Right to repair

[Jon Elson]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

In the past, it was because stick shifts got better
gas mileage, and were cheaper.

Well, adding more gear ratios and the lock-up torque converter helped the
mileage a bit. Now, I have a hybrid that has a continuously variable
transmission and no torque converter. They use a wet-pack clutch like on a
motorcycle to do the initial start. So, it has all the advantages of a
stick shift, but my family can drive it, too.

Jon

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:21:44 -0600, Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu>
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

In the past, it was because stick shifts got better
gas mileage, and were cheaper.

Well, adding more gear ratios and the lock-up torque converter helped the
mileage a bit. Now, I have a hybrid that has a continuously variable
transmission and no torque converter. They use a wet-pack clutch like on a
motorcycle to do the initial start. So, it has all the advantages of a
stick shift, but my family can drive it, too.

Thanks. I'm told there's little difference between the gas mileage of
a stick versus an automatic. For example, my current 2001 Subaru
Forester is rated at 21 mpg with either transmission.
<https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=17279&id=17278>
Left column is manual transmission while the right column is
automatic. My Acar Android program has about 8 years of mileage
records and shows an average of 22.673 mpg over a distance of 47,215
miles and 2,000.50 gallons of the cheapest regular I can find. This
is a 16 year old vehicle, which does not have the benefits of the
technology you mention, yet still has identical rated gas mileage for
manual and automatic. I suspect the reason lies elsewhere.

Even if the gas mileage was better for an automatic, I would still
prefer driving a manual transmission. I don't feel like it's driving
without the stick. There's probably some symbolism there, but I'll
pretend not to notice.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:26:28 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

In October I bought a brand new 2012 Mustang convertible with the stick
shift. (It had 200 or so miles on it--it had got caught up in the
Takata airbag mess, so the dealer couldn't sell it for ages.) Got a
nice discount too--it wound up being the price of my daughter's Kia
econobox.

He must have been glad to get rid of it after five years depreciating
in storage. Congratulations.

I once bought a new 1967 Mustang (after I trashed my mother's car).
200 cid engine, 3 speed manual transmission (of course), and zero
options. It was truly an economy car. At the time, I was working
part time at a local Ford dealer, so I got a good deal and was later
able to economically deal with the inevitable broken parts. It was
the worst car I had ever owned. All the weight was over the engine.
If I tried hard, I could spin the wheels in any of the 3 speeds.
Traction in snow or mud was non-existent. Because the rear end was so
light, the leaf springs on the rear were not very stiff. When I
loaded the trunk with about 250 lbs of Motorola 40V, 80D, and 160D
radios, the rear end sank. The range of adjustment for the headlights
was not enough to make the light beams level again. I could go on
forever complaining about the Mustang. However, that was 1967 and
presumably Ford has learned a few things in the intervening 50 years.

>Newer cars are full of surveillance devices, which I cordially dislike.

Yep. One of the casualties in the rush towards progress is the loss
of privacy. I'm told that this is now the "information age" which
makes little distinction between public and private information. The
loss of privacy sucks, but is survivable. Think of it like the
Japanese shoji paper curtains. There's little real privacy with
those, but if everyone pretends not to notice what's happening on the
other side, one can get the illusion of privacy. I think that's where
we're heading. Every data collecting entity knows what's happening,
but as long as they don't do anything with the data, you have the
illusion of privacy. When those entities abuse your information is
where the problems begin. I don't believe we can stop the collection
of information, but we might have a chance stopping anyone from using
what it collects.

Cheers
Phil Hobbs

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 14:49:36 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:21:44 -0600, Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

In the past, it was because stick shifts got better
gas mileage, and were cheaper.

Well, adding more gear ratios and the lock-up torque converter helped the
mileage a bit. Now, I have a hybrid that has a continuously variable
transmission and no torque converter. They use a wet-pack clutch like on a
motorcycle to do the initial start. So, it has all the advantages of a
stick shift, but my family can drive it, too.

Thanks. I'm told there's little difference between the gas mileage of
a stick versus an automatic. For example, my current 2001 Subaru
Forester is rated at 21 mpg with either transmission.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=17279&id=17278
Left column is manual transmission while the right column is
automatic. My Acar Android program has about 8 years of mileage
records and shows an average of 22.673 mpg over a distance of 47,215
miles and 2,000.50 gallons of the cheapest regular I can find. This
is a 16 year old vehicle, which does not have the benefits of the
technology you mention, yet still has identical rated gas mileage for
manual and automatic. I suspect the reason lies elsewhere.

