This is topic Buying a new truck in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006803

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 02-07-2013, 06:18 PM:
 
Since my old Ranger has now arrived at its 21st year, I decided that it's time to retire that and buy a new truck. Boy, was I in for an eye-opener -- trucks and related technology have sure advanced since the last time I looked at them.

After checking with the local Ford dealership and the GM dealership, I decided to get a 2013 Ford Escape SUV with 4 wheel drive. It sure has a lot of gadgets, it even parks itself! (I never knew that vehicles could do that. Science fiction come to life and all that.) The key never leaves your pocket -- the door unlocks when you touch the handle, then you press the starter button and drive off. At least I won't have to worry about locking the key in the truck any more.

My intention was to pay cash for this truck (Here's my money, where's my truck?) but oddly enough I could get $3500 off of the price if I financed it over 7 years of monthly payments, made three monthly payments on it and then paid off the loan in full on the 91st day, which I can do with no penalty. Strange, but I'll take it since my money can sit in the bank for 3 extra months this way too. It won't add up to all of $3500 saving because they charge $100 or so to register the loan and then I end up paying 3 months of interest on the purchase price, but still: any saving is a saving. I guess they hope that after you sign up for payments you'll just keep on making payments.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-20-2013, 11:36 PM:
 
Give it a few years and all of them gadgets are going to break and that is costly to replace...esp from FORD.

That's the sign that they want you to trade the vehicle off and grab a new one since fussing with gadget repair isn't what they want you to do.

Keeping you in payments is how banks are making money with long term loans, not losing money on short term, or early pay-off loans.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-21-2013, 10:29 AM:
 
I'd say do it, with the following conditions:

1. There is no penalty for paying-off the loan early.
2. You can trust yourself to pay-off the loan and not settle into making those payments for the full term.

The lender is betting that you'll spend the money and/or get comfortable with making the payments.

And, yeah... We're gonna need a photo of this truck...
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-21-2013, 11:12 AM:
 
Cars are too expensive. No, not just because they charge too much for the product but because they put too much expensive crap on them you don't need.

I don't need, nor do I want DVD players, video games, navigation systems, heated seats or automated butt wipers. I don't want any electronic device getting between me and operating the car. I don't care for anti-lock brakes. I certainly don't want a bomb embedded in my steering wheel! I don't give a flying fuck what supposed safety statistic any shit-for-brains asshole tries to cite as a reason why I need that shit in my car.

I don't want a bunch of shit in my car that I didn't ask for. It's all nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to drive up profit margins by manipulating government regulations and public perception so high-profit extras become required necessities.

I want four fucking wheels and a fucking engine. Nothing more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnyhkBU1yaw
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 02-21-2013, 12:31 PM:
 
Randy, I understand your logic as far as 'extras' but I certainly wouldn't consider seat belts and air bags 'extras'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joMK1WZjP7g

If you say you'd rather be in the '59, I'll dig up the suicide hotline number for ya....
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-21-2013, 01:00 PM:
 
My wife has pretty much the same vehicle as Frank describes (2013 Ford Escape) and while it's pretty fun to drive, the electronics ARE a pain. The clock keeps resetting itself; the satellite radio forgets what station it's on or else it changes the source for no reason. None of this happens with any predictable pattern, just at random. I would guess we don't use about 30% of the features -- partly because many of the touchscreen controls (like HVAC and radio volume) are duplicated with real pushbuttons or knobs on the dashboard.

The Bluetooth phone works fine, but when my wife calls me while driving, it sounds like she's standing in a windstorm near the ocean. The voice command thing works pretty well but it fouls up enough of the time that it's easier to just use the actual buttons. We use it mostly to change stations on the radio.

Of all the fancy features the one I like the best is not having to screw with the key. You just get in the car and press the button and go. I have to admit I do worry about the long term reliability of all the 42 billion "sensors" the car is equipped with.

I drive a 2011 Ford Ranger which is pretty surprising in its simplicity. It is almost identical to the 2002 model I had previously. I don't know what I'll do when this truck wears out, since Ford has now stopped making the Ranger and I have no need for a bigger F150. But, I probably won't have to worry about it for at least 8 or 9 years. (For those already saying "Get a Toyota" or something, I'm a die-hard Ford guy for two reasons: I've always liked their products, and the local Ford dealer is one of our parts store's biggest customers.)
 

---

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 02-21-2013, 01:16 PM:
 
Don't know how an SUV is a truck, but I'm with Randy for the most part on this one. I bought a 2005 Corolla brand new. No power locks. No power windows. No satellite or HD radio. No backup camera or GPS or internet-connected dashboard. Just four fucking tires, a fucking engine, four fucking doors, a fucking trunk, a fucking AM/FM/CD player, four fucking seat belts, a fucking glovebox and a couple of fucking cupholders. Everything else is bullshit.
 

---

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 02-21-2013, 01:53 PM:
 
I have a Nissan Versa, which is equipped in a similar fashion to Edward's Corolla, except for the "fucking" trunk. Mine is a hatchback.
My main bone of discontention is the tire pressure sensors my car is equipped with. The alert light on my dash comes on when we have a sudden warm-to-cold temp change, or when we get our first rain, and the sensor does not tell me which tire is underinflated. I have ignored it, only to have it go away after I've driven several miles.
I guess really busy people need them, lest they forget to look at their tires and notice one of them is flat...
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-21-2013, 02:28 PM:
 
I don't see the point in so much of the integrated gadgetry.

A good smart phone or tablet is way better than any in-dash system from any vehicle maker on the planet. It doesn't matter if it is a tiny econo-box car or a Rolls Royce. The apps on my Android phone are going to do a better job, be updated more often, and not cost anywhere near as much money as some fancy in-dash navigation system.

