Conference terri::cars_uk

    They are, according to a road safety survey done in sweden, the most
    unsafe car in their class in terms of injuries/deaths in road
    accidents.  The safest in its class was the Nova, which was between 2
    and 5 times safer, depending on the type of accident.
    
    
    John

Get a VW Polo, much nicer if you want a comfy small car and aren't worried
about performance.

Scott

Be but bear in mind that the new Polo has just come out in mainland Europe -
so expect depreciation on the old model if you buy one.

    Ok so you've had some bad comments, now for some good ones...
    
    When i drove the plain bog standard `Collette' i found it very comfy,
    quiet, and fairly nippy for its size.
    
    It was a real pleasure to drive (maybe thats why all the learner cars
    are Micra's), the clutch is easy, overall the viewing area is good,
    and very easy to get used to... its the kind of car you can get into
    and feel at home in after 5 minutes...
    
    All in all, i actually liked it... perfect for traffic driving 0etc...
    
    				Lewis.

	Well I think the Micra is pretty good value for money. My girlfriend's
	Micra is four years old and has, in the main, been subjected to short
	journeys and a lot of stop/start town driving. As we all know, this
	is general, is not particularly good for the car, but the Micra has
	never let us down in the four years weve had it. This is more than
	I can say for my last three or four cars I've owned, but that's another
	story.

	All in all it's a very good town/short journey car. The steering's light
	,excellent all round vision, easy gear change and, from our experience,
	 reliable. As a matter of interest I was talking to an ANWB man ( the
	Dutch RAC/AA ) and they rate these as one of the most reliable cars in
	their class. 

	Gordon

	Micra Collete :- my wife has been driving one for 4 years now,
			  she likes :-

	 goodpoints :-	easy to drive,
			light steering,
			easy clutch,
			nothing complicated about it,
			great for town driving, very nippy.
			will cruise at 70+ (with some noise !)

	 badpoints :-	radio with one speaker (we got another installed with
						two speakers)

	Clutch went after 28,000 miles (99% of driving about town, and a little
	  complaint about her driving habits !)
			

The "Colette" isn't the base model, it's the mid-range one.

Possibly the most unpleasant thing about a Micra is Nissan salesman and their
fake offers of cheap prices.  But as you're buying s/hand privately you won't
get that.

The car has a very different feel to it than European cars; I'm told it's
"just typical Japanese"; you either like it or you don't."  I don't, but then
I don't like Trabants either...

Scott

    Another vote in favour. My wife had an automatic Micra,
     for several years and for use about town found it ideal.
    Plenty of vision, good space inside for kids and dogs, very reliable,
    cheap to run(mpg etc), wide doors to get in and out of and although the
    boot is not big it has a low sill for lifting heavy bags more easily.
    I drove it a bit and although not a hotrod was more than adequate for
    the purpose. Depreciation was average.
    More room and more comfortable than polo,metro,fiesta in the same price
    range.

    
    Pug 205 Diesel?
    Never yet seen a rusty one and they go back to 1983.
    55-60 mpg on the smelly stuff
    More comfortable than Fiesta, Polo, Old Metro etc
    Looks good
    
    But.......Expensive.
    
    Just a thought
    
    Dave

    Re: .8
    
    What was it like selling an Automatic Micra (if you did sell...)?
    
    Pete.

    Very sad; but we got a good price and its since been sold on again and
    is still in immac.,2 lady owners condition

    I'll rephrase my question - how easy was it to sell? Are automatics in
    demand?
    
    Pete.

    Why shouldn't they be?  Currently on my first - I wouldn't go back to
    all that gear-shifting and clutch work in traffic jams for anything!
    
    Jeff.

    yes very easy to "sell". Lots of demand still

    Oh... I was perhaps under the mistaken impression that small automatics
    were difficult to sell!
    
    Pete.

    
    SMALL Automatics are easy to sell. My parents had a queue of people
    wanting to buy their Metro Automatic and the garage also offered a
    good trade in price.
    
    I think bigger autos are harder to get rid off because they are more
    common. The trouble is that there are very few SMALL Automatics around.
    
    Mark

    The reason being that automatics use up 10% of the engine power for
    the shift mechanism.small cars don't have that kind of power reduction
    to spare........
    

Re .prev

Is this right?  Sounds bizzarre to me.  It doesn't take you 10% of your engine's
power to pull the gear stick about so I don't see how anything like this amount
of energy is required to do an equivalent job automatically.

What I know about gearboxes could be written on the reverse of a transverse 
flange collar socket bearing from the 'box of a mini but this just surprises me.

Jon

    It also sounds illogical from the perspective of engine size. The
    amount of power required to shift gears cannot be a percentage of the
    engine size. A 2.8 litre Sierra and a 1.6 litre Sierra must surely use
    a similar amount of power to shift gears.
    
    If they had said that it was related to car size (weight) I would have
    found that more logical.......
    
