bk7794 wrote:I guess its a car. They are outside and things are going to happen to them. As long as your not deliberately beating the crap out of it then its ok.
This is roughly how I look at it. Yes, I want to protect it. But it is just a giant, very useful, very expensive tool. And when you use tools, eventually stuff happens. So if you get a nick or scratch here or there, it's fine.
its not a a very expensive tool, toy or instrument
its a very expensive, elaborate and joyful, self-flattery device.
Squint wrote:This is roughly how I look at it. Yes, I want to protect it. But it is just a giant, very useful, very expensive tool. And when you use tools, eventually stuff happens. So if you get a nick or scratch here or there, it's fine.
its not a a very expensive tool, toy or instrument
its a very expensive, elaborate and joyful, self-flattery device.
Depends on the car you have
'15 Mazda 3 iSport Hatch 6MT
'11 Ford Fiesta Hatchback SE 5MT
'14 Giant Escape City 24MT '97 Honda Civic EX 4AT - Retired @ 184,001 mi
bk7794 wrote:I guess its a car. They are outside and things are going to happen to them. As long as your not deliberately beating the crap out of it then its ok.
This is roughly how I look at it. Yes, I want to protect it. But it is just a giant, very useful, very expensive tool. And when you use tools, eventually stuff happens. So if you get a nick or scratch here or there, it's fine.
its not a a very expensive tool, toy or instrument
its a very expensive, elaborate and joyful, self-flattery device.
Ecouraging to see the high percentage of those new Subarus with manual transmissions being sold. A rear wheel drive Subaru seems strange though. They've always been unconventional. As far as I know never made an inline 4 cylinder engine. 3 yes, but not 4.
six wrote:Why get a weekend-car and a daily-grind car when you can have the best of both worlds??? The CTS-V comes to mind
I ended up with a weekend car - but not really by choice since the company provided a vehicle. Advantages and disadvantages to that. Disadvantages are moving vehicles around the driveway during times of the year when on-street parking is prohibited. It was nice getting 50+ cents a mile before getting the company car. But the general concensus seems to be you're better off with a company vehicle if you travel at least moderately for business.
2007 Toyota Tacoma SR5 2.7L 5MT
2002 Chevy Silverado LS 4x4 4AT
The car was developed together with Toyota (and is sold as the Scion FR-S in the US and the Toyota GT-86 in the rest of the world), who were modelling it after the old RWD AE-86 coupe. Now, I know that a lot of people still say that the Subaru version should have been offered with AWD to stay true to the Subaru image, but that would have added a lot of weight and compromised the performance and fun factors. So yes, although it is the first Subaru without AWD since the early base-model Imprezas (I believe?), it's not entirely Subaru's decision, nor is it entirely their car.
The car was developed together with Toyota (and is sold as the Scion FR-S in the US and the Toyota GT-86 in the rest of the world), who were modelling it after the old RWD AE-86 coupe. Now, I know that a lot of people still say that the Subaru version should have been offered with AWD to stay true to the Subaru image, but that would have added a lot of weight and compromised the performance and fun factors. So yes, although it is the first Subaru without AWD since the early base-model Imprezas (I believe?), it's not entirely Subaru's decision, nor is it entirely their car.
My understanding, at least coming from the Toyota/Scion guys who talked with us, was that is was mostly Toyota for the design, and Subaru did some of the engineering/engine work. That could have just been my impression from that meeting several months ago, but that's what I gathered. Toyota had a bigger role in it than Subaru.
'15 Mazda 3 iSport Hatch 6MT
'11 Ford Fiesta Hatchback SE 5MT
'14 Giant Escape City 24MT '97 Honda Civic EX 4AT - Retired @ 184,001 mi
Subaru has always done drive configurations different from the market. When everything was RWD, Subaru was FWD. When everything went FWD, Subaru went AWD. Now that the market is mostly FWD with lots of AWD and a few RWD, it fits with Subaru's tradition to offer RWD, though I agree that it was more likely a Toyota plan.
I'm more surprised that Toyota would offer a car with RWD. Has Toyota had any RWD car in the past 30 years? Everything I can think of has been FWD, not even AWD.