For music, I think it's enough for the car to have a decent radio and CD player. It would be nice to have really good speakers and amps as standard equipment, but one can probably get a better deal and setup after market. In the end, for multimedia purposes I think a vehicle should just have a place in the dash where someone can rest their phone. Provide some USB and iPod inputs so music can be streamed into the car's stereo system. An AC adapter for each passenger would be nice.

The skeptic in me thinks some of the integrated gadgetry is a scam to make it where the average person can't work on his own vehicle. I don't think we're far from the point where a car has to be hooked to a $100,000 proprietary device at the dealership just to change the oil or an air filter.


What happens when this stuff breaks? Key-less entry and start up is really convenient. But what if the system running it goes on the blink and has you locked out of your car and the vehicle unable to start? I can see drivers getting so dependent on their vehicle's rear mounted camera and collision detection system they'll just keep backing up without looking when that system stops working unexpectedly. Then the real fun will happen.

There's a lot of technological push to make it where vehicles can drive themselves. More and more new vehicles can parallel park themselves. To be turned into a mere passenger when you're in the driver's seat is kind of depressing.

On a fundamental level vehicles are so freaking expensive anymore that once you have one and have it paid off you won't want to buy another one for a long time. Computerized gadgets in a 10 year old vehicle are going to seem laughably primitive compared to a portable device someone can bring into the vehicle.

This is essentially why I think some other ideas to integrate technologies together are stupid. A bunch of the technology press keeps salivating over the rumors of an Apple branded HDTV set. I think having a DVD player integrated into a TV is stupid enough. Integrating a computer that's gonna go obsolete in 2-5 years into a TV set that customers will expect to last a decade or more is even more stupid. I guess some bean counting executives are masturbating over the fantasy of consumers buying new HDTV sets every 1-2 years just to have the latest version made by Apple.
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 02-21-2013, 02:40 PM:
 
My girlfriend gave me her 2003 Corolla when she bought her new one back in 2011. The dealer did not want it due to the high mileage. It had about 320,000 miles on it, and I figured I would use it to commute until it died, as it gets much better gas mileage than either my Mustang Convertible and my Jeep Liberty. It now has about 340,000 miles on it, and is still running trouble free. The only thing I have done to it is change the oil every 3,000 miles (as did my girlfriend before me).

As to my 2003 Jeep Liberty, it is the worst piece of crap I have ever owned. It was poorly engineered, poorly built, from crappy components. I just got another recall notice in the mail, indicating that the air bags may go off at any time without warning, but they do not have the part to fix the problem. Chrysler will let me know when the part becomes available. Never again will I own a Chrysler vehicle. Never. Back in the 1970's, I owned a Fiat X-1/9, which was also a poorly designed and built piece of garbage. No wonder Chrysler felt at home selling out to Fiat.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-21-2013, 04:34 PM:
 
I'm not THAT much against seat belts and air bags. My only complaint is that there is a pellet of solid rocket engine fuel two feet from your face. While it's not common, by any means, they can go off without apparent cause and it is a bad enough problem to warrant concern. I have air bags in my car(s) but I still look at them with jaundiced eye.

When air bags were first marketed they were supposed to be in place of seat belts. It wasn't until they (the engineers) realized that the constraints they had to work under (full inflation in under 30ms) that they, somehow, became "supplementary."

That just says to me that marketing drives deployment of such things, not real practicality.

This drive to marketing is what's causing all these cars to be outfitted with so many gewgaws. They can't make better cars that get better mileage and are safer to drive so they just spend the research money figuring out ways to put in fancy toys to hoodwink people into thinking their cars are better.

There really has been no great improvements in cars in, I'd say, ten to twenty years. Only more expensive gadgets.

I loved my Dodge Neon. It got 30+ MPG on a bad day. On the open highway, it got 32-35. If I "hypermiled" it, I could get nearly 40. One time, driving I-40 over the Great Smoky Mountains between Oak Ridge, TN and Greensboro, NC, I got 42 MPG. That was with nearly 1,000 lbs. of projector equipment in the trunk, another couple hundred pounds of tools and luggage in the back seat and my 300 lb., fat ass in the driver's seat. The car was only rated for 800 lb. of passengers and cargo.

My car didn't have any of the problems that people claimed they had with their Neons. I got over 120,000 miles out of it with nothing more than gas, oil and tire changes. I would have bought another Neon when I got rid of mine if Chrysler hadn't stopped making them. Why, instead of putting expensive, electronic gadgets into cars, why didn't Chrysler spend research dollars ironing the bugs out of existing cars like the Neon?

My 13 year old Mazda 626 has in excess of 130,000 miles on it and, if it wasn't for the rust, I'd consider keeping it for another ten years. Living in Pennsylvania, rust is just a fact of life. :|

That video from "Demolition Man" wasn't just meant to be funny. I thought it was but there was an underlying message. If it hadn't been for all of the electronic gizmos and "Auto-Drive" Stallone probably wouldn't have crashed the car. I'm not saying that electronics cause crashes but I still think that, in many cases, a human being able to intervene in an emergency is better than trusting machines.
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 02-21-2013, 05:06 PM:
 
I decided to get a SUV instead of a half-ton truck because my main use for this thing is hauling candy out from "the city" for my theatre. A new truck would require a new cap, and since there's something to be said for heated cargo space, a SUV seems to be the thing to get. Plus I've found that I need something with a back seat about once every second blue moon: My wife's parents were here for a couple of weeks about ten years ago and I had to rent a car to pick everyone up from the airport and take them back. The back seat in this thing folds down to make more cargo space when I don't need a back seat (which is most of the time).

