T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1245.1 | Fearing for the lad. | CRATE::SAXBY | Time to say something contentious! | Tue Oct 02 1990 15:02 | 7 |
|
YES.
Mark
PS I'm beginning to worry about you Art. First you want an MR2 and now
this! :^)
|
1245.2 | Engine killer | NEWOA::VANDIK::HENNEMAN | Open top motoring = diesel fumes | Tue Oct 02 1990 15:08 | 4 |
| Labouring an engine in a high gear at low revs puts just as much, if not more,
strain upon it as screaming along at max revs in a low gear.
Dick
|
1245.3 | | VOGON::ATWAL | Dreams, they complicate my life | Tue Oct 02 1990 15:16 | 9 |
| what exactly does it do to the engine?
I really want this info so that I can explain the benefits of not labouring
the engine to someone who causes the engine to labour because they believe
1000rpm is far more fuel efficient & kinder to the engine than 2.5-4Krpm is
thanks...
...art
|
1245.4 | Here's one or two | GRANPA::63654::NAYLOR | PP53546A N2433040 GM4GNJ IAMP and bar | Tue Oct 02 1990 15:45 | 11 |
| 1000 rpm = less oil pressure, particularly when warm = more wear.
Under power, you actually need MORE throttle to move along at 1000 rpm,
therefore more fuel consumed than at 1500 rpm or so (normal 30 mph revs?)
1000 rpm = less than efficient alternator (usually designed to run at 1250
or more), therefore run down battery faster. This could be dubious! :-)
Why shake your engine to bits anyway!!!
Brian
|
1245.5 | | ANNECY::MATTHEWS | M+M Enterprises. Thats the CATCH | Tue Oct 02 1990 16:06 | 16 |
| >> Under power, you actually need MORE throttle to move along at 1000 rpm,
>> therefore more fuel consumed than at 1500 rpm or so (normal 30 mph revs?)
Are you sure ??? Surely, if you use MORE throttle, the engine revs will
rise ...
I would suspect that it all depends how the engine is set up. It must be
possible to set up an engine to be most efficient at any point in the
effective rev-range.
I head once about a study being done with a bus engine that ran at
constant revs. The 'throttle' pedal caused the gears to change to make
the thing go faster or slower. The economy was supposed to be much improved,
but the drivers found it difficult to get used to ...
Mark
|
1245.6 | Art knows what he'd doing :-) | OVAL::GUEST_N | Nowhere at all.... | Tue Oct 02 1990 16:15 | 4 |
|
I wouldn't worry, Mark. MR2 <> Low revs....
Nigel
|
1245.7 | Now, what was the question? | NEWOA::VANDIK::HENNEMAN | Open top motoring = diesel fumes | Tue Oct 02 1990 16:29 | 11 |
| Most volume produced cars around today are designed so that they are at their
most fuel efficient at somewhere between 2.5-4.5k rpm. The clue here is the revs
at which peak torque is delivered.
If you apply a constant load to the engine, but vary the engine revolutions, as
the efficiency falls off at low revs, you will have to put more energy into the
engine, in order to get the same amount of work out. This means that you waste
fuel. You also load up the moving parts of the engine, which induces wear. This
is compounded by the low oil pressure of the low revving engine.
Dick
|
1245.8 | | CRATE::SAXBY | Time to say something contentious! | Tue Oct 02 1990 16:32 | 15 |
|
Yep,
It did strike me as an odd combination. :^)
Obviously for the ultimate economy low(ish) revs are preferable, but
there is a line. It seems common sense that an engine which is chugging
along can't be running healthily, but you just can't tell some people.
I'm not sure of any ACTUAL reason why labouring an engine is bad for
it, but it might be worth pointing out to this person that the engine
is having to do more work (and therefore needs more power/revs) to
move a car than it needs just to turn the engine over while coasting.
Mark
|
1245.11 | | ANNECY::MATTHEWS | M+M Enterprises. Thats the CATCH | Tue Oct 02 1990 17:50 | 14 |
| >> Wear is caused by force...
