Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs
Comments
I disagree. The suspension design is a series of trade-offs between ride quality, nvh, and vehicle handling. Tire selection is mostly a matter of the purchasing group fighting with the marketing group. The priorities of the designers or marketing people may be different for your own (urnews wants things a little cushier, I would like things a little firmer, etc). An educated consumer can better align the vehicle to the driving characteristics they desire than it was delivered from the factory.
P215/55/R16: 25.31" (LX/LX-P)
P225/50/R17: 25.86" (LX-S, EX/EX-L, EXV6/EX-LV6 sedan)
P235/45/R18: 26.32" (EXV6/EX-LV6 coupe)
Each of the chassis is tuned differently, and likely matched to the tire as well. But more important thing to remember is that each of those rims have different width. IIRC...
16x6.5
17x7.5
18x8.0
The width determines how far you can go safely with the width of rubber. In 2007, Honda P215/50/R17 tires were mounted on 17x7 rims. For P225/50/R17 tires, the new choice is 17x7.5.
It happened with me once. I had tires replaced at Discount Tire Company, and they put a wider tire on one of the wheels which went into smokes about 30-40 mile later as I had embarked on my road trip soon after. I had to return, got it replaced, restarted my journey but before I went far, decided to check air pressure. In the process, noted there was another tire with the wrong size. Had to return again.
So, it is important to consider more things.
I disagree with this statement. Now if you want to say the majority of writers can't figure it out, I'll agree with you.
As far as the tire size and circumference, I almost doubt there is a correction for the first 2 (LXs and EXs) in the speedometer, and in the 3rd case I bet it is handled in software.
When you purchase tires, the tire will be spec'd for a rim width range. Even tires that are the same width occasionally have different upper and lower limits for rim width. It requires being knowledgeable and a little bit of checking.
Does every Joe Average consumer need to worry about it? No. Can you make a better decision or purchase choice armed with a little information? Definitely.
So, its not just being too tall or too wide from the sprung chassis, but also the rim size. One needs to be wary of those when changing tire size.
Yeah I wouldn't want to replace my 16" rims with chrome 'dubs or anything, but going from my 16" rim to a relatively light weight 17" rim and a performance tire should be well within the approximate weights of the existing combination. If there was the clearance and offset, going to a wider tire in the same diameter would be an option as well.
Its not even so much about changing the size, its about the tire itself. The PepBoys house brand tire isn't going to handle like a Pirelli P-Zero. That same P-Zero will have different characteristics than the Yokahama AVID H4. Tires are the single biggest factor on the vehicle when it comes to handling and ride. There are gains to be had when replacing the stock configuration.
I drove the 750il and adjusted specific idrive settings while driving. Now I don't read the manual to see what the 100s of settings for for, but in 1 minute I set up the car for me. The new incarnation of the idrive is far and away better than the old, but I'd rather have idrive than 100s of buttons.
... takes the cake, IMO.
There are a few issues here.
1. The increasing complexity of vehicles leads to 1000 tiny buttons or having a control structure like i-Drive or Audi's MMI.
2. The original incarnation of i-Drive was not a user centered design, and I doubt they did use cases to determine the feature set. I think they made a big list of task and put them on different menus. There was no prioritizing tasks and very limited short-cuts.
3. More recent versions of i-Drive are based on a combination of prioritized menus and standard buttons, making for an easier to use/simplified interface
4. The design changes with each iteration and with each model (3ser,5ser,7ser) so there is little consistency between models/revisions, so there is a learning curve with each edition.
60-70% of the time, I use voice control in my TL (the picture is from 2008 Accord). The rest is done via touch screen (unfortunately, no longer an option in the new Accord).
For folks that are intimidated by buttons (and the count of), I feel touch-screen menu may be the better way to go. Select function then have the buttons related to it on the screen. It is the way I control audio controls in my TL. The buttons below the screen are redundant and could be used when at a complete stop (or if anything goes wrong with LCD over time).
I read somewhere that Audi/VW is planning use of touch screen dash. Great idea. Although, I hope there is also some room for fall back option. After 6-7 years, I don't want to learn that there is no way to control features if the touch screen dies (like those small digital cameras that are getting rid of optical view finders in favor of LCD/EVF... the LCD breaks, the camera is rendered virtually useless).
