Karl's Daily Log Book

hammen2

...with your approach, Karl. You are trying to come up with generalizations about the product lines of the various car companies. It's far easier to do this when the company only offers 4-5 cars and a couple of trucks - when you are GM and offer the breadth of models and products, any time I would say "GM does good at X" you could come up with a vehicle that didn't have those characteristics. I've never driven an Aveo, don't plan to, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did not have the HVAC, engine, or transmission performance that one would expect of a GM vehicle.

Likewise, I've blasted GM before about their crappy interiors. Olds used to have the best interiors of modern GM cars, then they got killed. Caddy has picked up, the new Buicks seem solidly average (which is a step up from where they used to be), and the GTO's interior is fantastic. Nevertheless, the Impala, Trailblazer, et. al. are less-than-mediocre.

GM is the 800-pound gorilla here. I don't care who you get to run the company, it still takes time to turn the Titanic around. Not to say that I don't have some disagreements with "Decontent" Lutz and Wagoner...

--Robert

Kirstie_H

Well, I think the point that Karl's trying to hammer home is that yes, GM is good at several things. He hasn't said they're bad at all things, and has consistently said that there are some good aspects to be found in GM vehicles. However, they are not class-leading in any area, period.

Many posts attempt to refute this assertion by asking, "what about the Solstice?" or, "haven't you driven the Cobalt?" We're not talking about individual vehicles and their merits - we're talking about a corporate standard that doesn't reach the level of class-leading in any one category, not about whether this or that individual vehicle meets or exceeds expectations.

In some of our other topics, we're talking about GM and their ability to survive with stock market losses, whether Bob Lutz is the man to turn things around, and how concerned we should be about the performance of GM (and Ford). Consumers clearly DO have concerns. The number of discussions focusing on the future of GM does, in fact, point to the company being the 800 lb gorilla. They're a large economic and to some extent, cultural influence, and it's important that the Titanic makes that turn without tipping over.

Karl, do you see that happening? Does GM seem to understand what you've pointed out? It'd be interesting to hear your perspective on the future direction of GM.

kirstie_h
Roving Host
Host, Future Vehicles & Smart Shopper discussions

denver5357

GM is class-leading in ... its size. I wonder ... if you eliminated GM's sales to 1) gov't fleets (which happen because gov'ts are too afraid of criticism to buy a more reliable, better-built foreign car that ironically would cost taxpayers LESS in the long run, and 2) middle American, pro-union, "Buy U.S." buyers, what would GM's sales be? In other words, if you looked at the segment of buyers who bought a car because they truly liked that car vs. all others, how would GM do?

Karl, Really enjoyed your post and it makes a lot of sense. I've owned two Chevys, two Hondas, a Toyota and a Nissan in the past 22 years. I still have a Honda, the Toyota and the Nissan.

BTW, any impressions on the Toyota Matrix, Karl? We are considering trading down to a car with better mileage but also the ability to haul dogs and two kids AND with AWD. And we are trying to do it for $20K max. I have not yet driven the Matrix but it seems to fits those specs. Thanks.

sebring95

I would peg a vast majority of all cars as being emotional more than doing true comparison shopping and picking the best. If everybody drove the best, (even if you spread the best acrossed several models to adjust for preferences) there wouldn't have been tons of Grand Ams and Cavaliers sold every year. The fact is, folks like a car and buy it. Might not be the best, but for some reason that's what they want.

My wife KNEW she wanted a GX470 without ever driving, looking inside, etc. She likes Lexus, she likes reliable vehicles, and she liked the looks. I couldn't talk her into even driving anything else to compare. Now I get to hear about the things she doesn't like about it and every little problem is a big disappointment.....but that's another story all together. I think we (meaning myself and most folks on these forums) are the minority when it comes to shopping for a vehicle.

sputterguy

The Solstice has killer looks and appears well made. However, with a powerplant putting out 170hp and at approximately the same price, it will be competing with the Miata. And the Miata is appr. 300lbs lighter so it will be faster. This is not class-leading. If they had dropped in the 275hp version of theNorthstar it would be competing at the high end of the class intead of the low end with the Miata. Another lost chance...

kyfdx

I saw the Solstice at the car show.. the car just looks huge to me.. Extremely wide... it just doesn't appear "tossable".. I was expecting something more like the Miata, and it isn't anything like that..

hammen2

First the 275 hp Northstar is a FWD motor, and the Solstice is a RWD chassis.
Second, have you ever seen a NorthStar? It's a big, heavy motor. IF you could get it under the hood (doubtful), you'd have to make the rear end out of solid steel just to keep the car's nose from hitting the ground.

