The (front) wheel reinvented?

[dabac]

Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
(http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
content...)

Apart from the obvious "advantage" of making potholes, curbs and
similar indefinitely more thrilling, is there any truth to their
statement of better cornering ability through the front quad set-up?

(sure, you get 4 contact patches instead of one, but you also get 1/4
of the pressure on each, so is it really a net gain in friction?)

And how often do you feel that tight cornering is what's holding you
back on your rides?

Wouldn't it look cute with 4 individual fenders on the front wheels
though? :)


--
dabac

[sergio]

On Feb 5, 11:26 am, dabac <dabac.34a...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:

> Apart from the obvious "advantage" of making potholes, curbs and
> similar indefinitely more thrilling,

Just stupid, in my opinion.

Sergio
Pisa

[unforgiven99@juno.com]

On Feb 5, 5:26 am, dabac <dabac.34a...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
wrote:
> Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
> contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
> (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
> link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
> content...)
>
> Apart from the obvious "advantage" of making potholes, curbs and
> similar indefinitely more thrilling, is there any truth to their
> statement of better cornering ability through the front quad set-up?
>
> (sure, you get 4 contact patches instead of one, but you also get 1/4
> of the pressure on each, so is it really a net gain in friction?)
>
> And how often do you feel that tight cornering is what's holding you
> back on your rides?
>
> Wouldn't it look cute with 4 individual fenders on the front wheels
> though? :)
>
> --
> dabac

Well, they clearly aren't buying into the idea that a low bottom
bracket might help cornering. Friction is a function of normal force
and surface behavior, not pressure. That's why their reference to the
scrubbing sound is irrelevant. When the front of this contraption
gets turned, the two wheels on the inside are going to break traction
by simple virtue of trying to turn on the same radius as the outer
two. When the inside tires break, weight goes to the outside, and
total friction stays the same. But I guess some people are easily
convinced that rapid tire wear is a sure sign that they're really
pushing the laws of physics.

[nmp]

dabac wrote:

> Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
> contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
> (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
> link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
> content...)
>
> Apart from the obvious "advantage" of making potholes, curbs and similar
> indefinitely more thrilling, is there any truth to their statement of
> better cornering ability through the front quad set-up?
>
> (sure, you get 4 contact patches instead of one, but you also get 1/4 of
> the pressure on each, so is it really a net gain in friction?)
>
> And how often do you feel that tight cornering is what's holding you
> back on your rides?
>
> Wouldn't it look cute with 4 individual fenders on the front wheels
> though? :)

Right.

In his next post, Carl is probably going to show us the same invention
but from the 1800's.

[Dave Reckoning]

"dabac" <dabac.34azdb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote in message
news:dabac.34azdb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com...
>
> Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
> contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
> (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
> link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
> content...)
>
> Apart from the obvious "advantage" of making potholes, curbs and
> similar indefinitely more thrilling, is there any truth to their
> statement of better cornering ability through the front quad set-up?
>
> (sure, you get 4 contact patches instead of one, but you also get 1/4
> of the pressure on each, so is it really a net gain in friction?)
>
> And how often do you feel that tight cornering is what's holding you
> back on your rides?
>
> Wouldn't it look cute with 4 individual fenders on the front wheels
> though? :)
>
>
> --
> dabac
>

Perhaps it it hubris but, I bet I can achieve more centripetal force on my
fixed gear bike than that kid in the picture can on that thing.

Am I crazy to think so?

--
Dave Reckoning
Noblesville, Indiana

[Werehatrack]

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 21:26:01 +1100, dabac
<dabac.34azdb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> may have said:

>
>Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
>contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
>(http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
>link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
>content...)

I think you got it right in the last part there.

The fact that something is possible does not automatically make it a
good idea. The fact that someone is making it does not always mean it
works. The fact that it appears to work on first exposure does not
prove it's going to be durable - or safe - in the long term.

Anyone else here recall the Shockster?

For that matter, anyone here still driving an old VW Rabbit?

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Steve Kirkendall]

dabac wrote:
> Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
> contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
> (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
> link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
> content...)
>
> Apart from the obvious "advantage" of making potholes, curbs and
> similar indefinitely more thrilling, is there any truth to their
> statement of better cornering ability through the front quad set-up?

