I think this would be an interesting thing to talk about - I kind of don't really talk too much about the cars I flip, aside from the mechanics. I think this is an interesting place to do quick style reviews about some of the cars I've driven/owned.
(Combined into one)
2001 Mazda Tribute V6 FWD, purchased early January, sold early March
2004 Ford Escape V6 4x4 Limited, purchased late Feb, sold Mid March
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/16A99D2D-431D-447A-9D59-471304169730.jpg)
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/Avatar/8716CE6E-3D2E-4611-9828-A20C05BBD23F.jpg)
+ I see why so many people bought these things when new. The V6 models are faster than the 4cyl only RAV4 and other Asian small SUV's of this era whilst only being marginally worse on gas.
+ It feels a lot more truck-y in ride, handling, and overall demeanor. For someone who'd like a "truck" to act like a "truck" I can see its appeal over the CR-V, which drives like a Honda Civic with big shocks.
+ It can tow worth a damn in this trim (3500lbs!)
+ Good interior room
+ Ground clearance is also really good
+ The 3.0L V6 has a lot of torque and despite the trans having only four gears, it seems well matched. The car never feels out taxed
+ I think the 2001 - 2004 cars are actually 4WD, not AWD (I think). There's no center diff, and you can lock the rear (sort of)
- The driving position is weird, to the point any emergency maneuver may actually make this car tip over
- Plastic quality and gap quality isn't as nice as the Honda/Toyota
Honestly, out of all the cars, I like these SUVs a lot. A hell of a lot more than the Saturn VUE I got in October.
We've had 2 Escapes, the first one is a 2001 AWD 3.0 V6, the 2nd one is a 2009 FWD 2.5 I4. We owned them both until last year when I sold the '01 to a local car flipper.
My impressions are very positive for the most part.
The '01:
Especially impressed with the drive line, the 3.0 Duratec perform faultlessly with only 1 coil pack needing replacement beyond the normal maintenance. Even after 270,000 kilometers, it did not noticably consume any oil. However, I did have to replace the front and rear sway bar links as well as the front control arms; specifically because the ball joints were starting to wear. I replaced the battery after 13 years, but what impressed me most was the only light I had to replace was the front left turn signal bulb. Every other light in the vehicle continued to work throughout the entire 15 years that I owned it.
The '09, my wife's car:
As reliable as the '01, but suspension pieces seemed more durable. Never had to fix anything on it and the 6 speed auto worked well with the 2.5 (Mazda) engine. The handling seemed a bit improved over the '01 and remained unchanged over the 8 years that we drove it. The only complaint is the noisy hydraulic lash adjusters (a Mazda complaint), but it never effected the performance. Still going strong afteer 210,000 kilometers. We gave it to our daughter a couple of months ago when we bought our new car.
I would mention that I maintained both of them vigorously in respect to fluids, filters, etc.
I would also mention that we still use the original Michelins that it came with; although we swapped them with Hankook snow tires each winter.
Yeah, these 3.0L Duratec engines are really nice. I liked driving the Tribute for two months, since I drove it as my "real car" when I sold the Yaris and before I bought the Sonic.
I liked it more than the CR-V I had, too.
Yea, they drive well enough and have plenty of power. Kinda sportsy, even.
They do feel tippy. Oddly enough, the new ones feel weirdly tippy as well.
Also don't understand Ford's use of the stupid MPG gauge that doesn't give you any actual figures, just a down and up arrow with blocks in between.
Other than that, I haven't hated the handful I've driven over the years. They're perfectly adequate for what they are. Certainly a bit Fisher Price on the inside, but not a horrible design at least.
They use them as cabs in NYC, for whatever that's worth. I hated them because with the partition they really killed rear leg room. Pretty cramped. The current ones are right sized.
I do prefer the butch styling of the old ones though. I hope for the next gen they crib more of the Explorer's looks. Current one screams "driver is a wine swilling millennial mom"
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 16, 2017, 10:06:32 AM
They use them as cabs in NYC, for whatever that's worth. I hated them because with the partition they really killed rear leg room. Pretty cramped. The current ones are right sized.
I do prefer the butch styling of the old ones though. I hope for the next gen they crib more of the Explorer's looks. Current one screams "driver is a wine swilling millennial mom"
The NYC cabs were hybrids. I recall Ford wanted to test the hybrid drive line and a bunch of them ended up as NYC cabs. Noticed a bunch of them when we were there on a couple of occasions. Some must have a hell-of-a-lot of miles on them by now. Don't like the goofy looking Nissans they chose as the standard Yellow cab.
Quote from: giant_mtb on January 16, 2017, 10:05:14 AM
They do feel tippy. Oddly enough, the new ones feel weirdly tippy as well.
Also don't understand Ford's use of the stupid MPG gauge that doesn't give you any actual figures, just a down and up arrow with blocks in between.
Other than that, I haven't hated the handful I've driven over the years. They're perfectly adequate for what they are. Certainly a bit Fisher Price on the inside, but not a horrible design at least.
Never felt tippy in either of the Escapes we owned. Matter of perception, I suppose.
I loved my mom's '01 Tribute V6. The engine sounds nice and pulls pretty hard. The fuel economy was bad though, about 20mpg combined.
Ergonomics in those were terrible. Used to carpool with my friend who had a V6 escape. My knees touched the dash no matter how far back the seat was. It was like they put the dash too low in the vehicle so my knees completely missed the contour of it.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 16, 2017, 10:06:32 AM
They use them as cabs in NYC, for whatever that's worth. I hated them because with the partition they really killed rear leg room. Pretty cramped. The current ones are right sized.
I do prefer the butch styling of the old ones though. I hope for the next gen they crib more of the Explorer's looks. Current one screams "driver is a wine swilling millennial mom"
Same here! I was eyeballing them before I brought the CSV last fall.
An ex of mine had the first gen Escape and I second Mr.H's complaints--the dash was in the wrong spot and actually pretty painful for tall knees if you hit a bad bump.
My dad had the third gen for a hot minute (seafoam green, ugly as sin, didn't last two years). You still sat really high but the ergo issues were fixed. I kinda liked the AWD in that and did 400ish miles in terrible weather. It handled like a champ on both the wet and dry.
The back seat in the new Escape is too low to the ground.
Don't like the styling of the Current Escape. It's like they sold out to the import crowd and missed the mark.
It's got stadium seating!!
(http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2606948.1461083746!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/nydn-2017-ford-escape-titanium-black-leather-rear-seat.jpg)
Versa has a larger back seat :facepalm:
Quote from: 2o6 on January 16, 2017, 05:06:08 PM
The back seat in the new Escape is too low to the ground.
Psssh. That's nothing. Try spending a few hours in the back seat of an element. Tons and tons of legroom in front of you. Great head room. But you're basically sitting on the ground. Ass cheeks ache after like 30 minutes. Just awful.
Quote from: FoMoJo on January 16, 2017, 05:09:17 PM
Don't like the styling of the Current Escape. It's like they sold out to the import crowd and missed the mark.