1980 Buick LeSabre 4.1L 5MT
Put your car in your sig!
Learn to launch/FAQs/lugging/misused terms: meta-sig
watkins wrote:Humans have rear-biased AWD. Cows have 4WD
Not counting trucks, there were Supra, MR2, Previa, and 30 years is a long enough window to catch the last of the RWD Celicas as well. Then we could count the LS, GS, and IS and probably a few other Lexi since the subject of the thread isn't badged as a Toyota anyway.
IMBoring25 wrote:Not counting trucks, there were Supra, MR2, Previa, and 30 years is a long enough window to catch the last of the RWD Celicas as well. Then we could count the LS, GS, and IS and probably a few other Lexi since the subject of the thread isn't badged as a Toyota anyway.
Back in the mid-90s, I purchased a RWD Celica (yes, manual transmission!) from a mechanic friend of mine. I bought it as a winter beater, so he swapped a set of old-school deep lug snow tires on the rear. The car was surprisingly good in the snow, despite the fact that it looked like an old rust bucket. We had a really snowy winter that year, so the car spent lots of time plowing through the snow and it handled it amazingly well.
theholycow wrote:Subaru has always done drive configurations different from the market. When everything was RWD, Subaru was FWD. When everything went FWD, Subaru went AWD. Now that the market is mostly FWD with lots of AWD and a few RWD, it fits with Subaru's tradition to offer RWD, though I agree that it was more likely a Toyota plan.
I'm more surprised that Toyota would offer a car with RWD. Has Toyota had any RWD car in the past 30 years? Everything I can think of has been FWD, not even AWD.
AWD is catching on with Toyota too. The Venza, a couple of the SUVs, the Sienna all have AWD as an option with FWD being the standard.
'15 Mazda 3 iSport Hatch 6MT
'11 Ford Fiesta Hatchback SE 5MT
'14 Giant Escape City 24MT '97 Honda Civic EX 4AT - Retired @ 184,001 mi
The car was developed together with Toyota (and is sold as the Scion FR-S in the US and the Toyota GT-86 in the rest of the world), who were modelling it after the old RWD AE-86 coupe. Now, I know that a lot of people still say that the Subaru version should have been offered with AWD to stay true to the Subaru image, but that would have added a lot of weight and compromised the performance and fun factors. So yes, although it is the first Subaru without AWD since the early base-model Imprezas (I believe?), it's not entirely Subaru's decision, nor is it entirely their car.
My understanding, at least coming from the Toyota/Scion guys who talked with us, was that is was mostly Toyota for the design, and Subaru did some of the engineering/engine work. That could have just been my impression from that meeting several months ago, but that's what I gathered. Toyota had a bigger role in it than Subaru.
Subaru didn't do some of the engine work, they fitted the car with their 2.0L boxer engine -- the same one that's currently in the base Impreza. Aside from that, I don't know how the distribution falls, but it is a revival of an old Toyota, so it would make sense for Toyota to do the majority of the design work. Personally, I don't think it looks strikingly like a Toyota or a Subaru, but then again car designs are becoming so similar nowadays that companies don't exactly have as many distinctive features any more. I remember one time in a parking lot at school, seeing a new white Honda Accord parked next to a new white Volkswagen Passat. Even right next to each other, I still couldn't tell them apart.
ashowofhands wrote:
Subaru didn't do some of the engine work, they fitted the car with their 2.0L boxer engine -- the same one that's currently in the base Impreza.
I believe Toyota contributed their own fuel injection and ignition system to Subaru's boxer engine. At least I think I remember reading that somewhere.
ashowofhands wrote:
Subaru didn't do some of the engine work, they fitted the car with their 2.0L boxer engine -- the same one that's currently in the base Impreza. Aside from that, I don't know how the distribution falls, but it is a revival of an old Toyota, so it would make sense for Toyota to do the majority of the design work. Personally, I don't think it looks strikingly like a Toyota or a Subaru, but then again car designs are becoming so similar nowadays that companies don't exactly have as many distinctive features any more. I remember one time in a parking lot at school, seeing a new white Honda Accord parked next to a new white Volkswagen Passat. Even right next to each other, I still couldn't tell them apart.