The supercharged Ecotec in the Solstice GXP will reportedly offer up to 250 hp, but, in typical GM fashion, it won't be out for a model year or two. Just once I'd like to see GM launch a new platform with all of the models and engines it's supposed to have...

dieselone

While I disagree about dropping in the Northstar (leave that to Monster Garage :shades: ), it definitely needs either less weight or more power. The supercharged 2.0L from the Cobalt SS should at least be offered. The weight is the biggest issue to me. That is the biggest killer for a car trying to be nimble and it looks like the Solstice won't be competing with the Miata anytime soon at your local Solo II course.

bigdaddycoats

How about this article by Jerry Flint?

http://www.forbes.com/columnists/2005/04/14/cz_jf_0414flint.html

bigdaddycoats

How about class-leading design for Cadillac? Not all may like it, but it surely helped in the Cadillac renaissance.

bigdaddycoats

Weight alone will not determine which is faster.

bigdaddycoats

I will still say the Cobalt is currently best in class along with the Mazda3.

I say they share the honors because each is targeting a different audience. The 3 is going more for the driving enthusiast (zoom, zoom), while the Cobalt is geared towards the more traditional buyer. Personally, I would choose the 3 because of the more sporty nature - that may change however, when the Cobalt is available with the 2.4 Ecotec this summer.

The Civic is a good car, yes. But the Cobalt does ride better.

I like the Focus a lot and used to own one. Even with the 3 recalls and blown transmission it was still a fun car. The new interior though, is a step down from the previous design. Cobalt interior is better.

Corolla - good, but boring. Styling is nothing great and looks really bad in trim with the add on rocker panels and spoilers. Cobalt still rides better.

Neon - please, the Cobalt is better in every way. Except power and that is only if you are talking about the SRT. Even then, I would much rather have a Supercharged SS over a SRT-4 any day. Even the slight advantage in acceleration does not overcome the rest of the Neon's shortcomings.

Of course these are just my opinions. The Cobalt does not lead in every category. Neither does any other car mentioned above. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses. But, as a whole the Cobalt and the 3 are at the top.

bigdaddycoats

On a side note -

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts with us.

carlisimo

"could you elaborate on "the Corvette's rear suspension -> unrefined handling" comment?"

I didn't want to turn this into a Corvette conversation so I left it at that... but basically, the rear suspension uses leaf springs instead of coil springs. Ben Hur's chariot had leaf springs. But to be fair, the Corvette doesn't use the leaf springs to control suspension geometry; it has double-A arms, so it's handling doesn't have any problems (though lots of reviews say it's hard to place the car with confidence).

The Corvette isn't smooth like an M3 or a 911. Its weight shifts are abrupt (lots of nose dive, for example, hence the complaints about its behavior under heavy braking)), and it's easy to spin out in one. The ride is also said to be rough, and that's ok to most Corvette fans but it's a compromise between handling and ride, while some cars seem to do both very well.

Mr_Shiftright

GM has had SO LONG to get its act together! I really wonder how long the automotive media apologists can hold out. It's like waiting for the King of France to come back.

GM has an uncanny way of shooting itself in the foot. If the competition doesn't beat the stuffings out of a GM product, then GM will gladly do it for them.

Go figure. Any one of us, for 1/50th the salary, could have told a GM executive how to market the GTO, fer instance. Or pulled on a shirt cuff and mentioned how overpriced the XLR was?

How can such interesting cars fail? It takes genius to screw up cars like this.

denver5357

"GM has an uncanny way of shooting itself in the foot."

Very true. There have been several stories in national media (Fortune, WSJ) within the past month about GM's newest troubles. On the one hand they have billions in retiree benefits to pay (an old problem), and on the other their newest cars have had lukewarm receptions from buyers. In one of the articles (I think Fortune), the new GM CEO said they wanted to get away from incentives and make buyers "focus on the car, not the deal." But as had been posted, the cars are no great shakes. The irony is that GM vehicles often do include very useful conveniences that the imports do not. But the overall reliability/performance/styling doesn't measure up and that matters more to buyers who buy on more than just incentives and rebates. Fleet sales prop GM up.

mirth

Just read Lutz's blog where he referenced a few articles that point out the inaccuracies in Neil's G6 column. They boil down to two: he "inaccurately" compared sales of both the 4 and 6 cyclinder Grand Ams to the sales of the G6, which only comes as a 6 cyclinder, and he incorrectly stated that the G6 has heavy incentives.