    JK

	Automatics use up engine power through the torque converter
	unless I'm very much mistaken. It's not the actual changing
	gear that's the problem, it's the simulating the action of
	a manual clutch (no doubt someone can explain this better
	than me).

	Jonathan.

�	Automatics use up engine power through the torque converter
    
    The action of a torque converter introduces a continuous
    amount of 'slip' during use. This will lose power all the time,
    unless you have 'lock-up' - which is a feature on newer auto-boxes.
    
    J.R.

    The following is for the less mechanically aware.....
    
    a manual system transfers the drive to the gearbox via a 'fibrous'
    friction plate sandwiched between two metal plates, the action of
    depressing the clutch pedal, parts the metal plates, and disconnects
    the torque between the three.
    
    An automatic is actually an automatic gearbox AND an automatic clutch,
    two separate items. The 'automatic clutch' is in fact a series of
    interlaced discs, alternating between drive feed, and drive takeup,
    sitting in a highly viscous fluid. At rest one set of disks is stopped,
    with the interleaved disks turning, and providing influence on the
    stationary via the fluid. The energy from the drive is dissapated by
    the fluid. 
    
    As you begin to move, the fluid dissappates less of the energy as it
    transfers it from one set of disks to the other. In conventional
    systems there's ALWAYS a degree of slip, hence automatics have much
    slower acceleration. 
    
    As has been mentioned, modern systems provide a means whereby, as the
    speeds of both sets of disks match there is a method of locking them
    together providing direct drive without slip. This is more efficient,
    both for performance and economy. This is normally only done on the top
    one or two gears. ( traditionally automatics were 3 speed, low medium,
    high, these modern boxes are increasingly 4 speed, akin to manuals
    going to 5 speed).
    
    Thus the best spec is 4 speed automatic with partial lockup in 3rd, and
    full lockup in top!.
    
    
    Richard

�    systems there's ALWAYS a degree of slip, hence automatics have much
�    slower acceleration. 
    
    You didn't mention the other feature of the 'torque converter',
    in that in can increase the torque being put out at certain
    speed ranges.  I know little about this, do you know more
    (and explain how this is achieved) ?
    
    J.R.

    For those still boggling at how a torque converter mimics a clutch, the
    analogy I always use is stirring a bowl of treacle. If you stir it
    slowly, you will just move the treacle. The faster you go, the bowl
    itself will start to turn, until if you go really fast, the bowl is
    turning nearly as fast as the spoon.
    
    Steve

    What about CVT (Continuously variable torque) as in the Fiat's and Ford
    Fiesta's? As I understood it, it used a belt system on a drum that
    could change ratios continuosly. Can anyone add anymore detail to this
    (woefully inadequate!).
    
    Pete.

    CVT = Continuously Variable Transmission (I believe)
    
    The principle was developed for use by DAF,
    which involved 'rubber bands' on cones.
    
    Low gear achieved by belt running on small-diameter,
    shifting to larger-diameter as gearing gets 'higher'.
    (same as gear ratios in a gearbox)
    This should happen such that engine is kept at an
    'efficient' rev-band range.
    
    The Ford/Fiat versions use a steel belt (some sort of multi-link
    chain?) to achieve the same effect.
    
    I think the person with the patent was a 'van Doone' or van Doorne...
    
    J.R.

    CVT still uses a torque converter, and thus suffers some power loss.
    
    Steve

    Yes, the CVT was developped by DAF (thank God they stopped making those
    cars.....).
    
    Cheers,
    Flying Dutchman

Re: .26

It's Van Doorne.


Re: .27

It does not use a torque converter.  The original (DAF-type) version uses a
centrifugal clutch, the newer types a hydraulically operated clutch which 
is controlled by the engine speed. 


Re: .28

The old DAF-type transmission is still made and used on the Volvo 340.

(BTW, the DAF transmission was successfully used by some Formula 3 cars.)

jb

    RE: CVT:
    
    Only the steel belts are made by Van Doorne now.
    All the other parts are made either by the car manufacturer or
    someone else.
    
    Ford and Fiat are using it in Europe.
    Subaru is one of the Japanese versions. (CVT in big capitals on doors)
    
                   Dutch Hans

 My mate has a volvo with the CVT 'box, and it is strange sitting in it with the
revs at a constant pace, while you know that the car is accelerating.

    More CVT info:
    
    - One of the major differences between CVT and the old Variomatic:
      CVT belts PUSH rather than the Variomatic belts pull the driven
      shafts.  
    - Normally there is only one CVT belt in a car; the Variomatic 
      had two belts.
    - Differential gear is after CVT; Variomatic differential gear 
      was before. (reason = have force divided between two belts;
                   the belt was the weakest part of the Variomatic system)
    
    It is expected by 1991 models to have a CVT implemented on two litres
    engines.
    
    Hans

    What happened to the original topic ?