Accord 2008 and fuel octane

#21

jim beam wrote:

Quote:

Tony Harding wrote:
jim beam wrote:
shawn wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:17:56 -0800, jim beam
spamvortex (AT) bad (DOT) example.net> wrote:

Tony Harding wrote:
jim beam wrote:
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
In article <F5mdnejsVMXWIObanZ2dnUVZ_o3inZ2d (AT) speakeasy (DOT) net>,
jim beam <spamvortex (AT) bad (DOT) example.net> wrote:

There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere.

driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda.
What kind of "give"?

pretty much everything - cheaper glass, cheaper paint, cheaper
metal, cheaper design, worse tolerances, lower standards across
the board.
In what way has Honda lowered standards?
macpherson strut suspension!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is that a negative or a positive?

negative.

Just how bad can they be? Porsche has used McPherson struts from the
beginning (1963) on their 911 series (including the '69 911 I owned
years ago) and continue to use them in 2008 models.

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/12/2008-porsche-911-gt2-introduction-suspension-technology/

http://www.allautoreviews.com/auto_reviews/porsche/porsche-911-turbo.htm

they're great for old farts that drive on freeways.

You did notice the link for the 2008 911 Turbo, didn't you?

Quote:

but in terms of
engineering fact, they don't keep the maximum contact patch on the road
of both the steering wheels at all angles. that means they're not as
good in the twisties. it's a geometry thing - turn the wheels to full
lock and see how much tire is on the road on the inside tire - not much.
the compromise compensation is wider tires, but that's not perfect for
normal road use because they suck more gas and aquaplane more in the
wet. wishbones allow better geometry but with a significantly higher
component count. that means they cost a lot more, hence the move away.

don't have the link handy, but somewhere on the web, there's data on the
cornering g-force produced by a number of late 80's/early 90's hot
hatches, rx7, gti, etc. the honda crx, with 4-wheel wishbones and the
skinniest tires, can produce the highest g-force, hence the best
cornering ability of the lot.

So a CR-V can out corner a Porsche? My money's on the P-wagon.

#22

jim beam wrote:

<snip>

Quote:

So a CR-V can out corner a Porsche? My money's on the P-wagon.

did you notice the part where i said "the compromise compensation is
wider tires"? how much wider are the tires on the porsche vs. the cr-v?
or any honda come to that. [since you're into reviews, you may also
want to compare the head-to-heads of the honda s2000 vs. the boxter.]

Do you have a link?

#23

On Jan 16, 3:33 am, Tony Harding <ToH... (AT) nowhere (DOT) org> wrote:

Quote:

jim beam wrote:

snip

So a CR-V can out corner a Porsche? My money's on the P-wagon.

did you notice the part where i said "the compromise compensation is
wider tires"? how much wider are the tires on the porsche vs. the cr-v?
or any honda come to that. [since you're into reviews, you may also
want to compare the head-to-heads of the honda s2000 vs. the boxter.]

Do you have a link?

Here's a link to a "strut-encumbered" Civic TypeR beating a S2000 at
the track.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=123912

(Rumor mill (Temple of VTEC) says the S2000 is about to go out of
production.)

BMWs also carry a strut suspension.

Perhaps it's fair to say that suspension engineering and
implementation details play a significant role in delivered
performance.

My biggest gripe regarding strut vs wishbone front suspension is the
taller bodywork and loss of visibility (of the road right in front of
the car) with struts. IMHO, the new Civic is simply awful in this
regard.

#24

ACAR wrote:

Quote:

On Jan 16, 3:33 am, Tony Harding <ToH... (AT) nowhere (DOT) org> wrote:
jim beam wrote:

snip

So a CR-V can out corner a Porsche? My money's on the P-wagon.

did you notice the part where i said "the compromise compensation is
wider tires"? how much wider are the tires on the porsche vs. the cr-v?
or any honda come to that. [since you're into reviews, you may also
want to compare the head-to-heads of the honda s2000 vs. the boxter.]
Do you have a link?

Here's a link to a "strut-encumbered" Civic TypeR beating a S2000 at
the track.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=123912

(Rumor mill (Temple of VTEC) says the S2000 is about to go out of
production.)

BMWs also carry a strut suspension.

Perhaps it's fair to say that suspension engineering and
implementation details play a significant role in delivered
performance.

Thanks - that's it in a nutshell.

#25

Tony Harding (ToHard (AT) nowhere (DOT) org) writes:

Quote:

ACAR wrote:
On Jan 16, 3:33 am, Tony Harding <ToH... (AT) nowhere (DOT) org> wrote:
jim beam wrote:

snip

So a CR-V can out corner a Porsche? My money's on the P-wagon.

did you notice the part where i said "the compromise compensation is
wider tires"? how much wider are the tires on the porsche vs. the cr-v?
or any honda come to that. [since you're into reviews, you may also
want to compare the head-to-heads of the honda s2000 vs. the boxter.]
Do you have a link?

Here's a link to a "strut-encumbered" Civic TypeR beating a S2000 at
the track.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=123912

(Rumor mill (Temple of VTEC) says the S2000 is about to go out of
production.)

BMWs also carry a strut suspension.

Perhaps it's fair to say that suspension engineering and
implementation details play a significant role in delivered
performance.

Thanks - that's it in a nutshell.

But MacFarty's wonky struts are inherently wonky. Look at what Honda did with
the Civic when they went to "MacFarty struts"... they had to mount the
steering rack about four feet off the ground, with frickin' Ford Twin
I-Beams for tie rods, to try and get rid of the inherent 'bump steer' of
Mr. MacFarty's wonky design.