Yea you hit the nail on the head. Store brand Astons and Range Rovers? Sure. Store brand RAV4s? Why? A $25K Range Rover Sport would be pretty sweet.
Quote from: MrH on January 16, 2017, 06:52:07 PM
Psssh. That's nothing. Try spending a few hours in the back seat of an element. Tons and tons of legroom in front of you. Great head room. But you're basically sitting on the ground. Ass cheeks ache after like 30 minutes. Just awful.
That's a pretty good position for a bowel movement, though. Perhaps the seats should have doubled as portable toilets....
Quote from: MX793 on January 16, 2017, 06:58:39 PM
That's a pretty good position for a bowel movement, though. Perhaps the seats should have doubled as portable toilets....
We have a pooping bathroom equipped with a squatty potty. I'm very familiar with the stance. And you're right, the element wasn't too far off.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 16, 2017, 05:06:08 PM
The back seat in the new Escape is too low to the ground.
Back seats are for kids anyways, so...
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 16, 2017, 07:00:09 PM
Back seats are for kids anyways, so...
The storage, transport, and creation of.
I love the 2017 Escape. I want my parents to replace their Mazda6 with one
I hate the interiors of the new ones. So black and plasticky.
I had an ecoboost edge as a rental. That was a pretty nice little crossover.
Quote from: FoMoJo on January 16, 2017, 05:09:17 PM
Don't like the styling of the Current Escape. It's like they sold out to the import crowd and missed the mark.
Funny, I was behind two Escapes yesterday, one which was the previous gen and a current Escape. I had the same exact thought.
Quote from: MrH on January 16, 2017, 07:27:30 PM
I hate the interiors of the new ones. So black and plasticky.
I had an ecoboost edge as a rental. That was a pretty nice little crossover.
Little...? The Edge is huge!
Quote from: Cookie Monster on January 16, 2017, 07:56:51 PM
Funny, I was behind two Escapes yesterday, one which was the previous gen and a current Escape. I had the same exact thought.
Sales are still strong. I'm indifferent to either one.
2004 Cadillac CTS 3.6L
Purchased Mid April 2016, and sold around Early July 2016.
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/E13C3330-7CA6-4C25-BE07-16E5D063EEA4.jpg)
+ I still like this design a lot. It still has held up well, and I think edgier designs are the way to go for luxury cars.
+ The steering is both Cadillac familiar, but still precise.
+ GM really does well with automatic transmissions, this car shifts smoothly and confidently.
+ It's interesting how the 3.6L "HIGH FEATURE" engine changes character depending on what it's in or which variant is used. In the FWD applications, like the Traverse and other LAMBDA crossovers, it feels borderline inappropriate in regards to how late the power/torque comes in the car. In this car, partially because of gearing and weight, the 3.6L feels a lot more free and easier. I prefer it to most BMW I6 cars.
+ The leather has a distinct GM Cadillac smell that channels my childhood.
+ Ride was compliant, but handling was still very good. It rode better than a 3 series, and felt more comfortable than a C-class, without being wafty and insubstantial like a Lexus ES.
+ automatic shifter has great weight and good feel
- Although fit and finish was better than anything GM was making at the time (Step inside an 04 Cavalier or any of the GM N-body cars), material quality was honestly about on the same level as a VW Jetta
- The 2.8L and whatever other engine that isn't the 3.6L is refried garbage
- Some of the interior design choices are stupid (THERE ARE A LOT OF BUTTONS)
- Some of the controls are kind of cryptic (Sunroof control)
- This car held up far worse than practically any other small luxury car of the day, except maybe the X-type. X-types are garbage.
Whoever decided these HVAC vents were a good idea has never cleaned a vent. Can't stand these pieces of shit.
(http://doublejslist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/2004_cadillac_cts-v_sedan_base_cc_oem_1_500-2.jpg)
Quote from: giant_mtb on January 17, 2017, 01:11:01 AM
Whoever decided these HVAC vents were a good idea has never cleaned a vent. Can't stand these pieces of shit.
(http://doublejslist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/2004_cadillac_cts-v_sedan_base_cc_oem_1_500-2.jpg)
At least they're super stylish. Oh wait.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 17, 2017, 12:01:02 AM
2004 Cadillac CTS 3.6L
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/E13C3330-7CA6-4C25-BE07-16E5D063EEA4.jpg)
+ I still like this design a lot.
I agree.
Lol but you don't agree with anything else?
Quote from: 2o6 on January 17, 2017, 12:01:02 AM
2004 Cadillac CTS 3.6L
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/E13C3330-7CA6-4C25-BE07-16E5D063EEA4.jpg)
+ I still like this design a lot. It still has held up well, and I think edgier designs are the way to go for luxury cars.
+ The steering is both Cadillac familiar, but still precise.
+ GM really does well with automatic transmissions, this car shifts smoothly and confidently.
+ It's interesting how the 3.6L "HIGH FEATURE" engine changes character depending on what it's in or which variant is used. In the FWD applications, like the Traverse and other LAMBDA crossovers, it feels borderline inappropriate in regards to how late the power/torque comes in the car. In this car, partially because of gearing and weight, the 3.6L feels a lot more free and easier. I prefer it to most BMW I6 cars.
+ The leather has a distinct GM Cadillac smell that channels my childhood.
+ Ride was compliant, but handling was still very good. It rode better than a 3 series, and felt more comfortable than a C-class, without being wafty and insubstantial like a Lexus ES.
+ automatic shifter has great weight and good feel
- Although fit and finish was better than anything GM was making at the time (Step inside an 04 Cavalier or any of the GM N-body cars), material quality was honestly about on the same level as a VW Jetta
- The 2.8L and whatever other engine that isn't the 3.6L is refried garbage
- Some of the interior design choices are stupid (THERE ARE A LOT OF BUTTONS)
- Some of the controls are kind of cryptic (Sunroof control)
- This car held up far worse than practically any other small luxury car of the day, except maybe the X-type. X-types are garbage.
I've always liked Cadillac's "Art and Science" design language, but this is a rather bland representation of it.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on January 16, 2017, 07:16:28 PM
I love the 2017 Escape. I want my parents to replace their Mazda6 with one
On our list too.
Quote from: Laconian on January 16, 2017, 09:53:44 PM
Little...? The Edge is huge!
It is? :confused: It's a two row crossover. Pretty similar to a Rav4/CRV/Escape size :huh:
Quote from: MrH on January 17, 2017, 08:35:19 AM
It is? :confused: It's a two row crossover. Pretty similar to a Rav4/CRV/Escape size :huh:
The Edge is wide as shit. It's basically a short Explorer. Which is not a small car. Edges are huge, bigger than the already too big for the segment Equinox/Terrain.
Quote from: TBR on January 17, 2017, 08:33:03 AM
On our list too.
Look at the Lincoln MKC
Quote from: 2o6 on January 17, 2017, 08:39:35 AM
The Edge is wide as shit. It's basically a short Explorer. Which is not a small car. Edges are huge, bigger than the already too big for the segment Equinox/Terrain.
