Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #15 – July 25, 2009, 05:57:53 PM Truthfully, we are not spinning our wheels, though it might seem like we are if only MPG figures are looked at. What your comparison misses is that the newer car has 6 air bags, meets modern roll over standards, has better brakes, ABS, traction control, meets modern emissions standards, is better appointed, and is 50% quieter than your old Citation. All of these factors add an unbelievable amount of weight. Take the more powerful 4cyl out of a new Colbalt and install it in your Citation and mileage will greatly improve as compared to either car's original mileage. Also remember that new cars are rated differently than the old ones, and comparing what mileage you actually got in your Citation to the advertised mileage of a new car is not an apples to apples comparison. To prove my point, my parent's 2008 Buick Lucerne, rated at 25mpg (I think, highway, actually returns 30-32mpg highway on a regular basis. It is also more powerful, quieter, holds more people, has more options, and is safer than your Citation.Oh, I couldn't find a listing for an '85 4cyl Citation, but the 6cyl is rated ant 24mpg Highway according to the new standards.Shiny Side Up!Bill Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #16 – July 25, 2009, 07:11:12 PM QuoteIts going on 30 years ago and we had better gas mileage than new cars today,, can I make a point or not?If you want efficiency,, get an old car, cheaper parts, prob better on gas (as i would point out and tip my had to GM's 2.5L). With one tiny litte lone fuel injector, that car really raised the bar as far as efficiency goes. To add to the mix,, the sucker had more storage then you could use most of the time.You're comparing a car that was the exception -- your Citation -- to what will be the norm. Try putting that same drivetrain from the Citation in a similar sized car from today laden with the added weight of 20+ years of safety regulations worth of parts. The 90 hp rating was within the norm for those days would be a laughing stock today. My wife's 2000 Mercury Cougar displaces the same 2.5 liters and has 170 hp and that car weighs 3100 pounds. BTW, I routinely get 34-35 MPG on the highway in that car as well. My Mustang; with about 450 HP at the flywheel; returns 24 MPG on the highway in a 3300+ pound car with me the wife and an extra 200 pounds in it. I've done that a few times. Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #17 – July 26, 2009, 12:18:45 PM Quote from: ProTouring442;283763Truthfully, we are not spinning our wheels, though it might seem like we are if only MPG figures are looked at. What your comparison misses is that the newer car has 6 air bags, meets modern roll over standards, has better brakes, ABS, traction control, meets modern emissions standards, is better appointed, and is 50% quieter than your old Citation. All of these factors add an unbelievable amount of weight. Take the more powerful 4cyl out of a new Colbalt and install it in your Citation and mileage will greatly improve as compared to either car's original mileage. Also remember that new cars are rated differently than the old ones, and comparing what mileage you actually got in your Citation to the advertised mileage of a new car is not an apples to apples comparison. To prove my point, my parent's 2008 Buick Lucerne, rated at 25mpg (I think, highway, actually returns 30-32mpg highway on a regular basis. It is also more powerful, quieter, holds more people, has more options, and is safer than your Citation.Oh, I couldn't find a listing for an '85 4cyl Citation, but the 6cyl is rated ant 24mpg Highway according to the new standards.Shiny Side Up!Billwell thats just retarded:DYou come out with information that is backed by a closing statement that says you cant find any information to back up your claims.Even more retarded,,, :D(only kiddding),,is the fact that I put up a link to one of many which included the 4banger MPG and you couldnt find that info.People today operate on the general idea that if its old, its no good for today.Fact- This example of many older cars had more steelFact- they were heavy Fact- emisions standards have'nt changed all that much nationallyFact- this car was as quiet as new carsfact- this car held 5 passangers (with room to spare mind you)Fact- this car was boring to drive, looked not so prettyfact- New price was approx 7,000Fact- wieght approx 2700lbsfact- recalls on rear brakes locking up forced many recalls (nothing has changed)Fact- computer controlled engines, carb'd engines, MPFI engines availFact- Roller lifters used on 84 and upFact- Intake 