The General Car Thread.

[Cannot think of a name]

It's starting to look like my first car will be a Mark 1 golf...

A mk1 GTi is also on the list of mules that I'd get while doing the resto on my current daily driver. I almost bought one loooooooooong ago but it was sold out from underneath me so I bought a 914 instead.

Smaller is cheaper than bigger... yes. That is true of almost everything though.

Like Porsche gt3's

*nods*

So, weird story. My brother's brother in law (that's how it works, right? His wife's brother is his brother in law but not mine...shit's complicated)...anyway, dude is loaded. Like, one percenter. Not euphamistically, like an actual honest to god millionaire with a car collection including an R8, F355, Viper, Ducati, Range Rover Sport, a Ferrari 458 before he disintegrated it.

He was trying to decide what Porsche to buy, a Turbo or a GT3. So he talked to my brother who is a car guy, who talked to me because I love Porsches. I said something along the lines of the Turbo being more 'civil' and fast for anyone but if you were serious about driving, you got the GT3...so he bought a GT3 and I realized that what I had essentially said was, "Well, if you're not a wussy you get a GT3." I felt bad, but also kinda good that I just peer pressured a loaded guy into a purchase.

Actually, reminds me of a time way way back when I was going to the Historics as a spectator when I convinced a rich dude to buy a Panoz over a Prowler. Some exotic salesmen owe me a check, dammit.

[Auzkhia]

The point was a smaller crossover is cheaper than a bigger suv. A traverse is still an suv.

Smaller is cheaper than bigger... yes. That is true of almost everything though.

Unless, you're buying in bulk, that doesn't apply to individual automobiles, or if you are Porsche, which charges you for having less stuff in your car.

[Val Halla]

It's starting to look like my first car will be a Mark 1 golf...

A mk1 GTi is also on the list of mules that I'd get while doing the resto on my current daily driver. I almost bought one loooooooooong ago but it was sold out from underneath me so I bought a 914 instead.

Like Porsche gt3's

*nods*

So, weird story. My brother's brother in law (that's how it works, right? His wife's brother is his brother in law but not mine...shit's complicated)...anyway, dude is loaded. Like, one percenter. Not euphamistically, like an actual honest to god millionaire with a car collection including an R8, F355, Viper, Ducati, Range Rover Sport, a Ferrari 458 before he disintegrated it.

He was trying to decide what Porsche to buy, a Turbo or a GT3. So he talked to my brother who is a car guy, who talked to me because I love Porsches. I said something along the lines of the Turbo being more 'civil' and fast for anyone but if you were serious about driving, you got the GT3...so he bought a GT3 and I realized that what I had essentially said was, "Well, if you're not a wussy you get a GT3." I felt bad, but also kinda good that I just peer pressured a loaded guy into a purchase.

Actually, reminds me of a time way way back when I was going to the Historics as a spectator when I convinced a rich dude to buy a Panoz over a Prowler. Some exotic salesmen owe me a check, dammit.

Just a bog standard one, nothing special. I'm off for that or a Civic.

Want to own an M3 E30 one day. Eh.

[USS Monitor]

I live in foothills, where it barely even rains and all the roads are smooth...SUVs as far as the eye can see. Up in the Sierras where it snows and there are undeveloped roads, everyone has a Subaru. I mentioned this observation to a local and he just said, "It's the right tool for the job." I don't know that I've met a Subaru owner who didn't really like their car.

4 problems with my new 2015 forrester.

1. The cvt, sucks
2. The rear view camera is not refined enough, it can get washed out to where you don't see everything you need to.
3. The bluetooth stinks, 2 generations behind ford.
4. The brake pedal is too soft, the car stops fine, I juse hate the brake feel.

That said, I would buy again. Perfect car for us to downsize too from a minivan.

Also supposedly 2 and 3 have been fixed on the 2016's.

I definitely don't care about rearview camera or bluetooth. I am not dead-set on even having those features. But I do want something that won't annoy me every time I have to stop.

[Risottia]

Just a question: What is the difference between driving a standard transmission car and driving a tiptronic? Does the latter consume more oil?