Look at the Lincoln MKC
Eric doesn't like body width tail lights. Our list is going to be..eclectic.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 17, 2017, 08:39:35 AM
The Edge is wide as shit. It's basically a short Explorer. Which is not a small car. Edges are huge, bigger than the already too big for the segment Equinox/Terrain.
Look at the Lincoln MKC
Compact (C1) vs. midside (CD4) platform.
Quote from: MrH on January 17, 2017, 08:35:19 AM
It is? :confused: It's a two row crossover. Pretty similar to a Rav4/CRV/Escape size :huh:
One size bigger, a la Nissan Murano/Subaru Outback/Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Yea I like the Edge's class. 3rd rows are vestigial at best
Quote from: ifcar on January 17, 2017, 11:02:50 AM
One size bigger, a la Nissan Murano/Subaru Outback/Jeep Grand Cherokee.
I don't consider any of those "huge" either really. :huh:
I wish we got the 3 row Edge. Looks better than the Explorer and the styling better matches the rest of the lineup.
(http://s1.cdn.autoevolution.com/images/news/larger-chinese-ford-edge-spotted-in-michigan-101601_1.jpg)
That's what Edges look like now? Holy shit. They weren't exactly good-looking in their Gillette days. So much gross chrome.
(https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/ford/edge/2007/oem/2007_ford_edge_4dr-suv_sel_fq_oem_1_500.jpg)
This is the 5 seat version we get
(http://www.theignitionblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/2015-03-13-11.19.37.jpg)
Quote from: 2o6 on January 17, 2017, 12:01:02 AM
2004 Cadillac CTS 3.6L
- Although fit and finish was better than anything GM was making at the time (Step inside an 04 Cavalier or any of the GM N-body cars), material quality was honestly about on the same level as a VW Jetta
Contemporary Jettas had better materials. My Passat's materials (also a 2004) was head and shoulders above the CTS in the interior; both in materials and fitment.
Quote
- This car held up far worse than practically any other small luxury car of the day, except maybe the X-type. X-types are garbage.
Aw, really? I like those. Manual AWD Jag!
Quote from: MrH on January 17, 2017, 11:46:06 AM
I don't consider any of those "huge" either really. :huh:
I feel like Rav4s are pretty big. Edge is definitely huge.
2003 Pontiac Vibe - Purchased Late July 2016, Sold Late September 2016
2004 Pontiac Vibe - Purchased Mid March 2016, sold Late March 2016
2005 Pontiac Vibe - Purchased Mid June 2015, Sold Late July 2016 (she still has this car and loves it)
(All 1.8L Automatic)
2004
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/EA09A01A-E97C-4961-9075-F60C91BF64CC.jpg)
2003
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/88A32C92-68BE-43C8-84B9-174588505ECB.jpg)
2005
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i224/Kalos_23/CCCF61CA-C316-4A6A-B405-BDB3864E244D.jpg)
+ Ride is very good for a small car
+ There's actually a lot of space in these, I moved my house in tha 2005 car, and the SUV-like rear hatch window that opens independent from the hatch door. Coupled with the front seat that folds flat (!!!), you can carry a few 2x8 pieces of wood hanging out the back of the car!
+ the 1.8L mated to the 4AT sounds like it would be a horrible combination, but the car never feels out of it's depth. Obviously, 130HP isn't a lot, but I could cruise at 75MPH with a car full of people with no real issue. I like this powertrain combo more than whatever Honda was offering in the Civic at this time.
+ Toyota could take some lessons from this car in regards to making their steering on their modern cars better. It's not super fun, but it feels secure with adequate heft and feel.
+ the 110V two-pronged household outlet is super useful and I wish more cars had them.
- the one GM piece of equipment, that AC Delco stereo, always looks and performs like crap.
- Handling is so-so
- driving position isn't for everyone. Footwell is fairly shallow, and not a hell of a lot of range in the steering wheel position
Vibes are pretty competent cars, and I recommend them for someone looking for something reliable, good on gas, and cheap to run. Just keep oil in them, otherwise I'll buy them off you when that 1.8L blows up.
I was thinking about one when we were shopping for the Rabbit. I never drove one, but I feel like a same year VW feels more substantial.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 24, 2017, 08:36:28 AM
- driving position isn't for everyone. Footwell is fairly shallow, and not a hell of a lot of range in the steering wheel position
Truf. I hated the seating position behind the wheel of this car. When I was shopping for a new car the Vibe/Matrix was immediately crossed off the list due to how uncomfortable it was to me.
Quote from: 93JC on January 24, 2017, 09:24:15 AM
Truf. I hated the seating position behind the wheel of this car. When I was shopping for a new car the Vibe/Matrix was immediately crossed off the list due to how uncomfortable it was to me.
The 2009+ Matrix/Vibe is even worse, IMO.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 24, 2017, 09:23:37 AM
I was thinking about one when we were shopping for the Rabbit. I never drove one, but I feel like a same year VW feels more substantial.
Not really. I mean, a Jetta IV feels pretty solid, but I wouldn't call the Toyota tinny or tippy.
The Matrix/Vibe, last Corollas, and even Camrys feel built for apes - long arms, short legs. I have long legs and short arms.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on January 24, 2017, 09:30:30 AM
The Matrix/Vibe, last Corollas, and even Camrys feel built for apes - long arms, short legs. I have long legs and short arms.
Some Civics are like that too.
El Camino is built perfectly for you.
Quote from: Raza on January 18, 2017, 01:21:55 AM
I feel like Rav4s are pretty big. Edge is definitely huge.
A Suburban is huge. An Excursion is huge. Edge is not even close to huge.
Quote from: giant_mtb on January 24, 2017, 11:20:04 AM
A Suburban is huge. An Excursion is huge. Edge is not even close to huge.
Yeah. The 4Runner is quite a bit bigger than an Edge. Hell, half ton trucks are the best sellers here and they're waaaaaay bigger than an Edge.
Quote from: MrH on January 24, 2017, 11:22:20 AM
Yeah. The 4Runner is quite a bit bigger than an Edge. Hell, half ton trucks are the best sellers here and they're waaaaaay bigger than an Edge.
Wrong.
4 runner and Edge are actually about the same size, save for height. Edges are not small cars.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 24, 2017, 09:28:29 AM
The 2009+ Matrix/Vibe is even worse, IMO.
Agreed. I had been behind the wheel of an older one, and had a seat in the second-generation car at the local auto show. Even worse.
The car was super practical otherwise, lots of smart thinking went into it, but I despised being inside it.
The Fold Flat Front Seat Is Definitely A Nice Touch.
Dunno why my phone just capitalized all those words.
Quote from: giant_mtb on January 24, 2017, 03:13:54 PM
The Fold Flat Front Seat Is Definitely A Nice Touch.
Dunno why my phone just capitalized all those words.
The ghost of 2o6 past has haunted your phone!!!11!!!one!!
Quote from: Cookie Monster on January 24, 2017, 03:23:07 PM
The ghost of 2o6 past has haunted your phone!!!11!!!one!!
