Car modifications

Car Modifications Talks Archive

A-E | E-M | M-S | S-Z

1st page | 2nd page | 3rd page | 4th page | 5th page | 6th page | 7th page | 8th page | 9th page | 10th page | 11th page | 12th page





Subject:
Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting

From: "AstraVanMan" <Peter(at)Whataloadofforeskinbollocks.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting

Lines: 16

Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 10:33:11 GMT

NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.5.35.39

_______________________________________











> I`ve driven one to within an inch of its poor little buzzy life and found

> it quite amusing.

>

> However, it`s hard work trying to keep the bloody things going quickly.

>

> I prefer my current transport - which never goes above 2000 rpm in the

> daily grind.



That be being the Rangie then? It is a V8, isn`t it?



Sorry for asking (I know these questions are frowned upon), but what sort of

mpg are you getting from it, on average?



Peter













Next Topic

SUBJECT: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting
GO >>>

From: "Depresion" <blank(at)128.0.0.1>

Subject: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting

Lines: 38

Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 10:44:33 GMT

NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.106.28.172

_______________________________________













"DervMan" <dervman(at)ntlworld.com> wrote in message

news:Voure.20418$%21.1902(at)newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...

> "SteveH" <steve(at)italiancar.co.uk> wrote in message

> news:1gy47ts.a3vgdy1ejyb1kN%steve(at)italiancar.co.uk...

>> DanTXD <dan405(at)SdanPontAherMun.com> wrote:

>>

>>> "SteveH" <steve(at)italiancar.co.uk> wrote in message

>>> news:1gy442m.1yplt1513ekj8hN%steve(at)italiancar.co.uk...

>>> > DanTXD <dan405(at)SdanPontAherMun.com> wrote:

>>> >

>>> >> >> ....and you`ll STILL be going DAMN slowly.

>>> >> >

>>> >> > I`d suggest you go and drive one before making such comments.

>>> >>

>>> >> I`ve driven the Cinq version - same innit?

>>> >>

>>> >> It was fine for chucking round a carpark in a comedy fashion, but on the

>>> >> road, it was just annoying.

>>> >

>>> > In which case, you need to read the advice given to the OP.

>>>

>>> We`re not seriously arguing that the Sei/Cinq Sporting isn`t slow are we?

>>> `Cos lets face it, if its fast, then so is Dervy`s Ka, and i for one am

>>> NEVER going to say that, unless he gets a 2.0 ZVH Turbo in there ;)

>>

>> Ultimately, they may be deemed to be `slow`, but they certainly don`t

>> feel it if you`re driving them in the true Wop style.

>

>

> It _feels_ fast, but it`s not.

>

> Sorry, but 55 PS and 1.1 litres, plus just over 700 kg, is _not_ fast.



700kg? How id it that heavy when my polo is only 830kg and not made from kitchen

foil?










Next Topic

SUBJECT: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting
GO >>>

From: "DanTXD" <dan405(at)SdanPontAherMun.com>

Subject: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting

Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 12:59:17 +0100

Lines: 28

_______________________________________











"AstraVanMan" <Peter(at)Whataloadofforeskinbollocks.co.uk> wrote in message

news:xlyre.14422$jS3.12667(at)newsfe2-win.ntli.net...

>> We`re not seriously arguing that the Sei/Cinq Sporting isn`t slow are we?

>> `Cos lets face it, if its fast, then so is Dervy`s Ka, and i for one am

>> NEVER going to say that, unless he gets a 2.0 ZVH Turbo in there ;)

>

> ZVH. What a mad idea that was. You`ve got a Zetec engine, a reasonably

> good, rev-happy engine, so you take the 16 valve head off it, and put a

> CVH head, known for lots of problems like valve guides going, etc etc.

> Okaaay.

>

> Seriously, what *is* the attraction in doing that? Is it the extra

> low-down torque that the 8-valve CVH head provides? Is it worth the

> sacrifice?

>

> Having said all that, I`ve had a couple of 1.3CVH Escorts, and I was

> always quite impressed with them, compared to the 1.3 OHVs I`d previously

> had - they had hydraulic tappets for one, and did seem a lot more modern,

> smooth and refined. In comparison, like.

>



I figured it was something to do with the ease of turboing - but i don`t

know. Dervy probly does though....



--

Dan














Last "Cars" Post on Wordpress:


Title: RX3
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 01:44:36 +0000
Author: Phil

1-1

RX3 sedan. Simmons F90s. Old school cool.


More on: http://philscarblog.wordpress.com/2009/09/26/rx3/



____________________________________________________________

Title: Skateboarders are Buttheads
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:30:01 +0000
Author: colleenanderson

This should get me a bit of hate mail but it’s true. Okay, not ALL skateboarders are buttheads but the vast majority that I run into on the streets are. The ones that go to the skateboard parks and other safe areas to do their acrobatic feats of derring-do are no problem at all.

The ones that careen through traffic trying to race Death out of Darwin’s gene pool: now those are the giant buttheads. They care for little, not themselves, nor anyone else and have the arrogance that equates to a short life.

We have many forms of locomotion; cars, buses, bicycles, feet, motorcycles, roller blades and skateboards. Skateboards are the least suited to sidewalk and road. Bicyclists and motorcyclists ride small wheeled vehicles with their flesh exposed to the elements and the hard metal of other machines. They wear reflective and protective clothing, and helmets. Of course there would probably be a few death-wish hopefuls who would try to ride without helmets if it weren’t law, like it’s cool to have your brains splat on pavement or something. Cool to be stupid: that’s attractive.

Bicyclists, if they want to remain alive, pedal along beside cars as they can’t go as fast. Drivers and bicyclists should always respect each other’s space and cut out any ego issues. Unfortunately there are attitudes on both sides, but we can always dream of better tolerance. But back to skateboarders; they don’t wear protective or reflective clothing, they don’t wear helmets. Two fails right there.

Pedestrians have the right of way of sidewalks. They walk on them, not on the road where they would soon be road pizza. Of course there are butthead pedestrians who jaywalk in front of cars as if they own the road. But most stick to the sidewalks where they belong. Skateboarders get another fail for having a wheeled object on the sidewalk. Bikes aren’t allowed there; neither are skateboards.

Skateboarders don’t fit the rules of the road because they can’t go fast enough, not even as fast as a bike unless it’s downhill. They don’t wear the proper gear and on top of that they’re kicking a leg out and veering, long undulations in and out of traffic. Skateboarders don’t fit the rules of the sidewalk, because they’re on wheels. They’re hazardous to the pedestrians and often swerve all over the place.

On top of all this, they, who are least protected on the road, take the biggest risks, rolling down the middle of the street, nonchalantly getting out of the way–eventually, when a driver has had to break or slow down for them. It always amazes me that the less protection a person has from vehicles, it’s almost as if the arrogance goes up exponentially.


More on: http://colleenanderson.wordpress.com/2009/09/24/skateboarders-are-buttheads/













Powered by x701.com