Automotive Perspectives

Saab, parting is such sweet sorrow...

2009-12-18T07:39:00.001-08:00

RIP Saab AB. We hardly knew ye, though we did lust after the many awesome vehicles in your repertoire. Sad day for the automotive world and future car enthusiasts.

There are only two Real Synthetic Oils in America

2007-11-26T20:03:00.000-08:00

So you think that all these "Synthetic" oils available for sale in the various stores around the US are true PAO based Motor Oils. Think again. PAO or Polyalphaolefin is the main lab produced synthetic base for Group IV stock Synthetic Oils. Base I, II & III are all dino oils. I'm being really concise on this as it can be researched elsewhere, I'm just posting it to get the point out to the masses.

Since a 1997 court case brought on by Mobil against Castrol (in the US), and subsequently won by Castrol granted anyone to produce their non-PAO Group III base oil and sell it as a full synthetic, again, ONLY in the United States because anything can be bought or decided by the wrong people (courts, not scientists) in the US. So, since 1997 there has really only been one true synthetic oil available for sale in the United States, Mobil 1.

Well, I'm letting everyone in on a little secret. Castrol DOES sell a true synthetic in the US, it just doesn't make it here (which is fine by me). Autozone sells Castrol 0w30 "European Formula" Syntec. Look for the "Made in Germany" on the back of the bottle. See, in Europe the BS that is allowed to fly in the US isn't worth squat before a real set of government standards groups as in Europe. This is one of those few. Castrol SLX (now Castrol Edge). Note again, there are no other versions of Castrol or any other brand you can buy in a store on any given day other than Mobil 1 which are true synthetics.

There are racing specialties and what not, and "Amsoil" which while a true synthetic has some of the sleaziest marketing people in the world. Contrary to what they'd have you believe, Amsoil isn't the secret oil that most race teams use. In my 10 years of Rallying, Hillclimb and Time Trials I believe I've seen Amsoil once. Most people either use a high end conventional from Castrol or Valvoline, or Mobil 1 Synthetic.

Either way, if you DO look at the various tests online, you'll find that Castrol actually does indeed beat Mobil 1 on many levels (though not all), so either really will do well for your synthetic needs. Mobil 1 is generally a little on the thinner side of its viscosity rating (high number), whereas German Castrol (as it is referenced (or simply GC)) is a little on the thick for its equivalent viscosity rating.

If you are running a high performance engine, a turbo engine, a supercharged engine and/or care simply about providing your engine the best care you can in terms of motor oil, you've got those choices for synthetics and nothing else. Caveat emptor.

And if anyone is wondering, the reason why I specifically went for German Castrol is because it has been pretty much designed for the German motor manufacturers. It is the only oil in the United States (synthetic) that passes the stricter of VW, Audi, Mercedes, Opel, BMW and Porsches requirements for engine oil. I drive a Chevrolet Optra5 these days since selling the VW Bora Sport 1.8T and it is powered by a modern evolution of the 1st generation Iron Ecotec by Opel, which just happens to be produced in Melbourne by Holden (GM Australia). The engine is happy now, getting the fluids it truly wants.

Till next time

Eric

What are your Top 10 automobiles of choice?

2006-02-08T09:11:00.000-08:00

I was thinking about this whilst flinging my Optra around on my commute today down a gravel covered B road and thought I'd share with everyone as well as request responses with your choices.

Here are the guidelines. Pick your favourite top 10 choices of vehicles you'd like to own, and are technically in your price range (doesn't mean it'd be easy, but basically it means no Bugatti Veyron unless you're pulling over the equivalent of 1,000,000 € per year). Five should be vehicles that are available for purchase right now in your country, and five should be unavailable for purchase (legally) in your country. By country, I refer to where you are currently living, not where you were born per se.

Vehicles can be from any year past or present, and prices of said vehicles should reflect what they would cost in 2006 dollars.

Finally, what, if any modifications would you make to said vehicles, whether it be paint, or engine, or even upholstery changes?

As for me: My top 5 cars (available in the United States) and what i'd do with them are (in no particular order):

1. 1987 Volkswagen Vanagon Syncro (AWD) with a Subaru WRX STI motor mounted in place of the stock motor. This engine is wonderful, they FIT in the Vanagon (as others have proven with the NON-STI version of said powerplant, and the vehilces are a hoot to drive with gobs of room and surprisingly wonderful handling (especially for a vehicle with the aerodynamics of a cinder block.

2. 1988 Toyota Celica (RWD) in white with a proper tarmac specific rally suspension setup and lightened drivetrain bits. Think Juha Kankunen in the late 80's.

3. 1993 Ford Escort Cosworth (SUN Racing imported US Spec, Street Legal versions for $43,000 from 1992-1996). I would make this into a look alike of Carlos Sainz's Repsol sponsored WRC cossie. I absolutely loved the looks and design of the RSII Cosworth.

4. 1985 Merkur XR4Ti in black, with all of the necessary body bits to give it the interior and exterior appearance of the fabulous Ford RS500 Sierras, one of my favourite touring cars of all time. This would include a larger Garrett turbocharger and the necessary intercooling upgrades. I'd be aiming for 450ps output for this one (though in the US there is one guy pushing 650ps output overall, which is just plain sick).

5. 1987 Alfa Romeo 164 3.0l V6 (last of the RWD 164's) in Red, kept entirely stock. To me, this is the epitome of what a European saloon should be.

An now, My top 5 cars (NOT available in the United States) and what i'd do with them are (in no particular order):

1. 2005 Renault Williams Clio 182 Trophy - in Blue with Yellow alloys, otherwise stock.

2. 1967 Morris Minor 1000, Right hand drive, bone stock.

3. 2005 Vauxhall VX220 roadster.. Everything that people like about the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky but with better looks and nicer switchgear.

4. 1997 Nissan Sunny GTI-R in fully rally look alike trim down to the graphics and all.

5. Peugeot 206 GTi, in white, lowered with 19' 5 spoke alloys shod with Michelin Pilots, and a quad rally light pod on the nose of the bonnet and the WRC rear aero package (high spoiler).

So that sums it up, 1 Volkswagen, 1 Alfa Romeo, 1 Toyota, 2 Fords, 1 Nissan, 1 Renault, 1 MG, 1 Peugeot and 1 Vauxhall. Fairly well balanced and affordable (just not all at once).

What about your choices?

American Fear of Small Cars

2006-01-30T14:05:00.000-08:00

I was listening to the podcast today from The Car Buyer's Notebook and I came away disturbed. Frank Giovinazzi, host of the aforementioned podcast and owner of the related site claimed more or less that unless the price of petrol go so exorbitantly high, there's no way he ("any many other Americans") would ever be in a small car again.

First, I find this somewhat amusing because quite frankly, in America, there is no such thing as a small car (by world standards) barring say the Mini, the Scion xA and the Chevrolet Kalos/Aveo. I wouldn't call the Toyota Yaris a small car (given that they made it larger to come here and even then, it wasn't Aygo sized) yet I gather he might. This comes back to the American mentality of bigger is better, which by the way is a very flawed mindset.

Secondly, are all of the individuals which Frank mentions and includes himself amongst claustrophobic?

