The "I just drove a..." Thread

[Kitdy]

Some more comments:

It was me in the Mazda 3.

I must mandatorily apologize for all of us driving so slow.

Did you deal with a lightly accented Canado-Dutchman? I know one who is with your people.

You can see why GM was so cozy on their laurels. Toyota certainly is right now.

[f6fhellcat13]

Some comments:

1) Lucas electrics are the single best automotive invention ever.

Surely a Lucas positive-ground feedback variable-venturi carburetor is the ideal towards which we should all strive.

2) I thought 4 speed gearboxes had disappeared from cars by now

Me too. As Kitdy alluded to below, Toyota was certainly resting on it's laurels as it was the last generation designed before the ****ing global financial crisis. The GFC and new emissions regs have managed to rouse Toyota from their stupor, at least in that department.

3) Great read
4) I bet this car is as fast (or maybe faster) as my car in straight line
5) I have a bumper sticker in my MX-5 which says "My other car is a Zonda"

Unfortunately, my Zonda has been in the shop for a while. Something about pistons escaping the block and gears escaping the transmission when I did a top speed run at 620psi (42.7 bar) of boost and 330mphz.

One of the greatest ironies is a friend of mine, which is an engineer, and who simply can't understand my obsession with Toyota iQs and Citroën C6s. I'm not saying he should buy a Renault Avantime, but if an engineer can't appreciate the greatness of the Miller engine in the supercharged Micra we are doing something wrong.

As an engineer, I am around a fair number of other engineers and have observed a similar phenomenon. They seem to be more interested in the utility of the car, than its actual engineering. The upshot of all that is that the parking lot where I work is filled with load-bearing pickup trucks, super-economy Japanese small cars, and Subarus... contemptible Subarus. For them, that cars are the most use-optimized cars available: haulers, for those who need to haul or want to look like they do, cheap to run cars for those who do not, and Subarus for people who like the idea of an all-around car and don't want to buy two sets of tires. There are also the inevitable (in the Northeast, anyway) fleet of Buick LeSabres and pickups driven by the blue-collar floor workers.

Nevertheless, if I ever get thrown the perennial question ("what car should I get?") I always try to steer them (see what I did there?) towards something that at least isn't catastrophically bad, for fear that they'd end up in something as terrible as a Mercedes-Benz A-Class...

Oh wait.

As a compulsive craigslister, I tend to think of new cars in terms of old car prices. For instance: my roomate bought a WRX (he does have two sets of tires, though...) for around $30,000. I found a pair of "runs good" early-'90s Buick Regals on craigslist for $500. He could have had 120 Buick Regals for the same price as his Subaru. I am also incredibly cheap. so, when people ask for "real" advice, not "stupid Miles advice" I tell them to buy an early-'90s Japanese car for $1,000 with 70,000 miles and drive it until the darkness takes the Earth and everyone else is driving a Countryman (not unlike Shakespeare's "country matters"...).
I do give advice, but rarely when it comes to the whole car. I am much more likely to give a salient answer to a question about which car has the best engine/interior/reliability etc... than "Which car should I buy?" If they ask that, I tend to respond with something stupid. If they have the gall to suggest a car or two as a basis for my recommendation, I usually launch into a diatribe about those cars and their brand. That last statement really rams home that I am just a forumite, for all my talk of being a post-ironic car enthusiast, it sounds like I am just an angry armchair racer living in my parents' basement after all.

(PD. I recently drove one of the new Skydrivegreemotion Mazda 3s and it is interesting to think why would anyone to spend significantly more to get something that's worse)

Excuse my ignorance, but what is the difference between it and the normal one? I thought Mazda was beSkydriving the whole range.

Some more comments:

It was me in the Mazda 3.

Lies! It was Gilles Villeneuve (who started life as a drag racer, I believe) as far as I was concerned in the Corolla.

I must mandatorily apologize for all of us driving so slow.

Is it better in English Canada? I can understand the 50 km/h limits in the city itself, what with Kebekwah pedestrians milling around with their laissez-faire attitude towards checking for trraffic.

Did you deal with a lightly accented Canado-Dutchman? I know one who is with your people.

Noper, does he work in Mirabel?

You can see why GM was so cozy on their laurels. Toyota certainly is right now.

