|
Coffee Jones posted:Yeah, I know. That's an unfortunate name. (safe search on) It's actually "Equus," latin for "horse."
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2010 22:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 13:39 |
|
|
Hermansen posted:Audi A7 Sportback revealed today. This is Audi's answer to the CLS, Panamera.. basically 2+2 luxury. Found some pictures at http://www.autoblog.com/2010/07/26/2011-audi-a7-sportback-shows-its-shapely-rump-in-munich/
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2010 12:49
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:I can't see it catching on all that well, though. I haven't seen that many Cubes, and I'd consider that one to be more socially acceptable than the Juke. Nissan's website is also kind of unclear whether or not you can get AWD with the 6-speed manual transmission or you're forced into the CVT. Looks like a reasonable little car though. If my current car lasts until they come out, I might be interested.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2010 00:15
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:In my eyes, showing off the RS at the Woodward Dream Cruise, of all places, makes a compelling argument for their plans. Check out the people gathered around the RS instead of looking at the new supercharger from Ford on their new 5.0 Mustang. I sure hope that's the case, and that it's not just this one out on the dream cruise: http://jalopnik.com/5464201/viva-los-hoons-jalopnik-reader-buys-mexican-focus-rs
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2010 01:03
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Hey, who likes lots of front overhang?:
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2010 20:53
|
|
|
Morphix posted:Article mentions the Cayman style front grill. I kind of like it...it reminds me of the older beetle designs, but it looks too big. Yeah, much like the Panamera, it kind of looks too long.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2010 21:47
|
|
|
ozziegt posted:Holy poo poo have you guys seen the new Nissan Juke? I think it gives the Aztek a run for it's money. I'm considering test driving one; I like the commonality of the design language with the 370Z (aggressive front lighting, taillights blending into body curves) and the fake-2-door look.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2010 15:51
|
|
|
NOTinuyasha posted:Alright I'll get dogpiled for saying this but I like the Juke, it's a cheap fake SUV with a turbocharged 1.6 that gets 24/31 and has an optional 6-speed at every trim level. It looks weird but that doesn't bother me at all, because if I see one more Rav4 or CRV I will have a breakdown, and if it's light blue I will kill myself right then and there. I'm afraid to go outside.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2010 01:25
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Juke in the wild
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2010 18:30
|
|
|
I work from home in a really walkable district in Miami, so I only drive once a week or so. When my car dies, I really have no idea what I'll get. I want a GTI, but I can't rationalize it at all.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2010 15:38
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:Hey, who wants to see what's inside Ken Block's Fiesta? quote:Because shower injectors introduce the fuel a long way back by spraying into the bell of the intake stack, much of the fuel vaporizes when going down the runner. The fuel's latent heat of vaporization cools the intake charge causing it to shrink and increase in density. More charge can be ingested improving volumetric efficiency. Is the "fuel injection as evaporative charge cooling" trick used (or rather, selected for instead of just a convenient side effect) in any production cars?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2010 19:35
|
|
|
Blocko posted:If the cameras come with fisheye lenses on them I will be supremely happy. All the backing-up cameras I've used have been very much fisheye, allowing you to see the pavement under your bumper, the wall right behind the camera, and things pretty far off to the side. I think it'd be a lot safer if all cars were required to be Miatas or other short and low-slung cars with minimal blind spots.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2011 21:03
|
|
|
dissss posted:Only works with the top down - Miatas (well NAs at least) have massive blindspots with the top up. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2011 22:30
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Good news W-body fans, the Impala will be kept in production until 2014! Good news, rental agency operators! Up until I got a Camry a week and a half ago, the Impala was the most tolerable "full-size" rental car I've had.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2011 07:01
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:If they're going to be so smug about the "real cars for real drivers" attitude they've got going on there, let's see the manual shifter in the thing. Hertz, National, Avis, and Budget told them not to bother.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 06:53
|
|
|
Morphix posted:Aaah, ya I can concede to that point. Just seems like US automakers level of laziness when compared to how much development seemingly goes into their other platforms. Least it's not spread through the whole product line I guess... If it's not broken (and considering they still move them at their ridiculous price, it's not), don't fix it. If Ford was selling Panther platform cars for over $100,000, they'd still be making them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 20:24
|
|
|
CFRP has quite a way to go in terms of cheapness, right? There's no special or rare stuff in it, just thread and plastic?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2011 15:39
|
|
|
I would so drive an El CaM3no 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2011 00:24
