By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I do all my own servicing, and at 140k my Forester has had zero problems...just bought new tires, plugs, etc...out of good options really.
Been thinking about getting a clutch kit, but the current clutch shows no signs of a problem. A safer bet is a set of brake pads all the way around, maybe rotors this time.
John
Alan
09 Outback
Not your size? hmmmmm...
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Starting tread depth was 13/32, tread depth at the end of last season was 11/32, and current tread depth is 10/32. Verdict? Not only are these tires simply phenomenal on snow/ice (better in snow than others, as good on ice), but they are wearing at an excellent rate.
For comparison, The Continental ExtremeWinterContact I put on my Escort (same start & end dates as the Forester) received 8564 miles this winter and were at 9/32 in the rear and 8/32 in the front, with a starting depth of 11/32. Since the winter wear indicators appear on both cars' tires at 6/32 (if I recall correctly), I'm looking at possibly only one more confident winter with the Continentals (two total), but two more winters with the UGI's (four total).
My goal with both sets of tires was three winters minimum.
Huh. I guess I should have posted this on the Winter Tire thread....
The weather was in the low 80s, so it wasn't any thing out of the ordinary. He took it into the dealer to get repaired, and the dealer said they had heard of other similar situations occurring. The dealer said it had something to do with weak glass, or something like that.
This is the first I've ever heard of anything like this occurring.
Bob
Bob
Whodathunk that a gas-powered 3.5L V6, with DOHC, 4-valves per cylinder, and twin turbochargers would win over the hearts of pickup truck drivers? Color me surprised.
On a down note, PickupTruck.com just recently did a towing test of the new F-150 2WD with this EcoBoost engine, and the gas mileage was terrible.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/04/road-test-review-2011-ford-f-150-fx2-35-lit- - - er-ecoboost-v-6-part-1.html
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/04/road-test-review-2011-ford-f-150-fx2-35-lit- - - er-ecoboost-v-6-part-2.html
Bob
That fuel economy difference doesn't surprise me at all. At the speeds and grades they were pulling, that engine really would have to be tapping its power potential to give them what they wanted, which means bye-bye economy!
Honestly, though, for most pickup drivers the ecoboost V6 is an ideal setup because most will never haul a trailer (or anything heavy for that matter!), and most of those who do will rarely if ever haul a nearly 5-ton trailer. Perhaps some ATVs, maybe a watercraft now and again, but those who regularly work their trucks will opt for the higher torque/displacement engines (diesel or V8) that are meant for this type of work routinely.
I am glad to see that the 6 is being so well received. A half-ton 4-door pickup with a short bed on it and decent fuel economy can be quite a versatile vehicle: Able to do hard work on occasion and tote a family around with ease the rest of the time.
http://www.pickuptrucks.com/
Bob
Speaking of alternative engines to the venerable V8, though, I was completely shocked when I read about the stuff GM abandoned in 2008 in order to save a few high-priority projects like the Volt.
One of them was a small(ish) turbodiesel which presumably would've been used in various trucks and SUVs. That engine would've been awesome right now! I wouldn't be surprised if they gave up because of the complexity of the urea injection and/or particulate filters.
http://news.motorbiker.org/blogs.nsf/dx/honda-gold-wing-to-go-hybrid.htm
Bob
The gas saved driving around all the rest of the time would more than cover the difference.
The range on the other hand is a problem and would get tiresome soon. Up here, we often have very long distances between services and you have to plan ahead. Wes can understand what I'm saying I'm sure. I wouldn't want to be in crisis mode all the time wondering if we can make it. The Burb has a 38 gallon tank iirc. If it were an option for for our needs (it's not), an accessory tank would be almost a necessity for me.
Bob
I have the Conti ExtremeWinter Contacts on both the OBW and the Odyssey and feel that they have done very well. They probably are wearing fast as winter tires go, but they stick like glue. Season #2 for the Ody (about 9k total miles), and I measured 9-10 /32 against the original 11/32. I just took them off a few nights ago because the all-seasons were barely legal and I didn't want to run in the spring rains that way. The van is sold - being 'delivered' tonight. I got nearly $6k for it, so it was the right thing to do. 2002 with 138k miles. Astounding reliability, but how long before my luck runs out?
The set on the OBW went about 2.5k miles from Dec to April 15th, and still have a solid 10/32 on them.
I'm curious what mpg it gets on premium. Quick napkin math says if it's 2 mpg better (9.5 compared to 7.5) that would more than make up for a 20 cent increase for 91/92 vs 87.
Sounds like your EWC's are wearing probably on about the same pace as mine. I think the alignment might be off on the front end of the car (even though it doesn't pull or anything), because the front tires not only were worn more than the rears, but also did not wear evenly.
It is not so much that the EWC's are wearing quicker than the UGI's mile-for-mile, but with both tires having the same winter wear indicator point (6/32 if I recall correctly), the extra 2/32 of tread depth will give the UGI's a longer useable life. After two winters (and combined mileage of approximately 14,000), the UGI's have just about the same tread depth (a little more, actually) as the EWC. So, in terms of bang-for-the-buck, the UGI wins!
It is difficult for me to compare the overall traction quality between the two just because the vehicles' base capabilities so starkly contrast, but I am quite satisfied with the performance of both tires on their respective vehicles.
Also, those guys were nuts to work that rig that hard on those runs. Any owner that both wanted his truck to last a while and wanted to get modest fuel economy would take a trip like that at a more reasonable 55-60 mph. That alone would have "boosted" the economy by 10%+.
What I meant is that I don't see a huge difference between 7mpg and 8, and yes I do know that's 14%. 2100 miles is 300 gallons for the Ecoboost where I would need 265 gallons IF (and it's a big if) I still got 8-9mph driving at their speeds (I drive slower) and over those climbs.