Yeah, I would imagine that when GM was king of the hill, there were far more faults in their cars. I was surpirsed to see so many American(-branded) cars up here. I can understand in other parts of Canada, because they're made there, but it didn't seem to jell with the rest of the cheap Japanese cars, quasi-Euro luxury cars, and an overabundance of Dodge pickups. I would have though that they would turn their noses up at the thought of a car made in English Canada.

[Kitdy]

Our GroundActiv is Otto. I don't know the other differences.

On the subject of Activ, can we ReActiv-ly try to get car companies' marketing departments to spell words?

In English Canada, or as it is sometimes known, the Rest of Canada (seriously), or non-Quebec (just now I made this up jokingly), we still drive like tools: "Oh excuse me there, bahd, I've got a cup of Tims' in one hand and my cell in the other so imma just do 115 in the fast lane in my Kia Rio."

There are slightly different car buying habits in QC than in ON as you probably know and read in TTAC. American badged cars ("domestics" as they are sadly referred to here often) are still littered across the place. The fact that the Big 3 cars sell well in Canada in my eyes has minimally to do with a bunch being made in Ontario in my estimation. The Big 3 always have had at least a few competitive products, there is often strong brand identity (go to a NASCAR race at CGV and you will see a lot of diehard brand(ed) fans), history, and even some strange North American sense of unity and the absorption in some sense of American car culture as our own that extends beyond the understandable boomer fascination with muscle cars. You also see "domestics" do better in suburban areas and I'd imagine in rural Quebec the Big 3 do just about as well as they do in rural Ontario which is probably very near as well as they do in rural USA.

[f6fhellcat13]

Pictures of the Corolla added to previous post! Brace yinzselves!


Trip 2
Setting: Oklahoma City, OK and its environs
Car: 2014 Hyundai Veloster
Mileage: 55 miles when I got it

Once upon a time in the 1980s, yuppies stomped across the landscape leaving the smell of cologne and the burnt-out husks of bohemians in their wake. I wasn’t actually there though, so that might be partly fabricated; ask Kitdy, though, he was a part of Toronto’s booming mustache-and-minivan scene in the ‘80s. (That might be fabricated as well.) Unfortunately, they, or even we, are back with a vengeance. RayBans litter the sidewalks in front of loft apartments. Organic groceries are purchased at exorbitant prices from premium boutiques. Suspiciously well-groomed people annoy me with their mannerisms. All the signs are there.

Carmakers, ever-eager to get their grubby mitts on a new/recycled market, have descended on these youths with a passion. premium smaller cars have returned to these golden shores to suit them. The A3 sells in droves (err.. leases) and the Fiat 500 is doing well in that market and only in that market, it should be noted.

Somehow, all of this leads to a slightly-scruffy me at a rental lot in Oklahoma City. It’s 90° (33°C), humid as hell, midnight, and I’m sweating in the work clothes I neglected to change out of after a full day’s toil in Connecticut. Perhaps because I was dressed up, and I look about twelve, the woman at the desk with the charming Southern accent thought I would be a perfect fit for the Veloster. If that was the case, I feel like Hyundai’s marketing has pretty much reached only her. I don't think the car is really designed with Oklahomans in mind. Fortunately, I was only in OKC for 24 hours, so I did not have to deal with the heat for long. Unfortunately, with twelve of those hours at work, four spent waiting at the airport, and six hours of sleep there wasn’t much time to get to know the Veloster on a less-superficial level. Wanting to explore the city a bit that night, I did drive around for about an hour, but between the Cartesian streets and straight-and-flat freeways, there wasn’t much room for fun.

Everything I saw in the car lead me to believe that they were targeting the neo-yuppie post-hipster types I was referring to above, but I haven’t really seen that many of those types in Velosters. Instead you get the faux-aggressive types with the MMA shirts and tufty facial hair. It should be noted that I don’t watch TV or listen to non-public radio and I have a fantastic piece of ad-blocking software on my internet browser so I am not exposed to the advertising barrage that most contemporary folks seem to be. The girl I’m currently dating drives a Veloster and is more of the type described above; it’s very possible that she is clouding my appraisal of the car.

