Random Thoughts... [Automotive Edition]

How is Canadian depreciation on a Lexus GX460? Basically a Land Cruiser Prado underneath, the 460 has a timing chain rather than the 470's belt, and I think it comes with three rows.
We only got the 460. Virtually no depreciation whatsoever, and they start in the 70s new, so that's out.
 
Last edited:
GMT900 SierraYukon Denali? Get the Suburban-based one if you want more space,though I imagine length could be an issue there. Although then again, if she was asking for a Silverado.
 
Last edited:
@Jim

If you plan on keeping this vehicle long term (our definitions may be different), I'd toss everything FWD based out the window. Once you cross the 100k threshold, get ready to shell out for CV shafts, especially on the heavier models.

For the Japanese offerings, everything is junk sans the body on frame stuff. 4 Runner and Sequioa only, then.

American offerings, Tahoe or see how the new Expedition works out, otherwise you have a 9th gen F150. Not a bad thing, but a little long in the tooth, but as of 2015(?) you can get the 3.5 EcoBoost, which I'd have more faith in than the 5.4 V8.

The Santa Fe isn't bad and the warranty helps a lot if you get the 10/100 as well, but I can't speculate on anything about them as I have no experience with them.
 
Last edited:
It actually doesn't say anything relevant to the question (what proportion of oil is used for fuel).

It's irrelevant, crude oil has to be separated into fractions before it can be useful, fuels are just some of those fractions. Even if you were to completely not use any of it for fuel you would still have those fractions once the process of refining crude is completed.

- - - Updated - - -

Okay FG hive mind. The preliminary search for a car to replace Mrs. Corrigan's GLK250 (lease expires end of September) has begun. We're through with leasing, so this will be a purchase/finance. Here are the needs, keeping in mind this is to be the all purpose family vehicle (since I'm determined to keep filling the garage with 2-seaters or near 2-seaters):

- Budget roughly 40-50k CDN for new/lightly used
- 6 or 7 seater with at least halfway decent storage (i.e. 2-3 full size suitcases) with all seats deployed (roof box will almost certainly be purchased for major outings)
- Comfortable
- Reliable (plan on owning it until it utterly dies/becomes too expensive to repair, which IMO should be AT LEAST 10-15 years)
- AWD
- No four bangers. 6 and above cylinders only
- Need not be covered in whale penis leather, but neither should it be a Rubbermaid fest, either
- Decent ground clearance (no trail riding, but would like to use it for long stretches of gravel road or to get to campsites), so basically, no wagons. SUVs/CUVs only.
- Towing capacity not important, as we have nothing to tow, but that might change in 5 or 10 years time (think small boat).
- Absolutley nothing European. Our baby Porsche aside, we're done with zee Germans. Too expensive for starters, and absolutely not worth it in the long run. She prefers Japanese/Korean, but I'm determined to also get her to at least try some American offerings.
- Not the Ford Transit, Rick!


Here's my list thus far:

- Acura MDX
- Honda Pilot
- Nissan Pathfinder
- Infiniti QX60
- Toyota 4Runner
- Toyota Highlander
- Toyota Sequoia (over budget unless we can score a deal, but it would serve my hidden agenda of the car being too big to fit in the garage and prevent ruining my man cave plans)
- Hyundai Sante Fe
- GMC Acadia/Chevrolet Traverse
- Chevrolet Tahoe (doubtful, but she might like it, also see Sequoia)
- Ford Flex
- Ford Explorer/Lincoln MKT
- Ford Expedition

I know that's a whopping range of prices and sizes in that group but that's only because I'm trying to keep an open mind, and frankly, sometimes she surprises me (if we didn't need the 6 seats, she'd be asking for a Silverado right now). If I were to take a pre-test drive guess, I suspect the Honda Pilot and Hyundai Sante Fe might be her favourites. I wonder about the Honda automatics in this day and age (Spectre?). I'm partial to the new Acadia, but it's pricey (though I'm sure we could negotiate it heavily) and I wonder about GMC long term 'Kwalitee'.

