|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Mid-hot Seat Leon FR. New 208GTi. Could you speak to how these will do a better job than my civic?
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2017 08:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 06:52 |
|
|
Jaded Burnout posted:Hello I would like some car buying advice! If 30k pounds is in range for a new car, have you considered the Ford Mustang ecoboost?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2017 09:09
|
|
|
I live in Somerville (Boston) and have never owned a car in my life. Starting to think about whether it makes sense to buy one, mainly because Zipcar fees are a bummer when I'm driving out to the burbs and paying for it to sit 2 hours while I do trapeze class. I reverse commute by train and have no desire to drive to work so this will be an occasional errands and weekend outing car. Proposed Budget: $5k? Is that reasonable? Not in a hurry to buy so I could save more. New or Used: Used Body Style: Prefer 4 door, smallish for street parking How will you be using the car?: Driving to trapeze in the suburbs on weekends (summer only). Running errands places the T doesn't go. Buying cat litter. Running for the border when the Gilead republic eventually goes down. What aspects are most important to you?: Standard transmission, good sightlines, cheap to own My parents had a string of VW hatchbacks when I was growing up. I liked those. Not married to the idea of anything in particular, but standard transmission is a must. I learned on a standard and I prefer it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
Jaded Burnout posted:The civic type R I've got is supposedly a hot hatch, I suspect it may be too hot for its own good what with the tyre chirping. Is that sort of thing mitigated by rear wheel drive or do you need all wheel drive to distribute da powah? How do higher horsepower 2WD cars manage it? Big fat tyres? RWD cars have an inherent advantage under acceleration, because they're shifting weight onto the drive wheels instead off off them. But, almost any RWD performance car these days will have enough power and gearing to spin its rear tires into a big smoky burnout. What generation Civic are you driving, what kind of tires do you have on it, and how old are they? If your main problem with it is how it behaves off the line, you might be better served by sticky tires instead of a whole new car.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
Jaded Burnout posted:Could you speak to how these will do a better job than my civic? You complain about power deployment and both of those are lower power hot hatches. Both of them also look a lot better than your civic. You could also get a 1-series, the rwd one, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:RWD cars have an inherent advantage under acceleration, because they're shifting weight onto the drive wheels instead off off them. But, almost any RWD performance car these days will have enough power and gearing to spin its rear tires into a big smoky burnout. Gotcha. Space Gopher posted:What generation Civic are you driving, what kind of tires do you have on it, and how old are they? If your main problem with it is how it behaves off the line, you might be better served by sticky tires instead of a whole new car. It's an 04/05 EP3 type R. Continental SportContact 4 tyres. I chose those because the SC2s are battle tested for me for handling in the wet, which is important during high speed commutes on winding country roads in a country where it rains all the time. The wheels have spun even on brand new tyres, much as they did for whatever brand were on it when I bought it (second hand). I didn't have the chirping problem in the S but I think it is as you say a power/gearing issue. The S was a 5 speed, the R is 6 speed. I deliberately avoided the newer body because I thought it looked ugly, but I'm coming around to it. The EP3 doesn't look great with the snub nose, but really looks are secondary (but not a non-issue, cf. Fiat Multipla). KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:You complain about power deployment and both of those are lower power hot hatches. Ah I see. That's true, but I'm not sure lower power is what I'm after. I like the power, and would even be OK with more of it, but better distributed across the gears and with better ability to apply it to the floor. KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Both of them also look a lot better than your civic. You may be right there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
You have the EP3 so I actually think your car looks pretty good. In the wet, all cars have power deployment issues, basically. The 89hp Corsa I drove last week had power deployment issues in the wet. If you're really concerned I think you should go with something AWD like the S3 / Golf R / WRX.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 10:32
|
|
|
I would expect it in the rain, but this one spins the wheels any time I set off without being careful, on good tarmac in bone dry 30ºC weather.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 10:51
|
|
|
Jaded Burnout posted:I would expect it in the rain, but this one spins the wheels any time I set off without being careful, on good tarmac in bone dry 30ºC weather. Something seems weird because you're really only dealing with about 200 hp and on sticky summer tires that should almost never be an issue.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
