Honda Car Forum

"Warren Weber" <hiview@bresnan.net> wrote in message
news:zsydnVlpvcDd6MjanZ2dnUVZ_oqhnZ2d@bresnan.com. ..
>
> "Picasso" <Picasso@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:47552ae4$0$5298$9a566e8b@news.aliant.net...
>>> But when I wanted a 4WD SUV to do some rough 4 wheeling Ford did not
>>> meet my specifications.
>>> So I bought a Nissan product. A Infinity 2001 QX4. Great machine.
>>> Handles deep rivers and steep stair step rocky terrain. My favorite.
>>> Smooth clearance under side. No hanging items to catch on rocks.
>>
>> Theres no hanging items on fords or chevs
>
> Look at the shocks on rear.

You mean like a current Explorer or Expedition with IRS? The shocks are in a
unit with the coil springs and don't hang down at all. What do you call that
big round thing hanging down in the center of a Infiniti Pathfinder or is it
a Nissan QX4......

Ed

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:13lb9mppmpt4u36@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Warren Weber" <hiview@bresnan.net> wrote in message
> news:zsydnVlpvcDd6MjanZ2dnUVZ_oqhnZ2d@bresnan.com. ..
>>
>> "Picasso" <Picasso@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:47552ae4$0$5298$9a566e8b@news.aliant.net...
>>>> But when I wanted a 4WD SUV to do some rough 4 wheeling Ford did not
>>>> meet my specifications.
>>>> So I bought a Nissan product. A Infinity 2001 QX4. Great machine.
>>>> Handles deep rivers and steep stair step rocky terrain. My favorite.
>>>> Smooth clearance under side. No hanging items to catch on rocks.
>>>
>>> Theres no hanging items on fords or chevs
>>
>> Look at the shocks on rear.
>
> You mean like a current Explorer or Expedition with IRS? The shocks are in
> a unit with the coil springs and don't hang down at all. What do you call
> that big round thing hanging down in the center of a Infiniti Pathfinder
> or is it a Nissan QX4......
>
> Ed

It's called Suspension.

On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 01:19:44 GMT, "F.H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote:

>Tim wrote:
>
>> The people who work for Ford are the same people pushing for Iraq War...
>
>Gee, I didn't know *that*. Is it a union thing?

Yup. Contract demand 479799025B.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography
Lifetime member; Vast Right Wing Conspiricy
Web Site: www.destarr.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 11:30:26 -0500, "Mike hunt" <mikehunt22@lycos.com>
wrote:

>Perhaps but the fact remains as of today the two best selling vehicles are
>trucks not cars and both GM and Ford outsell any import. Not too many years
>ago Ford was the best selling 'brand' in the US and the same pundits were
>predicting Ford Motor Company would outsell GM in the US 'if the trend
>continued,' but you are entitled to you own opinion

Well Ford is going to be #3 in US sales as of 2007 and that isn't my
opinion, it's a fact you can take to the bank. As for Toyota beating
Chevy in 2007, that is a toss-up right now.

So these two pickups are the best sellers, so what? That will be
scant consolation if Ford and GM go under. It is profit that counts
at the end of the day. Either Toyota or Honda could afford to buy
both GM and Ford just to put them out of their misery.

>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:l1f9l3tpo6ip33al11h29c08dhhumlaeua@4ax.com.. .
>> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:37:55 -0500, "Mike hunt" <mikehunt22@lycos.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>DUH! Ford still sells the highest volume vehicle in the US, the F150 that
>>>sells at a rate nearly twice that of the Camry, the best selling car,
>>>because that is what buys want to buy.
>
>>>For every car sold in the US in 2007 there is a truck sold in the US, why
>>>do
>>>you think Nissan and Toyota offer Trucks and Honda even tried to make a
>>>"truck" out of the Accord with the Ridgeline? The second and third best
>>>sellers are the Chevy and Dodge truck, not cars
>>
>>
>> Ford isn't selling as many F150s now that gas seems to be permanently
>> above $3. Sales are down 12% so far this year.
>>
>>
>> F-series 635,520 -12.4%
>> Camry 434,277 + 5.8%
>> Accord 360,976 +10.8%
>>
>> If this trend continues, the F-series could be down to #3 in about
>> three years.
>>
>> Bzzzt. Oh, I'm sorry. The correct answer (based on sales YTD) is:
>>
>> 1. F-Series
>> 2. Silverado
>> 3. Camry
>> 4. Accord
>> 5. Corolla
>> 6. Ram
>>
>> Better luck next time.
>>
>> BTW, Ram was 4th in sales last year behind Camry so your "facts" are
>> at least a year out of date.
>>
>> <http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071202/BUSINESS01/712020646/1002>
>>
>> Hey Mike, care to comment on US Ford sales falling behind Toyota this
>> year? Or the fact that Toyota may pass Chevy to be the best selling
>> brand?
>