Even if the gas mileage was better for an automatic, I would still
prefer driving a manual transmission. I don't feel like it's driving
without the stick. There's probably some symbolism there, but I'll
pretend not to notice.

I tend to drive my cars almost into the ground because I keep them so
long. I gave my last car away when it had 280,000 miles on it and it
still ran well so I guess it wasn't quite driven into the ground. I
always bought sticks but my most recent car purchase, which will
probably be my last, is an automatic. I chose automatic because they
now, and for some time, have been more reliable than a clutch. They
just plain require less maintenance and last longer. On top of that,
it used to be you could bump start a car with a manual transmission
and a low battery but modern fuel injection requires too much juice
for a bump start with a low battery. So another advantage of the
manual transmission goes away. Besides, I'm not a kid anymore and
don't tend to let my battery go dead or run out of gas because I'm a
little more responsible that I used to be.
Eric

 

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <g82a9ctqen77inns5arhr1q4b9kq5oj5mn@4ax.com>,
jeffl@cruzio.com says...

Newer cars are full of surveillance devices, which I cordially dislike.

Yep. One of the casualties in the rush towards progress is the loss
of privacy. I'm told that this is now the "information age" which
makes little distinction between public and private information. The
loss of privacy sucks, but is survivable. Think of it like the
Japanese shoji paper curtains. There's little real privacy with
those, but if everyone pretends not to notice what's happening on the
other side, one can get the illusion of privacy. I think that's where
we're heading. Every data collecting entity knows what's happening,
but as long as they don't do anything with the data, you have the
illusion of privacy. When those entities abuse your information is
where the problems begin. I don't believe we can stop the collection
of information, but we might have a chance stopping anyone from using
what it collects.

Cheers
Phil Hobbs

From things I have read it seems that some of the onboard computers are
getting to be about like the 'black boxes' on airplanes. There was some
talk of letting the police download the data in accidents to see what
the speed of the car was and other things.

 

[tom]

"Ralph Mowery" <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.32fee140610671f998982b@news.east.earthlink.net...

In article <g82a9ctqen77inns5arhr1q4b9kq5oj5mn@4ax.com>,
jeffl@cruzio.com says...


Newer cars are full of surveillance devices, which I cordially dislike.

Yep. One of the casualties in the rush towards progress is the loss
of privacy. I'm told that this is now the "information age" which
makes little distinction between public and private information. The
loss of privacy sucks, but is survivable. Think of it like the
Japanese shoji paper curtains. There's little real privacy with
those, but if everyone pretends not to notice what's happening on the
other side, one can get the illusion of privacy. I think that's where
we're heading. Every data collecting entity knows what's happening,
but as long as they don't do anything with the data, you have the
illusion of privacy. When those entities abuse your information is
where the problems begin. I don't believe we can stop the collection
of information, but we might have a chance stopping anyone from using
what it collects.

Cheers
Phil Hobbs

From things I have read it seems that some of the onboard computers are
getting to be about like the 'black boxes' on airplanes. There was some
talk of letting the police download the data in accidents to see what
the speed of the car was and other things.

It's been that way for at least the last ten years.

 

>"Yeah, but he keeps stomping his left foot on the floor where the clutch
pedal is SUPPOSED to be every time he come up to a light or stop sign.
Don't ask how I know about this - 30 years of primarily driving stick. "

He makes another mistake but I am not going to tell him how to drive. He puts it is neutral at stoplights and then jas it into first when it is time to take off.

I don't know about you but I have found that usually the throwout bearing is cheaper and easier to replace than the first gear synchronizers.

 

"Ummm, try running Linux! No EULA at all, you are ENCOURAGED to browse the
source code. "

I have a few versions of it kicking around here and have tried them. Too many things to learn how to do on it for now.

Though I might be forced as my old XP and Vista (yuk) will eventually quit. If you see me buying a new version of Windows please shoot me, I mean it.

I have never paid for Windows except in a preloaded machine, and won't and I have no shame about it. Every EULA says I am buying nothing so I'll give them exactly what it is worth. Nothing.

If I live too long, Linux will be inevitable. I might have to take up some hobbies involving very fast cars, lighter than air hydrogen aircraft and the like. (I know how to make hydrogen)

 

>"I are an engineer (of sorts). All my vehicles have had stick shifts
since about 1970. In the past, it was because stick shifts got better
gas mileage, and were cheaper. I even converted one old vehicle from
automatic to manual (because the junk yard wanted less for the manual
than a rebuild would have cost me for the automatic). Today, it's
purely psychological and maybe a little macho. "

For better or worse you have discarded a few facts. We are a car family, or were until people started dying off. There is one automatic transmission that will outperform a stick in a certain weight class - the THM400.

