GTP Cool Wall: 1999-2006 Honda Insight

  • Thread starter Thread starter White & Nerdy
  • 325 comments
  • 20,456 views

1999-2006 Honda Insight


  • Total voters
    131
  • Poll closed .
I'm such a hypocrite, I know. Mainly watching anime but primarily reading western comics, barely liking any rock music but still enjoying playing the guitar, liking cars but wanting to protect the environment...

It's like these things aren't mutually incompatible or something.

;)

Are you suggesting that there are many varying mindsets, preferences and the worlds population can't be placed into two black and white categories? astonishing.
 
I have to ask, how does one start an ICE engine in -40 degree Canadian weather? crank handle?

:lol: I laughed much louder, really, than I should have. This is why I park my diesel truck facing downhill when I'm far from home. :D

Haha. It's a little difficult sometimes, but the battery is usually to blame though.

And what powers the ECU, the fuel pump, the spark plugs? If you're driving a modern car, you've got to muck about with electricity, anyway. I'm not convinced of an EV future... I know the numbers too well, but an EV car is about as uncomplicated as any new car can get... and can be pretty reliable given the right battery architecture and electronics.

Come back in 15 years or so when you want a fun cheap car but all the compacts are electric.

Not going to happen. And even then, you won't have to worry about it, because you wouldn't be able to afford them.

A mild hybrid, however, like a MazdaSpeed2 with start-stop and a 150 hp gasoline SkyActiv engine, weighing just 800 kilograms? That you might be able to get a lease on.


You let things like this take hold and they will kill everything you love.

GM made the Solstice and Sky. Did you buy one? Nope. Mazda and Toyota still make really excellent small, affordable sports cars that are manual and rear wheel drive. Are you actively looking to finance one right now? No? Instead, you're asking about what modifications you can make to your front-wheel drive clunker.

The reason we don't get non-FWD, non-AT mainstream choices is because we're not mainstream. We're indie hipsters who scrounge around in the garbage for our car selections and listen to unhip death metal on pirated mixtapes in our garages. If you want your favorite music to survive on a commercial basis, you buy their albums from the record store.

Since you don't, they can't. And it's not the fault of the nice lady driving her Prius to pick up her kids at school. It's your fault because you don't vote with your wallet.

-

The Insight? It's not pop music. It may sound a bit like the Prius, but it's smarter, more eclectic and a whole lot cooler. Think improvisational jazz rather than Motown R&B.
 
Last edited:
Why doesn't someone just come up with a different alternative? Something that's better than electric cars. I also find it funny how environmentalists want us to drive electric cars, yet they want us to conserve electricity in our everyday lives.

Would you leave your car running overnight? Or leave your oven on 24/7? Think about how you might answer these questions, and then consider how silly your last sentence is. It isn't that we should be conserving electicity specifically, it is energy in general, regardless of what it is.
 
post-37243-Anna-Kendrick-gross-gif-Imgur-Jrsc.gif
 
I think all cars need to be described using music genres from now on.

The Citroen DS is romantic, while the Traction Avant is baroque. The 2CV is a homeless man on a street corner with a couple of spoons, while the Saxo VTS is grime. The SM is krautrock, while the BX belongs on the new wavier side of post punk.

And that's just Citroens.
 
You defending him like some white knight is unnecessary considering the ignorance.
I'm not white-knight-ing for anyone, I'm defending some of the beliefs that he naively elevates onto flimsy pedestals for terrible reasons.

If it's not your intention to drag anything down, that's fine.
 
And besides, the way things are going now, we'll never technically run out of oil. The government has locked it all up so it can sit uselessly in the ground for all eternity.

In practice, we have until the everywhere else runs dry, with ever more extortionate prices along the way.
 
Well seriously, how can we run out if we can't even get to so much of it?

This earth has been around for billions of years, in that time fossil fuels have been created within this earth.

Mankind has only been engaged in industry which allowed the use of these fuels for lets be generous 200 years.

In 200 years, we have almost completely depleated this resource. Why do you think there is such a rush to find new ways to power society as we know it and such a massive push to reduce fuel usage in the mean time?

The fuel IS running out, regardless of what you seem to believe. "In 15 years" cars as we know it truly won't be a thing "at this rate" because there will be nothing to put in the tanks.

You're going to see a hell of a lot more scrapyards filling up with gas guzzlers shortly, so count your pennies if you're seriously going to try and cling to your impossible ideals of thirsty V8s built by blokes in a shed getting 1.2 MPG because in no time at all you're going to be paying 100 bucks a gallon - faster than you'd think too if you don't want the general population driving electric/hybrid vehicles.

