Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / January 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

85 MPH speedometers?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Premier Bush - 25 Dec 2007 20:08 GMT
What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
the 85 MPH speedo and by 92 they had been replaced by the 140 MPH units, so
it was lifted sometime between those years.  I saw a picture of the new 2009
Corvette ZR-1 speedo and it was a 220 MPH unit, imagine that car with an 85
MPH unit.

(crossposted to rad because somebody there probably knows the answer)
Sherman L. Cahal - 25 Dec 2007 20:19 GMT
> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
> from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> (crossposted to rad because somebody there probably knows the answer)

My father's 1991 Chevrolet Silverado had the 85 MPH limit.
Floyd Rogers - 25 Dec 2007 20:27 GMT
> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it
> was from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang
> GT had the 85 MPH speedo and by 92 they had been replaced by the 140 MPH
> units, so it was lifted sometime between those years.  I saw a picture of
> the new 2009 Corvette ZR-1 speedo and it was a 220 MPH unit, imagine that
> car with an 85 MPH unit.

It is incorrect to say that they were "mandated".  They were *anticipated*
to
be mandated, but never were.

FloydR
Premier Bush - 25 Dec 2007 21:01 GMT
>> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I
>> know it was from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> *anticipated* to
> be mandated, but never were.

I didn't know that.  Thanks.
Brent P - 25 Dec 2007 21:38 GMT
>> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it
>> was from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> to
> be mandated, but never were.

They were mandated.

1976 or 1977 was the first model year, it was repealed in some time in the
80s.

It was one of those lovely claybrookian things.
necromancer - 25 Dec 2007 22:37 GMT
Brent P:
> >> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it
> >> was from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> 1976 or 1977 was the first model year, it was repealed in some time in the
> 80s.

Must have been 1977. My first car, a F**d Granada had a 120MPH speedo.

> It was one of those lovely claybrookian things.

I can believe that. One of those reminders of the dark ages of US
history.



Signature

"What about you? You got a problem with this?"
                            --Tony Soprano

Brent P - 25 Dec 2007 22:42 GMT
>  Brent P:
>> >> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Must have been 1977. My first car, a F**d Granada had a 120MPH speedo.

I think mav's only had 85mph speedos in the '77 model.
 
>> It was one of those lovely claybrookian things.
>
> I can believe that. One of those reminders of the dark ages of US
> history.

We are heading into a new dark age right now. New CAFE, stagflation,
etc.... sounds like the 70s are coming right back at us.
Premier Bush - 27 Dec 2007 03:51 GMT
> I think mav's only had 85mph speedos in the '77 model.
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> We are heading into a new dark age right now. New CAFE, stagflation,
> etc.... sounds like the 70s are coming right back at us.

Fitting, as right now we're in the middle of a sort of a "muscle era".
necromancer - 27 Dec 2007 14:27 GMT
Premier Bush:
> > I think mav's only had 85mph speedos in the '77 model.
> >
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Fitting, as right now we're in the middle of a sort of a "muscle era".

Only instead of works of art like the Mustang or the Corvette, the,
"muscle," is in rolling suppositories like the hummer. :(

Signature

Loco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend defends a known *DRUNK DRIVER*:

"Teddy went off a single lane bridge with no guard rail at night.
The real killer was the idiot who built the bridge. Next question."
      --Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/laura bush - VEHICULAR
HOMICIDE
          June 20th, 2006
Ref: http://tinyurl.com/zlnyz
Message ID: qcch92lislem5sqq92qgf7hf9mlm847sgh@4ax.com

Studemania - 27 Dec 2007 07:41 GMT
On Dec 25, 2:42 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
wrote:
> In article <MPG.21db501ea63b105d98a...@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, necromancer wrote:
> >  Brent P:
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

CAFE probably won't have much effect on fast cars being available.
Some friendly (greedy?) maker will make a rocket available.

POI: Years ago, Richard Branson was driving along a motprway in a
Range Rover and ended up sliding on the side of the vehicle into the
centre barrier, at speed. All inside survived.
As a salute to the car, he ordered 100 for his airline and music
firms.

Some car wit, upon hearing this said, "If he hadn't been in a Range
Rover, he wouldn't have had the accident!"
Brent P - 27 Dec 2007 09:11 GMT
> On Dec 25, 2:42 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
> wrote:

>> We are heading into a new dark age right now. New CAFE, stagflation,
>> etc.... sounds like the 70s are coming right back at us.- Hide quoted text -

> CAFE probably won't have much effect on fast cars being available.
> Some friendly (greedy?) maker will make a rocket available.

