|
NOTinuyasha posted: Edit: Oh Jesus gently caress me.  
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 00:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
Lowclock posted:Yes, please continue explaining why drums are inferior for racing, which everyone including me has already said. You still need to stop on the street. Hell in hilly areas like where I live enough people cook the brakes modern all disc cars.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 00:27
|
|
|
Lowclock posted:Yes, please continue explaining why drums are inferior for racing, which everyone including me has already said. I'm pretty sure being able to stop quickly is a good thing off the track, too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 00:31
|
|
|
Cat Terrist posted:I *HAVE* driven cars with front drum brakes, unlike almost everyone else here. You really think MOST people here have never driven a VW Beetle or a 70's pickup?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 00:38
|
|
|
The Third Man posted:I'm pretty sure being able to stop quickly is a good thing off the track, too. You can. Drum brakes are not inherently weak and aren't going to fade to uselessness in one hard stop. I've driven lots of miles on a '66 Bel-Air with power 4 wheel drums, and a '69 Chevelle and '65 Mustang with unassisted 4 wheel drums. I admittedly drive like an rear end in a top hat and never once have I ever said "Geez I wish these things had discs", even after threshold braking to 0 from 70 on the highway in an emergency. All they have is clean drums, 80's era shoes and dry brake fluid. Yes, I'm sure if I tried to lap a track or ride them down the side of a mountain I would probably be better off with discs, but I'm not, and neither are what's probably 99% of all drivers. Maybe these cars just have tremendously awesome drum brakes and I've never driven super-lovely ones from some '80s econobox that probably wouldn't stop for poo poo even if it had discs. Sorry. Lowclock fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Jul 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 00:47
|
|
|
Motronic posted:You really think MOST people here have never driven a VW Beetle or a 70's pickup? I'd say that's a safe assumption. I've driven a Beetle... once... and I didn't know how to drive manual at the time. It was interesting. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 00:48
|
|
|
Lowclock posted:You can. Drum brakes are not inherently weak and aren't going to fade to uselessness in one hard stop. Try stopping a '68 charger from 130'ish to 0 in one stop. Glorious brake-fade right around 70mph. By Glorious, I mean pretty much no brakes anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 00:52
|
|
|
Only time I've experienced brake fade was driving through a hilly residential area in SF. The suicide circuit master cylinder is way more of a liability than the drum brakes, I'd even say that buying cheap tires has more of an effect on drivability than properly functioning drums. E: ^^ not a charger though. I only broke a buck once, and the car got scary fast. Lots of other upgrades I'd have to do before I'd want to upgrade the brakes!
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 00:52
|
|
|
NOTinuyasha posted:Motronic posted:You really think MOST people here have never driven a VW Beetle or a 70's pickup? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 01:02
|
|
|
The Locator posted:Try stopping a '68 charger from 130'ish to 0 in one stop. Glorious brake-fade right around 70mph. By Glorious, I mean pretty much no brakes anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 01:10
|
|
|
Lowclock posted:Slamming on the brakes at 130mph is just common, every-day, legal street-driving when you live life a quarter-mile at a time. Or if you happen to be almost any teenager in the world in a car that can go that fast and thinks he can get away with going that fast.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 01:38
|
|
|
Lowclock posted:Slamming on the brakes at 130mph is just common, every-day, legal street-driving when you live life a quarter-mile at a time. The world would be safer with drum only brakes. By far.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 01:43
|
|
|
Motronic posted:You really think MOST people here have never driven a VW Beetle or a 70's pickup? Yes, that's a pretty safe assumption. Seeing as, across full-size trucks, GM went front disc in 1971, Dodge in 1972, and Ford in 1973, it's also pretty safe to say most AI posters have never driven a truck without at least front discs. Hell, I never actually drove my '70 with front drums on it myself, we did that conversion before I could drive. Drums make sense on the rear because in almost any non-performance application, the benefits of disc brakes are so minimal compared to the costs that manufacturers would rather lower the MSRP slightly. You also have to consider that braking today is a huge difference from braking 40 years ago. Brakes 40 years ago had to deal with much lighter