Here is an example of a car that looks great on paper but in real life was not what it should have been. I traded my failing 1995 Saturn SL2 sedan for this '98 Contour in the summer of 2001. It came equipped with the 2.5L V6 rated at 170hp. The automatic transmission had 4 gears and the brakes were disc in front and drum in the rear. A Contour weighed in at around 2769lbs according to Consumerguide.com which is pretty good when you have 165ft/lb torque pulling it. Again, power to weight ratio was looking good on paper and the V6 was rated at around 22mpg combined which was competitive.
Here's what I liked about the car. The V6 was good for it's relatively small displacement. The torque factor is something I had never had before, it's hard to build torque on a small displacement engine. The handling was fairly good on this model, the SE stuck to the road well. On ramps were fun to rev the six and dig into the curve. The interior was roomy enough for me, plenty of head room (I'm not that tall so it usually isn't a problem). A nice attribute of this car was the heater core pumped out a tremendous amount of BTU's to keep you nice and warm in the cold Wisconsin winter. I can't say that about all the cars I've had.
Alright, here's where the rest of the story gets ugly. I only owned this car for 8 months before I traded it in. I had it in the shop 7 times. I kid you not. Two recalls racked up 4 trips to the dealer (they couldn't properly perform the procedures), one other trip was an alternator replacement, another was a wheel bearing, and another was to change the transmission fluid because it was burnt (at only 40k). I spent 2k in repairs and there was no sign telling me it would slow down. Bottom line, I learned that reliability in a car is very important to me.
Now let me clarify. I understand that maintenance is a cost of a car. In fact I will spend a bit more up front to keep my car running well and in good shape than most people will. I like to be proactive and prevent things from wearing out if I can. But repairs are totally different. I bought the car with around 33k on the odometer and to have burnt transmission fluid, an alternator and wheel bearing go out is unacceptable. I was barely over 40k at this point. With the money I spent in repairs I could have put a down payment on a much nicer car (I should have looked at the Prelude...) but that's another story. I was a college student at the time and I was taking a class in Milwaukee while working in Brookfield and living in Sussex. Driving was part of the way I lived life and the constant interruption in my transportation was interfering with my life.
With all of this I did get reinforced from my Contour that I like a sporty nature in my vehicles. Good handling and power to weight ratio is a great formula in my book. When I was looking to trade this car in I did look for a 2000 Celica or '98 Prelude but couldn't find one that was under 17k (I only had a max budget of around 11k at the time). I did take a test drive of a nice '98 Accord LX V6 and '00 Camry LE 4cyl.
I was very impressed with the Camry and how posh it felt. The ride was very easy and the insulation kept you nice and isolated from road noise. It actually felt like driving a Lincoln at a far lower price point. The 6 speaker stereo had good acoustics in the cabin and the reliability reputation of Toyota (at the time) spoke very loudly to me. I traded the Contour for the Camry sedan. Looking back I probably should have gone for the Accord for a number of reasons but that's a different blog.
So in March of '02 I was the owner of a 2000 Camry LE. I don't think my Contour was on the lot very long. I think the dealer was able to sell it in just over 40 days. I feel bad for the person that bought it, maybe it was bad karma?
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
1995 Saturn SL2
In 1999 I was still in college full time and working a couple jobs. My chemistry classes demanded more lab time and my insurance rates that were supposedly going to drop when I turned 21 didn't materialize (Thanks insurance agent, you didn't deliver). So I decided to get out from the financial thumb of my Sunfire and trade down. I did a trade/sale with my mom for a 1995 Saturn SL2. It had 86k miles, a 5-speed transmission, crank windows and manual door locks. Luckily it had A/C (don't laugh, some cars you would buy at the time didn't!) and a tape deck and really that satisfied all my car needs at that point. My insurance would be lower, I was even on the value so I didn't have a car loan so I really didn't need to work that many hours for car costs.
I had a love/hate relationship with this car. It was a 4-door sedan which at the time I wasn't thrilled about. I didn't haul people hardly ever so I would have preferred a coupe. The color was a gold exterior and a tan interior. The cool thing about the gold is that it really hid the dirt so if you didn't wash it often you could never really tell. The tan interior however tended to show dirt on the mats very easily and tan plastics kind of made me think of an older person's car. Things to think about in terms of maintenance.
There are a couple really good things about this car. The SL2 came with the twin cam engine rated at 126hp. The 5-speed manual had some shorter gear ratios and really helped acceleration. At the time I was kind of annoyed that I would have to shift so often but later I learned that it helps performance and fuel economy. Anyway I did like to rev the car (I'll admit it). It seemed eager to do so and never let you down when you did.