Jaded Burnout posted:handling in the wet, which is important during high speed commutes on winding country roads in a country where it rains all the time. You want AWD. Take a look at the scoobies - assuming you can find an unmolested one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Something seems weird because you're really only dealing with about 200 hp and on sticky summer tires that should almost never be an issue. ikr. I'll investigate more and drop into AI with some more info. spog posted:You want AWD. I'll take this into strong consideration, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Something seems weird because you're really only dealing with about 200 hp and on sticky summer tires that should almost never be an issue. Honda has a proud tradition of making performance models by dropping in a very short diff (among other things). That generation CTR has something like a 4.76:1 final drive on top of a gearbox that's pretty short in the first few gears. But, still, this might be the first time anybody's described a stock early-2000s Civic anything as a nigh-uncontrollable torque monster off the line. Jaded Burnout, what else have you driven with a standard transmission, two-wheel drive (either end), and decent power? I feel like this issue might crop up for you in a lot of higher-performance cars.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:Jaded Burnout, what else have you driven with a standard transmission, two-wheel drive (either end), and decent power? I feel like this issue might crop up for you in a lot of higher-performance cars. Depends on your definition of decent power, but since I'm English almost all the cars I've driven have been manuals. I've not had this problem in my old Type S (same tyres) nor in a BMW, I think a couple of Audis, and of course not in anything else I've driven either but a 1.6 Golf does not a performance car make. It's quite possible that it's me but this thing chirps at anything but the smoothest application of power so if that seems unusual then it might be something up with the car. It also kangaroos under light power in the bottom two gears which is also not a problem I've had in any other car, so I'm wondering if there's a suspension / motor mount issue. But I don't know enough detail under the hood to make that call. Edit: in the Type S I could slam full throttle and fully release the clutch at the same instant and not get this effect. In the R this happens going to the shops. Jaded Burnout fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Jul 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
I have a FWD Camry Hybrid that will easily chirp if I gun it from a stop. I'm only throwing this out here because it can't be that unusual to have some chirping if you're applying a lot of torque from a standstill. It's most noticeable for me when accelerating AND turning. In need to floor it for straight-line acceleration to chirp. I don't consider this to be a problem: the solution is "don't floor it from a standstill, dingus."
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
I've chirped the tires in my wife's 08 Civic, it's something like 140hp. That was when I was just about brand new at driving stick though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Ok, this might be a particularly dumbfuck question, but I thought you guys would be the best to ask. I test drove a prius today, and it's literally the first car I've ever driven. Is it normal to have to move/scoot around to get out from under the steering wheel when you get into and out of a car? I have always driven trucks or suvs, and in those it's more like hop in, hop out, and no weird contortions needed cause the steering wheel isn't that close to my legs. I did try tilting it up a bit, and tilting it down, but either way it was still pretty much RIGHT THERE and I had to maneuver around it. Is that something that is in every car, or just this particular model?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
Do you mean you had to swing your legs out of the car to get out rather than just sort of stepping down out of a SUV? Yeah that's a car. Some will be easier to just step out of than others but I wouldn't call it "contortions." Apparently you know you can tilt the wheel so I guess it's just something you'll need to get used to rather than a badly adjusted wheel.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
It's not a stupid question.  Even as a skinny guy, it took me several days of fiddling with every single power seat adjustment (10-way I think... angle of seatback, seat height, seatfront angle, forward/back) as well as up-down and forward-back adjustments of the steering wheel to find a position that fit well. A good fit means it feels good while you're driving and you can get in and out easily and comfortably. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYMOg22P6aA This was helpful, but it doesn't discuss steering wheel adjustment. Maybe find a perfect seating position then adjust the wheel so it feels natural, making sure it's high enough that it isn't confining when getting in/out. Michael Scott fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Jul 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
Stupid_Sexy_Flander posted:Ok, this might be a particularly dumbfuck question, but I thought you guys would be the best to ask. I've never driven a Prius, but there are a number of car models designed by people who want me to drive with my knees or crotch jammed into the column or steering wheel. Not all cars are that bad, you just have to experiment. S197 Mustangs and 4th gen Camaros gave me adequate leg/knee space under the wheel when I put the column on the highest setting. The Toyota/Subaru GT86, I couldn't even get my lower body into position.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