They do funny things with the torque convertor that makes it take off from the hole at about 5:1. You simply can't put a gearset in a stick that big. I think a bunch of high end luxury cars still use the THM400, rolls maybe or whatever ?

When you put a bigger gearset into a stick it is more prone to failure, which is quite catastophic I mean really don't even try to rebuild it. The valve body in the THM400 is a veritable analog computer running on hydraulics and it really does know better when to shift than you do. The beauty of the THM400 is that the gearset only gets it down to (IIRC) 2.73:1, the torque convertor takes up the rest. Then it smoothly settles to the 2.73:1 and soon thereafter shifts into second. Note that it does not shift out of first, first is still engaged but on a one way clutch. that makes for a smoother shift and actually if you have to tromp on it a smoother downshift as well.

When theey went to front wheel drive trannies got to be a pain. No more onee way clutch in most of them which means if the cable is not set right you get a big clunk as you coast down to a red light. If you are concerned with mileage you know exactly why I mean, you could never feel the old trannies shift like that.

What's worse, if some stupid little solennoid ggoes bad in these new electronically controlled trannnies it throws a code, even though it is only maybe passing gear or whatever, and then you can't get plates. And for some reason, unless he was lied to bigtime, I know someone who had a Ford with a Triton V8 that when three solenoids went bad in the tranny it mimiced the symptoms of jumped cam timing. I still think he was lied to but why would his mechanic go and have some valves replaced in the interference engine and do the timing irons instead of just replacing three solenoids ?

And now cars run Windows ? They gotta be kidding.

I want a 1967 Chevy. I liked my 1970 Toronado, but really it was trouble waiting to happen. First of all it was too fast. It could be beat but not in traffic. Plus every part cost a fortune, even the muffler was $300. (evacuator system) Too much, I need to get from point A to point B, and just as important back to point A. That means I do not need ridiculously priced parts on the car that have to be ordered from bumfuckt Sweden somewhere.

Hell, give me a model T and a propane heater.

 

>"In October I bought a brand new 2012 Mustang convertible with the stick
shift. (It had 200 or so miles on it--it had got caught up in the
Takata airbag mess, so the dealer couldn't sell it for ages.) Got a
nice discount too--it wound up being the price of my daughter's Kia
econobox. "

Well first of all you just disconnect those air bags and watch where you are going. I bet you still can in a 2012, but you may have to put a resistor in there or something to simulate a load.

One thing that probably helped your negotiations on that car was that people today don't really go for stick shifts. They have to play farmville, text and talk on the phone whilst keeping an eye on their chipped dog and watching insidd their house to see if anyone is stealing their plasma TV. Also they have to update their facebook every three minutes or their dear friends (who would kill them in an alley usually) don't think they're dead. Or something.

 

>"I once bought a new 1967 Mustang (after I trashed my mother's car).
200 cid engine, 3 speed manual transmission (of course), and zero
options. It was truly an economy car. "

I had a couple of Pintos. both stick. In fact that was when I started playing around with valve timing and learned quite a bit. then later Porsche or someone came out with variable valve timing. Whoever Ford bought for a while...

There are models that have not only vaariable valve timing but also direct cylinder fuel ijection. these are high end models and unfortunately with those you are stuck with their electronics, if you can call it that.

But I did notice things. Turn the camone way offf and you can slip your foot o ff the clutch in third and it peels tires and does not stall. however in NO GEAR wil it do over 45 MPH. Go the other way and you have to feather the clutch in, even in first gear, as if you were taking off in third. But past a certain RPM the thing would take off like a bat out of hell. So obviously making it variable is a good idea and I tried to work out some sort of mechanical arrangement to do so but I had no machines, not even a bandsaw, and I never could weld. So much for that.

 

<"On top of that,
it used to be you could bump start a car with a manual transmission
and a low battery but modern fuel injection requires too much juice
for a bump start with a low battery"

There are other problems. When you turn the key on it only charges the fuel system for a few seconds.

And yes, I found out one day that some cars actually use more juice running than starting. Between the ridiculous firing current and voltage, then you got anywhere from four to sixteen fuel injectors. The car would literally crank but not start unless it had a jump.