Fuel economy was good too. Upper 20's easily and into the 30's on a road trip. I think this was helped by the low curb weight of the car. Since there were so many plastic panels (doors, etc) it really only tipped the scale at 2400lbs (give or take). This was my first experience with power to weight ratio. It taught me that with less vehicle to move, the engine works less and can seemingly put out more. The power to weight concept has worked for years with British sports cars, the Mazda Miata, Toyota MR2, and countless others.
I had some complaints though about this vehicle (to put it lightly). Due to the light weight I found that it didn't handle as well in the snow as my Cavalier did. Sure the manual transmission helped but less weight seemed to not help traction. If you want a stark contrast, think of a 1970 Oldsmobile Toronado which is a heavy, FWD car that really isn't hampered by snowy conditions.
Also, these 1.9L engines seemed to go through oil like I go through coffee. I tend to change my oil every 3k or so and learned an important lesson in maintenance. CHECK YOUR CAR REGULARLY. When I worked fewer hours during college it took me 6 months to put on 3k miles (pretty awesome). When I went to do the oil change I only was able to drain out a quart and a half of oil. This is dangerous for an engine and I'm very lucky I didn't have piston ring issues or who knows what else. I worked with a guy who also had a '96 SC and when I drove behind him I smelled burning oil. Also, when my in-laws traded in their '94 SL1 they had a cracked block and oil leaked into the coolant. So to put it lightly the 1.9L had some quality and reliability issues.
The last straw for me was at around 109k the engine seemed to spontaneously die. Usually this would happen at intersections but you could tell because the engine started running rough and then killed. If you were lucky you could push the clutch and then rev the hell out of the engine to keep it going but soon that didn't work. I had it into a Saturn dealer twice and they couldn't identify the issue. I made the decision to get rid of the car when my fiance` and I almost got into a car accident because of the car dying.
Ok, I'm clear in my writings that I'm not fond of the Saturn SL cars. My cousin is an avid Saturn fan and does bring up good points. They are easy to work on, there are tons of them out there and parts are widely available. There are many people that get well over 200k miles on them and a few reports of over 500k exist as well (without engine rebuilds). The plastic body panels help the car to look like they're in good shape so you won't see any rusted out doors on these. If you are a fan, they have their strong points. My biggest take aways from this car were the importance of power to weight ratio, gear ratios, and reliability.
I ultimately wound up trading my '95 SL2 for a '98 Ford Contour SE. That is a whole different story, but other cars I considered trading for were a '95 Chrysler LeBaron GTC, '95 Nissan Sentra XE, '98 Sunfire GT, '98 Cavalier SE, '95 Civic LX, all with 5 speed transmissions. In retrospect I kind of wish I would have gone for the Sentra, Civic or Sunfire. They all had very nice transmissions and they would have probably been more reliable than the Contour. Enough of that for now, I'll share more in the next post, thanks for reading.
I had a love/hate relationship with this car. It was a 4-door sedan which at the time I wasn't thrilled about. I didn't haul people hardly ever so I would have preferred a coupe. The color was a gold exterior and a tan interior. The cool thing about the gold is that it really hid the dirt so if you didn't wash it often you could never really tell. The tan interior however tended to show dirt on the mats very easily and tan plastics kind of made me think of an older person's car. Things to think about in terms of maintenance.
There are a couple really good things about this car. The SL2 came with the twin cam engine rated at 126hp. The 5-speed manual had some shorter gear ratios and really helped acceleration. At the time I was kind of annoyed that I would have to shift so often but later I learned that it helps performance and fuel economy. Anyway I did like to rev the car (I'll admit it). It seemed eager to do so and never let you down when you did.
Fuel economy was good too. Upper 20's easily and into the 30's on a road trip. I think this was helped by the low curb weight of the car. Since there were so many plastic panels (doors, etc) it really only tipped the scale at 2400lbs (give or take). This was my first experience with power to weight ratio. It taught me that with less vehicle to move, the engine works less and can seemingly put out more. The power to weight concept has worked for years with British sports cars, the Mazda Miata, Toyota MR2, and countless others.
I had some complaints though about this vehicle (to put it lightly). Due to the light weight I found that it didn't handle as well in the snow as my Cavalier did. Sure the manual transmission helped but less weight seemed to not help traction. If you want a stark contrast, think of a 1970 Oldsmobile Toronado which is a heavy, FWD car that really isn't hampered by snowy conditions.
