SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 10 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
What was highest label on your first car speedometer?
| 3% | 11 votes |
| 3% | 9 votes |
| 3% | 11 votes |
| 18% | 55 votes |
| 2% | 8 votes |
| 61% | 184 votes |
| 7% | 21 votes |
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
- Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
- Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
- This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
What was highest label on your first car speedometer?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 74 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
(1)
After all is said and done, a hell of a lot more is said than done.
(Score: 3, Informative) by ChrisMaple on Sunday March 24, @03:04AM (2 children)
1966 Corvette.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by RS3 on Monday March 25, @04:02PM
OMG! Do you still have it? Please say yes.
What engine?
160 also: 1968 Firebird 400 conv, and yes, I have it.
One of my current cars, '06 Volvo S40 T5, speedo also goes to 160, stock specs say it'll do 165.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 13, @08:19AM
GMC was always a scam. Bad cars, bad engines, false rebranding. I remember Sodium-filled exhaust valve stems, in their "truck" engines. Regularly fried. No need for a speedometer, when your basic engineering is so pathetic.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Gaaark on Sunday March 24, @03:33AM
...how fast did those smash'em cars go?
-- https://www.toysyouhad.com/Smash.htm [toysyouhad.com]
Hours of entertainment.
"They blowed up REAL good!" (for you fans of SCTV... also, "Don't touch that knob...don't touch that dial! And stop touching yourself!")
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 24, @05:22AM (2 children)
you insensitive clod!
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday March 25, @03:47PM (1 child)
Inconthievable !
I didn't think of that.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26, @06:20AM
you mean you didn't conthieve it?
by the way: I'm over forty, two kids, wife doesn't drive either. a car would simplify some things, but obviously we can live with public transport and the kindness of friends.
I did own a bicycle speedometer at some point, but it was digital and I have no idea how high it went (display limited to 2 digits, km/h, but I never tested what it could actually measure). maybe I'll get another one (but my phone GPS does the job when I need it...).
(Score: 3, Informative) by maxwell demon on Sunday March 24, @07:57AM (2 children)
I never owned a car, therefore I had no need for a car speedometer. But if I had owned one, it would have been in km/h.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday March 26, @04:06PM (1 child)
You must live in one of those countries that has actual working public transportation. Imagine that.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 2) by WeekendMonkey on Sunday March 24, @11:11AM (18 children)
Mk3 Ford Escort, though my 1300 would only do about 100mph.
(Score: 3, Informative) by zocalo on Sunday March 24, @12:40PM (14 children)
Another factor is likely to be economies of scale. You're likely going to get a good number of non-perfomance-critical parts being shared between basic family cars as the higher-end sports cars from the same marque, so it was probably just cheaper to put the same speedo in across as much of the range as possible. If that's a default 155mph for the M-series or AMG tearing along the autobahn, then that's what the basic family saloon gets as well.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Sunday March 24, @09:27PM (7 children)
I think it's similar to wristwatches that are water resistant to 200m (600ft) - nobody is going down that far with a watch, but 200m is much better than 50m, right? Therefore I should pay more for that watch. Similarly, adding numbers to a speedo that your car could only achieve by driving off a cliff could give the false impression of being a more powerful engine, and therefore more desirable.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Mykl on Sunday March 24, @09:30PM (5 children)
Sorry everyone - I know this will come up. 200m is actually 656.17'
(Score: 5, Funny) by c0lo on Monday March 25, @04:01AM (4 children)
Oh, God, what a gaffe.
The appropriate freedom unit in that range is football field lengths - yes, of course it's the one and only football: the American Football. Not soccer, no Aussie footy, no nothin', just football, yea get it? :grin:
And so, we're talking about 2.1872266 football field lengths.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Funny) by JustNiz on Friday March 29, @07:46PM (3 children)
>> it's the one and only football: the American Football.
the one which is mostly played only in the US where they primarily use their hands to pass a prolate spheroid but for some reason call it "football"?
...as opposed to the game known and loved by billions world-wide and called "Football" because players use their feet to pass and shoot an actual ball? :grin:
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Thursday April 18, @11:10AM (2 children)
Also the country where the "world series" has only two nations involved
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Friday April 19, @09:05PM (1 child)
29 of the 30 teams are American. It's barely even 2 nations.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 19, @10:39PM
That name was given to the championship between the American League and National League that was first played in 1903. There was a championship with that name in the 19th century, but it's not recognized as being part of the World Series history, and the AL didn't exist back then. The name stuck around for historical reasons.