How's the Chrysler Pacifica? Is it a big piece of poo poo like other Chryslers? Also, am I insane for being interested in a Mini soft top?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:How's the Chrysler Pacifica? Is it a big piece of poo poo like other Chryslers? The new Pacific is really nice, unclear on long term reliability but it probably won't be at Odyssey/Sienna levels. If you want to be on the christmas card list of your local BMW/Mini dealer, you should absolutely get a soft top Mini.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:I live in Somerville (Boston) and have never owned a car in my life. Starting to think about whether it makes sense to buy one, mainly because Zipcar fees are a bummer when I'm driving out to the burbs and paying for it to sit 2 hours while I do trapeze class. I reverse commute by train and have no desire to drive to work so this will be an occasional errands and weekend outing car. A Honda Fit would fit you perfectly. They are genuinely fun little cars, the turning radius is amazingly good for tight city parking, and they are quite peppy for what they are. You can easily find a great running example for 5K and they are drat reliable cars. The manual feel didn't feel suuuuper great to me, but I'm used to very notchy cars so maybe it was just personal preference. Since it's a hatch, there's tons of space for all your kitty litter as well
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
Does this chart reflect reality? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
There's a few entries in there that would seem to go against the "common sense" anecdotes out there, like Audi being entirely above average, and Mini being squarely average. But then there are also some entries that hilariously confirm common ancedotes, like Fiat and Jeep. And that variance on Ford lol. So I'm sure we'll all just pick and choose what we agree and disagree with. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:Does this chart reflect reality? It's not a bad overall picture. While there are definitely issues with CR's reliability data, aggregating it with other sources does paint a picture of FCA still having real troubles with reliability. Off the top of my head, there's the FCA/ZF 9-speed being a piece of poo poo prior to the Pacifica, transmission failures and electrical/radio problems in the Grand Cherokee, the diesels exploding around the 20K mile mark. All this being said, I'd take the risk on a new Pacifica. It's actually good, Chrysler has sorted out the 9-speed for this application, and pricing has adjusted to significantly undercut the Japanese vans in the real world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
dk2m posted:A Honda Fit would fit you perfectly. They are genuinely fun little cars, the turning radius is amazingly good for tight city parking, and they are quite peppy for what they are. Downside, the Fits you can find for 5k are all from the model years that suffer from water ingress. Also consider the Mazda2, Ford Fiesta, maybe Chevrolet Sonic which are all in the same class.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:Does this chart reflect reality? % better or worst than average what? This chart doesn't tell you what it's measuring. Initial quality? Customer satisfaction? Reliability? How hosed up you can get off the glue in the carpets? Infotainment systems? Rear leg room?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
IRQ posted:% better or worst than average what? http://www.consumerreports.org/cars-how-car-brands-compare-for-reliability/ quote:Our 2015 auto survey, conducted last spring, gathered information from Consumer Reports subscribers who collectively owned or leased over 740,000 vehicles. From this data, we can predict how cars will hold up, and collectively, what the outlook is per brand.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
That chart seems terrible .
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Predicted reliability based on a survey of owners. Ok. I'm not sure how well it reflects reality since people have a tendency to not want to admit they bought an inferior product, but then look at the discrepancy between Honda and
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
I lived for 5 years in Germany. VW products, including Audi, are commonly considered to be reliable vehicles that are "smart choices". I actually owned a Golf 4 TDI and drove it from 140,000 km until 215,000 km before selling it. While I spent quite a bit of money maintaining it, it was never on things I considered to be abnormal for its age and mileage: things like suspension parts (more my preference), filters, brakes, etc. Nothing major failed that wasn't a wear item, and same goes for the Golf 4 1.6 I had before that (god awful engine), the Audi A5 3.0 TDI that came after, or my mother-in-law's Golf 5 1.6. Being American, I'm familiar with the conception that VW and pretty much all things German are not "reliable cars". Is average reliability of vehicles available in the US just that much higher? Hard to swallow that, as the typical Asian brands widely considered to be the most reliable are all available there - just sold in much lower volumes. Does the proliferation of diesels swing the average? Somehow I doubt it, as although the engines may have greater longevity, there are a lot more pieces to fail in a diesel drivetrain. Does it have something to do with average age/mileage of the fleet? Doubtful as well as there are countless instances of extremely long-lived VWs, Mercedes and even BMWs that would otherwise be considered to be ticking time bombs of reliability. Could it be that German cars are pickier about maintainance and that Americans tend to neglect this to some extent? Sits on Pilster fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Jul 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
