The Car Thread ... !

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

Saying that a loaded Honda Accord for $30k should be RWD isn't "wrong" - it's my personal preference. For the money you pay, one shouldn't be stuck with FWD. (Newsflash: there exist plenty of care enthusiasts amongst the masses. I'm sure plenty of people can't afford anything more than a Honda Accord and are wishing that their car was RWD. Just because someone can't afford a better car than an Accord, it doesn't mean that they don't possess the knowledge to criticize their car's construction. In fact, I'm sure that my uncle would have much more fun driving around a RWD Crown Vic than his FWD Camry. He's a great driver and is skilled with mechanics. I'm sure he would appreciate his car more if it weren't FWD.

You're finding every way to yell at me. I obviously know more than the common driver. You simply want to find fault in everything I say, even if it's an opinion or preference.

 

[2298754]

Saying that a Honda Accord for $30k should be RWD isn't "wrong" - it's my personal preference. You're finding every way to yell at me.

Stop playing the victim card. No one is "yelling" at you...

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

Stop playing the victim card. No one is "yelling" at you...

"What are you blabbering about?" Oh, gee... God forgive me for ever considering that perhaps some people here are somewhat rude and critical of what I say, even if I'm giving an innocent opinion.

Myself: 'Hey, I like the so-and-so; it drives very we--' You: 'Wrong. You're wrong. It doesn't. I could respect your opinion, but since you know nothing, I'll just outright say what I think and tell you why what you think is incorrect.'

I can't even make a single comment about a car and not get pummeled. Most of the time, I don't even comment with the intention of being right or wrong; I just list my observations of an automobile. So far, the only observation of mine that one of the angry ones here has agreed with was what I said about key fobs getting uglier and being more gimmicky than convenient. I am surprised that some key-fob aficionado didn't come on here and write me a novel on why I am wrong about key fobs and that I have no prior experience with key fobs - and that, by not being the true owner of a key fob, I suddenly have no idea what I'm talking about. Seriously, though: I am so surprised that I didn't get criticized for that. I was waiting for someone to rag on me for that.

 

[2298754]

Here's a new car that was announced today

Land Rover Discovery 5

Comes in two engines, 340hp SCV6 and a ~240hp turbodiesel

First impressions: Looks decent, even though it's lost that classic "Disco-ness." Price has gone up significantly. A loaded HSE Luxury Diesel is about $75,000, so about $10k less than the equivalent Range Rover Sport HSE Td6. Interior is a huge step in the right direction. Dare I say, even looks better than the RR/RRS' interiors... @A.Goldberg, what do you think?


http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/28/2018-land-rover-discovery-paris-motor-show-official/

The engine lineup features JLR's 340-hp, 3.0-liter supercharged V6, available on all trims. The transmission is the ZF eight-speed automatic, with a choice of single or two-speed Torsen-based torque biasing center gearing. Towing capacity is 8,201 pounds. A 3.0-liter turbodiesel making 254 hp will also be available.

We'll have to see what the market makes of this move. It goes on sale in mid-2017, starting at $50,985.

One I configured

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

I never said that the Accord was prestigious... I just said that there should be a RWD model. Are only prestigious cars RWD? I guess that's the case now.
[doublepost=1475108201][/doublepost]

Here's a new car that was announced today

Land Rover Discovery 5

Comes in two engines, 340hp SCV6 and a ~240hp turbodiesel

First impressions: Looks decent, even though it's lost that classic "Disco-ness." Price has gone up significantly. A loaded HSE Luxury Diesel is about $73,000, so about $10k less than the equivalent Range Rover Sport HSE Td6. Interior is a huge step in the right direction. Dare I say, even looks better than the RR/RRS' interiors... @A.Goldberg, what do you think?


http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/28/2018-land-rover-discovery-paris-motor-show-official/

Should I play your card and criticize your opinion on this new Discovery, or should I just be nice and respect the points you've made?

Or, perhaps, should I be daring and say that the rear of the car is somewhat askew and unattractive, or will that get me keyboard-warrior'd?

 

[2298754]

Should I play your card and criticize your opinion on this new Discovery, or should I just be nice and respect the points you've made?