What the article can not tell you is the take rate of the EcoBoost for commercial buyers. People who buy half-tons for business operate on the KISS/disposable-truck principle... it needs to be simple and cheap so if something bad happens, they don't take a beating replacing it. They also don't want a truck that will suffer from abuse by employees, so they want the truck that's strong enough to do the job without raging power numbers (this is why the HD chassis/cab trucks have diesel engines with notably less power than the pickups). I would make a reasonable assumption that most commercial buyers opt for the 3.7L V6 or 5.0L V8 for that reason... if they really need to tow regularly, they go with the diesel HD.
kcram - Pickups/Wagons Host
No doubt, but how many people stay under the speed limit?
Bob
But my go-fast days are behind me... and since the Ram is paid for, it's not going anywhere for a while - using that former payment money to wipe out all my other debt.
What remains to be seen is if the proposed 2014 fuel economy standards for over-8000 GVWR vehicles come to pass, or does a new administration in Washington come 2013 dismiss them. If they remain enacted, there is growing concern that the power wars will be quickly over, and trucks won't be anywhere near as capable as they are now. The guy in the market for a 350/3500 pickup to tow his horses/race cars/etc. will either have to find a late model used rig, or will have to step up to a medium-duty truck that could require him to get a CDL - and those mediums will also have fuel economy standards imposed.
kcram - Pickups/Wagons Host
I doubt it'll fit our budget, but we can dream, right?
Any more, that seems to be about the only thing left that we can do! :P
I'm trying to talk my wife into letting me have a little trailerable boat!
I will say I grew up on a house on the water with our boat out back. It was a really cool experience growing up, but a very expensive one for my father! Once I went away to college my mother made my father sell the boat. He's never been the same since. . .
tom
My dad owned a water front lake property, and we loved boating, but I saw the repair bills associated with it.
We only get down there 8-10 times per year, and even then maybe only 5-6 times during the warm season. It would be hard to justify the cost since it's a 2nd property. I'd rather rent, even if it's a couple of weekends each year. Much cheaper than owning, and less hassle.
Sounds like propagation from a point defect in the glass. Occasionally glass manufacturers get inclusions of non glass like material in their feed-stock of recycled glass (all manufactured glass includes some proportion of recycled material and this may be contaminated by items like pyrex glass or a tiny chip of stone). This inclusion does not expand/contract in line with the balance of the window. Typically, the inclusion is about the size of a grain of sand and virtually undetectable to the naked eye
The window eventually shatters, starting from the inclusion. If the glass has remained in the frame, you can usually see a pattern around a single point but further out the shatter pattern appears random.
Prime triggers for the ultimate failure are physical impact, or heating/cooling. I dealt with a very spectacular failure of a large window in an art gallery, which was subject to overnight frost, followed by brilliant sunshine, resulting in sudden catastrophic failure.
The other common failure mechanism comes where the stresses in the glass have not been relieved properly. After glass has been processed to shape it, etc. it is placed in a Lehr to anneal the glass, bringing the glass up to a temperature just below melting and then reducing temperature in a controlled fashion to slowly remove the mechanical stresses in the glass.
In unannealed glass, you can sometime precipitate failure by creating a stress point and then applying a thermal shock to the item, the fault propagates from the introduced weak point.
It is quite exciting when it happens.
Cheers
Graham
Bob
Bov
There's a bit of a Wild West right now with so much data being available on smartphones, nay, superphones.. that people unwittingly take on all kinds of risks.
It's one thing for malware/crimeware to steal your data, but for law enforcement to knowingly exploit gaps in what your phone *ought* to be protecting is reprehensible. :surprise:
I'm not giving up my smartphone, but I want full-phone encryption ASAP. I have every available feature in the base Android 2.2 enabled but I still have doubts that it would withstand inspection from a Cellebrite or similar device. And I have nothing to hide, but I firmly believe in the 4th Amendment.
They also have a Mini Cooper S Countryman All4.
Bob
I think it's TOTALLY unreasonable for a cop to ask you to hand over your phone.
My response would be simple - it is a work phone and it would violate my company's Information Security policy to hand it over to anyone, however I would comply with the law if it's a requirement.
That's a round-about and polite way to say "not without a warrant you big fat jerk!"
When is the Abarth coming?
I should go drive one. Maybe when that rag-top model comes out.
However if they arrest you then they seize any and everything on your person and can inspect it as long as they can demonstrate probable cause. (Which is... um, slightly vague.)
Even worse-- if you have bluetooth enabled on your phone they might be able to pair with it without even physically seizing the device, and slurp your contact list, location history, gps speed, sms texts and locally cached email.
Woohoo!
Cop sees 90mph top speed and won't be happy...
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/05/03/nissan-wins-bid-to-be-next-new-york-city-taxi- - - - /
The Nissan NV200 is similar in size and purpose to the Ford TransitConnect. Here's the NV200 in commercial dress:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_NV200
http://www.google.com/search?q=Nissan+NV200&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&prmd=ivns- - - - &tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=mB3ATYOiLMHq0QGp04imBQ&ved=0CC4QsAQ&biw=1000- - - - &bih=1001
The NV200 is not on sale in the USA—yet. I'm sure that will change shortly with this announcement.
Bob
I'm not trying to wear the tinfoil hat... but have I mentioned that I despise this technology?
Phone? "Just say no."
Wonder if it'll be a diesel?
Second, it's probably cheaper to build (and repair) than a minivan.
Of special note, I see navigation is standard; makes sense for a taxi.
Bob
Forester down a bit, but Impreza way up. Legacy and Outback up; even the Tribeca increased!
Bob
If so I'm not sure I'd call it a truck.