The world has moved on, you need to as well or you're going to find yourself alone in an outdated vision of it.
 
What I'm saying is, we could buy ourselves a great deal of time by actually extracting the oil we have left. But unfortunately, those in charge will not let us. Just look at ANWR - just getting a little slice of that area unlocked is like pulling teeth. So soon enough, we will find ourselves "out of oil" even though there's still plenty left in such places.
 
What I'm saying is, we could buy ourselves a great deal of time by actually extracting the oil we have left. But unfortunately, those in charge will not let us. Just look at ANWR - just getting a little slice of that area unlocked is like pulling teeth. So soon enough, we will find ourselves "out of oil" even though there's still plenty left in such places.

It's not economic to drill as deep as the wells you're talking about are.

It's like the oil sands, we can draw a great deal of oil from them but it's a laborious and expensive process.

Okay think of it like this, your engine has blown on your car and you go to the local wreckers.

Now you only have a grand, which would be enough for a normal motor - but the last one just sold as you got there and the only motor remaining is a fully built monster of a motor worth 15 grand.

Now what do you do? you've run out of cheap motors and the only thing remaining is the big expensive motor.

Then the guy at the wreckers says "Hey, actually I have this fully running car here for 1 grand, would you like that instead" (For the sake of argument ignore the plethora of issues a 1 grand car would have)

What're you going to do? bankrupt yourself getting the super motor or move on to something else that's a lot cheaper?

I suck at trying to boil complex stuff into relatable situations but I hope you get it
 
That 15 grand motor sounds like a real babe magnet, I'll take two!
 
I'm guessing the cost of getting oil from deep wells or sand wouldn't be all that much more expensive than getting oil shipped in from across the globe.

That wasn't the point anyway. The point is, the land containing all this oil is completely off-limits in many cases, often thanks to the environmental lobby.

It's got me thinking, though - is there perhaps some other way to get hold of a combustible liquid besides oil? There's corn ethanol, but that stuff sucks and takes a bite out of food production too. I've heard a similar, but better, fuel can be derived from sugar, not sure if I'm remembering right though. There has got to be, somewhere out there, another plant, not so connected to the food supply, from which fuel can be extracted. Where there's a will, there's a way - what concerns me is that there is no will. The green lobby has been exerting political pressure to push everyone toward electric cars instead. At this point so much is invested in electric motor technology, I don't think anyone would bother to look.
 
I like the car a lot but the argument of buying a car to save in fuel is pretty ridiculous, you have an extra car that will have extra costs apart from the initial purchase price and in most cases will depreciate. A better argument is that the car is comfortable and fun in everyday driving. Also find the special weekend car argument valid but the fuel just doesn't add up enough in a few years to justify an extra car.

Disclaimer: my daily does 13MPG :D
 
I'm guessing the cost of getting oil from deep wells or sand wouldn't be all that much more expensive than getting oil shipped in from across the globe.
Either your guess is wrong, or we're shipping oil from Saudi Arabia just for fun. I'd lean towards the former, but that's just me.
Where there's a will, there's a way - what concerns me is that there is no will. The green lobby has been exerting political pressure to push everyone toward electric cars instead. At this point so much is invested in electric motor technology, I don't think anyone would bother to look.
Amazing that energy companies have no will to develop new forms of energy that they could market and sell to the public. That's really incredible of them that they'd put the environment ahead of profits, despite centuries of doing the exact opposite.

This stuff doesn't stand up to the slightest bit of critical thinking. Cheap oil is over. It will never come back, and it's not the fault of hippies, liberals, or the EPA. The oil that was pumped out of Texas and is currently pumped out of Saudi Arabia is cheap to pump and easy to process. We haven't found any more of it in years, and the current wells are running dry. We won't "run out" of oil, but the cost will continue rising indefinitely because the cost of production will continue increasing. You are drastically underestimating the costs involved in alternative forms of oil production.
 