On the second one they're right - I think the G6 incentives are relatively light ($500?). However, since the G6 is the replacement for the Grand Am, I think it's very fair to compare the total sales. It means that a bunch of people who would have bought a 4 cylinder Grand Am are now buying a non-Pontiac vehicle. Who's fault is that? (Hint: not the LA Times.) Anything else is just making excuses. There's also a lot of talk about future tweaks coming this year and next, but frankly, you only get one chance at a first impression, and GM flubbed it.

dieselone

According to GMs incentive website, they are offering $2500 cash on the '05 G6 here in the south central region. I wouldn't call that small.

xkss

carlisimo,

The new Pontiac Solstice will weigh less than a BMW Z4 and an Audi TT.

xkss

Maybe it is just me, but the new Z06 seems like it has the stuff to make it at least one of the best sports cars out there.

Carbon fiber, magnesium, six-piston caliper front brakes with individual brake pads, four-piston caliper rear brakes with individual brake pads, 505 hp, backed by the factory in racing, dry-sump lubrication, aluminum chassis, developed with the C6-R, developed with Dave Hill and other Corvette enthusiasts, 470 lb-ft of torque, 7,000 rpm redline, exhaust mufflers with valves that open after 3,500 rpm, and on and on...

The 911 is fantastic, but Porsche refuses to fix the RMS (rear main seal) leaks on the new 05 911 (it is a rare problem). The RMS problem first came out on the 1997 Boxster. The 911 Turbo used to be the wild 911, but now any pimple-face teenager with a driver's license could drive it thanks to an optional automatic transmission. Dry-sump lubrication was only available on the previous 911 with the GT2, GT3, and 911 Turbo. Plus, the new Cayman (Boxster with a roof and other changes) could make the 911 obsolete. I expect more from Porsche than Chevrolet.

Now the 2006 Pontiac Solstice.

Awesome styling (makes the new MX-5 look bland), $19,995 including a $575 destination charge (will be the most affordable roadster on the market), optional limited-slip differential (gee, where is that on the Z4?), less weight than a Z4 and Audi TT, no gizmos to go wrong like SMG, and on...

xkss

You said the following:

"Ford -- great steering feel and overall handling, solid interior design and quality, attractive exterior design (often retro, but still well executed)"

Does that really apply to the Ford Crown Victoria?

xkss

GM's main reason for using the transverse leafs, front and rear, on the C5 (applicable to the C6 as well) is, believe it or not, space.

To do a proper coil-over suspension, the shocks on the car would need to be mounted at a more vertical angle. This would require not only redesigning the lower control arm (no big deal) but also the upper shock tower (big deal.) Said redesigned shock tower would cut into the rear storage compartment (no big deal) and, up front, the engine compartment (REALLY big deal.)

The leafs allow the shocks to be mounted at a slightly more horizontal angle, thereby lowering the shock tower and not cutting into interior space.

As for advantages vs. disadvantages, there aren't many at all. Seperate coil-overs offer you independent wheel adjustments, allowing you to change the spring rate on the front right wheel without affecting the rate on the front left, if you desired. Over-all, the 4 coils may actually be a tad bit lighter than the two big leafs. In reality, those are the only two advantages coil-overs have.

Carlisimo, have you driven a 2006 Corvette Z06?

editor_karl

I knew it was only a matter of time, that's why I mentioned it in this discussion's description.

I got a speeding ticket today!!

The most bizarre aspect is that it was from the EXACT same officer who gave me a ticket in January. In both cases I'm fighting the ticket, as any thinking entity should unless the ticket is truly justified. Just to clarify right now, I have gotten justified tickets in the past. Once I was going too fast in a residential area and totally agreed with the officer when he told me so. The other time I ran a red light because of a lack of attentiveness. These situations happened over 10 years ago (the red light happened 15 years ago when I was 20), and both times I paid the fine and went to traffic school with no ill will toward the officer or the world of traffic law enforcement.

