Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations

[Deleted User]

Got it!

Thursday we had the dealership install a clear bra on our 2015 Outback using one of their vendors, which they price matched against a local vendor I had picked previously. I was initially planning to have the installation completed after the purchase and with Xpel Ultimate. After discussing my plans with the dealer, they agreed to price match and install the new 3M Scotchgard Pro film. We're taking a bit of a risk with a brand new self healing film, but I liked the idea of having the installation completed at the dealer with no risk of paint chips while driving to an outside vendor. Plus the warranty will be 7 years through the dealer.

While the film was being installed Thursday I corresponded with our sales representative to determine financing. We were prepared to pay the lump sum with a check, but wanted to see if rates were low enough to incentivize us to keep our funds in the market. Turns out they were. Subaru offered 1.9%.

We arranged a pickup for Friday afternoon when our daughter was out of school so she could participate in our family event. When we pulled into the lot we spotted our new arctic white Outback awaiting us out front with the clear bra installed. We conducted a quick inspection and while doing so were met by our sales representative. We saw two issues. One, the side mirror had a small wrinkle in the clear bra, and two, the bumper had been drilled for a license plate against my instructions.

The clear bra will be fixed next week, but the bumper is more complicated. We could reject the Outback and order a new one with about a 2.5 month wait, or accept it, and we chose to accept it given the long wait.

After discussing the bumper issue with our sales rep we went inside and filled out the credit app for finance. We waited about 15 minutes while the finance manager drew up the contract and other paperwork, and then worked with him in his office to close the deal.

I'm a stickler for details and noted some discrepancies in the paperwork. The finance manager sheepishly admitted a mistake that resulted in higher pricing on the contract than we agreed in August, and he immediately corrected the paperwork. He mentioned the Subaru warranty extensions, but never pushed them nor offered any other extras. We turned down the warranty extensions and signed the (many) docs.

Our final deal was $27,776 plus taxes, about 3% below invoice and way below the $30,800 MSRP. The clear bra was separate from the car purchase ($680 to cover the front bumper, partial hood, partial fenders, headlights, and side mirrors).

Our sales rep spent 20 minutes going over all the vehicle's functions, paying particular attention to the unique Eyesight functions and commands. When he finished up, my daughter jumped in the back seat and we drove home together in relatively heavy traffic due to the time of day. At one point I checked one of the Eyesight functions by intentionally drifting toward the center of a road, and just as I was about to cross over the line, the car beeped to let me know. Pretty cool.

Yesterday I spent the day applying two coats of Scotchgard to the fabric, washing and prepping the paint, and then applying a paint coating to the paint, plastic, glass, and painted aluminum wheels. The Outback has sat in the garage since then, allowing the paint coating to cure before we expose it to real life.

The next task is to sell the aging minivan. I need to haul some sheetrock over the next couple of weeks, and I'm thinking we'll keep the van until we finish the project.

driver100

ab348 said:

sterlingdog said:

The article also mentioned suspension. It said that when the truck is loaded that the suspension is better and that you don't feel the roughness as much.

I really don't have a dog in this fight.

Not a politically correct thing to say these days!

Don't worry...no flag!

fezo

Mako - nice conclusion to your tractor situation. Of course you spent more on a tractor than I usually spend on a car but I don't have your land to navigate.

I had both a Celebrity and Lumina as rentals (one an insurance rental, the other on a vacation). They were perfectly fine cars. Didn't move the excite-o-meter at all but both were perfectly fine family haulers which is what we needed.

I see reviews telling me that Camry is trying to get sportier like an Accord and that Hyundai has moved the Sonata to be more like previous Camrys. Guess there will always be choices for any taste. Were I in the market for a new mid-size I'd test the Altima and Legacy as well as a few others but I'd bet I'd land in a Mazda 6. Can't get one like mine anymore and they've even eliminated the hatchback but in the year and a half I've owned it this car has made a big impression on me.

driver100

tyguy said:

Got it!

Thursday we had the dealership install a clear bra on our 2015 Outback
I

Yesterday I spent the day applying two coats of Scotchgard to the fabric, washing and prepping the paint, and then applying a paint coating to the paint, plastic, glass, and painted aluminum wheels. The Outback has sat in the garage since then, allowing the paint coating to cure before we expose it to real life.
.

Went very well considering...except for the holes in the bumper...and I kind of thought that could go wrong. Anything out of normal procedure where one person has to stand over the other will probably get messed up.

Keep the windows open while that Scotchguard dries...but you probably know that. I checked on having seats treated by the dealer but all the information I found said doing it yourself with Scotchguard was just as good......but, don't drive it for a day once applied.

The car sounds beautiful and must look very attractive in white...my favorite color (or favourite colours for fellow Canadians).

abacomike

@tyguy said:

"Got it!"

Tyguy, your outstanding compilation of the "play-by-play" activities as you acquired your new Outback was so good I actually thought I was there with you and your family to pick up the new family addition and was with you in the finance department when you found those price discrepancies (they tried to pull a fast one there, me thinks).  You certainly know how to describe your experiences - and enjoyed reading about them.

My sincere congratulations to you and your family and I wish you the best of luck with it.

I was particularly upset over the fact that you specifically told them not to drill holes in the front bumper.  At least it is plastic and won't rust.  They should repair that for you - it's the salesman's fault for not seeing to your wishes.  They should just REPLACE the front bumper.  If they had done that to my car, I would have let them "eat" it.  But as you said, you would have to wait several months.  But I would certainly ask them to replace the front bumper.

Enjoy!

oldfarmer50

I'm watching Hawaii 5-0 and loving all the old mid 60s cars. Funny watching them wallow in turns with no sway bars and bias ply tires. Can't believe we raced cars like that around town without flipping them over.

sterlingdog

driver100 said:

Here are the hi-lites, but please read the article too:

*And while the aluminum body on a revamped, fully-boxed ladder frame, which is now comprised of 78% high-strength steel (improving rigidity by about five to 10%) will steal most of the headlines, the other story here is the new 2.7-litre twin-turbo V6

*t’s also vastly easier to see out of. While wider overall by 40 mm, opening up the interior even more, the hood has lost some power dome bravado but gained better visibility out front. Better, the driver and passenger side windows swoop down more deeply for an excellent view to the left and right, as well as around the large A-pillars

*the other story here is the new 2.7-litre twin-turbo V6. This is, quite simply, a sweetheart engine. Absent of coarseness, it feels very much like the 3.5-litre EcoBoost in terms of power; but the 2.7 EcoBoost somehow comes across as smoother and more playful, as though it’s out to teach the old 3.5 some new tricks.

*As quiet, if not quieter than before, the new F-150 feels structurally tight, too, with more solidity to the cab. Indeed, shutting the door on the outgoing F-150 was like smacking a tray of Jell-O. Slamming the 2015 door is like closing the door to a safe.

