#
It is currently Fri Jul 25, 2014 11:32 am


Post a new topicPost a reply Page 2 of 3   [ 48 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 1:56 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 5:57 am
Posts: 535
Location: Strasburg, VA
yeah, i guess this thread is gone already..

the space above your head IS cargo area in the back. i'm able to fit two adults and FOUR SETS of wheels and tires in the back of my wifes' fit comfortably. and still cruise UP TO 90mph.

and yes, the article is very subjective, it was just to prove a point that if someone is considering a Fit, they should also be looking at Versas because they are kind of in the same class. vice-versa. HAHAHAAA.

both are sub-compact, 4 door hatch backs that seat up to 5 people. they are both at the bottom of the parent companies ranges as far as placement..

by the way, my wife averages 38mpg on her daily commute. mostly at 75mph on the highway.

another point; mustang still has a live axle in the back.. tell THEM to progress if you are going to complain about the solid beam in the back of these little beasts. they are like that to get more cargo room. they aren't made to be fantastic handling little cars, but surprisingly they ARE. and the base fit is available with 14's, so there goes that complaint.. well, was for the 07/08.

and what's wrong with drums? other than being a pain, they are reliable and last a very long time and are very up to the task of stopping these things, even while fully loaded and beyond..

they are all great little cars that are very resourceful, very fun, and to be honest great at the market segment they possess.

btw, although i'm a Versa hater, yours looks very nice. i would definitely drive yours every day. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 3:05 pm 

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:26 am
Posts: 393
Location: Midwest, USA
My 1989 hatchback (a real hatchback, it has a door on the left, another on the right, and a sloped rear window that tilts up to expose the rear cargo area) will hold the equivalent of a 40"x48" pallet stacked 4 foot tall, and do about 120 MPH while hauling it. Its 130 HP engine gets 37 1/2 MPG highway when driven the speed limit of 75 MPH. It came with disks and drums, but has been converted to four wheel disks, and the stopping difference is Huge with a capitol H. This also reduced the sprung weight by 25+ pounds. The car was made the year before the manufacturer switched to independent rear suspension, which is my only real gripe, because the ride quality and handling suffer significantly because of this. (The last five years have taught me that rear suspension design dictates pretty much all of the limits and inadequacies of a car).

However, I can not wear a stove pipe hat while driving my car. This is not a concern for me, I am 5'11" and need only enough space between my scalp and the headliner to fit the thickness of a Bell helmet. Perhaps this is not a problem due to the fact that the vehicle manufacturer did not mount the seats at "bar stool" height, assuming that my knees bend and function normally, which can no longer be assumed by manufacturers in 2009.

A Ford Mustang is not front wheel drive, and is not an economy car. In addition, a solid beam rear axle (swing axle, torsion axle) of a FWD car is not the same thing as a multi link rear suspension of a rear wheel drive car. A torsion axle has two links and swings like a big hinge. A multi link rear suspension rides up and down in an arc, but does not swing.
Mustang Cobras came with fully independent rear suspension, and benefited from the enhanced handling they provide. But high horsepower engines and the poor metallurgy of American car makers usually makes for broken half shafts.
With a FWD car, this is not a concern. Independent rear suspension with front wheel drive provides better handling, better ride quality, and more efficient cornering. That last part is of highest relevance in a comparison of cars built for high fuel economy. Get the car around the corner with less work, friction, and difficulty, and it wastes less fuel going through the corner.

The same goes for the wheel size. If these manufacturers were really concerned with fuel economy, the highest trim level would have the lightest weight wheel and tire combination, and tires would be limited to a width that prevented excessive friction loss. I parked next to a Prius a few weeks ago, and it had 17 inch factory wheels and something absurd like 215 or 225 width tires.

Sorry, I'm not seeing progress, and certainly not the kind of progress that 20 years time should have brought.
But the disappointment doesn't usually get as far as the actual equipment or weight of today's new cars, it usually ends with the realization that what looked sporty and low slung in the advertising turned out to be five foot tall and looks like a mini van, just shorter, but still just as tall as a mini van.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:09 pm 
Administrator

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 8:45 pm
Posts: 2568
despite my being mostly a nissan guy, versa haters don't bother me none ... the versa being a renault and all :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:46 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:36 pm
Posts: 96
Location: Westminster CA
burabuda wrote:
despite my being mostly a nissan guy, versa haters don't bother me none ... the versa being a renault and all :lol:

OH SNAP!

