 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Mazda / Mazda Miata / January 2006Remote start for standard transmission?
Now that I'm heading into my first Minnesota winter in a long time without heated parking, I've been getting a bit jealous of people with remote starters. I know I should just tough it out, but that aluminum shift knob gets pretty cold and I hate wearing gloves while driving. All of the remote start systems I've seen claimed to be for auto transmissions only, but I would think that with a bit of creative wiring, one could get one to work with a standard transmission. If one wanted remote-start for a standard transmission, you'd have to bypass the clutch/starter interlock switch. I don't think I'd be comfortable doing that unless there was a neutral switch that would prevent the remote starter from kicking in whith the transmission in gear. Do Miata's have a neutral-switch that could be used for such an interlock?  SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! What GOOD is a at CARDBOARD suitcase ANYWAY? visi.com You'll be trying to turn the tranny (in neutral) over along with the engine - ain't gonna make it some mornings. > Now that I'm heading into my first Minnesota winter in a long > time without heated parking, I've been getting a bit jealous of > people with remote starters. > You'll be trying to turn the tranny (in neutral) over along with the > engine - ain't gonna make it some mornings. Darn. You're right. That hadn't occured to me. At -20F, the engine running at idle has a hard time turning the cold transmission in neutral. A battery that's also at -20F probably isn't going to do it. Maybe a remote controlled block heater... SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! .. does your DRESSING at ROOM have enough ASPARAGUS? visi.com > Maybe a remote controlled block heater... That's a much better idea than letting your engine idle for more than a minute. Think about all that unburned fuel dripping down the cylinder walls and contaminating your oil. Start the car, fasten the seatbelt, and drive away, gently. At -20, there's no way around gloves and a knit hat. SignatureLanny Chambers '94C, St. Louis http://www.hummingbirds.net/alignment.html > Maybe a remote controlled block heater... Oh man, I gotta story... This girl I dated had an old beater. One hot summer day she managed to flood it and ran the battery down trying to start it. So... she plugged in the block heater. That's what you do when it won't start, right? Musta been 95 that day. :) miker > You'll be trying to turn the tranny (in neutral) over along with the > engine - ain't gonna make it some mornings. > > > Now that I'm heading into my first Minnesota winter in a long > > time without heated parking, I've been getting a bit jealous of > > people with remote starters. The extra drag of a cold trans isn't that great at starting speeds. I disabled the clutch switch on Miata and my Toyota truck mainly so I could start the engine with the car in neutral. I don't run the Miata in bad weather, but I do use the truck and it has started at -10F while in neutral. I use a block heater on my Benz diesel-auto trans- and it works quite well. >> You'll be trying to turn the tranny (in neutral) over along with the >> engine - ain't gonna make it some mornings. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >disabled the clutch switch on Miata and my Toyota truck mainly so I could >start the engine with the car in neutral. Is there something I do not see? Why do you want start without disengaging the clutch? Is not the less parts moving along, the better? >I don't run the Miata in bad weather, but I do use the truck and it has >started at -10F while in neutral. >I use a block heater on my Benz diesel-auto trans- and it works quite well. Leon SignatureLeon van Dommelen :) Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .) rammm@dommelen.net http://www.dommelen.net/miata EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen) > >The extra drag of a cold trans isn't that great at starting speeds. I > >disabled the clutch switch on Miata and my Toyota truck mainly so I could [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Leon I dislike placing thrust loads on the crankshaft before the oil is circulating. A few parts in the transmission add no appreciable load to the starter. Automatic transmission are turned with the starter aren't they? > Is there something I do not see? Why do you want start without disengaging > the clutch? Because he's not in the car, he's inside with the remote. miker >> You'll be trying to turn the tranny (in neutral) over along with the >> engine - ain't gonna make it some mornings. > > The extra drag of a cold trans isn't that great at starting > speeds. I have doubts the engine will be able start with that much load on it. There have been more than a few times when I've had to give it some throttle so the engine had enough torque to turn the transmission in neutral. Assuming the battery and starter can provide enough torque, maybe the ECU is smart enough to compensate for a heavy load while starting. SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! PEGGY FLEMING is at stealing BASKET BALLS to visi.com feed the babies in VERMONT. > >> You'll be trying to turn the tranny (in neutral) over along with the > >> engine - ain't gonna make it some mornings. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > can provide enough torque, maybe the ECU is smart enough to > compensate for a heavy load while starting. I would change the trans oil. I always start my cars in neutral and they always start. Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's not in neutral? > > >> You'll be trying to turn the tranny (in neutral) over along with the > > >> engine - ain't gonna make it some mornings. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I would change the trans oil. I always start my cars in neutral and they > always start. > Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you > considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's > not in neutral? That's why I asked about neutral interlock switches. SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! Yow! It's some people at inside the wall! This is visi.com better than mopping! > > Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you > > considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's > > not in neutral? > > That's why I asked about neutral interlock switches. I bypassed the neutral interlock on both my stick shift cars. I really dont need to be protected from myself. >>> Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you >>> considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I bypassed the neutral interlock on both my stick shift cars. > I really dont need to be protected from myself. And you have a remote starter? SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! I selected E5... but at I didn't hear "Sam the Sham visi.com and the Pharoahs"! >>> Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you >>> considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I bypassed the neutral interlock on both my stick shift cars. I > really dont need to be protected from myself. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply > >>> Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you > >>> considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. You have lived a very sheltered life. >>>>> Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you >>>>> considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > You have lived a very sheltered life. No, you're really selling yourself short if you believe that. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply > >>>>> Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you > >>>>> considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > No, you're really selling yourself short if you believe that. No I'm not. You're a sheltered fool if disabling a clutch safety switch is the dumbest thing you've ever heard. >>>>>>> Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you >>>>>>> considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > No I'm not. You're a sheltered fool if disabling a clutch safety > switch is the dumbest thing you've ever heard. Oh, I'm sorry, you've misunderstood me. I was talking about your public bragging about removing the neutral interlock on your cars. It's not that often that you hear someone so boldly point out their lack of intelligence on a public forum. It's not that you DID it...it's that you're so PROUD of it. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply > > No I'm not. You're a sheltered fool if disabling a clutch safety > > switch is the dumbest thing you've ever heard. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > -- > tooloud AHA! You are Captain Underpants. > No I'm not. You're a sheltered fool if disabling a clutch safety switch is > the dumbest thing you've ever heard. tooloud is no fool, but I don't see what the big deal is with the clutch switch. It is recommended that you remove this when installing a high-performance clutch, Flying Miata even sells the unit that allows the bypass without doing you own wiring. I drove a miata for over 5 years with the switch engaged. The miata that I have now driven for over a year with the Act 3 Clutch seems every bit as safe to me as the setup I had before. It was never a big deal to push the clutch in, but it is kind of nice not to have to do it now. The dumbest thing I ever heard said was "Hey guys, watch this!" when I was in high school. That was just a few minutes before I heard the ambulance sirens. :-) Pat > >>> Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you > >>> considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Then I guess you're going to hear it again - I'm another that thinks the same way. When I turn the key to crank, I want it to crank. No discussion, no arguments about safety or lack thereof, JUST CRANK AND DO IT NOW. Being able to do that has gotten me home on multiple occasions. Snapped clutch cable on a Honda Civic. Had to start it in gear and pop-shift it, stalling it out/turning it off for stop signs, then re-starting in gear all the way home. (Just under 30 miles) To keep it at least *KIND OF* on topic, The same "start it in gear, pop shift, stall/shut-down for stops" that worked for the Civic has gotten me to the parts joint for the rebuild kit, and back home to the tools in my *MAZDA* (See? On topic :) ) 626 (Uh-oh... lost the topic again) when the clutch slave cylinder cup puked. (slave-cup failure on Mazdas, whether Miatas or 626s, seems to be relatively common, according to the number of posts from Miata drivers I've seen about it around here. I'd have a hard time disagreeing. Fortunately, it's also cheap, quick, and easy to fix. But first, you've gotta get car, tools, and parts all in the same place at the same time.) It's for *PRECISELY* that reason that I typically own and have physical possession of a vehicle with a stick for less than 24 hours before any clutch and/or stick-position interlock that will keep it from cranking when I turn the key gets permanently defeated. I don't need a flesh-and-blood nanny, and I sure as hell don't need one made out of metal and shaped like a car! Editorial/opinion section: What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, anyway? Is it really *THAT* much effort to walk over, open the door, and turn the key?? Ignoring that part, what kind of complete idiot would try to put one on a car with a stick, and why??? Dunno about anybody else, but I was taught from day one that a properly parked stick is always *AT LEAST* left in either first or reverse, and it's a damned good idea, if not flat-out mandatory, to set the parking brake besides. With that in mind, the idea of having some gizmo around that somebody could push - intentionally or otherwise - to get my car to crank without physically turning the key is sheer insanity, complete with a side-order of stupid! It's about like tits on a bilygoat, since it'll never be safe to push that button unless you're sitting in the driver's seat - Making the whole idea utterly (udderly? :) ) pointless! SignatureDon Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist, or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow" somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info > What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, > anyway? Is it really *THAT* much effort to walk over, open the > door, and turn the key?? They seem pretty popular around here when the temperature hits -20F. > Ignoring that part, what kind of complete idiot would try to > put one on a car with a stick, and why??? On presumes for the same reasons people put them on other cars you ugly, stupid, obnoxious a.shole. SignatureGrant Edwards grante@visi.com > > What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, > > anyway? Is it really *THAT* much effort to walk over, open the > > door, and turn the key?? > > They seem pretty popular around here when the temperature hits > -20F. Michigan-raised, m'lad, so I've BTDT, and I'm not impressed. If you're that fragile, and not bright enough to dress suitably for the weather, well... <shrug> what what more needs to be said? > > Ignoring that part, what kind of complete idiot would try to > > put one on a car with a stick, and why??? > > On presumes for the same reasons people put them on other cars > you ugly, stupid, obnoxious a.shole. Oh, OK, I think I understand... That must be your code for "I've got nothing meaningful to say, but I disagree with your opinion, so I'll spew insults to make sure everybody knows I'm still here." Do I get a gold star for guessing right? Or is it the usual reward of "another dose of insults" this week? Hmmm... maybe it's my lucky day, and the prize is a <plonk> this time? That's always a favorite amongst those practicing your methods. SignatureDon Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist, or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow" somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info > Michigan-raised, m'lad, so I've BTDT, and I'm not impressed. > If you're that fragile, and not bright enough to dress > suitably for the weather, well... <shrug> what what more needs > to be said? I don't have remote start. >> On presumes for the same reasons people put them on other cars >> you ugly, stupid, obnoxious a.shole. > > Oh, OK, I think I understand... You were the one who was calling people lazy stupid a.ses. I just assuumed that was the way you preferred to be addressed. If not, then I suggest you not address others in that manner. SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! I am covered with at pure vegetable oil and I am visi.com writing a best seller! >>> What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, >>> anyway? Is it really *THAT* much effort to walk over, open the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > that fragile, and not bright enough to dress suitably for the weather, > well... <shrug> what what more needs to be said? You come across as a big, dumb, brute of a man that refuses to see past the end of his nose. <snip> Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply >>>> What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, >>>> anyway? Is it really *THAT* much effort to walk over, open the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > You come across as a big, dumb, brute of a man that refuses to > see past the end of his nose. Somebody as tough as he probably doesn't believe in indoor plumbing or electricity either. SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! Now I'm concentrating at on a specific tank battle visi.com toward the end of World War II! > >>> What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, > >>> anyway? Is it really *THAT* much effort to walk over, open the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > You come across as a big, dumb, brute of a man that refuses to see past the > end of his nose. Your opinion is noted - And given exactly the treatment it warrants: None. SignatureDon Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist, or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow" somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info >>>>> Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you >>>>> considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > want it to crank. No discussion, no arguments about