:lol:
When I returned down to the next line it went back to normal. Happens every once in a while.
Dang looking back on it the PlastiClad-era might have been the coup de grĂ¢ce of Pontiac's execution.
Quote from: giant_mtb on January 24, 2017, 11:20:04 AM
A Suburban is huge. An Excursion is huge. Edge is not even close to huge.
Everything is huge.
Quote from: MrH on January 24, 2017, 11:22:20 AM
Yeah. The 4Runner is quite a bit bigger than an Edge. Hell, half ton trucks are the best sellers here and they're waaaaaay bigger than an Edge.
4Runner is a house. It's enormous. It's essentially a landgoing battleship.
2017 4runner
190-191″ L x 76″ W x 72″ H
2017 Odyssey
203″ L x 79″ W x 68″ H
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 25, 2017, 05:12:08 AM
2017 4runner
190-191″ L x 76″ W x 72″ H
2017 Odyssey
203″ L x 79″ W x 68″ H
2017 Ford Edge 188"L x 76"W x 69"H
Quote from: RomanChariot on January 25, 2017, 10:17:34 AM
2017 Ford Edge 188"L x 76"W x 69"H
I did NOT realize those are so large. They do a good job of appearing smaller.
2007 Toyota Yaris (4-speed auto) Purchased July 2016, sold September 2016
Obviously, I owned two of these before this one but, my driving impressions changed after I bought the Sonic
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/CD5D919B-9D69-4469-A35B-398A1C278221.jpg)
+ Good economy
+ interior plastics feel good quality and well assembled
+ I actually like the center mounted gauge cluster
+ easy to maneuver and park
+ lots of space inside for a small car
+ good sound system
+ 1.5L is tractable with good low down torque for it's size
+ ride is good
- it's too damn slow
- 4 gears don't seem like enough, despite it being OK for the Corolla
- handling is clumsy
- steering feel and response is bad
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 25, 2017, 02:52:48 PM
I did NOT realize those are so large. They do a good job of appearing smaller.
The latest 4Runner is over 15" longer and 9" wider than the original from the '80s. It is also 5" longer but about 3" narrower than the K5 Blazer from the '80s.
Quote from: Raza on January 25, 2017, 03:29:10 AM
4Runner is a house. It's enormous. It's essentially a landgoing battleship.
:lol:
Honestly, for an SUV, it's absolutely perfect in size for me. Third row in a pinch, good room in the second row. Front seats don't feel like they're a mile apart like in a Suburban.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 17, 2017, 12:01:02 AM
2004 Cadillac CTS 3.6L
+ I still like this design a lot. It still has held up well, and I think edgier designs are the way to go for luxury cars.
+ The steering is both Cadillac familiar, but still precise.
+ GM really does well with automatic transmissions, this car shifts smoothly and confidently.
+ It's interesting how the 3.6L "HIGH FEATURE" engine changes character depending on what it's in or which variant is used. In the FWD applications, like the Traverse and other LAMBDA crossovers, it feels borderline inappropriate in regards to how late the power/torque comes in the car. In this car, partially because of gearing and weight, the 3.6L feels a lot more free and easier. I prefer it to most BMW I6 cars.
+ The leather has a distinct GM Cadillac smell that channels my childhood.
+ Ride was compliant, but handling was still very good. It rode better than a 3 series, and felt more comfortable than a C-class, without being wafty and insubstantial like a Lexus ES.
+ automatic shifter has great weight and good feel
- Although fit and finish was better than anything GM was making at the time (Step inside an 04 Cavalier or any of the GM N-body cars), material quality was honestly about on the same level as a VW Jetta
- The 2.8L and whatever other engine that isn't the 3.6L is refried garbage
- Some of the interior design choices are stupid (THERE ARE A LOT OF BUTTONS)
- Some of the controls are kind of cryptic (Sunroof control)
- This car held up far worse than practically any other small luxury car of the day, except maybe the X-type. X-types are garbage.
hmm thought I remember you saying the car was garbage ;)
Quote from: Vinsanity on January 25, 2017, 08:06:32 PM
hmm thought I remember you saying the car was garbage ;)
That particular example had been beat. Terrible water leak, rust issues
Quote from: 2o6 on January 25, 2017, 08:51:50 PM
That particular example had been beat. Terrible water leak, rust issues
Yeah just busting your chops, figured yours was beat.
Did you have to put a lot of money into it to make it flippable?
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/7C0AC03C-06E1-4967-A17C-363887833994.jpg)
2008 Honda Fit - Purchased Jan 2017, Sold ????
+ Excellent use of space
+ Man this 1.5L is really rev happy. The 1.5L in the Yaris has a sweeter midrange and stronger low end torque and feels more balanced, but the 1.5L in the Fit more fun to wring out
+ this shifter/clutch is great! It's super fun and easy to fling in gear. It's different than the germanic heaviness of the clutch/shifter/steering of my Sonic.
+ Handling is super precise. Transitional speed and stability bests a lot of big cars
+ super versatile seats
- The gearing is too damn short. 5th feels like 3rd in my Sonic, and more like 4th in the manual Yarises I had. At 70MPH, the Fit is at 3700RPM. At 70MPH, the Sonic is at 2200RPM.
- Although the car is rev happy and the gearing makes it feel like youre really doing something, in real life, the car is actually very slow. Sonic can out walk this car.
- Above 70MPH it's not as stable as it could be (Sonic rides like a big car)
- this steering wheel is actually kind of large. Also the range of adjustment is lacking.
- NO AUX INPUT. This seems silly to complain about, but GM had this standard on most cars in 2006, and in this Honda it's only available on the Fit Sport.
The Sonic and Fit are two different cars. They're both fun, but the Sonic is more comfortable.
2007 Mazda 6 * not sure what model grade is
Purchased, early Dec 2016. Sold, Early Feb 2017.
2.3L, 5AT
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/25007007-C5E1-4EEA-97F9-2179274012FC.jpg)
+ The 4 cylinder plus the gearing of the five speed auto feels faster and more responsive than the 4cyl Accord or 4cyl Camry.
+ The seats are super comfy
+ Overall suspension tuning seems more responsive than the Camry.
- The Accord and Camry feel better made in nearly every way. Especially the Accord.
- The Accord and Camry have more room.
- The steering is merely, OK
- I see why this car was a fleet queen
Quote from: 2o6 on January 29, 2017, 11:45:38 AM
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/7C0AC03C-06E1-4967-A17C-363887833994.jpg)
2008 Honda Fit - Purchased Jan 2017, Sold ????
+ Excellent use of space
+ Man this 1.5L is really rev happy. The 1.5L in the Yaris has a sweeter midrange and stronger low end torque and feels more balanced, but the 1.5L in the Fit more fun to wring out
+ this shifter/clutch is great! It's super fun and easy to fling in gear. It's different than the germanic heaviness of the clutch/shifter/steering of my Sonic.
