PDA

View Full Version : If we decide to go with a minivan...


FC
08-04-2009, 03:10 PM
I think I woudl have to consider this (http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?ct=c&car_id=264950581&dealer_id=1153147&car_year=2007&rdm=1249412811464&model=R63AMG&num_records=100&systime=&make2=&highlightFirstMakeModel=&start_year=1981&keywordsfyc=&keywordsrep=&engine=&certified=&body_code=0&fuel=&awsp=false&search_type=both&distance=0&marketZipError=false&search_lang=en&sownerid=50161580&showZipError=n&make=MB&keywords_display=&color=&page_location=findacar%3A%3Aispsearchform&min_price=&drive=&default_sort=priceDESC&seller_type=b&max_mileage=&style_flag=1&sort_type=priceDESC&address=02021&advanced=&end_year=2010&doors=&transmission=&max_price=&cardist=174&standard=false). :lol:

Sleeper. Redefined.



...and it's AWD. I think this may be the only AWD AMG ever made.

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=116635/pageNumber=1

TD
08-04-2009, 03:22 PM
Except that "minivan" has no more space than your V70R.

JST
08-04-2009, 03:27 PM
I'd kind of dig one of those. How many did they sell? Five?

FC
08-04-2009, 03:28 PM
I'd kind of dig one of those. How many did they sell? Five?

If you believe one ad, 30. There are 4 for sale in the US (autotrader).

FC
08-04-2009, 03:30 PM
Except that "minivan" has no more space than your V70R.

You clearly have never seen one of these things. Plus, a minivan is in the cards only if we ever have 3 kids.

So, no, I'm not getting one. And if a good allroad V2.0 ever arrives in the US market (or hell a regular wagon that can be raised by 2 inches at the push of a button), I won't consider an SUV either.

John V
08-05-2009, 07:50 AM
G-d those things are hideous.

FC
08-05-2009, 08:18 AM
G-d those things are hideous.

Yup. Not pretty. But minivans are not particularly hot either.

lupinsea
08-05-2009, 11:51 AM
My wife has banned minivans from our household fleet.

FC
08-05-2009, 12:26 PM
My wife has banned minivans from our household fleet.

So has my wife. She would MUCH rather have a big SUV.

lip277
08-05-2009, 12:34 PM
So has my wife. She would MUCH rather have a big SUV.

Me 3.

Hence our Yukon.....

TD
08-05-2009, 12:34 PM
As a family hauler, I'm at a loss as to a reason to pick an SUV over a minivan.

nate
08-05-2009, 12:50 PM
Does anyone sell a manual transmission minivan in the US these days?

ff
08-05-2009, 12:52 PM
As a family hauler, I'm at a loss as to a reason to pick an SUV over a minivan.

Towing
4WD option much easier to find
RWD layout option
More likely to have a suspension that doesn't float and wallow like a 70's Lincoln (minivans are the worst)
V8 option
LSD option
Ground clearance
Body-on-frame option

TD
08-05-2009, 12:55 PM
Towing
4WD option much easier to find
RWD layout option
More likely to have a suspension that doesn't float and wallow like a 70's Lincoln (minivans are the worst)
V8 option
LSD option
Ground clearance
Body-on-frame option
"As a family hauler..."

Those things do not relate to a vehicle's functionality as a family hauler.

TD
08-05-2009, 12:58 PM
Does anyone sell a manual transmission minivan in the US these days?
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/configEntryPoint.action?vehicleCode=MZ5&modelYear=2009&skipZip=0&zip=20850

ff
08-05-2009, 01:26 PM
"As a family hauler..."

Those things do not relate to a vehicle's functionality as a family hauler.

It does if you need to do more than just "haul a family". Most people without 5 garage stalls and 7-digit salaries need to buy something fulfills multiple needs. That's why someone might choose an SUV over a minivan as a family hauler.

Josh (PA)
08-05-2009, 03:09 PM
"As a family hauler..."

Those things do not relate to a vehicle's functionality as a family hauler.

I wanted a three across bench as the middle row, with the ability to carry two kid friends in the flip up rear when necessary and a nice big flat floor storage area when not in use. I also wanted to tow a trailer and have a good ski vehicle, so the MDX made more sense for us than the Odyssey would have.

RMR
08-05-2009, 03:21 PM
Honestly, if you are going to buy a minivan you have to go with the Honda Oddessy. My brother-in-law has one and it holds his family of 6 very well. A minivan does not need 300+ horsepower. The honda is actually hugely capable and has massive amounts of utility and does not drive that bad.

