Toshi's thread
- Thread starter Toshi
- Start date
Slipping mentally into the middle-class life
If we should end up somewhere non-tropical, with non-negligible yearly snowfall, then having something with AWD might be a decent idea. Also, if we have kids down the road, having a goodly amount of rear seat legroom for rear-facing child seats would also be a good idea. Is it possible to have these things along with decent mileage and the other expected amenities (heated seats and mirrors, HIDs, non-zero towing capacity)? I set off to find out the answer tonight [ed: well, last night, when I originally posted this elsewhere].
Here's what I found, limiting vehicles loosely to those that crossed my mind, have 20+ mpg combined, 35+ inches of rear seat legroom, AWD, and available gizmos like HIDs and heated seats:
- Optioned similarly (that is, lavishly) all the vehicles basically end up costing $50k. Wow. (The lone domestic on the list is cheaper but it doesn't really belong with the others, lacking a third row and sporting a 4-banger underhood.)
- These things aren't only expensive but are porkers, close to two long tons if not more. AWD + the gizmos adds weight, I guess.
- Mileage pretty much sucks across the board except for the Toyota/Lexus hybrids. Some outliers exist on the bottom end, too, like the Land Cruiser and Land Rover LR4 hovering just above single digits.
- Some vehicles just don't make any sense on paper, like the VW Touareg and Acura ZDX, both of which boast prices well over $50k and curb weights within kissing distance of 5000 lbs yet have only around 100 cubic feet of passenger volume. Again, our Prius has 96 cubic feet in addition to its 46 mpg and 3000 lb curb weight!
- The AWD Toyota minivan, the Sienna, has no better mpg than the typical car-based/unit-body SUV, although it does have a metric ton of interior room (164 cu. ft, if I recall correctly). In any case, it didn't make the cut.
Anyway, here's the pared-down product of my night's amusement, which will likely come to absolutely nothing but made for some daydreaming and scheming:
I want heated seats and mirrors, AWD, and decent gas mileage but you won't see me paying $50k for that privilege any time soon.
If we should end up somewhere non-tropical, with non-negligible yearly snowfall, then having something with AWD might be a decent idea. Also, if we have kids down the road, having a goodly amount of rear seat legroom for rear-facing child seats would also be a good idea. Is it possible to have these things along with decent mileage and the other expected amenities (heated seats and mirrors, HIDs, non-zero towing capacity)? I set off to find out the answer tonight [ed: well, last night, when I originally posted this elsewhere].
Here's what I found, limiting vehicles loosely to those that crossed my mind, have 20+ mpg combined, 35+ inches of rear seat legroom, AWD, and available gizmos like HIDs and heated seats:
- Optioned similarly (that is, lavishly) all the vehicles basically end up costing $50k. Wow. (The lone domestic on the list is cheaper but it doesn't really belong with the others, lacking a third row and sporting a 4-banger underhood.)
- These things aren't only expensive but are porkers, close to two long tons if not more. AWD + the gizmos adds weight, I guess.
- Mileage pretty much sucks across the board except for the Toyota/Lexus hybrids. Some outliers exist on the bottom end, too, like the Land Cruiser and Land Rover LR4 hovering just above single digits.
- Some vehicles just don't make any sense on paper, like the VW Touareg and Acura ZDX, both of which boast prices well over $50k and curb weights within kissing distance of 5000 lbs yet have only around 100 cubic feet of passenger volume. Again, our Prius has 96 cubic feet in addition to its 46 mpg and 3000 lb curb weight!
- The AWD Toyota minivan, the Sienna, has no better mpg than the typical car-based/unit-body SUV, although it does have a metric ton of interior room (164 cu. ft, if I recall correctly). In any case, it didn't make the cut.
Anyway, here's the pared-down product of my night's amusement, which will likely come to absolutely nothing but made for some daydreaming and scheming:
I want heated seats and mirrors, AWD, and decent gas mileage but you won't see me paying $50k for that privilege any time soon.
I just finished batch-entering my (anticipated) hours for the remainder of this academic year. I'm honest about the hours I enter but am not so retentive as to go back and edit entries if I stayed an extra half hour or hour. Therefore let us round up my reported total of 2482 hours for the year to, say, 2500. Take into account that 3 weeks of the 52 are vacation and you get a rough average of 51 hours per week.
Yeah, 51 hours working per week, during residency. That's phenomenal, and completely makes up for the fact that 14 weeks of those 49 were either day float or night float. Thank you, radiology.
(Nothing, on the other hand, can erase the pain of my surgery intern year. It wasn't only the hours but also the atmosphere, personalities, and completely hierarchical/"**** rolls down from above" system. It was awful... but I did learn a lot of relevant stuff that helps me now.)
Yeah, 51 hours working per week, during residency. That's phenomenal, and completely makes up for the fact that 14 weeks of those 49 were either day float or night float. Thank you, radiology.
(Nothing, on the other hand, can erase the pain of my surgery intern year. It wasn't only the hours but also the atmosphere, personalities, and completely hierarchical/"**** rolls down from above" system. It was awful... but I did learn a lot of relevant stuff that helps me now.)
A lil bit of linkage lovin for Toshi. 
I'd love it if they could do this sort of thing down here..... Sounds a fascinating project.
http://www.except.nl/design/Schiebroek-Zuid/index.html
I'd love it if they could do this sort of thing down here..... Sounds a fascinating project.
http://www.except.nl/design/Schiebroek-Zuid/index.html
Although I sometime think those "European sensibilities" can be pretty over the top like this......
http://inhabitat.com/winning-design-turns-abandoned-italian-bridge-into-eco-village/
Looks very cool, but somehow I just don't think it's be a success.
http://inhabitat.com/winning-design-turns-abandoned-italian-bridge-into-eco-village/
Looks very cool, but somehow I just don't think it's be a success.
I rode my Versys today! I rescued it from the hospital covered parking garage, where it's been chained to a pole since Thanksgiving (minus 6 miles of riding in the middle on the one "normal" December day we had).
I'd forgotten how much I like being on it. The riding position is so tall--I can see over the roofs of big SUVs like the Acura MDX, and people give me wide berth. Well, that's probably also because of my florid day-glo outfit and the fact that I'm probably within the first half dozen riders they've seen on the road this year.
I just need to figure out how to keep my neck warm then I'll be set with regard to commuting in on the motorcycle…
I might not ride tomorrow due to the chance of snow, but M-F looks doable!
I'd forgotten how much I like being on it. The riding position is so tall--I can see over the roofs of big SUVs like the Acura MDX, and people give me wide berth. Well, that's probably also because of my florid day-glo outfit and the fact that I'm probably within the first half dozen riders they've seen on the road this year.
I just need to figure out how to keep my neck warm then I'll be set with regard to commuting in on the motorcycle…
I might not ride tomorrow due to the chance of snow, but M-F looks doable!