+ Handling is super precise. Transitional speed and stability bests a lot of big cars
+ super versatile seats
- The gearing is too damn short. 5th feels like 3rd in my Sonic, and more like 4th in the manual Yarises I had. At 70MPH, the Fit is at 3700RPM. At 70MPH, the Sonic is at 2200RPM.
- Although the car is rev happy and the gearing makes it feel like youre really doing something, in real life, the car is actually very slow. Sonic can out walk this car.
- Above 70MPH it's not as stable as it could be (Sonic rides like a big car)
- this steering wheel is actually kind of large. Also the range of adjustment is lacking.
- NO AUX INPUT. This seems silly to complain about, but GM had this standard on most cars in 2006, and in this Honda it's only available on the Fit Sport.
The Sonic and Fit are two different cars. They're both fun, but the Sonic is more comfortable.
Can't wait to pick it up for $800 :lol:
Quote from: 2o6 on February 07, 2017, 07:59:28 AM
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/25007007-C5E1-4EEA-97F9-2179274012FC.jpg)
Those have aged really well. That's a good looking car. ...unlike the newer ones (IMO).
Quote from: 2o6 on February 07, 2017, 07:59:28 AM
2007 Mazda 6
[...]
- I see why this car was a fleet queen
It was? Don't think I've ever seen one in a rental fleet. The generation after that one, yeah, but not the first gen. 6.
Quote from: giant_mtb on February 07, 2017, 09:46:07 AM
Those have aged really well. That's a good looking car. ...unlike the newer ones (IMO).
It needs the dealer installed body kit, imo, to really look its best. Without it looks kinda wimpy.
Quote from: 93JC on February 07, 2017, 01:09:31 PM
It was? Don't think I've ever seen one in a rental fleet. The generation after that one, yeah, but not the first gen. 6.
Yep. Big fleet Queen in the US
Quote from: 93JC on February 07, 2017, 01:09:31 PM
It was? Don't think I've ever seen one in a rental fleet. The generation after that one, yeah, but not the first gen. 6.
The basic ones seemed to fill fleets nicely, even in the first generation. Maybe it was just that fleet operators couldn't kick their habit of buying 626s.
Quote from: 2o6 on February 07, 2017, 02:08:13 PM
Yep. Big fleet Queen in the US
Huh.
Ten years ago the big mid-size fleet queens here were "domestic": Chevy Malibu, the then-new Dodge Avenger and Chrysler Sebring, and to a lesser extent the Ford Fusion. It was around this time that I started seeing Camrys and Altimas hitting the rental fleets. "The new 'Bu" is still a fleet queen here, and I haven't seen a privately-owned Impala in many, many years, but the Camry and Altima picked up the business Chrysler used to get. I don't see Mazda 6es in rental fleets; I don't see Mazda 6es
at all... Very unpopular car, sadly.
I think if Mazda did what Hyundai/Kia started doing in the U.S. two decades ago - offering a 10 year/100,000 mile power train warranty and 5 year/60,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty - they wouldn't be such a minor niche brand here. They make better cars than Hyundai/Kia.
Quote from: veeman on February 07, 2017, 10:47:50 PM
I think if Mazda did what Hyundai/Kia started doing in the U.S. two decades ago - offering a 10 year/100,000 mile power train warranty and 5 year/60,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty - they wouldn't be such a minor niche brand here. They make better cars than Hyundai/Kia.
Mazda does make niche cars compared to Hyundai/Kia, though. Relatively expensive, relatively premium-feeling, and sporty rather than roomy or comfortable. Nicer to drive, sure, but it's easy to see why they're lower-volume.
2008 Saturn VUE XE (2.4L, 4AT)
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/89A3E700-E99E-46A2-9346-8FA07D2B347C.jpg)
Purchased Late September 2016, sold Early November 2016
+ Easy to drive. Car is deceptively maneuverable.
+ Good ride
+ Big cargo area (some of these modern SUV's have really small cargo areas for some reason)
+ Handsome looking
+ transmission is butter smooth
- It is so damn slow. It's probably slower than the Automatic Yaris I had. The 2.4 in theory produces ~170HP, but I have no clue where they are. When paired to the 4AT, it's just a slow POS, and even worse when full of people. I took it apple picking with friends, and freeway jaunts were full of just the car revving the piss out of that 2.4L to get anywhere. The 2.4L isn't known for low down torque, and it's not the nicest to really wring out, either.
- These seats are uncomfortable. They're very hard, and the seat bottoms are very short.
- Not very memorable. It's like it was designed to be a rental car.
- Standard GM AcDelco parts bin crapola stereo.
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/E74FA8A3-7CFA-4547-8BB1-EF401D796A98.jpg) (http://s70.photobucket.com/user/Vannette_12/media/E74FA8A3-7CFA-4547-8BB1-EF401D796A98.jpg.html)
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i87/Vannette_12/A2A15246-0FC4-41F0-82B6-84B08DA6ACE9.jpg) (http://s70.photobucket.com/user/Vannette_12/media/A2A15246-0FC4-41F0-82B6-84B08DA6ACE9.jpg.html)
2010 Dodge Journey SXT (3.5L, FWD, 6AT, 5-passenger) (Purchased April 2017, Sold ???)
+ I still think it's a handsome looking vehicle, even if a bit bland. Lines are clean, and it's pleasant to look at.
+ Chrysler stereos are generally good (no U-connect in my car, however), and it's got good quality, if a bit biased on the low and midrange ends.
+ loads of cubby holes, two in the rear floorboards, the little drink chiller above the glovebox is nifty.
+ loads of power outlets, including a 110v standard house plug outlet
+ Seats are comfortable, if a bit unsupportive
+ good amount of interior room for 5-passengers.
+ (Ive been in a 7-seat model) although the 3rd row in these cars is obviously tight - but it's not totally useless like the Highlander or Outlander
- 3.5L is merely adequate. I know the 3.6L Pentastar is a better engine and has wayy more power and economy, but I think this was the swan song for the 3.5L SOHC unit that initially saw service in the '93 Intrepid
- This car probably barely moves with the 2.4L 4cyl
- transmission is smooth, but doesn't like downshifting.
- motor is smooth, but doesn't really like revving
- every plastic you are meant to touch feels like shit. The worst offender being the "leather wrapped" steering wheel
- the automatic transmission gear selector is positioned in a weird place, super close to your hip, and it feels awkward to use and like the gearstick is in the wrong place at all times
- Ride is squishy and unresolved
- handling and steering is kind of poor
- fuel economy sucks for the level of performance you get. A 2010 CRV offers about 85% of the space, but with better performance and economy.
I can see why you'd be lured into a pre FCA car with steep discounts. But at list price? Hell no.
(https://s3.postimg.org/8sv86tpkz/20464436_10209146225759287_1444218983_n.jpg)
2008 Scion xD, (1.8L 4AT)
Purchased Late July 2017, Sold Early August 2017
+ It's super roomy for being a small car
+ the 4AT is acceptable for what it is
+ Roadholding and freeway manners are wayyy better than the Yaris it's based upon
- I'm not sure I drove this car enough to get a good impression, I had it for literally 6 days and about ~100 miles
- The 1ZZ (Corolla's old 1.8) and that 4AT seem like a more robust combo, with more midrange and tractability.
