Printable View
A turbo, and a turbo 5-cylinder no less! Talk about an abomination :)Quote:
Originally Posted by altagirl
Actually I was surprised you liked the Volvo so much when you posted yesterday about it. When my wife and I drove it we were pretty underwhelmed. Yes, I thought the engine had good power, but nothing else about the car did much for us. But, I guess if we all liked the same car model there wouldn't be like 200 different ones on the market.
Thanks, but it's not your fault, it's my responsibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by altagirl
And it's __so__ time for a change, despite the fact that the money is really good. I'll be getting me one of them self employed thingys within a couple of years.
My vote is for the suby XT, both for the turbo engine and the 50/50 mechanical 4wd. Subaru has been building turbo rally cars for years. Ask any WRX owner if they've had problems with their drivetrain; they are frickin bomber. The suby engine block can take over 350 hp with no internal mods and still be reliable (right KS?)--with slight mods, they pump them up to 500 hp for racing. Volvo engines don't have the time tested rally heritage of the suby. Subaru quality has improved greatly since 2000, check the reviews in comparison with volvo and audi, all suby models are recommended by CR. Plus they do well in the crash tests.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, no. Ever heard of the 240? You know, the one they built for 20-some years straight, and that people still race to this day...and it's a 2WD at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by natty dread
I am a Volvo devotee, I was born and raised on them, but something AG said about the AWD system keyed me. With the Volvo being electronically-controlled, and the Subie being mechanically-controlled, I'd steer towards the Subaru. With my experience with airplanes and their systems, and with Volvo computers (my father's 850 had several issues), staying simple is the way to go, and getting sophisticated is generally asking from trouble. Complex, intricate, computer or electrically-driven stuff breaks, and mechanical stuff is far more reliable and a whole hell of a lot less finicky. You'd be surprised, but in aerospace stuff (at least from a systems point of view), the vogue has been to make things essential things like landing gear simpler and more effecient, learning a lesson from 60s and 70s engineering that making complex shit is just asking for trouble. AD, don't punk me on this like I know you can.
As I mentioned, my father's 850 Turbo had some issues with its ECU, one time a transmission issue and some other related issues (constant "check engine" light being on despite there being no problem and the system being reset, etc), enough of which we ended up getting a sport ECU from iPD of Portland, and all the issues went away - it's a hot rod now too, it gained about 50hp from the swap & a new sport exhaust system being added.
Also Volvo is a relative newcomer to the AWD game, but Subaru's been at it for god knows how long, without having to involve fancy technology. Their system is likely to be more robust.
Buster, I'm the opposite of you, I LOVE turbocharged cars and how they handle - the steep acceleration curve, the way they power up hills and around corners...I love 'em.
Natty pointed something very good out...all of Subaru's stuff has been recommended by CR. Volvo's hasn't.
That said I think Subarus still feel cheap on the inside, even when dressed up all pretty...and that 3.0 V-6, if it's still the same as it was with the "LL Bean" model, is hooked up to the world's most BORING shift program, so the car still sucks. The addition of turbos as an option are exactly what was needed for their line....or allowing the 6 to come with a stick.
Sure the 240 is bomber and proven jumperb, but there is little resemblence between its drivetrain components and the current unreliable volvos. The drivetrain in the subaru uses the same technology currently used and abused in rallies for the last decade and a half--the EJ20/25 block is legendary for it's strength. Haven't seen volvo on the WRC podium in that time. 240/current volvos=apples/oranges. Sure, the subies interiors aren't volvo/audi/lexus/vw quality, but their engineering, especially today, is second to none.
Okay, that made me laugh. My boob job is still not leaking silicone at 310,000 km, although I suppose it I had driven it for the first 275,000, it would be a different story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
No, I agree. Remember my company has stuck to mostly mechanical flight controls until recently while "the other guy" has been dedicated to fly-by-wire systems since probably the '70s.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumper Bones
What a crock. Subie's are bland and basic, and now tarted up for west coast yuppies. Fine engineering they aren't - european cars are far better engineered. Compare interior efficency, engine efficency, it shows everywhere. Where's the Subaru rally team based? England. Who's the competition? Those luxury car mavens Peugeot, Ford(Volvo!) and Mitsubishi. Where do real car companies put the money when they want to compete? F1. WRC is a sideline.Quote:
Originally Posted by natty dread
More importantly, if you are looking to impress clients that you are succesful, a Subaru doesn't do it (unless you live in Seattle or Portland). European cars do, Japanese luxury will do, as will luxo SUV's. Size does matter. 2 people comfortably in the back seat is definitely important.