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 23:17:11 -0500, "Ed White"
<cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>
>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:l1f9l3tpo6ip33al11h29c08dhhumlaeua@4ax.com.. .
>> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:37:55 -0500, "Mike hunt" <mikehunt22@lycos.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>DUH! Ford still sells the highest volume vehicle in the US, the F150 that
>>>sells at a rate nearly twice that of the Camry, the best selling car,
>>>because that is what buys want to buy.
>>
>> Ford isn't selling as many F150s now that gas seems to be permanently
>> above $3. Sales are down 12% so far this year.
>
>Well the November news was not all bad for Ford. They actually sold more
>vehicle in November of 2007 than November 0f 2006. And in fact, Ford's
>monthly sales were up more in November of this year (compared to last
>November) than were Toyotas (Ford was up 0.6%, Toyota was up 0.3%).

True but... Toyota's basis (what they sold in November 2006) was a
record month, as was November 2007. Ford is up 0.6% over being in the
toilet. Toyota outsold Ford in November by 15,000.

If you look at the year rather than just one month, Toyota is up 4%
and Ford is down 12% versus 2006.

>And apparently the new Tundra is turning into a disaster. Despite piling on
>incentives, Tundra sales can only be described as extremely disappointing
>(sales fell in November, and it is unlikely that Toyota will meet it sales
>goals for the new monster truck). In my opinion, Toyota screwed the pooch on
>this one. They replaced a reasonable sized truck with a ridiculously large
>loser. I do see a few of them around town now, but the only person I know
>that owns one is very disappointed. It sucks gas and rattles like an old
>Dodge.

Good. I am glad to see any of these stupid trucks fail in the
marketplace. Maybe it will influence them and the other automakers to
build more sensible vehicles. I would guess that 90% of the pickups I
see (admittedly it is an urban environment) are being used for jobs
that could be better served by a subcompact.

I think $3 gas is doing a lot of good.

"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:83qbl39p9smo26vk584u8t2ehumpd9p4fr@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 11:30:26 -0500, "Mike hunt" <mikehunt22@lycos.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Perhaps but the fact remains as of today the two best selling vehicles are
>>trucks not cars and both GM and Ford outsell any import. Not too many
>>years
>>ago Ford was the best selling 'brand' in the US and the same pundits were
>>predicting Ford Motor Company would outsell GM in the US 'if the trend
>>continued,' but you are entitled to you own opinion
>
> Well Ford is going to be #3 in US sales as of 2007 and that isn't my
> opinion, it's a fact you can take to the bank. As for Toyota beating
> Chevy in 2007, that is a toss-up right now.

Fact is something already happened. Calling your own prediction as fact?
No it aint no fact, I'm afraid you will be disappointed, because what
already happened may not repeat itself. Because Ford moves too slow, the
Chinese carmakers will beat all of you up again, with cheaper and good gas
cars. Go to Habor Freight, and Walmat and enlighten yourself. The Chinese
investors now are buying American banks. I used to hear you called the
Chinese hyping, man we're 180 degree direction!! Sad sad... I am poorer
and poorer with you, make no mistake, I am trying to wake you up.

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:13lat59kpldif26@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "My Name Is Nobody" <nobody@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:Vme5j.7711$o_6.2647@trnddc08...
>
> >> I suppose the one exception is the "all new" Camry for 2007. But then
> >> Ford had an all new Mustang in 2004, all new 500 in 2005, and all new
> >> Fusion in
> >
> > Come on now Ed, the Mustang was all new for 2005. :-)
>
> You are correct.
>

Whall, you see part of the problem is that most of the auto pundits out
there,
like the people that write the reviews in Car and Driver and such, have not
reconciled to the fact that a basic truck is extremely utilitaritian and
functional.
You can haul plywood, a motorcycle, a couch, move across town, you name
it. If you take the tailgate off of it or put on a tonneau, it becomes a
fairly
fuel efficient single-passenger commuting vehicle - not as good as a sedan
of
course, but if you don't have to commute a great deal, so what.