Fantastic article on the rise of the SUV and the mentality behind it:
http://www.gladwell.com/pdf/suv.pdf
http://www.gladwell.com/pdf/suv.pdf
I got out for 45 miles on the motorcycle today but didn't feel comfortable at all when on wet patches even though it's technically above freezing. I think I'll take the car in for at least another week--not worth it if it's just to prove a point and isn't fun.
Last edited:
I think I posted the MDX SH-AWD video somewhere on RM in the past but here's it and some others. Just in case we need AWD in the future I thought it'd be fun/educational to check out the capabilities of the different marques' systems. We wouldn't want to get an "AWD" system that can't pull the weight of the car, after all--don't laugh, as it's much more possible than you might think!
Split surface slope: SH-AWD > Quattro or Lexus Active Torque Control
One wheel (!) with traction on a slope: Subaru VTD > 4Motion > Honda Real Time 4WD or Toyota Full Time 4WD. I wonder if the 4WD-i system on the Highlander Hybrid would cope with this at all.
One axle with traction: xDrive > Quattro, xDrive >= 4MATIC or Quattro or xDrive > Quattro, take your pick of video
With improper tire choice on sloped grass or snow: Land Rover full-time AWD > xDrive, but with proper tire choice an xDrive X6 climbs a similar split-surface hill as the MDX with SH-AWD does in the first linked video
NB: I'm capitalizing the AWD/4WD system names, since those funny proper names often imply something about the capabilities and whether all wheels are driven or whether it only activates when wheels slip, etc. Also note that Subaru's AWD systems vary by transmission type, engine choice, and model, and Quattro can refer to a number of different systems in Audi-land depending again on engine type and layout, and model. Subaru VTD system explanation links: link1, link2, link3.
Cliffs Notes for the above: What I get out of the above is that Acura's SH-AWD, Subaru's VTD, and BMW's xDrive seem to be a cut above their competition in cars and soft-road SUVs. However, I don't know how "real SUVs" with 4WD systems compare in ability.
I'm guessing that the 4Runner Trail Grade, which looks impressive what with its Land Cruiser-esque features (rear electric locker, hydraulic sway bar disconnects, crawl control, multiple settings for the 4WD system, and "A-TRAC"), would do quite well. Its A-TRAC system, in particular, which is basically an e-diff type setup to keep open diffs from routing all torque to the no-traction wheel, seems like it would work well in conjunction with the lockable center diff and electronic rear locker.
Given that the FJ doesn't have these fancy features plus is both impractical (2 doors) and impossible to see out of, it's out. Jeeps are out because of MMike's (and my family's past) experience, and because of the archaic design: I trust Toyota's engineers much more than Chrysler's. Similarly Land Rover simply isn't an option. So, barring ground clearance issues, would an Outback 3.6R with VTD or a 4Runner Trail Edition get around in snow-land better? Hmm… heh.
Ok, my head is full now with all this probably useless cruft. Time to sleep.
Split surface slope: SH-AWD > Quattro or Lexus Active Torque Control
One wheel (!) with traction on a slope: Subaru VTD > 4Motion > Honda Real Time 4WD or Toyota Full Time 4WD. I wonder if the 4WD-i system on the Highlander Hybrid would cope with this at all.
One axle with traction: xDrive > Quattro, xDrive >= 4MATIC or Quattro or xDrive > Quattro, take your pick of video
With improper tire choice on sloped grass or snow: Land Rover full-time AWD > xDrive, but with proper tire choice an xDrive X6 climbs a similar split-surface hill as the MDX with SH-AWD does in the first linked video
NB: I'm capitalizing the AWD/4WD system names, since those funny proper names often imply something about the capabilities and whether all wheels are driven or whether it only activates when wheels slip, etc. Also note that Subaru's AWD systems vary by transmission type, engine choice, and model, and Quattro can refer to a number of different systems in Audi-land depending again on engine type and layout, and model. Subaru VTD system explanation links: link1, link2, link3.
Cliffs Notes for the above: What I get out of the above is that Acura's SH-AWD, Subaru's VTD, and BMW's xDrive seem to be a cut above their competition in cars and soft-road SUVs. However, I don't know how "real SUVs" with 4WD systems compare in ability.
I'm guessing that the 4Runner Trail Grade, which looks impressive what with its Land Cruiser-esque features (rear electric locker, hydraulic sway bar disconnects, crawl control, multiple settings for the 4WD system, and "A-TRAC"), would do quite well. Its A-TRAC system, in particular, which is basically an e-diff type setup to keep open diffs from routing all torque to the no-traction wheel, seems like it would work well in conjunction with the lockable center diff and electronic rear locker.
Given that the FJ doesn't have these fancy features plus is both impractical (2 doors) and impossible to see out of, it's out. Jeeps are out because of MMike's (and my family's past) experience, and because of the archaic design: I trust Toyota's engineers much more than Chrysler's. Similarly Land Rover simply isn't an option. So, barring ground clearance issues, would an Outback 3.6R with VTD or a 4Runner Trail Edition get around in snow-land better? Hmm… heh.
Ok, my head is full now with all this probably useless cruft. Time to sleep.
Last edited:
Moar videoz!
Subaru VTD and Active AWD > Volvo XC70 > Volvo XC90, Toyota Highlander, Honda CR-V on the rollers and also on a dirt hill, or Subaru Outback > Volvo's Haldex-based XC70 on a dirt hill +/- a small trailer. This seals it: no front-biased Haldex systems for me!
New and old Quattro ski jump ads showing that studded snows are good stuff when AWD can power all 4 wheels, apparently not a given. Equally practical: An Audi S4 climbing some twisty road without tires
To try to sum up what I've learned:
Good systems for slippery ground, assuming proper tires:
1. Subaru VTD: planetary center diff, LSD in the rear, open diff up front, and "e-diff" individual wheel braking via VDC.
2. Acura SH-AWD and BMW's xDrive both use a clutch pack centrally + open axle diffs + "e-diff."
3. Longitudinal-engine Audi Quattros and VW 4Motions use a Torsen center diff + open axle diffs + "e-diff".
Second tier:
1. Mercedes-Benz 4MATIC uses 3 open diffs + "e-diff".
Poorly performing systems:
1. Anything Haldex, which means FWD until wheelspin, followed by poor torque transfer (see all the above videos). The list of Haldex-equipped vehicles is huge, and notable mentions from it include transverse-engine VWs and Audis, anything Volvo, non-truck-based Fords, the Land Rover LR2 (surprising!), Saabs, and GMC crossovers. Toyota doesn't license the Haldex company's wares but their Highlander and RAV-4 systems are very similar. Most other ones that one might think of fall under this heading, too, of FWD-until-slippage reactive systems.
Specialty systems for road-only use:
Audi's Sport Differential system builds on their Torsen/longitudinal Quattro system and adds in torque vectoring at the rear axle. Cool. This is similar to the Active Yaw Control on the Mitsubishi Evo, which is in turn similar to the ATTESSA-ETS system on the Nissan GT-R. Torque vectoring AWD is awesome from a technological point of view.