BLAW BLAW BLAW, BLOW SMOKE, BLOW SMOKE. They're fucking coches. No one has mentioned the Honda Element. Dissapointing.Quote:
Originally Posted by cj001f
Eazy E, mutha fucka, easy E - - the one and only.
Fucking poser...Quote:
Originally Posted by cj001f
I'm gonna buy a house cuz my realtor drives a "blah, blah, blah".....oh yippee, bang my pussy!Quote:
Originally Posted by cj001f
First - I'd say WRC performance is more applicable to me since I still want a car w/good AWD capabilities to get me up the mountain. You don't look to F1 cars for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by cj001f
You can comfortably put 2 people in the back seat in the Legacy, just like the Volvo, BMW or any other wagon. And I would venture that SLC has the same attitude on Subarus as Seattle or Portland - there's still the general feeling that they get you around best in the snow, so having a nice one is perfectly acceptable and sensible if you ski. And the one I'm looking at is the solid color (no 2 tone) and while the interior isn't quite as nice as the Volvo, it's about equal to the Nissan, and better than the non-leather interior I could afford in the BMW. And sorry but the Honda Element is hideous. I don't care what the interior looks like or can carry.
I'm not trying to go too crazy with having a status car - it needs to be nice but not "I'm making a killing off of you" nice. There's a guy in my office who drives a hummer and he had a client that told him he hates those things and "you obviously don't need my business anyway". But having something too small, noisy and old isn't going to make them want me to drive them around either.
I just got finished cleaning up my Subaru and putting for sale signs on it and the Subaru dealer called and said they'd give me $4000 for the trade in. I don't have time to go in until Monday, so I guess I'll see if anyone wants it for $4500 or so in the meantime...
Heh,Quote:
Originally Posted by cj001f
Alta,
I don't know what your sales tax is, but you'll come close to saving the $500 if you trade it in because you are only taxed on the diff b/t sales price and trade allowance. (if you're still purchasing not leasing).
don't take time out of your weekend to sell your car, enjoy it.
That's great! Hopefully that ridiculous vehicle turns many potential clients away.Quote:
Originally Posted by altagirl
Ford actually makes good, cool, performance cars in Europe. Why can't they bring that shit here!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumper Bones
VW's will nickel and dime you to death. Ask any VW owner that has had theirs past 40K miles! If you ever consider getting a VW Passat, just go out and buy an A4. BTW, you can get A4's for the same amount as a Subaru, and for those wanting to keep claiming Stupid-roo's are reliable, things have changed since the days of the old Gl's and Legacy's up to about 1995. Still don't believe me, look at the chart on the 1st or 2nd page of this post. That chart says it all.
AG if you like Subaru's so much why don't you go with a Legacy GT (or is it the XT now)....whatever the GT ish wagon with the 2.5 turbo is?
It's fast as hell, and you know what the Subaru AWD system is like.....Almost the performance of a STI (power wise) and some practicality. And if you need more power, just go down to Cobb Tuning in SLC and they'll make it fast as hell!
Ok, so I'm in exactly the same sitch as AG and have been out test driving cars. Mrs. Comish has an A4 and its our 2nd and neither have had any issues what so ever. I have always loved the "feel" of the German cars. The way the doors shut, how my left nut feels in the seats, etc.
Drove the A4 2.0T 6MT yesterday. Interior is great and it is definitely a nice car, but I don't think I can pay $31 or $32k for it. Just wasn't in love. Felt a little heavy/slow for the engine.
redrove the Subie Legacy GT and Outback XT with stick. Definitely liked these a lot more than the first time. Wished the turbo lag wasn't so bad, don't like the feel of them compared to the Audi, stick isn't as smooth, suspension much softer, brakes not as good, Interior much better than past but still not quite Audi, but the price is right... Maybe $26k. Also the Outback would definitely give us a some clearance for those E. Sierra/Baja dirt roads. Thing is 75% of driving is around LA roads where I like a tight, stiff suspension, torquey car.
