Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Dangers of DRL

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by maven View Post
    I am very scared for us.
    9a20637ee739ca3054de4532ce2281a9df3c3b92984963605e46f833a5af028d.jpg


    Originally posted by maven View Post
    "Better" engines is purely subjective.
    Instead of better I'm sure he meant more effeicent. No want you can say that a carbureted 427ci from a 70s corvette is more effeicent than the 427ci from a Z06.
    ***MH1 Retro***
    "America has three cities, New York, San Francisco and New Orleans. Everywhere else is Cleveland."
    - Tennessee Williams

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by maven View Post
      $300 of fuel at $3.40/gallon is 88 gallons of fuel. Talking annual mileage of 15,000 miles, we are talking a fuel economy diiference of 1.25-4.5mpg (assuming ranges of 15-30mpg). This is MASSIVE fuel usage. There is in no way I can fathom these numbers were even remotely accurate. That kind of fuel consumption is greater than that of even 4wd systems.


      Non ferrous alloys and plastic composites are very much indeed now widely used throughtout
      vehicle construction, Along with multiplex networks to reduce wiring mass, and forced induction aspirated engines producing equivalent power from significsntly less dense power trains. But these are still merely "band aids" IMO as I don't know of a single current top selling model that isnt heavier than its 10-20 year older version. Corolla,Civic,Camry,Accord,Malibu,Impala,Silverado ,F150,Explorer,Suburban,Altima,etc..... All notably heavier than they used to be.
      This is true. But you also have to take into account the size difference between modern vehicles and their predecessors. Compacts today, are the same size as mid-size cars only 15 years ago.
      2001 Ford Focus SE Wagon - MH1 6.0, E46-R shrouds, XB35 5500K bulbs - DAILY
      2012 Mazda 3i Touring Skyactiv - Black Series Clear Lenses, blocked squirrel finders, DDM kit, 9011 HIR1 high beams - SOLD
      2011 Mazda 2 Sport - Mini D2S 1.0, E46-R shrouds, Osram Xenarc bulbs - First retrofitted Mazda 2 in North America
      http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showt...it-your-Mazda2 - TOTALED
      2005 Kia Spectra EX - Mini D2S 1.0, E55-R shrouds, Morimoto 3Five 5000K bulbs - TOTALED

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by maven View Post
        More features....adding crap for the sake of adding crap...Im not into this. Theres nothing that a 2014 car has that a 1994 doesnt that I want, save for maybe navigation which I would use from my phone anyway =
        Here's a short list that I can come up with:
        - An ABS system that isn't finicky and generally crap.
        - Decent audio systems. Though I like to build my own stuff, I wouldn't have to if there was a good foundation from the start.
        - HIDs
        Originally posted by Bitter
        They're literally flying canoes with boxer engines packed full of Molotov cocktails that rely on tampons and $10 screws to stay in the air and not kill you.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by phantom240 View Post
          Here's a short list that I can come up with:
          - An ABS system that isn't finicky and generally crap.
          - Decent audio systems. Though I like to build my own stuff, I wouldn't have to if there was a good foundation from the start.
          - HIDs
          Though I truly prefer a "drivers" car with minimal disttractions and no drivers aids of any kind for my fun cars, I agree 100% for a daily beater....that said.....

          ABS was perfectly functional in 1994, especially in performance oriented cars.

