I think beginning in 2008 there will begin to be a huge variety of choices, especially in trucks. An ultra efficient diesel will inject :surprise: life into a stagnating segment of the vehicle industry.
The winner IMO will be the one that can switch over more vehicles faster.
One thing I have noticed is that many of you who don't see the need for a truck don't live in the Deep South. Come on down to my place sometime in your wagon, minivan, or suburban and load up one bale of hay or straw, one bundle of firewood, or a sack of mulch that has about a gajillion fireants baled or bundled up in the middle of it and you'll be wishing you had a truck.
Also, many pickup owners where I live actually use their trucks regularly. They pull their boats, campers, ATV trailers, etc. AND in the post-Katrina months EVERYBODY needed a truck.
And as for the following comment:
See many people (non-business) driving PUs but very rarely see anything in the bed. Think that many who own/drive these are merely their fashion statements.
Oh, PUH-LEEZZ. Like driving a Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, Range Rover, Corvette, or any other car/truck/van/suv, etc, etc, etc is not "merely making a fashion statement". Let's not get into this whole argument of the thousandth time. :sick:
BOTTOM LINE: you drive whatever you drive because it's your choice. In the spirit of Independence Day I say that they should add the freedom to drive whatever you like to the Bill of Rights.
Pickups are probably most dangerous vehicles on the road both for their occupants and others: 1. Terrible handling - worst of all classes, especially empty, especially small pickups (Ranger) 2. Not much of crashworthiness - at best there is some mass protection, but the frame characteristics do not help in energy absorption. 3. Cargo flying off the bed is not helping either as there is no way to secure large cargo agains sliding during a collision. And how many of owners simply throw stuff on the bed without securing. Guess how much momentum that wrench will have when launched like a missile?
An unsecured wrench lying in the back of a minivan is more dangerous to the occupants than the one in the bed of a PU. At least in the pickup you've got the rear windsheild between you and the wrench.
Ford is allegedly closing the Ranger plant in MI waiting for the country-wide approval of clean diesel in order to import diesel Rangers from Thailand, Brazil and elsewhere. Again come 2008 there may be a whole slew of options available to us not available now.
Nissan and Toyota are poised in Thailand as well. The new San Antonio plant is ready to put diesel Tundra's out right away after the gasser versions debut later this year. Honda has already announced the diesel Ody and MDX.
Come on down to my place sometime in your wagon, minivan, or suburban and load up one bale of hay or straw, one bundle of firewood, or a sack of mulch
First off if they had all those fire ants I wouldn't want the stuff anyway. But I have hauled firewood Straw and the like in the wagon.
Oh, PUH-LEEZZ. Like driving a Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, Range Rover, Corvette, or any other car/truck/van/suv, etc, etc, etc is not "merely making a fashion statement".
Some cars it is a fashion statement, other cars its not. Yep driving a Vette is a "fashion" statement but tell me what sort of fashion statement is driving a Hyundai station wagon?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Priced properly either car will see in approximately the same amount of time.
That may be true in theory, but in practice, an unpopular car doesn't have a very large buyer pool from which to choose, and it sits alongside numerous other cars just like it in your local classifieds, Auto Trader, etc..
If you resell a 5-year Honda sedan, your phone will be ringing off the hook with brand-loyal and import-loyal buyers, and you will sell the car in fairly short order and without severe discounting. With a comparable 5-year old Chevy, you'll be competing against boatloads of cars, while there won't be many takers. The Chevy is the marketing equivalent of the lone voice in the wilderness, which is the last thing you want when you need to have a crowd. I suspect that in comparison to the price guides, the real-world hit to the price of the Chevy will be much higher than it would be for the beloved transplant or import.
No problem. If you want to buy a Honda built in Ohio or a Toyota assembled in Kentucky, instead of a Ford built in Mexico or a Chevy assembled in Korea, that's perfectly fine by me.
"And here's my wagon trump, in how many wagons can you realistically load a 4x8 sheet of plywood and still close the liftgate?"
You know, I have heard this argument all my life. I owned a pickup from 1991 through 1997, and although it was handy, as a third vehicle - I never put one sheet of 4x8 plywood in it. I wouldn't know what to do with it. That's why I have to hire folks to build for me, and they seem to have pickups.
Since then, I have managed without one, owning one or two SUVs ever since.
Snake, you and I have got to just agree to disagree on this one. AMOF, I think this is probably the first time we've ever been on opposite sides of an issue.
One thing I totally agree with you on is that nobody driving an Hyundai is "posing". :P
And no, if I knew the ants were there, I wouldn't touch it, but the fact is that you don't always know until it's too late. My MIL actually brought home several snake eggs in a sack of potatoes once. They never realized it until baby snakes were crawling across the kitchen floor. :surprise:
As for the wrench through the windsheild, I was being a bit sarcastic, but I'm also saying that a lot of people are just as negligent in securing cargo in a van, SUV, or wagon as others are in trucks.
I think the biggest issue with safety in pickup trucks is that you've always got to be aware of the fact that you are driving a larger and usually heavier vehicle than others around you. I tend not to drive my truck as fast as our car and I try to watch out for others. But that door swings both ways. If you're driving a small car, watch out for the bigger ones.
No problem. If you want to buy a Honda built in Ohio or a Toyota assembled in Kentucky, instead of a Ford built in Mexico or a Chevy assembled in Korea, that's perfectly fine by me.
In the words of Larry the Cable Guy: I don't care where you from, that there's funny! :P I had exactly the same thought about Dodges built in Mexico.
