SAmadei

This is mostly for the folks who grew up in the Baltimore-Philadelphia suburban zones in the '60s-'80s. Well, burned into the dark recesses of my childhood are trips to Ginos and Burger King, not McDonalds. Well, in the early '80s, Ginos were converted to Roy Rogers (which were left to dry up) and a major eating institution passed into the history. Well, apparently, no more. The popularity of places like Five Guys and Red Robin have demonstrated that there is a market for upscale burger restaurants, and many of the original Ginos people are putting together a new Ginos chain. Apparently, the first location was opened in King of Prussia, PA in late 2010, to quite a bit of fanfare. And they are looking for new franchisees. www.ginosgiant.com Let the roadtrips begin!

Fuel pump will commonly go out of the blue on any GM car over X years old or XXX miles. However, a dead fuel pump will result in a crank-no start situation, and you can test the fuel pump by listening for it start up or by using a fuel pressure gauge. Since this car is not even turning over, I'd suspect starter/solenoid (replaced with starter), battery or battery cables. Since he tried to jump it without success, I'd look at starter first. But keep in mind, its possible to not jump start the car right, so for a proper diagnosis, I'd doubel check that the starter was getting enough juice. You can remove the starter and have many parts places will test it.

Oh, yeah... Here. Of course, this is a great demo why I don't refill cars/trucks/mowers in an enclosed space. They did this from inside the van, while it was closed up. Bad idea. Pouring a little gas into the carb is a good way to get a dry fuel system primed... but you have to still be careful. In a van, that means opening the doors and getting everyone out.

I thought there might be some of that. We're lucky... at the shore, its been all rain... and I don't think we'll see much of anything but a ton of rain.

Hmmm... So what you're saying is that they were unable to prevent the product from leaking or exploding suddenly by using their intellect to hold down a lever? About three or so of our members were able to use their superior intellect to use the product without issue, so I guess the defense lawyers are going to want to get a hold of them and learn of their secrets. ;-) Either that, or they got lucky and didn't experience something ranging from leakage and inconvenience to 3rd degree burns.

Do people who buy this (or rent/test them) actually use this feature on a regular basis? Knowing the setup time and the requirements for the space to back into, I would think even a half-competent parker would prefer to do the "the old fashioned way". I mean, when you're driving, does this give you, what 12 seconds to txt message someone? Its not like you can completely ignore the process, you are still liable for the car's actions. I just question this feature being not much more that a curiosity to show your friends. A true "Parking Assistant", to me, would be something like those extra wheeled things shown off in the '50s that helped people park in tiny spaces. I can't find a vintage video, but its somethign like THIS. Seems kind of a waste to put that on a Renault 5/Le Car, but on a long car or SUV, it would be a big help.

The Camaro has always been a 'Pony Car', not a 'Muscle Car'. Granted some would argue that the current Camaro is based on a full-size platform and could be argued that makes it a muscle car. I'm not going there. Perhaps being a Pony Car, that gives GM the excuse to go 4 cyl... considering that many Mustangs and Camaros have already sported them.

So far OWN is a failure. It barely gathers 50% of the ratings the Discovery Health channel did before it was canabalized.

Not sure you could use these for gas/kerosene in most states. IIRC, your container needs to be red and be marked 'gasoline' to get gas filled into it, for example. Granted, most gas station people are not going to stop you... I'm merely saying that you would still be breaking the law.

At this point, I don't find that as interesting as the fact that Wikipedia had this info in early 2009... including that 8 2010 Sky's were also built. I would like to know the logic behind the creation of these cars so early.

You might have seen THIS on Jalopnik, but I thought it was neat enough to report here. Oddly, I get a a British Blues Brothers vibe from some parts of the run. But the real reason I thought it was neat... while driving through London with their completely uninteresting vehicles, what do you see around 14:08? Yeah, an early white second gen Trans Am. I've heard there are only a handful of these in the UK, it was kinda interesting to see one captured during this high speed chase.