Next mini-project (after practicing and dinner) will be to figure out what diff/locker 4WD system options are out there in the sanely priced market: XTerra/Pathfinder, 4Runner, Grand Cherokee to start.
Subaru VTD and Active AWD > Volvo XC70 > Volvo XC90, Toyota Highlander, Honda CR-V on the rollers and also on a dirt hill, or Subaru Outback > Volvo's Haldex-based XC70 on a dirt hill +/- a small trailer. This seals it: no front-biased Haldex systems for me!
New and old Quattro ski jump ads showing that studded snows are good stuff when AWD can power all 4 wheels, apparently not a given. Equally practical: An Audi S4 climbing some twisty road without tires
To try to sum up what I've learned:
Good systems for slippery ground, assuming proper tires:
1. Subaru VTD: planetary center diff, LSD in the rear, open diff up front, and "e-diff" individual wheel braking via VDC.
2. Acura SH-AWD and BMW's xDrive both use a clutch pack centrally + open axle diffs + "e-diff."
3. Longitudinal-engine Audi Quattros and VW 4Motions use a Torsen center diff + open axle diffs + "e-diff".
Second tier:
1. Mercedes-Benz 4MATIC uses 3 open diffs + "e-diff".
Poorly performing systems:
1. Anything Haldex, which means FWD until wheelspin, followed by poor torque transfer (see all the above videos). The list of Haldex-equipped vehicles is huge, and notable mentions from it include transverse-engine VWs and Audis, anything Volvo, non-truck-based Fords, the Land Rover LR2 (surprising!), Saabs, and GMC crossovers. Toyota doesn't license the Haldex company's wares but their Highlander and RAV-4 systems are very similar. Most other ones that one might think of fall under this heading, too, of FWD-until-slippage reactive systems.
Specialty systems for road-only use:
Audi's Sport Differential system builds on their Torsen/longitudinal Quattro system and adds in torque vectoring at the rear axle. Cool. This is similar to the Active Yaw Control on the Mitsubishi Evo, which is in turn similar to the ATTESSA-ETS system on the Nissan GT-R. Torque vectoring AWD is awesome from a technological point of view.
Next mini-project (after practicing and dinner) will be to figure out what diff/locker 4WD system options are out there in the sanely priced market: XTerra/Pathfinder, 4Runner, Grand Cherokee to start.
2010+ Toyota 4Runner Trail Edition offroad stuffs:
- body on frame
- 9.6" ground clearance
- 33/26 degree approach/departure angles
- part-time 4WD, two speed transfer case, with e-diff (A-TRAC)
(- alternatively one can spring for a full-time 4WD system with a lockable center Torsen diff but then one loses the locker, KDSS, and other offroad gizmos)
- electric rear locker
- electric disconnect for swaybars (KDSS)
- electronic aids up the wazoo for off-road: Multi-terrain Select, Crawl Control,
Hill Start Assist Control, Downhill Assist Control
- 19 mpg combined x 24 gallon tank: 450 mile theoretical range
- $36k base, $42k with navi, KDSS, fancy trimmings but still washable fabric interior
The Land Cruiser shares the KDSS suspension, Crawl Control, Hill Start Assist Control, and the fancy A-TRAC full-time 4WD system with a Torsen center diff and has off-road credo with 8.9" clearance and 30/20/21 approach/departure/breakover angles, but it's really expensive and huge. On the other hand, it does get basically equivalent mpg to the much-smaller Grand Cherokee below, 13/18 vs. 13/19
Just as relevant/irrelevant due to price and size is the nevertheless-capable Land Rover LR4. Shame such nice hardware is wasted in mall parking lots: what use is Hill Descent Control, low range transfer cases, and height adjustable air suspension in that setting?
2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo X with Off-Road Package 2 offroad stuffs:
- unibody
- air suspension (Quadra-Lift) yields max 10.7" ground clearance
- 34/29 degree approach/departure angles
- the fanciest 4WD system is Quadra-Drive II, which is a full-time 4WD, two speed transfer case system with electronically controlled clutch packs acting as a "center diff" and open diffs + e-diff software at the axles
- no factory locker
- no factory swaybar disconnect, and note the poor articulation in the photo above!
- electronic aids for offroad: Hill Descent Control, Selec-Terrain System
- 15 mpg with the V8 (necessary for fancy 4WD, off-road package), 24.6 gallon tank: 370 mile theoretical range
- $43k for a Laredo X with the above-described goodies
Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon offroad stuffs:
- body on frame, and not much body at that
- 10.5" ground clearance with standard frame sliders
- 44/40/21 approach/departure/breakover angles
- part time 4WD with a 2-speed transfer case with an extra-low low range
- electric front and rear lockers! on Dana 44 axles
- factory front swaybar electric disconnect
- electronic aids: none.
- 17 mpg, 22.5 gallon tank, 380 mile theoretical range
- $40k with navi, cloth seats, hardtop, sad old-tech 4 speed auto
Nissan XTerra Pro-4X offroad stuffs:
- body on frame
- 9.5" ground clearance
- 32/30/25 approach/departure/breakover angles
- part-time 4WD with 2-speed transfer case, e-diff ("Active Brake Limited Slip")
- electric rear locker
- no factory swaybar disconnect
- electronic aids: Hill Descent Control, Hill Start Assist
- 17 mpg in 4x4 auto trim, 21.1 gallon tank: 360 mile theoretical range
- $32k for cloth, but no electronic gadgets (navi) or poofery (sunroof, etc.) available. That stuff is on the Pathfinder, which is still body on frame and part-time 4WD but has less clearance, no locker, no aids.
Thoughts on the above:
1) It'd be the cheapest (by far) and easiest to simply not end up somewhere where 4WD/AWD is recommended, although one could make an argument for the latter given wet Pac NW roads and steep hills, I suppose. Given that true 4WD systems (4Runner Trail, XTerra, and Wrangler) are off-road-only then it'd be silly to have such a vehicle unless one was truly out in the boonies. An Outback 3.6R with VTD makes more sense for the wet-urban dweller, IMO.
2) The Rubicon owns all in specs, even in long-wheelbase Unlimited guise. The 4Runner Trail is also impressive, and Four Wheeler magazine properly fellated Toyota when they took a few stock 4Runners along the length of the Rubicon trail: http://www.fourwheeler.com/roadtests/129_0912_2010_toyota_4runner_review_rubicon_trail/index.html . Of course, Four Wheeler also fellated Jeep for their new Grand Cherokee, which is quite clearly street biased despite the Trail Ready verbiage for this and that: http://www.fourwheeler.com/roadtests/129_1008_first_drive_2011_jeep_grand_cherokee/hemi_v8.html .
With regard to the capability of the 4WD systems vs. the AWD systems for the party tricks that Subaru is so proud of, what with the ramps and rollers and all: Toyota does claim that their A-TRAC 4WD "can distribute power to just one wheel with traction". What I'm not so sure of is whether a locked-rear-diff 4Runner or locked-at-both-axles Rubicon would go forward with one wheel on ice or whether it'd spin all tires and go sideways/off the road. Hmph.