cars, much lower horsepower, and much less traction from the tires. Even econoboxes are heavy compared to the compact cars from 1970 (Beetle, Mini, and Opel GT spring to mind - and the latter two had front discs!), but they also have easily double the horsepower of those same three cars. I'd also wager that even the high mileage low-rolling-resistance tires you see on a hybrid could out-grip ye olde Goodyear Polyglas bias-ply tires. Brakes are being asked to deal with a huge increase in energy compared to 40 years ago, and unlike 40 years ago, nearly everyone around you is driving a car with braking systems built to modern standards. You REALLY don't want to be the one guy with four-wheel-drums in an emergency situation when everyone around you mashes their ABS-equipped discs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 02:06
|
|
|
dissss posted:Hell in hilly areas like where I live enough people cook the brakes modern all disc cars. What does this sentence mean?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 02:12
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Yes, that's a pretty safe assumption. Seeing as, across full-size trucks, GM went front disc in 1971, Dodge in 1972, and Ford in 1973, it's also pretty safe to say most AI posters have never driven a truck without at least front discs. Hell, I never actually drove my '70 with front drums on it myself, we did that conversion before I could drive. Here's where and why I'm off on this: I never owned a 1/2 ton truck until the late 90s. Both my 74 F250 and 78 F350 had drums all around. My friends Chevys had drums all around. But we were landscapers and contractors, so we all had 3/4 ton and larger trucks. So....my bad. But also I'm apparently old.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 02:12
|
|
|
The Scientist posted:What does this sentence mean? he forgot the word "on" in between brakes and modern
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 02:13
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Somewhere, someone is looking at this and going "Yeah, that'd look awesome if it wasn't damaged."
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 03:35
|
|
|
One time I drove a 66 Olds 442 with non-assisted drum brakes on all four corners. Once was enough. A car with that much go should not have so little stop.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 03:46
|
|
|
Skyssx posted:The world would be safer with drum only brakes. By far. The world would be safer if you got rid of seat belts, air bags, crumple zones, and anti-lock brakes and replaced all these things with a 6" rusty spike sticking straight out from the non-collapsible steering column. We'd just take longer to get to work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 03:47
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:The world would be safer if you got rid of seat belts, air bags, crumple zones, and anti-lock brakes and replaced all these things with a 6" rusty spike sticking straight out from the non-collapsible steering column. We'd just take longer to get to work. I'd still drive the poo poo out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 04:15
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:The world would be safer if you got rid of seat belts, air bags, crumple zones, and anti-lock brakes and replaced all these things with a 6" rusty spike sticking straight out from the non-collapsible steering column. We'd just take longer to get to work. Sorry - that would only work for people 25 and above. Perhaps 22 or 23, but that's where I would draw the line. People younger than that literally have a reduced ability to cognitively assess risk related to things that might happen to them in the future. So you'd end up with a LOT of kids with rusty metal spikes in their chests, as well as giving them a reason to wear all kinds of Mad Max armor when they drove.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 04:18
|
|
|
JD Brickmeister posted:Sorry - that would only work for people 25 and above. Perhaps 22 or 23, but that's where I would draw the line. People younger than that literally have a reduced ability to cognitively assess risk related to things that might happen to them in the future. So you'd end up with a LOT of kids with rusty metal spikes in their chests, as well as giving them a reason to wear all kinds of Mad Max armor when they drove. Where's the problem?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 04:52
|
|
|