Major League Baseball also does operate a proper world championship. It's called the World Baseball Classic [wikipedia.org]. The 2023 tournament was excellent, and it will be played again in 2026.
It would be difficult to have a proper world championship with professional teams from various leagues, and it would be dominated by teams in the United States. Most of the top baseball leagues globally are in the northern hemisphere, so a proper postseason tournament would probably be done in October. But that wouldn't work well for any Australian teams. But most of the top players globally tend to end up playing in the US. Japan won the 2023 WBC, but their best professional players often end up signing to play in MLB. The WBC works well because it's held before the MLB season, and players represent their own countries. It means that some of the best players in the world are playing for countries like Japan and the Dominican Republic instead of the US, so it's a lot more competitive. The WBC is the world championship you're looking for, and it's actually a lot more competitive if players represent their countries instead of having a world championship of professional teams.
The WBC also has some great uniforms [sportingnews.com]. I thought Japan's uniforms were quite underrated at #8, and I really liked the classic look. I didn't like the US uniforms, so that list has them ranked around where they should be. On the other hand, janrinok's country is seriously overrated at #18 (out of 20 countries) [businessinsider.com].
(Score: 1) by anubi on Thursday March 28, @06:55AM
And I used to have an amplifier whose volume control went all the way to 11! Obviously better than one that pegged out at just 10.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by mendax on Monday March 25, @07:09PM (5 children)
My last Ford Ranger, a 2006 model year, had as speedo that goes to 120 mph and the 2.3L engine easily let it get to 95 mph but it had some kind of governor installed that prevented it from going beyond that speed. Annoying!
I've never tried to see how fast my current car, a 2018 Ford Escape, will go for fear that something will go wrong. It only has a 1.5L engine but the turbo charger gives it a lot of power so it might be reasonably quick. However, it blew a head gasket at 63k miles last summer (thank you, Ford, for knowingly installing engines with defective heads that allow coolant to pool against the gasket) and I'd rather not have any other engine problems so I'll never find out. It did let me accelerate to 85 mph in Texas last October quickly, a notion of the car's potential.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Tuesday March 26, @08:28PM (4 children)
My '02 Chevy Astro has speed limited in the PCM (computer) at 98 MPH. I have software and a hardware interface such that I could edit that and all other running parameters. I have no desire to push that car to 98 MPH, even if it was legal. I'm not sure if my '06 Volvo has speed limiter. I'm working on getting the ability to edit its ECM (engine computer). I've had it slightly above 120, and factory spec max speed is 165, which might be the limit, but I don't know yet.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by anubi on Thursday March 28, @07:11AM (3 children)
My old Ford E350 7.3L IDI ( Purely mechanical Indirect Diesel Injection) speedometer goes to 85 ( 88 if you count the tics ), but I have never had it past 70. I understand my injection pump has a governor to protect the engine from overspeed, but I have never noticed it kicking in.
I drive pretty slow in this thing. It's 185 HP engine already strains against the pure inertial mass of this beastie. With this much stored kinetic energy, any error in judgement will likely prove fatal to all involved. With this in mind, I drive this thing like my life depends on it. Not only mine but someone else's too.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday March 28, @11:54AM (2 children)
Very wise indeed. I wonder what RPM the speed limiter kicks in. AFAIK Diesels don't keep making more HP as RPMs increase past a certain point, so there isn't much point in revving it to whatever the limit is. They're certainly known for their torque output. In the '90s a girlfriend had a Chevy Chevette. I was in a salvage yard looking for something for her car and found a Diesel Chevette. I can't imagine how sluggish that car had to be. For you non USAians, you probably know that Diesel cars are pretty rare in the US, but Diesels are very common in bigger vehicles here.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by crm114 on Wednesday April 10, @05:08PM (1 child)
Chevette Diesel was my first car.
My dad bought it for me, and said "You get this car because you aren't going to be leaving tire marks in any parking lots."