In any case it's nice to see that there exist vehicles where the engineers and enthusiasts--including off-road enthusiasts--have won out over the marketing staff, who would dictate low-cost FWD-based AWD systems and dozens of cupholders for all. My parents have a current-gen XTerra out in Wyoming, by the way, and I think it's even that fancy Pro-4X model. If it's not all snowy out there when we visit them in a little over a month then I'll try to take it out on some trails for kicks.
1) It'd be the cheapest (by far) and easiest to simply not end up somewhere where 4WD/AWD is recommended, although one could make an argument for the latter given wet Pac NW roads and steep hills, I suppose. Given that true 4WD systems (4Runner Trail, XTerra, and Wrangler) are off-road-only then it'd be silly to have such a vehicle unless one was truly out in the boonies. An Outback 3.6R with VTD makes more sense for the wet-urban dweller, IMO.
2) The Rubicon owns all in specs, even in long-wheelbase Unlimited guise. The 4Runner Trail is also impressive, and Four Wheeler magazine properly fellated Toyota when they took a few stock 4Runners along the length of the Rubicon trail: http://www.fourwheeler.com/roadtests/129_0912_2010_toyota_4runner_review_rubicon_trail/index.html . Of course, Four Wheeler also fellated Jeep for their new Grand Cherokee, which is quite clearly street biased despite the Trail Ready verbiage for this and that: http://www.fourwheeler.com/roadtests/129_1008_first_drive_2011_jeep_grand_cherokee/hemi_v8.html .
With regard to the capability of the 4WD systems vs. the AWD systems for the party tricks that Subaru is so proud of, what with the ramps and rollers and all: Toyota does claim that their A-TRAC 4WD "can distribute power to just one wheel with traction". What I'm not so sure of is whether a locked-rear-diff 4Runner or locked-at-both-axles Rubicon would go forward with one wheel on ice or whether it'd spin all tires and go sideways/off the road. Hmph.
In any case it's nice to see that there exist vehicles where the engineers and enthusiasts--including off-road enthusiasts--have won out over the marketing staff, who would dictate low-cost FWD-based AWD systems and dozens of cupholders for all. My parents have a current-gen XTerra out in Wyoming, by the way, and I think it's even that fancy Pro-4X model. If it's not all snowy out there when we visit them in a little over a month then I'll try to take it out on some trails for kicks.
Picdump from my iPhone:
1) Using all the 4" of suspension travel that my Fit has to salvage a parking spot avoided by others due to the ramp of ice. Check out the articulation, yo
2) Spotted at Costco: someone actually using his/her SUV to park in a plowed-in space. Amusing. Much better articulation than on my Fit, at least
3) I made it out on the Versys this past weekend to grab the ADVrider tag, dormant for a month+. I think I need new tires soon. Note the inglorious flat spot in the center from straightline miles.
1) Using all the 4" of suspension travel that my Fit has to salvage a parking spot avoided by others due to the ramp of ice. Check out the articulation, yo
2) Spotted at Costco: someone actually using his/her SUV to park in a plowed-in space. Amusing. Much better articulation than on my Fit, at least
3) I made it out on the Versys this past weekend to grab the ADVrider tag, dormant for a month+. I think I need new tires soon. Note the inglorious flat spot in the center from straightline miles.
I wrote the above in June 2010. I finally placed the order today, and not even for the same parts. I ended up just replacing the right footrest with a 2008 OEM part, didn't swap out Jessica's passenger pegs, and ordered up a new, non-bent brake pedal. Combine that with a new, cleaner ziptie "fix" for my loose right front turn signal and a new set of tires soon to arrive and be installed and you have the makings of a low budget makeover. All this bike has to do is last me until 2013/2014
Mental preparation for the new riding year:
Classic high-side, too much lean, too much mid-corner gas (then too little):
Low-side at the exact same turn and spot, too much mid-corner gas. Better this than the former!
Another high-side from the same corner. Poor body position and in the slow-mo you can actually see the twist of the wrist that led to the rear losing traction:
Oldie but goodie, low-siding in front of a waiting CHP patrolman:
Definite rider error: hands not even on front brake at all (look at the slow-mo!) and target fixation:
Missed a shift but then slowed down and simply target fixated all the way to the guardrail?
Brutal, into the guardrail on a scooter! Poor body position, total lack of riding gear (shorts and Crocs!), scraped hard parts then lowside, wham!
This low-side is a great example of why one should wear a full-face and riding gear, IMO. Note the head under the guardrail in the slow-mo!
Lest you think it's all sportbike squids and stoner scooterists that do the crashing, here's a SV low-siding:
This low-side is kind of interesting. You can see where the rider realized he had too much lean angle. Unfortunately for him steering into the turn a ton mid-corner doesn't fix things:
Finally, not that I condone riding this close to the edge on the street, here's how it's done properly. Looking through the turn, check. Steady throttle and steering inputs, check. Hanging off the inside to minimize scraping hard parts, check. No crash? Check.
Classic high-side, too much lean, too much mid-corner gas (then too little):
Low-side at the exact same turn and spot, too much mid-corner gas. Better this than the former!
Another high-side from the same corner. Poor body position and in the slow-mo you can actually see the twist of the wrist that led to the rear losing traction:
Oldie but goodie, low-siding in front of a waiting CHP patrolman:
Definite rider error: hands not even on front brake at all (look at the slow-mo!) and target fixation:
Missed a shift but then slowed down and simply target fixated all the way to the guardrail?
Brutal, into the guardrail on a scooter! Poor body position, total lack of riding gear (shorts and Crocs!), scraped hard parts then lowside, wham!
This low-side is a great example of why one should wear a full-face and riding gear, IMO. Note the head under the guardrail in the slow-mo!
Lest you think it's all sportbike squids and stoner scooterists that do the crashing, here's a SV low-siding:
This low-side is kind of interesting. You can see where the rider realized he had too much lean angle. Unfortunately for him steering into the turn a ton mid-corner doesn't fix things:
Finally, not that I condone riding this close to the edge on the street, here's how it's done properly. Looking through the turn, check. Steady throttle and steering inputs, check. Hanging off the inside to minimize scraping hard parts, check. No crash? Check.
This is awesome:
http://www.mercedes-g-entdecker.com/test/ENTDECKER.pdf
G-wagen, but not the foofed out USDM spec: European military spec, 3.0 CDI turbodiesel netting 17 mpg (14 l/100 km). 17 mpg isn't a killer when it can carry just shy of 61 (!) US gallons of diesel onboard for a range of 1500 km! 2 speed transfer case and 3 electrically locking diffs. Literal ton of extra touches that all seem well thought out, see the PDF if you're morbidly curious as to what crazy Germans/Swiss/South Africans have come up with.
I'll be damned if it's even a penny under 6 figures, though. Actually, when looking into it a bit further, it looks like it goes for about 50,000 GBP in South Africa, so under $100k USD.
