The beginnings of Eco modding. (What car should I get?)

[rmay635703]

Do Subaru’s still blow head gaskets sometime after 100k or is that fixed once and for all?

[Isaac Zackary]

Originally Posted by rmay635703

Do Subaru’s still blow head gaskets sometime after 100k or is that fixed once and for all?

I don't have the magazine with me right now. But I seem to remember CR giving a few Subarus good odds of being reliable.

[19bonestock88]

Originally Posted by rmay635703

Do Subaru’s still blow head gaskets sometime after 100k or is that fixed once and for all?

Originally Posted by Isaac Zackary

I don't have the magazine with me right now. But I seem to remember CR giving a few Subarus good odds of being reliable.

The FB20 is an entirely new engine design, not related to the EJ251 and 253 that kept blowing head gaskets... it’s pretty undersquare, so it makes decent torque down low for only being 2 liters... the CVT it’s paired to us geared nice, turning around 2400 at 80mph(IIRC)

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by rmay635703

Do Subaru’s still blow head gaskets sometime after 100k or is that fixed once and for all?

IIRC the bad ones had the "open deck" engines, already phased out.

[slowmover]

Originally Posted by Isaac Zackary

Thanks for your posts. I don't mean to sound so hard, you are making a valid point. But as to which car is safer than the other, you have to have the total risk calculated from the total statistics in order to determine which is safer, This graph isn't to date but it illustrates the point:

The Suburban is by far the safest SUV out there. For protecting its occupants, the Suburban is much better than your average car. I'm not sure which years this graph is from. I was trying to find one made by the same guy/company that in those years the Suburban was better than any other car or SUV, except Minivans. Statistically if you want safety, get a minivan. You are much less likely to die in a minivan than any other form of personal transportation.

Unless you show the total statistics, saying the Charger is safest is just opinion based on some half facts. A car can have very good crash test ratings. But how likely are you to get into an accident in the first place? I have to travel over steep, snow covered, mountain passes and you're telling me that I need a RWD Charger?

I don't have to do what I do. But I wouldn't call it a mistake. For years I lived with only a bicycle, and could do that again if I had to. Now talk about a safety issue! The car I have works perfectly fine for what I do. The whole reason I want to go from a 1985 VW diesel to a 2014 Toyota Prius is for safety concerns. That car seems like it will work for me in every which way possible. And how much safer is a Charger over a Prius? Do you have the statistics?

Your chart isn’t even half the story. It’s 20-years out of date. Keep researching. An inaccurate reflection of reality is shown. Worse than biased (the questions presupposed). A pickup-based live-axle vehicle is WORST. Can’t steer, can’t maneuver, prone to rollover. When one carefully words WHAT to match a severely narrowed question, your reading of that chart is “the answer”. (The Avalon is roughly peer to my point about sedans). There’s more and better out there.

Avoiding serious death or injury is the criterion. Not which vehicle can best take a hit.

The vehicle able to get out of its own way AT SPEED is in the first tier of choices. What are the tech specs that make that so? Look into it. (Fred Puhn)

Second are questions of curb weight & wheelbase. Able to take multiple hits. I posted above where that graph peaks for efficiency. (And don’t knock the better ride qualities). A Prius and it’s cousins can’t take more than one hit.

The Charger (Mercedes) design is that result. It isnt by any mistake or coincidence. Its Science!! (It’s also available AWD, but that kills FE).

Basic design trumps electronic bandaids. Which all SUVs are dependent upon. The physics of the thing should be obvious. 8th grade.

(FB, it’s no mistake that this chassis has the ability to put up to 700-HP to the ground. As you know, one can drop an engine like that into a Suburban, but the chances of seeing even half of that transmitted to the ground for a significant percentage of time is ridiculously small).

OP, cheap-to-run is part of low cost ownership. Do the rest of the math on all aspects. Insurance, tax, finance, depreciation and the rest. Fuel is less than half.
Length of ownership is “true” economy.

The well-designed sedan with the FE drivetrain (and fleet market) has ALWAYS been the economy choice. Long-lived, easily repaired, and low cost per mile of operation.

As before, a bad commute was your choice. How will you compound that mistake (is what you genuinely want to avoid)? Others move where opportunity exists. How many compromises can you make in the name of (whatever) before the risks outweigh feeding ego?