>>forces in the engine increase when you try to extract power at low RPM.
>>At high RPM the forces are lower for the same power.
>>at high RPM more of the forces are in the gear box which is built to
>>take it.
This is probably the case, but why ???
Is it anything to do with inertia ??? The higher the revs, the greater
the inertia, so the engine has a tendancy to keep spinning ???
If it is, then perhaps the bore/stroke ratio is important.
Also, why don't diesels seem to mind running at very low revs ???
|
1245.12 | | VOGON::ATWAL | Dreams, they complicate my life | Tue Oct 02 1990 18:03 | 9 |
| thanks so far...
what causes the engine(?) to shudder like it does at low RPMs?
ta..
...art
|
1245.13 | | OVAL::ALFORDJ | Ice a speciality | Tue Oct 02 1990 18:45 | 7 |
|
>what causes the engine(?) to shudder like it does at low RPMs?
big ends shaking themselves to bits, maybe...
;-)
|
1245.14 | Knackered Mountings ? | ESDC2::MUDAN | Speak clearly after the Beep... | Wed Oct 03 1990 09:36 | 5 |
|
The engine could be shuddering if the mountings have been knackered.
The mountings should endure the 'low rev & straining on the engine'
but once they're worn out...
|
1245.15 | Injection cars don't seem to have the problem | HOO78C::DUINHOVEN | Dutch treat | Wed Oct 03 1990 13:35 | 9 |
| Shuttering in my daily use BX TGI does not occur.
This is because the injection type of fuel distribution.
I guess carburettor cars suffer much more of this.
Shuttering is caused I think by overloading the engine, in comparison
to power produced at this low rev. Engine tends to shut down....
Hans
|
1245.16 | my opinion | UKCSSE::RDAVIES | Live long and prosper | Wed Oct 03 1990 15:16 | 10 |
| Shurely shuddering is because the revs are below the normal idle speed
of the car and thus the engine is
a being starved of fuel
b reving so low that the individual strokes are identifyable.
Diesels don't necessarilly run at lower speeds, it's just their torque
comes on-stream at lower revs than a petrol engine(typical petrol, peak
torque @4k-5k, typical diesel peak torque @2k-3k)
Richard
|
1245.17 | Shudder, Scream Horror Story | CHEST::RUTTER | Rutter The Nutter | Wed Oct 03 1990 16:05 | 25 |
| I would certainly think that revving an engine so slowly that it is
'shuddering' (makes me shudder to think of it) is bad for economy, if
not for engine longevity.
In agreement with .16, point b - identifying each stroke.
Not sure about point a - being starved of fuel.
I think that an engine would shudder due to the combustion process
not going on in the manner to which it was designed.
If an engine is turning over slowly, fuel is not being drawn in at
a high enough velocity, this would mean it will not mix so readily
with the air, causing poor combustion, hence 'rough' running.
When more throttle is used, with the engine under load, this situation
will not improve readily, as ignition timing will (usually) be changed
and more fuel injected (or sucked in), but amount of air will be the
same - until revs rise. If the engine isn't losing the battle too
badly, it will recover - but if the unwitting driver has let the revs
drop [much] too far, it will not accelerate at all.
Personally speaking, I don't let the engine shudder - but I am guilty
of making it scream on occasions...
John Rutter
|
1245.18 | In my opinion | CRATE::LEECH | | Wed Oct 03 1990 20:52 | 5 |
| Surely the reason for the juddering is due to the engine coming close
to stall speed ? ( and don't call me shirley !)
Shaun
|
1245.19 | My engine sucks, what happens when it blows? | MARVIN::RUSLING | Hastings Upper Layers | Thu Oct 04 1990 12:13 | 18 |
|
Maybe this is drifting off the point, but that's never stopped me
in the past...