I wonder if one could even legally import one into the US, however: The G-Wagen itself (in rap-star gaudy trim) is imported and federalized. The 3.0 CDI powertrain is in many federalized M-B products. I doubt this trim is crash tested or emissions tested, so probably just as much of a non-starter as importing cars from Japan, etc.
http://www.mercedes-g-entdecker.com/test/ENTDECKER.pdf
G-wagen, but not the foofed out USDM spec: European military spec, 3.0 CDI turbodiesel netting 17 mpg (14 l/100 km). 17 mpg isn't a killer when it can carry just shy of 61 (!) US gallons of diesel onboard for a range of 1500 km! 2 speed transfer case and 3 electrically locking diffs. Literal ton of extra touches that all seem well thought out, see the PDF if you're morbidly curious as to what crazy Germans/Swiss/South Africans have come up with.
I'll be damned if it's even a penny under 6 figures, though.
Actually, when looking into it a bit further, it looks like it goes for about 50,000 GBP in South Africa, so under $100k USD. I wonder if one could even legally import one into the US, however: The G-Wagen itself (in rap-star gaudy trim) is imported and federalized. The 3.0 CDI powertrain is in many federalized M-B products. I doubt this trim is crash tested or emissions tested, so probably just as much of a non-starter as importing cars from Japan, etc.
120 miles. Bitterly cold. I honestly think it would have been unsafe without heated gear. As it was I still became fatigued from the cold near the end. I came home with my prize safely in hand, however: one pear and one blackberry pie from Briermere Farms.
Route:
Oh, I also cemented that I want ABS on my next bike on today's ride: I got on the binders hard for a changing light on a 55 mph-marked road. I had been daydreaming a bit and didn't notice it until it turned yellow maybe 150 feet ahead of me. Although technically under perfect conditions with a trained rider doing multiple passes my bike can haul itself down from 60 mph to a stop in under 115 feet (extrapolating from sport bikes doing it just over 100 in testing) I spent an extra half second evaluating the traction before getting on it hard… and ended up running the light, albeit at a lower speed.
As it turns out this light has plenty of "dead time" between one turning red and cross traffic getting the green, probably because of inattentive schmoes like me (guilty as charged), so there was no harm, but I can see how I could have slid through on my side if I'd grabbed too much brake when startled had the road been wet.
As it turns out this light has plenty of "dead time" between one turning red and cross traffic getting the green, probably because of inattentive schmoes like me (guilty as charged), so there was no harm, but I can see how I could have slid through on my side if I'd grabbed too much brake when startled had the road been wet.
First post in this thread, probably. We should get some rides in, when I get my 900SS back up and running (just needs a bit of mechanic love, and the weather to improve).
I'm in Danbury, but in-laws are out in East Marion, end of the North Fork.
Rte. 7 in CT is supposed to be amazing...road trip?
I'm in Danbury, but in-laws are out in East Marion, end of the North Fork.
Rte. 7 in CT is supposed to be amazing...road trip?
I'm down like a clown!
Let's get some good weather going!
This is pretty sobering:
http://www.dnainfo.com/20110224/chelsea-hells-kitchen/bus-passengers-heard-motorcyclists-screams-lincoln-tunnel-crash
Note all the reflective gear on the motorcyclist, too. He was probably geared up just like me.
http://www.dnainfo.com/20110224/chelsea-hells-kitchen/bus-passengers-heard-motorcyclists-screams-lincoln-tunnel-crash
Note all the reflective gear on the motorcyclist, too. He was probably geared up just like me.
Jessica and I are going to test drive a 4Runner and an Outback this weekend for kicks. No, we're definitely not in the market for anything until 2013, but I do like to test drive this and that periodically and see if my mental image matches behind the wheel reality.
My current half-baked 2013/2014 plan is for her to rock whatever the hell she wants, maybe an Outback or a Prius v if she still wants to go that route for her own conscience, and for me to go the bro-tastic route and drive a 4Runner. Both of these would ideally be 2010-2011ish CPO purchases. After all, I'll still be on the motorcycle* unless the weather's poor, and I did have fun in my old Pathfinder even with its open diffs and unibody. I could see myself finding a happy medium, exploring some trails while not going all rock-crawler nuts and hanging out with the rednecks who live and die by their welder, not to mention getting back out to the ski areas and trailheads along forest service roads that the Pac NW has in abundance… (I've got to get out of the Tri-State area! gah!)
* The Versys will go when I have the financial chance, too. As I alluded to a few posts above, I definitely want ABS. Hmm, unless I switch to a dual-sport, since most of those (BMW excepted) don't have it…
My current half-baked 2013/2014 plan is for her to rock whatever the hell she wants, maybe an Outback or a Prius v if she still wants to go that route for her own conscience, and for me to go the bro-tastic route and drive a 4Runner. Both of these would ideally be 2010-2011ish CPO purchases. After all, I'll still be on the motorcycle* unless the weather's poor, and I did have fun in my old Pathfinder even with its open diffs and unibody. I could see myself finding a happy medium, exploring some trails while not going all rock-crawler nuts and hanging out with the rednecks who live and die by their welder, not to mention getting back out to the ski areas and trailheads along forest service roads that the Pac NW has in abundance… (I've got to get out of the Tri-State area! gah!
)* The Versys will go when I have the financial chance, too. As I alluded to a few posts above, I definitely want ABS. Hmm, unless I switch to a dual-sport, since most of those (BMW excepted) don't have it…
My short-lived 4Runner dream is fading already:
My wife and I test-drove a 2011 4Runner today (SR5 with leather as they had no Trails on the lot), and I'm not sure that it's for me even though it looked so great on paper.
Pluses:
- looks great
- glove-friendly dashboard controls
- huge cargo area in back
- backup camera in rear-view mirror offsets large size and average rear visibility
- good power, decent brakes, no excessive body roll that I could sense
- 4WD with a lever on the transfer case! and all the Trail-specific bits, of course
Minuses:
- high hip point means a little step up for me and a huge step up for my 5'4" wife
- high dashboard and hood combined with short vertical-height, upright windshield conspires to limit visibility. It kind of felt like my RX-8 in that I couldn't see stoplights when the first car in line unless I peered forward.
- generally felt big and high, and rather than finding this sensation comforting or evoking power or whatever it's supposed to do I actually found myself a bit uncomfortable. I'm sure I'd get used to it--I did drive a Pathfinder on 31"s for a few years--but I didn't love it, and I was looking to love it.
My wife and I test-drove a 2011 4Runner today (SR5 with leather as they had no Trails on the lot), and I'm not sure that it's for me even though it looked so great on paper.
Pluses:
- looks great
- glove-friendly dashboard controls
- huge cargo area in back
- backup camera in rear-view mirror offsets large size and average rear visibility
- good power, decent brakes, no excessive body roll that I could sense
- 4WD with a lever on the transfer case! and all the Trail-specific bits, of course
Minuses:
- high hip point means a little step up for me and a huge step up for my 5'4" wife
- high dashboard and hood combined with short vertical-height, upright windshield conspires to limit visibility. It kind of felt like my RX-8 in that I couldn't see stoplights when the first car in line unless I peered forward.
