Recent Comments:
Toyota Auris is one safe low-emission diesel car {Autoblog Green}
Dec 22nd 2006 9:57PM I'm a little confused - is the Auris the European Matrix? The Matrix is based on the Corolla here in the USA, so will we be getting a new Matrix as well as a new Corolla?
As an aside, I am truly looking forward to the US version of the Corolla in MY2008. I would particularly enjoy a 3-door hatchback hybrid, but failing that I wouldn't mind the diesel engine. Keeping in mind what sells in the American market, I speculate that Toyota will offer a petrol 4-door, petrol or hybrid 5-door, and a petrol 3-door hatchback. Checking out the UK site, I was schocked to see the mileage on the diesel 3-door Corolla - 58.9 MPG! But I agree with Jimmy in post #1 - a diesel for the USA is unlikely.
Mitsubishi to sell electric car in the U.S. {Autoblog Green}
Oct 9th 2006 1:03PM Jimmy, how do the lithium polymer batteries compare with regards to capacity loss?
Hydrogen economy might be powered with help from cobalt {Autoblog Green}
Sep 10th 2006 1:07AM Most of the products and items we use today have come from a collaborative effort. Even "singular accomplishments" have come about from multiple collaborators. Edison didn't "invent" the light bulb, he is credited with being the first to make the concept viable. Wilbur and Orville Wright didn't "invent" the airplane, they are credited with being the first to prove the concept of powered flight. This phenomenon is precisely the reason that competition is encouraged among scientists. One scientist saying "I can do it better" benefits everybody.
Back on topic, I wonder if cobalt is more readily available than platinum?
Jeep drops price on new Wrangler {Autoblog}
Sep 1st 2006 1:56PM Yeah, no kidding! Gimme back my diesel!!! On top of all the torque and fuel efficiency issues, having a gasoline engine reduces the fording depth and overall water-resistance of the motor! I, for one, do not want to have to waterproof the ignition system of one of the best off-road vehicles available!
New seat belts resemble racing harnesses {Autoblog}
Sep 1st 2006 1:36PM Here's what's wrong with this:
"Ford research showed that consumers who tested the four-point belts perceived them to be safer, more comfortable and (depending on design) easier to use than conventional three point belts."
Perceived. Test subjects PERCEIVED the belts to be safer. Nowhere in this short article do I hear a Safety Engineer or other type of professional Engineer discussing quantitative test results.
If we're only talking about PERCEPTION, I'm sure I can find a bunch of people to attest to the safety of an hypothetical 6,000 pound car with all the structural integrity and crash-worthiness of an ice sculpture!
What really makes me mad is that this type of PR grandstanding, despite its lack of scientific basis, really appeals to lawmakers. If Ford isn't careful, we'll see (what amounts to) untested technology becoming mandatory for all passenger cars.
Consumer Reports ranks Porsche 911 best performance car {Autoblog}
Sep 1st 2006 1:09PM As far as ranking the 911 the "top ultra-performance car" - uhhh, DUH!!! However, I agree with one commenter who said that CR should reserve judgement until some of the maintenance bills come in. Two years ago, I went shopping for a new sports car, and the 911 was on my short list. Every used 911 I looked at, even the lightly-used, had minor mechanical issues that required major maintenance expense. The most egregious was a sweet 95 cabrio that needed $16,000 to replace a bent suspension arm and the coilover on the right front.
The Corvette is a fantastic, fabulous car: incredibly sure-footed, lots of low-end torque, good brakes, astounding cornering with little driver effort. The interior could be made of better materials, to that I agree.
The Viper is amazing, but not a car I would want to live with.
So, Porsche 911 top ultra-performance? You bet. But considering CR's audience, wouldn't you expect them to recommend a car that has lower total cost of ownership? While the *normal* maintenance costs of the Corvette are on par with the 911, the Corvette costs less to buy, insure, fuel, and repair than the 911.
Ford launches new F-series ad campaign {Autoblog}
Aug 18th 2006 1:06PM Thanks to the Canyonero episode of The Simpsons, I chuckle whenever I see journalists use the term "F-Series" to refer to Ford's trucks. "Hey, she must be one of those hot-to-trot soccer moms!" Has the cigarette lighter been replaced with a lipstick tube? Heh heh heh...
Seriously, though, tough trucks, those Fords. Circa MY 1997 F150 is still one of my favorite for looks, copied inelegantly by the Tundra. I wish Ford had kept the cohesive and clean design of model years 97-2000. Recent F150s look clunky, overwrought, and plasticky by comparison.
General Motors hires agency to hit the young and diverse {Autoblog}
Jul 14th 2006 11:01AM I don't even think that picture came from GM. It has none of the usual advertising elements: the car isn't centerframed, the people are not posed, the lighting is terrible, there's a reflection on the hood of the car, there's glare on the window glass, and there are bales of hay and other detractors in the background. This picture looks very much like it was taken by a non-photographer with a standard point-and-shoot camera.
Any confirmation of this, Erin?
Master Mechanics vote for 3,000-mile oil change interval {Autoblog}
Jul 13th 2006 3:04PM From the article:
"Mechanics view oil as the lifeblood of the car engine, with 84 percent
saying not getting a regular oil change can cause the most problems for
a vehicle, when compared to other maintenance issues. Sixty percent of
the ASE certified master technicians said the oil should be changed at
3,000 miles - the longtime, recommended standard. Only 29 percent said
between 3,000-5,000 miles is okay. Acceptability of 5,000 to 10,000
miles before an oil change is virtually non-existent at two percent."
The choice of words reveals this (DUH!) as the propaganda it is:
"sixty" (vs. "60" like the other numbers)
"Only" 29%
"virtually non-existent at two percent"
"the longtime, recommended standard"
Lots of hyperbole, subtle exaggeration, and visual word tricks being used here... Notice that the 300 mechanics surveyed also mused about the future of alternative fuels as well as consumer bias against domestic makes.
This is junk science!
Master Mechanics vote for 3,000-mile oil change interval {Autoblog}
Jul 13th 2006 2:36PM dakota says: "I'll change it every 3 months. It's easier that way, besides there are people that drop more than that a week or 2 weeks on buying crap that they don't even need IE: cigarettes ect.. It's funny to see those people moan about changing oil and the price of it but then run to the 7-11 every chance to feed their nic. habbit."
Funny thing, that. I facilitate addiction clinics. Addicts are often dysfunctionally frugal in other areas of their lives. Their justification is simple: If they save on toothpaste, they can buy more alcohol/drugs/cigarettes. I've seen addicts sell family heirlooms to buy vodka.
Non-addicts probably also have a bit of this thought process at work. The point is not necessarily to save money for the sake of having money, the point is to save money on necessities of lesser importance in order to increase buying power for items of greater individual importance. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the Autoblog readers confessed to skimping somewhere else in their lives in order to free up money for their car.
The engine oil life monitor is installed by the manufacturer, right? From a jaded viewpoint, wouldn't it be in their best interest to shorten the usable life of their automobiles? Who knows? Maybe a modern car with modern filtration could reach 500,000 or 1 million miles with 3,000 mile oil change intervals...
Me:
Toyota Tacoma - every 5,000 miles, as per manu. specs
Audi TT - oil change service notification, usually works out to 3,500 miles
