Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

driver100

ab348
There was an article by Michael Lamm in Hemmings the other day on the subject of driving and avoiding accidents. It is a nice read and I recommend it.

Enjoyed your summary of the article...will read it all later. The author expresses himself well, and I would say he nailed it.....when you are driving that is where all your attention should be. He likens driving to a 3D chess game....you always have to think about what could happen and what the other guys could do.

driver100

On automatics vs manual. Lots of good points. Basically, we can't get the cars we want as manuals...it is more important to have a manual for Mrs D than me. I like them, but at 70+ I know a knee, leg, arm, foot, etc could get injured easily, more chance I will be able to drive if my car is an automatic.
In the Tampa area the article ab mentioned says driving should be all your doing when you are driving....and I think an automatic lets you concentrate on other things happening around you.....one less thing to think about.

oldfarmer50

tjc78 said:

I have zero desire to ever own a manual, especially with as good as the modern automatics are.

To me manuals are like potato chips...I love em’ but not as a steady diet. I had fun with the ones I’ve driven.

oldfarmer50

andres3 said:

I'm spoiled when it comes to automatics. I really, really, REALLY prefer a dual clutch to an 8-speed slush box. 7 gears is actually enough, and perfect.

While I'm not often "racing" and HPDE's are not "racing" either, I do like the sound of the lightning quick shifts under heavy throtlle when an open straight presents itself, and I leave traffic at the last stop light in the distant rear view mirror within seconds.

I like the mechanical feel, quickness, and efficiency of them.

I've never had one break on me, so I can't comment as to replacement costs that I have heard are quite high. The A3's exhibited no signs of issues at over 100,000 miles. And you know the way those 100,000 miles were driven @oldfarmer50 would never have bought my A3.

If I was to entertain a 2-series, it'd have to be the DSG version of the M2. Now, all I need to know is, does BMW's dual clutch work fantastically like Audi/VW's, or does it work more stone-age like, such as the Kia Optima's?

The only vehicles I ever bought with more than 100k miles were my farm trucks and one of those was only because the owner lied that 192k was 92k.

My comfort zone is a 10-15 year old mostly depreciated vehicle with low mileage.

My current search is centering around basic transportation sedans for my son’s Uber activity. The current hand me down PT Cruiser is not aging well.

In about a year or two I’d be running out to look at something similar to this:

https://www.denooyerchevrolet.com/used/Chevrolet/2010-Chevrolet-Malibu-d2de34100a0e0adf1ea85fd34ca6fa67.htm

In fact I’m tempted right now. The CarFax shows a pretty obsessive maintenance schedule. Tough to resist.

stickguy

looks like a pretty good deal. And a great Uber option. How many years do they give you before it ages out, since that one is already 10?

sda

oldfarmer50 said:

andres3 said:

I'm spoiled when it comes to automatics. I really, really, REALLY prefer a dual clutch to an 8-speed slush box. 7 gears is actually enough, and perfect.

While I'm not often "racing" and HPDE's are not "racing" either, I do like the sound of the lightning quick shifts under heavy throtlle when an open straight presents itself, and I leave traffic at the last stop light in the distant rear view mirror within seconds.

I like the mechanical feel, quickness, and efficiency of them.

I've never had one break on me, so I can't comment as to replacement costs that I have heard are quite high. The A3's exhibited no signs of issues at over 100,000 miles. And you know the way those 100,000 miles were driven @oldfarmer50 would never have bought my A3.

If I was to entertain a 2-series, it'd have to be the DSG version of the M2. Now, all I need to know is, does BMW's dual clutch work fantastically like Audi/VW's, or does it work more stone-age like, such as the Kia Optima's?

The only vehicles I ever bought with more than 100k miles were my farm trucks and one of those was only because the owner lied that 192k was 92k.

My comfort zone is a 10-15 year old mostly depreciated vehicle with low mileage.

My current search is centering around basic transportation sedans for my son’s Uber activity. The current hand me down PT Cruiser is not aging well.

In about a year or two I’d be running out to look at something similar to this:

https://www.denooyerchevrolet.com/used/Chevrolet/2010-Chevrolet-Malibu-d2de34100a0e0adf1ea85fd34ca6fa67.htm

In fact I’m tempted right now. The CarFax shows a pretty obsessive maintenance schedule. Tough to resist.

I’ve driven several versions of that Malibu and liked them. They ride well, they’re quiet, are generally nicely equipped and still nice looking. The 2.4 feels peppy enough as the 6 speed auto is well matched to the engine.

sda

A couple of things the CVT does well in the Accord is in low speed bumper to bumper traffic it is extremely smooth without the annoying shift 1-2 up/dn typical automatics do in those situations.
It is nicely progressive and responsive as you accelerate, maintains speed well without the trans hunting for the right gear when driving in hilly area. The only time it is somewhat annoying is under full out acceleration when it does drone yet still accelerates quickly. Effective, yes, sporty, no.

oldfarmer50

sda said:

A couple of things the CVT does well in the Accord is in low speed bumper to bumper traffic it is extremely smooth without the annoying shift 1-2 up/dn typical automatics do in those situations.
It is nicely progressive and responsive as you accelerate, maintains speed well without the trans hunting for the right gear when driving in hilly area. The only time it is somewhat annoying is under full out acceleration when it does drone yet still accelerates quickly. Effective, yes, sporty, no.