There are lots of other features worth reading about....excellent article:
National Post Driving review 2015 Ford F-150

Please see my post to Imid dated October 4. His video and the Edmunds article are both worth noting. Personally, I think that there is a certain amount of "fluff' and "yellow" journalism as relates to some of these assertions. I suppose that I could say that my doors slam like a "safe" since I have closed a safe before, though I have never smacked a tray of Jell-O. An odd comparison to be sure. I have a V8 engine so I can't speak to the V6. Looking at the interior dash, I only see three changes there---air vents are vertical rather than round, gear shift is now on the console, and there is push button start. As for the vertical air vents, they may have made a mistake there. The beauty of the circular vents is that they are adjustable for 360 degrees. After using them, I really see the versatility and convenience in that feature. My wife also noticed it the other day. As I said earlier, the front exterior grill isn't as pretty to me as the 2014. Here again, it's a matter of personal taste. Same with the rear passenger windows---not quite as square as the 2014 and I do like the square look. That was a major factor in purchasing the truck. Only the Honda Pilot was a competing vehicle in the square design department. I just don't care for these curved, futuristic designs in cars today. If I had to purchase one of them, it would probably be the Legacy by Subaru.

The jury is still out on the MPG for 2015---until at least November. I am now 745 miles into the break-in period of 1,000 miles. It is suggested that I not rate the MPG until 2,000 to 3,000 miles. I began at 12.3 MPG and am now at 16.9 MPG for highway driving. The promise is 21 MPG Hwy. We'll see. I do admire Ford for taking the giant leap with an aluminum truck---probably the most daring endeavor of any car company in the history of automobiles.

As each new vehicle is "born", it is expected to be better than the model before it. While that is true most of the time, slip ups do happen. We have often mentioned here certain vehicles of the past that were bombers. Let's hope that the new truck proves to be the best yet. There is much weighing in the balance----Ford's excellent reputation, designer's future, assembly plant jobs, economic impact in this country, etc. Farmers and construction workers will be depending on the Ford Tough legacy. It is extremely important that these hard working Americans not be disappointed. For people like me, it's no big deal. I may find it convenient to haul a few small antiques or ride through the farm in Alabama. At the farm, I don't work; I just check the plots to make sure that the evil BIL hasn't ripped off my wife by selling a plot that he "forgot" to tell us about. Sixty percent of the farm plots have been sold to various industries. I cannot wait until the remaining 40% is sold. That means that we will never have to deal with evil relatives again. They're either all dead or off the map. O Happy days!

Richard

sterlingdog

ab348 said:

Re. the 2015 F-150: I have to think that if the pricing on these is not too much different from the 2014, that Ford's profit margins will be significantly reduced because of the use of aluminum. I also am concerned that the use of thinner high-strength steel in the frame will leave these trucks prone to premature frame rust-out in the salt belt, just like the old Ranger. I also find the new instrument panel/dash design very unattractive.

Really, are we not again at the point with full-size pickups that we were with full-size cars in the mid-1970s? These vehicles are needlessly huge, and resorting to aluminum for them to save weight is ignoring the real problem - they are just too bulky. Will someone be brave and introduce a downsized pickup that does not trade off capacity and space, the way GM did with their full-size cars in 1977? We need a return to sanity.

You made an excellent point. The trucks are ridiculously big. The Ford Ranger was a nice sized truck with fair capacity and interior space. I would have been happy to purchase one of those and would have saved money and had no problem with the garage. Yes, I agree. We have reached the opulence peak in trucks.

Richard

[Deleted User]

Driver: good point about the windows with Scotchgard. I was in a dilemma over the timing of all the treatments this weekend. I applied Scotchgard first to prevent overspray vapor from falling on the fresh paint coating, but then I had to keep the windows up since they were treated with the same coating as the paint and needed cure time. Let's just say the interior became rather "potent" until I could open the windows this morning.

Mike: thank you for the kind words. The bumper situation was a difficult one for me. As a people and process manager in my professional life I'm accustomed to holding people to expectations, but I didn't want aftermarket paint, and I was worried about them loosening up all the clips and other fasteners if they were to replace the bumper. In the end, after a little consternation, I decided I would install a license plate frame that would use the holes they created. Today I found a nice powder coated steel one that will blend with the black plastic trim well. I'm trying to make lemonade out of the situation, and I keep reminding myself I scored a very good price given the demand for the new Outback.

I'll get some pictures posted soon.

sterlingdog

driver100 said:

ab348 said:

Re. the 2015 F-150: I have to think that if the pricing on these is not too much different from the 2014, that Ford's profit margins will be significantly reduced because of the use of aluminum. I also am concerned that the use of thinner high-strength steel in the frame will leave these trucks prone to premature frame rust-out in the salt belt, just like the old Ranger. I also find the new instrument panel/dash design very unattractive.

Really, are we not again at the point with full-size pickups that we were with full-size cars in the mid-1970s? These vehicles are needlessly huge, and resorting to aluminum for them to save weight is ignoring the real problem - they are just too bulky. Will someone be brave and introduce a downsized pickup that does not trade off capacity and space, the way GM did with their full-size cars in 1977? We need a return to sanity.

Sorry ab, to write so much but the reviewer disagrees about the interior, he thinks it is a huge improvement....kind of amusing and interesting to read:

nside is yet another round of key changes. Gone is the biggest slab of plastic this side of a water park that once stood in for a dash. Materials are now varied and sculpted with softer touches all around, and real aluminum on Platinum models. The leather in the Lariat interior seems especially good, and the instrumentation, now with an eight-inch screen that can display just about anything asked of it this side of YouTube videos, even includes tire pressures for each tire. Keyless entry and ignition are available; there are a couple of USB ports, and a 110V/400-watt power outlet capable of powering episodes of Longmire on a 42-inch TV. A new 360-degree bird’s eye-view camera makes positioning the truck a snap, especially to a trailer. This is a cab that can now compete with, maybe even outshine, the excellent interior of the Ram.

And about rusting out:

The military-grade aluminum, requiring some 2,500 rivets to assemble as though it were a P-51 Mustang, will mean less dings and dents showing up on the sheet metal from careless shoppers at the mall, Ford says, and will never rust (though it can corrode), making for a lot of F-150 carcasses dotting farm fields 50 years from now.

*************************************************************************

I would agree, the size of trucks is getting out of hand. But, people don't want small trucks, Ford gave up on the Ranger. Talking about the size of trucks, I find those trucks with the twin wheels in the back are totally ugly, and they are so wide they are often unsafe to pass unless the driver of the truck is right in his lane.

Kind of like the Ford F-450...how would you like to get this into your garage....probably need to back it into your house.

A truck with the twin wheels in the rear is called a "Dooley" in the South. They have a purpose in horse country. They are used here to pull those long horse trailers to competitions. I have a friend who uses his "Dooley" between here and his horse farm in Galax, Virginia. It is an absolute monster of a truck. Before they built the first horse stable, they often slept in the "Dooley" and were very comfortable. After the second stable, they finally built a nice house. He's on his third "Dooley" and loves it. When he is pulling a horse trailer through the Virginia mountains, he's getting about 7 MPG! I made one of those "Dooley"/trailer mountain trips with him. It was a little unnerving on some of the curves.

