Random Thoughts... [Automotive Edition]

rickhamilton620 said:
No. I declined LDW as my credit card provides insurance coverage.

That and, aside from today/yesterday evening, the car will only be driven to and from work and parked separately from my fellow faculty/staff, like all cars I rent.

I did get LDW on the Optima and it likely saved my ass due to not noticing a chip in a tire sidewall until after I picked up the car and the TPMS came on....but I would have been covered by the credit card had I declined LDW anyway so....


Edit: I will try to avoid light poles...or telephone/electrical poles for that matter....
Click to expand...

Does your credit card insurance cover a large masked man taking a sledgehammer to the 500 as a form of artistic criticism, then? :p
 
Shit, that reminds me. I think I have a 500 wedged in my wheel well. I keep meaning to wash it out.

Seriously though, watch that crash test again. You can see the Audi continue slightly forward during the crash while the Fiat actually reverses direction and is bounced backwards the way that it came.

https://youtu.be/TJzZ7-Od6KY?t=35s (direct link to timestamp)

[video=youtube;TJzZ7-Od6KY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJzZ7-Od6KY[/video]
(Skip to 0:35)

You can see the same thing happen here with the Smart vs a Merc S-Class. While the safety cage stays intact, the g-loading on the occupants of the smaller cars is significantly more as the mass of the larger vehicle keeps moving forward, forcing the small car to stop and reverse direction. In these examples, they always brag about the safety cage, but I have yet to find data regarding the g-forces of the occupants of the two cars.

Maybe someone can do the math here, but just by eyeballing it, I am 99% sure that the Smart or Fiat will experience much higher g-loads and more injury than the larger vehicles in the test.
 
Last edited:
Of course the lighter car will move backwards in a frontal crash with a heavier car given both traveled at the same speed before. It's called physics.

Also, 8.7 l/100 km in city driving? That's only marginally less than my Focus with the 2l engine achieves... and mine is a real-world number.
 
Der Stig said:
Subaru with an auto is awful. The 4 EAT is a garbage gearbox. My dad had an '07 Legacy 2.5i with one and it was awful. If it had been a manual, it might have been fun. Also, the head gaskets went at about 100k and cost $3k for the service at the main dealer.
Click to expand...

A friend recently bought a 2015 Impreza with the 6 speed auto and when I drove it I felt like it's no worse than other automatics I've driven. Especially after we had just driven a new Focus automatic, the Subaru felt like an improvement. The other thing was the headgaskets issue - all new Subarus are warrantied for that, so even if it happens at 150k miles, they will fix it for free.

In other unrelated news, I've been looking at this thing on the local craigslist that no one has bought yet. I am very tempted:
http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/hnp/cto/5326360982.html

1991 Alfa Romeo 164S 5-speed, allegedly no rust, which I believe to be a lie considering it's an Italian car in the upper MidWest.
 
Why can't Subaru get their headgaskets right?
 
6spd_Panther said:
It has some of the same problems at the 5th gen camaro though. A moderately optioned GT premium weighs well north of 3850lbs. For a sports car.

Yes, there are cases where the new mustang handles better, but for all the added refinement it winds up feeling bloated relative to the S197 cars. And in ecobloat form, it's really pretty awful to drive.

The 5.2, as far as I know, uses quite a few tricks to keep a fairly flat torque curve across the rev range, but weight is killer here, again. Carbon fiber wheels and a semi-exotic V8 to sell something that's marginally faster than an ATS-V or Camaro SS in a straight line?
Click to expand...


A, The Mustang is not a sports car. B, there is plenty of torque at the low end, it might not be as much as "lesser" Mustangs though. So in comparison, it may feel weak. There is an art to making an engine feel a certain way, and until we can drop the camshafts and tune the way it feels at will, there will always be tricks used to make it feel and work better.
 
_HighVoltage_ said:
A friend recently bought a 2015 Impreza with the 6 speed auto and when I drove it I felt like it's no worse than other automatics I've driven. Especially after we had just driven a new Focus automatic, the Subaru felt like an improvement. The other thing was the headgaskets issue - all new Subarus are warrantied for that, so even if it happens at 150k miles, they will fix it for free.

