Me too. I'm quite stuck in the 90s when it comes to small and midsize cars. Whereas the manufacturers are now thinking 3- and 5-door hatchbacks and 4-door sedans (which tend to be ugly at the small end of the spectrum) powered by 1400cc and 2000cc turbo fours, I'm still thinking along the lines of 4-door sedan, 5-door wagon, 2-door coupe, and maybe convertible powered by naturally aspirated ~2000cc fours and ~3000cc V6es.
I wish manufacturers would just pull their heads in & stop making SUVs. Instead just force people to buy wagons.
SUVs are so popular because of delusions of safety. My mom is a great example, she buys Expeditions because they're big and safe. I drive that car and it constantly feels like it'll tip over. I agree, wagon master race.
Big BOF v8 suvs are the bee's knees. I dig wagons too, but I'd be lying to you if I said I wouldn't whip an suv.
wagons are the best. I drive a subaru outback wagon daily and it is lots of fun. a little less storage than an suv, but its still plenty.
I'd honestly drive a Tahoe before I'd drive an old wagon. Old wagons are cool as hell, but if I had to pick one; Tahoe all the way. They're not really worth anything and parts are abundant so I could whip the hell out of it and not feel guilty, it has off-road capability, will haul tons of shit and not complain, tons of space inside, etc etc. Watch the mpg fall. Gotta love it.
I personally wouldn't mind owning a Nissan Stagea as it would probably fit most of my needs, it has a large boot so I could fit tool boxes (because future automotive technician), sleep in the back, its RWD or I could buy it with 4wd plus it is based on the Nissan skyline v35 but I probably would have to worry about fuel economy.
more similarities to the laurel than skyline, though all 3 vehicles have *huge* amounts in common. most of the 4wd's come with 4 speed autos. Stickshift master race A skyline manual will go in though.
I think the laurel stopped around 2002 I'm guessing you are talking about the first and second gen stageas with the rb inline 6.
Saw a car crash up the road from my house tonight. Doing 60km/h driving behind a Hyundai Getz when a Mazda 3 comes off the freeway & blows through the light, Hyundai didn't even have time to brake. Mazda did a 180 & the Hyundai spun 90 degrees. Airbags went off & Mazda driver was taken in an Ambulance. Both cars are probably write-offs.
I really don't know who's idea it was to make a manual vehicle without a rev limiter or tachometer. My Ranger has neither as far as I can tell. I've never wound it out enough to notice it stop pulling so maybe I just haven't revved it high enough but I want to get one of those $20 Autozone Tachs.
Here's a question for everyone: How many people think the word "ricer" is the most misused/abused word in car culture, if not in the English language? It seems to be that it's now just used as a generic insult to anyone who owns a car that the other person doesn't like the looks of. The car could be perfectly fine otherwise, but if it looks or sounds distasteful, then it's a "ricer" apparently. Personally, I'd like to redefine it as "a vehicle which has had modifications done to it for the purposes of increasing performance, when the modifications done do not increase the performance of the car in any measurable way." With this definition, if your car looks like a piece of crap, sounds like a piece of crap, drives like a piece of crap, but you didn't intend on it being a well-performing car anyways, you're fine. However, if you are "that guy" who thinks the tiny spoiler on the back of your Ford Fusion actually creates downforce, because it's a spoiler, and therefore must make downforce (yes, I know wings make downforce, and spoilers decrease drag), and puts another Fusion spoiler on top of the stock one for more downforce, you are a ricer.
So I took my car for a dyno run today, its a 1998 Isuzu Frontier 2.8 (4JB1-T) with a few mods. Stock, its supposed to make 74Kw and 240Nm The graph I got says 77Kw and 420Nm, supposedly at the wheels. BUT when calculating the Torque from the power curve, the max is 280Nm and when I calculate the Power from the torque curve, the max is 115Kw. If someone more knowledgeable can enlighten me to whats going on I would appreciate it. Run 1 was in 4th gear and run 2 in 3rd.
Could your math be off? Are you using power = torque × rpm ÷ 5252? I'd guess you were making 76 peak KW at the wheel. --- Post updated --- When I bought my first civic it was a dx model and had no tach. I took the cluster out of a wrecked ex trim civic and the tach worked fine. Now in my coup I have a 99 to 01 crv cluster that looks pretty sweet. Not having a tach is boring. I consider myself at least a light ricer. Yes I have the Japanese wheels and suspension on an American sold economy car. Yes I have a carbon fiber hood and trunk. If you were to call me a ricer, you'd be well within your rights, and you wouldn't get an argument out of me. The ONLY thing that differentiates me from most ricers, is I have performance mods. Oh well.
I used an online calculator that uses these equations: Torque (N.m) = 9.5488 x Power (kW) / Speed (RPM) Power (kW) = Torque (N.m) x Speed (RPM) / 9.5488 I think they gave me power at the wheels and torque at the engine or something. I dont know why though.
Funny line in a Jalopnik article talking about the Big Three's looking down upon Tesla, "And then there’s Sergio Marchionne, delusional head of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, who claimed that he could build a Tesla Model 3 competitor and get it on the market within 12 months, if he felt like it. This makes a lot of sense, much in the same way that I can hit a home run at Comerica Park, I just don’t want to embarrass the professionals on the Detroit Tigers."
The 96-01 Explorer gauge clusters swap right in, plug and play, but I'd have to figure out what to do about the mileage difference.
