[Ming]

Any things that people post regularly on car forums, or that automakers say that annoy you?

I have a couple:

1. "Hondas get 100 hp per liter, unlike your lame domestic engine" Not all Hondas by far. And the few that do don't get that HP when most people want it, at the stoplight. Gimme a break, and while you are at it, tell me how much less torque than horsepower your Civic Si gets.

2. Misspellings of Camaro. "Camero" "Camarro" "Kamero" - some even by Camaro enthusiasts!! How can you own the car and not know how to spell the name! :lol:

3. "The Japanese have better quality" Does that include Suzuki, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Subaru, Daihatsu, and Isuzu? Can I cherry pick Cadillac and Buick and have them represent all Domestic brands?

4. "DOHC engines are smaller". In displacement, maybe, but not necessarily in the size of the total package.

5. Using "proven" as a way of deflecting criticism for outdated technology, like 4-speed automatics. "It's proven and reliable, GM should never change it, 4-speed 4-Evah!" Actually, GM does this in its own PR stuff, and it just annoys me. Proven? Perhaps. Competitive in today's marketplace where 40% of car buyers research their car on the internet before buying? Not.

Please add to this list or take issue with mine.

 

[Ghrankenstein]

My favorite is "FWD is only better than RWD in the snow."

Ghrank

 

[cyboexpo2002]

5B. Add the word "venerable" to be used alternately with "proven".

 

[yoblues]

Automakers showing you concept vehicles that make you drool and they never build them.

 

[Ghrankenstein]

"Contemporary" to describe bland styling on a brand-name they like. I guess we're stretching this to include the auto press.


Ghrank

 

[IMPALAon20s]

import fanatics that use the words "heavily moded" to mean they added mufflers and a cone filter and 8910732974832748 stickers.

 

[Ghrankenstein]

import fanatics that use the words "heavily moded" to mean they added mufflers and a cone filter and 8910732974832748 stickers.

or Flowmasters and that's it.

Ghrank

 

[GroundedZ]

Lets see now. <_<

1 - "Corvette's ARE NOT world-class sports cars! They're just old muscle cars!"
2 - "An LS1 powered F-body can smoke ANYTHING!!"
3 - "The Acura RSX has a 9000RPM redline!!"
4 - "...and i beat that's Accord's *** by 5 'car links'"
5 - "Custom blue tailights. $500 each."
6 - "Technology is the replacement for displacment."
7 - "It features front-wheel drive."
8 - "GET 24INCH SPINNAZ 4 THAT BEAST!!!"
9 - "Click here to check out the E-Ram electric Supercharger!!"
10 - "VTEC 'kicked in'"
11 - "Downshifting is cheating!!"
12 - "My 1999 GSR. Stock everything. Runs low 11's"
13 - "Bring back the Camaro!"
14 - "But it's not a RWD V8."
15 - "You just got VTEC'ed!!"
16 - "But mine's got a 7000RPM redline. Yours redlines at 4500PRM!!"
17 - "I got first place at the sound-off today!!"
18 - "All Japanese cars get good gas mileage."
19 - "It's a cute little car."
20 - "...are still using that low-tech 3.8L dinosaur engine."
21 - "Pushrods are low-tech."
22 - "But they don't race in any rallys so they suck!!"
23 - "Fiero's are rear-engined."
24 - "Nothing can beat a V8. NOTHING!!"
25 - "Just slap a intake and an exhaust on it and you can beat most V8's"
26 - "I love front-wheel drive!!"
27 - "If you have $20K and want a small car - you have no reason NOT to buy a Toyota Prius."
28 - "THAT CAR IS SICK!!"
29 - "Best car ever!"


That's all i can think of for now.

 

[Ghrankenstein]

2 - "An LS1 powered F-body can smoke ANYTHING!!"

In reality this is a stretch, but where has this been posted anywhere? Name one vehicle within $10,000 of its MSRP that can.

For that matter, name one vehicle with $10,000 of an LT-1 F-Body that can.

Grounded Z, you're 100% wrong on this one. Noone has posted this, on this forum at least. Perhaps that's a "stereotype" but all of us F-body owners, LT1, LS1 regardless know when we're beaten. And that is, for the vast majority of us, never.