I drive very little since I just walk when I'm doing stuff around town and only take the truck out for long trips that I seldom make, so any vehicle that I get will probably "age out" before it wears out. In the summer it's usually nice enough outside that walking is no hardship, and in the winter by the time I plug in the truck's block heater and let that sit for three or four hours, then start the truck and wait for it to warm up and be ready to actually drive somewhere, I could have already walked where I was going two or three times. So my truck pretty much just lives in my garage most of the time.

I've never understood people around here who buy cars. With the road and weather conditions that we have here, this is truck country. Most people seem to understand that and there really aren't that many cars around here -- 90% of the vehicles you see on the street in the winter are trucks and SUV's but still: I passed someone driving a Smart Car, of all things, down the highway in an snowstorm a couple of weeks ago. I could barely believe it. A Smart Car in a snowstorm. Talk about taking your life in your hands. I'm sure that one of the highway plows could pick that thing up and toss it away without the operator even noticing.

My choices for vehicles here are Ford or GM unless I want to buy from a dealership that's out of town, which I don't. So I looked at the Ford and I looked at the GM and it seems that I get quite a bit more for my money with the Ford than I get with the GM. I promised myself years ago that my next vehicle was going to be a four wheel drive since my Ranger doesn't have that and I've often wished that it did.

I took the GM and the Ford both on a test drive where I went onto a rather poorly maintained gravel road with some loose snow on it and stopped, then floored the accelerator. The Ford Escape hugged the road better than the GM when I did that, and I felt more secure. That's pretty much what sold me on it, right there.

My new truck is currently sitting on a railroad car somewhere. They initially told me that it would be here by the 15th, but now they say it will be here between Monday and Wednesday of next week. Oh well. I don't have anywhere that I need to be going for the next while anyway.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-21-2013, 06:01 PM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

When air bags were first marketed they were supposed to be in place of seat belts. It wasn't until they (the engineers) realized that the constraints they had to work under (full inflation in under 30ms) that they, somehow, became "supplementary."

---

That's not true. You still need the seat belt in order to keep you from sliding forward under the air bag, and that has been true from day one. Air bags don't protect your knees, they just keep your torso from flying thru the windshield.

I have a buddy who is a paramedic. He told me the airbag is a lifesaver on almost a weekly basis.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-21-2013, 06:41 PM:
 
My current car is a basic Saturn Ion with manual windows and door locks. The radio is aftermarket, but that was a gift.

Two things have changed in the past few years. I live in a place that "has winter" and I also do road trips now, which is something I never really did when I lived in California.

So, I have started thinking about the features I want in my next car.

Winter makes me wish for: Heated seats, heated steering wheel and 4-wheel drive.

Road trips make me wish for: Cruise control and built-in GPS.

Oh, yeah! One more...

Getting older makes me wish for: a car that's easier to get in and out of -- so an SUV might be in the cards.

Having said all of that, my car is about to hit 100,000 miles and it still runs great. The thing I like best about it is that it's already paid for. So, I'm going to hang onto it for a li'l while longer.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-21-2013, 07:07 PM:
 
I definitely agree on the ease-of-entry/exit thing. That's one thing I like about our SUV and pickup -- easy to get in and out of, and that's another reason I don't really want a bigger pickup - don't want to have to CLIMB in and out of it.

We have heated leather seats in our new Escape. I don't like them... the heat is all under your butt-cheeks but not under your legs, so it feels weird. And, once it's been on for a few minutes even on the lowest setting it starts to feel uncomfortably warm -- for me at least. I don't know if all heated seats are this way or not.

To be fair, we've had a mild winter this year so I really have not needed the heated seats so much....by the time you've sat there for a couple of minutes, body heat does its thing and the seat feels fine. If we get one of our famous Montana -25 spells, I might think differently...but we only see that kind of weather about once every two or three years, if that, so to me the heated seats aren't all that big a deal. My wife, however, likes them much more than I do.

For GPS, I think a smart phone will do just fine and be updated continually so we didn't even buy the navigation package.

Cruise control is an absolute necessity out here where you can drive on the freeways for hours at a time without ever having to hit the brakes. It has probably saved me from several speeding tickets!
 

---

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 02-22-2013, 01:57 AM:
 
Cruise Control is what my Nissan is lacking, and the few road trips I have taken makes me wish I had it. However, I still plan to drive that car almost into the ground. 10 years minimum.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-22-2013, 08:28 AM:
 

quote: Manny Knowles

---

Road trips make me wish for: Cruise control and built-in GPS.

---

quote: Buck Wilson

---

Randy I disagree about the air bags preportedly being primary restraints.

---

quote:

---

The auto industry and research and regulatory communities have moved away from their initial view of the airbag as a seat belt replacement, and the bags are now nominally designated as Supplemental Restraint System (SRS) or Supplemental Inflatable Restraints.

---

quote: Randy Stankey

---

There IS a pellet of explosives two feet in front of your face.

---

quote: Manny Knowles

---

What's the kill rate on airbags, Randy?

---

quote: Randy Stankey

---

This isn't entrepreneurship. It's not capitalism. It's just plain stupidity.

---

It's pretty much the definition of capitalism and entrepreneurship: Sell a widget for the greatest amount of money and the least amount of expense that the market will bear. Buyer beware.
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 02-22-2013, 11:53 PM:
 
Scott, YES!!!! AGREE!!

I'm in a rental '12 Focus(some broad pulled out in front of me, BANG) and the keys won't even fit in my pocket, forget putting them on my main keychain.

I own an 88 5-speed Grand Prix and a 93 5-speed Festiva. The looks of them alone are good enough theft deterrents, let alone the transmissions. The keys for both cars take up less than half the space on a ring than just one of the focus keys.

