Car Enthusiast Club [Now Motorcycle friendly!] - First thread to 150k! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Bitter]

23 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

define "long"

 

lol

How far is it between dealers?

[theninja35]

2 hours ago, iDeFecZx said:

You definitely wouldnt want to take a Noble on a long road trip

My neighbor has a Noble and based on the fact it's never moved, I guess you wouldn't want to take a Noble on any trip.

[Fast_N_Curious]

7 hours ago, Bitter said:

Yeah and my 2000 Celica is a fast back.

Hey, if you have a problem with the "grand touring" classification take it up with FIA. They were the ones that officially certified the car for use for racing in the grand tourer class as a true production car. I put a lot more weight in their decision to approve it than I do your opinion to the contrary. 

 

In other words, the GTO met the standards and specifications put in place by FIA for the grand tourer class of racing. That means it's a GTO in every sense of the word, in other words, it's legit. 

 

 

3 hours ago, IPD said:

It would never have been a big deal at all--except that Pontiac's bastard is the reason why Mitsubishi was unable to call the GTO a GTO in the USA.  It's literally that everywhere else in the world.  And the Mitsubishi is actually a true GTO--and was raced as such.

It wasn't that they were unable to call the GTO a GTO in the USA, it was that they paid respect to the OG, the Pontiac GTO and didn't want to step on anyone's toes. In other words, Mitsubishi had enough respect for the Pontiac GTO, that they avoided any friction by naming it something else in the US market. As I am sure you are aware, the Mitsubishi GTO came along much later than the Pontiac GTO. It would have been a little retarded to name it the same as the original muscle car which started everything. 

 

 

5 hours ago, DANK_AS_gay said:

That first line is wrong in that image. The Mustang was incredibly cheap ($20,000 today with the v6, I forget when they released the i-4 config). That's what popularised muscle cars, the allure of a cheap, cool car that anyone could have. Sure they existed before the Mustang, but they weren't easily accessible, similar to how cars existed before the Model T, but they weren't popularized until the Model T. The Pontiac was GM sh!tting themselves seeing the success of the Mustang. The success being 318,000 Mustangs sold in one year (100,000 in under 3 months). The dealerships were fighting over pre-orders lol. Sounds a lot like today.

Mustang was really more of a pony car than anything else... so no, the first line is not wrong. You can find dozens of publications that put forth the same information, see below... the GTO was the OG not the mustang.

 

[Fast_N_Curious]

3 hours ago, IPD said:

It would never have been a big deal at all--except that Pontiac's bastard is the reason why Mitsubishi was unable to call the GTO a GTO in the USA.  It's literally that everywhere else in the world.  And the Mitsubishi is actually a true GTO--and was raced as such.

 

P.S.

Muscle-Car and Grand-Touring do not go hand in hand.  The Viper is a muscle car, and no sane person would ever take it on road trips (muscle-car and pony-car are at best nebulous terms--and vary based on whim of whoever is talking).  Moreover, "the new generation" is most definitely relevant to the discussion; it proves that the fanbois have been--and still are--wrong.  But sure, keep acting like you can't help yourself and have to keep posting random wiki pages to support your argument.

 

And don't even get me started on the literal definition of GTO.  If literal nomenclature is all that matters, I can bring up other countless examples where the exceptions keep disproving the rule.  Now please, post up vids if you racing your Pontiac goat at the 'ring.

I would refer you to FIA to figure out why they certified the Pontiac GTO as an official grand touring race car if it's not. LOL

 

Again, it's just a name people. When you create something, you can name it. If you still have a problem with what Pontiac did with the naming convention, I'd recommend you file a complaint...

 

 

ps. I hate the new GTO but this discussion is centered on the original, so lets not get distracted by the later generations at this time. 

[Bitter]

12 minutes ago, Fast_N_Curious said:

Hey, if you have a problem with the "grand touring" classification take it up with FIA. They were the ones that officially certified the car for use for racing in the grand tourer class as a true production car. I put a lot more weight in their decision to approve it than I do your opinion to the contrary. 

 

In other words, the GTO met the standards and specifications put in place by FIA for the grand tourer class of racing. That means it's a GTO in every sense of the word, in other words, it's legit. 