Richard

stickguy

The upcoming Chevy Colorado is still "big" to me, but seems tiny next to the 1/2 tons of today. Yet, it is roughly the size of the 1/2s from a few generations back.

I loved the Ford "world" ranger (world meaning everywhere but the US) when they featured it last year on Amazing race. i could see getting one of them. especially a diesel. Oh well.

driver100

sterlingdog said:

driver100 said:

Here are the hi-lites, but please read the article too:

*And while the aluminum body on a revamped, fully-boxed ladder frame, which is now comprised of 78% high-strength steel (improving rigidity by about five to 10%) will steal most of the headlines, the other story here is the new 2.7-litre twin-turbo V6

*t’s also vastly easier to see out of. While wider overall by 40 mm, opening up the interior even more, the hood has lost some power dome bravado but gained better visibility out front. Better, the driver and passenger side windows swoop down more deeply for an excellent view to the left and right, as well as around the large A-pillars

*the other story here is the new 2.7-litre twin-turbo V6. This is, quite simply, a sweetheart engine. Absent of coarseness, it feels very much like the 3.5-litre EcoBoost in terms of power; but the 2.7 EcoBoost somehow comes across as smoother and more playful, as though it’s out to teach the old 3.5 some new tricks.

*As quiet, if not quieter than before, the new F-150 feels structurally tight, too, with more solidity to the cab. Indeed, shutting the door on the outgoing F-150 was like smacking a tray of Jell-O. Slamming the 2015 door is like closing the door to a safe.

There are lots of other features worth reading about....excellent article:
National Post Driving review 2015 Ford F-150

Please see my post to Imid dated October 4. His video and the Edmunds article are both worth noting. Personally, I think that there is a certain amount of "fluff' and "yellow" journalism as relates to some of these assertions. I suppose that I could say that my doors slam like a "safe" since I have closed a safe before, though I have never smacked a tray of Jell-O. An odd comparison to be sure. I have a V8 engine so I can't speak to the V6. Looking at the interior dash, I only see three changes there---air vents are vertical rather than round, gear shift is now on the console, and there is push button start. As for the vertical air vents, they may have made a mistake there. The beauty of the circular vents is that they are adjustable for 360 degrees. After using them, I really see the versatility and convenience in that feature. My wife also noticed it the other day. As I said earlier, the front exterior grill isn't as pretty to me as the 2014. Here again, it's a matter of personal taste. Same with the rear passenger windows---not quite as square as the 2014 and I do like the square look. That was a major factor in purchasing the truck. Only the Honda Pilot was a competing vehicle in the square design department. I just don't care for these curved, futuristic designs in cars today. If I had to purchase one of them, it would probably be the Legacy by Subaru.

The jury is still out on the MPG for 2015---until at least November. I am now 745 miles into the break-in period of 1,000 miles. It is suggested that I not rate the MPG until 2,000 to 3,000 miles. I began at 12.3 MPG and am now at 16.9 MPG for highway driving. The promise is 21 MPG Hwy. We'll see. I do admire Ford for taking the giant leap with an aluminum truck---probably the most daring endeavor of any car company in the history of automobiles.

As each new vehicle is "born", it is expected to be better than the model before it. While that is true most of the time, slip ups do happen. We have often mentioned here certain vehicles of the past that were bombers. Let's hope that the new truck proves to be the best yet. There is much weighing in the balance----Ford's excellent reputation, designer's future, assembly plant jobs, economic impact in this country, etc. Farmers and construction workers will be depending on the Ford Tough legacy. It is extremely important that these hard working Americans not be disappointed. For people like me, it's no big deal. I may find it convenient to haul a few small antiques or ride through the farm in Alabama. At the farm, I don't work; I just check the plots to make sure that the evil BIL hasn't ripped off my wife by selling a plot that he "forgot" to tell us about. Sixty percent of the farm plots have been sold to various industries. I cannot wait until the remaining 40% is sold. That means that we will never have to deal with evil relatives again. They're either all dead or off the map. O Happy days!

Richard

Just some quick notes:

I just checked the 2014 interior and to me, there is a bit of a difference, but I am not sure one looks much better than the other. I mean, both look very nice.


I agree with you about the front. I prefer the 2014 to the 2015. There may be allowances to have LED lights or something.

Not sure about the door being like Jello - hard to believe. I think the reviewer is using literary license to make a point, but a comparison should not be over the top.

I prefer a squared off roof to a rounded futuristic bubbly one anytime.

Sometimes cars do get uglier with each model change. The previous edition of the Explorer seemed that way to me. The new one is a fresh start, hopefully it won't go downhill. The 2nd version of the Taurus was ugly, whereas the first version - the jelly bean - was a ground breaking futuristic design.

Finally, is your BIL related to my SIL? They seem to have a similar modus operandi. Some people are sociopaths, don't care about anyone except themselves. The SIL paid about 90% of what he was supposed to pay for the business, and we gave up - however, we do get to claim it as a loss. Now, he is complaining because his accountant just told him - he has to pay taxes on half the amount he didn't pay. There's only one reason he would even mention this to me, but it is falling on deaf ears.

Seems that if the government is losing $X from us, they want it from him. He has the MBA but didn't see it coming. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm!

sterlingdog

ab348 said:

driver100 said:

nside is yet another round of key changes. Gone is the biggest slab of plastic this side of a water park that once stood in for a dash. Materials are now varied and sculpted with softer touches all around, and real aluminum on Platinum models. The leather in the Lariat interior seems especially good, and the instrumentation, now with an eight-inch screen that can display just about anything asked of it this side of YouTube videos, even includes tire pressures for each tire. Keyless entry and ignition are available; there are a couple of USB ports, and a 110V/400-watt power outlet capable of powering episodes of Longmire on a 42-inch TV. A new 360-degree bird’s eye-view camera makes positioning the truck a snap, especially to a trailer. This is a cab that can now compete with, maybe even outshine, the excellent interior of the Ram.

My comment about the IP is based on this pic. To me, this looks almost cartoonish. Ford seems to have trouble with interior design IMO.

And about rusting out:

The military-grade aluminum, requiring some 2,500 rivets to assemble as though it were a P-51 Mustang, will mean less dings and dents showing up on the sheet metal from careless shoppers at the mall, Ford says, and will never rust (though it can corrode), making for a lot of F-150 carcasses dotting farm fields 50 years from now.

The aluminum (let's hope the "military-grade" descriptor gets dropped soon) needs that kind of structure as it is weaker than steel. I wonder how a door skin is riveted to prevent door dings and still maintain a smooth surface in its center. Time will tell on that. I expect they over time will end up looking like aluminum rowboats.

My concern about rusting has nothing to do with aluminum but with the thinner steel used in the vehicle frames. I do not know if high-strength steel is less prone to rusting than regular steel. But when I hear "thinner frame" I think of the downsized '78 GM intermediates, which did the same thing. Their rear frame rails rusted out so badly that GM actually cataloged a repair kit at one point to repair them.