          Audio system we are on same exact page. I build much of my own stuff or just deal with whats there, cars that have anything remotely worthwhile are well out of my price range. My McIntosh and Pioneer PRS stuff was within my budget and was/is far superior to standard automotive audio

          HIDs, well you got me...this ones obvious. Ive never owned a vehicle with OEM HIDs and I dont see me getting one in the next 5 yrs either. But I am very willing to carry the extra couple pounds a retrofit adds...I consider this a performance mod HIDs were available back in 94-95 though
          We are weapons of massive consumption.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by maven View Post
            More features....adding crap for the sake of adding crap...Im not into this. Theres nothing that a 2014 car has that a 1994 doesnt that I want, save for maybe navigation which I would use from my phone anyway

            "Better" engines is purely subjective.
            Eh. There are a lot of features I like that newer cars have. ABS, better radios (including Bluetooth Audio/AUX jacks).. Multifunction displays that show engine statistics.. auto up/down windows.. LED taillights/headlights.. LED turn mirrors.. lol. Good, adjustable fuel injection!! and the ability to have a lot of HP and still get 30+mpg lol. AFS is nice as well...

            I did mean efficiency though. Besides, I'm talking stock form - the 2.0L's from years past compared to current 2.0L engines are miles and miles apart.


            Originally posted by BOO5TED View Post
            Instead of better I'm sure he meant more effeicent. No want you can say that a carbureted 427ci from a 70s corvette is more effeicent than the 427ci from a Z06.
            +1

            Originally posted by phantom240 View Post
            Here's a short list that I can come up with:
            - An ABS system that isn't finicky and generally crap.
            - Decent audio systems. Though I like to build my own stuff, I wouldn't have to if there was a good foundation from the start.
            - HIDs
            +1

            Originally posted by maven View Post
            Though I truly prefer a "drivers" car with minimal disttractions and no drivers aids of any kind for my fun cars, I agree 100% for a daily beater....that said.....


            Audio system we are on same exact page. I build much of my own stuff or just deal with whats there, cars that have anything remotely worthwhile are well out of my price range. My McIntosh and Pioneer PRS stuff was within my budget and was/is far superior to standard automotive audio

            HIDs, well you got me...this ones obvious. Ive never owned a vehicle with OEM HIDs and I dont see me getting one in the next 5 yrs either. But I am very willing to carry the extra couple pounds a retrofit adds...I consider this a performance mod HIDs were available back in 94-95 though
            I don't care about adding aftermarket stereo stuff anymore for the most part. While having a sub is nice... having storage space is as well. So is taking a turn and not having to worry about stuff flying around lol
            2012 Volkswagen Golf R. 2016 Ford Fiesta ST

            The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by wireless View Post
              I don't care about adding aftermarket stereo stuff anymore for the most part. While having a sub is nice... having storage space is as well. So is taking a turn and not having to worry about stuff flying around lol
              I can't deal with stock, paper cone, coax "whizzer cone" speakers. Can't do it.
              Originally posted by Bitter
              They're literally flying canoes with boxer engines packed full of Molotov cocktails that rely on tampons and $10 screws to stay in the air and not kill you.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by maven View Post
                Though I truly prefer a "drivers" car with minimal disttractions and no drivers aids of any kind for my fun cars, I agree 100% for a daily beater....that said.....

                ABS was perfectly functional in 1994, especially in performance oriented cars.
                I disagree. Not a single Honda on the planet that came with ABS in 1994, still has a functional ABS system. Chevrolet had a good bit of problems with that as well. Other brands, I have too little experience to speak for.

                Originally posted by maven View Post
                HIDs, well you got me...this ones obvious. Ive never owned a vehicle with OEM HIDs and I dont see me getting one in the next 5 yrs either. But I am very willing to carry the extra couple pounds a retrofit adds...I consider this a performance mod HIDs were available back in 94-95 though
                Yeah, if you had a brand new BMW 7-series...
                Originally posted by Bitter
                They're literally flying canoes with boxer engines packed full of Molotov cocktails that rely on tampons and $10 screws to stay in the air and not kill you.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by phantom240 View Post
                  I disagree. Not a single Honda on the planet that came with ABS in 1994, still has a functional ABS system. Chevrolet had a good bit of problems with that as well. Other brands, I have too little experience to speak for.
                  That's a very crappy generalization... lol

                  My Camry is a 1994, ABS still works. I do love the system so I don't lock up my brakes after a hard pull when the suspension is the most upset and on uneven pavement. This isn't even a performance car to start with, and the ABS system is very decent and doesn't interfere with my way of spirited driving.