I tend not to drive my truck as fast as our car and I try to watch out for others
Those posting the crash test results from IIHS always leave out the insurance ratings for PU trucks. They are rated as much less apt to have a fatal accident as smaller vehicles. A 2500 Chevy has a rating of 32 for injury the best car is a 45 and the best SUV is a 37. By comparison the most popular car the Camry got a much worse 108 and the Accord even worse 122. So crash tests don't mean much to the insurance companies when it comes to premiums. And my GMC PU was about $400 a year less than my 2005 Passat. The Passat Wagon had a very good 56 rating. Better than ANY other midsized car.
So crash tests are only part of the story. And not a big part at that.
PS My 2005 GMC Sierra Hybrid was built in Indiana. First GM truck out of 5 built here in the USA.
Well, of course the large mass of the SUV or truck will level - flatten most cars which get in their way. There is a higher death rate for those incidents between cars and those beasts. Is that a good thing? And the next logic is to have everyone drive the next larger vehicle, until you run out of road space, steel or money to make double the size of the previous one, time two? I would think that eventually the liability for injuries caused, would become great enough for larger trucks and SUVS, that their rates for insurance would increase. -Loren
would think that eventually the liability for injuries caused, would become great enough for larger trucks and SUVS, that their rates for insurance would increase.
Why? Insurance rates are based on the cost of repair and liability. So if you own a Hummer and are the cause of an accident your premium should go up. By the same rules if you own a Corolla and cause an accident your premium should go up. Those numbers by the IIHS are indicative of the injuries and cost of repair to given vehicles. By that rating and most conventional logic you are safer and pay a lower premium in a full sized PU or SUV.
We have an archived thread that is 60k plus posts that explore all aspects of this subject. I would suggest anyone with questions to look that thread up. A good read for the 4th of July.
Well, I would assume if you cause injury, death, and destruction of the other vehicle involved, then your insurance company shall have to produce more in the way of money to cover the claim and more lawyer time, since what could have been a lesser crash, can indeed end in one of a greater degree. -Loren
well i cant specify the factory where they are built... but i can make sure if i put my money out that they have an AMERICAN name... got that??? any more questions??
Well, I would assume if you cause injury, death, and destruction of the other vehicle involved
I would assume you are correct. However my first responsibility is to my family and passengers. So if I jam them into an Echo and get broadsided by a 1 ton behemoth of a truck I am the one to blame. I will not, if gas gets to $20 per gallon go out on the highway in the likes of these small cars. They are misleading people saying they are safe because they pass a crash test with a car of equal size. The odds are very small that you will get hit by a vehicle of equal size and weight. Going with the largest practical vehicle is the wisest decision.
Just one example. The Kia Optima has the lowest insurance rating for a midsized car. It is rated for injury at 180. Yet you look at the crash test scores and it gets all 4 & 5 stars. People read the crash test ratings and believe they are in a safe car when it is only safe if they pick and choose who runs a red light and broadsides them. I am not going to preach at others what they should drive. For me and mine I am going for what I feel is safest. That should be each persons responsibility.
True. Larger wins. So what happens when everyone owns a heavyweight? Too Goliaths come together and ...
Mercedes knows what damage their larger cars do to the lesser sized. They use three zones of increasing resistance which softens the blow to the other car, as well as protecting the occupants within the Mercedes larger car.
I have driven a wide range of cars, from a Buick LeSabre of earliest '60's, to a tiny Miata. The first drive on a freeway, when you pass a semi, and note that the tires are higher than your Miata, you are a little intimidated. Like a motorcycle, survival depends on maneuverability. While it was fun, I must say they are pretty small. I think a good balance of mid-sized to larger car which are rated safer cars, and have some handling to them, compared to simply having the biggest beast, is more the way I would go. But to each his or her own. And I see how some people want a larger SUV to fit all the kids and gear in, or a truck to haul the hay, or pull a trailer with.
As for everyone having to own an SUV or large truck to be safe, I not only don't care for the idea, it would not work. If all the vehicles are heavy, it is in a slightly same condition as the old days, as in a lot of weight colliding each time, though the safety of trucks and SUVs are better than the old cars. But you see what I mean, to a degree, it is like to heavyweight sluggers in a ring duking it out. -Loren
The forces in a crash are governed by the law of conservation of momentum, which is mass X velocity.
Assuming that one is not T-boned, with today's vehicle designs everyone should walk away from a frontal crash unless the speeds were outrageous. The best way to help survive is to slow down and reduce the velocity of at least one vehicle ( yours ). It reduces the total amount of momentum in the equation.
A larger vehicle ( more mass ) adds momentum to a crash equation and two large vehicles crashing at say 40 mph are far riskier than two smaller vehicles crashing together.
One large vehicle going off the road and hitting a tree is riskier in that there is more energy to dissipate than a compact car in a similar crash.
Now is the larger amount of steel, plastic and rubber in a large SUV sufficient to absorb this extra energy from the crash? That depends on the vehicle.
when you pass a semi, and note that the tires are higher than your Miata, you are a little intimidated.
I agree. I liked driving the Passat Wagon. It was great handling, great brakes and performance. I felt lost in a sea of lifted vehicles here in San Diego. I know as well as you that at least half were not necessary. Never the less they are there and we are potential victims of these monsters. There is no way that these monster trucks with 12" lifts & and tires the size of Delaware, are safe. Yet they are everywhere. At least in my 1/2 ton PU I can see the top of the tires.
I can remember when I was a teenager that you could not raise or lower a car more than a set height. Police would stop you and poke this stick under your car and if it hit anything they wrote you a ticket. Now anything goes. Wheels tires outside the fenders. I don't think they have any laws except the stupid emissions test. Loud exhaust and sound systems. I honestly thought of buying a CTX like Demi Moore's new husband drives. That would keep me above the fray. And satisfy my desire for a diesel vehicle. Ain't she pretty?