- generally felt big and high, and rather than finding this sensation comforting or evoking power or whatever it's supposed to do I actually found myself a bit uncomfortable. I'm sure I'd get used to it--I did drive a Pathfinder on 31"s for a few years--but I didn't love it, and I was looking to love it.
We also drove a Venza and hit up the Subaru and Lexus dealerships beforehand.
Venza pluses:
- Jessica likes that she can see over the top of the vehicle (63.4", so I guess she was tiptoeing a bit), as opposed to the Lexus RX that is just a bit too tall for her to do the same (66.3").
- Hip point feels like it's 2-3" lower than in the RX, so it's very easy to slide into with no step up at all.
- Smooth corporate V6, snazzy interior, great rear legroom, felt airy/roomy inside, cool dashboard.
- $10-15k cheaper than an RX450h
- "Panoramic roof" is pretty cool idea, and again good for having the rear feel open:
Venza minuses:
- Horrible brakes. Really mushy and felt weak. Horrible. I googled "Venza mushy brakes" afterwards and saw tons of reviews mentioning this and carping about the same.
- Not as quiet or smooth drivetrain-wise as the RX hybrid
- Did I mention that the brakes suck? They really were deal-killer bad, not that we were looking to buy anything imminently.
Verdict: Wait for a Venza hybrid. We like how Toyota Hybrid Synergy Drive vehicles drive and even like/are used to how the regenerative brakes feel. We'd much rather have that drivetrain for its quietness/smoothness/braking feel, and, yes, even its fuel economy benefit.
We also poked our head into a Highlander on the showroom floor and were not impressed with its interior design, materials, or layout. In two row guise it's outclassed by the Venza. In three row setup it makes for a crappy minivan replacement--just get a minivan! (Playing with the folding/hiding 3rd row seats on a Sienna was quite entertaining, although it felt huge from behind the wheel.) Even the availability of the hybrid drivetrain on the Highlander would not be enough for us to consider one.
Venza pluses:
- Jessica likes that she can see over the top of the vehicle (63.4", so I guess she was tiptoeing a bit), as opposed to the Lexus RX that is just a bit too tall for her to do the same (66.3").
- Hip point feels like it's 2-3" lower than in the RX, so it's very easy to slide into with no step up at all.
- Smooth corporate V6, snazzy interior, great rear legroom, felt airy/roomy inside, cool dashboard.
- $10-15k cheaper than an RX450h
- "Panoramic roof" is pretty cool idea, and again good for having the rear feel open:
Venza minuses:
- Horrible brakes. Really mushy and felt weak. Horrible. I googled "Venza mushy brakes" afterwards and saw tons of reviews mentioning this and carping about the same.
- Not as quiet or smooth drivetrain-wise as the RX hybrid
- Did I mention that the brakes suck? They really were deal-killer bad, not that we were looking to buy anything imminently.
Verdict: Wait for a Venza hybrid. We like how Toyota Hybrid Synergy Drive vehicles drive and even like/are used to how the regenerative brakes feel. We'd much rather have that drivetrain for its quietness/smoothness/braking feel, and, yes, even its fuel economy benefit.
We also poked our head into a Highlander on the showroom floor and were not impressed with its interior design, materials, or layout. In two row guise it's outclassed by the Venza. In three row setup it makes for a crappy minivan replacement--just get a minivan! (Playing with the folding/hiding 3rd row seats on a Sienna was quite entertaining, although it felt huge from behind the wheel.) Even the availability of the hybrid drivetrain on the Highlander would not be enough for us to consider one.
Last edited:
At the Subaru dealer we wanted to check out the Outback, preferably a 3.6R variant.
We ended up doing nothing of the sort, as the dealer (Hassett Subaru in Wantagh) was atrocious: no customer parking, super physically crowded car showroom, and a distinct lack of sales staff. There was one guy "helping" one couple while 3 or 4 couples/families wandered around aimlessly. We left after about 5 minutes of opening doors and sitting in seats. We did decide, however, that the Forester looks and feels cheaper than the Outback, so if we ever do find a decent dealer it'd be the Outback that we give a whirl.
I wrote Subaru of America to tell of my experience, so perhaps some good will come of this after all. Meh. How do you expect to sell cars this way, Subaru?!
We ended up doing nothing of the sort, as the dealer (Hassett Subaru in Wantagh) was atrocious: no customer parking, super physically crowded car showroom, and a distinct lack of sales staff. There was one guy "helping" one couple while 3 or 4 couples/families wandered around aimlessly. We left after about 5 minutes of opening doors and sitting in seats. We did decide, however, that the Forester looks and feels cheaper than the Outback, so if we ever do find a decent dealer it'd be the Outback that we give a whirl.
I wrote Subaru of America to tell of my experience, so perhaps some good will come of this after all. Meh. How do you expect to sell cars this way, Subaru?!
Before we'd done any of the above we hit up Lexus. Jessica's mother has an RX330 (the 330 being the last/2nd generation: RX300 was first, then RX330/RX400h, now RX350/RX450h) and therefore she's familiar and somewhat fond of the design.
RX450h pluses:
- Awesome drivetrain. Our Prius is quiet and smooth but this takes it to a whole new level: not surprising given that the underlying V6 (as in the Venza/Camry/Highlander/etc.) is a pretty smooth customer on its own, let alone with an electric motor to dampen its actions further. Good brake pedal feel, even, with regen less obvious/blatant than in our Prius.
- Good interior materials throughout
- Heated and cooled front seats!
- Nifty tech available such as LED headlights as well as the usual soccer mom crap like a powered liftgate
- Reasonable outwards visibility: good to the front, average to the sides and back
- Paint quality on Lexuses is perceptibly different than that on other makes.
- "Power meter" in place of tach is amusing, sort of like a very poor man's hp meter on a Veyron, perhaps
RXh minuses:
- Pricey. We were quoted ~$50k for one with navi. Yowch.
- Jessica wasn't as enamored of the high seating position as she'd thought she'd be. Good girl: she's used to driving regular cars now!
- Rear seat felt cramped and the environment back there gloomy despite adequate numbers on paper. I blame a C-pillar that swoops downward and inward aggressively, putting headliner way closer to my head than I think should be the case.
- Under the hood is a sea of plastic covers. No metal or mechanical bits visible at all and even the battery has its own flush cover!
Verdict: We liked it but didn't love it. I think the powertrain is great but the whole package, price aside, just didn't grab me or her. Just as I went in expecting to love the 4Runner, she went in expecting to love the RXh, and neither expectation held true. Back to the drawing board… which is just as well since this one (the RXh, not my wife, heh) is an expensive bitch!