Thirdly, what do people need (in terms of consumer non-work vehicles) such a vast of expanse of space for, their obese frames (wait, this is America we're speaking of). No, you don't need to carry cases of paperwork, luggage and enough cans of food and drink around in your boot. Look at the joke which is the Ford Expedition. Do you really think it is necessary that ever occupant has that much space between them, enough that one would have to lean (to the point of laying down) on their side to reach the door handle on the opposing side of the vehicle? This is a joke, no wonder SUV's are laughed at round the world. Lets not even get into 4x4's as that's another issue in and of itself.

Wait, I just had a realisation.. it's more room for cup holders and folding trays so that people can hold their 2 litre sized fountain drinks from the local mini-mart/petrol station in any one of 12 locations in these behemoths. This applies to more than just SUV's. And before anyone says that other manufacturers (specifically European or Japanese) also make cars that are massive, realise that they are primarily made for the US Market, or conversely for heads of state and ambassadors globally (not to mention the local Prince and/or ruler of (name you Middle Eastern sovereign country here). Even companies like Volvo made larger versions of their cars, but they had a use. Limousines and Hearses. There's just no non-selfish/arrogant reason for consumers to have vehicles of this magnitude.

I think the real reason that Frank and others hold such a hatred of so called "Small Cars" is the fear in their own minds that they'll be somewhat less important if people cannot immediately see that they spent such-and-such amount of currency or are trying to allude to a parallel with their penis.

So sad, so American a mindset (though not exclusively lest I be chided for this posting). Maybe people like that will grow a set and allow themselves to experience non-yacht sized vehicles for once, there is something out there in terms of reasonably sized vehicles for everyone. But please, whatever you do, don't think that America has small cars available, because its just not the truth of the matter.

-Eric

Quick Review: 2006 Chevrolet Epica (Chevrolet Evanda)

2006-01-27T08:15:00.000-08:00

Today I had to drop off my 2005 Chevrolet Optra 5 for its 12,000km service and oil change, and as such, the dealer provides a loaner car. In this case, the car was a Chevrolet Epica (Chevrolet Evanda in Europe).

First things first: I do not care for large cars, and to me, anything over 4.5 metres long it too big for my liking. This car is a whopping 4.77 metres in length and yet it doesn't feel that way from the driver's seat, in fact it feels just the opposite. I'm not exactly average in height standing at 190cm, but my build is average (a.k.a. not fat/don't have the average American's girth). I honestly felt cramped to the point where I'm glad I'm not claustrophobic because it would've caused an episode if I were. The overall cabin does seem expansive except for having my head almost rubbing against the headliner and my kneels almost straddling the leather wrapped steering wheel. I guess were I average height it might be a better fit. This must be what the current Impala is like (in terms of size) inside.

The dash material and controls seemed a little on the cheap end, and mis-matched as well. I felt like I was in a Nissan A32 Maxima where everything was smooth plastic coloured I'm-going-to-fade-horribly-in-5-years-or-so black. The control stalks on the steering column were not much better having a fragile feel about them. Needless to say, I'm not impressed with the control bits either, even the leather wrapped wheel had a cheap feel about it. I'd give the Interior a 6 out of 10 were I judging it in that manner.

The exterior is quite beautiful for a large saloon as it were, with lines sculpted by Giugiaro of Italdesign in Turino, Italy. Nice flowing profile with a v-shaped hood. Pictures don't do it justice (which seems to be a theme with most of Giugiaro's designs sans the new Alfa Brera. I did notice I received quite a large number of glances and double takes while driving to the office today, so I think that does give some indication that while still a conservatively fashions form, it is different enough to warrant that second look by passersby.

This leads me to the last section of my mini-review, performance. The 2.5l 30v inline 6 feels more impressive than its numbers on paper would have one believe. For a car that just tips the scales at a little over 1500kg one would think that 115kw (155ps) @ 5,800rpm and 240nm (177 lbs ft) of torque would be somewhat lacking, but it isn't. The four speed adaptive automatic transmission seemed willing under acceleration to take the revs up past 6,000rpm for every shift without complaining. This engine should be available to other Chevrolet models as it really has the feel that only an inline 6 seems to have (how i miss the E30 BMW 323i's 2.3l inline 6). Acceleration feels solid and the brakes fairly strong with only a hint of fade after continuous stops.

The above remarks are based on a 39km drive over a limited length of A roads and an overwhelming majority of B roads. The handling for a car in this class are steady and sure footed and body roll was kept to a minimal without the ride ever feeling harsh, even on gravel.

I wouldn't buy one for myself, but I definitely think that with a little more work on the interior materials quality (not the fit and finish which seemed fairly bang on), this car could definitely be a viable option for those people I know who prefer a larger saloon as their mode of transport. Now if we could only get the SUV drivers to downsize to saloons (or better yet hatchbacks), things would be quite chipper in my book.

Eric

Correcting a Corporate Mistake (Badge Engineering Reversed)

2006-01-25T11:31:00.000-08:00

As many of you know, I recently sold my 2003 Volkswagen Bora Sportline 1.8T (Jetta IV Turbo w/180ps) and took delivery of a 2005 "Suzuki Reno". I really enjoy the car, it reminds me of how I prefer my driving experiences; In touch with the car, receiving feedback when accelerating, braking, cornering, etc., as opposed to pure isolation. As cars (both models and manufacturers) have achieved popularity, they've become over-burdened with extra weight, electronics and plushness which only serve to isolate said driver from the very action that one is to do in an automobile. Drive.

Back to the issue at hand though, I have this "Suzuki Reno" listed in the aforementioned quotes because while technically it is sold as a Suzuki, the car is a General Motors product. It is sold in Europe as a Chevrolet Lacetti, China as a Buick Excelle HSV, Korea as a GM Daewoo Lacetti, Africa, Canada and Malasia as a Chevrolet Optra. Yes, Suzuki does parter with GM and is indeed part owner of the GM Daewoo manufacturing facilities, however that is only in part because GM has ownership in Suzuki as a whole, just as with Subaru, et al.

I recently (thanks to the wonderful help of GM of Canada and Tom Smith Chevrolet in Ontario in helping me to aquire the necessary tidbits (for a wonderful price I might add) of converting my car back to the way it should've been sold in the United States; As a Chevrolet.

If Chevrolet is going to put its name on this product all over the world, why can't they put it on its product in the US. People love the Aveo (Kalos). I'm sick of badge engineering and name changing from market to market. Personally, I'd've liked to have seen the Lacetti name used (afterall, they are Italian designed bodies (interior and exterior), so it isn't outlandish an idea).

I've taken matters into my own hands. Yes, I will be converting the Suzuki logo covered grille over to the factory Chevrolet badged grille, and yes, the rear logos will be coming off of the car and will be replaced with the factory Chevrolet parts. This is my own little protest against the stupidity of badge engineering. If Daewoo still existed as a sovereign corporate entity, they would be badged as such, but as it stands, they are Chevrolets, powered by GM Opel designed, GM Holden built Family II, 16v DOHC 2.0l motors (in North America as a whole (The rest of the world gets 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, Supercharged 1.8, and as of 2006 Diesel options)).