- Robbie Coltrane holding a large machine hammer,
in 'Planes and Automobiles'

"This is an Edinburgh spanner"

#26

On Jan 17, 6:57*pm, cf... (AT) FreeNet (DOT) Carleton.CA (M.A. Stewart) wrote:

Quote:

But MacFarty's wonky struts are inherently wonky. Look at what Honda did with
the Civic when they went to "MacFarty struts"...

yeah, they built a TypeR that can outhandle a S2000.

we can debate betamax vs VHS next; same theory/practice argument.

#27

On Jan 17, 10:11 pm, jim beam <spamvor... (AT) bad (DOT) example.net> wrote:

Quote:

ACAR wrote:
On Jan 17, 6:57�pm, cf... (AT) FreeNet (DOT) Carleton.CA (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
But MacFarty's wonky struts are inherently wonky. Look at what Honda did with
the Civic when they went to "MacFarty struts"...

yeah, they built a TypeR that can outhandle a S2000.

we can debate betamax vs VHS next; same theory/practice argument.

drifting is not handling big guy

the link at Edmunds is to a 3-lap race at a road course in Japan.
some drifting by the S2000, not entirely intentional
try it, you'll rice it.
[there's more to the story as there were other "heats" taken by a
lightly modified S2000]

- there's limited tire adhesion, so the

Quote:

problems of geometry are lost in the overall slippage. that's why you
have macpherson on rally cars and wishbone on [successful] circuit cars
- one slides, the other doesn't.

I'm not disputing the theoretical superiority of double A-arm
suspensions for the pavement. (As you know, part of the beauty of this
design is the flexibility to engineer in (or out) the handling/
response desired.)
I'm disputing the blanket assertion that all double A-arm suspensions
are better than all MacPherson struts suspensions. The last Accord we
bought is a competent handling car but nothing more.

#28

On Jan 18, 9:30 am, jim beam <spamvor... (AT) bad (DOT) example.net> wrote:

Quote:

I'm disputing the blanket assertion that all double A-arm suspensions
are better than all MacPherson struts suspensions.

unless there's a fundamental oversight by the designer, they are though.

a double A-arm suspension can't be crappy?
really?

Quote:

macpherson simply cannot get around the geometry problems that
wishbones can.

double A-arm suspensions certainly can be well designed.
and some aren't.

Quote:

The last Accord we
bought is a competent handling car but nothing more.

again, what is the tire width? compare like with like.

one might argue that designers include tire considerations when
designing suspensions so comparing like with like is to keep OEM
sizes, not forcing a single size onto the cars.

Quote:

camry has a
wider stock tire width than accord. drives great in a straight line and
on moderate curves. but despite the compensation of the wider tire, it
can't hang with the accord in the twisties.

camry?
who picked that as the standard bearer for strut suspension design?

what else ya got?

#29

jim beam wrote:

Quote:

M.A. Stewart wrote:
Tony Harding (ToHard (AT) nowhere (DOT) org) writes:
ACAR wrote:
On Jan 16, 3:33 am, Tony Harding <ToH... (AT) nowhere (DOT) org> wrote:
jim beam wrote:

snip

So a CR-V can out corner a Porsche? My money's on the P-wagon.

did you notice the part where i said "the compromise compensation is
wider tires"? how much wider are the tires on the porsche vs. the
cr-v?
or any honda come to that. [since you're into reviews, you may also
want to compare the head-to-heads of the honda s2000 vs. the boxter.]
Do you have a link?
Here's a link to a "strut-encumbered" Civic TypeR beating a S2000 at
the track.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=123912

(Rumor mill (Temple of VTEC) says the S2000 is about to go out of
production.)

BMWs also carry a strut suspension.

Perhaps it's fair to say that suspension engineering and
implementation details play a significant role in delivered
performance.
Thanks - that's it in a nutshell.

But MacFarty's wonky struts are inherently wonky. Look at what Honda
did with
the Civic when they went to "MacFarty struts"... they had to mount the
steering rack about four feet off the ground, with frickin' Ford Twin
I-Beams for tie rods, to try and get rid of the inherent 'bump steer' of
Mr. MacFarty's wonky design.

but they don't /want/ to know about the reasoning - they just want to
watch ricer videos on the net.

LOL, this NG is priceless! :-D

#30

jim beam wrote:

Quote:

ACAR wrote:
On Jan 17, 10:11 pm, jim beam <spamvor... (AT) bad (DOT) example.net> wrote:
ACAR wrote:
On Jan 17, 6:57�pm, cf... (AT) FreeNet (DOT) Carleton.CA (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
But MacFarty's wonky struts are inherently wonky. Look at what
Honda did with
the Civic when they went to "MacFarty struts"...
yeah, they built a TypeR that can outhandle a S2000.
we can debate betamax vs VHS next; same theory/practice argument.
drifting is not handling big guy

the link at Edmunds is to a 3-lap race at a road course in Japan.
some drifting by the S2000, not entirely intentional
try it, you'll rice it.
[there's more to the story as there were other "heats" taken by a
lightly modified S2000]

- there's limited tire adhesion, so the
problems of geometry are lost in the overall slippage. that's why you
have macpherson on rally cars and wishbone on [successful] circuit cars
- one slides, the other doesn't.

I'm not disputing the theoretical superiority of double A-arm
suspensions for the pavement. (As you know, part of the beauty of this
design is the flexibility to engineer in (or out) the handling/
response desired.)
I'm disputing the blanket assertion that all double A-arm suspensions
are better than all MacPherson struts suspensions.

unless there's a fundamental oversight by the designer, they are though.
macpherson simply cannot get around the geometry problems that
wishbones can.

The last Accord we
bought is a competent handling car but nothing more.

again, what is the tire width? compare like with like. camry has a
wider stock tire width than accord. drives great in a straight line and
on moderate curves. but despite the compensation of the wider tire, it
can't hang with the accord in the twisties.

And that's all due to the struts? I doubt it.