RX450h pluses:
- Awesome drivetrain. Our Prius is quiet and smooth but this takes it to a whole new level: not surprising given that the underlying V6 (as in the Venza/Camry/Highlander/etc.) is a pretty smooth customer on its own, let alone with an electric motor to dampen its actions further. Good brake pedal feel, even, with regen less obvious/blatant than in our Prius.
- Good interior materials throughout
- Heated and cooled front seats!
- Nifty tech available such as LED headlights as well as the usual soccer mom crap like a powered liftgate
- Reasonable outwards visibility: good to the front, average to the sides and back
- Paint quality on Lexuses is perceptibly different than that on other makes.
- "Power meter" in place of tach is amusing, sort of like a very poor man's hp meter on a Veyron, perhaps
RXh minuses:
- Pricey. We were quoted ~$50k for one with navi. Yowch.
- Jessica wasn't as enamored of the high seating position as she'd thought she'd be. Good girl: she's used to driving regular cars now!
- Rear seat felt cramped and the environment back there gloomy despite adequate numbers on paper. I blame a C-pillar that swoops downward and inward aggressively, putting headliner way closer to my head than I think should be the case.
- Under the hood is a sea of plastic covers. No metal or mechanical bits visible at all and even the battery has its own flush cover!
Verdict: We liked it but didn't love it. I think the powertrain is great but the whole package, price aside, just didn't grab me or her. Just as I went in expecting to love the 4Runner, she went in expecting to love the RXh, and neither expectation held true. Back to the drawing board… which is just as well since this one (the RXh, not my wife, heh) is an expensive bitch!
Last edited:
we have the 2010 FXT. We got it vs. the Outback because of the size of the later. Given that we got the XT Limited, in retrospect I would have gotten the X Premium. Not turbo, cheaper gas, and no Nav (POS system).
we looked at a Q5 and X3 for about 10 min each, but they were far too expensive. The lexus was nice, but apparently aren't designed for people over 6' tall.
The Forester just seems to get last-gen technology: doesn't get the 265 hp WRX 2.5 liter turbo mill, still has a 4EAT as the only turbo tranny option, and doesn't have the fancy VTD/VCD AWD combo that the Outback has.
Given that we're even considering an RXh--again, this would be my wife's vehicle--you can surmise that handling at the limit isn't of the utmost importance. The extra pounds that the current Outback put on would probably be unnoticed…
Audi and BMW do seem to be pretty exorbitantly priced, yeah. I want headlight sprayers! … but I don't want to pay $60k to get a Germanic vehicle that has 'em.
Given that we're even considering an RXh--again, this would be my wife's vehicle--you can surmise that handling at the limit isn't of the utmost importance. The extra pounds that the current Outback put on would probably be unnoticed…
Audi and BMW do seem to be pretty exorbitantly priced, yeah. I want headlight sprayers!
… but I don't want to pay $60k to get a Germanic vehicle that has 'em.
I'm not such a fan of the bike itself (Ducati Diavel), but here's a cool video showing modern motorcycle production line techniques:
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/02/27/video-building-the-ducati-diavel-in-one-minute/#continued
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/02/27/video-building-the-ducati-diavel-in-one-minute/#continued
I won't argue that at all. I do feel though that I'd rather pay 50% for last gen technology. It's an in/out cash flow that I'm concerned about.The Forester just seems to get last-gen technology: doesn't get the 265 hp WRX 2.5 liter turbo mill, still has a 4EAT as the only turbo tranny option, and doesn't have the fancy VTD/VCD AWD combo that the Outback has.
Given that we're even considering an RXh--again, this would be my wife's vehicle--you can surmise that handling at the limit isn't of the utmost importance. The extra pounds that the current Outback put on would probably be unnoticed
Audi and BMW do seem to be pretty exorbitantly priced, yeah. I want headlight sprayers!
After the somewhat disappointing series of test drives this weekend I think my wife and I need to rethink what we want. Ok, we don't need to do anything of the sort, but I'll do it anyway. I thought I had her pegged and that she'd love the RXh, but it was not so. (I also thought I had myself pegged and that I'd love the 4Runner, but it was not so, as well.)
What I hear and imagine that my wife wants from a car:
1. Enough rear legroom for rear-facing child seats (>= 35") and a roofline that doesn't make one claustrophobic in the back seat (RX is too swoopy in the C-pillar region, leading to an oddly tight feeling back seat given its size and on-paper capaciousness).
2. Not intimidating to drive. This includes height (RX is too high but she doesn't want to be at other cars' door-handle height, either), and outward visibility. A rear-view camera is a must if the car has any compromise in C-/D-pillar thickness or has a weird rear window layout like the Prius.
3. Heated seats and other convenience stuff: Bluetooth, nice stereo, built-in navi.
4. Good fuel economy, for her personal conscience's sake
5. Smooth powertrain. Note that this doesn't imply fast by any means, as I've never heard her complain about the Prius, Fit, or even the old dog Corolla being too slow!
6. Either a big trunk or a hatchback layout with a decent sized cargo area.
She doesn't care a whit about drivetrain layout, underlying technology, fuel type, and doesn't need/want a third row of seats. SUVs with third rows are packaging nightmares with compromised cargo areas, and minivans are too big at this point even though their all-singing-and-dancing seat-flipping tricks are very impressive.
Given what I've heard from her and her impressions of the cars that we've looked at she actually might be happiest staying within the Prius family, maybe with that Prius v that I floated earlier. (By 2013 our current Prius will be 9 years old and probably at 120,000 miles, so I think it should be retired from her daily usage.) The slowness wouldn't faze her, the economy/familiarity/smoothness of the HSD drivetrain would please her, the visibility is better now that there's a single piece of rear window rather than a split, the requisite electronic interior gadgets should be available, and the practicality and rear space legroom is all there.
My wants:
1. Proper driving position. To me this means a low cowl/dashboard height, thin pillars, plenty of glass space, and a low beltline (none of this tank-like recent crap). The 4Runner really failed this test for me: I had to sit high to see over the high dashboard and jutty, high hood, and the low height of the windshield and thick pillars really compromised visibility. My RX-8 had horrible upwards visibility at stoplights and a distinct lack of headroom but was otherwise great in this regard. I've heard BMWs and Porsches especially praised for their driving positions but haven't driven any of the latter and wasn't particularly impressed by anything in the 3 series that I drove for a few hours in Chicago last year.
2. Tactile feedback and a sense of being balanced. The tactile sensations from the steering and shifter are what made my RX-8 much more fun (and easier when at the limit on the track) to drive than the WRX. It also felt more balanced in that it had enough tire, brakes, and handling poise for its speed. Indeed, it could have been faster yet. The WRX felt raw and edgy, and its handling was an odd mix of understeer under power and oversteer on lifting, with turbo lag making balancing the two problematic.
3. Good power to weight ratio. The RX-8 + driver was about 14.1 lbs/hp while my Versys with rider is about 10.2 lbs/hp. The latter ratio feels much, much more peppy, I must say. Going all the way to 10 lbs/hp in a car might not be necessary, as my old, unreliable modded WRX wasn't quite there yet felt very quick, but it sure would be fun. I can't even fathom what a GT-R, around 7.6 lbs/hp with driver, would feel like: a veritable roller coaster ride, I'm sure.