Aside from that, the chevy grille is nicer than the Suzuki grille. I also like how the badge placement is different for every other version of this car than the Suzuki. The Suzuki places the "Suzuki" nameplate on the lower left of the rear (under the tail light just above the bumper) and the "Reno" (stupid name) badge right above the bumper on the far right side of the rear). Everywhere else, the car name (Optra 5) is located on the thin strip above the hatch release handle right below the rear window and just to the left of the center of the car, with the Chevrolet plate being symmetrically placed on the right side. It looks nicer over all.

People may wonder, and I gather some Chevy V8 heads are going to feel annoyed that a Chevrolet name is on yet another small hatchbatck (a beautifully designed one I might add) as opposed to an obnoxiously oversized car and/or SUV (Stupid Unnecessary Vomitmobile). This is where we should be heading. A family hatchback with good looks, reasonable 4 cylinder motors and nice interior space. We need more of these than SUV's. Yes, yes, you can have your new Camaro and the venerable Corvette as well, but they are specialty cars, and quite impractical, but that's the buyers choice, but at least they are purpose built and used. Too many SUV's are still driven by one person, with no real need for the "utility" part of its 'function'. Back to topic.

Louis Chevrolet was not an American he was Swiss born and French raised for the first third of his life, and while he (along with his older brother Gaston) was a cracking good racecar driver, he was still a down to earth persons-person. His idea was affordable yet good cars with a sense of style, performance and reliability. General Motors has proven they can do this, more so in the rest of the world than here (much like Ford has (neither being particularly good when it came to the style and reliabilty portions, though that is changing), it is only fair that they stop the bullshit and knock off the badge engineering, pull up their socks, drop some lines, bring focus to those which remain and don't pretend that Saab makes a V8 SUV, or that the swedes as a whole for that matter would want one. Lets not pretend that there is such a thing as a Chevrolet Forester (as is sold in Asia), and finally, Holden designed the Monaro, not Pontiac, forgetting calling it a GTO and pissing fan boys off, sell it as a Holden Monaro at GM Dealerships if you chose, but enough is enough with calling a Rose a Tulip in one Country and something else in another, it is stupid and hopefully people will wise up enough to not buy it.

I apologise for the haphazard manner in which these ideas were strewn together, but I hope I was able to get my point across and that those who have read this, got the gist of what I was trying to convey.

Nissan and Renault

2006-01-23T10:23:00.000-08:00

While I'm not a big fan of badge engineering, such as the way General Motors likes to operate on the global level, but I do see it as a means for parent companies to get their products into markets they aren't prominent in, while having child ventures entrenched.

What I'm talking about is Renault and Nissan. Renault is the parent company of Nissan motor cars, and while Renault doesn't sll cars in the United State due to image and costs, why not having Nissan (which does sell cars in the US, and does hold a decent image in the market) sell a badge engineered version of the Megane or Clio, or the Clio 182 Trophy?

These are vehicles that if sold here would sell, I don't think there is any doubt there. There is a dealer network, so parts and maintenance wouldn't be an issue. I think they have an opportunity to sell their developed products in the United States without said products having to carry the baggage of the stigma (in the US) of being a Renault, and some would say even worse, being French.

What do others think about this. I know I'd love to get my hands on a Clio here, but I just don't see it happening under the Renault name due to the pig headed mentality of the Red state 'Mericans. Your thoughts?

-Eric

Hatchbacks...

2006-01-08T16:24:00.000-08:00

I'm curious as to what other think regarding the reasons why the inhabitants of the United States of America as a whole generally cringe when they hear "hatchback". It has gotten so bad recently (the hatred of the word hatchback) in the US that the term crossover is being applied in its stead.

When I was younger and driving my first 'real' car (my second car actually, my first died after an engine fire, and two self-destructing gear boxes, it was a 1979 Datsun B210 wagon), which was a 1986 MkII Volkswagen Golf 3 door. This car was the epitomy (to me at the time) of what a car was all about. It had a wonderful soft touch dash, a nice solid headliner, precise shifter with a decent stock throw (both side to side and fore and aft), no to mention great fuel economy, an engine that was bulletproof and liked to be worked but was happy at a lower rpm'ed pace just the same.

I did have a few friends who never understood hatchbacks (even thought their rebadge mustangs (as Mercury Capris) were also hatchbacks. They never realised that hatchbacks around the world were used for racing, rallying, et al. Sure, in the US we had good reason for the negative reviews, we had some lemons here. The Yugo being the most memorable, it was just a really bad Fiat knockoff built in Yugoslavia. We had the Renault LeCar which, in its form back then, was not something that the average american driver would deal with on a day to day basis. The horrible pacer and gremlin were examples of how piss poor American designers were capable of being. Afterall, America isn't exaclty known for its beautiful designs in the automotive world. Just as a pre-emptive note: tail fins are not 'beautiful' if anyone decides to bring up the supposed 'glory days' of design.

But I digress. The hatchback has continued in the US to be seen as a tiny, economy based automobile relegated to those who cannot afford a "real" car, for the most part. There are exceptions, such as the Golf (which can now be had for as much as somewhere in the low 30's (for the .:R32 version), but for the most part, I think everyone follows me..

Hatchbacks are nice and big inside on the whole, their design tends to mean more headroom, and overall more utility as well than their saloon bretheren. They are family cars, as well as sporty runabouts (i.e. Hothatches).. Every major manufacturer offers high performance hatchbacks, and I'm not talking estate versions either (Station Wagons for those of you who are isolationists). Alfa Romeo, Renault, Peugeot, Citroen, Volkswagen/Audi/Seat, Vauxhall/Opel/Holden/Chevrolet/Daewoo, Honda, Toyota, Ford, Mitsubishi, Suzuki, Nissan (I always wanted a Sunny GTI-R), Kia, Hyundai, etc. all make hatchbacks, and performance versions as well.

To a degree I'm happy about the views in America because it allowed me to pay less when I picked up my Chevrolet Lacetti/Optra5/Excelle/etc. However I'd still like to see people waking up and realising that SUV's are unnecessary, oversized fuel wasting jokes that shouldn't have come into existance, whereas a hatchback or an estate version would do just the same, while being safer, quicker, more nimble and more cost effective to run.

As a side note, I'm not on a limited budget when it comes to cars, the purchase of my recent hatchback (new) equates to less pay than two months wages for me, so it obiously is a choice (and this is the ONLY reason why I mention anything of my personal finances), just to stress the preference, no one will hear this mentioned again as it is immaterial.

Anyone else out there understand the lack of understanding regarding hatches?

Eric

The Toyota Yaris, in the US.. WHY Toyota, why!?

2005-12-29T09:54:00.000-08:00

I know that might look like a deceiving title for this blog, but in reality it is an honest question to Toyota. I was quite excited that Toyota was bringing the wonderful Yaris over to the States.

For one, a reasonable supermini classed car, with a peppy 1.0l, 70bhp engine that is quite fuel efficient sounds wonderful.

The truth is that Toyota backed out and 'fixed' that which was never broken in the first place. They're giving the US a larger car, an ugly saloon version (the hatch looks beautiful, the saloon looks outright awful, and to top it all off, the engine we'll be getting here is a 1.5l 108bhp version. Talk about adding insult to injury.