Should one of us pull up next to a C5, most of us would just give a "thumbs-up" for the owner having a cool, faster, car. Should one of us pull up to a Mustang, most of us are willing to put our reputation on the line should it not be stock or a Cobra, and even then, should the Cobra not be able to hook up.

We don't think our V-8 Camaros will smoke anything. Just most anything. Stock.

Regards,

Ghrankenstein

 

[GroundedZ]

Originally posted by Ghrankenstein@Feb 29 2004, 07:18 AM
Grounded Z, you're 100% wrong on this one.  Noone has posted this, on this forum at least.  Perhaps that's a "stereotype" but all of us F-body owners, LT1, LS1 regardless know when we're beaten.  And that is, for the vast majority of us, never.

You're not going to like this Ghrank.

I don't think i'm wrong at all. There are plenty of LS1 fanboys out there who look upon the engine as God's gift to Chevy - the absolute pinnicle of engine design and engineering; if it wasn't already under my hood - it would be in an art museum.

It's not.

I heard an LS1 owner brag about totally obliterating Ferrari Modena - but in the same breath - also mentions the race between him an SVT Mustang that he needed nitrous in order to win. That line alone is also what spawned the "Nothing can beat a V8" and "Downshifting is cheating" comments. They are so over-confindent in the engine that actually losing to anything else in race would mean the other guy was cheating with nitrious becasue "My car is unbeatable".

They're just another branch of ricers. Ricers think they are unbeatable in race. Most ricers have junk car that weren't ment to go fast anyway. An LS1 fanboy has a much better car than the garden variety ricer - but the attitude still remains the same.

That's the kind of piss ignorance that gets my goat. That's why it's on the list.

 

[gopedxr7]

i hate it when people say that the corvette is a bad car. it was the best car i have ever driven. one rich @$$ i once worked with, he drove to work in his mommys mercades V12 coupe, complained about how crappy the corvette was and how bad the body rolled. i mean he got so defensive when i started talking about how good american cars were it was unbeleivable. i did not even say that i preffered american cars and he was insulting them. My favorite was when i asked him how many american cars he drive he said just the corvette. so one car compared to your mercades makes every other american car bad compaired every foreign car. what logic.

most of these import lovers will tell you they hate american cars. but then they will say, ecept for the corvette, escalade, mustang, mussle cars, etc. i hate that.

one day i want someone to show me a single japanese car from the 60s, 70s, and even the 80s that still runs and in good shape. you can find hundreds of US cars but when was the last time you saw a classic 1970s civic?

another thing is that they look at the companies average fuel econmomy. lets see when a company makes like mostly suvs and comercial trucks they have less average fuel economy than a company that makes all small tiny cars. The chevy impala gets higher fuel economy with the 3.4 than the camry with the 3.0.

But the stereotype that irritates me more than any other is the one that foreign cars are safer than american cars. nothing irritates me more when people think that a little honda is safer. where the hell did this one come from i dont know

What about the sterotype that foreign cars are easier to fix? Have any of you taken a wheel off a bmw or a vw? no lugnuts, they have lugbolts. it took me and 2 of my friends to put the wheel back on. now what if you have a flat on the highway, all alone and have to change the tire?

I am 19 years old. i have driven various cars. i just preffer the american stuff. i have tried other foreign makes so i can justify my preferance, unlike most my age that have just grew up with a foreign car and thats the best and never even stepped in a american car and still hate them. I just hate the stiff steering, high reving stuff, and the rock hard seats.

i can go on forever. and i have much more that i can say but i got school work to do

Alan

 

[3rdGenBlackbird]

Lotta LS1 owners are ****y, but certainly not all.

I agree with everything you said, gopedxr7!

Although, I don't mind seeing a clean "classic" 70's honda or toyota on the road. Preferably clean and good-running, not in bad shape or race-modified. But that's rarer than seeing a clean sting ray.

