Really bad trunk leak on a 1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP
Mike Howells
I have a brand new 1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP and noticed some moisture in
the trunk area. I removed the cover to the spare tire and found about 10
gallons of standing water where the spare tire sits. I had to remove
EVERYTHING and unplug the rubber plugs to unplug the water. The water
flowed out like a broken aquarium.
The car trunk smells like total mildew now and the trunk carpet is in bad
shape. Can you confirm if this is a warranty issue? Also, has anybody else
experienced this problem with 1997 Grand Prix's? I can't find where the
leak is coming from so I have a feeling they'll probably have the car in
service for quite a long time. When I drain the trunk it fills right back
up again when it rains. Oh the fun of owning a new car.
--
Mike Howells
mhow...@i1.net
http://www.i1.net/~mhowells
chita
Ewww....... I'd say this certainly WAS a warranty issue. Take that car
back to the dealer and just go home, indicating you'll be back when they've
fixed it. They'll probably put in a new rubber around the trunk. Sounds as
if that might be the problem. It would also be appropriate for you to
demand that they clean the moldy mess, too, IMHO.
Mike Howells <mhow...@i1.net> wrote in article
<5ntbkh$8j3$1...@news1.i1.net>...
MisterFixit
Mike Howells wrote:
>
> I have a brand new 1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP and noticed some moisture in
> the trunk area. I removed the cover to the spare tire and found about 10
> EVERYTHING and unplug the rubber plugs to unplug the water. The water
> flowed out like a broken aquarium.
>
> The car trunk smells like total mildew now and the trunk carpet is in bad
> shape. Can you confirm if this is a warranty issue? Also, has anybody else
> experienced this problem with 1997 Grand Prix's? I can't find where the
> leak is coming from so I have a feeling they'll probably have the car in
> service for quite a long time. When I drain the trunk it fills right back
> up again when it rains. Oh the fun of owning a new car.
> --
> Mike Howells
> mhow...@i1.net
> http://www.i1.net/~mhowells
Youuuu betcha! There is nothing in the owners manual that discusses a
feature where you can keep goldfish alive in the trunk!!
My wife had been looking at used cars last fall and noticed that 90% of
all GM trunks are moldy and mildewed and that the floor under the trunk
mats are rusted from so much moisture. She never found any goldfish but
she sure did find water. Each time she questioned the salesperson they
gave her some cock and bull story about the trunk being accidently open
when they took it thru the car wash or equivalent bull.
We now have a 92 Pontiac Bonneville which is dry as a bone - no leaks,
no moisture. So it looks like it can be done, make a GM with a dry
trunk. Something definately went wrong at the GM design board to have
so many cars with wet trunks.
--
Bob
Chilton, Motor and Haynes have their place but there is nothing like the
Manufacturer's Shop Manual for the detailed explanation and diagrams you
need to do some serious work. Get it from your local public library -
it's FREEEEEE!!!
Edward Kim
Mike Howells (mhow...@i1.net) wrote:
: The car trunk smells like total mildew now and the trunk carpet is in bad
: shape. Can you confirm if this is a warranty issue? Also, has anybody else
: experienced this problem with 1997 Grand Prix's? I can't find where the
: leak is coming from so I have a feeling they'll probably have the car in
: service for quite a long time. When I drain the trunk it fills right back
: up again when it rains. Oh the fun of owning a new car.
My friend owns a '97 Grand Prix GT and he had the same EXACT problem.
Took it in for warranty work and no more problems to speak of.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+Edward Kim +
+Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 +
+uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!+
+1996 Mustang GT White/Black interior 5-speed +
+SVO 3.55s, SVO subframes, K&N w/o air intake silencer +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
*W0lph*
> I have a brand new 1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP and noticed some moisture in
> the trunk area. I removed the cover to the spare tire and found about 10
> gallons of standing water where the spare tire sits. I had to remove
> EVERYTHING and unplug the rubber plugs to unplug the water. The water
> flowed out like a broken aquarium.
>
> The car trunk smells like total mildew now and the trunk carpet is in bad
> shape. Can you confirm if this is a warranty issue? Also, has anybody else
> experienced this problem with 1997 Grand Prix's? I can't find where the
> leak is coming from so I have a feeling they'll probably have the car in
> service for quite a long time. When I drain the trunk it fills right back
> up again when it rains. Oh the fun of owning a new car.
Welcome to the wonderful world of GM.
Mark J. Rinehart
> I have a brand new 1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP and noticed some moisture in
> the trunk area. I removed the cover to the spare tire and found about 10
> gallons of standing water where the spare tire sits. I had to remove
> EVERYTHING and unplug the rubber plugs to unplug the water. The water
> flowed out like a broken aquarium.
> The car trunk smells like total mildew now and the trunk carpet is in bad
> shape. Can you confirm if this is a warranty issue? Also, has anybody else
> experienced this problem with 1997 Grand Prix's? I can't find where the
> leak is coming from so I have a feeling they'll probably have the car in
> service for quite a long time. When I drain the trunk it fills right back
> up again when it rains. Oh the fun of owning a new car.
> Mike Howells
I have a 95 GP GTP. My trunk leaked on 4 different occasions - the
first 3 occasions, the rear windshield seal was allegedly the problem.
Oddly enough, the fourth occasion allegedly didn't involved the rear
windshield - isn't that interesting, considering that the NJ lemon law
can be invoked on the 4th fix of the same warranty item, for the same
exact problem? - anyway, on the 4th occasion, I was told that the rear
spoiler and 2 body seams were the problem - this, even though the leak
was in exactly the same place as the 1st three times.
YES - if yours were my car, I'd have it back to the dealer so fast,
their heads would be spinning.
Mark
wong
In article <*W0lph*-16069711...@192.168.1.7>, *W0lph*@emi.net (*W0lph*) writes:
|> In article <5ntbkh$8j3$1...@news1.i1.net>, "Mike Howells" <mhow...@i1.net> wrote:
|>
|> > I have a brand new 1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP and noticed some moisture in
|> > the trunk area. I removed the cover to the spare tire and found about 10
|> > gallons of standing water where the spare tire sits. I had to remove
|> > EVERYTHING and unplug the rubber plugs to unplug the water. The water
|> > flowed out like a broken aquarium.
|> >
|> > The car trunk smells like total mildew now and the trunk carpet is in bad
|> > shape. Can you confirm if this is a warranty issue? Also, has anybody else
|> > experienced this problem with 1997 Grand Prix's? I can't find where the
|> > leak is coming from so I have a feeling they'll probably have the car in
|> > service for quite a long time. When I drain the trunk it fills right back
|> > up again when it rains. Oh the fun of owning a new car.
|>
|> Welcome to the wonderful world of GM.
When GM designed the 1st gen Saturn, they didn't provide drainage for the
trunk. So when you open a wet trunk lid, all the water falls into the trunk.
Seems like a design flaw. I wouldn't be surprised if GM doesn't give a damn
about customers complaining wet trunks.
--
reverse my login name and remove "anti.spam." to reply by email.
91 Isuzu Stylus XS -- shares the showroom floor with Saturn
97 Acura Integra GS-R
Victor Smith
On 16 Jun 1997 19:17:57 GMT, wca...@anti.spam.bnr.ca (wong) wrote:
>
>When GM designed the 1st gen Saturn, they didn't provide drainage for the
>trunk. So when you open a wet trunk lid, all the water falls into the trunk.
>Seems like a design flaw. I wouldn't be surprised if GM doesn't give a damn
>about customers complaining wet trunks.
>
Yeah, this reminds me of Honda designing tail-light lenses that fill
with water every time it rains. Been happening for years. I wouldn't
be surprised if Honda doesn't give a damn about customers complaining
about burnt out tail-lights and strange sloshing noises.
--Vic
Andi Baritchi
Mike Howells wrote:
>
> I have a brand new 1997 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP and noticed some
> moisture in
> the trunk area. I removed the cover to the spare tire and found about
> 10
> gallons of standing water where the spare tire sits. I had to remove
> EVERYTHING and unplug the rubber plugs to unplug the water. The water
> flowed out like a broken aquarium.
>
> The car trunk smells like total mildew now and the trunk carpet is in
> bad
> shape. Can you confirm if this is a warranty issue? Also, has anybody
> else
> experienced this problem with 1997 Grand Prix's? I can't find where
> the
> leak is coming from so I have a feeling they'll probably have the car
> in
> service for quite a long time. When I drain the trunk it fills right
> back
> up again when it rains. Oh the fun of owning a new car.
Funny how the Maximas are well-built -- something that Pontiac leaves to
be desired.
--Andi
--
#include <disclaimer.h>
/*
\\\\\|/////
\\ / \ //
( O O )
*-------------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo-------------------*
| |
| Andi Baritchi Student and Webmaster |
| Computer Science & Eng. http://www-cse.uta.edu |
| University of Texas at Arlington |
| |
| http://web2.airmail.net/andi an...@airmail.net |
| |
| .oooO |
| ( ) Oooo. |
*---------------------\ (--( )--------------------*
\_) ) /
(_/
*/
Bentley
Victor Smith (vics...@ameritech.net) said something like:
: Yeah, this reminds me of Honda designing tail-light lenses that fill
: with water every time it rains. Been happening for years.
It has? Funny, of the seven Hondas I've owned, and in which I've driven a
quarter million miles, I've never had this happen. Which of your Hondas
had this problem, Vic? Years and models, please.
--
> B E N T L E Y < ben...@access.digex.net
Victor Smith
On 17 Jun 1997 13:52:13 GMT, ben...@access2.digex.net (Bentley) wrote:
>Victor Smith (vics...@ameritech.net) said something like:
>: Yeah, this reminds me of Honda designing tail-light lenses that fill
>: with water every time it rains. Been happening for years.
>
>It has? Funny, of the seven Hondas I've owned, and in which I've driven a
>quarter million miles, I've never had this happen. Which of your Hondas
>had this problem, Vic? Years and models, please.
Seven Hondas?! My God, is this the same same Bentley who has so many
times trumpeted his eclectic taste in cars? Which other cars have you
owned seven of, may I ask?
I hardly expected this response from you, oh impartial one, who has oft
railed against slamming a mfg for the anecdotal sins of a model.
May I remind you that my post to which you've taken offense, in response
to a post from Mr. Honda (probably Isaac) Wong, who was in agreement
with Mr. Nissan Wolph, which bashed all of GM because of reported
leaking trunks in new Pontiacs, was a simple tit-for-tat?
As for how many Honda's I've owned, that number probably equals the
sum of the number of Pontiacs owned by mssgrs. Wong and Wolph.
And my reply was in keeping with the 'let's be fair' rules of conduct
you have so often espoused.
But you have shown your Honda fanaticism once again, in blinding
yourself to this well known Honda problem of leaking headlights and wet
trunks (and BTW, to me, this problem, like the leaking Pontiacs, ain't
no big THANG).
Attached, since you asked, is but a sample of posts noting this
problem, from R.A.H of course (you see, I am truly eclectic in my
tastes:)).
I have taken the liberty of including some 'leaking Del Sol sunroof'
posts, since the Del Sol is one of the SEVEN Honda's you have purchased.
I have, mercifully, ignored the many posts about the proliferate leaking
of water into the passenger compartment Honda A/C's are wont to do, and
the subsequent stench many Honda owners put up with.
I am not knocking Honda here, as I think they are fine cars, but simply
answering your post.
And pointing out, as I tried to do in the post to which you responded,
that it is not fair to slam a mfg because of isolated (and sometimes, in
the larger scheme, unimportant), problems.
Hereya go, Bent, and my apologies for dupes, and more apologies to those
who *didn't* ask, for this outrageously large post. Hey, at least I
didn't post a binary of 'my Accord', or ' my Mugen stickers', as happens
so often in R.A.H.:)
Subject: Re: Help! Leaking tallights
From: Dwayne Clipperton <cli...@nortel.ca.NoSpam>
Date: 1997/05/09
Message-Id: <337321...@nortel.ca.NoSpam>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
Gennady, Samokhin wrote:
>
> In article <3370a9ba....@news.sprynet.com>, rmpr...@sprynet.com says...
> >
> >I have a '90 Prelude that has BOTH the tail light pieces showing
> >condensation. Most noticeable after a hard rain or car wash. This
> >problem has been progressing to its present stage of both lenses. It
> >was just one lens.
>
> I had a leak in the left taillight of my 86 Accord. It was not just the
> condensation, but about 2 inches of water after each rain. I removed the
[snip]
For my car, it was an epidemic. Every little
rain would blow another bulb.
What worked for my old beater ('84 Prelude) was to
drill two small holes in the bottom of each lens.
I was concerned that the bolts may be rusted
and was beyond the point of spending money and
effort on the car.
Subject: Re: WATER LEAK CRX
From: and...@genasys.com.au (Andrew Congdon)
Date: 1996/09/03
Message-Id: <50fk4c$b...@gisdev.genasys.com.au>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
In article <84157976...@scoob.demon.co.uk>,
Andy <An...@scoob.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I have a 1991 Vtec CRX. The problem i have is that whenever we have a
>reasonable downpour i get a leak from the hinges of the boot lid,
>which somehow, end up under the back seat soaking it and smelling like
>an elephants danglies. Any suggestions ??
C'mon there ain't that much room in the back seat!
Then again if I can get 3 people in my back seat...
Have you checked it isn't the tail light lenses leaking, this seems
quite common. Having said that I also have a leak onto the back seat
from one of the hatch struts but I've never been able to work out
where it starts.
Subject: Re: Help! Leaking tallights
From: n...@sfu.ca (Norman Chi-Bon Li)
Date: 1997/05/07
Message-Id: <5kqcc8$hiu$1...@morgoth.sfu.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
GFT (rmpr...@sprynet.com) wrote:
: I have a '90 Prelude that has BOTH the tail light pieces showing
: condensation. Most noticeable after a hard rain or car wash. This
: problem has been progressing to its present stage of both lenses. It
: was just one lens.
: Curious to know if there is a fix. I have talked with a couple of
: people who say they had to replace the lens for a couple of hundred
: bucks each side. The center piece with the "PRELUDE" logo is fine.
: Ideas on a fix is appreciated.
: Thanks,
: Grant
: gto...@mindspring.com
You have exactly the same problem I've been having with my '90 Prelude
as
well. It happened to me about half a year ago and it started to get
worse
after all the snow during the winter. I posted the exact same message as
you to look for help on a solution and several people have suggested
that
you can take the lens out and use RTV (I think) to seal the edges of the
lens where the water is supposed to drain by and down to the ground.
Some people suspected that the seal around the lens is cracked,
therefore
allowing water to leak in.
I haven't been able to fix it yet because of the weather here. It's been
raining too much. The best thing to do is to wait for a stretch of sunny
days before attempting a fix because you want to completely dry out your
lens before sealing it or you'll risk leaving it moist inside allowing
condensation to form. You'll also want to give the RTV time to settle
into
place or whatever. So I'm still waiting for the weather the get better
before I fix my taillights. Oh, and if you want to do it properly, you
can
also go to your dealer and buy the proper gaskets which cost about $25
CDN
for each side. Much cheaper than replacing the entire lens unless its
cracked. Good luck!
Subject: Re: Water in Tail-lights
From: rmor...@mindspring.com (Robert Morella)
Date: 1997/01/19
Message-Id: <5bsav2$d...@camel5.mindspring.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
My 90 Accord does the same thing. It's a combination of the gasket
drying out and the edges of the lights being improperly glued
together. I fixed it by coating both sides of the gasket with a thin
layer of RTV and then sealing up the edge-seams of the lenses with
more rtv sealer. It was very tough to get them completely dried out.
n...@sfu.ca (Norman Chi-Bon Li) wrote:
>Hi people,
>I was just wondering if any of you have experience water leaking into your
>tail-lights and staying in there. Well, my 1990 Prelude has this problem.
>I think the water in there was responsible for my brake lights shorting
>out a couple of times too. I'm not too sure of where the water is leaking
>in from but the problem has led to water leaking into the trunk as well,
>because you can access the tail-light compartment through the trunk.