I just want to know.. WHY Toyota.. why.

Eric

Tax new cars based upon Auto Emissions

2005-12-16T09:13:00.000-08:00

I know that some of the readers here had an issue with my previous post regarding Displacement based taxes, so I've thought about alternatives, one being the emissions based tax.

If one looks at standard auto-reviews in a publication such as Top Gear, it very quickly becomes apparent that CO2 Emissions are listed right next to 0-100km times, power output and fuel economy. Here we have CAFE standards which are so convoluted to allow sly maneuvers allowing a revolting quantity of trucks and SUVs to be sold without penalising said manufacturers. By pushing the burden onto the consumer, it will affect the manufacturers indirectly through their choices.

If Joe consumer has to pay a tax annually (which would go to help clean up the air in general/environment) based upon the particulate emissions of their vehicle, it would definitely benefit them to ask for lower emissions producing vehicles from their manufacturers. This would also limit after market performance parts producers from taking the easy way out with mods which build dirty horsepower. Efficiency is and always has been the key to more power gains, and this would just reinforce that.

Its time we as a country, take responsibility for our choices and the effects they have on not only ourselves, but the world.

Eric

Finalise our conversion to metric already...

2005-12-09T12:31:00.000-08:00

The United States has been moving toward Metric units of measure since the mid 1800's. The government has over time (and as recently as 1988/1991 additional changes were put in place to finalise said transition in terms of preferences and official weights and measures (including trade). We see it in many places, whether measuring cups in the kitchens, dual readouts on our home thermostats, or our soft-drink bottles. The only problem is, a lack of consistency.

In the United States our soda comes in litres, and our milk doesn't. We reference our engines by their litre displacement, yet we fill the petrol tank by the gallon. We are not (as of January 2005), the last country (sans two small territories in Eurasia) which has not completely made the changeover to the metric system. We still use a duodecimal (base 12) system for much of our comparisons. I realise this rant is very much a non-automotive one, but give it a moment as it does tie into autos quite quickly, as in the next sentence.

Most of the vehicles built in the world today (including those built in the US and/or for the US) are done utilising metric components, whether those 14mm bolds that hold on ones fender, or the 21mm bolt that fastens your steering wheel, it is omnipresent. So why not make the automobile the place to take a stand and lead the final steps to metric adoption in the US.

It could start with the Petrol stations. Start selling petrol by the litre. Think about it, all of those vehicles which are produced elsewhere and sold in the US. Does anyone honestly think that your '14.5 gallon tank' was built with US measurements in mind? Think again. What you have is a 55 litre tank. How about engine oil, or coolant? It's just being rounded to the nearest 10th of a quart for the sake of ease. There we go again though, we naturally round things down into 10ths.. Base 10 again, the whole point of metric.

I realise this is a bit of a tirade against US thinking, but ultimatley it isn't as it makes sense. Think of how convenient it would be if we didn't need to have dual measurements in every book/measuring implements/etc. that we currently do. There would never be confusion again when travelling or purchasing an item from elsewhere (or for that matter, baking a recipe from outside the US (like a wonderful recipie for speculaas I found recently).

Metric is simple, here's a few hints to help the metrically challenged.

Freezing point of water: 0 degrees centigrade
Room temperature: 20 degrees centigrade
Body temperature: 37 degrees centigrade
Boiling water: 100 degrees centigrade

100km = 62mph
400m = 1/4 mile

1kw (kilowatt) = 1.34bhp
1nm (newton-metre) = .737ft/lbs

Though it is much easier to just not do conversions and immerse oneself in metric only. It is easier than you might think, and after a little while, when everything new is metric only, won't it be nice that you'll only need one set of tools ;)

Eric

North American Suspension Setups

2005-12-08T07:43:00.000-08:00

I though I understood a while back why it was that the auto manufacturers in the North American (specifically US market) always put such boring laxative-esque suspension setups on their vehicles. Originally I thought it was for the purposes of counter balancing the absolutely horrid road surfaces throughout the country (especially Pennsylvania and all points north), and to help keep Americans sedate and distant from feeling any feedback whatsoever (not that most would know what to do with said feedback).

The theory as mentioned above got shot right out of the window several years back when every manufacturer started putting 17" and larger diameter wheels on their offerings, as anyone who has owned or driven a vehicle with ultra-low profile tyres will tell you, you feel eveything and your chances of a flat upon meeting a pothole or curb are way up there in the realms of most-likely.

I gather that since the people in the states sans the enthusiasts (not to be confused with the wanna be boy racers) haven't had the opportunity to experience their vehicle (if it happens to be of a global market model) with the suspension it was originally built upon, they don' know what they should be feeling. Sure, there are individuals out there (such as myself) that will go through the effort to aquire the necessary peices to bring their vehicle's ride in line (or even beyond) the factory's original design/intentions (to taste mind you), such as myself, but most wouldn't, and it is mainly because they don't know what they're missing.

You can have a firm suspension that corners fairly flat, and provides positive feedback through the steeering and seat while allowing for a non-jarring ride. The english, germans, french, swedes and italins have been doing this for years. I know that when I converted my Late Model 240's suspension to a Bilstein setup with progressive springs and 25mm anti-sway bars front and rear, the car felt solid, able footed and quite controllable while still retaining an absolutely docile ride when wanted. The same went for my MkII Golf (and eventual turn-key rally/hillclimb Group 2 competition car).

Wouldn't it make sense to return to reasonbly sized tyres and profiles, matched with more competent suspension setups? Would it not be more cost effective for the respective manfuacturers to have a simplified process in place utilising uniform parts? Doesn't this have beneficial repercussions throughout the supply chain and process? Maybe this wil change one day, but sadly, I'm doubtful, afterall this is the land of Walmart and MacDonalds, mediocrity abound on the road towards automotive entropy.

Eric

Smaller Displacement Engines

2005-12-06T08:00:00.000-08:00

In the United States we hear a lot regarding the freedom of choice, as well as how the free market economy gives consumers more options than anywhere else, yet when looking at the automotive sector, I find myself asking "do we really have that many options available to us?"

If one takes a look at pretty much any other moderately sized market for cars such as Western Europe, Asia and South America it quickly becomes clear that our options are (in terms of variety) greatly limited. We get a smaller, less diverse grouping of manufacturers, a subset of said manufacturers products and even more so, a minute selection of motors for each of the aforementioned groups of vehicles.

Example 1: Choice of Manufacturers

First off we have to think about brands in general. Do we count Acura and Honda as two manufacturers? How about Audi and Volkswagen (amongst others)? For our criteria, Honda and Acura count as one manufacturer because most if not all of the cars sold as Acuras in the US carry the Honda badge elsewhere. Volkswagen and Audi would be counted separately because they are sold as such distincly around the world. Lets think about this then.
We have all of the Major Japanese and most fo the German companies, the Swedes, and a few of the English brands via both American and German owned parent companies. We could say that we have some of the Italian and French cars available in our country, but that's only if you count supercars/exotics. This brings up my first issue:
Where are the everyday car companies from those countries. Where are the cars from Opel (GM Germany), Vauxhall (GM UK), Holden, Ford (of Europe and Australia), Lancia, Renault, Peugeot, Citroen, Proton, Daihatsu (yes, Daihatsu), Smart?