(https://s3.postimg.org/6pg2gya1f/21014829_10209292925186681_873772450_o.jpg)
2006 Toyota Corolla - Purchased in August 2017, sold ???
+ That 1.8L and 4AT combo is nowhere near as bad as it sounds. Although the car is not fast, I never felt as if the car was too slow or out of it's depth.
+ It has good interior room, and the space is managed well.
+ Interior and plastics quality are pretty good for the year and time period it was made
+ Fuel economy is superb
- I feel like Fuel economy is good because the car forces you to drive slower because it's s dynamically bad. The shocks are soft. The steering is vague with little feel. It feels as secure at 65MPH as my Sonic feels at 90MPH.
- God, this car is so outrageously dull. Any sort of design flair that could have been put on the inside or outside was forgone for something much more inoffensive.
- This is a Corolla LE; the topmost trim. This car has keyless entry, power locks, power windows, cruise control, etc. The works. Yet curiously, this car doesn't have ABS. I checked Toyota's spec sheet; ABS was still an option on all the trims. WHY.
- The brakes are so progressive, it's actually kind of hard to lock the wheels, not sure if this is good or bad.
- I've complained about the footwells being too shallow on the Vibe/Matrix- but the Corolla is even worse. The steering column doesn't telescope and the footwell is EVEN SHALLOWER than the Vibe/Matrix. The driving position is unnatural.
Quote from: 2o6 on August 23, 2017, 01:50:09 PM
+ It has good interior room, and the space is managed well.
[...]
- I've complained about the footwells being too shallow on the Vibe/Matrix- but the Corolla is even worse. The steering column doesn't telescope and the footwell is EVEN SHALLOWER than the Vibe/Matrix. The driving position is unnatural.
Contradictory, no? I test-drove almost every compact car on the market 2008-2009 when I was shopping for my car but I didn't even bother going to Toyota: I had seat time in a Corolla at the local auto show and the uncomfortable seating position behind the wheel immediately eliminated the car from consideration. I thought they, and the Matrix/Vibe, were horrendously uncomfortable thus not making very good use of the available interior room at all.
Quote from: 93JC on August 23, 2017, 03:38:09 PM
Contradictory, no? I test-drove almost every compact car on the market 2008-2009 when I was shopping for my car but I didn't even bother going to Toyota: I had seat time in a Corolla at the local auto show and the uncomfortable seating position behind the wheel immediately eliminated the car from consideration. I thought they, and the Matrix/Vibe, were horrendously uncomfortable thus not making very good use of the available interior room at all.
The legroom is fine, but the pedal placement and steering wheel placement (particularly the too short column) is the worst.
I complained about that when I rented one last week. Especially since I'm used the wheel being very close to me in my car.
2006 Honda Civic LX (1.8L, 5AT)
Purchased: Early May 2018, Sold: ???
(https://s31.postimg.cc/7agczg9qj/One.jpg)
+ I still think this design is one of the freshest designs Honda has done in the past 20 years. Despite it being now 13 years old, the design still looks futuristic and contemporary. I also think the generation before and after this Civic don't look anywhere near as good. I don't mind the current Civic, mostly because I've seen it around a lot, but this Civic looks great. I also like how despite people clamoring about "model bloat", this Civic is only marginally bigger than it's immediate predecessor. It felt bigger and substantial than the old car, but still felt compact and small.
+ I like the interior. I know that large dash top got on a lot of shopper's nerves back in 2005-2006, but really in perspective, it's about the same as every modern car these days. I think the current shape Ford Focus might have an equally long dash top, but doesn't feel as airy as the 2006 Civic.
+ The R18 is a much better engine than the D17 (block casting issues aside), it's still lacking torque, but it's got a stronger midrange and lower end versus the old D17 of the old cars.
+ Steering is accurate and good. Could use more feel, but it's still pretty sharp.
+ Roadholding and handling are also much better than the Corolla although not as good as the Mazda 3. But Mazda hadn't figured out how to apply corrosion protection until like 2010, so that's also a consideration. A 2006 Mazda 3 is likely literally in the scrapyard.
+ I feel like a lot of smaller cars had been going thru a renaissance in 2006; I think around this time is when people in the US stopped seeing a Civic as a 2nd or 3rd car, but more workable as a real family car. Coincidentally, my friend has a 2001 Civic EX at his house, and driving on the freeway, makes me realize how a lot of small cars felt like tin cans, not that long ago, even.
- The 5AT is OK. Shift logic could be better.
- Honda makes a shitty AC compressor.
- Ergonomics of the dual-tier dash means my hand covers the speedometer.
- As nice as it is, somehow despite having 171K, this car is weirdly still worth almost $5000. I can't picture paying $5000 for a 12 year old car with nearly 200K.
That's exactly what my gfs 2010 looks like. Color and wheelcovers.
Her paint is in terrible shape. And I LOL at the strut towers being under the windshield(almost). Everything else about it is decent. The only thing that stands out to me is that the engine is so so smooth. It might just be because the 86's is a can of jumping beans though
There are 3 things I found out really matter to me from this car:
- Torque
- Fast + cold + reliable A/C
- Low road noise
Other than that it was pretty good, but unfortunately there are no easy fixes for any of those issues. Just from the A/C thing I don't think I'll buy another Honda, at least not without a mid July test drive.
Quote from: Rich on May 27, 2018, 03:46:13 AM
That's exactly what my gfs 2010 looks like. Color and wheelcovers.
Her paint is in terrible shape. And I LOL at the strut towers being under the windshield(almost). Everything else about it is decent. The only thing that stands out to me is that the engine is so so smooth. It might just be because the 86's is a can of jumping beans though
I think you have to take the cowl off to take off the struts. And taking the cowl off is super easy. Also, this one had the paint recall done. So the paint looks good.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 27, 2018, 07:23:56 AM
There are 3 things I found out really matter to me from this car:
- Torque
- Fast + cold + reliable A/C
- Low road noise
Other than that it was pretty good, but unfortunately there are no easy fixes for any of those issues. Just from the A/C thing I don't think I'll buy another Honda, at least not without a mid July test drive.
Don't you still have yours?
I enjoy that generation a lot. I thought the instrument panel was silly at first, but really liked it after having one for a week.
Quote from: 2o6 on May 27, 2018, 09:44:01 AM
I think you have to take the cowl off to take off the struts. And taking the cowl off is super easy. Also, this one had the paint recall done. So the paint looks good.
Don't you still have yours?
I sold it to my father in law. Getting to the struts was easy, I'm pretty sure I got to the top hat nuts with a regular 3/8" socket wrench
2007 Mazda 3 s (2.3L, 5MT)
(https://s8.postimg.cc/dhwnec1px/B1_D8215_A-_F687-490_F-9_E7_F-45_EF45_F69569.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/f9pm98l2p/)
I'm gonna compare this car to the Sonic, they're both similar enough I can get away wth it
+ steering, and overall demeanor is very sharp.