Also, these 1.9L engines seemed to go through oil like I go through coffee. I tend to change my oil every 3k or so and learned an important lesson in maintenance. CHECK YOUR CAR REGULARLY. When I worked fewer hours during college it took me 6 months to put on 3k miles (pretty awesome). When I went to do the oil change I only was able to drain out a quart and a half of oil. This is dangerous for an engine and I'm very lucky I didn't have piston ring issues or who knows what else. I worked with a guy who also had a '96 SC and when I drove behind him I smelled burning oil. Also, when my in-laws traded in their '94 SL1 they had a cracked block and oil leaked into the coolant. So to put it lightly the 1.9L had some quality and reliability issues.
The last straw for me was at around 109k the engine seemed to spontaneously die. Usually this would happen at intersections but you could tell because the engine started running rough and then killed. If you were lucky you could push the clutch and then rev the hell out of the engine to keep it going but soon that didn't work. I had it into a Saturn dealer twice and they couldn't identify the issue. I made the decision to get rid of the car when my fiance` and I almost got into a car accident because of the car dying.
Ok, I'm clear in my writings that I'm not fond of the Saturn SL cars. My cousin is an avid Saturn fan and does bring up good points. They are easy to work on, there are tons of them out there and parts are widely available. There are many people that get well over 200k miles on them and a few reports of over 500k exist as well (without engine rebuilds). The plastic body panels help the car to look like they're in good shape so you won't see any rusted out doors on these. If you are a fan, they have their strong points. My biggest take aways from this car were the importance of power to weight ratio, gear ratios, and reliability.
I ultimately wound up trading my '95 SL2 for a '98 Ford Contour SE. That is a whole different story, but other cars I considered trading for were a '95 Chrysler LeBaron GTC, '95 Nissan Sentra XE, '98 Sunfire GT, '98 Cavalier SE, '95 Civic LX, all with 5 speed transmissions. In retrospect I kind of wish I would have gone for the Sentra, Civic or Sunfire. They all had very nice transmissions and they would have probably been more reliable than the Contour. Enough of that for now, I'll share more in the next post, thanks for reading.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
2010 Camaro Review
Model: 2010 Camaro LS, V6 with 6spd Automatic
Highlights: V6 has power to spare, balanced enough to be a daily driver, respectable fuel economy
What needs work: Visibility, interior plastics are too hard and scratch easily
When we were able to take a vacation this summer, I tried planning it out so that we wouldn’t need to rent a car. But given the fact we were going to be in Seattle, Portland, and Gearhart/Seaside that wasn’t going to pan out. So I decided to make this as fun as possible by renting a fun car. The three options that came up were a 2009 Ford Mustang V6, 2009 Infiniti M35 sedan, or a 2010 V6 Camaro. Based on some initial research on specs and performance the Camaro won (with some heavy negotiation and compromises).
Overall I was very impressed. It was fun to drive, very popular (people pointing, thumbs up, etc) and worked very well in the northwest region in a few different conditions. It was a good balance between sporty and comfortable and I think GM has put out a good product. Between fuel economy and handling I was constantly comparing this car to my 2004 WRX wagon (modified mind you). My only other driving experience that came close enough to a Camaro was test driving a 2000 Firebird V6 (automatic). Let me say that there have been some dramatic improvements.
Powertrain:
One of the first questions is what is powering this beast? I even had a couple guys in a Ford Taurus pull up along side us when we were on I-5 and gesture 6 or 8 (with his fingers). The rental version of this was the LS V6 version powered by GM’s 3.6L Direct Injection motor. According to GM’s website this engine has an output of 304hp and 273 ft/lb torque. The thing I will say about this is that it is very linear. From my perspective my WRX has a severe turbo lag and then explosive power. The Naturally Aspirated engine is nice and smooth to redline. I didn’t experience any wheezing in the upper RPM range like some other cars. Also, having owned Japanese cars with 4 cylinders for the last several years I’m not used to torque, but rather high end horsepower. This was a nice change, especially for something as beefy and heavy as this coupe.
The Camaro had no trouble passing or merging onto the freeway. Now since this was a rental I was obviously not able to do any track testing and obtain any 0-60 or ¼ mile data. I can say though that passing uphill with steep inclines was NO problem. The 6 speed had short enough gear ratios that it would fully take advantage of the ponies on tap. The one thing I didn’t like was the fact that it would have to downshift a couple times if you needed to do a pass. Granted this is the automatic version I’m writing about so that is a given. The sport mode helped this with the paddles on the steering wheel. All you needed to do was downshift before you passed and then mash the accelerator to effortlessly woosh by any lumber trucks.