Need to go redrive the Volvo S40. It seems right between the 2 in many aspects. Price, power, "feel". Faster than the Audi with no turbo lag = really fun, slower ultimately than the Subie, but again no turbo lag. Hmm.
Additionally on leases check to see if one is officially being sponsored by the manufacturer because with those the financing piece is usually heavily subsidized = good deal, as long as you don't drive too much.
Would be very curious to learn more about deductions for buying a car. What piece of a financed (bought) car can be deducted and for who? My car will be around 50% for work if that matters. Is it just the interest payments? Is it just an itemized dedecution?
again, get the Suby. I too am in sales, and have a 2002 Outback LTD, leather, etc. When cleaned up for client meetngs, etc, its very nice, but not flashy. It easily seats 4 adults comfortably, and its off-road/snow performance doesn't need any more touting here. Basically, the car, like me, is a chameleon: "professional" when it needs to be, not too flashy, and "dirtbag" and "core" enough for hauling my bikes/skis/dogs/gear all over CA.Quote:
Originally Posted by altagirl
Subies are nice cars, but there is NO WAY on earth that their engineering is "second-to-none." Subaru *just* introduced variable-valve timing in their engines, while other car makers have had it for at least a decade.Quote:
Originally Posted by natty dread
In addition, most Subarus get crappy gas mileage, even if you take into consideration that they are 4wd, 'cause the only way they can get a engine with decent power is by turbocharging it. Why do you think that they had to go through with the charade of getting the new Outback classified as an "SUV" while the old one was not? They had to get the Outback exempt from the CAFE standards for cars, because if they didn't, the aggregate fuel economy of their fleet would below EPA standards.
Subarus have primitive electronic stability control systems, no diesel engines, no high-pressure direct injection engines, no paddle-shift manual transmission (VW/Audi's DSG is the most advanced), no radar-guided/laser-guided cruise control, no heads-up display, no keyless start, no Bluetooth compatability, no ceramic brakes, no 6-/7-speed automatic, no adjustable suspension, no "pre-crash" system, and the list goes on.
Don't get me wrong--I think Subarus are good cars (save the poor fuel mileage), but they aren't close to the best engineered cars made. Nor are they the most reliable. And the new "Alfa"-like grille that is on the B9 Tribeca and that will soon be on ALL their cars (new Impreza STI front = barf) looks pretty ugly.
ADD: And if you don't believe me, introducing the 2006 WRX STI!
http://www.webwombat.com.au/motoring...x-06-sti-1.JPG
Yep, Subie's gas mileage is pretty dang bad. One bummer in this age of more reasonably priced gas...
Its also not solely based on the turbocharging because check out Audi's new FSI 2.0T. turbocharged and gets 31 or 32 on the highway with >200 hp/tourque. And apparently we aren't even seeing the real fuel efficient benefits possible from the FSI.
Not trying to hijack, but I'm in the market for a commuter car and I found a decent car I'm probably going to buy this weekend. I figured I would toss it out there since some of the people around here seem to have some good knowledge.
It's a 2003 Honda Civic DX, the basic version. It's got dealer installed AC added, about 50K miles, and it's a 5 speed stick. The price is fair, right around the high-end Kelly blue book value and it's currently owned by the original owner. 95% of the miles are highway commuter miles and it just had the 50K tune-up at the dealer without any problems. I'm not worried about driving it in the snow since we have a 4-wheel drive for ski days.
I think it's a good deal on a good car. Can anyone tell me different?
