You went 3,000 miles in 5 days. 600 a day, if you average 55 mph that's over
10 hours a day in the car driving. If you held a steady 110 mph then it is
only 27 hours. You drove 1/8 of the way around the earth going to NC!


From PA, it's 749 miles to the beach house. But we didn't drive from
PA, we only stopped there to pick up my father. We also stopped off at
a few places in virginia. We were also gone from the 16th - 24th. Is
that five days? Good lord, Bob. Do better, please. BTW, I drove there
in 11 hours at night so Thomas could sleep through the trip. Thank god
for Sirius radio. It's a shame you admitted that such things are too
much for your limited focus. It really makes long drives nicer.


You paid more than 28K.

Well, if you really believe that than I'm even more certain we did
great on the price!


GPS, cell phone, radio, nagging wife = distractions and dangers to driving.

Yes, to poor drivers who can't focus. You should remove everything.


1/8th the distance around the earth! In crossing 5 states!


That sounds like you might have a clue until you realize that two way
is over 2K easily.


That's pretty much how we felt when we test drove the newest one.

You got that right.

Toyota will increase power for 2008.


Same name, same manufacturer, same engineers, same assembly plant,
commonality in parts

Nope...wrong again (and again and again), Bob. The new Sedona shares no
parts with the old Sedona, not even the switches or trim. And the
design team and build is now Hyundai. In fact it's built side by side
with the Entourage from Hyundai. It's the same van. The old Sedona was
Kia's 100%. So if you agree with JD Powers that the Hyundai is the most
improved car line in history, it's no wonder that the Sedona is getting
reviewed as the best minivan ever.


Right, all they have to do is cut the price and run KIA out.

Cutting the price still won't match Kia's better engine, nicer cabin
and more features. That's American car-maker thinking and you can bet
Toyota is smarter than that. The new Sienna will be improved to match
the Sedona.

Toyota is a great company and I expect them to raise the bar yet again
and soon.


RB
35s5
NY

Capt. Rob wrote:
You went 3,000 miles in 5 days. 600 a day, if you average 55 mph that's over
10 hours a day in the car driving. If you held a steady 110 mph then it is
only 27 hours. You drove 1/8 of the way around the earth going to NC!


From PA, it's 749 miles to the beach house. But we didn't drive from
PA, we only stopped there to pick up my father. We also stopped off at
a few places in virginia. We were also gone from the 16th - 24th. Is
that five days? Good lord, Bob. Do better, please. BTW, I drove there
in 11 hours at night so Thomas could sleep through the trip. Thank god
for Sirius radio. It's a shame you admitted that such things are too
much for your limited focus. It really makes long drives nicer.


You paid more than 28K.

Well, if you really believe that than I'm even more certain we did
great on the price!


GPS, cell phone, radio, nagging wife = distractions and dangers to driving.

Yes, to poor drivers who can't focus. You should remove everything.


1/8th the distance around the earth! In crossing 5 states!


That sounds like you might have a clue until you realize that two way
is over 2K easily.


That's pretty much how we felt when we test drove the newest one.

You got that right.

Toyota will increase power for 2008.


Same name, same manufacturer, same engineers, same assembly plant,
commonality in parts

Nope...wrong again (and again and again), Bob. The new Sedona shares no
parts with the old Sedona, not even the switches or trim. And the
design team and build is now Hyundai. In fact it's built side by side
with the Entourage from Hyundai. It's the same van. The old Sedona was
Kia's 100%. So if you agree with JD Powers that the Hyundai is the most
improved car line in history, it's no wonder that the Sedona is getting
reviewed as the best minivan ever.


Right, all they have to do is cut the price and run KIA out.

Cutting the price still won't match Kia's better engine, nicer cabin
and more features. That's American car-maker thinking and you can bet
Toyota is smarter than that. The new Sienna will be improved to match
the Sedona.

Toyota is a great company and I expect them to raise the bar yet again
and soon.


RB
35s5
NY

My old Nissan truck with 300,000 miles has you beat all to hell. It
can go anywhere, speedo is broke so I dont worry about goin fast, it
hauls all my sailin crap and I dont worry about the spilled used oil
from my boats diesel in back. I can go thu the woods on any rutted
path bouncin offa trees and I dont worry about scratches. It hasnt had
AC in 10 years so it helps me get used to the heat here. It has a
simple engine cuz all the pollution crap rusted away and fell off.
You have a stereo in your veeeehicle? My gawd, thats for girls and
wine sippin wimps. You gotta be able to lissen to all the machines
noises to tell what its doing. Who needs a built in movie system? My
kids take turns countin all the stuff on my truck that doesnt work. My
daughter is convinced that when it finally dies (although I believe in
automotive immoratlity) that it will go to Old Truck Paradise on Dog
Island where it'll share stories of its adventures with all the other
old trucks there slowly being covered with vines and drifting dunes.
If that ever happens, I'll rig up a player to a small solar cell and
battery to randomely serenade the old trucks with Neil Young's "Long
May You Run"