To attract this demographic Hyundai has gone for a grapeshot approach: a little premiumness via perceived-sportiness and a little more via perceived-luxury. It should be noted that luxury in cars is a moot point; an S-Class is arguably less comfortable than a ‘90s Park Avenue, but that doesn’t matter because the Mursaydese has more toys. Among these, and swinging both ways, is the dual-clutch transmission; a torque converter would have sufficed, making it a luxury item, and it does mean that shifts don’t take weeks and the car does not squivvle and blorb its way away from a stop. However, it is lacking refinement, in both the shifting and the programming; the former detracting from the luxury and the latter from sportiness. Though, I would rate the Hyundai’s transmission poorly, it was better than the soul-crushing experience I had in a Mk 5.5 GTI; driving that car gave me a headache, the Veloster did not. Suffice it to say, it was not as good as the PDK in the Panamera I rode in as a passenger. Other luxuries include the rear halfdoor, the big screen and backup camera, and a decently laid-out thick-rimmed steering wheel. (“These durned younguns like their steering wheels like they like their glasses!) On the sportiness front, the car had a decent set of alloy wheels, aggressive damping, and an optional turbo that wasn’t there on my rental. The sum of all this premiumness doesn’t seem to add up. This strikes me as a typically-Korean (or American) compromise. Both of those countries seem to design cars in a discontinuous manner, so the product never quite jells with what we were promised at the beginning or what was advertised at the end. On the “young and hip” front, I think the exterior work quite well. While obviously a car in the modern idiom, which I tend to dislike, the swoops and creases are well-placed. The gaping maw at the front, no doubt stolen from the Genesis Coupe in an attempt to kindle Hyundai Corporate Styling™, is my least favorite part of the car, but the grille cannot be seen from the sides, so the horror only lasts for about 100° when you do a lap of the car. The beltline and large wheels conspire to make the car look a little too heavy for my liking, but I’m an idiot. When I said the Veloster’s rear looks like an Alfa 4C with your eyes crossed and wonky depth perception, it was no idle praise. I think it is a pretty successful design.

There were a few on and offramps, as well as freeway interchanges, that allowed a little fun, but it was late and I was tired. I had no interest in sleepily writing off my rental car, so I can’t speak to its handling much above 5/10ths. It seemed plenty grippy, but I am used to driving around in a car from the 1980s on 1970s-designed tires. Despite that, it was not a particularly fun car to mess around with. The suspension setup was nice enough, but nothing that encouraged silliness. Perhaps the damping was a bit too much over some bumps, but I doubt drivers of German cars would bat an eyelid at that. The steering was completely numb and the transmission wasn’t particularly great, all of which conspired to sap the fun from what should have been a light and chuckable car.

The engine was a four-cylindered Otto-cycle unit and that’s about all I can say. It moved the Veloster around with much more grace than the Corolla’s engine and sounded less offensive while doing so. It was direct-injected and had some of the accompanying rattle at startup and at low engine speeds with the windows down. It would actually have been a good fit for the Toyota; it would have been as intrusive and easy-listening as the rest of the car. I didn’t drive it much, so I wouldn’t trust this figure, but I estimate that I got low thirties for gas mileage (7l/100km ±1).

The interior is of decent quality, on the same facet of the luxury spectrum as you’d find modern domestics, cheap Japanese cars, and high-priced VWs. There are a number of hard plastics that Hyundai, like Fiat, tries to obfuscate by making them brightly colored. While the effect is a bit EDM for the target market, and much too bright me, it is a reasonable cohesive and well thought-out place to be. Owing to the whirlwind nature of my visit, I did not get a chance to spend any large amount of time in the seat, but can’t report any ergonomic complaints with the chairs during my stay. As ever, the most important part of a rental car is the iPod integration, which, though not quite as intuitive as the Corolla, had the most attractive interface of the cars I’ve rented. The stereo was miles better than the Corolla’s, helped in no small part by the reduction in wind noise and tire roar compared to the Toyota at highway speeds. Visibility wasn’t great especially out the sides. Though I understand the theoretical utility of a CRX-esque, horizontally-split backlight, the bar separating the pieces of glass was perfectly placed to interfere with sight out the back. The trunk seemed large enough; certainly it was more than adequate to fit my carry-on only luggage. Thanks to the halfdoor in the back, entry and egress are not as hard as they should be. There is still not a huge amount of space back there, but for schlepping around neo-yuppies preposterously-named spawn I would imagine it’s nice not to have to fold the front seat to load the chilluns. In my experience with the other Veloster in my life, the halfdoor provides a large enough aperture to ram drunk people into to cart them back from the boozery at the end of the night. All in all, despite a slightly-garish aesthetic, I think the interior is decently done. It could have done with being more cheerful á la Fiat or more premium á la Audi. As it is, it’s another Korean compromise whose small faults manage to mask its respectable utility.

