Consumer Reports: "Disappointing ION"...

In article >,
Blah blah > wrote:

> What ever a 1988 regal had. Cant remember what it had but if you look
> them up on ebay theres a lot of them that say the odometer stopped at 60
> some thousand.

Heh.


> Some port work might make his engine breath better. Not to hard to do
> on a harley so long as you have had experience porting heads. Some of
> the stock harley manifolds really sucked. Usually rough intake runners
> give you good low end torque but poor upper end hp. In the right hands
> any HD motor will do just as good if not better than a S&S. Just depends
> on who's going through it. Me? I could probably make a HD engine run
> really good but stock is all I want at this point in my life...

I think it's more an issue of his bike just not having the omph. Mine's
got a 95 inch motor, worked heads, 11.5:1 compression, cam, pipes, etc.
His is stock save for a cam and pipes. And oh yeah, 15 cubes smaller,
plus his bike's a bit heavier...

> Fit-and-finish aside, this is one of my favorite styled automobiles...
> http://www.carsearch.nl/photo.htm
> http://www.carsearch.nl/PONTIAC-FIERO-GT.htm


I liked the Fiero. I had a silver, base model '84 Fiero back in the early
90's. My father is a mechanic and bought it for $400 with a bad tranny in
it. He rebuilt the tranny and gave it to me to drive. It had the plain
steel wheels with the stock beauty rings. Even though it was the first
year Fiero, it was real dependable. That 2.5 iron Duke was one of the
strongest 4 bangers ever, albeit not a very spirited engine. Too bad GM
didn't put the high revving Quad 4 in it!

Similar cars from that era which I liked also were the '85 to '90 Subaru XT
(wedge shaped, very cool, available in AWD Turbo), Toyota MR2 (4AGE 16V
DOHC 1600cc engine that redlined at 7500), Corolla GT-S (same engine as the
MR2), Nissan Pulsar NX, Isuzu Impulse, and the Mitsubishi Starion.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"Justin" <justin1138@REMOVEnet> wrote in message
57.130...
> > Fit-and-finish aside, this is one of my favorite styled automobiles...
> > http://www.carsearch.nl/photo.htm
> > http://www.carsearch.nl/PONTIAC-FIERO-GT.htm
>
>
> I liked the Fiero. I had a silver, base model '84 Fiero back in the early
> 90's. My father is a mechanic and bought it for $400 with a bad tranny in
> it. He rebuilt the tranny and gave it to me to drive. It had the plain
> steel wheels with the stock beauty rings. Even though it was the first
> year Fiero, it was real dependable. That 2.5 iron Duke was one of the
> strongest 4 bangers ever, albeit not a very spirited engine. Too bad GM
> didn't put the high revving Quad 4 in it!
>
> Similar cars from that era which I liked also were the '85 to '90 Subaru
XT
> (wedge shaped, very cool, available in AWD Turbo), Toyota MR2 (4AGE 16V
> DOHC 1600cc engine that redlined at 7500), Corolla GT-S (same engine as
the
> MR2), Nissan Pulsar NX, Isuzu Impulse, and the Mitsubishi Starion.

You mentioned a couple of my all-time favorites!

Two friends of mine bought new white Corolla GT-Ss. The first was kind of
boxy with square headlights. The second (a couple of years later) was
sleeker with pop-up headlights. Both of these cars looked great in white,
and the second one was one of the first cars I noticed where the factory
painted everything body colored (incl. mirrors). These Corollas were really
sharp looking, IMO.

Someone who worked in the same building bought a new red Dodge Conquest TSi
(aka Mitsubishi Starion). Man, I loved how this car looked! It's hard to
find decent pics of these cars today and even when I do, the car looks a
little dated. But I remember how they made my jaw drop the very first time I
saw them. Not too many cars do this to me anymore, although maybe being in
my late-'30s I'm just not as interested.
--


Mark
'99 Civic Si


>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Simply put, the Ion is a mediocre car. Saturn is so close to be a
complete failure, wouldn't it be the VUE's revival, thanks to Honda's
V6.

Of course, what I said is not objective. And I don't think that a
car's evaluation has to be objective. the car has to show balance,
enough to make you forget about the car's weak points. In the case of
the Ion, it can't.

Competition 1, Saturn 0.



>
> Objectively, other than the gripers who should never have bought one, what
> do you think dislikes are that has made ION such a poor seller for Saturn?
> Any ideas?

>> Objectively, other than the gripers who should never have bought one,
>> what do you think dislikes are that has made ION such a poor seller
>> for Saturn? Any ideas?


