OT: Vehicle turning circles & more car questions

[retired711]

Several months ago, my 2010 Toyota Prius was rear-ended while stopped by a Chevy Silverado driving probably 35-40 mph. My wife and I, the only occupants, were completely unharmed. The other driver's insurance company promptly acknowledged fault. The car's drivability was unaffected and so I didn't rush to do anything. I got an estimate for repair and then took the car to a body shop I've worked with before. It turns out the car is a total loss. Apparently modern cars are engineered to essentially fold up in a collision so that the vehicle bears the brunt of the impact. This protects the occupants, but it makes it expensive to repair the car. The insurance company gave me, IMHO, a fair price.

We have another vehicle but it would be good to replace the Prius so that my wife and I can be doing different things at once. So we have been carshopping. Now that we're old and (in my case) decrepit, we care about ease of access and egress, and we care a lot about visibility. (I've always disliked the lack of visibility in the Prius and getting in and out of the car was becoming somewhat uncomfortable.) So we are probably going to get a compact SUV.

That brings me to my questions. The Prius had a 37-foot turning circle. (This and other numbers come from Consumer Reports.) Model A that we are considering has a 36-foot turning circle. Model B has a 39-foot turning circle. It seems to me that the difference is big enough that I will notice it, particularly when I drive in Philadelphia or another city. Am I right?

In addition, the Prius was 69 inches wide. Model A that we are considering is 72 inches wide. Model B is 74 inches. I am inclined to think that Model B would require a significantly greater adjustment for me than would A. I should add that depth perception has never been my strong suit.

I have not mentioned anything else about the vehicles so that the discussion remains focused. I might open it up depending on the response.

I hope no one will view these as stupid questions, and I apologize if they are. Best wishes to all for a wonderful 2024 -- and for many Rutgers victories!

 

[Knight Shift]

Several months ago, my 2010 Toyota Prius was rear-ended while stopped by a Chevy Silverado driving probably 35-40 mph. My wife and I, the only occupants, were completely unharmed. The other driver's insurance company promptly acknowledged fault. The car's drivability was unaffected and so I didn't rush to do anything. I got an estimate for repair and then took the car to a body shop I've worked with before. It turns out the car is a total loss. Apparently modern cars are engineered to essentially fold up in a collision so that the vehicle bears the brunt of the impact. This protects the occupants, but it makes it expensive to repair the car. The insurance company gave me, IMHO, a fair price.

We have another vehicle but it would be good to replace the Prius so that my wife and I can be doing different things at once. So we have been carshopping. Now that we're old and (in my case) decrepit, we care about ease of access and egress, and we care a lot about visibility. (I've always disliked the lack of visibility in the Prius and getting in and out of the car was becoming somewhat uncomfortable.) So we are probably going to get a compact SUV.

That brings me to my questions. The Prius had a 37-foot turning circle. (This and other numbers come from Consumer Reports.) Model A that we are considering has a 36-foot turning circle. Model B has a 39-foot turning circle. It seems to me that the difference is big enough that I will notice it, particularly when I drive in Philadelphia or another city. Am I right?

In addition, the Prius was 69 inches wide. Model A that we are considering is 72 inches wide. Model B is 74 inches. I am inclined to think that Model B would require a significantly greater adjustment for me that would A. I should add that depth perception has never been my strong suit.

I have not mentioned anything else about the vehicles so that the discussion remains focused. I might open it up depending on the response.

I hope no one will view these as stupid questions, and I apologize if they are. Best wishes to all for a wonderful 2024 -- and for many Rutgers victories!

The correct answer on these forums is always-buy a Honda Accord (that's sarcasm, and an old, tired joke).

I noticed a huge difference in turning circle after turning in my Audi Q5, which had a 38 foot turning circle, when I moved to a Ford Maverick pickup which had "only" a 3 foot greater turning circle of 41 feet.

Personally, if all else is equal, get the Model A with the tighter turning circle and narrower width. You said you were old and decrepit. It will only get more difficult to make K -turns and U-turns on narrow streets/roads. I would also make sure you have a good rear view camera (most modern cars have decent ones).