Sits on Pilster posted:Could it be that German cars are pickier about maintainance and that Americans tend to neglect this to some extent? I think you hit the nail. Even the unreliable older Audi A4s had a singular annoying failure, which was massive oil consumption. It was covered under warranty and usually after that was fixed it was generally reliable. Had a timing belt but if you took care of that at around 100k or whenever it squealed you'd likely be OK. BMWs are a different story I guess with the single highest maintenance cost in the auto industry. Japanese makes are extremely popular in the US and have a reputation for reliability that outshines advantages other makes may have year after year. The Camry has been the best selling sedan in the US for something like 15 years. Michael Scott fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Jul 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
Sits on Pilster posted:I lived for 5 years in Germany. VW products, including Audi, are commonly considered to be reliable vehicles that are "smart choices". I actually owned a Golf 4 TDI and drove it from 140,000 km until 215,000 km before selling it. While I spent quite a bit of money maintaining it, it was never on things I considered to be abnormal for its age and mileage: things like suspension parts (more my preference), filters, brakes, etc. Nothing major failed that wasn't a wear item, and same goes for the Golf 4 1.6 I had before that (god awful engine), the Audi A5 3.0 TDI that came after, or my mother-in-law's Golf 5 1.6. Don't German drivers put a lot more wear on their cars in general anyway, with much higher speed limits (or no limits at all)? I would imagine that this would act somewhat as an equalizer, where any car is going to need more maintenance with that sort of treatment. Maybe that's off base though? My dad always felt that cars last much longer in the US because of that (he moved from Germany to North America when he was about 30), but maybe it's just that cars didn't last very long in general while he was growing up. I wouldn't be convinced that Americans are actually less picky about maintenance than Germans without some statistics. My family is German and they never do maintenance on their cars, while my American in-laws are incredibly meticulous about it, to the point that it's irritating. I mean, that's just an anecdote, obviously, but I just mean that I wouldn't say off-hand that Germans are better about that sort of thing. EDIT: I will say, though, I'm not sure I've heard people say that VWs are actually that unreliable, most of the complaints I hear are that repairs and maintenance are very expensive on German cars. Audis, on the other hand, well, the only German I know who owns an Audi says that it was the worst mistake of his life, and that he literally just stopped driving his and uses car-to-go or whatever the equivalent there is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:Does this chart reflect reality? I would say it's an accurate reflection of Consumer Reports' reality. It may not reflect objective reality. CR has like 2+ million subscribers with around 4 million cars between them (most people have 2 cars, some more some less), yet their DB is based on only about 500,000 cars. Those 500,000 are the most dedicated subscribers, willing to go out of their way to fill in the survey, and most likely to have internalized CR's editorial views. That's a response rate of only 12.5%, so maybe 75-80% of the members do not respond. That immediately makes their data suspect, as not only is it not a representative sample of all cars, it's not even a representative sample of CR-owned cars. Also, given that a the hundreds of different combinations of MY, brand, model, trim packages, etc. that these cars must be subdivided into, and that a majority of these cars will be in the most popular brands, there's going to be a lot of categories for which only a few hundred cars or less may fall. That's going to give dubious counting stats with large error bars on the data - meaning that differences in the data increasing become statistical flukes, not representative of the whole. Couple that with CR's enormous editorial biases, and you get data like that. CR loves Honda and Toyota, praising them constantly in their reviews. CR also hates American cars generally, Chrysler in particular, and hammer that in every issue they can (these biases go back to at least the '70s and have not been in the least bit hidden). The editorial biases the affect the way people rate their cars, and it's not in the least bit shocking the the cars CR promotes constantly as the best get rated by their readers at the top an the ones they bash constantly end up at the bottom. Thus it represents CR's view of reality, but may not reflect objective reality. Overall, the ratings aren't completely terrible, as they broadly mirror the results from Edmunds' repair cost data. It's obvious which one I trust more, but CR's isn't just a random collection of numbers. It's biased, but once you understand that bias it's more useful. FIAT, for example, is certainly above average in repair costs by any objective measure. Whether they're the absolute worst is debatable. Similarly Toyota and Honda are usually below average in repair costs and consistently among the better cars, based on other objective measures - but whether they're actually the best may be somewhat debatable, due to the biases inherent in CR's methodology. The other thing to watch out for is that it's strictly a comparative ranking - nowhere does it compare with or make a statement about actual acceptability. What I mean is the worst car on the list could still be pretty good absent any other data. The best car on the list may actually be unacceptably bad, and the rest even worse, without some absolute data. As an illustration of the point, I might be getting an 85 and a B in a class. By any absolute standard, that's pretty good. However, I still might be last in the class if everyone else is scoring higher. Regardless, on an absolute scale I'm fine. Other students being better doesn't make me a bad student. So my last caveat is to be careful making the leap from "last on the list" to "unacceptably bad." That does not necessarily follow. You need other data to do that. This post is kind of a mess, as I'm trying to say too much without doing a megapost, while I'm tired and on vacation. I'll try to clarify whatever doesn't make sense. Deteriorata fucked around with this message at 05:08 on Jul 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