My engine is carburetted, that means that the throttle opens a
valve to let more petrol into the carb. However, an engine sucks
petrol in because of the differences in pressure. So, even if I
open the throttle wider than I need, the engine will only take what
it needs. [aside: is this true?] So, running an engine so slowly
that it judders and nearly stalls doesn't neccessarily mean that
petrol usage is bad, just not the most efficient that a given engine
can manage.
Now, what happens if the engine is injected. Presumably the injection
is controlled via sensors, but of what? Again, it shouldn't be
possible to overfeed the engine.
Dave
|
1245.20 | reply to dave... | IOSG::MARSHALL | Why can't a woman be more like a car? | Thu Oct 04 1990 14:19 | 24 |
| >>the throttle opens a valve to let more petrol into the carb
Wrong! The throttle opens a valve letting more air into the carb. The
petrol is sucked into the air flow by the pressure differential at the
mouth of the jet (same principle that keeps aeroplanes up). However,
most modern carbs have an accelerator pump that "injects" petrol into
the air stream as you depress the throttle, to compensate for the
sudden drop in vacuum, hence speed of air flow. The air flow then
speeds up again as the engine revs rise...
Most modern carbs have a "by-pass idle" circuit, which is a subsidiary
jet supplying petrol when the throttle is "shut" and the engine is
idling. The supply of air / petrol thorugh this path is just enough to
keep the engine idling, and isn't enough to keep the engine at low revs
under load. This may explain the lumpy running at low revs.
More likely though is that the engine just isn't going fast enough to
run smoothly: try riding a bicycle in a straight line very slowly. You
tend to wobble a bit. As you go faster, you can keep in a straight
line. As the engine goes faster, the momentum in the flywheel keeps
the engine running smoothly, ironing out the lumpiness in the
individual power strokes...
Scott
|
1245.21 | Oh, it squishes too | MARVIN::RUSLING | Hastings Upper Layers | Thu Oct 04 1990 16:10 | 12 |
|
Aha, enlightenment is coming (slowly). However, I don't know if
my carb has a by-pass idle circuit. To vary the idle speed, I
adjust a little grub screw which stops the lever going fully home
(or to zero, or whatever). I guess that this must leave the
engine with an appropriate amount of air (to suck). As for
squirting, you're quite right, mine does.
Oh, and I believe that the air flow trick that sucks the air/petrol
mix into the engine is called the venturi effect?
Dave
|
1245.22 | Or is it the Pagemaker effect? | TASTY::JEFFERY | Tears of disbelief spilling out of my eyes | Mon Oct 08 1990 11:02 | 9 |
| .19 seems to be correct.
I've noticed that you can coast right down to idle without any lumpiness,
but if you try to accelarate, then the engine does shudder.
As current thinking says that you use the brakes to slow down, then start
from the right gear, then this seems right.
Mark.
|
1245.23 | Slowing down | KERNEL::SHELLEYR | Adios, amoeba _m_���_m_ | Mon Oct 08 1990 12:19 | 12 |
| > "coast right down to idle without any lumpiness"
I've always been an advocate of the police school of thought where you
use your brakes to slow down rather than braking and changing down
through all the gears as is the case in the driving test.
As they say, brake pads are cheaper to replace than gearboxes.
Do you agree with this ? and would it not be more economical to "coast"
in neutral when braking (I know you're not supposed to).
- Roy
|
1245.25 | On these colder mornings.... | OVAL::GUEST_N | Nowhere at all.... | Tue Oct 09 1990 11:30 | 16 |
| On a similar subject, how about starting off in the morning.
I'm sure i've heard/read/imagined that you should start up and drive
off. While the engine is cold you shouldn't do excessive revs. This
sounds right, but is it ?
Some people i know insist on turning their engine on and letting it
idle for 5-10 minutes ( have a cup of coffee) before jumping in and
driving off. Is this better for the car ?