The automatic is less engaging than a manual and I have not tried GM’s 6 speed manual yet. I would imagine there would be a significant difference. One thing I will say is that the 6 speed auto does help with the fuel economy. According to GM, the LS V6 is rated at 17 city and 29 freeway. I was able to calculate a mixed average of 26mpg (that’s some significant detours through city blocks due to the Garmin rerouting us through city congestion…grrr). I think freeway driving over 30mpg is possible and this makes me wonder what intake/header/exhaust upgrades would do…
Handling:
I have to say that the handling of this car was decent. The Camaro is a very substantial coupe, weighing in with a curb weight of 3780 lbs. For a sporty car I find this to be a bit on the heavy side. My WRX wagon weighs in at roughly 3200 lbs and that’s with an AWD system. The cool thing about the Camaro though is that it certainly feels grounded. Growing up in the Midwest I have an innate fear of RWD platforms due to our insane winters. The last thing I want to be on the road with is a high torque, RWD car, trying to plow through 8 inches of snow. I’ve even wiped out a Mustang in heavy rain (almost taking out a Lexus on the test drive) so I personally am more comfortable in the FWD or AWD platform. That being said I am very impressed at the stability of this coupe. I found myself driving up through some mountainous area when we went from Seattle to Portland (I-5). Unfortunately it was raining a fair amount and some of the road was less than smooth, laden with some frost heaves or bumps of some sort. My fear was that the rear axle would skip over some of these, especially around the corners but I have to admit this car was stable. The independent rear made me at peace with any fears I may have had about RWD in the rain. The stock tires did a good job at channeling away the water and never once did I break traction in the rain (driving within 5mph of the posted speed limits).
Aside from my initial RWD concerns I was very impressed with the balance of the suspension. It wasn’t overly stiff or punishing on the ride but not too soft to remind you of a Camry. Body lean was not too bad and on heavy acceleration the front didn’t fly up (like it would with a weak suspension). I think this would be very suitable for a daily driver however if you’re looking for more of a track car I’d say upgrade the suspension or go up to the SS model.
Interior:
The biggest thing that stood out for me was the feeling of being in a retro car. The Camaro has a low roofline and when you’re sitting in the driver’s seat it reminded me of a chopped top street rod. This felt like a pretty sporty American car. It unfortunately compromises visibility like nothing else and it’s not for everyone (like the wife) but I liked it. I was used to compromised visibility from when I had my 2001 Celica so this wasn’t too much a surprise. The C-pillars are huge though and backing out of a parking garage spot was a test of faith.
The interior layout is pretty carved out and makes you feel like you’re in a cockpit (in a good way). I did find that the controls were easy to use (and figure out) on the radio and the steering wheel. The computer between the gauges was simple enough to figure out and read out your fuel efficiency and had a mode to display your speed. Some people might like this because the numbers on the speedometer aren’t always easy to get a good read (not good if you’re trying to avoid speeding tickets).
The driver and passenger windows in the doors are short. This goes along with the whole chopped top feeling but isn’t too bad. The passenger seat sits very low and is actually difficult to see out the front, maybe adjustable seats would have been nice for this side too.
One thing I will say is that the interior plastics are hard. When I picked up the car it only had 1700 miles on the odometer and I had noticed some scratches already from seatbelts or whatever it was. I would say that is something to be improved upon in a refresh. Plenty of space to put things and cup holders are adequate. Overall the interior is not too shabby.
Exterior:
The only thing to say here is that they’ve done a great job with the shape. It has that perfect, classic muscle car shape which includes a large engine bay proportion. Very few recent cars pull that off with the exceptions of the new Dodge Challenger, Ford Mustang and the last generation Honda Prelude.
The larger rims that come stock seem to fit the car well. I think if GM would have gone cheap and tried to get away with 16” rims that it would just make the proportions appear awkward. These larger 18’s suit the car very well!
I think the other thing I appreciate is the roofline. The top is designed to look like it’s chopped low and it’s nice they did that. A lot of custom auto projects would take something like a ’50 Mercury coupe and chop the top to make it flatter. I think this flat top works well with the trunk and the hood.
Overall:
I am overall impressed with the new Camaro. I have yet to drive a SS trim but I can say that GM has put together a very nice package for the price point. Competition at this dollar point includes a Genesis Coupe 2.0, Honda Civic Si, or Ford Mustang V6. For getting 304hp, independent rear axle, and 26mpg combined I’d say that’s pretty impressive. Civic, Genesis and current V6 Mustang are barely over 200hp and can’t even compete with the power. Sure the Civic will get you better mpg and the handling will be more agile. The Genesis will also be more agile and future aftermarket is very promising. And the Mustang...well it’s got history. Personally I wouldn’t buy the automatic version of this car. It makes it too tame for my own taste but I think the blend they’ve put together will satisfy most people looking for a sporty daily driver that won’t break the bank. Nicely done GM, very nice.