A couple of years ago, I had the idea of mounting a skateboard in place
of the front wheel. The idea was attractive mostly because it's weird,
but I also hoped it would also make the steering "feel" a little better
for a chopper with an extra long fork and shallow steering tube angle.
Or even better: a street luge. Turning the handlebars would make the
skateboard lean, which would then cause it to turn.

But improving the handling of a chopper with long forks is a loosing
proposition anyway. With so little weight on the front wheel, nothing
is going to make a chopper handle well.

Besides, there's the pothole problem.

One other issue that nobody's mentioned: precession. With a big
wheel in front, if you start to lean toward one side or the other,
the gyroscopic precession will cause the front wheel to turn in that
direction, making the bike move back under you again. That's why
you can right a bike with no hands. The skateboard rig wouldn't do
that, so you'd need to work harder to maintain your balance.

That's how it seems to me anyway. I never did get around to trying
this out.

[datakoll]

On Feb 5, 5:45*am, sergio <serva...@df.unipi.it> wrote:
> On Feb 5, 11:26 am, dabac <dabac.34a...@no-
>
> mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> > Apart from the obvious "advantage" of making potholes, curbs and
> > similar indefinitely more thrilling,
>
> Just stupid, in my opinion.
>
> Sergio
> Pisa

whattsa matta? Diocletion didn;t get the potholes filled yet?

[Squat'n Dive]

On Feb 5, 9:25 am, unforgive...@juno.com wrote:
> On Feb 5, 5:26 am, dabac <dabac.34a...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
> > contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
> > (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
> > link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
> > content...)
>
> > Apart from the obvious "advantage" of making potholes, curbs and
> > similar indefinitely more thrilling, is there any truth to their
> > statement of better cornering ability through the front quad set-up?
>
> > (sure, you get 4 contact patches instead of one, but you also get 1/4
> > of the pressure on each, so is it really a net gain in friction?)
>
> > And how often do you feel that tight cornering is what's holding you
> > back on your rides?
>
> > Wouldn't it look cute with 4 individual fenders on the front wheels
> > though? :)
>
> > --
> > dabac
>
> Well, they clearly aren't buying into the idea that a low bottom
> bracket might help cornering. Friction is a function of normal force
> and surface behavior, not pressure. That's why their reference to the
> scrubbing sound is irrelevant. When the front of this contraption
> gets turned, the two wheels on the inside are going to break traction
> by simple virtue of trying to turn on the same radius as the outer
> two. When the inside tires break, weight goes to the outside, and
> total friction stays the same. But I guess some people are easily
> convinced that rapid tire wear is a sure sign that they're really
> pushing the laws of physics.

consider the setup on sand patches. I expect the quad to regain the
traction quicker.
But I wonder about cost per mile with the tiny size of these.
If they are anything like rollerblade wheels the costs must be thru
the roof.
And potholes... don't even mention those.
I wonder how well the quad setup would've worked if the wheels were in
the 8-12" range.
Steering must be a ***** then though.

[G.fried]

nmp schrieb:
> dabac wrote:
>
>> Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
>> contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
>> (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
>> link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
>> content...)
>>
>> Apart from the obvious "advantage" of making potholes, curbs and similar
>> indefinitely more thrilling, is there any truth to their statement of
>> better cornering ability through the front quad set-up?
>>
>> (sure, you get 4 contact patches instead of one, but you also get 1/4 of
>> the pressure on each, so is it really a net gain in friction?)
>>
>> And how often do you feel that tight cornering is what's holding you
>> back on your rides?
>>
>> Wouldn't it look cute with 4 individual fenders on the front wheels
>> though? :)
>



I have two fenders now ;-)


http://www.hyperbike.cc/docs/original/nachrechts.jpg

cheers


> Right.
>
> In his next post, Carl is probably going to show us the same invention
> but from the 1800's.

[Tom Sherman]

Werehatrack wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 21:26:01 +1100, dabac
> <dabac.34azdb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> may have said:
>
>> Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
>> contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
>> (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
>> link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
>> content...)
>
> I think you got it right in the last part there.
>
> The fact that something is possible does not automatically make it a
> good idea. The fact that someone is making it does not always mean it
> works. The fact that it appears to work on first exposure does not
> prove it's going to be durable - or safe - in the long term.
>
> Anyone else here recall the Shockster?
>
I saw on mounted on a LCD P-38 [1].

