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
Definitely go with digital. Downloading digital to a computer is so simple my daughter uses it for some of her homework assignments.
Check epinions for some feedback. Several places had negative comments about Sharp products so I avoided them. Ended up with a very inexpensive RCA ($300). It's the only camcorder we own and works fine. It was cheaper than many analog units.
Jim
-Ian
and you guys might not even care ...
When I was car-shopping a couple years ago, one more reason I liked the Subaru was that the hatch on the back went UP and went UP far enough that I could stand under it comfortably. Now you guys might be too tall, but at about 5'8" I have plenty of clearance without bumping my head. It's REALLY nice when you are loading in groceries or packages in a parking lot and it's snowing or raining! Some of the 'larger' vehicles I drove had doors that swung sideways (some very heavy) or hatches didn't go up as far as the Subie's does ...
(small thing in the overall ratings .. but still a great convenience! and you MIGHT let the woman in your life drive it sometime!)
Ed
-mike
Vibe is more exciting with the high output engine, but it still needs to be wrung out (all the hp is up in the 6-8k range), so I think it will be sluggish as an automatic. Still, it has gobs of useable cargo space in a compact, tossable, easy to park setup. And you can't beat that price right now.
If anything remotely looking like an SUV weren't disallowed at the track and I had to buy something this month, that turbo Forester would be it. But I do like to go to the track and to autocross, so I personally would take advantage of the 0.0% financing and the big breaks on bugeye WRXs and pick up a yellow wagon.
Jon: the Vibe has 123hp with AWD. You gotta ask yourself if you even want to own a car that slow, it won't be able to get out of its own way going up a hill in the mountains. Even a stripped Impreza TS wagon has 42 more horses!
If you must, buy a 1 or 2 year old TS wagon used, it'll be cheaper the the powertrain warranty will still have about 3 years left on it, same as that Vibe.
I hate to say it but I'd get a FWD Vibe instead, 7 more horses and less weight/drag means it's probably tolerable, if not fast. That engine just cannot overcome the extra burden the way Subaru's 2.5l can.
I say get a great car and keep it longer. You come out ahead, and happier. Buy a car you don't even like right now, when it's new, and just imagine when it's an older POS.
$3500 is a lot, though, I'll admit. You can't use it on the Saturn Vue, right? Even though I wasn't impressed with it. What about the Malibu Maxx? Or a Tahoe or Avalanche, I guess those are overkill? I'd wait to see the Chevy Equinox, it's cute, at least.
-juice
OK, the same dealer has a TS for $15,970. Auto is $16,645. So it's only about a grand more.
I think the Pontiac is overpriced to begin with. This is the problem - GM buils the rebate into the price nowadays, the MSRP is GROSSLY overpriced, so in the end the final deal still isn't all that great, even with a gargantuan GM card rebate.
The Vibe has a 3/36 warranty. Buy a 5/60 extended and boom, you break even.
I'd pick the 165 horsies.
-juice
Of course you can make the point that "SUV's don't kill people, people kill people", so to speak. Strictly speaking, that's correct, of course. But a "bad driver" in a Metro is a heck of a lot less dangerous than a bad driver in Hummer. The Hummer is an enabling technology. Lose control of one of those, and everybody around you has real trouble. Lose control in a Metro, and that's bad, but not nearly as bad. Now add in the fact that losing control in some vehicles is a great deal easier than in others and you have a legitimate issue, particularly where the more dangerous vehicles (to others) are also the ones that are less forgiving of bad drivers.
So it's not just about your right to drive whatever you want. It's also about your responsibility to drive what you want safely. To the extent that SUV's are marketed as "safer", with zero discussion of their pro's and con's, the car companies are (deliberately) misleading the buying public, which makes them "accessories to the crime" in my book. Some companies are more guilty of this than others, of course.
A motor vehicle can be considered a lethal weapon, and society has every right, indeed an obligation, to ensure that users of motor vehicles are informed and properly trained regarding their safe use. People who refuse to use them properly should be banned from using them (drunk drivers & habitual offenders for instance).
As to SUV safety per se, I'll throw my hat into the ring and take issue with the Forbes article several pages back - SUV's are NOT safer per se than cars, and the vehicle fatality rates in them actually demonstrate that - the Forbes article badly misinterprets the available stats, indeed, reverses them ! The fatality rate in SUV's is 1.5x that of mini-vans. Adding in the risk to other drivers posed by SUV's underscores the safety issue.
With SUV's, you're trading one kind of risk for another. How that impacts you're safety depends to a great extent on your typical driving circumstances.