Isuzu engine - (because GM couldn't build a Diesel to save their lives). The Chevette was 0-60 in about 2 minutes, assuming we were going down hill. :) But it had the torque. We mounted a tow mount on it, and it pulled its own weight in lawn-care equipment up a 8% grade to grandma's house every week.
It was also a standard (stick) shift. Wonderful to drive that thing in a parking lot in the first snow of the year.
Taught my little sister to drive a stick in it. Drove half-way up our inclined driveway, pulled the emergency brake, put it in neutral, and had her get us home.
The Chevette Diesel was a one-of-a kind.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 11, @03:05PM
I test drove a 1978 VW Rabbit Diesel, stick shift. I accidentally selected 3rd gear instead of first through most of the test drive, it was dog slow but would easily launch like that. When I finally did find first gear it performed much better.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Funny) by Damp_Cuttlefish on Monday March 25, @08:59AM (1 child)
A few years on I had a Ford Fusion (Europe, not US flavour).
It also went to 140, and once hit 109 (Indicated) after about 15 minutes, downhill, with tailwind.
1.4 diesel, tiny little turbo and no intercooler.
In winter it ran cold and made no power.
In summer it ran hot and made no power.
But for a brief window in between you could realise the full and awesome might of it's 67 crank horsepower.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday March 26, @04:09PM
This makes me wonder if car companies were deceptively putting much higher mph / kph numbers on their speed-o-meters than the car was capable of going as a tool to help make the sale to the prospective buyer. However I wouldn't want to make an aspersion upon the fine people in marketing and sails.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday March 25, @09:19PM
I was getting the "Carter years" used cars until I got a real job, there was a US federal mandate for speedometers to only read up to 85mph.
I had a 1980 Honda Civic 1300cc which would indicate 85mph on level ground without a tailwind, but it was mis-calibrated about +5% (apparently also a common practice in those years), so true speed when at 85 indicated was more like 81mph.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday March 24, @08:27PM (1 child)
I bet they eventually integrate GPS mapping and directions, and replace the speedometer with a progress bar and ETA. Then when you make a wrong turn, it'll actually make sense when the progress bar goes backwards.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday March 26, @11:38PM
There are already aftermarket GPS based speedometers, much simpler to install than a driveshaft takeoff gear.
The point of the speedometer is safety/compliance with speed limit laws.
Our new vehicle has a smart display beside the speedometer with all kinds of fuel economy, tire pressure and other info. The higher price models also put lame navigation there, phone based navigation has lots of advantages over old software and maps they put in dash.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by boltronics on Monday March 25, @02:24AM (6 children)
Never owned a car, and I hope I never have to.
I work from home, in an inner city high rise apartment. I have a shopping mall 100m from my doorstep. That same mall has a tram stop that can take me anywhere in the CBD for free, and I can read or study my Anki decks while waiting.
Otherwise, I can use my foot scooter, ride my trusty 17-year old Trek 3900 mountain bike, or walk to get anything I need and get exercise at the same time.
As a Millennial in Australia, I also couldn't justify the expense of owning a car when struggling just to be able to afford a home. Now that I finally purchased one (at around 40 - thanks to Satoshi, AMD GPUs and some patience), having lived my entire life without owning a car, I see no reason to get one now. Maybe it's just because I've not lived with one, but I think that there's nothing worse than sitting in a metal box, wasting your precious time, just to get from point A to point B.
The environmental impacts alone (even just considering the manufacturing costs of the vehicle) makes such a luxury difficult to justify.
It's GNU/Linux dammit!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 25, @04:04PM (5 children)
Please disambiguate your use of the following terms:
CBD
Anki decks
Thanks!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 25, @09:44PM (4 children)
CBD is "central business district," which could be a number of places that use that name. The most populated is Seoul: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downtown_Seoul [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anki_(software) [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by boltronics on Monday March 25, @11:20PM (3 children)
I'm surprised. It's a very common term.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_business_district [wikipedia.org]
It's GNU/Linux dammit!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by janrinok on Tuesday March 26, @07:04AM (2 children)
Perhaps It is common in places with significant US influence. I too had never heard of it.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26, @08:24AM (1 child)
I think it is a side effect of the car-centric design of most US cities. In many cities around the world, there is a mixing of residential and commercial and even minor industrial zoning. But in the US, the different zones are much more distinct and are usually divided into explicit districts. Many mixed-use spaces have been destroyed because the car made them unnecessary. But in other places around the world, they do have mixed use and mass transit. This makes the designs of their cities much different because there aren't single use districts to the same extent because they quickly become untenable to the population without independent point-to-point transportation.