Nope........ :DQuote:
Originally Posted by sftc
I agree, However I am waiting for the A3 3.2 litre FSI VR6 Quattro w/DSG to arrive stateside sometime this fall, now that my friend will be a kick ass audiQuote:
Originally Posted by comish
Yep, I agree with you on the A3. I'm actually happy with the current 2.0T in that light of a car, but no Quattro!?!?!? :nonono2: What were they thinking? The thing now has too much power for the front wheels and has definite torque steer and just loses traction when accelerating hard, especially in corners. Loved the car, just not sure I could do it with just front wheel drive. Plus I need a car in the fall before the Quattro is going to get here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Bag O' Donuts
read this on why no quattro on the 2.0T, kinda makes sense from a pricing standpoint real reason no quattro on 2.0T A3
Sounds like we need a car-talk section of the board. Geeze, can't believe this thread is gone on so long.
I didn't read the entire thread, but I was looking at the Saab 9-2X on the recent GM deal employee pricing - pretty much the WRX in a Saab wrapper - but I'm not a car guy so that assumption could get me in trouble on this thread.
Saab Pricing - deal
After the beating my buddy's Impreza 2.5RS has taken in the last five performance rally events he's been in, I'm really impressed with the toughness of those little cars. Yeah, it has some serious skid plating going on, but it has taken some sizable hits w/o any problems.
Wow, that seems like a pretty good deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by powstash
Do not get a VW. Reliability sucks monky weenies.
C'mon AG - You would look great in one of these:
http://www.fantasycars.com/sedans/ja...rxevilsti2.jpg
barf barf barf barf barf! what the hell are they thinking?Quote:
Originally Posted by SLCFreshies
Look at that price for the 9-2X - 16 or 19 thousand (for Aero and Linear, respectively)!!! That's cheaper than you can get the Subaru models for, by quite a bit!
Now that car is actually a good deal! When it first came out, it was more expensive than the Subaru, and I couldn't see what all it did for someone other than that it had the front end sheetmetal from a Saab - I mean, it didn't even have the quircky center console ignition or anything.
Oh, come on, it's not exactly a radical departure from the current model. I think it looks o.k.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumper Bones
yeah, I'm overreacting a little...it DOES look better than the Tribeca...but I still don't like it.
I liked what they'd gone with for now, with the current models. I think the Legacy 2.5 GT sedan is beautiful!
I'm just trying to envisage that fascia accross their line...to the Foresters, and the Legacies...uggggth.
Im not going thru seven pages, did you get a new car yet? And what is it?
If not, make up your mind already. Must be nice for clients and fit $40 K worth of gear. Easy!
:the_finge
(Chillis for lunch with a few beers :the_finge )
The Legacy and Forester haven't been seen with a new, improved grille yet, but the Forester did get a new, bigger-is-better schnozz for 2006. Oh, and the reason for the "Alfa-like" noses on the Impreza and B9 is because Subie's new head designer worked for *gasp* Alfa.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumper Bones
http://a904.g.akamai.net/7/904/506/v.../aIMG_0245.jpg
To add to the "what-were-they-thinking" file, I agree that the Audi bringing in an A3 to the US without quattro is a dumb idea. Granted most Audis in the rest of the world are not 4wd, but you'd think that the US product managers would have some common sense.
I also think having Subaru (and Saab) make SUVs like the B9 is another dumb idea. I mean, people buy Subarus so they DON'T have to buy an SUV. (Don't even get me started on the new Saab SUV which is a rebadged Chevy Trailblazer!?!?!) Why does Subaru need to come out with one now? I know they want to move upmarket, but I seriously doubt that the B9 will enable Subaru to sell upmarket cars, just like the relative success of the VW Touraeg didn't do squat for the Phaeton. And since the popularity of SUVs is on the wane, why waste resources on developing one now?
Finally, although the new Lexus IS looks great, they are reliving the mistakes of the old IS by bringing in the top-of-the-line engine WITHOUT a manual. Again. You'd think they would have realized that since the Mk1 IS got panned in the press because it had no manual, it would be a priority NUMBER ONE to bring in the IS350 with a manual. But no...
We do need a car forum! :)
How about Subaru naming their SUV for a neighborhood in Manhattan? That makes about as much sense as if K2 decided to name their new ski the Miami.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLCFreshies
For you trivia fans out there TriBeCa is a contraction of "Triangle Below Canal Street."