                  Besides that, my Supra TT is also a 1994 and the system works well and I still can't live without it.

                  My Integra GSR is a '95, and ABS still works. All the parts are identical to a '94. I recently sold the car and changed over to a Type-R, but worked on the day I sold the car.
                  1485+ WHP PTE Pro-Mod 94mm Supra TT (STi-R Lens/75w/XB 6500K)
                  1128 WHP GTW3476 TT Camry V6 3.3L (TL-R / Philips XV)
                  952 WHP PTE 6870 '94 Supra TT AT ATFSpeed (4TL-R / Osram CBH)
                  625 WHP GT28RS TT '11 Infiniti G37XS (Morimoto M-LED)
                  515 WHP GTW 62mm Lexus IS300 (MD2S 3.0 / 4TL-R / Philips X-Ultinon)
                  Dynamotorsports.ca

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by wireless View Post
                    Eh. There are a lot of features I like that newer cars have. ABS, better radios (including Bluetooth Audio/AUX jacks).. Multifunction displays that show engine statistics.. auto up/down windows.. LED taillights/headlights.. LED turn mirrors.. lol. Good, adjustable fuel injection!! and the ability to have a lot of HP and still get 30+mpg lol. AFS is nice as well...

                    I did mean efficiency though. Besides, I'm talking stock form - the 2.0L's from years past compared to current 2.0L engines are miles and miles apart.
                    I with you 100% on efficiency of the newest engines, they are excellent. But its not gonna make me choose the new one over the old....Id take a 1996 Civic Si over a 2014, a MkII GTi over a Mk6, they were just a better driving experience, a car that felt more engaging, nimble....less coddling.


                    I don't care about adding aftermarket stereo stuff anymore for the most part. While having a sub is nice... having storage space is as well. So is taking a turn and not having to worry about stuff flying around lol
                    Same here...I never mentioned subs, just quality speakers and sound processing. And the aftermarket beats OEM in 94 and 14 so its moot to me.

                    Originally posted by phantom240 View Post
                    I disagree. Not a single Honda on the planet that came with ABS in 1994, still has a functional ABS system. Chevrolet had a good bit of problems with that as well. Other brands, I have too little experience to speak for.


                    Yeah, if you had a brand new BMW 7-series...
                    Everyone had problems back in the day, and they still do...but that said ABS was available and functional on reasonably priced cars. Id have no problem driving a new 94-96 vehicle and feeling that the ABS was worth having. As far as technologies of the day not working properly or being durable........All you need to do is look at todays crop of gasoline direct injected vehicles. This technology is responsible alot of the power and efficiency gains in the last 5 years, its also very unreliable compared to good old "inefficient" port injection. Widespread, persistant drivability issues and outright engine failure are commonplace among all manufacturers using this technology. (GM, BMW, MB, Porsche all have well known problems with it across multiple engine platforms)

                    Yes, BMW 7 series or a MkVIII Lincoln....it was here and available though. And still isnt even widespread use across the top10 bestsellers. Yet another area where I have used aftermarket options for many years.
                    We are weapons of massive consumption.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      to save fuel and run a DRL kill the OE DRLs and stick on a set of hella dayline DRLs (I run them on my superduty instead of running the headlights i just have a cupple of running lights mounted at the back hooked up to the DRL kit solves all and i still keep the way my truck turns on all the running/position/park lights when i open a door definetly a smart idea
                      my vehicles

                      2013 subaru impreza WRX STi new body style (some mods)
                      04 subaru impreza WRX STi (project car)
                      2013 ford F550 platnum dually (extreem mods CAT engine swap)

                      my wifes car

                      2012 subaru impreza limited sport (some mods)
                      07 hyundai accent GLS (extreem mods)

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X