If my keys don't 'fit right' in my pocket, I get pretty upset. Kinda OCD about it.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-23-2013, 12:12 AM:
 
Scott -- I said I don't believe that airbags are being forced on us **against our will**

I think most people are happy to have airbags in their cars.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-23-2013, 01:05 AM:
 

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

the electronics ARE a pain. The clock keeps resetting itself; the satellite radio forgets what station it's on or else it changes the source for no reason

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

New cars use keys with built-in chips which require blanks that can only be purchased through a dealer. They are also annoyingly large (the "handle" part of the key contains the chip). This is sold as an anti-theft feature, as it supposedly ensures that a generic key cannot be made to start the car. A key for my Honda goes for upwards of $60, and requires a service appointment. That is insane. Do any customers really want this "feature"? Has the auto theft rate gone down since this became common? I doubt it.

---

quote: Thatcham Research Centre

---

Thatcham are aware of recent security concerns regarding a spate of vehicle thefts, where organised criminal gangs are gaining access to a vehicle’s On Board Diagnostic unit and using highly sophisticated technology are able to re-programme a blank key and steal the vehicle. This particular crime has been associated with a range of vehicles from different manufacturers

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

I've NEVER heard of an airbag going off when the car didn't hit something first.

---

quote: US Dept Of Transportation

---

Vehicle Make / Model: Model Year(s):
JEEP / GRAND CHEROKEE 2002-2004
JEEP / LIBERTY 2002-2003
Manufacturer: CHRYSLER GROUP LLC Report Receipt Date: NOV 08, 2012
NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID Number: 12V527000 NHTSA Action Number: EA12001

Component: AIR BAGS:FRONTAL:SENSOR/CONTROL MODULE
Potential Number of Units Affected: 744,822

Summary:

Chrysler is recalling certain model year 2002 and 2003 Jeep Liberty vehicles manufactured January 9, 2001, through March 28, 2003, and 2002 through 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles manufactured February 13, 2001, through May 23, 2003. A component in the air bag control module may fail causing the front airbags, side curtain airbags, and/or seatbelt pretensioners to deploy inadvertently while the vehicle is being operated.

Consequence:

Inadvertent deployment of the airbags may increase the risk of injury and the possibility of a vehicle crash.

Remedy:

Chrysler will notify owners, and dealers will install a supplemental jumper harness to the airbag control module, free of charge. Owners were notified of the recall by interim letter in January 2013. The remedy for affected Liberty vehicles is expected to be available in April 2013. The remedy for affected Grand Cherokee vehicles is expected to be available later in the year. Owners may contact Chrysler at 1-800-247-9753.

Notes:

Chrysler's recall campaign number is M35. Owners may also contact the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), or go to www.safercar.gov.

---

Now you can READ about airbags going off when the car didn't his something first. What the government link does not tell you, but the mailing from Chrysler does, is that they do not have the parts to fix the problem. Never again will I buy a Chrysler vehicle. Never.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-23-2013, 04:14 PM:
 
That recall notice also doesn't tell you that it ever really happened, just that it MAY happen due to a defective part that they discovered. They could have discovered that defect in routine testing. So I will have to keep to my original statement that I've never heard of it happening.

We do agree on one thing though -- I don't like Chryslers either.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 02-23-2013, 07:03 PM:
 
This is why I love my 98 BMW Z3: it's simple. Sure, there is an airbag but it has a seemingly normal key, no power keyless entry, an aftermarket stereo that replaced a cassette deck, no cup holders, no onboard computer, heck it's even a 5 speed. 4 wheels and 2 seats! The most advanced feature is probably the traction control and heated seats.

I love her dearly.

AJG
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-23-2013, 07:53 PM:
 
BTW, don't mind me -- I enjoy these discussions but, to me, a disagreement doesn't equal "don't like" or "don't respect" anyone on here. Especially Randy.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-23-2013, 11:21 PM:
 
I love you too, honey!
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 02-23-2013, 11:24 PM:
 
Get a room you two.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-24-2013, 07:11 AM:
 
I am a Chrysler fan primarily because I have an outstanding dealer. Chryslers made under Mercedes are very bad. Before and after are just fine.

My 2004 Minivan has 177,000 miles and has no troubles. (former Hadden Service van.)

I agree that years ago (before K car) they were horrible. Louis
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-24-2013, 08:28 AM:
 
For a period of time, between approx. 1995 and 2005, I think Chrysler made some good cars. They weren't great cars. They could have been better but, instead of working to improve the models they had in production, they started producing supposed luxury models. Had they taken the money they spent on creating new, expensive cars and plowed it into making the cars they already sold better, I would still be a (conditional) fan of Chrysler cars. As it stands, now, they build marginal quality cars in designs that I don't like which are way too expensive for what you really get.

BTW: One gewgaw that I do like is keyless entry. It's nice to be able to unlock your car doors or open the trunk when you've got your hands full or when you're trying to quickly get out of the rain. If your keyless system is also an alarm, the car can warn you whether somebody might have tampered with your car. (e.g. - The car's horn beeps once when you unlock it but beeps three times if the car's alarm has been triggered since you were away.) It's also nice that the cars interior lights come on when you press the button on the key fob. It gives you a chance to see inside the car, from a distance, to be sure your car is safe before you get in.

You can get keyless entry as an aftermarket option but, if it is part of an option package that you are likely get get, anyway, it might be worthwhile to get it as a factory installed option.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-24-2013, 01:09 PM:
 
Indeed - the keyless entry/remote start is my favorite thing about the Escape. As Frank said in the first post, you don't need to even push a button -- just touch the door handle and if the key is within 3 feet, the door opens. I've done some experimenting and it's pretty accurate -- I set the key about 40 inches away and the doors stayed locked.