Most of the other tickets I've received border between questionable and totally bogus in terms of me really doing something "wrong" and/or "unsafe." Today is a perfect example. Driving down PCH, keeping up with traffic in a group of about six cars. We're coming down a hill, I'm in the left lane slightly ahead of a car in the right lane with three cars right behind us, and there sits Evil Keneivel on his motorcycle (creatively positioned in shade to make him almost impossible to see).

My Valentine One made not a peep, but he claimed he used laser (the Valentine One is supposed to detect laser as well as radar, and it has in the past). He pulls me over (the other five cars undoubtedly sighed with relief as he zeroed in on me) and wrote me up for 69 mph. I of course glanced at my speedo when I saw him, and it was indicating 61 mph (speedos are notoriously fast to keep people from getting speeding tickets, so I'd guess I was actually doing around 56-59 mph).

I actually like this guy. We talked cars back in January and we did it again this time. I told him what my speedo indicated and that my laser detector never went off, but he claimed the laser could be pointed at the grille and not be picked up by my detector in the windshield. Sounds possible, but between my speedo indication and never having my detector go off is too much for me to just accept the ticket blissfully.

Here's the wild part. When he wrote me a ticket in January he claimed I was doing 65 in a 50, but the actual charge was "too fast for conditions" with a reference to a California traffic code. You look the code up and it doesn't say "going 65 in a 50 zone is illegal" but instead says you can't go "too fast for conditions, as defined by going 15 percent faster (rate of travel) than what 85 percent of the traffic on that stretch of road travels at." So I fought the ticket on the basis that 65 mph on that stretch of PCH is NOT 15 percent higher than 85 percent of the traffic in that area. In other words, everyone goes well over 50 mph on that part of PCH (unless they see a cop). I fought the ticket using "trial by declaration" (mail) and still haven't heard the verdict.

Today Officer Tulley wrote me up for 69 in a 65, even though it was in the same 50 mph zone (about .5 a mile away from) where I got the last ticket. He told me that instead of calling it "too fast for conditions" he was writing me up for breaking the basic California law that says you should never go over 65 mph under any circumstances in this state. He told me this AFTER I told him about fighting my previous ticket and the basis for why I was fighting it.

This begs the question: Why did he change the nature of the charge? I mailed in my rebuttal on the first ticket three weeks ago. Any chance it got some traction and is forcing them to rethink their methodology?

Don't know. Still haven't gotten the final verdict notice. But either way, today's ticket amounts to a 4 mph transgression. In Colorado that wouldn't even be a point on my license, but I haven't confirmed this for California yet.

I'll let you guys know what I find out. But as an automotive journalist it sure is a pain in the [non-permissible content removed] to deal with this stuff.

And for anyone out there dumb enough to suggest "Well, if you'd just slow down you wouldn't get speeding tickets" here is my response:

I've not had a traffic accident that was my fault in 18 years, and I've only had one that was my fault in 20 years of driving (on snow when I was 17, with contact happening at less than 15 mph). Both of these recent tickets (along with almost every other one) happened in a wide open area with no kids around and while I was essentially keeping up with traffic.

These tickets are so obviously a form of revenue generation (versus being actually pubic safety oriented) that I feel sorry for those who won't or can't see it.

If I didn't have such a spotless record in terms of accidents, along with multiple driving training courses under my belt, I might feel differently about always obeying the letter of the law. But I do, so I don't. I don't have a path of destruction in my driving past. When it comes to residential areas I slow down and am watchful for kids/pedestrians. I obviously don't drive dangerously or my accident record would reflect it, but unfortunately an arbitrary speed limit and/or the creative (say, always at the bottom of hills...) placement of a traffic cop can make it look otherwise on your record. It sucks for good drivers who end up having higher insurance rates, but that's the world we live in.

It really kills me how in California you basically aren't required to call the police for a traffic accident unless someone is killed (it's not like this in Colorado). This means you could have one accident a month and the police wouldn't even know about it, despite causing massive property damage and personal injury. At the same time, if your record is clear of accidents, but you get the occasional speeding ticket, you're insurance rates go up and, theoretically, you could lose your license.

Silly.

kyfdx

Puh-leeeeeze...

You were going 69 (or 61 or 58) in a 50 MPH zone and you are crying about a ticket?

And, because you were in a group of six, he shouldn't single you out?