Or, perhaps, should I be daring and say that the rear of the car is somewhat askew and unattractive, or will that get me keyboard-warrior'd?

Be my guest. I'm not the one throwing a tantrum or the one out of touch with reality...
[doublepost=1475109454][/doublepost]http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/26/2017-jeep-compass-debut-official/#slide-4075448

2017 Jeep Compass debuts with tiny Grand Cherokee looks

The new Compass is based on a stretched version of the Renegade platform, what FiatChrysler Automotive in a fit of eloquence calls the "Small Wide 4x4" architecture. We expect front-wheel drive as standard and four-wheel drive as a very commonly selected option. The Compass should offer either a 2.0-liter turbo inline-four or a naturally-aspirated 2.4-liter inline-four, both mated to a nine-speed automatic transmission. There's a chance it'll get a manual, but it's a very slim chance. That being said, globally there will be 17 powertrain options, according to FCA, and that may mean US consumers will have more than one choice in the matter. Judging by the first photo above, a an off-road-ready Trailhawk model is a good bet.

Probably another home-run by Jeep. Wouldn't be surprised if they can't keep these in stock

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

You seem to retaliate way more; I am throwing no 'tantrums.' But, anyway. If I were to criticize the Discovery (or even say why I like it), SOMEONE here would probably find SOME way to put me down. Not gonna do it.

 

[2298754]

You seem to retaliate way more; I am throwing no 'tantrums.' But, anyway. If I were to criticize the Discovery (or even say why I like it), SOMEONE here would probably find SOME way to put me down. Not gonna do it.

Here we go with the victim playing again...

I can't even make a single comment about a car and not get pummeled.

 

[0388631]

I'm all for equal rights, but why did FCA hire blind designers?

 

[iLog.Genius]

I'm all for equal rights, but why did FCA hire blind designers?

LMAO

 

[A.Goldberg]

Here's a new car that was announced today

Land Rover Discovery 5

Comes in two engines, 340hp SCV6 and a ~240hp turbodiesel

First impressions: Looks decent, even though it's lost that classic "Disco-ness." Price has gone up significantly. A loaded HSE Luxury Diesel is about $75,000, so about $10k less than the equivalent Range Rover Sport HSE Td6. Interior is a huge step in the right direction. Dare I say, even looks better than the RR/RRS' interiors... @A.Goldberg, what do you think?


http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/28/2018-land-rover-discovery-paris-motor-show-official/

One I configured

Land Rover convoluting and diluting their line up once again. I really wish they'd diversify their design. They're turning into a one tricky pony. 5 different renditions of a Ford Explorer aesthetic.

A optioned up Disco 5 sounds like a much better deal than the RRS. A higher spec RRS almost makes a RR worth it. Even the Disco Sport price tag encroaches on the Disco 5. Then Evoke serves even less bearing in the lineup with an absurd price tag + mediocre performance, quality, and versatility.

I can only imagine the abomination the Defender replacement will become.

Land Rover is doing a decent job selling their cars but I wish they'd get back towards their earlier roots. Right now they're exploiting the Range Rover name and design. I think their simple lineup of the past worked best, as flawed as even that was. I think you can only ale so many SUVs before you saturate your brand.

 

[0388631]

They're following Hans's dreams.

 

[A.Goldberg]

It's not just the RWD and equal weight distribution - it also has such responsive power steering. It's not necessarily tight, but it can react faster than the Honda can; and given that it's an archaic body style and a bigger, heavier body, it's somewhat impressive. Still, I am sure that the Honda could work some wonders of its own with RWD. And, again, RWD means far less frontal weight. By saying that Honda should fix that, I'm implying that they should look into RWD options. I know that FWD is economical and simplistic, but certain vehicles shouldn't be FWD vehicles. Toyota's RAV 4, for example, is FWD... which is slightly annoying. I know it's small, but come on.

In most cases, RWD does give a more agile feel over FWD, again which is why most sports cars are RWD vs FWD (or least rear wheel biased AWD)

I see @A.Goldberg has been administering @AutoUnion39 with meds again.

I'm curious... what this even mean?