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:I meant new cars. Both of my cars have it on the stalk, but it seems that everybody has moved it to the steering wheel since about five years ago. It's definitely cheaper to have it on the wheel; my old Mitsubishi has it on a stalk in the same place and with the same control layout as Toyotas. Modern Mercedes-Benzes (or at least the C-class I rented a couple times) have one to the top-left of the steering wheel, so you always end up triggering it when turning and manually stopping the turn signal.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 04:47
|
|
|
SOME CAR REVIEWS FROM A COUPLE WEEKENDS AGO WHEN I WENT ON A PETROFASCISM BINGE 2011 Nissan Juke I tested this at the dealership and made sure they had a manual transmission one to test. Since I went within minutes of opening on a Saturday morning, the only salesman available couldn't drive stick very well (95% of Nissans are sold with some kind of automatic, CVT or otherwise), which was funny. That car doesn't feel as big as it seems like it should, and feels like I want my Mirage to feel; plenty of torque when you open the trottle, sixth gear for highway cruising, and I could get a comfy seating position. If my car goes and I have a lifestyle change where I need to own a car, this would be a contender. I'd want to take it on a longer test drive than four miles though. 2011 Chevrolet Cruze I drove this during a promotional/marketing type event, and ended up driving it about 60 miles (from the Coral Terrace neighborhood south-west of Miami International Airport to Boca Raton). The version was the "LTZ" trim level, with the 1.4L turbo, OnStar, and satellite radio. We had the car loaded with five people, and I didn't have to jam the driver's seat all the way back like I do in almost every other car (the exception is the contemporary Dodge Challenger, which has an absolutely retarded amount of space for the front seat). Due to the load of the car, lower-output engine, and the slushbox, it didn't feel nearly as fun or powerful as the Juke. However, the interior's a bit nicer, OnStar is quite cool, and it seemed less noisy and raw than the Juke. I'll be recommending it to my parents, since they're pro-boring-car. 2011 Chevrolet Equinox This was driven at the same event as the Cruze, but only about ten miles. It has basically the same interior as the Cruze, but is bigger, slower, and less fun because "crossover."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 05:16
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Agreed. Their recent 130min firesale ad for the 2010 Charger SRT-8 was incredible. I really appreciated that they gave a new, young director the chance to share us his vision.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2011 07:31
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Well Google's been getting away with it, so I think eventually it might happen. It might just be super helpful steering and throttle control at first... but eventually, the machines will get us I've done over a thousand highway miles in the last two weeks; the sooner a computer can do that while I yospost from the passenger seat the better.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
travisray2004 posted:Wait....am I understanding this correctly? There are actual "Miku" concerts? I just keep thinking about Krieger's fiancée from "Archer."
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2011 17:20
|
|
|
el topo posted:People think "automated driving" means the driver takes a completely passive role, but that's pretty far-fetched. Driving is increasingly assisted in cars today, and that's not really a bad thing. This is my standard argument in favor of smarter cars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBxQL7u7rxk#t=31s
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2011 03:41
|
|
|
I drove some cars this weekend. Rented the Chrysler 200 Convertible for the last couple days of RailsConf in Baltimore and a couple days of general DC stuff; the back seat isn't hostile to human life like some convertibles and the interior seems pretty nice. However, the body is pretty floppy on bad roads and the convertible mechanism is slow as hell and blocks off most of the trunk when it's down. If you have anything other than one person's carry-ons in there you're not putting the top down. And last night, since my forty minute flight got delayed four hours, I rented a 2011 Hyundai Genesis sedan for the three hour drive to South Florida. It was quite quiet and smooth on the highways, had lots of pull all three times I took on-ramps, and seemed nice. The USB port didn't work with my iPhone 3GS and the blue LCD screen on the stereo was too bright even at the lowest setting.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2011 22:24
|
|
|
Mordred posted:Seeing Americans whine about cars being too expensive makes me mad. I'd much rather have working public transit and pedestrian/bicycle-friendly cities than cheap cars
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2011 22:35
|
|
|
Mordred posted:What the hell are you doing in AI? Reading about cars; driving and automobiles are a lot more fun if you don't have a daily commute to suck the enjoyment out of them. Faerunner posted:I'd like both Move to a city that got big before 1950 and ended up a bit car-hostile: Chicago, New York, or San Francisco.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2011 13:51
|
|
|
Christobevii3 posted:Has anyone driven a chevy cruze eco 6 speed? I'm still at a loss what to do car wise. One part of me wants to be an idiot and buy a mustang boss 302 and the other be economical and get a cruze or go in between and get a gti update. Still might fix the 5.3L s10 blazer swap... AutoBlog has, and I think they liked it. I wouldn't mind testing one. I spent last weekend with the Cruze LTZ RS: quote:The cars used in this review were provided by General Motors.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2011 14:06
|
|
|
dissss posted:Because thats how much torque diesels make - Its only a little more than an equivalent VW or Ford model. The Cruze LTZ isn't quick either. It's not dangerously slow, but it's slow enough that you'd rather have the stick from the Eco just for the extra control and confidence.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:The way they packaged the 4-2-1 header over the cat is pretty nice: Oh wow, that should really help get the cat up to operating temperature faster.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2011 14:12