Example 2: Diversity of Offerings from Available Manufacturers

Since there happens to be so vast a void of autos not currently available in the United States, I'm only going to pick out a few vehicles for sake of brevity. I'll take my selections from various world markets served by companies already selling their autos in the United States. Please note that I aware of some new arrivals coming to the US such as the Toyota Yaris (replacing the Echo), and this is a good thing, lets hope it is the beginning of long-term change.

Honda Jazz

Honda FR-V

Toyota Aygo

Toyota Corolla Hatchback

Chevrolet Matiz

Chevrolet Tacuma

Ford Ka

Ford Galaxy

Ford Fiesta

Ford Mondeo (We used to get the Contour/Mystique which was a Mondeo before we ruined ours.

Vauxhall Vectra (GM)

Vauxhall VX220 (GM)

Vauxhall Astra (GM)

Opel Tigra (GM)

Opel Signum (GM)

Opel Vivaro (GM)

Holden Barina (GM)

Holden Commodore (GM)

Holden Ute (GM)

Mazda 2

Mazda 5 (MVP, NOT the MX-5)

Nissan Micra

Nissan Almera

Suzuki Swift

Mind you there are some cars that come to the US as other brands, but usually at a premium, and/or without options offered on the original. Look at the new Ford Focus.. NOT the one in the US, but the one in Europe. We get the Mazda 3 and Volvo S40 which shares its platform, but not as what it originally was built as.. A Ford. We get the Chevrolet Optra/Lacetti/Excelle as a Suzuki Reno/Forenza, but in Canada it is still a Chevy. What is the deal with such badge engineering, it seems so pointless.

Example 3: Choice of Motors

This is really a no brainer, and I'm not going to list every possibility for the autos current sold in the United States, however as a simple example, I'll just use the current Ford Focus available in the United States and Suzuki Reno/Forenza (Chevrolet Lacetti).

In England you have a choice of the following motors available in your Focus:

1.4l - 80ps, 1.6l - 100ps, 1.6l VCT - 115ps, 2.0l - 145ps, 2.5l - 225ps, 1.6 Turbo Diesel - 109ps
1.8 Turbo Diesel - 115ps, 2.0 Turbo Diesel - 135ps, 2.0 Turbo Diesel - 136ps

In Europe you have the choice of the following motors availabe in your Lacetti/Reno/Forenza/Excelle, etc:

1.4l - 94ps, 1.6l - 109ps, 1.8l - 122ps and a special WTTC +R Edition with a 1.8l Supercharged Motor @ 170ps

----

Does anyone else see the disparity here. This is supposed to be a country full of freedom and choice, but apparently someone forgot to inform the auto makers.

Eric

Glimmer of Hope #1: Viewing Cars filling up on Diesel at the pumping station...

2005-10-05T13:24:00.000-07:00

Living not too far from the local petrol station I get to see (if I care to look outside my front windows in that particular direction) how busy the station is.

I must admit that looking over and seeing a slew of Volkswagen TDI Golfs, Jettas/Boras and New Beetles, Vanagons filling up on #2 Diesel brings a smile to my face.

I also see a good deal of pickups, heavy duty lorries, and the occasional Mercedes lifts ones spirits as well. I do however long for the day when "Sport" models of many cars refer to the Turbo Diesel versions, and when luxury vehicles (real luxury vehicles, not what Americans (and apparently only Americans) consider luxury vehicles (given what Domestic manufacturers passed off as cars these last 60 years its no surprise) come standard with Diesel motors.

It will happen, hopefully sooner rather than later. And if anyone is going to respond to this, make sure you know what exists outside of the borders of the before making a comment, you may serve to save yourself the humiliation you'd be encumbered by if you speak too quickly, uninformed.

E

Clarification: Why Americans are rightfully disliked...

2005-10-05T13:16:00.000-07:00

Recently, while partaking on another web log http://autoblog.com on a discussion pertaining to the suggestion of raising petrol taxes up annually until the cost per gallon hits $6.00 (USD), a specfic response in the slew of comments stood out, and it single handedly proves the ignorance, and idiocy of a chunk of middle America (U.S. that, not our neighbors south of the border). It was (and I quote)

"why in the hell do i actually CARE what the rest of the world is paying for gas? if they are that stupid, then let them pay! Why should we americans have to pay more because the europeans and british are taxed to the nth degree? If you people who want to pay more, maybe you ought to leave America and pay more in the "rest of the world" so it can make you happy.. But for the rest of us we will keep paying less and fighting you crazed, control freak people who think just because YOU have a good idea that all of the rest of use have to listen? we don't and we're not going to pay more, PERIOD!"

I really don't think this person deserves to be a member of society since he is playing the "these are all my marbles and I'm going home it you all don't play my way".. This is the epitomy of isolationist attitude, this is the most uncooperative, inconsiderate, unfeeling, uncaring attitude I've had the displeasure of seeing in an online post regarding the world and its inhabitants in relation to the United States.

One can only hope that idiots who espouse such vehement hatred due to their lack of understanding and/or intelligence stop breeding as it is hard enough trying to make Amends as a country for all the bad we did (yes, we did much good, but that doesn't excuse the bad).

To our brothers and sisters elsewhere in the civilised world, we truly are sorry for arses like this.

E

Chrysler Needs to Go Away, Forever.

2005-10-03T08:59:00.000-07:00

There, I've said it. Chrysler, as a company needs to go away forever. This all came to realisation a fortnight ago when I was following up on announcements of the Neon's replacement. A "Larger, more powerful Compact" called the "Caliber".

Lets get something straight here. A Compact is called that for a reason. The idea isn't to make it larger. Secondly, in a time when the rest of the world gets it (meaning: smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient cars), the best Chrysler group can do is make their vehicles bigger and heavier, using larger, more fuel thirsty motors? (Though one saving grace of the Caliber is that it may be available in the US with a Volkswagen 2.0 litre Turbo Diesel, power & thirifty when it comes to fuel.)

This one point alone is not enough to justify a company who year after you produces vehicles whose looks have the sole purpose of looking menacing in people's rearview mirrors. It is exactly this kind of ugly American mentality/view that makes the rest of the world loathe the U.S. and its attitudes.

We see more and more these days Chrysler bringing back old Muscle Car era names and larger, less thrifty motors, unabashedly I might add. This is the wrong direction that the motor industry in the United States needs to be heading. We need to get rid of the V8's (at least over 3.0 litres), start using more Diesels, aiming for SMALLER, more fuel efficient cars (this doesn't mean that have to be slow, or boring), and start following the lead of GM Europe (Opel, Vauxhall), Ford Europe (the only way we get the new high power Focus is to buy it as a Volvo), Renault, Peugeot, Citroen, etc. ad infinitum/ad nauseum.

We're heading down the dark path which we helped to start in the first place, and it needs to end. Dissolving Chrysler could be one of the best things Daimler could do. Either that, or get rid of the existing products and use the Chrysler name to start selling more innovative cars from the likes of Smart and others.