The wealthy will still be able to get them. The point is to keep the
such cars out of the hands of the serfs. The gas guzzler tax is nothing if
you're buying a $100K+ auto.

It's just about telling us what we can and cannot have, control as usual.
Ron's Inspector's Inspector - 27 Dec 2007 19:06 GMT
> In article
> <ba8cc6da-8449-4747-874e-da49618cdc30@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> It's just about telling us what we can and cannot have, control as usual.

If you want a gas guzzler, apply yourself at school, get a good job, work
hard, and buy one.  Nobody's stopping you, except maybe your need to be a
victim.

Asshat.
Brent P - 28 Dec 2007 05:51 GMT
>> In article
>> <ba8cc6da-8449-4747-874e-da49618cdc30@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> Asshat.

Nice projection there. I take it you don't understand how CAFE works.
CAFE stands for Corporate Average Fuel Economy. To avoid high penalties
on the cars they sell an automaker must meet the CAFE number. This will
cause said manufacturer not to offer cars with lower mpg figures. You
can't buy what's not made, and that's congresses intent. It wouldn't
matter how much money I made, the everyman affordable sports cars
wouldn't exist for sale... sure, there might be a pretender car like a
mustang ii, but that's about it. The cars the wealthy buy, those would
still be for sale.
Ron's Inspector's Inspector - 28 Dec 2007 14:45 GMT
>>> In article
>>> <ba8cc6da-8449-4747-874e-da49618cdc30@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
> mustang ii, but that's about it. The cars the wealthy buy, those would
> still be for sale.

It's not about "CAFE," you moron.

The point is, you idiot, that if you want to buy a gas guzzler, and only the
wealthy can buy gas guzzlers, then get a better job and become wealthy.
Brent P - 28 Dec 2007 19:55 GMT
>>>> In article
>>>> <ba8cc6da-8449-4747-874e-da49618cdc30@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>> mustang ii, but that's about it. The cars the wealthy buy, those would
>> still be for sale.

> It's not about "CAFE," you moron.

Yes it is, follow the thread dumbshit.

> The point is, you idiot, that if you want to buy a gas guzzler, and only the
> wealthy can buy gas guzzlers, then get a better job and become wealthy.

An education, a job, and working hard doesn't make one wealthy
99.999999999% of the time.
Ron's Inspector's Inspector - 31 Dec 2007 14:36 GMT
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <ba8cc6da-8449-4747-874e-da49618cdc30@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>
> Yes it is, follow the thread dumbshit.

It branched, shitforbrains.  Please try to keep up.  Or should I use
Clearview or something?
Brent P - 31 Dec 2007 18:27 GMT
>>>>>> In article
>>>>>> <ba8cc6da-8449-4747-874e-da49618cdc30@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
> It branched, shitforbrains.  Please try to keep up.  Or should I use
> Clearview or something?

You clearly haven't kept up fucktard.
Ron's Inspector's Inspector - 31 Dec 2007 19:00 GMT
>>>>> In article <fl0t01012he@news5.newsguy.com>, Ron's Inspector's
>>>>> Inspector
[quoted text clipped - 51 lines]
>
> You clearly haven't kept up fucktard.

This just in -- you can't "keep up" with someone who is below you.
Therefore, you will need to catch up with me; in order to "catch up" with
you I'll need to suffer some sort of traumatic brain injury.
Scott in SoCal - 28 Dec 2007 18:28 GMT
>> If you want a gas guzzler, apply yourself at school, get a good job, work
>> hard, and buy one.  Nobody's stopping you, except maybe your need to be a
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>on the cars they sell an automaker must meet the CAFE number. This will
>cause said manufacturer not to offer cars with lower mpg figures.

Ford still offers cars like the Cobra despire CAFE. They simply tack
on a $1000 "Gas Guzzler Tax." People who can afford it will pay it;
people who can't will drive Priuses.
Brent P - 28 Dec 2007 19:57 GMT
>>> If you want a gas guzzler, apply yourself at school, get a good job, work
>>> hard, and buy one.  Nobody's stopping you, except maybe your need to be a
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> on a $1000 "Gas Guzzler Tax." People who can afford it will pay it;
> people who can't will drive Priuses.

A large automaker offering a car with the gas guzzler tax has been the
exception, not the rule. With the new CAFE numbers, there won't be a
suitable mustang to base a GT500 off of. The mustang under the new CAFE
laws most resemeble a 1974 2.3L 4 cylinder mustang ii.
Scott in SoCal - 28 Dec 2007 20:34 GMT
>>>> If you want a gas guzzler, apply yourself at school, get a good job, work
>>>> hard, and buy one.  Nobody's stopping you, except maybe your need to be a
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>exception, not the rule. With the new CAFE numbers, there won't be a
>suitable mustang to base a GT500 off of.