A couple more stereotypes and common quotes-

All third gen f-body owners are hicks.
"AWD baby! Suburu's are the best!!!"
"Yeah, but my prelude is stick, so I can take most V8s!"
"Yeah, I've got a hemi!" (Even when they DON'T have a hemi!)
"Yeah the only domestic I like is the 'vette, but all the old ones are slow."
"Man, that's old tech! I've got DOHC!" (Too bad you don't know what that means....)
"What's the problem? You can't afford a newer car than that '79 chevy? Pfft!!"
..."Yeah, my car gets great gas milage!" (What's the problem? Can't afford an extra fillup once a week?)
"V8's have no top-end!"
"I have more HP/Liter"
"Imports are lighter!" (Good job adding those heavy wheels and purposeful spoiler dude!)
"All domestics are over 4k lbs."
"All imports are under 2.5k lbs."
"With my exhaust, I should have another 35 hp at the wheels!"
"Tornado fuel saver kicks ***!!"


And a couple for the import guys just to be fair...
"All import drivers are ricers."
"All ricers drive like s***!" (Only most of them do!)

And to reiterate the one I hate the most:
"All third gen f-body owners are hicks!"

Laters,
Scott

 

[paul8488]

Originally posted by GroundedZ@Feb 29 2004, 01:15 AM
23 - "Fiero's are rear-engined."

argh! i know there's a difference between mid and rear engine (i believe it depends on whether or not the engine is behind the rear axle), but practically, i'd say if the engine is behind the seats, rear engine makes sense. going by the definition, i've heard that some cars with the engine in front are considered mid-engine (with the engine sitting well back of the front axle).

 

[yoblues]

The myth that Geman cars were so superior quality wise. I don't think so and the myth finally being exposed.

 

[powervette]

calling every American car in my country
"American ****"

 

[Tone]

Originally posted by paul8488+Mar 1 2004, 07:43 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (paul8488 @ Mar 1 2004, 07:43 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-GroundedZ@Feb 29 2004, 01:15 AM
23 - "Fiero's are rear-engined."

argh! i know there's a difference between mid and rear engine (i believe it depends on whether or not the engine is behind the rear axle), but practically, i'd say if the engine is behind the seats, rear engine makes sense. going by the definition, i've heard that some cars with the engine in front are considered mid-engine (with the engine sitting well back of the front axle). [/b][/quote]
If an engine is between the centre of the front and rear wheels, it is considered mid-engined. This is true if the engine if postioned behind the centreline of the front wheels (see the Mercedes SLR and - I believe - the new Corvette for examples). The more common examples have the engine in front of the rear wheel centreline - the MR2, the Fiero, various exotics.

If the engine is behind the centre of the rear wheels, it is considered rear engined. Examples include the original Beetle, Porche 356s and 911s, the Corvair and Tatras.

Keeping the weight of the engine between the wheels tends to keeps the car more balanced, allowing it to change directions more quickly. However, front and rear mid engined cars (Corvette vs. Fiero, for example) tend to have much different weight distributions. Front-mid engined cars can come close to 50/50 weight distributions; rear-mid engined cars tend more towards 40/60 as both the engine and major drivetrain parts are behind the mid-point of the car. This gives front-mid engined cars more balanced and forgiving handling; rear mid engined cars have advantages in acceleration and braking (because of the rear weight bias) and tend to turn into a corner quicker. They don't like a lot of adjustments at the limits of adhesion, generally, and won't necessarily like a lot of thottle coming out of a corner. Or course, these are (gross) generalizations - suspension tuning and tire sizes can make a rear-mid engined car quite benign in handling.

Rear-engined cars like the 911 have an even stonger rear weight bias, though they give back some interior space. This makes them excel at acceleration and braking as the weight transfer is very advantageous for each (lots of weight on the drive wheels during acceleration; balanced weight over all four wheels for braking). However, hanging all that weight on the rear end makes the car want to oversteer - or hang the back end out - during cornering. 911s used to be quite prone to what is call lift-throttle oversteer - if you were at the limit in a corner and backed off the gas, the weight would tranfer forward and the already-taxed rear tires (carrying most of the weight of the car) would lose traction, giving major oversteer. Meaning, if you were at the limit, the LAST thing to do was lift - very counterintuitive. However, the latest versions of the 911s have used better suspension geometry and larger rear tires to pretty much tame the beast.

So, there are fairly significant differences between mid and rear engined cars - if you are as into this kind of stuff as I am!