E

Car Parks #1: (That would be a parking garage to you other 'Mericans)

2005-09-27T13:34:00.000-07:00

This morning on a trip into the local metropolis (of Philadephia, PA) a realisation came upon me. Whilst maneuvering through a multi-level car park in Centre City, I realised that the reason why it was so ridiculously tight for turning was due to the obscene overcrowding, coupled by the reality that SUV's and behemoth automobiles take up too much room, coupled with the fact that these facilities were not built with multi-tonne vehicles over 2 metres in height and over 2.5 metres in width in mind.

This got me thinking upon seeing a few Mini Coopers (and not to mention Ferrari 360 Barchetta in beautiful Ferrari Red), that if Americans would actually dump these wasteful, unnecessary vehicles for the more aptly and appropo hatches and smaller saloons (even small estates), it wouldn't be as bad in terms of making it through the challenge course of the car park (which at times is akin to bike trials, and we're not talking TT's here).

However, reality struck me hard upon my skull reminding me that were that the case, the American's would just make the spots smaller and pack even more autos in, or they'd utilise a smaller facility, ensuring that it was perpetually difficult regardless of the size of vehicles which chose to grace said car parks hallow asphalt lined ground.

Pitiful, but that's American thinking for you.

E

Political Needs #1: Displacement based taxes on cars and trucks.

2005-09-23T12:59:00.000-07:00

Just like in Greece and Maylasia (as well as other countries), the United States should (but won't sadly) impose taxes based upon displacement rather than cost. For example, for petrol based vehicles, anything up to 1.5 litres in displacement would be taxed at say 10% MSRP, 1.51 to 2.0 litres at %25 MSRP, 2.01 to 2.5 litres %38, 2.51 to 3.0 litres at %50, and anything over 3.0 litres would be taxed as 100% MSRP. This wouldn't stop anyone from being able to own the vehicle of their choice, but it would mean that engines that use more gasoline would pay up front for all the damage their preferences cause.

Diesel engines would be a little more flexible in terms of ranges of size, maybe the lowest rate would be to 1.7 litres @ 10%, as so on and so forth up to 3.3 litres with anyting over being 100% taxed over MSRP. You want that new $23,000 Mustang GT, well, because of it you can pay $23,000 in taxes on it.. $46,000 in total. I think we'd start seeing more sensible purchases out there. We'd also start seeing the availability of the wonderful high torque, low polluting (now) displacement Diesels that Europe sees.

Wake up America, things need to change, this would be one way to do it, without taking away "choice" which we all value as United States citizens.

E

American Car Market : Much like Americans... Getting larger around the waist as years go on...

2005-09-22T07:47:00.000-07:00

Observation #1: Unless you've been hiding under a rock for the past 25 years, you have to be aware that vehicles in the American Market are swelling annually as if connected to a giant pneumatic pump.

Part of this issues relates to all the whiz-bang features that the average American thinks they want in their car(s) and/or truck(s).

What? 3 cupholders not enough? well, gotta make the cabin a little larger to accomodate the other 7 we're going to add.

What's that now? Your fat ass doesn't fit on the seat of the average car now so rather than eating healthily and responsibly and putting the doughnut down, you want the automakers (foreign and domestic) to widen the seat to fit your oversized posterior? And we have to lengthen the car too because you're to oversized to fit in the backseat? Rather than just better ergonomics inside the cabin and the removal of a stupid set of cupholders in the backseat, lets just add a few hundred pounds to the car to compensate for the extra metal it is going to take for stiffening the chassis and body thanks to the lengthening and widening of what was a perfectly fine vehicle its first few model years, just so you can have your food while you drive.

Wait? You're complaining about the gas economy of the new version of the car now all because they had to add a bigger engine, because the older engine (which worked fine before they added the cupholders, wider body/longer chassis) doesn't cut it anymore with those extra hundreds of pounds of weight (of the car, not to mention the occupants) are causing a strain on the driveline?

The above may seem silly, but this is exactly what has been happening on all levels of the American car market. It is a cyclical problem. Cars started getting bigger and heavier, all of a sudden requiring more safety equipment to protect against next years even bigger and heavier model vechiles. This madness needs to stop. It has become so infectious that even the Japanese and Europeans (those which still sell in the US Market) have caught this disease (at least in their US bound products).

Examples:

Mk I VW Golf (Rabbit to you 'Mericans) vs. Mk : We're talking about 1000lbs difference in weight.

Ford Contour (Actually it is a European Ford called the Mondeo) vs. any Contour from the 3rd model year (in the US) onward. : In great in length and weight significantly enough to take away the wonderful feel of the original with no gain other than fat-ass accomidations.

The Mini-Van. There is no such thing anymore. Have you SEEN the size of a modern "Mini" Van. They're massive. The only thing they're not in terms of size of "Full Size" vans in the same height. YOU DON'T NEED an 8 Passenger vehicle. If you think you're going to then get a Diesel Bus or use a condom.

The fact that a country could find itself coming out with a vehicle like the Ford Excrement (correction: Excursion) which boasted being the biggest SUV on the planet is just shameful. We should be proud of making a fuel efficient vehicle, or a greener vehicle, or a fun to drive, flashy yet still economical and environmentally friendly sports car, but NEVER should be be proud (or even worse, consumers of) wasteful, polluting, oversized bovine waste which screams to the world, "We're a bunch of overweight, careless gluttons and we don't give a F*ck about anything but ourselves". Great image there to pass on to the next generation. I think I'm going to be sick.

E

Choice of Car Manufacturer screwed up by American Sensibilities (the lack thereof)

2005-09-19T09:59:00.000-07:00

The United State really screwed itself to true choice and variety thanks to its 'pro-American' bullshit mentality through the 70's, 80's and 90's.

We used to host french cars and italian cars amongst other (usually asian) car companies back then. Companies like Renault, Peugeot and Citroen. Companies like Alfa Romea and Lancia. GM and Ford used to sell their European cars here such as Opels and English/German Fords. (though they bunged that one up themselves by changing the drivetrains from what the original cars had to mismatched American junk)

Some of it was due to poor choices in cars to import, some had to do with lesser quality as well as an insufficient amount of quality dealerships. Most of it had to do ultimately with Americans themselves.

Americans don't take care of their possesions. In Europe, you take care of your car, basic maintenance is all I'm talking about here, checking your oil, keeping it clean, and not putting in cheap petrol, oil and/or coolant which saves pennies, but ultimately leads to the demise of a vehicle worth thousands and on up.

In my lifetime, we have lost from our shores:

Opel, European Ford, Alfa Romeo, Peugeot, Citroen, Renault, Rover (as Sterling), MG, Mini (Pre-BMW), Lancia, Daihatsu, and I'm sure others. Some of these cars were not the best choice to come here, but overall, ALL of the above companies existed as of a year ago (Rover is at its end as far as I can tell) in the rest of the world.

These companies still have a sense of value and taste, and because they don't build the completely unnecessary wastes of metal and resources known as SUV's, they don't have much of a chance here.