_________________
if it was easy to restore, they would call it chevrolet
dont piss off america, or well bring democracy to your country
"if god had wanted you to live, he would not have created me"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 6:12 pm 

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:26 am
Posts: 393
Location: Midwest, USA
burabuda wrote:
versa haters don't bother me none


I'm not anti Nissan or Toyota or Mazda or even Honda in this. I really want to like the new smaller cars. I love small cars. They say that car makers and consumers are being forced back to small cars. But what they are selling is not really small, and not delivering what they are portraying. And it certainly isn't an improvement on what they were doing 20 years ago.

Twenty years ago, we did not have direct injection, variable valve timing, and non-batch fire true multi point and individually spraying fuel injection.
But we had 1.6 liter engines that put out 130 HP.
The Versa comes with a 107 HP 1.6 liter, or a 122 HP 1.8 liter.

We also had 2,400 pound cars that, with the above engine, would get 36 MPG on the highway with no problem at all. Nineteen years ago they had independent rear suspension and four wheel disk brakes.
The Versa has drums on the back and weighs 2800 pounds.

Several car makers have gone back and forth on four wheel disk brakes, never seeming to permanently embrace the technology in favor of cutting costs.

There's no excuse for the solid beam rear axles aside from the same cost cutting measures at the expense of product performance and poorer fuel consumption.

These new small cars are supposed to be set up for maximum fuel economy, but are tarted up with oversized aluminum wheels and fat tires. If they were serious, they would be looking at the wheel and tire combinations off of land speed record cars, skinny and light weight. It's obvious to anyone that tried to build a race car for two types of racing, you can't build the same car for autocross and drag racing and road racing and rally and land speed and expect to be successful. So you can't build for maximum fuel economy and maximum cornering grip and be successful at both.

Advertising continues to stress sportiness and performance while design reflects that these cars are built for an obese customer. Commercials show high speed cornering and flying down the highway. But the cars are tall, littered with cup holders made to hold 50 gallon drum size big gulp cups, seats are tall, and there is no hint of design for performance.
Basic aerodynamic theory covers things like the cross sectional area of what you are trying to push through the air. The taller it is, the more area it has, and the more resistance there will be. But if your customer can't bend down to sit down, there is a problem.

Clearly, I am well outside of the demographic they are trying to sell cars to, and we are not going to see something like the Starion or 240SX or even the light weight but sporty economy cars of the same era, which make our current crop of small cars look shameful.
But there is a level of dishonesty and misdirection in the auto industry right now that is insulting.
Cars are built for gluttony and to fit a gluttonous user, but advertised as high performance. Cars are labeled as fuel efficient but trade economy for fashion. Marketing cars as an extension of the Lazy Boy chair in the family room is wrong, they are a machine for travel, and society be better off with a back to basics approach to transportation, especially given the economic climate.

I was probably the only person going into the auto show a few years ago, excited to see the Yaris when it first came out. I was also the only one upset with the sight in person. Sure, it's a Toyota, it can be expected to be overweight, but what is this garbage of having to climb up to get into a small car? The Fitt, Versa, and Mazda2 that followed were just repetition of the same chorus. It's not hate, it's extreme disappointment after hopeful anticipation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 7:58 pm 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:57 pm
Posts: 8526
Location: Arlington, TX, USA
JT191 wrote:
I was probably the only person going into the auto show a few years ago, excited to see the Yaris when it first came out. I was also the only one upset with the sight in person. Sure, it's a Toyota, it can be expected to be overweight, but what is this garbage of having to climb up to get into a small car? The Fitt, Versa, and Mazda2 that followed were just repetition of the same chorus. It's not hate, it's extreme disappointment after hopeful anticipation.


FWIW, the Versa went on sale in the US quite some time before the Yaris.

And I kinda like the higher seating position. :P

But at 6'3" I don't climb "up" to get into anything. :lol:


Last edited by john on Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:01 pm 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:57 pm
Posts: 8526
Location: Arlington, TX, USA
Lincoln Stax wrote:
datsunfreak wrote:
Stationwagonguy wrote:
Maybe the new Hyundai Genesis?


IMO, that's it's only real direct competition.


What about the Audi TT? Or the Porsche Cayman?


Cars that cost twice as much and are loaded with waaay more technology? Don't really see those as being in the same category as the Z/Genesis either.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:01 pm 

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:26 am
Posts: 393
Location: Midwest, USA
datsunfreak wrote:

FWIW, the Versa went on sale in the US quite some time before the Yaris.



My notes show all three were first at the Chicago show in 2006. The Yaris was presented as being on the showroom floors at the time of the show, while the Fit and Versa were introductions of the next year's model. The Versa and Fit did not make it to the other Midwest auto shows until 2007.