And right year? Once poluation gets heavy and the gasoline/oil gets scarce to a point, the energy will have to do. Which will probably take lots more years. The electric cars taht usually don't have any kind of v8 obviously and no true sound of a car, it's just very soulless. But there's only one electric car that I would love to have: Tesla Model S.
Electric cars won't just magic up out of thin air once conditions reach some sort of "right, we need them now" tipping point. The entire idea behind developing them now is to ensure we're ready when they genuinely are needed.
In my opinion, never.
Subtext: I know absolutely zero about electric cars, I'm scared of the technology and I don't like change.
Because bad ideas push out good. You get electric cars to a point where they're tolerable for the average person, they'll buy nothing else because for some reason they think a car that makes no noise is a good thing. Then good luck ever finding a mainstream entry-level or midsize car with an ICE ever again. It's happened many times - RWD giving way to FWD, ruthless displacement downsizing becoming the norm, and now improved automatic transmissions chasing away manuals. You let things like this take hold and they will kill everything you love.
God forbid things become better for the people who actually buy cars!

Here's an idea: Drag your sorry ass out of the hole you live in, improve your lot in life, get yourself a successful job and maybe you'll be able to buy some of the cars you crave, rather than tediously moaning about some dystopian future where people drive around in cars you don't really understand, have never driven, but seem to dislike anyway.
This is one of those cars that mostly appeals to automotive hipsters. Everything about it, from the extremely awkward styling to the geeky technology powering it is so different and unusual, its the main reason why it was a sales failure. Have to give it SU.
Actually, it was a sales "failure" because they never planned to build many of them anyway. Actually, you could consider it quite successful - they built a set number of them, and sold every single one - despite it having quite a high price at the time.

But still, do feel free to continue on the "haven't got a clue" train to its destination.
 
Either your guess is wrong, or we're shipping oil from Saudi Arabia just for fun. I'd lean towards the former, but that's just me.

Some of it could be backroom deals, some of it could be the green lobby whining about polar bears or whatever. The thing about that is, some of the world's other oil-producing nations (not naming names, to avoid moderation) barely care about people, so how much value do you think they place on their local wildlife?

Amazing that energy companies have no will to develop new forms of energy that they could market and sell to the public. That's really incredible of them that they'd put the environment ahead of profits, despite centuries of doing the exact opposite.

This stuff doesn't stand up to the slightest bit of critical thinking.

Like I said, blame the environmentalists. They whine about pollution to their freinds in D.C., or in some cases, in California, said friends start pushing all the new alternative technologies with subsidies and regulations. This skews the profit & loss equations - suddenly manufacturers have to start building money-losing electric cars to keep the paper pushers happy, and customers start buying more of them because the government promised them money back. From the perspective of a normal person, an electric car still doesn't make a lick of sense, but until Uncle Sam is removed from the equation, most or all of the "OH NOES PEAK OIL" research & development will be concentrated on making them make sense. There are, I think, very strong reasons to search for a feasible gasoline-substitue, and to go full speed ahead on oil extraction in the mean time:

-Relatively speaking, liquid fuels have a high energy density - one of the main reasons electric cars still don't work is the need to carry 1,000 lbs of battery for about 1.5 gallons worth of energy - and if the Tesla Roadster is anything to go by, it's still inferior even if you ignore that due to being more vulnerable to overheating.

-They also refuel more quickly. That's the other main problem with electrics - spend all night recharging to get maybe 100 miles of range on a good day, though Tesla's designs seem to be capable of slightly more. Hydrogen solves this problem, but there are issues with getting hold of it so at the end it's probably even worse than electric. The only reason I advocated for it before was because Mazda had apparently figured out how to run it in an ICE.

-The fun argument. How do you shift it? What does it sound like?

-Oh, and speaking of energy density, refuelling, and range: have fun being trapped in the big city!

So, that's the sitch. We need some sort of gasoline-substitute that's compatible with existing engines, and that is derived as little as possible from crude oil. We can't rely on the mainstream to get it for us because they've been more or less paid off to work on electric cars. And, honestly, I can't think of a grimmer automotive stay of execution that having to drive one of those. So, brains, get thinking!
 
Last edited:
Like I said, blame the environmentalists.
Consider this one of your major personal issues. Gotta be someone to blame! (Never yourself though).
And, honestly, I can't think of a grimmer automotive stay of execution that having to drive one of those.
This is the other: A narrow mind.

Honest question: Do you find yourself unhappy, more often than not? If so, have you ever considered that your bleak outlook may be something to do with a completely unnecessary "world is out to get me" attitude?

Protip: Life isn't actually that bad. You live in the developed world. You own your own a car, and a computer which allows you to spew any old dross onto the internet at any time you choose. You even have a job, against the odds, and presumably are in a reasonable state of health.

And yet you use that fortunate position in life to complain about stuff that doesn't even affect you. All. The. Time. What is so unfulfilling about life that you must constantly rail against things you know very little about, and will probably never affect you to any significant degree?
 
