car that should lock up its rears first if anything because of a tendency towards a more front biased weight distribution. he told you a bronco did a 180 trying to slow down behind him and on ice all 4 wheels would lock up very easily like immediately. who is the stupid one here if all four wheels lock up the vehicle should remain stable and keep going in a straight line assuming a flat road. you only do 180s under braking if the rears lock first. nate -- replace roosters with cox to reply. http//members.cox.net/njnagel .

From : brent p

tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote you just dont want to accept facts too bad your brain is locked in reverse. its not my fault you are too stupid to understand that the rear brakes locking up first has *nothing* to do with which wheels are driven but only with the braking system of the car and its weight distribution. if you knew anything about the physics of the problem its the fwd car that should lock up its rears first if anything because of a tendency towards a more front biased weight distribution. he told you a bronco did a 180 trying to slow down behind him and on ice all 4 wheels would lock up very easily like immediately. who is the stupid one here he cant drive a truck made in the 70s. goodie for him. .

From : Annonymous

ive owned an 88 volvo rwd a 71 pontiacrwd an 88 mx-6fwd 94 accordfwd 78 nova rwd and a 96 subaru. i would say that the 71 and 78 gm cars were acceptable on the snow but not my first choices. the car that performed the worst was the mx-6. it had bad throttle off oversteer tendencies in the snow that sent me into a guard rail once. fortunately i was going slow and the rear bumper just grazed it but still scary. had it been a rwd car i could have given it a little gas to shift weight and get the back end back behind me. before you dispute this or say i am nuts learn a little about vehicle dynamics and note that i said little gas. then try it some time with a rwd car in the snow. a little bit of gas will straighten you out. a lot will break the tail end loose and make life worse. this is what a real driver is talking about when they mention changing the attitude of the car with the gas pedal. you are varying the vector inline with the car which then changes the available traction to contribute to the lateral vector. you are also shifting weight. these combine to alter the lateral grip of the tire and the attitude of the car. back to the point... the mx-6 was a nightmare. the best car in the snow except for the subaru of course was the volvo. it is rear wheel drive. i never got stuck even in 6-8 inches of snow in hilly areas. if you know how to drift a rear drive car in the snow you can get it to go exactly where you want it to. i am not condoning driving like a maniac but in slippery conditions it is a nice skill to have if an emergency arises where you have to make a save. the subaru is in my opinion the best car for the snow as long as it can clear it. it has wonderful traction great braking great handling and if you hit something it has a low cg so it wont flip as easily as a behemoth suv. if i were to buy a car for my grandmother to drive in the snow and the subaru wasnt available it would be the zero-skill-required-just- drive-like-a-snail fwd accord. however if i could spend two hours with someone in a parking lot full of snow teaching them how to control a car with their right foot i would buy them a rwd car. in skilled hands an rwd car is more friendly. one caveat is that if it has loads of power it is hard to finely control the power to the rear wheels which is necessary to control the attitude of the car. that is what makes it hard to handle. that is why pony cars got a bad name. people say it is the light rear end but id bet you get less complaints from 6 cylinder pony cars than from 8 cylinder ones. and for those discussing the back end coming out earlier that can happen on any car. it is not a function of weight or driveline. it is more a function of brake bias suspension geometrysufficient rear toe tire pressures correct and what the ddriver is doing with the car before braking. if the car already has a yaw moment it is easy to get a twitchy car to rotate with the brake pedal. it is actually easier with a car that has the weight over the front wheels since you can apply more braking force with the front wheels while turning before they will lock up and lose the lateral vector. some elementary books on the science are the carroll smith series to win then you need to go to college text to really get into the good stuff. i forget the title of the one that i learned from but it is turquise in color and it has everything in it. sae papers are too expensive. .

From : dll

weelliott@gmail.com back to the point... i would say that the 71 and 78 gm cars were acceptable on the snow the best car in the snow except for the subaru of course was the volvo. the subaru is in my opinion the best car for the snow if i were to buy a car for my grandmother to drive in the snow have you considered a snowmobile i hear they are really great in snow. - nate .

From : who

weelliott@gmail.com weelliott@gmail.com wrote i would say that the 71 and 78 gm cars were acceptable on the snow but not my first choices. i had a rwd 63 chev ii for 100k miles over 8 yrs. it was bad in snow. i had a rwd gmc van long version for 60k moles over 12 yrs. it was camper converted so had a fairly good weight balance. it was very bad terrible in snow. these two vehicles were manual transmission. a long time ago about 1960 i had a morris minor rwd as a loaner car it was totally useless in snow. at that time my car was a vw beetle rwd rear engine which was great in snow even with summer tires if you didnt go too fast when you wanted to turn- then it didnt turn. .

From : fred w

r. mark clayton wrote bjn wrote on sat 24 feb 2007 205731 -0500 edward ohare could it be theyll have to **pay** someone to take chrysler dont forget they make these too http//www.caranddriver.com/previews/11572/2007-jeep-wrangler-and-wrangler-unlimited.html which is part of the problem. outside the us suvs are increasingly seen as anti-green anti pedestrian and un-cool. london probably about half the new car market in the uk has recently introduced a special 25 $50 charge for suvs to drive in - three times that for ordinary cars. surely you are not calling a jeep wrangler an suv -- -fred w .

From : paul elliot

brent p wrote tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote i have no problem with proper tires. and what control do i have its called a throttle and a clutch. how do you control the rear of a fwd car the only control system over the rear wheels of such a car is the parking brake. they follow. come with me for a drive in the real snow driving we get in our western canadian mountains and ill teach you something about fwd. how about a chicago ice storm the only thing that will save you then is studded snow tires. -- heaven is where the police are british the chefs italian the mechanics german the lovers french and it is all organized by the swiss. hell is where the police are german the chefs british the mechanics french the lovers swiss and it is all organized by italians. http//new.photos.yahoo.com/paul1cart/albums/ .

From : edward ohare

on sun 25 feb 2007 011905 gmt imethisguy imethisguyno@spamtelus.net wrote i suppose it would be bad optics if they took part of the money they get for the chrysler division assuming they got any money at all now thats an interesting idea. what **is** the value of a car company that is losing money losing market share is non-competitive in the bread and butter midsize segment i thought the previous sebring/stratus were terrible cars very much like the large current gm cars and the new ones arent getting good reviews and basically has a lineup other than the pickups and minivans of niche models oh yea it has old factories an old workforce huge obligations to retirees and the only market it does reasonably well in north america is one that every auto maker in the world wants a piece of. could it be theyll have to **pay** someone to take chrysler .

From : arif khokar

brent p wrote however your front driver isnt like that. when it loses traction youre just shit out of luck unless you know the counter intuitive things to do. if you lift the throttle you could just be making matters worse by unloading your front wheels. i take it you meant rear wheels. in any case lifting the throttle and decreasing steering input was somewhat intuitive for me. then again counter steering is also intuitive to me as well .

From : geekboy

geekboy wrote have you ever owned or driven one have driven a rental one. although it has good torque it is ponderous gives you no feel for the road the steering is very soft and handles badly. you just have to get accustomed to it. just because it feels that way dont mean it dont handle well. years ago my mom had a 79 big ford ltd. to me it felt the same way you described and i could never get used to driving it as a young driver. i eventually totaled it because an oncoming driver on a narrow road blinded me with their lights. i could not feel what part of the road i was on went into a ditch and hit a cement culvert. .

From : brent p

on sat 24 feb 2007 124316 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. most people dont drive like you do. in that i make an effort to drive properly yep. oh yea you drive properly as far as extracting most of what a car has to offer from it. but you need to be doing that on a private track not out in public. i see this was your lame attempt at personal attack to try and protray me as some sort of boy racer. well it doesnt change that rwd is better than fwd and it can be realized in normal street driving. for them reasonable ride and handling combined with greater interior and trunk space makes fwd a better system. properly designed trunk space and interior space differences are negligible. lets start with a flat floor as close to the ground as possible. i know of no fwd car that has said flat floor. they still have a hump its just slightly smaller. the ride height of the car has zero to do with which wheels are driven. with rear drive you have to provide for the transmission. you have to provide room for it in fwd drive as well. you can have a very long engine compartment and house it there but you end up with a very long car. or a very wide one with fwd or a tiny engine. so following what has been common practice for decades you raise a portion of the floor to clear the transmission. and yet that hump is still there in fwd cars. because in fwd cars the shifter linkage exhaust etc are still run through the center. i cant imagine putting the transmission in a long engine compartment qualifies as being properly designed for any aspect other than to support your idea it can be done. extra vehicle length extra weight increased turning radius you name it they all get worse. nice strawman. of course you can get the transmission out of the passenger compartment space by mounting the engine transversely. hey theres the ticket. and have shitty weight distribution because of it and still have a hump in the passenger compartment just a bit smaller of a hump. and the motion is already in the right plane just at the wrong end of the car for rwd. so lets.... hey! all you need is a chain and sprocket on each side and run them directly to sprockets on each rear wheel... just like a motorcycle... right through the rockers. but then the rockers are kinda tall high entry height. but youd have an excuse for gull wing doors that woudl probably leak when exposed to a heavy dew. you seem to like building absurd senarios and then knocking them down. completely and utterly meaningless. well none of this works so lets accept transmission encroachment into the passenger compartment space. now we have the differential to be concerned with. a fairly large item and with a live axle it has to move. so now we have another deviation from a flat floor. and if you put in irs thats fine the differential doesnt move but now the irs will encroach substantially unless you consider something like semi-trailing arms or swing axles to be properly designed rear suspensions. spoken like someone who has never crawled under a fwd car. i havent been under a fwd car that didnt have enough space under there for a differential. in fact many front wheel drive cars have a structural beam for the suspension right where a live axle would be on a rear wheel drive car and its nearly as big as one. the space savings you are mentioning are negligible. tiny. what control do you have when the rear wheels spin and the rear fishtails look at what theyve spent on abs to prevent this from happening under braking. yet you think its ok under power. i have no problem with proper tires. and what control do i have its called a throttle and a clutch. how do you control the rear of a fwd car the only control system over the rear wheels of such a car is the parking brake. all the control youre talking about does is let you increase or decrease the spin rate after rwd has caused a spin. with fwd loss of traction to the drive wheels doesnt cause a spin. theres no need to control the rear wheels. the car goes straight and they remain under control. obviously you dont know how to drive. with a rear wheel drive car you can feel the instability coming on before youve lost all traction and just lift the throttle a bit and not spin. in addition to that the front wheels can steer the car and be used to compensate. thats the beauty of being able to control all four wheels if you lose traction on either end you still have some control to use to get it back and its intuitive. however your front driver isnt like that. when it loses traction youre just shit out of luck unless you know the counter intuitive things to do. if you lift the throttle you could just be making matters worse by unloading your front wheels. if

