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: "DervMan" <dervman(at)ntlworld.com>

Subject: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting

Lines: 40

Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 21:13:13 GMT

NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.0.53.182

_______________________________________











"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.



Well, the Zetec-E isn`t especially rev happy. It`s arguably better than a

CVH, but not really by much. The Zetec-SE is much rev happier (at least

apart from the detuned 1.4 used in the current Fiesta and older generation

Focus).



> 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?



It`s because the CVH is easily tuned, either atmo or turbo, whereas the

Zetec-E isn`t. But the Zetec-E has a very strong bottom end. This means

you can produce more power with greater reliability.



> 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.



The later CVH engines were much better. Sadly the 1.4, 1.6 and 1.8 are not

compatible (as I understand). The 1.8 has a totally different design, but

later CVH 1.8 Sierras are much better than earlier machines.



They`re also cheap to fix.



--

The DervMan

www.dervman.com













Next Topic

SUBJECT: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting
GO >>>

From: "DervMan" <dervman(at)ntlworld.com>

Subject: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting

Lines: 67

Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 21:16:16 GMT

NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.0.53.182

_______________________________________











"Ronny" <ronny(at)nospamfsplanes.net> wrote in message

news:TqednZTbFOy_ETPfRVnyhQ(at)pipex.net...

> DervMan wrote:

>> "Me" <no.0ne(at)nowhere.com> wrote in message

>> news:9mire.601873$Ge2.500631(at)fe03.news.easynews.com...

>>> Took the missus car for an MOT the other day and can anyone tell me

>>> how this car is known as a "Sporting", I think a moped would have a

>>> better 0 to 60 time and everyone tries to intimidate you when you

>>> drive them too!

>>

>>

>> Please ignore the helpful advice on making one faster, it doesn`t

>> work, it`s still slow in a straight line...

>>

>> ...but that`s not the point. The Cinquecento (and Siecento) are all

>> about the package. They have a great buzzy little FIRE engine and a

>> nice grippy feeling. In isolation or compared to most of their

>> peers, they _feel_ quicker.

>>

>> For the young, the Italian (probably) or those seeking good value, it

>> works.

>>

>> I like them. Would I have another Siecento or Cinquecento? I prefer

>> the Cinquecento - Fiat rubbed out the hard edges of the Cinq when

>> they made the Sie, the ride is a bit softer and it generaly doesn`t

>> work quite as well.

>>

>> Annoyingly for Fiat, Ford produced a sub-B car that trades punches in

>> the performance stakes, goes around corners even better, uses more

>> petrol, has a longer service interval and sits in a cheaper insurance

>> bracket - oh and sold stacks more.

>

> If you want a fun small car like that, try a VW Lupo GTI or the Seat

> Arosa,

> much more fun, better engines, decent specs.



Hmm. Aye perhaps - except back in 1995 the Arosa or Lupo wasn`t out.



But to be fair the GTI is missing the point. The Cinquecento took the small

car concept and proved that you don`t have to have a 1.6 125 PS donk and

stiff suspension to have a laugh. They`re not meant to be quick cars, only

feel quick.



The best thing about the Cinquecento Sporting is that you can cane it

10/10th of its abilities and still spend the majority of the time inside the

speed limits.



> This review made me laugh :)

>

> "Only the 1.1 petrol is still on sale. Fun round town, stretched out of it

> and overtaking needs forward planning and a note from your mum. Avoid the

> Citymatic gearbox"



:)



> Reminds me of Alan Partridge when he phones his wife, and tells her about

> her husband Renault Megane review in top gear magazine "Over taking

> national

> express coaches can be a long a drawn out affair" :)



Hehehe.



--

The DervMan

www.dervman.com










Next Topic

SUBJECT: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting
GO >>>

From: "DervMan" <dervman(at)ntlworld.com>

Subject: Re: Fiat Sceicento Sporting

Lines: 113

Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 21:30:53 GMT

NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.0.53.182

_______________________________________











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

news:1gy5tnw.1syq1jrb1jh4nN%steve(at)italiancar.co.uk...

> DervMan <dervman(at)ntlworld.com> wrote:

>

>> "Me" <no.0ne(at)nowhere.com> wrote in message

>> news:9mire.601873$Ge2.500631(at)fe03.news.easynews.com...

>> > Took the missus car for an MOT the other day and can anyone tell me how

>> > this car is known as a "Sporting", I think a moped would have a better

>> > 0

>> > to 60 time and everyone tries to intimidate you when you drive them

>> > too!

>>

>>

>> Please ignore the helpful advice on making one faster, it doesn`t work,

>> it`s

>> still slow in a straight line...

>>

> <snip>

>>

>> Annoyingly for Fiat, Ford produced a sub-B car that trades punches in the

>> performance stakes, goes around corners even better, uses more petrol,

>> has a

>> longer service interval and sits in a cheaper insurance bracket - oh and

>> sold stacks more.

>

> That was also more expensive, less rust resistant, had a nasty engine

> designed in the 1950s and looked like it was styled by a 5 year old.



I thought you liked the Cinquecento though?



Oh you`re on about the Ka, heh.



It was more expensive, to the tune of about £1,000. But it also has a

superior ride.



If you judge the Cinq by your example, I gotta judge the Ka by ours example.

Our Cinq had a bubble of rust coming through the rear hatchback, which was

covered under warranty. We`ve nothing like that with the Ka...