You're better off in a head-on with a smaller vehicle. You're worse off with respect to emergency maneuvers (roll-over) and single-vehicle accidents (run off the road asleep and hit a bridge abuttment). The latter is because that stiff SUV truck frame will not absorb the impact energy as well as a unibody, and therefore transfers the energy to the passengers - deceleration rates are higher, which translates to greater injury risk.
If you're inflated sense of security in the slick leads you to overdrive the conditions, you're at greater risk as well, but we might agree that you should have known better. Trouble is, you might hurt somebody else finding out.
-brianV
We already do that with big trucks, why not with SUVs? Driver's Ed for those should include lessons in their limitations compared to cars.
-juice
AWD / Jon: We love our TS Wagon. It's a more affordable alternative to the WRX with similar styling, very good handling, and more than adequate power for our needs. 165hp w/ AWD for $17,000 (you'd probably get a better deal than we did since we didn't wait) is not bad. Add a set of WRX takeoff wheels for $500 or less from someone who upgraded if you don't like the stock steelies.
-mike
I'll offer an example. I had a standard MD driver's license and went in for the Motorcycle test. You don't have to take a written exam at all (!), and the riding test was so easy it was ridiculous. Any kid could hop on a scooter and get one.
In fact that's exactly what I did - earned my Class M license on a scooter.
-juice
Check out the Alfa Romeo Kamal. That's what the next Forester should look like. It's gorgeous! :-)
In fact, all the Alfas are stylish. The B11S actually has a better sorted rear than most of the Alfas, but the Alfas are cleaner in profile. Fronts are the same, just Alfa uses a V and Subaru uses an A shape.
-juice
I'm also OK with insurance companies lowering SUV collision rates and raising medical liability rates, in line with the types of losses they tend to incur and cause. This would translate to a considerable increase in overall SUV rates though, since medical liability cost generally far outstrips collision losses.
If you're going to drive a Hummer and hurt someone, you should be required to make them right again.
If people were required to run an emergency maneuver course in their SUV, how many would end up buying one ? How 'bout a "reduced traction" course ? I can see it now, all happy and giddy about how fast they can accelerate and than BAM - into the barrier on the corner, hay bales flying all over the place.
-brianV
-mike
Spirited in rush hour traffic well outside of sanity under lousy driving conditions is another matter entirely.
-brianV
-mike
Does that mean the next thing is to have people who buy STis, Miatas and Mustang GT should have special licences, because they are so much more powerful than a Camry or DeVille?
Bob
Ed
How about mandatory avoidance training in several vehicles - a FWD car, a sports sedan, and a big SUV - under different road conditions for everybody? People driving SUV's with GVWR over 6000# (pick a number) or tow ratings over class II need a separate certificate.
-brianV
You think the status quo is better - big yellow rollover warning on the visor? Why not incorporate those warnings into driver training instead? Who actually reads those?
People should also be required to learn how to put a vehicle in and out of 4WD and Lo range before they can drive a vehicle equipped that way. I guess we leave it up to the dealers or owners reading the manual. RTFM is about as common as lips on chickens! LOL
Keep something in mind - current laws for light trucks were written for them to be as work trucks, not as passenger vehicles. Back then especially it would seem like common sense.
Sports cars have higher capabilities, so they could do anything a normal car would be expected to do, only better.
-juice
As a teacher, is it ok if I wish for actual adults having some training as parents before they have the children they send to us in school five years later? ....
please? .. huh ? ...
Nuvolari: cool name. Future A6 coupe? Some details need to be sorted, the A6 sedan is more handsome. I don't like the headlights, the C-pillar, or the interior much. Isn't this horsepower race getting a little out of control? Do you need 600hp to go 55mph on most roads?
Airflite: half way between a Crossfire and a Pacifica. I dunno, I don't like the boat tail look, don't like it on the Crossfire either. If it gets the 3.2l V6 from Mercedes that would be its best selling point.
MX Sportif: cute, sort of a tall P5. Again we have a C-pillar like the Murano with a severe blind spot problem. It looks big - I thought it would have been based on the Mazda 6 platform.
Nissan Evalia: dumb name, eh? Looks like a pregnant or even hunchbacked Murano, minus the good looks. Even the new Quest looks better.
Subaru B11S: love it. Please, pretty please, model all Subies after this look. I'd get rid of the 2-tone on the lower body cladding, that's about it. Heck, I'd take it as-is.
-juice
Are you seriously suggesting that someone needs a special license to drive an 6000 GVW truck or SUV?