(Score: 3, Informative) by boltronics on Tuesday March 26, @09:10AM
I've lived in Hong Kong a few times (back before it was handed over to China), each time up until the maximum I was allowed to stay at a time on a tourist visa (which was 3 months). Even though most people there don't own a car, there are still different districts for different things. Sham Shui Po for computers and video games, some for clothes markets, etc. When I wanted a gas soldering iron to install a mod chip in my original Xbox, I had to go to another place for that by bus. When I wanted to go look at guitars, I had to again travel around by bus. It didn't matter if I lived in Kowloon or the New Territories. Possibly Hong Kong Island would be a different story (the wealthiest area with the tourist attractions)... not sure.
Contrast that with where I live in Australia. I've got computer stores, video game stores, record stores, multiple cinemas, art supplies, junk shops, anything you could want... even a Costco, all easily within walking distance. The furthest I have to travel for anything is ~3.5km if I need something from the hardware store, which is not often.
To put it into perspective, a 20km run is not a big deal. A 3.5km walk or ride is nothing.
But if I had to get in a car to go to place A because I needed to pick up my copy of Princess Peach Showtime, and then to place B to do grocery shopping, and then to place C to pick up the latest issue of The Way of the Househusband... I'd get tired of that lifestyle real fast.
It's GNU/Linux dammit!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Zinho on Monday March 25, @04:33PM (5 children)
Had to look up images of the instrument cluster online. It had two small ticks past the label for 80, so not quite 88; no flux capacitor for me!
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday March 25, @05:09PM (3 children)
85?
My early 80s Plymouth Horizon went up to labeled 85, I checked some online photos of the dash cluster. Super retro memories from looking at that dash cluster. Over 80 in an early 80s econobox car, BTW, was rather optimistic and somewhat scary. A 90s Saturn at 115 on the street felt safer than an 80s Horizon at 80.
Interestingly that heavy chunk of cast iron IIRC is still both the heaviest engine and the lowest power output engine I've ever personally owned. 84 horsepower on its best brand new day, and FAR over 300 pounds with all the crap installed on the engine stand, maybe 400 pounds total. My wife's giant van 2GR-FE engine supposedly weighs 359 pounds, although it is about 40 years newer and outputs well over three times the power.
It's crazy that in the old days like my grandpa's era, there were cars on the road with engines well over 700, even 800 pounds. You need a pretty serious engine hoist to pull one of those with a reasonable factor of safety. It never ceases to amaze me how the weight of the average American car engine has gone from 750 to 250 pounds, at around the same time as the weight of the average American has gone from 120 to 360 pounds.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Monday March 25, @09:23PM (2 children)
What amazes me is that they're making the engines lighter, they're making the sheet metal thinner, they're using plastic like crazy on things that used to be cast metals, and the overall vehicle weights are barely changing - going up if anything. But, ever since about 1990 the engines' power output has been going up with not so much improved fuel economy, I guess that's progress. I'd be much more impressed with a 100mpg econobox than a 400hp 5000lb SUV.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday April 11, @04:34AM (1 child)
On weights, plastics, etc., I'm pretty sure it's that they're making the passenger cage thicker and stronger, and needing to lighten everything else. Also making it energy-absorbing, "crumple zones", etc.- lighter, thinner, and plastics front and rear.
My fairly recent purchase '06 Volvo S40 has amazingly thick steel base platform, frame, pillars, cross brace, etc., and they did much to lighten everything outside of the passenger cage. It even has an aluminum hood (aluminium bonnet?) which surprised me when I kept trying to get a magnetic work light to stay in place. Trunk lid (boot) is steel, but again, the very outer parts, esp. far front and rear, are pretty thin. Really awesome car btw. I'm loving it too much. It'll get over 30 MPG highway if I behave.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 11, @11:24AM
My (US spec) 1980 Honda Civic carried 4 six foot+ adults plus cargo reasonably comfortably and got 30+ mpg all the time, 35 if I behaved well, in other words: almost never. 55hp, top speed 80mph on level ground in still air.
