The Car Thread ... !

[A.Goldberg]

But the GL is an SUV on the exterior. I wouldn't call swimming a sport to be frank. I don't call most sports sports because they're not really a sport. I don't consider racing a sport, yet others do. Must be an East Coast Jewish thing, as all the Jewish people I know end up driving German cars. Two and a Half Men had a line in it during its earlier years. Something a writer's grandmother said once many moons ago about Mercedes being Hitler's Nazi phallic symbol. Evelyn Harper, the character who played Charlie and Allen's mother said that, IIRC. I can see why some may be aprehensive about it if their family suffered in the factories. A lot of companies were involved with the Third Reich, but do these people actively protest using the products and or services of these companies, or is it just the car brands?

Volvo Wagon, you say? All you need is a golden retriever (Goldberg => Golden Retriever), a dog cage barrier and two or three Goldberglings. TBH, The Sienna Limited Premium with the V6 gets 19/27, which is rather good for a behemoth nearing on 2.5 tons.

Edit: Well, the GLE coupe looks rather nice... Still too small in terms of available space. The Nissan Murano and the Infiniti FX series, were the first crossovers I recall hitting the market in the early 2000s. Unless something came before either one. Off to bed to have a nightmare or two of Maserati's trying to run me down but suffering from catastrophic engine failure at the last second.

Yes, competitive swimming is not a physical activity done in competition? Neither will soccer I presume. Or lacrosse? I was an avid skier much of my life but that's more of a pastime. I notice you're very particular about your own categorization of things.

I was (mostly) kidding about companies like VW and Ford and Hugo Boss. There are some annoying people who insist on following such practices out of resentment decades later.

 

[quagmire]

Has anyone taken a look at the new Suburbans? They are much improved. The only thing they lack that the previous generations has is space. The new one is still a big automobile, but it has been compressed some. Didn't get to drive it, but the driver agreed that it was a great ride. Being in the back, I was able to feel how soft and coddling the suspension was. And, of course, the seats were very supportive - much softer than the ones in the '07 that we used to have.

My parents got a 2016 Suburban replacing their 2002 Suburban. The difference between them is staggering. Yeah you lose a few inches in height in the interior to enable the third row to fold flat, but the interior is vastly improved.

I wouldn't call the Suburbans ride as soft. It rides firmer than the 2002. You want soft? Go drive a 2005-2009 Equinox, Cadillac DTS, and a Town Car. Those are soft suspensions. I would call the current Suburban's ride as comfortable. The firmer ride instills more confidence in driving it along with the firmer brake pedal. Though the biggest change that improves driving it is the change to a rack and pinion steering over the 2002's Recirculating-ball steering. With the '02's steering, there was no on center feedback with a lot of play in the wheel. The 16's steering is more precise. My mom loves towing the horse trailer with the new Suburban over the old one.

 

[128keaton]

My parents got a 2016 Suburban replacing their 2002 Suburban. The difference between them is staggering. Yeah you lose a few inches in height in the interior to enable the third row to fold flat, but the interior is vastly improved.

I wouldn't call the Suburbans ride as soft. It rides firmer than the 2002. You want soft? Go drive a 2005-2009 Equinox, Cadillac DTS, and a Town Car. Those are soft suspensions. I would call the current Suburban's ride as comfortable. The firmer ride instills more confidence in driving it along with the firmer brake pedal. Though the biggest change that improves driving it is the change to a rack and pinion steering over the 2002's Recirculating-ball steering. With the '02's steering, there was no on center feedback with a lot of play in the wheel. The 16's steering is more precise. My mom loves towing the horse trailer with the new Suburban over the old one.

yes! There is a fine line between squishy and comfortable. Too squishy and, you are right, you don't almost trust the car to go where you put it. The 2015 Suburban had comfortable suspension (like you said) it felt pretty easy to drive, but I'm not sure if I liked the steering wheel. I don't know if anyone else has felt this, but the size of the steering wheel needs to be relevant to the size of the car. It felt way too small.
[doublepost=1473874180][/doublepost](oh another fun thing) my car only has REAR abs so if I'm going down the road during slippery conditions, I'll have full control over my straight facing rear wheels, but my front wheels which control the car are as good as ice skates . Also, my CEL came on this morning, I know the code, but I am not sure why. I got rid of it this weekend and its been driving spectacularly, but the drive this morning it was boorish and slow

 

[D.T.]