Vanagoon posted:If we're going to hate on Ford for reliability issues it must again be mentioned that the Taurus' Automatic Transmission sucked harder than several overlapping black holes. I did so many that I could pull or install an AXOD/AXODE in only 30 minutes. We once on a dare played a game called "name that bolt". With a blindfold on, you could hand me any bolt from the R&R out of the box and I could identify it by feel and either put it right into the car or tell you were it goes. When I moved on to the building room I would build 2 or 3 AXOD or 4L60 trans a day. I became as intimate with their guts as I had with the pulling. I hundreds or maybe a thousand over a few years. Inside the AXOD there are lots of ways that they can fail on their own. There is something in an AXOD AXODE and a couple other FWD ford trans called the "front planet".  That little tube bit up the center is the center shaft. It is a solid part of the planetary assembly. The sun gear when inserted down into it has a bushing that rides on the outside of it. The end of that sun gear will also ride on a thrust bearing that is down inside of that assembly which is hard to see in this picture. The majority of AXOD variant failures are because of lube/pump, converter, clutch, or sprag failures. This usually result in the gearset needing to be replaced as they are usually destroyed. This wasn't good enough for ford. They started making a extra cut which was cleverly hidden under that thrust bearing. Just a tiny sharp cut around the radius of the base of that shaft to thin the metal to work as a breakaway perforation. This cut is not large enough to reduce mass in any way that could be useful in fuel economy, was missing from the original front planets, and also missing from the replacement sets they sold. The break would quickly render the transmission useless and include damage to other internals. When I first found it, I showed it to a few customers. They became so angry that I decided not to show it to anymore. These cars with the AXOD or AXODE I was working on were rarely SHO's. They were mostly regular models with either the 3.0 or 3.8 liter V6. Those engines in the various Ford vehicles had massive head gasket issues. Some seemed to be purposefully mis-machined deck surfaces. The RMS finish of the deck surface was not just coarse, it was rippled. Looking like too fast of a pass on the machine, or a bad, dull, broken, clogged, or dirty milling tool head. A couple times in my wheeling and dealing cars I passed on free Tauri with bad trans or head gaskets because I had such disdain for them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 04:59
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:When I moved on to the building room I would build 2 or 3 AXOD or 4L60 trans a day. I became as intimate with their guts as I had with the pulling. I hundreds or maybe a thousand over a few years. I've had the misfortune of being in three different vehicles as their 700R4/4L60 gave up the ghost. One was our '97 Suburban, which started spraying the exhaust with ATF somewhere about 30 miles east of Yuma on I8, at about 95MPH. Started slipping in fourth soon after. For whatever reason my parents decided to keep on going and eventually it made it all the way to Phoenix, in second gear. Only had 40,000 miles on it too. Next was another Suburban, '93 I think, where it just silently started slipping going up hills in fourth, then third; it went from normal to dead within about 10 miles. That one had well over 150k on it, though. Last one, so far, was the 700R4 I had in my truck. About 20,000 miles and it failed in much the same way as the one in the '97 Suburban, though it had given me about a week or two of warning with really lovely soft shifts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 06:38
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:lovely transmission stuff Was the AX4S also known for reliability issues? It's basically an upgraded, renamed AXOD-E, and I had a '98 Windstar with a 3.8 that managed to eat two transmissions in the four years I owned it. Both replaced under warranty, but I'm wondering if it's something I did or if they were still as lovely as ever. I mean, I'm sure my driving habits didn't help, I thrashed the hell out of that poor van. I'm surprised I didn't roll it over or crash into a tree in my "I got my license late so I'm making up for lost time" stupid driver phase. The best was when I was driving across the state with the van loaded up to probably about 3 times its weight capacity, averaging 90mph on Rt. 80, when a seal decided to go. It was a small enough leak to spray ATF over about 200 miles of highway and my exhaust, while I was wondering what the weird filmy stuff accumulating on my back window was, before it finally gave out completely. Amazingly, after getting the seal reseated and some new fluid (plus a healthy dose of additive), I was able to limp it the rest of the way to my destination, though I was cautioned against going over 65mph and told to get it fixed properly as soon as possible. A month later the transmission failed in a completely different way, though most likely related to the initial incident. As I recall something went horribly wrong in the torque converter, the word "gouged" was used somewhere in the description of the failure. I'm probably one of the only people who has ever actually benefited from an extended warranty, it paid for itself after the first transmission. E: I did get the transmission fixed properly after the first time, I didn't just let it go until it gave out completely. RowanAmeth fucked around with this message at 07:17 on Jul 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 07:15
