Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

1108109111113114222

Comments

  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    One problem that exists is that folks with AWD vehicles think they have a security blanket and they can just drive all willy-nilly and AWD will keep them safe. You are right about a number of folks in AWD vehicles that end up in the ditches because they don't slow down. They think AWD provides them with a sense of invincibility in snowy, icy, wet conditions.

    I too had a RWD vehicle (86 Supra) and never had any problems in snowy conditions. However, it was a manual and I knew how to drive it in bad conditions...SENSIBLY!!!

    For some, AWD replaces common sensibility.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    I agree with you...I wasn't saying YOU didn't say it couldn't be useful, I was just voicing my 2 cents on it...that's all.

    Another thing that folks really forget about too is the tires they have on their vehicle makes all the difference.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    and Canada would likely be one of those places where one would face crappy enough driving conditions often enough that 4wd or awd would be a logical purchase, don't you think? The fact that you can get along fine in your RWD 300 is more a testimony to your driving abilities and experience, put your car in the hands of many of us down here in the lower 48 and we will get stuck (or slid into a snow bank) in a rwd car before we would in the same car fwd. Perhaps, sad but true since many folks have really known nothing but fwd and there remains a few of us left that remember well how much easier it was to get around on snow covered roads in a 40hp VW Bug than it was in a 300hp GTO (with or without snow tires or sandbags in the trunk).
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    My first car was RWD and am thankful for it. After a few scary situations you learn real quick to slow down. Never got stuck even in a few large storms.

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    I don't think there is any doubt that these 'safety' systems are in effect making us all less capable drivers - much as allmet contends. some computer somewhere 'preventing' you from making a mistake does nothing to teach you how to correct that mistake or even let you know what that mistake was in the first place - and will further be misconstrued by many 'drivers' as some sort of protection from really gross driving misjudgements at which point then you have to wonder whether these things are 'safety' systems at all? Unfortunately, sooner or later TV lawyers will get involved in the answer!
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    I agree with your statement. Quick story: a few years back was driving a base model Altima. I assumed (first mistake) it had Anti-Lock and needed a panic stop in the rain. So used to "stomp and steer" it wasn't a pretty stop at all and almost spun out of control. It just goes to show that when you are used to these electronic aids how one forgets the basics. If I would have known I would have for sure pumped them myself. What are we all going to do when a VSC sensor is slightly out of range and causes more trouble than good. My car is equipped with VSC and while I guess it would work as designed I intend not to find out. I also feel that not having an "off" switch is a disgrace. A choice obviously made be Yota's lawyers and not the engineers.

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • I also feel that not having an "off" switch is a disgrace. A choice obviously made be Yota's lawyers and not the engineers.

    This is one place I feel like Honda has the idea NAILED. There is a simple VSA defeat switch in all of their cars equipped with the system. It resets every time the car is switched off, then back on, meaning you must turn it off for each trip (a good idea to have it default to "ON" but with the ability to turn it off in no-time).
  • I can turn it off any time in Maxima and it resets to ON when vehicle is restarted.
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    My previous Toyota's did have "off" switches. It could just be a cost cutting measure. There is a method to defeat it through a ridiculous set of commands.

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • It could just be a cost cutting measure.

    I'm thinking the earlier post had it right when talking about the lawyers doing things.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    That's how the Azera is as well.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    the 'off' switch is fine and should be required - but given that it defaults to 'on' on a restart who is going to habitually turn it off (kinda like fastening a seat belt)
    this is not likely cost cutting but much more likely Toyota's product liability lawyers talking - a corollary of McDonalds serving hot coffee that is actually hot. If you read your Avalon manual carefully you will find out that putting a real beverage in your real beverage holders is strictly prohibited by those same silly lawyers.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    PS there are several cars out there BTW where off is not necessarily off, off just 'reprograms' the yaw sensors to higher tolerances..
  • As in Mercedes-Benz. The Corvette also offers a "Competition Mode' i believe.
  • I agree that in almost all situations AWD is nothing but a marketing gimmick in an originally FWD vehicle - there's a penalty to be paid in that you haul that extra weight, complexity, and cost around 100% of the time, and in an auto gain almost no benefit.
    That gentleman from NYC who needs his AWD for the rare 10" snowstorm will probably be stranded anyway, because the ground clearance on most cars does not exceed 6 or 7 inches; hence, he's unable to get down to solid ground, anyway. He's just plowing snow with his front bumper like the rest of us. In a truck with more clearance it makes more sense, especially compared to RWD only.
    Fact is, I'd take FWD with good winter tires over an AWD car with all season tires, and in my experience, a rear wheel drive car with close to 50-50 weight distribution and good ( and usually narrower ) winter tires and traction control does pretty good in snow also.
  • floridabob1floridabob1 Posts: 1,190
    RE: 3418
    I don't know where you are located, but if you have ever driven a 4WD car in snow,you would definitely notice the difference.
  • cobrazeracobrazera Posts: 352
    I'm in Michigan and have driven AWD in snow - I traded a Jaguar X-type for my Azera. I have also owned 4WD Tahoes for a number of years.
    IMO the biggest problem with 4 wheels driving is that you must be on the gas to get any benefit. Yeah, it's a bit better for acceleration, but once you're underway and encounter a sliding problem, you usually want or need to slow down - not speed up. The added weight of the 4WD then becomes a detriment. The ease of acceleration also gives the driver a false sense of the traction available: all the 4WD drive trucks and SUVs in the freeway medians and ditches during winter conditions support that argument.
    Good winter tires work on acceleration, handling, and braking.
  • jaymagicjaymagic Posts: 309
    I simply put 4 studded tires on my 4x4 Explorer for the winter, and use it when the roads are really bad. Otherwise, the Azera with the traction control and electronic stability control gets me around just fine on the stock tires.