> For that matter, anyone here still driving an old VW Rabbit?
>
No, mine rusted to the point that the suspension mounts pushed through
their mountings. The floor was rusted enough that the car flooded when
driven through a puddle.

I learned my lesson and now drive cars designed and built by Japan based
manufacturers.

[1] <http://www.lightningbikes.com/p38.htm>.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[datakoll]

Sherman forgot to look under the floor mats. Think Rusto! Think?
I watched Jame Hunt drive the 6 wheel GP car-great end straight
acceleration.
That's what I thought when the picture pooped in-getting snubbed in a
pothole and running my mug down the pavement.
Great 28" Rims! how could that be avoided? the front end's gonna go
into a hloe and stay there for 3-4 days but ura gonna continue onward.
The frame could have a metal prong on the stem facing the rider so...
itsa joke right? In Benelux dowah dowha dododowha IN BENELUX...

[Ed Pirrero]

On Feb 5, 8:23*pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
wrote:
> Werehatrack wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 21:26:01 +1100, dabac
> > <dabac.34a...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> may have said:
>
> >> Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
> >> contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
> >> (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
> >> link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
> >> content...)
>
> > I think you got it right in the last part there.
>
> > The fact that something is possible does not automatically make it a
> > good idea. *The fact that someone is making it does not always mean it
> > works. *The fact that it appears to work on first exposure does not
> > prove it's going to be durable - or safe - in the long term.
>
> > Anyone else here recall the Shockster? *
>
> I saw on mounted on a LCD P-38 [1].
>
> > For that matter, anyone here still driving an old VW Rabbit?
>
> No, mine rusted to the point that the suspension mounts pushed through
> their mountings. The floor was rusted enough that the car flooded when
> driven through a puddle.
>
> I learned my lesson and now drive cars designed and built by Japan based
> manufacturers.

German cars are now fully galvanized, and rust is only a problem where
it is a problem for all other cars - in places where roads are salted.

The first generation of VW Rabbits were not galvanized, and rusted
quickly in areas with road salt. Oddly, in just the same fashion as
their Japanese contemporaries.

Out here in the West, where they do not see fit to salt the roads, I
see first-generation Rabbits quite often.

E.P.

[Tom Sherman]

datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>
> Sherman forgot to look under the floor mats. Think Rusto! Think?...
>
Nonsense. I looked under the floor mats and saw the surface of the road. :(

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[jim beam]

datakoll wrote:
>
> Sherman forgot to look under the floor mats. Think Rusto! Think?
> I watched Jame Hunt drive the 6 wheel GP car-great end straight
> acceleration.

jeepers, that shows your age!


> That's what I thought when the picture pooped in-getting snubbed in a
> pothole and running my mug down the pavement.
> Great 28" Rims! how could that be avoided? the front end's gonna go
> into a hloe and stay there for 3-4 days but ura gonna continue onward.
> The frame could have a metal prong on the stem facing the rider so...
> itsa joke right? In Benelux dowah dowha dododowha IN BENELUX...

[datakoll]

On Feb 5, 11:59*pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
>
> > Sherman forgot to look under the floor mats. Think Rusto! Think?
> > I watched Jame Hunt drive the 6 wheel GP car-great end straight
> > acceleration.
>
> jeepers, that shows your age!
>
>
>
> > That's what I thought when the picture pooped in-getting snubbed in a
> > pothole and running my mug down the pavement.
> > Great 28" Rims! how could that be avoided? the front end's gonna go
> > into a hloe and stay there for 3-4 days but ura gonna continue onward.
> > The frame could have a metal prong on the stem facing the rider so...
> > itsa joke right? In Benelux dowah dowha dododowha IN BENELUX...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

whoa! what happens when there's no centrifugal force on the front?
only at the rear.