1.7x exhaust 1.3xFact- Fittment quality issues with interior,,Recalls on clutch peddal, rear brakes, gas cap / filler tube, Fuel filter recall made by Fram, rack / pinion , structural damage to rear sway bar welds when car strapped for shipping and improperly tied down.linky to recalls ,, one of many resourceshttp://www.automobilemag.com/auto_recalls/11/chevrolet/citation/index.htmlFact- Thicker skin than todays cars along with metal bumperfact- Xmph crash speeds would yield less damage than todays cars.Fact- Carb's v6 sucked badFact- oil leaks on dizzy oring due to heavy duty stock oil pump.fact- Dizzy on the 4cyl was in a difficult location (again, no change here)fact- pick your car,,,,http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_recalls/11/dodge/charger/index.htmlThe recalls on most any car havent changed,, just the politics of which maker is under the spotlight. Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #18 – July 26, 2009, 01:13:24 PM If I only drive freeway I can get 30+mpg on the freeway. I picked up one of my freinds from orem one weekend which is about 25 miles each way. Including driving around town to get smokes and a couple other things, probably about 8-10 miles city, I got 33.4 mpg there and back. Along with several hills with over 6% grade both up and down. And this car has no power! I have to floor it to maintain 60mph up some of the hills I was driving on. If you drive any car like a grandma you can get decent mileage out of it. When my friend had a 89 cavalier, we would beat on it and drive it like morons and still get over 30mpg. Same with my grandma's 82? mazda. I would beat the living out of that truck, and get 40+ over a tank of gas with NO freeway.I guarantee that if I had newer seals, bearings and tires, I could get better gas mileage out of the tbird then v8demon gets out of his mustang. Even swapping in better parts for better power gets better efficiency. Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #19 – July 26, 2009, 02:55:22 PM Quote from: jcassityFact- they were heavy...Fact- wieght approx 2700lbsQuote from: That link about the Citations...and GM even got weights down to European norms, ranging from 2462 Ib (1117 kg) to 2568 Ib (1165 kg) according to model.Heavy at approximately 2700 pounds.....Bring your 20th to a scale and prepare to be astonished.Quote from: jcassityI put up a link to one of many which included the 4banger MPG Quote from: The site againThe four-cylinder manual models were claimed to consume fuel at the rate of 24 mpg around town (9.80 lit/100 km), and at 38 mpg (US) when cruising (6.19 lit/1 00 km). The overall average was therefore 29 mpg /8.11 lit/100 km.Quotefact- Xmph crash speeds would yield less damage than todays cars.To whom? The car or the occupants? Crumple zones keep insurance costs due to medical treatment down.QuoteFact- Carb's v6 sucked bad????Meaning the Citation V6 or all V6 cars in general? Either way I would consider that more opinion than fact.Fact -- The Citations did not have the following:-Rear seat lap/shoulder safety belts-airbags-third brake light-ABS-side impact beams-crumple zonesNo safety feature is as good as an informed, educated, prepared and safe driver. I have no control over whether or not the total strangers on the same roads as me are in fact those things, so I'll do what I can. I'll make sure my family is in a safe vehicle that could protect them while serving it's other duties in a diligent fashion. If I can throw in a warranty and roadside assistance for when I might not be close by; even better. Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #20 – July 26, 2009, 03:57:33 PM Quote from: jcassity;283868Fact- This example of many older cars had more steelWhile many older cars (older than 80's) had more steel, they certainly didn't get 35 MPG. Only small stripped out gutless shiznitboxes achieved those numbers.QuoteFact- they were heavy See above. Also, compare a modern car that gets mid 30's MPG to your mid 30's MPG Citation. I'd bet the modern car weighs much more, has much more power, and pollutes much less. We're always hearing about how the early 90's Metro got 50+ MPG. Yes, it did. It also weighed quite a bit less than 2000 pounds. My Saturn weighs about 2300. It's hard to find a car that light now.QuoteFact- emisions standards have'nt changed all that much nationallyFALSE. Emissions standards have increased exponentially since the early 80's. In 1996 alone, the year OBD-II was mandated, they increased by a whole lot. My '97 Saturn likely belches about 1% of the emissions your old Citation did, and my Saturn would look absolutely filthy by today's standards.QuoteFact- this car was as quiet as new carsMaybe as quiet as new cars in 1985. I've worked on thousands of Iron Dukes. Quiet was not a word used to describe them.Quotefact- this car held 5 passangers (with room to spare mind you)Fact- this car was boring to drive, looked not so prettyfact- New price was approx 7,000Fact- wieght approx 2700lbsfact- recalls on rear brakes locking up forced many recalls (nothing has changed)I'll give you these ones. What would that $7k equate to in 2009 dollars, though?QuoteFact- computer controlled engines, carb'd engines, MPFI engines availEven the most sophisticated computer controlled engines of the day were crude by today's standards. 