More importantly it seems to be reliable which can’t be said for some of the competition. Will it go 200k miles like the rest of the car? That the data I’d be looking for.

imidazol97

Is anyone else having trouble signing in to this forum? I get an
error after entering my password that says "an unknown error occurred."

abacomike

imidazol97 said:

Is anyone else having trouble signing in to this forum? I get an
error after entering my password that says "an unknown error occurred."

Every so often, but not frequently. I just chalk it up to a glitch(es). 🤪😛😜

jmonroe

tjc78 said:

I have zero desire to ever own a manual, especially with as good as the modern automatics are.

Me too but I understand why some like a stick. I got my fill of driving a stick after I got out of the Navy when I drove for UPS while working my way through night school. Eventually I had to quit that job because I was getting to school late for too many classes. Maybe that's another reason I don't like sticks...too many bad memories.

jmonroe

roadburner

I've come to the point where I prefer manuals in cars that really need one- those with engines that need to be wound out to make significant power, like my Club Sport- the M42 needs to be kept north of 4500 rpm to make brisk progress. With engines that make peak torque from 1300-4500 rpm-such as the N55 and B58-I prefer theZF 8HP; it shifts quickly, rev matches, and has a true manual mode.
That said, I'm not all that enamored by the DCTs in the M cars; if I was going to replace my M235i; I'd go with an M240i if I wanted two pedals and an M2 if I wanted three...

qbrozen

Starting to ponder flying to AK and using VRBO and Turo. Looks like we could save a good bit of money while being on our own schedule, which I always prefer.

stickguy

we are going to Sicily next spring (2021). That one is with a group of family, and is a tour. Last big trip (Ireland) we did it DIY (we me doing the bulk of the planning and coordination) and I have zero desire to try and put together another one. If it was just me and the wife going, maybe.

Kinda looking forward to having everything taken care of for me (other than some free afternoon and evenings) including all transit. I want to enjoy, not think! Might end up costing more than if I hustled cheap places to stay, but worth it to us this time.

sda

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy driving a car with a manual transmission. Before being old enough to drive I had a Honda XL-125 which made it easy to transfer using a clutch and shifting gears from the motorcycle to driving a manual transmission car. I even learned to double clutch in my first car, a 62 Galaxie with a non-synchronized 1st gear, 3 speed column shift transmission. A couple of years ago, even though I hadn’t driven a car with a manual transmission for over 10 years, I drove a friend’s BMW 318 convertible. I had no trouble at all and it felt natural driving and fun driving a stick again.

ronsteve

Michaell said:

The first car she had with a true automatic transmission was the '99 Expedition we leased. Her commute at the time included a road that went down a canyon, which can be treacherous in the winter. We had to have a talk about how to use the transmission lever to 'downshift' the transmission to use engine braking.

Now, with flappy paddles, it's a bit easier to mimic the function of a true stick shift.

Thing is, I'm seeing a few with paddle shifting where you can just do it from D (without going to any M or S mode), BUT after a certain amount of time it will go back to the gear the tranny thinks it should be in.

My RDX does that and it's not ALL bad (definitely not all good either) and I also encountered that in a Chrysler 300, which I seem to remember doing some of its own shifting in S as well.

stickguy

I think the RDX has an S setting too on the trans? I should know, since I have owned one for 7.5 years. But as usual for me, I tried the paddles once when I got it, and never again (other than accidentally flicking one a couple of times). Correct though that you can hit a downshift any time you want but it will be temporary, not full manual mode.

ronsteve

stickguy said:

I think the RDX has an S setting too on the trans? I should know, since I have owned one for 7.5 years. But as usual for me, I tried the paddles once when I got it, and never again (other than accidentally flicking one a couple of times). Correct though that you can hit a downshift any time you want but it will be temporary, not full manual mode.

Yes, there is an S mode on the RDX, which will initially just give you more aggressive shift points, but once you hit a paddle in S you're essentially full manual. Most of my S usage was when we drove from Louisville to Richmond, and I didn't want to be so shift-happy on every rolling hill. I think the VCM gets behind too, and S mode seems to alleviate that.

Otherwise, I only use the paddles when I have good reason to believe a downshift will be coming, and decide to make it pre-emptively as it'll be smoother that way than if the tranny actually kicks down on its own. In most of those situations the temporary shift works fine.

ab348

sda said:

I’ve driven several versions of that Malibu and liked them. They ride well, they’re quiet, are generally nicely equipped and still nice looking. The 2.4 feels peppy enough as the 6 speed auto is well matched to the engine.

I almost bought one (probably should have in retrospect - a dealer here had one with the V6, grey leather and nice wheels on their lot in dark blue metallic, a handsome car) and had several as rentals. Always liked them and found the dash design in particular nicely done, better than the subsequent models. The negatives for me were only minor - the taillight design looked both cheap and ugly, and the lack of a center armrest in the rear seat.

oldfarmer50

stickguy said:

looks like a pretty good deal. And a great Uber option. How many years do they give you before it ages out, since that one is already 10?

I think in our area it’s 15 years. Down in NYC where driving is rougher on cars I’m told it’s 10.