Remember the SVT Focus?
Premier Bush - 11 Jan 2008 03:28 GMT
>>>>> If you want a gas guzzler, apply yourself at school, get a good
>>>>> job, work hard, and buy one.  Nobody's stopping you, except maybe
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
> Remember the SVT Focus?

Or the Mustang SVO?
Scott in SoCal - 27 Dec 2007 20:29 GMT
>On Dec 25, 2:42 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
>wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
>Some car wit, upon hearing this said, "If he hadn't been in a Range
>Rover, he wouldn't have had the accident!"

Speaking of Range/Land Rover testimonials, the other day the Chicago
area was subjected to a large windstorm, with gusts up to 88 MPH
recorded in the metro area. The evening newscast was covering the
aftermath: downed powerlines, roofs ripped off, etc. One incident
involved a BGS and its support that had been blown down onto the
freeway; some idiot driving a Rover ran over it and flattened two of
his tires.

While watching this report, I flashed back to a series of Rover TV
commercials that has been running on the local TV stations here in
SoCal. The commercials show Rover vehicles fording flooded streets,
driving up the side of a cliff to get around a section of road that
has been obliterated by a landslide, and other such macho off-road
activities that leave ordinary vehicles stranded. The voice-over says
something about how the chances of encountering Mother Nature on one
of her bad days is seven to one, and Rover vehicles are built for the
one. As this guy notes in his blog, that literally means that Rover
vehicles are built for the one GOOD day, and that they suck the rest
of the time!

http://davekearns.com/?p=18

I guess the guy with the two flat tires should have waited for the one
GOOD day. :)
Studemania - 27 Dec 2007 23:31 GMT
> On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 23:41:45 -0800 (PST), Studemania
>
[quoted text clipped - 72 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

I don't know if it still holds true, but the rumour in Coventry was
that the Solihull assembly guys were laughing at the fools who bought
the Discos.
necromancer - 28 Dec 2007 01:25 GMT
Scott in SoCal:
> Speaking of Range/Land Rover testimonials, the other day the Chicago
> area was subjected to a large windstorm, with gusts up to 88 MPH
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> freeway; some idiot driving a Rover ran over it and flattened two of
> his tires.

Happened to catch a glimpse of a Land Rover on 9A in j-ville today.
Seems that the makers/marketers of the Rovers are trying to ratchet up
the yuppie chest thumping VS GM and its hummer. The spare tire cover had
the phrase, "Hummer Recovery Vehicle," on it.

Wonder if there are any Ford or GMC heavy duty tow trucks with big
winches that have, "Land Rover Recovery Vehicle," written somewhere on
them....

Signature

"You can't legislate away people's right to be a.sholes!"
                      --Wesley Snipes as Simon Phoenix
                        in "Demolition Man."

Garth Almgren - 28 Dec 2007 07:37 GMT
>  Scott in SoCal:
>> Speaking of Range/Land Rover testimonials, the other day the Chicago
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> the yuppie chest thumping VS GM and its hummer. The spare tire cover had
> the phrase, "Hummer Recovery Vehicle," on it.

That bumper sticker slogan seems to be popular with the Jeep crowd too.

> Wonder if there are any Ford or GMC heavy duty tow trucks with big
> winches that have, "Land Rover Recovery Vehicle," written somewhere on
> them....

Heh, reminds me of a highly modified and well (ab)used Wrangler I've
seen running around here with a "Poser Recovery Vehicle" bumper sticker,
complete with a small graphic of a generic SUV with dubs high-centered
on a craggy rock.

I'm not a fan of bumper stickers in general, but at least this one isn't
brand specific. :)

Signature

~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
                      --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

Scott in SoCal - 28 Dec 2007 18:30 GMT
>>  Scott in SoCal:
>>> Speaking of Range/Land Rover testimonials, the other day the Chicago
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
>That bumper sticker slogan seems to be popular with the Jeep crowd too.

Indeed it is. I saw a Jeep with a similar slogan parked in the local
grocery store parking lot a few months back.  Mind you, this was no
bumper sticker; it was painted in big bold letters right across the
hood. :)
Paul Hovnanian P.E. - 28 Dec 2007 19:40 GMT
[snip]

> We are heading into a new dark age right now. New CAFE, stagflation,
> etc.... sounds like the 70s are coming right back at us.

Not a problem. Those who want bigger vehicles will buy a truck that has
a GVW high enough to make it into the exempt category.