I happened to be in a parking lot on Friday and when I returned I found a F-150 had parked next to me. It was like being docked next to a battleship. Backing out of the space was an adventure in blind backing as you could see nothing. Maybe we need segregated pickup parking sections to keep them away from the rest of us and improve safety.


With aluminum, I'll be anxious to see how it does in a crash test.

Richard

sterlingdog

ab348 said:

sterlingdog said:

The article also mentioned suspension. It said that when the truck is loaded that the suspension is better and that you don't feel the roughness as much.

I suppose it depends how you look at it. The Edmunds review said the new suspension was not as good as the previous model when unladen, feeling somewhat rougher and "bound up". Not a way I like to feel.

I really don't have a dog in this fight. I just find these vehicles a bit crazy for most people. But I think they are taking the place of grandad's body-on-frame mid-'70s Cadillac, Mercury, Buick or Lincoln sedan with the big V-8 that just floated down the road for people who want a gigantic vehicle.

I have to agree. Perhaps the truck brings back memories of my beloved Lincoln Town Car.

Richard

sterlingdog

mako1a said:

Ford's 2014 steel built or the 2015 aluminum built. I would buy either one without worry. However I have to congratulate Richard for choosing the 5.0 V-8 engine over the ecoboost. Eco has only been out since 2011 and even though I hope it works well, it hasn't been around long enough for me to spend a large sum on it. (eco costs more as well).

Thanks. I felt as you do. The ecoboost concerned me a little for the same reasons. My wife mentioned that the V8 would drink more gas and cost more. As I told her, I knew what I was getting with the V8---good power and proven reliability. With the other, I wasn't so sure. It was the same with the truck body. I could have waited another three months for the 2015, but I knew for sure that I was getting "Ford Tough" with the 2014. Another factor was that particular color combination. It was difficult to find in the 4x2. When I saw it on the lot while visiting my sister, I nearly flipped out. I knew then that I had better jump on it while I had the chance.

Richard

sterlingdog

tyguy said:

Driver: good point about the windows with Scotchgard. I was in a dilemma over the timing of all the treatments this weekend. I applied Scotchgard first to prevent overspray vapor from falling on the fresh paint coating, but then I had to keep the windows up since they were treated with the same coating as the paint and needed cure time. Let's just say the interior became rather "potent" until I could open the windows this morning.

Mike: thank you for the kind words. The bumper situation was a difficult one for me. As a people and process manager in my professional life I'm accustomed to holding people to expectations, but I didn't want aftermarket paint, and I was worried about them loosening up all the clips and other fasteners if they were to replace the bumper. In the end, after a little consternation, I decided I would install a license plate frame that would use the holes they created. Today I found a nice powder coated steel one that will blend with the black plastic trim well. I'm trying to make lemonade out of the situation, and I keep reminding myself I scored a very good price given the demand for the new Outback.

I'll get some pictures posted soon.

Congratulations on the beautiful new purchase. I do like that particular white color. I've seen it on the Cadillac and it's a real beauty. Don't let the bumper situation dampen your spirits. The nice plate frame will make it all good. I agree with Mike; the salesman screwed up---and you even reminded him as I recall. Survey should indicate that mishap.

Speaking of surveys, I've received THREE! That's enough. I'm running out of Mr. Nice Guy.

Richard

ray80

imidazol97 said:

bwia said:

Yesterday I saw a Chevy Celebrity on the road. It was showroom new and looked like a 1986 or 1987 model year. I don't remember the Celebrity very well but my neighbor had a Pontiac 6000 that looked sharp.

Celebrity spanned 1981 to 1987. I believe it was replaced by the Lumina. A strong point was the nice wagons the Celebrity and it's brothers had. The Celebrity was paralleled in Pontiac, Buick, and Oldsmobile by models with few changes other than better accoutrements.

We had an 86' Celebrity wagon in that blue color. Wasn't a bad machine. I ordered it before the new MY and picked it up in early fall. This was before information was as readily available as it is today. Rumor had it back then winter tires weren't needed with radial tires, and you didn't need winter tires with FWD (this was our first FWD). One day in Dec on the way home from work the plain rain changed to freezing rain and I quickly found out those rumors were not exactly true as the Tiger paws didn't cut it and I drove the last 2 miles or so basicly out of control .

driver100

ray80 said:

imidazol97 said:

bwia said:

Yesterday I saw a Chevy Celebrity on the road. It was showroom new and looked like a 1986 or 1987 model year. I don't remember the Celebrity very well but my neighbor had a Pontiac 6000 that looked sharp.

Celebrity spanned 1981 to 1987. I believe it was replaced by the Lumina. A strong point was the nice wagons the Celebrity and it's brothers had. The Celebrity was paralleled in Pontiac, Buick, and Oldsmobile by models with few changes other than better accoutrements.

We had an 86' Celebrity wagon in that blue color. Wasn't a bad machine. I ordered it before the new MY and picked it up in early fall. This was before information was as readily available as it is today. Rumor had it back then winter tires weren't needed with radial tires, and you didn't need winter tires with FWD (this was our first FWD). One day in Dec on the way home from work the plain rain changed to freezing rain and I quickly found out those rumors were not exactly true as the Tiger paws didn't cut it and I drove the last 2 miles or so basicly out of control .

I like the design of those 86 Celebrity's and the car was a good size. Since GM wasn't great with FWD and since a RWD car was probably less costly to repair, and would probably last much longer....I thought to myself...they should offer these cars with FWD and RWD. It would make a differnce in interior space as you would have a driveshaft. But, I think these could have been much better cars with RWD. At least if you hit a curb with the front wheels it wouldn't cost $1000s to fix.

graphicguy

sterlingdog said:

mako1a said:

Ford's 2014 steel built or the 2015 aluminum built. I would buy either one without worry. However I have to congratulate Richard for choosing the 5.0 V-8 engine over the ecoboost. Eco has only been out since 2011 and even though I hope it works well, it hasn't been around long enough for me to spend a large sum on it. (eco costs more as well).

Thanks. I felt as you do. The ecoboost concerned me a little for the same reasons. My wife mentioned that the V8 would drink more gas and cost more. As I told her, I knew what I was getting with the V8---good power and proven reliability. With the other, I wasn't so sure. It was the same with the truck body. I could have waited another three months for the 2015, but I knew for sure that I was getting "Ford Tough" with the 2014. Another factor was that particular color combination. It was difficult to find in the 4x2. When I saw it on the lot while visiting my sister, I nearly flipped out. I knew then that I had better jump on it while I had the chance.

Richard

Richard....good looking truck. I think the F 150 has become sort of a do it all vehicle. Their interiors are as upscale as any luxury car, and you can throw mulch in the back when you need to, or go on a long trip in comfort. There's a lot to like with your truck.

Different application, but I have a neighbor with a Taurus SHO with that EcoBoost motor. :Pretty nice ride, with a nice push when it's punched. But, that's different than putting it in a Pickup.

js06gv

sterlingdog said:

mako1a said:

Ford's 2014 steel built or the 2015 aluminum built. I would buy either one without worry. However I have to congratulate Richard for choosing the 5.0 V-8 engine over the ecoboost. Eco has only been out since 2011 and even though I hope it works well, it hasn't been around long enough for me to spend a large sum on it. (eco costs more as well).