 

>"From things I have read it seems that some of the onboard computers are
getting to be about like the 'black boxes' on airplanes. There was some
talk of letting the police download the data in accidents to see what
the speed of the car was and other things. "

Years ago there was a politician who had a wreck and insisted on a sobreity test. There was speculation that he tried to kill himself but without a fit of morality I don't see why.

Of course it was all forgotten in a few days, as is the tradition here, but I have my own speculation. One of the reasons he insisted on the test is because the road was icy and I suspect he was going off the road and spinning his wheels trying to get back on. In such a case the black box would have reported the vehicle speed at probably 120 MPH or whatever when it was going maybe 40 MPH with the gas to the metal and the wheel turned toward the road.

There are at least a plethora of news stories about which I would like to see the followup. The problem is I guess you simply have to take names, literally. Like the doctor who filed for a variance on a gag act about discussing his nephrology patients' kidney problems brought on by fracking materials, I remember the name Rodriguez and that it was Pennsylvania where they judge pretty much told him to fuck off, but to more easily get to the story I would have to remember his first name because he has a common last name.

It is impractiacl to save searches and also to bookmark anything because then you have 150,000 entries and can't make heads nor tails out of anything. so things get forgotten, like for example that Assad did not use the gas. Like a whole bunch of other things that get swept under the rug.

I know people who stupidly (well they are stupid) kept their dead Mother's body on storage for eight months. They did this because their Father was just ending a sentence in Utah and the one son had power of attorney though the Mother to dispense his affairs and he had PERS, which was a nice retirement. Well they got caught with eight UNCASHED SS checks of the Mother's and the news said they did it for her SS money. Now if they had done that, why would they be in possession of all the UNCASHED checks ? And her checks were chump change compared to his, but they had to keep that power of attorney alive until he got out.

I have seen many many other things and simply do not watch anymore. I sometimes watch the weather, and half the time that is wrong. world affairs, I will go to RT and PressTV first, then check it with the BBC and a few other places. I fact, foreign sources often have more precise coverage of US domestic issues though they put one hell of a liberal slant on it.

Like Australians, think we should take in all these refugees, but what do they do with them ? They keep them on an island ! Bunch of fucking hypocrites. and now Trump got in an argument with their PM. So what ?

Yup, 1967 Chevy, 283 and a stick, even a three on the tree. you know three speeds had better gears than many four speeds back then. The smaller and stronger gearset did not deliver the ratios and taking off in first was like somewhere between taking off in second and third. so them you needed to change the rear end and then you are doing 4,800 RPM at 60 MPH. So now you need a cam and a bore out and more carbs.

I drove a bunch of them and I remember - "Did I just shift or not ?". Bunch of junk really. Yeah, you could almost never blow a Muncie, but you sure did want to. Boatanchor.

I wonder what these black boxes do with a stick shift. Like asking that blode "What gear were you i n at the time of impact ?", "Oh, Nikes and a sweatsuit".

 

[Jon Elson]

jurb6006@gmail.com wrote:

"Ummm, try running Linux! No EULA at all, you are ENCOURAGED to browse
the
source code. "

I have a few versions of it kicking around here and have tried them. Too
many things to learn how to do on it for now.

Though I might be forced as my old XP and Vista (yuk) will eventually
quit. If you see me buying a new version of Windows please shoot me, I
mean it.

I have never paid for Windows except in a preloaded machine, and won't and
I have no shame about it. Every EULA says I am buying nothing so I'll give
them exactly what it is worth. Nothing.

If I live too long, Linux will be inevitable. I might have to take up some
hobbies involving very fast cars, lighter than air hydrogen aircraft and
the like. (I know how to make hydrogen)

My desktop at work once ran for about 480 days before a power failure
rebooted it. Typically, my desktops run about 100 - 180 days before there
is some need to reboot them. Have you ever had a crash on your Windows
system? I have had a few, when there were hardware failures, but they are
REALLY rare. I have a web server here that just hums along, even though it
is constantly attacked by various hackers. They haven't been able to get in
to do anything bad in ages.

Jon

 

jurb...@gmail.com wrote:

"Ummm, try running Linux! No EULA at all, you are ENCOURAGED to browse
the
source code. "

I have a few versions of it kicking around here and have tried them. Too
many things to learn how to do on it for now.

Though I might be forced as my old XP and Vista (yuk) will eventually
quit. If you see me buying a new version of Windows please shoot me, I
mean it.