But you`re right, at least in the early years. I keep on seeing parked

Cinquecentos looked very much the worse for the wear these days. It`s quite

sad, really.



As for the styling, you`ve the boxy, sit-up-and-bed Cinquecento, or the

swoopy curvy Ka. I`ve run both, on balance I don`t really prefer either

exterior. They`re different. However, the Ka`s interior is much better to

live with and it`s better equipped. Pre-1996 Cinquecentos didn`t have a

light-up dashboard, and all had all sorts of strange funkiness with regard

to the interior switches. Rear wash / wipe on the dashboard? Electric

window switches on the dashboard in the middle? Eh? Not the easiest of

cars to get used to.



> The

> Ka may (allegedly) corner better, but it`s just not fun.



You`re wrong. It is fun. It`s different fun. With the Cinquecento, it`s

great fun to nail it corner after corner after corner. It feels raw, eager,

buzzy. The Ka doesn`t have the eagerness, but it`s more refined, more

subtle and a damn sight easier on the ears when you have to take the

motorway route.



> It`s also loads

> bigger on the outside but, for some unfathomable reason, smaller on the

> inside.



In some respects it is. Driven four up, nobody gets much room in the back

of either. There`s about an inch more headroom in the Cinquecento (Dervy

measured) and about half an inch less knee room. Neither is comfortable for

me to sit in the back. But you`re right, there is more room in the

Cinquecento.



The Ka is a four seater, the Cinquecento seats five - in theory!



Seats in the normal upright position, the Ka`s boot is _significantly_

bigger than the Cinquecento. If you buy a car like this to go shopping,

that`s important.



Seats folded down, the Cinquecento rules. It has a great boxy cargo hold

with more room than the Ka. Access is also better (the Ka has a curvy ass

and rear lights that cut in on the shape). And the Cinquecento`s rear seat

base forms a half height bulkhead, letting the seat backs fold flat.



Mind you the Ka has a split / fold rear seat as standard, which wasn`t

something my Cinquecento SX had, so you can take three people (including the

driver) and something chunky from Ikea, which isn`t an option.



More room in the Cinquecento, then, less versatile under certain conditions.



> Think that just about covers it.



No there`s more. The Cinquecento didn`t have power assisted super quick

steering, most Kas have. It didn`t have ABS on the options list. It was an

option on all Kas from early 1997. It didn`t have air conditioning

available in right hand drive form, optional in some Kas from 1997, standard

in others, unavailable in the basic one. It had a transmission that would

get stuck in fifth and wasn`t especially fluid at the best of times - small

Ford tranmissions rule the world. Occasionally the rear windscreen would

shatter, not something the Ka is known for. It had a ventilation system

that could either demist the windscreen or the side windows, but not both at

the same time. The Ka can manage this.



I think the Cinquecento is a great machine and I would possibly have

another, but as a design, it is simply outclassed by the Ka.



Ford raised the city car game by devising a chassis that slapped everything

else in the class about the face with a wed haddock in the twisty material

but also gave it a supple ride and decent motorway refinement.



--

The DervMan

www.dervman.com














Last "Cars" Post on Wordpress:


Title: Cars 2
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 00:19:37 +0000
Author: crazydeeps

Click Here to view the Gallery

Click Here to view the Gallery


More on: http://crazydeeps.wordpress.com/2009/09/27/cars-2/



____________________________________________________________

Title: Apparently Canadian Superheroes Drive Porsches...
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 23:33:31 +0000
Author: dailydale

they were in Canada right? You guys live in igloos up there right?

they were in Canada right? You guys live in igloos up there right?

A couple of guys in Ottawa became vigilante heroes last Friday after chasing down a sexual assault suspect in a Porsche 997 twin turbo. Apparently the two guys (the passenger was Matt Spezza, brother of Senator’s Jason Spezza) were driving along when some hysterical girl jumped in front of the car and basically claimed that someone just tried to rape her. She pointed out the guy, who was still parked on the side of the road, waiting for the girl to calm down and get back in the car (good luck). When he realized these two had stopped to help her, he drove off in his Pontiac Wave. So the “Porsche police” told the girl, who was on the phone with 911, to get in the back of their car and the promptly starting chasing this guy down (Porsche 997 vs. Pontiac Wave), apparently reaching speeds of a buck seventy (over 100mph) throughout the streets of Ottawa. The chase ended when the Porsche police forced the guy to make the wrong move into a Mcdonalds drive thru, where the real police had set up a roadblock (it was very likely the cops were eating chicken nuggets at the time). The suspect was charged with… *deep breath* sexual assault, forcible confinement, uttering death threats, dangerous driving, impaired operation of a vehicle, and driving over the legal limit of intoxication.

The Porsche Police

The Porsche Police

So apparently the jury (aka the canadian public) are split on the Porsche police’s actions. Some say that the guys are heroes for chasing the suspect down which eventually led to his arrest, while others think they had no right to speed through the streets to get him. The cops are keeping their mouth’s shut on the situation, even leaving it out of the official press release, because the guys were on the phone with 911 at the time, and were not told to give up the chase. Sure, they could have easily just taken the guys licence plate and told the cops and let them deal with it, but where’s the fun in that? This was probably the only time in the driver’s whole life that he was legally able to tear through the streets as fast as his hot whip would allow. The police are not pressing charges against the men, but at the same time, they aren’t condoning what they did. They are attempting a bit of damage control by saying that nobody should pursue a criminal, rather alert the police then let them do their job. What do you think?