关于CHEVROLET CAVALIER
- 主题发起人 cool cat
- 开始时间
chessman
知名会员
- 注册
- 2003-02-16
- 消息
- 523
- 荣誉分数
- 0
- 声望点数
- 126
Re: Re: CIVIC没你说的那么差吧
)。 99年租过一辆当年的Cavalier开了三天，感觉是88年model的好处已所剩无几，但engine还是那样让人受不了，油耗没好多少。
我记得Civic和Corrola是属于small car,而Cavalier是定在compact car的范畴，本来就是稍大一些的车，但现在可能Cavalier已做的越来越小(重量也就比Civic只重个60公斤不到)，但发动机2.2L的比1.8L的还省油那一定是老美造的奇迹。
GM列出的Cavalier(2003的model)油耗是City:10.1L/100Km Highway:6.9L/100Km,若能开着空调才5.8L/100Km那又是一个奇迹(告诉GM让他改Cavalier的specs)。
本来小日本车的特点就是省油，可靠性高，老美车的特点是舒服和performance好(大体说来)。但新车Cavalier价格比Civic和Corrola还少个两三千，小日本的车在这满街的跑，真是老美老加太不爱国了哎。
我更相信市场经济和统计数字，但买车除了先了解北美车，日本车和欧洲车的特点外，你最好先想好你想要的是啥。
开过三年88的Cavalier(2.0的engine,那时的Civic和Corrola是1.6的engine),确实很喜欢，可就是不喜欢她的engine和油耗(比我现在的一辆89的3.0升6缸的Toyota还狠)。 在北美玩了8年多的车，也还是第一次听说老美的车比小日本的车省油(而且缸还大不少
)。 99年租过一辆当年的Cavalier开了三天，感觉是88年model的好处已所剩无几，但engine还是那样让人受不了，油耗没好多少。我记得Civic和Corrola是属于small car,而Cavalier是定在compact car的范畴，本来就是稍大一些的车，但现在可能Cavalier已做的越来越小(重量也就比Civic只重个60公斤不到)，但发动机2.2L的比1.8L的还省油那一定是老美造的奇迹。
GM列出的Cavalier(2003的model)油耗是City:10.1L/100Km Highway:6.9L/100Km,若能开着空调才5.8L/100Km那又是一个奇迹(告诉GM让他改Cavalier的specs)。
本来小日本车的特点就是省油，可靠性高，老美车的特点是舒服和performance好(大体说来)。但新车Cavalier价格比Civic和Corrola还少个两三千，小日本的车在这满街的跑，真是老美老加太不爱国了哎。
我更相信市场经济和统计数字，但买车除了先了解北美车，日本车和欧洲车的特点外，你最好先想好你想要的是啥。
事实上是GM的车所列出的油耗值几乎每个Driver都可以超越，而日车的油耗只有天知道什么高手才能开出来。
部仅仅是油耗，速度计，里程表也一样（没想过吧？呵呵）。
楼上的朋友讲得好，两辆车一起走同样路程试过没有？正常的车试过没有（15年的老车与保养和里程数关系太大了）？日本人好高务远，喜欢搞小动作是出名的了。
给你个实测结果报告看看吧：
厂商为了表示车性能好，提高“指标”，人为高调速度表等多达10%。
报告显示BMW的水分最多，GM最少（但在欧洲出售的GM还是入乡随俗，标高了一些）。
这是在里程表丑闻（降低油耗“指标”，同样也是水分：欧洲车>日本车>美国车）之后的另一行业性丑闻。
http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Cara.../april/200204_feature_speedometer.xml?&page=1
Speedometer Scandal!
Can you trust your most frequently consulted gauge?
BY FRANK MARKUS
APRIL 2002
Page 1 of 2
Regular readers have probably noticed that when we describe a vehicle that really gets our juices flowing, we tend to hyperbolize about the accuracy and precision with which the steering wheel and pedals communicate exactly what is happening down where the rubber meets the road. It has recently come to our attention, however, that many of the cars we like best are surprisingly inaccurate about reporting the velocity with which the road is passing beneath the tires. Or, to put it another way, speedometers lie.
Yes, ladies and germs, we are scooping 20/20 and 60 Minutes with this scandal: Speedometers Lie! Okay, "exaggerate" may state it more aptly, if less provocatively.