However, the Rav 4 would be nicer if it were RWD

That doesn't really make any sense. The RAV4 is not a performance inspired SUV in the slightest. The 0-60 time is pretty dismal. It's a car-based SUV meaning derrivered from a car chassis. Most cars are FWD. Therefore you're going to get a FWD or AWD setup. The majority of Rav4's, at least out here are AWD.

To arbitrarily make an RWD design out of a FWD based platform would require a massive redesign of you wanted to shift the weight of the car backwards considering FWD-based AWD cars still have a transaxle (transmission + axel) sitting beneath the engine rather than a more linear setup.

And the benefits of FWD for the average driver beyond better economy also includes more practicality slippery conditions and more cabin/rear seat/trunk space. You don't need mechanical parts running through the center of the car. Some AWD sedans have much less trunk space to accomodate the rear differential.

From a design practicality setup a FWD vehicle is far more complex than a RWD setup. You're placing the engine and transmission under the hood rather that spreading out the peices. It also makes repairs more difficult.

Someone paying for a loaded Accord is someone who cares a bit more about their car than someone looking to get the cheapest, most economic vehicle possible. The Accord would be much improved if there were a RWD version, and I'm sure that many people would appreciate i

Someone paying more for a loaded Accord is paying more for the creature comforts- leather, navigation, climate control, maybe some extra power with the V6. One does not buy an accord if they want a preformance vehicle. At the end of the day the Accord is a midsize "family sedan", practicality is the single functional purpose of the car.

For most people, as the market clearly shows, people favor convential sedans with FWD despite the few drawbacks. Simple solution if you don't want a FWD car, buy a RWD car or an AWD vehicle with a performance inclined design.

Never have a been to a forum where one gets mocked for expressing opinions. Something tells me that some of you have your own issues you're dealing with, so you take out your aggression on others who you feel are ignorant. It's okay; I've also had Mac-haters take out their aggression on me and doubt my knowledge on computers. Same old crap - been there, done that.

Relax, friend. Don't take it so personally. In the past you've clearly demonstrated resentment for people criticizing your potentially unjustified comments about material objects. In other words you're redirecting comments about a car you/your family owns against your own personal character. Similar example someone says "your computer sucks" --> gets interpreted as ---> "you suck", which turns into escalated responses. It's an incredibly primitive way of thinking. I suggest you notice the difference and ponder how that opens you up to future criticism.

 

[0388631]

I'm not sure myself. I had a few martinis that evening.
[doublepost=1475135650][/doublepost]To be quite fair to Monsieur Maserati, ambient lighting can be most definitely improved from here on out. I think Audi's take on it is quite tasteful. MBZ's ambient lighting always reminded me of a seedy gentleman's club in the outskirts of Paris where you could snort cocaine off the bosom off of a blonde woman from Prague with 100 Euro notes.

 

[quagmire]

Relax, friend. Don't take it so personally. In the past you've clearly demonstrated resentment for people criticizing your potentially unjustified comments about material objects. In other words you're redirecting comments about a car you/your family owns against your own personal character. Similar example someone says "your computer sucks" --> gets interpreted as ---> "you suck", which turns into escalated responses. It's an incredibly primitive way of thinking. I suggest you notice the difference and ponder how that opens you up to future criticism.

And we have had worse. Unless @PowerMac G4 MDD you start trying to convince us a Daewoo lancetti is the best car in the world and how Daewoo makes most cars and GM just rebadged them, you'll be fine.

I think if you explain your opinion more besides "FWD sucks, RWD is better" you will take others here explaining why it's impractical for cars you want to be RWD or have manufactures have two separate platforms for one car a bit better.