I don't call most sports sports because they're not really a sport.

I don't even know what to ...

 

[iLog.Genius]

I don't even know what to ...

Yes! Let's turn this into another debate of classification! I enjoyed the last one a lot!

I'll start, a sport is a sport if it, by definition, requires any sort of physical effort, ability and/or competing against other individuals or team.

 

[0388631]

A rousing game of snooker and darts should require many mugs of ale in that case. Now onto things worth the time to discuss, the new TT RS. I've been waiting for this video for weeks.

 

[bunnspecial]

I don't know if anyone else has felt this, but the size of the steering wheel needs to be relevant to the size of the car. It felt way too small.

To an extent, but the trend has been to somewhat smaller wheels since cars basically take no effort now. Granted even big sloppy trucks now are moving(at least in the smaller sizes) to R&P steering from recirculating ball, which does give a lot more steering feel.

I hate to keep going back to the Town Car specifically, and the Panther platform in general, but one of the major mechanical changes in the '03 redesign was rack and pinion steering. I've only extensively driven one post-'03 Panther(although I've driven several of them) and that was my mom's last TC-the '06. The difference in steering is hard to describe. I had a LOT of wheel time behind a couple of different pre-'03 TCs(I'd guess 40K or so total spread across 4 cars) and probably put 10-15K on the '06. The '06 definitely had a fair bit more steering feel and felt more "planted"(or at least as much as a car that size can) but in a lot of ways I preferred the recirculating ball of the pre-03 cars. Even though it was a lot sloppier, it seemed more in character with the car.

The 15" wheel on my MG stands out in relationship to the size of the car, but I'm sure as heck glad to have it. I wouldn't mind to have a 16" if it weren't for leg clearance.

 

[iLog.Genius]

A rousing game of snooker and darts should require many mugs of ale in that case. Now onto things worth the time to discuss, the new TT RS. I've been waiting for this video for weeks.

718 Cayman for me for the simple fact that it offers what I want and what I'm looking for if I were to buy small coupe/roadster: manual transmission and RWD.

The TTRS is a great car, all things considered, but like most of today's car, it's a point-and-shoot type of car and lacks the feeling you're looking for and a feeling only a manual transmission can provide.

 

[0388631]

There is the benefit of it being mid-engined unlike the Audi, offering a unique driving experience. Having heard the 718 Cayman in person, it doesn't sound very pleasing, even with the PSE option. A manual isn't too realistic depending on where you live here. At the end of the day, it simply depends on which you'd prefer in the long run and whatever creature comforts you may enjoy. With the Porsche, you get that stiff but smooth chassis Porsche always delivers that provides immense fun and fast cornering ability. The TTs I've driven didn't offer that same experience, unless I'm unaware of my bias towards Porsche cars. Though the TT RS is gorgeous and wouldn't draw too much attention to it unlike the Porsche.

The Cayman GTS speaks to me more than the 718.

 

[iLog.Genius]

Though the TT RS is gorgeous and wouldn't draw too much attention to it unlike the Porsche.

I don't know about that. The people I know and the people around the city here would not stop and admire a Boxster or Cayman because it isn't a 911. Granted these people aren't car enthusiasts don't understand how special the Boxster/Cayman are in their own regard. Same applies for the TT(RS). No one really looks at Audi's unless it's a R8. So at least around here in the GTA, the general public could really give two s--ts about the Boxter/Cayman/TT!

 

[0388631]

I don't know about that. The people I know and the people around the city here would not stop and admire a Boxster or Cayman because it isn't a 911. Granted these people aren't car enthusiasts don't understand how special the Boxster/Cayman are in their own regard. Same applies for the TT(RS). No one really looks at Audi's unless it's a R8. So at least around here in the GTA, the general public could really give two s--ts about the Boxter/Cayman/TT!