Some may say that they didn't sell large family sedans here, and that isn't the case. American's (as mentioned in a previous post) have been conditioned to think that a Family sedan needs to be the size of a Chevy Impala, Ford Crown Victoria or a Chyrsler LHS. The other companies were selling Family Sized cars here. Amongst them: The Alfa Romeo 164, Almost any Citroen sold here, every Peugeot sold here, some of the Renaults (which eventually were build by Eagle, American, and no longer functioning as a company thanks to Chrysler). We used to get Ford Sierras (as Merkurs), and Opels (via Buick). All capable of hauling the family around, let alone provided great driving experiences while exhibiting (in most cases) decent if not great fuel economy figures.

We, thanks to our twisted views about how the world should be (instead of conforming to the reasonable views shared amongst the mature European, Australian and Asian peoples in general) brought it upon ourselves. Thanks to those companies pulling out, we might never get to enjoy some of the very wonderful cars on sale now as close as Canada and Mexico from Manufacturers such as Seat (from Spain), Lancia (Italy), Alfa Romeo (Italy), Peugeot (France), Citroen (France), Renault (France), MG (England), Proton (Maylasia), Daihatsu (Japan), Fiat (Italy), Ford Europe, Opel (GM Europe), Vauxhall (GM UK), Holden (GM Australia (other than the Monaro (Pontiac GTO))), etc. amongst others.

How embarrassing it can be to be associated with such stupidity in my own country. Maybe one day when the country gets aquired and we're on the Euro, Pound Sterling, Yen or Yuan, other countries will come back to the United States and people will see what they've been missing.

E

Lesson #3: Don't be offended by people who don't buy 'merican cars.

2005-09-16T11:29:00.000-07:00

The world is a lot bigger than the United States. We didn't invent the car, nor did we invent most of the modern luxurys and features which are currently afforded us.

Here's a little trivia, test your knowledge:

Who invented the first automobile? ... Daimler (1885)
Who invented the disc brake? ... Peugeot (1909)
Who invented Anti-Lock Brakes? ... Mercedes
Who invented Traction Control? ... Mercedes
Who invented Electronic Stability Control? ... Mercedes
Who invented the Diesel engine? ... Rudolf Diesel (German)
Who invented the 3 point seatbelt? ... A Volvo Engineer in Sweden and then for free shared it with the world because safety was more important than profits.

This isn't to say the Americans never invented anything... For one: The Airbag back in the 60's! (Yes, you can get an old Oldsmobile from the 70's with an Airbag).. , however they are also responsible for the hideousness of 'the chrome bumper'.. Can't win 'em all.

My point here is that we didn't invent much of anything. We've made poorly inefficient overweight gas guzzlers, unapologetically I might add while the rest of the world learned to produce safe, lightweight, well handling attractive vehicles which were also efficient and affordable.

This site is aimed at the majority of American drivers, so here's a bigger fact: GM designs and sells cars in Europe and elsewhere that we don't get in the United States, and on those few occassions which we did, they messed it up by putting in an inferior gas guzzling engine of a higher displacement which got worse fuel economy and lower performance.

Example(s):

Ford produced the Sierra Cosworth/RS500 in England. All wheel drive, nice powerful engine, etc. back in the 1980's. We got it as a Merkur, with a 2.3l Turbocharged 4cylinder Pinto motor.

Ford produced the original Escort in the 1970's. It was used for professional rallying and racing. It was front engine, and rear wheel drive.

Ford also produced what was at one time the fastest production car in history, the RS200. Big V8? nope.. 1.8l Four Cylinder with between 250 and 450bhp versions at that displacement.
Currently the new Focus ST over there (a 4cylinder) is looking at 240bhp and 250 lbs. ft of torque. What do we get? 170bhp in the short lived Focus SVT.

GM is sold as Opel in Germany, Vauxhall in Britain, Holden in Australia. You want a hot car, forget your Cobalt SS.. You want a Vauxhall VX220.

My point is this. People buy non-American vehicles because they offer what the American manufacturers don't (at least not in the United States). Quality, Performance, Efficiency and Cost.

What DO American companies give you? Trucks and SUV's that all but the professional contractors and delivery services out there DON'T need. Even then, Ford makes nice Panel vans in Europe which are four cylinder diesels and built on small-pickup chassis'. Sorry, you don't need a 280bhp V8 to deliver replacement windows. A 110bhp diesel with 200lbs of torque getting almost 30mpg will do much better thank you.

If you were still offended by this, get over it, you've bought the hype and get what you deserve, drive your Chevy's and Fords and what not but when you see other people driving cars in the same price range with better suspensions, lighting, features and comfort, don't go complaining about them foreigners putting 'mericans out of a job as it was American companies that did (and do) that. Aside from that, your American cars aren't all built here anyway.

The Camaro/Firebirds were built in Canada.
The Ford Focus, Contour (Mondeo in the rest of the world) etc were released in Europe about 4 years prior to coming to the US.
The Cadillac Catera? Look inside the door Jamb, built in Russelheim, Germany.
That new Pontiac GTO? Melbourne, Australia, it's a Holden.
How about that new Focus anyway, you reliase the most recent (best) version thus far is built off of the Volvo S40 platform? Its an improvement, but again, not one we came up with in the US.
Like your Corvette C5 & C6's silky transmission? Germany.. You can say "Danke" now.

E

Diversion #1: Average Litres of Displacement from Cars I've Personally Owned.

2005-09-15T11:03:00.000-07:00

Over the years I've driven quite a lot of vehicles, whether it was when I worked as a driver for a car auction, my semi-professional Motorsports experiences or from people who knew of my driving background who wished me to put their car through the ropes as it were.

These cars basically span from Suzuki Swifts with 1.0l 3 Cylinder Motors to Ferrari 308GTS's, Lotus Esprit S4S's, Authentic Cobras (not of the Mustang Variety), Aston Martin DB2 Race cars, and 7.3l Turbo Diesel F350 Pickups. I have experience with FWD, AWD, 4WD (Part Time w/No Center Diff), RWD. I've owned front engine, rear engine, water cooled, air cooled layouts. I've had wagons, hatchbacks, sedans, vans and pickups. I've had my fair share of experience owning, repairing, racing and transporting a plethora of vehicles.

My personal vehicles do say more about me though in terms of what I feel is practical for the everyday driver. In order, they are:

1979 Datsun 210 - 1.5l, 4cyl. RWD, Front Engine, Watercooled, 4 Door Wagon
1986 Volkswagen Golf - 1.8l, 4cyl. FWD, Front Engine, Watercooled, 2 Door Hatchback/Hillclimb-Rallycar
1981 Volkswagen Vanagon - 2.1l, 4cyl. RWD, Rear Engine, Aircooled, 3 Door Van/Tow Vehicle
1985 Chevrolet S-10 Extended Cab 4x4 - 2.5l, 4cyl. 4WD, Front Engine, Watercooled, 2 Door Pickup/Tow Vehicle
1987 Volvo 240DL - 2.3l, 4cyl. RWD, Front Engine, Watercooled, 4 Door Sedan
2003 Volkswagen Jetta GLS - 1.8l, 4cyl. Turbocharged, FWD, Front Engine, Watercooled, 4 Door Sedan
2005 Daewoo Lacetti - 2.0l, 4cyl. FWD, Front Engine, Watercooled, 4 Door Hatchback

I recently added up the displacement of all the aforementioned engines and divided by the number of vehicles. Guess what.. Apparently 2.0l is my average vehicle displacement. Given that my average was 2.0l before my most recent aquisition, I'm not surprised that I bought the Lacetti.