When traveling at a true 70 mph, as indicated by our highly precise Datron optical fifth-wheel equipment, the average speedometer (based on more than 200 road-tested vehicles) reads 71.37 mph. Wait, wait! Before you roll your eyes and turn the page, let us dig just a bit deeper and reveal some dirt.
Sorted by price, luxury cars are the least accurate, and cars costing less than $20,000 are the most accurate. By category, sports cars indicate higher speeds than sedans or trucks. Cars built in Europe exaggerate more than Japanese cars, which in turn fib more than North American ones. And by manufacturer, GM's domestic products are the most accurate, and BMW's are the least accurate by far. One other trend: Only 13 of our 200 test speedos registered below true 70 mph, and only three of those were below 69 mph, while 90 vehicles indicated higher than 71 mph. Are our cars trying to keep us out of traffic court?
To understand, let's first study the speedometer. In the good old days, plastic gears in the transmission spun a cable that turned a magnet, which imparted a rotational force to a metal cup attached to the needle. A return spring countered this force. Worn gears, kinked or improperly lubed cables, tired springs, vibrations, and countless other variables could affect these mechanical units.
But today, nearly all speedometers are controlled electronically. Typically, they are driven by either the vehicle's wheel-speed sensors or, more commonly, by a "variable reluctance magnetic sensor" reading the speed of the passing teeth on a gear in the transmission. The sine-wave signal generated is converted to speed by a computer, and a stepper motor moves the needle with digital accuracy.
Variations in tire size and inflation levels are the sources of error these days. Normal wear and underinflation reduce the diameter of the tire, causing it to spin faster and produce an artificially high reading. From full tread depth to baldness, speeds can vary by up to about two percent, or 1.4 mph at 70 mph. Lowering tire pressure 5 psi, or carrying a heavy load on the drive axle, can result in about half that difference. Overinflation or oversize tires slow down the speedometer. All our speed measurements were made on cars with new stock tires correctly inflated, but one might expect a manufacturer to account for wear and to bias the speed a bit low; results suggest that not to be the case.
So we sought out the rule book to find out just how much accuracy is mandated. In the U.S., manufacturers voluntarily follow the standard set by the Society of Automotive Engineers, J1226, which is pretty lax. To begin with, manufacturers are afforded the latitude to aim for within plus-or-minus two percent of absolute accuracy or to introduce bias to read high on a sliding scale of from minus-one to plus-three percent at low speeds to zero to plus-four percent above 55 mph. And those percentages are not of actual speed but rather a percentage of the total speed range indicated on the dial. So the four-percent allowable range on an 85-mph speedometer is 3.4 mph, and the acceptable range on a 150-mph speedometer is 6.0 mph.
But wait, there's more. Driving in arctic or desert climates? You're allowed another plus-or-minus two percent near the extremes of 20-to-130-degrees Fahrenheit, and yet another plus-or-minus one percent if the gauge was ever exposed to minus-40 to plus-185 F. Alternator acting up? Take another plus-or-minus one percent if the operating voltage strays two volts above or below the normal rating. Tire error is excluded from the above, and odometer accuracy is more tightly controlled to plus-or-minus four percent of actual mileage.
The European regulation, ECE-R 39, is more concise, stating essentially that the speed indicated must never be lower than the true speed or higher by more than one-tenth of true speed plus four kilometers per hour (79.5 mph at a true 70). Never low. Not even if somebody swaps a big set of 285/35R-18s for stock 255/45R-16s.
There's your explanation of high-reading European speedometers, with the highest readings on Porsches and BMWs that are most likely to lure owners inclined to fool with tire sizes. Of course, only the speedometer must conform. Trip computers are free to report average speed honestly. Try setting your BMW or Porsche cruise control and then resetting the average-speed function. Unless you've screwed up the tires, the trip computer should show a nearly accurate reading. Even General Motors, whose domestic speedometers are the best, must skew its readings slightly high on vehicles exported to Europe.
So there you have it: the raw, unvarnished truth about speedometers, laid bare without the underhanded aid of secret pyrotechnics. Readjust your comfortable indicated cruising speeds accordingly.
