HP on a grade.... KiddingHisSelf wants to know......

On 5/6/2013 8:17 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> On Mon, 6 May 2013 00:09:50 -0400, "Existential Angst"
> > wrote:
>
>> "mike" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 5/5/2013 8:28 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> NOW -- the 1960/70 Beetle had 42 hp (before it jumped to 54), at only
>>>> 2,000#, so, contrary to the smugly ignerintKidding, the VW was MORE than
>>>> capable of climbing max interstate grades at 60 mph.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> My '64 beetle got 29MPG on the flatland in Texas.
>>> Half a century later, why can't cars do better?
>>> MUCH better??
>>>
>>> I've talked with several people driving the "smart car".
>>> They don't even do much better than my beetle.
>>> What gives?
>>>
>>> Oh, my beetle didn't have any cup-holders...that must be it.
>>
>> I've been asking the same Q for years.
>> Ed H. called my 1971 Datsun 510 "a tuna can with a motor"..... but what a
>> tuna can!!!
>> WAAAY over 30 mpg.....
>
> I thought your tuna can was a 210? That's the one I called a tuna can.
>
> The 510 was a mechanical copy of a BMW 1500. It was an excellent car
> -- Japan's first high-volume production car made with a unibody. It
> was the car to beat in several SCCA classes over the years, right up
> through the mid-'80s when it was the fastest car in ITC (the Old
> Junque class).
>
> The 210 was, IIRC, a body-on-ladder-frame structure. One excellent and
> iconic Brit book on chassis said that type was obsolete in 1962. Only
> 210s were made a decade later. d8-)
>
Hey, how can you not love a car than came in a "Honey Bee" version?

<http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3429/3933344080_4ed2bc8615.jpg>

--
T0m $herm@n

On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:16:10 -0500, "T0m $herman"
> wrote:

>On 5/6/2013 8:17 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 May 2013 00:09:50 -0400, "Existential Angst"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> "mike" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 5/5/2013 8:28 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> NOW -- the 1960/70 Beetle had 42 hp (before it jumped to 54), at only
>>>>> 2,000#, so, contrary to the smugly ignerintKidding, the VW was MORE than
>>>>> capable of climbing max interstate grades at 60 mph.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> My '64 beetle got 29MPG on the flatland in Texas.
>>>> Half a century later, why can't cars do better?
>>>> MUCH better??
>>>>
>>>> I've talked with several people driving the "smart car".
>>>> They don't even do much better than my beetle.
>>>> What gives?
>>>>
>>>> Oh, my beetle didn't have any cup-holders...that must be it.
>>>
>>> I've been asking the same Q for years.
>>> Ed H. called my 1971 Datsun 510 "a tuna can with a motor"..... but what a
>>> tuna can!!!
>>> WAAAY over 30 mpg.....
>>
>> I thought your tuna can was a 210? That's the one I called a tuna can.
>>
>> The 510 was a mechanical copy of a BMW 1500. It was an excellent car
>> -- Japan's first high-volume production car made with a unibody. It
>> was the car to beat in several SCCA classes over the years, right up
>> through the mid-'80s when it was the fastest car in ITC (the Old
>> Junque class).
>>
>> The 210 was, IIRC, a body-on-ladder-frame structure. One excellent and
>> iconic Brit book on chassis said that type was obsolete in 1962. Only
>> 210s were made a decade later. d8-)
>>
>Hey, how can you not love a car than came in a "Honey Bee" version?
>
><http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3429/3933344080_4ed2bc8615.jpg>

That's true! My sister-in-law had one, when I was dating my
wife-to-be. It was so cute I wanted to puke. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 06 May 2013 09:17:13 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:

> I liked the handstraps on the old VWs. I miss them. And the shims on the
> fan belt drive pulley that were supposed to let you easily adjust the
> tension, but which tended to rust into a unified lump.

That's brilliant engineering: as the car gets older, the belt loosens,
but simultaneously the shims rust and swell, and cause the pulley to
tension up the belt