Consider buying American!

still just me wrote:

>For 9999 out of 10,000 drivers, FWD makes more sense.

Wrong.

>Unless you're
>into throttle steer and serious performance driving, RWD has no
>advantages and some serious disadvantages.

Wrong again.

jim beam wrote:

>there
>are many advantages to fwd for normal driving - that's why so many
>vehicles use it.

Correct.

On the other hand, statements like Just Me's "Unless you're
into throttle steer and serious performance driving, RWD has no
advantages" are NOT correct.

Tony Harding wrote:
> BaJoRi wrote:
>>
>> "swllz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> Tony Harding wrote:
>>>> tater wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23124844/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> GM just made it known that they lost 39 billion in 2007, the largest
>>>>>> ever annual loss for a US automaker.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The big three are losing money, and if we don't give them the support
>>>>>> they need, they are going to go under. Consider buying an American
>>>>>> car.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> American cars are crap. Made by unionists more worried about when
>>>>> their
>>>>> next coffee break is than making quality cars. They've negotiated
>>>>> themselves
>>>>> right out of jobs as the big auto makers cut back. It's not
>>>>> possible to do business that way and compete on a world wide economy.
>>>>
>>>> It's hardly the workers' fault - Honda & Toyota employ American
>>>> workers and turn out quality vehicles. This is a management failing.
>>>
>>> It is very true. The top management in GM should be blamed. GM
>>> assemble line workers do not make much more than assemble line worker
>>> in TOYOTA. They just assemble what have been planed and designed by
>>> management. The top management in GM take home a huge salary and
>>> bouns compare to TOYOTA or HONDA top management.
>>
>> What are the annual healthcare and retirement benefit costs for GM and
>> Ford, owing to the UAW contracts, as compared with Honda and Toyota?
>> So to say that those Japanese companies take care of their empoyees as
>> well as the Big Three is an outright lie.
>
> Wake up, dude, Japan, along with every other first world country with
> the exception of the US, has universal health coverage and retirement
> benefits, so Japanese companies, et al., have no direct health care
> and/or retirement costs. Makes for quite a competitive advantage,
> doesn't it?

eh? so who pays for it all then? it wouldn't be taxes would it? is
there some way japanese companies don't pay tax where american ones do?

jim beam wrote:
<....

> eh? so who pays for it all then? it wouldn't be taxes would it? is
> there some way japanese companies don't pay tax where american ones do?

The Japanese Corporate Income taxes are actually slightly higher than US
corporate income taxes.

Jeff

In article >,
> wrote:
> In the case of the timing belt, there is one skinny piece of rubber
> between running and total destruction of your engine. That was not true
> in the American OHC motors I have owned.

Generally speaking it's not possible to make an efficient non interference
engine. If it was everyone would.

--
*I got a sweater for Christmas. I really wanted a screamer or a moaner*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:25:46 -0800, jim beam
> > wrote:
>
>> seems you're not very familiar with the situation yourself - there's no
>> complexity difference between the two. and as stated by others, there
>> are many advantages to fwd for normal driving - that's why so many
>> vehicles use it.
>
> The main reason companies build FWD cars is simplicity of final
> assembly. The whole drive train comes in on a pallet and can be
> installed in minutes.

what, just like how an f150 chassis is built you mean?


> They also tend to be a commodity item so you can
> have Buicks, Chevy's and Cadilacs all using the same basic units.
> Swapping for another engine trans combo involves minimal changes to
> the rest of the car.

dude, have you looked at the taurus? that has a body designed for
front, rear and 4wd options depending on the market it was sold into.
not just "minimal" changes, ZERO changes.


>
> BTW anyone on a slippery road is using torque steer. Unfortunately in
> a FWD, once you lose one factor, you lose them all. Your life is
> hanging on the traction of 2 tires, not 4.

rubbish. 2wd is 2wd. period. fwd has the weight over the drive wheels
where it can provide traction. unlike rwd.


>
> It is a similar argument to the reliability question. Hondas may run
> longer before they need maintenance but when they do you are not
> fixing them on the side of the road.

so how are you going to fix a chevy electronic ignition module at the
side of the road? ford ecu? chrysler transmission? you can't even fix
a serpentine unless you happen to carry special tools.


> They don't "fail safe". In the
> case of the timing belt, there is one skinny piece of rubber between
> running and total destruction of your engine. That was not true in the
> American OHC motors I have owned.

er, do you think a belt change is going to sneak up on you unexpected???
with honda, it's 105k miles between changes. how much chance you'll
accidentally miss it???

advantages of belts include much better timing precision and quieter
operation. the only disadvantage is not allowing for idiots that can't
look at their mileage every 7 years.

dizzy wrote:
> still just me wrote:
>
>> For 9999 out of 10,000 drivers, FWD makes more sense.
>
> Wrong.
>
>> Unless you're
>> into throttle steer and serious performance driving, RWD has no
>> advantages and some serious disadvantages.
>
> Wrong again.
>

neither statement are wrong. in the wet, fwd is a big advantage because
the weight is over the driving wheels. rwd's can easily spin out with
doofus behind the wheel.

Jeff wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
> <....
>
>> eh? so who pays for it all then? it wouldn't be taxes would it? is
>> there some way japanese companies don't pay tax where american ones do?
>
> The Japanese Corporate Income taxes are actually slightly higher than US
> corporate income taxes.
>

and they have fewer loopholes for tax avoidance. i was asking
rhetorical questions to see if our friend tony could see how the wheels
were falling off his argument.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> In article >,
> > wrote:
>> In the case of the timing belt, there is one skinny piece of rubber
>> between running and total destruction of your engine. That was not true
>> in the American OHC motors I have owned.
>
> Generally speaking it's not possible to make an efficient non interference
> engine. If it was everyone would.
>

indeed.

In article > ,
jim beam > wrote:
> advantages of belts include much better timing precision and quieter
> operation. the only disadvantage is not allowing for idiots that can't
> look at their mileage every 7 years.

Strange the way then that most makers are going back to chains. Despite
them costing far more - the main reason for belts in the first place. Cost
cutting.

--
*24 hours in a day ... 24 beers in a case ... coincidence? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.