>If anybody has encountered this problem, could you offer me some advice?
>I've been told that I should drill a hole at the bottom of the compartment
>to allow the water to leak out. I haven't looked into that yet but I want
>to see if there is some way I can seal up the leak, if I can find it.
Subject: Help! Leaking tallights
From: rmpr...@sprynet.com (GFT)
Date: 1997/05/07
Message-Id: <3370a9ba....@news.sprynet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
I have a '90 Prelude that has BOTH the tail light pieces showing
condensation. Most noticeable after a hard rain or car wash. This
problem has been progressing to its present stage of both lenses. It
was just one lens.
Curious to know if there is a fix. I have talked with a couple of
people who say they had to replace the lens for a couple of hundred
bucks each side. The center piece with the "PRELUDE" logo is fine.
Subject: Re: Leaky trunk in '86 Prelude
From: rmor...@mindspring.com (Robert Morella)
Date: 1997/01/20
Message-Id: <5c0j77$p...@camel5.mindspring.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
The taillamp gaskets dry out and leak. Also the lens assemblies are
not always as watertight as they're supposed to be. Get a couple of
tubes of RTV sealant. take out the taillights and 'goop it up'.
Make sure the electrical connections are not getting wet..spray some
WD-40 on them just in case.
mpr...@wolfenet.com (Pat & Molly Ringe) wrote:
>mpr...@wolfenet.com (Pat & Molly Ringe) wrote:
>>Anyone heard of leak problems with Prelude Trunks? My '86 has apx.
>>140K on it and the trunk seems to be perpetually wet along the rear
>>end. Not soaked, just damp, almost as if it were very heavy
>>condensation. The weatherstripping seems to be intact, so I'm a bit
>>puzzled...I live in Seattle, so it's wet a lot of the time, but I've
>>never had this problem with any of my other cars.
>>My roommate's '92 Civic is apparently doing the same thing - she's the
>>one who heard about the 'well-known' leak problem...
Subject: Water in Tail-lights
From: n...@sfu.ca (Norman Chi-Bon Li)
Date: 1997/01/17
Message-Id: <5boula$h...@morgoth.sfu.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
Hi people,
I was just wondering if any of you have experience water leaking into
your
tail-lights and staying in there. Well, my 1990 Prelude has this
problem.
I think the water in there was responsible for my brake lights shorting
out a couple of times too. I'm not too sure of where the water is
leaking
in from but the problem has led to water leaking into the trunk as well,
because you can access the tail-light compartment through the trunk.
If anybody has encountered this problem, could you offer me some advice?
I've been told that I should drill a hole at the bottom of the
compartment
to allow the water to leak out. I haven't looked into that yet but I
want
to see if there is some way I can seal up the leak, if I can find it.
Subject: Re: Water leak in Odyssey..repaired but now what?
From: gmc...@wwa.com (G McGrew)
Date: 1996/09/14
Message-Id: <51f1is$t...@kirin.wwa.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
If the rust isn't extensive and the seat doesn't stink of mildew, this
sounds
reasonable. As long as he is guaranteeing look-like-new results and no
return
of rust for the remainder of the warantee, I would give them a chance.
In article <50hipb$h...@panix2.panix.com>, kl...@panix.com (Kenneth Lew)
wrote:
#The Honda dealer appeared to have fixed the water leak in my less than
#one year old minivan. Apparently, the latch for the back door was loose
&
#tightening it fixed it. Now when I park my car nose down on my
#steep driveway I experience no leak. Now I need to restore my third
#seat to its original state. The metal portion of the seat
#is rusted and the fabric has rust stains, because the seat was folded
#into the floor compartment and seating in the water when the leak
occurred.
#
#
#The Honda regional rep wants to sand the rust away from the seat
#frame, replace the seat fabric and chemically steam the rust stain
#off the floor carpet. He think's that replacing the seat is not
#waranted. Any opinions? Thanks in advance.
#
Subject: WATER LEAK CRX
From: An...@scoob.demon.co.uk (Andy)
Date: 1996/09/01
Message-Id: <84157976...@scoob.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
I have a 1991 Vtec CRX. The problem i have is that whenever we have a
reasonable downpour i get a leak from the hinges of the boot lid,
which somehow, end up under the back seat soaking it and smelling like
an elephants danglies. Any suggestions ??
Thanking you all in advance.
Subject: Want info for CRX (/ Civic) rust FAQ
From: roge...@aol.com (RogerTIII)
Date: 1997/04/18
Message-Id: <19970418190...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
Folks,
I have an '85 CRX DX that's had some rust problems, and have belonged to
the CRX List long enough to know that some CRXes (and Civics too, no
doubt) are so rusted the jack "hard points" just crush on many cars (and
that many 2nd gen. Rexes leak water lots of places, inviting rust
wholesale). CRXes are great cars that are no longer made, so for the
CRX
Owner's Club home page (www.crx.org), its newsletter and whoever else,
I'm
going to compile a FAQ on dealing with rust and would appreciate any
knowledgeable input (best way to prevent / deal with drain hole
clogging,
best rust prevention and mending techniques, etc.). Honda has no plans
to
replace the CRX (sorry, Del Sol owners, but your cars have _way_ too
much
chassis flex and radically insufficient cargo space to be a "true" CRX),
so something's needed to preserve these backroad-eating spacious roofed
go-karts before their floorpans all vanish.
Subject: Want info for CRX (/ Civic) rust FAQ
From: roge...@aol.com (RogerTIII)
Date: 1997/04/18
Message-Id: <19970418190...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
Folks,
I have an '85 CRX DX that's had some rust problems, and have belonged to
the CRX List long enough to know that some CRXes (and Civics too, no
doubt) are so rusted the jack "hard points" just crush on many cars (and
that many 2nd gen. Rexes leak water lots of places, inviting rust
wholesale). CRXes are great cars that are no longer made, so for the
CRX
Owner's Club home page (www.crx.org), its newsletter and whoever else,
I'm
going to compile a FAQ on dealing with rust and would appreciate any
knowledgeable input (best way to prevent / deal with drain hole
clogging,
best rust prevention and mending techniques, etc.). Honda has no plans
to
replace the CRX (sorry, Del Sol owners, but your cars have _way_ too
much
chassis flex and radically insufficient cargo space to be a "true" CRX),
so something's needed to preserve these backroad-eating spacious roofed
go-karts before their floorpans all vanish.
Subject: Re: Water in Tail-lights
From: mich...@virgin.net (Michael )
Date: 1997/02/02
Message-Id: <5d2oob$i...@news3-gui.server.cableol.net>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
n...@sfu.ca (Norman Chi-Bon Li) wrote:
Yes I have encounted this problem on my 1990 Accord. It was more like
condensation a pool of water. The answer is to remove the offending
lamp drain it out seal it clear bathroom sealant and Bob is your
Uncle. It worked for me Norman.
Michael
>Hi people,
>I was just wondering if any of you have experience water leaking into your
>tail-lights and staying in there. Well, my 1990 Prelude has this problem.
>I think the water in there was responsible for my brake lights shorting
>out a couple of times too. I'm not too sure of where the water is leaking
>in from but the problem has led to water leaking into the trunk as well,
>because you can access the tail-light compartment through the trunk.
>If anybody has encountered this problem, could you offer me some advice?
>I've been told that I should drill a hole at the bottom of the compartment
>to allow the water to leak out. I haven't looked into that yet but I want
>to see if there is some way I can seal up the leak, if I can find it.
Subject: Re: Accord Trunk Leak?
From: bpa...@portal.ca (Brian Palmer)
Date: 1996/07/25
Message-Id: <4t768n$q...@thoth.portal.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
"Eric S. Korenman, TJUH Radiology" <kore...@jeflin.tju.edu> wrote:
>I have had a used '92 accord for about a year now and have
>recently noticed water collecting in the trunk on the
>driver's side. (left side)
>I pulled back the trunk liner and found that the water
>was collecting near the air vent on the floor of the trunk.
>The radio antenna is above the collection of water.
>Water collects collects even when the car is just left out in the rain.
>Is the vent or the antenna the more likely culprit?
>Antenna funtions just fine.
>Anyone had similar problems? Solutions?
Try the sunroof drain. It connects up with the antenna drain and has
a tendency to get clogged. Also the tail light gaskets can sometimes
leak. Best way to check is with a helper hosing the area down while
you watch inside with a flashlight.....
Subject: Re: Leaky trunk in '86 Prelude
From: br...@nic.wat.hookup.net (Brent Rowe)
Date: 1997/01/23
Message-Id: <5c8q63$eqo$1...@nic.wat.hookup.net>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
: mpr...@wolfenet.com (Pat & Molly Ringe) wrote:
: >Anyone heard of leak problems with Prelude Trunks? My '86 has apx.
: >140K on it and the trunk seems to be perpetually wet along the rear
: >end. Not soaked, just damp, almost as if it were very heavy
I have an '85 with water problems...found this out about 3 weeks after
purchase. Looked under the trunk bottom and found about 5 gallons of
water marinating my spare tire.
If you take out the spare tire, you'll notice a drain hole with a plug
in it... take this plug out, or put a hole in the rubber part.
In my case, it isnt a design problem, my trunk lid is rusted out.
Subject: Leaking Prelude
From: pjc...@falcon.ece.ucdavis.edu (Peter Cheng)
Date: 1996/11/20
Message-Id: <56vhqo$h...@mark.ucdavis.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
Hi,
I have a 88 Prelude and water is leaking in when it rains. It
used to be leaking from the truck to the back passenger seat and
floor. But I took off all the back lights and put sealing on it.
That helped.
But this year, rainy season started again, and it is leaking.
This time it does not appear to be coming from the truck. It seems
only the left back passenger floor is flooded. I can't find any water
in the truck or the side of windows.
Does anyone know where the leak maybe coming from?
Any help is appreciated.
Subject: Civic Leaks
From: "Patrick J. Smith" <p...@nortel.ca>
Date: 1996/11/14
Message-Id: <328B4C5A...@nortel.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
I just bought a used 94 Civic Si. There was quite a bit of
rain here last weekend - much of it ended up on the floor of my
car. (we're talking puddles here!)
I took it back to the dealer I bought it from (Nissan). The
mechanics took a look at it and determined the following.
- water does not leak in through the sun roof - it drains as it should
- water does not leak in if the fans are turned off
- water leaks in if the fans are on, and fresh air mode is selected.
They told me there is no fix for this - don't drive with the fans
on in a rainstorm. I have a hard time believing that Honda would
design a ventalation system that leaks when it's raining.
I called the previous owner who assured me that he had never seen
anything like this. I have all the service records and everything
looks like it's in order.
So - has anyone ecountered this before? Does it seem reasonable to
you. I'm taking the car to honda in a couple of days to see what
they think.
Thanks
Patrick
Subject: Re: Leaking Prelude
From: slartibartfast <dave...@gladstone.uoregon.edu>
Date: 1996/11/25
Message-Id:
<Pine.SOL.3.91.96112...@gladstone.uoregon.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
I had this problem with my previous prelude. We took out the back seat
and underneath were some leaky rubber seals. It wasn't too hard to fix,
especially considering what an incovenience the water behind the
passenger seat was.
Good luck, Dave.
On 20 Nov 1996, Peter Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a 88 Prelude and water is leaking in when it rains. It
> used to be leaking from the truck to the back passenger seat and
> floor. But I took off all the back lights and put sealing on it.
> That helped.
> But this year, rainy season started again, and it is leaking.
> This time it does not appear to be coming from the truck. It seems
> only the left back passenger floor is flooded. I can't find any water
> in the truck or the side of windows.
> Does anyone know where the leak maybe coming from?
> Any help is appreciated.
Subject: Re: Del Sol
From: Beth <75203...@compuserve.com>
Date: 1996/09/10
Message-Id: <3235E8...@compuserve.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
K. Martin wrote:
>
> I'm thinking about buying a '94 or '95 del Sol. I was wondering what
> driving the car in the winter is like--does the top leak, do the wipers
> and defrosters work well enough for good visibility in the rain? I would
> appreciate any comments regarding this car.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Prnl...@aol.com
I have a 93 Del Sol (bought in Dec. '92) and I still like it. I live
north of Boston so the car and I have had our share of winter driving
fun. So far it's been just fine. I've skidded a few times in the snow,
but that had more to do with me that the car. The defroster works great
and being able to crack the rear window helps a lot.
My car does leak, a lot. I have used all kinds of treatments on the
gaskets (including replacing), and so far nothing has helped. FWIW, I
know people who have more recent Del Sols and they say they don't have
the same problems. The other issue is that the car creaks and squeaks
over every bump. It's much worse in the winter.
All in all it's been a good car. In 3.5 years and 50K miles I've
replaced
the tires once and I just got a new battery. I average around 32 MPG and
the clutch is still going strong.
Subject: Re: Civic Del Sol?
From: may...@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor)
Date: 1996/08/11
Message-Id: <maynor.8...@Isis.MsState.Edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
Tony Esporma <antonio...@jpl.nasa.gov> writes:
>There was a service bulletin out for the sunroof on the early
>DelSols. Did you ever complain to your dealer about it? They
>should have fixed it under warranty if so.
They installed something called a "rattle kit" and something else
called a "leak kit." The two worked about equally well. The roof
continued to rattle and leak.
Subject: Re: Del Sol
From: Beth <75203...@compuserve.com>
Date: 1996/09/10
Message-Id: <3235E8...@compuserve.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
K. Martin wrote:
>
> I'm thinking about buying a '94 or '95 del Sol. I was wondering what
> driving the car in the winter is like--does the top leak, do the wipers
> and defrosters work well enough for good visibility in the rain? I would
> appreciate any comments regarding this car.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Prnl...@aol.com
I have a 93 Del Sol (bought in Dec. '92) and I still like it. I live
north of Boston so the car and I have had our share of winter driving
fun. So far it's been just fine. I've skidded a few times in the snow,
but that had more to do with me that the car. The defroster works great
and being able to crack the rear window helps a lot.
My car does leak, a lot. I have used all kinds of treatments on the
gaskets (including replacing), and so far nothing has helped. FWIW, I
know people who have more recent Del Sols and they say they don't have
the same problems. The other issue is that the car creaks and squeaks
over every bump. It's much worse in the winter.
All in all it's been a good car. In 3.5 years and 50K miles I've
replaced
the tires once and I just got a new battery. I average around 32 MPG and
the clutch is still going strong.
Subject: Re: Honda Del Sol
From: win...@gate.net (Winston Mo)
Date: 1996/04/10
Message-Id: <4khu8e$1p...@navajo.gate.net>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
****************************************************************
I bought a NEW 95 Si A/T it is pretty good, although the roof
do make little noise.
Get a bigger engine one instead of the S, it offers a better
horse and brakes, But do not offer Power Door lock as a 93 but in 95
they
have it
When buying a used one, make sure it don't leak water, and the
moding around the top do not dry or crack, because it tends to leak
water when get old, so have dealer change it if is does.
Good luck
Subject: Water vapour in tail light assembly
From: re...@nortel.ca
Date: 1996/06/10
Message-Id: <4phrpb$m...@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
The tail light assembly on my 1990 Civic seems to be trapping some water
vapour and I was wondering if anyone has had a similar problem.
I removed the light assembly from the body of the car to have a closer
look
and sure enough there was some condensation on the inside of the plastic
lense. I was able to clean the condensation through the holes where the
bulbs
enter.
However, there are two plastic lenses - an inner one which is part of
the
whole light assembly and an outer one that fits sunggly over the inner
one.
Somehow some vapour is also getting between the two plastic lenses.
Has anyone been successful at removing the outer lense and then
re-attaching
it? Also, is there any way to prevent such condensation from
re-occuring?
Has anyone tried drilling a small hole into the light assembly?
Subject: Re: my pretty new EX smells like a moldy garbage can
From: manoj George <st...@jetson.uh.edu>
Date: 1996/12/01
Message-Id: <32A20D...@jetson.uh.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
check to see if the smell is coming from the doors. Sometimes if there
is a leak water will fill up in the doors and start to smell..i think
there might be a release of some kind on the bottom of the door...Go and
get the dealer to check it out...afterall they have your money, make
sure they fix all the bugs with the car!!!