My theory is that the Ion is just too ugly, compared to the '96 to '02 SL
series and compared to the new Civic, Kia Sephia, Dodge Neon, etc.. It
looks better than the Corolla though. The '96 to '99 Saturns, IMHO, were
wonderfully styled.



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article > , saintor1
@hotmail.com says...
> Simply put, the Ion is a mediocre car. Saturn is so close to be a
> complete failure, wouldn't it be the VUE's revival, thanks to Honda's
> V6.


The honda v6 isnt special believe me. Its power band is way to high for
a suv.



In article 30>, justin1138@REMOVEnet says...
> My theory is that the Ion is just too ugly, compared to the '96 to '02 SL
> series and compared to the new Civic, Kia Sephia, Dodge Neon, etc.. It
> looks better than the Corolla though. The '96 to '99 Saturns, IMHO, were
> wonderfully styled.

IMHO the ones you named off are far behind saturn in looks. Hell
saturns way ahead of most of those in crash test and thats not an
opinion. Kia's are coffins period. People buy Kia's because their stupid
enough to fall for that 10yr warranty crap. Nothing else is a factor to
them. There are 2 Ion body styles anyhow. The coupe and sedan look
nothing alike.

You obviously don't know what you are talking about. It has specially
low-end ooomph.

> The honda v6 isnt special believe me. Its power band is way to high for
> a suv.
>
>
>
> In article 30>,
justin1138@REMOVEnet says...
> > My theory is that the Ion is just too ugly, compared to the '96 to '02
SL
> > series and compared to the new Civic, Kia Sephia, Dodge Neon, etc.. It
> > looks better than the Corolla though. The '96 to '99 Saturns, IMHO,
were
> > wonderfully styled.
>
> IMHO the ones you named off are far behind saturn in looks. Hell
> saturns way ahead of most of those in crash test and thats not an
> opinion. Kia's are coffins period. People buy Kia's because their stupid
> enough to fall for that 10yr warranty crap. Nothing else is a factor to
> them. There are 2 Ion body styles anyhow. The coupe and sedan look
> nothing alike.
>

Specially low-end oomph? Pfft...I know what I'm talking about, I dont
buy trucks/suv's that need to be whined out to 5000rpm to reach their
powerband to get a load moving. Get with it. You might enjoy working an
engine at ridiculously high and wastefull rpms but I do not. Its just
more wear and tear.

Lets see... Peak torque at 3600rpm's or peak torque at 4500rpms. Which
engine will have to be screeming to keep up with the other? I'd rather
have torque down low where I need it and use it the most. Not only that
but less engine rotations draw less fuel and air and make for better
mileage. 4500rpm's to reach peak torque in a suv is a wasteful.

In article >, saintor1
@REMOVETHIShotmail.com says...
> You obviously don't know what you are talking about. It has specially
> low-end ooomph.
>
> > The honda v6 isnt special believe me. Its power band is way to high for
> > a suv.

Honda make an engine with *torque*????

They excel at engines with their torque and HP peaks being uselessly
high for a street car. Witness the S2000, the car that's downright
dangerous to merge onto a highway with unless the engine's going at
least 6 grand.

Given the way Hondas are now, I'd hate to imagine what they'd be like
without VTEC (which is a ****ty way to vary timming anyway), given
VTEC's supposed advantage is a broader powerband, though it's only real
advantage is marketing.

Oh yes, and is it too much to ask for an automatic that can make up it's
mind what gear it's in?

Absolutely.

To the contrary of popular belief, all Honda have a relatively flat torque
curve. Even the B16a on old Civic Si. Except that with sub 2L and
specialized vehicles like S2000, we are not talking about an high value.

But the big 4 like the 2.3-2.4L and V6 are fairly torquey at low-end.

I owned a non-VTEC and a VTEC Accords. The VTEC one had a much better sound
at high RPM and was slightly more powerful. Behind the obvious marketing
value, there is a technical point with VTEC. Now with i-VTEC std on
RSX/Si-R/Accord 4 cyl., the variable timing system is no longer at only high
RPM.

"Philip Nasadowski" > wrote in message
...
> Honda make an engine with *torque*????
>
> They excel at engines with their torque and HP peaks being uselessly
> high for a street car. Witness the S2000, the car that's downright
> dangerous to merge onto a highway with unless the engine's going at
> least 6 grand.
>
> Given the way Hondas are now, I'd hate to imagine what they'd be like
> without VTEC (which is a ****ty way to vary timming anyway), given
> VTEC's supposed advantage is a broader powerband, though it's only real
> advantage is marketing.
>
> Oh yes, and is it too much to ask for an automatic that can make up it's
> mind what gear it's in?