Super-Economy of 1997!

[2o6]

Go!

[Eye of the Tiger]

Swift

[Laconian]

I saw six full-grown men climb out of an Aspire when I worked at the shitty redneck hardware store. It blew my mind. After they pretzeled their way back in, I marveled at how low the car's ride height became.

[2o6]

The Metro seems like the most technologically advanced car here, on paper. IMO it looks pretty good, and has four wheel independent suspension, instead of the stick axles on the Tercel and Aspire.

[CALL_911]

I'll take the Tercel. The damn thing will run forever.

[cawimmer430]

I've never ever aspired to own an Aspire (I can see why they gave it that name - in the hopes that people would aspire to own one!).

My vote went to the Toyota Tercel. It's probably the best car here, which isn't saying much! 


Friend of mine had one of those 3-cylinder Swifts! Jesus Christ...   

[Onslaught]

Toyota

[Laconian]

I've never ever aspired to own an Aspire (I can see why they gave it that name - in the hopes that people would aspire to own one!).

Low Aspirations.

[Northlands]

Accent.

[93JC]

The Metro seems like the most technologically advanced car here, on paper. IMO it looks pretty good, and has four wheel independent suspension, instead of the stick axles on the Tercel and Aspire.

Your fascination with "stick axles" needs to stop, dude. You sound like a complete boob whenever you bring it up.

[Cookie Monster]

Metro. I don't really care either way.

[Speed_Racer]

Low Aspirations.

Aspire to not be poor so they could afford a better car.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

I'll take the Tercel. The damn thing will run forever.

Yep!

[MexicoCityM3]

Bicycle, Bus or Walking

[Eye of the Tiger]

A moderately-sized motorcycle would get 50-60 mpg. A scooter might get 100.

[Madman]

Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick, what a terrible assortment to choose from!

But which is the least wretched of a pretty awful bunch?  Let's begin the process of elimination.......

First of all, a car this small needs to be a hatchback.  That rules out the TURDsel and its useless trunk.  Next is the Swift/Metro or whatever the hell it is.  I once had the dubious "pleasure" of driving a Geo Metro and wondered what kept the owners of these miserable deathtraps from committing suicide.

So, that leaves either the Aspire or the Accent to pick from.  Despite having a laughable name (Aspire to one day own a REAL car, I assume?) the Kia-built Ford does score practicality points by being available as a five door hatch, a body configuration denied to Amercan Hyundai Accent shoppers.  But the Aspire was propelled by a woefully inadequate 63 horsepower 1.3 litre four pot.  On the other hand, the Accent was a relative hot-rod, packing a 92 horsepower 1.5 litre engine.  The Accent GT hatchback offered 105 thundering ponies, making it the most powerful car in this entire survey!  The 42 horsepower advantage of the Accent GT over the Aspire plus the Accent's aforementioned four wheel independent suspension means the Hyundai is the least shitty car here.

That settles it.  I'll take a Hyundai Accent GT three-door hatch with the five speed manual.

[cawimmer430]

Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick, what a terrible assortment to choose from!

But which is the least wretched of a pretty awful bunch?  Let's begin the process of elimination.......

First of all, a car this small need to be a hatchback.  That rules out the TURDsel and its useless trunk.  Next is the Swift/Metro or whatever the hell it is.  I once had the dubious "pleasure" of driving a Geo Metro and wondered what kept the owners of these miserable deathtraps from committing suicide.

So, that leaves either the Aspire or the Accent to pick from.  Despite having a laughable name (Aspire to one day own a REAL car, I assume?) the Kia-built Ford does score practicality points by being available as a five door hatch, a body configuration denied to Amercan Hyundai Accent shoppers.  But the Aspire was propelled by a woefully inadequate 63 horsepower 1.3 litre four pot.  On the other hand, the Accent was a relative hot-rod, packing a 92 horsepower 1.5 litre engine.  The Accent GT hatchback offered 105 thunding ponies, making it the most powerful car in this entire survey!  The 42 horsepower advantage of the Accent GT over the Aspire plus the Accent's aforementioned four wheel independent suspension means the Hyundai is the least shitty car here.

That settles it.  I'll take a Hyundai Accent GT three-door hatch with the five speed manual.

[Rupert]

Metro. Tercel is better, but not a hatch.

Now the older 4WD Tercel wagons...

[Rupert]

Bicycle, Bus or Walking

BBW?

[Cookie Monster]

BBW?