Our local GM dealer carries pickup trucks based on the C4500 commercial
truck chassis.

Signature

Paul Hovnanian    paul@hovnanian.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Procrastinators: The leaders for tomorrow.

Scott in SoCal - 25 Dec 2007 22:56 GMT
> Brent P:
>> >> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>I can believe that. One of those reminders of the dark ages of US
>history.

Along with the colored line on the speedometer face at the 55 MPH
mark.
necromancer - 26 Dec 2007 00:46 GMT
Scott in SoCal:
> Along with the colored line on the speedometer face at the 55 MPH
> mark.

I've had a few cars like that; either the 55 was circled or in a
different color from the rest of the numbers. Interestingly enough, on
two former F**ds of mine, one an 87 and the other an 88 model had the 55
highlighted in red - this after the SL was raised to 65MPH. Both my
current cars have regular speedometers - the 96 indicated up to 110 and
the 2000 indicates up to 120MPH.

Signature

Speeders And Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS supports the troops again:
"Screw that 'he's just doing his job' justification. That's what the
nazi guards said. And that's what our child-torturing troops in iraq
say."

Speeders And Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS
(A.k.a: LBMHB/lb-VH/am/POA etc...)
1/7/2007, 1118 hours.

Ref: http://tinyurl.com/y7c5ah
Message ID: 1168186680.432376.36280@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com

Floyd Rogers - 26 Dec 2007 04:42 GMT
> Brent P:
>> >> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>
> Must have been 1977. My first car, a F**d Granada had a 120MPH speedo.

My '77 Porsche 924 had a 125mph speedo.
So did our '77 BMWs.  No Porsche or BMW ever had one.
Many cars never got the 85mph speedos.  Probably would be more
correct to say that the final phase-in year never happened, because
the repeal happened first.

FloydR
Mark F - 26 Dec 2007 06:14 GMT
> Brent P:
>> >> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>I can believe that. One of those reminders of the dark ages of US
>history.

My 1977 Nova's speedometer only went to 85mph.
Eeyore - 26 Dec 2007 07:14 GMT
> My 1977 Nova's speedometer only went to 85mph.

Could it actually make 85 ?

Graham
Scott M. Kozel - 27 Dec 2007 01:49 GMT
> > My 1977 Nova's speedometer only went to 85mph.
>
> Could it actually make 85 ?

Easily +.  I had a 1975 Chevrolet Nova.

Signature

Scott M. Kozel    Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Capital Beltway Projects           http://www.capital-beltway.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley   http://www.pennways.com

Premier Bush - 27 Dec 2007 04:35 GMT
>>> My 1977 Nova's speedometer only went to 85mph.
>>
>> Could it actually make 85 ?
>
> Easily +.  I had a 1975 Chevrolet Nova.

It probably depends on the engine.
Scott M. Kozel - 27 Dec 2007 21:42 GMT
> >>> My 1977 Nova's speedometer only went to 85mph.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> It probably depends on the engine.

In-line 6 cylinder engine, the smallest offered.  I didn't go beyond
100, but it was still climbing well at that point.   IIRC that speedo
went to 120.

--
Scott M. Kozel    Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Capital Beltway Projects           http://www.capital-beltway.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley   http://www.pennways.com
Rich Piehl - 27 Dec 2007 22:10 GMT
>>>>> My 1977 Nova's speedometer only went to 85mph.
>>>> Could it actually make 85 ?
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> 100, but it was still climbing well at that point.   IIRC that speedo
> went to 120.

My dad drove a company car that was a mid to late 70's version Nova for
a couple of years.  Had a V-8, but wasn't a SS.  It was pretty peppy and
I'm sure could have topped 85 pretty easily.  But the MPH ABSOLUTELY
STUNK! - like less than 15.  Pretty bad for such a small lightweight car.

Take care,
Rich

God bless the USA

Signature

That's one of the problems in this country
The nuts don't know they're nuts.

                      --Jeff Foxworthy

Scott M. Kozel - 28 Dec 2007 02:51 GMT
> >>> I had a 1975 Chevrolet Nova.
> >
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> I'm sure could have topped 85 pretty easily.  But the MPH ABSOLUTELY
> STUNK! - like less than 15.  Pretty bad for such a small lightweight car.

Mine got about 20 mpg on the highway.  I wouldn't call it small or
lightweight, either, as it was a 4-door sedan that weighed about 3,200
pounds.