Theorically the tiptronic should combine the best part of the manual transmission (more control and motor braking) with the best part of the automatic (no risk to force the clutch).

That said, if you don't drive a lot on windy roads on in the city traffic, a manual should suit you perfectly fine, while costing less.

[Ethel mermania]

4 problems with my new 2015 forrester.

1. The cvt, sucks
2. The rear view camera is not refined enough, it can get washed out to where you don't see everything you need to.
3. The bluetooth stinks, 2 generations behind ford.
4. The brake pedal is too soft, the car stops fine, I juse hate the brake feel.

That said, I would buy again. Perfect car for us to downsize too from a minivan.

Also supposedly 2 and 3 have been fixed on the 2016's.

I definitely don't care about rearview camera or bluetooth. I am not dead-set on even having those features. But I do want something that won't annoy me every time I have to stop.

That depends on how you feel about brake feel, I don't much like ford brakes either. The cars stop fine, I just don't like going 1/4 the way down the mushy pedal before the brakes start to bite. Where you live a subaru is an excellent car choice. Symmetrical 4 wheel drive is a good choice in mushy weather. Boston is where subaru imports from japan. (Took 30 days to build and ship my car from japan, took 32 days to get it off the frickin dock, and get it down here) Give them credit they know their market.

[Rio Cana]

I live in foothills, where it barely even rains and all the roads are smooth...SUVs as far as the eye can see. Up in the Sierras where it snows and there are undeveloped roads, everyone has a Subaru. I mentioned this observation to a local and he just said, "It's the right tool for the job." I don't know that I've met a Subaru owner who didn't really like their car.

4 problems with my new 2015 forrester.

1. The cvt, sucks
2. The rear view camera is not refined enough, it can get washed out to where you don't see everything you need to.
3. The bluetooth stinks, 2 generations behind ford.
4. The brake pedal is too soft, the car stops fine, I juse hate the brake feel.

That said, I would buy again. Perfect car for us to downsize too from a minivan.

Also supposedly 2 and 3 have been fixed on the 2016's.

No insult intended, but your post made me laugh. You are complaining about problems with a new auto made in 2015 and which is still under guarantee. I would be happy with a new auto. If you owned my current auto you would most likely be complaining plenty.

1. My auto has no CVT whatever that is.
2. Camera! You got to be kidding.
3. Bluetooth, the auto does not even have a radio since it overloaded some time ago due to defective alternator overcharging.
4. So your brakes are soft. At least you have power brakes. My auto does not. It did not come with a power booster. That was an option back then when the auto was made. But it did come with Air Conditioning.

Edit - Forgot to mention, I am the fourth owner. Auto was made in 1979.

[Val Halla]

4 problems with my new 2015 forrester.

1. The cvt, sucks
2. The rear view camera is not refined enough, it can get washed out to where you don't see everything you need to.
3. The bluetooth stinks, 2 generations behind ford.
4. The brake pedal is too soft, the car stops fine, I juse hate the brake feel.

That said, I would buy again. Perfect car for us to downsize too from a minivan.

Also supposedly 2 and 3 have been fixed on the 2016's.

No insult intended, but your post made me laugh. You are complaining about problems with a new auto made in 2015 and which is still under guarantee. I would be happy with a new auto. If you owned my current auto you would most likely be complaining plenty.

1. My auto has no CVT whatever that is.
2. Camera! You got to be kidding.
3. Bluetooth, the auto does not even have a radio since it overloaded some time ago due to defective alternator overcharging.
4. So your brakes are soft. At least you have power brakes. My auto does not. It did not come with a power booster. That was an option back then when the auto was made. But it did come with Air Conditioning.

Edit - Forgot to mention, I am the fourth owner. Auto was made in 1979.

Jesus. Probably old than my father >_>

[Gim]

Just a question: What is the difference between driving a standard transmission car and driving a tiptronic? Does the latter consume more oil?

Theorically the tiptronic should combine the best part of the manual transmission (more control and motor braking) with the best part of the automatic (no risk to force the clutch).

That said, if you don't drive a lot on windy roads on in the city traffic, a manual should suit you perfectly fine, while costing less.

