siegen

I got the name wrong, they call it the "High X-Bone Frame". It was a convertible/roadster frame Honda developed solely for the S2000. Read about it here. Well, I used Pipes for the tire and outer wheel, and a cylinder for the inner wheel. Then I modeled a sort of detailed spoke, moved the center point to the center of the wheel, and duplicated it around in degrees. I then used cylinders to cut holes for the lug nuts. It may be easiest to show you. Here is the Maya file. If you have a version older than '09, you can try going to the options for open, and selecting Ignore Version. Here is a jpg closeup of the wheel. I'll give mental ray a shot. I haven't really used it much. Hehe. The interior isn't really done (neither is the back end). I was on a tight schedule. ;-]

+1 The holes not only reduce surface area, but they can cause the rotors to crack or break. Some cheaper brands even take perfectly good blanks, run them through a drill press, and turn around and put a markup on them. All for the bling!

Oh, I used Autodesk Maya. I did the wheels before I did the car. They weren't too difficult, although it's hard to explain how to do them. Hehe. Yes, it does seem to have Miata and Viper influence. Even though I mainly looked at S2000's and Solstice's when creating it.

A chair is worthless without joysticks.

This is my idea for the next S2000 (about as good as any of those japanese "scoop" magazines anyhow). For my final project in my 3D design class I was supposed to make like a desk or something with some tools on it. It's a beginner's class after all. I decided to try my hand at a car, and figured I'd do a roadster (this is my first car model). It's incomplete but close enough (final was yesterday so I had to turn it in). I present to you, the 2010 Honda S2000! * Lighter-weight than outgoing model. * Retractable soft-top folds into forward trunk area. * Offered in three trim levels: base, Type R, and Type RR trim. * RWD X-frame chassis refined to increase rigidity while reducing weight. Base Trim $25,790 not including destination charges 210hp K20 with 6-speed manual transmission 2,550 lbs curb-weight 51/49 weight distribution Type R Trim $32,630 not including destination charges 290hp K22 turbocharged with 6-speed manual transmission 17-inch lightweight wheels High-performance summer tires 2,750 lbs curb-weight 52/48 weight distribution Type RR Trim (pictured above) $36,230 not including destination charges Same as Type R with following modifications: No stereo system, A/C, or soft-top. Carbon fiber hard-top, hood, and trunk lid Aerodynamic lip and rear spoilers Recaro lightweight racing seats 2,590 lbs curb-weight 50/50 weight distribution

Is it just me, or is the guy on the right in this photo doing a left-handed Nazi salute?

I got to drive this beauty.

The vehicle beeps at you if you leave the lights on. If I leave the lights on, turn off and exit the vehicle, I usually have a reason as to why I want the lights to remain on. I can't imagine anyone accidentally leaving the lights on, unless their buzzer is malfunctioning, or they are indeed deaf. This "technology" certainly isn't that hard, but it is also needless. Speaking of technology, why hasn't anyone developed a satellite than can scratch my ass with a laser beam from space? The Accord and Civic are right on par with the Camry and Corolla like they always have been. They usually don't sell quite as much, but they also offer fewer incentives and have far fewer fleet sales. They have been selling around 20k during this recession, which is as much as anyone could ask for. The Civic and Accord are not being eroded, that's just asinine. The domestics and Koreans are finally offering products that can compete, hence they are stealing a few sales. But the Accord/Civic still lead in terms of fewest incentives and fleet sales, often by a huge margin. Acura is confused.

(Please excuse my long post) The vehicles Honda claims it has are the same vehicles every manufacturer claims it has, including GM. If a manufacturer isn't confident in their product who will be? The consensus that Honda products are far and away better than anything available elsewhere tends to be perpetuated mostly by forums like these, surprisingly. That certainly isn't the attitude at vtec.net, nor is it at auto magazines anymore. It is the point though. Five years ago there were 400,000 people willing and able to purchase GM vehicles in a Summer month. That was before most of GM's "good" vehicles. GM has lost over half of its volume now, despite having the best products it has ever had. The troubles GM is having are taking their toll and ravishing GM, but GM still has a lot more potential customers and is a much larger company than Honda. Being able to hold on to half of their volume, despite the fear of bankruptcy, isn't absurd IMO. And like I said earlier, this June's sales will be the most telling to determine just how much the bankruptcy will hurt GM, since it wasn't certain until May 30th that they would be filing. Expecting the Civic to sell at pre-recession levels during the recession is silly. Expecting it to sell as much as it did during its best month ever, when it was 20+% above good economy levels already, is ever sillier. I don't consider the Civic to be a big stand out from others anymore, and I wouldn't expect it to buck the automotive trend any more than any other vehicle. The current generation is 4 years old after all. I don't consider GM a corpse. They are in bankruptcy, but it is obvious to anyone who watches the news that the government is fully committed to turning them around in a couple months. GM also has some excellent vehicles, and a lot of money on the hood. Sure they have, but not nearly as much as everyone else. The important thing to consider is each manufacturer's "average" selling rate and how down they are compared to it. Honda's average selling rate has been 100,000~ in the Winter and 140,000~ in the Summer, consistently for several years. During the recession, so far, their average has dropped to 75,000 during the Winter and 100,000 during the Summer. Compared to their average before the recession, that is a 25-30% drop, which is considerably better than the industry average so far. When you look at an irregular month such as May, where they sold 167,000, you have to avoid taking it out of context. Honda doesn't sell that many cars normally; they wouldn't even have the capacity to sell that many per month if they could. If you talk to dealers, most will tell you that inventories were extremely low after that month. May '09 - 98,344 Apr '09 - 101,029 Mar '09 - 88,379 Feb '09 - 71,575 Jan '09 - 71,031 Dec '08 - 86,085 Nov '08 - 76,233 Oct '08 - 85,864 Sept '08 - 96,626 Aug '08 - 146,855 Jul '08 - 138,744 Jun '08 - 142,539 May '08 - 167,997 Apr '08 - 135,180 Mar '08 - 138,734 Feb '08 - 115,397 Jan '08 - 98,511 For good measure: April 2009 Honda 101,029 GM 173,007 April 2008 Honda 135,180 GM 260,922 April 2007 Honda 126,419 GM 311,687 April 2006 Honda 139,124 GM 345,404 April 2005 Honda 135,597 GM 385,939 April 2004 Honda 114,929 GM 401,451 April 2003 Honda 117,783 GM 400,687