Signature

Scott M. Kozel    Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Capital Beltway Projects           http://www.capital-beltway.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley   http://www.pennways.com

Rich Piehl - 28 Dec 2007 03:12 GMT
>>>>> I had a 1975 Chevrolet Nova.
>>> In-line 6 cylinder engine, the smallest offered.  I didn't go beyond
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> lightweight, either, as it was a 4-door sedan that weighed about 3,200
> pounds.

This was a 4 door, too.  Maybe it wasn't as light weight as it looked
like it ought to be.  At that time there were still enough land yachts
running around that this seemed small by comparison.  Not to a VW
Beetle, but to the other car in our garage which was a full size Catalina.

Take care,
Rich

God bless the USA

Signature

That's one of the problems in this country
The nuts don't know they're nuts.

                      --Jeff Foxworthy

Scott M. Kozel - 28 Dec 2007 03:23 GMT
> > Mine got about 20 mpg on the highway.  I wouldn't call it small or
> > lightweight, either, as it was a 4-door sedan that weighed about 3,200
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> running around that this seemed small by comparison.  Not to a VW
> Beetle, but to the other car in our garage which was a full size Catalina.

As we know, cars on average were quite a bit larger and heavier then,
compared to today.  The 1975 Nova was a compact for the time, but
considerably larger than a sub-compact.

Signature

Scott M. Kozel    Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Capital Beltway Projects           http://www.capital-beltway.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley   http://www.pennways.com

Rich Piehl - 28 Dec 2007 04:03 GMT
>>> Mine got about 20 mpg on the highway.  I wouldn't call it small or
>>> lightweight, either, as it was a 4-door sedan that weighed about 3,200
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> compared to today.  The 1975 Nova was a compact for the time, but
> considerably larger than a sub-compact.

Indeed.  Today you would be hard pressed to fit a V-8 in to something
labeled as a compact.  Then it wasn't all that unusual.  Remember the
Gremlin that had a V-8?  Talk about overkill.

Take care,
Rich

God bless the USA

Signature

That's one of the problems in this country
The nuts don't know they're nuts.

                      --Jeff Foxworthy

Scott M. Kozel - 28 Dec 2007 04:39 GMT
> > As we know, cars on average were quite a bit larger and heavier then,
> > compared to today.  The 1975 Nova was a compact for the time, but
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> labeled as a compact.  Then it wasn't all that unusual.  Remember the
> Gremlin that had a V-8?  Talk about overkill.

Mine had a 250 cubic inch displacement (CID) in-line 6 cylinder engine.

The V8 options were 262 CID, 305 CID, and 350 CID.

Signature

Scott M. Kozel    Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Capital Beltway Projects           http://www.capital-beltway.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley   http://www.pennways.com

Mark F - 28 Dec 2007 04:27 GMT
>> My 1977 Nova's speedometer only went to 85mph.
>
>Could it actually make 85 ?
>
>Graham

Yes, it had the same V8 they offered in the Camaro that year.
Eeyore - 26 Dec 2007 07:12 GMT
>  Brent P:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Must have been 1977. My first car, a F**d Granada had a 120MPH speedo.

Was the Grannie sold in the USA ?

Graham
necromancer - 26 Dec 2007 13:52 GMT
Eeyore:

> >  Brent P:
> > >
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> Was the Grannie sold in the USA ?

A car with that name was, yes. whether or not it was the same as what
was sold in the UK, I don't know.

Signature

Loco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend foams like a Bartlo
(and spelling or gramatical errors are left as is):

"Hey - necromancer is a criminal coddler. BTW the article
says 4X and then it says the BAC was .187 which doesn't
make much sense.  Not that it matters.  Drunk drivers who
kill should get life wo parole."

Ref: http://tinyurl.com/rqvtg
Message ID:i2k082lf3gv2p6h1sosge2bqma6uvce2ft@4ax.com

richard - 25 Dec 2007 20:29 GMT
>What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
>from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>(crossposted to rad because somebody there probably knows the answer)

I do not believe there is a fed regulation on it. I believe they do it
that way because nobody in there right mind is gonna drive 100mph.

Trucker sees another truck speeding down the hiway:
"Hey black KW how fast ya goin?"
"KW"
"KW? What the hell speed is that?"
"Hell if I know. The needle is resting over the KW logo at the bottom
of the dial."
Premier Bush - 25 Dec 2007 21:01 GMT
>> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I
>> know it was from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> I do not believe there is a fed regulation on it. I believe they do it
> that way because nobody in there right mind is gonna drive 100mph.

Me, but I've never been accused of being in my right mind.
Jack May - 25 Dec 2007 21:16 GMT
>>> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I
>>> know it was from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Me, but I've never been accused of being in my right mind.

