Trade it in or drive it to the ground?

[obamanation]

So what? Just look at an Ariel Atom with 600HP but only 200 more lbs.

what? Your car is an Ariel atom that has 600hp and weighs 200 more lbs, what? Ariel atom weighs 1000lbs, what vehicle do you have weighs that little and have 600hp??? 😕

 

[jlee]

How could you not? It's probably 50X more fun than a motorcycle ever could be.

Ever ride a bike? Hell have you ever driven anything with more than 200hp?

Motorcycles aren't EPA rated for mileage... Since they're not rated for mileage, it's pretty pointless because then comparisons are based upon driver experience. If you drive a Prius correctly, you can average 70mpg-85mpg if you do a lot of city driving and 60mpg if you do highway driving. But again, mileage is pretty dependent on the driver and if you don't have a set standard to compare mileage numbers, that's all you can go by.

By "correctly" you mean "pissing everyone off behind you", right?

 

[exdeath]

what? Your car is an Ariel atom that has 600hp and weighs 200 more lbs, what? Ariel atom weighs 1000lbs, what vehicle do you have weighs that little and have 600hp??? 😕

Um no. You're saying a 300 HP Atom that weighs 1350 lbs is fast without need a big powerful engine. True.

But I'm saying that argument doesn't mean anything, because a 600 HP Atom that weighs 1550 lbs with that bigger more powerful engine is faster still. Also true.

When you want that kind of power and performance, efficiency and fuel economy are the least of your concerns.

No matter how small or light you can make something and still make it fast, but efficient, you can always make it a little less efficient and make it that much faster. And lets face it, someone buying that kind of car couldn't care less about mpg.

 

[obamanation]

Ever ride a bike? Hell have you ever driven anything with more than 200hp?

Motorcycle with 200hp? If I had the chance to ride a motorcycle with 200hp, you can be guaranteed I'd be a squid. At least with the Atom, you know it can actually handle with out worrying about tipping it over or hitting a slick patch of road while going crazy fast. Sure you can die in both vehicles, but I'd imagine the atom is safer. Atom is really a glorified go-kart, and I like go-karts. I'm also certain the atom is much faster than any motorcycle and can handle turns faster than any other motorcycle as well for the mere fact it has 4 wheels and is stable unlike a motorcycle.

By "correctly" you mean "pissing everyone off behind you", right?

Depends on traffic conditions.. If traffic is light, then it shouldn't matter, if traffic is heavy, then it really shouldn't matter. I test drove an '09 Prius for two days and when I averaged 80mpg in city driving, there was a reasonable amount of traffic. The Prius allows you to coast with the engine off while a regular gasser doesn't which is why it has so much potential to save fuel over other vehicles. There are asshole drivers all around and regardless of how much over the limit I drive, I've always been passed so it's a little subjective to say "drive with the flow". Driving conditions can change pretty rapidly but if you're driving on roads with at least 2 lanes in each direction, then there is no need to worry about cars lining up behind you.

The Prius has little potential for improving mileage on the freeway, from maybe 50mpg to 60mpg while in the City, mileage can be improved from 50mpg city to 80mpg+ depending on ambient temperature and driving conditions/speeds. The fantastic part about the Prius is when you get caught in bumper to bumper traffic. If you're driving at a crawl for a good portion of your commute, like in Los Angeles traffic, the Prius has great potential for high mileage because for a good portion of the trip you could theoretically be on battery power. Hybrid's strength is city driving, this should be a given, and because of this, one doesn't have to go to extreme lengths in order to get significantly better mileage. For city driving, I haven't encountered a vehicle with so much potential for improving mileage without resorting to extreme measures like keying on and off the engine cause the computer does that for you.

 

[jlee]

Motorcycle with 200hp? If I had the chance to ride a motorcycle with 200hp, you can be guaranteed I'd be a squid. At least with the Atom, you know it can actually handle with out worrying about tipping it over or hitting a slick patch of road while going crazy fast. Sure you can die in both vehicles, but I'd imagine the atom is safer. Atom is really a glorified go-kart, and I like go-karts.

I said "anything" with over 200hp. The fact that you don't think a slick patch of road is concerning in a car speaks volumes about your lack of experience driving.

I'm also certain the atom is much faster than any motorcycle and can handle turns faster than any other motorcycle as well for the mere fact it has 4 wheels and is stable unlike a motorcycle.

Well, you'd be wrong.

 

[obamanation]

I said "anything" with over 200hp. The fact that you don't think a slick patch of road is concerning in a car speaks volumes about your lack of experience driving.