Thanks. I felt as you do. The ecoboost concerned me a little for the same reasons. My wife mentioned that the V8 would drink more gas and cost more. As I told her, I knew what I was getting with the V8---good power and proven reliability. With the other, I wasn't so sure. It was the same with the truck body. I could have waited another three months for the 2015, but I knew for sure that I was getting "Ford Tough" with the 2014. Another factor was that particular color combination. It was difficult to find in the 4x2. When I saw it on the lot while visiting my sister, I nearly flipped out. I knew then that I had better jump on it while I had the chance.

Richard

I also had the same choice to make when purchasing my F-150 last year and like you I opted for the 5.0L V8. Probably the strongest reason for me is that I'm a truck guy and just like a traditional V8. In other words, I wanted my truck to sound like a truck and not a sewing machine. I'll admit that the Ecoboost has plenty of power and even though it's only 5 hp stronger than the V8, it can be argued that the extra torque would be better for towing my boat.

But here are the main reasons I bypassed the Ecoboost. 1 - it was an extra cost option at $1,095. 2 - per the EPA it only returns 1 mpg better on both the city and highway cycles. 3 - there are several reports from Ecoboost owners that there is a moisture issue with the turbo engine which creates situations where the engine just shuts down when it's raining outside. Granted, I don't have all the details on this but there is a lot of chatter about it on F-150 forums and apparently Ford is aware and has been working on a fix. I doubt this affects all Ecoboost engines but even the potential for losing power while cruising down the highway was enough for me to stay away. As for mileage, some say it's incredible and beats the EPA ratings while others say the engine does no better than a V8.

What's really interesting about this motor is that Ford dealers stock way more of them than they do the V8, and at least the dealers I frequented were pushing it really hard. They have had a lot of folks bought into a turbo V6 since it came out in 2011, but I wonder how many would make the same decision again.

oldfarmer50

tyguy:

Congrats on your new ride. I would be POed if someone drilled holes in my bumper against my specific request. No front plates required in your state?

I might have missed it but what color is your interior? I have heard that Scotchgard can cause some colors to run.

sterlingdog

js06gv said:

sterlingdog said:

mako1a said:

Ford's 2014 steel built or the 2015 aluminum built. I would buy either one without worry. However I have to congratulate Richard for choosing the 5.0 V-8 engine over the ecoboost. Eco has only been out since 2011 and even though I hope it works well, it hasn't been around long enough for me to spend a large sum on it. (eco costs more as well).

Thanks. I felt as you do. The ecoboost concerned me a little for the same reasons. My wife mentioned that the V8 would drink more gas and cost more. As I told her, I knew what I was getting with the V8---good power and proven reliability. With the other, I wasn't so sure. It was the same with the truck body. I could have waited another three months for the 2015, but I knew for sure that I was getting "Ford Tough" with the 2014. Another factor was that particular color combination. It was difficult to find in the 4x2. When I saw it on the lot while visiting my sister, I nearly flipped out. I knew then that I had better jump on it while I had the chance.

Richard

I also had the same choice to make when purchasing my F-150 last year and like you I opted for the 5.0L V8. Probably the strongest reason for me is that I'm a truck guy and just like a traditional V8. In other words, I wanted my truck to sound like a truck and not a sewing machine. I'll admit that the Ecoboost has plenty of power and even though it's only 5 hp stronger than the V8, it can be argued that the extra torque would be better for towing my boat.

But here are the main reasons I bypassed the Ecoboost. 1 - it was an extra cost option at $1,095. 2 - per the EPA it only returns 1 mpg better on both the city and highway cycles. 3 - there are several reports from Ecoboost owners that there is a moisture issue with the turbo engine which creates situations where the engine just shuts down when it's raining outside. Granted, I don't have all the details on this but there is a lot of chatter about it on F-150 forums and apparently Ford is aware and has been working on a fix. I doubt this affects all Ecoboost engines but even the potential for losing power while cruising down the highway was enough for me to stay away. As for mileage, some say it's incredible and beats the EPA ratings while others say the engine does no better than a V8.

What's really interesting about this motor is that Ford dealers stock way more of them than they do the V8, and at least the dealers I frequented were pushing it really hard. They have had a lot of folks bought into a turbo V6 since it came out in 2011, but I wonder how many would make the same decision again.

All excellent points. I had not heard about the moisture issue. That would definitely make me stay away from that engine. This is my first truck so I have much to learn. After 70+ years, I'm excited to finally have one. I got exactly what I wanted. I had many years to think about it.

Richard

sterlingdog

graphicguy said:

sterlingdog said:

mako1a said:

Ford's 2014 steel built or the 2015 aluminum built. I would buy either one without worry. However I have to congratulate Richard for choosing the 5.0 V-8 engine over the ecoboost. Eco has only been out since 2011 and even though I hope it works well, it hasn't been around long enough for me to spend a large sum on it. (eco costs more as well).

Thanks. I felt as you do. The ecoboost concerned me a little for the same reasons. My wife mentioned that the V8 would drink more gas and cost more. As I told her, I knew what I was getting with the V8---good power and proven reliability. With the other, I wasn't so sure. It was the same with the truck body. I could have waited another three months for the 2015, but I knew for sure that I was getting "Ford Tough" with the 2014. Another factor was that particular color combination. It was difficult to find in the 4x2. When I saw it on the lot while visiting my sister, I nearly flipped out. I knew then that I had better jump on it while I had the chance.

Richard

Richard....good looking truck. I think the F 150 has become sort of a do it all vehicle. Their interiors are as upscale as any luxury car, and you can throw mulch in the back when you need to, or go on a long trip in comfort. There's a lot to like with your truck.

Different application, but I have a neighbor with a Taurus SHO with that EcoBoost motor. :Pretty nice ride, with a nice push when it's punched. But, that's different than putting it in a Pickup.

Thanks, GG. I've been surprised at the luxury and comfort---as good as our Caddy SRX. I'm really having fun and so many people tell me that is very pretty.

Richard

ab348

When are you going to post some pictures? All we have seen are facsimiles so far unless I missed it.

fezo

On Ford engines. The great irony is that my Mazda has the Duratech engine the Windstall was supposed to get but since they weren't quite ready they put in the old 3.8s in early ones. At first I thought "great - a free option." If I only knew...

The Duratech is great on admittedly a much smaller vehicle.

ab348

Not to start another thread on "my car is better than your car" but I have never particularly been impressed with anything from Ford. Everything seems to be compromised on the design side so that it doesn't last. I know people tend to bash GM for cost-cutting and Chrysler for poor reliability/quality but Ford seems to combine elements of both. I don't hate them, but they just sort of leave me cold, like Nissan.

nyccarguy

@tyguy‌

Congrats on your new Outback. 1 week in and I'm still loving my 2015 Legacy. What is the 3M Scotchguard? Do I buy it online or at the local auto parts store? How does it work? (Spray and wipe, or spay and let it soak in so to speak)

This is a big part of what I wrote for CCBA, so for those of you who have read it already, sorry:

A few things I'm starting to notice (good and not so good) since the Legacy has become my daily driver a little more than a week ago:

The Legacy has proved itself to be a great commuter. It soaks up bumps and road imperfections nicely. The ride is smooth, but not floaty at all. This AM, it was 42 degrees when I left so the seat heaters proved their worth even on the lowest setting. I really like the small, leather wrapped steering wheel. The Bluetooth and Voice Recognition work fantastic.