 

[colbert17]

Several months ago, my 2010 Toyota Prius was rear-ended while stopped by a Chevy Silverado driving probably 35-40 mph. My wife and I, the only occupants, were completely unharmed. The other driver's insurance company promptly acknowledged fault. The car's drivability was unaffected and so I didn't rush to do anything. I got an estimate for repair and then took the car to a body shop I've worked with before. It turns out the car is a total loss. Apparently modern cars are engineered to essentially fold up in a collision so that the vehicle bears the brunt of the impact. This protects the occupants, but it makes it expensive to repair the car. The insurance company gave me, IMHO, a fair price.

We have another vehicle but it would be good to replace the Prius so that my wife and I can be doing different things at once. So we have been carshopping. Now that we're old and (in my case) decrepit, we care about ease of access and egress, and we care a lot about visibility. (I've always disliked the lack of visibility in the Prius and getting in and out of the car was becoming somewhat uncomfortable.) So we are probably going to get a compact SUV.

That brings me to my questions. The Prius had a 37-foot turning circle. (This and other numbers come from Consumer Reports.) Model A that we are considering has a 36-foot turning circle. Model B has a 39-foot turning circle. It seems to me that the difference is big enough that I will notice it, particularly when I drive in Philadelphia or another city. Am I right?

In addition, the Prius was 69 inches wide. Model A that we are considering is 72 inches wide. Model B is 74 inches. I am inclined to think that Model B would require a significantly greater adjustment for me that would A. I should add that depth perception has never been my strong suit.

I have not mentioned anything else about the vehicles so that the discussion remains focused. I might open it up depending on the response.

I hope no one will view these as stupid questions, and I apologize if they are. Best wishes to all for a wonderful 2024 -- and for many Rutgers victories!

As an older person myself I understand what you're looking for. I don't know much about cars but you might want to think about upgrading from a Model A.

 

[retired711]

The correct answer on these forums is always-buy a Honda Accord (that's sarcasm, and an old, tired joke).

I noticed a huge difference in turning circle after turning in my Audi Q5, which had a 38 foot turning circle, when I moved to a Ford Maverick pickup which had "only" a 3 foot greater turning circle of 41 feet.

Personally, if all else is equal, get the Model A with the tighter turning circle and narrower width. You said you were old and decrepit. It will only get more difficult to make K -turns and U-turns on narrow streets/roads. I would also make sure you have a good rear view camera (most modern cars have decent ones).

Thanks so much! Every new vehicle these days seems to have a rear view camera: is there anything that makes a camera particularly good or bad? BTW, the vehicles we are considering have reverse automatic braking -- that seems to me to be a very desirable feature no matter how good the rear camera is.

 

[retired711]

As an older person myself I understand what you're looking for. I don't know much about cars but you might want to think about upgrading from a Model A.

Yeah, I thought someone would say that! :)

 

[Knight Shift]

Thanks so much! Every new vehicle these days seems to have a rear view camera: is there anything that makes a camera particularly good or bad? BTW, the vehicles we are considering have reverse automatic braking -- that seems to me to be a very desirable feature no matter how good the rear camera is.

I'm not really that up to speed on the different cameras. We have an F150 Lightning EV and a Volvo S60, and both of them have great cameras. We rented a Hyundai smaller SUV on a trip recently, and I thought that camera was subpar, but maybe I have camera privilege. If you drive it on a test drive, and it is good enough for you, that's good enough.

 

[rurichdog]

Thanks so much! Every new vehicle these days seems to have a rear view camera: is there anything that makes a camera particularly good or bad? BTW, the vehicles we are considering have reverse automatic braking -- that seems to me to be a very desirable feature no matter how good the rear camera is.

Cameras are good because they have software integrations that make audible warnings, visible warnings, and will also stop the vehicle if another car or motion or object is detected. Very helpful when backing out of a spot in a crowded parking lot. Also the rear view mirror can be obscured by the huge blindspots afforded by modern vehicle design; rollovers are apparently a big concern these days, so C-pillars are not only beefier they are at an angle that better supports the roof...but makes it very hard to see around.

 

[dconifer]

Damn, I drive old, out-of-date vehicles. That's all I got.