It also was crazy light, like 1600 lbs. 12" wheels, I had the "wide" 155 tires fitted. It would keep up with normal traffic away from stoplights if you accelerated at wide open throttle.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday March 26, @07:05AM
I was wondering if anyone had noticed that.....
(Score: 2) by Snospar on Monday March 25, @05:05PM (1 child)
I've opted for 120mph because I can't remember and I can't find any photos of the speedometer from cars of that era. I'm laughing at the spec sheet which lists the top speed as 112mph - not a chance, not downhill with a strong wind, not ever.
It was nippy away from the traffic lights because it was so light (fibre glass panels I think), but once you got above 30mph things deteriorated quickly. I think 0-60 was defined as "If you're lucky" rather than in seconds.
Huge thanks to all the Soylent volunteers without whom this community (and this post) would not be possible.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday March 25, @05:24PM
Your car shipped with S-rated tires good up to 112.
In the 90s I had a Saturn that shipped IIRC with U-rated tires and the engine computer refused to let the engine/transmission rev over 124. You could buy H-rated tires or even faster, but the engine computer provided IIRC a hard limit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 25, @05:31PM
Pretty sure it was 85 mph in the 4-cylinder 80s Mustang.
There were some good things and bad things about that car.
The good: fun to drive on dry pavement, actually pretty good power-to-weight for the time considering the smaller engine. That speedo matched up nicely with the tachometer, showing a kind of V shape at 65 mph, and on some roads we finally started to get that *legally*. Seeing that V shape meant not only that it was going at a good speed, but that the engine was running properly. Also, it had a hatch and you could actually fit a twin mattress and box spring in there with just a little over-hang. I actually moved across town like that a few times. It was $5k used, two years old, not high mileage; maybe 20k. This was a reasonable sum for me to pay off after a small loan from my parents, combined with paper route and Summer internship money. Those were the days.
The bad? Still using a carburetor, so roughly 20mpg but that was also decent for the time. The real problem: idiot gauge that showed normal when it was actually over-heating. I believe this dramatically shortened the life of the car. I eventually hard-wired a fan switch so the electric fan on the radiator would run when I knew it might overheat. It didn't make it too far pas 100k miles.
The 85mph speedo was, BTW, not any kind of hard limit. Being the early 20s driver I was, I tested it a few times on the open road. I could only estimate that I might have cracked 100mph, based on a linear interpolation of the space past the end. The sound of the engine revving down when you took your foot off the gas was really cool. It's a good thing I didn't hurt anybody.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Monday March 25, @06:57PM
It was a motorcycle, a 1977 Suzuki GS550 and the speedo went to 140 mph I think, not that the 35 horsepower the engine could generate would ever let it go that fast.
And as far as kph vs mph goes, I'm a fucking American and we rightly use miles! If you like kilometers, go to Canada. ;-)
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Spamalope on Tuesday March 26, @01:43AM (3 children)
With the 400 Cleveland could hardly get out of it's own way when I got it. Once I found the ignition wires were so bad they glowed with st. Elmo's fire at night and fixed that it was a bit better. Later I found the exhaust valve springs were of terrible quality from the factory and were so defective the valves floated at 2,000 rpm. That fixed and a nicer cam installed (and a few other upgrades), it'd bury the needle and was such a smooth cruiser @80 long distance. Fun times. Sadly it was rusting out when I got it, and not worth thousands to save at the time.
I 100% miss being able to see a gap ahead of me on a freeway on-ramp and easily accelerate to it with just a blip on the throttle.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by istartedi on Thursday March 28, @11:39PM (1 child)
Those big old engines could be quite durable if you were willing, able, and/or had the fund$ to replace the crappy stock parts. I used to salivate over bronze valve guides, blue-printing, and other stuff I read about in Hotrod Magazine that would not only up the horsepower but also make them smooth and durable. It was a passion that faded out in my 20s as the need to simply make a living intruded, and then the realization that even though there's something to be said for the simplicity of those things, modded old iron was not going to get me the mileage of any random 21st century econobox. Praticality took over, and a bit of green guilt. Still fun to think about those big wide cars though. Once we get past vendor lock in, we might even see a new birth of electric hot rodding. It'll never be a totally green hobby; but exhaust out the tail pipe will be a thing of the past and 0-60 times unbelievable in our youth are already routine for EVs.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by drussell on Saturday April 13, @01:48PM
0-100 in less than a second: https://youtu.be/XQIu5tZ0vbQ [youtu.be]
"AMZ Racing's "mythen" holds the world record for electric vehicle acceleration: 0-100km/h in 0.956 seconds."