Guess you told them! I like reading the threads, but find the arguments about whose vehicle is better, moronic and tiring.There's only one best vehicle and I'm driving it -- if you see what I mean.
but i can make sure if i put my money out that they have an AMERICAN name... got that???
Well, then you don't want Chrysler, as it is foreign now.... Oh - you mean the name? I think Chevrolet is French...
So you're saying American names built overseas are OK?
Why would you buy an American nameplate from a company that is outsourcing its manufacturing to other countries, shutting down US factories, rather than a foreign nameplate spending millions of $$ building new plants for jobs in the USA?
> Kia Optima has the lowest insurance rating for a midsized car. It is rated for injury at 180. Yet you look at the crash test scores and it gets all 4 & 5 stars. People read the crash test ratings and believe they are in a safe car when it is only safe if they pick and choose who runs a red light and broadsides them.
Think that might also be true for Camcords and Civrollas? And other cars of all types as well. The engineers have done what the marketing people needed; they designed the car to meet the test. Problem occurs when you dont run into a solid-faced block during your accident as done in the test.
The best way to help survive is to slow down and reduce the velocity of at least one vehicle ( yours ).
That to me is the MOST important factor in all this discussion. The Driver is the ultimate safety device. I see little cars zipping around like they are invulnerable. I see behemoths blasting around with no regard for the other vehicles on the road. Somewhere we have to make driver responsibility the top priority in issuing a license to drive. Too many drivers on the roads should not be allowed behind the wheel of anything bigger than a shopping cart.
PS Hope all are having a safe happy 4th of July!!!!!
One large vehicle going off the road and hitting a tree is riskier in that there is more energy to dissipate than a compact car in a similar crash.
Actually, there's more to it than that. I think one critical factor in an accident is how much of your vehicle's mass is in front of you, versus behind you. This is one reason that vans and pickup trucks, and vehicles where you sit close to the front of the vehicle, do poorly when you run them into something that's not going to budge, like a bridge abutment or a decent-sized tree.
I noticed that in my '85 Silverado that I sit just as close to the front of the vehicle as my uncle does in his '03 Corolla. However, with the truck more than half of its length is still behind me, and a great deal of its mass is, as well. Now with something like my uncle's Corolla, where the driver's butt sits is at least halfway back, and the majority of that car's mass is ahead of the driver.
I guess the analogy I'm trying to make is something akin to a train wreck or bus crash, where usually the passengers towards the back are usually safer. I think that in many cases, a taller driver might usually come out better in an accident than a shorter driver, simply because the taller driver will sit further back from the steering wheel, dashboard, etc. And in side impacts, a taller driver will be situated back between the B-pillars. So instead of your head coming into contact with the intruding SUV, you'll hit the B-pillar, which probably would be the lesser of two evils. So I could see a tall person in a smaller vehicle possibly coming off better than a short person in a big vehicle.
As for the momentum of an accident, well the vehicle doing the hitting inflicts that force on what it hits. If it's something that's easily smashed, then what gets hit takes most of the impact. If it's something that's not going to give, that force gets inflicted back on the car that's doing the hitting.
Another factor is how well the crush space is preserved within the passenger cabin, and how well the passengers stay put in their seats. Often it's not the forces that are generated from the impact, but the occupants coming into contact with some part of the car's interior.
The problem I see is the testing for "Stars" from the ratings is done with flat objects. Hitting a tree means that a 6-24 inch diameter object is going to inpress itself into the front of your vehicle (assuming front impact). I had a picture of a telephone pole from Columbia Parkway in Cinci that had one back into a car about a yard. It missed the motor. So the car did not slow down as rapidly as it might have were the motor stopped by the pole. The car slowed down, the driver hit the windshield. The same car today probably would pass the frontal impact safety test because of the broad area of impact. But that narrow telephone pole could have turned a 40 mph crash into a fatal if it hit the front of the frame member or the motor and slowed the car more quickly.
It's how much the car has slowed when the occupant hits a part of the car having continued at the original speed because of inertia that causes the real problem. Seatbelts start using up that relative inertia by holding the occupant back from impact.
A car which crushes a lot and slowly slows the rear of the car down can impede into the passenger compartment. So long crush capability isn't always good. That's the engineering which went into Mercedes years ago, and has been copied by the other companies and probably improved on greatly for less than full-sized cars in the two years since the concept of a strong passenger cage was originated.
The test advertisements of side impacts and how wonder brand X is in those don't impress me a bit. I don't want to have a side impact, with side airbags, with side curtain bags, without side bags, at all. I have seen too many dead people with side impacts in my lifetime.
Tall people still have their knees and legs close to the dashboard and as they move forward stretching their seatbelt those knees and feet still hit things. We can hope the firewall doesn't move back to meet the legs and feet in the process due to strength of the impact.
In my opinion the full-sized pickups are safer to hit another medium or full-sized car with. They tend to be stronger and absorb energy as the different strength parts of one meet the parts of the other vehicle. They also tend to ride up and go over the bumper level and motor level in the opposing vehicle.
a drunk in an old early 70's Ford F-series came flying over the blind hill in front of my house and clipped our mailbox. Oh, I should also mention that he clipped the telephone pole beside it! :surprise:
Snapped that sucker like a twig. It literally ripped a chunk out of the pole, allowing the upper part, with the wires, to drop down to where you could reach them if you were inclined to do so. The impact also pulled down the next nearest telephone pole to the rear, which went down into the neighbors pine tree and set it on fire.
The truck was totaled, and not just because of its age. Any modern vehicle with this much damage inflicted upon it would've been a total, as well. IIRC, the driver didn't get hurt that badly, but did end up in the hospital.