From : matthew t russotto

edward ohare edwardohare@nospam.yahoo.com.invalid wrote could it be theyll have to **pay** someone to take chrysler they could sell it to a group which will take it into bankruptcy strip off and sell the minivan division and send the rest to the breakers. except that congress would shit a brick at the unions behest. -- theres no such thing as a free lunch but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. .

From : brent p

brent p wrote however your front driver isnt like that. when it loses traction youre just shit out of luck unless you know the counter intuitive things to do. if you lift the throttle you could just be making matters worse by unloading your front wheels. i take it you meant rear wheels. in any case lifting the throttle and decreasing steering input was somewhat intuitive for me. then again counter steering is also intuitive to me as well dammit... read that over twice and still missed that. anyway point being you have to know what youre doing at the limits with fwd. that reminds me of something i forgot with rwd in snow the throttle can be used to steer ; .

From : art

gordon hudson wrote i got a lincoln towncar that says different. now that is a good american car. i hope youre joking. why would he be have you ever owned or driven one that is a nice car. it drives nice and looks good. it sure does drive better than most of the mercedes-benz i have driven and the v8 is has can really get that car moving quick. the continental had only a v6 and has since been discontinued. though i have the older model which is the most popular due to its larger size and nicer looks and the trunk space is huge. 4 body size ;- i also get lots of compliments on it. it looks almost new. the newest ones are too rounded and much smaller than the previous generation. gonna keep this one a long time. i used to rent lincoln towncars a decade ago when one company had them cheap. could not believe the windnoise. basically the same lousy front door weatherstripping design as on my 91 taurus. .

From : art

wrote on sat 24 feb 2007 124316 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote wrote very true. the advantages of rwd drive come mostly from handling and being able to control all four wheels. most people dont drive like you do. in that i make an effort to drive properly yep. oh yea you drive properly as far as extracting most of what a car has to offer from it. but you need to be doing that on a private track not out in public. i see this was your lame attempt at personal attack to try and protray me as some sort of boy racer. well it doesnt change that rwd is better than fwd and it can be realized in normal street driving. for them reasonable ride and handling combined with greater interior and trunk space makes fwd a better system. properly designed trunk space and interior space differences are negligible. lets start with a flat floor as close to the ground as possible. i know of no fwd car that has said flat floor. they still have a hump its just slightly smaller. the ride height of the car has zero to do with which wheels are driven. check out honda civic and toyota avalon. the rest could have flat floors if car makers wanted to. .

From : brent p

on sat 24 feb 2007 215008 -0600 tetraethylleadremovethis@yahoo.com brent p wrote that reminds me of something i forgot with rwd in snow the throttle can be used to steer ; oh yes at the cost of loosing driving traction. you do want to go somewhere dont you not just spin in circles. again apparently you dont know how to drive. use the throttle to enduce some oversteer and turn quicker than normal. its fun if you know how to do it. .