---------------------------------------------
AQUA wrote:
>
> On 21 Nov 1996 00:55:18 GMT, <devilcar> wrote:
> >I have a '96 civic EX coupe and we just got our first rain of the season
> >a week ago. Ever since then, my car has smelled like rotting fish
> >and now a mildewy garbage can. I've searched my car for any kind
> >of food particle and have failed to find any. It doesn't seem
> >to be coming out from my vents....help???
> >
> >Please post any replies and thanks in advance!
> >
Subject: Re: del Sol leaking window rubber
From: ben...@access5.digex.net (Bentley)
Date: 1996/11/29
Message-Id: <57lvk4$l...@news4.digex.net>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
pszi...@vnet.ibm.com said something like:
: I have a '92 CRX (alias del Sol) that leaks above the driver's side top
: front corner.
: Has anyone experienced this? Has Honda replaced these rubber seals for free?
I've not, but I've talked to some other owners who have. Dunno how long
warranties run in Australia, but it would over on a 92 up here. One
thing
I've noticed, however, is that a good dealership will replace piddly
things like this for free. Also, be sure to keep the seals well-lubed
with
a silcon spray: It will help redice (or eliminate) the squeaks in cold
weather, and it will help keep the rubber firm and tight against the
glass.
: ps: This has gotto be the best little car in the world!
Except for the leak, right? :)
> B E N T L E Y < ben...@access.digex.net
93 del Sol Si
Subject: Re: 97 Acc EX Is All Wet
From: jpmc...@pitt.edu (Jason P Mcdonald)
Date: 1996/10/25
Message-Id: <54qcvh$o...@usenet.srv.cis.pitt.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
Tim Morrissey (tem...@interpath.com) wrote:
: Hey,
: We have a 97 Accord EX that seems to have a water leak. The carpet and
: mat on the drivers side is wet, real wet; not just tracked in/wet shoes
: wet. It is not the A/C condensor. The windows have been up and the sun
: roof has been closed but there has been lots of rain.
: Obviously we are going back to the dealer but does anyone have any ides on
: this?
: Timmy
: Dine Right and Dine On Time
Our 96 Accord had a very similar problem which turned out to be
that leaves and other small debris were clogging the A/C, and the water
was overflowing onto the floor (passenger side in our case). If your
shop is going for the quick-fix, they just use compressed air to blow
the system clean and send you on your way, but the problem will come
back
(at least it did for us). To really fix it, they have to actually get
inside
the A/C system. It certainly sounds like the same thing --
try to listen for a sloshing-water sound which seems to be coming from
behind the dashboard.
Subject: Re: Water dripping when A/C on.
From: br...@stat.ohio-state.edu (Brian K Smith)
Date: 1996/06/17
Message-Id: <4q40ih$1...@wolf.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
In article <31C56F...@nortel.ca>,
Andrew Lavigne <alav...@nortel.ca> wrote:
>I've got a '95 Integra, and yesterday I noticed a few drops of water from
>underneath the dash on the passenger side while I had the A/C on for a while.
>Is this some sort of normal condensation from the evaporator in the dash,
>or is this indicative of some sort of leak?
This is perfectly normal from any air conditioner. Happens with my 96
Integra. It will happen even more when it's humid out.
Subject: Re: Honda del Sol owner experience
From: dsm...@bgnet.bgsu.edu (daniel smead)
Date: 1996/05/18
Message-Id: <4nleol$3...@infoserver.bgsu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
In a previous article, rjtu...@aimnet.com (Ray Turner) says:
>I'm considering a '96 del Sol. Any owners out there?
>How about wind noise or roof leaks in the rain?
>Any other reliability problems?
>Thanks for your advice.
>Ray
>
I've got a '94 del Sol Si. The top does leak a little. Wind noise with
the top off is pretty low for a convertible, especially if you leave the
windows up for highway driving. If you're willing to overlook a few
drops
of water on your knee, and don't have a need for a back seat, it's a
decent little car. And I've heard that the leaking water problem has
been
fixed in the newer cars, although I guess we'll have to wait until the
'96s are a few years old to find out.
Subject: Re: Leaking Backup Lights
From: ke...@earthlink.net (Glenn/Linda)
Date: 1996/04/13
Message-Id: <keiko-12049...@max2-vgd-ca-25.earthlink.net>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
In article <4kheui$4...@henson.cc.wwu.edu>, eve...@cc.wwu.edu (Evelyn
Albrecht) wrote:
>
> >Interesting...from reading yours & similar posts this seems to plague
> >89-90 Civics. I have a 90 Civic DX and I noticed this problem within
> >one year after puchasing it new...
>
> My '92 Civic Si also collects water in the left-side backup light box
> and trunk, where it must leak out of the light box as well as into it.
>
Yikes!
And I thought I was the only one with this problem! I have a 1988 CRX si
and as soon as we get heavy rain, my tail light gets flooded with water
and leaks into the "trunk" area.The result is a gallon of water in my
car
and the lovely smell of mildew for weeks. The dealer has told me he has
seen this many times.
Subject: Re: Honda Del Sol
From: may...@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor)
Date: 1996/04/08
Message-Id: <maynor.8...@Ra.MsState.Edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
jaso...@connect.ab.ca (Jason Rae) writes:
>I am planning on buying a used Del Sol ('93). Any comments on them?
Be prepared to watch water trickling down inside the car when it rains.
Even after installation of the "leak kit" (I think that's what they
called it), it will leak. Just like after installation of the "rattle
kit," it will continue to rattle at least a little bit.
Although I am still a very loyal Honda supporter, I will say that the
closest Honda has ever come to screwing up was with the del Sol. I
kept my '93 del Sol a little over two years, which was longer than the
only other person I know personally who had one kept his. I loved the
color of mine (a really great blue) and found it fun sometimes (with the
top off), but otherwise I wasn't wild about it. The roof rattled and
leaked. Getting in and out of it was uncomfortable. The fuzzy black
interior was ugly and sucked up dog hairs like crazy. Fooling with
taking the top off and storing it in the trunk was a bother.
>What would be a good price for an average one?
I don't remember now what I got for trading mine in about a year ago.
--
Subject: Re: Leaking Backup Lights
From: eve...@cc.wwu.edu (Evelyn Albrecht)
Date: 1996/04/10
Message-Id: <4kheui$4...@henson.cc.wwu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.honda
fran...@wam.umd.edu (Francis DeBernardo) writes:
>Pauly Keyz (pa...@netwatcher.com) wrote:
>: I have a 1990 Civic LX Sedan and have been dripped on numerous times
>: while bending over my trunk. I look up and water is coming from the gray
>: plastic boxes where the backup lights are concealed. I've had the
>: tailight gaskets replaced three times and after one of our rainstorms, I
>: found the problem has not gone away.
... snip ...
>Interesting...from reading yours & similar posts this seems to plague
>89-90 Civics. I have a 90 Civic DX and I noticed this problem within
>one year after puchasing it new...
My '92 Civic Si also collects water in the left-side backup light box
and trunk, where it must leak out of the light box as well as into
it.
Marc
>: Yeah, this reminds me of Honda designing tail-light lenses that fill
>: with water every time it rains. Been happening for years.
>It has? Funny, of the seven Hondas I've owned, and in which I've driven a
>quarter million miles, I've never had this happen. Which of your Hondas
>had this problem, Vic? Years and models, please.
My sister's '91 Civic DX sedan has this problem. Not real
bothersome, except that it dumps some water in the trunk after a
rain. Victor, since you know of it, is there an easy fix? TSB?
I thought it might just be her car, so I haven't given it much
thought.
Marc
For email, remove second "y" from Gum...@tamu.edu
Victor Smith
Not hard to fix. See my post to Mark. New gaskets and RTV sealant.
Might not even need new gaskets, but just RTV if the old gaskets aren't
torn up. BTW, you can find gasket material at a good hardware store,
and cut your own. Might be cheaper.
--Vic
Sloan E. Essman
Sounds terrible Mike. Mine had just a little moisture under the top mat
that probably came from just normal condensation. The carpet is dry.
For reference, normally, the trunk should seal against the rubber that
runs around the entire trunk. When you open the trunk lid, it drains
onto the back glass and then runs down below the trunk weather stripping
and out the drain holes behind the tail-light assemblies.
Any idea where your water is coming in from?
Sloan
my...@er.y
The problem as I explained to him is that the new body of the '97 Grand
Prix has trouble in the trunk. Where the sheet metal pieces in the wheel
house meet the seams are not properly sealed. When he drives the water
from the tires splashes up into the trunk through the improperly sealed
seams.
Unfortunately, as long as he is moving, water is leaking into the trunk.
There is a fix that involves using a specific sealant to seal these
seams.
Bill
Tom Pschar
Andi Baritchi wrote:
>
> Funny how the Maximas are well-built -- something that Pontiac leaves to
> be desired.
Get a clue. That sample size of one means a lot.
Hey, my trunk doesn't leak! I've just raised the quality of the Grand
Prix by 50%!
> --Andi
Tom
mri...@gte.net
>Mike Howells wrote:
[leaky trunk]
>Funny how the Maximas are well-built -- something that Pontiac leaves to
>be desired.
Funny, Nissan designed leaky fuel injectors instead. Go figure, you may
need some "poor soul" in Pontiac with a trunk full of water to put out
your engine fire.
--
mrivers *(at)* gte.net
These addresses are not mine, but from companies who persist at spamming.
They are here for targeting by other spammers who scan newsgroups.
sup...@fastresult.com sa...@savetrees.com bi...@bigfoot.com
acceptance...@ns3.guhert.net subs...@cyberpromo.com
postm...@tor-srs1.netcom.ca postm...@nucleus.com
Bentley
: times trumpeted his eclectic taste in cars?
Trumpeted? I've pointed out that I've owned cars from three continents,
seven countries, and more than a few manufacturers, especially when asked.
: Which other cars have you owned seven of, may I ask?
Ford.
: May I remind you that my post to which you've taken offense, in response
: to a post from Mr. Honda (probably Isaac) Wong, who was in agreement
: with Mr. Nissan Wolph, which bashed all of GM because of reported
: leaking trunks in new Pontiacs, was a simple tit-for-tat?
You may, but it's a lame excuse. Here's how I saw the exchange:
1. mhow...@i1.net started the thread, complaining of leaks with his
Grand Prix.
2. bro...@ase.com says he's had the same problem with his Accord.
3. ch...@worldnet.att.net-nospam says take it back to the dealer and
make them fix it (good advice, thinks I)
4. gt7...@acmex.gatech.edu says his friend had the same problem with
the same car.
5. BobH...@Misterfixit.com says he and his wife were car shopping and
noticed the same problem with many GM cars they drove.
6. W0lph*@emi.net makes a snide comment about GM.
7. rine...@aramis.rutgers.edu says his 95 GP suffered from the same
problem, 4 times.
8. wca...@anti.spam.bnr.ca opines that Saturns have a design flaw in
which water from an opened trunk cascades into the trunk (and he's
right). He goes on to slam GM in general (so to speak).
So, we have several people with first or second hand experience with their
GM products leaking -- perhaps they were all lying, who knows.
And then we have Vic, who decides this is (another) good opportunity to
slam Honda. For whatever reason.
: As for how many Honda's I've owned, that number probably equals the
: sum of the number of Pontiacs owned by mssgrs. Wong and Wolph.
So, you have no experience in Honda ownership, yet feel compelled to
comment on them with regularity (those prunes help, heh) and to even
compile lists of their problems from the Honda newsgroup?
: And my reply was in keeping with the 'let's be fair' rules of conduct
: you have so often espoused.
When did I say that?
: But you have shown your Honda fanaticism once again, in blinding
: yourself to this well known Honda problem of leaking headlights and wet
Headlights too? Gee, I never had that problem either. Got it with the old
Saab, tho, it's a real pain. But that's the pre-GM Saab.
I guess it's time to turn in my Honda Fanatic card, as of the past ten
vehicles I've purchased, only one has been a Honda. And of the three cars
on my short list for the next purchase (to replace the one Honda, I might
add), none are Hondas. Labels are effective when they're accurate, Vic,
but this one is simply sad. And how many non-GM products have you owned,
if I may ask?
: I have taken the liberty of including some 'leaking Del Sol sunroof'
: posts, since the Del Sol is one of the SEVEN Honda's you have purchased.
I humbly submit that there has never been a del Sol with a leaking
sunroof. At least not a factory installed sunroof.
: I have, mercifully, ignored the many posts about the proliferate leaking
: of water into the passenger compartment Honda A/C's are wont to do, and
: the subsequent stench many Honda owners put up with.
Yeah, our Monte Carlo and our Buicks used to do that. Nasty.
: I am not knocking Honda here, as I think they are fine cars, but simply
: answering your post.
Um, how can I put this nicely? I can't: Bullshit. 'Fine cars' my ass.
As for knocking Honda, you took care of that in the first post.
: And pointing out, as I tried to do in the post to which you responded,
: that it is not fair to slam a mfg because of isolated (and sometimes, in
: the larger scheme, unimportant), problems.
So... why not go after the guy who started the thread? Why not tell him
"Don't worry about it, it's unimportant?"
: Hereya go, Bent, and my apologies for dupes, and more apologies to those
: who *didn't* ask, for this outrageously large post. Hey, at least I
: didn't post a binary of 'my Accord', or ' my Mugen stickers', as happens
: so often in R.A.H.:)
Often? I can only remember two, one of a VTEC jpg, and one by a fellow who
was trying to sell his Legend.
[big snip]
That's quite a list. Looks like there is some evidence that Hondas leak.
Guess I've been lucky -- my trouble-free Saab ownership would indicate
that I am. But I'm still not sure what this has to do with Pontiacs, or GM
cars in general, however. If someone posted that the ABS failed on his
Caddilac, I take it you'd immediately look up all the ABS failures on
Hondas?
Lloyd has trained you well, it would seem.
ilias...@visi.net
It wasn't the injectors, it is the fuel with alcohol level above 5%
sold in the US. The injectors seals were not designed to handle
it and dissolved. They didn't have problems in Japan.
I had that problem in my 200sxTurbo, the car is 11 years old,
runs well and handles better than my 96 Max...
Andi Baritchi
mri...@gte.net wrote:
>
> >Mike Howells wrote:
>
> [leaky trunk]
>
> >Funny how the Maximas are well-built -- something that Pontiac leaves
> to
> >be desired.
>
> Funny, Nissan designed leaky fuel injectors instead. Go figure, you
> may
> need some "poor soul" in Pontiac with a trunk full of water to put out
> your engine fire.
>
> --
> mrivers *(at)* gte.net
>
> These addresses are not mine, but from companies who persist at
> spamming.
> They are here for targeting by other spammers who scan newsgroups.
> sup...@fastresult.com sa...@savetrees.com bi...@bigfoot.com
> acceptance...@ns3.guhert.net subs...@cyberpromo.com
> postm...@tor-srs1.netcom.ca postm...@nucleus.com
Actually, my '97 Maxima SE 5-speed is running just fine, fuel injectors
and all. Take a look at automobile magazine -- "Is this the best V6 in
the world, or what?" They were talking about Nissan's VQ30DE, of
course, not GM's cheapo 3.8 Series II.
Victor Smith
On 18 Jun 1997 01:52:31 GMT, ben...@access1.digex.net (Bentley) wrote:
>Victor Smith (vics...@ameritech.net) said something like:
>: Seven Hondas?! My God, is this the same same Bentley who has so many
>: times trumpeted his eclectic taste in cars?
>
>Trumpeted? I've pointed out that I've owned cars from three continents,
>seven countries, and more than a few manufacturers, especially when asked.
>
>: Which other cars have you owned seven of, may I ask?
>
>Ford.
Seven Hondas, seven Fords, a couple of SAABS, a Monte. You are a busy
bee buyer. How old did you say you were?