|
|
|
Never experienced complete automatic transmission failure personally as every car I've owned was a manual  but the stories I read about automatic Focus owners with Ford's 4F27E automatic was enough to put me off of traditional slushbox autos for life. There were a large number of people that were on their second or third transmission before their cars rolled over 25,000 miles.Also I understand that the current GM/Ford joint venture 6 speed auto is turning out to be something of a quagmire for both manufacturers; my Fusion (fleet car) had to have its clutch packs replaced around 65,000 miles, and aside from giving it some gas on the highway every now and then I hardly abuse the car. Although I guess the rough shifting and skipping gears I experienced was nothing compared to the "push on the gas and have the transmission completely poo poo itself 10 feet later, leaving you stranded in oncoming traffic" issues a few of my co-workers had.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 07:33
|
|
|
Geoj posted:Never experienced complete automatic transmission failure personally as every car I've owned was a manual Well, now I have an '07 Cobalt with a manual, and I love it. Aside from the control arm bushings making GBS threads themselves. And the steering column making noise. And the brakes causing the whole car to shake if I use them too much. And half the controls on the driver's door not working. And the rattles and squeaks coming from all the interior trim pieces. And the handling that makes the car feel twice as heavy as it is. And the tiny opening to the trunk that makes it impossible to fit anything larger than a small suitcase in it. And the fact that the armrest interferes with the parking brake lever. And the non-existent leg room in the back. And the enormous A-pillars that create blind spots an F-150 could hide in. And the high beams that barely improve visibility at night. Aside from that, though, it's great! Honestly, I do actually like the car. It gets fantastic mileage, and handling issues notwithstanding, it's kind of fun to do irresponsible things with it on the back roads. It just has a lot of little issues, and a few bigger ones, that keep it from being fantastic. Though maybe I'm victim of some form of automotive Stockholm Syndrome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 07:52
|
|
|
Geoj posted:Never experienced complete automatic transmission failure personally as every car I've owned was a manual I would have thought that GM/Ford have FINALLY put their automatic FWD trans axle woes to rest with the new joint venture box. I've heard that some of the very early units had a software problem that had been resolved with a reflash already. The Fusion had built up a reputation for itself as one of the most reliable cars ever made, but that was the last generation that used the Toyota tranny. They're not really going to flush it all down the toilet now, are they? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 07:55
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:My job before going to work for the railroad in 1998 was rebuilding transmissions. Before I was allowed to rebuild them I did just the pulling installing part for a few years. Ah, sweet vindication. Do you happen to know what it was exactly that makes the 1-2 shift in an AXOD Family member so terrible? I swear every loving time it made that shift it would shudder. EVERY time. Mine (in my late '98 Taurus) also had a severe "coastdown bump" they called it where sometimes if you didn't wait for the bump when slowing down and tried to take off again the trans would start freewheeling and then slam into gear hard enough to chirp the tires. The first time this happened it was so violent that I thought that someone had hit me. I am beginning to believe that by law the American automakers ought to be banned from ever making any front wheel drive automatics and instead should have to be shamed by being forced to purchase them from Toyota and Honda until they learn to make an Automatic Trans-axle that is not such a monumental piece of lovely poo poo. Edit: because this is a pics thread, here is a - plastic - GM 4L60 accumulator piston.  Found at http://www.tuckertrans.com/tips/fixes.html Plastic parts in the transmission, gently caress You GM. Vanagoon fucked around with this message at 11:14 on Jul 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 10:20
|
|
|
I had an 89 Taurus (3.0) as my first car. Transmission never failed. Not sure how. All we every replaced in the 13 years or so that car was in the family was battery, starter, voltage regulator, alternator (killed by the VR) and some sheet metal/plastic after my brother t-boned a brand-new Camry. We put a police-package grille on it.  That car had over 200k miles on it when we sold it, and probably lives in the woods somewhere like the Anglia in Harry Potter.My 93 Taurus (3.8) was the stereotypical shitbox Taurus. I owned it for two years because I bought a brand new Focus because the payments were lower than the repair costs. The Taurus ate headgaskets, motor mounts, AC lines (torn by engine movement), water pump, and of course the transmission. Also the rear windshield shattered in some extremely cold weather. That was fun to drive home.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 12:54