I have driven my Porsche at 100 MPH on a country dirt road with one finger
on the steering wheel.   What is sane depends on the quality of your
machine.
Eeyore - 27 Dec 2007 05:34 GMT
> > richard wrote:
> >>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> on the steering wheel.   What is sane depends on the quality of your
> machine.

I've never exceeded an indicated 138.

Graham
Brent Jonas - 25 Dec 2007 21:27 GMT
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 14:08:03 -0600, "Premier Bush"
>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> I do not believe there is a fed regulation on it. I believe they do it
> that way because nobody in there right mind is gonna drive 100mph.

Usually a laid back driver, I was doing anywhere between 80 and up to
95 MPH on I-10 between Phoenix and Palm Springs, only because few
drivers bothered to obey the 75 MPH limit (it was the Sunday of the
Thanksgiving holiday), and I didn't want several road-rage drivers
breathing down my rear bumper, so I simply kept up with the general
flow.  (I still kept about 4 seconds of space, however).


-Brent
Bill - 26 Dec 2007 06:02 GMT
>>What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it
>>was
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> I do not believe there is a fed regulation on it. I believe they do it
> that way because nobody in there right mind is gonna drive 100mph.

Christmas Eve I was I was doing over 100 -- and that was on the entrance
ramp.

TGFS -- Thank God for Stuttgart.

- B
Ron's Inspector's Inspector - 27 Dec 2007 19:12 GMT
>>>What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it
>>>was
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> Christmas Eve I was I was doing over 100 -- and that was on the entrance
> ramp.

My '94 Sable stationwagon's digital speedometer was limited to 85MPH.  If
you'd exceeded 85MPH the digits started flashing.  However, if you went to
metric mode, it would just flip over to "136KPH," and it was OK up to at
least 150KPH (93MPH) -- the fastest I ever got it to go.
John F. Carr - 25 Dec 2007 21:26 GMT
>What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
>from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
>the 85 MPH speedo and by 92 they had been replaced by the 140 MPH units, so
>it was lifted sometime between those years.  I saw a picture of the new 2009
>Corvette ZR-1 speedo and it was a 220 MPH unit, imagine that car with an 85
>MPH unit.

The 85 mph speedometer regulation was proposed in 1976; adopted
during the Carter administration effective September 1, 1979;
and repealed as a result of Reagan's regulatory review effective
March 25, 1982.  I do not know whether the rule applied to
designated model years or to all cars manufactured between those
dates.

The same rule, FMVSS 127, also required tamper-evident odometers
on the theory that incorrect odometer readings were a safety hazard.
The odometer part of the rule never went into effect.

The notice of revocation of the speedometer rule stated:

   The agency's 1976 regulatory evaluation on Standard No.
   127 projected that the requirement that the limitation
   on the maximum speed shown on the speedometer scale
   would be five percent effective in reducing accidents
   involving young drivers. The projected effectiveness
   was based on the assumption that the 85 mph maximum
   speed indication would be a psychological deterrent to
   high speed driving. However, the agency has no data
   indicating that the speedometer scale limitation is
   effective to any extent in reducing the tendency to
   drive too fast and in reducing the resultant accidents
   and injuries. Also, the commenters provided no data
   indicating that the limitation had any actual effect.

Signature

   John Carr (jfc@mit.edu)

Premier Bush - 25 Dec 2007 21:33 GMT
>> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I
>> know it was from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>    and injuries. Also, the commenters provided no data
>    indicating that the limitation had any actual effect.

The 85 MPH speedo in my 1980 Mercury Cougar that I had when I was 16 sure
didn't deter me from driving like a bat out of hell when I was 16-17.  I'm
lucky I didn't wrap that car around a tree.  It had a 5.0L V8 (302 cid),
although it was detuned, but it did have decent top speed, and it was fast
enough to get a 16 year old in trouble.
Scott in SoCal - 25 Dec 2007 22:55 GMT
>What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
>from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
>the 85 MPH speedo and by 92 they had been replaced by the 140 MPH units, so
>it was lifted sometime between those years.

My 1991 LX 5.0 also had the 140 MPH speedo. That narrows the range of
possibilities down by a year for ya. :)
Garth Almgren - 28 Dec 2007 07:59 GMT
>> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
>>from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> My 1991 LX 5.0 also had the 140 MPH speedo. That narrows the range of
> possibilities down by a year for ya. :)

Standard FOX Mustangs had 85 MPH speedometers from '79 to mid-87 when
the Mustang got a mild face lift. During most of that time ('82 on up,
IIRC) the SSP Mustangs had a 140 MPH speedometer. After '87, they all did.