I was thinking that nobody would notice a change in turning circle dimension. But RETIRED brought it up, and KNIGHTSHIFT expounded. I stand corrected; thanks for the education.

Good luck, RETIRED. Seems to be lots of good information in this thread already...

 

[jtung230]

You got rear ended at 30 -40 mph? That’s a serious collision. Glad you are ok. Surprise cops let you drive the car away from the scene.

 

[dconifer]

You got rear ended at 30 -40 mph? That’s a serious collision. Glad you are ok. Surprise cops let you drive the car away from the scene.

My daughter wrapped her Prius around a utility pole and walked away (it was totaled, though). The "expert" at the junk yard where it ended up told me that the Prius is "safe AF".

 

[jtung230]

My daughter wrapped her Prius around a utility pole and walked away (it was totaled, though). The "expert" at the junk yard where it ended up told me that the Prius is "safe AF".

I don’t doubt that. But I’m surprised the car is still road worthy that the cop let you drive away.

 

[Rutgers Chris]

Thanks so much! Every new vehicle these days seems to have a rear view camera: is there anything that makes a camera particularly good or bad? BTW, the vehicles we are considering have reverse automatic braking -- that seems to me to be a very desirable feature no matter how good the rear camera is.

I had a Nissan with a very aggressive automatic break in reverse. It definitely helped a time or two, even if it scares the hell out of you unnecessarily from time to time.

 

[retired711]

You got rear ended at 30 -40 mph? That’s a serious collision. Glad you are ok. Surprise cops let you drive the car away from the scene.

All I can say is that my wife and I were completely uninjured. The cops never showed up. There was no need -- the driver of the vehicle was apologetic and cooperative.

 

[RUevolution36]

turning radius is very noticeable. 3" of extra width is noticeable, but you'll adapt. 6" wider will be very noticeable.

Also, there are some cars that offer an overhead 360 view camera, which is better than just a plain rear view camera, imo. my cars don't have it, but i've driven cars with it and its fantastic.

 

[e5fdny]

@retired711,

Since you’re thinking about a smaller SUV give the Honda CR-V or HR-V a look.

Honda’s in my experience (Accord and Odyssey) have a very tight turning radius. Guessing their small SUVs do too.

 

[retired711]

@retired711,

Since you’re thinking about a smaller SUV give the Honda CR-V or HR-V a look.

Honda’s in my experience (Accord and Odyssey) have a very tight turning radius. Guessing their small SUVs do too.

The CR-V is the "Model B" that has a 39-foot turning radius. I find that surprisingly large.

 

[jtung230]

All I can say is that my wife and I were completely uninjured. The cops never showed up. There was no need -- the driver of the vehicle was apologetic and cooperative.

Are you telling me both of you drove off? No way it happened at 30-40 mph.

 

[retired711]

Are you telling me both of you drove off? No way it happened at 30-40 mph.

FWIW, he did not claim to have been braking or traveling slowly, and traffic on that road is generally 30-40 mph. Whatever his speed, we consider ourselves to have been *very* lucky.

 

[e5fdny]

The CR-V is the "Model B" that has a 39-foot turning radius. I find that surprisingly large.

Okay. I’ve never driven one so I can’t compare it to other small SUVs.

But the Accord vs Camry/Lexus was tighter.

As was the Odyssey minivan vs other minivans in our family.

So I assumed that was across the board for Honda.

 

[retired711]

I hope I won't bore everybody with more basic questions:

First, is AWD really worthwhile? We don't off-road; we don't have that much snow in N.J.; and it seems to me that modern traction control systems, found on most cars, pretty much do the same thing. In addition, AWD, as I understand it, makes a car heavier and therefore hurts fuel economy. Am I missing something?

Second, are on-board navigation systems worthwhile? I am told that a cellphone can almost always be paired with the screen on the car, and so one can get a visual display as with an onboard system. I dislike the maps software on my iphone, but is the on-board system likely to be much better?

We continue to look at compact SUVs. We liked the Subaru Forester, especially for its excellent visibility and access, but it would be nice to have a hybrid for the better gas mileage. Consumer Reports likes the Honda CR-V hybrid much more than the Toyota Rav-4 hybrid-- the former has better brakes and visibility and better access and egress. (We're at an age where all of that is important to us.) It also likes the Hyundai Tucson hybrid. I have to add that I have had three different Toyotas -- the good news is that they rarely need major repairs, but the bad news is that all developed annoying issues as they aged (for instance, the Prius started burning a significant amount of oil at the 90K mark.)