And, of course.... you are the world's safest driver otherwise, and he should know that by looking at you? Oh no, that's right... he knows because you told him about the other ticket he just wrote you, and how you are taking it to court!

And he couldn't be using laser, because your detector didn't go off? (Ever look into how wide a laser beam is at 100 yards?.. maybe an inch).

You were speeding. You got caught. More power to you if you can get out of it, but welcome to the real world.

I do agree that the whole thing with insurance rates and revenue generation are a problem, but you knew the rules going in..

regards,
kyfdx

dieselone

I feel your pain. I lived in Ohio for a brief period of time thank God (3 yrs), the Ohio highway patrol are like flies. I received 6 tickets in those 3 years, I think I helped put a nice down payment on a Crown Vic.

PF_Flyer

Editor Karl can always hop over to the Traffic Enforcement Tactics - the good, the bad, and the sneaky topic!

PF Flyer
Host
News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles

The Subaru Crew Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule

jchan2

Well.. if the LaCrosse is considered a full sized car, shouldn't the Nissan Maxima be one too? It's longer than an Accord at a slightly higher price. The EPA classifies my I35 as a Midsize, and I'd think the EPA would classify the LaCrosse as a midsize also. My I35 has 36.2 inches of rear legroom, and the LaCrosse has 37.2 inches, which makes it seem roomy for a midsized car, yet all the magazines are criticizing it for a lack of rear seat legroom. Sure, the Avalon has 40 inches of legroom, but it's so long that it's classified as a full-size by the EPA.

Edmunds should compare the Maxima and LaCrosse... Sure, I think the Maxima would win, but the Maxima is closer in size and purpose to the LaCrosse than the Avalon or Five-Hundred or LeSebre/Lucerne.

And yes, Chevrolet is still producing the Cavalier.

varmint

I'm a bit late to the discussion, but I'll throw my two cents in anyway.

I honestly don't see a problem with building cars that are merely good enough. There have been many times when I've read a review of a half-dozen cars and the one in the winner's circle was the one that scored second-best in most all categories, without being first in any one. Hondas and Toyotas are often good for winning both awards and buyers this way. Ford is pretty good at this with their big trucks, too.

But there's a catch. A vehicle that is going to win hearts and minds without excelling in any one area absolutely cannot be a total bust in any one area, either. I call it the "doesn't suck" attribute. If a vehicle can earn sufficiently high scores under the doesn't suck column, it can move mountains. But if that same vehicle has significant tragic flaws, forget about it. The parts that suck become the only noteworthy characteristics.

I think GM has quite a few of those. Their minivans, cars, and even some of their trucks fall into that class. About the only brand capable of escaping is Cadillac.

The other extreme is having a car that does one or two things so well, the rest of it doesn't matter. I think The Dodge Viper is probably the poster child for this class. GM has a few of these. The Vette certainly owns the bang for buck category. The Suburban is another winner of this type. But you can't build a full-line of products around that sort of design philosophy. It's a tactic which works in niche segments. It doesn't wash in the mass market.

blueguydotcom

Now the 2006 Pontiac Solstice.

Awesome styling (makes the new MX-5 look bland), $19,995 including a $575 destination charge (will be the most affordable roadster on the market), optional limited-slip differential (gee, where is that on the Z4?), less weight than a Z4 and Audi TT, no gizmos to go wrong like SMG, and on..

xkss mentions the styling and price of the Solstice v. the MX-5 and then jumps to the weight of the far pricier european models. Hmm, that more expensive (2-3k?) MX-5 weighs several hundred pounds (at least 390) less than the Solstice.

Still the Solstice and View with the blown engine from the Cobalt could be a massive amount of fun for under 25k. Sexy looking cars too.

hpowders

Wow! Actually complaining to a law enforcement officer that your Valentine One didn't alert you to the officer's laser beam! And this guy actually offers you an explanation!
You my good sir have perfectly demonstrated the concept of chutzbah!

sputterguy

Hmmmm. Maybe that's why GM didn't listen to me. Just kidding. I wasn't aware that the Northstar was FWD 'only'. You get my point though. The Solstice is a heavy car for a two-seater I think and at 2800lbs, 170hp isn't going to push it around very quickly. Maybe they will bump it up later but what GM needs now is a hit not a lukewarm offering. And what's up with the GXP. Bonneville GXP, Grand Prix GXP, and now Solstice GXP. Can't they come up with something a little cooler to designate high performance? And a little variety also.