Not only did FOX bodied Fords have the 85 MPH speedo and the 55 MPH
highlighted, but 55 was aligned so that it was prominently in the 12:00
position:
http://www.v6stang.com/v6stang/pics/99999.jpg
(WARNING: graphic depiction of early-80s fake woodgrain, and high levels
of reflection and glare)

Signature

~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
                      --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS - 26 Dec 2007 00:31 GMT
> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
> from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> (crossposted to rad because somebody there probably knows the answer)

And when some ZR1 owner kills someone by speeding, GM is gonna get
sued for making cars that fast and for putting in speedometers that
encourage speeding. GM is stupid.
Larry Bud - 26 Dec 2007 03:36 GMT
On Dec 25, 7:31 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
<beta...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> > What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
> > from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> sued for making cars that fast and for putting in speedometers that
> encourage speeding. GM is stupid.

Only for weak minded morons like yourself can an inanimate object like
a speedometer encourage you to do ANYTHING.
Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) - 26 Dec 2007 04:25 GMT
>On Dec 25, 7:31 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
><beta...@earthlink.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>Only for weak minded morons like yourself can an inanimate object like
>a speedometer encourage you to do ANYTHING.

Yup; just the sound of a shoe tapping against tile gets SADDAM all hot
and bothered.

Signature

Half drunk is a waste of money.

Alex - 26 Dec 2007 16:15 GMT
On Dec 25, 7:31 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
<beta...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> And when some ZR1 owner kills someone by speeding, GM is gonna get
> sued for making cars that fast and for putting in speedometers that
> encourage speeding. GM is stupid.

The only stupid thing is that you you think a speedometer encourages
speeding.
--------------------
Alex
Ron's Inspector's Inspector - 27 Dec 2007 19:13 GMT
> On Dec 25, 7:31 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
> <beta...@earthlink.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> The only stupid thing is that you you think a speedometer encourages
> speeding.

Sure... like the Big Mac on the menu encourages fat-a.ses to order six of
them.
Bigfoot 4x4x4 - 26 Dec 2007 01:28 GMT
>What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
>from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>(crossposted to rad because somebody there probably knows the answer)

My 1987 IROC Camaro has a 145mph speedo. I believe '87 was the first
year that was available; others were 85mph. And my 1987 Porsche 944
has a 160, which is a bit optimistic, but also used on the Turbo. Of
course, it's furrin'; the rules may not have applied to them.
MLOM - 26 Dec 2007 03:15 GMT
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 14:08:03 -0600, "Premier Bush"
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> has a 160, which is a bit optimistic, but also used on the Turbo. Of
> course, it's furrin'; the rules may not have applied to them.

When on OIF duty in Kuwait in '03-04, our staff car was a Mazda 6 with
a 300 speedo.  Even in km/h that's quite fast (186 mph).  Kuwait
traffic generally went 140-160 km/h despite a 120 km/h posted SL.  One
time I was a passenger in it at a 140 cruise speed.  Some joker in an
SUV passed us.  The driver followed to check the SUV's speed but
backed off when the speedo reached 220.
MLOM - 26 Dec 2007 03:10 GMT
> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
> from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> (crossposted to rad because somebody there probably knows the answer)

Not exactly sure, but here's a clue from what I drove over the years.

My vehicles in HS and college were a 1971 Dodge Dart, a 1973 El Camino
(both with 120mph speedo's) and a 1972 GMC pickup (with a 100-mph
speedo).

Next was a 1981 Bronco with a 100 mph speedo.

Then was a 1989 GMC S-15 Jimmy with 85 speedo (though it was confirmed
to reach 103 once).

Then a 1989 Pontiac Lemans GSE.  IIRC with 120 speedo.  Redline
estimate would have been about 115 mph.

Then a 1989 Civic.  IIRC a 100 speedo.  Estimated redline around 110.

Then a 1999 F**d Ranger, 100 speedo.  It would have redlined past the
speedo limit.

Current vehicle: 2004 Jeep Wrangler, 120 speedo.  It does 60 at 2500
rpm and 75 at 3000.  Estimated redline about 120, but I haven't pushed
it past 90 (80's about as fast as is comfortable in it).
Larry Bud - 26 Dec 2007 03:34 GMT
> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
> from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
> the 85 MPH speedo and by 92 they had been replaced by the 140 MPH units, so
> it was lifted sometime between those years.  I saw a picture of the new 2009
> Corvette ZR-1 speedo and it was a 220 MPH unit, imagine that car with an 85
> MPH unit.