[datakoll]

On Feb 6, 12:20*am, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 5, 11:59*pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > datakoll wrote:
>
> > > Sherman forgot to look under the floor mats. Think Rusto! Think?
> > > I watched Jame Hunt drive the 6 wheel GP car-great end straight
> > > acceleration.
>
> > jeepers, that shows your age!
>
> > > That's what I thought when the picture pooped in-getting snubbed in a
> > > pothole and running my mug down the pavement.
> > > Great 28" Rims! how could that be avoided? the front end's gonna go
> > > into a hloe and stay there for 3-4 days but ura gonna continue onward.
> > > The frame could have a metal prong on the stem facing the rider so...
> > > itsa joke right? In Benelux dowah dowha dododowha IN BENELUX...- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> whoa! what happens when there's no centrifugal force on the front?
> only at the rear.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The Hunt F1 6 wheel car had excellent turn in.

[Werehatrack]

On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 10:40:47 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
<gcmschemist@gmail.com> may have said:

>On Feb 5, 8:23*pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
>wrote:
>> Werehatrack wrote:
>> > On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 21:26:01 +1100, dabac
>> > <dabac.34a...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> may have said:
>>
>> >> Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
>> >> contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
>> >> (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
>> >> link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
>> >> content...)
>>
>> > I think you got it right in the last part there.
>>
>> > The fact that something is possible does not automatically make it a
>> > good idea. *The fact that someone is making it does not always mean it
>> > works. *The fact that it appears to work on first exposure does not
>> > prove it's going to be durable - or safe - in the long term.
>>
>> > Anyone else here recall the Shockster? *
>>
>> I saw on mounted on a LCD P-38 [1].
>>
>> > For that matter, anyone here still driving an old VW Rabbit?
>>
>> No, mine rusted to the point that the suspension mounts pushed through
>> their mountings. The floor was rusted enough that the car flooded when
>> driven through a puddle.
>>
>> I learned my lesson and now drive cars designed and built by Japan based
>> manufacturers.
>
>German cars are now fully galvanized, and rust is only a problem where
>it is a problem for all other cars - in places where roads are salted.
>
>The first generation of VW Rabbits were not galvanized, and rusted
>quickly in areas with road salt. Oddly, in just the same fashion as
>their Japanese contemporaries.
>
>Out here in the West, where they do not see fit to salt the roads, I
>see first-generation Rabbits quite often.

But, I will wager, not too many...and if you examine some closely, you
may find undetected faults or evidence of unusual repairs. There are
a number of long-term Rabbit structural failure modes that were not
discovered until the cars had been around for quite a while. One is
that the unibody tends to develop a large crack in the firewall panel
aft of the engine; another (which was known at least as early as 1983)
is that the inner cowl panel above the suspension mount tends to
develop cracks. Then there's the not-necessarily-salt-related
corrosion problem in wet areas due to water getting inside and rotting
out the brake lines under the carpeting. And those are just some of
the body-related problem spots; the electrical system faults, fuel
system glitches and various engine woes combined to make maintaining a
Rabbit more of a career than a pastime. But they were sturdy buggers
indeed by comparison to the Waterboxer Vanagon, which was afficted by
the infamous popcorn motor. (It is possible that I was the coiner of
that term; when I came up with it shortly after they came out, no one
else had heard it. My creativity did not endear me to the powers
within the organization.)


--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[datakoll]

ya gotta paint the little boxes with zinc chromate or linseed oil then
Rusto/metallic latex/Rusto.
Try a rotary brush with the datakoll brush holder.
incroyable!

ifn ura gonna run Rallye then the little box will crack here and there
after all it snot a Volvo.

[Ed Pirrero]