One of my favorite Top Gear snippets. Unfortunately, only a slim minority will ever that it seriously. I've always observed similar effects with my driving. I always seem to get atrocious fuel economy with econo cars, but decent mileage driving my usual rides. For example, comparing the Iron duke Celebrity or various Chevettes to my 6 cyl '70 Tempest. Or my "econo" 307 Buick wagon versus my heavier LT1 Caprice wagon.

Are you suggesting everything GM makes in ~2018 will be 3200 pounds or less in order to be LNF-ready? GM can't even make the new Regal 3200 pounds. No, a 4000 pound Impala or Camaro with one of your miracle LNF engines will be fine. *Sigh*. Actually, I really doubt there is much on the GM-related aftermarket I don't know about. Summit/Jegs is not the be all, end all. So whats the purpose of keeping these parts secret? Sure, there are EO numbers for a lot of the LSx stuff. But an intake for a LSx that allows use of a carb is never going to get an EO number. Now, subtract all the V8 parts... and all the listings for generic racing or standard replacement parts (I hardly consider a listing for a LED 194 bulb or a racing fuel cell to be part of the H-body aftermarket) and what is left from Summit and Jegs for GM 4 and 6 cyl cars with EO numbers? Not much. OMG, a FWD SS with a problem hooking up? My friend's 1986 Skyhawk had trouble hooking up if you stomped on it, too. And to compare apples to apples, what percentage of SSes built in the last 10 years will your SS out run? How many of those are V8s? I've observed the automotive market for long enough to make an educated guess. You'll also note I say "Sometimes"... I know the rules of physics are not going to allow many cars to hit the 35-39mpg CAFE requirements. Sure, a ATS-V will be quite spiffy... but at a niche price... and in numbers that GM won't mind just tacking on the gas guzzler penalty. But if the Alpha Camaro ends up being primarily a 95% 4 cyl car, as Camino noted in the 6th gen Camaro thread, it should be retired. Imagining that future is like being in 1988 and imagining the Probe-based Mustang future Ford originally intended. However, even 4cyl LNF-esque Camaros might be too optimistic. After all, no Solstice came close to 35 mpg. And if we consider eAssist or hybrids, we're looking at more weight, complexity and cost... and more niche ...and we know GM's track record with niche cars... Fiero... Reatta...Allante...EV1... XLR... SSR... GTO... Kappa... G8... Sure, the CAFE 35-39 mpg requirements might never get enough traction to become a problem, but its clear that GM is taking CAFE quite serious right now... so we're going to get 35-39mpg CAFE influenced cars regardless if we get 35-39mpg CAFE or not.