Me neither but I've heard the same thing and have watched several online demos and videos of Sync in action. If we get another Ford I'm definitely paying the $300 for Sync. I'm sold.
What will the 2008 Accord voice commands control? Sync allows you to control everything from your bluetooth cell phone (which can be in your purse or pocket) right down to the mp3 player you have plugged into the USB port. That USB port allows you to get software/feature updates into the system using your own USB drive too IIRC. Pretty cool IMO.
Voice is a good option, especially when it works correctly. The car is a horrible place to try to do sound recognition, it requires expensive mics and noise canceling software, etc.
The rest is done via touch screen (unfortunately, no longer an option in the new Accord).
Touchscreen = eyes off road time. No tactile feedback that your finger is on the button, or that it pressed the button means you have to look every time. A real button is a ballistic motion for your body. Even in my 3 mo old Accord the main radio controls are operated by touch not by looking.
What will the 2008 Accord voice commands control? Sync allows you to control everything from your bluetooth cell phone (which can be in your purse or pocket) right down to the mp3 player you have plugged into the USB port. That USB port allows you to get software/feature updates into the system using your own USB drive too IIRC. Pretty cool IMO.
Due to a somewhat sudden change of events, the Accord is likely to get flipped for a Fusion or Focus, and whatever I get will have Sync. I am anxious to try it out.
The Bluetooth phone interface also works fine. I recently read some comments that others were having trouble getting their systems to recognize their cell phones.
As for touch screen, it isn't as better than an intuitively laid out dash, but it reduces number of "buttons" by getting only the selections related to function you chose. I agree, real buttons are better, but not always. They need to be laid out well, and distinctly marked (that they require no more than a glance, just like it would be with touch screen), and can be felt with a little learning. That takes me back to Honda, and why I feel they know how to get those little things done, well (but apparently, few recognize the point of having mostly dedicated buttons). Take a look here again...
Voice Recognition works! Thats why I rely on it for most part. The new Accord's is even better (than my TL), especially when it comes to NAV related functions.
As for touch screen, it isn't as better than an intuitively laid out dash (again, tough to beat Honda there, although, it is quite a challenge in my TL to figure out the buttons), but it drastically reduces eyes off the road when I want to use it (which is usually when I'm at a light/stopped). The best bet is with buttons that are not only grouped well but "feel" different than others.
- Well marked, easy to read buttons
- Logically grouped
- Multi-push buttons (like fan speed, category, skip, scan etc) have notches at the end to differentiate from others (that can be "felt" so with a little learning, the driver can simply position the finger and operate them).
Here is another example of thoughtful design (note the presence of dots)...
And of course, the buttons on the steering wheel. They are distinctly designed, large enough and easy to read. One of the problems I have had with my TL is between bluetooth selection and voice activation buttons in that they look/feel very similar. Honda addressed that with the new Accord. Now bluetooth selection is flush with the spoke on the rim and voice activation button stays put.
http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr111507.html
One question, though: I wonder why the IIHS tested the Accord thoroughly within a month of its introduction, yet the Altima's been out for a year and hasn't been tested by the IIHS for side crashes yet, nor has the Optima, which has been out for over a year and a half in its present form? It's not like the Altima isn't a popular seller. The Optima less so, but it sells more units than many other cars that the IIHS has managed to squeeze into their test schedule in the past 18 months. Interesting...
with "acceptable" for side, that is why it did not make the list.
Of the sixteen vehicles listed in that link (previous post), only one is from 2007 (Kia Optima). 2008 Accord and Camry have been out for couple of months but 2008 Malibu is the newest, and still found itself being tested. Payola?
The current Altima has been out for about a year now and has not been tested for side impact by the IIHS. The 2006.5 Optima came out in 1H 2006 and hasn't been crashed in the side yet either. (And that's significant because if it were to get a Good score on the side crash test, it would be a "Top Pick.") Yet the Accord and Camry get near-immediate testing. And they should--they are popular cars and many people (like me) want to know how they fare in crash tests before buying. But the Altima is one of the top-selling cars, as is the Malibu. IIHS also hasn't tested (side) some other cars that debuted last year but sell in significant numbers, e.g. the mid-sized (interior wise) Elantra and Sentra. Just kind of curious.