In other unrelated news, I've been looking at this thing on the local craigslist that no one has bought yet. I am very tempted:
http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/hnp/cto/5326360982.html

1991 Alfa Romeo 164S 5-speed, allegedly no rust, which I believe to be a lie considering it's an Italian car in the upper MidWest.
Click to expand...

The '15 models are all CBT (continuously bad transmission) AFAIK but if you are looking at an older Fozzy they would have a normal 4 speed slushbox and those soooock
 
_HighVoltage_ said:
A friend recently bought a 2015 Impreza with the 6 speed auto and when I drove it I felt like it's no worse than other automatics I've driven. Especially after we had just driven a new Focus automatic, the Subaru felt like an improvement. The other thing was the headgaskets issue - all new Subarus are warrantied for that, so even if it happens at 150k miles, they will fix it for free.

In other unrelated news, I've been looking at this thing on the local craigslist that no one has bought yet. I am very tempted:
http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/hnp/cto/5326360982.html

1991 Alfa Romeo 164S 5-speed, allegedly no rust, which I believe to be a lie considering it's an Italian car in the upper MidWest.
Click to expand...

Key world: e30, bmw, mercedec, toyota, honda, performance,
Click to expand...
 
rickhamilton620 said:
FVFtvtK.jpg
Click to expand...

Why is a 500 considered CCAR, shouldn't it be two down as MCAR? I'd be pissed if I paid for compact but got mini :dunno:

- - - Updated - - -

Spectre said:
This article is geared more towards classic Brit cars, but it addresses some of the problems with ethanol and storage.
http://www.mossmotors.com/SiteGraphics/Pages/ethanol.html

I have seen ethanol laced gas start producing gums/varnishes in a fuel system in as little as two weeks sitting, let alone a month. A lot depends on the environment, the brand of gas, the vehicle's materials, etc.
Click to expand...

Yeah, using old Brits as a standard is a great way of spreading FUD :rolleyes:
 
narf said:
Why is a 500 considered CCAR, shouldn't it be two down as MCAR? I'd be pissed if I paid for compact but got mini :dunno:
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if we even have a designation for MCAR. Also they don't always make much sense, my Mustang is classed as a compact despite being almost same size as a WRX
 
Saw a NA Miata today (which is really rare around here).
Red.
Pristine condition.
20" chrome wheels.
:blowup:
 
DanRoM said:
Of course the lighter car will move backwards in a frontal crash with a heavier car given both traveled at the same speed before. It's called physics.
Click to expand...

That's the point, no matter how strong the safety cage, the squishy bits inside get enormous g-loading and there is no engineering around it.
 
rickhamilton620 said:
Get your barf bag ready!

Actually you may be surprised by my initial thoughts on the car in question having driven it 90 minutes this evening alone. Or not. More to come tomorrow.
Click to expand...

So, it's tomorrow. Speak to us of the 500 (so we can get the nausea over with already).
 
Redliner said:
Saw a NA Miata today (which is really rare around here).
Red.
Pristine condition.
20" chrome wheels.
:blowup:
Click to expand...

How does one fit those on an NA? It must look like a donk.

Stupid ass n00b question, could a "heavy duty" battery tax the alternator to the point of voltage drop and engine hesitation?

- - - Updated - - -

Blind_Io said:
That's the point, no matter how strong the safety cage, the squishy bits inside get enormous g-loading and there is no engineering around it.
Click to expand...

You can survive quite a bit of G's though, I think max recorded was 120 in an F1 crash.
 
prizrak said:
Stupid ass n00b question, could a "heavy duty" battery tax the alternator to the point of voltage drop and engine hesitation?
Click to expand...


No. The battery is the storage tank for the electricity, so it is just putting a 22 gallon tank to replace the stock 16 gallon tank. But, heavy duty batteries are often found in a vehicle that has some electrical issue to overcome the problem.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top