+ steering is quick with good feel, and accuracy. Turn in is good, and body roll is low. Grip is high. The car definitely encourages you to push it.
+ the 2.3 is a revvy motor, and I forgot how nice a naturally aspirated motor is. The Sonic's 1.4T tuned for economy makes power soon, but it doesn't really rev high and runs out of steam at like 5500RPM. The Mazda peaks later.
+ the shifter is amazing. Not as good as a Honda, but still very nice.
+ I think the styling has held up well, and the interior (although tighter than the civic) looks more expensive (at first glance) than a similar vintage Corolla.
+ the extra wheelbase inches and multilink suspension of the Mazda 3 (versus then sonic's simple torsion beam) means it handles bumps more sophiscated than the Sonic. Not that the Sonic is bad, but the Mazda 3 is better.
+ sound system is pretty nice.
+ less road noise than the Civic
- these things are kind of dumpy; like the Mazda 6 I had, the sporty demeanor and nice looking interior is let down by some budget touches. The window switches feel comparatively flimsy compared to a Toyota or Honda. Also, 104k and a front strut feels tired. The AC compressor is noisy (not bad, but works).
- Corrosion protection? Never heard of her. The Civic I had was a year older, spent its life outside, had a full 75k more miles on it, and had no (severe) corrosion on it. This Mazda is clean for its year and miles and location, but it definitely has visible rust starting in places like the wheel wells.
- the clutch take up point is very high and abrupt
- it needs a 6th gear. 5th is very short, and buzzy.
- it's real world (and numerically, I think) slower than the Sonic
- I'm only getting like 25MPG, if that.
- the 2.3L is an unreliable motor that's tempermental. The Honda and Toyota have so many fewer points of failure. The 2.3L have all these issues and I hate them. This is motor 3 for this car; the original failed, and the junkyard gave me one with a bad timing chain.
The SkyActiv motor and the new generation fixed a lot of gripes I have with the Mazda 3.
Back in 2007 tho, not much could match this. The Cobalt SS was fast, but it wouldn't let you forget that it's a Cobalt.
2011 Chevy Cruze LS 1.8L 6MT (Purchased Dec 2018)
+ It's interesting how a car a "class up" really does feel more solid. Not that the Sonic is a tin can, but the Cruze's extra heft feels a bit more solid.
+ Aside from the awkwardly resolved front fascia, the Cruze has handsome lines. Good proportions, the wheels fill out the design.
+ The watt's linkage in the back, really helps with the ride.
+ The seats are comfortable
+ The sound system is great; it's actually better than mine in the Sonic
+ Solid, secure handling, with good freeway roadholding
+ really quiet (compared to the Civic which is very noisy)
+ The Transmission (not the same 6MT as my car, which is a different unit) feels slick and heavy.
+ It does feel like VW Jetta, in a good way.
+ The Driver Information Center with it's options for trip, speedo, etc, are very nice.
- Apple and Android were doggish about their bluetooth channels back in 2010. My 2012 Sonic has streaming audio and phone, but this 2011 Cruze only has bluetooth calls. I've been told there's a $50 part you can find that you can add into the BCM that will add streaming audio, but honestly who cares.
- No hill hold assist
- The front fascia I've always thought was kind of ugly, same with that horrible black triangle of plastic near the rear doors.
- The 1.8L is essentially a bored and stroked version of the 1.6L in the old Aveo. It's smooth enough, but slow. It's like driving the 1.4T, but the boost never comes.
- MPG is mediocre; I'm doing good to get 28MPG. The Sonic gets 32MPG.
With that said, I think GM made a real misstep by not tooling up Ramos Arzipe or Lordstown, OH to produce the gen 1 Cruze Hatchback or Wagon back in 2010. I like my Sonic a lot, but if there was a Cruze hatch, I would have bought that instead.
(https://i.postimg.cc/WbkMXsDc/49454897-10212423094798965-3987721952872628224-n.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
The newer gen seems to get better MPG. 30-32 around town, 40+ on the highway.
And they're killing that too :facepalm:
Malibu looks nice but it's too fucking big. Optima is my limit. I couldn't walk past anything bigger in the garage
A Watt's link won't help with ride; it in fact should not effect it all. A Watt's linkage eliminates side to side shift under cornering loads, but it doesn't effect ride except by adding unsprung mass.
I def recall side to side deflection over rough stuff in my old Maximas I can't recall feeling in IRS equipped cars. Anything that helps locate the wheels properly is better
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 07, 2019, 12:44:48 PM
A Watt's link won't help with ride; it in fact should not effect it all. A Watt's linkage eliminates side to side shift under cornering loads, but it doesn't effect ride except by adding unsprung mass.
Don't you have to make the busihings stronger to compensate for the lack of watts linkage? The sonic doesn't have one, and neither do Cruzes with the "Eco" model grade. They def ride worse (but still pretty good)
Quote from: 2o6 on January 07, 2019, 01:36:54 PM
Don't you have to make the busihings stronger to compensate for the lack of watts linkage? The sonic doesn't have one, and neither do Cruzes with the "Eco" model grade. They def ride worse (but still pretty good)
Does the Crooze have a solid rear axle? I thought it was a torsion beam, which shouldn't need a watts link to locate it side-to-side... but I suppose it wouldn't hurt.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 07, 2019, 01:36:54 PM
Don't you have to make the busihings stronger to compensate for the lack of watts linkage? The sonic doesn't have one, and neither do Cruzes with the "Eco" model grade. They def ride worse (but still pretty good)
You could, but in general what I think you're feeling is a better sorted out suspension altogether; the linkage being one part of it, but not the part that leads to better ride- it does lead to better handling.
Could help with mid-corner bumps?
Quote from: CaminoRacer on January 07, 2019, 07:05:22 PM
Could help with mid-corner bumps?
No, but it might help with mid-bump corners.
1999 Toyota Camry LE 4cyl Auto
(https://i.postimg.cc/T1Y4Xdg8/D7-F05-BB5-6-AFE-4-E53-A088-10-BDBBE19375.jpg)
+ The ride exceptional. It rides as smooth as it's GM contemporaries, but actually feels well-built.
+ The interior quality is also very high quality. Panel gaps are tight. Everything you touch feels nice and high quality. Despite being 20 years old, the plastics all look basically new.
+ it's whisper quiet
+ it's easy to work on; most things are dead simple.
- It's been awhile since I've driven a car this old, but this car isn't very technologically advanced - even for it's day.
- It's painfully boring inside and out
- The 5SFE 2.2L 4cyl only makes around 130HP; which I guess is ok for it's contempoaries, but I see why buyers may have opted for the V6 Camry or it's american competition. a GM 3.1L N-body would be it's direct competitor, and although it only has about 5-10 more HP, those pushrod engines have torque by the boatload. The Camry doesn't. Even the 2.4L twin cam N-body cars were appreciably faster.
