To be fair, most early Asian made front wheel drives were shocking vehicles (handling wise.)
From memory the first fwd car I drove was my sister's Renault 12 which compared to my rwd Fiat I owned at the time felt strange and not impressive. The first fwd car that I owned wasn't until late 2000 when I bought a new Camry v6. Thankfully fwd had advanced a fair bit by then although I still prefer rwd if given the choice.
I agree early Japanese cars weren't known for being great handlers, they mainly sold on their value for money and reliability.
What is also interesting is that it is a "push" belt. In other words, the belt does not use a pulling effect like every other application I've seen for a belt, but pushes it instead. The belt is make up of a bunch of steel plates that are strung together so the belt would always be pushing these plates tighter into each other. The plates will never compress since they are steel so the belt will never stretch, or shrink as in this case. I'm not sure how else it might wear out or fail. I guess it would have to totally come apart by the inside linkage failing. That would be a bad day for the tranny.
LPSISRL wrote:What is also interesting is that it is a "push" belt. In other words, the belt does not use a pulling effect like every other application I've seen for a belt, but pushes it instead. The belt is make up of a bunch of steel plates that are strung together so the belt would always be pushing these plates tighter into each other. The plates will never compress since they are steel so the belt will never stretch, or shrink as in this case. I'm not sure how else it might wear out or fail. I guess it would have to totally come apart by the inside linkage failing. That would be a bad day for the tranny.
LPSISRL wrote:What is also interesting is that it is a "push" belt. In other words, the belt does not use a pulling effect like every other application I've seen for a belt, but pushes it instead. The belt is make up of a bunch of steel plates that are strung together so the belt would always be pushing these plates tighter into each other. The plates will never compress since they are steel so the belt will never stretch, or shrink as in this case. I'm not sure how else it might wear out or fail. I guess it would have to totally come apart by the inside linkage failing. That would be a bad day for the tranny.
Wow, I also learned. I have never heard or even imagined of a push belt! I imagine the wear will be where the belt is hinged or as you said "linkage".
To be fair, most early Asian made front wheel drives were shocking vehicles (handling wise.)
From memory the first fwd car I drove was my sister's Renault 12 which compared to my rwd Fiat I owned at the time felt strange and not impressive. The first fwd car that I owned wasn't until late 2000 when I bought a new Camry v6. Thankfully fwd had advanced a fair bit by then although I still prefer rwd if given the choice.
I agree early Japanese cars weren't known for being great handlers, they mainly sold on their value for money and reliability.
My 75 Honda Civic handled great. It was the best car I ever had and I got it with over 150,000 miles on it! I got the Civic to paint and resell for a profit. I was so impressed with it when driving it to my home, I sold my brand new Ford Escort and kept the Civic.
I've never driven a a Civic but from memory the early ones were a popular car in Australia. I think the Japanese were very good at making cars user friendly.
I think modern Civics are great cars for non-car people. They used to be more interesting, but now they seem to be complacent as reliable economy cars with not much else to define them. The Civic Si is more stirring but easily outdone by pretty much every rival. With the refusal of the Type-R coming to the US, I simply just see the Civic as a commuter car for non-car people. Since MY '97, Civics have seemed to just get dull.
I see Mazda as the new Honda of the 80's and 90's because they focus on driving dynamics even for smaller, non-performance cars. The 80's and 90's is when Honda had their beloved CRX, Civics, and Preludes. Now, you just don't see Honda fanboys like you used to a decade ago driving these cars.
Honda is like the new Toyota. They've pretty much made everything bland to appeal to the masses. They've killed off interesting models and seem to rest on their laurels. Not saying all their cars are boring, but the Civic is not really one I would go for anymore. In fact, many reputable sites and publications seem to favor the Hyundai Elantra as the preferred economy car overall with the Mazda3 being the fun car of the pack. Honda pretty much sells the Civic on reputation earned from the past.
Something else I've noticed about the CVT which everyone dishes it on. With light throttle, the rpms drop quickly after take off and the car seems to bog down from the drop in rpms. I believe that this is may just be a perception based on our experience with "normal" automatics and the associated engine sounds and vibrations. Try this sometime: Take the tach and "feel" out of the equation. Watch just the speedometer when giving it light throttle. You'll probably notice, as I have, that the rate of acceleration does not change when the rpms drop into the 1500 range. It remains pretty much consistent. However, the added vibration and sound of the engine turning only 1500 rpms gives us a perception that the car has bogged down when in reality, it really hasn't. Try it some time.
KuroNekko wrote:
Honda is like the new Toyota. They've pretty much made everything bland to appeal to the masses. They've killed off interesting models and seem to rest on their laurels.
I agree. Recently Honda seems to have devoted most of their development to making Hybrids. Which sadly most car company's will probably do to meet the new MPG standards. That early Civic was the reason I purchased the 76 Accord. That Accord was a driving dynamic disappointment compared to the Civic. I ended up rebuilding the engine on the Accord and was amazed with the well thought out design I had not previously experienced with American cars.
A simple example; the oil filter was easily replaced on both Honda's. The oil filter on the Escort was at the rear of the engine right against the firewall. I burned my hand many times changing the oil on the Escort and other American cars. I imagine the engine team designed separately from the body and chassis teams, then put the separate designs together at the end. Seems the Japanese teams worked better together. I think I have read that American design teams are more integrated now.
Hopefully that explains my minor disappointment with changing the oil on the Kizashi. The oil filter is easily replaced but having to remove the underbody panel to drain the oil makes the Kizashi the most difficult oil change of all the Japanese designed cars I have experienced.