GM does build cars that people want. But the way they ran their business was inefficient and inflexible. When auto sales fell 30% industry-wide, and the demand for vehicles shifted from large SUV's and trucks to more fuel efficient cars (although not as big of a swing as most people make it seem), GM was unable to adapt. That is the main reason they failed IMO. Having some duds for product didn't help, but GM had a lot of good product too. Honda is not suffering more than GM. Caddy summed up what I was trying to say nicely.

To put this better into perspective: May 2008 GM down 30.2% Ford down 16.0% Nissan up 4.4% Honda up 11.3% I'm sure you all know I don't really care about Toyota, but they were down a year ago and down about 38% this month. The fact that Honda and Nissan were up last year and GM and Ford were down, especially the difference between GM and Honda, makes this month seem extra positive for GM when taken out of context. If you were down 30% last year, and down 30% this year, it is quite a bit worse than being up 11% last year, and down 39% this year, even though the percentages will seem to favor GM this year.

Taken out of context. Read my comment in the Honda May sales thread (at least regarding Honda). Accord: 22,597 Malibu: 14,098 The Malibu is certainly doing well. Don't forget incentive spending at GM is double or more than double that at Honda, and GM still sells considerably higher percentages of vehicles to fleets, including the Malibu. GM is doing very good given the circumstances. June monthly sales should be quite telling. It will be interesting to see what the bankruptcy does to their sales.

Just so you guys know, May '08 was Honda's highest-selling month ever (ever!). Have a look at the press release for May '08; sales were up 11% compared to May '07, led by huge sales increases of the Accord and Civic by 32% and 28% respectively, which also set incredible sales records. Thinking that sales could even touch those numbers during a recession is silly. May '09 numbers are ok despite the percentage drop. Compare them to the last 6 months of sales. The only sore spots I see are the Element and Ridgeline, which need new life soon. And of course the RL, which isn't even worth considering at this point (there are still '08 new RL's on dealer lots).

Unfathomable a few years ago? Perhaps some people are just now taking their rosy glasses off.

That is an astute observation. I notice the inner pads tend to wear more on the cars who's brakes I have changed.

"Honda knows about the issue and is investigating the issue." "Honda knows about it and won't fix the problem." Maybe Honda has to finish their investigation before they can fix the problem? Honda will probably issue a TSB or recall given the number of similar complaints, once a fix is ready. It seems like most of these complaints are people experiencing premature rear brake pad wear, and are having to replace the rear pads (and turn or replace rotors) around 12-15k. Not a big deal or a safety issue, given it is roughly 200~ complaints out of the 400,000~ 2008 Accords sold (not even counting 2009 models). This likely is caused by a bad batch of rear brake pads or rotors, as 66Stang pointed out. After replacing with good pads/rotors I doubt they will have trouble again, as long as the maintenance was done right by the dealership, and not half-assed. The dealership should do this for free, although I imagine many of them will try to get labor out of it. As for Paul, I think he should demand that the dealership replace the rear brake pads and rotors with new parts. Deglazing the rotors doesn't fix faulty parts. It sounds to me like his dealership is either dumb/lazy or he is. Why he got the privilege of being on the main page of an auto blog is beyond me.

The point of making these rules is to make them difficult to achieve, or just on the verge of achievable and impossibility. It forces engineers and designers to change and think in new radical ways. The idea that the only way to achieve these standards is to make cars really small and uncomfortable is an idea bread from the same thinking of the last 100 years. If we don't do things that seem impossible to achieve, then we'll just go on our current path of relatively low advancement. Carbon Fiber is the perfect example. It is expensive because it isn't used in mainstream cars, and it isn't used in mainstream cars because it is expensive. The only reason it is expensive is due to the process of making it and recycling it. These processes haven't been refined or done in mass to where carbon fiber can become an economically viable replacement for steel - although it isn't too far off. Big automakers aren't going to adopt carbon fiber if there is no reason to; steel works fine and cars don't need to be lighter. Yet it is these big automakers that are the key to making carbon fiber economical and widespread, since they have the manufacturing and R&D power to do so. It takes government legislation saying that cars need to be more efficient (to save captain planet) for automakers to consider that carbon fiber may end up being more economical than steel, if they start investing in the process of making it.

Jeremy Clarkson. Would you expect anything different? It's impossible to take anything he says seriously, when he mutters things like this:

It bugs me when people make such a big fuss about this. It was even on the local news. Woop-dee-freaken-doo, she can sing well.

I wasn't aware they weren't using transmissions already.

awesome, 2502... err 2503 as of this post.... sort of a paradox really. edit. no pingas for u!

what am I at now?

Oh noes. GM builds another potentially segment leading vehicle. Still costs a dime more than the CR-V (CR-V at $21,915 after destination). Is this larger than the CR-V (interior volume)? The CR-V averages combined 24.5 mpg in real world driving, which exceeds its EPA rating by 1.5. This isn't based on a lot of results, but they are consistent. I wonder if this will match or exceed its rating as well.

Interesting "ram box" idea on the Dodge.