While there are car enthusiasts out there, our numbers are shrinking. Our generation is more about technology, social media, etc than the baby boomers loving cars as cars symbolized freedom to go anywhere for them. Cars being an appliance, simple A to B transportation, etc is the prevailing thought these days. The volume isn't there to justify developing unique RWD platforms for vehicles like the Accord, RAV4, etc. The demand is for FWD/AWD based vehicles and manufactures can save money by basing these vehicles on a common platform. As others have explained, the costs to develop( thus the cost of the final product) RWD platforms are higher than FWD platforms. So if Honda had to develop a unique RWD platform for the Accord, the Accord wouldn't top out at $30K, it would be a bit higher. And just to clear things up, are you saying the lower end Accord models can remain FWD, but the top end should be RWD? That especially won't happen. It simply won't be profitable. Cost to reengineer the platform, separate tooling at the plant, etc. It makes the whole operation unnecessarily complex( and thus costly). Every Accord model would have to be RWD for any chance for Honda to make money and again the cost of the Accord would go up.

There is a reason why GM stopped giving brands semi-automny( though Cadillac is trying to get that back a bit), why they don't offer a bunch of engine choices( the choice of OHV V6's, DOHC V6's, etc). That was very expensive for them. While they could have maintained it when they had marketshare of 50%+, it wasn't sustainable when the market changed and they had to streamline the operation( at first in the worst way by rebadging everything and took them 20-30 years to learn that lesson the hard way).

Another reason why the Accord and other family sedans are getting more expensive is inflation and our salaries haven't kept up( thus our buying power goes down). As I pointed out to my parents when they got sticker shock when they were buying their 2016 Suburban and saw it was $60K when their 2002 Suburban cost $40K. If you take $40K in 2002 money and adjust it for inflation, it would be $60K in todays money. My 2007 Saturn Aura XR cost $28,000 back in 2006. That's $33,000 in todays money which is in line of loaded family sedans today. Now manufactures are packing the high end models with features to hopefully get people to shell out that money. It's not that manufactures are getting greedy necessarily, but they have to keep up with inflation to protect their slim profit margins.

 

[iLog.Genius]

Another reason why the Accord and other family sedans are getting more expensive is inflation and our salaries haven't kept up( thus our buying power goes down). As I pointed out to my parents when they got sticker shock when they were buying their 2016 Suburban and saw it was $60K when their 2002 Suburban cost $40K. If you take $40K in 2002 money and adjust it for inflation, it would be $60K in todays money. My 2007 Saturn Aura XR cost $28,000 back in 2006. That's $33,000 in todays money which is in line of loaded family sedans today. Now manufactures are packing the high end models with features to hopefully get people to shell out that money. It's not that manufactures are getting greedy necessarily, but they have to keep up with inflation to protect their slim profit margins.

I think a lot of people forget this. Prices have generally been the same, just adjusted for inflation but the problem is everyone still making the same amount which makes cars a lot more expensive than in the past.

 

[D.T.]

The GT350 is something else. It may not look nice inside because it's a Ford, but my god... There's something visceral about that car. As the Orangutan said in the past, "It makes your loins warm up."

Have you seen RFP's drive/review at Laguna Seca? (It was for DCotY)

“I am in love with [it]. It just works: the level of control, the balance, the stability without understeer.”

[doublepost=1475160289][/doublepost]I saw an ATS-V on the way home on Tuesday, [I believe] it was the Crystal White package (matte white), had all the carbon dress up goodies - the wheels looked aftermarket just because of the additional positive offset, but it could've been OEM-ers with spacers, plus the stance was pretty tight, I suspect aftermarketing lowering.

Anyway, it looked terrific.
[doublepost=1475160373][/doublepost]... and for my 3rd merged post

Got these delivered today

 

[bunnspecial]

To change the subject a bit, I got my rebuilt distributor for the MG back on Monday. I sent it to Jeff Schlemmer at Advanced Distributors, who is THE go-to guy for Lucas distributors. He tears them down, cleans them, and sets the mechanical tolerances to better than new. He goes one step further, though, and chooses advance weights and springs based on the information you give him about your engine and car. So, the distributor you receive back does not have an out-of-the book advance curve but rather one tailored to your engine.

I've been running a Chinese-made Pertronix branded type 25D distributor(which Jeff-who would know-tells me is really a 45D mechanism inside a 25D housing). My car ran better on it than it did with my worn out original, but I still wanted to get the original back in place.