Now, in this case, because the truck snapped the pole, it didn't decelerate that quickly. IIRC, the truck ended up about 15-20 feet beyond the pole, and had spun around at about a 90 degree angle. That's probably one thing that had saved the driver. I think this is one case where, had it been a modern, lighter, "softer" vehicle, the results would have been much worse. This type of vehicle might not have been strong enough to snap the pole, meaning that it would have decelerated almost instantly, the stopping distance for the driver being dictated by how far the vehicle crumpled up. And an airbag down your throat doesn't do you much good if it's followed by a telephone chaser!
Now by and large, vehicle are safer these days, but often the result of an accident can be pure luck.
Is that the test dummies don't react like real live human beings. I was in a wreck a few years ago where a guy pulled out in front of me and I hit the utility trailer he was pulling. I didn't seem to be injured but the next day my back was killing me. I went to the Doctor and she explained to me that often what happens is that we (men in particular) injure ourselves because we tend grip the steering wheel really tight and tense up just before impact. Other people may let go of the wheel, try to lie down, or who knows what else.
I guess what we should do is get a law passed making it illegal to have a tree within 100 feet of a highway right of way, or perhaps we could ask God to start making them with breakaway trunks.
The best accident is not having one. Just because your car choice got rated 5-stars doesn't mean it's the best for surviving an accident; your accident won't be textbook.
So people who choose a car based on the star ratings may not get what they think. It's like picking a car based on an advertised price without considering all the rebates, addons, ups, packs, trade in value, etc.
One of the more infamous/embarrassing crashes I've had was when I rear-ended a '55 DeSoto with my '57. I was following a friend to a DeSoto show in Ellicott City, MD, and we were getting off of one highway onto another. Unfortunately they were doing constructon on the highway we were getting onto, and the yield sign had been replaced by a stopsign. Oh, and it was raining. And I still remember the song on the radio..."It never rains in Southern California."
I had a friend in the car with me, too. Well, my buddy in the '55 goes to accelerate to get up to merge speed. I look over my shoulder, see a Hyundai coming off in the distance, but knew there was plenty of time, so I accelerated too. But when I looked back ahead, I saw my buddy had just slammed on his brakes when he saw the stopsign. I had no choice but to hit the brakes and hope for the best. I remember my friend singing along with that song, and his pitch suddenly changed "I wanna go hooooMMMMMAAAAAUGH!"
I didn't have time to tense up, because I was trying to concentrate more on not making the brakes lock up, and then doing my best to steer once they did. My buddy grabbed the dashboard and went rigid.
I remember bouncing forward, head bobbing down, and then when I came back up, seeing that '55 leap ahead from the impact. It was almost graceful. My first thought, as I saw that the '55 looked undamaged, was "Thank God". I just presumed the front of mine would be a mess, though.
Turns out, the only damage I did to my friend's car was put a ding in each of the metal bumper guards, to go with the set he already had. As for my car, it scraped some dust off the bumper/grille, but that was it. My buddy with the '55 had a stiff neck for a couple days, and my friend riding with me was stiff all over. And about the only thing that happened to me was that I was scared as hell to drive that thing the rest of the way to the car show, and was a bundle of nerves driving back.
Now you'd think that this would be a good example of how much better modern cars are, since you'd think that modern disc brakes and ABS would possibly avert this situation. However, I don't think it would. To be honest, I can lock up my 4-wheel disc Intrepid just as easily as I could that DeSoto. And I should have been further back. ABS might have kept the wheels from locking up, but I don't think they would have stopped it in time.
The biggest contributor to this accident, IMO, was familiarity and the way it can hamper your alertness. Both of us had been on that on-ramp countless times before, and didn't even think there'd be a stopsign there. Until it was too late. Then add in the rain. And the fact that both of us accelerated, not knowing we'd have to slam on the brakes.
The last serious accident I was in was back in 1998, when I got t-boned in my 1986 Monte Carlo by a kid who ran a stopsign. That was one that happened so fast I didn't even have time to tense up. I was dizzy and lightheaded and out of it for awhile, probably from the adrenaline rush, but didn't get bruised up or achy or anything. I'd imagine that if I tensed up, it would've been much worse. Probably still no permanent damage, but I would've been achy.
You are probably right. I don't think that one would fit in my garage. This is actually more to my liking. If I could just find out how to get my name on the list.
Each Willie Willys is powered by a 6.5-litre, twin-turbo diesel engine with the production version generating 350 horsepower. The transmission is a six-speed automatic. The truck has spark plugs, unusual for a diesel engine, which the designers state will help reduce particulate emissions. Tests indicated the truck should average thirty-eight miles per gallon. And, of course, it runs on pure biodiesel. While the frame is made of conventional stainless steel and the truck bed is oak, the body is made of a soy-based resin.
So people who choose a car based on the star ratings may not get what they think. It's like picking a car based on an advertised price without considering all the rebates, addons, ups, packs, trade in value, etc.
So, if one is buying a new vehicle and most everything is about equal (purchase price, size, power, mpg, features, resale value, ok neutral styling, etc) should one just go ahead and buy a 3 star vehicle rather than a 5 star vehicle?
should one just go ahead and buy a 3 star vehicle rather than a 5 star vehicle?
I can guarantee the 3 star GMC Sierra will come out ahead in a collision with a 5 star Civic. Both the passengers and the vehicle.
My only wish is that my 2005 GMC was built as sturdy as my 1998 Suburban. Big difference in the sheet metal.
Every one has to make their own choice. I just wish the crash tests were more honest. People see 5 stars and think that means they will survive a crash better than 3 stars on a different vehicle.
I can guarantee the 3 star GMC Sierra will come out ahead in a collision with a 5 star Civic. Both the passengers and the vehicle.
These vehicles are not in same class/category. My post stated:
"So, if one is buying a new vehicle and most everything is about equal (purchase price, size, power, mpg, features, resale value, ok neutral styling, etc) should one just go ahead and buy a 3 star vehicle rather than a 5 star vehicle?"
