Toyota loses its way
in [Toyota]
|
Prev: Good news Bad news...
Next: Governors of states with Toyota plants defend beleaguered automaker
From: Jeff Strickland on 21 Feb 2010 23:33 "Ashton Crusher" <demi(a)moore.net> wrote in message news:ur14o51770qrts8dqs8aaa0j5sov96414f(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:27:28 -0800, "Jeff Strickland" > <crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >>"Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>news:hlq6db$bua$2(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>> >>>> Having said that, I'd not expect any transmission to hold up for very >>>> long >>>> while pulling "full throttle shifts A FEW TIMES PER WEEK." Why on earth >>>> would anybody subject an econo-box of any make or model to full >>>> throttle >>>> shifts a few times a YEAR, much less a few times a week? (which is the >>>> same position that Jim Beam is taking) That's absurdity that exceeds >>>> the >>>> assertion that Detroit blocks e-spec lighting from coming here. >>> He's pissed all he could afford was a Tercel and was trying to make a >>> Drift racer out of it. >>> >>> >>> >> >>Drifting in a FWD? I thought one got FWD to avoid drifting. There's >>nothing >>in the whole world like hanging the back end out and feathering the gas to >>make the car drift sidways across the parking lot. >> >>I suppose winding the motor to redline to force a shift, "a few times a >>week," is somthing one might do while trying to drift the rear end. No, >>that >>wouldn't work. >> >> >> > > The thing had around 90 hp. Drifting wasn't in the program. It is also FWD, which would pretty much exclude drifting also. I was thinking that the redline shift points might indicate that you didn't know that FWD cars don't drift very well.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 21 Feb 2010 23:37 On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 21:26:21 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote: >>He's pissed all he could afford was a Tercel and was trying to make a >>Drift racer out of it. >> >> >> > > Hardly. It was left over from the in-laws when they died. And they put > gentle miles on it. Even so, it blew the head gasket while they had it. > Then the Transmission failed. All before 110,000 Toyota quality???? Even worse. You took a gently driven car and managed to destroy it? And head gaskets are known on this car. Must have been prior to 1994. Easy fix. You can lift the engine out of the engine bay yourself.
From: Ashton Crusher on 22 Feb 2010 23:35 On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 23:37:25 -0500, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote: >On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 21:26:21 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote: > >>>He's pissed all he could afford was a Tercel and was trying to make a >>>Drift racer out of it. >>> >>> >>> >> >> Hardly. It was left over from the in-laws when they died. And they put >> gentle miles on it. Even so, it blew the head gasket while they had it. >> Then the Transmission failed. All before 110,000 Toyota quality???? > >Even worse. You took a gently driven car and managed to destroy it? > >And head gaskets are known on this car. Must have been prior to 1994. >Easy fix. You can lift the engine out of the engine bay yourself. Ah, the Typical Toyota apologist reply, ignore the lack of quality as if the fact that it's actually repairable excuses it.
From: Ashton Crusher on 22 Feb 2010 23:43 On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 17:43:49 -0800, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlrjeff(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >"Ashton Crusher" <demi(a)moore.net> wrote in message >news:b6j0o5t9t42o4k75jqmo8jlvce0k53gluc(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:32:42 -0500, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> >> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:21:00 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:24:55 -0500, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 22:34:35 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>Well, I did it three times in one day, quite often. Never had a >>>>>>>problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Then again, I made sure the ATF was correct and at the correct level. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> You are becoming a desperate troll. Get back in touch when you return >>>>>> to the land of the rational. Bye bye. >>>>> >>>>>I think you either just don't know how to drive, or were trying to drive >>>>>a Tercel like a Supra. >>>>> >>>>>Either way, you ruined a perfectly good transmission in a perfectly good >>>>>car all by yourself. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Believe what you want. It's your delusion. >>> >>>Not mine at all. You must have done something serious to be able to ruin >>>this transmission. >>> >>>This transmission is rated 131 hp, and is mated to an engine that produces >>>108. You should congratulate yuourself for being clever enough to ruin an >>>transmission rated 28 HP more than the engine can produce. >>> >>>The spec for 1st gear is 34MPH. You probably managed to exceed that, and >>>probably the 2nd gear spec, too. Ever hear of an Owner's Manual? It's in >>>there. >>> >>> >> >> Is English a second language for you? What part of "it was shifting >> itself in fully automatic mode" do you not understand? Just like >> every other car I've driven. I drive them all the same, it was only >> the Toyota that could not hold up to a few full throttle automatically >> controlled up shifts a week. It appears you really have little >> understanding of how cars work. > > > >You're the reason why buying a Used Car is a dangerous proposition. If you >drive all cars to red line before they shift, you're doing serious damage to >the engine and the transmission. > >I had automatic transmissions that made this kind of shift a handful of >times in all of the years I owned them, and none that ever made them more >once in the same quarter. There isn't an automatic transmission made that's >intended to make full throttle shifts at or near red line, a few times a >week. > >It doesn't matter that you claim you do it all of the time, it's no way to >treat your machine. Ever. Period. > > > Wow, for a while I wasn't sure but now I am,... you are completely ignorant of cars and how they are designed and how they work. I've driven EVERY car I've ever owned that way and NONE of them suffered any damage as a result of these "red line engine and transmission" shifts, except, of course, the Toyota.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 23 Feb 2010 00:09
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:35:34 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote: >>Even worse. You took a gently driven car and managed to destroy it? >> >>And head gaskets are known on this car. Must have been prior to 1994. >>Easy fix. You can lift the engine out of the engine bay yourself. > > > Ah, the Typical Toyota apologist reply, ignore the lack of quality as if > the fact that it's actually repairable excuses it. Toyota was using asbestos head gaskets, and thanks to our government was forced to abandon the asbestos gaskets for a different material. As a result, the torque specs for the head bolts was wrong. Try replacing the HG on a Supra, if you think the job on a Tercel is bad. Ford, GM and Chrysler NEVER make any mistakes, right? 1995 Chrysler LHS Recall Item Affected: SUSPENSION:FRONT:CONTROL ARM:LOWER ARM Date Announced: 8/17/1999 Description of Recall: VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES. THE LOWER CONTROL ARM ATTACHING BRACKETS CAN CRACK DUE TO FATIGUE AND SEPARATE FROM THE ENGINE CRADLE. Action Needed To Fix It: DEALERS WILL REINFORCE THE ENGINE CRADLE AT THE POINT WHERE THE LOWER CONTROL ARM ATTACHES TO IT. That's not dangerous, at all... |