>
>: May I remind you that my post to which you've taken offense, in response
>: to a post from Mr. Honda (probably Isaac) Wong, who was in agreement
>: with Mr. Nissan Wolph, which bashed all of GM because of reported
>: leaking trunks in new Pontiacs, was a simple tit-for-tat?
>
>You may, but it's a lame excuse. Here's how I saw the exchange:
Lame for me, but ok for you. I get it.
>
>1. mhow...@i1.net started the thread, complaining of leaks with his
>Grand Prix.
>
>2. bro...@ase.com says he's had the same problem with his Accord.
>
>3. ch...@worldnet.att.net-nospam says take it back to the dealer and
>make them fix it (good advice, thinks I)
>
>4. gt7...@acmex.gatech.edu says his friend had the same problem with
>the same car.
>
>5. BobH...@Misterfixit.com says he and his wife were car shopping and
>noticed the same problem with many GM cars they drove.
>
>6. W0lph*@emi.net makes a snide comment about GM.
>
>7. rine...@aramis.rutgers.edu says his 95 GP suffered from the same
>problem, 4 times.
>
>8. wca...@anti.spam.bnr.ca opines that Saturns have a design flaw in
>which water from an opened trunk cascades into the trunk (and he's
>right). He goes on to slam GM in general (so to speak).
>
>So, we have several people with first or second hand experience with their
>GM products leaking -- perhaps they were all lying, who knows.
Oh, GM owners are liars? Thanks. I think the GM'ers can take care of
themselves, without Wolph and Wong's oh-so-helpful comments..
>
>And then we have Vic, who decides this is (another) good opportunity to
>slam Honda. For whatever reason.
No, I was offered a good opportunity to slam Honda Wong, and I took it.
>
>: As for how many Honda's I've owned, that number probably equals the
>: sum of the number of Pontiacs owned by mssgrs. Wong and Wolph.
>
>So, you have no experience in Honda ownership, yet feel compelled to
>comment on them with regularity (those prunes help, heh) and to even
>compile lists of their problems from the Honda newsgroup?
Geez, can't you read? Who the hell needs experience when slamming a
slammer. All I need are the facts.
>
>: And my reply was in keeping with the 'let's be fair' rules of conduct
>: you have so often espoused.
>
>When did I say that?
Don't make me get it. I've had enough DejaNews today.
>
>: But you have shown your Honda fanaticism once again, in blinding
>: yourself to this well known Honda problem of leaking headlights and wet
>
>Headlights too? Gee, I never had that problem either. Got it with the old
>Saab, tho, it's a real pain. But that's the pre-GM Saab.
Wow, you r're really letting your hair down with all this GM praising.
Oddly enough, my headlight/tailight typo, and your remarking on it, has
worked out well. For your pleasure I've attached two posts regarding
water in the *headlights* of new Hondas. I didn't get them on DejaNews.
They're fresh, among today's postings. Ask and ye shall receive.
>
>I guess it's time to turn in my Honda Fanatic card, as of the past ten
>vehicles I've purchased, only one has been a Honda. And of the three cars
>on my short list for the next purchase (to replace the one Honda, I might
>add), none are Hondas. Labels are effective when they're accurate, Vic,
>but this one is simply sad. And how many non-GM products have you owned,
>if I may ask?
One Ford, one Dodge, one VW. And my GM's just add up to your Honda's.
BTW, I don't recall you mentioning owning *any* Ford in the past, save a
work van your company really owned. Care to give a few details on these
seven Fords you've owned? And I'll tell about my Buick, Pontiac, Olds,
and four Chevy's. And the Ford, Dodge and VW as a bonus.
>
>: I have taken the liberty of including some 'leaking Del Sol sunroof'
>: posts, since the Del Sol is one of the SEVEN Honda's you have purchased.
>
>I humbly submit that there has never been a del Sol with a leaking
>sunroof. At least not a factory installed sunroof.
You probably *do* believe that, deep in your Honda heart.
>
>: I have, mercifully, ignored the many posts about the proliferate leaking
>: of water into the passenger compartment Honda A/C's are wont to do, and
>: the subsequent stench many Honda owners put up with.
>
>Yeah, our Monte Carlo and our Buicks used to do that. Nasty.
Are we still living in the distant past? How about trying the '90's?
>
>: I am not knocking Honda here, as I think they are fine cars, but simply
>: answering your post.
>
>Um, how can I put this nicely? I can't: Bullshit. 'Fine cars' my ass.
>As for knocking Honda, you took care of that in the first post.
I repeat, Honda's are fine cars. Believe me or not. I just don't
think they are sainted, as you and Mr. Wong do. As to your accusation
of me knocking Honda, I simply pointed out the truth to Mr. Honda Wong,
who was bashing GM, as he has in the past. You denied that truth and
asked for proof. You got exactly what you asked for. So did he. I let
Nissan Wolph go, as he and Nissan Fred are incorrigible. Besides, the
Nissan fuel injector fires are not as numerous as the leaking Honda
taillights.
Hey, I just remembered something...........
Once I was parked, making out, with my wife-to-be, in my '67 Chevy, 327
Holley Quad, Hurst on the floor. It was snowy, and the trees in the
park before us glistened through the fog on that big Chevy windshield.
The kissing was as wonderful as the wintry panorama before us, and love
was heavy in the air. I was at peace with the world, feeling a
remarkable bliss. I never knew life could be so filled with peace.
We were cuddled, gazing into each ohers eyes. I realized I had lit a
cigarette eons ago, and looked down at my hand, which rested on my knee.
The spark had burned to the filter of the cigarette, and the entire ash
was intact. I put it away in the ashtray, consumed but unsmoked, and
turning to my love, slowly brought my lips to her's.
An empty beer can bounced off the car, thrown from a car passing in the
lot behind us.
My love jerked in fright, but I merely smiled, so deep was my bliss.
'It's just some kids', I assured her. 'They're gone. They won't come
back'.
We resumed our kissing, and the sheer ecstasy of being in love only
increased, until
Another empty beer can bounced off the car.
I shoved my love aside, shifted into reverse, backed out, went into
second for traction and took after the offending car. The punks (I get
to call them punks because I was 25, and they weren't) were trying to
escape the lot, but slipping and sliding. They had waited too long
after throwing the second can, probably figuring that since I took one,
they'd give me three. Their car was a new sedan, probably their
daddy's. It was some kind of Chrysler or Ford, but don't ask me which,
as I was only familiar with GM's.
I caught them broadside, doing about 10mph on the ice, as their wheels
were spinning in their panic to escape. I'll never forget the look of
horror on the faces of the two punks in the backseat as I crunched into
the rear door and fender. The '67 Chevy was a mean-looking car.
Or perhaps they could see my face.
I pushed them up into the snowbank at the end of the lot until my wheels
started to spin, and backed up for another run at them. The back
driverside door and rear fender were dented in, and I wanted the front
door and fender.
As I shifted into second again, I heard screaming in my right ear, and
looking in that direction, I saw my love. Gee, I had plumb forgot about
her. She was saying 'Let them go!, Let them go!'. As I considered
that, they caught a grip and got away, skidding out into the street.
I drove to a different park across town, and the bliss returned for us.
I always wonder what the daddy of these kids said when he saw that
dented-in car. And if they ever threw another beer can. Now I don't
necessarily condone this type of behavior, and I have regretted doing
many youthful things, but I never regretted this.
Nice little vignette, huh Bent? Haven't thought about that for years.
Wolph threw the first can. Wong threw the second. So I dented Wong's
Honda. You throwing in with these can-tossers?
>
>: And pointing out, as I tried to do in the post to which you responded,
>: that it is not fair to slam a mfg because of isolated (and sometimes, in
>: the larger scheme, unimportant), problems.
>
>So... why not go after the guy who started the thread? Why not tell him
>"Don't worry about it, it's unimportant?"
So what, now I can only respond to thread originators? Besides, the
Pontiac guys will help him out. I don't have a Pontiac. But I do have
a couple of fine Chevy's.
>
>: Hereya go, Bent, and my apologies for dupes, and more apologies to those
>: who *didn't* ask, for this outrageously large post. Hey, at least I
>: didn't post a binary of 'my Accord', or ' my Mugen stickers', as happens
>: so often in R.A.H.:)
>
>Often? I can only remember two, one of a VTEC jpg, and one by a fellow who
>was trying to sell his Legend.
Poor memory.
>
>[big snip]
>
>That's quite a list. Looks like there is some evidence that Hondas leak.
>Guess I've been lucky -- my trouble-free Saab ownership would indicate
>that I am. But I'm still not sure what this has to do with Pontiacs, or GM
>cars in general, however. If someone posted that the ABS failed on his
>Caddilac, I take it you'd immediately look up all the ABS failures on
>Hondas?
Most Honda owners are *lucky*. Most Honda owners have trouble-free
cars. Others aren't *lucky*, and have some problems.
This doesn't have a damn thing to do with Pontiacs. Or Cadillacs.
It has to do with your getting upset with me for pointing out to a
Honda-owning GM-basher that Hondas aren't perfect either. Live with it.
You know, your Honda stripes show through loud and clear, as do my
Chevy stripes. Just about everyone posting here has obvious
preferences, with the possible exception of Bill Stanton, who can
condemn the z28 he had, but still appreciate Fords and GM's, while
loving his Mitsu.
Maybe some day, in some far away place and time, you will buy a GM car.
Maybe some day, in some far away place and time, I will buy a Honda car.
........................
Nah.
>
>Lloyd has trained you well, it would seem.
>
Lloyd who?
Heres the leaking Honda headlight info you asked for, and note the last
sentence. You mentioned prunes? At least this fellow recognizes it.:
On 18 Jun 1997 04:48:23 GMT, sorc...@the.lamest.com (Sorcerer) wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>I just bought a '97 Civix LX sedan a month ago and noticed I have
>moisture in my left front headlight. I called my dealer, they told me to
>bring it in, left it for a day and the service department proceeded to
>keep it the whole day and then informed me ...
>
>"The headlight assembly isn't a closed unit, so there's no way to prevent
>moisture from getting in there. Replacing the headlight won't fix it,
>you could have the same thing happen with the new unit. Try driving
>around with your headlights on to help the water go away."
>
>Is this the "solution"? I no longer have moisture where the headlight
>is, but now there is remaining moisture in the part of the headlight that
>houses the turn signal.
>
>I guess if I take my dealer's advice, I could ride around with my left
>blinker on constantly until the moisture goes away.
>
>Since this isn't feasible, is there a permanent fix for this or is it not
>even a problem and I'm just being anal?
>
>
On 18 Jun 1997 04:48:23 GMT, sorc...@the.lamest.com (Sorcerer) wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>I just bought a '97 Civix LX sedan a month ago and noticed I have
>moisture in my left front headlight. I called my dealer, they told me to
>bring it in, left it for a day and the service department proceeded to
>keep it the whole day and then informed me ...
>
>"The headlight assembly isn't a closed unit, so there's no way to prevent
>moisture from getting in there. Replacing the headlight won't fix it,
>you could have the same thing happen with the new unit. Try driving
>around with your headlights on to help the water go away."
>
>Is this the "solution"? I no longer have moisture where the headlight
>is, but now there is remaining moisture in the part of the headlight that
>houses the turn signal.
>
>I guess if I take my dealer's advice, I could ride around with my left
>blinker on constantly until the moisture goes away.
>
>Since this isn't feasible, is there a permanent fix for this or is it not
>even a problem and I'm just being anal?
>
>
David Foley
Andi Baritchi wrote in article ...
>mri...@gte.net wrote:
>>
>> >Mike Howells wrote:
>> [leaky trunk]
>> >Funny how the Maximas are well-built -- something that Pontiac leaves
>> to be desired.
>>
>> Funny, Nissan designed leaky fuel injectors instead. Go figure, you
>> may
>> need some "poor soul" in Pontiac with a trunk full of water to put out
>> your engine fire.
>>
>and all. Take a look at automobile magazine -- "Is this the best V6 in
>the world, or what?" They were talking about Nissan's VQ30DE, of
>course, not GM's cheapo 3.8 Series II.
The same cheapo 3.8 that has been on Wards' Top Ten Engine list for the
past couple of years ???
The same cheapo 3.8 that Jap-car-lover and Yank-car-basher James Healey
from USA Today admitted is *far* superior off-freeway to comporable V6's
from Honda, Toyota, and (wait for it ...) Nissan. "Sends 'em to the
showers !!!".
I hereby banish *you* to the showers for making stupid untrue comments ...
go fight for the soap along with Nissan Wolphie, Nissan Fred, and Honda
Wong.
Andi Baritchi
Maybe you missed one fact: Ward's list that you acclaim also awards my
engine (Nissan VQ30DE) as one of the 10 best. So you can't say that the
3.8 is better than my 3.0. You probably WILL say that it's comparable,
but it's not. Not as smooth, runs out of breath at much lower rpm's,
bigger displacement, bigger physical size per displacement, pushrods
(yuck! there's another 60 punds!)...
I love my VQ engine. I've tried some cars with GM's series II 3.8L, and
they weren't bad, but the Americans are always a generation or two
behind the Japanese... even the 85-89 generation of Maximas had SOHC
engines... GM's still pushing the aged pushrod anti-technology.
Arch
Just wondering, wheren't OHC engines around before pushrod engines?
Andi, what software did you use to design YOUR engine? Wasn't Nissan's
3.0 V6 engine good enough? If you are an American, then YOUR engine is
on Ward's list too.
Bill Stanton
On Wed, 18 Jun 1997 12:45:56 -0500, Andi Baritchi <an...@airmail.net>
wrote:
> Maybe you missed one fact: Ward's list that you acclaim also awards my
> engine (Nissan VQ30DE) as one of the 10 best. So you can't say that the
> 3.8 is better than my 3.0. You probably WILL say that it's comparable,
> but it's not. Not as smooth, runs out of breath at much lower rpm's,
> bigger displacement, bigger physical size per displacement, pushrods
> (yuck! there's another 60 punds!)...
You know, GM must've done something right with the GTP, because I have
never seen a group of people (Maxima owners) so defensive and upset
about a competitor vehicle since the Mustang/Camaro wars!
ANTI-SPAM IS IN EFFECT! TO REPLY REMOVE THE
"<NOSPAM>" FROM MY EMAIL ADDRESS!
征馬辰漫滌豕偕帘滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕� 畔�_(畔�_(畔�_(BILL STANTON)_.毀�_.毀�_.毀� 征馬辰漫 Art -- Animation -- Design 征馬辰漫
_.毀� mail:bstanton<AT>gte<DOT>net (畔�_
http://home1.gte.net/bstanton/index.htm
征馬辰漫滌豕偕帘滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕�
_
Sloan E. Essman
myst@er.y wrote:
> Sloan E. Essman wrote:
> > Any idea where your water is coming in from?
>
> The problem as I explained to him is that the new body of the '97
> Grand
> Prix has trouble in the trunk. Where the sheet metal pieces in the
> wheel
> house meet the seams are not properly sealed. When he drives the
> water
> from the tires splashes up into the trunk through the improperly
> sealed
> seams.
> Unfortunately, as long as he is moving, water is leaking into the
> trunk.
> There is a fix that involves using a specific sealant to seal these
> seams.
I checked my spare tire assembly and didn't find any water. I guess
I'll look into the trunk with a little more detail this weekend to see
if I find any smaller leaks.
Sloan
Sloan E. Essman
Bill Stanton wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 1997 12:45:56 -0500, Andi Baritchi <an...@airmail.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Maybe you missed one fact: Ward's list that you acclaim also awards
> my
> > engine (Nissan VQ30DE) as one of the 10 best. So you can't say that
> the
> > 3.8 is better than my 3.0. You probably WILL say that it's
> comparable,
> > but it's not. Not as smooth, runs out of breath at much lower
> rpm's,
> > bigger displacement, bigger physical size per displacement, pushrods
>
> > (yuck! there's another 60 punds!)...
>
> You know, GM must've done something right with the GTP, because I have
>
> never seen a group of people (Maxima owners) so defensive and upset
> about a competitor vehicle since the Mustang/Camaro wars!