Why does it matter? What is your point? A slick patch of road for a car, like something covered in sand is far less catastrophic if one wheel catches than if a motorcycle reaches that same patch.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Well I think you're wrong.. 😛

 

[jlee]

Why does it matter? What is your point? A slick patch of road for a car, like something covered in sand is far less catastrophic if one wheel catches than if a motorcycle reaches that same patch.

When's the last time you drove a car that had balls?

Well I think you're wrong.. 😛

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Hayabusa

 

[PhoKingGuy]

The only hybrid id ever consider is the Fusion, mainly just because it looks and drives like a normal car.

 

[obamanation]

When's the last time you drove a car that had balls?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Hayabusa

I don't know if I'd consider that Suzuki being faster in that while the Ariel Atom appears to be artificially speed limited, on a technical course, I'd say the Ariel is faster which is what I meant by "faster". My fault for not clarifying that as faster usually means top speed..

Would you consider a 275hp 3800lb car to "have balls"? I wouldn't...

 

[PhoKingGuy]

Dude, didnt you say you drive like an 88 CRX? I don't know what gives you the right to hate on anything anyone drives here regardless of what it is.

 

[T2urtle]

yep. OP has already put in a new alternator, starter, water pump, timing belt ( some of the most expensive of maintenance items ). It'll probably last 10 years if you just keep doing the basic fluid changes/brakes/etc.

...though I bet the OP has run far far away from this thread :awe: .

yea i do bet he has ran...

but if he is here, one thing to know is he did take care of all the higher $$ mechincal engine stuff but another important aspect to me is the suspsension, it can get equally are expensive but its not a MUST go but you bought a lexus and you want the nice cushy ride and etc. but yea he got the main things. gotta expect small $100 sensors along the way. $100 sensor a month is better then $500 car payment.

 

[obamanation]

Dude, didnt you say you drive like an 88 CRX? I don't know what gives you the right to hate on anything anyone drives here regardless of what it is.

Yeah, and guess what? It's a lot more fun car than a Merc E class or any of the "high end" cars. I disabled the traction control on these vehicles and despite the high HP ratings, not a whole lotta thrust which is one of the reasons I believe disabling traction control doesn't guarantee the engine isn't torque limited in the lower gears. The CRX HF isn't a fast car but while I don't feel scared taking corners quickly in the CRX, I do in these land yachts.. These expensive cars just aren't a whole lot of fun and I know because I met some people and they let me have at it with their cars. Some people are concerned with power weight ratios, some people like 0-60 times, or maybe a combination of various metrics, but I like my own metric that I've made up, cost to fun ratio. A $3000 car has a higher likelihood of getting a good cost to fun ratio than a $50,000 car.

I'm fully aware of why these vehicles are expensive and what their primary objective is, it's certainly not a "kids" vehicle or anything of the sort. Some offer very supple but firm rides, are quiet and have decent performance with lots of luxuries and excellent attention to detail. I really can appreciate all the work that has been put into these vehicles even though most of their customers are incapable of noticing such things. So, while I can acknowledge and appreciate such things, I have no need for them.


For a "general purpose, one size fits all vehicle", all I really want in a vehicle is one that is practical, acceptably comfortable for long drives, excellent handling, spacious, quiet, acceptable performance and gets by most people's standards "superb" fuel economy. However, the vehicles that fit this description aren't stickshift and so it's a no go for me as I'm still of the age where I care about cars. Soon as I stop caring, I wouldn't be surprised if I got an automatic.

 

[sdifox]

Yeah, and guess what? It's a lot more fun car than a Merc E class or any of the "high end" cars. I disabled the traction control on these vehicles and despite the high HP ratings, not a whole lotta thrust which is one of the reasons I believe disabling traction control doesn't guarantee the engine isn't torque limited in the lower gears. The CRX HF isn't a fast car but while I don't feel scared taking corners quickly in the CRX, I do in these land yachts.. These expensive cars just aren't a whole lot of fun and I know because I met some people and they let me have at it with their cars. Some people are concerned with power weight ratios, some people like 0-60 times, or maybe a combination of various metrics, but I like my own metric that I've made up, cost to fun ratio. A $3000 car has a higher likelihood of getting a good cost to fun ratio than a $50,000 car.

I'm fully aware of why these vehicles are expensive and what their primary objective is, it's certainly not a "kids" vehicle or anything of the sort. Some offer very supple but firm rides, are quiet and have decent performance with lots of luxuries and excellent attention to detail. I really can appreciate all the work that has been put into these vehicles even though most of their customers are incapable of noticing such things. So, while I can acknowledge and appreciate such things, I have no need for them.


