|
22 Eargesplitten posted:I've told her that you only really stall when starting. She still doesn't want to do it, maybe she's afraid of getting honked at for stopping traffic. Have you actually driven one? If you really step on it, it accelerates just fine. It's not sports car territory or anything, but it's fine for an econobox. You do need to actually step on it though. The 2013 Civic hybrid's 0-60 time is 9.8 seconds (the 2003 is 12 seconds). The 2011 Prius's 0-60? 9.7 seconds (2004 10.1). The reason Priuses are so strongly recommended in this thread is that because of the way the drivetrain is built, there are very very few things that go wrong. That said, the difference between the best and worst cars has greatly diminished. Anyway, it's clear you like the Civic more, and it's fine to have preferences, I just think it's an objectively worse car in nearly every measurable way. EDIT: Gen 2 Prius 50-70 7.9 seconds, 2006 Civic Hybrid 8.4 seconds according to car and driver. Grumpwagon fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Jul 22, 2017 |
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 13:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:57 |
|
|
Does anything else use the Prius drivetrain? I drove a hybrid Highlander about 5 years ago that had tons of power; same system?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 13:24
|
|
|
Grumpwagon posted:Have you actually driven one? If you really step on it, it accelerates just fine. It's not sports car territory or anything, but it's fine for an econobox. You do need to actually step on it though. The 2013 Civic hybrid's 0-60 time is 9.8 seconds (the 2003 is 12 seconds). The 2011 Prius's 0-60? 9.7 seconds (2004 10.1). According to the Edmunds TCO data, the Chevy Volt is considerably cheaper to operate than the Prius. It also has much better drivability.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:According to the Edmunds TCO data, the Chevy Volt is considerably cheaper to operate than the Prius. It also has much better drivability. I'm sure that's very useful information for someone who is looking for a $3000 car.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
ShadeofBlue posted:I'm sure that's very useful information for someone who is looking for a $3000 car. My bad. I just checked and even the 2010 models are still 7-8k at least. I assumed they'd be lower.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
If you're worried about merging onto interstates you need to pull your seat forward and actually hammer the gas all the way down. Every modern car is plenty fast. I drive a twelve year old vibe with like 130hp and out accelerate nearly everyone on on ramps. I usually have to slow down and back off a bit to give myself room but then use the whole ramp to accelerate rather than just doing 30mph to the end then trying to jump to 70mph instantly like a ton of idiots.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
Prius's feel a lot slower than they really are because of their economy-focused throttle curve - you have to bury the pedal right to the floor in order to get meaningful acceleration. If you're used to moderate pedal pressure actually doing something, Prius's feel unbearably sluggish. If you really hammer the gas pedal, they're perfectly tolerable during merges and such , just not fun at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
Veinless posted:Does anything else use the Prius drivetrain? I drove a hybrid Highlander about 5 years ago that had tons of power; same system? Pretty sure it's not the same system. Highlander hybrid is one of the cool systems where adding the hybrid technology increases power rather than decreases. Stock highlander is ~200 HP, hybrid highlander is 300 HP.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Michael Scott posted:Pretty sure it's not the same system. Highlander hybrid is one of the cool systems where adding the hybrid technology increases power rather than decreases. All Toyota and Lexus hybrids use the same basic planetary gearset engine/motor/transmission design. Even the Lexus LC500h, which has a conventional automatic transmission, just bolts it onto the output of the hybrid power split device. "Adding hybrid technology" to a given gas engine will always add power. You'd have to be some kind of engineering anti-genius to decrease total power by adding another significant power source. Some cars, like the Prius, use the added power from the electric side of the drivetrain to get away with a less powerful, more efficient gas engine and maintain acceptable total system HP. Others, like the LC500h and various hybrid supercars out there, use it to increase total power and flatten out the torque curve for better performance. In all cases, the hybrid system is more powerful than the gas engine alone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
Yeah I came here again to write that my Prius, despite being entirely soulless as posted previously, has no issues merging onto the interstate or dealing with itself once there. But it looks like that dead horse has been beaten.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Sometimes I turn off the A/C in my old CR-V when I want to gun it. It was a necessity in my parents' old Civic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