部仅仅是油耗，速度计，里程表也一样（没想过吧？呵呵）。
楼上的朋友讲得好，两辆车一起走同样路程试过没有？正常的车试过没有（15年的老车与保养和里程数关系太大了）？日本人好高务远，喜欢搞小动作是出名的了。
给你个实测结果报告看看吧：
厂商为了表示车性能好，提高“指标”，人为高调速度表等多达10%。
报告显示BMW的水分最多，GM最少（但在欧洲出售的GM还是入乡随俗，标高了一些）。
这是在里程表丑闻（降低油耗“指标”，同样也是水分：欧洲车>日本车>美国车）之后的另一行业性丑闻。
http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Cara.../april/200204_feature_speedometer.xml?&page=1
Speedometer Scandal!
Can you trust your most frequently consulted gauge?
BY FRANK MARKUS
APRIL 2002
Page 1 of 2
Regular readers have probably noticed that when we describe a vehicle that really gets our juices flowing, we tend to hyperbolize about the accuracy and precision with which the steering wheel and pedals communicate exactly what is happening down where the rubber meets the road. It has recently come to our attention, however, that many of the cars we like best are surprisingly inaccurate about reporting the velocity with which the road is passing beneath the tires. Or, to put it another way, speedometers lie.
Yes, ladies and germs, we are scooping 20/20 and 60 Minutes with this scandal: Speedometers Lie! Okay, "exaggerate" may state it more aptly, if less provocatively.
When traveling at a true 70 mph, as indicated by our highly precise Datron optical fifth-wheel equipment, the average speedometer (based on more than 200 road-tested vehicles) reads 71.37 mph. Wait, wait! Before you roll your eyes and turn the page, let us dig just a bit deeper and reveal some dirt.
Sorted by price, luxury cars are the least accurate, and cars costing less than $20,000 are the most accurate. By category, sports cars indicate higher speeds than sedans or trucks. Cars built in Europe exaggerate more than Japanese cars, which in turn fib more than North American ones. And by manufacturer, GM's domestic products are the most accurate, and BMW's are the least accurate by far. One other trend: Only 13 of our 200 test speedos registered below true 70 mph, and only three of those were below 69 mph, while 90 vehicles indicated higher than 71 mph. Are our cars trying to keep us out of traffic court?
To understand, let's first study the speedometer. In the good old days, plastic gears in the transmission spun a cable that turned a magnet, which imparted a rotational force to a metal cup attached to the needle. A return spring countered this force. Worn gears, kinked or improperly lubed cables, tired springs, vibrations, and countless other variables could affect these mechanical units.
But today, nearly all speedometers are controlled electronically. Typically, they are driven by either the vehicle's wheel-speed sensors or, more commonly, by a "variable reluctance magnetic sensor" reading the speed of the passing teeth on a gear in the transmission. The sine-wave signal generated is converted to speed by a computer, and a stepper motor moves the needle with digital accuracy.
Variations in tire size and inflation levels are the sources of error these days. Normal wear and underinflation reduce the diameter of the tire, causing it to spin faster and produce an artificially high reading. From full tread depth to baldness, speeds can vary by up to about two percent, or 1.4 mph at 70 mph. Lowering tire pressure 5 psi, or carrying a heavy load on the drive axle, can result in about half that difference. Overinflation or oversize tires slow down the speedometer. All our speed measurements were made on cars with new stock tires correctly inflated, but one might expect a manufacturer to account for wear and to bias the speed a bit low; results suggest that not to be the case.
So we sought out the rule book to find out just how much accuracy is mandated. In the U.S., manufacturers voluntarily follow the standard set by the Society of Automotive Engineers, J1226, which is pretty lax. To begin with, manufacturers are afforded the latitude to aim for within plus-or-minus two percent of absolute accuracy or to introduce bias to read high on a sliding scale of from minus-one to plus-three percent at low speeds to zero to plus-four percent above 55 mph. And those percentages are not of actual speed but rather a percentage of the total speed range indicated on the dial. So the four-percent allowable range on an 85-mph speedometer is 3.4 mph, and the acceptable range on a 150-mph speedometer is 6.0 mph.