Yeah, these GTP Vs Maxima posts are getting kinda old. It's pretty
obvious that most of the Grand Prix owners love their cars, and the
Maxima owners love theirs. These posts are pretty pointless. I think
I'll start a new one: "I like what I have, and it doesn't matter to me
what anybody else drives." *grin*
--
Sloaner
Andi Baritchi
Bill Stanton wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Jun 1997 12:45:56 -0500, Andi Baritchi <an...@airmail.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Maybe you missed one fact: Ward's list that you acclaim also awards
> my
> > engine (Nissan VQ30DE) as one of the 10 best. So you can't say that
> the
> > 3.8 is better than my 3.0. You probably WILL say that it's
> comparable,
> > but it's not. Not as smooth, runs out of breath at much lower
> rpm's,
> > bigger displacement, bigger physical size per displacement, pushrods
> > (yuck! there's another 60 punds!)...
>
> You know, GM must've done something right with the GTP, because I have
> never seen a group of people (Maxima owners) so defensive and upset
> about a competitor vehicle since the Mustang/Camaro wars!
>
> "<NOSPAM>" FROM MY EMAIL ADDRESS!
>
> 征馬辰漫滌豕偕帘滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕�> 畔�_(畔�_(畔�_(BILL STANTON)_.毀�_.毀�_.毀�> 征馬辰漫 Art -- Animation -- Design 征馬辰漫
> _.毀� mail:bstanton<AT>gte<DOT>net (畔�_
> http://home1.gte.net/bstanton/index.htm
> 征馬辰漫滌豕偕帘滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕�> _
>
Finally a smart post by somebody on this group. Bill, you're absolutely
right. The GTP is a pretty nice car, and it's approaching the
Maxima... but we still have the advantage :-)
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos
Bentley <ben...@access2.digex.net> wrote:
: Victor Smith (vics...@ameritech.net) said something like:
: : with water every time it rains. Been happening for years.
: It has? Funny, of the seven Hondas I've owned, and in which I've driven a
: quarter million miles, I've never had this happen. Which of your Hondas
: had this problem, Vic? Years and models, please.
I've seen MANY an 80's Civic, including mine, do it.
Spiros
--
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos email: stri...@primenet.com
at home in Central Indiana www.primenet.com/~strianta
Frank Kurucz
Andi Baritchi wrote:
>
> Actually, my '97 Maxima SE 5-speed is running just fine, fuel injectors
> and all. Take a look at automobile magazine -- "Is this the best V6 in
> the world, or what?" They were talking about Nissan's VQ30DE, of
> course, not GM's cheapo 3.8 Series II.
To be fair to GM, their 3800 engine has been labeled one of the ten
best engines in the world (I would still take the VQ30DE any day).
Frank
Frank Kurucz
David Foley wrote:
>
> The same cheapo 3.8 that Jap-car-lover and Yank-car-basher James Healey
> from USA Today admitted is *far* superior off-freeway to comporable V6's
> from Honda, Toyota, and (wait for it ...) Nissan. "Sends 'em to the
> showers !!!".
That may be his opinion. As someone who has owned both I disagree.
Of course the keyword is "comparable". Since Nissan, Toyota and
Honda do not make pushrod V6's there are no comparable engines.
I will admit that it is remarkable what GM has been able to
accomplish with ancient technology. I will also say that our
3800 ran rough and guzzled oil until it was repaired under
warranty.
Frank
Bentley
: bee buyer. How old did you say you were?
...
: Oh, GM owners are liars? Thanks.
...
: Geez, can't you read?
: One Ford, one Dodge, one VW. And my GM's just add up to your Honda's.
: BTW, I don't recall you mentioning owning *any* Ford in the past, save a
: work van your company really owned. Care to give a few details on these
: seven Fords you've owned?
No. I'll spar with you when it's fun, but you go too far, friend.
A little advice: If you're going to post flame-bait, learn to deal with
the responses.
--
P.J. Hartman
Andi Baritchi <an...@airmail.net> wrote:
>behind the Japanese... even the 85-89 generation of Maximas had SOHC
>engines... GM's still pushing the aged pushrod anti-technology.
Using technology for technology's sake is a waste of money.
Pushrods are old tech, but they do allow for a more compact engine and
a lower cost.
If they had no benefit at all, then it would be stupid to produce
them.
--
P.J. Hartman | pjh{at}radiks{dot}net
'98 C5 Ord# 264DXT | '90 Kawasaki ZX-11
'90 Eagle Talon TSi AWD | '81 Suzuki GS450LX
'77 MGB Roadster | '90 Hyundai Sonata
Frank Kurucz
P.J. Hartman wrote:
>
> Andi Baritchi <an...@airmail.net> wrote:
>
> >behind the Japanese... even the 85-89 generation of Maximas had SOHC
> >engines... GM's still pushing the aged pushrod anti-technology.
>
> Using technology for technology's sake is a waste of money.
>
> Pushrods are old tech, but they do allow for a more compact engine and
> a lower cost.
>
> If they had no benefit at all, then it would be stupid to produce
> them.
I don't think that benefit is the issue, but cost to GM. Americans are
still willing to accept rougher running pushrod engines, so GM sells
'em.
In other markets a pushrod is not considered acceptable.
Frank
mri...@gte.net
>On 18 Jun 1997 00:01:43 GMT, mri...@gte.net wrote:
>It wasn't the injectors, it is the fuel with alcohol level above 5%
>sold in the US. The injectors seals were not designed to handle
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>it and dissolved. They didn't have problems in Japan.
>I had that problem in my 200sxTurbo, the car is 11 years old,
>runs well and handles better than my 96 Max...
Er, it's the gases fault that Nissan didn't design the car for use in
the US? (Hey they didn't bother to notify me that there was a problem,
either, I had to here it on the news, go figure, customer support?)
I'ld consider leaky injectors a far worse problem than a leaky trunk
(well, unless you like to put fuel in the trunk too), and the fact that
how many GP's are affected vesus how many Maximas (and other Nissans)?
(I heard Maximas had Rack problems too. I've had mine replaced 4 or 5
times, needs it again).
I had my injectors replaced, but the car still runs eradically, must be
some other expensive part that needs to be replaced.
ilias...@visi.net
Actually, in my manual they say NOT to use
fuel with alcohol. Have you read yours?
mri...@gte.net
Shawn Lin
Andi Baritchi wrote:
> I love my VQ engine. I've tried some cars with GM's series II 3.8L, and
> they weren't bad, but the Americans are always a generation or two
> behind the Japanese... even the 85-89 generation of Maximas had SOHC
> engines... GM's still pushing the aged pushrod anti-technology.
If it's not broken, why fix it?
Bigger displacement, pushrods... so what?
The Grand Prix GT has 195HP, 220 ft-lbs torque, 19/30mpg, 0-60 in 7.7
seconds.
Nissan Maxima GLE's V6 has 190 HP, 205 ft-lbs torque, 21/28mpg (auto),
0-60 in 7.9 seconds.
Where are the HUGE performance gains with the DOHC technology? Where
are the amazing improvements in fuel economy? How is it this ancient
"anti-technology" comes so close to matching Nissan's state-of-the-art
DOHC techno-everything engine? How come GM's 3800 Series II V6
Supercharged in a Grand Prix GTP can even make the Japanese DOHC V8 in
the Ford Taurus SHO whimper? The non-Supercharged version isn't even
that much slower than the DOHC *V8* in the Taurus.
With the complexity of DOHC engines (FOUR camshafts you know) and the
need to replace those wimpy timing belts every 60k miles...
I would definitely pick the simpler, easier to work on, iron block, old
pushrod "anti-technology" if the power and fuel economy were close.
--
Shawn Lin <sli...@mail.orion.org> SMSU student from Springfield, MO
"A friend will help you move, a GOOD friend will help you move a body"
Tape sucks, MiniDisc is cool, http://members.tripod.com/~Psych/
Bored? See my webpage: http://science.smsu.edu/~lin
*W0lph*
In article <33ACF0B3...@mail.orion.org>, Shawn Lin
<sli...@mail.orion.org> wrote:
> Andi Baritchi wrote:
>
> > I love my VQ engine. I've tried some cars with GM's series II 3.8L, and
> > they weren't bad, but the Americans are always a generation or two
> > behind the Japanese... even the 85-89 generation of Maximas had SOHC
> > engines... GM's still pushing the aged pushrod anti-technology.
>
> If it's not broken, why fix it?
> Bigger displacement, pushrods... so what?
>
> The Grand Prix GT has 195HP, 220 ft-lbs torque, 19/30mpg, 0-60 in 7.7
> seconds.
> Nissan Maxima GLE's V6 has 190 HP, 205 ft-lbs torque, 21/28mpg (auto),
> 0-60 in 7.9 seconds.
>
> Where are the HUGE performance gains with the DOHC technology? Where
> are the amazing improvements in fuel economy?
Ah, but the same engine in the SE 5speed version runs 0-60 in ~6.6 seconds,
and in fact, the normally aspirated 3.0L V6 runs just about the same as
GM's Supercharged 3.8L V6 in the GTP.. So.. bigger engine AND a supercharger,
and about teh same performance.. hmm.. yea.. that shows how superior that
pushrod engine is..
> With the complexity of DOHC engines (FOUR camshafts you know) and the
> need to replace those wimpy timing belts every 60k miles...
Learn before you open your mouth. The engine in question, the Nissan 3.0L
V6 uses a timing chain; not a belt.. And, its one of the most reliable
engines on the road by just about any reporting agency.
mri...@gte.net
>Actually, in my manual they say NOT to use
>fuel with alcohol. Have you read yours?
You are correct, I haven't read the whole manual (Unfortunately, I
inherited it from my parents, the manuel isn't exactly intact:).
However, I still believe that this is Nissan's fault, if it were not, I
don't think the Nissan would voluntarily replace the injectors for free.
And since this tread started with someone claiming that the Maxima is a
better built car than the GP, I simply pointed that out. And as farther
proof that Maximas are not the greastest thing since sliced bread,
yesterday I replaced the alternator again(again), in the new alternator's
box was a note listing common problems with, suprise, Maxima's. Some
problems listed were, low power at idle(need to change pulley), wiring
being to thin and some other problems that cause alternators to become
toast.
mri...@gte.net
>Ah, but the same engine in the SE 5speed version runs 0-60 in ~6.6 seconds,
And the SE *auto* runs in 7.9, compare apples.
SE Auto =7.9
GP GT (always auto) =7.7
The old pushrod pushes the heavier GP GT a tad quicker the the Maxima auto.
>and in fact, the normally aspirated 3.0L V6 runs just about the same as
>GM's Supercharged 3.8L V6 in the GTP.. So.. bigger engine AND a supercharger,
>and about teh same performance.. hmm.. yea.. that shows how superior that
>pushrod engine is..
Ofcourse the Maxima's 5speed has nothing to do with it at all. I'm sure
if the GP was available in manual form (or if Pontiac put more boost thru
the supercharger), this debate would have never started.
JBlessing
In article <*W0lph*-23069706...@192.168.1.10>, *W0lph*@emi.net
says...
>Learn before you open your mouth. The engine in question, the Nissan 3.0L
>V6 uses a timing chain; not a belt.. And, its one of the most reliable
>engines on the road by just about any reporting agency.
Exactly what year 3.0 are we talking about? The Maxima's 3.0 at least till
1990 used a timing belt, and even worse IS an interference engine. There
is excellence in engineering design for ya.
--
Jordan Blessing L1 Master Tech
------------------------------
Remove NOSPAM from email address to reply.
Sorry I had to do this, but blame all the
asshole spammers that are filling my mailbox
with amsoil, spiralmax, slick 50, pyramid schemes,
snake oils, get rich quick schemes and other forms
of bullshit.
E. William Lawrence III
Andi Baritchi wrote:
>
> mri...@gte.net wrote:
> >
> > >Mike Howells wrote:
> >
> > [leaky trunk]
> >
> > >Funny how the Maximas are well-built -- something that Pontiac leaves
> > to
> > >be desired.
> >
> > Funny, Nissan designed leaky fuel injectors instead. Go figure, you
> > may
> > need some "poor soul" in Pontiac with a trunk full of water to put out
> > your engine fire.
> >
> > mrivers *(at)* gte.net
> >
> > These addresses are not mine, but from companies who persist at
> > spamming.
> > They are here for targeting by other spammers who scan newsgroups.
> > sup...@fastresult.com sa...@savetrees.com bi...@bigfoot.com
> > acceptance...@ns3.guhert.net subs...@cyberpromo.com
> > postm...@tor-srs1.netcom.ca postm...@nucleus.com
>
> and all. Take a look at automobile magazine -- "Is this the best V6 in
> the world, or what?" They were talking about Nissan's VQ30DE, of
> course, not GM's cheapo 3.8 Series II.
>
>
> --
> #include <disclaimer.h>
>
> /*
> \\\\\|/////
> \\ / \ //
> ( O O )
> *-------------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo-------------------*
> | |
> | Andi Baritchi Student and Webmaster |
> | Computer Science & Eng. http://www-cse.uta.edu |
> | University of Texas at Arlington |
> | |
> | http://web2.airmail.net/andi an...@airmail.net |
> | |
> | .oooO |
> | ( ) Oooo. |
> *---------------------\ (--( )--------------------*
> \_) ) /
> (_/
> */
If you don't like GM cars don't buy them.
There is no reason for dealer bashing in this newsgroup.
Your opinion is welcome, but your statement is just another form of
prejudice. We can always do without it, thank you.
The series II happens to be a very reliable and durable powerplant.
I cannot personally speak for the nissan although I believe it to be very
adequate also. I own and service GM cars and am very happy in doing
both.
I don't mean to be rude only to express my personal opinion.
Feel free to disagree but please don't be rude.
Incidentally this whole trunk leak business has been addressed within the
ranks of pontiac and the remedy is readily available at any dealership.
I have already informed the original poster of this fix and this
bickering is pointless.
It is only dragging people away from the purpose of this newsgroup,
to help one another.
It has turned from rec.autos.tech/driving into rec.autos.bickering
Let's concentrate on helping eachother and not annoying eachother.
Thank you for your attention.
Frank Kurucz
Shawn Lin wrote:
>
> Where are the HUGE performance gains with the DOHC technology?
The Maxima's engine is has only 78% of the Pontiacs engine. How does
GM's 3.1 liter compare with Nissan's 3.0. That is a better comparison.
Also, Nissan had no trouble wringing out 300 HP out of the similar
3 liter twin turbo.
Frank
Frank Kurucz
Frank Kurucz wrote:
>
> Shawn Lin wrote:
> >
>
> > Where are the HUGE performance gains with the DOHC technology?
>
> The Maxima's engine is has only 78% of the Pontiacs engine. How does
displacement
Bentley
Shawn Lin (sli...@mail.orion.org) said something like:
: With the complexity of DOHC engines (FOUR camshafts you know) and the
: need to replace those wimpy timing belts every 60k miles...
Timing belts? On the Maxima's V6? I think not.
: I would definitely pick the simpler, easier to work on, iron block, old
: pushrod "anti-technology" if the power and fuel economy were close.
Yeah, superchargers are paragons of simplicity...
ilias...@visi.net
I agree, it's Nissan's fault and Maxima is not the
greatest in the world. But I paid for my new 96
Max 18K and I think it's a lot of car for the money
with above-average reliability. I tested new
Camry and Avalon - it's boring, Subaru - no
power, Accord - small and unreasonably priced.
Volvo 850 is good but it's about 27K. There is
no Acura Legend anymore...Well, now about
Pontiac GTP: I really like the exterior, but GM's
reliability record is just scary. I have 86 200sx turbo
and the only thing I changed was... injectors.The alternator,
AC and many other electrical components in it are made
by Hitachi, you can see them on other Japanese cars,
such as Toyota and Mazda. What year is your Maxima,
are you using OEM alternator?
On 23 Jun 1997 22:16:11 GMT, mri...@gte.net wrote:
>>Actually, in my manual they say NOT to use
>>fuel with alcohol. Have you read yours?
>
>You are correct, I haven't read the whole manual (Unfortunately, I
>inherited it from my parents, the manuel isn't exactly intact:).