Nigel
As an aside a few months ago i saw a sign in a Swiss Garage which said
that modern cars didn't need idling before setting off and that it was
also bad for the environment.
|
1245.26 | | MARVIN::RUSLING | Hastings Upper Layers | Tue Oct 09 1990 12:09 | 18 |
|
Hmmm. What I usually do, is to start the engine and then buckle up
and get comfortable. Thus, when I pull off the drive, the engine has
been running for a couple of minutes. Then, once I'm going, I keep
the engine to less than half its possible revs until it has warmed
up. I would certainly never start the car and move off immediately.
The first few minutes of an engine running is the most
dangerous 'cos the oil and engine parts are still cool so the most
wear happens. With more modern (synthetic) oils, this is less
dangerous.
Presumably, the Swiss say that idling a car until it is warm is
environmently unfriendly because the car will take longer to warm
up, and, because it is running on the choke, will chuck out more
gung into the atmostphere.
Dave
|
1245.27 | Don't let it idle | IOSG::MARSHALL | Waterloo Sunset | Tue Oct 09 1990 12:18 | 7 |
| You shouldn't let a car idle to warm up. It takes *ages* to warm up that way,
so spends more time running cold, hence more damage. I've always been told to
start up and drive off straight away. Don't know about driving the first few
miles at low revs though. I would have thought higher revs would give you
better oil pressure sooner...
Scott
|
1245.28 | Not reaching the parts... | SUBURB::SAXBYM | Really Manic Information Centre | Tue Oct 09 1990 12:22 | 7 |
|
Isn't the argument that the oil is thicker at cold temperatures and may
not be lubricating all the moving parts properly. If this is true (not
that it probably is now with super-thin multigrades) then there may not
be enough lubrication to suitably withstand high-revs.
Mark
|
1245.29 | | FORTY2::BETTS | | Tue Oct 09 1990 12:26 | 15 |
|
My regime is to start the engine, check the guages and watch the oil
pressure rise to its normal level. On a cold morning, the car will
idle at around 2K rpm (maybe a tad high). After the oil pressure has
stabilised, I'll raise the revs to perhaps 2500 or 3000 rpm for a
few seconds - just to clear any misfire etc.
Then I drive off, trying to keep the revs to below 3000 rpm (difficult
as I drive out of the village and onto a dual carriageway) or 4000 rpm
at most. Its hard to judge when the engine is warmed through (I use
the water temperature as a first guide, but water warms a lot quicker
than oil), but I'll try to use minimal throttle and revs for the first
few (say five) miles at least.
Bill.
|
1245.30 | All alloy engines can be very sensitive | CHEFS::OSBORNEC | | Tue Oct 09 1990 12:27 | 13 |
|
Any owner of Alfa's, Ferrari's, Maserati's etc will tell you that the
Owners Manual INSISTS you warm the engine up for a few minutes - even
in the summer.
Few do, hence the head damage on many older Alfa's. Suspect not warming
may well be the problem with the horrendous head difficulties with
'70's BMW's -- & even Hillman Imps.
Needless to say, not many Italians follow the book, but they have been
told. Interesting that most Italian motorcars have (had?) a hand
throttle that was meant for waming, but was also splendid when you were
desperately trying to balance your Webers ...
|
1245.31 | quality of engineering...? | VOGON::ATWAL | Dreams, they complicate my life | Tue Oct 09 1990 13:02 | 7 |
| the owners manual for the vw golf (1.3) that i used to have stated
that you should drive away as soon as possible; and NOT to leave the
engine idling to warm up.
the manual for the renault strongly recommends letting the engine
idle for a minute or so before moving of
...art
|
1245.32 | >1 minute idle = BAD ? | AYOV18::MMCKINLAY | Someday...and some don't | Tue Oct 09 1990 13:17 | 8 |
|
I recall from somewhere that you should never let an engine idle
(whether warm or cold) for more than 1 minute (I believe it was
an ~Austin Rover~ manual for the MG Metro) ?
Mark.
|
1245.33 | | OVAL::GUEST_N | Nowhere at all.... | Tue Oct 09 1990 13:32 | 11 |
|
Can mass produced engines really be that different that they require
minutes of warming up (Alfa etc), no warming up (VW), or
somewhere in the middle ?