(Continued due to post-size limitiations in the next post.)

[f6fhellcat13]

So where does this leave the Veloster? At the Oklahoma City Airport, of course. As an Audi or Fiat fighter this car is deeply flawed. Hyundai seems to have created a car with the premiumness (no italics) of a Fiat and the sense of humor of an Audi, which is not a winning combination. This car would need an even more thorough makeover to become sporty, so I think the luxury angle is the one to push. Offering standard leather and nav at Korean prices, combined with their impressive warranties might help the Veloster, but most of the issue is, as ever, with the brand. The same issues faced by the Genesis sedan face the Veloster. It’s an uphill battle that I think Hyundai can win, but it won’t be for a while. Audi has its years and years of cynical marketing and good aesthetic design to support its image and Fiat has been given a clean slate (here, anyways) with which to build their brand. Though perceptions of the Koreans are changing, Hyundai still has a way to go before its cross-shopped with the brands that they want to be cross-shopped with. It would be nice if it was a more fun car, just like it would have been nice if the Genesis Coupe was a more viable player in its market segment. We must remember, though, how new the Koreans are at sport cars. With the exception of the Tiburon (Coupe, elsewhere), what even remotely-sporty cars do Hyundai (and Kia) have? Even Daewoo, the redheaded stepchild of the industry, cranks out cars that race in the BTCC. I think the nickel-and-dime approach that Hyundai has taken has made them successful, but as they look to escape their image, they will need to modify their behavior accordingly and start putting money and advertising (racing being one form of advertising) into making people think that they’ve changed and are sporty now.

[Ferrer]

As an engineer, I am around a fair number of other engineers and have observed a similar phenomenon. They seem to be more interested in the utility of the car, than its actual engineering. The upshot of all that is that the parking lot where I work is filled with load-bearing pickup trucks, super-economy Japanese small cars, and Subarus... contemptible Subarus. For them, that cars are the most use-optimized cars available: haulers, for those who need to haul or want to look like they do, cheap to run cars for those who do not, and Subarus for people who like the idea of an all-around car and don't want to buy two sets of tires. There are also the inevitable (in the Northeast, anyway) fleet of Buick LeSabres and pickups driven by the blue-collar floor workers.

I can understand that. I could even agree.

My engineer friend is far worse than that. He says when he buys a car he looks for design (but for some reason he hates Alfa Romeos). He is the sort of chap who buys an Audi A3 1.2 and then dresses it up with the S-Line body kit and orders it with the biggest wheels available. That's his idea of automotive nirvana.

I cannot understand that.

As a compulsive craigslister, I tend to think of new cars in terms of old car prices. For instance: my roomate bought a WRX (he does have two sets of tires, though...) for around $30,000. I found a pair of "runs good" early-'90s Buick Regals on craigslist for $500. He could have had 120 Buick Regals for the same price as his Subaru. I am also incredibly cheap. so, when people ask for "real" advice, not "stupid Miles advice" I tell them to buy an early-'90s Japanese car for $1,000 with 70,000 miles and drive it until the darkness takes the Earth and everyone else is driving a Countryman (not unlike Shakespeare's "country matters"...).
I do give advice, but rarely when it comes to the whole car. I am much more likely to give a salient answer to a question about which car has the best engine/interior/reliability etc... than "Which car should I buy?" If they ask that, I tend to respond with something stupid. If they have the gall to suggest a car or two as a basis for my recommendation, I usually launch into a diatribe about those cars and their brand. That last statement really rams home that I am just a forumite, for all my talk of being a post-ironic car enthusiast, it sounds like I am just an angry armchair racer living in my parents' basement after all.

The first used car I bought in my life was a reliability nightmare. And it was German. This has made me wary of anything that is not fully brand new.

On the other hand, though, I agree that brand new cars are very expensive indeed. This is usually for two reasons (at least for me); either you have to put up with equipment you don't want or you have to pay exponential price increases for marginal improvements (and a badge).

The first case usually happens with generalist manufacturers. For personal reasons I'd like to have on my next car bluetooth, sat nav, cruise control and LED/Xenon headlamps. However, in most cars these elements only come with the highest trim levels (even when they are optional extras) which means you also have to put up with large wheels, lane departure warning, leather seats or many other things you essentially do not want and which make the unnecessarily expensive.