I see, but learning manual is a chore for me. Engine goes off every time I press the clutch.

[Ethel mermania]

4 problems with my new 2015 forrester.

1. The cvt, sucks
2. The rear view camera is not refined enough, it can get washed out to where you don't see everything you need to.
3. The bluetooth stinks, 2 generations behind ford.
4. The brake pedal is too soft, the car stops fine, I juse hate the brake feel.

That said, I would buy again. Perfect car for us to downsize too from a minivan.

Also supposedly 2 and 3 have been fixed on the 2016's.

No insult intended, but your post made me laugh. You are complaining about problems with a new auto made in 2015 and which is still under guarantee. I would be happy with a new auto. If you owned my current auto you would most likely be complaining plenty.

1. My auto has no CVT whatever that is.
2. Camera! You got to be kidding.
3. Bluetooth, the auto does not even have a radio since it overloaded some time ago due to defective alternator overcharging.
4. So your brakes are soft. At least you have power brakes. My auto does not. It did not come with a power booster. That was an option back then when the auto was made. But it did come with Air Conditioning.

Edit - Forgot to mention, I am the fourth owner. Auto was made in 1979.

When you pay 25k for a car you have a right to bitch. The items i listed are the way the car works, not covered under warentee. That you can't afford a new car is not my issue.

Electrical systems on 1979 model year cars are not that hard to fix. Get yourself a Chilton book and a multimeter. Then replace the radio, in dash units for a 1979 anything can be had for less than 100 dollars.

A cvt is a continuous variable transmission, or you could have googled it.
Rear view cameras are going to be mandated equipment on every new car sold after 2018.

[Patridam]

It's starting to look like my first car will be a Mark 1 golf...

Before I purchased my Lincoln (for $1000 when I was 17 yrs old; course' I had to replace the trans and the heater core); the car my parents let me drive was a 1993 VW Rabbit Cabriolet. Now, before you go and say "well they moved on to the MK. II by then didn't they? No, they did not. The convertible/cabriolet was only ever on the Mk. I platform. They updated the Golf hatch and the jetta to Mk II and Mk III, but kept the Cabriolet basically like it came from 1976. Here's what I wrote about it in the last auto thread:

As for the rest, I think I'm the exact opposite. My parents stuck me in VW's all my life, and I had to drive >one of these< for a few years. I hate it. Independently of the various shortfalls of the rabbit we had in particular (a broken idle stabilizer valve that ended up with an incredibly shaky idle atop the already rough 1.8L, as well as excessive wind noise above 30 mph from a poor door repair), I hated it.

It was painfully slow, partly to do with the 3 speed auto. 3-speed, in 1993!. I timed it at 18 seconds for 0-60 and a top speed on the flat of 83 mph. The 'power windows' only worked some of the time, and only one at a time (one relay for four windows and the top). It didn't handle well, with power steering that was simultaneously loose but rather heavy; it didn't get very good mileage (I used the trip odometer and a full tank to get an estimate of 24 mpg); and it didn't brake well despite only weighing 2300 lbs (tiny discs in the front, small drums in the back, no antilock). To top it off, it's hilariously unsafe.

I mean, look at this. I don't want my head smashing against a hood in a 30 mph crash. I used this video to convince my dad to *let* me buy a car other than a VW.

Now, obviously a rabbit isn't indicative of every subcompact/compact car, but much of the argument still stands. I feel very nervous in a small car, I go and get the feeling somebody on their cell phone is going to smash into me with an expedition and I'll be smushed flatter than a pancake. I'd take the 6 mpg or so loss on a larger car just for the safety. As far as I'm concerned the additional comfort (and in many cases, style and power) are just bonuses. I can actually drive the Lincoln with confidence, not being scared of getting hit by someone whenever I try to do anything. The fact it's a lot faster, stops better, and probably handles better are admittedly not the usual situation for large vs. small cars, though.

[The Two Jerseys]

Just a question: What is the difference between driving a standard transmission car and driving a tiptronic? Does the latter consume more oil?