I got 482.8 miles on my 1st tank of gas. The car took 17.069 gallons (18.5 Gallon Tank) of 87 octane ($3.559) for an average of 28.29 mpg. So I should be able to easily achieve 500 mile tanks.

The 3 things I've noticed so far that bug me are:

The placement of the clock. I've got to take my eyes off the road and look down to see what time it is.

No lever on the inside of the trunk. I'm used to having a small handle on the inside of the trunk to close it. Now I've got to put my hands on the car's dirty trunk to close it.

Distance to Empty: This AM I get into the car and it says my DTE is 40 miles. Plenty for me to get to work, then up to Costco this afternoon on my way home. I jump on 95 (3.5 miles from my house and now the DTE is down to 30 miles. Ok, fine, it will stay steady or go back up. I'm still fine with my original plan. The whole trip down 95, it reads 30 miles. All of the sudden, I look down and it goes from 30 to - - - -. So I stop for gas when I get off the highway. No big deal. I'm just used to my BMW and my wife's Pilot which let you run the car all the way down:) Now I know for the future.

houdini1

nyccarguy said:

@tyguy‌

Congrats on your new Outback. 1 week in and I'm still loving my 2015 Legacy. What is the 3M Scotchguard? Do I buy it online or at the local auto parts store? How does it work? (Spray and wipe, or spay and let it soak in so to speak)

This is a big part of what I wrote for CCBA, so for those of you who have read it already, sorry:

A few things I'm starting to notice (good and not so good) since the Legacy has become my daily driver a little more than a week ago:

The Legacy has proved itself to be a great commuter. It soaks up bumps and road imperfections nicely. The ride is smooth, but not floaty at all. This AM, it was 42 degrees when I left so the seat heaters proved their worth even on the lowest setting. I really like the small, leather wrapped steering wheel. The Bluetooth and Voice Recognition work fantastic.

I got 482.8 miles on my 1st tank of gas. The car took 17.069 gallons (18.5 Gallon Tank) of 87 octane ($3.559) for an average of 28.29 mpg. So I should be able to easily achieve 500 mile tanks.

The 3 things I've noticed so far that bug me are:

The placement of the clock. I've got to take my eyes off the road and look down to see what time it is.

No lever on the inside of the trunk. I'm used to having a small handle on the inside of the trunk to close it. Now I've got to put my hands on the car's dirty trunk to close it.

Distance to Empty: This AM I get into the car and it says my DTE is 40 miles. Plenty for me to get to work, then up to Costco this afternoon on my way home. I jump on 95 (3.5 miles from my house and now the DTE is down to 30 miles. Ok, fine, it will stay steady or go back up. I'm still fine with my original plan. The whole trip down 95, it reads 30 miles. All of the sudden, I look down and it goes from 30 to - - - -. So I stop for gas when I get off the highway. No big deal. I'm just used to my BMW and my wife's Pilot which let you run the car all the way down:) Now I know for the future.

I bet you still had plenty of miles left. How much did it hold? My Lexus does the same thing when you get to around 30 miles left. I guess they do that so they can't be blamed if you run out with, say, 2 miles left to empty on the display.

ray80

nyccarguy said:

@tyguy‌

Distance to Empty: This AM I get into the car and it says my DTE is 40 miles. Plenty for me to get to work, then up to Costco this afternoon on my way home. I jump on 95 (3.5 miles from my house and now the DTE is down to 30 miles. Ok, fine, it will stay steady or go back up. I'm still fine with my original plan. The whole trip down 95, it reads 30 miles. All of the sudden, I look down and it goes from 30 to - - - -. So I stop for gas when I get off the highway. No big deal. I'm just used to my BMW and my wife's Pilot which let you run the car all the way down:) Now I know for the future.

I have seen that sort of complaint before in other places. I think its actually a good thing because the vehicle has no idea if your going to be cruising down the highway at 30 MPG for the next thirty miles or slugging along in bumper to bumper city traffic at 2 MPG so DTE would be meaningless

driver100

nyccarguy said:

@tyguy‌

Congrats on your new Outback. 1 week in and I'm still loving my 2015 Legacy. What is the 3M Scotchguard? Do I buy it online or at the local auto parts store? How does it work? (Spray and wipe, or spay and let it soak in so to speak)

Thanks for the weekly update. It is always hard to get used to something, when a new car doesn't have it...like the handle on the inside of the trunk. But, no car is perfect. The 535 comes close for me.....I would love lane change warnings though....the MB will definitely have that.

Ty might get back to you about the Scotchguard....I did buy my can but never used it before. Basically, test a small area first because there is a small chance it could alter the color. Use it on seats and carpet, all cloth areas. Leave the windows open for a day, and don't use the car. If you do have a spill it will protect the fabric, the spilled liquid will bubble up and you can soak it up. One of the worst stains is from new jeans on light colored seats...the dye can come right off and it is hard to remove. This should help....grape juice, coffee, should all wipe off.

Detailers or dealers will charge over $100 to put on this protection....they use the same stuff you can do it yourself for less than $10 a can

I haven't had a problem with stains....a bit on the bmw before this, caused by new jeans....but, for the small cost and extra protection I will apply it to the new E.

driver100

sterlingdog said:

driver100 said:

ab348 said:

Re. the 2015 F-150: I have to think that if the pricing on these is not too much different from the 2014, that Ford's profit margins will be significantly reduced because of the use of aluminum. I also am concerned that the use of thinner high-strength steel in the frame will leave these trucks prone to premature frame rust-out in the salt belt, just like the old Ranger. I also find the new instrument panel/dash design very unattractive.

Really, are we not again at the point with full-size pickups that we were with full-size cars in the mid-1970s? These vehicles are needlessly huge, and resorting to aluminum for them to save weight is ignoring the real problem - they are just too bulky. Will someone be brave and introduce a downsized pickup that does not trade off capacity and space, the way GM did with their full-size cars in 1977? We need a return to sanity.

Sorry ab, to write so much but the reviewer disagrees about the interior, he thinks it is a huge improvement....kind of amusing and interesting to read:

nside is yet another round of key changes. Gone is the biggest slab of plastic this side of a water park that once stood in for a dash. Materials are now varied and sculpted with softer touches all around, and real aluminum on Platinum models. The leather in the Lariat interior seems especially good, and the instrumentation, now with an eight-inch screen that can display just about anything asked of it this side of YouTube videos, even includes tire pressures for each tire. Keyless entry and ignition are available; there are a couple of USB ports, and a 110V/400-watt power outlet capable of powering episodes of Longmire on a 42-inch TV. A new 360-degree bird’s eye-view camera makes positioning the truck a snap, especially to a trailer. This is a cab that can now compete with, maybe even outshine, the excellent interior of the Ram.