Coming back to engine longetivity, what is the possible damage from
getting it wrong, and will it be better/worse than running the engine
at low rev's (as a comparison) ?
Nigel_whose_cars_'ticks_over'_at_upto_2400_on_coldish_days.
|
1245.34 | Watch those dials | CRATE::RUTTER | Rutter The Nutter | Tue Oct 09 1990 14:29 | 31 |
| It is a fact that revving a cold engine will be bad for it !
As for starting engines/waiting/driving off, I wouldn't know
what is best - or for what engines.
Driving 'gently' is the obvious way to warm it up.
Oil pressure will actually be highest just after start-up (as long
as it has actually circulated through the engine) as cold oil will
be 'thicker' (even modern synthetics).
I used to make a point of not running high revs until the water guage
reached its 'normal' position - then I got a car with both water and
oil temperature guages. I was surprised to find that the oil temp.
did not even start to rise until the water was at 'normal' position.
I now wait until the oil temperature at least starts to rise before
giving the engine 'some stick' - this may take quite a few miles on a
cold morning (I don't like to wait, but that's the way it goes).
John Rutter (change oil regularly, but synthetic, don't mix types)
P.S.
Running a turbo engine also requires that you let the engine cool down
before switching off (following high-boost travelling).
Seems like I should spend more time waiting for the engine to warm-up
and cool down than I can save by driving faster !!!
Answer to that - drive faster still, or sod the engine ?
|
1245.36 | | HOTSPR::KENNEDY | Chaos is a Science. | Tue Oct 09 1990 14:54 | 15 |
|
My understanding is that excessive revs while the engine is cold
has two possible effect. Firstly cold oil on cold bearings does not
lubricate as well as when both are warm. Secondly when the oil is
cold its viscosity is higher, hence its pressure will be higher - even
the relief valve will not handle this fully - so there is a risk of
oil seal damage.
There is also an effect, that I think is called 'wiping', that
can occur in plain bush bearings (i.e. big ends and crankshaft main
bearings) where the combination of high pressure and high loading
(that can occur when red lining a cold engine) can cause the bearing
shell material to be actually wiped off by the oil.
- John.
|
1245.37 | | VOGON::BALL | Have you got a licence for that pun? | Tue Oct 09 1990 17:17 | 14 |
| Here's the way I start off in the morning:
(1) Leap in & shut door.
(2) Turn key in ignition. Engine coughs and stalls.
(3) Remember choke & pull out. (Prev car had auto choke)
(4) Wheelspin out of parking place at max revs.
(5) Attempt to simultaneously put seatbelt and radio on before I get to
corner of road where I need hands to steer.
Is this recommended?
Jon
|
1245.38 | | VOGON::ATWAL | Dreams, they complicate my life | Tue Oct 09 1990 17:30 | 5 |
| well you're along the right lines there, however you are going wrong
at one point; you must remember to slam in the Bananarama tape and turn
the volume up full whack before you try to wheelspin away...
...art :-)
|
1245.39 | | FORTY2::BETTS | | Tue Oct 09 1990 17:34 | 4 |
|
You need hands to steer? Wot a wimp ;-)
Bill.
|
1245.40 | It's My Fault | VOGON::MORGAN | Physically Phffftt | Tue Oct 09 1990 17:35 | 6 |
| Re .37/.38
And I was partly responsible for these guys being employed at Digital !
Rich
|
1245.41 | | FORTY2::BETTS | | Tue Oct 09 1990 17:43 | 5 |
|
A major contribution to road safety, Rich. (Well, it keeps them off
the streets...)