Theorically the tiptronic should combine the best part of the manual transmission (more control and motor braking) with the best part of the automatic (no risk to force the clutch).

That said, if you don't drive a lot on windy roads on in the city traffic, a manual should suit you perfectly fine, while costing less.

But the twisties are the best place to drive a stick!

[Patridam]

4 problems with my new 2015 forrester.

1. The cvt, sucks
2. The rear view camera is not refined enough, it can get washed out to where you don't see everything you need to.
3. The bluetooth stinks, 2 generations behind ford.
4. The brake pedal is too soft, the car stops fine, I juse hate the brake feel.

That said, I would buy again. Perfect car for us to downsize too from a minivan.

Also supposedly 2 and 3 have been fixed on the 2016's.

No insult intended, but your post made me laugh. You are complaining about problems with a new auto made in 2015 and which is still under guarantee. I would be happy with a new auto. If you owned my current auto you would most likely be complaining plenty.

1. My auto has no CVT whatever that is.
2. Camera! You got to be kidding.
3. Bluetooth, the auto does not even have a radio since it overloaded some time ago due to defective alternator overcharging.
4. So your brakes are soft. At least you have power brakes. My auto does not. It did not come with a power booster. That was an option back then when the auto was made. But it did come with Air Conditioning.

Edit - Forgot to mention, I am the fourth owner. Auto was made in 1979.

What car do you have from 1979? It sounds like a European car judging by the descriptions of no power brakes.

[Auzkhia]

It's starting to look like my first car will be a Mark 1 golf...

I'm still on my first car, a 1999 Mercedes Benz C280 sport w202.

[Ragnarheim]

There's no sign of Colonel Boat, nor Lieutenant Bicycle.

Shame.

[Petrolheadia]

But they don't pay less for a crossover.

Price a Tahoe v a equinox, then come back and chat.

The Equinox is a much smaller car. A better example would be a Honda CRV. Nowadays they are crossovers and cost about as much as when they were SUVs (late 90s).

[Patridam]

But they don't pay less for a crossover.

Price a Tahoe v a equinox, then come back and chat.

They are not anywhere near the same size, though. The Equinox is a compact with only two rows of seating, the Tahoe is full size with three rows. Obviously the Equinox is going to be cheaper; but that has nothing to do with crossover versus SUV, it has to do with full size versus compact, and standard features.

It's no cheaper to make a crossover than it is to make an SUV of the same size and level of features. That was the point he was making.

[Petrolheadia]

The point was a smaller crossover is cheaper than a bigger suv. A traverse is still an suv.

Traverse is a crossover, and it has almost the exact same dimensions as a Tahoe so it's not really smaller.

Starting MSRP of a Traverse is $16,000 lower than that of a Tahoe, so you're still correct that a crossover is cheaper.

But the Tahoe has a more powerful basic engine, a more durable truck frame, more space and luxuries. Plus, Chevy puts it higher in its lineup.

[Petrolheadia]

Welcome! One of the moderators suggested that I should start a thread about cars in general and I saw a similar one on the BeamNG forums. This is a thread where you can say anything about cars: love them, hate them, say which ones you own, which you want, what have you seen a person doing with a car... anything car related.

I'll start (knowing that it would evolve into something else):
In the last 10 years SUVs have been steadily replaced by crossovers. In my opinion this is a step back for motoring. Yes, not many people took SUVs offroad, but at least they had the ability to do it. In the crossovers they don't. We also shouldn't forget about the fact that crossovers have less interior space than similarily-sized SUVs. In my opinion ditching SUVs for crossovers was a step back for motoring.

Crossovers are just smaller SUVs but are based upon car unibodies, instead of pickup truck frames. So in theory, they use slightly less fuel, cost less money, and are easier to drive for the general populace. Most crossovers are just fatter cars, which ruin styling and handling. I think they are just ghastly compromises.

I prefer actual cars, like sedans/saloons, wagons/estates, and coupés. The minivan/MPV and the SUV killed the good old station wagon.

Well, you probably like wagons because where you live they are rare. In my case it is exactly the opposite: a ton of cars in my town are wagons, so I got bored of them.