Thanks to all of you who have commented so far, and thanks in advance for your further comments.

 

[rutgersal]

I hope I won't bore everybody with more basic questions:

First, is AWD really worthwhile? We don't off-road; we don't have that much snow in N.J.; and it seems to me that modern traction control systems, found on most cars, pretty much do the same thing. In addition, AWD, as I understand it, makes a car heavier and therefore hurts fuel economy. Am I missing something?

Second, are on-board navigation systems worthwhile? I am told that a cellphone can almost always be paired with the screen on the car, and so one can get a visual display as with an onboard system. I dislike the maps software on my iphone, but is the on-board system likely to be much better?

We continue to look at compact SUVs. We liked the Subaru Forester, especially for its excellent visibility and access, but it would be nice to have a hybrid for the better gas mileage. Consumer Reports likes the Honda CR-V hybrid much more than the Toyota Rav-4 hybrid-- the former has better brakes and visibility and better access and egress. (We're at an age where all of that is important to us.) It also likes the Hyundai Tucson hybrid. I have to add that I have had three different Toyotas -- the good news is that they rarely need major repairs, but the bad news is that all developed annoying issues as they aged (for instance, the Prius started burning a significant amount of oil at the 90K mark.)

Thanks to all of you who have commented so far, and thanks in advance for your further comments.

BMWs All Wheel Drive System is excellent and provides excellent traction and performance in snow, with minimal mileage penalty. For our weather, you don’t really need all wheel drive, but it’s a nice to have, especially when you’re driving in a heavy snowstorm. If you’re not going to drive in snow, then you don’t need it and front wheel drive is good enough.

The Honda Accord Hybrid is excellent and even the regular Honda Accord is no slouch, delivering 38 mpg. It has many of the same features as the more expensive BMW. It also comes with Apple CarPlay, which is all you need to interface with your iPhone, eliminating the need for an onboard navigation system, which is a waste. CarPlay shows Google Maps beautifully, and is much better to look at than your phone when driving. The CRV you mentioned is also excellent, as is the Subaru Forester and more expensive stablemate, the Outback. The Toyotas are good too.

 

[Rutgers Chris]

Awd would be nice in case we do get snow in my opinion.

On board navigation isn’t necessary at all, just plug in your phone.

Given all you’ve said, I think going with a Toyota based on your familiarity makes sense.

 

[e5fdny]

I hope I won't bore everybody with more basic questions:

First, is AWD really worthwhile? We don't off-road; we don't have that much snow in N.J.; and it seems to me that modern traction control systems, found on most cars, pretty much do the same thing. In addition, AWD, as I understand it, makes a car heavier and therefore hurts fuel economy. Am I missing something?

Second, are on-board navigation systems worthwhile? I am told that a cellphone can almost always be paired with the screen on the car, and so one can get a visual display as with an onboard system. I dislike the maps software on my iphone, but is the on-board system likely to be much better?

We continue to look at compact SUVs. We liked the Subaru Forester, especially for its excellent visibility and access, but it would be nice to have a hybrid for the better gas mileage. Consumer Reports likes the Honda CR-V hybrid much more than the Toyota Rav-4 hybrid-- the former has better brakes and visibility and better access and egress. (We're at an age where all of that is important to us.) It also likes the Hyundai Tucson hybrid. I have to add that I have had three different Toyotas -- the good news is that they rarely need major repairs, but the bad news is that all developed annoying issues as they aged (for instance, the Prius started burning a significant amount of oil at the 90K mark.)

Thanks to all of you who have commented so far, and thanks in advance for your further comments.

Subaru guy here.

Loved my Outback and very comfortable with my Legacy now too (about 30+ MPG highway). The AWD has come in handy for both when needed. The ones I know who have a Forester love them too.

As for the onboard display, as others have said…do you really need it with the phones? Also, while distracting for some, pretty sure you can turn them off if you want.

