Honda Car Forum

On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 16:46:34 GMT, "Cosmin N." <no@email.com> wrote:

>Bill B. Johnson wrote:
>
>> In article <UFNBb.12148$NN.1797213@news1.news.adelphia.net> , "razingkane"
>> <razingkaneDELETEME@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You did not state what kind of car your driving. I've got a 99 Accord EX
>>>4cyl /manual (150 hp). I live in Colorado. On Interstate 70, the main
>>>east/west interstate through Colorado. I've had no problems keeping up
>>>with cars traveling 70-80 MPH through mountain passes. The highest pass is
>>>the Eisenhower Tunnel at a little over 11,000 feet above sea level. I
>>>routinely drive at over 9000 feet above sea level with no problems. I used
>>>live in California and I drove a 87 CRX 4cyl/manual I've been up Sepulveda,
>>>Cajon pass, Palomar Mountain, Montezuma grade, Big Bear, Lake Tahoe... and I
>>>never had any sort of problems keeping up with traffic. So I don't think
>>>you'll have any problems with Sepulveda pass...no matter what your driving,
>>>although I don't know how the Honda Insight would do but the are automatics
>>>right?
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>Rick
>>>
>>
>>
>> Rick--you are right--I did NOT state the type of car that I was driving. I
>> was driving a 1999 4 cyl auto trans. I found out that both of our cars
>> have a computer chip set so that our cars can't go above 130 mph. I think
>> that it is refered to as a speed limiter or something like that. One
>> poster told me that Honda does this so that people don't blow head gaskets
>> as a result of going over 130 mph for long distances.
>
>My 94 Accord EXR (4Cyl, auto) does not have such a limitation. I pushed
>it all the way to 220km/h, and it still had some acceleration left, but
>I ran out of road. Only an idiot would imagine he can drive the car over
>long distances at such high speeds though, but I guess it happened,
>because the 98-02 4Cyl model does have that limiter at 180km/h. I wonder
>if the 03 still has it...
>
>I'm fairly sure that the 98-02 V6's do not have the limiter either.
>
>Cosmin

I have an '03 and had it to 195 so far, so no limiter at 180 anyway.

Jody

billbjohnson555@nospamhotmail.com (Bill B. Johnson) wrote in
news:billbjohnson555-1112030842320001@pm3-broad-203.snlo.dialup.fix.net:

> Rick--you are right--I did NOT state the type of car that I was
> driving. I was driving a 1999 4 cyl auto trans. I found out that both
> of our cars have a computer chip set so that our cars can't go above
> 130 mph. I think that it is refered to as a speed limiter or something
> like that. One poster told me that Honda does this so that people
> don't blow head gaskets as a result of going over 130 mph for long
> distances.

I'm going to ask a stupid question here...what does vehicle velocity (as
opposed to engine RPM) have to do with a head gasket?

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 03:46:16 GMT, Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>I'm going to ask a stupid question here...what does vehicle velocity (as
>opposed to engine RPM) have to do with a head gasket?

I'm going to guess that it's a matter of running the engine at full
power on a long gear putting maximum stress on everything, which is
tough enough on Indy cars and not really what street cars are designed
to do.


J.

"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
news:045ltv4qgdjuif5ptpqakersk1ebi3lntk@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 03:46:16 GMT, Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >I'm going to ask a stupid question here...what does vehicle velocity (as
> >opposed to engine RPM) have to do with a head gasket?
>
> I'm going to guess that it's a matter of running the engine at full
> power on a long gear putting maximum stress on everything, which is
> tough enough on Indy cars and not really what street cars are designed
> to do.

I'd think the Honda engines would handle it, though. Shoot, the
ubiquitous 2.2L engine that Chrysler put into millions of vehicles back in
the 80's would handle 24 hours straight of average speeds well in excess of
100mph. You won't be able to do that on any roads that I know of, unless
you're just running back and forth on the Autobahn for 24 hours and happen
to have no traffic....

On 12/13/03 8:38, in article ovFCb.4862$5Q6.1317@okepread04, "mrdancer"
<mrdancer@hotmail.dotcom> wrote:

> "JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote in message
> news:045ltv4qgdjuif5ptpqakersk1ebi3lntk@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 03:46:16 GMT, Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>> I'm going to ask a stupid question here...what does vehicle velocity (as
>>> opposed to engine RPM) have to do with a head gasket?
>>
>> I'm going to guess that it's a matter of running the engine at full
>> power on a long gear putting maximum stress on everything, which is
>> tough enough on Indy cars and not really what street cars are designed
>> to do.
>
> I'd think the Honda engines would handle it, though. Shoot, the
> ubiquitous 2.2L engine that Chrysler put into millions of vehicles back in
> the 80's would handle 24 hours straight of average speeds well in excess of
> 100mph. You won't be able to do that on any roads that I know of, unless
> you're just running back and forth on the Autobahn for 24 hours and happen
> to have no traffic....
>
>
Isn't that Chrysler 2.2L the same engine that is always blowing a rich,
black plume of smoke out of nearly every late 80s Caravan still on the road?
Or did they have something different in them?