prom candy posted:Sometimes I turn off the A/C in my old CR-V when I want to gun it. It was a necessity in my parents' old Civic. Both of those vehicles likely cut the compressor at WOT, making it unnecessary for you to actually do anything to "turn off" the AC.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Both of those vehicles likely cut the compressor at WOT, making it unnecessary for you to actually do anything to "turn off" the AC. It makes me feel like a bad rear end when I pretend it's a thrust button. Also I don't think I've ever actually gone WOT on my car because I drive like a big baby. Similar to what people were saying about the Toyotas I don't think my CR-V is even that slow really (160hp/162 lb. ft). I've been trying to push it a bit harder lately since I've started dreaming of getting something sportier and it's not as bad as I thought. I still don't think I've ever even taken it into VTEC range.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
prom candy posted:It makes me feel like a bad rear end when I pretend it's a thrust button. Also I don't think I've ever actually gone WOT on my car because I drive like a big baby. Similar to what people were saying about the Toyotas I don't think my CR-V is even that slow really (160hp/162 lb. ft). I've been trying to push it a bit harder lately since I've started dreaming of getting something sportier and it's not as bad as I thought. I still don't think I've ever even taken it into VTEC range. Then why are you worried about turning off the AC for "acceleration"? The skinny pedal is what does that. Several of the crusty old mechanics at the local Porsche dealership love to relate their stories of all of the "doctor driven" cars that come in for maintenance and performance complaints that are completely resolved by driving them up to temperature and then flogging them to redline a few times up the nearby hill on the highway. This doesn't apply to just sports cars. You are driving like a grandmother, and it's likely making your vehicle worse in every way if you are just limping it along all the time. If flooring it and/or running it up to redline breaks something that something was going to break real soon now anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
A redline a day keeps the mechanic away.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
As I've gotten older I've been more and more accepting of average acceleration cars. I mean, I certainly enjoy driving some acceleration monster, but I'm perfectly fine with driving regular cars I'd they do their jobs well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Both of those vehicles likely cut the compressor at WOT, making it unnecessary for you to actually do anything to "turn off" the AC. I always feel like there's a delay as the car thinks it over, but this is in an automatic anyway so. Also, prom candy posted:It makes me feel like a bad rear end when I pretend it's a thrust button.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Then why are you worried about turning off the AC for "acceleration"? The skinny pedal is what does that. This is extremely true. I can think of two common examples right off the top of my head - the Caddy Northstar and Saturn S motors both had oil-consumption issues and both were caused by sticking oil-control rings. The cause in both cases was never revving the engine up, constant low rpms eventually lead to carbon buildup in the ring lands and the rings don't seal for poo poo. I'm not saying to beat the gently caress out of your car all the time, but occasional full-throttle acceleration when merging on freeways and such is not bad for a properly-running engine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:This is extremely true. I can think of two common examples right off the top of my head - the Caddy Northstar and Saturn S motors both had oil-consumption issues and both were caused by sticking oil-control rings. The cause in both cases was never revving the engine up, constant low rpms eventually lead to carbon buildup in the ring lands and the rings don't seal for poo poo. It's kinda funny that things like that keep not getting found in testing by lots of vehicle manufacturers because they flog the poo poo out of the cars for testing, not drive them like grandpop for 4 years (which they obviously can't do because of time). The infamous Porsche IMS bearing failure is a great example of that. They were improperly lubricated (chain in a wet sump rather than pressurized oil) - unless you redlined it occasionally. So anyone who drove the poo poo out of their cars was totally fine. Dr. Slow's car junked the bearing and pretty much the motor at that point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Then why are you worried about turning off the AC for "acceleration"? The skinny pedal is what does that. I do drive like a grandma, because I was a passenger in an ugly accident right before I got my license in 2003 or so. We hydroplaned on an on-ramp and ended up upside down in a ditch and for a really long time (and even now still kinda) I had this feeling like I was always just on the edge of something terrible happening in a car. So cars have always been this combo of appliance/threat for me until recently when I realized that cars and driving are actually super cool and something I want to know a lot more about, and I probably have a lot of dumb habits from that (like turning off the A/C rather than mashing the throttle). Anyway, what's the best way to redline an automatic car without going way over the speed limit?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
