Our "own" car reviews

killpanda

wants to fondle your manboobs
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
5,003
Location
Stuck in France
If I recall correctly, the IMA system (integrated motor assist I believe) that Honda uses on their hybrids can't run the car on electric power alone.
 

lip

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
2,957
Location
Switzerland
Car(s)
Audi S6 Barkwagon
Foot down, dials go dark blue, but the car doesn't accelerate at all? What was the fuel consumption at the end of the test drive? 6.5 seems a lot for such a car. My heavy diesel gets better than that.
That number on the dash display was always either 6.5L or 6.8L. But I had to fill it up after 140 Kilometers of Autobahn before I gave it back, and I only managed to cram in 7 liters until it was full again.
So it actually was more frugal then the display said. But that's probably because I resigned to stay at 120km/h to protect my ears. :D

The car isn't crap, it's just that I'm not the right person for a city-mom runabout like this. By a long shot.
 

MacGuffin

Forum Addict
DONOR
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
8,294
Location
Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Car(s)
'17 Ford Mustang GT Fastback
That number on the dash display was always either 6.5L or 6.8L. But I had to fill it up after 140 Kilometers of Autobahn before I gave it back, and I only managed to cram in 7 liters until it was full again.
So it actually was more frugal then the display said. But that's probably because I resigned to stay at 120km/h to protect my ears. :D

The car isn't crap, it's just that I'm not the right person for a city-mom runabout like this. By a long shot.
Hrrrm Hrrrm...

May I just mention, that I managed 7.8 Liters per 100 km in a 245 HP BMW 330d with not even making the slightest attempt of driving economically? The trip included country roads in the Harz Mountains, lots of pedal to the metal on the Autobahn and also some city shopping trip on a Saturday (including IKEA). With a little more effort and doing 140 km/h instead of 240, I bet it would have ended below 5 liters/100 km.

I really see no use at all in hybrids. At least not with petrol engines.
 
Last edited:

McRae

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
1,193
Hybrids are still the better choice in the city I believe. It's of course a completely different matter on the Autobahn.
 

otispunkmeyer

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
4,829
Location
Loughborough UK
Car(s)
'03 Skoda Superb (farewell :(), '06 Honda Civic ES
If I recall correctly, the IMA system (integrated motor assist I believe) that Honda uses on their hybrids can't run the car on electric power alone.
Its part of the fly wheel assembly I think, so I guess the engine cannot be switched off completely unless they use some kind of coupling between the crank and flywheel. The motor really is only there to give some extra twist when setting off or accelerating from low revs where honda engines traditionally have no torque to speak of. I.e. you dont have to wring its neck to get moving!
 
  • Like
Reactions: lip

LP

Your Brown Banana for Scale
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
7,961
Location
East-Timor, USA
Car(s)
206 HP N/A washing machine
So I'll do one. Please be gentle as this is like my first real attempt at a proper review.

We had a Dodge Durango Crew for our rental car in yellowstone. I had never driven the old one and I had never seen the new version. We just accepted.



First thing we noticed, it's WELL equipped. We had automatic locks, automated trunk door opening and closing, keyless start, keyless unlock, auxiliary ports, satellite radio, 2 USB ports (1 ipod port), 2 power plug points, touch screen audio interface, motorized seats, cupholders every-freaking-where, climate control with a ton of settings and cubby holes to hide stuff in. Oh and we had reversing cameras and park assist on this model, which turned out to be super handy considering the size of this buffalo.

We had 3 suitcases, and several grocery bags and carry on bags. As is with the backseats up, you can seat 7 but you can't fit all the luggage. With the back seats folded down, we had enough room and then some for all of our goods and wares. There was tons of leg room in the back, with climate controls in the back as well.



Alright, dull stuff aside.

We had the 3.6L V6 with 290 HP. It comes with a 5.7 V8 Hemi, but we didn't have that. However, the engine is no quiet little V6 mouse. Put my foot down and I heard this wail that in some situations sounded like the Ferrari 612 Scaglietti. It may just have been the position where I was sitting but I was certain I was hearing a ferrari. The engine was gutsy enough to get us out of sticky traffic situations but it did feel a bit under power considering the amount of weight that it was lugging. It especially felt sluggish when getting from 0-60.

One of the big things I liked about this durango is that it looks menacing. It doesn't come off as a christian motorist type of car but rather a "get the hell out of my way before I chew you up and fart you out of my exhaust pipes while leaving you in a trail of my glorious thunder". Yet it also has a sort of humble kind of SUV look, it's handsome. It shares a chassis I believe with the new Jeep Cherokee, and frankly I love it. I saw quite a few of the newer model Cherokees and I could instantly make the connection between the 2 vehicles.