Model: 2010 Camaro LS, V6 with 6spd Automatic
Highlights: V6 has power to spare, balanced enough to be a daily driver, respectable fuel economy
What needs work: Visibility, interior plastics are too hard and scratch easily
When we were able to take a vacation this summer, I tried planning it out so that we wouldn’t need to rent a car. But given the fact we were going to be in Seattle, Portland, and Gearhart/Seaside that wasn’t going to pan out. So I decided to make this as fun as possible by renting a fun car. The three options that came up were a 2009 Ford Mustang V6, 2009 Infiniti M35 sedan, or a 2010 V6 Camaro. Based on some initial research on specs and performance the Camaro won (with some heavy negotiation and compromises).
Overall I was very impressed. It was fun to drive, very popular (people pointing, thumbs up, etc) and worked very well in the northwest region in a few different conditions. It was a good balance between sporty and comfortable and I think GM has put out a good product. Between fuel economy and handling I was constantly comparing this car to my 2004 WRX wagon (modified mind you). My only other driving experience that came close enough to a Camaro was test driving a 2000 Firebird V6 (automatic). Let me say that there have been some dramatic improvements.
Powertrain:
One of the first questions is what is powering this beast? I even had a couple guys in a Ford Taurus pull up along side us when we were on I-5 and gesture 6 or 8 (with his fingers). The rental version of this was the LS V6 version powered by GM’s 3.6L Direct Injection motor. According to GM’s website this engine has an output of 304hp and 273 ft/lb torque. The thing I will say about this is that it is very linear. From my perspective my WRX has a severe turbo lag and then explosive power. The Naturally Aspirated engine is nice and smooth to redline. I didn’t experience any wheezing in the upper RPM range like some other cars. Also, having owned Japanese cars with 4 cylinders for the last several years I’m not used to torque, but rather high end horsepower. This was a nice change, especially for something as beefy and heavy as this coupe.
The Camaro had no trouble passing or merging onto the freeway. Now since this was a rental I was obviously not able to do any track testing and obtain any 0-60 or ¼ mile data. I can say though that passing uphill with steep inclines was NO problem. The 6 speed had short enough gear ratios that it would fully take advantage of the ponies on tap. The one thing I didn’t like was the fact that it would have to downshift a couple times if you needed to do a pass. Granted this is the automatic version I’m writing about so that is a given. The sport mode helped this with the paddles on the steering wheel. All you needed to do was downshift before you passed and then mash the accelerator to effortlessly woosh by any lumber trucks.
The automatic is less engaging than a manual and I have not tried GM’s 6 speed manual yet. I would imagine there would be a significant difference. One thing I will say is that the 6 speed auto does help with the fuel economy. According to GM, the LS V6 is rated at 17 city and 29 freeway. I was able to calculate a mixed average of 26mpg (that’s some significant detours through city blocks due to the Garmin rerouting us through city congestion…grrr). I think freeway driving over 30mpg is possible and this makes me wonder what intake/header/exhaust upgrades would do…
Handling:
I have to say that the handling of this car was decent. The Camaro is a very substantial coupe, weighing in with a curb weight of 3780 lbs. For a sporty car I find this to be a bit on the heavy side. My WRX wagon weighs in at roughly 3200 lbs and that’s with an AWD system. The cool thing about the Camaro though is that it certainly feels grounded. Growing up in the Midwest I have an innate fear of RWD platforms due to our insane winters. The last thing I want to be on the road with is a high torque, RWD car, trying to plow through 8 inches of snow. I’ve even wiped out a Mustang in heavy rain (almost taking out a Lexus on the test drive) so I personally am more comfortable in the FWD or AWD platform. That being said I am very impressed at the stability of this coupe. I found myself driving up through some mountainous area when we went from Seattle to Portland (I-5). Unfortunately it was raining a fair amount and some of the road was less than smooth, laden with some frost heaves or bumps of some sort. My fear was that the rear axle would skip over some of these, especially around the corners but I have to admit this car was stable. The independent rear made me at peace with any fears I may have had about RWD in the rain. The stock tires did a good job at channeling away the water and never once did I break traction in the rain (driving within 5mph of the posted speed limits).