>However, I still believe that this is Nissan's fault, if it were not, I
>don't think the Nissan would voluntarily replace the injectors for free.
>And since this tread started with someone claiming that the Maxima is a
>better built car than the GP, I simply pointed that out. And as farther
>proof that Maximas are not the greastest thing since sliced bread,
>yesterday I replaced the alternator again(again), in the new alternator's
>box was a note listing common problems with, suprise, Maxima's. Some
>problems listed were, low power at idle(need to change pulley), wiring
>being to thin and some other problems that cause alternators to become
>toast.
>
ilias...@visi.net
Hey, the guy is buying the car "to work on". I bought my
Maxima to "enjoy the ride"
On 24 Jun 1997 00:31:00 GMT, ben...@access2.digex.net (Bentley)
wrote:
Andi Baritchi
AMEN.
*W0lph* wrote:
>
> In article <33ACF0B3...@mail.orion.org>, Shawn Lin
> <sli...@mail.orion.org> wrote:
>
> > Andi Baritchi wrote:
> >
> > > I love my VQ engine. I've tried some cars with GM's series II
> 3.8L, and
> > > they weren't bad, but the Americans are always a generation or two
> > > behind the Japanese... even the 85-89 generation of Maximas had
> SOHC
> > > engines... GM's still pushing the aged pushrod anti-technology.
> >
> > If it's not broken, why fix it?
> > Bigger displacement, pushrods... so what?
> >
> > The Grand Prix GT has 195HP, 220 ft-lbs torque, 19/30mpg, 0-60 in
> 7.7
> > seconds.
> > Nissan Maxima GLE's V6 has 190 HP, 205 ft-lbs torque, 21/28mpg
> (auto),
> > 0-60 in 7.9 seconds.
> >
> > Where are the HUGE performance gains with the DOHC technology?
> Where
> > are the amazing improvements in fuel economy?
>
> Ah, but the same engine in the SE 5speed version runs 0-60 in ~6.6
> seconds,
> and in fact, the normally aspirated 3.0L V6 runs just about the same
> as
> GM's Supercharged 3.8L V6 in the GTP.. So.. bigger engine AND a
> supercharger,
> and about teh same performance.. hmm.. yea.. that shows how superior
> that
> pushrod engine is..
>
> > With the complexity of DOHC engines (FOUR camshafts you know) and
> the
> > need to replace those wimpy timing belts every 60k miles...
>
> Learn before you open your mouth. The engine in question, the Nissan
> 3.0L
> V6 uses a timing chain; not a belt.. And, its one of the most reliable
> engines on the road by just about any reporting agency.
--
Andi Baritchi
> 3.0L
> >V6 uses a timing chain; not a belt.. And, its one of the most
> reliable
> >engines on the road by just about any reporting agency.
>
> till
> 1990 used a timing belt, and even worse IS an interference engine.
> There
> is excellence in engineering design for ya.
> --
> Jordan Blessing L1 Master Tech
> ------------------------------
> Remove NOSPAM from email address to reply.
>
> Sorry I had to do this, but blame all the
> asshole spammers that are filling my mailbox
> with amsoil, spiralmax, slick 50, pyramid schemes,
> snake oils, get rich quick schemes and other forms
> of bullshit.
We're talking about the VQ30DE, which was introduced in the '95 Maxima.
--Andi
Marc
Andi Baritchi <an...@airmail.net> said:
>We're talking about the VQ30DE, which was introduced in the '95 Maxima.
Is the VQ30DE completly different from the VG30E, or are they
somewhat related?
Marc
For email, remove second "y" from Gum...@tamu.edu
mri...@gte.net
>such as Toyota and Mazda. What year is your Maxima,
>are you using OEM alternator?
It's an 87 Maxima grocery getter (wagon:), 122000 miles old. I don't have
the name of the company the alternator came from, however it is likely a
reconditioned part since it only cost $90, can't justify buying expensive
new parts, the last alternator cost ~$200. It did however come in a box:)
I realize that these things go wrong on cars this old, the problem is that
things have been going wrong since the car was only a couple years old.
I think the A/C was the first to go. I don't believe that it was due to
abuse, it was my mother's car! Well there was that incident concerning
a trailer hitch and the radiator:)
My experience with GM's:
My parents previous vehicles, were GMs, both ran well into the 100000s
'76 Nova 100000+, car sat for *seven* years(after thay got the maxima),
A/C still worked!, though it needed work. Mom traded it in a couple
years ago, and we believe one the the dealers mechanics bought it and
restored it.
'83 Chevy Van 140000+, has had tranny replaced, it did tow the Nova
between Florida and Nevada twice.
My grandfathers 6x Nova has a zillion miles, still runs. Lotsa bondo!
RMoburg
>I don't think that benefit is the issue, but cost to GM. Americans are
>still willing to accept rougher running pushrod engines, so GM sells
>'em.
Rougher running? Maybe some, but not the 3800 Gen II or the new Vette
V8?
The rest of the comarison may, or may not, be true as the "rest of
the world" would have 4 cylinder engines at the same, or higher, price
points than the American OHV.
>In other markets a pushrod is not considered acceptable.
And you came up with this based on what? The "rest of the world"
usually have taxes that increase signifigantly after 2 liters. This
left engines in the V6 range displacement, as high end premium
engines. And as such, came out with DOHC and SOHC configs.
Different price points and heritages.
BTW do you consider the U.K. and Australia as places OHV's wouldn't be
acceptable?
Marc
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> said:
>P.J. Hartman wrote:
[pushrod engines]
>> If they had no benefit at all, then it would be stupid to produce
>> them.
>I don't think that benefit is the issue, but cost to GM. Americans are
>still willing to accept rougher running pushrod engines, so GM sells
>'em.
>In other markets a pushrod is not considered acceptable.
Quick comparison of the 3.4 DOHC and 3800 II
The pushrod costs less
The pushrod weighs less
The pushrod gets better mileage
The pushrod has more torque
The pushrod gives better acceleration
The DOHC gives more power (with less accel and worse mileage)
In my opinion, the pushrod is just as smooth running, as long as
it isn't taken all the way to red-line. But then, I've driven a
number of DOHCs that are rougher at red than the 3800 (Neon for
one).
JBlessing
In article
<5A55839A4219AC8F.3688D61E...@library-proxy.airnews.
net>, an...@airmail.net says...
>
>JBlessing wrote:
>>
>> In article <*W0lph*-23069706...@192.168.1.10>, *W0lph*@emi.net
>> says...
>>
>> >Learn before you open your mouth. The engine in question, the Nissan
>> 3.0L
>> >V6 uses a timing chain; not a belt.. And, its one of the most
>> reliable
>> >engines on the road by just about any reporting agency.
>>
>> Exactly what year 3.0 are we talking about? The Maxima's 3.0 at least
>> till
>> 1990 used a timing belt, and even worse IS an interference engine.
>> There
>> is excellence in engineering design for ya.
>> --
>> Jordan Blessing L1 Master Tech
>We're talking about the VQ30DE, which was introduced in the '95 Maxima.
>
> --Andi
Well it's about time Nissan got their act together!
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
: > Pushrods are old tech, but they do allow for a more compact engine and
: > a lower cost.
: >
: > If they had no benefit at all, then it would be stupid to produce
: > them.
: I don't think that benefit is the issue, but cost to GM. Americans are
: still willing to accept rougher running pushrod engines, so GM sells
: 'em.
: In other markets a pushrod is not considered acceptable.
I suggest you drive a 3800V6 Supercharged for a while before passing
judgement.
Older technology does very well in many cases; There are fighter planes
older than I am that are still considered best in class. Same
for programming languages, software systems, etc.
A prominent Automotive industries journal had an article on the
very subject, btw. The concensus is that marketing, not technology,
is driving the market...
Spiros
--
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos email: stri...@primenet.com
at home in Central Indiana www.primenet.com/~strianta
Frank Kurucz
RMoburg wrote:
>
> Rougher running? Maybe some, but not the 3800 Gen II or
> the new Vette V8?
Don't get me wrong here. It is remarkable what GM has been able to
do with its OHV engines. And while GM tends to suffer from quality
problems in some areas (mostly fit and finish) their engines tend
to be pretty good.
Nonetheless GMs OHV V6 needs 26% more displacement than the Nissan
V6 to produce comparable performance. I test drove the GP GTP
and the 3800 was pretty smooth for an OHV, but I like the Maxima's
engine better.
I say this not as a "Nissan bigot" (I have owned a few GM products
over the years), but as someone who is very impressed with the
Nissan product. I do admit also that if I did not enjoy manual
shifting that I would probably give the nod to the GTP. It is
a very good value.
>
> Different price points and heritages.
> BTW do you consider the U.K. and Australia as places OHV's wouldn't be
> acceptable?
I didn't say *everywhere*.
Frank
Frank Kurucz
> >> them.
>
> >I don't think that benefit is the issue, but cost to GM. Americans are
> >still willing to accept rougher running pushrod engines, so GM sells
> >'em.
> >In other markets a pushrod is not considered acceptable.
>
>
> The pushrod costs less
> The pushrod weighs less
> The pushrod gets better mileage
> The pushrod has more torque
> The pushrod gives better acceleration
>
> The DOHC gives more power (with less accel and worse mileage)
So GM doesn't know how to make a decent DOHC. Small wonder, after
all it took them 30 years to get the 3800 right.
On the other hand Ford gets 300 HP out of a 4.6l DOHC, about
the same as GM's 5.7l pushrods.
>
> In my opinion, the pushrod is just as smooth running, as long as
> it isn't taken all the way to red-line. But then, I've driven a
> number of DOHCs that are rougher at red than the 3800 (Neon for
> one).
No argument here. For typical American cruising a torquey
pushrod is the way to go. Great engine for a minivan.
Frank
Bhaskar Manda
jble...@peganet.com (JBlessing) writes:
>In article
><5A55839A4219AC8F.3688D61E...@library-proxy.airnews.
>net>, an...@airmail.net says...
>>JBlessing wrote:
>>> Exactly what year 3.0 are we talking about? The Maxima's 3.0 at least
>>> till 1990 used a timing belt, and even worse IS an interference engine.
>>> There is excellence in engineering design for ya.
>>We're talking about the VQ30DE, which was introduced in the '95 Maxima.
>Well it's about time Nissan got their act together!
What are you talking about? Timing belts have their advantages.
With tranverse engines and water pumps squeezed to the belt drive,
it was a good thing to replace the belt anyway, so that the pump
could be replaced. The belt was quieter, cheaper and adequately
reliable for the applications. Nissan's had chains in various
OHC engines since the middle eighties (and most like before in
non-US engines) also. It's not like they didn't have the technology.
I think you comparing Nissan to GM, and asking Nissan to "get their
act together." This implies that you have no clue about the history
of the two companies and their products.
-bhaskar
Frank Kurucz
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos wrote:
> I suggest you drive a 3800V6 Supercharged for a while before passing
> judgement.
I have. The 3800 SC is pretty good. If I recall right it has a lower
redline than the Nissan.
I have owned a GM 3800 powered vehicle, so I am familiar with the 3800
family. It is indeed one of GM's best, and really not bad at all
for an OHV (ours started guzzling oil around 20K miles, but I
realize that is anecdotal).
I have also owned Nissan V6's, which I have been much happier with.
To be fair my judgement is probably biased by the total ownership
experience. My '89 Maxima never, ever, had to visit the shop for
repairs during the 7 years I owned it. By comparison, our Pontiac
visited the shop about 20 times in about 24 months (twice for
engine problems). Our 96 Pathfinder has been back twice (I am
very dissapointed) once for a faulty airbag sensor, and once for
a noisy ventilation fan.
Frank
Chuck Tomlinson
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>Nonetheless GMs OHV V6 needs 26% more displacement than the Nissan
>V6 to produce comparable performance. I test drove the GP GTP
>and the 3800 was pretty smooth for an OHV, but I like the Maxima's
>engine better.
I'm interested to know what aspect of an OHV design is supposedly
responsible for it's increased inherent roughness (in comparison
with an OHC design). IOW, what exactly does "pretty smooth for an
OHV" mean? Please feel free to be very specific.
Thanks in advance...
--
Chuck Tomlinson
Bill Stanton
On Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:33:34 -0600, Frank Kurucz
<anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Nonetheless GMs OHV V6 needs 26% more displacement than the Nissan
> V6 to produce comparable performance. I test drove the GP GTP
> and the 3800 was pretty smooth for an OHV, but I like the Maxima's
> engine better.
Fred, you are wrong here and I keep reminding you. The non-blown
3800II Grand Prix GT is quicker than the Maxima when both are equipped
with automatic transmissions. So GM's OHV V6 doesn't necessarily
always need 26% more displacement to produce comparable performance.
ANTI-SPAM IS IN EFFECT! TO REPLY REMOVE THE
"<NOSPAM>" FROM MY EMAIL ADDRESS!
征馬辰漫滌豕偕帘滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕� 畔�_(畔�_(畔�_(BILL STANTON)_.毀�_.毀�_.毀� 征馬辰漫 Art -- Animation -- Design 征馬辰漫
_.毀� mail:bstanton<AT>gte<DOT>net (畔�_
http://home1.gte.net/bstanton/index.htm
征馬辰漫滌豕偕帘滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕�
_
Bill Stanton
On Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:41:53 -0600, Frank Kurucz
<anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Shawn Lin wrote:
> >
>
> > Where are the HUGE performance gains with the DOHC technology?
>
> The Maxima's engine is has only 78% of the Pontiacs engine. How does
> GM's 3.1 liter compare with Nissan's 3.0. That is a better comparison.
>
> Also, Nissan had no trouble wringing out 300 HP out of the similar
> 3 liter twin turbo.
What does this have to do with it? The 3800II Supercharged is still
nice, still smooth and still cheap to make thus providing a cheaper
GTP than Maxima.
Ford gets 305hp out of its normally aspirated 4.6L motor, does this
make the twin turbos on the 3.0L Z motor look stupid? No, it's just a
different method.
Marc
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> said:
>Nonetheless GMs OHV V6 needs 26% more displacement than the Nissan
>V6 to produce comparable performance.
Could you please explain why displacement matters? If the engine
gets better accel, better mileage, and at a lower cost, why do
you think less of it because it uses more displacement?
E. William Lawrence III
Chuck Tomlinson wrote:
>
> Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> >Nonetheless GMs OHV V6 needs 26% more displacement than the Nissan
> >and the 3800 was pretty smooth for an OHV, but I like the Maxima's
> >engine better.
>
> responsible for it's increased inherent roughness (in comparison
> with an OHC design). IOW, what exactly does "pretty smooth for an
> OHV" mean? Please feel free to be very specific.
>
> Thanks in advance...
> --
> Chuck Tomlinson
Chuck,
I am with you, I would be interested to find out what is so much more
"smooth" about a OHC engine. I own a 24 valve DOHC 3.4 liter v6 in my
cutlass supreme. I also work at a GM dealership and drive the
supercharged 3800 regularly, along with the regular series II v6.
I don't notice any difference between the performance or "roughness" of
these powertrains. They still work the same, the intake opens, mix goes
in, intake closes, gas burns, exhaust opens, gas goes out.
They both have six cyls. The only way to make a car run smoother is to
add cylinders to make up for the power pulse gaps in the engine, as far
as I know. But maybe someone knows something I dont, I would like to
hear so I can learn.
Thanks.
Bill
Andi Baritchi
OHC engines are not necessarily smoother than OHV engines. But this
fact is always true: OHC engines have the POTENTIAL to be made smoother
than OHV engines. Why? There's more camshafts, thus they can be tuned
more precisely.
True: GM did a superb job at balancing their Series II 3800cc V6 -- it's
as well-balanced as some OHC engines, and it does it with only one
camshaft.
So they pretty maxed out the potential of balancing an OHV engine with
their Series II 3.8L V6. OTOH, they didn't do such a good job balancing
the 3.4L OHC engine to its full potential -- thus the 3.4 liter looks
better on paper, but isn't really better at all.