TT's aren't fairly common here. I think the most common Audis you do see are A4s or S4s. As I said yesterday or the day before, many people view Audi as an upscale VW. Though most people wouldn't take a secondary glance toward an M car and couldn't tell a difference, because to them it's just a BMW. People do look at Caymans, though. I don't know many Porsche owners who'd write off the Cayman, it's usually non-car people. My wife is more into Porsche than I am, as she owned one way before I met her. She had quite a lot of fun in a Targa my older sibling's wife's brother owned about 8 or 9 years ago. A Porsche isn't in the books for now. We'd have very little time to use it on weekends and DD'ing one isn't practical. Can't really open the car up on your way to work. But if I spotted a low mileage CPO 997.2 Turbo for "cheap," I'd pounce on it like a 70s Rockstar does on a mound of coke.

 

[iLog.Genius]

I don't know many Porsche owners who'd write off the Cayman, it's usually non-car people.

Not just non-car people. If you frequent other car forums and magazine websites, a lot of people still don't respect the Boxster/Cayman. Arguably, the Boxster/Cayman is the best driving Porsche and has surpassed the 911 in that regard. While the 911 is still a great (great) car, it's slowly becoming a grand tourer and it's smaller brothers have passed it as a drivers car. Not a lot of people will agree with me on that but the fact that a statement like that can be made and argued speaks volumes on how good the Boxster/Cayman is or has become.

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

My parents got a 2016 Suburban replacing their 2002 Suburban. The difference between them is staggering. Yeah you lose a few inches in height in the interior to enable the third row to fold flat, but the interior is vastly improved.

I wouldn't call the Suburbans ride as soft. It rides firmer than the 2002. You want soft? Go drive a 2005-2009 Equinox, Cadillac DTS, and a Town Car. Those are soft suspensions. I would call the current Suburban's ride as comfortable. The firmer ride instills more confidence in driving it along with the firmer brake pedal. Though the biggest change that improves driving it is the change to a rack and pinion steering over the 2002's Recirculating-ball steering. With the '02's steering, there was no on center feedback with a lot of play in the wheel. The 16's steering is more precise. My mom loves towing the horse trailer with the new Suburban over the old one.

I didn't get to test drive it, but my dad did (I rode in it). Even as the passenger, I felt a huge difference. Yeah, suspension is stiffer nowadays (I wouldn't doubt for a second that a 2002 has soft suspension), but I think the one we test drove had the better suspension package, so it felt rather comfortable, but - yeah- not soft. It may have also felt comfier than usual to me because our current SUV has stiff, sporty suspension; and although we have a Crown Vic, it's a P71, so the suspension is raised and firm.

Anyway, huge improvement. I was skeptical of it for some time, but it has proven to be a really nice SUV. I'm wanting to get behind the wheel of one. My brother thinks it's ugly. Eh--I mean, it's a little Transformers-ish and exaggerated, but it's otherwise very sleek solid-looking. It may be less of a rugged vehicle than the previous generation, but at least its mechanics are much improved.

 

[0388631]

Not just non-car people. If you frequent other car forums and magazine websites, a lot of people still don't respect the Boxster/Cayman.

Yep. Unfortunately, commenters fall under two groups; 1. Ones who are car people and can respect a car for what it really is and not what it tries to pass itself off as and 2. People who'll insult a car because they heard some review or because it looks like something else from the manufacturer's lineup. In a way, most comments are akin to YouTube comments; cancerous.

Arguably, the Boxster/Cayman is the best driving Porsche and has surpassed the 911 in that regard. While the 911 is still a great (great) car, it's slowly becoming a grand tourer and it's smaller brothers have passed it as a drivers car.

Indeed. I'm bemused by the Cayman GT4 and wish I could get my hands on one simply to take it for a test drive. The 911 is a great car, but it keeps getting larger. There was a post on Rennlist 1-2 years ago where they compared an old 70s 911 to a 997 or 991 parked one after the other. It was astounding to see just how larger newer 911s have become.

Not a lot of people will agree with me on that but the fact that a statement like that can be made and argued speaks volumes on how good the Boxster/Cayman is or has become.

Sorry, what statement?

 

[iLog.Genius]

Sorry, what statement?

That the Boxster/Cayman are better driving (driver's) car than a 911.

