• Sign Up! To view all forums and unlock additional cool features

    Welcome to the #1 Fiesta ST Forum and Fiesta ST community dedicated to Fiesta ST owners and enthusiasts. Register for an account, it's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the Fiesta ST Forum today!

Honda stops production of the North American Car of the Year for 11 days due to slow sales

Messages
24
Likes
10
Location
San Diego
#2
The Accord looks is huge at 192 inches. It won’t fit in my single-car garage. I can’t blame consumers these days....I think i’d rather have mid-size SUV than a big sedan. But everyone has their needs and preferences.

We obviously prefer an economical sports car.
 


OP
jmrtsus

jmrtsus

1000 Post Club
Premium Account
Messages
1,121
Likes
582
Location
Ooltewah
Thread Starter #3
The Accord looks is huge at 192 inches. It won’t fit in my single-car garage. I can’t blame consumers these days....I think i’d rather have mid-size SUV than a big sedan. But everyone has their needs and preferences.

We obviously prefer an economical sports car.
I realize you think it is big......but, won't fit a single car garage? Really? I see F-150's in them here! Our single garage holds vans and SUV's.........you must have a strange single car garage. LOL!

BTW I don't think it is 16 feet long! 192 inches?

EDIT: Sorry, I was wrong......just did some checking and it is indeed 16 ft. On the surface that just made no sense to me. When I was young we had a couple of Edsel's and I thought they were giants, but they were a hair under 18 feet long. A base f-150 is 21 ft and they fit, my next door neighbor garages his 2017. So even if the Accord is big it is comparable to others in its class. My first car was under 10 foot long, a Fiat 500 so any car is huge compared to it. Our cars are 13.3 ft, the Accord styling makes it look extra long but it is only 2.6 ft longer than the Fiesta. My Fox body Mustang was only 15 feet. So the Accord like all other cars just seems to keep growing. Thank you Ford for my FiST! I don't want no stinking SUV or pick-em-up! Small cars rule the curves!
 


Last edited:

XR650R

1000 Post Club
Premium Account
Messages
1,286
Likes
1,073
Location
Eerie
#4
[video=youtube;VGQNVq5Ou4E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGQNVq5Ou4E[/video]
 


OP
jmrtsus

jmrtsus

1000 Post Club
Premium Account
Messages
1,121
Likes
582
Location
Ooltewah
Thread Starter #6
It's doubly sad because cars are so good now.
I found it interesting that based on road/track tests my FiST (MP-215) would beat a Shelby GT500KR in all performance categories. At the time I thought no car could ever beat the "King of the Road" except a tubbed Hemi! Now my 96 CI beast will eat it's lunch and get me 36MPG plus a faster and safer car.
 


zanethan

Active member
Messages
557
Likes
189
Location
Charlotte
#7
I found it interesting that based on road/track tests my FiST (MP-215) would beat a Shelby GT500KR in all performance categories. At the time I thought no car could ever beat the "King of the Road" except a tubbed Hemi! Now my 96 CI beast will eat it's lunch and get me 36MPG plus a faster and safer car.
You can't compare those numbers as tire technology was so poor in the '60s that muscle cars couldn't get traction off the line. If you put some decent tires on a GT500KR and the 0-60 drops to mid 5 seconds.

Our Fiesta's wouldn't stand a chance in a straight line against most muscle cars assuming they had modern tires.
 


OP
jmrtsus

jmrtsus

1000 Post Club
Premium Account
Messages
1,121
Likes
582
Location
Ooltewah
Thread Starter #8
You can't compare those numbers as tire technology was so poor in the '60s that muscle cars couldn't get traction off the line. If you put some decent tires on a GT500KR and the 0-60 drops to mid 5 seconds.

Our Fiesta's wouldn't stand a chance in a straight line against most muscle cars assuming they had modern tires.
I agree.....I was comparing road test to road tests and how we though they were so fast on the streets then. The truth of the matter is a well chosen small block was quite often faster on the streets. The Poly-glass tires were just a smoke generator for most big blocks. Even though I came from the other side of the tracks my high school was majority rich kids. My '59 Fiat 500 shared the parking lot with hemi's, 6-packs, 442's, goats and more Mustang/Camaro/Firebirds than you could count. The cars I had around me growing up were two GTO's one a tri-power 4 speed, '67 442, 68 Capri XR w/built 390, '68 Mustang 390 GTA, 440 4bbl Charger and a '68 Super Bee 383. All with bad brakes and leaned in a curve like a boat! Even then my dream cars were Abarth turbo Fiats, Mini's, BMW 1600's and a Triumph GT6+! Top dog on the street in my area of New Orleans was an AAR 'Cuda 340 6-pk 4 speed. It could hook while the big blocks either lugged off the line or smoked tires. So yeah a GT500KR that was tubbed out with slicks was a bad ass.....but on late 60's street tires I bet a Boss 302 would give it fits. What we thought of as the billy bad ass street cars of all time are easily eclipsed by today's 4 cyl micro motors. BTW, 0-60 times in my Fiat was infinite! It topped out at 56 mph on flat land! And I bet it took 30 seconds or more to get to 56. I think my Fiat is what shaped my car lust for the last 55 years. And no car has put more smiles on my face than my FiST. Only car I ever had that I can run out of balls before running out of speed and grip! Have not discovered her limits but on the roads I drive if you mess up you will do a Thelma and Louise exit. Long live fast cars, strong spirits, a good smoke, Cajun food and loose women. Not necessarily in order.
 


