Speaking of real wheels, we have already entered the spring and it is time to test the chevys, sports cars, vans and visit everywhere glued to the Royal Road of California. Thanks Mr. Warren Brown.
Okay, latter state. But if you really want to enjoy spring on the road, you'd best drive through Virginia's Shenandoah Valley or the Storm Hill Mountain area of New York State.
Hi Warren - we have been researching a new long hauler (to replace our beloved Ford Focus wagon) for awhile now. We keep on reading about the Ford C-Max - and all its changes in features and release dates. We really like the Mazda5, but I'm wondering if we should wait until Fall (if they stick with that) for the C-Max? We have no kids, but do have largish dogs, camping gear and two bikes (usually 2 out of threes of those at once) to fit inside. Thanks!
You've probably heard that the C-Max Hybrid is scheduled for release late summer, or early fall 2012. The C-Max Energi, more of an extended range plug-in electric, which supposedly can run 500 miles via a Chevy Volt-like combination of battery-powered motor and extended range fossil fuel engine, will come in mid-2013. Prices will determine their acceptability. Prices ahve not yet been ammounced. My overall EV prediction: Thy will remain something of a hard sell, but a growing portion of the market for the next five years.
Does a sturdy suspension have to mean a hard ride? What is the sturdiest small SUV. In Costa Rica, the roads are terrible. They eat tie rods, ball joints, bushings and stabilizers.
Traditional truck suspensions, those with leaf-spring rear suspensions, solid beams, that sort of thing, guarantee a hard, bumpy ride. It's the nature of the beast. Most sophisticated trucks nowadays are using more compliant four-wheel-independent suspension systems.
Check out a used Hyundai Elantra (which I've driven all over the Bay Area with great delight) or a Subaru Impreza, perfect for Bay Area, including occasional muddy patches, and for getting up to and around the ski zones.
Again, Hyundai is hard to beat in your suggested price range. Look at the Accent or the Elantra used. The Toyota Corolla is hard to beat as a reliable economy/commuter car. And if you need all-wheel-drive, Subaru is hard to beat anywhere. You'll pay more for Toyota or Subaru. But I'm a parent. I've been there with college kids (now paying their own way, including student loans, thank God!). Paying more for piece of mind is worth it.
I'm looking at a BMW X3 (2013 for the better gas milage). But BMW, which used to have a full size spare tire, no longer has any spare and has run flats instead (now on all their cars). I'm female and frequently do long distances alone. I like to have a full size spare so, if there's a flat, I can change the tire and go without having to ask anyone for assistance (yes, I know how to change a tire). I know that, with run flats, they can go an extra 150 miles after a puncture, but it's only at 50 mph (not a safe speed on the New Jersey Turnpike), and what if I'm 200+ miles from home or my destination. Can I use a can of sealer and air to fix the tire? Is there anything else I can do to fix the tire so I can keep on driving to my destination and at a normal speed? Thank you very much for any info you have. This is a serious problem for me.
I don't know how to change a tire, at least not with total confidence and competence. So, if I get a flat on the Turnpike, here's hoping you're driving my way!
But one of the many reasons you're getting better mileage in 2013 3-Series Bimmers is that those cars are extremely weight conscious. They drop pounds by doing things such as jettisoning weighty spare tires. Run-flats also help by reducing rolling resistance without dangerously compromising traction. The downside is a harder ride, somewhat mitigated by a superior suspension system, and a higher cost.
But run-flats can keep you going 50 miles at 50 miles per hour (stay in right lane, of course) until you reach a service station (all over NJ, especially in the Turnpike area). Run-flats have improved much since their introduction 15 or so years ago. I don't think you have anything to worry about. And, of course, always keep a charged cell phone on the road.
The column last week was on the A3 2.0 TDi wagon. But your point is well-taken. Seems to me that someone at Volkswagen, Audi's corporate parent, needs to set borders. Let VW handle the economy and entry-level luxury stuff. Allow Audi to handle the high-end exclusively. It does not take a genius to figure out that when you're buying an A3 2.0 TDi wagon, you're buying a VW SportWagen TDi at a higher price.
Waiting is no guarantor of perfection in the automobile business, nor in anything else. Nor is it a sign of car-hating crackpottery, addictive pennypinching, or heel-dragging. It all depends on what you are waiting for. In the case of the new Subaru Outback, though, there is no need to wait. Subaru has vehicle quality, reliability, and its various all-wheel-drive systems (among the best in the business) down to a science. I'd go for it. And if your spouse makes one of those irritating "I told you so" noises, make him wait for a few things. He'll wise up and shut up. Good luck.
Thanks for your comment. I've grown up since I've started writing about this business 30 years ago. So "zoom" no longer is an overwhelming factor in my concerns. Structural integrity and overall vehicle safety are. A vehicle that sins against safety in pursuit of performance chutzpah no longer gets my vote. Fuel economy and tailpipe pollution are major concerns. Traveling changed my mind on those. After seeing as many Chinese in Africa as I've seen Africans--the Chinese were there for oil and other available natural resources--it occurred to me that ours is a dangerously finite world. We can help limit resource wars by limiting resource waste. And it is our world--one world when seen from above, with "oceans" becoming one large body of water punctuated by separate pieces of land. Same with air. Air-blown pollution does not stop at national borders. Cleaner cars can reduce that, too. And I like something well-sculpted outside and pretty inside. Safety preferences include side and head air bags; automatically tensions seat belts; four-wheel disc brakes (all ventilated, or ventilated front and solid rear); electronic stability and traction control; good visibility, of course; automatic blind-side warning, becoming increasingly valuable to me the older I get.
Keep an eye on Volvo. Geely of China, Volvo's new owner, is pouring a lot of money into product development. You will have an S40-type vehicle, probably even available with hybrid, electric-gas, or diesel technology, and more strikingly designed, soon.
The new Subaru Outback. You want something else?
I'd shop the Hyundai Elantra or Chevrolet Sonic. Both are safe, reliable small cars easy to park and fuel. And what I like about the Sonic is its optional infotainment center, which obviates the need for expensive onboard navigation by allowing you to sync your i Phone navi or portable Garmin or other navi with the Sonic's screen.
Check out my favorite four compact haulers: Mazda CX-5, Honda CR-V, Chevrolet Equinox, and Toyota Rav-4. Any one of them can handle all of your transportation concerns.
Only a handful of auto manufacturers use continuously variable transmissions, and in only a few models. Seems like if CVTs were good things they would be used more widely, but if they were bad thing, nobody would use them at all. So how do CVTs compare to ordinary automatic transmissions in terms of reliability, smooth operation, gas mileage, acceleration, etc.? If I am looking at a model that offers trim levels with a choice of regular automatic or CVT (some Nissans, for one), which do I want, and why?
CVTs, continuously variable transmissions, are a work in progress--a darned good work in progress, especially in an era of steadily rising fuel prices. We'll see more of them, especially from Nissan and Hyundai, I think. Things change, sometimes slowly. But they change.
Look, life, injury and death or random. How well you survive a crash in any vehicle depends on the closing speed and angle of the crash, the compatibility or lack thereof of objects crashed, the amount of safety mitigation (seat belts, air bags, errant energy management structure, et cetera) involved in the crash. There's also the matter of pure luck, which no one seems capable of explaining to anyone's satisfaction. A closing speed of 45 mph is a rather horrendous crash. Pray for luck in that one in any vehicle.
Thoughts, comments, suggestions or criticisms about The Post's Live Q&As? Send us an e-mail.
Become a fan of Post Live on Facebook.
Follow @WashingtonPost on Twitter.