[EDIT: despite the requirements, she might still opt for a minivan, but that broadens the search too much for the purposes of this exercise, so let's ignore those for the time being]
Minivan would actually fit your needs best as all the non-massive SUVs (Pathfinder, Explorer) have pretty much no storage once third row is deployed. You are probably better off looking at things the size of Expedition or just going with a minivan (sliding doors in crowded car parks are quite good for kids)

- - - Updated - - -

It's not for people who park on streets. But does it need to be all things to all people before it's not considered a failure?

Yes, as the ICE is just such a technology, want to get rid of ICE have to replace it with something that is all things to all people. Remember personal transport is a drop in the emissions bucket.
 
Last edited:
Random Thoughts... [Automotive Edition]

Expedition or minivan. The Sequoia has a god awful interior. The GM's, while nice, have compromised 3rd rows and cargo areas (dat liftover...) due to the lack of IRS.

The Durango could be interesting even though it's a class below the BOF entries, it's rear drive by default, available with V8 power....
 
I have to agree with gaasc. GMT900 SUV. The GMT800 i have is nice too but typical old GM interior. Drivetrain is reliable as hell and comfortable. Seems to tick all your boxes. You will probably never need a roof box either if you get the Yukon XL or Suburban.
 
The main problem with all of the above is that unlike pictured in the comic, the first gen Insight wasn't a plug-in hybrid. That instantly discredits not only the picture but the entire post. Much like the subframe bolts on the Passat CC, who knows what else was crafted out of BS, since there's such an obvious oversight in the center of it all?

Nice attempt at a boomerang, but you are apparently unaware of the fact that since the Insight has a resale value of "lolno" in most of the US, it is a relatively popular modification to convert it to a PHEV or even a full BEV. And, as the graphic suggests, to then crow about it. It's not even a homebrew job - there have been commercially available kits to do either conversion since the late 2000s. Here's one of the PHEV kits as installed: https://www.flickr.com/photos/79702783@N00/sets/72157622162233964/with/4035494136/

- - - Updated - - -

Expedition or minivan. The Sequoia has a god awful interior. The GM's, while nice, have compromised 3rd rows and cargo areas (dat liftover...) due to the lack of IRS.

The Durango could be interesting even though it's a class below the BOF entries, it's rear drive by default, available with V8 power....

No, rick. The Durango is, unsurprisingly, crap. The third row seating isn't very good and you basically have no stowage space back there if you do use the third row. Remember, most people that get a three row SUV take the third row out and heave it into their garage, never to use it again until time to sell the car.
 
Last edited:
Ah, but for a car to be able to stand for all electric cars and specifically plug-ins, it mustn't be one that needs a conversion to become such.

But is there even an electric car yet that every egghead on the internet would recognize specifically to be a plug-in electric vehicle? One that is not the GM Impact?
 
Okay FG hive mind. The preliminary search for a car to replace Mrs. Corrigan's GLK250 (lease expires end of September) has begun. We're through with leasing, so this will be a purchase/finance. Here are the needs, keeping in mind this is to be the all purpose family vehicle (since I'm determined to keep filling the garage with 2-seaters or near 2-seaters):

- Budget roughly 40-50k CDN for new/lightly used
- 6 or 7 seater with at least halfway decent storage (i.e. 2-3 full size suitcases) with all seats deployed (roof box will almost certainly be purchased for major outings)
- Comfortable
- Reliable (plan on owning it until it utterly dies/becomes too expensive to repair, which IMO should be AT LEAST 10-15 years)
- AWD
- No four bangers. 6 and above cylinders only
- Need not be covered in whale penis leather, but neither should it be a Rubbermaid fest, either
- Decent ground clearance (no trail riding, but would like to use it for long stretches of gravel road or to get to campsites), so basically, no wagons. SUVs/CUVs only.
- Towing capacity not important, as we have nothing to tow, but that might change in 5 or 10 years time (think small boat).
- Absolutley nothing European. Our baby Porsche aside, we're done with zee Germans. Too expensive for starters, and absolutely not worth it in the long run. She prefers Japanese/Korean, but I'm determined to also get her to at least try some American offerings.
- Not the Ford Transit, Rick!