editor_karl

I would essentially agree with all your points:

a) HVAC -- this is true. GM cars are superb at making the cabin hot or cold in record time. I'd forgotten this, but your comment reminded me. Good call out
b) automatic transmissions -- yes, as I alluded in my first post on this subject, GM's automatic transmissions are basically smart when it comes to picking gears and crisp when it comes to shifting them. I would also like to see more gears offered in their automatics, but the current versions are good
c) engines -- it amazes me what GM has continued to do with pushrods. While NVH is generally below segment average, power and fuel mileage are often above. Our long-term Malibu is getting crazy good mileage, and it's certainly not underpowered

All good points. I'm bummed that GM can't extend these strengths to other longstanding problem areas, such as interior quality, steering feel and overall driving dynamics (though the CTS, STS and SRX are strong in those areas, too; not segment leading, but strong).

Great feedback hammen2.

editor_karl

You guys are both right. GM is a "titanic" corporation and it takes time to turn something that big around. But how long is long enough? In my opinion, the clock started running in 1973 when people were waiting in line for fuel and it appeared that the days of 400 cubic inch, 4,500 pound dinosaurs (that made 135 horsepower and got 8 mpg) we not the wave of the future.

Japan arrived with cars like the Civic and Accord and has never looked back. The domestics struggled for years, and didn't really get a handle on things until the late 1980s, in my opinion. Then Japan turned up the quality and performance again and the domestics were left playing catch-up again.

It's now been 30-plus years since the Japanese made major inroads to the American car market, and I think few people would argue that the Focus, Neon or even the new Cobalt (yes the new Cobalt, too) are as good as the Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla or Mazda 3, overall. I like the Focus' interior space and driving dynamics, and I like the SRT-4's horsepower, and I like the Cobalt's styling and ride quality. But none of them have particularly clean repair/recall records (jury still out on Cobalt), and none of them is as refined as the Japanese alternatives.

And then there's the resale value issue...

GM makes a lot of different models, but Toyota isn't exactly a "small" company. Look how many car/truck/suv models they offer (plus a minivan). And now there's Scion, too. Yet ALL of Toyota's cars are among the best in their respective segments in terms of drivetrain refinement/NVH levels, quiet cabins and build quality.

Oh, and did someone say "hybrid" out there? Toyota almost has a monopoly on the hybrid market with three strong offerings and more on the way. Honda is the only other company even playing in this area. And to be clear, the Escape Hybrid is essentially a Prius SUV because is uses all Toyota parts for the electric side. The full-size GM trucks are not really hybrids, they're vehicles with generators that recapture braking energy and engine's that turn off at stop lights. A definite step in the right direction, but not nearly as sophisticated as the Prius or Accord Hybrid.

Why isn't a domestic company leading the charge in this area. Why isn't the company that "...can still do anything it wants -- anything" setting the pace for hybrid offerings? Why? Why? Why?!

editor_karl

Actually, the Ford Crown Victoria does have pretty good steering feel, especially considering its age and target market. It's better than a DTS or Avalon or LaCrosse. I'd have to drive it back-to-back with a new STS to know for sure, but I'd hope the STS is better, since it's BRAND NEW and the Crown Victoria is quite old.

I'm telling you guys, Ford has got the steering feel thing down, and since that's a major focus of mine in any car I drive, I tend to really like Fords even if they have other issues (which I know they do). The new F-150? The Focus? The new Mustang? Even the Explorer and Expedition. These cars offering amazing feedback through the steering wheel. Only the Winstar/Freestar comes up short (very short, in fact) in terms of driving dynamics as far as Ford product that I've driven and haven't been impressed with.

editor_karl

So you think going 61 indicated mph (which probably equates to an actual speed of around 56-58 mph) on a downhill slope with six other cars doing the same speed justifies a 69 mph speeding ticket?

OK...

Sounds like you suffer from the dreaded "the law's the law and there'e never an excuse to break it" mentality.

BTW, he shouldn't "know" anything about me, except how dangerous I was being at the time he witnessed my driving style.

Here's an easy litmus test you can all take. When you got your last traffic ticket, what was the actual problem at the time -- other than the cop giving you a ticket? Was there the sqeualing of tires being locked up? Was there one or more drivers having to swerve hard? Was there some problem OTHER than the officer writing you a ticket? If there was, you probably deserved the ticket for driving dangerously.