But wait, there's more. Driving in arctic or desert climates? You're allowed another plus-or-minus two percent near the extremes of 20-to-130-degrees Fahrenheit, and yet another plus-or-minus one percent if the gauge was ever exposed to minus-40 to plus-185 F. Alternator acting up? Take another plus-or-minus one percent if the operating voltage strays two volts above or below the normal rating. Tire error is excluded from the above, and odometer accuracy is more tightly controlled to plus-or-minus four percent of actual mileage.
The European regulation, ECE-R 39, is more concise, stating essentially that the speed indicated must never be lower than the true speed or higher by more than one-tenth of true speed plus four kilometers per hour (79.5 mph at a true 70). Never low. Not even if somebody swaps a big set of 285/35R-18s for stock 255/45R-16s.
There's your explanation of high-reading European speedometers, with the highest readings on Porsches and BMWs that are most likely to lure owners inclined to fool with tire sizes. Of course, only the speedometer must conform. Trip computers are free to report average speed honestly. Try setting your BMW or Porsche cruise control and then resetting the average-speed function. Unless you've screwed up the tires, the trip computer should show a nearly accurate reading. Even General Motors, whose domestic speedometers are the best, must skew its readings slightly high on vehicles exported to Europe.
So there you have it: the raw, unvarnished truth about speedometers, laid bare without the underhanded aid of secret pyrotechnics. Readjust your comfortable indicated cruising speeds accordingly.
Re: 铀235，你敢不敢赌？
Cavalier 我现在不开了，但我的Buick Centry完全可以轻松达到6.9L/100Km开空调，比手册高出一大截。上周刚从大瀑布回来测的。去年去大瀑布油耗还低些（速度比这次慢）。国内别克的实测有过百公里油耗6.373升（驾驶车号粤Ｂ－Ｇ５０００别克ＧＬ型轿车的车主顾壮丽先生）的记录http://www.carcn.net/wxby/you/65.ht...shanghaigm.com/knowledge/knowledge_fuel03.htm 13位车主最终的平均每百公里油耗为6.16升。排量２・９８升的别克轿车从深圳开到汕头竟然仅仅耗油１５升左右， [url]http://business.china.com/zh_cn/auto/carman/technique/1629/20001204/45991.html[/url] 在上海通用汽车和深圳标远汽车公司举办的“别克杯”驾驶好习惯大赛中，１３辆别克车的确创下了平均百公里油耗６・６５升的“奇迹”。
5.8升也是去年一个朋友的2000 Cavalier 2.2L从多伦多来回实测出来的。
GM的车只要不是太旧，还真没有油耗达不到厂家标称的。
说实话Civic我还真不敢开太单薄了，我的命要紧。