[2o6]

Your fascination with "stick axles" needs to stop, dude. You sound like a complete boob whenever you bring it up.

I'm nowhere near that bad, now, mostly because I've driven so many cars now + experimenting with RACER. I don't think it's as bad as you think I do, but it's not a preference of mine. It logically doesn't seem to be an ideal setup (when you throw out things like cost and packaging)


Remember when I hated twist-axles? I'm over that now. 

[cawimmer430]

Somebody vote for the Aspire. It's depressing to see that it has zero votes! There must be somebody out there who aspires to own an Aspire!

[Eye of the Tiger]

Hi, I've been to three years of college for automotive technology and engineering, and 'the fuck is a "stick axle"?

[2o6]

Hi, I've been to three years of college for automotive technology and engineering, and 'the fuck is a "stick axle"?

A beam with springs on either end

[93JC]

So what is the difference between a "stick axle" and a "twist-axle"? The problem here is that you throw out these terms and,

1) they're not the commonly accepted nomenclature, so off the bat it makes people wonder WTF you're even talking about and,
2) you seemingly don't know what your made-up nomenclature is referring to anyway

Driving dealer stock around a parking lot and playing some crap video game won't teach you much.

[2o6]

Okay, "Solid Axle" and "Torsion Beam".





Besides, I do deliveries and many-a test drive - I do more driving than parking lot speeds.


I did some research on it, coupled with looking at cars on the lift at work, it's pretty interesting how WRONG I was. I can understand why manufacturers use ither or.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but a torsion beam consists of

- A pair of sprung trailing arms coming off the body of the vehicle - without the torsion beam (twist axle) it'd be totally independent. However, since actual total independence (coupled with the fact that a singular trailing arm can't have any camber change) isn't always totally desirable, a beam is between them that acts as an Anti-rollbar controlling body motions. Stiffen the rollbar up, and the wheels actions become more dependent. I understand why cars like mine use them, not only does it look pretty cheap, but it takes up so much less space while providing a better driving dynamic than a solid axle.


A solid axle is totally dependent; the what one side is doing, the other must do the opposite. Shouldn't this consist of poor lateral hop and possible wrong camber given to the bank of a curve? The Econoline had some insane axle hop over minute bumps, but everything was broken on the Econoline, so that's a bit unfair. I've noticed it more on the GM trucks (although modern trucks are so well isolated that I can't imagine many people like my parents who are used to driving a broken Econoline) actually noticing. Some of the Chrysler Vans have some ass wobble lateral see-sawing upon driving (compounded by the soft damping and slab sided design). Even the Mustangs I've driven (not really the latest gen, but noticeable in the older ones) had some axle hop upon when I drove them fast over a quick succession of bumps.



Yet again, not trying to prove fact, but just stating my experiences in these cars.

[93JC]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a torsion beam consists of

- A pair of sprung trailing arms coming off the body of the vehicle - without the torsion beam (twist axle) it'd be totally independent. However, since actual total independence (coupled with the fact that a singular trailing arm can't have any camber change) isn't always totally desirable, a beam is between them that acts as an Anti-rollbar controlling body motions. Stiffen the rollbar up, and the wheels actions become more dependent. I understand why cars like mine use them, not only does it look pretty cheap, but it takes up so much less space while providing a better driving dynamic than a solid axle.

More or less correct. They usually have semi-trailing arms (the axis of rotation is not parallel to the axle) which do allow camber changes.

A solid axle is totally dependent; the what one side is doing, the other must do the opposite.

Yes.

Shouldn't this consist of poor lateral hop

Most solid axles have several links and a Panhard bar to minimize lateral movement.

and possible wrong camber given to the bank of a curve? The Econoline had some insane axle hop over minute bumps, but everything was broken on the Econoline, so that's a bit unfair. I've noticed it more on the GM trucks (although modern trucks are so well isolated that I can't imagine many people like my parents who are used to driving a broken Econoline) actually noticing. Some of the Chrysler Vans have some ass wobble lateral see-sawing upon driving (compounded by the soft damping and slab sided design). Even the Mustangs I've driven (not really the latest gen, but noticeable in the older ones) had some axle hop upon when I drove them fast over a quick succession of bumps.

In general, yes, but "insane axle hop" won't happen unless the car has broken or poorly sized shock absorbers and bushings.


A Tercel does not have a solid axle.

[Rich]

Aspire was sold in 1997?

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

Aspire was sold in 1997?

Yep!

[Raza]

Tercel, I guess.