What I received back is truly a work of art. It looks brand new. I opted to go(back) to points and give them a fair shot. I installed and timed the the new distributor during my lunch break on Tuesday, and the performance improvement is amazing. One of my perpetual woes has always been that in hard cornering, I often downshift into 3rd but end up at about 1500rpms. The engine has next to no torque at that speed, so it could make pulling out of the corner difficult until it was up to 2300 or so. The jump in ratios between 2nd and 3rd is enough that I think going all the way down to second would be a recipe for disaster, so I've just lived with what I have. The rebuilt distributor gives me a fair bit more low-end torque. It's not great, but certainly a lot better than what it was.

 

[iLog.Genius]

Have you seen RFP's drive/review at Laguna Seca? (It was for DCotY)

“I am in love with [it]. It just works: the level of control, the balance, the stability without understeer.”

[doublepost=1475160289][/doublepost]I saw an ATS-V on the way home on Tuesday, [I believe] it was the Crystal White package (matte white), had all the carbon dress up goodies - the wheels looked aftermarket just because of the additional positive offset, but it could've been OEM-ers with spacers, plus the stance was pretty tight, I suspect aftermarketing lowering.

Anyway, it looked terrific.
[doublepost=1475160373][/doublepost]... and for my 3rd merged post

Got these delivered today

View attachment 660965

I always loved the Mustang (in all iterations) more than its American competitors.

 

[quagmire]

Have you seen RFP's drive/review at Laguna Seca? (It was for DCotY)

“I am in love with [it]. It just works: the level of control, the balance, the stability without understeer.”

I wish the GT350 was in my budget and without stupid ADM. That car does scream special especially with that Voodoo engine. If it was within my budget, I would highly consider it over the Camaro SS. Wasn't impressed with the GT, but it does sound like the GT350 is transformative for the Mustang.

Lets also keep in mind that was the GT350R, not the regular GT350 in MT's DCOTY though.

 

[2298754]

I always loved the Mustang (in all iterations) more than its American competitors.

Definitely the best American muscle car. The Camaro and Challenger don't do anything for me.

 

[bunnspecial]

Definitely the best American muscle car. The Camaro and Challenger don't do anything for me.

My boss has a '15 Challenger Scat Pack. The styling isn't quite my cup of tea, although his does look quite good(black on black with dark rims) and the exhaust note is heavenly.

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

The majority of my posts are lengthy, and I explain my reasoning and thoughts in all of them. I am not simply saying that one thing sucks and another thing is great. It's just that, for some reason, I get people like AutoUnion criticizing most of my posts - even the ones that merely consist of my thoughts on a car or an aspect of cars.

For example, I made a comment on my loathing key fobs because I believe that they are gimmicky and usually look ugly (especially Ford's key fobs). Now, to my surprise, another user (I think it was AutoUnion) actually agreed with me...

however, it's usually a blunt counterargument, and it all started with AutoUnion calling my family's vehicle a piece of junk that belongs in a scrap yard.
[doublepost=1475184004][/doublepost]

I think a lot of people forget this. Prices have generally been the same, just adjusted for inflation but the problem is everyone still making the same amount which makes cars a lot more expensive than in the past.

It's not just inflation that's making cars seem more expensive. Today's vehicles are being stuffed with extra [and expensive] technology - some of which is useful and necessary, others which are gimmicky.

These days, even economy cars are being fitted with things such as side-curtain airbags, electronic stability systems, electronic power steering, more elaborate entertainment systems, and things like back-up cameras. There are quite a few new safety standards that these car manufacturers must adhere to. So, even though a car might seem simple and underwhelming, there are internal features that end up driving up its cost and making it appear to be an overpriced car. Sure, I suppose that I could cut some slack on the Accord being $30k tops, given what has been said... although, I would personally put $30k into something better - it's possible. Contrary to what I've said about old cars, however, Hondas have always been only relatively cheap. If I remember correctly, my mom's early 1990s Honda cost as much then (for 1990s money) as one would cost now. There are SOME exceptions. An example of a car that is much more expensive now is the Toyota Landcruiser. In 1996, a full-loaded Landcruiser was about $70k (adjusted for inflation). Today, a Landcruiser starts at $80k.

