Ever stopped at a dealer to confim how great your current car is?

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Clev

As mentioned above, the closest in size is probably the Smart.

The trouble with the Smart (and to a lesser but still objectional extent with the Fit, and essentially all other small cars these days) is the horrible bolt-upright toad-on-a-stool seating position. Now if they'd bring back the Roadster Smart Roadster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia they'd have a real good chance of getting me as a customer.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Ford Man

Are you sure of the cost of the Yugo? I don't remember the exact cost, but was thinking the base price was under $3,000. I remember the Yugo and from everything I've heard about their reliability it was pretty poor at any price with most of them only lasting about 50K miles I think.

I thought so too. Maybe it went up in 1986, which is what I found on the web.

And yeah, they were a pile of suck. :-)

[Clev]

Originally Posted by shovel

that's cool, what does it cost me when someone dies from another choice they make? like when someone goes swimming and drowns, or when someone goes hiking and gets lost, or when someone enjoys a milkshake with every single meal and has a heart attack, or when someone rides around on their bicycle with headphones on and gets hit by a car, or when someone dies for any other reason? i'd imagine every death - including natural causes - cost money to clean up and deal with.

Homeowners pay higher premiums for having a pool. Most life insurance charges more for smokers, and generally lost hikers are billed for their rescue if they fail to take basic precautions. Seat belts are required because people who don't use them run a real risk of injuring others when that pothole or minor sideswipe knocks them out of their driving position.

what does this have to do with the fact that i can buy a motorcycle and drive it around on public streets but i can't buy a brand new 1500lb econo car?

Because only a tiny minority of people would want them. Hell, even the '73 Civic and '84 CRX weighed over 1,700 pounds. The ForTwo is probably one of the lightest regular production cars made.

And the reason you can buy a motorcycle is because the motorcycle lobby is strong.

[RH77]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

RH77,

My B14 (1996) SE-R v. my B15 (2002) SE-R shows a 140 lb weight difference - 2600 v. 2743 lbs. Both were similarly equipped, with AC, powered sunroof, MT, power door locks, etc. The main differences were the larger and heavier QR25DE engine v. the SR20DE, the 2 door B14 v. the 4 door body style of the B15, and 7" more length in the newer car. In fact, the '02 is only 3" shorter than the 1996 Nissan Altima was.

Most of the added weight likely came from the larger engine and larger body size. There were lots of other weight-adding changes in the newer version , from two extra power door locks and the 300 W Fosgate audio amp and speakers, to the 17" wheels and 6 speed transmission.

The big weight differences came before the mid 90s. My previous car was a 1987 Renault (AMC) GTA. It didn't have airbags or A/C, had a manual sunroof, and its 2 liter engine only made 95 hp. But it only weighed 2000 lbs, was 6" shorter than the '96 Nissan, and cornered on rails compared to the SE-Rs. Renault kept the weight down with extremely thin metal. I could push in the roof's sheet metal with my pinkie finger, it was so thin.

Back on topic...
I used to Autocross a '99 Civic Si in the same class as an SE-R with the SR20DE. It was no contest. Between the skills of the veteran driver in the Nissan and its lethal combination of cornering and optimal power band, I was left at the bottom of second gear out of VTEC and foundering. I learned to respect that combination even after it had disappeared from the market.

Speaking of Autocross (Gymkhana)-- a show of hands: How many people have lost control of a vehicle (either in a controlled environment or by accident)? Now, how many have lost it with stability control? Yes, it's still possible. I think that as part of Drivers' Ed, you should have to lose control of a vehicle on a closed course to realize how powerless you are in that situation (with or without the safety aids) -- and what measures can be taken to 1) prevent the incident; and 2) make an educated attempt at regaining control. For those that haven't experience the added safety features, they are dramatic and (IMHO) are very much "worth it".

ABS, Stability and Traction Control doesn't always work, but it does aid in keeping inexperienced (or just plain crummy drivers) in somewhat of control. I find it helpful in snowy conditions that I have to drive in for work as a routine new drug research auditor. The job has to be done in a certain amount of time to ensure patient safety, regulatory compliance and accurate data. It's why I rack up road miles in rentals. With a blizzard in Iowa last year, I found the added features to be very handy and allowed a more focused driving experience. I have driven in worse conditions with a lot more stress and perhaps an air of edgy distraction without the tech.

Further, 15-passenger vans are mandated to have stability control. Why? Too many inexperienced drivers were rolling the vans on high school or college excursions, often killing young passengers. Usually a team member or coach was behind the wheel. I used to regularly drive a similar, "Type-III" Ambulance Conversion, Ford E-350 Diesel as a medic. The suspension was often overloaded and was top-heavy. Unfortunately, no RSC or ABS was available then. Somehow I never wrecked, but will admit to having gotten stuck in the snow and slid sideways a few times on emergency calls. Despite the clean record, ABS or RSC would have been an added level of precision that could easily add piece of mind.