My son put about 25k miles/year on his last car. At that rate he’d put 125k on a 2010 before it aged out of the system. If it lasted that long I’d say he got his money’s worth out of it.

oldfarmer50

qbrozen said:

Starting to ponder flying to AK and using VRBO and Turo. Looks like we could save a good bit of money while being on our own schedule, which I always prefer.

Alaska in the middle of winter? What are you, a moose?

Unless AK is Arkansas, which would raise a whole different set of questions.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

https://amp.timeinc.net/thedrive/opinion/9171/why-radars-detectors-matter-more-than-ever?source=dam

Great read on why Waze is lame on its own, you have to be a power user of all technology information available in order to be the BEST driver you can be!

Technology cannot make you a better driver, it can mask poor driving skills, it can minimize the consequences of bad driving but it cannot make you a better driver.

Disagree. A driver needs as much information as they can in order to remain alert and situationally aware of their surroundings. Not using tools/technology/gauges is just remaining ignorant of the available information surrounding you.

Granted, if you can't take in the information from your gauges, instrument panel, and maintain sufficient awareness and attention to the roadway, then by all means ignore your guages, instrument panel, car, and other conditions surrounding you. At some point it is time to recognize the lack of congnitive ability, and hand in your license voluntarily.



P.S. Accidents are not accidents. They are negligent collisions. Usually by one party being at fault. While not-at-fault collisons can be swayed by good or bad luck, at-fault collisions are not by chance, luck, or accident. There are people out there without at-fault collisions out on the roadway, for 10, 20, 30, 40 years. Even a whole lifetime. This is no accident. Those drivers (if they have a lot of miles under their belts) have developed skills and habits that makes their impressive results and driving record predictable, expected, and highly likely.

Those with bad driving habits do and will cause collisions. It is inevitable, and that is why I don't see the distinction DA's make between vehicular manslaughter and "negligent vehicular manslaughter." To me all vehicular manslaugther (if you are found at fault) should be treated as criminally negligent. Get those drivers off the road! Jail time!

I disagree with you. There is such a thing as information overload, up to a certain point additional information is helpful, past that point additional information becomes useless and may even be counterproductive. once you get flooded with information your ability to process relevant information is diminished by the fact that you have to sort relevant information out of the irrelevant information. In other words you have a high noise to signal ratio. A well designed exam question will use this, giving you more information than you need to answer the question and it can mess you up.

An accident is just that an accident. An accident is an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

https://amp.timeinc.net/thedrive/opinion/9171/why-radars-detectors-matter-more-than-ever?source=dam

Great read on why Waze is lame on its own, you have to be a power user of all technology information available in order to be the BEST driver you can be!

Technology cannot make you a better driver, it can mask poor driving skills, it can minimize the consequences of bad driving but it cannot make you a better driver.

Disagree. A driver needs as much information as they can in order to remain alert and situationally aware of their surroundings. Not using tools/technology/gauges is just remaining ignorant of the available information surrounding you.

Granted, if you can't take in the information from your gauges, instrument panel, and maintain sufficient awareness and attention to the roadway, then by all means ignore your guages, instrument panel, car, and other conditions surrounding you. At some point it is time to recognize the lack of congnitive ability, and hand in your license voluntarily.



P.S. Accidents are not accidents. They are negligent collisions. Usually by one party being at fault. While not-at-fault collisons can be swayed by good or bad luck, at-fault collisions are not by chance, luck, or accident. There are people out there without at-fault collisions out on the roadway, for 10, 20, 30, 40 years. Even a whole lifetime. This is no accident. Those drivers (if they have a lot of miles under their belts) have developed skills and habits that makes their impressive results and driving record predictable, expected, and highly likely.

Those with bad driving habits do and will cause collisions. It is inevitable, and that is why I don't see the distinction DA's make between vehicular manslaughter and "negligent vehicular manslaughter." To me all vehicular manslaugther (if you are found at fault) should be treated as criminally negligent. Get those drivers off the road! Jail time!

I disagree with you. There is such a thing as information overload, up to a certain point additional information is helpful, past that point additional information becomes useless and may even be counterproductive. once you get flooded with information your ability to process relevant information is diminished by the fact that you have to sort relevant information out of the irrelevant information. In other words you have a high noise to signal ratio. A well designed exam question will use this, giving you more information than you need to answer the question and it can mess you up.

Now for such things as Waze, that would be information overload. To properly drive my car here I need to know what's going around me right now not what might be a mile a head of me. Plus if that obstacle has been removed I am looking for that which is not there which may mean I w
might miss what is there. As for warnings about police, if I have to adjust my driving because there is a police officer around then I am not being a good driver. Oh and if you think that it gives you a warning that traffic might slow down and/or hit their brakes a good driver would always be on the lookout for that.

An accident is just that an accident. An accident is an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally.

snakeweasel

fintail said:

Some tech like ABS, ESC, traction control etc can make one a better driver in specific situations. Some old Luddites may disagree, but those are often the same types who think they can shift faster than the newest breed of automatics, and think they had it worse and worked harder than anyone under 40.

I wouldn't say it would make you a better driver but that they will save your but if you make mistakes. There is a difference between being a good driver and driving good because technology is correcting your mistakes. Someone who cant add isn't great at math simply because they have a calculator.

graphicguy

@ab348 ....couldn’t agree with your post more.