The one feature that I personally would never want to pay for is a rear back-up camera, but today's economy cars are beginning to receive them. I suppose it makes sense, since cars are becoming harder and harder to see out of, but they cost a lot of money.

 

[iLog.Genius]

It's not just inflation that's making cars seem more expensive. Today's vehicles are being stuffed with extra [and expensive] technology - some of which is useful and necessary, others which are gimmicky.

These days, even economy cars are being fitted with things such as side-curtain airbags, electronic stability systems, electronic power steering, more elaborate entertainment systems, and things like back-up cameras. There are quite a few new safety standards that these car manufacturers must adhere to. So, even though a car might seem simple and underwhelming, there are internal features that end up driving up its cost and making it appear to be an overpriced car. Sure, I suppose that I could cut some slack on the Accord being $30k tops, given what has been said... although, I would personally put $30k into something better - it's possible. Contrary to what I've said about old cars, however, Hondas have always been only relatively cheap. If I remember correctly, my mom's early 1990s Honda cost as much then (for 1990s money) as one would cost now. There are SOME exceptions. An example of a car that is much more expensive now is the Toyota Landcruiser. In 1996, a full-loaded Landcruiser was about $70k (adjusted for inflation). Today, a Landcruiser starts at $80k.

The one feature that I personally would never want to pay for is a rear back-up camera, but today's economy cars are beginning to receive them. I suppose it makes sense, since cars are becoming harder and harder to see out of, but they cost a lot of money.

I'm sure there are some exceptions where the price of the vehicle exceeds the price adjusted for inflation but generally speaking, there's a lot more value in cars today than there was in the past. Whether you like the features that come standard is a different argument but you get a ton of a lot more with today's cars than you did with cars in the past.

 

[PowerMac G4 MDD]

[/QUOTE]Relax, friend. Don't take it so personally. In the past you've clearly demonstrated resentment for people criticizing your potentially unjustified comments about material objects. In other words you're redirecting comments about a car you/your family owns against your own personal character. Similar example someone says "your computer sucks" --> gets interpreted as ---> "you suck", which turns into escalated responses. It's an incredibly primitive way of thinking. I suggest you notice the difference and ponder how that opens you up to future criticism.[/QUOTE]

Dude, I say that I like a car and then I get insulted for it... what do you call that? I lift a finger and I have someone telling me that I'm wrong or that my opinions make no sense.

I am not thinking that I am personally being attacked; don't think that I am translating "your car sucks" into "you suck." I'm just sick of giving thoughts or opinions and having some wiseacre tell me that my judgment is off or that everything I've driven sucks.

Do you realize that a person can feel pestered even if they are not being attacked personally? Sorry if it seems like I was implying that I was personally attacked... I don't think that at all. You're created thoughts for me, for some reason.
[doublepost=1475185192][/doublepost]

I'm sure there are some exceptions where the price of the vehicle exceeds the price adjusted for inflation but generally speaking, there's a lot more value in cars today than there was in the past. Whether you like the features that come standard is a different argument but you get a ton of a lot more with today's cars than you did with cars in the past.

You have a good point: what a person received from an economy car back in, say, the 1970s was nothing compared to what one receives from today's economy cars. However, I think that there are more than just a few exceptions regarding cars being more expensive today, relative to the past. As I said, cars are including more and more features - expensive features - even when they might not even be necessary or cost-effective to include in an economy car. I personally feel that economy cars aren't too cost-effective these days, since one can get a really nice used car, instead of a dirt-cheap Nissan that has the same features as a cheap 1990s car. (Just rode in a new Note the other day, and it had crank windows and a manual transmission.)

It seems that it's more worth-it to save up for a better model, or else go with a used car that was premium in its day. When economy cars were new, nobody had the option to go and buy a used car that was economical, since they weren't economical by nature. Nowadays, it seems more worth-it to get a used car that is relatively economical and definitely a much nicer driver than the brand-new economy car.

Ex. The cheapest possible Nissan (Sentra) - which is a dismal car - is $10,000 (sales tax, etc. likely not included). It's definitely not as good as a Honda, and probably far worse than a Toyota. I'd rather opt for a used sedan. $10k might not seem bad, but it's a lot to drop on the worst possible new car.