The one feature with remote start that I wish for, is an automatic garage door open. It has "smart" pushbuttons that you can program to your garage door opener, so you'd think there would be a way to start the car from inside the house, and have the car trigger the garage door opener to keep the garage from filling with noxious fumes. Alas...Ford hasn't had that idea yet.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-24-2013, 01:27 PM:
 
I don't care for remote start. All the cars I have owned have had manual transmissions. There isn't a reasonable way to have remote start on a manual transmission without leaving the gear shift in neutral and defeating the clutch interlock switch. I don't think that's a good idea at all.

Buttonless fobs can be hacked and defeated. You only need a passive radiator which extends the distance. If you can make an active repeater, you can extend the distance to 100 ft. or more. That's far enough away that, by the time the owner realizes his car is being hacked, it's too late.

Regular, pushbutton fobs only transmit for a second or less, only when the button has been pressed. A would-be hacker would have to have his listening gear operating at the exact moment you press the button. Over the years, I have developed the habit of pressing the button with my hand in my pocket. It wasn't specifically in order to prevent telegraphing my actions but, for whatever reason I started, it has that effect.

I order to hack either type of key fob it probably takes similar technology. The problem is that the technology can be bought for, probably, a couple of thousand dollars and the knowhow can probably be obtained from the internet.

Does a buttonless fob offer more or less security than a regular one? I don't know. The difference is probably only psychological, if any.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-24-2013, 11:14 PM:
 
If it's the 3.0L (6G72 motor), motor was made by Mitsubishi. 3.3L was by Chrysler.

Outside of valve seals drying out, that 3.0L is a bulletproof motor.

quote: Randy Stankey

---

remote start on a manual transmission without leaving the gear shift in neutral and defeating the clutch interlock switch. I don't think that's a good idea at all.

---

Only advantage of defeating the clutch interock switch on start that it saves on the thrust bearings on the crank due to the pressure plate being released and the housing of the pressure plate is putting the linear load on the flywheel and wants to move the crank forward.

Common thrust bearing failure results in "crankwalk" were the crank moves forward a good quarter inch
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-25-2013, 07:41 AM:
 
I have no problem with the thrust bearing even after 130K.

I did have to replace the master cylinder for the hydraulic clutch. The slave is still good.

While the cylinder was going bad, I developed two habits.
1) Double-pump the clutch. 2) Shift into neutral and let the clutch out when sitting at stoplights.

Double pumping isn't necessary in small cars with fully synchronized transmissions but it's probably good habit to have. Who knows? I might have to drive a dump truck one day.

Shifting into neutral is probably better for your clutch when idling at stoplights.

There's another thing that bugs me about the way they sell cars. It's hard to find cars with manual transmissions, anymore. Why should I have to get an automatic transmission because 98% of the people in the town where I live are too stupid to drive anything but automatics?

BTW: I still believe that it should be a requirement to demonstrate basic proficiency driving a car with a manual transmission in order to pass your driver's test.
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 02-25-2013, 10:32 AM:
 
^^^Amen!!

My mother made me take my drivers' test in a 5-speed. I'm glad she did.

Got a 99%. Only reason I didn't get a perfect score was because I left it out of gear when I parked. I had the park brake applied though.

MTX4LYFE!
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-25-2013, 10:56 AM:
 
That's one of those questions like whether you should double-clutch a car vs. a truck or whether you should shift into neutral when idling at a stoplight. Arguments can be made for and against either.

When parking, I put the transmission into reverse. Some people say that you should put it into first gear. Others say it should be neutral. As long as the parking brake is engaged, arguments can be made for any.

Personally, I believe that, since reverse is the lowest gear, it is the best. Others have said that leaving the transmission in the lowest FORWARD gear is better. Still, others have said that leaving the transmission in neutral prevents the clutch, gears and engine from being ripped up should the car get hit.

Honestly, I don't know which is best. Maybe the real answer varies based on conditions? But reverse is my habit. I do it automatically, almost without thinking.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-25-2013, 12:10 PM:
 
I first learned to drive in a '43 (I think) Willys Jeep. It had a 3-speed on the column.


Picture of our Jeep with my friend Mark Killham (R.I.P.)

Later I had a '77-1/2 Ford Mustang Cobra with a stick shift. I remember being amazed how much easier and smoother the shifting was in the Cobra!

I've heard several arguments for how to leave the manual transmission when parking. I always left mine in reverse too, since we had a garage at home and reverse was always the first gear I needed anyway.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-25-2013, 09:09 PM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

Why should I have to get an automatic transmission because 98% of the people in the town where I live are too stupid to drive anything but automatics?

---

quote: Randy Stankey

---

but they should demonstrate basic proficiency, how to start, stop and drive without tearing up the gears.

---

quote: James Westbrook

---

"You WILL wear out the clutch."

---

quote: Randy Stankey

---

Buttonless fobs can be hacked and defeated. You only need a passive radiator which extends the distance. If you can make an active repeater, you can extend the distance to 100 ft. or more. That's far enough away that, by the time the owner realizes his car is being hacked, it's too late.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

I don't think manuals are unpopular because people don't know how to drive them. It's because they don't want to have their "phone hand" or their "eating hand" or their "putting on makeup hand" busy shifting gears.

---

quote: Rick Raskin

---

I take it you've never had to drive a stick in massive rush hour traffic.

---

No, but I drove an automatic on the 405 from San Diego to L.A. once when there had been a huge pile-up and the trip took something like 4 1/2 hours. Even that was a hassle. I don't know how city guys do it with the stick shift. I guess you have to learn to love it, like Randy did.

I do live in a small town which has its own challenges. You never have to drive very far, but you have to stop a lot and you are constantly getting stuck behind "Aunt Bee" types who drive 10mph or less. I take at least 8 or 10 short (1 mile or less, but too far to walk efficiently) trips a day due to my job, and I've had two different stick-shift cars over the years and grew to hate them both, just because I don't get off on the whole clutch/gas experience. I like to just put it in gear and go.