I agree with you about those factors play above the stars in a staged test. Your collision may not be the same as the staged test therefore a 6 star ability may be only a 2 star crush for your. I am think I agree on your order of those factors.
I watched a collision of two cars Saturday. Brakes made the collision a whole lot less energy. The young, inexperienced driver hit the brakes for a good second of screaching rubber and burned off a lot of energy. The Saturn rear end was admirable in handlig the collision and the front of the Cobalt RS absorbed the 35-40 mph without appearing to move the front cradle--the wheels looked in place.
A more experienced driver would have steered right onto the berm and low ditch and gone around the Saturn who had started to move forward upon seeing the driver behind not stopping. The Cobalt stayed straight with the braking and probably could have steered off to the right. and gone around. The 17-year old was so startled he probably had no brain at that time other than brakes and stay on the road. He probably felt he was a great driver before the accident but didn't realize the lack of training and always looking or the out in case of an accident. Just had a kid go through a good driver training course where that was emphasized continually---the out in case of the unexpected.
The 17-year old showed no contrition as mom and a younger brother picked him up in an older van. His body language looked like he was having a good time.
Oh, the accident was because he was digging for, reaching for a cell phone.
Yes, I take straight braking ability with antilocks as most important. Handling overall is second. But handling doesn't mean ability to turn corners at 50 mph in city streets and taking curves at 30 over the marked speed; it means keeping its feet when a car is asked to do avoidance maneuvers. It doesn't have to be graceful while doing it--just capable.
2015 Cruze 2LT, 2014 Malibu 2LT, 2008 Cobalt 2LT
I can't speak for IIHS since it is just another safety rating system but since you brought it up, NHTSA's star rating has some holes that I noticed. For example, side crash test rating measures injury in three areas (head, chest and pelvic) in terms of forces subjected to each of them. However, in their final rating system, they use only chest. A car doing marginally better in protecting chest, but significantly worse than another in protecting head and pelvic area would get 5-stars but the other would get 4-stars. I've yet to figure out why they would measure three, but use one.
It's bad enough to have people exhibit that "spaced-out" glare and dorky, buzzed-out driving we have to live with when they're driving and talking on their cell-phones at the same time. But when they text-message while driving that is heightened stupidity personified.
2011 Kia Soul Sport 5-speed
as we all do - but given 'safety' also generally comes with a size and weight penalty, are you willing to sacrifice some of that evasive capability for some better performance in some industry (or governmental) crash test.? Any one of those attributes (braking/handling/power) we use most every day, how often do any of us hit anything hard enough even to get the airbags to deploy? The obvious 'duh' answer to that has to be 'it only has to happen once' but my question is do we really and truly disqualify an otherwise good car just because the NHTSA for example has decided that you don't want to get hit in a certain manner?
Would you buy a car that had excellent dynamic ability but structurally challenged in crash tests for yourself and family?
Once would be more than enough. I've never done it, but my oldest son has. I'm glad that car had frontal airbags. No injury except a little scrape on one arm.
You'd think the a model with sales of 200,000+, and the third biggest selling midsize (and 8th best selling vehicle, overall) would have fit in their schedule at some time in the last year. :confuse:
I also noticed they don't test every model every year. This is the first time since 2004 that Accord has been tested for side impact. In fact, Fusion is perhaps the only cars in the list tested two years in a row (2006, 2007).
That's because the last "new" model was in '03, and it doesn't make any sense for the IIHS to retest a car that hasn't been significantly revised.
In fact, Fusion is perhaps the only cars in the list tested two years in a row (2006, 2007).
The Fusion is the exception in this case, because in '06, they only tested a non-airbag equipped model, and received poor ratings because of it. In '07, Ford had it tested again with side airbags and the results improved because of it.
The one I saw in a photo was orange (lighter color) and brown. According to reviews, several color combinations will be available.
I looked at the different color combinations, and none of them seemed right. All of the colors seem strange/odd (colors I've never seen before). Who wants an Orange interior?
He stopped dead in his tracks, staring into my car. I walked up and hit the unlock button when he said, your car started itself. I smiled and said Yup. It likes to do that when it see's me coming.
He said, expletive deleted, I just paid $63000 for this new Jag and it doesn't do that. Shaking his head as he got in his beautiful Jag.
I got in and chuckled to myself knowing he could have bought three Aura XR's for the price of his (Ford) British tin. :shades: