More fun with my car!

Toecutter · Post by **Toecutter** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:16 pm

I ordered a high-torque mini starter from Jeg's last week. I just put it in yesterday (after having to replace the starter relay, because I broke the B-post terminal). The car starts so easily now, it puts my parents' '98 Buick to shame.

I replaced a starter in my old '86 IROC, and that was a pain. I had to push the thing up through the engine compartment, rotate it 180º along the horizontal axis, tilt it downward, and try to force it through the gaps in the exhaust manifold. That was after I had to disassemble and remove the external solenoid. To put the new one in, I had to do it all in reverse, meaning I had to put the solenoid back together once the starter was crudely in place.

This car, though, it was easy! Just two bolts (granted, one I had to get at around the headers with 3' worth of socket extensions), a 10mm machine screw to hold the ONE starter cable, pull it out, and bingo! The new one I put it used two wires (a direct positive terminal connection to the battery, and a starter relay wire for the solenoid), but it was just as easy.

As bad as Ford's build quality is, they sure do a good job making their engines mechanic-friendly.

Veldrin · Post by **Veldrin** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:27 pm

Wow that almost makes me think about careing.

Mr Pilkington · Post by **Mr Pilkington** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 6:37 pm

Here's what I have done with my car this week:
Drove it. Washed it. Raced (and beat the shit out of) 3 Hondas.
This is why I buy German, I don't have to work on, let-alone fix, it on a daily basis like domestics.

Jonathan02us · Post by **Jonathan02us** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 9:26 pm

Koo, i do my own maintance on my cars too. 8)

Toecutter · Post by **Toecutter** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 2:38 am

German cars, like Hondas, do last quite a while (except for the pre '96 EFI Volkswagons), but you can't do any routine maintenance without ASE certification. They're built from an engineer's perspective, and not a hot rodder's or mechanic's perspective.

Engineers (especially the Krauts) want to jam as many complex, useless features into a car as possible. The beauty of those cars is their "Swiss-Army Knife" design, seeing how the engineers managed to cram everything into a small package.

However, all the engineers understand is how to shove stuff into a small package, and make it more expensive. How many modern engineers spend the time to work on their car in their garage, instead of handing out the cash to someone else who spends two years of their life just to keep up with all the tricks and tools necessary to rip out the useless crap, and replace it?

Also, modern cars are forced to crumple like an empty beer can, because the "safety experts" hired by the government believe safety is all about destroying a perfectly good car, while catching the driver's face in an inflatable balloon. Back in the '60s, safety was achieved by building the car like a tank, to the extent it can total a Hyundai at 5 mph, and not receive a scratch on a stock, 30+ year old laquer paintjob.

The last true year of good domestic build quality was '67. It was in 1968 that GM's quality went way down, especially in the new Mako Shark-styled 3rd generation Corvette.

If you want decent build quality, reliability, and an engine with a reasonable power:weight ratio throughout the rpm range, get a Dodge Dynasty. The 2.5L in-line-four is basically a stroked 2.2L with throttle body injection. Naturally aspirated, it puts out 147 lb-ft of torque @ 2,800 rpm, and I believe 120 hp within 3,000-4,500 rpm.

There are three turbocharged versions of the 2.5L, the rarest (the Turbo III) pushing 220 hp. There's also an MPFI (Multi-Port Fuel Injection) version used in the Dodge Spirit R/T (only produced in Mexico) which borders the Turbo III's performance.

This engine is almost indestructible. You can drive it without coolant until it dies, let it cool down for 15 minutes, and drive it again with no engine damage whatsoever. Why did I mention a coolant problem? Because the brass freeze plugs and head gasket are prone to failing (check the Dodge Dynasty's TSB's on the web at alldata.com). Other than that, basic maintenance keeps the car running as it did new out of the factory.

The A-604 overdrive transmission is a piece of crap, much like the pre-'86 Th-700R4's. But most 2.5L equipped Dynasties only have the 3-speed automatic. A reliable 5-speed is offered in the Spirit, Shadow, and other cars using the same 2.5L powerplant.

Now that I've ranted on the incredible quality of Mopar economy cars, this is what GM has to build:

A 5.3L Vortec (327 cid SFI Gen III Small Block Chevy) equipped performance car using the new Sigma platform (introduced in 2003 for Cadillac as GM's primary rear-wheel drive passenger car platform). If GM is smart, they'd offer the Borg-Warner T-56 six speed tranny (Dodge Viper, Chevy Camaro/Firebird/Corvette) stock, with an optional 4L-80E overdrive transmission. An aluminum driveshaft, 12 bolt Chevy rear-end with C-Clip Eliminator kit, Eaton posi, and four-link ladder bar suspension would finish off the drivetrain.

The car would run OEM-style headers, making it California smog legal, connecting to a 2 1/2" dual exhaust with x-pipe.

A very basic interior would finish off the package, making for a relatively inexpensive ($20,000-$25,000) performance car. When I mean basic, I mean a light grey, "Chevy Astro" style interior. All gauges would be off-white faced, 2 1/4" diameter, except for the standard 3" speedo and tach. An ultraviolet dash light would more efficiently illuminate the gauges for night driving, without straining the driver's eyes.

The exterior would take on a styling similar to the GM T-type body of the '80s (Buick Regal, Grand National, Chevy Malibu SS Aero Coupe), with a few extra compound curves. A cowl-induction hood would be stock, with Ram-Air available. There would be an open grille, eliminating the need for undercar scoops and "aprons" to be ground up on driveways and hills. The door windows would be bolted and immovable, with triangular vent windows in front manually operated. The rear passenger windows would be hinged to open rearward, like the two-door '80s BMW's. In combination with the vent windows, this would more efficiently cool the interior with a ram-air effect.

downwithpants · Post by **downwithpants** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 3:49 am

i had a dream about driving my car this week
no wait, that was last week.

congratulations on your car though. i wish i knew what you were talking about. but for now i'll just nod and smile.

ansem'skitty · Post by **ansem'skitty** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 5:29 am

I ain't gonna read all that.

)v(ajin Koji · Post by **)v(ajin Koji** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 8:46 am

ansem'skitty wrote:I ain't gonna read all that.

yes you will

Jonathan02us · Post by **Jonathan02us** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 4:04 pm

)v(ajin Koji wrote:
ansem'skitty wrote:I ain't gonna read all that.
yes you will

That was a lot of writing, did u write all that o copy and paste. I read like half of it and i was like great info but it dont relate to my car so ok...

Toecutter · Post by **Toecutter** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 10:57 pm

That was a lot of writing, did u write all that o copy and paste. I read like half of it and i was like great info but it dont relate to my car so ok...

I wrote all of that. I've had those ideas for a budget high performance production car from GM for quite a while. It's just the way to put those crappy riceburners and overpriced Kraut cars in their place.

To me, the ultimate car would have to be the Shelby A/C Cobra 427. It's completely stripped down to the bare essentials (gauges, bucket seats, rollbar, 427 Cobra-Jet V8), and then there's those gorgeous sidepipes! Nothing like a very short, 3" diameter dual exhaust system with no restrictions (mufflers, catalytic converters, smog pumps) to more than make up for the non-existent stereo.