Bill.
|
1245.43 | | NEWOA::BAILEY | life below 4,000 revs | Tue Oct 09 1990 18:08 | 12 |
| <<< Note 1245.42 by VANTEN::MITCHELLD "Spin? Who Me? I'm only the driver" >>>
-< Wrong tape >-
>Half way thru "The Chain" by Fleetwood Mac from the Rumours LP
>Its a bit difficult to synchronise with traffic lights. Perhaps its due
>to having that silly amber light in the sequence
wrong part fitted: you need "It'll end in tears" by "This mortal coil"
you can synchronise with _anything_ with this tape
|
1245.44 | Synchronised Welly ? | CRATE::RUTTER | J.R. | Tue Oct 09 1990 18:11 | 9 |
| Re .-1 (The Chain)
Traffic lights, huh ?
Follow the lead of 'touring car' racers, or better still the Trucks,
they have a rolling start - Red light = Continue for another lap ?
Other option, play "The Race" - by Yello, then shift through the box,
hoping not to jump the lights - or find any corners !
|
1245.46 | re .39 (no hands) | IOSG::MARSHALL | Waterloo Sunset | Tue Oct 09 1990 18:20 | 3 |
| I suppose there's so much torque-steer you don't need a steering wheel ;-)
Scott
|
1245.47 | "Dicey Reilly" by the Dubliners | PUGH::FRENCHS | Semper in excernere | Wed Oct 10 1990 09:52 | 12 |
| Ok then.
I have just purchased a Long wheel base Landrover with a 3.5 Lt V8 under the
bonnet.
What tracks would the panel recomend to play whilst driving this beast.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And on a more serious note, how would you look after a V8.
Simon.
|
1245.49 | Can't help it... | SWEEP::PREECE | I say, you chaps...! | Wed Oct 10 1990 10:43 | 5 |
|
LOUD ones !!
|
1245.50 | V8 Land Rover, listen to the ENGINE | CRATE::RUTTER | J.R. | Wed Oct 10 1990 10:59 | 17 |
| Re .47
You mean you have a STEREO in your Landy !!!
What is the world coming to ?
As for looking after the V8, earlier reply about oil etc. makes sense.
Of more importance is keeping water out of it, that would give
it a terminal illness for sure.
I do expect you will be taking it off-road, won't you ?
John Rutter (who until last week was the owner of a rusty CJ7 JEEP,
was a shame to let it go - I must replace it sometime soon)
|
1245.51 | Just read the personal name. | PUGH::FRENCHS | Semper in excernere | Wed Oct 10 1990 11:32 | 19 |
| re..
... You mean you have a STEREO in your Landy !!!
/ Not yet, but soon. I do have an amateur radio already installed.
... What is the world coming to ?
/ Fun fun fun :-) (see my title)
... I do expect you will be taking it off-road, won't you ?
/ But of course, what do you take me for? ;-)
... John Rutter (who until last week was the owner of a rusty CJ7 JEEP,
was a shame to let it go - I must replace it sometime soon)
/ You could always buy a Landrover ;-)
|
1245.52 | V8 comments | CRATE::RUTTER | J.R. | Wed Oct 10 1990 11:44 | 19 |
| Re .-1 'could always buy a Land Rover'
Running a Land Rover would appear to conform too much !
Good they may be, but they seem to be a few 'too many' around.
I also thought it was difficult getting V8 versions, unless you
buy a recent version. Of course, Range Rovers are available with
V8 engines and COIL SPRINGs, but then don't you also get thick,
luxurious carpet and a free pair of green wellies with those ?
Anyway, I though off-roader types didn't take much notice of
how to 'take care of' engines, just fill it up, bog it down,
winch it out and keep on going...
As this appears to be going on about the vehicle type, rather than
the topic title 'engine longevity', perhaps you could point me in
the direction of an 'All-Wheel-Drive' topic or conference ???
J.R.
|
1245.54 | forget the engine head - watch yours | PUGH::FRENCHS | Semper in excernere | Wed Oct 10 1990 14:10 | 4 |
| If you do roll your Landy, don't undo your harness if you remain upside down.