The Vettes got around the limit.  My '86 Vette has an eletronic
"gauge" that slopes up to 85, but the digital readout goes up to
whatever the car will go.
Seven - 26 Dec 2007 15:37 GMT
> > What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
> > from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> "gauge" that slopes up to 85, but the digital readout goes up to
> whatever the car will go.

My '84 and '85 300ZXs did as well. Digital dash had basically two
speed reads, one a linear progression from 0 to 85, one a digital MPH
readout. Haven't felt reckless enough to test the third digit yet.

My '88 Lebaron convertible registered to 120, with at least a
confirmed 105.

The '85 Lebaron was an 85 MPH. Pronounced vibration past 75, but there
was no way in hell I was going to tell my parents *that* bit back in
high school.

-Steven
Larry Harvilla - 26 Dec 2007 03:55 GMT
> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
> from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> (crossposted to rad because somebody there probably knows the answer)

My parents' 1984 Pontiac 6000 LE, the world's greatest piece of sh.t if
there ever was one*, had a horizontal (i.e., not circular) 85-mph
speedometer in it. As others have mentioned elsewhere in this thread, it
likewise had the small circled 55 sandwiched in between the much larger
50 and 60 indications.

My father also had two company cars whose dashboards I can reasonably
recall back in those days. Both his 1986 and 1990 Ford Tempo GLs had
circular 85-mph speedos. For some reason, I'm drawing a blank on the
1993 Tempo he had after those two, but I think that the 1996 Ford
Contour they gave him next had a higher-than-85 speedo.

I'm too young to recall the dash of the 1982 Dodge Aries he was assigned
immediately before those Tempos -- all I can remember about that car was
that he let an A/C drain hose blockage remain way too long, causing
puddling on the passenger-side floor.

* You really want to hear the stories of how big a piece of sh.t the
Pontiac was? E-mail me.

Signature

Larry Harvilla
e-mail: larry AT phatpage DOT org
blog-aliciousness: http://www.phatpage.org/news/

Highways section still in progress at http://www.phatpage.org/highways.html

Lost in my mind - 26 Dec 2007 09:10 GMT
> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
> from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> (crossposted to rad because somebody there probably knows the answer)

My Current Vehicles: 78 Thunderbird - 85MPH Circular, 95 Cherokee -
85MPH Circular, 07 Compass - 120MPH Circular
Past Vehicles I remember: 91 Town Car - 85MPH Horizontal, 79 and 87
Mustang - 85MPH Circular, 84 Caprice - 85MPH Horizontal.

I still notice several NEW vehicles with 85MPH speedo's, but they do
appear to be a dying breed.
Studemania - 27 Dec 2007 07:33 GMT
> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
> from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> (crossposted to rad because somebody there probably knows the answer)

Why not just be a safe driver and cover the speedo with a piece of
cardboard and select your speed by fitting in with the other traffic?
(I'm a retired safety officer and do a continuous "risk assessent" as
the conditions change.)
Scott in SoCal - 27 Dec 2007 20:31 GMT
>> What years were the 85 MPH speedometers mandated by the feds?  I know it was
>> from sometime around 1980 to sometime around 1990.  The 1987 Mustang GT had
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>(I'm a retired safety officer and do a continuous "risk assessent" as
>the conditions change.)

In the absence of revenue enhancement patrols, this would be sound
advice. The ONLY purpose for a speedometer, aside from verifying your
new land speed record, is to help drivers guard against highwaymen.
Studemania - 27 Dec 2007 23:39 GMT
> On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 23:33:28 -0800 (PST), Studemania
>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> advice. The ONLY purpose for a speedometer, aside from verifying your
> new land speed record, is to help drivers guard against highwaymen.

Do people still blink their lights, warning drivers coming the other
way of traps ahead? Of course, speeders (legal, not safety type) have
to be careful of entrance ramps and sky patrols.
DanKMTB@gmail.com - 28 Dec 2007 00:07 GMT
> > On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 23:33:28 -0800 (PST), Studemania
>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Probably depends on when and where.  I do, I was taught to by my
parents when I was a kid.  I notice others rarely do it for me in MA,
and probably 50% of the time in NH.
necromancer - 28 Dec 2007 01:28 GMT
Studemania:

> Do people still blink their lights, warning drivers coming the other
> way of traps ahead? Of course, speeders (legal, not safety type) have
> to be careful of entrance ramps and sky patrols.

I don't think so. Atleast around here in the southeast, I haven't seen
anyone do that in years.

Signature

"Don't taze me, bro!
<Bzzztzzztzzztzzt>
Owwwwwwwwwwwwww"
            --Andrew Meyer

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.