Have to note the word "size" in above.
This means for example minivan brand x vs minivan brand y, small suv brand a vs small suv brand b, and so forth. It does not mean Civic vs Silverado, or Fit vs S Class.
That's certainly what I would do. I'd pick a car I'd feel more able to avoid an accident in, or I'd pick the one that impressed me as stronger and better engineered for having the proper buckle and give in the right places. But the idea is not to have an accident. I'd place more emphasis on that part.
I judge that the test methods are the best we can come up with but represent a small percentage of the type of accidents that occur. I notice when there's an accident how the two or more vehicles struck and how they fared. That helps me form my own opinion.
I misunderstood your meaning. So yes I would take a 5 star Civic, Camry or Jetta over a 4 star Prius. Again the crash test ratings are very limited in scope. Though I would feel safer in a 4 star E300 Mercedes than a 5 star Camry. Both being midsized.
Just as I left the steel industry the one of the latest advancements in technology for the frames and bodies was the use of 'tailored blanks'. This idea has been in use for years in mechanical engineering. Simply put instead of having a single thickness of steel throughout the entire structure ( bridge, power pole, auto frame ) the structure is engineered with more thickness ( or stronger steel ) at the point where it's needed the most.
In the case of an auto frame it's right in front of the safety cage. In the crumple zones of a vehicle the frame is prestressed to collapse in a uniform and predictable manner diverting the energy around and away from the passenger cabin. The frame is of varying thickness from thinner in front to thicker and likely stronger in back. Making this part requires differing thicknesses of steel and possibly different steel strengths as well. Creating this 'tailored blank' which is then formed into a frame/body part requires that it be laser welded since the steel can be of two completely different chemistries.
This design approach saves weight where it's not needed and puts it where it can do more good. The results are pretty conclusive in that the IIHS has 'declared victory' on the issue of frontal impact tests. All modern vehicles should do very well in this type of crash.
My mother in law has never driven anything but "American cars" in the 15 years I've known her. She went out last weekend and traded her Chrysler (debate away on if it is American or German if you wish) in on a Toyota Highlander. I never thought I would see her buy a "foreign car." Since she did, then I know American carmakers are in trouble.
As for me, I drive a Ford F-150 built in Kansas City and my wife's Saturn VUE was built in Spring Hill. However, our next vehicles will depend on what we decide to buy. We have three kids who are still pretty young (5,7 & 9) so we get along fine in what we have. We know we'll need to make a change in the near future (year or so). If we decide on a van, it'll probably be a Sienna. If we decide on a SUV, it'll probably be a Suburban. I do not subscribe to the belief that American cars are crap--and I do not pretend they lead the world, either. We buy what is best for us--and if what is best for us is American, then that's great. But not required.
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 think beginning in 2008 there will begin to be a huge variety of choices, especially in trucks. An ultra efficient diesel will inject :surprise: life into a stagnating segment of the vehicle industry.
The winner IMO will be the one that can switch over more vehicles faster.
Also, many pickup owners where I live actually use their trucks regularly. They pull their boats, campers, ATV trailers, etc. AND in the post-Katrina months EVERYBODY needed a truck.
And as for the following comment:
See many people (non-business) driving PUs but very rarely see anything in the bed. Think that many who own/drive these are merely their fashion statements.
Oh, PUH-LEEZZ. Like driving a Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, Range Rover, Corvette, or any other car/truck/van/suv, etc, etc, etc is not "merely making a fashion statement". Let's not get into this whole argument of the thousandth time. :sick:
BOTTOM LINE: you drive whatever you drive because it's your choice. In the spirit of Independence Day I say that they should add the freedom to drive whatever you like to the Bill of Rights.
1. Terrible handling - worst of all classes, especially empty, especially small pickups (Ranger)
2. Not much of crashworthiness - at best there is some mass protection, but the frame characteristics do not help in energy absorption.
3. Cargo flying off the bed is not helping either as there is no way to secure large cargo agains sliding during a collision. And how many of owners simply throw stuff on the bed without securing. Guess how much momentum that wrench will have when launched like a missile?
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Nissan and Toyota are poised in Thailand as well. The new San Antonio plant is ready to put diesel Tundra's out right away after the gasser versions debut later this year. Honda has already announced the diesel Ody and MDX.
First off if they had all those fire ants I wouldn't want the stuff anyway. But I have hauled firewood Straw and the like in the wagon.
Oh, PUH-LEEZZ. Like driving a Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, Range Rover, Corvette, or any other car/truck/van/suv, etc, etc, etc is not "merely making a fashion statement".
Some cars it is a fashion statement, other cars its not. Yep driving a Vette is a "fashion" statement but tell me what sort of fashion statement is driving a Hyundai station wagon?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Yep better chance of getting hit as now you have broken glass as well as the wrench coming at you.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
That may be true in theory, but in practice, an unpopular car doesn't have a very large buyer pool from which to choose, and it sits alongside numerous other cars just like it in your local classifieds, Auto Trader, etc..
If you resell a 5-year Honda sedan, your phone will be ringing off the hook with brand-loyal and import-loyal buyers, and you will sell the car in fairly short order and without severe discounting. With a comparable 5-year old Chevy, you'll be competing against boatloads of cars, while there won't be many takers. The Chevy is the marketing equivalent of the lone voice in the wilderness, which is the last thing you want when you need to have a crowd. I suspect that in comparison to the price guides, the real-world hit to the price of the Chevy will be much higher than it would be for the beloved transplant or import.
No problem. If you want to buy a Honda built in Ohio or a Toyota assembled in Kentucky, instead of a Ford built in Mexico or a Chevy assembled in Korea, that's perfectly fine by me.