The Yaris stood out personally as a three door square back instead of a five door.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:18 pm 

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:39 am
Posts: 310
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Seems to be alot of new-car hating here, so it begs the question.

Have any of the people bagging 350Z's or 370Z's actually DRIVEN one?

Ive driven the 350 and i can tell you it pretty much shits all over the Z32. Not sure on the exact figures, but im pretty sure the Z33 is lighter then the 32. 34 is lighter still.

It all points to something RETURNING to what a 240z is like to drive. I mean, the Z34 is even shorter/lighter then the Z33. Granted cars will never be as light as they used to, but its a fair effort none the less.

_________________
[F3ARED] 76 Isuzu Gemini Coupe - forged G180z, EFI, 525hp Turbo, 6years and still building...

Daily 78 Isuzu Gemini Sedan, stock G161z, Rodeo EFI, 500hp roller, 157rwkw. Fun :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 3:29 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 5:58 pm
Posts: 409
Location: Seattle WA USA
datsunfreak wrote:
Lincoln Stax wrote:
What about the Audi TT? Or the Porsche Cayman?


Cars that cost twice as much and are loaded with waaay more technology? Don't really see those as being in the same category as the Z/Genesis either.


Just for fun, I thought I'd put out the major specs on most of the cars that could be considered competitors of the 370Z. It makes for some interesting comparisons. I got all the info from the manufacturer's websites, with the exception of the Mustang's weight. Ford doesn't have it on their website. I had to find online reviews to get that info. While the venerable Mr. K considers the 370Z to be expensive and overweight (and compared to the 240Z, he's right), it's actually pretty much average compared with all the other cars below.

Nissan 370Z/Nismo 370Z
engine: 3.7 V-6/3.7 V-6
horsepower: 332/350
wheelbase: 100.4/100.4
weight: 3232/3300
drivetrain: FR/FR
price: $29,930/$39,130

Hundai Genesis Coupe 2.0/3.8 Track
engine: 2.0 turbo I-4/3.8 V-6
horsepower: 210/306
wheelbase: 111/111
weight: 3294/3389
drivetrain: FR/FR
price: $22,000/$29,500

2010 Audi TT/TTS
engine: 2.0 I-4/2.0 turbo I-4
horsepower: 200/265
wheelbase: 97.2/97.2
weight: 3153/3241
drivetrain: 4WD/4WD
price: $37,8000/$45,900

Porsche Cayman/Cayman S
engine: 2.9 flat-6/3.4 flat-6
horsepower: 265/320
wheelbase: 95.1/95.1
weight: 2932/2976
drivetrain: MR/MR
price: $50,300/$60,200

2010 Ford Mustang/GT/GT500
engine: 4.0 V-6/4.6 V-8/5.4 V-8
horsepower: 210/315/540
wheelbase: 107.1/107.1/107.1
weight: 3380/3415/3903
drivetrain: FR/FR/FR
price: $21,845/$28,845/$47,175

2010 Chevy Camaro LS/2SS
engine: 3.6 V-6/6.2 V-8
horsepower: 304/426
wheelbase: 112.3/112.3
weight: 3780/3849
drivetrain: FR/FR
price: $22,680/$33,745

2010 Dodge Challenger SE/R/T
engine: 3.5 V-6/5.7 V-8
horsepower: 250/372
wheelbase: 116/116
weight: 3819/4041
drivetrain: FR/FR
price: $22,945/$32,880

_________________
Image
My JNC: 1983 Subaru GL wagon
My JNM: 1979 Yamaha XS Eleven


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 5:03 am 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:57 pm
Posts: 8526
Location: Arlington, TX, USA
JT191 wrote:
My notes show all three were first at the Chicago show in 2006. The Yaris was presented as being on the showroom floors at the time of the show, while the Fit and Versa were introductions of the next year's model. The Versa and Fit did not make it to the other Midwest auto shows until 2007.


Well, I bought my Versa in June 2006, so...

Never saw a Yaris on any dealer lots in this area until December 2006.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:57 am 

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:26 am
Posts: 393
Location: Midwest, USA
datsunfreak wrote:
JT191 wrote:
My notes show all three were first at the Chicago show in 2006. The Yaris was presented as being on the showroom floors at the time of the show, while the Fit and Versa were introductions of the next year's model. The Versa and Fit did not make it to the other Midwest auto shows until 2007.


Well, I bought my Versa in June 2006, so...

Never saw a Yaris on any dealer lots in this area until December 2006.