[Petrolheadia]

It's starting to look like my first car will be a Mark 1 golf...

Before I purchased my Lincoln (for $1000 when I was 17 yrs old; course' I had to replace the trans and the heater core); the car my parents let me drive was a 1993 VW Rabbit Cabriolet. Now, before you go and say "well they moved on to the MK. II by then didn't they? No, they did not. The convertible/cabriolet was only ever on the Mk. I platform. They updated the Golf hatch and the jetta to Mk II and Mk III, but kept the Cabriolet basically like it came from 1976. Here's what I wrote about it in the last auto thread:

As for the rest, I think I'm the exact opposite. My parents stuck me in VW's all my life, and I had to drive >one of these< for a few years. I hate it. Independently of the various shortfalls of the rabbit we had in particular (a broken idle stabilizer valve that ended up with an incredibly shaky idle atop the already rough 1.8L, as well as excessive wind noise above 30 mph from a poor door repair), I hated it.

It was painfully slow, partly to do with the 3 speed auto. 3-speed, in 1993!. I timed it at 18 seconds for 0-60 and a top speed on the flat of 83 mph. The 'power windows' only worked some of the time, and only one at a time (one relay for four windows and the top). It didn't handle well, with power steering that was simultaneously loose but rather heavy; it didn't get very good mileage (I used the trip odometer and a full tank to get an estimate of 24 mpg); and it didn't brake well despite only weighing 2300 lbs (tiny discs in the front, small drums in the back, no antilock). To top it off, it's hilariously unsafe.

I mean, look at this. I don't want my head smashing against a hood in a 30 mph crash. I used this video to convince my dad to *let* me buy a car other than a VW.

Now, obviously a rabbit isn't indicative of every subcompact/compact car, but much of the argument still stands. I feel very nervous in a small car, I go and get the feeling somebody on their cell phone is going to smash into me with an expedition and I'll be smushed flatter than a pancake. I'd take the 6 mpg or so loss on a larger car just for the safety. As far as I'm concerned the additional comfort (and in many cases, style and power) are just bonuses. I can actually drive the Lincoln with confidence, not being scared of getting hit by someone whenever I try to do anything. The fact it's a lot faster, stops better, and probably handles better are admittedly not the usual situation for large vs. small cars, though.

The Golf III got a fresh cabrio version, the IV didn't.

[Renewed Dissonance]

I prefer almost any other form of land transportation to cars.

Why?

Well, for a long trip, a two-way by train costs me less than half the price of renting**, fueling, and insuring a car with zero traffic-construction-as*hole related stress. It also happens to be way more environmentally friendly.

Drive and deal with all the attendant sh*t, or pay a fraction of the price to be lifted and laid. It's a no-brainer. The same general logic applies to daily public transportation (including short-route commuter trains).

(** Why would I put 800+ miles on my own car, when I could put it on someone else's? Seriously, I'm too poor for this crap. And my 40 year old 4-banger barely does daily driving anyway.)

[The Liberated Territories]

I love Porsche, but I assume that I would only be able to afford a Cayman or a 911 from the 90s. :/ damn rich people

[Renewed Dissonance]

I see, but learning manual is a chore for me.

Absolutely true. But once you do learn it, an automatic will just feel wrong.

Engine goes off every time I press the clutch.

When you press the clutch pedal down, the engine stalls?

[Renewed Dissonance]

That said, if you don't drive a lot on windy roads on in the city traffic, a manual should suit you perfectly fine, while costing less.

I adore driving stick in busy city traffic. You learn very quickly to look far ahead and adjust your speed/gear selection well ahead of time, so you're in the perfect spot to accelerate back up to speed with minimal effort when the light turns green.

I've lost count of all the automatic clowns who I breeze on by at the green, after they've rushed ahead and and have to slam to a stop right before the light turned.

[Gim]

I see, but learning manual is a chore for me.

Absolutely true. But once you do learn it, an automatic will just feel wrong.

Engine goes off every time I press the clutch.

When you press the clutch pedal down, the engine stalls?

No, the ignition just goes off. I have to start the car again.