I stuns me to see what people are doing when attempting to drive. I’ve seen them looking at their laps, on the highway, doing 65 and not watching the road. What are they looking at? I’ll assume it’s their phone. Don’t see to much of it in recent years, but there’s always the person who’s more focused on lighting their cigarette than driving. Then there’s everyone’s pet peeve.....the person who has their cell phone stuck in front of them or in their ear, oblivious to everything and everyone else around them.

It’s usually the people in junkers who are the worst offenders. Cause and effect?

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

stickguy said:

rule of thumb, if you get honked at, cursed at, and bird flipped at, on a regular basis, you are not a good driver.

I'd add "if you get tailgated a lot" to that list. Many above average drivers report that tailgating is a non-issue when you maintain situational awareness (as you are supposed to) and observe proper lanes for your driving.

There are hours long You Tube clips with entire long trips being made with front and back dash cams showing tailgating to be nonexistant. A total non-issue.

I would love to see that reference. I've seen to many YouTube videos that shows the exact opposite.

But let's look at my recent history. Yesterday on the way to work I am on a two lane road following someone at a respectable distance and keeping up with them and they were following someone else we were doing about 5 ove SL. Some impatient slob came up behind me and sat on my back. Yesterday on the way home I'm in the left lane of the tollway doing 40 to 45 MPH and someone was riding my rear end. Now to be honest I wanted to go faster but there was someone in front of me blocking me. But to be honest he likely wanted to go faster but there was someone blocking him and so on and so forth for the next 20 miles. so was I the bad driver or was it the jackalope that was tailgating?

Sorry I dont think someone else's bad driving habits reflect on my driving skills.

ab348

graphicguy said:

@ab348 ....couldn’t agree with your post more.

I stuns me to see what people are doing when attempting to drive. I’ve seen them looking at their laps, on the highway, doing 65 and not watching the road. What are they looking at? I’ll assume it’s their phone. Don’t see to much of it in recent years, but there’s always the person who’s more focused on lighting their cigarette than driving. Then there’s everyone’s pet peeve.....the person who has their cell phone stuck in front of them or in their ear, oblivious to everything and everyone else around them.

It’s usually the people in junkers who are the worst offenders. Cause and effect?

I was terrified a decade or so back when I went on a road trip with 3 ladies from the Marketing division. One of them was driving and for the entire 2 hours I don't think the phone left her hand - mostly texting. Jeebus.

What I find baffling is something I saw on a Cadillac ATS FB group this week. A guy was relating how he took his car to a detailer and when he picked it up the guy told him he didn't need to leave a tip because of all the weed he cleaned out of the dash cubby and cupholders. That led to a bunch of bros congratulating him and telling their own stories about how their cars are the main places they smoke weed when driving and how they need them detailed regularly to get rid of the stench. They all seemed quite proud of it and to them it was perfectly fine. I equate it to bragging about filling your water bottle with vodka and then driving around swigging on that. WTH is wrong with people?

roadburner

I judged a concours at the BMW NA HQ in NJ back in the early '90s. There was a joint in the ashtray of one 320i that I was judging. One of the other judges told me he thought it was a bribe.

snakeweasel

fintail said:

I saw a bumper sticker yesterday that proclaimed "Manual Transmission - If I roll back into you, you are too close". No buddy, it means you can't drive a stick. It was on a WRX, probably with plenty of vape smoke film on the windows.

I'd wager if one thinks they are being tailgated a lot, they are the problem. Reminds me of the person who has been married 6 times complaining about how hard it is to find a good spouse - to find the issue, look in a mirror.

andres3 said:

I'd add "if you get tailgated a lot" to that list. Many above average drivers report that tailgating is a non-issue when you maintain situational awareness (as you are supposed to) and observe proper lanes for your driving.

There are hours long You Tube clips with entire long trips being made with front and back dash cams showing tailgating to be nonexistant. A total non-issue.

Many decades ago that happened to me, someone rolled back into me at a stop light. She told me that I was to close, I told her she backed into me. Funny thing was when she started rolling backwards I initially thought that I was moving forward, me practically standing on my brake told me she was the one moving.

andres3

roadburner said:

I've come to the point where I prefer manuals in cars that really need one- those with engines that need to be wound out to make significant power, like my Club Sport- the M42 needs to be kept north of 4500 rpm to make brisk progress. With engines that make peak torque from 1300-4500 rpm-such as the N55 and B58-I prefer theZF 8HP; it shifts quickly, rev matches, and has a true manual mode.
That said, I'm not all that enamored by the DCTs in the M cars; if I was going to replace my M235i; I'd go with an M240i if I wanted two pedals and an M2 if I wanted three...

Hmm... let me phrase a question that will test just HOW unenamored you are with BMW's DCT's.

If BMW offered you an M2 with 2 pedals (DCT) and a 240i with 2 pedals (8-speed) for the EXACT same price, would you still want the 240i?

andres3

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

https://amp.timeinc.net/thedrive/opinion/9171/why-radars-detectors-matter-more-than-ever?source=dam

Great read on why Waze is lame on its own, you have to be a power user of all technology information available in order to be the BEST driver you can be!

Technology cannot make you a better driver, it can mask poor driving skills, it can minimize the consequences of bad driving but it cannot make you a better driver.

Disagree. A driver needs as much information as they can in order to remain alert and situationally aware of their surroundings. Not using tools/technology/gauges is just remaining ignorant of the available information surrounding you.