I think you need to determine what priority to assign cargo space versus third row seating - because most of the vehicles you listed cannot comfortably accommodate two full sized hard suitcases with the third row seating in use. You have also forgotten the Suburban and its relatives, as they can easily check most if not all of the boxes (though some conditionally) you require while not being too much larger than the Tahoe/Yukon/etc. The Suburban is also shorter than the Silverado your wife has requested - at least vice the crew cab versions.

Honda's current automatics for mid-size and larger are all six, eight or more speeds. It was the five speed gearboxes that were made of fail - but then so were pretty much everyone else's five speed automatics to greater or lesser degree. It seems like the rule of thumb for automatic transmissions is that above three speeds, only get automatics with even numbers of speeds for best results.

EDIT: despite the requirements, she might still opt for a minivan, but that broadens the search too much for the purposes of this exercise, so let's ignore those for the time being]

Not to mention that the minivan would be a symbol that you'd given up on life. :D

- - - Updated - - -

Ah, but for a car to be able to stand for all electric cars and specifically plug-ins, it mustn't be one that needs a conversion to become such.

But is there even an electric car yet that every egghead on the internet would recognize specifically to be a plug-in electric vehicle? One that is not the GM Impact?

The Kammback shape of the Insight, which is similar to the Prius and most other "LOOK AT MEEEEEE, I'M A HYBRID/BEV" so-called cars, is close enough for most people to stand in for all of them. Hell, for that matter, there's still a lot of idiots out there that think "hybrid' = BEV car and that you have to plug in all Prius models ever.
 
Last edited:
For me, the Insight is closer to a late-'90s version of the Citro?n SM, and being a fearless pioneer of unconventional tech it managed to be a better late-'90s Citro?n than Citro?ns themselves.

As for the Prius bit, I wouldn't prop up my post with just "there are idiots out there".
 
For me, the Insight is closer to a late-'90s version of the Citro?n SM, and being a fearless pioneer of unconventional tech it managed to be a better late-'90s Citro?n than Citro?ns themselves.

As for the Prius bit, I wouldn't prop up my post with just "there are idiots out there".

So, like the SM, it's a symbol of utter engineering failure and an embarrassment to motoring? Good to know.

I'm pointing out that the Kammback shape over here screams "hybrid/BEV" to most people (to the point where it's a known marketing phenomenon) over here. It's something where one vehicle of this shape can stand representative of the entire class of hybrids/BEVs for artistic purposes. It is also the case that if the perception of vehicles that look like this wasn't such that many people thought they had to be plugged in - or that the knowledge of said perception wasn't so widely spread - the artist wouldn't have used it to make their point. Nobody in the intended audience would have gotten the joke.

Just like if the reputation of Detroit as a shithole wasn't widely known, this scene would never have been put in a (mostly comedy) movie.
 
Last edited:
On a positive note, finally one of Spectre's posts is showing the Insight I was always longing for :)
 
Someone needs to revive the E30 dashboard, where the controls are rammed in the drivers face.
 
GMT900 SierraYukon Denali? Get the Suburban-based one if you want more space,though I imagine length could be an issue there. Although then again, if she was asking for a Silverado.
The Yukon starts at 58k CDN without really anything in it, and the Denali is in the 70s. No go.

@Jim

If you plan on keeping this vehicle long term (our definitions may be different), I'd toss everything FWD based out the window. Once you cross the 100k threshold, get ready to shell out for CV shafts, especially on the heavier models.

For the Japanese offerings, everything is junk sans the body on frame stuff. 4 Runner and Sequioa only, then.

American offerings, Tahoe or see how the new Expedition works out, otherwise you have a 9th gen F150. Not a bad thing, but a little long in the tooth, but as of 2015(?) you can get the 3.5 EcoBoost, which I'd have more faith in than the 5.4 V8.

The Santa Fe isn't bad and the warranty helps a lot if you get the 10/100 as well, but I can't speculate on anything about them as I have no experience with them.
Thanks, I hadn't really considered that. Still, not sure if that's enough to sway me unless FWD related equipment (i.e. CV shafts, boot, etc) becomes cost prohibitive. It's not a cheap fix, but it might still be cost effective if the vehicle can go another 100,000+ on them before needing looked at again. Thoughts?