On Feb 6, 4:23 pm, Werehatrack <raul...@earthWEEDSlink.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 10:40:47 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
> <gcmschem...@gmail.com> may have said:
>
>
>
> >On Feb 5, 8:23 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> >wrote:
> >> Werehatrack wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 21:26:01 +1100, dabac
> >> > <dabac.34a...@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> may have said:
>
> >> >> Maybe according to the old adage "the more the merrier" the following
> >> >> contraption has seen the light of day: 'Streetsurfer'
> >> >> (http://www.streetsurfer.nl/streetsurfer) (Yes, despite the name the
> >> >> link does contain cycling content. Well, perhaps bicycle-looking object
> >> >> content...)
>
> >> > I think you got it right in the last part there.
>
> >> > The fact that something is possible does not automatically make it a
> >> > good idea. The fact that someone is making it does not always mean it
> >> > works. The fact that it appears to work on first exposure does not
> >> > prove it's going to be durable - or safe - in the long term.
>
> >> > Anyone else here recall the Shockster?
>
> >> I saw on mounted on a LCD P-38 [1].
>
> >> > For that matter, anyone here still driving an old VW Rabbit?
>
> >> No, mine rusted to the point that the suspension mounts pushed through
> >> their mountings. The floor was rusted enough that the car flooded when
> >> driven through a puddle.
>
> >> I learned my lesson and now drive cars designed and built by Japan based
> >> manufacturers.
>
> >German cars are now fully galvanized, and rust is only a problem where
> >it is a problem for all other cars - in places where roads are salted.
>
> >The first generation of VW Rabbits were not galvanized, and rusted
> >quickly in areas with road salt. Oddly, in just the same fashion as
> >their Japanese contemporaries.
>
> >Out here in the West, where they do not see fit to salt the roads, I
> >see first-generation Rabbits quite often.
>
> But, I will wager, not too many.

No, that is absolutely true. I do, however, see more of them, in
better shape, than Japanese cars of the same vintage.

I almost bought a diesel Rabbit that had been converted to a modern
1.9L TDI diesel motor - the test drive was quite eye-opening. The car
was severely overpriced for what it was, but the guy had done a very
nice job of all the modifications. Complete strip of the unibody to
the shell, then built up with essentially new moving parts. The
interior had been updated to heated leather seating, excellent stereo,
very nice instrumentation, and plenty of sound deadening (a flaw in
the originals). He had well over the $9k he was asking, and I
believed him when he said he could get the thing to reliably get
60mpg. (Considering the weight of the original Rabbit, and the weight
of the motor donor, I would have guessed better than 50 mpg).

It was also quite quick, nice to drive, and very quiet, even at
highway speed. He was justifiably proud of the car.

Every now and then, I am sad that I didn't pony up for the thing. But
I bought a diesel Mercedes and had enough of the $9k left over to push
my turbo Audi to close to 400HP.

Also, my MTB fits in the trunk of the Mercedes. It would have been
tough to get it in the Rabbit, even after taking off the wheels.

E.P.

[dabac]

Werehatrack Wrote:
> ... rotting out the brake lines under the carpeting.

What? Brake lines ran THROUGH the passenger compartment? Never seen
such a thing.

(well, actually I have, but that was in a heavily modified rally car,
and it certainly didn't have anythig as frivolous as carpets inside...)


--
dabac

[Crescentius Vespasianus]

One is
> that the unibody tends to develop a large crack in the firewall panel
> aft of the engine; another (which was known at least as early as 1983)
> is that the inner cowl panel above the suspension mount tends to
> develop cracks.
---------------
An intact firewall is essential. I
remember having to drive a Dodge truck
(70's) in the agricultural industry, and
every once and a while I would have a
fire under the hood. I was just a kid,
and didn't know any mechanics, but
somehow there would be gas leaks. So I
had fire extinguisher and I'd put the
fire out. Or if I just stopped, and
turned the ignition off, the fire would
go out. It never seemed to do any
damage, and I'd be on my way again. But
I did drill a hole in the firewall, and
if I saw fire coming through there, I
knew I had another engine fire going.

And then there was the a Triumph that I
drove in those days. One day I had an
electrical fire behind the dash. And
if I remember, I used snow to put it
out. Even after that fire, the car
still worked afterwards, it just stunk a
little. Even when I ride my bike,
occasionally I'll smell the burning wire
insulation of cars passing me, you can't
miss it.

[Peter Cole]

Werehatrack wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 10:40:47 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero

>> Out here in the West, where they do not see fit to salt the roads, I
>> see first-generation Rabbits quite often.
>
> But, I will wager, not too many...and if you examine some closely, you
> may find undetected faults or evidence of unusual repairs. There are
> a number of long-term Rabbit structural failure modes that were not
> discovered until the cars had been around for quite a while. One is
> that the unibody tends to develop a large crack in the firewall panel
> aft of the engine; another (which was known at least as early as 1983)
> is that the inner cowl panel above the suspension mount tends to
> develop cracks. Then there's the not-necessarily-salt-related
> corrosion problem in wet areas due to water getting inside and rotting
> out the brake lines under the carpeting. And those are just some of
> the body-related problem spots; the electrical system faults, fuel
> system glitches and various engine woes combined to make maintaining a
> Rabbit more of a career than a pastime.