I do agree that drivers ed should teach kids how to drive stick shifts, but since they are pretty much all but gone from cars these days anyway, I suppose it's soon going to fall into the same category as writing in cursive.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-26-2013, 08:12 PM:
 
I don't have any problems with my leg getting tired, even in traffic. Maybe that will change when I get old like you guys.


 

---

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 02-26-2013, 08:24 PM:
 
My first new car was a '54 Chevrotet Bel Aire with a "Powerglide" tranny. I've not had anything but automatics since. They really make for a comfortable ride.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-26-2013, 09:38 PM:
 
On a personal note: why I like clutch cars is that I have full control of the motion of the car and the car itself.

I let off the gas, the car begins to slow down due to the compression braking of the motor (and it saves on brakes a great deal-I can make a set of brakes last twice as long than with an automatic car due to the aid of compression braking) since there is 100% power connection from motor to the wheels, whereas the automatic you don't have that full connection due to the fluid inbetween the driving and driven vanes of the torque converter and the complicated devices that shifts the clutches per each gear.

Driving an automatic is like a car that actually drives itself which really bugs me since I can't have that control as I do with a clutch car...and never smoked a clutch in my lifetime.

The advantage with the automatic is that the power is 100% from transmission to the wheels during shifting since with dropping the clutch, one loses connection (and momentum) inbetween the gears-why 4x4 trucks in 4 by mode works great with an automatic due to the continual power connection between shifts.

I also like the engine to tire control during the winter, esp on questionable roads, so I can use the motor to help me have the tire to ground control by the motor's compression braking. With the automatic, you let off the gas, the car is actually just coasting since there is no direct contact from drive train to the motor for compression braking.

Thus, one has to nurse the brake pedal to substitute that control that the motor can't produce..and more prone to sliding and losing tire control can be the result.

I grew up on a farm, learned how to operate a clutch vehicle (our Farmall Tractor) at 8yrs old and literally had to stand on the clutch pedal to put the thing in gear and learned how to release it at the correct time. Then, got behind the wheel of the hay trucks with those heavy clutches where by the time I took Driver's Ed in high school (in which we drove automatic vehicles), I passed with flying colors and my parents gave me my first car - a 1962 Rambler American with the "3 on the Tree" and away I went with it .. and never looked back.

Now, granted, stop and go town driving with an automatic is bliss since dumping the cluch all the time can get to a body, but still love my clutch for highway driving and the power and control that I have.

This is what I drive as my highway car (this is a photo of the same vehicle that I own, but not the vehicle of what I own..)


 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-26-2013, 10:48 PM:
 
One thing I don't like about automatics is the gear ratios. Many cars with automatics only have three gears. That creates problems when passing or climbing hills.

On a recent trip from Pennsylvania to South Carolina, we drove my wife's car which has a 3-speed automatic. The terrain on our journey went through the mountains of West Virginia. I frequently felt the car bog down when climbing a hill. I had to step on the gas to kick the transmission down to a lower gear. That meant I had to go faster in order to climb the hill. This presents a problem in that area because the police in the small towns in those areas like to set up speed traps to catch out of state drivers. I was faced with the problem of either being sluggish going uphill or risk getting stopped. Going down the hill, the car tended to go into a higher gear, again, increasing my downhill speed, forcing me to use my breaks too much.

Driving my car with a 5-speed, I had the choice of downshifting to climb a hill or using engine breaking to regulate speed downhill. My car with its manual transmission is more responsive when conditions change.

If I'm driving on slippery roads, I have the option of downshifting to use engine breaking or shifting up a little early in order to keep the wheels from spinning out. In a car with an automatic transmission, you have only the brakes unless you want to shift into "low."

If you want to regulate speed around a curve, you can downshift with a manual transmission where you couldn't with an automatic. Generally speaking, I can maintain an average speed that is five or ten miles per hour slower than people driving automatics but, because I have more control of the car, I can often pass people driving automatics.

The number one reason why I advocate learning to drive a manual transmission is because it teaches you to plan ahead. You can't simply step on the gas pedal to jackrabbit between stop lights. You have to look one or two cars ahead to see what traffic is doing in front of you.

If you're coming up to a "stale" green light (one where you don't know how soon it's going to turn yellow) and there are a few slow pokes ahead, you can let up a little so as to prevent having to make a quick stop at the intersection. If the way is clear, you can go a little faster without too much risk. If traffic is "stop and go" you can put your transmission in one gear then, by watching traffic two cars ahead, judge when to use the clutch to maintain a consistent, safe speed while still having the option of using your breaks if you need them.

If you have two or three people in close proximity who drive manual transmission and maintain consistent speeds, traffic flows better and EVERYBODY goes faster.

Even if a person prefers to drive an automatic, as long as they know how to drive a standard, they almost always drive at a naturally consistent pace.

It is not simply speed which causes accidents. It is inconsistent, unpredictable speed. If you have just one timid, unpredictable driver in a line of traffic, that person increases the chances of accidents for everybody around him.

Driving a manual transmission gives you more control, allows you to drive more consistently and makes traffic go smoother. I say it's also a little bit safer. Plus, I still think a well-driven manual transmission is more fuel efficient.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-26-2013, 11:24 PM:
 
The newest cars I've seen that are sold in both automatic and manual transmissions actually have the EPA estimated fuel ratings slightly better for the automatics. I know this wasn't the case even a handful of years ago. Apparently, they've designed better automatic tranny's...
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-26-2013, 11:43 PM:
 
Don't forget that the EPA changed the way they estimate fuel economy in 2008. I don't know how that effects the difference between automatics and standards but it is probably something to look into.