If there wasn't, you probably were being used to help fill the local county coffers.

editor_karl

You my good sir have perfectly demonstrated the concept of chutzbah!

Thank you, but no big deal. I even made him show me the laser gun and then he let me look through the view finder while he targeted another car and "fired" to show me how small the beam was.

One thing I noticed is that accuracy has a flipside. Sure, the beam can be highly focused, but any slight movement of your hand sends it (literally) flying off the car you're targeting unless you're within about 75 feet (making the car a big enough target that some slight movement doesn't matter).

The guy is pretty cool, actually, and between these two stops in four months I feel like I really know him. One more citation from Officer Tulley and I'll have to add him to my Christmas card list...

xkss

It will do 0-60 in under 7 seconds for $19,995. It will cost less than the new Mazda MX-5.

The Pontiac Solstice, while weighing more than a Mazda Miata or the new MX-5, will weigh less than an Audi TT or a BMW Z4.

Pontiac has not announced a Solstice GXP.

Also, the Northstar is not fwd only. The Cadillac STS, XLR, and SRX have an available 4.6 liter Northstar V-8 and they are not fwd.

kyfdx

Well.. after you saw the cop, you looked down... and thought you were doing 61 MPH, which you assume is really slower than that.. I believe you wrote the officer stated from the start that he clocked you at 69 MPH... And. as you pointed out, you were in a 50 MPH zone. It sounds like he cut you a break by writing you up for 69 in a 65... Correct me if I'm wrong in any of that.. Unless you expect us to believe the officer was being untruthful, I don't see where your gripe is.

Whether traffic laws and speed limits are useful or not may be up for debate.. but, whether speeding is legal is pretty much a moot point.. Most of us speed, many of us most of the time... but, most of us realize we are taking our chances.. It is against the law..

I didn't say you were doing anything dangerous and I'm sure speeding tickets are used as revenue generators.... But, I don't suffer from any "mentality". You were speeding... you got caught.. It sucks.. and I'm sorry you got a ticket, but when you speed, that is always a possibility.. I just got back from a 1200 mile trip, and I was probably at least 10-15 over the limit for about 1000 miles of it.. No ticket.. part luck, part experience... I'd feel bad if I had been pulled over, but I wouldn't rail against the injustice of it all.. I make my choice, and I take my chances... fairness really doesn't enter into it.

What blows my mind, is that you actually told the officer that he caught you once before and you were taking that ticket to court.. Did you really think that was going to help you get out of the ticket?

Also, for future reference, any laser detector, even the vaunted Valentine One has a very slim chance of actually detecting a laser beam before you are clocked...You likely won't even get a reading when he clocks you, let alone the guy in front of you.. Lasers just don't bounce around like radar waves... it is a false security blanket.

regards,
kyfdx

xkss

Why doesn't Toyota set the pace for sports cars?

By the way, there will be no MR2 for the 2006 model year.

editor_karl

You were speeding... you got caught.. It sucks.. and I'm sorry you got a ticket, but when you speed, that is always a possibility..

Exactly my point. If most of us speed most of the time, and if it almost never ends up in personal or property damage, why is it a possibility that we can all get tickets for this behavior?

Just because fairness isn't included in the current system doesn't mean it shouldn't be, and doesn't mean I'm just going to say, "Oh well, got another bogus ticket. Guess I'll pay my money and move on."

Nope, I'm going to say things like, "The system is stupid. It serves no purpose except to generate revenue, and it's a travesty that otherwise capable and conscientious drivers can be randomly plucked (or some similar word) by something as arbitrary as being in the 'wrong' place at the 'wrong' time." The system may have existed for decades, and may exist for decades more. Doesn't mean I'm going to gleefully accept it.

blueguydotcom

Dunno if you watch the Apprentice but the task for the show was to create a brochure for the Solstice. Everybody at our weekly party (owners of bimmers, mazdas, toyotas) carried on about how sexy the car is. And it certainly is hot. I'll drive it and if it's more fun than an 06 Miata or an 06 330i I'll be inclined to roll the dice and do something unexpected: buy American.

It will do 0-60 in under 7 seconds for $19,995. It will cost less than the new Mazda MX-5.