Guess all those guys who bought Mallett Kappa cars are confused, too. No replacement for displacement. I haven't driven an LNF, as I have yet to find one that was installed in a vehicle I could fit in. However, previous turbos have underwhelmed me... Supras, 300ZX, couple more that were awful. Fuel efficiency? Well, the Solstice LNF spots the GTO/G8 about 1000 pounds and can still only get 4 mpg combined MPG better. I imagine an LNF IN a GTO/G8 would get about the same as a V8 powered GTO/G8. Lag... I still don't like the slow throttle response in most modern cars. Any turbo lag is eternity compared to that. When the foot goes down, I want a reaction instantly. There are plenty of other reasons I don't care for turbos, but I'm not going to debate turbos vs whatever further here. We're talking about a kit to turn 4 cyl Camaros into V8 Camaros. There is no OBD testing to provide a kit that duplicates an OBD existing setup. The kit could be as simple as a parts list where you get 10% off if you buy the whole shebang. Mallet and SLP go WAY beyond these upgrades... and cost an arm and a leg for that reason. Lets install one in an Impala or Camaro so I can try it. The 5.0 Fords always had weak parts, even the top cars. This is part of the Ford mantra for supplier pricing... 10% cheaper each year... which led to the '90s Explorer tire blowout disaster. Todays GM cars are better. Look at the W-body transmissions... GM was using 4t60e's and slowly moved everything up to 4t65e's in the late '90s even though the engine power levels stayed the same. It was cheaper to build the better tranny in bigger numbers. In a 4cyl -> v8 Camaro upgrade, what needs to be upgraded? Clutch, Tranny, driveshaft, Rear and axles (assuming its IRS). Assuming that CAFE lets GM build 5% of the cars with V8s in the 2018ish timeframe, maybe 5000 a year, GM is going to HAVE to share the stronger parts with the lesser cars to make it worth making the 5K V8 powered cars. Whats the manufacturing $$ difference in a 260hp/340tq drivetrain and a 450hp/450tq drivetrain? Maybe a few hundred bucks? (again, manufacturing side, not retail). Even if you replace the entire drivetrain at the retail level... just really rough guesstimates here... $400 clutch, $1000 manual transmission or $2000 automatic... driveshaft... $300. Rear end... $1000. Axles... $1000. So we added $4-5K to the engine upgrade... but you can recoup some money from the parts sold. In this timeframe, the enthusiast market is going to be starving... GM would make good headway with a wink and a nudge to the enthusiast that wants to get around CAFE without sitting on a waiting list at the dealership, hoping he'll get to pay for the privilege to overpay for "one of the last V8 interceptors". 85% of Summit and Jegs items only help you build a 30+ year old car or turn your Camaro/Firebird/Mustang/GTO into a smog-disaster that you will never get through emissions again. Sure, the stuff looks good on paper, but I don't see how this stuff passes a visual check. With the exception of a few top end kits for LSx powertrains, most stuff is carbs, carbs and more carbs. Can't put a carb on a 2010 Camaro and expect the CEL to not come on. Look at the transmission offerings in Summit or Jegs... you can't buy anything more sophisticated than a 700r4. Or parts for them. Not even a 4L60e. Its not like there aren't plenty of 200-4r, 4L60E, or 4L80E rebuilders out there making monster transmissions and parts. In 2010, yes. V8 Camaros are, what... 50-60% of the mix. The discussion at hand is the future... where V8 Camaros are rare and GM and the dealers price them so. The rumor is no V6 in the Alpha... so there is no middle ground. You will have the choice of a LNF-esque Camaro for $30K or a V8 powered Camaro for Vette prices. In 2018... will that be $60K or $100K? $30K + $10K (V8 upgrade) -4K (Old engine/drivetrain parts sold on eBay)... 36K would be a better deal than a 50K CAFE-limited edition Camaro. Even if you paid a garage to do it (+1.5K -- 16hr @ $90/h as a worst case scenario). Buying computer chips is so 1994. The bolt-on market relies on having a engine to bolt onto. When the V8s are CAFE-limited, what GM stuff (besides the LNF) is going to having any bolt ons? There is nothing out there for the current V6s. Even finding CAI air filter kits for GM 6 and 4 cyl cars is pretty hard. The only V6s I know that you can get a decent CAI for are 10 year old Grand Prixs... and they are NOT cheap. I'm done following this tangent. If you don't get my point, you aren't going to if I continue. To summarize... if CAFE screws with V8 cars like CARB has screwed with gas containers, people will take unusual steps to return to the status quo. GM can profit from any grassroots effort to circumvent the CAFE rules. Sometimes I feel like by the time Alpha gets here, we'll ask, "Why bother?"

I find it odd that the interior lights and parking lights would seem linked... the only place these would normally cross paths is the light switch... has that been replaced? Its where I'd start... but keep in mind, my expertise in all vested in GM stuff...so Hyundai may have something of a different design. Other than that, I'd look at the lighting controller... or whatever Hyundai is calling it. The fact that throwing the switch back and forth 4-5 times seems to fix the problem tells me its a physical problem in the switch or a problem inside whatever controller Hyundai has. Not sure thats a lot of help, but hopefully its a start.