3C (Computer Controlled Carburetor) was an absolute travesty.QuoteFact- Roller lifters used on 84 and upFact- Intake 1.7x exhaust 1.3xFact- Fittment quality issues with interior,,Recalls on clutch peddal, rear brakes, gas cap / filler tube, Fuel filter recall made by Fram, rack / pinion , structural damage to rear sway bar welds when car strapped for shipping and improperly tied down.linky to recalls ,, one of many resourceshttp://www.automobilemag.com/auto_recalls/11/chevrolet/citation/index.htmlFact- Thicker skin than todays cars along with metal bumperThicker, but softer. Today's cars use high strength steel and computer designs which make for much stronger body structures.Quotefact- Xmph crash speeds would yield less damage than todays cars.Yeah, the car might survive. Its occupants, not so much.QuoteFact- Carb's v6 sucked badThe carbed 2.8 V6 was a dog, but it was also dead reliable. The TBI versions were , though (they sludged up and plugged oil passages, destroying the engine).QuoteFact- oil leaks on dizzy oring due to heavy duty stock oil pump.fact- Dizzy on the 4cyl was in a difficult location (again, no change here)There's actually a big change there - nowadays you'd have to go pretty far to find a car that even has a distributor.Quotefact- pick your car,,,,http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_recalls/11/dodge/charger/index.htmlThe recalls on most any car havent changed,, just the politics of which maker is under the spotlight.If anything recalls have become more common. There are stricter regulations and more things to go wrong in modern cars. Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #21 – July 27, 2009, 12:08:06 AM Quote from: V8Demon;283895Heavy at approximately 2700 pounds.....Bring your 20th to a scale and prepare to be astonished.WRONG= they were heavy for what they were not to mention all the storage roomTo whom? The car or the occupants? Crumple zones keep insurance costs due to medical treatment down.????Meaning the Citation V6 or all V6 cars in general? Either way I would consider that more opinion than fact.UHH, why would i switch topics,,,duhh? ofcourse we are talking about the citation. I feel stupid just answering that :DFact -- The Citations did not have the following:-Rear seat lap/shoulder safety belts SUPER WRONG (ofcourse I only know from experience which you do not know about strapping a child seat into the back seat of a citation.-airbags CORRECT, so add em on-third brake light, WRONG-ABS- CORRECT- so add it on-side impact beams WRONG- been there seen that worked on that -crumple zones WRONG.= mostly wrongjust fyi people, the more information the better.just pointing out that the design was a good start and could be used on a modern platform and improved on **AS I ORIGNIALLY SAID until it was all taken out of context)**. It would be nice to see some engineering on an economical level. The Chevy Iron 4 was just an example to say the least. Its disappointing to see these efficiency numbers boasted like they have never been seen before. Its like a re-run. Im not bragging on any one old car either, just an example of what was achieved back then. While we are on the topic of "technology" and "research", even back then there were millions put towards promises of major designs yielding better and better gas mileage. We have gotten nowhere and no one can debate that. if they do,, then just look at what has been for sale over the past decade,, nothing but gas hogs everywhere. OH,, OH,, and before I forget,,These gas hogs that have been for sale were a direct result of all the BS reasearch. All im trying to say is that they gotta come up with something really "NEW" to impress me. To date, i dont see any reason to worry about driving a car that will knock the piss out of the next plastic car crossing over to hit me. Perhaps someone in the rainbow land will get it in thier mind that driving such a car could be a hazard because it it lethal to the rest of the cheaply constructed vehicles on the road. Id bet a Citation would plow a Rav4,,,lol and drive a way .Yeah,, i think i just made a prediction here fella's (and ladies), Soon the ownership of a car that contained X percent of metal will be illegal to drive on the roads. You heard it here first. Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #22 – July 27, 2009, 12:28:53 AM Quote from: Thunder Chicken;283906FALSE. Emissions standards have increased exponentially since the early 80's. In 1996 alone, the year OBD-II was mandated, they increased by a whole lot. My '97 Saturn likely belches about 1% of the emissions your old Citation did, and my Saturn would look absolutely filthy by today's standards..I think I worded that without enough detail,,What i meant was the pieces parts to achieve the emissions standards have not changed too much but the same principle applies= keep the exhaust as clean as possible. (and still be able to say "screw cali" Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #23 – July 27, 2009, 06:22:25 AM Quote from: jcassity;283868well thats just retarded:DYou come out with information that is backed by a closing statement that says you cant find any information to back up your claims.Even more retarded,,, :D(only kiddding),,is the fact that I put up a link to one of many which included the 4banger MPG and you couldnt find that info.Ahh, but I was looking for official EPA ratings, and the EPA does not show a 4cyl Citation in 85. Nonetheless, I do not doubt your 30+mpg, instead I believe that the new ratings would put a 4cyl Citation somewhere in the 25-26 mpg highway, and thus quite the equal to many newer cars.Shiny Side Up!Bill Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #24 – July 27, 2009, 07:01:25 AM I think what you may be missing is that manufacturers have managed to maintain and raise fuel efficiency (see my post on my parent's Buick) while building better, more reliable, safer, quieter, and more powerful cars. So why haven't they used this same technology to produce a car that gets much improved mileage, at the cost of performance? Because a car so produced would be a sales flop! Back when that Citation was built, the most popular car in the US was the RWD, very inefficient, Oldsmobile Cutlass. In fact, the G-body cars were so popular that GM kept them going some 6 years past the original date that they were to be discontinued and replaced with a more fuel efficient FWD design. Eventually GM was forced to cancel them as they could no longer get them to meet the emissions, safety, and efficiency standards. Think about it, in 1985 Ford produced 152,000 Thunderbirds. These were advanced, fuel injected, unibody cars. Chevrolet produced 120,000 Monte Carlos, a car that, when compared with the Thunderbird, was a good 10 years out of date! By the way, I think the old Citations were cool. I wouldn't mind one with a modern drive-train. I'm thinking a performance oriented AWD system, and a turbocharged 4cyl... Shiny Side Up!Bill Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #25 – July 27, 2009, 07:51:32 AM Quote-side impact beams WRONG- been there seen that worked on that-crumple zones WRONGthird brake light, WRONG.The side impact beam on newer cars are there for more than structural support. The beams in older cars won't hold a candle to the new ones. The patents for updates are popping up all the time. Personally, I don't consider the older ones a side impact beam to include my Cougar. It's more of a door skin support than anything else.Third brake light was not mandatory until 1986. I've seen a few Citations. One very recently and it DID NOT have a 3rd brake light....I've seen 3rd brake lights on plenty of pre-86 cars....all of them NON-factory.And how am I wrong about the crumple zones?QuoteFact -- The Citations did not have the following:-Rear seat lap/shoulder safety belts SUPER WRONG (of course I only know from experience which you do not know about strapping a child seat into the back That's funny, because according to the picture on the page here---> http://www.cardomain.com/ride/3170953/2 that looks to be a lap only belt. That car is an 1985 by the way. I believe you misread. I said no lap/shoulder belt; not devoid of seat belts completely. Here's ANOTHER rear seat picture: A company makes kits to RETROFIT a shoulder type belt into the Citation as well. Here's the link to that: http://www.tntrafficsafety.org/pdf/Retro.pdfScroll to page 4.And for your information; I do in fact know about strapping a child seat into the back of a car.Finally,Quote from: Both of us with jcassity's part in boldMeaning the Citation V6 or all V6 cars in general? Either way I