Granted, if you can't take in the information from your gauges, instrument panel, and maintain sufficient awareness and attention to the roadway, then by all means ignore your guages, instrument panel, car, and other conditions surrounding you. At some point it is time to recognize the lack of congnitive ability, and hand in your license voluntarily.



P.S. Accidents are not accidents. They are negligent collisions. Usually by one party being at fault. While not-at-fault collisons can be swayed by good or bad luck, at-fault collisions are not by chance, luck, or accident. There are people out there without at-fault collisions out on the roadway, for 10, 20, 30, 40 years. Even a whole lifetime. This is no accident. Those drivers (if they have a lot of miles under their belts) have developed skills and habits that makes their impressive results and driving record predictable, expected, and highly likely.

Those with bad driving habits do and will cause collisions. It is inevitable, and that is why I don't see the distinction DA's make between vehicular manslaughter and "negligent vehicular manslaughter." To me all vehicular manslaugther (if you are found at fault) should be treated as criminally negligent. Get those drivers off the road! Jail time!

I disagree with you. There is such a thing as information overload, up to a certain point additional information is helpful, past that point additional information becomes useless and may even be counterproductive. once you get flooded with information your ability to process relevant information is diminished by the fact that you have to sort relevant information out of the irrelevant information. In other words you have a high noise to signal ratio. A well designed exam question will use this, giving you more information than you need to answer the question and it can mess you up.

Now for such things as Waze, that would be information overload. To properly drive my car here I need to know what's going around me right now not what might be a mile a head of me. Plus if that obstacle has been removed I am looking for that which is not there which may mean I w
might miss what is there. As for warnings about police, if I have to adjust my driving because there is a police officer around then I am not being a good driver. Oh and if you think that it gives you a warning that traffic might slow down and/or hit their brakes a good driver would always be on the lookout for that.

An accident is just that an accident. An accident is an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally.

It's good to know what is up a mile ahead. It's called looking up and far ahead, not just at your front hood and the car you are right behind. You might miss something hoping you'll see it at the last second, we are all human afterall. You might miss the Police car on the shoulder due to a visual obstruction until very late in the situation. With a pre-warning system you'll have some advance notice and a raising of your "alertness" level. Since everyone else adjusts their driving when there is a Police Officer around, yes, having to adjust for that does make you a good driver. Not doing so makes you an outlier, and that's dangerous with speed differentials. I've seen people "overreact" to a police vehicle on the side of the road to the point it nearly caused them to lose control. This "information" is relevant, far from irrelevant.

I've often said that speed enforcement probably has a "net" counter-productive effect on traffic safety. There are a significant amount of collisions created by them pulling people over for a minor violation. In fact, I think this is the most likely way a Highway Patrol officer is killed on duty, during a traffic stop due to creating a massive speed differential between the high speed roadway and the shoulder.

With the amount of public service/safety announcements, and education/information out there on the dangers of driving distracted and/or drunk, the Prosecution Agencies across the Country are treating these "accidents" more and more criminally when someone is killed or maimed. It's about time if you ask me.

Unintentional? Maybe. Though if there is a trail of bad habits it can show negligence that was intended and deliberate.
Unexpected? No, not for a licensed driver (or formerly licensed) of age.

Every year the data gets more accurate on just how significant distracted driving is contributing to collisions that occur. It keeps going up, UP, and UP! I recognized this long ago, the data is catching up with those that had greater powers of observation long ago. It's still a non-point violation in CA to be on your cell phone, CRAZY! ABSURD!

The licensing has to mean something! Like competence. Even if it doesn't meet that standard yet.

fintail

Point taken, replace "driver" with "vehicle operator". I think few motorists have the desire to actually drive anymore.

snakeweasel said:

I wouldn't say it would make you a better driver but that they will save your but if you make mistakes. There is a difference between being a good driver and driving good because technology is correcting your mistakes. Someone who cant add isn't great at math simply because they have a calculator.

qbrozen

oldfarmer50 said:

qbrozen said:

Starting to ponder flying to AK and using VRBO and Turo. Looks like we could save a good bit of money while being on our own schedule, which I always prefer.

Alaska in the middle of winter? What are you, a moose?

Unless AK is Arkansas, which would raise a whole different set of questions.

this is regarding a summer trip

fintail

Another reason dashcams are cool. It'd be fun to see someone spin up a lie to the police, then destroy it with footage.

Years ago, I had an old guy accidentally put it in reverse, and gently backed into me at a light. I was in the fintail, which has strong bumpers and sturdy overriders, so nothing was damaged - I didn't even get out of the car, just told him not to worry.

snakeweasel said:

Many decades ago that happened to me, someone rolled back into me at a stop light. She told me that I was to close, I told her she backed into me. Funny thing was when she started rolling backwards I initially thought that I was moving forward, me practically standing on my brake told me she was the one moving.

fintail

Maybe kind of automatic vs manual, I am definitely a "manual" vacationer - I like to arrange everything myself, DIY, it's part of the fun for me. Funding bargains, planning it, checking everything out on maps to ensure the plan will work. I still can't imagine taking a guided trip, but maybe I'll get over it in the future. The money saved is also important, probably a big factor in my being able to take trips at all.