Rumorpedia:

"The Toyota Belta, a sedan (2006–present) sold as the Toyota Yaris in North America..."

"The Versa was introduced in the United States and Canada in July 2006 as a 2007 model."


Auto parts websites begin listing Yaris with the 2006 model, and Versa with the 2007 model. Carjunky.com, Innerauto.com, etc. These are popular cars so there is some motivation for accuracy to avoid missed sales, and enough volume to cause these companies to correct any errors they might find in their listings for these cars.


Any single source would be suspect, but the combination of the photos and written reports from the auto shows (notes mentioned yesterday), entry on the rumor website, and the companies selling parts by model year, makes a reasonable case.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:15 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 5:57 am
Posts: 535
Location: Strasburg, VA
makes sense. after july everything is "new". hahahaa. we bought my wifes' 08 Fit Sport in December 07. it was an 08 Sport color only too. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:30 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 10:45 pm
Posts: 26
Location: Houston/ Spring Branch
E-AT_me wrote:
yeah, i guess this thread is gone already..

the space above your head IS cargo area in the back. i'm able to fit two adults and FOUR SETS of wheels and tires in the back of my wifes' fit comfortably. and still cruise UP TO 90mph.

and yes, the article is very subjective, it was just to prove a point that if someone is considering a Fit, they should also be looking at Versas because they are kind of in the same class. vice-versa. HAHAHAAA.

both are sub-compact, 4 door hatch backs that seat up to 5 people. they are both at the bottom of the parent companies ranges as far as placement..

by the way, my wife averages 38mpg on her daily commute. mostly at 75mph on the highway.

another point; mustang still has a live axle in the back.. tell THEM to progress if you are going to complain about the solid beam in the back of these little beasts. they are like that to get more cargo room. they aren't made to be fantastic handling little cars, but surprisingly they ARE. and the base fit is available with 14's, so there goes that complaint.. well, was for the 07/08.

and what's wrong with drums? other than being a pain, they are reliable and last a very long time and are very up to the task of stopping these things, even while fully loaded and beyond..

they are all great little cars that are very resourceful, very fun, and to be honest great at the market segment they possess.

btw, although i'm a Versa hater, yours looks very nice. i would definitely drive yours every day. :)



I LOVE MY XD!!!! :mrgreen:

_________________
Jason
83' 280Z (stock)
85' Celica-Supra 6MGE (soon to be 1JZ)
85' AE86 -SR5- (soon to have the 6M from^)
95' Euro Taurus 3.8L(sold)
09' Scion XD
08' Town&Country
64 1/2' Mustang


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 11:32 pm 
Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Posts: 5592
Location: LA
E-AT_me wrote:
makes sense. after july everything is "new". hahahaa. we bought my wifes' 08 Fit Sport in December 07. it was an 08 Sport color only too. :)


I'd like to see a pic of this.

_________________
Tyler wrote:
How I long for a shit brown wagon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:24 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 8:04 am
Posts: 378
Location: Perth Western Australia
Did anybody read the link? It says he would rather drive his Versa than his 350Z, not 370Z.

Quote:
"Katayama has a 350Z in his garage but prefers to drive the family's Versa compact." And there you have it.

_________________
...................www.nostalgictrio.com...................


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 4:02 pm 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:57 pm
Posts: 8526
Location: Arlington, TX, USA
Yeah, like this thread is still on topic... :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 4:59 pm 
Administrator

Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 8:45 pm
Posts: 2568
mr camouflage wrote:
Did anybody read the link? It says he would rather drive his Versa than his 350Z, not 370Z.

Quote:
"Katayama has a 350Z in his garage but prefers to drive the family's Versa compact." And there you have it.


nah we're going by the thread title that i fixed .. almost 8)

anyway, i'd rather drive mr. k's versa than his venza too :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:02 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 5:57 am
Posts: 535
Location: Strasburg, VA
ben wrote:
E-AT_me wrote:
makes sense. after july everything is "new". hahahaa. we bought my wifes' 08 Fit Sport in December 07. it was an 08 Sport color only too. :)


I'd like to see a pic of this.


blackberry pearl available for the first gen Fits, only for 08 Sport models.. now rocking green wheels..

i will snap a picture in a few for ya.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:55 am 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:57 pm
Posts: 8526
Location: Arlington, TX, USA
burabuda wrote:
anyway, i'd rather drive mr. k's versa than his venza too :)


I kinda like that Venza. It's too big, but it is a tad stylish...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 2 of 3   [ 48 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
610nm Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net