The "old" EPA mileage estimate for my car (2001, Mazda 626) is 26 to 32 MPG with 29 as average. I consistently get 28-30 MPG driving around town and 30+ on the highway. Mileage goes down in the winter, as low as 25, but, when I took it out on the highway on a nice, summer day and "hypermiled" I got almost 34.

The "new" EPA estimate for my car is 23-29, average 25.
I'm getting better than their "new" estimates on a bad day. The estimates on the same model car with an automatic is between 22 and 25.

Cripes! If I got mileage that bad, I'd have my car in the shop!
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-27-2013, 11:58 AM:
 
Why you're seeing 6 speed autos along with 6 speed manuals so the automatic can closely match the MPG rating of the manual.

And why does the manual get better mileage? Simply due to my previous discussion of direct connection between engine, drive line to the wheels due to the clutch making that direct contact between the two. Automatics can't have this luxury due to the fluid and indirect coupling that is between the two and it takes more from the engine to perform as with the manual, thus, the results would be less MPG.

So, we add more gears in the tranny (German vehicles now have 7 speed automatics...) to get the MPG up to specs.

(Can you imagine a Simplex XL sitting on top of an old 4-star head with a fluid coupler between the motor and imput shaft of the soundhead, and how long it would take for that XL to ramp up to speed with the fluid coupler compared to a standard flex coupler?)
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-27-2013, 12:11 PM:
 
One thing I was surprised at with our new Escape is the amount of power it has from the 4-cylinder engine. It's the "Eco-boost" engine, which has some magical properties I don't understand to boost the horsepower. I've only "downsized" engines once in my life (went from an 8-cylinder Mustang with a 302, to a 1.6L 4 cylinder) and swore I'd never do THAT again. Our previous Escape had a 3.0L six cylinder in it, and even at 219,000 miles still had plenty of get-up-and-go.

But the Eco-boost 4 has been very impressive, even in the hilly area where we drive. I think Frank will be impressed with his as well. (Got it yet Frank?)
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 02-27-2013, 12:36 PM:
 
The dealer phoned me yesterday and told me that I can pick it up this afternoon. So I'll zip out there shortly and get it. The guy who bought my old truck is supposed to be here within the next few minutes to get that, so I'm just waiting for him to show up.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-27-2013, 02:21 PM:
 

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

"Eco-boost" engine, which has some magical properties

---

quote: Frank Cox

---

The dealer phoned me yesterday and told me that I can pick it up this afternoon. So I'll zip out there shortly and get it.

---

Burn this to a CD and play it in the car as you drive it off the lot!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVr78foNgsU


 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 02-28-2013, 05:04 PM:
 
My new battle wagon. This is a 2013 Ford Escape SEL with 4 wheel drive.


 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-28-2013, 09:43 PM:
 
Like the color ... and it looks COLD outside ! "B..rrrr"

Like your little cinema. Congrats with it !

(At least you got the right soft drink vendor to go with the business ...lol)
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 02-28-2013, 11:38 PM:
 
When I was first setting up my theatre, I wrote a letter to Pepsi and a letter to Coke and said that I'm opening a theatre, please come and see me. The Pepsi salesman was ringing my doorbell two days after I mailed the letter. Five YEARS later, the Coke salesman showed up.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-01-2013, 04:08 AM:
 
Pepsi has almost always been for the small business owner whereas Coke goes for the larger accounts.

You go to small towns, esp the markets and such and on the side of the building is the classic "Pepsi" logo painted on the side, or a signage hanging on the front of the venue.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-01-2013, 11:32 AM:
 
Nice new SUV. I'm jealous!!!
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-01-2013, 03:52 PM:
 
We had a similar experience with Coke vs Pepsi. When I first bought the theatre we had an ancient, terrible looking menu board that was too small and a machine that was an ugly piece of crap. Coke just flat told us no, they would not give us a new one or either.

So we called Pepsi, and they pretty much said "sure, how many menu boards do you need?" and also offered to paint the sign on the side of our building, which they have re-done 3 times since then. They gave us a new machine which has been replaced with newer/faster units twice. They've also been responsive when we've had equipment problems and such. So yeah, they're a keeper in this neck of the woods.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-01-2013, 04:52 PM:
 
But it's Pepsi!
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-01-2013, 06:01 PM:
 
I'm having flashbacks to my Pepsi experiments of 2003.

I foolishly spent a month trying to make Pepsi taste like Coke, not realizing that they just taste different.
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 03-30-2013, 03:37 PM:
 
Now this is a truck.

Apparently the base model costs a mere $629,000.
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 04-10-2013, 06:43 PM:
 
Well, live and learn. I rarely drive, so my new truck has been sitting for a week. I used it last exactly one week ago: last Wednesday. I went to take it out this afternoon and nothing doing -- all of the lights and display screens and doodads start, but the engine won't crank.

I had to call "Ford Roadside Assistance" to come and look at it. They sent the guy who has the garage and tow truck just down the street from me. He walked over with a hand-held battery booster doodad and said that he sees a lot of this with new vehicles that have all of this gadgetry. The battery was sufficiently dead that it would run the gadgets but not crank the engine. He boosted it and all was well.

I guess a lot of this stuff is never really turned off. It has a burglar alarm and who knows what that run continuously and I guess that's enough to drain the battery if if sits for a while.

He told me that I should get a "battery maintainer" installed, and just leave it plugged in when I'm not using it. So I now have one of those things ordered at Melville Motors.

On the plus side I feel better knowing that there's nothing actually wrong with my new truck. But the lesson here is that if you buy a new vehicle and don't plan to use it every single day you should probably get a battery maintainer for it. I didn't have this gadgetry in my old truck so it was never a problem before.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 04-10-2013, 11:01 PM:
 
Ever listen to Car Talk on NPR radio?