"Jason Faas" <jpfaasNOSPAM@neb.rr.com> writes:

> <mrdancer@hotmail.dotcom> wrote:
>
>> I'd think the Honda engines would handle it, though. Shoot, the
>> ubiquitous 2.2L engine that Chrysler put into millions of vehicles back
>> in the 80's would handle 24 hours straight of average speeds well in
>> excess of 100mph. You won't be able to do that on any roads that I
>> know of, unless you're just running back and forth on the Autobahn for
>> 24 hours and happen to have no traffic....
>
> Isn't that Chrysler 2.2L the same engine that is always blowing a rich,
> black plume of smoke out of nearly every late 80s Caravan still on the
> road? Or did they have something different in them?

Hey, they're not broken down though, are they?

"Knuckles Muldoon" <mortimersnurd@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jevetvsv35kr6om8ih6mtarugcuu852pf6@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:05:15 GMT, JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net>
> wrote:
>
> >4cyl engine with stick, can it stay up with LA freeway traffic (80mph
> >when clear), including making it up a hill like Sepulveda Pass in
> >decent shape?
> >
> >Thanks.
> >
> >J.
> I have driven two 4 cyl.Accords cross country many times in all terrain
and climate zones and 80 mph in LA would be a snap for a stick as its at sea
level for the most part.
`86 Accord
`92Accord
ed/ontario

"Knuckles Muldoon" <mortimersnurd@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8s9jtv45scjohl42mp14u975q0pa1eld21@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 16:46:34 GMT, "Cosmin N." <no@email.com> wrote:
>
> >Bill B. Johnson wrote:
> >
> >> In article <UFNBb.12148$NN.1797213@news1.news.adelphia.net> ,
"razingkane"
> >> <razingkaneDELETEME@adelphia.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>You did not state what kind of car your driving. I've got a 99 Accord
EX
> >>>4cyl /manual (150 hp). I live in Colorado. On Interstate 70, the main
> >>>east/west interstate through Colorado. I've had no problems keeping
up
> >>>with cars traveling 70-80 MPH through mountain passes. The highest
pass is
> >>>the Eisenhower Tunnel at a little over 11,000 feet above sea level. I
> >>>routinely drive at over 9000 feet above sea level with no problems. I
used
> >>>live in California and I drove a 87 CRX 4cyl/manual I've been up
Sepulveda,
> >>>Cajon pass, Palomar Mountain, Montezuma grade, Big Bear, Lake Tahoe...
and I
> >>>never had any sort of problems keeping up with traffic. So I don't
think
> >>>you'll have any problems with Sepulveda pass...no matter what your
driving,
> >>>although I don't know how the Honda Insight would do but the are
automatics
> >>>right?
> >>>
> >>>Cheers,
> >>>
> >>>Rick
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Rick--you are right--I did NOT state the type of car that I was
driving. I
> >> was driving a 1999 4 cyl auto trans. I found out that both of our cars
> >> have a computer chip set so that our cars can't go above 130 mph. I
think
> >> that it is refered to as a speed limiter or something like that. One
> >> poster told me that Honda does this so that people don't blow head
gaskets
> >> as a result of going over 130 mph for long distances.
> >
> >My 94 Accord EXR (4Cyl, auto) does not have such a limitation. I pushed
> >it all the way to 220km/h, and it still had some acceleration left, but
> >I ran out of road. Only an idiot would imagine he can drive the car over
> >long distances at such high speeds though, but I guess it happened,
> >because the 98-02 4Cyl model does have that limiter at 180km/h. I wonder
> >if the 03 still has it...
> >
I set the cruise on my `92 at 160kph (80mph) when travelling cross country
in the States on the Interstate / and that is for hours ata time .
ed/ontario

On 12/14/03 18:36, in article qk7Db.127868$PD3.5845395@nnrp1.uunet.ca,
"xxxxxxxx" <carpe_diem@netrover.com> wrote:


>>>
> I set the cruise on my `92 at 160kph (80mph) when travelling cross country
> in the States on the Interstate / and that is for hours ata time .
> ed/ontario
>
>
160kph is more like 100 mph (99.2). A little more of a risk for tires and
tickets.

Jason