Random Thoughts... [Automotive Edition]

Ok, want an answer to a question I have... My parents recently (yesterday) spent $7300 on a 2007 Kia Rio with around 50,000 miles. It is essentially a base model, as in wind up windows.

My first instinct is that this is a tremendous ripoff.

Agree/disagree?
 
JakeRadden said:
Ok, want an answer to a question I have... My parents recently (yesterday) spent $7300 on a 2007 Kia Rio with around 50,000 miles. It is essentially a base model, as in wind up windows.

My first instinct is that this is a tremendous ripoff.

Agree/disagree?
Click to expand...

I would say decent ripoff. they could have gotten a 2008 with 15000 less miles for $200 more. before any bargaining takes place
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/ctd/1525211709.html
 
Last edited:
So my car needs a new transmission, dad can't fix it without spending so much that it would be the same amount as a rebuilt one. Before he does anything, what could incorrect gear ratios mean? It makes a clunk sound when trying for third and only holds the first two gears. It is the tiptronic transmission if that helps.
 
Topgearfanatic said:
So my car needs a new transmission, dad can't fix it without spending so much that it would be the same amount as a rebuilt one. Before he does anything, what could incorrect gear ratios mean? It makes a clunk sound when trying for third and only holds the first two gears. It is the tiptronic transmission if that helps.
Click to expand...

"Incorrect ratios" could mean that the transmission computer is attempting to select a gear and for whatever reason (mechanical failure, solenoid pack failure, sensor failure) the transmission isn't going into that gear - and since the computer doesn't get confirmation of the shift, it says the equivalent of "I'm in third, but the gearbox says I'm still in second... wait a sec, that's not right..."

Clunk noise would argue that the solenoid pack is still working but that some other part of the mechanism has died; this will put the system into limp-home mode in order to try to preserve what you have left - hence why it's only got two gears.

Chances are pretty good that this is due to the classic $0.50 VW Transmission Cooler O-Ring Failure. VAG never seems to do enough US-climactic-condition testing.

JakeRadden said:
Ok, want an answer to a question I have... My parents recently (yesterday) spent $7300 on a 2007 Kia Rio with around 50,000 miles. It is essentially a base model, as in wind up windows.

My first instinct is that this is a tremendous ripoff.

Agree/disagree?
Click to expand...

Enormous ripoff. No, seriously. $7300 will buy you a lot better than that (might want to look really closely at what this one is :D), especially as that Rio doesn't have a warranty any more. Even if you don't want a Jaguar, you can get better deals. As pointed out above, a 2008 is about the same price, and you could even have found some leftover 2009s for that price - and that would have had a warranty.

tigger said:
A long, proud tradition at GM. I think they're still trying to get people to believe that OnStar is better than an actual nav screen.
Click to expand...

They're still running ads for it that way. They're trying to get people to buy the 'navigation-as-a-subscription' idea rather than shell out for real navigation systems in lesser cars. Government Motors for you there.
 
Last edited:
Here's a question: when rev matching while downshifting, suppose you don't quite hit the sweetspot - is it "better" to

a) over do it and have too many revs

b) half done and have too little revs

?
 
Brother Michael said:
Here's a question: when rev matching while downshifting, suppose you don't quite hit the sweetspot - is it "better" to

a) over do it and have too many revs

b) half done and have too little revs

?
Click to expand...

Depends, are you decelerating or dropping a cog for better acceleration?
 
Spectre said:
Yeah, the Stanley/Proto line is pretty good stuff.

The only issue is that you now need a 3/8" drive and a 1/4" drive one to cover everything. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Do you make money turning wrenches? Probably not since you just bought a torque wrench. So just get some adapters to change the drive to 3/8" and 1/4". They are always handy to have around.
 
question about torque, rpm and fuel...

yesterday i had a discussion with a friend who drives a 2008 volvo V50 2.0D with a 6 speed gearbox.

he was driving around at 90kmh, and put it in sixth gear, so his revs dropped to about 1800rpm.

his maximum torque is around 2K rpm

now will he use less fuel staying 200 revs below maximum torque, or staying 200 revs above?

i think it's better to stay above, but have nothing to backup my claim...

anyone else?
 
GRtak said:
Do you make money turning wrenches? Probably not since you just bought a torque wrench. So just get some adapters to change the drive to 3/8" and 1/4". They are always handy to have around.
Click to expand...

I wasn't the one who just got his first torque wrench.

Tell me, does your half inch torue wrench that you're so proud of and consider should be the only one you need go down to 7 foot pounds? No?

Then you can't use it on a lot of modern and not-so-modern cars for everything. Valve or rocker covers can have torque specs of inch-pounds and getting it right can be critical to avoid leakage and warpage... unless you're one of the cretinous apes I despise who just slathers on gallons of RTV and torques to 'whatever feels good'... then wonders why his engine grenaded because of oil starvation (because the RTV got into places it shouldn't have).
 