In Europe, I also like to drive myself a little (even with the usually excellent trains and transit), and have rented a car for at least a few days on every trip.

stickguy said:

we are going to Sicily next spring (2021). That one is with a group of family, and is a tour. Last big trip (Ireland) we did it DIY (we me doing the bulk of the planning and coordination) and I have zero desire to try and put together another one. If it was just me and the wife going, maybe.

Kinda looking forward to having everything taken care of for me (other than some free afternoon and evenings) including all transit. I want to enjoy, not think! Might end up costing more than if I hustled cheap places to stay, but worth it to us this time.

andres3

snakeweasel said:

fintail said:

I saw a bumper sticker yesterday that proclaimed "Manual Transmission - If I roll back into you, you are too close". No buddy, it means you can't drive a stick. It was on a WRX, probably with plenty of vape smoke film on the windows.

I'd wager if one thinks they are being tailgated a lot, they are the problem. Reminds me of the person who has been married 6 times complaining about how hard it is to find a good spouse - to find the issue, look in a mirror.

andres3 said:

I'd add "if you get tailgated a lot" to that list. Many above average drivers report that tailgating is a non-issue when you maintain situational awareness (as you are supposed to) and observe proper lanes for your driving.

There are hours long You Tube clips with entire long trips being made with front and back dash cams showing tailgating to be nonexistant. A total non-issue.

I ld her she backed into me. Funny thing was when she started rolling backwards I initially thought that I was moving forward, me practically standing on my brake told me she was the one moving.

I do think there should be a "personal" space around a vehicle of maybe 1 to 2' that should not be invaded. In this way, you can't do a 100-0 MPH standing on the ABS brakes full power stop from far away to stop 1" behind someones bumper "out of nowhere" and then blame them when they back up 1 inch!

Not saying this is what you did at all, but I think this would be a good liability rule. Parking lot situations coming up a lot lately.

fintail

Around here, it is either those in upmarket CUVs/SUVs (looking at you Audi/BMW/Rover), or clapped out Civrollas/Camcordimas who seem to cause the most distracted driver chaos.

Not long ago, I had a close call with a woman in an Accord who breezed through the green signaled crosswalk I was occupying at the time. I shook my head, and she stopped and shouted out her window "you don't have to shake your head at me". I was temped to reply "(female dog), you're lucky I don't carry". No excuse for missing a pedestrian in such a scenario unless you're distracted and shouldn't be driving at all. What a world. Crosswalk issues are what I see most in my area, along with last second decisions due to a phone held to an ear. And those holding a phone in a car with Bluetooth should have their fine squared, but I have little evidence such regulations are enforced at all.

graphicguy said:

@ab348 ....couldn’t agree with your post more.

I stuns me to see what people are doing when attempting to drive. I’ve seen them looking at their laps, on the highway, doing 65 and not watching the road. What are they looking at? I’ll assume it’s their phone. Don’t see to much of it in recent years, but there’s always the person who’s more focused on lighting their cigarette than driving. Then there’s everyone’s pet peeve.....the person who has their cell phone stuck in front of them or in their ear, oblivious to everything and everyone else around them.

It’s usually the people in junkers who are the worst offenders. Cause and effect?

andres3

fintail said:

Another reason dashcams are cool. It'd be fun to see someone spin up a lie to the police, then destroy it with footage.

Years ago, I had an old guy accidentally put it in reverse, and gently backed into me at a light. I was in the fintail, which has strong bumpers and sturdy overriders, so nothing was damaged - I didn't even get out of the car, just told him not to worry.

snakeweasel said:

Many decades ago that happened to me, someone rolled back into me at a stop light. She told me that I was to close, I told her she backed into me. Funny thing was when she started rolling backwards I initially thought that I was moving forward, me practically standing on my brake told me she was the one moving.

I live for that. I didn't share the dash cam video (unfortunately I only have forward facing at this time) with the at-fault parties insurance yet. I wanted to see if they'd commit insurance fraud first. I do think it's good practice to let someone hang themselves on insurance fraud if that's the type of person they are.

I have a strong intuition that bad drivers causing collisions strongly correlates to both dishonesty and being a deadbeat when it comes to paying for their debts/mistakes.

roadburner

andres3 said:

Hmm... let me phrase a question that will test just HOW unenamored you are with BMW's DCT's.

If BMW offered you an M2 with 2 pedals (DCT) and a 240i with 2 pedals (8-speed) for the EXACT same price, would you still want the 240i?

I'd probably still go with the M240i; it's more of a laid back GT- and the ZF HP8 suits it quite well. The M2 is a more focused track weapon; the manual complements its nature.

fintail

I've had a few cars with paddles - only used them once or twice, just doesn't seem to have a point with how/where I drive. Mind you, in the fintail I shift the automatic for myself a bit, as the shift points seem weird to me, and the car sometimes runs better with a higher rpm than the transmission allows by itself.

I see sda mentioned an old Ford with a 3 on the tree, I suspect my dad's old Fairlane with that same configuration might have biased me against manuals - that car with its heavy brakes and steering, along with heavy clutch and 3 on the tree, was not fun for a young driver.

Michaell said:

I get it. When I met my wife, she only knew how to drive stick (she did have one of those semi-automatic VW Bugs way back when).

