The Car Thread

[MrDrew]

2 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

Pretty sure you've never been in a Suburban/Expedition/Armada/etc.

Adults fit comfortably in the second row, children through school age in the 3rd with tons of space even with the 3rd row up.

Not sure where you're taking your car, but it won't be the same places you can take a vehicle with a transfers case and 10 inches of ground clearance.

Also, let's see how that minivan or sedan tows a boat, camper, toy hauler....you get the idea.

Lastly, if you just mean "crossover" and not SUV, you may want to think again.  My 82 year old father thought the same way you did until he turned 80.  All of a sudden getting in and out of cars that have a seating position lower to the ground wasn't so easy and he traded the sedan in for a crossover.

Just because you don't see the value doesn't mean it isn't there.

I wasn't talking about a full-size SUV. There is a purpose for those. They're still a lot harder to use the back seat than it is in a van. Even truck-based mid-size SUV have real utility. 

Are crossovers nice vehicles? Yes. Is there a real purpose for them? Not at all. I understand that they sit higher than most cars, but there definitely cars out there that have the same seat height. There's a high profit margin in the crossovers, so it's easier for the dealer to steer somebody in that direction than show them other options.  

For the vast amount of the population, buying a crossover is essentially a comb over. You know things are changing, you need to do something, but you're holding on to being cool and won't just come to terms with what's really happening. Most of them are built on a car platform, with bigger tires, a 1,000 extra pounds, and stying that adds a lot of drag. They're overgrown station wagons that have less space in the back, get way worse gas mileage, and cost more for that. 

With that being said, there actually are a few vehicles that fall into the crossover category that actually are useful. The Subaru Crosstrek has crazy ground clearance, a good AWD system, and can actually get you places that some real SUV's cant. The Porsche Cayenne tows 7,700lbs, has serious offroad capability, and is a sports car when the suspension is dropped. 

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

1 hour ago, MrDrew said:

I wasn't talking about a full-size SUV. There is a purpose for those. They're still a lot harder to use the back seat than it is in a van. Even truck-based mid-size SUV have real utility. 

Are crossovers nice vehicles? Yes. Is there a real purpose for them? Not at all. I understand that they sit higher than most cars, but there definitely cars out there that have the same seat height. There's a high profit margin in the crossovers, so it's easier for the dealer to steer somebody in that direction than show them other options.  

For the vast amount of the population, buying a crossover is essentially a comb over. You know things are changing, you need to do something, but you're holding on to being cool and won't just come to terms with what's really happening. Most of them are built on a car platform, with bigger tires, a 1,000 extra pounds, and stying that adds a lot of drag. They're overgrown station wagons that have less space in the back, get way worse gas mileage, and cost more for that. 

With that being said, there actually are a few vehicles that fall into the crossover category that actually are useful. The Subaru Crosstrek has crazy ground clearance, a good AWD system, and can actually get you places that some real SUV's cant. The Porsche Cayenne tows 7,700lbs, has serious offroad capability, and is a sports car when the suspension is dropped. 

I don't disagree, most folks simply prefer the looks to a car.

The 3rd row crossover can be decent for a person who leases as they wont have the vehicle long, but when the school age kids get bigger that backseat isn't very useful, I agree.

A minivan is almost always a better option for a large family, no way around it.

[skywindO2]

Last time I took my car in for an oil change, they said I should be looking into getting new tires about this time of year. Anything I should know about buying tires? Is the penny test accurate when determining if I need new tires?

 

Was planning on just going with whatever was cheapest from Costco. 

[MrDrew]

36 minutes ago, skywindO2 said:

Last time I took my car in for an oil change, they said I should be looking into getting new tires about this time of year. Anything I should know about buying tires? Is the penny test accurate when determining if I need new tires?

 

Was planning on just going with whatever was cheapest from Costco. 

You live in Canada. You should probably invest in some winter tires if you're getting them now. 

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

5 hours ago, skywindO2 said:

Last time I took my car in for an oil change, they said I should be looking into getting new tires about this time of year. Anything I should know about buying tires? Is the penny test accurate when determining if I need new tires?

 

Was planning on just going with whatever was cheapest from Costco. 

Tirerack.com

Research and read consumer reviews.

On a side note, the tires are literally the only part of the car connecting you to the road (little known fact right there) and is something I personally wouldn’t recommend cheaping out on.

On yet another side note, I’m getting some new BFG KO2’s put on this Saturday. Pretty excited.

