Various Topics on Ford

..lvinGibs.. ..ilcity.c..

That is because although the Nissan Murano has a lot of HP
it develops the HP and torque at higher RPM's, typical of
Japanese engines, than do most American engines.. Torque at high
RPM is fine for a manual tranny but toque needs to
come on a lower RPM with any automatic tranny to be most
useful. Torque is what get one going and keep one going
on grades. If you want to get the most from your Murano
you need to keep the petal to the metal till you get the
RPM's up to get you to the speed you want quickly.



mike hunt




"Barry S." wrote:
>
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:57:22 GMT, "john cline ii"
> <jwciitakeout@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> ><MikeHunt@lycos.com> wrote in part:
> >
> >| Nothing in common with the Taurus. The 500 and the Mercury
> >| Montego are built on a completely new Ford ch***is, first offered
> >| on Volvos. 200 HP DOC V6. FWD and AWD with a CVT
> >| and available six speed tranny. It will be the bench mark for
> >| all mid sized cars. Production is under way.
> >
> >Actually, production starts 12 July 2oo4.
> >
> >The AWD comes ONLY with the CVT. The six speed is standard on FWD
> >models, with CVT optional...
> >
> >john cline ii, who hopes that helps.....
>
> I'll be curious to see how people react to the CVT... I've driven a
> Nissan Murano extensively and found I don't really care for the CVT..
>
> It just doesn't accelerate like I expect it to..
>
> __________________
> Note: To reply, replace the word 'spam' embedded in return address with 'mail'.
> N38.6 W121.4

..lvinGibs.. ..ilcity.c..

Body styling has nothing to do with the ch***is. The first
Chrysler minivans used the 'K' car ch***is. The Lincoln LS,
T-Bird and a Jag are all built on the same ch***is as is
the 2005 Mustang. None looks anything like the other.


mike hunt



Jeff wrote:
>
> "asdffdsa" <x@x.x> wrote in message news:fNVxc.14675$1L4.6479@okepread02...
> > So what does the new Ford 500 have in store?!?!
> >
> > Is it just a glorified Taurus?
> >
> > AWD?
> >
> > It looks nice kinda weird
> >
> >
>
> Is the new Ford Mondeo based on the same chasis as the Ford 500? Or is it
> still based on the Contour chasis? The pictures of the 500 and the Mondeo
> look quite similar.
>
> Jeff

..lvinGibs.. ..ilcity.c..

Body styling has nothing to do with the ch***is. The first
Chrysler minivans used the 'K' car ch***is. The Lincoln LS,
T-Bird and a Jag are all built on the same ch***is as is
the 2005 Mustang. None looks anything like the other.


mike hunt



Jeff wrote:
>
> "asdffdsa" <x@x.x> wrote in message news:fNVxc.14675$1L4.6479@okepread02...
> > So what does the new Ford 500 have in store?!?!
> >
> > Is it just a glorified Taurus?
> >
> > AWD?
> >
> > It looks nice kinda weird
> >
> >
>
> Is the new Ford Mondeo based on the same chasis as the Ford 500? Or is it
> still based on the Contour chasis? The pictures of the 500 and the Mondeo
> look quite similar.
>
> Jeff

.. .. ..i..

"Barry S." wrote:
>

> I'll be curious to see how people react to the CVT... I've driven a
> Nissan Murano extensively and found I don't really care for the CVT..
>
> It just doesn't accelerate like I expect it to..

I hae a Saturn Vue with a four cylinder and the CVT. Driving
it is different and takes some getting used to. However,
after an adjustment period, I like it. If you floor the car,
the engine speed immeadiately jumps up to around 6000 rpm,
and then the vehicle speeds starts increasing to match it.
It seems "wrong" but it accelerates briskly. According to
road test I have seen, the variable speed transmission
provides slightly better acceleration than the 5 speed
manual in the same vehicle.

Regards,

Ed White

.. .. ..i..

"Barry S." wrote:
>

> I'll be curious to see how people react to the CVT... I've driven a
> Nissan Murano extensively and found I don't really care for the CVT..
>
> It just doesn't accelerate like I expect it to..

I hae a Saturn Vue with a four cylinder and the CVT. Driving
it is different and takes some getting used to. However,
after an adjustment period, I like it. If you floor the car,
the engine speed immeadiately jumps up to around 6000 rpm,
and then the vehicle speeds starts increasing to match it.
It seems "wrong" but it accelerates briskly. According to
road test I have seen, the variable speed transmission
provides slightly better acceleration than the 5 speed
manual in the same vehicle.