On 26 Jun 2006 11:41:25 -0700, wrote:


My old Nissan truck with 300,000 miles has you beat all to hell. It
can go anywhere, speedo is broke so I dont worry about goin fast, it
hauls all my sailin crap and I dont worry about the spilled used oil
from my boats diesel in back. I can go thu the woods on any rutted
path bouncin offa trees and I dont worry about scratches. It hasnt had
AC in 10 years so it helps me get used to the heat here. It has a
simple engine cuz all the pollution crap rusted away and fell off.
You have a stereo in your veeeehicle? My gawd, thats for girls and
wine sippin wimps. You gotta be able to lissen to all the machines
noises to tell what its doing. Who needs a built in movie system? My
kids take turns countin all the stuff on my truck that doesnt work. My
daughter is convinced that when it finally dies (although I believe in
automotive immoratlity) that it will go to Old Truck Paradise on Dog
Island where it'll share stories of its adventures with all the other
old trucks there slowly being covered with vines and drifting dunes.
If that ever happens, I'll rig up a player to a small solar cell and
battery to randomely serenade the old trucks with Neil Young's "Long
May You Run"


Brings a tear to my eye. My 1976 Datsun (that was Nissan before they
figured out it was also a silly looking dog in English) Pickup truck
finally died several years back. I don't know how many miles, speedo
broke, I never fixed it. Never had air. It had an early and feeble
attempt at emission control but I left it all off when I changed a
head gasket and the truck was much more efficient without it. Japs
actually thought that people in the U. S. wanted trucks that could
haul so they geared them very low and it would go anywhere and pull
anything.

Only got rid of it because stuff started rusting off. Minor things
like hood hinge brackets and such. For me it was an excuse to buy a
welding machine, however, better half convinced me the welding machine
was worth more than the truck. Sold it to a kid who roached it out
within six months. I miss it. Wish I had bought that welding
machine.

Steereo. Are you kidding me. There is no sound system in the world
that you would be able to hear when that low geared dude was pitching
about 3.5K RPM just to cruise at 65.

Seems like I paid about $2800 for it brand new. Sold it for $600.
Let's see that would be about eighty bucks a year depreciation
expense.

Frank

If that ever happens, I'll rig up a player to a small solar cell and
battery to randomely serenade the old trucks with Neil Young's "Long
May You Run"


Get the Emmylou Harris version


Frank Boettcher wrote:
Brings a tear to my eye. My 1976 Datsun (that was Nissan before they
figured out it was also a silly looking dog in English) Pickup truck
finally died several years back.

Those were great little trucks


.... It had an early and feeble
attempt at emission control but I left it all off when I changed a
head gasket and the truck was much more efficient without it.

Doubt it very seriously... you probably had a clogged line
or vacuum leak long before you took it all off. Those
systems were actually quite good when working properly. They
were a bit on the fragile side though.



Seems like I paid about $2800 for it brand new. Sold it for $600.
Let's see that would be about eighty bucks a year depreciation
expense.


It works out to be a great deal if you break it down by
ton/miles per $. Those things got pretty good gas mileage too.

DSK

On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:44:22 -0400, DSK wrote:




.... It had an early and feeble
attempt at emission control but I left it all off when I changed a
head gasket and the truck was much more efficient without it.

Doubt it very seriously... you probably had a clogged line
or vacuum leak long before you took it all off. Those
systems were actually quite good when working properly. They
were a bit on the fragile side though.


I don't know. It had the pre catcon system that injected air into the
exhaust manifold just south of the exhaust valves, looking for a post
cylinder burn. Had a air pump that was belted off the crank pulley.

That system seemed to rely partially on a retardation or dwell of the
throttle dump. When you took your foot off the pedal it would not
immediately drop but slowly come down. Made it a little tricky to
shift a manual. Additionally, it had a tendency to backfire
excessively on deceleration. All of this from day one. Others
complained of burned exhaust valves

When I took it off (or more accurately didn't put it back on when I
chaged the head gasket and did a valve job), it ran so much smoother.
Immediate throttle dump, no more backfiring and no hesitation. Gas
mileage increased by about 5 percent. So it ran more efficiently as I
stated, but I can't comment on the relative emission effectivity.

They didn't use that system for very long.

Frank

.... It had an early and feeble
attempt at emission control but I left it all off when I changed a
head gasket and the truck was much more efficient without it.

Doubt it very seriously... you probably had a clogged line
or vacuum leak long before you took it all off. Those
systems were actually quite good when working properly. They
were a bit on the fragile side though.