John V
08-05-2009, 03:21 PM
Yup. Not pretty. But minivans are not particularly hot either.

I'd rather have an Odyssey or a CR-V if I ever had to subject myself to a vehicle like this. Fortunately, I won't.

RMR
08-05-2009, 03:27 PM
"As a family hauler..."

Those things do not relate to a vehicle's functionality as a family hauler.

Completely agree.

Mr. The Edge
08-05-2009, 04:37 PM
So has my wife. She would MUCH rather have a big SUV.

+1

Again, we both LOVE her big ass Infiniti QX56. Heading down to Laguna Beach over the weekend with 7 people and all of our luggage and beach toys and DVD player and A/C outlets for everybody and kick ass stereo and electronic gizmos galore. I wouldn't want this to be *my* daily driver, but sure nice to have one in the garage. Best SUV we have ever owned, bar none.

BahnBaum
08-05-2009, 06:18 PM
I'd rather have an Odyssey or a CR-V if I ever had to subject myself to a vehicle like this. Fortunately, I won't.

Bookmarked.

Alex

JST
08-05-2009, 08:31 PM
If you are going to have a minivan, you might as well have a 500 hp minivan.

The Mazda 5 and forthcoming Focus C Max seem like all around better choices for what I'd want a vehicle like this for, but if I absolutely had to have more seats and could bring myself to buy a slushbox, the twin turbo Flex would be first and last on my shopping list.

Josh (PA)
08-05-2009, 09:05 PM
I don't get the hatred for the R Class. It's not as pretty as a c63AMG or an SL black series, but by minivan standards it is pretty sharp. It has the choice of diesels, or v8s or even AMG v8s in an RWD or AWD chassis with nicely done luxury interior. It seems like just the thing for a lot of people here who outgrow 3 in the back wagons. You hate SUVs, but then you go and hate nice rwd minivans... sometimes I think you just hate for the fun of it.

John V
08-05-2009, 09:51 PM
The R-class has a face no mother could love. It may be supremely practical, comfortable, whatever... it's just so godawful fugly I could never have it in my garage.

ZBB
08-05-2009, 10:13 PM
The R-class has a face no mother could love. It may be supremely practical, comfortable, whatever... it's just so godawful fugly I could never have it in my garage.

I don't think its ugly... There's a family at our day care that has one, and I think its pretty decent looking (for a minivan)...

Melissa
08-05-2009, 10:26 PM
I love my Honda Odyssey. :eeps:

We briefly considered a larger SUV, but one of the main reasons we opted for a van was the height thing and getting kids in and out of the vehicle. (Plus, we already have a full size truck so having an SUV in addition seemed silly.)

I had had enough of climbing up into our F150 with babies and toddlers and back down again. Even with step bars, it was a pain in the ass. Now if I was ten inches taller, it might be easier, but there's still the issue of littles climbing in and out on their own.

FC
08-05-2009, 11:17 PM
If you are going to have a minivan, you might as well have a 500 hp minivan.

That.

John V
08-06-2009, 06:45 AM
That.

Ugh. Not for me. If I'm going to buy something big and it isn't going to be used for towing (people / stuff hauling only) I want it to be quiet, comfy and good on gas. It's never going to be a sports car. Why bother trying?

Mercedes seeems to think there is only one way to make their cars interesting - big power. Blah.

JST
08-06-2009, 07:45 AM
Quiet, good on gas...boring. If it can't handle, it might as well be all ate up with motor.

FC
08-06-2009, 08:22 AM
Quiet, good on gas...boring. If it can't handle, it might as well be all ate up with motor.

Spectacular brakes for a minivan ain't bad either.

Let me just say, that while getting a JGC with the "big" V8 was accidental, it is nice to be able to have a vehicle that can get out of the way quickly, even if it behaves like an inflatable ride int he process. It can also be fun in a very different way.

John V
08-06-2009, 08:43 AM
Spectacular brakes for a minivan ain't bad either.

Let me just say, that while getting a JGC with the "big" V8 was accidental, it is nice to be able to have a vehicle that can get out of the way quickly, even if it behaves like an inflatable ride int he process. It can also be fun in a very different way.

Spectacular brakes, so you can pretend like you're going to do a bunch of laps of the Nurburgring without turning them to dust? When all they'll really do for you is cost more to replace when they wear out? ;)

zach
08-06-2009, 08:45 AM
Quiet, good on gas...boring. If it can't handle, it might as well be all ate up with motor.

Exactly.

