toyoguy

lol @ the insight

this non-scientific study conducted by some British newspaper? http://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/02/report-...s-equal-that-o/ the solar panels power a fan to vent the interior when its parked under the sun. like this modern turbodiesel? http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive...rs/4284188.html the new midsize Prius weighs 3000lbs and in two to four years will switch over to a lighter lithium-ion battery pack. There are other technologies like direct injection and Valvematic that can significantly increase efficiency for the gasoline motor. The hybrids are only going to get far more efficient while diesels will be fighting emission regulations the EPA and CARB will begin passing shortly. Diesel will be a completely dead technology in the US as far as passenger cars are concerned in less than 5 years, significantly less mileage and a higher price, doesn't sound like a winner.

then your friend must be deaf since the Accord sets off a clearly audible alarm as soon as the driver's door is opened.

I just read that article which is a pretty long read but I didn't see it even mention the Insight. It didn't say the Prius is superior to Volt either, what is indisputable is the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry already reported GM is at least one generation behind Toyota on on green powertrains. The Prius does cost less than 2/3's what the Volt is expected to and unlike the Volt it isn't paid for by the American taxpayer along with its $7,500 tax credit. The Prius has a combined EPA rating of 50 mpg which by GM's own estimate means the average Prius commuter doesn't even need a full gallon of gas to get to work. And of course once the Volt passes 40 miles it's sucking gas just like the Prius. Even if the average price of gas is $6.00 the Prius needs $4.80 to cover 40 miles and then the Volt at best is on equal footing with it. The Prius plug-in should be arriving around the same time as the Volt which gives the Prius buyer the option of paying extra for the plug-in or just sticking to the standard model. Exactly what makes the Volt so superior? Looking at GM's own estimates of 10,000 units/year compared to 600,000 units/year for the Prius, the buyer isn't buying it. But then again it doesn't matter since the federal government will spend whatever amount GM asks. What's funny though is how many of the Volt's biggest supporters aren't interested in buying the Volt, it turns out they are really just GM's biggest supporters.

my parents got their Samsung off amazon or newegg, I forget either way much cheaper than Best Buy

or just the American and Japanese markets have imploded while European markets have not yet, but sooner or later they'll collapse as well. Goes to show you what pathetic management can do to a company. GM is a vastly superior company compared to VW and shouldn't ever be behind VW in sales.

except Toyota created Lexus and Scion VW did not create Audi, Lamborghini, Skoda, Seat, Veyron, Bentley, Bugatti or Scania.

I compared similar generations. the 1998-2002 Accord is rated below the 1997-2001 Camry in frontal collisions the 2003-2007 Accord structure is rated below the 2002-2006 Camry in side impacts the 2008-present Accord structure is rated below the 2007-present Camry structure in side impacts the 1996-2004 RL is rated below the 1995-2000 LS 400 in frontal collisions the 2007-present CRV is rated below the 2006-present RAV4 in roof strength. 2006-present Civic vs 2003-2008 Corolla 2001-2005 Civic vs 1998-2002 Corolla score one for Honda.

did Honda even offer a single vehicle sold in the 90's rated good in the frontal offset crash? the LS 400, RX 300, Camry, Sienna, Avalon, and Tundra were. Toyota was the first Japanese company to offer stability control. the first company to offer side curtain airbags, knee airbags, adaptive headlamps, a radar-based pre-collision system. exactly what has Honda advanced in terms of safety? the only thing stopping Toyota from receiving more Top Safety Pick awards is head restraint designs, largely irrelevant to me. However the head restraints in my Camry tilted forward while the previous Accord and my G37's do not and are too far rearward. Almost guarantees whiplash in a rear end collision. The Accords front seat belt was fixed, the Camry did adjust up and down and was much easier to position properly and stayed positioned properly.

Just last Saturday an F150 at a stop sign somehow didn't see me while I was driving 60 mph. I had to jump over into the turning to avoid T-boning him and back into my original lane to avoid jumping the curb...my old Camry would have rolled all over the place but my new car didn't even care. No doubt a less skilled driver like my gf would have had an accident.

well fortunately for car buyers, full-size SUV and to a lesser extent mid-size SUV sales have collapsed. Personally, I wouldn't want to buy a new vehicle below mid-size or 3300 lbs for safety reasons, the better fuel economy isn't worth the extra risk. My girl is a terrible driver so I hope to pick up a 4000 lb LS430 for her by Christmas. In safercar tests the Camry fairs better than the Accord. In the IIHS side impact tests the Camry's structure is rated good while the Accord's is rated acceptable, the previous Accord received a marginal structural rating compared to the previous Camry's acceptable rating back in 1998 the Camry received a good overall frontal crash score while the Accord was rated acceptable. In IIHS rollover test the newer CRV gets a lower score than the RAV4. the previous RL received an acceptable rating compared to the older LS400's perfect rating in IIHS frontal crash testing. the previous TSX received an acceptable overall rating in side impact tests compared to the perfectly rated IS 250 Honda safer than Toyota? Which cars are these.

true, the the 330i I tested had 50k mi on it, when I took it out on a a rough uneven road the frame showed poor strength and construction. The BMW also had plenty of rattles, kinda funny someone would claim the car is nearly perfect (maybe they missed the wind noise, lousy audio and so-so seats too), BMW should stop designing new cars cause there is nothing to improve. I on the other hand found plenty wrong with the 330i, that tends to happen when your spending your own money. When I decided I'd get a new car instead I didn't even bother testing the 335i. Guess that's how BMW builds cars designed to last 50k mi then start falling apart at the seams or maybe I'm just used to driving cars that actually are built to last. And I thought the 330i is as sterile and boring as they come, much like the 528i I had in possession for over a month.

Have you driven them? I tested a 2006 330i and it was way slow in acceleration. The 3.0-liter engine is a wimp in the lower-mid range, and the engine doesn't sound sporty at all. About the only thing going for its completely smooth, but the lack of power and poor engine note quickly ruled it out for me.

I used to like Honda but these days their J-series engines and 5-spd autos are too weak for me to consider. I almost picked up a used '08 TL (some amazing deals) but decided to go with the 09 G37. I liked the Honda's quieter engine and I found the seats sublime. And oddly I actually preferred the TL's interior much more than the G's and even newer TL's. But when pushed aggressively the TL shows its inferior fwd balance.

I paid over $250 for a 260 GTX just a month ago.