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:It's substantially bigger than the Mini and bigger than the GTI.  Overall length is less than an inch longer than the MINI Cooper Countryman, it's skinnier than either, and has a mere four inches on (is 106% of) the GTI's height. I was considering one a few months ago, but my car hasn't died yet so…
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2011 02:07
|
|
|
Gripen5 posted:The Sonata Turbo recommends 87. Not sure why exactly. Because the engine is designed and tested to run just fine on 87. There used to be a sticky thread on Prius Chat (don't ask) saying that higher octane than 87 doesn't actually help gas mileage (measured per gallon).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2011 00:06
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:I think CVTs have higher frictional losses than conventional gearboxes, and make up for it by being in the "right" gear vis a vis the engine at all times, which makes them better suited for certain types of vehicles, like Japanese kei cars that otherwise can only fit a 4 speed autos and mostly do city drive cycle(I think they have a clutch that just freewheels when not moving?). For larger cars/engines and highway cruising they aren't very good. The Nissan Juke (similar in size and weight to a VW Golf or Mini Cooper Countryman) gets better highway mileage and much better city mileage with the CVT than the six-speed manual.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2011 21:40
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I think the venn diagram showing "traditional subaru customers" and "people who are interested in the toyobaru" has a very small overlap and most of thsoe people post on this forum. Subaru only caters to ricers (no offense intended, I drive a Mitsubishi) and Colorado-tier granolas, and the BR-Z covers half of that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2011 15:01
|
|
|
Guinness posted:
I live in Florida, anything north and west of Colorado Springs is part of Colorado from my perspective 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2011 18:14
|
|
|
dissss posted:Sure high end ones do, but even an unsubsidised very low end smartphone will have a comparatively good screen compared to the one in that Mazda and cost about $100 unlocked and unsubsidised. The problem is that Mazda is a car company, and they don't necessarily see the display quality (a variable cost) and design (a big fixed cost that's easy to gently caress up: http://www.autoblog.com/2011/03/30/fords-second-gen-sync-system-off-to-a-buggy-start/ ) as being worth the extra cost. A car with a '90s crappy cabin infotainment system that works is a lot better than one with an extremely ambitious cutting-edge one that falls flat.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2011 22:26
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:The change to the side profile is atrocious. And the Camaro rear lights don't even make sense to me - why the hell would you want to remind people of your cheaper counterpart? Because the "cheaper counterpart" is a runaway hit and Chevrolet doesn't want to mess with it in the process of introducing a more coherent design language across both of their sporty cars.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2011 15:12
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:With the introduction of the ZL-1, the Camaro is already edging dangerously close to the Corvette in terms of pricing and power/prestige. Given that situation, logically you would want to further separate the two cars to avoid competing against yourself. Making the more expensive of the two cars (which is still selling well and has received few complaints about its styling) look more like the cheaper one is really pretty pointless. If anything, you would want to take the car further upscale since the only way to get people to buy a base Corvette instead of the ZL-1 Camaro is to accentuate the sharper styling and smaller size from being a true two-seater sports car instead of a muscle car/pony car. Making it look fatter and more like the $25k Camaro makes no sense. By making the Corvette look like the Camaro, they are re-framing it from the other fast Chevrolet to the aspirational upgrade from the Camaro. Same style, same powertrain (?), but more elite since it's more expensive and less practical. If they can get somebody who wants a Corvette but can't make the case for it into a Camaro instead of a Mustang or Challenger due to the consistent identity, that's a win. They aren't trying to make two distinct sporty cars that individually make lots of money, they're trying to build a brand (Chevrolet) that makes lots of money on sports cars, no matter the size. Making the Corvette look like the Camaro fits in to that; they're not making it look like the Mustang or Challenger.  reversal of fortune: it's the same reason Apple redesigned the iMac lines in 2009 to use the same design language as the 2008 MacBook, and why the iPod Mini got discontinued in favor of the iPod Nano. The brand and the company as a whole are more important than the products.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2011 15:30
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Except the Corvette has always been the halo car of the Chevrolet lineup, and there is no reason to make it look uglier. I still think my Ford analogy works better. Making the Corvette look like the Camaro helps it build the brand as a halo car. I'm sorry you don't like the way it looks!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2011 04:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 13:39 |
|
|
Cakefool posted:Dear god how wide do they think parking spaces are? Is that a concept or a pre-production jobbie? Unless there's a price tag attached, assume it's just a concept developed at great expense that will never be produced. There's less disappointment that way.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2011 14:01
|
|