Aside from my initial RWD concerns I was very impressed with the balance of the suspension. It wasn’t overly stiff or punishing on the ride but not too soft to remind you of a Camry. Body lean was not too bad and on heavy acceleration the front didn’t fly up (like it would with a weak suspension). I think this would be very suitable for a daily driver however if you’re looking for more of a track car I’d say upgrade the suspension or go up to the SS model.
Interior:
The biggest thing that stood out for me was the feeling of being in a retro car. The Camaro has a low roofline and when you’re sitting in the driver’s seat it reminded me of a chopped top street rod. This felt like a pretty sporty American car. It unfortunately compromises visibility like nothing else and it’s not for everyone (like the wife) but I liked it. I was used to compromised visibility from when I had my 2001 Celica so this wasn’t too much a surprise. The C-pillars are huge though and backing out of a parking garage spot was a test of faith.
The interior layout is pretty carved out and makes you feel like you’re in a cockpit (in a good way). I did find that the controls were easy to use (and figure out) on the radio and the steering wheel. The computer between the gauges was simple enough to figure out and read out your fuel efficiency and had a mode to display your speed. Some people might like this because the numbers on the speedometer aren’t always easy to get a good read (not good if you’re trying to avoid speeding tickets).
The driver and passenger windows in the doors are short. This goes along with the whole chopped top feeling but isn’t too bad. The passenger seat sits very low and is actually difficult to see out the front, maybe adjustable seats would have been nice for this side too.
One thing I will say is that the interior plastics are hard. When I picked up the car it only had 1700 miles on the odometer and I had noticed some scratches already from seatbelts or whatever it was. I would say that is something to be improved upon in a refresh. Plenty of space to put things and cup holders are adequate. Overall the interior is not too shabby.
Exterior:
The only thing to say here is that they’ve done a great job with the shape. It has that perfect, classic muscle car shape which includes a large engine bay proportion. Very few recent cars pull that off with the exceptions of the new Dodge Challenger, Ford Mustang and the last generation Honda Prelude.
The larger rims that come stock seem to fit the car well. I think if GM would have gone cheap and tried to get away with 16” rims that it would just make the proportions appear awkward. These larger 18’s suit the car very well!
I think the other thing I appreciate is the roofline. The top is designed to look like it’s chopped low and it’s nice they did that. A lot of custom auto projects would take something like a ’50 Mercury coupe and chop the top to make it flatter. I think this flat top works well with the trunk and the hood.
Overall:
I am overall impressed with the new Camaro. I have yet to drive a SS trim but I can say that GM has put together a very nice package for the price point. Competition at this dollar point includes a Genesis Coupe 2.0, Honda Civic Si, or Ford Mustang V6. For getting 304hp, independent rear axle, and 26mpg combined I’d say that’s pretty impressive. Civic, Genesis and current V6 Mustang are barely over 200hp and can’t even compete with the power. Sure the Civic will get you better mpg and the handling will be more agile. The Genesis will also be more agile and future aftermarket is very promising. And the Mustang...well it’s got history. Personally I wouldn’t buy the automatic version of this car. It makes it too tame for my own taste but I think the blend they’ve put together will satisfy most people looking for a sporty daily driver that won’t break the bank. Nicely done GM, very nice.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Why did I name this blog what I did?
First of all I love dichotomy. I think many things have two sides to them and I feel car ownership is certainly two-sided. It's a love-hate thing at times, sometimes you love the car and sometimes you get really sick of it. Example being, I love modding cars. The ability to extract more efficiency, performance or aesthetics from the starting model is very rewarding. Some projects may be a pain in the @$$ but the wrench time is fun for me. I've done radiator, exhaust, brake, intake and other jobs on my cars and I learn something every time.
I've learned about different types of car like sporty, luxury, economy etc. and in this I learned what I appreciate. I love more than anything a car that handles well, tight control and connects you to the road. For me it is very rewarding to be able to dig into a corner on a twisty road and feel how solid a car is. I actually prefer handling to speed and would take a better handling car than a quarter mile king. This is also a fun part of car ownership for me.
Now there is also the down side to having the set of keys like monthly payments. Sometimes I don't want to be paying every month and have the expendable cash. I about had my Celica GT paid off but had to admit that it was a terrible car for where I lived (not great in the unplowed back country roads where I made my commute) and needed to trade it for something matching the needs of 'the sticks'. Then there is the repair factor. When something breaks, not only is it costly it is inconvenient. You get stranded waiting for a part or the job to be done (if you have someone do it) and it affects your lifestyle. No sir, not fun at all. And when things pile up you really begin to dislike that machine in the garage and possibly start thinking of the other cool possible trades that exist on the lot down the road.