A constant fear that I never will be able to get to the point where it would affect me. I.E. by the time I can afford a new car, there won't be a single one left that's acutally worth driving, at least not at a low price point. And by the time I'm rich enough to not care about price, there's won't be a single car worth driving left anywhere, assuiming internal combustion hasn't been completely outlawed to appease Greenpeace.
 
You can't afford a car from the naughties, why are you worrying about what would be available in the 20s?

Used cars won't disappear, why don't you go put a deposit on an FR-S? or is the "Sissy engine" too much of a put off for you?

Here's an idea, if you stopped driving a gas guzzler you'd be able to afford a "Proper" car far quicker than if you continued to fool yourself.

You drive a FWD, underpowered, gas guzzling V6 with the chassis rigidity of a wet sponge - a Honda Fit is more engaging to drive than your car.

I dare you to go and test drive a Fit, or any other car you think is garbage. Or are you too scared that your ridiculous world will come crashing down.


Now, real talk time.

I know you have this deluded mindset that you need to stand up for the "Old ways" and "What it means to be a man" But the fact is, these ideals are prehistoric and ridiculous.

Come, please - PLEASE join us in the real world. Take down your walls, your barriers holding you back in life and enjoy life for the love of all that is good.
 
I think it's uncool, reminds me too much of an Honda Civic, not a big fan of Civics. Also the new Insight looks cooler.
 
A constant fear that I never will be able to get to the point where it would affect me. I.E. by the time I can afford a new car, there won't be a single one left that's acutally worth driving, at least not at a low price point. And by the time I'm rich enough to not care about price, there's won't be a single car worth driving left anywhere, assuiming internal combustion hasn't been completely outlawed to appease Greenpeace.
Why is it a constant fear?

The daft thing is, if you actually took the time to educate yourself on the subject you'd probably come away with a more realistic viewpoint on EVs/hybrids etc - more like that of @niky or myself. Even I'm not expecting real volumes of electric cars on the road for at least another 20 years, and even then they'll be part of a rich patchwork of alternative technologies.

The trouble here is, you don't seem to want to educate yourself on the subject. You'd rather assume that what you're saying is right and hold it as some sort of concept to be constantly fought against. I could direct you to a rather excellent, balanced* website on green vehicles - and whether you disagree with the cars themselves or not, it would at least help inform you on some of the subjects you seem to lack knowledge on. But I'd probably be wasting my time, because you've already made up your mind on this one.

For the record, and this is probably worth noting at this point, I don't care that you or anyone else here finds the Insight uncool. I'm a long, long way past caring what other people think of my car (and as I mentioned, people I've actually met and care about seem to like it regardless). What bothers me is the huge volume of misinformation and cynicism that seems to accompany the opinions of those who aren't keen.



* You probably find this concept hard to understand too, but we cover both the positive and the negative stories on green vehicles. And there are people like you - only the polar opposite - who are annoyed every time we cover the bad stuff, because they feel we should be advocates. That isn't what journalism is about, and it's why I'd recommend our website, because the only thing we actually care about is being thorough and accurate.
 
I'm guessing the cost of getting oil from deep wells or sand wouldn't be all that much more expensive than getting oil shipped in from across the globe.

Oh, its quite a bit more expensive.

That wasn't the point anyway. The point is, the land containing all this oil is completely off-limits in many cases, often thanks to the environmental lobby.

And because the damage resulting would out weigh the gains, economically and environmentally.

Certainly not worth it for a band aid fix to a large problem. By large, I mean "oh god, I'm going to bleed out in hour" bad.

It's got me thinking, though - is there perhaps some other way to get hold of a combustible liquid besides oil? There's corn ethanol, but that stuff sucks and takes a bite out of food production too. I've heard a similar, but better, fuel can be derived from sugar, not sure if I'm remembering right though. There has got to be, somewhere out there, another plant, not so connected to the food supply, from which fuel can be extracted.

We also have this thing called hydrogen. And refining other fuels from bio matter is certainly possible. Here is the catch though, it takes more energy to produce this than oil. The food supply isn't even that big of a deal, more the economics of keeping it cost effective means using crops from less developed nations, which drives their prices up leading to local issues.

Of course, this doesn't address the other aspect, which is ICE engines are wildly inefficient compared to electric. By this, I mean 30% to 95%, so you waste the fast majority of the energy in fuel to heat.

Where there's a will, there's a way - what concerns me is that there is no will. The green lobby has been exerting political pressure to push everyone toward electric cars instead. At this point so much is invested in electric motor technology, I don't think anyone would bother to look.