The first car she had with a true automatic transmission was the '99 Expedition we leased. Her commute at the time included a road that went down a canyon, which can be treacherous in the winter. We had to have a talk about how to use the transmission lever to 'downshift' the transmission to use engine braking.

Now, with flappy paddles, it's a bit easier to mimic the function of a true stick shift.

snakeweasel

fintail said:

IMNSHO, if one drives for many years for at least average annual mileages, and can continue to not have an at-fault accident, they are far more than "lucky", as one might claim above. They are skilled both in their driving and avoiding the lowest common denominator clogging the roadways.

And yeah, that someone can take a life via bad driving and receive less of a sentence than for many drug offenses (especially in less than first world parts of Murka) is disgustingly sad.

andres3 said:

P.S. Accidents are not accidents. They are negligent collisions. Usually by one party being at fault. While not-at-fault collisons can be swayed by good or bad luck, at-fault collisions are not by chance, luck, or accident. There are people out there without at-fault collisions out on the roadway, for 10, 20, 30, 40 years. Even a whole lifetime. This is no accident. Those drivers (if they have a lot of miles under their belts) have developed skills and habits that makes their impressive results and driving record predictable, expected, and highly likely.

Those with bad driving habits do and will cause collisions. It is inevitable, and that is why I don't see the distinction DA's make between vehicular manslaughter and "negligent vehicular manslaughter." To me all vehicular manslaugther (if you are found at fault) should be treated as criminally negligent. Get those drivers off the road! Jail time!

When I mentioned luck as a function of the number of accidents one experiences I was talking total accidents, not just at fault accidents. No matter how good of a driver you are you cannot always avoid the other person causing an accident. However one can minimize the frequency and severity of them.

ab348

fintail said:

Crosswalk issues are what I see most in my area, along with last second decisions due to a phone held to an ear.

In my town, pedestrians seem to think they are surrounded by a force field and commonly step into the path of moving vehicles, crosswalk or no crosswalk, blithely assuming the vehicle will stop. I had it happen just yesterday, with a guy stepping out of a coffee place with his $10 artisinal concoction and walking straight ahead mid-block into the street. Then he looked surprised when he finally realized I was there and (thankfully for him) had seen him coming and stopped.

andres3

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

stickguy said:

rule of thumb, if you get honked at, cursed at, and bird flipped at, on a regular basis, you are not a good driver.

I'd add "if you get tailgated a lot" to that list. Many above average drivers report that tailgating is a non-issue when you maintain situational awareness (as you are supposed to) and observe proper lanes for your driving.

There are hours long You Tube clips with entire long trips being made with front and back dash cams showing tailgating to be nonexistant. A total non-issue.

I would love to see that reference. I've seen to many YouTube videos that shows the exact opposite.

But let's look at my recent history. Yesterday on the way to work I am on a two lane road following someone at a respectable distance and keeping up with them and they were following someone else we were doing about 5 ove SL. Some impatient slob came up behind me and sat on my back. Yesterday on the way home I'm in the left lane of the tollway doing 40 to 45 MPH and someone was riding my rear end. Now to be honest I wanted to go faster but there was someone in front of me blocking me. But to be honest he likely wanted to go faster but there was someone blocking him and so on and so forth for the next 20 miles. so was I the bad driver or was it the jackalope that was tailgating?

Sorry I dont think someone else's bad driving habits reflect on my driving skills.

I think best practice is to move to the right no matter how many more people are guilty of "left lane camping" The "everyone else was doing it" defense doesn't work on speeding tickets, and it shouldn't work on left lane camping defenses either.

By moving right, he'll pass you, and perhaps tailgate the next car that fails to move over in time to not impede their progress. Is this really that hard? It's safer to have them in front of you than tailgating you.

Granted, I'm assuming everyone in the left lane was indeed camping (not actively passing traffic to the right). This happens a lot in CA.

snakeweasel

cdnpinhead said:

". . . the same types who think they can shift faster than the newest breed of automatics, and think they had it worse and worked harder than anyone under 40"

That chip on your shoulder (which has been evident for years) will get heavier and heavier as time passes. Enjoy.

The advantage of a 3-pedal manual transmission has nothing to do with shift speed. It has to do with the ability to put the car in the gear you want, when you want, how you want. Going down long downgrades is an instance where I want to be able to put the transmission into a gear that allows the car to proceed with no need to use the brakes. I realize that I may as be speaking Swahili, but there are a few on here who may know what I'm talking about.

Then there's the maintenance/replacement cost. I realize that most people on here would rather be drawn and quartered instead of keeping a vehicle for a long time, but manual transmissions don't break, as a rule. A clutch is required from time to time (I'm 160K miles on my original), but replacing one is a much less onerous situation than dealing with automatic transmission repair/replacement.

Or, as I'm sure you're aware, I could talk to the hand.

Automatic transmissions do have the ability to put it into a lower gear going downhill, especially those that allow manual shifting.

As for maintenance costs I have taken multiple auto transmissions to 200k with no issues.

snakeweasel

tjc78 said:

I have zero desire to ever own a manual, especially with as good as the modern automatics are.

As long as I drive in rush hour traffic in a major metro area I will not drive a manual. When I retire an move to a more rural area I may consider a manual, but not til then.

andres3

snakeweasel said:

fintail said:

IMNSHO, if one drives for many years for at least average annual mileages, and can continue to not have an at-fault accident, they are far more than "lucky", as one might claim above. They are skilled both in their driving and avoiding the lowest common denominator clogging the roadways.