And about rusting out:

The military-grade aluminum, requiring some 2,500 rivets to assemble as though it were a P-51 Mustang, will mean less dings and dents showing up on the sheet metal from careless shoppers at the mall, Ford says, and will never rust (though it can corrode), making for a lot of F-150 carcasses dotting farm fields 50 years from now.

*************************************************************************

I would agree, the size of trucks is getting out of hand. But, people don't want small trucks, Ford gave up on the Ranger. Talking about the size of trucks, I find those trucks with the twin wheels in the back are totally ugly, and they are so wide they are often unsafe to pass unless the driver of the truck is right in his lane.

Kind of like the Ford F-450...how would you like to get this into your garage....probably need to back it into your house.

A truck with the twin wheels in the rear is called a "Dooley" in the South. They have a purpose in horse country. They are used here to pull those long horse trailers to competitions. I have a friend who uses his "Dooley" between here and his horse farm in Galax, Virginia. It is an absolute monster of a truck. Before they built the first horse stable, they often slept in the "Dooley" and were very comfortable. After the second stable, they finally built a nice house. He's on his third "Dooley" and loves it. When he is pulling a horse trailer through the Virginia mountains, he's getting about 7 MPG! I made one of those "Dooley"/trailer mountain trips with him. It was a little unnerving on some of the curves.

Richard

Thanks for the explanation...I have seen "Dooleys" pulling horse trailers quite often. I get that they are stronger and can carry more weight, but, they are really wide. Shouldn't they be called "Duelly's"?

robr2

driver100 said:

Thanks for the explanation...I have seen "Dooleys" pulling horse trailers quite often. I get that they are stronger and can carry more weight, but, they are really wide. Shouldn't they be called "Duelly's"?

It's dually.

Michaell

robr2 said:

driver100 said:

Thanks for the explanation...I have seen "Dooleys" pulling horse trailers quite often. I get that they are stronger and can carry more weight, but, they are really wide. Shouldn't they be called "Duelly's"?

It's dually.

Funny that the correct spelling comes from a guy who lives in a town where they won't fit on most streets.

oldfarmer50

fezo said:

On Ford engines. The great irony is that my Mazda has the Duratech engine the Windstall was supposed to get but since they weren't quite ready they put in the old 3.8s in early ones. At first I thought "great - a free option." If I only knew...

The Duratech is great on admittedly a much smaller vehicle.

Wasn't that 3.8L a head gasket blower?

driver100

robr2 said:

driver100 said:

Thanks for the explanation...I have seen "Dooleys" pulling horse trailers quite often. I get that they are stronger and can carry more weight, but, they are really wide. Shouldn't they be called "Duelly's"?

It's dually.

Well, at least Richard got it wrong too!

I thought duel was two, as in a gun fight duel. I forgot about dual, meaning two...I suppose as in dual exhaust pipes. I was actually a good speller in public school....but, I guess I acquired so much knowledge since then spelling has taken a (to use a car term) backseat.



The tale of two spellings tells us the difference between two words, that can be exchanged each other. When two words are similar, people are often faced with a dilemma (or as some of us say, dilemna :@ -which would be incorrect as well), a duel with the spelling and another duel with themselves. The importance of correct spelling is very important. Every word is forged to define a precise concept. A misspelled word doesn't give the right connotation to the thought, that it is supposed to represent.
What Does the Word Duel Mean?

The word duel is a noun. It describes a fight between two people. It is an old practice, used to solve a quarrel, typically about a point of honor. In modern times, the word is used less formally to describe every kind of contention between two people.
What Does the Word Dual Mean?

The word dual is an adjective. It refers to a couple of people or objects. It can be dual anything that is composed of two elements, a pair, a couple, or it can describe a double aspect of the same thing.

sterlingdog

ab348 said:

When are you going to post some pictures? All we have seen are facsimiles so far unless I missed it.

Probably not long after my reincarnation process is completed. Until then, I remain technically challenged. I'll return as a home builder, auto mechanic, and computer specialist. Perhaps you weren't here a few years ago when I yanked all the wires out of my computer to install a new keyboard. That DIY repair cost me $2,000. I didn't know that the wires unscrewed. You really don't want me to send pictures to this site. Edmunds would be down for at least six months.

I just had a thought. I'll email some to Imid and he can post them.

Richard

oldfarmer50

I may have a stalker.

My obsession with Mustangs ebbs and flows and in one of my manic stages I was dumb enough to actually contact a dealer in NJ through Edmunds. They had a 2015 GT on their site at unbelievable price. Too good to be true actually.

We did an email dance for awhile with me asking to confirm the price and them responding "come on down". I finally got tired of the dance and told them I was no longer interested. That was two weeks ago.

Today I got a phone message from these guys saying they will "work with me" and to "come on down". You'd think that when I asked them not to email me any more they would get the message. I mean I wasn't asking for a "best price" to go shop, I just wanted to confirm that the posted price wasn't a typo. When the wouldn't give me a straight answer I terminated contact.

I'm the last guy you want to try the hard sell with.

I wonder, do dealers have a generic high pressure marketing plan that they just plug in for all leads regardless of what need the customer requests? I know some of our sales people have commented on how frustrating internet leads are to them and the low percentage that convert to actual sales.

sterlingdog

robr2 said:

driver100 said:

Thanks for the explanation...I have seen "Dooleys" pulling horse trailers quite often. I get that they are stronger and can carry more weight, but, they are really wide. Shouldn't they be called "Duelly's"?

It's dually.

Not the Dillards-Dooley lyrics or the Irish name of Dooley. You are totally correct. Sorry about that.

Richard

abacomike

@oldfarmer50‌ said:

"I wonder, do dealers have a generic high pressure marketing plan that they just plug in for all leads regardless of what need the customer requests?"

OF, I believe it is up to the Internet sales manager, not necessarily the dealerships.  Each dealership is different and dealership management is, of course, unique to the dealership environment.  Let me explain further.

At the dealership I helped manage, the Internet department was under the supervision of a separate manager who reported directly to the General Manager.  His marching orders were to get customers into the dealership, no matter what it took to accomplish that.  Once in the dealership, the manager assigned one of my salesmen to that customer.  I had no involvement in those deals because the Internet manager "desked" his own deals.

I refused to take that job when I first started there because all those deals were near or at invoice - so there was little or no chance to make a decent salary, both for the manager or the salesmen.  I did not like that department because it operated much like a "sweat shop" with most of the contact with customers was in the form of emails and phone calls.

That line "come on down" or similar words was always used.  Our internet department did 10% of our monthly sales - but their CSI (customer satisfaction index) was awful and brought the entire dealership down.

Like I said, I didn't like that department because it was cut throat and more like a carnival barker trying to get patrons inside the "tent!"

driver100

oldfarmer50 said:

I may have a stalker.



I'm the last guy you want to try the hard sell with.