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 11, @03:07PM
My first car was a '78 Toyota Corolla from Ohio - the right front suspension attachment to the unibody was completely rusted away... fun car for the summer, then sold before the left side had a chance to rust through.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26, @04:52AM
A truthful answer, but, as the car in question was a Lada 1200 estate there was a greater chance of fusion spontaneously occurring in old Ivan's engine than the beastie ever developing enough power to reach 70 mph, let alone 120.
Despite that, I wish I still had the old bugger, it was a reliable beastie.
(Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Tuesday March 26, @06:10AM
I had to look it up as I couldn't remember for sure, but the highest label on the speedometer of my beat-up, 20-year-old El Camino was 100 miles per hour. Realistically, though, it only reached 55mph while going downhill; I always used highway onramps that sloped down from overpasses in order to get it fast enough to merge on safely.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by cmdrklarg on Tuesday March 26, @06:39PM (23 children)
My first car (Dad owned) was a Ford Pinto, 1975 I think. Speedometer went up to 110 or 120 IIRC. I actually had that thing up to 100MPH once, but I watched the fuel gauge moving slowly down when I was.
The first vehicle I actually owned was a 1988 Ford Ranger, never really had it going very fast. Speedometer only went up to 85MPH looks like.
Buddy of mine drove an IROC Z28 Camaro, I forget the year. One time we were heading home from somewhere and he decided to step on it. The speedometer went up to 150MPH, and he buried it. He then let off the gas and let it coast. That needle stayed buried for 10 seconds before it started to go down again.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 28, @05:47AM (20 children)
My frist SoylentNews (janrinok owned) had a limit of one post per minute, and squashing the accelerator just made the aggregator lock up with arbitrary spams of mod, and shadow deletion of content, resulting in the 500 Internal Server Error that we have all grown to love. At least there are no alt-right click-bait stories, when the site is down. Happy Birthday, janrinok!
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday March 28, @06:01AM (19 children)
Back already?
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12, @01:07AM
I used to own a JATO Rocket Car. Speedo was useless. And where I went, we didn't need "roads".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JATO_Rocket_Car [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Friday April 19, @09:47PM (1 child)
"Buddy of mine drove an IROC Z28 Camaro, I forget the year. One time we were heading home from somewhere and he decided to step on it. The speedometer went up to 150MPH, and he buried it."
Was it modified? Heavily? An '85 IROC-Z 5L V8 seems to be rated at 145mph. A '90 5.7L V8 is rated at 146mph. Deep past 150mph seems like it would need to have been pretty heavily modified, including the transmission gear ratios. Or maybe not, I do NOT pretend to know much about Camaro variants. That was just a quick google.
Funny story -- I had a buddy with a Trans-Am of some sort from the same era, V8; rated the same at 145mph.
Speedo only went to 120 though; i think it must have been imported with a ratio convertor installed on the speedo though because it actually read kph. So, anyway, he buried the needle all the time since it maxed at 120kph. One day we decided to pace it with my 944T, and the trans am maxed out at ~85mph (~138kph). It was far from new when he bought it, and a little neglected -- so the lost horses wasn't really a suprise but it was far less than he imagined it could still do.