Frank Boettcher wrote:
I don't know. It had the pre catcon system that injected air into the
exhaust manifold just south of the exhaust valves, looking for a post
cylinder burn. Had a air pump that was belted off the crank pulley.


This was a '78? Our shop truck was a few years newer but I
figured the system would be somewhat the same.

That system seemed to rely partially on a retardation or dwell of the
throttle dump. When you took your foot off the pedal it would not
immediately drop but slowly come down.

That doesn't sound good. In fact, if it was doing this from
day one, I wonder if yours was not put together right.
Certainly post-combustion air injection shouldn't have this
effect.

.... Made it a little tricky to
shift a manual.

I bet so!

... Additionally, it had a tendency to backfire
excessively on deceleration. All of this from day one. Others
complained of burned exhaust valves


Sounds like a bad system, either some engineering oversight
or poor QA.


When I took it off (or more accurately didn't put it back on when I
chaged the head gasket and did a valve job), it ran so much smoother.
Immediate throttle dump, no more backfiring and no hesitation. Gas
mileage increased by about 5 percent. So it ran more efficiently as I
stated, but I can't comment on the relative emission effectivity.

They didn't use that system for very long.


Obviously I can't claim to be an expert on all
pre-electronic emission control systems, but as a combustion
control technician I've seen all sorts of hacked-up BS
excuses for post-consumer systems... none of them have ever
worked for s&*#. The real problem most of the time is poor
maintenance, for example the vacuum regulated systems on
many cars (late 1970s thur the 1980s) worked quite well...
*if* the hoses weren't crimped or some part of it
disconnected or leaky. Then of course, the people who worked
on them "informally" were usually not sophisticated
mechanics anyway, and tended to regard all this new-fangled
complex stuff as junk... indirectly sabotaging the system
and thus justifying their prejudices... kind of like the way
some sailors are...

Nowadays, CO and O2 sensors are a lot better than they used
to be, combustion control can be very precise & reliable
which improves fuel economy and engine longevity. Big
plusses! I still dislike all that electronic crap hooked up
to my engine though

Regards
Doug King

On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:47:31 -0400, DSK wrote:

.... It had an early and feeble
attempt at emission control but I left it all off when I changed a
head gasket and the truck was much more efficient without it.

Doubt it very seriously... you probably had a clogged line
or vacuum leak long before you took it all off. Those
systems were actually quite good when working properly. They
were a bit on the fragile side though.



Frank Boettcher wrote:
I don't know. It had the pre catcon system that injected air into the
exhaust manifold just south of the exhaust valves, looking for a post
cylinder burn. Had a air pump that was belted off the crank pulley.


This was a '78? Our shop truck was a few years newer but I
figured the system would be somewhat the same.

'76. Maybe a beta model?


That system seemed to rely partially on a retardation or dwell of the
throttle dump. When you took your foot off the pedal it would not
immediately drop but slowly come down.

That doesn't sound good. In fact, if it was doing this from
day one, I wonder if yours was not put together right.
Certainly post-combustion air injection shouldn't have this
effect.

They all did it, or at least my sample, I bought mine as part of a
five vehicle fleet. My Father in Law was buying four for his business
and I tacked one on for myself to get his fleet price. His fleet
service trucks were identical to mine in the characteristic I've
described.

.... Made it a little tricky to
shift a manual.

I bet so!

... Additionally, it had a tendency to backfire
excessively on deceleration. All of this from day one. Others
complained of burned exhaust valves


Sounds like a bad system, either some engineering oversight
or poor QA.


When I took it off (or more accurately didn't put it back on when I
chaged the head gasket and did a valve job), it ran so much smoother.
Immediate throttle dump, no more backfiring and no hesitation. Gas
mileage increased by about 5 percent. So it ran more efficiently as I
stated, but I can't comment on the relative emission effectivity.

They didn't use that system for very long.


Obviously I can't claim to be an expert on all
pre-electronic emission control systems, but as a combustion
control technician I've seen all sorts of hacked-up BS
excuses for post-consumer systems... none of them have ever
worked for s&*#. The real problem most of the time is poor
maintenance, for example the vacuum regulated systems on
many cars (late 1970s thur the 1980s) worked quite well...
*if* the hoses weren't crimped or some part of it
disconnected or leaky. Then of course, the people who worked
on them "informally" were usually not sophisticated
mechanics anyway, and tended to regard all this new-fangled
complex stuff as junk... indirectly sabotaging the system
and thus justifying their prejudices... kind of like the way
some sailors are...

Nowadays, CO and O2 sensors are a lot better than they used
to be, combustion control can be very precise & reliable
which improves fuel economy and engine longevity. Big
plusses! I still dislike all that electronic crap hooked up
to my engine though

Regards
Doug King