And yeah, that someone can take a life via bad driving and receive less of a sentence than for many drug offenses (especially in less than first world parts of Murka) is disgustingly sad.

andres3 said:

P.S. Accidents are not accidents. They are negligent collisions. Usually by one party being at fault. While not-at-fault collisons can be swayed by good or bad luck, at-fault collisions are not by chance, luck, or accident. There are people out there without at-fault collisions out on the roadway, for 10, 20, 30, 40 years. Even a whole lifetime. This is no accident. Those drivers (if they have a lot of miles under their belts) have developed skills and habits that makes their impressive results and driving record predictable, expected, and highly likely.

Those with bad driving habits do and will cause collisions. It is inevitable, and that is why I don't see the distinction DA's make between vehicular manslaughter and "negligent vehicular manslaughter." To me all vehicular manslaugther (if you are found at fault) should be treated as criminally negligent. Get those drivers off the road! Jail time!

When I mentioned luck as a function of the number of accidents one experiences I was talking total accidents, not just at fault accidents. No matter how good of a driver you are you cannot always avoid the other person causing an accident. However one can minimize the frequency and severity of them.

Minimizing frequency is the goal for sure. You don't always have control over the severity, just as you can't always avoid another person causing a collision. The two go hand in hand.

The slower is safer crowd thinks going down the freeway at 5 MPH won't result in them getting rear ended by someone going 80 MPH (A 75 MPH impact speed!) . That's pretty severe.

snakeweasel

stickguy said:

I’ll get a stick again eventually. But likely on a toy at this point.

I think the whole class”ATs can shift a microsecond quicker” argument is a red herring. I, like I’ll bet darn near everyone else, am not racing my DD, nor am I reclining and power shifting on the way to target. It’s extremely rare that. Would ever be in a situation where that fraction would ever matter. More common to find the AT lugging along in way too high a gear.

The traffic and hills in gridlock, that’s legit. As is liking the control and engagement of having 3 pedals. But F1 going to automatics is not really relevant to any driving I do!

Shifting faster is not always about speed, it also increases gas mileage. Faster shifts means the engine is disengaged from the transmission for less time so less power loss. A DCT can shift up to ten times faster than someone shifting manually meaning practically no power loss.

andres3

snakeweasel said:

stickguy said:

I’ll get a stick again eventually. But likely on a toy at this point.

I think the whole class”ATs can shift a microsecond quicker” argument is a red herring. I, like I’ll bet darn near everyone else, am not racing my DD, nor am I reclining and power shifting on the way to target. It’s extremely rare that. Would ever be in a situation where that fraction would ever matter. More common to find the AT lugging along in way too high a gear.

The traffic and hills in gridlock, that’s legit. As is liking the control and engagement of having 3 pedals. But F1 going to automatics is not really relevant to any driving I do!

Shifting faster is not always about speed, it also increases gas mileage. Faster shifts means the engine is disengaged from the transmission for less time so less power loss. A DCT can shift up to ten times faster than someone shifting manually meaning practically no power loss.

Good point; I'm getting about the same fuel economy from an 8-speed slushbox with a 220 HP motor as I did with a 7-speed DSG with a 333-400 HP motor (tune for 400).

Your driving habits could vary the results; someone with a lead foot will probably experience similar.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

I'm spoiled when it comes to automatics. I really, really, REALLY prefer a dual clutch to an 8-speed slush box. 7 gears is actually enough, and perfect.

While I'm not often "racing" and HPDE's are not "racing" either, I do like the sound of the lightning quick shifts under heavy throtlle when an open straight presents itself, and I leave traffic at the last stop light in the distant rear view mirror within seconds.

I like the mechanical feel, quickness, and efficiency of them.

I've never had one break on me, so I can't comment as to replacement costs that I have heard are quite high. The A3's exhibited no signs of issues at over 100,000 miles. And you know the way those 100,000 miles were driven @oldfarmer50 would never have bought my A3.

If I was to entertain a 2-series, it'd have to be the DSG version of the M2. Now, all I need to know is, does BMW's dual clutch work fantastically like Audi/VW's, or does it work more stone-age like, such as the Kia Optima's?

I have a DCT on my motorcycle and I have to say I really love the thing. Highly efficient with perfect rev matching, so smooth is the shifting that most times the only way you can tell its shifting is the click sound it makes as it shifts.

fintail

Add headphones/earbuds to the mix, and you have the local oblivious walkers. I also notice jaywalkers here are in two groups - those who appear to be high schoolers, and those old enough to be the grandparents of said high schoolers.

In my neighborhood, many intersections have lights/signals, where there's no excuse not to yield to a crosswalk, but people still blow through them without a care. There have been multiple fatalities over the past years, no real enforcement because of course.

ab348 said:

fintail said:

In my town, pedestrians seem to think they are surrounded by a force field and commonly step into the path of moving vehicles, crosswalk or no crosswalk, blithely assuming the vehicle will stop. I had it happen just yesterday, with a guy stepping out of a coffee place with his $10 artisinal concoction and walking straight ahead mid-block into the street. Then he looked surprised when he finally realized I was there and (thankfully for him) had seen him coming and stopped.