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I had an 89 Taurus (3.0) as my first car. Transmission never failed. It wasn't your brother at all, it was the car: "I'll show you, you motherfucker! I can be reliable too!" You may have had the Taurus cousin of Christine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_%28novel%29
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 13:19
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I had an 89 Taurus (3.0) as my first car. Transmission never failed. Not sure how. We had an 89 Taurus we bought new in 89 (To replace the 87 MT-5 that my Mom loooooooved but got wrecked) We never had the transmission replaced in it either. The car went to 275k and the odometer failed, and my dad drove it another 3 years. When the Ford place called asking about it (thinking they could get an easy sale out of us, they pretty much called me a liar when I said the car was fine, we weren't looking right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 14:10
|
|
|
90's domestic autoboxes are the worst. The A4LD in our '91 explorer exploded at 40k. I really don't understand it, either. The old 2 and 3 speed autos were rock-solid, and as soon as they added gear #4 they all went to poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 14:44
|
|
|
Vanagoon posted:It wasn't your brother at all, it was the car: "I'll show you, you motherfucker! I can be reliable too!" It did total the Camry while suffering zero structural damage (hood and one fender were bent, bumper cover and grille were broken), so you may be right. I would buy that car back if I ran across it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 14:47
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I had an 89 Taurus (3.0) as my first car. Transmission never failed. Not sure how. Yeah, I had a 1996 Dodge Grand Caravan 3.3 liter with a first gen A604 time bomb turning behind it. Got 150,000 miles out of it. I thought on several occasions it died, but it was always minor fixes. Got rid of the drat car after it stranded me 100 miles from home when the transmission fluid cooler lines ruptured suddenly. It was a pig to drive, but supremely useful vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 15:14
|
|
|
Vanagoon posted:Mine (in my late '98 Taurus) also had a severe "coastdown bump" they called it where sometimes if you didn't wait for the bump when slowing down and tried to take off again the trans would start freewheeling and then slam into gear hard enough to chirp the tires. The first time this happened it was so violent that I thought that someone had hit me. Any way to get that fixed, or is it just something that every AX4S does and there's nothing I can do about it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 15:53
|
|
|
EightBit posted:Where's the problem?  Except instead of being some one-off weird cosplay person, this would be your kids and their friends...
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 16:30
|
|
|
trouser chili posted:Yeah, I had a 1996 Dodge Grand Caravan 3.3 liter with a first gen A604 time bomb turning behind it. Got 150,000 miles out of it. I thought on several occasions it died, but it was always minor fixes. Got rid of the drat car after it stranded me 100 miles from home when the transmission fluid cooler lines ruptured suddenly. It was a pig to drive, but supremely useful vehicle. We had pretty much the same vehicle with the same powertrain at one of my former jobs. It blew the coolant lines as well. At the time I thought it was because everyone who drove it beat on it mercilessly but maybe it's a thing beyond that. Who knows?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 16:32
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:
The clutch packs in my transmission poo poo the bed after the reflash. To be fair I guess the damage could have started before, but the dealer ended up covering the service under warranty when I was outside of the factory warranty. The car has been pretty reliable otherwise, even when the transmission was acting up it never left me stranded. I do drive more than just about anyone other than OTR truckers (took delivery on new year's eve 2009, its currently sitting with just a hair under 70,000) so YMMV. Geoj fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Jul 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 17:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
NOTinuyasha posted:Back when I played Carmageddon 2 I made opponents cars look like this. Did a semi truck rear end this guy?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 18:11
|
|