4. I'm told that whatever I pick should have at least a vestigial back seat for use in a pinch, although I imagine that I could violate this "rule" if pressed. I don't need four doors, however.
5. I also like stuff like built-in navi, HID or even LED lights, Bluetooth integration, but these are secondary to the above.
I don't have a great idea of what fits the bill, but I'll use some downtime during the day/on call tomorrow to daydream. I'm not sure what resources other than the prose of reviewers to use to assess for visibility. Maybe interior photos will shed some light on this. Hmm.
I do know, however, that the Miata actually isn't a great fit by that mark although it's off the charts for tactile feedback: the top of the windshield frame is awfully close to being in my field of view (worse than on the RX-8, thinking back to my test drives of both back to back), and the car feels somewhat claustrophobic with the top up. A feeling of claustrophobia is no fun at all on a rainy day on I-5… I've also heard that Mustangs have a really high dashboard/cowl height, no surprise given the big V8 under hood. I remember this business about high dashboards being the case even on mid-90s Mustangs.
I thought I had her pegged and that she'd love the RXh, but it was not so. (I also thought I had myself pegged and that I'd love the 4Runner, but it was not so, as well.)What I hear and imagine that my wife wants from a car:
1. Enough rear legroom for rear-facing child seats (>= 35") and a roofline that doesn't make one claustrophobic in the back seat (RX is too swoopy in the C-pillar region, leading to an oddly tight feeling back seat given its size and on-paper capaciousness).
2. Not intimidating to drive. This includes height (RX is too high but she doesn't want to be at other cars' door-handle height, either), and outward visibility. A rear-view camera is a must if the car has any compromise in C-/D-pillar thickness or has a weird rear window layout like the Prius.
3. Heated seats and other convenience stuff: Bluetooth, nice stereo, built-in navi.
4. Good fuel economy, for her personal conscience's sake
5. Smooth powertrain. Note that this doesn't imply fast by any means, as I've never heard her complain about the Prius, Fit, or even the old dog Corolla being too slow!
6. Either a big trunk or a hatchback layout with a decent sized cargo area.
She doesn't care a whit about drivetrain layout, underlying technology, fuel type, and doesn't need/want a third row of seats. SUVs with third rows are packaging nightmares with compromised cargo areas, and minivans are too big at this point even though their all-singing-and-dancing seat-flipping tricks are very impressive.
Given what I've heard from her and her impressions of the cars that we've looked at she actually might be happiest staying within the Prius family, maybe with that Prius v that I floated earlier. (By 2013 our current Prius will be 9 years old and probably at 120,000 miles, so I think it should be retired from her daily usage.) The slowness wouldn't faze her, the economy/familiarity/smoothness of the HSD drivetrain would please her, the visibility is better now that there's a single piece of rear window rather than a split, the requisite electronic interior gadgets should be available, and the practicality and rear space legroom is all there.
My wants:
1. Proper driving position. To me this means a low cowl/dashboard height, thin pillars, plenty of glass space, and a low beltline (none of this tank-like recent crap). The 4Runner really failed this test for me: I had to sit high to see over the high dashboard and jutty, high hood, and the low height of the windshield and thick pillars really compromised visibility. My RX-8 had horrible upwards visibility at stoplights and a distinct lack of headroom but was otherwise great in this regard. I've heard BMWs and Porsches especially praised for their driving positions but haven't driven any of the latter and wasn't particularly impressed by anything in the 3 series that I drove for a few hours in Chicago last year.
2. Tactile feedback and a sense of being balanced. The tactile sensations from the steering and shifter are what made my RX-8 much more fun (and easier when at the limit on the track) to drive than the WRX. It also felt more balanced in that it had enough tire, brakes, and handling poise for its speed. Indeed, it could have been faster yet. The WRX felt raw and edgy, and its handling was an odd mix of understeer under power and oversteer on lifting, with turbo lag making balancing the two problematic.
3. Good power to weight ratio. The RX-8 + driver was about 14.1 lbs/hp while my Versys with rider is about 10.2 lbs/hp. The latter ratio feels much, much more peppy, I must say. Going all the way to 10 lbs/hp in a car might not be necessary, as my old, unreliable modded WRX wasn't quite there yet felt very quick, but it sure would be fun. I can't even fathom what a GT-R, around 7.6 lbs/hp with driver, would feel like: a veritable roller coaster ride, I'm sure.
4. I'm told that whatever I pick should have at least a vestigial back seat for use in a pinch, although I imagine that I could violate this "rule" if pressed. I don't need four doors, however.
5. I also like stuff like built-in navi, HID or even LED lights, Bluetooth integration, but these are secondary to the above.
I don't have a great idea of what fits the bill, but I'll use some downtime during the day/on call tomorrow to daydream. I'm not sure what resources other than the prose of reviewers to use to assess for visibility. Maybe interior photos will shed some light on this. Hmm.
I do know, however, that the Miata actually isn't a great fit by that mark although it's off the charts for tactile feedback: the top of the windshield frame is awfully close to being in my field of view (worse than on the RX-8, thinking back to my test drives of both back to back), and the car feels somewhat claustrophobic with the top up. A feeling of claustrophobia is no fun at all on a rainy day on I-5… I've also heard that Mustangs have a really high dashboard/cowl height, no surprise given the big V8 under hood. I remember this business about high dashboards being the case even on mid-90s Mustangs.
Last edited:
I still have a little mind**** going on with cornering when it's wet out, like today. I just don't trust the lateral traction once the ground gets a sheen on it, reinforced by how my boots slip easily off the rubber pegs and the ground when I put a foot down at lights. I'm comfortable enough with the traction when in a straight line, even when faced with the prospect of having to brake pretty quickly, but give me an on-ramp in the wet and I pucker up. I feel, or at least imagine I feel, the tires shifting around, hunting for traction.
In my defense, it might not be entirely in my head, as the bike definitely did step out a few inches laterally on a neighborhood corner taken at a moderate speed while coming home last night. New tires are in the mail, in any case...
In my defense, it might not be entirely in my head, as the bike definitely did step out a few inches laterally on a neighborhood corner taken at a moderate speed while coming home last night. New tires are in the mail, in any case...
cornering is about tires. www.tirerack.com
I enlisted the help of teh OT: http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2141923 .
Selected cars with "good driving position" votes:
993-era Porsche 911
Z32 (1990-1996) Nissan 300ZX
2nd gen Toyota MR2
STI
Miata, which I personally disagree with
Ferrari F430 (! probably not on the shopping list, ever)
"Bad driving position" votes:
Mustang
F-bodies: Camaro/Firebird
Corvettes in general
Viper
Lamborghini Gallardo
Nissan 350Z
Pontiac GTO
2nd gen Mitsubishi Eclipse