would consider that more opinion than fact.UHH, why would i switch topics,,,duhh? ofcourse we are talking about the citation. I feel stupid just answering that The tongue in cheek insults that you seem to be trying to slip under the radar aren't working. It would appear I'm not the only person they are directed at either FWIW. Your wording on the original part was rather generic so rather than assuming; I felt it better to ask for clarification.On a side note; anyone willing to pay $12,200 for one of these in smoking the crack. Lots of it! http://classiccars.com/81263.carEnough with the Citation. Back on topic. More info on the fiber optics. Apparently grant money is being used for study/testing: http://www.climatebiz.com/blog/2009/07/14/ford-laser-ignition Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #26 – July 27, 2009, 09:17:25 AM Add Airbags and ABS to a Citation? I guarantee that neither has, nor ever will happen. Who would add thousands of dollars worth of equipment to a car that's worth hundreds? A car never meant to have them, and nearly impossible to retro-fit non-compatible parts to.You do bring up a good point with the idea of adding these things to the Citation. If you added ABS and Airbags, along with all of the sensors and electronics needed to make them work, plus some side impact beams and a generous dollop of sound deadener, not to mention make it pass ANY modern crash tests, you can bet that weight would pass the 3200lb mark in a much bigger hurry than any Citation has ever been in. What you would be left with is a very ugly car that would struggle to hold highway speeds, achieving fuel economy in the low 20's. In other words, a POS joke of a car that no one would even consider putting on their long list without some sort of head trauma. Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #27 – July 28, 2009, 07:44:12 PM sorry v8,, i thought the "slash" "/" meant in your words "or",,,meaning had no belts.sorryThe whole thought I was bringing into this is close to what bill said. If we were able to build a car around fuel economy alone (which I would buy even if it lacked perfromance), why cant we build on past examples and exceed 40mpg average highway on gas?.BTW bill, The link i put up shows the 4 banger epa mileage.Again, excluding perfromance, why cant we build a car that gets better fuel economy even 25 -35% better than 30 years ago?I for one know darn well that driving that citation around in the early 90's didnt stand a chance to any other car but ,, I was happy with the pump gas mileage which made up for it all when your poor like we were back then in the military. Quote Selected
Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? Reply #28 – July 29, 2009, 02:19:12 AM Quote from: ProTouring442;284021Back when that Citation was built, the most popular car in the US was the RWD, very inefficient, Oldsmobile Cutlass. In fact, the G-body cars were so popular that GM kept them going some 6 years past the original date that they were to be discontinued and replaced with a more fuel efficient FWD design. Eventually GM was forced to cancel them as they could no longer get them to meet the emissions, safety, and efficiency standards. Think about it, in 1985 Ford produced 152,000 Thunderbirds. These were advanced, fuel injected, unibody cars. Chevrolet produced 120,000 Monte Carlos, a car that, when compared with the Thunderbird, was a good 10 years out of date! Shiny Side Up!BillI think that we should add to this that Both Ford and Chevy had FWD platforms ready to lunch in the early 80's we all know then as the Camaro (AKA Baretta) and the Probe(AKA Mustang). Ford and Chevy continued to produce these RWD cars because they both did market research after the fact and found out the very markets they were targeting said NO!, none of that FWD HERE BUDDY! They went as far to say that it would ruin the Camaro and Mustang. Then as for the Thunderbird looking so far advanced and ahead of the Monte's and such. That is cause Ford wanted the win NASCAR races. They blew Chevy out of the water with there AERO package. Chevy had there response the Monte Carlo SS. Then as for 85 you might want to double check but both Monte's and Tbird's had CarbEFI witch is just a carb with some injectors instead of jets. That is no where near real EFI. But Ford did have real EFI in the Turbo coupe/XR7's in 83'. Then if you wanna knock around the GM 2.5 Iron Dukies those were even carbEFI in 90. My Neighbor has one in a 90 Grand am. It does have DIS though get that one!Stuckman Quote Selected
Topic: Spark Plugs -- Soon to be a thing of the past? (Read 6850 times)
previous topic - next topic