safety or lack > thereof, JUST CRANK AND DO IT NOW. With that logic, you should stop locking your home and car doors. I mean, you want to JUST GET IN AND DO IT NOW, right? None of that silly "safety" stuff. > Being able to do that has gotten me home on multiple occasions. I've never been in that situation. I either choose more reliable cars than you or maintain them better. > Snapped clutch cable on a Honda Civic. Had to start it in gear and > pop-shift it, stalling it out/turning it off for stop signs, then > re-starting in gear all the way home. (Just under 30 miles) That's what AAA is for. > To keep it at least *KIND OF* on topic, The same "start it in gear, > pop shift, stall/shut-down for stops" that worked for the Civic has [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > it's also cheap, quick, and easy to fix. But first, you've gotta get > car, tools, and parts all in the same place at the same time.) I guess I don't find stories of nursing disabled cars to multiple places very brag-worthy. > It's for *PRECISELY* that reason that I typically own and have > physical possession of a vehicle with a stick for less than 24 hours > before any clutch and/or stick-position interlock that will keep it > from cranking when I turn the key gets permanently defeated. I don't > need a flesh-and-blood nanny, and I sure as hell don't need one made > out of metal and shaped like a car! Better get that ABS system disabled then. Pull the fuse for the airbags while you're at it...I mean, you're smarter than a silly CAR, aren't you? Who are you to have a CAR tell you what to do? You sound like the idiots on the Infiniti forum I frequent that brag about turning off the stability control every time they get in the car because they think they can do a better job. > Editorial/opinion section: > What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, anyway? Is it > really *THAT* much effort to walk over, open the door, and turn the > key?? <shrug> If you truly fail to see any worthwhile attributes to a remote starting system, you're thinking rather simply. I've had one--it can be a very handy device, provided that you attach it to a car that you're sure won't lurch forward when the wrong guy tries to use it. > Ignoring that part, what kind of complete idiot would try to put one > on a car with a stick, and why??? Dunno about anybody else, but I was > taught from day one that a properly parked stick is always *AT LEAST* > left in either first or reverse, and it's a damned good idea, if not > flat-out mandatory, to set the parking brake besides. On that we can agree. > With that in > mind, the idea of having some gizmo around that somebody could push - [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to push that button unless you're sitting in the driver's seat - > Making the whole idea utterly (udderly? :) ) pointless! It's at least as safe as turning the ignition yourself and walking away from the car, like many people tend to do anyway. It's also safe enough that GM got the idea past its legal department and is now offering it as as option on many of its cars--only on vehicles equipped with automatic transmissions, though. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply > >>>>> Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you > >>>>> considered what will happen if you start your Miata when it's [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > you want to JUST GET IN AND DO IT NOW, right? None of that silly "safety" > stuff. <heh> Little do you realize... I can't recall the last time I laid eyes (let alone hands) on a key that fits either of the house locks. > > Being able to do that has gotten me home on multiple occasions. > > I've never been in that situation. I either choose more reliable cars than > you or maintain them better. It must be nice to be able to afford to have whatever flavor car you choose, rather than living with what your budget permits... > > Snapped clutch cable on a Honda Civic. Had to start it in gear and > > pop-shift it, stalling it out/turning it off for stop signs, then > > re-starting in gear all the way home. (Just under 30 miles) > > That's what AAA is for. Not every 16 year old (my age at the time of that incident) can afford AAA - Hard enough paying for car, license, tags, insurance, gas, etc, etc, etc. For the record, today, I won't get in the car without my AAA Plus card in my wallet,and it *HAS* saved my bacon a few times, but for "If I can limp it home/wherever I need to be to fix it on my own, it'll save me one of my tows, and won't mean I'm sitting here on the side of the road with my thumb up my a.s for the next hour waiting for the tow-truck to arrive" > > To keep it at least *KIND OF* on topic, The same "start it in gear, > > pop shift, stall/shut-down for stops" that worked for the Civic has [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I guess I don't find stories of nursing disabled cars to multiple places > very brag-worthy. <shrug> That's your thing, I guess. It's not a brag, it's a simple statement of facts - The car broke. By doing something that the nanny-society would prefer to make impossible - All in the name of "safety", of course - I was capable of making it "unbroke". > > It's for *PRECISELY* that reason that I typically own and have > > physical possession of a vehicle with a stick for less than 24 hours [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Better get that ABS system disabled then. Haven't owned a car with ABS, and don't want one. > Pull the fuse for the airbags > while you're at it... If I ever end up with a car equipped with airbag, more than the fuse will be pulled... > I mean, you're smarter than a silly CAR, aren't you? > Who are you to have a CAR tell you what to do? Despite your attempt to get in a dig, I don't see it as such. I agree 100% with both of your statements. *I* am the brains of the operation when I'm behind the wheel, and I will not tolerate the vehicle trying to second-guess my decisions, regardless of how "unsafe" it might deem them to be. Period. > You sound like the idiots on the Infiniti forum I frequent that brag about > turning off the stability control every time they get in the car because > they think they can do a better job. Wouldn't know anything about that - I don't, and likely never will, drive an Infiniti. > > Editorial/opinion section: > > What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, anyway? Is it [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > very handy device, provided that you attach it to a car that you're sure > won't lurch forward when the wrong guy tries to use it. Well, I'm sure that they *CAN* be useful in some situations, but for the most part, I see a remote-start as more of a "rich kid/showoff" toy, rather than a practical addition to automobiles. > > Ignoring that part, what kind of complete idiot would try to put one > > on a car with a stick, and why??? Dunno about anybody else, but I was [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > on many of its cars--only on vehicles equipped with automatic transmissions, > though. Well, the very last part ("only on vehicles...") is at least SOMEWHAT reassuring. As far as the rest of it... <shrug> When I "turn the key and walk away", I generally mash the clutch as part of the operation, and before exiting the vehicle, ALWAYS make sure it's not in gear, the brake is set, and the vehicle isn't going anywhere. Such "hands-on verification" of status simply cannot be done (or at least, to my knowledge, has not been succesffully done so far) by pushing a button on a remote-start keyfob from the comfort of your Barcalounger/inside the store/wherever else that isn't "in the driver's seat". SignatureDon Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist, or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow" somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info <snip> >> With that logic, you should stop locking your home and car doors. I >> mean, you want to JUST GET IN AND DO IT NOW, right? None of that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I can't recall the last time I laid eyes (let alone hands) on a key > that fits either of the house locks. OK, I take back that "dumbest thing I ever heard" comment from before. You've now pointed out that you don't lock the doors to your house on a public, archived forum, while posting with a presumably real name and telling us where you grew up. Maybe you should just post your mother's maiden name and your SS# while you're at it. Better yet, just leave the front door unl...oops, I guess you already do. >>> Being able to do that has gotten me home on multiple occasions. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > It must be nice to be able to afford to have whatever flavor car you > choose, rather than living with what your budget permits... Certainly I'm not ashamed to be able to own and drive vehicles of the flavor I choose. One happens to be a Miata. >>> Snapped clutch cable on a Honda Civic. Had to start it in gear and >>> pop-shift it, stalling it out/turning it off for stop signs, then [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > AAA - Hard enough paying for car, license, tags, insurance, gas, etc, > etc, etc. Eh, age isn't much of an excuse these days. I'm provided with manufacturer-provided roadside assistance on several of my cars while they're under warranty, AAA from my employer, and free roadside assistance from my cell phone provider and auto insurance company. None of these cost me a dime. > For the record, today, I won't get in the car without my AAA Plus card > in my wallet,and it *HAS* saved my bacon a few times, but for "If I > can limp it home/wherever I need to be to fix it on my own, it'll > save me one of my tows, and won't mean I'm sitting here on the side > of the road with my thumb up my a.s for the next hour waiting for the > tow-truck to arrive" Better to wait than risk damaging something else on the way home or, worse yet, getting into an accident because you're paying more attention to limping your junker home. <snip> >> Better get that ABS system disabled then. > > Haven't owned a car with ABS, and don't want one. To each his own. ABS has its pros and its cons. >> Pull the fuse for the airbags >> while you're at it... > > If I ever end up with a car equipped with airbag, more than the fuse > will be pulled... Why would you say "if"? Certainly if you're reading a Miata newsgroup in the US, at least one of your cars came equipped with an airbag. >> I mean, you're smarter than a silly CAR, aren't you? >> Who are you to have a CAR tell you what to do? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Wouldn't know anything about that - I don't, and likely never will, > drive an Infiniti. That's irrelevant. Would you turn something like Stability Control off? There's another feature on one of my cars that shoots a laser from the front of the vehicle to determine the closing distance on objects ahead of me--if the system detects that I'm going to hit something, it sounds a warning and pre-pressurizes the brake lines. Would you disable that system? >>> Editorial/opinion section: >>> What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, anyway? Is [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > the most part, I see a remote-start as more of a "rich kid/showoff" > toy, rather than a practical addition to automobiles. "Rich kid/showoff" toy? They start at $49 from Wal-Mart and can be installed in an hour or two. I used to use mine to start my car from my office before I left for the day. That way, I could have the car warmed up without having to physically go outside to start it and thus saving me 10 minutes a day and avoiding tracking more snow into my building. That doesn't sound practical to you? <snip> > Well, the very last part ("only on vehicles...") is at least SOMEWHAT > reassuring. As far as the rest of it... <shrug> When I "turn the key [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > on a remote-start keyfob from the comfort of your Barcalounger/inside > the store/wherever else that isn't "in the driver's seat". Not on a car with a stick, no, which is why I also say that they should be installed only on cars with automatics. There's nothing to "verify" on a car with an automatic. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply >> Well, the very last part ("only on vehicles...") is at least SOMEWHAT >> reassuring. As far as the rest of it... <shrug> When I "turn the key [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > installed only on cars with automatics. There's nothing to "verify" on a car > with an automatic. Sure there is. I bet the remote start won't crank if it's not in park. The analagous thing on a stick would require that the transmission is in neutral with the parking brake engaged. I know there's a switch for the latter, and in my original posting I was wondering about the former. SignatureGrant >>> Well, the very last part ("only on vehicles...") is at least >>> SOMEWHAT reassuring. As far as the rest of it... <shrug> When I [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Sure there is. I bet the remote start won't crank if it's not in > park. Unless your car normally *would* start in park, there's nothing to verify. The car won't let it start. That said, the first step to installing a remote starter in a car with a manual transmission reads "disable clutch interlock", which now means there's nothing to stop the car from being started in gear. > The analagous thing on a stick would require that the > transmission is in neutral with the parking brake engaged. I > know there's a switch for the latter, and in my original > posting I was wondering about the former. You might a point if you could show me a remote-start system with this capability. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply > Unless your car normally *would* start in park, there's > nothing to verify. The car won't let it start. That said, the > first step to installing a remote starter in a car with a > manual transmission reads "disable clutch interlock", which > now means there's nothing to stop the car from being started > in gear. OK, so I take it the answer to my original question about a neutral interlock switch is "no"? >> The analagous thing on a stick would require that the >> transmission is in neutral with the parking brake engaged. I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You might a point if you could show me a remote-start system > with this capability. It's not really a capability of the remote-start system. You just wire a neutral interlock switch in parallel with the clutch interlock switch. Installing a neutral interlock switch might require a bit of work... SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! .. over in west at Philadelphia a puppy is visi.com vomiting... >> Unless your car normally *would* start in park, there's >> nothing to verify. The car won't let it start. That said, the [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >clutch interlock switch. Installing a neutral interlock switch >might require a bit of work... Don't know why. Isn't the neutral position the one in the middle? Incidentally, my link ECU displays an "n" when the car is in neutral, or in any gear with the clutch depressed. I assume it uses existing sensors for that. Leon SignatureLeon van Dommelen :) Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .) rammm@dommelen.net http://www.dommelen.net/miata EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen) >>>> The analagous thing on a stick would require that the >>>> transmission is in neutral with the parking brake engaged. I [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Don't know why. Isn't the neutral position the one in the > middle? Yes, but I thought previous reples to my question clearly implied that there was no neutral interlock switch. > Incidentally, my link ECU displays an "n" when the car is in > neutral, or in any gear with the clutch depressed. I assume > it uses existing sensors for that. I guess it must. That's what I wanted to know in my OP. If so, it would be pretty simple to wire up a relay across the clutch interlock switch and drive it with the neutral sensor. Then the starter would be allowed to engage if the clutch pedal was depressed _or_ the transmission was in neutral, so a remote starting system would work just fine. [Disregarding the wisdom of leaving the car parked with the transmission in neutral.] SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! I'm not available at for comment... visi.com > Unless your car normally *would* start in park, there's nothing to verify. > The car won't let it start. That said, the first step to installing a remote > starter in a car with a manual transmission reads "disable clutch > interlock", which now means there's nothing to stop the car from being > started in gear. > tooloud There is no need to disable the clutch interlock switch. Are you quoting some particular instructions or talking out your butt? >> Unless your car normally *would* start in park, there's >> nothing to verify. The car won't let it start. That said, the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > There is no need to disable the clutch interlock switch. Then how are you going to get the starter to crank? Install a remotely controlled actuator that depresses the clutch pedal? > Are you quoting some particular instructions or talking out > your butt? It seems (to me) pretty obvious that if you want to start a miata without depressing the clutch pedal you have to disable the clutch interlock. SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! I think I'll do BOTH at if I can get RESIDUALS!! visi.com > >> Unless your car normally *would* start in park, there's > >> nothing to verify. The car won't let it start. That said, the [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > -- > Grant Edwards You don't undertstand the starting circuit, otherwise it *would* be obvious that the interlock switch need not be disabled. I'm waiting for Tooloud to answer since he has "quoted" install instructions. > You don't undertstand the starting circuit, otherwise it > *would* be obvious that the interlock switch need not be > disabled. Care to explain? SignatureGrant Edwards grante Yow! Jesuit priests are at DATING CAREER DIPLOMATS!! visi.com > > You don't undertstand the starting circuit, otherwise it > > *would* be obvious that the interlock switch need not be > > disabled. > > Care to explain? Permit me? It's entirely possible, and quite simple, to completely ignore *ALL* of the interlocks, switches, sensors, and any other "etc. etc. etc." that might be standing between the battery and juice hitting the starter solenoid terminal. "Old School" mechanics' remote starts - The kind with a pushbutton, an 8-10 or so foot length of cable, and two alligator clamps that you hook up with one to the main starter terminal and the other to the starter solenoid terminal - did exactly that. Wire the output of your remote-start unit to a relay (if it isn't already set up that way) then wire the relay so that it acts as a replacement for the mechanic's buddy. When the relay closes in response to you mashing the button on your keyfob, the starter cranks, regardless of sensors, switches, interlocks, gear and/or clutch position, and whatever else, because you've bypassed all of it completely. The wisdom of such an action on a car with a stick rather than an automatic remains debatable, at best. The first time somebody forgot and the car got left in gear and the button got hit, either intentionally or otherwise... Well... Does the most likely scenario *REALLY* need to be spelled out, or is it as obvious to you as it is to me? SignatureDon Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist, or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow" somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info >> Unless your car normally *would* start in park, there's nothing to >> verify. The car won't let it start. That said, the first step to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > There is no need to disable the clutch interlock switch. Are you > quoting some particular instructions or talking out your butt? You're implying it's possible to start a vehicle with a manual transmission without depressing the clutch or bypassing the clutch switch. One way or another, you're bypassing the system. FWIW, I think most people understand that I wasn't saying that *literally*, the first step to this [idiotic--really effing idiotic] process isn't *literally* "1) Disable clutch interlock". I'm sure there are some other instructions in there first, like "stick in a chaw" or "have another beer while you contemplate what happens if the car is left in gear". Anyway, there's no reason to disable anything in any case, as no responsible company builds remote starters intended for use with manual transmissions. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply > >> Unless your car normally *would* start in park, there's nothing to > >> verify. The car won't let it start. That said, the first step to [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > without depressing the clutch or bypassing the clutch switch. One way or > another, you're bypassing the system. Now you've substituted "bypassing the system" for "disable clutch interlock". You sir are a quack. > FWIW, I think most people understand that I wasn't saying that *literally*, > the first step to this [idiotic--really effing idiotic] process isn't > *literally* "1) Disable clutch interlock". I'm sure there are some other > instructions in there first, like "stick in a chaw" or "have another beer > while you contemplate what happens if the car is left in gear". I think most people think you're talking out your butt. > Anyway, there's no reason to disable anything in any case, as no responsible > company builds remote starters intended for use with manual transmissions. I never claimed they did. But you did by stating that the instructions' first step is to "disable clutch interlock", which would only apply to car with standard trans. > -- > tooloud > Remove nothing to reply >>>> Unless your car normally *would* start in park, there's nothing to >>>> verify. The car won't let it start. That said, the first step to [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > interlock". > You sir are a quack. It doesn't matter whether you take it or make your system ignore the fact that it's there. Either way, you're finding a way around the switch doing its job. Bypassing the system IS "disabling the switch" in the real sense that if you're attempting to start the car without using the switch, you've disabled the system because you're not letting it do its job. >> FWIW, I think most people understand that I wasn't saying that >> *literally*, the first step to this [idiotic--really effing idiotic] [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I think most people think you're talking out your butt. I think most people think any discussion encouraging ways to install remote starters on stick-shift cars is stupid. I also think that you believe you're being very clever. I get the impression that you're scanning my post for spelling mistakes to *really* get me. >> Anyway, there's no reason to disable anything in any case, as no >> responsible company builds remote starters intended for use with [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > instructions' first step is to "disable clutch interlock", which > would only apply to car with standard trans. If you haven't noticed, that's exactly the topic at hand. Just to play your game for a moment, let's point out that you're attempting to explain to me what the first line of the instruction manual of a non-existent device reads. Let's also call it a moot point since the warning directly above the first line is "Not intended for use in cars with manual transmissions." ...and for God's sake, if you want to argue about things in the future, please come to the table with a case slightly more thought out than the simple semantics of the words "bypass" and "disable" and not waste each other's time. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply > OK, I take back that "dumbest thing I ever heard" comment from before. > You've now pointed out that you don't lock the doors to your house on a > public, archived forum, while posting with a presumably real name and > telling us where you grew up. Maybe you should just post your mother's > maiden name and your SS# while you're at it. Better yet, just leave the > front door unl...oops, I guess you already do. Tell ya what... If you think you've got what it takes to locate the house with the unlocked door based on the information given, feel free to drop me a line with your guess(es). Based on what you've said so far, they ought to be amusing. Good luck. In the unlikely, though admittedly not impossible, event that you or someone else succeeds in figuring out where that door is, and perhaps has thoughts towards using the information gathered to pay a "less-than-neighborly" visit, please bear in mind that we're a fairly tight-knit little group here on the hill, and most of us, including myself, are long-time clients of the security firm "Rotweiller, Remington, Winchester & Associates". > > For the record, today, I won't get in the car without my AAA Plus card > > in my wallet,and it *HAS* saved my bacon a few times, but for "If I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > yet, getting into an accident because you're paying more attention to > limping your junker home. As a blanket statement, I reject that completely. On a case-by-case basis, it may have some merit. Some "Make Do" methods are bad news from one end to the other. Others are sometimes not only "good enough for emergency use", but actually turn out to be an improvement over "the right way", and leave you wondering how many lawyers it took on the design team to get it made it that way to begin with. Just because it's been bodged into running well enough to limp home doesn't inherently make it unsafe to drive in all cases. In the specific case of shifting clutchless to get to the parts place/home, if *YOU* can't handle driving the vehicle without using the clutch, then yes - By all means, call the tow truck. In my case, Driving clutchless is, unquestionably, less convenient than with a clutch, but matching ground speed and engine revs to gear selection hardly constitutes a distraction that I'd consider a safety concern. Part of that is "know your ride", and part of it is "Am I capable?". I know my ride, and I'm capable. So where's the problem? Granted, that doesn't mean the next Joe Sixpack to come along knows his ride, or is capable, but that's not *THIS* case. > >> Better get that ABS system disabled then. > > > > Haven't owned a car with ABS, and don't want one. > > To each his own. ABS has its pros and its cons. We can agree on that much. For me and my limited experience with them, the pros don't manage to outweigh what I see as cons. But that's a definite "YMMV" situation, since I'm quite sure your point-by-point evaluation differs from mine, even if we end up in agreement overall. > >> I mean, you're smarter than a silly CAR, aren't you? > >> Who are you to have a CAR tell you what to do? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > That's irrelevant. Would you turn something like Stability Control off? Dunno. Depends on how well I think it works. Since I've never been behind the wheel of such a beast, I've got no clue whether it works well, sucks hard enough to pull a bowling ball through 50 feet of garden hose, or something in between. Until I gain that knowledge, I can't say anything meaningful. I WILL go as far as to say that I'd be looking at it real suspicious-like to start with, but beyond that... <shrug> Of course, I look at *ANY* sort of "fly-by-wire" that offers the machine the chance to second-guess my command inputs with a large amount of suspicion.That plane in Europe a couple years back put a scare into me over the idea - The concept of the pilots in that one trying like hell to boost power and increase control surface angles to lift out over the trees after takeoff, with the fly-by-wire system countermanding their inputs, and ultimately, slamming the plane into the ground, doesn't exactly inspire much confidence in such systems. Yes, I know, cars aren't airplanes, and it's not really "fly-by-wire" - The point remains, however: The machine "gets a say" in controlling its function, possibly overriding my commands. That's something that makes me *WAY* more than a little nervous. Particularly considering the so-called "state of the art". > There's another feature on one of my cars that shoots a laser from the front > of the vehicle to determine the closing distance on objects ahead of me--if > the system detects that I'm going to hit something, it sounds a warning and > pre-pressurizes the brake lines. Would you disable that system? Again, that would be an "Idunno - depends". If *ALL* it does is pre-pressurize the brake lines (*WITHOUT* causing the brakes to activate unless/until *I* explicitly say "make the brakes activate") I could probably live with it. If it activates the brakes on its own, or tries to second-guess my activating the brakes, it's gone just as fast as I can figure out how to disable it. The audible warning might need some alteration, depending on what it sounds like. (I'm also a merciless exterminator of buzzers, beepers, fweepers, ringers, dingers, pingers, bongers, rattlers, chimes, gongs, and similar noise-making devices on cars - the fasten seat belt and/or door-ajar buzzers usually get ripped out at the same time the clutch interlock is defeated - About the only thing of that nature I leave "active" is a "Headlights are on but the key isn't" warning.) > I used to use mine to start my car from my office before I left for the day. > That way, I could have the car warmed up without having to physically go > outside to start it and thus saving me 10 minutes a day and avoiding > tracking more snow into my building. That doesn't sound practical to you? I guess this is another of those "YMMV" things - I never noticed much problem with tracking snow into the house unless uncivilized kids were involved - civilized beings knew to use the doormat and/or boot-scraper sitting next to the door when I was living in snow-country. > > Well, the very last part ("only on vehicles...") is at least SOMEWHAT > > reassuring. As far as the rest of it... <shrug> When I "turn the key [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > installed only on cars with automatics. There's nothing to "verify" on a car > with an automatic. We seem to be in agreement here - lemme double-check to be sure: Remote start on Automatic: Perhaps frivolous, YMMV, but not automatically "bad". Remote start on stick: Perhaps frivolous, YMMV, definitely at least "not good", verging on "bad". Fair summary of this sub-topic of the conversation? SignatureDon Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist, or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow" somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info > Tell ya what... If you think you've got what it takes to locate the > house with the unlocked door based on the information given, feel free [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > and most of us, including myself, are long-time clients of the security > firm "Rotweiller, Remington, Winchester & Associates". Yes, there actually are a few places left that don't require the justified paranoia of living in a city that is filled with many thousands of people that are looking to do you harm. It looks like you live on land in Arizona that is large enough to support horses, which I assume is somewhat remote even if it is near the major cities. You mention close-knit neighbors, something that many city dwellers are completely unfamiliar with. We pack ourselves in like sardines by the millions and constantly move. The difference between that and open land with established and trusted neighbors is like night and day. You could probably leave a laptop outside your house in your unlocked car for a month and never have it messed with. At my last apartment complex, it would have lasted about 30 minutes, maybe. Finally, Arizona is almost identical to Texas as far as residents owning, (and knowing how to use), one or more firearms. Go ahead and post your address if you want, anyone traipsing onto your land because you posted that you leave your doors unlocked is so stupid that I don't think that you'll have a problem with them. Just aim for center of mass. Doesn't that Rottie get hot in Arizona? We have quite a few die from heat stroke here in the summer. BTW, I recognized the background on your website immediately, I am a huge Elric geek and I recently met the author, who lives near Austin. (oops, I just posted where I live!) :-) Sorry tooloud, we agree 99% of the time, this is the other 1%. Pat > > Tell ya what... If you think you've got what it takes to locate the > > house with the unlocked door based on the information given, feel free [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > It looks like you live on land in Arizona Oh! So close, but so far! So sorry, Grasshoppa. Good idea, but the Arizona info is coming up on (or did it recently slide past? <counts> Nope, coming up on.) being 7 years out of date. > Finally, Arizona is almost identical to Texas as far as residents > owning, (and knowing how to use), one or more firearms. Go ahead and > post your address if you want, anyone traipsing onto your land because > you posted that you leave your doors unlocked is so stupid that I don't > think that you'll have a problem with them. Just aim for center of mass. That's the general idea. "9-1-1" isn't really a viable option this far out(1) so a lot of folk in these parts tend to dial ".357", "12 ga.", or ".30-06" in case of "goblin incursions". > The difference between that and open land with established and trusted > neighbors is like night and day. > You could probably leave a laptop outside your house in your unlocked > car for a month and never have it messed with. Ayup. That would be about the size of it around here. > Doesn't that Rottie get hot in Arizona? We have quite a few die from > heat stroke here in the summer. Actually, he did quite well most of the time. Of course, during the TRULY hot months, he was often seen lounging in the horse tanks - An activity which seemed to annoy the bejeebers outta the horses! :) > BTW, I recognized the background on your website immediately, I am a > huge Elric geek and I recently met the author, who lives near Austin. Interesting. Last time I paid any attention to his whereabouts, he appeared confused about whether he wanted to be living in Ireland or New York. :) Wouldn't have expected him to land in Texas, of all places! I imagine him as more of a "Florida" kind of guy. (1) I'm *NOT* faulting the FD, but response time was 45+ minutes the day the house burned down! Reality is that even lead-footing it like there was gonna be no tomorrow, the time from "jumped in and turned the key" to "banging on the firehouse door" would be AT LEAST 25 minutes in any of the vehicles on the property. The sheer distance that has to be covered, combined with the drunken snake road that has to be travelled just won't allow much better than that. Which is why I'm impressed that the fire trucks were able to get here as quick as they did. Unless we struck lucky and happened to have a CHP or sheriff cruiser close at hand for a traffic stop or something, the cops would be coming from further, so even longer delay. Same thing for ambulance. <shrug> Just the trade-offs of not living someplace where you don't need to hear it (but you probably will anyway) to know your next-door neighbor just farted. SignatureDon Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist, or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow" somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info > Oh! So close, but so far! So sorry, Grasshoppa. Good idea, but the > Arizona info is coming up on (or did it recently slide past? <counts> > Nope, coming up on.) being 7 years out of date. Well, update your site already! :-) > That's the general idea. "9-1-1" isn't really a viable option this far > out(1) so a lot of folk in these parts tend to dial ".357", "12 ga.", or > ".30-06" in case of "goblin incursions". I don't really consider it a viable option in the city either, at least not to count on. Too many people have died or been raped with a phone receiver in their hands when they could have won the fight with a well-placed 158 or 230 grain hollowpoint. If I heard or saw anything suspicious, I would call 911, but the phone would be the second thing in my hand, the .45 auto would be first. > Interesting. Last time I paid any attention to his whereabouts, he > appeared confused about whether he wanted to be living in Ireland or New > York. :) Wouldn't have expected him to land in Texas, of all places! I > imagine him as more of a "Florida" kind of guy. I can understand Ireland, writers pay no income tax there unless the country has changed the law. A lot of writers choose to live there, imagine that. ;-) He, (Michael Moorcock: long time sci-fi author), also worked briefly as a creative writer for the same company I did in Austin, though it was about a year after I left. He has been here for at least 10 years, I have 3 signed books from him so far. Pat > > Oh! So close, but so far! So sorry, Grasshoppa. Good idea, but the > > Arizona info is coming up on (or did it recently slide past? <counts> > > Nope, coming up on.) being 7 years out of date. > > Well, update your site already! :-) One of these days when I manage to wrangle "ambition, interest, and something worth bothering to put up" into the same place at the same time, I just might :) > > That's the general idea. "9-1-1" isn't really a viable option this far > > out(1) so a lot of folk in these parts tend to dial ".357", "12 ga.", or [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > If I heard or saw anything suspicious, I would call 911, but the phone > would be the second thing in my hand, the .45 auto would be first. I like "Ol' Bessie" - I'm pretty sure she's a retired police squad-car dash gun. 12 gauge pump, un-plugged tube holds either 6 or 7 (copes with 2-3/4" or 3" rounds), plus another in the chamber. She sports an 18.75" cylinder choke barrel, and makes a nice little "doorway broom". Round in the chamber is #8 birdshot for a "polite request". Second round and those that follow are 00 buck - for those critters (two or four-legged) who don't quite grasp the concept. > I can understand Ireland, writers pay no income tax there unless the Hmmm... Maybe I need to take up a new profession? :) > country has changed the law. A lot of writers choose to live there, > imagine that. ;-) What a surprise, huh? :) > He, (Michael Moorcock: long time sci-fi author), also worked briefly as > a creative writer for the same company I did in Austin, though it was > about a year after I left. > He has been here for at least 10 years, I have 3 signed books from him > so far. Never been much on the "autographed <insert whatever it is>" concept - Guess I just don't have that sort of mind-set. I'm *MUCH* more interested in the stuff they write *OTHER* than their names, if ya follow :) SignatureDon Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist, or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow" somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info > Never been much on the "autographed <insert whatever it is>" concept - > Guess I just don't have that sort of mind-set. I'm *MUCH* more > interested in the stuff they write *OTHER* than their names, if ya > follow :) Well, I did have him put, "To the lucky high bidder from Michael Moorcock". ;-) I don't actually collect anything at all for myself, and I agree, I have no interest in autographs other than the value that they can add. Generally, if I don't use it, I want it gone and out of my way. On the other hand, I did find a vintage copy of "Pistol Pete", the famous Oklahoma lawman that was not only signed but was dedicated to a woman who was apparently a sweetheart. The book was worth quite a bit by itself, but the writing more than quadrupled the value, so signed books can be a good investment, especially if the author is dead or has quit writing. "Pistol Pete" was well worth the $1.00 I spent on it. :-) Pat > Of course, I look at *ANY* sort of "fly-by-wire" that offers the machine > the chance to second-guess my command inputs with a large amount of [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > little nervous. Particularly considering the so-called "state of the > art". It will be a while before the systems are perfected enough to completely surpass human abilities and to be bug-free, but I believe that we will get there eventually; where a plane flying itself or a car driving itself is far safer than using a human pilot or driver. It will probably take a generation or two, we are the people brought up on crashing computers