A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The dangers of DRLs



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #321  
Old July 15th 05, 01:04 PM
N8N
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



C.H. wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:05:00 -0700, N8N wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > C.H. wrote:
> >> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 05:55:06 -0400, Nate Nagel wrote:
> >>
> >> > C.H. wrote:
> >>
> >> >> GM has their share of transportation appliances, like most other
> >> >> manufacturers. Toyota almost exclusively makes transportation
> >> >> appliances. At GM you have the the choice. Boring or interesting. I
> >> >> rather prefer to have the choice.
> >> >>
> >> > For each of the "good" GM vehicles which you mention - which I don't
> >> > think are all that great - they've built several Luminas.
> >>
> >> And for every Supra Toyota has built literally hundreds of boring and
> >> staid Corollas and Avalons. And the Supra is dead anyway, so Toyota only
> >> builds ultra boring sedans now.

> >
> > My point was that a Corolla, Avalon, Jetta, etc. is a vastly better car
> > than a Lumina, Malibu (well, I'm reserving judgement on that - I haven't
> > had any experience with the new one) Cavalier, etc and is more engaging to
> > drive as well.

>
> The Lumina has been out of production for years. The new Malibu seems ok
> and in the price range of a new Cavalier you won't find much even from
> Japan, at least no 4-seat sedans.
>


Hyundai? Not Japanese but less expensive and more appealing.

> The Jetta on the other hand has major reliability problems and I
> personally despise it, YMMV.


Balls. It would be my pick of the group. Probably will outlast any
two of the other cars mentioned.

> And I have never seen a car more uninspired
> and boring than a Toyota Corolla.
>


At least it's competent, handles well, and is available with a decent
manual transmission. Probably more reliable than anything GM makes as
well.

> >> Because bread and butter sedans are not even marginally interesting in
> >> most brands.

> >
> > I disagree, most of the competition at least tries to be somewhat more
> > interesting than a typical GM product.

>
> If they really are trying they are failing miserably at it.
>


Denial - it's not just a river in Egypt anymore.

There's a reason people don't buy GM products - and it's not "bias" or
"hatred" much as you'd wish to call it that.

nate

Ads
  #322  
Old July 15th 05, 01:24 PM
223rem
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

C.H. wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 07:06:10 +0000, 223rem wrote:
>
>
>>C.H. wrote:
>>
>>>For what purpose?
>>>

>>
>>Driving enjoyment, what else?

>
>
> Definitely the GTO. The Evo's seating position for me is awkward, I am not overly fond of small turbocharged
> four-bangers but love V8s, specifically the LSx and the AWD is largely
> pointless for street driving around here.
>
> Chris


The Evo handles much better, and is more advanced technologically. I thought
you liked hi-tech cars?
  #323  
Old July 15th 05, 01:29 PM
N8N
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



223rem wrote:
> C.H. wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 07:06:10 +0000, 223rem wrote:
> >
> >
> >>C.H. wrote:
> >>
> >>>For what purpose?
> >>>
> >>
> >>Driving enjoyment, what else?

> >
> >
> > Definitely the GTO. The Evo's seating position for me is awkward, I am not overly fond of small turbocharged
> > four-bangers but love V8s, specifically the LSx and the AWD is largely
> > pointless for street driving around here.
> >
> > Chris

>
> The Evo handles much better, and is more advanced technologically. I thought
> you liked hi-tech cars?


I'll have to side with Christian on this one. The old Eclipse was the
only Mitsu****ty that I didn't hear horror stories about after a
couple-three years of ownership. The one Japanese brand without any
reputation for reliability whatsoever..

Now if you'd said WRX STi I'd be with you all the way.

nate

  #324  
Old July 15th 05, 01:39 PM
223rem
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

N8N wrote:

>
> Now if you'd said WRX STi I'd be with you all the way.


The WRX and the Evo have been road tested against each other
multiple times, and the experts' opinion was that the
Evo handles better and is preferable.
  #325  
Old July 15th 05, 01:44 PM
N8N
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



223rem wrote:
> N8N wrote:
>
> >
> > Now if you'd said WRX STi I'd be with you all the way.