Last edited:
bone said:
question about torque, rpm and fuel...

yesterday i had a discussion with a friend who drives a 2008 volvo V50 2.0D with a 6 speed gearbox.

he was driving around at 90kmh, and put it in sixth gear, so his revs dropped to about 1800rpm.

his maximum torque is around 2K rpm

now will he use less fuel staying 200 revs below maximum torque, or staying 200 revs above?

i think it's better to stay above, but have nothing to backup my claim...

anyone else?
Click to expand...

Below max torque, I think. Just as it's mostly pointless to rev above torque peak, I can't imagine that it would get any more fuel efficient either.

Brother Michael said:
Ah, forgot about that: decelerating.
Click to expand...

Lower. A little more wear on the synchros, but more engine braking and no forward surge.
 
Spectre said:
Below max torque, I think. Just as it's mostly pointless to rev above torque peak, I can't imagine that it would get any more fuel efficient either.
Click to expand...

eh?

torque peak is at 2000rpm, max hp is at 4000rpm. if you never go about 2K, you won't be going anywhere?
 
IIRC it doesnt matter above or below, since it's only 200 rpms so it wont make much difference anyway
I usually do the same in my car though (slightly below the "sweet" spot) and it makes it a tad more economical
 
bone said:
eh?

torque peak is at 2000rpm, max hp is at 4000rpm. if you never go about 2K, you won't be going anywhere?
Click to expand...

Generally, if you have a relatively peaky engine (and I'm sorry, that's most small displacement diesels and gas engines), shifting too much after the torque peak is pointless as the torque output falls off dramatically. While 'shift at or just after your torque peak' is a good general rule for efficiency, it's just a general rule. You'd need to sit down and crunch numbers to figure out what to do with any given car.

See:
http://www.datsuns.com/Tech/whentoshift.htm
http://www.allpar.com/eek/hp-vs-torque.html
http://www.welltall.com/ymc/discovery/car/shiftpt.html
 
EyeMWing said:
Automatic headlights and wipers can bite me. Seriously. Lights are a switch - you turn them on once per trip. And how the hell is a computer supposed to know how well *I* can see through the windshield? Crude emulation at best. I can handle pushing a lever and twiddling a knob every few minutes, thank you.
Click to expand...

I don't miss them, I just sort of expected it on a fully loaded car.
 
Spectre said:
"Incorrect ratios" could mean that the transmission computer is attempting to select a gear and for whatever reason (mechanical failure, solenoid pack failure, sensor failure) the transmission isn't going into that gear - and since the computer doesn't get confirmation of the shift, it says the equivalent of "I'm in third, but the gearbox says I'm still in second... wait a sec, that's not right..."

Clunk noise would argue that the solenoid pack is still working but that some other part of the mechanism has died; this will put the system into limp-home mode in order to try to preserve what you have left - hence why it's only got two gears.

Chances are pretty good that this is due to the classic $0.50 VW Transmission Cooler O-Ring Failure. VAG never seems to do enough US-climactic-condition testing.



Enormous ripoff. No, seriously. $7300 will buy you a lot better than that (might want to look really closely at what this one is :D), especially as that Rio doesn't have a warranty any more. Even if you don't want a Jaguar, you can get better deals. As pointed out above, a 2008 is about the same price, and you could even have found some leftover 2009s for that price - and that would have had a warranty.



They're still running ads for it that way. They're trying to get people to buy the 'navigation-as-a-subscription' idea rather than shell out for real navigation systems in lesser cars. Government Motors for you there.
Click to expand...
Thanks Spectre, you're great!
 
This is the Escalade my family rented on a recent trip to Colorado.
I must say for being a 10 tonne piece of crap it's a lot of fun to be in. Sure there's no brakes or acceleration and the interior is plastic made to look like chrome, but it'll definately put a smile on your face... provided you get to return it after a week.
http://img109.imageshack.**/img109/2144/img5017x.jpg
 
I have similar thoughts about my dad's Hummer H2. It's great fun to drive. Once.

OnStar's accident response thing is intriguing but it's also a bit Big Brother ish. And no, I don't need a "call someone for directions" button in my car thank you very much, I have GPS / friends for that.
 
Spectre said:
Then you can't use it on a lot of modern and not-so-modern cars for everything. Valve or rocker covers can have torque specs of inch-pounds and getting it right can be critical to avoid leakage and warpage... unless you're one of the cretinous apes I despise who just slathers on gallons of RTV and torques to 'whatever feels good'... then wonders why his engine grenaded because of oil starvation (because the RTV got into places it shouldn't have).
Click to expand...

This. And it's not like the low-spec ones are terribly expensive, either. Sure, the bigass digital half inch ones are $200 (and go down to ~20ft/lb), but a click-type 3/8 inch drive (which goes up to just a hair over 20ft/lb) is like $70, max. Now yeah, if you need more than 20lbs in a 3/8 inch format, just just a fucking adapter, because do you really honestly want 3 fucking torque wrenches to worry about losing/destroying?

Sure, it'd be nice to have a precision little one as well, but you're going to get less use out of it unless you're performing open-heart surgery on a regular basis - which most DIY mechanics aren't going to do more than once or twice in a lifetime.



Alternatively, you could try to be my dad and try to use one of these horrible abominations. Sorry, but attacking a bolt with all my might and reading a gauge at the same time just isn't going to happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top