Regards,

Ed White

.. .. ..i..

MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
>
> Body styling has nothing to do with the ch***is. The first
> Chrysler minivans used the 'K' car ch***is. The Lincoln LS,
> T-Bird and a Jag are all built on the same ch***is as is
> the 2005 Mustang. None looks anything like the other.

I don't know why this idea that the 2005 Mustang ch***is is
the same as the Lincoln LS keeps showing up. The facts are -

The front suspension is completely different
The rear suspension is completely different (radically so,
Mustang is a solid axle, Lincoln LS is IRS)
The engine and transmission choices are completely different
The tracks and wheelbases are different
The floor pans are completely different

But, both ch***is are both made from steel - so I guess they
are the same.

Ed

.. .. ..i..

MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
>
> Body styling has nothing to do with the ch***is. The first
> Chrysler minivans used the 'K' car ch***is. The Lincoln LS,
> T-Bird and a Jag are all built on the same ch***is as is
> the 2005 Mustang. None looks anything like the other.

I don't know why this idea that the 2005 Mustang ch***is is
the same as the Lincoln LS keeps showing up. The facts are -

The front suspension is completely different
The rear suspension is completely different (radically so,
Mustang is a solid axle, Lincoln LS is IRS)
The engine and transmission choices are completely different
The tracks and wheelbases are different
The floor pans are completely different

But, both ch***is are both made from steel - so I guess they
are the same.

Ed

..lvinGibs.. ..ilcity.c..

Perhaps it might be simply that you don't know what a
ch***is is? The Jag, LS and T-bird all have different steel
bodies and wheelbases. Have you ever actually looked inside of
an LS and a T-bird? The Cobra had the same ch***is and body as
the GT but different engine and rear suspensions.
Some mustangs had 4, 6 and 8 cy engines and solid axles yet the
Mark VII had an all aluminum 300 HP V8 and air suspension as well
as an independent rear suspension, all of them built on the same
ch***is yet different bodies


mike hunt




"C. E. White" wrote:
>
> MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
> >
> > Body styling has nothing to do with the ch***is. The first
> > Chrysler minivans used the 'K' car ch***is. The Lincoln LS,
> > T-Bird and a Jag are all built on the same ch***is as is
> > the 2005 Mustang. None looks anything like the other.
>
> I don't know why this idea that the 2005 Mustang ch***is is
> the same as the Lincoln LS keeps showing up. The facts are -
>
> The front suspension is completely different
> The rear suspension is completely different (radically so,
> Mustang is a solid axle, Lincoln LS is IRS)
> The engine and transmission choices are completely different
> The tracks and wheelbases are different
> The floor pans are completely different
>
> But, both ch***is are both made from steel - so I guess they
> are the same.
>
> Ed

..lvinGibs.. ..ilcity.c..

Perhaps it might be simply that you don't know what a
ch***is is? The Jag, LS and T-bird all have different steel
bodies and wheelbases. Have you ever actually looked inside of
an LS and a T-bird? The Cobra had the same ch***is and body as
the GT but different engine and rear suspensions.
Some mustangs had 4, 6 and 8 cy engines and solid axles yet the
Mark VII had an all aluminum 300 HP V8 and air suspension as well
as an independent rear suspension, all of them built on the same
ch***is yet different bodies


mike hunt




"C. E. White" wrote:
>
> MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
> >
> > Body styling has nothing to do with the ch***is. The first
> > Chrysler minivans used the 'K' car ch***is. The Lincoln LS,
> > T-Bird and a Jag are all built on the same ch***is as is
> > the 2005 Mustang. None looks anything like the other.
>
> I don't know why this idea that the 2005 Mustang ch***is is
> the same as the Lincoln LS keeps showing up. The facts are -
>
> The front suspension is completely different
> The rear suspension is completely different (radically so,
> Mustang is a solid axle, Lincoln LS is IRS)
> The engine and transmission choices are completely different
> The tracks and wheelbases are different
> The floor pans are completely different
>
> But, both ch***is are both made from steel - so I guess they
> are the same.
>
> Ed

....

<MelvinGibson@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:40C9C546.46D0A91F@mailcity.com...
> Body styling has nothing to do with the ch***is. The first
> Chrysler minivans used the 'K' car ch***is. The Lincoln LS,
> T-Bird and a Jag are all built on the same ch***is as is
> the 2005 Mustang. None looks anything like the other.

Thanks. Cars that look similar can have the same chasis as well (example
Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique).

Question: Do the Mondeo and 500 have the same chasis or different chases?

Jeff