Now an example of what is possible with OHC engines -- go out and test
drive a Maxima with the VQ30DE engine -- they did as good a job of
maximizing the potential of the engine as GM did on the Series II V6.
However, the potential of the VQ is higher than is the potential of the
Series II, because of more camshafts that allow for better tuning. The
end result is a far superior engine that runs smoother and is much
happier revving while keeping a meaty torque curve.
Here's another example of GM doing a good job of tuning -- and this time
they used a DOHC engine so the end result is also a SUPERB engine -- the
Northstar. The Northstar 4.6L has 300HP and 300 ft-lbs of torque. A GM
Vortec engine (still pushrods) that displaces 5.0L has less horsepower
and comparable torque... but that's a great engine too... very well
optimized. But alas, you can only do so much with pushrods... Like the
old saying goes -- four cams are better than one.
Frank Kurucz
Bill Stanton wrote:
>
> > Also, Nissan had no trouble wringing out 300 HP out of the similar
> > 3 liter twin turbo.
>
> What does this have to do with it? The 3800II Supercharged is still
> nice, still smooth and still cheap to make thus providing a cheaper
> GTP than Maxima.
Cheaper? Maybe in initial price (and then again not much, maybe 2K).
But in the long haul the Max will hold its value much better.
Last year I sold an 89 GXE (that MSRP'd for 16K) and got $7200.
43% of MSRP for a 7 year old car, not bad at all. I called the
local Pontiac dealer and asked the leasing manager what the residuals
where for the GTP. He said 65% for 2 years, 50% for 3 years. Seems
like Pontiac doesn't have a lot of faith in the resale value of its
flagship product.
Frank
Frank Kurucz
> >V6 to produce comparable performance.
>
> If the engine gets better accel
I am not convinced that it does, and besides I am not interested
in automatics anyway.
>, better mileage,
The Max has better city MPG's
>and at a lower cost,
Only initially, it will depreciate much faster.
> why do
> you think less of it because it uses more displacement?
Because it demonstrates that it is a lower tech engine
(plus it is an engine family that I have had a *lot*
of problems with, which I attribute to its low tech nature).
Frank
Frank Kurucz
Chuck Tomlinson wrote:
>
>
> I'm interested to know what aspect of an OHV design is supposedly
> responsible for it's increased inherent roughness (in comparison
> with an OHC design). IOW, what exactly does "pretty smooth for an
> OHV" mean? Please feel free to be very specific.
Why soitenly!
I meant to say that it revs pretty smoothly for an OHV.
Frank
Frank Kurucz
Bill Stanton wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:33:34 -0600, Frank Kurucz
> <anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> > Nonetheless GMs OHV V6 needs 26% more displacement than the Nissan
> > and the 3800 was pretty smooth for an OHV, but I like the Maxima's
> > engine better.
>
> 3800II Grand Prix GT is quicker than the Maxima when both are equipped
> with automatic transmissions. So GM's OHV V6 doesn't necessarily
> always need 26% more displacement to produce comparable performance.
>
According to the specs:
3800 II - 195 HP @ 5200 RPM, Torque: 230 lbs./ft. @ 4000 rpm
GM 3100 - 160 hp @ 5200 rpm , Torque: 185 lbs./ft. @ 4000 rpm
VQ 3,0 - 190 hp @ 5600 rpm, Torque: 205 lbs./ft. @ 4000 rpm
Even though the VQ is the smallest engine of the three, its raw
numbers are closer to the 3800 than the 3100.
Also, the GP GT weighs about 400 lbs (13%) more than the Maxima,
which offsets the 12% more torque and 3% more HP. Perhaps the
GP has lower gears?
Frank
Ryan Rahim
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution:
Marc (Gum...@tamu.edu) wrote:
: Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> said:
: >Nonetheless GMs OHV V6 needs 26% more displacement than the Nissan
: >V6 to produce comparable performance.
: Could you please explain why displacement matters? If the engine
: gets better accel, better mileage, and at a lower cost, why do
: you think less of it because it uses more displacement?
Not to mention more usable torque.
Ryan
: Marc
: For email, remove second "y" from Gum...@tamu.edu
--
Fahrvergnugen...the most *fun* you can have in your clothes
Chuck Tomlinson
Andi Baritchi <an...@airmail.net> wrote:
>
>OHC engines are not necessarily smoother than OHV engines. But this
>fact is always true: OHC engines have the POTENTIAL to be made smoother
>than OHV engines. Why? There's more camshafts, thus they can be tuned
>more precisely.
Gimme a break. In almost every modern engine, camshaft timing is
fixed at build time, no matter how many cams the engine has. The
tuning is all done before the first production engine is built.
Secondly, more cams offer the opportunity for more timing errors!
The lobes on a single cam are *not* going anywhere relative to each
other. There is no long chain or belt between the lobe sets, that
might allow relative phasing to drift over time.
[...]
>Here's another example of GM doing a good job of tuning -- and this time
>they used a DOHC engine so the end result is also a SUPERB engine -- the
>Northstar. The Northstar 4.6L has 300HP and 300 ft-lbs of torque. A GM
>Vortec engine (still pushrods) that displaces 5.0L has less horsepower
>and comparable torque... but that's a great engine too... very well
>optimized. But alas, you can only do so much with pushrods... Like the
>old saying goes -- four cams are better than one.
Not all old sayings are true. But it is true that many-cams (like
many-valves) appeals strongly to customers who think "more is
better" <- there's another old saying for you. You can't sell a 3
valve/cyl engine without some customers thinking "why not 4
valves?". You have 4V/cyl? Why not 5V/cyl? More! More!
BTW, the Corvette's LS1 engine is both smaller and more powerful
than a Northstar. By smaller, I mean externally, which is what
matters when you're trying to package an engine. I don't know how
much a Northstar weighs, but at 460 lbs dressed, the LS1 is almost
certainly lighter, too. Yet the Northstar is "superb", and the LS1
is a mere pushrod engine. Pretty amusing...
--
Chuck Tomlinson
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
: Cheaper? Maybe in initial price (and then again not much, maybe 2K).
: But in the long haul the Max will hold its value much better.
: Last year I sold an 89 GXE (that MSRP'd for 16K) and got $7200.
: 43% of MSRP for a 7 year old car, not bad at all. I called the
: local Pontiac dealer and asked the leasing manager what the residuals
: where for the GTP. He said 65% for 2 years, 50% for 3 years. Seems
: like Pontiac doesn't have a lot of faith in the resale value of its
: flagship product.
Except for all the rental Grand Prix's that are sold off after a year
or two of service, helping keep the resale value even lower. Not to
mention production volumes to start with...
I suggest you read up on what the professional automotive engineers
think of such issues (modern DOHC V6's vs. pushrods). I ran into
a very telling article last month which was not very much in favor
of 'modernization' for the sake of it.
DanVandeputte
JBlessing wrote:
>
> In article <*W0lph*-23069706...@192.168.1.10>, *W0lph*@emi.net
> says...
>
> >Learn before you open your mouth. The engine in question, the Nissan 3.0L
> >V6 uses a timing chain; not a belt.. And, its one of the most reliable
> >engines on the road by just about any reporting agency.
>
> 1990 used a timing belt, and even worse IS an interference engine. There
> is excellence in engineering design for ya.
Just about every Nissan I can think of uses a timing chain now, I'm not
sure about the 1.6L engine in the Sentra. But the Max does, the 240,
200, Altima, pickup; just not sure about the Sentra.
Frank Kurucz
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos wrote:
>
>
> Except for all the rental Grand Prix's that are sold off after a year
> or two of service, helping keep the resale value even lower. Not to
> mention production volumes to start with...
>
This is another beef I have with the big 3. Most American cars
depreciate
so fast that its not even funny, and they fan the flames by dumping cars
into the rental fleets.
However, a GP is not a terribly common rental (thats what Luminas are
for).
And its depreciation rate is better than the typical GM product, but
still
inferior to the typical Toyota or Nissan.
Frank
RMoburg
On Thu, 26 Jun 1997 16:05:12 -0600, Frank Kurucz
<anon...@nospam.com> made me think they wrote:
>Marc wrote:
>>
>> Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> said:
>> >P.J. Hartman wrote:
>>
>> [pushrod engines]
>> >> If they had no benefit at all, then it would be stupid to produce
>> >> them.
>>
>> >I don't think that benefit is the issue, but cost to GM. Americans are
>> >still willing to accept rougher running pushrod engines, so GM sells
>> >'em.
>> >In other markets a pushrod is not considered acceptable.
>>
>> Quick comparison of the 3.4 DOHC and 3800 II
>>
>> The pushrod costs less
>> The pushrod weighs less
>> The pushrod gets better mileage
>> The pushrod has more torque
>> The pushrod gives better acceleration
>>
>> The DOHC gives more power (with less accel and worse mileage)
>
>So GM doesn't know how to make a decent DOHC. Small wonder, after
>all it took them 30 years to get the 3800 right.
Of course we all know the Northstar engine is actually made by Nissan.
>On the other hand Ford gets 300 HP out of a 4.6l DOHC, about
>the same as GM's 5.7l pushrods.
I guess Nissan makes the new Vette OHV engine also??
>>
>> In my opinion, the pushrod is just as smooth running, as long as
>> it isn't taken all the way to red-line. But then, I've driven a
>> number of DOHCs that are rougher at red than the 3800 (Neon for
>> one).
>
>No argument here. For typical American cruising a torquey
>pushrod is the way to go. Great engine for a minivan.
>
And as long as Nissan can hook up to a 5 speed they are O.K.
But we all know what happens when they have to come into this
generation and hook up to an auto...bye bye performance..
Come to think of it, after what they did to the Maxima's rear
suspension, maybe they will go back to OHV engines.
ezb...@vafarg.pbz
Marc
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> said:
>Marc wrote:
>> Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> said:
>> >P.J. Hartman wrote:
>> >I don't think that benefit is the issue, but cost to GM. Americans are
>> >still willing to accept rougher running pushrod engines, so GM sells
>> >'em.
>> >In other markets a pushrod is not considered acceptable.
>> Quick comparison of the 3.4 DOHC and 3800 II
>> The pushrod costs less
>> The pushrod weighs less
>> The pushrod gets better mileage
>> The pushrod has more torque
>> The pushrod gives better acceleration
>> The DOHC gives more power (with less accel and worse mileage)
>So GM doesn't know how to make a decent DOHC. Small wonder, after
>all it took them 30 years to get the 3800 right.
If it ain't broke...
>On the other hand Ford gets 300 HP out of a 4.6l DOHC, about
>the same as GM's 5.7l pushrods.
And amazingly enough, that's what GM gets from a 4.6l DOHC. Care
to compare torque and cost between the LT-1 and Ford 4.6 DOHC?
>> In my opinion, the pushrod is just as smooth running, as long as
>> it isn't taken all the way to red-line. But then, I've driven a
>> number of DOHCs that are rougher at red than the 3800 (Neon for
>> one).
>No argument here. For typical American cruising a torquey
>pushrod is the way to go. Great engine for a minivan.
Whinney little motors with high hp/l are fine for scooters, but
torque is what moves the car. Or are you saying that a pushrod
engine, like, say, the 8.0l in the Viper isn't suited for a car,
and should only be in the Ram?
(I'm not against high hp/l, but that it is only a means to an
end)
Frank Kurucz
RMoburg wrote:
>
> Of course we all know the Northstar engine is actually made by Nissan.
Good point. Too bad Cadillac won't share this technology with the
other divisions (other than the Aurora). They probably won't
share because it is a differentiator. It is disturbing that
GM has such a hodgepodge of quality in their engines. Some are
pretty good (Corvette engine, NorthStar, 3800-II) while it still
sells some dogs (the 3.1 comes to mind here).
>
> >On the other hand Ford gets 300 HP out of a 4.6l DOHC, about
> >the same as GM's 5.7l pushrods.
>
> I guess Nissan makes the new Vette OHV engine also??
I would wager that if Nissan made a 5.7 DOHC V8 it would put the
Chevy engine to shame. It won't happen of course, mainly because
they can get the same performance out of the 3.0 with a turbo.
>
> And as long as Nissan can hook up to a 5 speed they are O.K.
I agree. The VQ is ideal for a manual.
> But we all know what happens when they have to come into this
> generation and hook up to an auto...bye bye performance..
This is true for most cars (auto == decreased performance).
Unless you have some outrageous amount of power (like a
Camaro Z28) this is usually the case.
> Come to think of it, after what they did to the Maxima's rear
> suspension, maybe they will go back to OHV engines.
This is one that Nissan enthusiasts are still wondering about.
Of course we know why it happened: to increase back seat space,
in order to make it more appealing to the unwashed masses.
The fact that most Maximas are sold with auto trannies does
document that most Americans are not interested in sport
sedans (at least not enough to bother with a clutch).
For most Americans performance is meaaured at the drag strip.
Frank
Frank Kurucz
Marc wrote:
>
> Whinney little motors with high hp/l are fine for scooters, but
> torque is what moves the car. Or are you saying that a pushrod
> engine, like, say, the 8.0l in the Viper isn't suited for a car,
> and should only be in the Ram?
I don't like "Whinney little motors" either. I don't think
that the VQ counts like a "whiner". An Cavalier 4 cyl - sure.
One advantage of smaller engines is that they are lighter.
Besides the obvoius advantage of lowering a cars weight it
also helps make a car less front heavy, improving handling.
Of course an even F/R weight ratio won't make one look or sound
cool while engaging in the American ritual of "cruising"
(for our European audience: cruising is the art of driving
slowly down Main Street in your cool car (the objective is to
be seen by others). A nice rumbling pushrod V8 enhances
the effect.
Frank
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
: So GM doesn't know how to make a decent DOHC. Small wonder, after
: all it took them 30 years to get the 3800 right.
It's called 'evolution'. As for 'decent DOHC' engines, the Northstar
V8 is world class, 300 HP and all.
: On the other hand Ford gets 300 HP out of a 4.6l DOHC, about
: the same as GM's 5.7l pushrods.
One engine is designed for a luxo-car or Pony car, the other for a
truck. So far noone, save Chrysler, has dropped the same engine
in the two segments, because the requirements are different.
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos
Marc <Gum...@tamu.edu> wrote:
: Whinney little motors with high hp/l are fine for scooters, but
: torque is what moves the car. Or are you saying that a pushrod
: engine, like, say, the 8.0l in the Viper isn't suited for a car,
: and should only be in the Ram?
Well, if torque is the measurement to go, doesn't Chrysler have
a six (turbodiesel?) on the Rams with torque figures that are
right between 'this can not be true' and 'outlandish'???
(something in the high 300's or low 400's?)
David Foley
Frank Kurucz wrote in article <33BC07...@nospam.com>...
>Of course an even F/R weight ratio won't make one look or sound
>cool while engaging in the American ritual of "cruising"
>for our European audience: cruising is the art of driving
>slowly down Main Street in your cool car (the objective is to
>be seen by others). A nice rumbling pushrod V8 enhances
>the effect.
Hmmmm ... rumbling pushrod V8 ... stereotyping. I can do that too ...
seems to me that the majority of people driving slowly down Main Street
employ different tools, like say Acura Integras or Honda Civics with nice
rumbling OHC's and very large mufflers. The objective is to be seen,
heard, and disliked by others.
sli...@mail.orion.org
In article <33b72ed2...@news.tamu.edu>,
> >V6 to produce comparable performance.
>
> Could you please explain why displacement matters? If the engine
> gets better accel, better mileage, and at a lower cost, why do
> you think less of it because it uses more displacement?
I'm also wondering why it matters.
As Ryan pointed out, the Series II also has more torque.
To run the engine, we pay for FUEL. We don't pay for displacement. I
really don't see what the relevance is of comparing displacement. So the
Nissan VQ engine has better horsepower per liter. What benefit does
better hp/l give to the owner of the Maxima that the GT owner is missing
out on? The benefit does NOT seem to be better fuel economy, at least
not according to EPA estimates.