Fine, you say, I'll go for a premium car. These at least let you choose equipment individually. Well, they do, but if say the quality and/or driving pleasure increases in 10 or 20%, the actual price tag increase is ten times that. Which makes you really think, is it really worth it?

Of course, as I said in another thread recently, this only applies if you have to care about money. If you are as rich as Carlos Slim and Bill Gates combined, then just pop down to you local Jag dealer and buy an F-Type S with the sports exhaust.

Excuse my ignorance, but what is the difference between it and the normal one? I thought Mazda was beSkydriving the whole range.

Indeed they are, but I mentioned it was the Skymotivebluesea in order to distinguish from the older, less silly-named generation.

(PD. The internet has told me today is your birthday so, happy birthday!)

[Ferrer]

Comments on the little Hyundai.

1) I do not know what an MMA shirt is.
2) Did you try looking for the turbo in the boot?
3) Good read!
4) Rubbish picture
5) I do not understand cars with a different number of doors in each side
6) All dual clutch gearboxes I've driven do not work properly at low speeds

Essentially the Veloster is clear example of style before substance. Yes the styling is... interesting but it is based on the Elantra chassis with torsion beam rear end.

Needless to say, it has flopped badly here and the car you actually want is the i30/Cee'd with its independent rear suspension.

[Kitdy]

but I’m an idiot

Best part of the review right there.

And here I was sitting reading this, sipping my latte, thinking you were an English major, not an engineer. You got talent, son.

Have... Have you actually heard people say "yinz" in your travels across the rustbelt?

[f6fhellcat13]

Have... Have you actually heard people say "yinz" in your travels across the rustbelt?

Negative, though I did see it on a video on YouTube.

Comments on the little Hyundai.

1) I do not know what an MMA shirt is.
2) Did you try looking for the turbo in the boot?
3) Good read!
4) Rubbish picture
5) I do not understand cars with a different number of doors in each side
6) All dual clutch gearboxes I've driven do not work properly at low speeds

1) Lucky you
2) No, but id did look for it under the hood and all I found was a plastic cafeteria tray.
3) Thanks!
4) Just you wait for my next review!
5) I think it can be made to work. In fact, I'd say it's one of the more successfully-excecuted elements of the Hyundai.
6) Me neither (see: repeated references to DSG in above post). I fear it is moving over to normal automatics, too. My current rental has a six-speed DCT and it's weird at all speeds, but especially slow speeds.

Essentially the Veloster is clear example of style before substance. Yes the styling is... interesting but it is based on the Elantra chassis with torsion beam rear end.

Needless to say, it has flopped badly here and the car you actually want is the i30/Cee'd with its independent rear suspension.

I don't think its dynamic capabilities are the reason for it flopping, though. There are other forces at play there.

[Kitdy]

What craphole are you in now?

I parked an '87 560SL today. So cool.

[Ferrer]

I don't think its dynamic capabilities are the reason for it flopping, though. There are other forces at play there.

Oh, sure, and the main one is that its brand name doesn't start with an "A" and end with an "udi". But even for us, twin turbo Zonda owners, the car is going to need more than weird styling and an odd number of doors.

Maybe if it was French...

I parked an '87 560SL today. So cool.

I relatively recently drove one of the infamous moose-elk-test Mercedes-Benz A-Classes - its only redeeming feature was that at least wasn't as bad as the current A-Class.

Beat that.

[Kitdy]

Beat that.

I have driven a CLA.

[Ferrer]

I have driven a CLA.

I have too.

It's not quite as bad as the A, but it still doesn't cut the mustard.

It's also seriously expensive.

And the proportions are wrong.

Detailing is good though.

[f6fhellcat13]

What craphole are you in now?

Back in Mount Royal again.
I have seen a worse abomination than the Shity Golf: it is the Shity Jetta.

Oh, sure, and the main one is that its brand name doesn't start with an "A" and end with an "udi". But even for us, twin turbo Zonda owners, the car is going to need more than weird styling and an odd number of doors.

Maybe if it was French...

I relatively recently drove one of the infamous moose-elk-test Mercedes-Benz A-Classes - its only redeeming feature was that at least wasn't as bad as the current A-Class.

Beat that.

Lexus RX?

[Ferrer]

Lexus RX?

I think sir you may have won.

Bonus points if it's a second gen.