The aftermarket is not taking care of the rest. Where are the kits to convert stock G8s into stock G8 GTs? Granted, its not a terribly popular upgrade path right now, but CAFE has not become insane yet. In any case, it would be a trip to the stealer with a mountain of part numbers. Remember, we're talking about the future with rumored insane CAFE where GM only dribbles out a handful of V8s to rich people... and the rest of us are stuck with underpowered junk. That's why its key that GM provides the parts as part of a kit, so that any conversion is as smog legal as if it came from the factory. In the end, if its a OBD2 system or better, the car is watching its emissions and as far as the state should be concerned, if its clean, its legal. Some of us don't like turbos. I don't like driving around my car at high RPMs all day long. I don't like the lag... yeah, they still lag. Breakage has been an issue ever since they started to trim part specs to save weight/material/money in the late '70s/early '80s. Nothing new here. Besides, we're not talking about making a 2018 4cyl Alpha Camaro into a 1000 hp monster. We're talking about making a 4cyl alpha Camaro into a 8 cyl alpha Camaro. GM would be giving its enthusiasts a wink by putting the same strength drivetrain in either a 4cyl or 8 cyl Camaro... as its not really saving that much weight to put weak junk in there.

...and Camaros... and Caprices (If GM ever allows the general public to buy them). If GM is going to force people to pay for the privilege of having a V8, there are going to be people out there that want one without paying 6 figures (based on the ridiculous CAFE numbers being floated for the end of this decade). GM could still sell them a 4 cyl Camaro for $25K and then a $9K engine kit, rather than having to fight for the privilege of getting a one of few, dealer overcharged V8 Camaro, which by 2018 or so, could be as rare as hen's teeth and also 6 figures...

It would be nice if GM would make parts kits available through GMPP to upgrade 4cyls into 8cyls easily. Them you can build your expensive halos that count against CAFE and yet people can still get around the CAFE issue with a few days in the garage and a potentially relatively cheap option from GMPP.

Well, for all those who think that government interference in gas container interfaces is perfectly fine, let me show you a preview of the CARB 5.0 Gas Can 2012 Interface... (Yes, all gas cans will be mobile in the future). All gas cans NOT using this interface after 2012 will be illegal and criminals will be branded terrorists. Yeah, its a bit of a frivolous discussion considering the disaster the politicians are doing elsewhere, but it reminds me of a famous statement, paraphrased here for the topic... First they came for the cheap, sensible gas containers, and I didn't speak out because I didn't use them that much. Then they came for our gas stations, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't an investor in the petrol companies. Then they came for our cars, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't able to afford one after getting fired from my gas station job. Then they came for me and there was no one who could care less for a broke, homeless guy unable to get around. ...In the end, I find it VERY interesting that the division here seems to be based on age/generation. It tells me that the brain washing is apparently working. I envision in a couple more generations you won't be able to tie your shoes without a license, insurance and special, anti-noose break-away shoelaces. Centuries from now, Mike Judge's Idiocracy will make him look like Nostradamus.

While I haven't seen the actual CARB rules, it appears that these new CARB rules (in effect since 1/1/09) only apply to 5 gallon or smaller containers. Looking at larger containers, I see a lot of the older "No-Spill" containers, which have worked reasonably well for me the past few years. It appears a lot of resellers are selling replacement spouts for the containers... effectively rendering this regulation useless and making the richer ever so much more richer...

That looks like its too narrow. Pouring gas into that would be pretty tedious. Also, funnels need to be dried off or you get gas in your trunk... and once dried off, you have a gassy rag in your trunk. I understand where Camino is coming from, as he's using larger cans on a variety of devices everyday... whereas you're using a small gas can occasionally. There is a big difference between using a relatively light 5 gallon gas can on a car and using a unwieldy 20 gallon can on a tractor over your head. And I'm sure the bulk of the equipment Camino uses is not vapor sealed anyway. I haven't used one of these newer ones yet, but I have used the previous CAFE/EPA enforced tanks and found that on some cars (like a 1966 Lincoln) even brand new gas cans were nearly unable to get gas into the vehicle without turning the can completely upside down... at which point the "safety" device leaked gas all over me and the car. Of course, I normally don't use the gas can spouts... I just unscrew them and pour. So when it comes to gas cans, I only care that they don't leak while closed in the back of my car. In the last few years, I really haven't had a leakage problem... so I'm not too upset. Honestly, what a lot of these cans need is a simple cap. I wonder where a fitting cap could be sourced... I'll have to keep an eye out.