[vikesfan89]

Has anyone ever taken the chrome of some rims before? I have a set of wheels that I use in the winter since the chrome was already getting bad. Last year I sprayed a black removable coating on, which look alrite until that started peeling but I think it would have worked better if I had the chrome off but that looks a little more complicated than I was thinking

[jrry32]

On 11/7/2017 at 8:58 AM, MrDrew said:

I wasn't talking about a full-size SUV. There is a purpose for those. They're still a lot harder to use the back seat than it is in a van. Even truck-based mid-size SUV have real utility. 

Are crossovers nice vehicles? Yes. Is there a real purpose for them? Not at all. I understand that they sit higher than most cars, but there definitely cars out there that have the same seat height. There's a high profit margin in the crossovers, so it's easier for the dealer to steer somebody in that direction than show them other options.  

For the vast amount of the population, buying a crossover is essentially a comb over. You know things are changing, you need to do something, but you're holding on to being cool and won't just come to terms with what's really happening. Most of them are built on a car platform, with bigger tires, a 1,000 extra pounds, and stying that adds a lot of drag. They're overgrown station wagons that have less space in the back, get way worse gas mileage, and cost more for that. 

With that being said, there actually are a few vehicles that fall into the crossover category that actually are useful. The Subaru Crosstrek has crazy ground clearance, a good AWD system, and can actually get you places that some real SUV's cant. The Porsche Cayenne tows 7,700lbs, has serious offroad capability, and is a sports car when the suspension is dropped. 

The purpose is that most people don't want to drive a mini-van.

[vikesfan89]

My brother never wanted to buy a mini van but I think he likes it quite a bit now

[MrDrew]

19 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

The purpose is that most people don't want to drive a mini-van.

Most of them sold wouldn't replace a mini van. That makes them pointless, gas wasting, overpriced, bad handling stationwagons. 

[jrry32]

28 minutes ago, MrDrew said:

Most of them sold wouldn't replace a mini van. That makes them pointless, gas wasting, overpriced, bad handling stationwagons. 

The point is to give you additional options because some people are unwilling to drive a mini-van.

Edited December 10, 2017 by jrry32

[MrDrew]

1 hour ago, jrry32 said:

The point is to give you additional options because some people are unwilling to drive a mini-van.

A CRV isn't a replacement for a mini van, and it's the best selling. It has no towing capability, no offroad ability, and very little room in the back. It's a poor replacement for a hatchback, trying to pose as a real SUV. The 3 row crossovers are an even worse replacement for a van.

Like I said, they're like a comb over. You know you need a van, or a wagon, but want to pretend like you're driving something cool. Problem is that they're not cool, and less practical. So there's really no point to them, except expensive denial. 

[jrry32]

1 hour ago, MrDrew said:

A CRV isn't a replacement for a mini van, and it's the best selling. It has no towing capability, no offroad ability, and very little room in the back. It's a poor replacement for a hatchback, trying to pose as a real SUV. The 3 row crossovers are an even worse replacement for a van.

Like I said, they're like a comb over. You know you need a van, or a wagon, but want to pretend like you're driving something cool. Problem is that they're not cool, and less practical. So there's really no point to them, except expensive denial. 

That's still a purpose. If it sells, it sells.

[MrDrew]

1 hour ago, jrry32 said:

That's still a purpose. If it sells, it sells.

So being environmentally irresponsible, overextending people's budget, and giving them a product that can't last as long due to being over weight/under powered is ok because it sells? 

[jrry32]

35 minutes ago, MrDrew said:

So being environmentally irresponsible, overextending people's budget, and giving them a product that can't last as long due to being over weight/under powered is ok because it sells? 

Yes. If it were a bad product, people wouldn't buy it. If people don't want to buy mini-vans, give them what they want. I have a lot of issues with corporations, but even I don't think it's their job to protect us from ourselves.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

43 minutes ago, MrDrew said:

So being environmentally irresponsible, overextending people's budget, and giving them a product that can't last as long due to being over weight/under powered is ok because it sells? 

Overextending whose budget?  Some people can actually afford crossovers. Why is this the manufacturers responsibility? Does this same horrific logic apply to everything or just crossovers? 

Environmentally irresponsible? Many crossovers have 4 and 6 cylinder engines, just like minivans. What vehicles are you referring to that are gas guzzlers in the crossover segment?

What data are you using for reliability/durability here?  I feel like there are plenty of high milage CRV's and Foresters on the road...