When is GM going to learn? (long)
- Thread starter 1 FMF
- Start date
- Status
That, and there are other reasons to avoid Chinese products. I won't get into them here, however.
Now come on JMH, you can't equate replacement parts needed to restore function after a failure to monstrous Frankenstein-ing that some of the ridiculous old Civic guys do to their cars. Adding a f@rt can, grotesquely UN-color-coordinated parts under the hood, silly pseudo Recaro seats, and a bad tint job hardly equate to a replacement alternator or new wiper motor, for example.
Perhaps we can find some unity -- why don't we all, import lovers and haters alike, join in lobbying congress to pass a law requiring all Civics older than 10 years to be inspected for "rice-i-ness" annually. Those that fail would be seized and shredded on the spot. Owners would be generously compensated $100 for their "loss". . .
ekpolk has a good plan, but I don't think we have to wait until they're 10 years old.
I always carry a camera with me, one of the few times I haven't lately, this is what I see.
We're at a get together for a friends family and sitting in the drive is a beat to crap grey Civic, maybe a '97 model. Ratty with almost bald tires and stock in every way, except for the 5" Autometer tach on the dash complete with shift light.
We were in tears we were laughing so hard...
I always carry a camera with me, one of the few times I haven't lately, this is what I see.
We're at a get together for a friends family and sitting in the drive is a beat to crap grey Civic, maybe a '97 model. Ratty with almost bald tires and stock in every way, except for the 5" Autometer tach on the dash complete with shift light.
We were in tears we were laughing so hard...
The program would easily pay for itself and maybe even turn huge profit by airing the live feed from the scene in a new kind of the reality show.quote:
Originally posted by ekpolk:
Those that fail would be seized and shredded on the spot. Owners would be generously compensated $100 for their "loss". . .
We don't need that..what we do need (and already have, here) is a law requiring you to not tow your totalled Civic home and leave it sitting in public view for weeks on end.
Of the only two vehicles I've had to call code enforcement about in the last two years, one was a Honda Civic, and the other was an Acura. Interestingly, both of them were hit in the same place with the same resulting damage of the right front wheel being almost horizontal.
I heard of this problem when I first got my 2000 4Runner. The guys on all the message boards were claiming the rotors "warped" in few miles and they were turning them, replacing them, etc. Sure enough, mine got some brake vibrations by the time it had about 50K miles.
But I got to wondering if it was really warpage, or just pad material transer to the rotor. So I decided just to leave mine and see what would happen. The thinking was if it were just pad material transfer it would wear off after a while.
Sure enough, it did go away. The brakes are far smoother now at 95K miles than they were at 50K and I've done nothing to them but drive the truck.
I still laugh since I had at least 10 people tell me of all the terrible things that were going to happen if I didn't turn them or replace them...
Another great article, shedding light on GM's cash reserves.
The Carrol Smith article is the one that got me to wondering about the whole warped disk thing in the first place.
It also stands to reason that I'd have less trouble with my truck than most people because mine is a manual trans. I don't have to sit with my foot on the brakes after stopping, and I don't. This would tend to lessen the whole pad material transfer problem...
I'm gong to have to remember to send Carrol Smith some pics from the rotors that were pulled off my brother's Mustang. See if he can explain why, when on a known flat surface, that there are marked regions where the rotors don't make contact. The material transfer explains when runout is several thousandths of an inch...but what if several hundredths?
As much as I like The Truth About Cars' reviews and editorials for the most part, they still make the same blundering errors that pretty much regulates them with the likes of a majority of other publications and e-zines. What's worse is that they have some real engineering talent to gleam from yet it never shows up.
So far we have:
Subaru WRX
Ford Mustang
Toyota Sienna
Toyota Corolla
Lexus IS 350
TOYOTA 4 Runner
VW Jetta
Honda Civic
Volvo
Infinity G35
in the GM thread.
...no wonder my post about the Audi RS4 being priced similarly to the Corvette was deleted. I forgot how direct comparisons (by me) of price/performance/quality are frowned upon here. It gets a little wierd when inconsequential, but relavent, posts begin disappear. It seems to be happening more and more recently.
Subaru WRX
Ford Mustang
Toyota Sienna
Toyota Corolla
Lexus IS 350
TOYOTA 4 Runner
VW Jetta
Honda Civic
Volvo
Infinity G35
in the GM thread.
...no wonder my post about the Audi RS4 being priced similarly to the Corvette was deleted. I forgot how direct comparisons (by me) of price/performance/quality are frowned upon here. It gets a little wierd when inconsequential, but relavent, posts begin disappear. It seems to be happening more and more recently.
I've seen worn rotors like you mention. I've also seen some with large pieces missing and areas that are obviously not flat so I don't think the pad material transfer problem is always the reason no matter what Carrol Smith says. A friend that maintains state of Illinois vehicles even told me of getting brand new rotors from NAPA that weren't flat out of the box.
In the case of the 4Runner though it seemed odd to me that guys were claiming their rotors were warped even though they might only have 25K miles use and a visible inspection showed nothing.