 

 

It wasn't that they were unable to call the GTO a GTO in the USA, it was that they paid respect to the OG, the Pontiac GTO and didn't want to step on anyone's toes. In other words, Mitsubishi had enough respect for the Pontiac GTO, that they avoided any friction by naming it something else in the US market. As I am sure you are aware, the Mitsubishi GTO came along much later than the Pontiac GTO. It would have been a little retarded to name it the same as the original muscle car which started everything. 

 

 

Mustang was really more of a pony car than anything else... so no, the first line is not wrong. You can find dozens of publications that put forth the same information, see below... the GTO was the OG not the mustang.

 

According to Wikipedia.....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fastback Actually a lot of cars are fastbacks. Do we call them that? No we do not because we're not all trapped in pedantry. American muscle cars are not 'grand tourers' except on paper and in America. In Europe where the concept was started, honed, and defined they would not be accepted as such. Same reason you don't see Dodge Challengers competing in drift competitions in Japan I would assume. There's a certain line defined by region which crossing is a 'faux pas' like one would experience taking a 70's Muscle Car to a FIA event in the GTO class. Just because someone did it doesn't mean it was widely accepted as an acceptable practice. I know people who dirt rally FWD cars, there's even a class for them....but it's not really where you want to be. 

[Fast_N_Curious]

5 hours ago, DANK_AS_gay said:

Is this for the Yamaha tuned Ford SVT v6?

Its for this car:

 

 

More information can be found here:

Looking Back at the Ford Taurus SHO: America's Greatest Sleeper? | DrivingLine

[DANK_AS_gay]

28 minutes ago, Fast_N_Curious said:

Hey, if you have a problem with the "grand touring" classification take it up with FIA. They were the ones that officially certified the car for use for racing in the grand tourer class as a true production car. I put a lot more weight in their decision to approve it than I do your opinion to the contrary. 

 

In other words, the GTO met the standards and specifications put in place by FIA for the grand tourer class of racing. That means it's a GTO in every sense of the word, in other words, it's legit. 

 

 

It wasn't that they were unable to call the GTO a GTO in the USA, it was that they paid respect to the OG, the Pontiac GTO and didn't want to step on anyone's toes. In other words, Mitsubishi had enough respect for the Pontiac GTO, that they avoided any friction by naming it something else in the US market. As I am sure you are aware, the Mitsubishi GTO came along much later than the Pontiac GTO. It would have been a little retarded to name it the same as the original muscle car which started everything. 

 

 

Mustang was really more of a pony car than anything else... so no, the first line is not wrong. You can find dozens of publications that put forth the same information, see below... the GTO was the OG not the mustang.

 

That image doesn't talk about the GTO... 1 for 2, it says the Mustang wasn't a muscle car, but does not say the GTO was. Let alone the ORIGINAL muscle car. 

[AlwaysFSX]

1 hour ago, Bitter said:

How far is it between dealers?

hah

[Fast_N_Curious]

42 minutes ago, DANK_AS_gay said:

That image doesn't talk about the GTO... 1 for 2, it says the Mustang wasn't a muscle car, but does not say the GTO was. Let alone the ORIGINAL muscle car. 

Sorry, meant to include this image for reference to the GTO...

 

[iDeFecZx]

2 hours ago, AlwaysFSX said:

define "long"

 

lol

Anything more than an hour in one of those

Theres nothing "GT" about them, theyre designed to be quick round a track, not comfortable on a roadtrip 

[iDeFecZx]

2 hours ago, Bitter said:

How far is it between dealers?

Depends how far you live from the warehouse theyre built in 

[Fast_N_Curious]

6 hours ago, vetali said:

Welcome to the thread! Arguing and debating pointless bullshit just to disagree seems to be the threads theme in modern times.

But it's not pointless. Hate to belabor the point, but one guy was actually trying to say the GTO was not really a significant automobile in terms of muscle car history here in the United States. The neurotic naming argument aside, I cannot let an error like that go on unchecked/unpunished. Otherwise, thank you for the welcome. 

[Bitter]

So should I bring up the Pontiac LeMans? I'm sure that was raced at the 24hrs of LeMans in order to earn that title. 