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

Not just non-car people. If you frequent other car forums and magazine websites, a lot of people still don't respect the Boxster/Cayman. Arguably, the Boxster/Cayman is the best driving Porsche and has surpassed the 911 in that regard. While the 911 is still a great (great) car, it's slowly becoming a grand tourer and it's smaller brothers have passed it as a drivers car. Not a lot of people will agree with me on that but the fact that a statement like that can be made and argued speaks volumes on how good the Boxster/Cayman is or has become.

yes! There is a fine line between squishy and comfortable. Too squishy and, you are right, you don't almost trust the car to go where you put it. The 2015 Suburban had comfortable suspension (like you said) it felt pretty easy to drive, but I'm not sure if I liked the steering wheel. I don't know if anyone else has felt this, but the size of the steering wheel needs to be relevant to the size of the car. It felt way too small.
[doublepost=1473874180][/doublepost](oh another fun thing) my car only has REAR abs so if I'm going down the road during slippery conditions, I'll have full control over my straight facing rear wheels, but my front wheels which control the car are as good as ice skates . Also, my CEL came on this morning, I know the code, but I am not sure why. I got rid of it this weekend and its been driving spectacularly, but the drive this morning it was boorish and slow

Yeah, I should have elaborated. 'Soft' suspension isn't the best because it can mean less control and also dipping and skipping. Firm suspension that's either adaptive or rides smoothly (or both) is the sweet spot. What I find odd about trucks like Range Rovers is that their suspension system is great; they are very comfortable to off-road; you feel the car's suspension sag when accelerating and slowing; yet, the suspension is also, at the same time, stiff. Going on a dip diagonally isn't pleasant, and hitting smaller bumps isn't great either. However, when the suspension adapts to off-road conditions, it's much better.
[doublepost=1473895081][/doublepost]

During a couple of trips out to LA, I noticed the huge number of Maseratis, I mean, they were all over like you'd expect to see Camrys - and a lot of younger people driving them vs. the typical 3-series I expect to see them in.

Well, we wound up driving past a couple of dealers with big signs up and/or [eventually] saw several billboards - holy hell, the leases were dirt cheap, I don't recall the _exact_ numbers but it was like $579-599/month, low-to-nothing down.

Maserati has begun to target younger, more mainstream crowds with their new line-ups. I see them everywhere. There were not this many Maseratis around with the last generation of QPs and such, and barely any around in the 80s and 90s. One could argue that they are also becoming more reliable (but only relative to their older models); however, it's also because the new models are a bit more 'hip' and less exclusive, and I've also seen great deals out there. Additionally, they have all become full auto and are apparently much smoother and drive-able as daily drivers. Haven't confirmed this, but someone told me that they felt like older Maseratis were more rough and gave the driver the feel of the road, and that the newer ones (specifically the QP) have a sort of BMW 7-series-like driving experience. It's apparently harder to tell that the car actually has all that power.

 

[D.T.]

Sweet talked myself into some free swag from a big supplier They want to do a little mini sponsorship

Also, a GP going for the Ford Stage 2 and 3 Power Packages.

The Stage 3 is a tune, intake, adapter, GT350 manifold - bumps the peak HP to ~500, adds some good mid-range, increases the redline to 7200 - and best of all, if installed by Ford or any ASE mechanic, it's also covered by warranty! (slightly re-configured to 3/36, but still outstanding).

 

[D.T.]

Beautiful PC Stage II install by a shop south of me. The car is setup really nice too, wheels, suspension, the install is super clean, and Pro Charger installs don't require any permanent modifications (not even minor trimming/cutting). Love the visible intercooler and BOV (quietly suggesting not to mess with this car )

~630rwhp, so roughly 750 at the motor, says it drives like stock until you lean into it. I really like the idea of a centrifugal on a manual car, especially a Perf Pack car with the 3:73s, vs. a PD that comes on so strong in the low[er] RPMs.

 

[JamesMike]

Beautiful PC Stage II install by a shop south of me. The car is setup really nice too, wheels, suspension, the install is super clean, and Pro Charger installs don't require any permanent modifications (not even minor trimming/cutting). Love the visible intercooler and BOV (quietly suggesting not to mess with this car )

~630rwhp, so roughly 750 at the motor, says it drives like stock until you lean into it. I really like the idea of a centrifugal on a manual car, especially a Perf Pack car with the 3:73s, vs. a PD that comes on so strong in the low[er] RPMs.

I like the color.