We had the variable 5-speed auto tranny and so I was always punching it manually from 0-60 (mostly so I could hear the engine <devilish laugh>). It took about 11-13 seconds to get to 60, which I guess is fine considering the weight again, but it did feel sluggish considering the glorious noise.

The transmission was very smooth, and I was actually pissed off at my own car for not being so, considering it's newer and less abused. The durango had about 11k miles on it when we started.



The seats were comfy as hell and when I was driving for hours on end I never felt tired. The console is informative, legible under all lighting conditions and not very confusing to navigate around. The windscreen wiper rod was however massively confusing. And the fuel cap opening button was placed in a very inconspicuous place.

The pedals are well placed and very easy to reach and use, not tiring to use for long periods of time. The brakes are excellent and capable of bringing the bison to a screeching halt very quickly. Yet minor adjustments are also possible and the brake goes light as it detects the intensity level.

The steering was amazing. I've driven SUVs and vans before loaded with stuff and empty and I felt like I was driving a water buffalo carrying a rhinoceros. But with the performance steering feature in this durango it felt like I was driving my honda. In fact it felt easier. Going around twisty roads on the mountains was no problem at all.

I looked up the price for this heffer online and it comes out to 35k, which is a lot, but you get quite a lot with it. Replacing the V6 with the V8 gets it to 36k, so not that bad. This is by far one of the best mid-size SUVs ever, and definitely the best SUV I've ever had the pleasure to drive.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TC

McRae

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
1,193
I suspect the Dodge weighs around 8 tons, has an ineffective engine and a just as ineffective gearbox.

A Mercedes GL350 CDI does 0-62 in 9,8 seconds. It probably costs quite a lot more as well though.
 

TC

aka TomCat
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,436
Are you really comparing a petrol engine to a diesel engine based solely on HP ratings in off-the-line acceleration?

Dodge: 260lb-ft of Torque at 4800 RPM
Merc: 457lb?ft of Torque at 1600 RPM

Seems a bit one sided to me.
 

TC

aka TomCat
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,436
It's just a completely different class of engine. It seems unrealistic to compare them. Turbocharged vs Naturally Aspirated? We don't get the same model here, we only get the 210hp version of the GL350 turbo diesel, but even that costs twice the price of the Dodge Durango.
 

MacGuffin

Forum Addict
DONOR
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
8,294
Location
Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Car(s)
'17 Ford Mustang GT Fastback
I understand what you wanna say but nevertheless that's a very crappy performance for such a powerful engine.
 

TC

aka TomCat
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,436
I really don't think so, if I'm honest. The GL350 uses a full time 4WD system with a massive amount more toque, which allows it to get off the line a lot faster than the Durango. But according to MB USA website, the GL350 we get needs 9.1 seconds to hit 60 MPH. So it is a couple seconds faster, which makes perfect sense and falls in line with the torque figures. The GL also has 2 extra gears. What's funny though, is that the Durango gets better fuel economy.


Edit: Hmm, just found this story online: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/10q4/2011_dodge_durango-short_take_road_test

Strapping our test gear to the rear-wheel-drive V-6, we recorded the same 8.4 seconds to 60 as we did with the Jeep Grand Cherokee despite the Dodge?s additional 183 pounds.
And for comparison sake: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...enz_gl350_bluetec_4matic-short_take_road_test

Acceleration to 60 mph is the same, at 8.6 seconds, but this truck trailed the long-termer by 0.2 second in the quarter-mile and by a full second to 100 mph. Chalk that up to the 157 extra pounds carried by this example.
 
Last edited:

Labcoatguy

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 27, 2005
Messages
13,874
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Car(s)
#Jaguar #XKR, #Saab #9-3, #Toyota #MR2 #Spyder
That's because torque > HP.

(waits for Cold Fussion to blow another fuse)
 

LP

Your Brown Banana for Scale
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
7,961
Location
East-Timor, USA
Car(s)
206 HP N/A washing machine
Look I could have also fucked the 0-60 measurement since I had only one opportunity to time it properly. The other time I guessed at the time it took, and that may have been off.

When it comes to grabbing at that torque and passing horseboxes and all that that are going slowly on the road it's remarkable. With limited space we managed to pass 3/4/5 cars with ease. Same with the highways when slowpokes were in the right lane.

The durango weighs 2.378 tons.
 

TC

aka TomCat
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,436
Sorry LP, it's not a criticism towards you or anything. Getting the best times in the real world is not always easy. Plus, it sounds like your rental was fully laden with passengers and gear, unless you emptied it all out when you timed it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LP
Top