I live in south east Wisconsin and out here there is very little public transportation available. In addition, towns are spread out far enough so you can't just walk to things, you could bike but that's only if weather permits. So in this area, cars are almost a necessity. So if you get irritated with your aging wreck of a machine you really can't just walk away, you need to solve your transportation problem.
That is the up side and the downside of car ownership. Since I pretty much need a set of wheels in this area I personally choose cars that I really enjoy driving and have a certain blend of fun and practicality. I guess this is the best way for me to balance what I need to do to get around and still like what I roll in. If you're damned if you do and damned if you don't, at least like your choice. I have learned what I like and I'm sticking to it!
P.S. Current car is a 2004 WRX wagon and one of the more fun cars I've owned :)
I've learned about different types of car like sporty, luxury, economy etc. and in this I learned what I appreciate. I love more than anything a car that handles well, tight control and connects you to the road. For me it is very rewarding to be able to dig into a corner on a twisty road and feel how solid a car is. I actually prefer handling to speed and would take a better handling car than a quarter mile king. This is also a fun part of car ownership for me.
Now there is also the down side to having the set of keys like monthly payments. Sometimes I don't want to be paying every month and have the expendable cash. I about had my Celica GT paid off but had to admit that it was a terrible car for where I lived (not great in the unplowed back country roads where I made my commute) and needed to trade it for something matching the needs of 'the sticks'. Then there is the repair factor. When something breaks, not only is it costly it is inconvenient. You get stranded waiting for a part or the job to be done (if you have someone do it) and it affects your lifestyle. No sir, not fun at all. And when things pile up you really begin to dislike that machine in the garage and possibly start thinking of the other cool possible trades that exist on the lot down the road.
I live in south east Wisconsin and out here there is very little public transportation available. In addition, towns are spread out far enough so you can't just walk to things, you could bike but that's only if weather permits. So in this area, cars are almost a necessity. So if you get irritated with your aging wreck of a machine you really can't just walk away, you need to solve your transportation problem.
That is the up side and the downside of car ownership. Since I pretty much need a set of wheels in this area I personally choose cars that I really enjoy driving and have a certain blend of fun and practicality. I guess this is the best way for me to balance what I need to do to get around and still like what I roll in. If you're damned if you do and damned if you don't, at least like your choice. I have learned what I like and I'm sticking to it!
P.S. Current car is a 2004 WRX wagon and one of the more fun cars I've owned :)
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
1997 Pontiac Sunfire
The second car I had was a 1997 Pontiac Sunfire SE coupe. It came with a 3 speed automatic transmission, 2.2L four cylinder engine good for 120 hp. Options included AM/FM cassette player, A/C and driver AND passenger mirror! Ok, the mirrors were standard but it seemed cool after my Cav didn't have one.
This was the first new car I bought. I traded in the '87 Cav with 117000 miles on it, it was in rough shape as far as maintenence. It needed brakes, tires, front shocks, and a tune up. The cost of those things was far above the resale value of the car so I decided to take the plunge and go for a new car that I could drive into the ground. The bonus of this was that I wouldn't have to worry about reliability and I could focus on college at the time. This was especially important because I was a commuter student and if I didn't have wheels, I didn't take the tests.
I balanced the pros and cons and took the plunge. I really did like that car. It handled well and that 2.2L was kind of torquey for what it was. It only weighed around 2600 lbs. and that power to weight ratio seemed to work well (I didn't understand the concept of power to weight ratio at that time). Reliability was very good. I didn't have to take it in for anything, and it certainly got me to where I needed to go. I think I was putting on around 18000 miles per year when I had that thing.
The 3 speed auto was interesting. The gear ratios were very long due to there only being three of them and it did fine on the freeway. I think I got in the upper 20's for mpg fuel efficiency. I didn't usually calculate this statistic back then but I remember it did well. I remember a kid in an early 90's Geo Storm pulling up next to me wanting to race one night. I buried the pedal and made sure he didn't pull ahead. I noticed he kept losing ground every time he shifted, which made me understand that if you have enough power going through a long gear then you don't lose the acceleration time shifting. Not that a 120hp car is a racer or anything but in that situation it was relevant.
Here's the hard part about the Sunfire. My insurance agent at the time was very good at pummeling me with high insurance rates. I was paying about 133 per month on that car which is very high. Granted I was like 20 at the time but still, there were better things I could be spending my money on. The other challenge was that I was paying ahead on my car payments to make sure the value of the car was higher than the amount owed on the loan. I didn't want to be upside down (the current term for that). I think the payments were something like 215 per month and I would usually pay 230-250 per month, whatever my finances would allow. I found out that I could only stay even with the trade in value though. I wanted to make sure that if I did have a financial crisis that I'd at least have an out by trading my car and not have to turn over a big sack of money to go with it.