So much is invested because it is magnitudes more efficient. And solves many of the compromises required for combustion engines, like power delivery and the need for gearing. Torque at idle means drifting and donuts are a simple tap of the foot away.

Some of it could be backroom deals, some of it could be the green lobby whining about polar bears or whatever. The thing about that is, some of the world's other oil-producing nations (not naming names, to avoid moderation) barely care about people, so how much value do you think they place on their local wildlife?

Mentioning Saudi Arabia or Syria won't get you banned, their human right issues are common knowledge. But your reasoning is just so... so... beyond tasteless I can't even fathom it. Are you truly so narcissistic?


Like I said, blame the environmentalists. They whine about pollution to their freinds in D.C., or in some cases, in California, said friends start pushing all the new alternative technologies with subsidies and regulations. This skews the profit & loss equations - suddenly manufacturers have to start building money-losing electric cars to keep the paper pushers happy, and customers start buying more of them because the government promised them money back. From the perspective of a normal person, an electric car still doesn't make a lick of sense, but until Uncle Sam is removed from the equation, most or all of the "OH NOES PEAK OIL" research & development will be concentrated on making them make sense. There are, I think, very strong reasons to search for a feasible gasoline-substitue, and to go full speed ahead on oil extraction in the mean time

You realize Tesla is working in a nation with almost no infrastructure and still looking to be profitable in the next year or two? These aren't money losing cars, they are an invest in the future of transportation.

Relatively speaking, liquid fuels have a high energy density - one of the main reasons electric cars still don't work is the need to carry 1,000 lbs of battery for about 1.5 gallons worth of energy - and if the Tesla Roadster is anything to go by, it's still inferior even if you ignore that due to being more vulnerable to overheating.

And the Model S has plenty of range for major trips along the West Coast with only minimal charging stations. If we actually develop anything close to proper infrastructure, the range of a couple hundred miles with 15 minute charges would mean you'd barely notice a difference.

The over heating issue isn't an issue, check your sources. Oh wait, you don't have any.

They also refuel more quickly. That's the other main problem with electrics - spend all night recharging to get maybe 100 miles of range on a good day, though Tesla's designs seem to be capable of slightly more. Hydrogen solves this problem, but there are issues with getting hold of it so at the end it's probably even worse than electric. The only reason I advocated for it before was because Mazda had apparently figured out how to run it in an ICE.

Rapid charge stations take 15 minutes for nearly 300 miles. Over night charge on a modern full size is similar, assuming you don't invest in the charge station at home.

You realize getting hydrogen is something I can literally do in my apartment? The process of producing it is stupid straight forward, but again, not terrible efficient and ultimately pointless because ICE is hilariously inefficient. Also, band aid fix.

The fun argument. How do you shift it? What does it sound like?

Who needs to shift when you run 12 second quarter miles and swing the back end out on command?

Oh, and speaking of energy density, refuelling, and range: have fun being trapped in the big city!

If you'd read anything in ages you'd realize this isn't the case.

So, that's the sitch. We need some sort of gasoline-substitute that's compatible with existing engines, and that is derived as little as possible from crude oil. We can't rely on the mainstream to get it for us because they've been more or less paid off to work on electric cars. And, honestly, I can't think of a grimmer automotive stay of execution that having to drive one of those. So, brains, get thinking!

Brains are thinking, much better than yours for sure. Guess what? They think you're an idiot stuck in the past clinging to the old ways because change is scary. Oh, and an absolutely miserable person.

tl;dr - read a god damn book that isn't the Bible.
 
Not only are electric motors three times more energy efficient, they are a much less complex machines altogether. Internal combustion engines have been around for well over 100 years so we know them quite well and to improve them we've went from a basic engine to slapping all sorts of systems to it to improve it's efficiency. Variable valve timing, all sorts of cooling and lubrication system derivatives, switchable inlet manifolds and whatnot. Common rail diesels to top it off. A basic 4 cylinder 16 valve motor has at the very least 50 loaded moving parts, whereas a basic electric motor has three. A single rotor and two bearings. It doesn't take an engineer to see which one is more likely to be more reliable, have less energy loss and would be easier to maintain.
 
The true downsides to an EV is the time it takes to recharge the battery, driving range, and the batteries will wear out over time.

Although, I do LOVE the Tesla Model S. There is one (silently) running around Carthage, and it's an elusive thing. I see it every once in a while, which is why I don't have a picture of it. :grumpy:
 
Back