and most of us have an inherent distrust of them, even though we trust our lives to them and use them for countless safety measures already. I do see a day when people are far more horrified at the idea of turning over things like transportation to human control than we are at turning it over to computers. This will be once the machines can do it with either a zero failure rate or at least at a much statistically safer level than human pilots or drivers are capable of. Until then, I'll enjoy driving my miata. It might not be an option for my descendants. Pat >> OK, I take back that "dumbest thing I ever heard" comment from >> before. You've now pointed out that you don't lock the doors to your [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > house with the unlocked door based on the information given, feel free > to drop me a line with your guess(es). I might do that, if nothing more than to see how good my logic skills have been keeping up. <snip> > As a blanket statement, I reject that completely. On a case-by-case > basis, it may have some merit. Some "Make Do" methods are bad news [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > doesn't mean the next Joe Sixpack to come along knows his ride, or is > capable, but that's not *THIS* case. Sure, and I can drive a car without a clutch just fine for the most part, except for the pesky part about stopping on level ground or uphill. That can be a PITA and potentially unsafe, unless you know something I don't. >>>> Better get that ABS system disabled then. >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > definite "YMMV" situation, since I'm quite sure your point-by-point > evaluation differs from mine, even if we end up in agreement overall. The main thing I don't like with ABS is the "overthinking" of the system when you're on a surface it "thinks" is too slick. Oftentimes friction can scrub off speed better than modulating and demodulating the brakes, i.e. skidding to a stop rather than travelling twice the distance while braking because the system is too scared to skid. I also disagree with the "Stomp and Steer" campaign some idiots started a while back. Depending on the driving surface, this isn't good advice for Joe Sixpack. <snip> >> That's irrelevant. Would you turn something like Stability Control >> off? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > can't say anything meaningful. I WILL go as far as to say that I'd be > looking at it real suspicious-like to start with, but beyond that... It seems to work just fine for me. I'm glad I know how it works, but as I can't brake individual wheels with only one pedal, it's appreciated in the snow. <snip> >> There's another feature on one of my cars that shoots a laser from >> the front of the vehicle to determine the closing distance on [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > is defeated - About the only thing of that nature I leave "active" is > a "Headlights are on but the key isn't" warning.) That feature alone won't brake the vehicle by itself. If the "intelligent" cruise control is activated, the vehicle will brake by itself. I tend to not use that feature because I'm usually driving in too heavy of traffic to make it worthwhile. >> I used to use mine to start my car from my office before I left for >> the day. That way, I could have the car warmed up without having to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > boot-scraper sitting next to the door when I was living in > snow-country. True, but it's no big deal to walk down to the well for a bucket of water either, yet we all have taps right there in the house. >>> Well, the very last part ("only on vehicles...") is at least >>> SOMEWHAT reassuring. As far as the rest of it... <shrug> When I [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Fair summary of this sub-topic of the conversation? Probably true. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply [war annals snip] >> Editorial/opinion section: >> What kind of lazy does it take to want a remote starter, anyway? Is it [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >on many of its cars--only on vehicles equipped with automatic transmissions, >though. The new Miata has, for all transmissions, an "Advanced Keyless Entry & Start System" option (in the Premium Package for the Grand Touring version.) Sounds like a remote start system to me. While I personally cannot think of anything more stupid for me, I can appreciate people who have to brave even more arctic temperatures than we suffer here in North Florida wanting to start their car remotely and only dash off to it after the heater starts functioning. I still shudder at the upstate New York winters I endured when a hapless graduate student. I WISH YOU ALL PEACE ON EARTH. This includes Tooloud, Don Bruder, Grant Edwards, Chas Hurst, ... all too. Leon :) SignatureLeon van Dommelen :) Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .) rammm@dommelen.net http://www.dommelen.net/miata EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen) <snip> > The new Miata has, for all transmissions, an "Advanced Keyless Entry & > Start System" option (in the Premium Package for the Grand Touring [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the upstate New York winters I endured when a hapless graduate > student. The Advanced Keyless Entry and Start System isn't a remote starter. It's actually a keyless ignition feature that doesn't require you to take the key fob out of your pocket to unlock/lock or start the car. I have Infiniti's version of this on one of my cars and it's the handiest feature I've seen on a car in quite some time. A nice feature of mine is that you can easily lock the door with the engine running so you can run into a convenience store or the post office or something quick...or not quick, for that matter. <cue a dozen people whining about fancy car electronics and what happens if it breaks and how much weight it adds and that's not fair I can't afford it and this is a sports car so you shouldn't have that because sports cars are supposed to be punishing to drive, etc.> > I WISH YOU ALL PEACE ON EARTH. > > This includes Tooloud, Don Bruder, Grant Edwards, Chas Hurst, ... all > too. Yeah, you too, Leon. Signaturetooloud Remove nothing to reply > I've never been in that situation. I either choose more reliable cars than > you or maintain them better. His car was a Honda Civic, it wasn't like he was driving a Geo Metro or a Yugo. Last time I checked, the Civic has a very good reliability rating, but the fact is, any car can break at any time. Sorry to call you out, and I am not exactly taking sides, but I remember a post by you from quite a while back where you advocated buying "beater" winter cars for very little money. You either spent the cost of the car maintaining it, (read: nursing it along), got lucky, or both. My guess is the main factor was luck, as old beater cars that sell for low dollars tend to have reliability problems, you know, things like snapped clutch cables. Pat I remember backing a VW Beatle (old one) up on ramps in reverse using the starter motor. No way I could have gotten it up there to fix it otherwise. miker > Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you considered what will > happen if you start your Miata when it's not in neutral? The world as we know it will cease to exist. Have you ever put on your trousers before your your underwear? > > > >> You'll be trying to turn the tranny (in neutral) over along with the > > > >> engine - ain't gonna make it some mornings. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > I would change the trans oil. I always start my cars in neutral and they > > always start. > > Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you considered what > will > > happen if you start your Miata when it's not in neutral? > > The world as we know it will cease to exist. > Have you ever put on your trousers before your your underwear? Have you ever heard of Captain Underpants? > > > Hopefully it's not too late to add something. Have you considered what > > will [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Have you ever heard of Captain Underpants? (GASP) Is that you? |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message