Simon ;-)
|
1245.55 | Back to the original subject...... | CHEFS::CLEMENTSD | Public Sector and Telecomms | Thu Oct 11 1990 10:43 | 10 |
| How about installing an engine preheater? Kenlowe do one called the
"Hotstart" which is claimed will pre heat the engine in about 10-15
minutes without consuming anything except a few amps of electricity.
Has a recirculating pump so will warm all the water and not just the
stuff that drifts around due to thermic syphons. 3Kw heater so you
don't have the battle of the block acting as a better radiator than the
heater is a heater.....
Costs �89 direct from Kenlowe; full bumph available if you drop me a
mail message.
|
1245.56 | Siberian Hack? | PEKING::GERRYT | | Wed Oct 17 1990 14:50 | 3 |
| ref .52
Why not try a Lada Niva instead ?
|
1245.57 | or Derek's favourite - a 101! | VOGON::MITCHELLE | | Wed Oct 17 1990 15:02 | 3 |
|
re.52 - there may be a lot of Landys about - but not that many ex MOD
lightweights - (especially not bright green! :-) )
|
1245.58 | ;-))) | PUGH::FRENCHS | Semper in excernere | Wed Oct 17 1990 15:35 | 5 |
| Don't you mean a 110 ?
Simon
|
1245.59 | Rusky performance | CRATE::RUTTER | Wot, no wheelspin | Thu Oct 18 1990 09:58 | 15 |
| � Why not try a Lada Niva instead ?
I have thought about that - they aren't too common,
just vehicles 'for the common person'...
They do have a deficiency in the 'grunt' department though.
I have heard of Fiat 2-litre conversions for these cars, but
I would expect that to give better acceleration, but not a
great deal of extra low-end power required when off-road.
Anyone out there know much about these, prices/points to check/etc. ?
J.R. (all this road-burning stuff does get a bit boring,
I shall have to go off-road, or on-circuit sooner or later)
|
1245.60 | | BRABAM::PHILPOTT | Col I F 'Tsingtao Dhum' Philpott | Thu Oct 18 1990 10:50 | 22 |
|
Off road performance is to some extent limited by torque to weight
ratios.
The Lada Niva offers 17 kg/lb.ft
The Suzuki SJ413 softtop is 18 kg/lb.ft
The Isuzu Trooper II short wheel base diesel offers 15 kg/lb.ft
The Land Rover Discovery TDi 14 kg/lb.ft.
The Toyota Landcruiser II (SWB) 14 kg/lb.ft.
The Daihatsu Fourtrak EX 12.6 kg/lb.ft.
The Daihatsu Sportrak EL EFi 16 kg/lb.ft
So, at least as far as engine "grunt power" is concerned the Niva is a
competant performer - certainly no worse than several others.
The Daihatsu would be great except that the ground clearance and
suspension both leave a lot to be desired.
The Disco and 'Cruiser are clear winners - but you could buy three
Nivas for the sort of price either of those bring!
/. Ian .\
|
1245.61 | gearbox & clutch this time... | TURB0::art | catch me if I fall | Wed May 29 1991 12:52 | 7 |
| is it bad (in terms of wear etc) to change gear without use of clutch
when the engine is not running?
ta,
...art
|
1245.62 | Yes | CHEST::WATSON | Blood on the Rooftops | Wed May 29 1991 13:09 | 1 |
| But I can't remember for the life of me why.
|
1245.63 | Tell Me Why... | ESDV00::MUDAN | Those Days Are Gone... | Wed May 29 1991 13:30 | 6 |
|
.61, Changing Gear without Engine Running !
Why would you want to do this ? Apart from fiddling around
waiting for the missus to finish shopping ;-)
|
1245.64 | | TURB0::art | catch me if I fall | Wed May 29 1991 13:33 | 12 |
| >> Why would you want to do this ? Apart from fiddling around
>> waiting for the missus to finish shopping ;-)
I guess that reason; just saw someone doing it and it made me wonder if
it was a bad thing to do?!
...art
ps. is it any better if the clutch is depressed before fiddling around?
|