For a "general purpose, one size fits all vehicle", all I really want in a vehicle is one that is practical, acceptably comfortable for long drives, excellent handling, spacious, quiet, acceptable performance and gets by most people's standards "superb" fuel economy. However, the vehicles that fit this description aren't stickshift and so it's a no go for me as I'm still of the age where I care about cars. Soon as I stop caring, I wouldn't be surprised if I got an automatic.

hahahahaha, did you just say a 88 CRX is more fun than a E class?

You stick to your CRX (and the Prius, must not forget the saviour of the world) and I'll stick to my E350 4matic.

 

[jlee]

hahahahaha, did you just say a 88 CRX is more fun than a E class?

You stick to your CRX (and the Prius, must not forget the saviour of the world) and I'll stick to my E350 4matic.

He has an HF, right? Or am I thinking of fleabag?

 

[sdifox]

He has an HF, right? Or am I thinking of fleabag?

They are becoming one...

 

[Bignate603]

Depends on traffic conditions.. If traffic is light, then it shouldn't matter, if traffic is heavy, then it really shouldn't matter. I test drove an '09 Prius for two days and when I averaged 80mpg in city driving, there was a reasonable amount of traffic. The Prius allows you to coast with the engine off while a regular gasser doesn't which is why it has so much potential to save fuel over other vehicles. There are asshole drivers all around and regardless of how much over the limit I drive, I've always been passed so it's a little subjective to say "drive with the flow". Driving conditions can change pretty rapidly but if you're driving on roads with at least 2 lanes in each direction, then there is no need to worry about cars lining up behind you.

Yes, you do. Getting stuck behind some of the idiot slow drivers here is almost as bad as getting stuck behind a city bus. They end up with a stack of cars behind them and you can't get around them because everyone behind you is jumping to the other lane and passing the moron trying to save a few drops of gas. There's not chance to accelerate and merge into the other lane because they're going a reasonable speed rather than the frustratingly slow speed the of the idiot in front of you.

If you can't drive in a way that doesn't get in the way of other people trying to drive the speed limit you shouldn't be on the road. Period.

 

[foghorn67]

Yeah, and guess what? It's a lot more fun car than a Merc E class or any of the "high end" cars. I disabled the traction control on these vehicles and despite the high HP ratings, not a whole lotta thrust which is one of the reasons I believe disabling traction control doesn't guarantee the engine isn't torque limited in the lower gears. The CRX HF isn't a fast car but while I don't feel scared taking corners quickly in the CRX, I do in these land yachts.. These expensive cars just aren't a whole lot of fun and I know because I met some people and they let me have at it with their cars. Some people are concerned with power weight ratios, some people like 0-60 times, or maybe a combination of various metrics, but I like my own metric that I've made up, cost to fun ratio. A $3000 car has a higher likelihood of getting a good cost to fun ratio than a $50,000 car.

I'm fully aware of why these vehicles are expensive and what their primary objective is, it's certainly not a "kids" vehicle or anything of the sort. Some offer very supple but firm rides, are quiet and have decent performance with lots of luxuries and excellent attention to detail. I really can appreciate all the work that has been put into these vehicles even though most of their customers are incapable of noticing such things. So, while I can acknowledge and appreciate such things, I have no need for them.


For a "general purpose, one size fits all vehicle", all I really want in a vehicle is one that is practical, acceptably comfortable for long drives, excellent handling, spacious, quiet, acceptable performance and gets by most people's standards "superb" fuel economy. However, the vehicles that fit this description aren't stickshift and so it's a no go for me as I'm still of the age where I care about cars. Soon as I stop caring, I wouldn't be surprised if I got an automatic.

You clearly do not know how to drive.

 

[sdifox]

You clearly do not know how to drive.

To be fair Prious are driven by hive mind.

 

[jlee]

Yeah, and guess what? It's a lot more fun car than a Merc E class or any of the "high end" cars. I disabled the traction control on these vehicles and despite the high HP ratings, not a whole lotta thrust which is one of the reasons I believe disabling traction control doesn't guarantee the engine isn't torque limited in the lower gears. The CRX HF isn't a fast car but while I don't feel scared taking corners quickly in the CRX, I do in these land yachts.. These expensive cars just aren't a whole lot of fun and I know because I met some people and they let me have at it with their cars. Some people are concerned with power weight ratios, some people like 0-60 times, or maybe a combination of various metrics, but I like my own metric that I've made up, cost to fun ratio. A $3000 car has a higher likelihood of getting a good cost to fun ratio than a $50,000 car.