As to drawing a line, it's already there: Anything over 26000 pounds, and you need a CDL. I can't believe you guys actually think someone needs a special license to drive a Chevy Tahoe.
Bob
1) The styling -- I'll probably get thrown off this board for saying this but whenever I see one I think "Pinto".
2) WRX -- Just knowing that there is one of these in the same line I'd never be able to drive any of the others!
If I decided I didn't want AWD and wanted something inexpensive I'd probably go with the Mazda P5...I think this is one of the best looking wagons out there. But I think you're right I probably wouldn't be happy with any of these long term.
And as far as motorcycle licenses go, I'm not sure if you can take the test on a scooter here in MN (if you could it would be easy), but I've heard it's actually quite humorous to watch people try to take it on their big cruisers. There was a guy in my MSF class who did this to see how hard the test was and every person he saw failed! Just about everyone in my class passed (except for the girl who fixated on the curb in a turn, hit it, and flipped over the handlebars and the guy who sideswiped a standing instructor!)
Jon
And on a side note, yes high powered sports cars should require special liscencing as well. I've seen more idiots out there smacking up their sports cars.
-mike
-mike
Ken
No way would I ever support graduated licensing for light trucks or SUVs. If that is ever proposed here in Maryland, I would fight it tooth and nail...
Bob
http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?s=86a05db188f0a539c8f- a05cae30ddc2e&threadid=10745&highlight=bees
-Brian
-Ian
I guess the intercooler makes for a next best thing to a honeycomb.
-Dave
Motorcycle
Passenger
Passenger Van
Van/Pick-up/Light Truck
Medium Truck/Heavy Vehicle
or something along that line; and the licenses are not interchangeable, i.e. If you're license for a Heavy Vehicle, you can't use that license to drive a Passenger car.
I'm for separate licensing/education for the type of vehicle driven.
-Dave
edit: newly licensed drivers are also required to display a "L" tag on the bumpers,... jokingly, sort of a warning for other drivers. ;-)
Bob
-Dave
On the other hand, to get a license in GA, all you have to do is pass a written test and manuever (at 5mph) around some cones in a parking lot!
-Frank P.
Honda is no stranger to building boxer engines: Their Gold Wing motorcycle, which came out in 1979, has been a boxer from day one. Interestingly, the transmission is under the engine, not behind it. Doing so, raises the engine a bit in the chassis, which in turn allows for a greater degree of banking when going through corners.
I wonder if they will ever apply boxer technology to cars?
Bob
Bob
I can understand that the current licensing classifications are enough from your angle of view, which is, one with life time experience behind the wheels of a 4x4, SUV, however you call it.
I'm for separate licensing/education/training to qualify the influx of now the majority drivers [passenger car] that rush into dealerships like lemmings to drive off in a SUV with no better notion other than, "I have a greater command of view", "it makes me feel more secure",... BUT have never driven one before.
I'll be very afraid if the pilot who has only flown Cessnas (sp) flies a B747
-Dave
I would too. But that analogy is much like driving a Geo Metro vs. driving a Mack truck. In order to drive the Mack, you need a CDL, which I agree with.
Bob
Would you agree that there's a transition going from driving a Geo Metro to a Ford Expedition and training [time behind the wheels to acclimate] is highly recommended?
Maybe I shouldn't use the term "separate licensing". How about an upgrade of the driver's license to drive a larger vehicle, like an Expedition? To qualify for the upgrade, the driver must be able to handle/understand the vehicle through time behind the wheels [training in a closed course]. As it is today, these unqualified drivers are out there going through their transition(s) at the expense of the safety of a lot of us.
Wait, I'm only speaking of drivers that have road time behind the wheels. For those "I just got my driver's license" category is a whole different matter. They shouldn't even be allowed to take on such vehicle until they have a good set of miles under their belts. I was riding with my co-worker's friend in his Grand Cherokee a year back [just got his license and the Jeep then]... 5 city blocks was all I could take. Now, to date, I've not made mike [paisan] stop the SVX or the Trooper and got out to walk. That's how scary [and dangerous to now think] that new driver was behind the wheels.
-Dave
It should be phased in for new licensees, with current drivers grand-fathered.
And what's the big deal anyway? It's ridiculous that in MD we have to get our cars emissions tested every 2 years, but drivers only have to pass an eye test every 5 years!
Dave: maybe the L stands for "Loser", tee hee.
Jon: did you see the face-lifted 2004 Impreza? Like that any better?
Funny to see Honda and BMW employ boxer designs on motorcycles. They know a good thing when they see it!
-juice
bit
-juice
suddenly, a cold nose
-Dave
-juice