Cavalier 我现在不开了，但我的Buick Centry完全可以轻松达到6.9L/100Km开空调，比手册高出一大截。上周刚从大瀑布回来测的。去年去大瀑布油耗还低些（速度比这次慢）。国内别克的实测有过百公里油耗6.373升（驾驶车号粤Ｂ－Ｇ５０００别克ＧＬ型轿车的车主顾壮丽先生）的记录http://www.carcn.net/wxby/you/65.ht...shanghaigm.com/knowledge/knowledge_fuel03.htm 13位车主最终的平均每百公里油耗为6.16升。排量２・９８升的别克轿车从深圳开到汕头竟然仅仅耗油１５升左右， [url]http://business.china.com/zh_cn/auto/carman/technique/1629/20001204/45991.html[/url] 在上海通用汽车和深圳标远汽车公司举办的“别克杯”驾驶好习惯大赛中，１３辆别克车的确创下了平均百公里油耗６・６５升的“奇迹”。
5.8升也是去年一个朋友的2000 Cavalier 2.2L从多伦多来回实测出来的。
GM的车只要不是太旧，还真没有油耗达不到厂家标称的。
说实话Civic我还真不敢开太单薄了，我的命要紧。
在冬天的时候，试开过全新的2门的运动型的 2003 CIVIC，开到 100 - 120KM / H 的时候，就感觉很飘，左右飘动。。。刹车的时候感觉车体打偏。
当时的天气是晴天，-30度，没有下雪。路面很好。20号公路。为了证实感觉，又去试了ACURA 的1。7 EL，这车和CIVIC差不多的（同样的底盘），感觉也差不多这样。
我个人是不喜欢日本车的，喜欢美国车和德国车的厚实和稳！
你去拉拉同级别的美国车和日本车的车门就知道那辆车的钢板厚了！
不要为了省油而忽视安全！日本车之所以省油，是因为车体轻，现在一般车的发动机技术都差不多。日本车也一样。小日本把普通车做的象玩具所以省油，日本车里边的内饰再漂亮，要是安全差，壳薄，开高速车体不稳的话，那也没啥值得称赞的。
一分钱一分货，价格和美国车差不多，但内饰还要漂亮，还要省油，天底下不可能有这样的好事。肯定是在其他的地方“偷工减料“才能有现在这样的所谓“经济的日本车！“ 仔细想想吧！
个人意见：为了安全，别买日本普通车！比较车辆，是看整体，若是单单比油耗，实在没意义！
你总不能说：林肯 和 卡迪 （8缸，耗油大着呢）比那个CIVIC都差吧 ？
当时的天气是晴天，-30度，没有下雪。路面很好。20号公路。为了证实感觉，又去试了ACURA 的1。7 EL，这车和CIVIC差不多的（同样的底盘），感觉也差不多这样。
我个人是不喜欢日本车的，喜欢美国车和德国车的厚实和稳！
你去拉拉同级别的美国车和日本车的车门就知道那辆车的钢板厚了！
不要为了省油而忽视安全！日本车之所以省油，是因为车体轻，现在一般车的发动机技术都差不多。日本车也一样。小日本把普通车做的象玩具所以省油，日本车里边的内饰再漂亮，要是安全差，壳薄，开高速车体不稳的话，那也没啥值得称赞的。
一分钱一分货，价格和美国车差不多，但内饰还要漂亮，还要省油，天底下不可能有这样的好事。肯定是在其他的地方“偷工减料“才能有现在这样的所谓“经济的日本车！“ 仔细想想吧！
个人意见：为了安全，别买日本普通车！比较车辆，是看整体，若是单单比油耗，实在没意义！
你总不能说：林肯 和 卡迪 （8缸，耗油大着呢）比那个CIVIC都差吧 ？
我来说两句
小日本车轻要看和什么车比。2003 年的 CAVALIER也就比CIVIC
重了50多公斤，又能比CIVIC安全到哪里去？不少人说CAVALIER
比CIVIC重许多，安全许多，不知道依据在哪里？
关于美国车超省油的说法(比SPEC上的指标还省油)，我想在这里
说两句。每个厂家标定自己车的耗油指标都有它的道理和依据。
任何厂家再诚实，也不会诚实到故意贬低自己车的程度。如果
CAVALIER和BUILK真如楼上的说的那样比SPEC上要省一大截油，
难道GM众多的工程师和产品测试人员都是脑子有毛病？非要在
自己的SPEC上对自己的产品贬低一把？你们知不知道GM里面的
试车员比你们的开车技术要高出许多？
关于GM举办的什么比赛，说句实在话我从来不相信这些结果。
我更相信GM最后不得不在自己SPEC上写下的数据。以我在诸多
厂家混过多年的经验，这些结果连北美的厂家都不可靠，更不
用说是在中国。
小日本车轻要看和什么车比。2003 年的 CAVALIER也就比CIVIC
重了50多公斤，又能比CIVIC安全到哪里去？不少人说CAVALIER
比CIVIC重许多，安全许多，不知道依据在哪里？
关于美国车超省油的说法(比SPEC上的指标还省油)，我想在这里
说两句。每个厂家标定自己车的耗油指标都有它的道理和依据。
任何厂家再诚实，也不会诚实到故意贬低自己车的程度。如果
CAVALIER和BUILK真如楼上的说的那样比SPEC上要省一大截油，
难道GM众多的工程师和产品测试人员都是脑子有毛病？非要在
自己的SPEC上对自己的产品贬低一把？你们知不知道GM里面的
试车员比你们的开车技术要高出许多？
关于GM举办的什么比赛，说句实在话我从来不相信这些结果。
我更相信GM最后不得不在自己SPEC上写下的数据。以我在诸多
厂家混过多年的经验，这些结果连北美的厂家都不可靠，更不
用说是在中国。