I'm fully aware of why these vehicles are expensive and what their primary objective is, it's certainly not a "kids" vehicle or anything of the sort. Some offer very supple but firm rides, are quiet and have decent performance with lots of luxuries and excellent attention to detail. I really can appreciate all the work that has been put into these vehicles even though most of their customers are incapable of noticing such things. So, while I can acknowledge and appreciate such things, I have no need for them.


For a "general purpose, one size fits all vehicle", all I really want in a vehicle is one that is practical, acceptably comfortable for long drives, excellent handling, spacious, quiet, acceptable performance and gets by most people's standards "superb" fuel economy. However, the vehicles that fit this description aren't stickshift and so it's a no go for me as I'm still of the age where I care about cars. Soon as I stop caring, I wouldn't be surprised if I got an automatic.

/facepalm

 

[PhoKingGuy]

For a "general purpose, one size fits all vehicle", all I really want in a vehicle is one that is practical, acceptably comfortable for long drives, excellent handling, spacious, quiet, acceptable performance and gets by most people's standards "superb" fuel economy.

This is pretty much the definition of my "girly" Jetta TDI

I still miss my old GTI though

 

[obamanation]

Yes, you do. Getting stuck behind some of the idiot slow drivers here is almost as bad as getting stuck behind a city bus. They end up with a stack of cars behind them and you can't get around them because everyone behind you is jumping to the other lane and passing the moron trying to save a few drops of gas. There's not chance to accelerate and merge into the other lane because they're going a reasonable speed rather than the frustratingly slow speed the of the idiot in front of you.

If you can't drive in a way that doesn't get in the way of other people trying to drive the speed limit you shouldn't be on the road. Period.

In pretty much every car but the Prius, I'll try to drive as fast as possible as long as it's below 55mph because there is no fuel economy benefit of low speeds in regular cars unless you do some very time consuming techniques. Where people really get annoyed with me and it's their own damn fault is that I'll coast to red lights, in that case they pretty much can just eat my ass. I realize some lights are tripped by cars sitting at them so if there aren't any cars ahead to trip the light, I won't be a dick about it but at the same time I don't want to have to stomp on my brakes when I reach the beginning of the intersection.

I guess what annoys most people is the rate of acceleration and the rate of deceleration but otherwise for city driving, if people are backing up behind me, it's because I don't care to exceed the posted speed limits.

This is pretty much the definition of my "girly" Jetta TDI

I still miss my old GTI though

You know, it may very well satisfy all of those things but it's still a VW and it's still a "girly" car.

 

[jlee]

In pretty much every car but the Prius, I'll try to drive as fast as possible as long as it's below 55mph because there is no fuel economy benefit of low speeds in regular cars unless you do some very time consuming techniques.

Newsflash: Below 55mph is slow, considering your typical interstate speed limit is 65-70mph.

 

[PhoKingGuy]

Newsflash: Below 55mph is slow, considering your typical interstate speed limit is 65-70mph.

The surface streets around here have 50mph speed limits, lol. The rigs on the freeway usually do 65ish, 55 is way way way too slow

 

[obamanation]

Newsflash: Below 55mph is slow, considering your typical interstate speed limit is 65-70mph.

The surface streets around here have 50mph speed limits, lol. The rigs on the freeway usually do 65ish, 55 is way way way too slow

Eh, if there are at least 4 lanes going in each direction, there is no excuse for you to get caught up behind me. There is an off ramp I take that has a suggested speed of 30mph but when I try to even do 10mph above that suggested speed, people still collect behind me which annoys me because they really shouldn't be taking that curve so quickly...not to mention the fact that the light is usually RED. As for my cruising speed, it's good for people who are merging onto the freeway because then they have no need to accelerate from 0-65 but more like 0-55. People really shouldn't cruise in the lane where people merge to get on and off the highway unless it's at a reduced speed because then it's just pure douchebaggery.

 

[jlee]

Eh, if there are at least 4 lanes going in each direction, there is no excuse for you to get caught up behind me. There is an off ramp I take that has a suggested speed of 30mph but when I try to even do 10mph above that suggested speed, people still collect behind me which annoys me because they really shouldn't be taking that curve so quickly...not to mention the fact that the light is usually RED. As for my cruising speed, it's good for people who are merging onto the freeway because then they have no need to accelerate from 0-65 but more like 0-55. People really shouldn't cruise in the lane where people merge to get on and off the highway unless it's at a reduced speed because then it's just pure douchebaggery.

You really like "ifs" - maybe you don't realize that, in many parts of the country, regular roads are one lane in each direction and interstates are two. It sucks to get stuck behind people like you, and I offset your fuel savings when I pass you at WOT. 😛