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Monday April 22, @09:09PM
I honestly have no idea. This was 35 years or so ago, so my memory could be somewhat faulty about it. I'm guessing it was an 87 or 88 model year.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 28, @03:23PM
120 was listed, but that baby had Chevy's smallest straight 6, 183. Not even down hill would it make 100mph safely. If that car could tell stories. :p
(Score: 2) by Rich on Saturday March 30, @02:51AM
I remembered that the rev counter went counterclockwise, but had to look up an image to be certain about the numbers. Brought back nice memories of that tiny mid-engined italian, red line at 7000, cut out at 7500 or so, a second carb barrel would open at around 5000. It could really scream (such are the Italians) - and almost keep up with an ordinary Golf GTI, despite lacking 30 horses (such are the Italians, too) :P Memories of the good times also let me forget what a rustbucket that was... ("these already rust in the advertisements", allegedly caused by high sulfur content Soviet export steel that was acquired through backroom deals)
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 30, @07:28PM (2 children)
Off topic policy complaint. Time to stop posting Boomer polls. Yes, it is so cute that your first car had a speedometer, that was not digitial. And that your first computer only had less than 640K RAM ('cause Billy said no one would ever need more!). But for those soylentils under 70, this nostalgia is boring. Please stop. Thank you.
(Score: 5, Touché) by janrinok on Saturday March 30, @07:41PM (1 child)
Polls are submitted just like submissions are. Over to you.....
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 03, @05:00AM
First road legal vehicle I drove, I think the speedo went to 90. I once got it up to 70. 1967 Chevy stepside pickup truck, six cylinder, three on the tree. It was never meant to go fast, of course.
Old ragged Ford station wagon read 120 - and I think I got it a little bit faster than 70. It wasn't meant to be fast, even when it was new, but it was a little faster than Grandpa's pickup truck.
'68 Chevy Impala was my first fast, dangerous car. Speedo went to 150 as I recall. 327 with a 3-speed slip-slide tranny, and highway gears. Never pegged it out, but I did get it over 140 a few times. It wasn't a muscle car by any stretch of the imagination, but it could, and did, beat a number of muscle cars in medium races - then it would keep on accelerating and leave those low-geared muscle cars behind. I've driven few cars since that I enjoyed as much.
(Score: 2) by Cyrix6x86 on Wednesday April 03, @04:08PM (2 children)
Pretty sure it was 85MPH. During that era, I think Congress mandated that speedometers capped at 85.
'84 Pontiac. White. Paid $600 in 1999; sold the stereo that came with it for $400. Found a rolled up blunt under the passenger seat.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 11, @03:11PM
We bought an ex-police Ford Taurus in the later '90s (when R12 was getting rare) - for about $1600 IIRC. Had a hard plastic prisoner seat in the back - got a like-new backseat from a junkyard for $20, paid another $10 for the seatbelts to go with it. Found a couple of arrest report copies and a nightclub VIP card under the seat, no blunts : ( Sold it a year later for $1800, the po po maintenance yard had kept it topped up with R12 long after ordinary people couldn't touch the stuff, first guy that test drove it paid our asking price.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by janrinok on Saturday April 06, @07:27AM (18 children)
I will delete your comment shortly.
There is NO new Board because currently there is NO new company. The Board is NCommander and Matt Angel.
You do not need my mailing address. But you can start your search centred on Lamballe, as I told you several years ago. I will exchange my mailing address for yours, once I have verified its accuracy.
Neither fliptop, martyb/bytram or myself are planning to be a member of any board, now or in the future.
We are under no legal obligation to reveal any of the information that you seek. I suggest that you initiate legal proceedings as you threatened to do 9 days ago. Try doing that and keeping your anonymity.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12, @06:53PM (1 child)
We who are about to be deleted, Salute you!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 17, @10:54PM
If you were deleted, how come you're still here? Huh?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 10, @05:43PM (8 children)
My cars don't have speedometers, only tachometers.
By the way, this is actually the case in NASCAR [reddit.com]. The cars don't have fuel gauges [reddit.com], either.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Wednesday April 10, @05:48PM (7 children)
I'll accept the hit on that one because it made me laugh!
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12, @07:56AM
While you are laughing and maniacally deleting, you might take a look at crafoo's latest bit of misogyny in his comment on the ECHR front page article. His own mother wants him deleted, if she read this.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 13, @07:57AM
We all think this is a axiom of Einstein's theory, but in fact it applied in meso-world scale to the SoylentNews. The speed at which janrinok can delete posts cannot exceed the rate at which ACs can post such posts as annoy janrinok. Hence, or rather Thence, maybe, therefore, his attempt to control the discussion on SoylentNews is Cosmologically untenable. Not possible. Give it up, janrinok. The Pukkas are aways gonna win.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Thursday April 18, @11:08AM (2 children)
Toyota Yaris, it has a digital speedo...