Will probably buy an Ascent since we really don’t need the Odyssey but like a 3rd row.

But you did your research and as you found out the CR-V does well. I’d consider that if I were you.

 

[rurichdog]

I recently bought a CRV and have been happy with it. Going from a V6 to a turbo 4cyl with a CVT has taken an adjustment. HondaLink is like the other onboard systems that you plug in to your phone with a usb cable and your Google Maps or Waze displays on the car screen. I haven't gotten the map sounds to work, I'll ask the service guy at my next service.

My previous car was a Camry and the interior of the newer RAV4 was too reminiscent of that, which I just could not get passed. The Honda felt more updated to me.

 

[Section124]

Agree with all the comments above but the other benefit to AWD is driving on wet and icy roads. We get more of those conditions than snow. I personally would never buy a car without it.

 

[Shelby65]

Don’t sweat the small stuff. Turning radius and car width are far down the list of meaningful comparisons for 99% of buyers.

Surely you already have a preference based on test drive, styling, safety ratings, expected cost to own and driver reviews. Buy that one with AWB and move on with your life.

 

[rutgersdave]

Thanks so much! Every new vehicle these days seems to have a rear view camera: is there anything that makes a camera particularly good or bad? BTW, the vehicles we are considering have reverse automatic braking -- that seems to me to be a very desirable feature no matter how good the rear camera is.

I have the reverse and front automatic braking and it has helped in a few occasions. However, in the reverse braking, backing out of the driveway, sometimes the car will automatically stop maybe due to the small slope of the driveway because there no cars or objects in the rear.

 

[retired711]

Subaru guy here.

Loved my Outback and very comfortable with my Legacy now too (about 30+ MPG highway). The AWD has come in handy for both when needed. The ones I know who have a Forester love them too.

As for the onboard display, as others have said…do you really need it with the phones? Also, while distracting for some, pretty sure you can turn them off if you want.

Will probably buy an Ascent since we really don’t need the Odyssey but like a 3rd row.

But you did your research and as you found out the CR-V does well. I’d consider that if I were you.

Thank you and others for your comments. We are planning this week to complete purchasing a Subaru Forester in the Touring trim. . We also test-drove a CR-V, and we thought the Forester had better visibility and seat access, both of which are important to us. The same was true for the Hyundai Tucson. I'm not wild about getting a navigation system, but there are enough other things we want on the Touring that we'll take it.

 

[BigRnj]

Several months ago, my 2010 Toyota Prius was rear-ended while stopped by a Chevy Silverado driving probably 35-40 mph.

… and the drivability was NOT impacted??? You sure you weren’t driving a surplus HumVee???

In my best My Cousin Vinny accent: “are U sure about that speed?” 😉

PS - glad no one was injured

 

[retired711]

… and the drivability was NOT impacted??? You sure you weren’t driving a surplus HumVee???

In my best My Cousin Vinny accent: “are U sure about that speed?” 😉

PS - glad no one was injured

I'm positive. The other vehicle was going at highway speed. The other driver didn't even claim to have hit the brakes.

 

[e5fdny]

Thank you and others for your comments. We are planning this week to complete purchasing a Subaru Forester in the Touring trim. . We also test-drove a CR-V, and we thought the Forester had better visibility and seat access, both of which are important to us. The same was true for the Hyundai Tucson. I'm not wild about getting a navigation system, but there are enough other things we want on the Touring that we'll take it.

Look at mister bougie here with the Touring trim line.😎

And again, as mentioned earlier, everyone I know who has a Forester really loves them.

 

[retired711]

Look at mister bougie here with the Touring trim line.😎

And again, as mentioned earlier, everyone I know who has a Forester really loves them.

Thanks! I meant to add that we did not test-drive the Toyota Rav 4 -- Consumer reports is very down on it except for the Prime. Beside, my last three cars have been Toyotas and I've been disappointed with their longevity. I would have hung on to the Prius longer, but I got tired of having to top off the oil every thousand or two thousand miles became of the amount it burned.

Maybe I should also add that we really don't drive enough to make it worthwhile to pay the premium for a hybrid, and I consider electric vehicles not ready for primetime until there is a *much* more extensive charging network.

Again, thanks to all!