You know, I have heard this argument all my life. I owned a pickup from 1991 through 1997, and although it was handy, as a third vehicle - I never put one sheet of 4x8 plywood in it. I wouldn't know what to do with it. That's why I have to hire folks to build for me, and they seem to have pickups.
Since then, I have managed without one, owning one or two SUVs ever since.
BTW get that wild hair checked out.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
One thing I totally agree with you on is that nobody driving an Hyundai is "posing". :P
And no, if I knew the ants were there, I wouldn't touch it, but the fact is that you don't always know until it's too late. My MIL actually brought home several snake eggs in a sack of potatoes once. They never realized it until baby snakes were crawling across the kitchen floor. :surprise:
As for the wrench through the windsheild, I was being a bit sarcastic, but I'm also saying that a lot of people are just as negligent in securing cargo in a van, SUV, or wagon as others are in trucks.
I think the biggest issue with safety in pickup trucks is that you've always got to be aware of the fact that you are driving a larger and usually heavier vehicle than others around you. I tend not to drive my truck as fast as our car and I try to watch out for others. But that door swings both ways. If you're driving a small car, watch out for the bigger ones.
In the words of Larry the Cable Guy: I don't care where you from, that there's funny! :P I had exactly the same thought about Dodges built in Mexico.
Hey, reckon Larry would buy a Ti-yoda?
Those posting the crash test results from IIHS always leave out the insurance ratings for PU trucks. They are rated as much less apt to have a fatal accident as smaller vehicles. A 2500 Chevy has a rating of 32 for injury the best car is a 45 and the best SUV is a 37. By comparison the most popular car the Camry got a much worse 108 and the Accord even worse 122. So crash tests don't mean much to the insurance companies when it comes to premiums. And my GMC PU was about $400 a year less than my 2005 Passat. The Passat Wagon had a very good 56 rating. Better than ANY other midsized car.
So crash tests are only part of the story. And not a big part at that.
PS
My 2005 GMC Sierra Hybrid was built in Indiana. First GM truck out of 5 built here in the USA.
I would think that eventually the liability for injuries caused, would become great enough for larger trucks and SUVS, that their rates for insurance would increase.
-Loren
Rocky
Why? Insurance rates are based on the cost of repair and liability. So if you own a Hummer and are the cause of an accident your premium should go up. By the same rules if you own a Corolla and cause an accident your premium should go up. Those numbers by the IIHS are indicative of the injuries and cost of repair to given vehicles. By that rating and most conventional logic you are safer and pay a lower premium in a full sized PU or SUV.
We have an archived thread that is 60k plus posts that explore all aspects of this subject. I would suggest anyone with questions to look that thread up. A good read for the 4th of July.
Happy 4th to all of you in Edmund's land.
-Loren
Maybe a soon to be former Delphi worker.
I would assume you are correct. However my first responsibility is to my family and passengers. So if I jam them into an Echo and get broadsided by a 1 ton behemoth of a truck I am the one to blame. I will not, if gas gets to $20 per gallon go out on the highway in the likes of these small cars. They are misleading people saying they are safe because they pass a crash test with a car of equal size. The odds are very small that you will get hit by a vehicle of equal size and weight. Going with the largest practical vehicle is the wisest decision.
Just one example. The Kia Optima has the lowest insurance rating for a midsized car. It is rated for injury at 180. Yet you look at the crash test scores and it gets all 4 & 5 stars. People read the crash test ratings and believe they are in a safe car when it is only safe if they pick and choose who runs a red light and broadsides them. I am not going to preach at others what they should drive. For me and mine I am going for what I feel is safest. That should be each persons responsibility.
Mercedes knows what damage their larger cars do to the lesser sized. They use three zones of increasing resistance which softens the blow to the other car, as well as protecting the occupants within the Mercedes larger car.
I have driven a wide range of cars, from a Buick LeSabre of earliest '60's, to a tiny Miata. The first drive on a freeway, when you pass a semi, and note that the tires are higher than your Miata, you are a little intimidated. Like a motorcycle, survival depends on maneuverability. While it was fun, I must say they are pretty small. I think a good balance of mid-sized to larger car which are rated safer cars, and have some handling to them, compared to simply having the biggest beast, is more the way I would go. But to each his or her own. And I see how some people want a larger SUV to fit all the kids and gear in, or a truck to haul the hay, or pull a trailer with.
As for everyone having to own an SUV or large truck to be safe, I not only don't care for the idea, it would not work. If all the vehicles are heavy, it is in a slightly same condition as the old days, as in a lot of weight colliding each time, though the safety of trucks and SUVs are better than the old cars. But you see what I mean, to a degree, it is like to heavyweight sluggers in a ring duking it out.
-Loren
Assuming that one is not T-boned, with today's vehicle designs everyone should walk away from a frontal crash unless the speeds were outrageous. The best way to help survive is to slow down and reduce the velocity of at least one vehicle ( yours ). It reduces the total amount of momentum in the equation.
A larger vehicle ( more mass ) adds momentum to a crash equation and two large vehicles crashing at say 40 mph are far riskier than two smaller vehicles crashing together.
One large vehicle going off the road and hitting a tree is riskier in that there is more energy to dissipate than a compact car in a similar crash.
Now is the larger amount of steel, plastic and rubber in a large SUV sufficient to absorb this extra energy from the crash? That depends on the vehicle.
I agree. I liked driving the Passat Wagon. It was great handling, great brakes and performance. I felt lost in a sea of lifted vehicles here in San Diego. I know as well as you that at least half were not necessary. Never the less they are there and we are potential victims of these monsters. There is no way that these monster trucks with 12" lifts & and tires the size of Delaware, are safe. Yet they are everywhere. At least in my 1/2 ton PU I can see the top of the tires.