>
> The WRX and the Evo have been road tested against each other
> multiple times, and the experts' opinion was that the
> Evo handles better and is preferable.


When new and in good condition. It also has the reputation for being a
fragile POS. I can give up a little in ultimate performance to get a
car that's "almost as good" from a company with a reputation for
bulletproof reliability (Subaru) than one that's initially more
pleasing to drive but is a notorious time bomb (Mitsu****ty)

Let's put it this way, when was the last time you saw a 10 year old
Mitsu still on the road and not smoking/knocking/obviously showing
signs of being on its last legs? Compare and contrast with the number
of granola-munchers that drive their ancient Scoobys until body panels
start falling off.

Frankly, I feel the same way about Mitsu that I do about GM except a)
Mitsu cars are still more fun to drive and b) they're even less
reliable.

nate

  #326  
Old July 15th 05, 03:38 PM
Daniel J. Stern
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, N8N wrote:

> > The WRX and the Evo have been road tested against each other multiple
> > times, and the experts' opinion was that the Evo handles better and is
> > preferable.


> When new and in good condition. It also has the reputation for being a
> fragile POS.


C/D wrang one out not too long ago. It kept breaking. They put several
thousand dollars' worth of upgrades on it, then it started breaking even
more.

Same old Bitsu****ti, selling polished turds to those dumb enough to buy
them.

> Let's put it this way, when was the last time you saw a 10 year old
> Mitsu still on the road and not smoking/knocking/obviously showing signs
> of being on its last legs? Compare and contrast with the number of
> granola-munchers that drive their ancient Scoobys until body panels
> start falling off.


Yep.

  #327  
Old July 15th 05, 03:42 PM
223rem
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

C.H. wrote:

>
> And I have never seen a car more uninspired
> and boring than a Toyota Corolla.


And yet you praise the Chevy Cobalt?! You're absurd.
A friend of mine has a Corolla, and it is a very
nice little car.
  #328  
Old July 15th 05, 04:02 PM
fbloogyudsr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"223rem" > wrote
> C.H. wrote:
>> And I have never seen a car more uninspired
>> and boring than a Toyota Corolla.

>
> And yet you praise the Chevy Cobalt?! You're absurd.
> A friend of mine has a Corolla, and it is a very
> nice little car.


Especially amusing considering the Corolla and (Geo) Chevy Prism
are the same car!

Floyd
  #329  
Old July 15th 05, 07:34 PM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 12:24:21 +0000, 223rem wrote:

> C.H. wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 07:06:10 +0000, 223rem wrote:
>>
>>
>>>C.H. wrote:
>>>
>>>>For what purpose?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Driving enjoyment, what else?

>>
>>
>> Definitely the GTO. The Evo's seating position for me is awkward, I am
>> not overly fond of small turbocharged four-bangers but love V8s,
>> specifically the LSx and the AWD is largely pointless for street driving
>> around here.
>>

> The Evo handles much better, and is more advanced technologically. I
> thought you liked hi-tech cars?


I don't care about 'hi-tech' unless it brings tangible benefits.

A cramped seating position destroys any fun a car provides and is
dangerous to boot. I suspect that I would probably do better with the GTO
on the track than I would with the Evo simply because not being able to
sit right and feel the car properly destroys any handling benefit the car
may have.

Chris
  #330  
Old July 15th 05, 07:35 PM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 05:29:33 -0700, N8N wrote:

> Now if you'd said WRX STi I'd be with you all the way.


I kinda like the STi, but I can't sit in it either. Even the Legacy's
seating position is bad, but the Imprezas (including the WRX) are plain
hopeless.

Chris
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Enable Caravan Daytime Running Lights (DRL's) Option ls_dot1 Chrysler 11 May 26th 05 01:49 AM
Disable DRL'S on 2002 S-10 Pete Technology 41 May 24th 05 04:19 AM
Disable DRL'S on 2002 S-10 Daniel J. Stern Driving 3 May 24th 05 04:19 AM
Why no rear lights with DRLs? Don Stauffer Technology 26 April 26th 05 04:16 AM
Chevy Tahoe DRls? BE Driving 0 March 28th 05 03:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.