The fuel expense ISN'T the problem. All weather roads plus subsidized fuel have led you and many others to make decisions not warranted by better assessments of family well-being.

.

[freebeard]

The vehicle able to get out of its own way AT SPEED is in the first tier of choices.

Well put. There is a cone of probability that precedes the vehicle down the road. Actually, a parabolic bell.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by slowmover

Basic design trumps electronic bandaids. Which all SUVs are dependent upon. The physics of the thing should be obvious. 8th grade.

Even though I'm favorable to some electronic safety features, mostly ABS brakes, it would be kinda pointless to neglect the basic design.

[Isaac Zackary]

Originally Posted by slowmover

Your chart isn’t even half the story. It’s 20-years out of date. Keep researching. An inaccurate reflection of reality is shown. Worse than biased (the questions presupposed). A pickup-based live-axle vehicle is WORST. Can’t steer, can’t maneuver, prone to rollover. When one carefully words WHAT to match a severely narrowed question, your reading of that chart is “the answer”. (The Avalon is roughly peer to my point about sedans). There’s more and better out there.

Avoiding serious death or injury is the criterion. Not which vehicle can best take a hit.

The vehicle able to get out of its own way AT SPEED is in the first tier of choices. What are the tech specs that make that so? Look into it. (Fred Puhn)

Second are questions of curb weight & wheelbase. Able to take multiple hits. I posted above where that graph peaks for efficiency. (And don’t knock the better ride qualities). A Prius and it’s cousins can’t take more than one hit.

The Charger (Mercedes) design is that result. It isnt by any mistake or coincidence. Its Science!! (It’s also available AWD, but that kills FE).

Basic design trumps electronic bandaids. Which all SUVs are dependent upon. The physics of the thing should be obvious. 8th grade.

(FB, it’s no mistake that this chassis has the ability to put up to 700-HP to the ground. As you know, one can drop an engine like that into a Suburban, but the chances of seeing even half of that transmitted to the ground for a significant percentage of time is ridiculously small).

OP, cheap-to-run is part of low cost ownership. Do the rest of the math on all aspects. Insurance, tax, finance, depreciation and the rest. Fuel is less than half.
Length of ownership is “true” economy.

The well-designed sedan with the FE drivetrain (and fleet market) has ALWAYS been the economy choice. Long-lived, easily repaired, and low cost per mile of operation.

As before, a bad commute was your choice. How will you compound that mistake (is what you genuinely want to avoid)? Others move where opportunity exists. How many compromises can you make in the name of (whatever) before the risks outweigh feeding ego?

The fuel expense ISN'T the problem. All weather roads plus subsidized fuel have led you and many others to make decisions not warranted by better assessments of family well-being.

.

You have good points, I must say. But you haven't proved or convinced me that the Charger is the safest car out there and if it's really so much safer that it's hands down the only car to buy.

1. You can take fun facts and simple statistics and make any vehicle the safest vehicle out there. The Charger has a lot going for it, but there's more to it than just what car takes a better beating or is easier to maneuver. Those facts you mentioned don't prove beyond a reasonable doubt it's any safer than any other car. Maybe it does in your mind, but try telling my SUV loving brother that, and he'll tell you a million reasons why you're wrong. Where did you get your information? How can I be sure it's not biased?
2. Overall total statistics are important for identifying the safer car and shows the car's safety in the real world, not just on paper. For an example, car A may get better crash test results than car B, but you still could be more likely to die in car A than car B. For an example, the Astro got terrible ratings for crashes and maneuverability and yet you were 1.5 time more likely to die in a Buick LeSabre or a Mercury Gran Marquis than an Astro back then. So are the LeSabre and Marquis safer than the Astro? In real world results they weren't.
3. Then there's the question of "how much safer?" For an example, in the graph the Camry protects its drivers better than the Avalon. The Accord, Jetta and Maxima aren't that much more dangerous to the driver of the car either. And as far as protecting the vehicles' occupants goes, the Caravan did better than anything else. But is the Caravan so much safer that I should buy that over a Camry or Avalon? Last I heard a school bus was the safest form of road transportation. Should I buy one of those?
4. People also have other goals and purposes in life than just safety. For an example, what if someone feels they need to "save the planet from global warming" and therefore prefer to drive a scooter or a bicycle than a car. That's their priority and shouldn't be judged for it. It doesn't mean that safety isn't important to them, or less important than other things. But you can't guarantee that you'll never die in a car accident by driving a certain vehicle, or that you'll certainly die by driving a different vehicle. You probably have more of a chance of dying from what eat or where you work than from what you drive.