Ooooh, the IMS is a perfect example. Another one I used to see all the time was the variable-vane turbos in Powerstroke diesels would fail after 25,000 miles in $60K King Ranch F-2/350's because the old fart drivers babied the poo poo out of them and the vanes would stick in one position. Meanwhile, the contractors who overloaded the hell out of their stripper pickups would get 200K miles out of a turbo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
prom candy posted:Anyway, what's the best way to redline an automatic car without going way over the speed limit? Push the skinny one to (or near) the floor from a stop in a straight line. Lift up gently and gradually when you approach the speed limit. You don't have to be speeding/breaking the law to do this - just at stop lights on 35-45 MPH roads and highway on ramps and such. JnnyThndrs posted:Another one I used to see all the time was the variable-vane turbos in Powerstroke diesels would fail after 25,000 miles in $60K King Ranch F-2/350's because the old fart drivers babied the poo poo out of them and the vanes would stick in one position. Yeah, this is another perfect example of that. I remember those as well, but the memory is almost buried in all of the other 6.ohno problems and pulling cabs off to do the work. Fun fact, 6.0s are drat near bulletproof after you throw a few grand into them. The formula is pretty much worked out now and, if you're willing to do your own work, you can actually get a decent deal on one. But don't listen to me, because I'ma broken car apologist who owns things like Land Rovers and multiple budget Porsche problem children BECAUSE I CAN TOTALLY MAKE THIS BETTER. Motronic fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Jul 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:As I've gotten older I've been more and more accepting of average acceleration cars. I mean, I certainly enjoy driving some acceleration monster, but I'm perfectly fine with driving regular cars I'd they do their jobs well. Also I might add if you make only decent money, it's difficult to rationalize the cost of a high performance car even if you enjoy the experience. The price difference is massive between average performance vs. higher performing cars, presumably partly due to the economies of scale. I guess a V6 Accord isn't too pricey but still, compare the cost of an average subcompact to a V6 Accord and there's like a $10k difference. The price differential also continues for many years into its used-market value. The Civic Si throws a wrench into my theory a bit, since it seems like quite a value for 200 HP at $24k, with Honda reliability. However it's only available with a manual trans, which fuckin sucks as someone that lives in a big city and deals with severe traffic every day. I know that will draw the AI ire. Michael Scott fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Jul 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
I don't know the US market as well but the Civic Si isn't that much cheaper than the Focus ST or the GTI is it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
Motronic posted:But don't listen to me, because I'ma broken car apologist who owns things like Land Rovers and multiple budget Porsche problem children BECAUSE I CAN TOTALLY MAKE THIS BETTER.  you are doing the Lord's work. Well, at least with the Porsches. No idea why anyone would want to keep a Land Rover on the road.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Most reviewers find them functional but "meh" - it's a competitive segment and it doesn't really stand out. Your own opinion matters more than theirs, though. If you like it, go for it. The CVT is enough of an issue that I'd actively look elsewhere. As you said, there's noting to particularly recommend it, so why gently caress with the potential hassle of the lousy JATCO CVT?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
prom candy posted:I don't know the US market as well but the Civic Si isn't that much cheaper than the Focus ST or the GTI is it? Not anymore. The Focus ST also has outrageous incentives at this point because it's old. Thermopyle posted:As I've gotten older I've been more and more accepting of average acceleration cars. I mean, I certainly enjoy driving some acceleration monster, but I'm perfectly fine with driving regular cars I'd they do their jobs well. Same. If you mash the pedal correctly and plan ahead, even a naturally aspirated 90hp Corsa or 79hp Fiesta is decent. Michael Scott posted:The Civic Si throws a wrench into my theory a bit, since it seems like quite a value for 200 HP at $24k, with Honda reliability. However it's only available with a manual trans, which fuckin sucks as someone that lives in a big city and deals with severe traffic every day. I know that will draw the AI ire. I'm glad Honda doesn't cater to people like you, but you can get the Civic Sport with an automatic transmission for $22k which is a fairly meaningful discount and it's probably 85% of the actual performance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
Red_Fred posted:
I understand that sentiment and I assure you the Land Rovers are not at all for the road. They are for where they actually belong: off road. They really are quite brilliant there and it makes keeping one of those pigs running worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Not anymore. The Focus ST also has outrageous incentives at this point because it's old. All the 1.5T civics are responding pretty well to tunes, according to the company that sells said tunes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
prom candy posted:I don't know the US market as well but the Civic Si isn't that much cheaper than the Focus ST or the GTI is it? Ford's incentives mess up the market pretty badly. The ST is now way cheaper than any of its competitors, and part of the reason the Fiesta is a slow seller here and is getting killed is that in the real world, Focus and Fiesta cost the exact same. In many cases in high-volume markets you could get a base Focus cheaper than a base Fiesta. I saw a dealer run $10,999 Focus S strippers for a couple months.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
The current iteration of the Focus debuted in 2011 and at this point I'm sure that Ford can turn a profit at end customer sales prices somewhere around 75% of MSRP.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:The current iteration of the Focus debuted in 2011 and at this point I'm sure that Ford can turn a profit at end customer sales prices somewhere around 75% of MSRP. It's gotta be even less than that, given that I got a new focus at 30% off with no negotiation more than 3 years ago. Fords MSRPs have zero relevance and they've been a brand based around deep discounting for a while. Look how even brand new just released F150s are $10k off sticker.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
The automotive equivalent of Kohls pricing
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:It's gotta be even less than that, given that I got a new focus at 30% off with no negotiation more than 3 years ago. Fords MSRPs have zero relevance and they've been a brand based around deep discounting for a while. Look how even brand new just released F150s are $10k off sticker. You may very well be right but the dealer is also taking actions with aged inventory, incentives for overall floorplan and target bonus numbers, and a bunch of other poo poo so not all of that discount is coming out of Ford's pocket.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
Well, lets talk about that then. If you're looking for a hot hatch, is the Focus ST still a good choice? As mentioned, it is old, but I remember it being well reviewed when it came out. What about the Fiesta ST? Reviews for that were even better. What's the best choice for a new hot hatch in TYOOL 2017?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
I personally liked driving the FiST way more than the FoST. Given how much the FiST depreciates a lightly used one should be pretty cheap. If you're cool with the size anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
New hot hatch is almost certainly the GTi, it has a very nice balance of performance, comfort, and interior quality. It's better designed than the FoST for sure. The FoST has very poorly utilized interior space. I really like my FoST and it's held up fairly well over the last 4+ years. I have an early build 2013 so anything later should be better. It's quick but does not feel very much quicker than the Mk.7 GTi. The interior quality is worse, as is the fuel economy. It does handle much better and does not start to protest once you get above 7 or 8 10ths. I found the tendency of the rear to kick out just a bit to be very rewarding in hard driving. The FiST is the same thing but... more. The ride is a bit worse, the handling is a bit sharper, and the interior is pretty down market.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
I think Ford is discontinuing the Fiesta in the US. Not sure what that will do to the used market for FiSTs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
How much can I reasonably expect to get for my trade-in? It's a silver 2006 Chevy Cobalt LT with ~143,000 miles. The original engine was replaced after it hydrolocked when my wife ran through a deep puddle. Various other issues (some power windows don't work, AC is sporadic, occasional stalling issues, some stains on the interior). KBB places this car into the "poor" category so it won't even give an estimated trade-in value. We've already decided on what car we will be purchasing and the price is more than reasonable but I'd like to squeeze as much as possible out of the trade-in. The estimate is between $500 and $1000 for one in "fair" condition so should I be happy if they offer like $500 for the car? It just seems awfully low for a car that is in running condition. Mind_Taker fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Jul 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:57 |
|
|
Mind_Taker posted:How much can I reasonably expect to get for my trade-in? It's a silver 2006 Chevy Cobalt LT with ~143,000 miles. The original engine was replaced after it hydrolocked when my wife ran through a deep puddle. Various other issues (some power windows don't work, AC is sporadic, occasional stalling issues, some stains on the interior). Yes, $500 is a realistic expectation for trade-in at a dealer.. I was offered $500 for a car in "fair" condition with a check engine light, and a KBB around $2000. Ended up declining the offer and Craigslisting for a higher amount. What car are you getting? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2017 20:30
|
|