I don't doubt that you had more experience than I did, but I can't
complain about my 1976 (German-made) Rabbit. It made it's 100K with
virtually no repairs. I only kept it 7 years when I replaced it with a
new Sirocco (11 years). That went 100K too, with only a CV joint. I
don't remember much rust on either car. Plenty of salt in Boston. Loved
both cars.

[Tom Sherman]

dabac wrote:
> Werehatrack Wrote:
>> ... rotting out the brake lines under the carpeting.
>
> What? Brake lines ran THROUGH the passenger compartment? Never seen
> such a thing.
>
My "Wabbit" (Golf I in Europe) had them there.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[Ed Pirrero]

On Feb 11, 2:07*pm, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Werehatrack wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 10:40:47 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
> >> Out here in the West, where they do not see fit to salt the roads, I
> >> see first-generation Rabbits quite often.
>
> > But, I will wager, not too many...and if you examine some closely, you
> > may find undetected faults or evidence of unusual repairs. *There are
> > a number of long-term Rabbit structural failure modes that were not
> > discovered until the cars had been around for quite a while. *One is
> > that the unibody tends to develop a large crack in the firewall panel
> > aft of the engine; another (which was known at least as early as 1983)
> > is that the inner cowl panel above the suspension mount tends to
> > develop cracks. *Then there's the not-necessarily-salt-related
> > corrosion problem in wet areas due to water getting inside and rotting
> > out the brake lines under the carpeting. *And those are just some of
> > the body-related problem spots; the electrical system faults, fuel
> > system glitches and various engine woes combined to make maintaining a
> > Rabbit more of a career than a pastime.
>
> I don't doubt that you had more experience than I did, but I can't
> complain about my 1976 (German-made) Rabbit. It made it's 100K with
> virtually no repairs. I only kept it 7 years when I replaced it with a
> new Sirocco (11 years). That went 100K too, with only a CV joint. I
> don't remember much rust on either car. Plenty of salt in Boston. Loved
> both cars.- Hide quoted text -

100k? Pfffft. Just getting broken in. I purchased an '83 GTI at
150k miles and ran it to nearly 300k. It had an unfortunate inelastic
collision with a Suburban when the Suburban's autotranny park pin
broke off and the thing rolled down a steep driveway, across the
street and right into the side of my pristine, fast, small car. I
drove that car like I stole it EVERYWHERE, and it still got over
30mpg. I then went out and bought a very nice, low-mile '78
Scirocco. 161k at purchase. I drove that car until it had 330k miles
on it. Some college students stole it and wrapped it around a phone
pole.

I still miss that car.

E.P.

[Peter Cole]

Ed Pirrero wrote:

> 100k? Pfffft. Just getting broken in. I purchased an '83 GTI at
> 150k miles and ran it to nearly 300k.

> I
> drove that car like I stole it EVERYWHERE, and it still got over
> 30mpg. I then went out and bought a very nice, low-mile '78
> Scirocco. 161k at purchase. I drove that car until it had 330k miles
> on it.

> I still miss that car.

I'm sure both of my VW's went way past 100K, just not with me. I miss
them both, especially the Sirocco, which was pristine, but having kids
made me trade it for a minivan <sigh>.

The thing that most impressed me about the Rabbit was its stability at
high speed. I'm embarrassed to admit it, but in those days I would drive
North to ski late at night on weekdays and would typically drive for an
hour or two at 100mph. At that speed the car felt like it was on rails.

[datakoll]

solid, predictable, fun driving, rain snow waterspouts typhoons glaze
ice
Monte off the floor.

[Ed Pirrero]

On Feb 12, 5:29*am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Ed Pirrero wrote:
> > 100k? *Pfffft. *Just getting broken in. *I purchased an '83 GTI at
> > 150k miles and ran it to nearly 300k.
> > I
> > drove that car like I stole it EVERYWHERE, and it still got over
> > 30mpg. *I then went out and bought a very nice, low-mile '78
> > Scirocco. *161k at purchase. *I drove that car until it had 330k miles
> > on it.
> > I still miss that car.
>
> I'm sure both of my VW's went way past 100K, just not with me. I miss
> them both, especially the Sirocco, which was pristine, but having kids
> made me trade it for a minivan <sigh>.
>
> The thing that most impressed me about the Rabbit was its stability at
> high speed. I'm embarrassed to admit it, but in those days I would drive
> North to ski late at night on weekdays and would typically drive for an
> hour or two at 100mph. At that speed the car felt like it was on rails.