I learned some valuable lessons with this. First, shop around for insurance. Even if you don't find a better deal you know what the competition is and where they stand. I'll have another story about insurance in a future blog but for now I can share that I did not successfully negotiate much lower of a rate. My agent told me there would be a drastic reduction in my rates when I turned 21 and I guess he thought 25 dollars annually was huge. I have a different concept I guess. The other lesson I learned is that new cars have a steep depreciation in the first few years. If you look at any Consumer Reports buying guide they have statistics per car what to expect your loss to be. A safe stat would be 30% in 3 years. Some cars are as high as 45%. Others if you are fortunate enough get popular in Fast and Furious movies and the value never really drops (ala Toyota Supra).
I did wind up getting rid of the car. My mom was in the market for a new car as her '95 Saturn was getting kind up there in miles. She wound up buying it off of me for the remaining trade in value and I was able to factor in her car as part of the deal. My lesson is that I don't need to buy a new car. The steep depreciation makes the cost of a car higher and if you're willing to take 20000 miles already on a car then you can get a higher quality car for the same price. This doesn't work for all people and sometimes you can get a KILLER deal on a closed out new car. Every situation is different. I learned that insurance rates are negotiable and new cars are not for me. But I really did like the red Sunfire. So did the cheerleader my sister knew back then. I did get some attention with it which is another story though :)
Monday, December 7, 2009
'87 Cavalier
So my first car was an '87 Chevy Cavalier 2 door coupe. it was a cool blue color that seemed to fade into a shadow if you parked it outside the shine of a street light. Kinda cool, reminded me of Nightcrawler from the X-Men. Anyway this was one of the funnier cars I owned. It was a base model so it came with this giant black box called an AM radio. It was replaced by some AM/FM cassette by Optimus. Never heard of the company but it played my King's X and Alice in Chains tapes I was into at the time so that's all that mattered to me then. Well except the fact that the wiring was bad on this Optimus radio and it cut the dash lights out...So at night I had to be really good at knowing how fast I was going. I got very good at listening to the engine and knowing what gear I was in. Oh, no worries, headlights and running lights were fine, it's just all the dashboard light was out (no paradise for me I guess). What else was quirky about this car, well there was no passenger mirror on the outside, that was an option. 5-speed transmission, no A/C (high schoolers didn't need to be spoiled by such luxury) and crank windows. If I recall correctly it was a 1.9 litre 4 cylinder engine rated at 89hp. Oh, and there was a bad spark plug that wouldn't come out so I'm sure it wasn't firing correctly, probably reducing the engine's meager output. Although my beast could outrun my friend's four speed Dodge Omni :)
Ok, so what did I learn from this car? Well, it taught me that I loved driving. To really learn to drive a car that has a manual transmission requires you to spend significant time with it. Unless you know where the sweet spot of the clutch is, you'll need practice. And I did get very good. I even taught friends to drive a manual transmission on that thing. It was a very forgiving powertrain and allowed for some mistakes.
Even more, it taught me I prefered a 5-speed manual over an automatic transmission. It connected me more to the machine and I felt I could control the car better. This control taught me to drive in Wisconsin winter, through snow that gets measured in feet. I learned about traction, braking and sliding (not drifting, that hadn't come to the states yet) and how you can use the transmission to affect all of these.
The Cav had things break a lot though. Little things like the plastic pins that keep the window in the track when you roll it down. Without them the windows just rotate in a circle and come off track. That's embarrassing when someone pulls up next to you to tell you something. I guess I learned that I don't like to be nickel and dimed to death by a car and that reliability is important to me. Not having a lot of mechanical ability at that age yet I couldn't fix a lot of things on my own. And fixing things can get expensive.
I got this Cav with 72000 miles on it and traded it in for a '97 Sunfire in the fall of 1997 with 117000 miles. But I did spend a lot of time with friends, give rides to people, and saw much of the state of Wisconsin. It got me out of the house when things weren't so good. I took drives when I needed to clear my head and the mighty Cav took me on my journey. It even dodged the potato truck when I needed it to. I wish I had more pictures of it, I can only think of one. I'll post it if I find it. Anyway I learned a lot from this car and it prepared me for the next one by giving me a comparison. I'm thankful to have a vehicle to get me through my life experience (and yes that was a parabolic statment).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)