I remember them telling a story about a problem in the 1970s where one out of every six new Cadillacs delivered from the factory to the car dealer's lots arrived with dead batteries.

Every car left the factory in perfect, working condition. When they arrived at the car lot, 1 in 6 had dead batteries. It took them months to figure out what the cause was.

Turns out, the light in the trunk was activated by a mercury switch attached to the trunk lid. Only six of these cars would fit on the car carrier. One of them had to be tipped at a steep angle to fit on the truck. It was that car, tipped so that the light in the trunk was on all the time that had the dead battery.

I wonder if there is some silly, little thing like that going on in your truck?
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-11-2013, 12:10 AM:
 

quote: Frank Cox

---

He told me that I should get a "battery maintainer" installed, and just leave it plugged in when I'm not using it. So I now have one of those things ordered at Melville Motors.

---

quote:

---

That's one of those questions like whether you should double-clutch a car vs. a truck or whether you should shift into neutral when idling at a stoplight. Arguments can be made for and against either.

When parking, I put the transmission into reverse. Some people say that you should put it into first gear. Others say it should be neutral. As long as the parking brake is engaged, arguments can be made for any.

Personally, I believe that, since reverse is the lowest gear, it is the best. Others have said that leaving the transmission in the lowest FORWARD gear is better. Still, others have said that leaving the transmission in neutral prevents the clutch, gears and engine from being ripped up should the car get hit.

Honestly, I don't know which is best. Maybe the real answer varies based on conditions? But reverse is my habit. I do it automatically, almost without thinking.

Randy

---

quote:

---

They are supposed to be challenge-response but that makes no difference. The hack does not actually defeat the electronics or decrypt the code/signal. It merely extends the distance over which the fob and the car's computer can communicate.

Place an antenna and some other radio gear near the car owner which can receive the the signal from the fob and relay it to the car. The car does not know how close or far the fob really is to the car. It "thinks" the owner is close by. Anybody who wants to take the car can simply walk up, one the door, push the starter button and drive away.

This hack was published in Technology Review a little over two years ago:

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/422298/car-theft-by-antenna/

I hope car manufacturers have taken steps to prevent this kind of theft!

Randy

---

quote:

---

Don't forget that the EPA changed the way they estimate fuel economy in 2008. I don't know how that effects the difference between automatics and standards but it is probably something to look into.

The "old" EPA mileage estimate for my car (2001, Mazda 626) is 26 to 32 MPG with 29 as average. I consistently get 28-30 MPG driving around town and 30+ on the highway. Mileage goes down in the winter, as low as 25, but, when I took it out on the highway on a nice, summer day and "hypermiled" I got almost 34.

The "new" EPA estimate for my car is 23-29, average 25.
I'm getting better than their "new" estimates on a bad day. The estimates on the same model car with an automatic is between 22 and 25.

Cripes! If I got mileage that bad, I'd have my car in the shop!

Randy

---

quote:

---

Well, live and learn. I rarely drive, so my new truck has been sitting for a week. I used it last exactly one week ago: last Wednesday. I went to take it out this afternoon and nothing doing -- all of the lights and display screens and doodads start, but the engine won't crank.

I had to call "Ford Roadside Assistance" to come and look at it. They sent the guy who has the garage and tow truck just down the street from me. He walked over with a hand-held battery booster doodad and said that he sees a lot of this with new vehicles that have all of this gadgetry. The battery was sufficiently dead that it would run the gadgets but not crank the engine. He boosted it and all was well.

I guess a lot of this stuff is never really turned off. It has a burglar alarm and who knows what that run continuously and I guess that's enough to drain the battery if if sits for a while.

He told me that I should get a "battery maintainer" installed, and just leave it plugged in when I'm not using it. So I now have one of those things ordered at Melville Motors.

On the plus side I feel better knowing that there's nothing actually wrong with my new truck. But the lesson here is that if you buy a new vehicle and don't plan to use it every single day you should probably get a battery maintainer for it. I didn't have this gadgetry in my old truck so it was never a problem before.

Frank

---

quote:

---

Ever listen to Car Talk on NPR radio?

I remember them telling a story about a problem in the 1970s where one out of every six new Cadillacs delivered from the factory to the car dealer's lots arrived with dead batteries.

Every car left the factory in perfect, working condition. When they arrived at the car lot, 1 in 6 had dead batteries. It took them months to figure out what the cause was.

Turns out, the light in the trunk was activated by a mercury switch attached to the trunk lid. Only six of these cars would fit on the car carrier. One of them had to be tipped at a steep angle to fit on the truck. It was that car, tipped so that the light in the trunk was on all the time that had the dead battery.

I wonder if there is some silly, little thing like that going on in your truck?

Randy

---

Thanks for sharing that, I found it quite amusing!

Always interesting to hear how new designs can backfire
 

---

Posted by Kris Verhanneman (Member # 5562) on 04-11-2013, 01:38 AM:
 
okay this is maybe a european point of view but when a car breaks down after a week of not using it, return the car to the shop.

All the explanations of install baterij things dont hold up. A car should be able to stand there for weeks/months without running.

Something in the car draings power. That is an probleme and should be fixed by the garage (they could at least replace the baterie or offer that baterie maintenance kit).
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-11-2013, 10:40 AM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

That's one of those questions like whether you should double-clutch a car vs. a truck or whether you should shift into neutral when idling at a stoplight. Arguments can be made for and against either.

---

quote: Randy Stankey

---

When parking, I put the transmission into reverse. Some people say that you should put it into first gear. Others say it should be neutral. As long as the parking brake is engaged, arguments can be made for any.

---