I've said before that I've driven a wide variety of cars from under 50bhp to over 800bhp, but I've found that while fun (a lot) for short bursts, I prefer a sensible balance. This doesn't mean that I don't know the max speed (from experience) of each of the above vehicles, nor does it imply that I haven't seen what it takes first hand to get a Vanagon airborn, an S-10 to do a 360, or a Golf on 2 side wheels at Pocono International Speedway, it just means that I realised a long time ago that more litres of displacement aren't the answer. I've learned an important lesson.

Less is more. (Unix geeks understand this in more way than one).

E

Lesson #2: Americans have screwed up sense of car class size(s).

2005-09-15T10:29:00.000-07:00

One thing I've always found of particular interest is the size-queen attitude of Americans as a whole. The "bigger is better" mentality whether it is houses, cars, refrigerators or stereo speakers.

This all came about when looking at the recent announcement from BMW regarding making a bigger "Mini" for America. What many people don't realise is that the original/1st generation Mini Coopers could fit INSIDE the current mini-coopers.

People here see them as "mini" cars, meant for two small people when in reality the original Mini Cooper which is considerably smaller was meant for 4 adults. I'm 6'3" (1.9m) tall and I fit into first geneation Racing Mini's fine (and that's wearing a helmet, and maneuvering around a roll cage).

The concept of car as being something you use for transportation of people is foreign to many Americans. It seems that people feel a car/truck is meant to be an extension of their house/garage/storage locker, and as such has to have room to house everything from kids to pets to boxes upon boxes of crap which really isn't being used for anything except taking up space in the oversized vehicles which are only necessitated by said boxes/mentality of storing them in an automobile. Stupid.. yes.

Back on topic. The current Mini Cooper is a "Compact Car" in the US. There is no equivalent to the "Micro" car class in the US. For a better example of sizing, look at the VW Bora (1999-2005.5 Jetta). In the United States, it is a compact car, in Europe it is a mid-sized car. I use the term "in Europe" loosely, as I'm going by the general motoring press which I read routinely beit French, Italian, English, Dutch, or German.

If we want to talk Micro-Cars, we need to start talking about the Ford Ka, the VW Polo (which is getting larger as each generation progresses), the Smart car, the Nissan Sunny, the Fiat Cinquincento, etc. ad nauseum.

Many of those cars listed above are what most Americans really need for their everyday business whether it is commuting to work over the vast expanses of land we have here (my commute is 39km (a little over 24 miles) each way through long winding single lane country roads, including some pea gravel and short bursts of highway expanse. The concept of driving an SUV which weighs in at 2.5 tons (2.2 tonnes) getting something like 15mpg (almost 6.4 kilometers per liter) is outlandish, yet Americans as a whole don't see anything wrong with this.

It boils down to the issue of what they need vs. what they've been conditioned to think that they need.

I smile when I see a family driving in a VW Golf TDI because it tells me that they have more common sense than the next person, driving alone in their monstrosity of an SUV. I personally am quite happy with my most recent automotive purchase, but I'll leave that for another discussion.

E

Lesson #1

2005-09-15T08:53:00.000-07:00

I realise I may get jumped on for this, but hear me out first. I reconise that in niche markets and specialty cars with limited production numbers, having a V8 really is appropriate. The key being "limited production numbers". Commuter cars/everyday vehicles have no reason for V8s.

It is a waste of natural resources, and the most inefficient way to build power. Muscle car fans are the hard to explain this to, must be from all of the poor exhaust emissions they've inhaled over the years. I'll explain this slowly, use small words and big examples so as to get it through to them.

V8 engines in everyday cars are pointless. To make the lesson easier to comprehend, we're going to keep driving habits out of this, meaning that I'm not saying to drive slower, nor am I saying not to drag it out at the stop lights (if that's your thing). What I AM saying is that the same kind of power and almighty torque figures can be had in much smaller, fewer cylindered, cleaner and efficient packages.

Part of the problem here is weight. Bigger engines require bigger chassis which means more weight. This not only affects capabilities in terms of speed and acceleration, it affects braking and handling.

The key is power to weight ratio. Lets take a look at a simple comparisons here using only American cars for clarity purposes:

2006 Ford Mustang GT vs. 2006 Dodge Neon SRT4:

Mustang: 300bhp, 320ft.lbs., 4.6l V8, 69bhp/litre - 0-62 in 5.1, 1/4mi 13.6

SRT4: 230bhp, 240ft.lbs, 2.4l I4T, 79bhp/litre - 0-62 in 5.3, 1/4mi 13.9

Cost of the Neon: Between $5,000 & $9,000 less to similiarly equipped Mustang GTs. Gas economy is between 2-5mpg better with the SRT4. The Neon seats 5 people vs. the Mustangs 4 offering more utility functionality aside from performance. Independent suspension front and rear vs. a many decades old design of a live axle in the GT. Warranties are similar (basic), but the powertrain warranty for the SRT4 is a full 7 years, 100,000 miles.

Both vehicles are starard interiors for American cars (cheap and plasticy), so that's a draw. Yes, the Mustang does have a heritage and it is Rear Wheel Drive (which is my personal preference), but in the rear world, on public roads, it is pointless when you consider the numbers.. Do the math.

Note: I personally don't like the looks or feel of the Neon, though its size is much nicer than the Mustang which seems to be too big of a vehicle externally, while offering minimal increases inside vs. the SRT-4 (in this example).

Of couse, if we were to bring European cars into the fray we could very quickly find sport diesels with monstrous torque figures and low-six second 0-60's while retaining 40-50mpg fuel figures.

Bring the Japanese rally-bred cars into it and you end up with All Wheel Drive, nicer interiors, torque figures at or nearing 300 ft. lbs., though that does bring the price up a bit. Had to be mentioned though.

E

Introduction

2005-09-15T08:02:00.000-07:00

Welcome to what will hopefully be a good forum for opening the eyes of the overwhelming majority of Americans regarding their poor choices, habits and feelings of superiority regarding the automotive world.

By Americans I do specifically mean citizens of the United States of America, and I reference them as such above because from their perspective, America is synonymous with the U.S.A. It is a poor view, as South America is also "America", as is Canada, however I don't wish to insult the intelligence of our Southern or Northern brothers and sisters.

This blog is aimed squarely at the John Smiths, Jane Joneses, Bubba Hatfields and Chet Yuppies in America. We all know the type I'm talking about. You can't go anywhere in America without seeing them. Little tiny women driving these monstrosities of SUVs, and Humongous Minivans. Redneck hicks driving Pickup trucks which are never used to haul anything, wasting fuel and clogging the air with foul emissions. Muscle car nuts who don't understand that V8's aren't "then end all be all", and still refer to "farn cars" (That's "Foreign" to any non-inbred citizen of the world).

We're going to address many issues here, feel free to jump right in. And yes, I started off with extreme stereotypes, the purpose of which is to get your attention not to insult everyone, though you may find that a good deal of what I described above is closer to fact than fiction.

Time to get in, sit down, strap your seatbelt on, shut up and listen. (Though intelligent debate is quite welcome, I do hope I'll learn something out of this as well).

E