What if you have to react to the "other guy"? This technology helps prevent an undesirable outcome, and I am in agreement of having them. We have seen that the weight is negligible compared to engine size, options, and auto trans in model refreshes/re-designs. There is a button to turn it off -- just press it to live life in "full control".

That GTA had to be a blast, by the way!

RH77

[SentraSE-R]

I've never driven anything that handled as well as that GTA, and it was a really good looking car, too. If only it had come with enough power to make it dangerous... It did have vicious torque steer with the wheels at full lock and gassing it.

I've lost it too many times to describe, in dirt, snow, ice, rain, and dry, but all with old school cars. My xB comes with VSC and traction control, so I may get a chance to lose it in the rain this winter, to see how it reacts.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by RH77

Further, 15-passenger vans are mandated to have stability control. Why? Too many inexperienced drivers were rolling the vans on high school or college excursions, often killing young passengers.

There was another issue with those vans. When there were a few passengers, they tended to sit all the way in the back. Since the rearmost few seats hang behind or on the rear axle, it presented a weight shift that caused handling issues and a few crashes.

[bgd73]

a 1987 subaru dual range, jacked up, peugeot wheels, pulling in and parking next to a .. 2010 forestor...

There would be giggles. which giggle is going to be heard laughing yet another 25 years after it's first 25 years...


My first sube was from a dealer. It was purchased from a muddy parking lot.
that same place is under big lights..new subarus.

I ponder real value. the machining. Densities, guages, solid states, even bolt sizes thoughout a car, and even chassis strengths disppeared into excuses not good enough...like a throttle cable.

..all while the world looks through thier butt at new ones with a misconception and 3 times as much to pay..for less.
I hope it is a war before my time is done. They can meet densities, guages and chassis's carrying enough punch to knock the greed right back out of them...

[99LeCouch]

After refurbishing the headlights on my car and hearing about the failures of the latest whiz-bang electronic drive-by-wire hardware, it's reassuring that my car does things the old-fashioned way. Plus I'm practiced at shifting into N in case of emergency!

And, even a low-tech ABS system is enough to prevent many collisions. Plenty of older cars have ABS. So we can still have the benefits of ABS while driving a cheaper old car.

[RH77]

I think lots of people never really know that they have the "fly-by-wire" technology that they're operating. Another problem is the failure of redundancy -- fuel delivery is no longer foot-pedal-cable-throttle, but instead foot-pedal-actuator-ECU-throttle. When reliable, it can allow quite efficient operation and emissions control.

I'm not sure if it's possible, but could the actuator have had 2-sides to compare inputs with one another (so then if one side is significantly different, a fault is thrown with a consequent engine cut)?

At the same time, we shouldn't shun technology that yields better fuel economy and fewer emissions. The revolt of carb vs. FI comes to mind. It seems that technology needs to be perfected, have a backup system, be simplified to the point of flawless reliability before it can be trusted in masses (at the same time they can just silently gain approval and slip it in without most of us knowing it). It really is too bad that the failures have likely tarnished this advancement, but at least the driving public is hopefully getting some education on emergency operation out of it -- and that it exists.

IIRC, Mercedes has been testing brake-by-wire that has a redundant hydraulic system.

On the topic of ABS, I remember when Chevy had ABS standard on all non-pickup, passenger vehicles sold (early 90's). Then they dropped it to save some cash.

RH77

Originally Posted by 99LeCouch

After refurbishing the headlights on my car and hearing about the failures of the latest whiz-bang electronic drive-by-wire hardware, it's reassuring that my car does things the old-fashioned way. Plus I'm practiced at shifting into N in case of emergency!

And, even a low-tech ABS system is enough to prevent many collisions. Plenty of older cars have ABS. So we can still have the benefits of ABS while driving a cheaper old car.

[El Duende]

I did, not too long ago. Nothing against the new Nissan line-up, but I feel like the B15 chassis (2000- 06' models) should've been the biggest model of Sentra. I always read about how the enthusiast following from the B13 & B14 didn't particularly love the redesign that took place in 00'. Sentras have always been small and relatively light, making them candidates for tuners and hypermillers alike. It felt strange to be dwarved by the B16's (09' version) "French design." Even with 16" steel wheels, the body appears to hover them, almost as if the wheel wells were black anti-gravity voids. From a practical standpoint, I can see how's its new size attracts a broader demographic. There's more room for passengers, groceries, and college books, (Along with empty Sonic wrappers) for a relatively low price. The drawback to all that is weight. A bigger engine is made standard, leaving fuel economy estimates with more to desire. The Versa takes the place of "subcompact" and even it still looks kinda big to me. (For it's classification) A couple of years back a Geo Metro fell into that category. That's quite a difference in dimensions compared to past cars.

In my experience with an American classic, having driven a Mercury Grand Marquis for over 1,400k, I appreciated the vastness of the cabin and road presence. Things are quiet and jazz music sets the mood. The steering is lighter than one attached to an arcade game. When I arrive at my destination, I unbuckle my seatbelt and its giant door swings open like the gate of a castle; fit for a king. Then I get out and stare at it for a couple of seconds. That's when it hits me: All that car... just to shuttle me.