Quisp

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,091
Likes
351
Location
Davenport
#9
I had a 69 Mach 1 with a 428 CJ. It ran 13.6 with traction bars and L60 tires. 13 mpg with 3.50 gears. 8 to 10 with 3.91's. It spewed more pollution sitting still with open vented gas tank than a modern vehicle rolling down the road.
 


Messages
301
Likes
101
Location
Orange
#10
All I know about new cars is what I read on the window stickers on whatever is parked outside the front door at Costco to promote their car buying program. Gotta say, a new Accord Sport with lots of accessories was stickered at just a tick over $25k, and it looked very nice. It's a very impressive car, but... it's a ... car. And who wants those any more.
 


Messages
67
Likes
49
Location
Weyauwega
#11
Went for a ride in a top of the line 2018 Accord Touring. Very nice car but listed for 35K. Most all cars not selling well nowadays. One reason I picked up the FiST so cheap. I'm almost 57 and grew up in the days of big cars. Restoring a 1964 Impala SS convertible. The rear quarter panel alone is 10 feet long. When I was 19 had a 1967 Cadillac Sedan Deville. Now that was big.
 


Intuit

2000 Post Club
Messages
2,191
Likes
807
Location
South West Ohio
#12
https://www.theindychannel.com/news/national/up-to-1500-workers-at-ohio-gm-plant-could-be-laid-off
<<LORDSTOWN, Ohio - A decline in Chevrolet Cruze sales is what General Motors officials say is to blame for an employee reduction at the Lordstown, Ohio plant. Up to 1,500 workers could be affected by layoffs this summer. ...................>>

Looks like a nice vehicle...
https://www.bing.com/images/search?...-10&sk=&cvid=236A99DA9675490DBBB223EAD91699CC
 


Dpro

3000 Post Club
Premium Account
Messages
3,120
Likes
2,334
Location
Los Feliz (neighborhood in LA)
#13
https://www.theindychannel.com/news/national/up-to-1500-workers-at-ohio-gm-plant-could-be-laid-off
<<LORDSTOWN, Ohio - A decline in Chevrolet Cruze sales is what General Motors officials say is to blame for an employee reduction at the Lordstown, Ohio plant. Up to 1,500 workers could be affected by layoffs this summer. ...................>>

Looks like a nice vehicle...
https://www.bing.com/images/search?...-10&sk=&cvid=236A99DA9675490DBBB223EAD91699CC

Cruzes are not bad at all I rented one in Chicago in like 2014- 2015 and it drove and handled like a European car. I was actually shocked. I was surprised when they announced a Hatchback in 2016. Though I think they saw all the FoST and Focus hatches out in the wild and said we gotta do a hatch Cruze.

A little too late to the game though. Its actually the same platform GM uses for the current generation Volt.
 


me32

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,829
Likes
258
Location
fairfield
#14
I had a 69 Mach 1 with a 428 CJ. It ran 13.6 with traction bars and L60 tires. 13 mpg with 3.50 gears. 8 to 10 with 3.91's. It spewed more pollution sitting still with open vented gas tank than a modern vehicle rolling down the road.
You still have that car? I'd love to have one. Pass on down. I have no problem with the pollution.
 


me32

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,829
Likes
258
Location
fairfield
#15
I guess it's not that much of a car of the year after all. Just saying
 


Quisp

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,091
Likes
351
Location
Davenport
#16
You still have that car? I'd love to have one. Pass on down. I have no problem with the pollution.
Traded it for a 71 Torino GT 429 CJ . I don't think either one survived the 80's .
 


me32

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,829
Likes
258
Location
fairfield
#17
Traded it for a 71 Torino GT 429 CJ . I don't think either one survived the 80's .
That's terrible news. Both those are collected cars now. I'd take either. One day I'll have my classic hot rod to drive and show at hot August nights
 


Messages
174
Likes
134
Location
Metro Detroit
#18
You can't compare those numbers as tire technology was so poor in the '60s that muscle cars couldn't get traction off the line. If you put some decent tires on a GT500KR and the 0-60 drops to mid 5 seconds.

Our Fiesta's wouldn't stand a chance in a straight line against most muscle cars assuming they had modern tires.
I have to disagree with this statement, because I've actually driven a lot the classic muscle cars. First, the Hemi's, L88's, LS6's and ZL1 cars were quite rare. What was common was 325 HP SS396 and 383 Road Runners. So you had something like 330 crankshaft HP in a car that weighed in around 3600 lbs. Were they peppy, darned right they were, but they weren't brutally fast. Basically our FiST had the power to weight ratio to pull a few car lengths in the quarter against a base SS396 and would humiliate the SS396 off the line.

Note, the reason for the Fiesta being faster off the line is simple, it's that Turbo torque curve. Back in the day the peak torque on those V8's typically was around 3700 RPM and most of the HO engines really didn't start building torque until 2800-3000 RPM. The only way to get a good launch was to use the clutch as an extra low variable gear. What you had to do was "ride the clutch" to keep the RPMs up around 5 grand and feather the clutch engagement until first gear was fully engaged. Do that too often and you got to crawl under the car with a buddy to pull the transmission and swap in a new clutch. BTW, back in the 60's those trasnmission cases were cast iron and heavy. If you had an Automatic you were hosed, sticky tires would bog you down and street tires would spin up to 70 or 80 mph.

BTW, street tires did produce a LOT less traction than tires today but a set of Mickey Thompson 10 inch "cheaters" were rather cheap and did have excellent traction and a distinctly short "Tread life". BTW, 20 to 30 passes and they were toes up for traction. So, way back when you could get these cars to hook up well provided you were willing to pay for it.
 


Last edited:


Top