Where did you get the sub 7 second 0-60 time? I've not seen an official test yet that says that. Still agonizingly slow by my standards but maybe the cobalt's engine mods are within reason to have done aftermarket. Anything over 6 seconds better have handling that's razor sharp.

editor_karl

Because they'd rather set the pace in family sedans, luxury sedans, SUVs, luxury SUVs, compact trucks and minivans. These sell in far greater numbers than sports cars, thus resulting in billions of dollars sitting in Toyota's many bank accounts.

Personally, I can't fault their priorities.

And when the Toyota/Lexus sports car that's been seen testing at the Nurburgring goes into production for 2007 they could well be setting the pace in sports cars, too.

xkss

I'm sure Toyota could set the pace for a reliable sports car. Will it even have a manual transmission? Not even the new IS350 has a true manual transmission.

A sports car from Lexus, that excites? One that is as much fun to drive as a Porsche 911? Or a Ferrari F430? Or a Lotus Elise? Or the 2006 Corvette Z06? Or the 2006 Aston Martin V8 Vantage?

Heck, they hardly marketed the current MR-2. They aren't doing much with the Celica. Where are the guys who developed the Supra of the 90s?

Is there anyone at Toyota that has the passion of Aston Martin's CEO, Dr. Ulrich Bez? Or Henrik Fikser, who has since left Aston Martin, but worked for them as their director of design from 2001 until 2004?

Just read these three articles

Aston Martin and Fisker part 1

part 2

part 3

navigator89

Editor Karl,

Just of curiosity, what car were you driving when you got caught? How much was the fine? My dad was caught doing 85km/h in a 70km/h zone, and he was driving a 1993 Ford Taurus. He didn't fight the ticket, even though he insisted he was going at around 65km/h. He paid $47 and moved on.

bryan

are not just related to speeding in the Washington DC area. Parking tickets are absolute "cash cows" for the DC government. I've had several parking tickets in the same area in the past few years, and I'm proud to say I've beaten four that were bogus (broken meters, missing meters, that kind of stuff). I did indeed pay those that were rightfully issued, usually the meter expired before I got back to the car--that's fair and I paid. Interesting is that all four of the bogus tickets were from the same ticket writer!

The last ticket I received was being placed on my windshield by the "meter maid" just as I got to my vehicle, and I said what's that for--my meter has not expired. She pointed to a meter one car over that had expired, and when I brought the error to her attention, her response was "Tough, you'll have to pay it or appeal it because I already wrote it". Arrgh! I've heard a lot of people just pay to avoid the hassle of appealing--NOT ME!

I appealed it like the other three in writing, and asked to be called to discuss this particular meter maid. Believe it or not, I did receive a call from the ticket adjudicator (sp?), who told me that my ticket was being thrown out as their records indicated that I had paid some tickets and had three others that were dismissed as erroneous. I also received a written notice that vacated the citation.

I was told in the discussion that this particular meter maid was being retrained, and that I was not the only person complaining about this particular ticket writer. I haven't seen this ticket writer in the last year or so, so perhaps she was reassigned or let go.

I guess my point is that when I'm wrong, I'll admit and pay my dues. However, when it appears that some ticket writers are trying to make some type of quota or whatever by issuing bogus tickets, I'm not contributing to their government coffers without an appeal. And don't even get me started about red light cameras!

And editor Karl--I understand why you are appealing--good luck to you!

jaserb

"The system is stupid. It serves no purpose except to generate revenue, and it's a travesty that otherwise capable and conscientious drivers can be randomly plucked (or some similar word) by something as arbitrary as being in the 'wrong' place at the 'wrong' time." The system may have existed for decades, and may exist for decades more. Doesn't mean I'm going to gleefully accept it."

I agree completely. But go read the "Traffic Enforcement Tactics" thread for a while, and you'll realize that no matter how bogus the ticket or ridiculous the circumstances there's a pretty good chance that the judge will side with the cop. I don't think kydfx was saying you have to like it, just that railing against the injustice of it all will do little more than increase your blood pressure.

-Jason

csandste

Move to Missouri, the only state (as far as I know) that lets you (almost) automatically change speeding tickets to non-moving violations... for a price.

http://www.ustraffictickets.com/default.htm

PF_Flyer

Let's not turn this into a traffic enforcement topic. This is Karl's logbook to relate his road test experiences. For traffic enforcement discussion, head on over to Traffic Enforcement Tactics - the good, the bad, and the sneaky

kyfdx

bigdaddycoats

I would agree, but karl is the one who started the traffic issue.