I can remember when I was a teenager that you could not raise or lower a car more than a set height. Police would stop you and poke this stick under your car and if it hit anything they wrote you a ticket. Now anything goes. Wheels tires outside the fenders. I don't think they have any laws except the stupid emissions test. Loud exhaust and sound systems. I honestly thought of buying a CTX like Demi Moore's new husband drives. That would keep me above the fray. And satisfy my desire for a diesel vehicle. Ain't she pretty?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
That's great news. So that means you'd buy the Honda Accord, made in the USA, over the Ford Fusion, made in Mexico.
Well, then you don't want Chrysler, as it is foreign now....
Oh - you mean the name? I think Chevrolet is French...
So you're saying American names built overseas are OK?
Why would you buy an American nameplate from a company that is outsourcing its manufacturing to other countries, shutting down US factories, rather than a foreign nameplate spending millions of $$ building new plants for jobs in the USA?
Think that might also be true for Camcords and Civrollas? And other cars of all types as well. The engineers have done what the marketing people needed; they designed the car to meet the test. Problem occurs when you dont run into a solid-faced block during your accident as done in the test.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That to me is the MOST important factor in all this discussion. The Driver is the ultimate safety device. I see little cars zipping around like they are invulnerable. I see behemoths blasting around with no regard for the other vehicles on the road. Somewhere we have to make driver responsibility the top priority in issuing a license to drive. Too many drivers on the roads should not be allowed behind the wheel of anything bigger than a shopping cart.
PS
Hope all are having a safe happy 4th of July!!!!!
Actually, there's more to it than that. I think one critical factor in an accident is how much of your vehicle's mass is in front of you, versus behind you. This is one reason that vans and pickup trucks, and vehicles where you sit close to the front of the vehicle, do poorly when you run them into something that's not going to budge, like a bridge abutment or a decent-sized tree.
I noticed that in my '85 Silverado that I sit just as close to the front of the vehicle as my uncle does in his '03 Corolla. However, with the truck more than half of its length is still behind me, and a great deal of its mass is, as well. Now with something like my uncle's Corolla, where the driver's butt sits is at least halfway back, and the majority of that car's mass is ahead of the driver.
I guess the analogy I'm trying to make is something akin to a train wreck or bus crash, where usually the passengers towards the back are usually safer. I think that in many cases, a taller driver might usually come out better in an accident than a shorter driver, simply because the taller driver will sit further back from the steering wheel, dashboard, etc. And in side impacts, a taller driver will be situated back between the B-pillars. So instead of your head coming into contact with the intruding SUV, you'll hit the B-pillar, which probably would be the lesser of two evils. So I could see a tall person in a smaller vehicle possibly coming off better than a short person in a big vehicle.
As for the momentum of an accident, well the vehicle doing the hitting inflicts that force on what it hits. If it's something that's easily smashed, then what gets hit takes most of the impact. If it's something that's not going to give, that force gets inflicted back on the car that's doing the hitting.
Another factor is how well the crush space is preserved within the passenger cabin, and how well the passengers stay put in their seats. Often it's not the forces that are generated from the impact, but the occupants coming into contact with some part of the car's interior.
It's how much the car has slowed when the occupant hits a part of the car having continued at the original speed because of inertia that causes the real problem. Seatbelts start using up that relative inertia by holding the occupant back from impact.
A car which crushes a lot and slowly slows the rear of the car down can impede into the passenger compartment. So long crush capability isn't always good. That's the engineering which went into Mercedes years ago, and has been copied by the other companies and probably improved on greatly for less than full-sized cars in the two years since the concept of a strong passenger cage was originated.
The test advertisements of side impacts and how wonder brand X is in those don't impress me a bit. I don't want to have a side impact, with side airbags, with side curtain bags, without side bags, at all. I have seen too many dead people with side impacts in my lifetime.
Tall people still have their knees and legs close to the dashboard and as they move forward stretching their seatbelt those knees and feet still hit things. We can hope the firewall doesn't move back to meet the legs and feet in the process due to strength of the impact.
In my opinion the full-sized pickups are safer to hit another medium or full-sized car with. They tend to be stronger and absorb energy as the different strength parts of one meet the parts of the other vehicle. They also tend to ride up and go over the bumper level and motor level in the opposing vehicle.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Snapped that sucker like a twig. It literally ripped a chunk out of the pole, allowing the upper part, with the wires, to drop down to where you could reach them if you were inclined to do so. The impact also pulled down the next nearest telephone pole to the rear, which went down into the neighbors pine tree and set it on fire.
The truck was totaled, and not just because of its age. Any modern vehicle with this much damage inflicted upon it would've been a total, as well. IIRC, the driver didn't get hurt that badly, but did end up in the hospital.
Now, in this case, because the truck snapped the pole, it didn't decelerate that quickly. IIRC, the truck ended up about 15-20 feet beyond the pole, and had spun around at about a 90 degree angle. That's probably one thing that had saved the driver. I think this is one case where, had it been a modern, lighter, "softer" vehicle, the results would have been much worse. This type of vehicle might not have been strong enough to snap the pole, meaning that it would have decelerated almost instantly, the stopping distance for the driver being dictated by how far the vehicle crumpled up. And an airbag down your throat doesn't do you much good if it's followed by a telephone chaser!
Now by and large, vehicle are safer these days, but often the result of an accident can be pure luck.
I guess what we should do is get a law passed making it illegal to have a tree within 100 feet of a highway right of way, or perhaps we could ask God to start making them with breakaway trunks.