- I'm pretty sure GM and Ford were using computer controlled "fuzzy logic". According to Wikipedia, the Camry's transmission is electronically controlled, but it just feels comparatively primitive compared to it's GM and Ford competition.
- I forgot how 1990's era vehicles AC systems notably rob power. It works just fine, but I turned on the A/C and accelerating into traffic got noticeably worse.
- The steering is super overboosted and has zero feel.
Sounds about right from what I remember. :lol:
My high school/early college girlfriend had one of those that was originally her grandmother's, so it only had like 30k miles despite being like 8 years old at the time.
Speaking of Camry's, Europe is getting the new Camry 2.5 Hybrid. I wonder how it will sell since previous Camry's were sales flops here.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 11, 2019, 03:55:58 AM
Speaking of Camry's, Europe is getting the new Camry 2.5 Hybrid. I wonder how it will sell since previous Camry's were sales flops here.
They make much more sense than pretty much any D-Class diesel mainstreamer
1000km/tank no problem.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 11, 2019, 10:58:32 AM
They make much more sense than pretty much any D-Class diesel mainstreamer
1000km/tank no problem.
Thing is, no one really buys cars that size anymore. The Mondeo and Insignia are flops.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 11, 2019, 10:58:32 AM
They make much more sense than pretty much any D-Class diesel mainstreamer
1000km/tank no problem.
Diesel vehicle sales in Europe have actually increased over the last months.
People can be irrational
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 12, 2019, 06:53:52 AM
People can be irrational
This is a lie. Fake news. Covfefe.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 12, 2019, 06:53:52 AM
People can be irrational
Or maybe they trust a modern EURO6d diesel more than a hybrid. :lol:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 13, 2019, 04:29:02 AM
Or maybe they trust a modern EURO6d diesel more than a hybrid. :lol:
Like I said people can be irrational
Why would anyone trust diesel after Volkswagen?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 13, 2019, 04:04:48 PM
Like I said people can be irrational
Why would anyone trust diesel after Volkswagen?
There are companies out there who make good, legal and compliant diesels. In fact the Diesel engine here is being praised and held in higher regard over the gasoline engine. The NOx issue has been solved, particulates are trapped and eliminated by modern particulate filters and the Diesel engine emits less grams of CO2 / km.
Financially a diesel still only makes sense for those who drive a certain high mileage per year, or in large and heavy luxury cars/SUVs.
Such companies are few and far between. IIRC BMW, MB, VWAG and FCA all have had diesel scandals. And diesels don't emit less than hybrids. The Camry Hybrid makes 207HP, has a 1000+ km fuel range and emits 98g/km. The Passat TDI 190PS emits 118g/km. And with the Camry you don't have to deal with urea or particulate filters or any of that extra maintenance nonsense. Hybrids are also significantly more efficient in urban/city driving as well, and they run on cheaper regular gasoline. Diesel really has no advantages over hybrids except the battery... but hybrid batteries are so small sourcing them is no biggie.
You can modify a diesel car so that it runs on used cooking oil. Can you do that with a hybrid :lol:
Quote from: veeman on June 14, 2019, 09:36:29 PM
You can modify a diesel car so that it runs on used cooking oil. Can you do that with a hybrid :lol:
I don't see why not, since you can use a potato to power a light bulb.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 14, 2019, 11:53:43 AM
Diesel really has no advantages over hybrids except the battery... but hybrid batteries are so small sourcing them is no biggie.
Highway cruising. A gasoline-hybrid will still need to lug around the extra weight of the electric motors and batteries.
Also, the urea fill-ups are not a big deal. Buy the urea, dump it into the urea tank. To my knowledge on newer diesels with larger urea tanks this needs to be done every 15,000 km. Not a big deal.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 16, 2019, 04:19:53 AM
Highway cruising. A gasoline-hybrid will still need to lug around the extra weight of the electric motors and batteries.
Also, the urea fill-ups are not a big deal. Buy the urea, dump it into the urea tank. To my knowledge on newer diesels with larger urea tanks this needs to be done every 15,000 km. Not a big deal.
I suppose, in a pinch, you can just pee into the tank :huh:.
Quote from: FoMoJo on June 16, 2019, 08:00:01 AM
I suppose, in a pinch, you can just pee into the tank :huh:.
:lol:
2009 Mazda 6i (2.5L, 6MT)
Here's a quick write up I did on facebook.
---------------
This is a 2009 Mazda 6i with the 2.5L four cylinder, and a six speed manual. This car is one of the reasons I've been disillusioned with most online car commentary and reviews. A great deal of them focus so much on armchair quarterbacking, and spec sheet racing, it forgets that cars are products and sometimes people just buy things because they like them. If something is slightly *worse* than what you perceive to be the better product, it doesn't make the "worse" product completely terrible.
This car, when it came out, was constantly derided as being "too big" and "too soft" and online enthusiasts LOVE to dump on this car, for some reason. They regard the generation one Mazda 6 as some sort of paragon of automotive midsized goodness.
I have owned a Gen 1 Mazda 6 (2.3L, automatic) - it was a fine car. It was pretty fun to drive, but it was a little bit sloppily made, and the 2.3L has never been a great engine - lots of them have top and bottom end problems and it's pretty easy to find a broken Mazda with a snapped connecting rod or some other catastrophic failure.
In short, the old one was ok. Not the second coming of Jesus like they try and say.
This new one (generation 2) was actually built in response to Mazda listening to their clientele, who liked their old cars but thought the old Mazda 6 was a little too small. (It was.) So, when Mazda revised the old platform for its second act, the US got a special version. Ours was slightly longer and wider than the car the rest of the world got. (And thus got a slightly different exterior, but I think a lot of the interior design and parts are shared between the car). There were also a few mechanical changes to the chassis as well; the front suspension switched from MacPherson struts to a double wishbone setup, and the dumpy 2.3L was changed to the better 2.5L. (The 3.7L V6 also made it into the car as well)
With that said, it is roomy - but as far as physical size it's between the contemporary Toyota Camry and Honda Accord of the day.
I don't understand why this "flopped". Maybe this was an early sign of the "sedanocolypse"? The car is definitely sportier than the Camry, and feels as nice as the Honda. I didn't find it to be "too soft" like people kept saying - this is actually one of the more enjoyable flip cars I've owned!
Things I like:
- the 2.5L has more torque than the 2.3L and seemingly is better made.
- despite it having a bigger engine, I'm averaging about 27MPG mixed
- it looks good
- the interior is easy to use, and fits together well
- the steering is nice
- the shifter feels pretty precise and well made
- loads of room, legroom for all passengers, and it's got a big trunk too.
Things I don't like:
- it feels big, but that's my own personal aversion to cars of this type. A Camry and accord feel just as large.
- the clutch engagement point is kind of high and abrupt (typical Mazda thing)
- the doors don't lock automatically when you start moving
It's a really solid car, and you should not believe the hype about what people online say. Go and test things out, form your own opinions.
(https://i.postimg.cc/9McZ2FHF/madda.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)