The original Smith article also has another myth about brake reservoir size and the low brake fluid warning lamp. He claims you should not add brake fluid when the low fluid warning light illuminates and instead it means you need pad replacement. The claim is, the lamp is set to just illuminate when the pads are extended sufficiently to be worn out. This is just silly. It wouldn't account for a number of types of wear and across a product line dozens of cars might use the same reservoir even though they have completely different brake systems at the wheels...
JHZR2
Staff member
Likely it was something else said... Lots of folks have expresed opinionsof this or that better than GM... or Ford in that thread...
Is an RS4 really as capable as a z06??? Id venture to guess not... and dont say traction, because nobody will be driving either vehicle in the snow and ice.
JMH
My experience..on two cars..has been that the light came on about a few thousand miles before the pads were completely worn out.
So, given that, I think the best advice is to check the pads for excessive wear when the light comes on. If they're worn, replace them. If not, add fluid.
It was a one-scentence post, "The RS4 is about the same price as the vette", and a link to a review. That must bother the Vette fans somehow. True GM Spirit, pretend the competition does not exist.
FYI-
"0 - 200 - 0 km/h in 21.8 secs., quicker than the Corvette C6 and the SLK 55 AMG thanks to the better traction of the permananet 4WD and the better ceramic brakes."
http://www.germancarzone.com/showthread.php?t=4241
"At the Nordschleife the Audi RS4 can full advantagee out of its powerful 4.2-lites V8 engine which also will power the Audi R8. Thanks to the permanent 4WD there is no under- or oversteer, it just gets a bit unstable when braking very hard. The sports suspension plus and the optional Pirelli P Zero Corsa sports tyres allow the Audi driver to go to the limits and to be neary as fast a Porsche Carrera S at its home track.
Also fited with the optional ceramic disk brakes the RS4 showed no fading even at the race track.
The RS4 is no drift king so loses at a short track like the Hockenheimring against the more powwrful Dodge Viper but also handles better than such a heavyweight like the much more powerful Mercedes SL 65 AMG.
0 - 200 - 0 km/h in 21.8 secs., quicker than the Corvette C6 and the SLK 55 AMG thanks to the better traction of the permananet 4WD and the better brakes.
aerodynamic balance:
The RS4 is no super sportscar but a limousine prodcing no downforce at 200 km/h. It gets lighter in front than in rear thanks to the rear spoiler changing the balance positively.
1.25 max. lateral acceleration on track is not bad for a car that weigh 1728 kg. The Pirelli P Zero Corsa tyres have benen modified and now offer a better wet handling than under dry conditions.
36m Salom:
the RS4 handles well, the adaptive damper control makes it as fast as the CLK DTM AMG, looks like the RS4 also is directly derived from the DTM race car.
At the wet handling track it even handles better than the Porsche Carreras and takes the provisional pole position for that test thanks to the 4WD and the new Pirelli P Zero Corsa tyres.
8.09 min - Audi RS4"
"0 - 200 - 0 km/h in 21.8 secs., quicker than the Corvette C6 and the SLK 55 AMG thanks to the better traction of the permananet 4WD and the better ceramic brakes."
http://www.germancarzone.com/showthread.php?t=4241
"At the Nordschleife the Audi RS4 can full advantagee out of its powerful 4.2-lites V8 engine which also will power the Audi R8. Thanks to the permanent 4WD there is no under- or oversteer, it just gets a bit unstable when braking very hard. The sports suspension plus and the optional Pirelli P Zero Corsa sports tyres allow the Audi driver to go to the limits and to be neary as fast a Porsche Carrera S at its home track.
Also fited with the optional ceramic disk brakes the RS4 showed no fading even at the race track.
The RS4 is no drift king so loses at a short track like the Hockenheimring against the more powwrful Dodge Viper but also handles better than such a heavyweight like the much more powerful Mercedes SL 65 AMG.
0 - 200 - 0 km/h in 21.8 secs., quicker than the Corvette C6 and the SLK 55 AMG thanks to the better traction of the permananet 4WD and the better brakes.
aerodynamic balance:
The RS4 is no super sportscar but a limousine prodcing no downforce at 200 km/h. It gets lighter in front than in rear thanks to the rear spoiler changing the balance positively.
1.25 max. lateral acceleration on track is not bad for a car that weigh 1728 kg. The Pirelli P Zero Corsa tyres have benen modified and now offer a better wet handling than under dry conditions.
36m Salom:
the RS4 handles well, the adaptive damper control makes it as fast as the CLK DTM AMG, looks like the RS4 also is directly derived from the DTM race car.
At the wet handling track it even handles better than the Porsche Carreras and takes the provisional pole position for that test thanks to the 4WD and the new Pirelli P Zero Corsa tyres.
8.09 min - Audi RS4"
JHZR2
Staff member
very intereswsting... I have always liked the S4...
But I doubt itll outperform a Z06 vette... Maybe a regular one, but not the new Z06...
WHat do you think?
JMH
But I doubt itll outperform a Z06 vette... Maybe a regular one, but not the new Z06...
WHat do you think?
JMH
I swapped a set of such rotors on my brother's 99 Civic DX and they performed flawlessly. The rotors were cheaper than the brake pads. It's so cheap now to make them anyway that a lot of places around here don't turn them anymore as it costs only a marginal amount of extra money to buy a brand new rotor. I'll be buying a set for my daily beater too when I do a full brake service on it.
- Status