I am interested in looking at the Charger and it's statistics. If twice as many people are dying in the Pri as they are in the Chargers then I'll definitely think about buying one. Still I need facts, proof, test results, statistics, not just somebody's word for it. I can't just tell my wife, "hey I decided to use our son's college fund for this gas guzzler because some guy on some forum said this was the car we should buy."

Originally Posted by slowmover

As before, a bad commute was your choice. How will you compound that mistake (is what you genuinely want to avoid)? Others move where opportunity exists. How many compromises can you make in the name of (whatever) before the risks outweigh feeding ego?

This is the one comment that is uncalled for. Let me tell you something. I live just a few blocks away from where I work, from the only place where I make money. In reality, with work, school, stores and everything my family needs for living within walking distance we don't even really "need" a car. But what I do, actually, what my family does is something we volunteer to do. We don't have to drive 150 miles per day, but we want to, it's our family's goal and desire, and whatever it is that we do is our family decision. And whatever it is, whether we're out saving the whales or trying to run for president or making sure Grandma takes her medicine, and whether or not you think that's important, it's our family decision and we have a right to do that.

And the same goes with time and money. I work part time so that I can have time to do what is important to us. Sure, I could be making twice or even three times what I make right now, at the same job where I work right now. But that's not my goal, and my family isn't suffering financially from my decisions. Sure, if I had kids that were malnourished, lived in a condemned home without heat or if we were only getting into more and more debt, sure, I see where I would need to check my priorities. But saying that I have to buy the absolute safest car in the whole world regardless of the cost and regardless of how that will affect our family's goals and decisions is just plain unreasonable.

Yes, it would be terrible for anyone in the family to end up dead or maimed for life from a car accident. But it would also be just as cruel to sacrifice what's important for us simply in the name of slightly decreasing our chances of getting hurt. I might as well as make sure everyone in my family uses a helmet everywhere they go and better get to work on that nuclear fallout shelter.

[Isaac Zackary]

Originally Posted by slowmover

OP, cheap-to-run is part of low cost ownership. Do the rest of the math on all aspects. Insurance, tax, finance, depreciation and the rest. Fuel is less than half.
Length of ownership is “true” economy.

Starting with the part that easier to compare, the economic part, I found that at least according to Edmunds, a used 2014 AWD Dodge Charger would run some $12,000 more in a 5 year period than a used 2014 Toyota Prius driving 15,000 miles per year. Of course if I drive double that, my costs would be more and the Dodge would cost even more.

Used AWD Dodge Charger Costs
Used Toyota Prius Costs

So in conclusion, if I drive 30,000 miles per year, I'm looking at about $7,130 on average per year in a 10 year period for driving a used Prius and about $11,900 on average per year in a 10 year period for driving a used Charger, over 1.5 times the cost. If I simply drove 15,000 miles per year like normal people it would only be $8,800 vs $6,000, almost 1.5 times the cost.

Safety. Interestingly the Charger doesn't have a 5-star rating in all categories. Both the 2014 Charger and Prius have 4 and 5 stars in different catagories. The Charger actually has a lower rating in a driver side crash than the Prius does. But the Prius has a lower driver front and side pole ratings.


2014 Car, DrFront, PsFront, DrSide, PaSide, SidePole, RollOver
Charger, 5, 4, 4, 5, 5, 4
Prius, 4, 4, 5, 5, 4, 4,


2014 Charger Safety
2014 Prius Safety

Edit: Here's some better Safety info. The Prius looks only marginally safer.
Charger Safety
Prius Safety
Of course this is just crash test ratings. On the road in the real world we need more statistics to point to which is safer, and if so by how much.

So, is the Prius really a death trap compared to the Charger? Is it worth shelling out $4,770 more per year for the Charger over the Prius?

[freebeard]

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/330850...-1/s-l1000.jpg