Interesting, so according to this: How Remote Entry Works it looks like any modern fob has a 40 bit "rolling key" and the only synchronization is done by the car holding the next 256 codes. In fact, I'd say that no fob has a key at all anymore, and that instead all fobs have the same set of keys that loop to infinity. Its the sych process that makes the fob work... at least until you hit the fob button the 257th time while not in the car's presence... then the fob will be assumed to be some other fob and ignored. As part of this sync process, the Car and the fobs all need to use the same Pseudo Random Number Generator. So if you imagine, all the remotes are sharing the same gigantic key that eventually repeats... but each car/remote is only looking at a small portion of that band. Its also interesting because all the US remotes work in the 315Mhz band. Not sure if that band is subdivided by supplier, etc. though. Thats a pretty big band, and I doubt the FCC would not subdivide it somewhat. Trivia...knowing that most GM cars can hold 4 fobs, thats 40K of non-volatile memory per car, just for keys and future keys. Don't sound like much, but thats alor for an embedded system on a car. Getting back to Von's problem... _IF_ this is a remote interference problem, you could solve the problem by unplugging the remote receiver for a few weeks... or by pushing your fob button (not in the presence of your car) 1000 times, then resynchronizing the fob. This would either drop you back in the list of rolling keys or put you ahead of the list of rolling keys enough to break the inadvertent sync you might have going on. Good news for me, as I can reuse my sister's remote since they never had the same key anyway. I just need to make sure I use the fob 256+ times before the cars end up near each other again... Bad news... if someone reverse engineers the PRNG (I'm sure someone has by now), you could jump 256 keys at a shot and rapid fire codes out and _someones_ car in a parking lot is going to eventually unlock. You could probably kick out 25K keys a second. 10 million keys in about 6~7 minutes.

Well, perhaps Subaru with its past GM linkage, shares a supplier. The remotes have FCC IDs, so I'm sure there is some band limitations in there somewhere to keep suppliers from stepping on each other's toes. Of course, there is also the possibility that someone has build something custom and it "recording" the remote signals and replaying them. Edit: Apparently, this is unlikely on a 2003 vintage. To isolate if this is a system problem or external problem, I'd disconnect the remote receiver for a few days. Trouble is if that stops the trunk from popping, you can't really test the unit itself without replacing/reprogramming it... and it could still be an external issue.

I suppose to be sure its not an electrical problem, I would check the wiring from the glove box button and remote receiver to the solenoid... but my thinking is that a short would not make it pop the trunk, it would stop the unit from working at all. I really haven't heard of too many people having the remote systems activate spontaneously. Is it just the trunk? Does it just happen at home? I'm going to go with a different idea... did someone else in the neighborhood get an additional GM car? While GM may boast of a plethora of remote security combinations, there are a lot of GM cars out there and they do repeat. Perhaps someone has a remote using the same key. I don't know the specs for GM's remote systems, so I don't know the exact chances of this happening. I suppose you could get an idea of the radius involved and just ask around... the remote shouldn't be good for more that a few hundred feet. I suppose you could clear your remotes and add the current remote back. Perhaps a long-lost remote is the one being triggered. Its funny you post this problem, as I recently was going to do something like this on purpose... My Bonne remote is getting flaky, and I have a spare "broken" remote for my sister's car. I was thinking of building a FrankenRemote and programming it to my car. Sure, if the cars were together, remote usage would get confusing... opening both sets of doors, popping both trunks...but they seldom are in the same state, let alone same driveway. Someone who has actually done the remote programming may be able to shed more like on this.

Well, I would assume its right in the database (MySQL?), and that you have access to that, either from MySQL port or via something like PHPMyAdmin. Changing a largely insignificant field like that likely won't hurt anything... but you want to leave indexes and stuff alone.