My current Audi is like that. At 100+ mph, it is the picture of
solidity. You can tell the car was designed for that kind of
environment, and that U.S. roads are German car Purgatory.

I am dismayed by the Sciroccos I see these days. Either basket cases,
or unobtanium. I saw an '81 Scirocco S, Mars Red, 82k miles. The guy
had set the reserve to $5k. The bidding when I saw it was at $8.3k.

That's nearly what it sold for, new.

E.P.

[datakoll]

Once, I watched a man cry talking about the cost for replacing his
Audi' door latch mechanism.

[still just me]

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:20:58 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
<gcmschemist@gmail.com> wrote:

>> The thing that most impressed me about the Rabbit was its stability at
>> high speed. I'm embarrassed to admit it, but in those days I would drive
>> North to ski late at night on weekdays and would typically drive for an
>> hour or two at 100mph. At that speed the car felt like it was on rails.
>
>My current Audi is like that. At 100+ mph, it is the picture of
>solidity. You can tell the car was designed for that kind of
>environment, and that U.S. roads are German car Purgatory.

Funny you should mention that. While my Japanese cars are far more
nimble at lower speeds, they get squirrely at higher speeds. Even with
modified suspensions, they are still not right. Quality European cars
have the opposite configuration - a bit stodgy at lower speeds, but
much more stable at higher speeds, positively "comfortable".
(Disclaimer added by my attorney: "not that I ever exceed legally
posted US speed limits" :-).

>I am dismayed by the Sciroccos I see these days. Either basket cases,
>or unobtanium. I saw an '81 Scirocco S, Mars Red, 82k miles. The guy
>had set the reserve to $5k. The bidding when I saw it was at $8.3k.
>
>That's nearly what it sold for, new.

Ah, the vintage Scirocco... few left in good condition.

[Michael Press]

In article <van6r3ttebvrf2kiu9n147btidk3tt82hs@4ax.com>,
still just me <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:20:58 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
> <gcmschemist@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> The thing that most impressed me about the Rabbit was its stability at
> >> high speed. I'm embarrassed to admit it, but in those days I would drive
> >> North to ski late at night on weekdays and would typically drive for an
> >> hour or two at 100mph. At that speed the car felt like it was on rails.
> >
> >My current Audi is like that. At 100+ mph, it is the picture of
> >solidity. You can tell the car was designed for that kind of
> >environment, and that U.S. roads are German car Purgatory.
>
> Funny you should mention that. While my Japanese cars are far more
> nimble at lower speeds, they get squirrely at higher speeds. Even with
> modified suspensions, they are still not right. Quality European cars
> have the opposite configuration - a bit stodgy at lower speeds, but
> much more stable at higher speeds, positively "comfortable".
> (Disclaimer added by my attorney: "not that I ever exceed legally
> posted US speed limits" :-).
>
> >I am dismayed by the Sciroccos I see these days. Either basket cases,
> >or unobtanium. I saw an '81 Scirocco S, Mars Red, 82k miles. The guy
> >had set the reserve to $5k. The bidding when I saw it was at $8.3k.
> >
> >That's nearly what it sold for, new.
>
> Ah, the vintage Scirocco... few left in good condition.

Not the case with my 1999 Accord.
Out of the factory with Michelin
MXV4 Plus tires, it runs on rails at all speeds.

--
Michael Press

[still just me]

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:14:08 -0800, Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>
wrote:

>
>Not the case with my 1999 Accord.
>Out of the factory with Michelin
>MXV4 Plus tires, it runs on rails at all speeds.

Have you driven any Euro cars? Audi, Saab, BMW at speed?

I spent years modifying suspensions on Jap cars and was thrilled with
them...until I drove some Euro cars at high rates. I was shocked at
how the Euro mobiles hunker down at higher speeds and glue themselves
to the road. Japanese cars get looser as speeds climb.