[Fast_N_Curious]

12 minutes ago, Bitter said:

So should I bring up the Pontiac LeMans? I'm sure that was raced at the 24hrs of LeMans in order to earn that title. 

No, I will finish your thought with a statement.

 

 GTO will always hold more value and recognition than any Lemans.

[bcredeur97]

Disclaimer: I’m still a newbie/idiot when it comes to refrigeration.

 

Just saw the news about the US phasing out HFC’s (RIP r134a) 
 

So when will r-1234yf actually be on store shelves to fill old cars with? I still don’t see it anywhere.
 

Also I see that while it does work in r134a systems; it does perform anywhere from 5-25% worse without any optimizations at least in the research papers I looked at. So that’s pretty sad  

[vetali]

20 minutes ago, bcredeur97 said:

Disclaimer: I’m still a newbie/idiot when it comes to refrigeration.

 

Just saw the news about the US phasing out HFC’s (RIP r134a) 
 

So when will r-1234yf actually be on store shelves to fill old cars with? I still don’t see it anywhere.
 

Also I see that while it does work in r134a systems; it does perform anywhere from 5-25% worse without any optimizations at least in the research papers I looked at. So that’s pretty sad  

They banned 134a counter sales here in Washington. Its been great this year. Tons of AC work for us.

 

I don't know if there ever will be 1234yf over the counter sales. You still need to be AC certified to buy it here. Plus it would be like 150 dollars for .5kg.

 

I personally don't advise using it in 134a systems. The oil is different. Still change out tons of civic condensers due to them using 134a condensers and they corrode.

[Bitter]

Do not put 1234yf in 134a systems.

https://www.originalair.com/never-convert-r12124a-systems-to-1234yf-heres-why

It's illegal to do so and potentially a fire hazard.

[Beerzerker]

14 hours ago, DANK_AS_gay said:

That first line is wrong in that image. The Mustang was incredibly cheap ($20,000 today with the v6, I forget when they released the i-4 config). That's what popularised muscle cars, the allure of a cheap, cool car that anyone could have. Sure they existed before the Mustang, but they weren't easily accessible, similar to how cars existed before the Model T, but they weren't popularized until the Model T. The Pontiac was GM sh!tting themselves seeing the success of the Mustang. The success being 318,000 Mustangs sold in one year (100,000 in under 3 months). The dealerships were fighting over pre-orders lol. Sounds a lot like today.

Yes, the Pontiac GTO existed before the Mustang was introduced, GM/Pontiac started production on Sept 1 1963.
1964 Pontiac GTO: The Definitive Resource Guide

The Mustang's own production beginning on March 9 1964.
Ford Mustang - Wikipedia

The concept of the Mustang at that time in itself wasn't new, in fact Ford had done a concept car of a Mustang at least 2 years earlier in 1962 (Mustang I) with a follow up in 63 (Mustang II concept car) that was more like but still not the same as the "Official" release in 64.
The earlier concepts and development of the "Official" release were called the "T-5" and a few of those (Production models) with the T-5 name did get out the door and were shipped overseas (Germany/Europe) but here they were all called Mustang.
I know that as fact because there is a guy not too far from here that has a T-5 and that's where it came from (Germany/Europe).
History of the Ford T5 (Mustang) | Mustang Maniac

For some reason I thought I saw it said (And I bolded it above) the GTO was conceived and created in response to the Mustang but that's not possible, being the GTO existed and was in production/sold before the Mustang. 
Said production dates of each model (GTO - Sept 36) /// (Mustang - March 64)  confirming this as fact.

Fun Fact:
You'd think so and all along the Mustang always had the same basic interior styling/seating right?
You'd be wrong.

In it's very first year of production, due to the insane demand for the little cars a few early Mustangs were made and sold with..... A bench seat!
That was due to suppliers not being able to keep up with the demand for them when demand took off and suppliers of these seats had trouble at first supplying the bucket seats they were supposed to have.
Instead of holding up production they simply used what was readily available in quantity (Bench seats) and sent them out the door until the suppliers caught up.

Yes, I've even seen one in person with the car's original papers proving it was indeed a factory bench-seated Mustang, said example being a standard coupe model with a standard inline 170 CID 6 cylinder engine.

