In reply to HappyAndy:
That was my Jeep for the first 6 months of ownership. I fixed the electrical issues, now it needs a clutch, rear main seal, and floor boards.
My old boss has an Escalade with a malfunctioning blend door. She had one quote to fix it at close to $1000. When she called the same shop 3 days later and said it was the same year Tahoe, the price dropped to around $600.
Someone please make a slanderous acronym out of Mitsubishi! I've been fighting with an Endeavor all afternoon, a vehicle under ten years old should not have its cv axel seized into a bearing hub, and for that matter it shouldn't have a bad hub bearing at just over 100k miles!
Sorry MITSU, no matter how fast your Evos are I will never touch one.
There's a good one for Mitsubishi... somewhere.
The axle thing is "normal" for any Mitsu-chassis Stratus/Avenger/the like. Whenever one needs an axle or a bearing, we usually quote both, plus a "maybe" quote if we have to get a knuckle from a junkyard, because sometimes even with heating the end of the CV orange-yellow it won't come out. Have seen this in cars as little as four years old.
They're kinda fun. We get to use the torches, a hub press, AND air hammers to try to get them apart.
I can believe the Escalade/Tahoe thing IF the Tahoe for that model year does not have the giant center console of doom that makes pulling the dash a giant PITA. Most Escalades do have that.
It's only hating you because it's name is misspelled.
It's Endeavour.
You had that problem with the space shuttle as well.
HappyAndy wrote: Someone please make a slanderous acronym out of Mitsubishi! I've been fighting with an Endeavor all afternoon, a vehicle under ten years old should not have its cv axel seized into a bearing hub, and for that matter it shouldn't have a bad hub bearing at just over 100k miles! Sorry MITSU, no matter how fast your Evos are I will never touch one.
Shit-u-bit-mi
In reply to HappyAndy:
I used to work for Mitsubishi. I'd never own one either.
However, a story I heard from my old boss there about how the starion got its name.
They wanted it to fight with the Mustang. So they called it a Starion. ::said in a Japanese accent:: "Ah, you know, Starion...very big horse."
"Yugos are crappy cars"
Yugos: that shows what happens when Italian engineering is mated with Communist work ethics, capitalist marketing and high alcohol consumption.
In reply to CGLockRacer:
I laffed!
CGLockRacer wrote: In reply to HappyAndy: I used to work for Mitsubishi. I'd never own one either. However, a story I heard from my old boss there about how the starion got its name. They wanted it to fight with the Mustang. So they called it a Starion. ::said in a Japanese accent:: "Ah, you know, Starion...very big horse."
I've heard that one before. It's funny, apocryphal or not.
So what is a Tredia?
JamesMcD wrote: I've heard that one before. It's funny, apocryphal or not. So what is a Tredia?
Isn't that the same as a Cordia?
They never did sell the Beadia, did they? Or would have it been a big wagon called the Sidewallia?
HiTempguy wrote:Curmudgeon wrote: Motorcycles: 'the Vincent Black Shadow was the fastest bike ever produced.' Nope, 'fraid not. It was the fastest production bike of its time (125 MPH) for about 5 years. 'The Vincent Black Shadow was so fast it was banned from the US.' Nope, never was. There were only 1700 produced and not many of them crossed the pond, but it was never banned from US sale.Are you into Vincents? My buddies father-in-law is hardcore into Vincents, quite possibly has the only running one in Alberta. He loves to talk about them, in case you are also a lonely Vincent owner...
"It'll keep up with an F117 until takeoff" "Take off?! can we handle that much torque?"
JamesMcD wrote:CGLockRacer wrote: In reply to HappyAndy: I used to work for Mitsubishi. I'd never own one either. However, a story I heard from my old boss there about how the starion got its name. They wanted it to fight with the Mustang. So they called it a Starion. ::said in a Japanese accent:: "Ah, you know, Starion...very big horse."I've heard that one before. It's funny, apocryphal or not. So what is a Tredia?
A horrible pile of Mitsubishi trash foisted on the unsuspecting public who were too cheap to buy a quality Japanese import.
but that's not important now.
I am so sick of hearing/reading that the new FRS/86/BRZ can't POSSIBLY have AWD. Like, that would defy the laws of physics and thermodynamics both if it did have AWD. If Subaru announced they had figured it out, people would assume it was an April Fool's joke until they found out it was true, then their heads would explode.