Michael Scott posted:I think you hit the nail. Even the unreliable older Audi A4s had a singular annoying failure, which was massive oil consumption. It was covered under warranty and usually after that was fixed it was generally reliable. Had a timing belt but if you took care of that at around 100k or whenever it squealed you'd likely be OK. Timing belts don't 'squeal'*,they generally just strip the teeth off the belt in one spot without warning. Serpentine belts squeal. Also, the big bitch about Audis is cost - take an 2003 A4 3.0, for example. Changing the timing belt on that car is a $2500-$3000 job(more, at a dealer), it's a goddamn nightmare. Compare that with a 2003 V6 Camry, the timing belt change is like $500 - $600 at an independent shop and it's well within a decent shade-tree mechanic's ability to do. That's a big reason why Camrys and Accords consistently outsell everything else. *except for the rare cases where the back of the belt runs the water pump and the pump seizes up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:Timing belts don't 'squeal'*,they generally just strip the teeth off the belt in one spot without warning. Serpentine belts squeal. Can the timing belt really just go with 0 warning even with visual/tactile inspections at every oil change? That's depressing as hell. The service positions in Audis are incredibly labor intensive and the dealer labor rates are $160 per hour in my city. That's a pretty big mark against it, I agree. I'm so happy a few people are okay with owning cars that are not minimized cost appliances, but goddamn it's so much work for stuff like a timing belt wtf. If they could engineer simpler/cheaper maintenance and repairs I think that would be marketable, no?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
You can't really see the timing belt in modern engines without disassembling a ton of poo poo, and yes, often they look perfectly fine except those twelve stripped teeth that caused 8 bent valves. That's why it's really important to change them on a newly-purchased high-mileage used vehicle unless you're 100% sure that the belt's been changed at the proper interval. Edit: as for the second part of your post, yeah, Audis and Passats are an outlier because of the 'service position' thing, but Euro cars in general are often more difficult to service than their equivalent Japanese competition, plus parts prices can be insane. Things like BMW's notoriously horrible cooling-system issues are simply inexcusable; the overuse and underengineering of plastic components in 'the ultimate driving machine' are a direct cause of enormous repair bills that could easily have been avoided with better design. JnnyThndrs fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Jul 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 05:29
|
|
|
One of the reasons American cars are cheap to fix in America is because the parts are already in America and American cars are very common in America, so lots of people know how to fix American cars in America. German cars are expensive to fix in America partly because the parts have to come from Germany and German cars are less common in America so fewer people know how to fix German cars in America. I suspect that German cars are cheaper to fix in Germany because the parts are already in Germany and German cars are very common in Germany, so lots of people know how to fix German cars in Germany. American cars are probably relatively more expensive to fix in Germany because the parts have to come from America and American cars are less common in Germany so fewer people know how to fix American cars in Germany. I might be crazy here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 08:30
|
|
|
At least a plurality if not a majority of German cars sold in the US are made in the US or Mexico. The biggest exporter of American cars is BMW. The easiest explanation for all this is that "reliability" just isn't that important to the new car buyer in rich countries. At least past a certain minimal threashold anyway, like yeah Land Rover and FIAT are probably bad enough that even their new car sales are somewhat affected, but for most other marques closer to the average/median, the fact that a Sonata might have 30 problems per 1,000 cars over 3 years vs 10 for a Camry, like Deteriota says, likely isn't enough to have any meaningful effect on how new car buyers choose their cars. Cars sell mostly because they offer the right mix of features and exterior/interior styling in the right body style at the right time. I mean it's not nothing, at least resale value is going to be affected by reliability and it's a significant factor, but people who have spent signficant amounts of their lives driving used cars might wonder why anyone bought a new Lumina or Tempo over a Camry or Accord in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 09:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 06:52 |
|
|
Luminas are extremely popular in the middle east.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 09:43
|
|