There's enough of the new car buying public that recognize this that light
and
mid sized trucks are always going to sell well in the US.

Personally I can't stand the look of the things - any pickup truck after
1955
looks like a Mexican/white trailer trashmobile in my book - and I'll never
be
caught dead owning one. I do my hauling with a trailer. But I see the
point
that dealing with hauling out a utility trailer from the shed and linking it
up takes
a lot more time than just walking out to the street and tossing whatever
piece
of crap you need to haul into the truck bed then driving off.

New car buyers generally either buy for image reasons (ie: Prius) or for
functionality. Trucks are extremely functional, it's no wonder they are as
popular as they are. Most of the auto pundits out there are so focused
on the image thing they have lost touch with the functionality end of it.

Ted

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 20:40:25 -0800, "Tim" <Busher@noway.com> wrote:

>
>"Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:83qbl39p9smo26vk584u8t2ehumpd9p4fr@4ax.com.. .
>> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 11:30:26 -0500, "Mike hunt" <mikehunt22@lycos.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Perhaps but the fact remains as of today the two best selling vehicles are
>>>trucks not cars and both GM and Ford outsell any import. Not too many
>>>years
>>>ago Ford was the best selling 'brand' in the US and the same pundits were
>>>predicting Ford Motor Company would outsell GM in the US 'if the trend
>>>continued,' but you are entitled to you own opinion
>>
>> Well Ford is going to be #3 in US sales as of 2007 and that isn't my
>> opinion, it's a fact you can take to the bank. As for Toyota beating
>> Chevy in 2007, that is a toss-up right now.
>
>Fact is something already happened. Calling your own prediction as fact?
>No it aint no fact, I'm afraid you will be disappointed, because what
>already happened may not repeat itself.

Ford is too far behind now to catch up. Baring a miracle which isn't
going to happen, Toyota will outsell Ford in the US in 2007. It's a
done deal.

> Because Ford moves too slow, the
>Chinese carmakers will beat all of you up again, with cheaper and good gas
>cars.

So far that hasn't happened. In fact they haven't sold a single car
here yet. Regardless of what the Chinese do, Ford is #3 and dropping.

> Go to Habor Freight, and Walmat and enlighten yourself.

Familiar with both of these retailers. OK if you need something
cheap. I wouldn't use Harbor Freight tools to work on my go kart.

> The Chinese
>investors now are buying American banks.

Hell, they are buying America thanks to Bush's deficit financing of
the disaster in Iraq.

> I used to hear you called the
>Chinese hyping, man we're 180 degree direction!!

Haven't a clue what you are talking about. If you are referring to
something I said on Usenet, please provide a Google Groups link.

> Sad sad... I am poorer
>and poorer with you, make no mistake, I am trying to wake you up.

I am not poor.

"Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$khgksj$fhk1$1@news.ipinc.net...
> If you take the tailgate off of it or put on a tonneau, it becomes a
> fairly
> fuel efficient single-passenger commuting vehicle - not as good as a sedan
> of
> course, but if you don't have to commute a great deal, so what.

Pickups get better mileage with the tailgate up, and no cover. The bed
creates a vortex behind the cab that maximizes the aerodynamics. With no
tailgate and/or a cover, the vortex cannot form.

---JRE---

On 12/6/07 10:26 AM, in article
4758221d$0$27497$8046368a@newsreader.iphouse.net, "NoOneYouKnow"
<NoOneYouKnow@SpammersSuckBigTime.Com> wrote:

> "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message
> news:newscache$khgksj$fhk1$1@news.ipinc.net...
>> If you take the tailgate off of it or put on a tonneau, it becomes a
>> fairly
>> fuel efficient single-passenger commuting vehicle - not as good as a sedan
>> of
>> course, but if you don't have to commute a great deal, so what.
>
> Pickups get better mileage with the tailgate up, and no cover. The bed
> creates a vortex behind the cab that maximizes the aerodynamics. With no
> tailgate and/or a cover, the vortex cannot form.
>
> ---JRE---
>
>
>
Consumer reports debunked that several years ago. They tested a number of
different pickups with and without tailgates. The results depended on the
truck. Some did better with the tailgates in place, some with them removed.
Its not a given that removing the tailgate improves mileage.