 

[A.Goldberg]

Yeah, I should have elaborated. 'Soft' suspension isn't the best because it can mean less control and also dipping and skipping. Firm suspension that's either adaptive or rides smoothly (or both) is the sweet spot. What I find odd about trucks like Range Rovers is that their suspension system is great; they are very comfortable to off-road; you feel the car's suspension sag when accelerating and slowing; yet, the suspension is also, at the same time, stiff. Going on a dip diagonally isn't pleasant, and hitting smaller bumps isn't great either. However, when the suspension adapts to off-road conditions, it's much better.

I wouldn't call a Range Rover SPORT particularly "soft". The dipping forward and aft on braking (or as you used "slowing") and acceleration is not a desirable feature. My father has a '12 RRS and I've never noticed a loosey goosey suspension, in fact it's remarkably stable for an SUV. Under normal driving I haven't witnessed dipping and jerking. I wouldn't call it "soft". Soft makes me think of some 1980's Cadillac that flexes in every direction including side to side. Or like a Lexus.

I'd say it has a good balance of comfort and handling for an SUV. Remember this car is in direct competion with things like BMW X5's and lower end Cayennes. It's geared towards on road performance more than off-road.

The adapative suspension "Dynamic Response" in the supercharged has more to do with body roll (handling) and off road wheel articulation than it does being a soft suspension. The air suspension has not adaptive function aside from activating extended profile mode if you bottom out.

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

I wouldn't call a Range Rover SPORT particularly "soft". The dipping forward and aft on braking (or as you used "slowing") and acceleration is not a desirable feature. My father has a '12 RRS and I've never noticed a loosey goosey suspension, in fact it's remarkably stable for an SUV. Under normal driving I haven't witnessed dipping and jerking. I wouldn't call it "soft". Soft makes me think of some 1980's Cadillac that flexes in every direction including side to side. Or like a Lexus.

I'd say it has a good balance of comfort and handling for an SUV. Remember this car is in direct competion with things like BMW X5's and lower end Cayennes. It's geared towards on road performance more than off-road.

The adapative suspension "Dynamic Response" in the supercharged has more to do with body roll (handling) and off road wheel articulation than it does being a soft suspension. The air suspension has not adaptive function aside from activating extended profile mode if you bottom out.

I didn't call the Range Rover Sport soft.

 

[2298754]

I didn't call the Range Rover Sport soft.

Yeah, you sorta did...

Yeah, I should have elaborated. 'Soft' suspension isn't the best because it can mean less control and also dipping and skipping. Firm suspension that's either adaptive or rides smoothly (or both) is the sweet spot. What I find odd about trucks like Range Rovers is that their suspension system is great; they are very comfortable to off-road; you feel the car's suspension sag when accelerating and slowing; yet, the suspension is also, at the same time, stiff. Going on a dip diagonally isn't pleasant, and hitting smaller bumps isn't great either. However, when the suspension adapts to off-road conditions, it's much better.

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

Yeah, you sorta did...

No... I didn't. The part about 'soft' suspension was an entirely different thought. Jesus Christ. This forum is full of snobs. You go over to the PowerPC Mac section and it's full of nice people who appreciate each other.

You come here and it's full of older men who challenge everything you say, even if what you say might have been inconsequential. And, of course, you hate on me just because your own Maserati purchase was a complete f*ck-up. Do me a favor and read what I said before jumping to false conclusions. And before you reply about my tone, consider the first thing you ever said to me.

 

[2298754]

No... I didn't. The part about 'soft's suspension was an entirely different thought. Jesus Christ. This forum is full of snobs. Outta here.

I find the bolded statement ironic... especially coming from the forum's self-pointed Maserati "expert." The same person who thinks the Neiman Marcus Quattroporte is the best thing in the world since sliced bread.

You don't even own the car. Whenever someone disagrees with you, you throw a tantrum.

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

I find the bolded statement ironic... especially coming from the forum's self-pointed Maserati "expert."

You don't even own the car. Whenever someone disagrees with your viewpoint, you seem to throw a tantrum.

Throw a tantrum? I haven't. The first thing YOU ever said to me was that our car should be scrapped. I never even asked you. Also, I find it ironic that you would refer to our car as junk, when your avatar says Chrysler on it.