    Used to use 4 studded tires on my Hyundai XG, which then had MUCH more traction than the Explorer without studded tires, but just decided last winter to change the studs to the Explorer for incredible traction, when needed. Stopping and turning are now incredible, along with very easy acceleration. The only problem is watching out the rear view mirror for other vehicles w/o studs which cannot come close to matching the stopping distance with studs.
  • scbobscbob Posts: 167
    The biggest problem we have in the Southern US is the people with AWD or 4WD who think they can drive at normal speeds on ICE!
    Learned a long time ago, if it ices; stay home! If it snows, FWD in my RAV4 Camry, Taurus, etc. did well.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    and I also a resident of the 'South' and can count on one hand, the number of times in the last 20 yeats that I had to contend wioh ice accumulation on the roads. The fact is that nothing helps (except possibly studded or chained tires) on ice, and the point really was AWD (or 4Wd) is a pretty dear price to pay in terms of vehicle price, operation and maintainence cost for what really amounts to maybe 90% of this country's population.
  • alexstorealexstore Posts: 264
    Is this a new maxima?
    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=122983#2

    Even though this article talks about Euro Teana, or infinity, on another site , sources close to Nissan are saying that next Generation Maxima will be close in design to M-B CLS. In my opinion this car is too Avalonish
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    "In my opinion this car is too Avalonish"

    That's not neccesarily a bad thing! You are right, the shape is almost identical.

    image

    image

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • scbobscbob Posts: 167
    Went to a car show in NC. Got to sit in a lot of cars. Interestingly, the Taurus/Sable seemed nicely sized and done, whereas the Cadillac CTS and Lincoln MKS(MKZ?)seemed very tight inside.
    Most impressive for sitting and size was the Buick Lucerne, even better than the Avalon. Couldn't get the doors on the Avalons dash to open. No Chevys around for some reason.
    Of course, these were two to five minutes per car just sitting.
  • Azera wins Total Value Award in Large Sedan category:

    http://www.strategicvision.com/press_release.php?pr=28

    " ... Hyundai earned two Total Value wins with the Hyundai Azera and Santa Fe. Although the Hyundai brand name currently does not carry the same level of reassurance that more established brands do, the Azera and Santa Fe both led their segments by providing products high in perceived quality, providing exceptional features, and being exceptionally priced – all supported with Hyundai’s warranty ..."
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    Second year in a row, for good measure.
  • djm2djm2 Posts: 705
    Hi All:
    A 2007 Hyundai Azera with the "04 option group ultimate package" and "floor mats" has an MSRP of $30,675, an invoice of $28,473 and a TMV of $27,275.
    QUESTION: ---- You can purchase a XLE V6 Toyota Camry for almost the same amount and have a better resale value after three (3) years of ownership! ------ Why purchase the Azera????? Educate me!!!!!!
    Best regards. ------ Dwayne :shades: :confuse: ;) :)
  • jlindhjlindh Posts: 282
    I can think of 3 reasons:

    1. Since the Azera has not been out for 3 years, the resale is unknown.

    2. You have a lot more car for those 3 years.

    3. The Camry has a boil on it's nose.
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    The Azera is a large car that competes more with the Avalon/Lucerne/Taurus than the Camry. You really shouldn't be comparing it to a midsize sedan. Good luck getting an XLE V6 Camry for $27,275. The Azera stands out as a value leader. Full size car for midsize price. However, as you point out depreciation is likely worse and so is fuel economy.

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,524
    The Azera doesn't have rattles and transmission/engineering/software whatever problems.

    The Azera doesn't end up with about $1500-1900 pack on the purchase like the local dealer tries to implement. E.g., $600 document fee and the salesman said $20 is document the other $580 is for unwrapping the car.
  • dborthdborth Posts: 474
    Re 3429: Bigger car, more features, better value $ for $, and you missed the best of all, $2,000 rebate this month. A no-brainer.
Sign In or Register to comment.