Hundreds of thousands of cars have been produced that had cylinders and axles/diff in the same plane. Oil pans with differentials built into them....think about that without your brain exploding!!! Seriously, while it may not be convenient to make this car AWD, it's certainly not impossible. Impossible means NOT POSSIBLE (which is different than NOT CONVENIENT). Say it's inconvenient, not feasible, PITA, whatever, but stop saying it's impossible.
Bryce
In reply to Nashco:
Does not compute. Don't know of a single car with a diff in the same plane as the cylinders. Still impossible (without in-hub electric motors), not a myth. 
I've seen plenty of cars with an engine in the back. Just sayin'. It isn't impossible it would just be a huge bunch of custom work that would change the entire flavor of the car.
Nashco wrote: I am so sick of hearing/reading that the new FRS/86/BRZ can't POSSIBLY have AWD. Bryce
It can't have AWD with Subaru transaxles. Most people, for some reason, think "Just put in the AWD parts from a WRX... brilliant!"
Without seeing one, but having had seen plenty of EJ engines, you can't put a diff under the engine without raising the engine a lot. The exhaust ports would kinda be in the way.
Unless you did some weird SAAB-like thign where the oil pan is also the diff case. I'm sure a hypoid diff would just love modern engine oil, too
RealMiniDriver wrote:HappyAndy wrote: Someone please make a slanderous acronym out of Mitsubishi! I've been fighting with an Endeavor all afternoon, a vehicle under ten years old should not have its cv axel seized into a bearing hub, and for that matter it shouldn't have a bad hub bearing at just over 100k miles! Sorry MITSU, no matter how fast your Evos are I will never touch one.Shit-u-bit-mi
I like those little pickups, Raiders I think they were called? Well, I only ever saw the Dodge re-badge (D50) in person, but they were pretty good, just a notch below the toyotas/nissans.
Evos are junk and it takes a lunatic to buy one over a WRX/STi.
Javelin wrote: In reply to Nashco: Does not compute. Don't know of a single car with a diff in the same plane as the *cylinders*. Still impossible (without in-hub electric motors), not a myth.
Lots of vehicles have cylinders and axles/diff in the same plane...as I said above. Don't believe me? Look into a Saab 900, GMT360, TH325/425, etc. These are the more pedestrian types, there are plenty more obscure/exotic versions of similar.
Possible.
Bryce
So now AWD drive for the twins is either a myth, lore or other incorrectness. I don't see the relevence to this thread.
Nashco wrote:Javelin wrote: In reply to Nashco: Does not compute. Don't know of a single car with a diff in the same plane as the *cylinders*. Still impossible (without in-hub electric motors), not a myth.Lots of vehicles have cylinders and axles/diff in the same plane...as I said above. Don't believe me? Look into a Saab 900, GMT360, TH325/425, etc. These are the more pedestrian types, there are plenty more obscure/exotic versions of similar. Possible. Bryce
I think he is talking about the horizontal plane, and you are talking about the vertical plane.
Basically, if you ran a string from the middle of one front wheel hub to the other front wheel hub it wouldn't go through the oil pan, it would go through the cylinder bores themselves. I still wouldn't call it impossible, but pretty tough.
Somewhere there is a cutaway that shows how low and far back (The car is really a front mount mid-engine, like an RX-7) the block is, but I can't find it.
EDIT: This isn't the image I was looking for, but you sort of get the idea.
Here's a myth/incorrectness: "Front-mid engine".
It's either front engine, or mid engine. Front engine is with the engine in front of the driver, mid engine is with the engine between the passenger compartment and the rear axle.
Yes, this is a massive peeve of mine.
I think if we combine front-mid-engineness with road-hugging weight, the Ford Econoline is the ultimate car
The unspoken problem with the current crop of diff-through-pan AWD systems such as BMW uses is that the wheels are huge and the engines sit low, so there is a lot of CV angle at the inner joints once you get axle connected from the diff way down there to the hub way up here. The plunging joints don't really like having that much angle long-term, or at least, you really know when the CVs start to get worn.
Yes, I know that there are some vehicles that have been using this design since time immemorial, but they generally had the diff sitting kinda high, or they had small (by modern standards) wheels and tires, or both. There's a big difference between a SAAB running on 205/50-15s, and a new car running on 245/40-19s or whatever. And even the SAABs kinda had problems, although easily solved by switching the inner CVs side-for-side.
This, by the way, is where I start blathering on about my idea for strut-mounted hub motors: The motor is concentric with the strut shaft and drives the CV via a ring and pinion. Yeah, it's horribly complex, but still kinda neat in concept.
Ah, the Rube Goldberg school of design.
In reply to Knurled:
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/mid-engine?region=us
You'll need to log in to post.