Minivan would actually fit your needs best as all the non-massive SUVs (Pathfinder, Explorer) have pretty much no storage once third row is deployed. You are probably better off looking at things the size of Expedition or just going with a minivan (sliding doors in crowded car parks are quite good for kids)
I agree, but like I said, I just wanted the hive to focus on CUVs/SUVs for the moment. I might inquire about minivans later.

Expedition or minivan. The Sequoia has a god awful interior. The GM's, while nice, have compromised 3rd rows and cargo areas (dat liftover...) due to the lack of IRS.

The Durango could be interesting even though it's a class below the BOF entries, it's rear drive by default, available with V8 power....
The Dodge scares me...

I have to agree with gaasc. GMT900 SUV. The GMT800 i have is nice too but typical old GM interior. Drivetrain is reliable as hell and comfortable. Seems to tick all your boxes. You will probably never need a roof box either if you get the Yukon XL or Suburban.
I suspect she'll balk at the size of the Suburban, but it is (now) on the list for her to look at. Thanks! See above for why no GMC models except the Acadia. Too $$$.

I think you need to determine what priority to assign cargo space versus third row seating - because most of the vehicles you listed cannot comfortably accommodate two full sized hard suitcases with the third row seating in use.
So, the second row would be for two full size, elderly adults (my parents), and the last row for dog and potential infant. By the time any child grows out of the third row, my parents will likely have passed on from this mortal coil. Highly unlikely to have many excursions with people in all seats, hence having "some" room aft of the third row, but not necessarily GMT-900 levels of real estate.

You have also forgotten the Suburban and its relatives, as they can easily check most if not all of the boxes (though some conditionally) you require while not being too much larger than the Tahoe/Yukon/etc. The Suburban is also shorter than the Silverado your wife has requested - at least vice the crew cab versions.
I blame forgetting the Suburban on being post call and having to answer the damn phone 6 times between 2-6 am. Thanks for that. Still, it's breaking the budget barrier, but could probably be made up for with discounts/negotiations.

Honda's current automatics for mid-size and larger are all six, eight or more speeds. It was the five speed gearboxes that were made of fail - but then so were pretty much everyone else's five speed automatics to greater or lesser degree. It seems like the rule of thumb for automatic transmissions is that above three speeds, only get automatics with even numbers of speeds for best results.
That's great to know. Thanks.

Not to mention that the minivan would be a symbol that you'd given up on life. :D
I'm not concerned about that. Not when I already have one, and soon another, car in the garage/drive that will help counter that impression. :p
 
Last edited:
Random Thoughts... [Automotive Edition]

Replying to what you edited out: Yes, the Suburban is shorter than a crew cab Silverado. A 2016 Suburban is 224.4" long and the shortest crew cab 2016 Silverado you could get is 230". This is the relationship they have always had; on any given GM full size truck chassis, the shortest four door variant is the Tahoe/Yukon, followed by the Suburban/etc and only then the actual pickup trucks.

Also, used they're a hell of a lot cheaper.
 
Last edited:
That relationship carried over to the S10 class too. My extended cab long box was longer than the s blazer by a significant amount.
 
So, the second row would be for two full size, elderly adults (my parents), and the last row for dog and potential infant. By the time any child grows out of the third row, my parents will likely have passed on from this mortal coil. Highly unlikely to have many excursions with people in all seats, hence having "some" room aft of the third row, but not necessarily GMT-900 levels of real estate.

You don't want to put kids in 3rd row seat in most SUVs (that are not Suburban sized), there is very little space between the rear end and 3rd row.
 
You wouldn't want a car seat in the 3rd row. It's a lot of back twisting and reaching to get back there and get anyone buckled in, and then every single time you wanted to fold down those back seats, you'd have to go through the pain-in-the-butt process of unhooking, and then re-installing the car seat. And since they need to face backwards, they are more susceptible to bright sunlight shining in their face through the back window than they are when sitting in the middle.
 
Top