OT: Purchasing a new SUV
- Thread starter RU31trap
- Start date
From the guy who complained about non Caterpillar equipment during Rutgers stadium expansion...
How do you like the '17 ridgeline? I'm currently looking between that, a Chevy Colorado, or Toyota Tacoma.
Absolutely love it! Quite as hell , almost too quite . Rides and handles great. I have the RTL -E so I have all the electronics.
Drove it last week from Monmouth County to King of Prussia and back in the snow storm. Put it snow mode and it never slipped and I always felt in control. I did like when coming off a ramp the Nissan truck in front of me was slipping all over the place. Way more interior room then the Tacoma. Never looked at the Chevy
Two negative to me are, the arm rests are too narrow and the speakers in the bed are nice to have for tailgating but do not get loud enough. Highly recommend that you take if for a test drive.
If you are looking at the Chevy Colorado, take a look at the GMC Canyon. IMO, the GMCs have nicer interiors. They just released (or will soon release) a Denali version of the Canyon.
I just had a flashback of one of he Honda's I owned. The armrests were ridiculously narrow. Seats were really uncomfortable too. I don't think I would ever go back to Honda.
I borrow a friends 2014 Kia van, the Sedona, on occasion.. he has it setup for cargo with no back seats... that thing moves. Has the optima engine in it... 3.5L 6. The 2016 Kia Sorrento tows the same 3500 total so I doubt that is going to change if towing is going to be an issue.
Nothing more, except maybe the name of an actual car...
What year? It's been a while since an S4 Avant was available in the U.S. The last one goes all the way back to the B7 era, i.e. the V-8 equipped S4.
I'm working on that info. It's in my building and has not moved in 6 months. I'm pretty sure it's one of the owners sons and I walk by it every morning in the parking deck. Has a ton of dust but I see the potential.
I'm not a huge car guy but I really like the look of it... it is grey with black leather seats.
I'm not a huge car guy but I really like the look of it... it is grey with black leather seats.
U.S. S4 Avants are of the B5 through B7 variants, sold from 2001 through 2009. The B5 ('01 - '05) has a twin-turbo 2.7 liter V6, the later ones through '09 came with the 340 hp 4.2 liter V8.
They're fun cars but you will definitely spend some appreciable coin to keep one in top running condition.
You should still check it out. I mean, there could be a perfectly good, non-mechanical explanation for why it's sitting there. Maybe there's a dead guy in the back or something.
I heartily recommend avoiding the CVT at all costs. It is not worthwhile to repair it, most likely will have to replace it when it breaks down.
I agree, but everyone is using a CVT now. I personally can't stand turbos. Every time I drive in a car that's equipped with a turbo it smells like its burning oil. Also, when your turbo goes it's like $4000 to rebuild one. But unfortunately more and more manufacturers are resorting to turbos as cheap HP. Does anyone agree?
A) No, they're not. It's pretty much a Japanese thing. Daimler-Chrylser had a fling with CVTs several years back but under Fiat has begun to see the error of their ways. Volkswagen-Audi, BMW, Mercedes, et al, do not use CVTs.
B) You might want to try driving one built in this century.
C) No, it isn't. It's actually more like $1500 and that's for a new one.
D) Wrong again. They're not "cheap horsepower", they're actually "expensive efficiency". They're used to allow manufacturers the ability to reduce overall displacement, thereby reducing specific fuel consumption, allowing them to meet CAFE standards. Turbocharged engines are more costly to the manufacturer throughout the product lifecycle. So...
E) No.
CVT stands for continuously variable transmission.
My experience has been that today's turbos are rock solid and refined. Have been driving cars with turbos for four years. My current 6 cylinder turbo has 326 hp but yields 27 mpg which is incredible to me. My biggest issue is resisting the temptation to drive fast.
my next car might actually be a truck, and I'd get the Ford F-150 Ecoboost, which I've previously rented. It has a V6 turbo.
I think he meant the Audi Accord. Obviously the most popular car on these boards.
Have owned a turbocharged Saab for 12 years now with no drama when it comes to the blower. Smooth power delivery, healthy amount of torque from a GM Ecotech block. They didn't invent it, but they were definitely one of the frontrunners of the turbocharging movement. In the early 2000s I leased an Audi A4 with the 1.8T. It was a little on the underpowered side, but the problems I had with that car had nothing to do with the turbo.
I'll add to the hijack, as I'm looking to lease a new SUV or CUV this fall when my Acadia lease is up. I've had several Acadias but now they just shrunk it so I'm not sure if I want it. Any suggestions or feedback on these?
GMC Acadia
Mazda CX-9
Ford Explorer
Dodge Durango
Lexus GX
Nissan Armada
GMC Yukon
Chevy Tahoe
GMC Acadia
Mazda CX-9
Ford Explorer
Dodge Durango
Lexus GX
Nissan Armada
GMC Yukon
Chevy Tahoe
I have none. Have friends who like the Acadia a lot, but you have an issue with it getting smaller. I am leaning towards Mazda CX-5 when I get out of my Audi Q5. Never knew anyone who had any problems or issues with GMC Yukon or Chevy Tahoe.
This is an extraordinary range of choices, i.e. these vehicles aren't all in the same class. You could narrow it down with a little better requirements analysis.
I've had 3 Acadias & would get a 4th but I'm disappointed it's smaller.
Hmmm, I know. I guess I'm looking for an Acadia replacement, as I mentioned above, I've had 3 Acadias & would get another if it wasn't smaller, which is why I'm now looking at such a wide range. Right now it's still early & I can't decide which way to go.
Of your choices, I think the Explorer is the closest to the older/larger Acadia. If you don't mind sacrificing the fuel economy, the Explorer Sport is a genuine hoot.
Might be solid wife shopping advice as well...
Was looking at vehicles in this class this weekend.
Explorer is longer than Acadia, by almost 19".
It's a nice interior. I found the usable storage with the 3rd row option to be surprisingly small, but this is my first real look into vehicles with 3rd row options.
If you are leasing, 2017 lease program is currently 1.25 money factor. You might be able to swing a new customer rebate of some sort. I was offered up to $4,000 in Ford programs, but I'm an existing Ford customer.
Explorer is bigger without a doubt, but I think your numbers are off a bit. Explorer is about 198-199" versus the 2017 Acadia which is about 192". Acadia's also narrower by some 2".
Not pointing you one way or another, but you always could get another 'plus-sized' Acadia. For 2017, GMC has the Acadia Limited which is the old body style alongside the new body style. And for 2018, Chevy just debuted the Traverse at the Detroit Auto Show. It's significantly bigger.
Could be. the 2017 Acadia length I got from Mr. Google said 172". Maybe I misread it
Don't just trust those Google auto-spit numbers - go to a source - manufacturer site, Edmunds, c&d, etc.
You wouldn't trust raw Google gun statistics numbers, would ya ; )