I wonder, do dealers have a generic high pressure marketing plan that they just plug in for all leads regardless of what need the customer requests? I know some of our sales people have commented on how frustrating internet leads are to them and the low percentage that convert to actual sales.

Just out of curiosity OF....have you taken a Mustang out for a spin? That might persuade you one way or the other if it is the car for you. Or, do you want the dream to continue.....and possibly keep you up at night. Sometimes the dream is better than the reality.

I met my friend for coffee today and I was surprised he was driving his Audi A4 R/S car and not his Maserati. He said the weather forecast called for rain, and he has no traction in rain in the Mas....it just hydroplanes.

Meanwhile, the A4 does it all, carries 4 people comfortably, has a lot of power, fun to drive, looks great.......if it was me, I would say the Maserati is more trouble than it is worth.

stever

sterlingdog said:

blockquote>Not the Dillards-Dooley lyrics or the Irish name of Dooley.

The Hang Down Your Head Tom of the North Carolina folk song spelled his name Dula (still pronounced Dooley). Tom probably entered Ellis Island as Dual, Lee and some clerk doubtless thought that was a lot of truck and changed it.

In other news, Edmunds.com's Lot Buddy app is now live. It's "the first car-shopping tool to offer locked-in pricing without requiring a buyer's personal information."

Just what you need when you are shopping Mustangs.

imidazol97

sterlingdog said:

Edmunds would be down for at least six months.

I just had a thought. I'll email some to Imid and he can post them.

I'd be happy to do that.

[Deleted User]

sterlingdog said:

Congratulations on the beautiful new purchase. I do like that particular white color. I've seen it on the Cadillac and it's a real beauty. Don't let the bumper situation dampen your spirits. The nice plate frame will make it all good. I agree with Mike; the salesman screwed up---and you even reminded him as I recall. Survey should indicate that mishap.

Thank you, Richard. We're not fretting the bumper any longer now that we have a solution in place. As soon as the plates are available we'll mount the frame and be happy

I love the red on your truck and I personally find the Ford red the best match to my preferences. The Subaru red is just a bit too dark, but the Ford red is stunning. I'm genuinely glad the truck has worked out so well for you.

[Deleted User]

nyccarguy said:

@tyguy‌

Congrats on your new Outback. 1 week in and I'm still loving my 2015 Legacy. What is the 3M Scotchguard? Do I buy it online or at the local auto parts store? How does it work? (Spray and wipe, or spay and let it soak in so to speak)

Thanks NYC!! As you mentioned earlier it'll be interesting to compare our ownership experiences of nearly identical vehicles.

Driver explained the Scotchgard for fabric in perfect detail and I couldn't possibly explain it any better. I've been using Scotchgard for roughly 30 years, starting with water proofing my ski clothing back in the days before Gore Tex. Scotchgard is readily available in car parts stores and places like Wal-Mart. Good stuff.

snakeweasel

imidazol97 said:

sterlingdog said:

imidazol97 said:

I have a $20 air pump from Harbor Freight that plugs into auxiliary power on the car and pumps the tire back up. The last two times my low tire alarm went off on '03, I just pulled in, checked pressure to see which tire was low (couldn't tell by sidewall) and pumped her back up. It'd be nicer to have the individual tire pressure gauges like my Cobalt and Malibu have.

Does the air pump have a really long cord? I'm trying to visualize this from the dash all the way to the rear tire. Richard

This has a long cord that reaches from the cigarette lighter inside well past the rear wheel. The only downside is that the pump has to be started first and then I have to screw on the hose to the tire valve stem. It does not have enough ooomph (that's oooumph in Canadian ) to start up against the air pressure from the tire. But it's light weighing only a few pounds to carry in the trunk with jumper cables and my AAA card.

http://www.harborfreight.com/12v-100-psi-high-volume-air-compressor-61788.html

I have a small one that it says is rated to 300 psi, only weighs a few pounds and gets the bicycle tires up to about 150 psi with no problem. IIRC it ran me only about $20.

roadburner

Coming soon- more news once the media embargo is lifted...
-

-

abacomike

FOLLOW-UP

I have always purchased my MB vehicles from a dealer that is about 18 miles north of where I live.  There is a dealer about 2 miles from me which is owned by the same corporation.  I have tried unsuccessfully to buy a car at my local dealer, but to no avail.

This past April, I was introduced to the GM of the local dealership through a mutual friend of ours.  He asked me why I travel so far to buy my cars when his dealership is in my neighborhood.  I told him why and he assured me he would meet or beat the price of my current dealership.  So I told him I would give him a shot on my next car.

About two months ago, I called him and I went in and met with one of his top salesmen.  After about 10 minutes, I asked if he had any info on the new MB E400.  He said he didn't, but that he would call me as soon as he had the ordering info.

That next week is when my dealer asked me to give him the specs on a new E400 and he gave me a copy of his ordering guide.  To make a long story shorter, I called this other guy at my local dealership and he said he still had no info.  That's when I decided I would continue doing business with my current dealership.

That salesman never called me back even though he knew his GM wanted me to buy from his dealership.  So I ordered the car.

This morning I was in my local dealer for a car wash (all the MB dealerships owned by AutoNation wash all Mercedes cars, no matter which dealership it was bought from).  I saw the salesman as I was talking with a manager there.  The salesman said he still had no info on the 2015 E400.  I laughed out loud at him and told him my new E400 was at the port awaiting transportation to my regular dealer and that I had ordered it 2 months ago.

The guy was obviously a loser - he never checked with his GM for info on ordering.  That is how so many salesmen lose business for a dealership - they either never follow-up or they follow-up so much they turn their potential buyers off!

oldfarmer50

driver100 said:

oldfarmer50 said:

I may have a stalker.



I'm the last guy you want to try the hard sell with.

I wonder, do dealers have a generic high pressure marketing plan that they just plug in for all leads regardless of what need the customer requests? I know some of our sales people have commented on how frustrating internet leads are to them and the low percentage that convert to actual sales.

Just out of curiosity OF....have you taken a Mustang out for a spin? That might persuade you one way or the other if it is the car for you. Or, do you want the dream to continue.....and possibly keep you up at night. Sometimes the dream is better than the reality.

I met my friend for coffee today and I was surprised he was driving his Audi A4 R/S car and not his Maserati. He said the weather forecast called for rain, and he has no traction in rain in the Mas....it just hydroplanes.

Meanwhile, the A4 does it all, carries 4 people comfortably, has a lot of power, fun to drive, looks great.......if it was me, I would say the Maserati is more trouble than it is worth.

Not yet. So far the only unit in my area is the 4 cyl. Turbo but the real reason is that between school and the farm I've been pulling 70 hour weeks and the dealers are closed on Sunday, the only day I'm free.

I suppose I could "come on down" to NJ when things slow down in a couple of weeks.

roadburner

I don't want to keep ragging on your friend, driver- but I'm almost certain that the Maserati's problems in the wet are due to the driver and/or the tires.

venture

roadburner said:

Coming soon- more news once the media embargo is lifted...
-

-

I saw an X4 a few days ago. I know it's only my opinion, but it was butt ugly.