#7: 84 dlx dream terc

[dlb]

this is only my second time actually buying anything from them so i can't say yet. part of the final price is a fee for border duties so i'm hoping that's it and i don't get gouged on and COD fees or duties when the stuff arrives but we'll see. the only other thing i bought from them before was a rebuilt brake master cylinder which came to $45 with shipping. no border fees on that but it's small. this order is about $220 so it's my first real test in that regard. as long as there are no surprise fees, most things cost about the same as from lordco once shipping is factored in.

as for using their site and wide range of parts, i like those a lot.

[marlinh]

I would appreciate a cost breakdown on what you ordered, out of curiosity. My fear is ordering something that is misboxed or no good. I like being able to walk in the store to return stuff. Would they pay postage etc for a return?

[dlb]

ok, when it shows up and i know the total (ie an surprise fees) i'll break it down for you. i totally agree about returning mail order stuff, it sucks.

[irowiki]

If it is their mistake they will generally pay return shipping.

[Petros]

I have occasionally got the wrong part in a box marked with the correct part number, not the retailer's fault. Usually the price was low enough I did not bother trying to return it (seal or minor bearing). That has happened when I buy stuff in a parts store too, I only take it back because I still need the correct part, but for a few bucks I do not want to mess around returning it.

I have had Rockauto pay for return shipping when they shipped the wrong part. Not a problem, you just have to provide documentation that it was the wrong part.

[dlb]

mileage from the second tank on the dream terc was 13 km/L (30.5 mpg). first tank was 13.5 km/L (31.7 mpg). that's great for winter driving.

something interesting to note is that on the first tank, i was driving with the stock 155/80r13 skinny tires. the mileage was better and i noticed the braking power was lacking. 100 km into the second tank, i switched to my old ae95 wheels and tires which are 185/70r13. the braking power feels much better, 'normal' i would say, but it looks the mileage may have been adversely affected. i realize two tanks is nothing to make any assumptions on but it got me thinking so i will do some further testing to see if the skinny and wide tires consistently make a noticeable impact on fuel economy. it's one of those things that i've read about lots but i've had a hard time finding any good A/B test results for it, even on the hypermiling forum. just lots of opinions without any good data to back it up.

[irowiki]

Skinny tires have less rolling resistance?

[dlb]

they definitely do, but i want to see exactly how much over the course of 5-10 tanks of gas for each set of tires.

[Petros]

yes, skinny tires have less rolling resistance, one of the reasons the old CRX HF model came with skinny wheels and tires. this has been tested and is pretty well known for many decades. Unfortunately, the better the grip of the tire, generally the more rolling resistance as well (lower fuel economy).

If you want the min rolling resistance run skinny tires, about half worn down, with about 60 psi in the tires. of course you will wear out the tires down the center pretty fast, and will go for a wild ride if you hit water on the roadway, but it will yield the best fuel economy.

[dlb]

just got 15.6 km/L (36.7 mpg) and that's mostly city driving in 5-10* celsius weather with the wider 185/70r13 tires. really impressed but the last tank was quite a bit lower (13 km/L) so i obviously need to log more kms to get a more accurate average.

still working on things. installed a stereo, sub, and rear speakers while at work over the last few days. the brand new CV axles just arrived from rockauto so i will get those in this next week when i have a few days off. i've been finding the steering is a little stiff, especially on returning to center after a turn, so i looked on here and read about lubing the steering u-joints. there is no play in them but they are my first suspect so i lubed them tonight, will see how they behave tomorrow. added seafoam to the oil last week, picking up some restore tomorrow to throw in after an oil change to see if that helps with the low compression and oil in the air filter housing. after my experience with restore in our truck, i'm pretty hopeful.

[dlb]

i added a can of restore after an oil change several days ago so i did another compression test. the original test results were 165, 140, 110, and 170. now they were 175, 180, 160, 180. i'm really impressed by those results.

there was still some oil in the air filter housing though so i wiped it out and will check again in a few days. might have been from while the restore was first doing its thing so we'll see.

[irowiki]

Was it burning oil at all before?

[dlb]

no, there were no clouds of blue out the exhaust, and the level on the dipstick didn't drop over the 750 km i drove it. just the oil in the air filter housing so my guess is that the worn rings or cylinders were allowing the peak combustion pressures to blow past the rings and push oil up and out the breather hose into the air filter.

[irowiki]

Ohhh, Buck started losing oil, but only over the mountain passes when I'm really pushing it, and I do see occasional oil traces in the air filter.

I'll try some restore with the next oil change!

Was your oil getting dirty black fast?

[dlb]

i'm not sure about how quickly the oil was getting dirty. it was black when i got it but has stayed golden since i changed it. i will be keeping an eye on it and will let you know how it goes.

marlene, i measured and weighed the cargo area plywood. it's much thinner and lighter than i thought. it's about 1/4"-5/16" thick and weighs 7 lbs. i checked the spare and it was flat so i filled it but the wood still doesn't wobble on top. it's 155/80r13 though so it doesn't create quite as big a hump as the 175/70r13's.

cargo 002 (Medium).jpg

cargo 004 (Medium).jpg