[AlwaysFSX]

7 hours ago, iDeFecZx said:

Anything more than an hour in one of those

Theres nothing "GT" about them, theyre designed to be quick round a track, not comfortable on a roadtrip 

drat

[bcredeur97]

11 minutes ago, Bitter said:

Do not put 1234yf in 134a systems.

https://www.originalair.com/never-convert-r12124a-systems-to-1234yf-heres-why

It's illegal to do so and potentially a fire hazard.

Ah. I had read it being illegal to put 134a in a 1234yf system didn’t realize the other way around was also illegal.

 

thing is there should be more incentive to sell this OTC because it’s less harmful to the environment, just more flammable. Why wasn’t this rushed to store shelves? @vetali

 

not that anyone is doing much ac work outside of dealerships for 1234yf yet since it’s still pretty new.

 

What will people fill their 134a cars with when they can’t buy it? I don’t think propane is an option like it was for r22 cars. 
 

not that you should fill a system with propane since it’s so flammable. But at least there was some way to make it work.

[Beerzerker]

One question would be if you'd need a license to buy it.
Everyone knows for example freon types like R12, R22 and so on requires you to have one, is the new stuff going to require it as well?
I know right now 134A doesn't but as you know rules change all the time - You may even be required at some point to have one to even get 134A and that would just suck if it happens.

[vetali]

17 minutes ago, bcredeur97 said:

Ah. I had read it being illegal to put 134a in a 1234yf system didn’t realize the other way around was also illegal.

 

thing is there should be more incentive to sell this OTC because it’s less harmful to the environment, just more flammable. Why wasn’t this rushed to store shelves? @vetali

 

not that anyone is doing much ac work outside of dealerships for 1234yf yet since it’s still pretty new.

 

What will people fill their 134a cars with when they can’t buy it? I don’t think propane is an option like it was for r22 cars. 
 

not that you should fill a system with propane since it’s so flammable. But at least there was some way to make it work.

I actually looked it up, you can buy 1234yf on amazon, though it says it cannot be delivered to my address.

 

Gonna be interesting when 134a is actually banned (I haven't looked to see if its being banned from shops yet). Its not like R12 and R22 where AC was an option. 134a was when AC became standard on vehicles and was used for a long time.

[Beerzerker]

It hasn't been banned yet because you can still get it from your local parts stores - I bought some just last week.

The thing with 1234yf being so new ATM means availability is limited right now but of course that's gonna change quickly. It's also more expensive per ounce so right now 134A is more affordable.

Same basic thing about home systems, there are new regs coming into effect as of Jan 1 2023 forcing a new type of central air/AC system to be sold with a new freon type, with these costing way more too. Even setups being sold now that's not of the "New" freon spec cannot be sold or installed at that time, only repairs and parts can be and you can bet that's not gonna last forever.

My dad-in-law just had a new system installed in his home last month and it was about $14,000 total and the new ones to come will be at least 30-40% higher in total cost according to the installer. 
He didn't get the high-end setup either, more like mid-tier because of the expense of it with what's available today so based on that, look for such with a typical home anywhere to be at least $20,000+ or higher just to have central air/AC, depending on where you are of course.
 

[DANK_AS_gay]

I always thought the higher octane fuel was a waste of money, until yesterday/today. I put 93 in my poor HR-V, and the difference brings a tear to my eye. In a car starving for low end torque, ANY power increasement is noticeable, and I'm pretty sure my car hadn't had anything but 87 in it since it was produced. I love this. I don't have to floor the thing to get it to go 40 (not an exaggeration). The websites that talk about the 0-60 claim 7 seconds... The fastest I got was 10. I'll have to retest with the higher octane, but I expect 9.5-9 secs. Nothin' crazy, but a noticeable improvement. 

Also...

https://www.turbokits.com/tsi-extreme-turbo-kit-hc2504e.html

only $4k... But it includes everything except fuel injectors, new fuel rail and fuel pump.

[JoaoPRSousa]

20 minutes ago, DANK_AS_gay said:

Also...

https://www.turbokits.com/tsi-extreme-turbo-kit-hc2504e.html

only $4k... But it includes everything except fuel injectors, new fuel rail and fuel pump.

 

No.