If your Iphone, Samsung, etc... is regularly plugged in and out of the tower's jack, I don't see why your 2007 version (or better) of Windows would ever crash.
I've heard that the new Windows 10 has made big changes, especially on the graphics and PC gaming side.

 

jurb...@gmail.com wrote:

."The problem is that anything to do with the emission control
system has to be certified to not alter the emissions of the car.
Hmmm, maybe won't matter a lot on a 30 year old car (if it even
HAD a computer). But, making after market replacement parts for
any part of the emissions system has to go through a lot more
than somebody making a wiper motor or a fender. "

Many 30 year old cars had computers. They were basic, just controlled
fuel mixture and ignition timing. Actually, after studying them
a bit I find that it almost doesn't matter how many cylinders
there are except for idle speed. Later one fire the injectors
in pairs or possibly single at a time in which case you need a
cam pulse to know what cylinder you're on.

These days its tough to tell what microprocessing helps do that. I'm not familiar with anything except bullshitting around on a few construction/remodeling sites. I don't know crap regarding auto and diesel, but I've heard of everything from two-strokes to 'v' and inline sixes on 18-wheelers. The new Ford Mustang is switching from a v6 to a v8. Some military combat vehicles have 10 and 12 cylinders. I guess its regarding the right torque, kinetic energy and inertia at the right time somewhere along the drive chain.

 

[whit3rd]

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 3:25:05 AM UTC-8, jurb...@gmail.com wrote:

."The problem is that anything to do with the emission control system has to
be certified to not alter the emissions of the car. ...

Many 30 year old cars had computers. They were basic, just controlled fuel mixture and ignition timing.

I've got a computer in a car that old, and it's NOT basic, there's a bunch of
solenoid drivers for vacuum control valves... or thermactors, or somesuch.

The microprocessor is of the MCS-96 family, the whole line of which was obsoleted
by Intel a decade ago.

 

"I've got a computer in a car that old, and it's NOT basic, there's a bunch of
solenoid drivers for vacuum control valves... or thermactors, or somesuch. "

Sounds like a computer controlled carburated engine. Those were a bad marriage. When they finally got to fuel injection it was much better. Seems like GM was the first, while others stuck with the clunky barbs with the enrichment solenoid. A pure mess really.

 

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 6:42:04 PM UTC-5, et...@whidbey.com wrote:

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 14:49:36 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:21:44 -0600, Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

In the past, it was because stick shifts got better
gas mileage, and were cheaper.

Well, adding more gear ratios and the lock-up torque converter helped the
mileage a bit. Now, I have a hybrid that has a continuously variable
transmission and no torque converter. They use a wet-pack clutch like on a
motorcycle to do the initial start. So, it has all the advantages of a
stick shift, but my family can drive it, too.

Thanks. I'm told there's little difference between the gas mileage of
a stick versus an automatic. For example, my current 2001 Subaru
Forester is rated at 21 mpg with either transmission.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=17279&id=17278
Left column is manual transmission while the right column is
automatic. My Acar Android program has about 8 years of mileage
records and shows an average of 22.673 mpg over a distance of 47,215
miles and 2,000.50 gallons of the cheapest regular I can find. This
is a 16 year old vehicle, which does not have the benefits of the
technology you mention, yet still has identical rated gas mileage for
manual and automatic. I suspect the reason lies elsewhere.

Even if the gas mileage was better for an automatic, I would still
prefer driving a manual transmission. I don't feel like it's driving
without the stick. There's probably some symbolism there, but I'll
pretend not to notice.
I tend to drive my cars almost into the ground because I keep them so
long. I gave my last car away when it had 280,000 miles on it and it
still ran well so I guess it wasn't quite driven into the ground.

Hah, mee too. But around here in the winter they use a lot of salt...
and I guess that just brings the ground closer... (I'm happy
if I get 200k.) I buy little commuter cars, and just can't find many
with a stick... so my last two cars have been auto.
I down shift going down my hill, but that's about it.

George H.

always bought sticks but my most recent car purchase, which will
probably be my last, is an automatic. I chose automatic because they
now, and for some time, have been more reliable than a clutch. They
just plain require less maintenance and last longer. On top of that,
it used to be you could bump start a car with a manual transmission
and a low battery but modern fuel injection requires too much juice
for a bump start with a low battery. So another advantage of the
manual transmission goes away. Besides, I'm not a kid anymore and
don't tend to let my battery go dead or run out of gas because I'm a
little more responsible that I used to be.
Eric