So people who choose a car based on the star ratings may not get what they think. It's like picking a car based on an advertised price without considering all the rebates, addons, ups, packs, trade in value, etc.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I had a friend in the car with me, too. Well, my buddy in the '55 goes to accelerate to get up to merge speed. I look over my shoulder, see a Hyundai coming off in the distance, but knew there was plenty of time, so I accelerated too. But when I looked back ahead, I saw my buddy had just slammed on his brakes when he saw the stopsign. I had no choice but to hit the brakes and hope for the best. I remember my friend singing along with that song, and his pitch suddenly changed "I wanna go hooooMMMMMAAAAAUGH!"
I didn't have time to tense up, because I was trying to concentrate more on not making the brakes lock up, and then doing my best to steer once they did. My buddy grabbed the dashboard and went rigid.
I remember bouncing forward, head bobbing down, and then when I came back up, seeing that '55 leap ahead from the impact. It was almost graceful. My first thought, as I saw that the '55 looked undamaged, was "Thank God". I just presumed the front of mine would be a mess, though.
Turns out, the only damage I did to my friend's car was put a ding in each of the metal bumper guards, to go with the set he already had. As for my car, it scraped some dust off the bumper/grille, but that was it. My buddy with the '55 had a stiff neck for a couple days, and my friend riding with me was stiff all over. And about the only thing that happened to me was that I was scared as hell to drive that thing the rest of the way to the car show, and was a bundle of nerves driving back.
Now you'd think that this would be a good example of how much better modern cars are, since you'd think that modern disc brakes and ABS would possibly avert this situation. However, I don't think it would. To be honest, I can lock up my 4-wheel disc Intrepid just as easily as I could that DeSoto. And I should have been further back. ABS might have kept the wheels from locking up, but I don't think they would have stopped it in time.
The biggest contributor to this accident, IMO, was familiarity and the way it can hamper your alertness. Both of us had been on that on-ramp countless times before, and didn't even think there'd be a stopsign there. Until it was too late. Then add in the rain. And the fact that both of us accelerated, not knowing we'd have to slam on the brakes.
The last serious accident I was in was back in 1998, when I got t-boned in my 1986 Monte Carlo by a kid who ran a stopsign. That was one that happened so fast I didn't even have time to tense up. I was dizzy and lightheaded and out of it for awhile, probably from the adrenaline rush, but didn't get bruised up or achy or anything. I'd imagine that if I tensed up, it would've been much worse. Probably still no permanent damage, but I would've been achy.
Yep its pretty, you may want to wait for the RXT or the MXT which are smaller versions. Less expensive and better mileage.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Each Willie Willys is powered by a 6.5-litre, twin-turbo diesel engine with the production version generating 350 horsepower. The transmission is a six-speed automatic. The truck has spark plugs, unusual for a diesel engine, which the designers state will help reduce particulate emissions. Tests indicated the truck should average thirty-eight miles per gallon. And, of course, it runs on pure biodiesel. While the frame is made of conventional stainless steel and the truck bed is oak, the body is made of a soy-based resin.
Each limited-edition Willie Willys costs $97,000
Most likely not, the hood on that thing is almost 6 feet off the ground. But man the inside of them are nice.
If I can later on I will post a much better picture of the CXT. :shades:
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
So, if one is buying a new vehicle and most everything is about equal (purchase price, size, power, mpg, features, resale value, ok neutral styling, etc) should one just go ahead and buy a 3 star vehicle rather than a 5 star vehicle?
I can guarantee the 3 star GMC Sierra will come out ahead in a collision with a 5 star Civic. Both the passengers and the vehicle.
My only wish is that my 2005 GMC was built as sturdy as my 1998 Suburban. Big difference in the sheet metal.
Every one has to make their own choice. I just wish the crash tests were more honest. People see 5 stars and think that means they will survive a crash better than 3 stars on a different vehicle.
These vehicles are not in same class/category. My post stated:
"So, if one is buying a new vehicle and most everything is about equal (purchase price, size, power, mpg, features, resale value, ok neutral styling, etc) should one just go ahead and buy a 3 star vehicle rather than a 5 star vehicle?"
Have to note the word "size" in above.
This means for example minivan brand x vs minivan brand y, small suv brand a vs small suv brand b, and so forth. It does not mean Civic vs Silverado, or Fit vs S Class.
I judge that the test methods are the best we can come up with but represent a small percentage of the type of accidents that occur. I notice when there's an accident how the two or more vehicles struck and how they fared. That helps me form my own opinion.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I misunderstood your meaning. So yes I would take a 5 star Civic, Camry or Jetta over a 4 star Prius. Again the crash test ratings are very limited in scope. Though I would feel safer in a 4 star E300 Mercedes than a 5 star Camry. Both being midsized.
In the case of an auto frame it's right in front of the safety cage. In the crumple zones of a vehicle the frame is prestressed to collapse in a uniform and predictable manner diverting the energy around and away from the passenger cabin. The frame is of varying thickness from thinner in front to thicker and likely stronger in back. Making this part requires differing thicknesses of steel and possibly different steel strengths as well. Creating this 'tailored blank' which is then formed into a frame/body part requires that it be laser welded since the steel can be of two completely different chemistries.
This design approach saves weight where it's not needed and puts it where it can do more good. The results are pretty conclusive in that the IIHS has 'declared victory' on the issue of frontal impact tests. All modern vehicles should do very well in this type of crash.
As for me, I drive a Ford F-150 built in Kansas City and my wife's Saturn VUE was built in Spring Hill. However, our next vehicles will depend on what we decide to buy. We have three kids who are still pretty young (5,7 & 9) so we get along fine in what we have. We know we'll need to make a change in the near future (year or so). If we decide on a van, it'll probably be a Sienna. If we decide on a SUV, it'll probably be a Suburban. I do not subscribe to the belief that American cars are crap--and I do not pretend they lead the world, either. We buy what is best for us--and if what is best for us is American, then that's great. But not required.