Only benefit I can think of is bragging rights. You can brag about how
"efficient" the motor is and how many hp/l it produces, but the TRUE
measure of efficiency IMO is fuel economy.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
RMoburg
On Fri, 04 Jul 1997 04:12:27 -0600, sli...@mail.orion.org wrote:
>In article <33b72ed2...@news.tamu.edu>,
> Gum...@tamu.edu (Marc) wrote:
>>
>> Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> said:
>>
>> >Nonetheless GMs OHV V6 needs 26% more displacement than the Nissan
>> >V6 to produce comparable performance.
>>
>> Could you please explain why displacement matters? If the engine
>> gets better accel, better mileage, and at a lower cost, why do
>> you think less of it because it uses more displacement?
>
>I'm also wondering why it matters.
>As Ryan pointed out, the Series II also has more torque.
>
>To run the engine, we pay for FUEL. We don't pay for displacement. I
>really don't see what the relevance is of comparing displacement. So the
>Nissan VQ engine has better horsepower per liter. What benefit does
>better hp/l give to the owner of the Maxima that the GT owner is missing
>out on? The benefit does NOT seem to be better fuel economy, at least
>not according to EPA estimates.
>
>Only benefit I can think of is bragging rights. You can brag about how
>"efficient" the motor is and how many hp/l it produces, but the TRUE
>measure of efficiency IMO is fuel economy.
>
IMO one of the things high HP/L usually means is (and Nissan ISN"T a
real good example of this, I would point more at the Chrysler 2.0) is
high HP figures and low torque numbers. Most of these engines are a
pain in the butt to drive on a daily basis. My rule of thumb is that
the rated horsepower should be pretty close to the rated torque.
Anything that has a lot higher horsepower in relationship to it's
torque numbers has to be "beat on" in a manual and is miserable in an
automatic.
ezb...@vafarg.pbz (ROT13)
John Weir
Frank Kurucz proclaims:
: I would wager that if Nissan made a 5.7 DOHC V8 it would put the
: Chevy engine to shame. It won't happen of course, mainly because
: they can get the same performance out of the 3.0 with a turbo.
No, two turbos.
While this scenario uses smaller engines, the comparison is
already being played out in Tony George's wet dream. The
engines are 4.0l, and I don't recall Infiniti having any
advantage over the Olds engines.
I speaking of engines, when was the last time that Nissan
produced a engine that has 40+ years in production as a
OEM installation? I know that is an extreme, but it is
still true.
I don't really agree with you statement that Nissan could
produce a better 5.7l DOHC than GM, but then again, let us
define the playing field. Better in what regard? What is
so catastrophic about the Caddy engine that you consider it
to be less than satisfactory?
John
Victor Smith
On 3 Jul 1997 21:52:00 -0700, Spiros Triantafyllopoulos
<stri...@primenet.com> wrote:
>
>Well, if torque is the measurement to go, doesn't Chrysler have
>a six (turbodiesel?) on the Rams with torque figures that are
>right between 'this can not be true' and 'outlandish'???
>(something in the high 300's or low 400's?)
>
>Spiros
Speaking of torque, how does torque affect acceleration when carrying a
load, ie, a passenger or two? Do all the 0-60 times fall by the wayside
when carrying a passenger?
I notice (according to Edmunds) that the Pontiac GT (non-supercharged)
runs to 60 in 6.9 against the Maxima's (auto) 7.9.
The Pontiac's HP is 195 against the Maxima's 190.
The Pontiac's torque is 230 ft/lbs against the Maxima's 205.
The Pontiac weighs 350 lbs more than the Maxima.
Will adding a 200lb passenger in each car increase the amount of
dust-eating/fume-sucking enforced on the Maxima?
Is the lower efficiency (acceleration and mpg) of the Maxima caused by
the anemia of the overly-complicated engine?
Or a poorly designed trans that can't get power to the pavement?
Or a simple lack of cubic inches?
On the same note, my sister has a '97 Buick Riviera, with the
super-charged 3800. Car & Driver clocked this big boat at
7.2 0-60. This is right close to the Maxima SE 5-speed time.
If a passenger happened to be sitting in these cars, is it possible
the Riviera barge would show the Maxima 5-sp some taillights?
Can anybody speculate on the performance of the Max if it were fitted
with the 3800II, or on the Pontiac GT or Riv fitted with the Max 3.0?
Probably have to put a GM trans in the Max to handle the power of
the 3800II, but that Max would move! Get better milage too.
The Pontiac and Riv with the Max 3.0 would be poor milage dogs.
IMHO.
--Vic
Bentley
Frank Kurucz (anon...@nospam.com) said something like:
: > Except for all the rental Grand Prix's that are sold off after a year
: > or two of service, helping keep the resale value even lower. Not to
: > mention production volumes to start with...
:
: This is another beef I have with the big 3. Most American cars
: depreciate
: so fast that its not even funny, and they fan the flames by dumping cars
: into the rental fleets.
I wouldn't say most -- there are plenty of imports (Nissan, Mazda,
Infiniti, Saab) that drop like rocks as well. And the domestic trucks are
the Kings of Depreciation these days, so it rather evens out.
: However, a GP is not a terribly common rental (thats what Luminas are
: for).
Sad but true.
: And its depreciation rate is better than the typical GM product, but
: still
: inferior to the typical Toyota or Nissan.
Typical Nissan? I suspect if you compare the totals for GM and Nissan,
you'll find very similar depreciation figures. And when you factor in the
Suburbans and Jimmies, it's all over. (Which is one of the reasons I
recommend used Nissan/Infinitis to just about everyone, it's one of those
weird quirks of consumer behavior that a, for the most part, impressive
vehicle with better-than-average reliability depreciates quickly. A 91 Q45
must be the best used buy out there).
--
> B E N T L E Y < ben...@access.digex.net
Marlon C. Mitchell
Frank Kurucz wrote:
> So GM doesn't know how to make a decent DOHC. Small wonder, after
> all it took them 30 years to get the 3800 right.
>
> On the other hand Ford gets 300 HP out of a 4.6l DOHC, about
> the same as GM's 5.7l pushrods.
>
To all the the forgetful people here: What the hell do you think the
NorthStar engine is? Its a sweet running 32 valve DOHC V8 and its made
by GM.
Marc
>: Whinney little motors with high hp/l are fine for scooters, but
>: torque is what moves the car. Or are you saying that a pushrod
>: engine, like, say, the 8.0l in the Viper isn't suited for a car,
>: and should only be in the Ram?
>Well, if torque is the measurement to go, doesn't Chrysler have
>a six (turbodiesel?) on the Rams with torque figures that are
>right between 'this can not be true' and 'outlandish'???
>(something in the high 300's or low 400's?)
It is my understanding that the 8.0 beats the torque of the turbo
diesel at all normal RPMs (from 1000+). The only little problem
is that it goes about half the distance per gallon of gas...
Marc
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> said:
>Spiros Triantafyllopoulos wrote:
>> I suggest you drive a 3800V6 Supercharged for a while before passing
>> judgement.
>I have. The 3800 SC is pretty good. If I recall right it has a lower
>redline than the Nissan.
Are you implying that you'd prefer to have 50 less hp and a whole
lot less torque for a few RPMs on the top end?
David Lovely
RMoburg wrote:
>
> IMO one of the things high HP/L usually means is (and Nissan ISN"T a
> real good example of this, I would point more at the Chrysler 2.0) is
> high HP figures and low torque numbers. Most of these engines are a
> pain in the butt to drive on a daily basis. My rule of thumb is that
> the rated horsepower should be pretty close to the rated torque.
> Anything that has a lot higher horsepower in relationship to it's
> torque numbers has to be "beat on" in a manual and is miserable in an
> automatic.
Nissan Sentras are also notorious in this area. I had to drive one for
a month. Little 16-valve engine (I forget the displacement) had a lot
on the top end (could do 120 MPH in the thing), but miserable
acceleration unless you ran full throttle which lurched the transmission
and made for an overall jerky ride.
Hi-HP/Lo-torque engines should NEVER be mated with automatics!
My VW Cabrio (87 vintage) is rated at 94 HP and about 110 ft-lbs
torque. Much more balanced and easier as a daily driver, IMO.
Of course, if I want acceleration, I'll just hop into my Impala SS :-)
--
+---------------------------+TM David P. Lovely
| | | | | | | | Atlanta Digital UNIX Support Group
| d | i | g | i | t | a | l | Alpharetta, Georgia
| | | | | | | | 800/354-9000 x30043
+---------------------------+ lov...@alf.dec.com
P.J. Hartman
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
>I would wager that if Nissan made a 5.7 DOHC V8 it would put the
>Chevy engine to shame. It won't happen of course, mainly because
>they can get the same performance out of the 3.0 with a turbo.
Chevy did produce a 5.7 DOHC V8; it was called the LT5 and was found
in the Corvette ZR-1 editions. Quite a beast. Quite expensive.
--
P.J. Hartman | pjh{at}radiks{dot}net
'98 Corvette Ord# 264DXT | '90 Kawasaki ZX-11
'90 Eagle Talon TSi AWD | '81 Suzuki GS450LX
'77 MGB Roadster | '90 Hyundai Sonata
Frank Kurucz
Bentley wrote:
>
> Typical Nissan? I suspect if you compare the totals for GM and Nissan,
> you'll find very similar depreciation figures. And when you factor in the
> Suburbans and Jimmies, it's all over. (Which is one of the reasons I
> recommend used Nissan/Infinitis to just about everyone, it's one of those
> weird quirks of consumer behavior that a, for the most part, impressive
> vehicle with better-than-average reliability depreciates quickly. A 91 Q45
> must be the best used buy out there).
The Q45 isn't your "typical Nissan". All I know is that in the Rocky
Mtn News
the asking price for 89-90 Maximas is around 6K. Taurus's from the same
year
go for about 3K, Grand Prixs go for about 4K, as do Bonneville's.
Luminas
go for about 4K as well.
Frank
Frank Kurucz
Marc wrote:
>
> Are you implying that you'd prefer to have 50 less hp and a whole
> lot less torque for a few RPMs on the top end?
Yes, for the following reasons:
1) It only comes with an automatic, which offsets some of the extra
power.
Also the car is heavier, which offsets some of the power as well.
2) Its manufacturer is well known as a purveyor of cars with poor fit
and
finish and below average reliability.
3) The car that the engine is attatched to is only an average value
retainer
(is depreciation is mediocre).
4) It really bugs me when the people at the service dept know me by
name.
Now if Pontiac could shave some weight of the GP, add a 5 speed, improve
it reliability so that I wouldn't find myself taking it in on average of
once per month for warranty repairs, then I would say that it would a
rather nice car.
Frank
Chuck Tomlinson
Frank Kurucz <anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>The Q45 isn't your "typical Nissan". All I know is that in the Rocky
>Mtn News
>the asking price for 89-90 Maximas is around 6K. Taurus's from the same
>year
>go for about 3K, Grand Prixs go for about 4K, as do Bonneville's.
>Luminas
>go for about 4K as well.
That's only half of the depreciation story. The other half would be
the original purchase prices of the vehicles. Just a comment...
--
Chuck Tomlinson
RMoburg
Bingo!
I just bought a new car that had an MSRP of for $40K, I paid $32K
($3750 in rebates subtracted from dealer invoice).
I know I'm going to take a beating on depreciation but the initial
purchase price will soften the fall considerably.
Plus I have a car that has a lot of personal value (to me) for the
next several years.
ezb...@vafarg.pbz (ROT13)
Frank Kurucz
Chuck Tomlinson wrote:
>
>
> That's only half of the depreciation story. The other half would be
> the original purchase prices of the vehicles. Just a comment...
Good point. I did try to pick cars that cost roughly the same.
Bonnevilles are actually quite more expensive than your typical
Max GXE.
Frank
Bentley
:
: The Q45 isn't your "typical Nissan".
Didn't say it was. Just pointing out that sometimes rapid depreciation can
be a good thing (unless you own one). Here's a car that's well-equipped,
gets rave reviews, has terrific quality and reliability, but drops in
proce like a brick in a pond. Thus, a gread used car to consider buying,
and a piss-poor car to buy new.
: All I know is that in the Rocky Mtn News the asking price for 89-90
: Maximas is around 6K.
Kelly's says a 90 Maxima GXE, 50k miles, in my neighborhood books for
$9,825.
: Taurus's from the same year go for about 3K,
KBB says $6,085 for a Taurus GL with the 3.0l V6, but I thought the
comparison was with GM products?
: Grand Prixs go for about 4K, as do Bonneville's. Luminas go for about 4K
: as well.
GP LE Sedan V6, $6,325.
Bonneville LE Sedan, $7,525.
Lumina V6, $6,075.
Kelly is usually high, so the ratios look about right. But one has to
consider a) how much more did that Maxima cost when new, and b) what
effect equipping the domestics to the same level as the Maxima would have
on price. As you know, most Japanese cars come equipped at trim levels,
while many domestics allow to pick and chose items like power windows,
locks, etc (most, not all).
Now, let's take a look at more apples-apples comparison, or at least
Granny Smith to Golden Delicious:
The ALG tells us that a 97 Maxima will have a residual of between .46
(GXE) and .50 (GLE) after five years. .50 is average for all cars.
Further, it gives us the following figures:
Grand Am GT 4-dr .49
Grand Prix 4D SE .48
Grand Prix 4D GT .52
Grand Prix 4D GTP .53
Grand Prix 4D GTP CAMI (Whatever the hell that is) .55
Lumina base .44
Lumina LS .45
Lumina LTZ .45
Looks pretty close, doesn't it? Which I beleive is what I said.
Banks across the country are betting a couple hundred billion dollars a
year on the ALG's data, btw. See for yourself at
http://www.leasesource.com/
Bentley
: Bonnevilles are actually quite more expensive than your typical
: Max GXE.
Are they? The Bonneville SE starts at $22,839, the GXE Auto at $23,719.
Don't get me wrong, I love the Maxima, and am no big fan of Bonneville's
-- they're too big, too wallowy, too ugly, and Ryan drives one sometimes,
which is enough to steer me away. But the cars are pretty close in price.
Bill Stanton
On Mon, 30 Jun 1997 10:05:26 -0600, Frank Kurucz
<anon...@nospam.com> wrote:
> > What does this have to do with it? The 3800II Supercharged is still
> > nice, still smooth and still cheap to make thus providing a cheaper
> > GTP than Maxima.
>
> Cheaper? Maybe in initial price (and then again not much, maybe 2K).
> But in the long haul the Max will hold its value much better.
Sorry, "initial" price is what we're discussing here, not what the car
will be in exactly 5 years.
Additionally, I'd wager a special edition Grand Prix GTP will hold its
value better than a Nissan Maxima over the long haul, the same way
MOST old Japanese cars are far less collectible than their American
counterparts (even in Japan).
> Last year I sold an 89 GXE (that MSRP'd for 16K) and got $7200.
> 43% of MSRP for a 7 year old car, not bad at all. I called the
> local Pontiac dealer and asked the leasing manager what the residuals
> where for the GTP.
Apples to oranges. Try comparing a 1989 GXE to a 1989 Grand Prix. And
it still doesn't mean the new cars will follow the same path. Look at
new F-Bodies - they're holding their value far better than they used
to (the convertible Camaro/Firebird is one of the highest resale-value
cars on the road).
> He said 65% for 2 years, 50% for 3 years. Seems
> like Pontiac doesn't have a lot of faith in the resale value of its
> flagship product.
Pardon me... The residual (in 5 years) on my 1995 300ZX TT is $14,000.
Explain that according to your Lease Residual = Car Resale theory.
ANTI-SPAM IS IN EFFECT! TO REPLY REMOVE THE
"<NOSPAM>" FROM MY EMAIL ADDRESS!
征馬辰漫滌豕偕帘滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕� 畔�_(畔�_(畔�_(BILL STANTON)_.毀�_.毀�_.毀� 征馬辰漫 Art -- Animation -- Design 征馬辰漫
_.毀� mail:bstanton<AT>gte<DOT>net (畔�_
http://home1.gte.net/bstanton/index.htm
征馬辰漫滌豕偕帘滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕征馬辰漫滌豕偕�
_