JST
08-06-2009, 09:02 AM
Spectacular brakes, so you can pretend like you're going to do a bunch of laps of the Nurburgring without turning them to dust? When all they'll really do for you is cost more to replace when they wear out? ;)

That sounds about right.

FC
08-06-2009, 09:28 AM
Spectacular brakes, so you can pretend like you're going to do a bunch of laps of the Nurburgring without turning them to dust? When all they'll really do for you is cost more to replace when they wear out? ;)

Sure, why not? It's my call and my dollars.

But you are honestly telling me you would rather have your EO Odyssey brakes on a van loaded with several hundered pounds doing 70mph+ in case of an emergency vs. 15"+ and 14"+ vented, multipiston AMG brakes?

ff
08-06-2009, 09:33 AM
Sure, why not? It's my call and my dollars.

But you are honestly telling me you would rather have your EO Odyssey brakes on a van loaded with several hundered pounds doing 70mph+ in case of an emergency vs. 15"+ and 14"+ vented, multipiston AMG brakes?

Is that with, or without the 150,000 mile all season Goodyear Invicta GL tires?

John V
08-06-2009, 09:33 AM
Sure, why not? It's my call and my dollars.

But you are honestly telling me you would rather have your EO Odyssey brakes on a van loaded with several hundered pounds doing 70mph+ in case of an emergency vs. 15"+ and 14"+ vented, multipiston AMG brakes?

I would venture to guess that the difference in brake hardware won't make much (if any) of a difference for one stop. And if the R-class stopped any shorter than the Odyssey it would probably be due to the tires, not the big ole fancy brakes.

clyde
08-06-2009, 10:46 AM
I would venture to guess that the difference in brake hardware won't make much (if any) of a difference for one stop. And if the R-class stopped any shorter than the Odyssey it would probably be due to the tires, not the big ole fancy brakes.

:+1

(aside...has that Odyssey tire thing been resolved yet?)

FC
08-06-2009, 10:47 AM
I would venture to guess that the difference in brake hardware won't make much (if any) of a difference for one stop. And if the R-class stopped any shorter than the Odyssey it would probably be due to the tires, not the big ole fancy brakes.

Not necessarily. If I put the sticky 295-wide tires on the odyssey, now the brakes will likley be undersized, and feel like shit in the process. Nevermind the massive dice an Odyssey will have versus a car wuth an AMG suspension.

I just find it funny that you seem to imply the R is just an ugly Odeyssey with a big engine.

rumatt
08-06-2009, 11:04 AM
I just find it funny that you seem to imply the R is just an ugly Odeyssey with a big engine.

Don't forget the most important part.. the badge to show how much money you have.

John V
08-06-2009, 11:05 AM
Not necessarily. If I put the sticky 295-wide tires on the odyssey, now the brakes will likley be undersized, and feel like shit in the process. Nevermind the massive dice an Odyssey will have versus a car wuth an AMG suspension.

I have read this five times and I can't for the life of me figure out what you mean.

I just find it funny that you seem to imply the R is just an ugly Odeyssey with a big engine.

I never once tried to imply that. All I said was that if I HAD to have a big family truckster (minivan, big SUV to not be used for towing), I wouldn't see the point of getting one that could haul ass but isn't good at much else (to wit, turning). Especially an ugly, overpriced, overweight one that gets crappy mileage and will cost a lot to maintain and repair.

I understand I'm in the minority on this.

FC
08-06-2009, 11:15 AM
I have read this five times and I can't for the life of me figure out what you mean.

Really? You are trying to tell me that if you increase grip significantly you don't get more out of better brakes? Or that if you grab any stock car you can add unlimited grip and never have to upgrade the braking to take advantage of that grip?

Look, I know you and clyde are very good at autox and likely racing in general. Far better than me and probably better than I ever could be. But don't forget what I do for a living.

I never once tried to imply that. All I said was that if I HAD to have a big family truckster (minivan, big SUV to not be used for towing), I wouldn't see the point of getting one that could haul ass but isn't good at much else (to wit, turning). Especially an ugly, overpriced, overweight one that gets crappy mileage and will cost a lot to maintain and repair.

I understand I'm in the minority on this.

Really? :lol:

John V
08-06-2009, 11:27 AM
Really? You are trying to tell me that if you increase grip significantly you don't get more out of better brakes? Or that if you grab any stock car you can add unlimited grip and never have to upgrade the braking to take advantage of that grip?

The wording of the last sentence of your first paragraph made no sense to me. :dunno:

I put sticky tires on my SHO back in the day (tiny ass 10" rotors, 3500lb car, single piston sliding calipers), and I had no trouble engaging the ABS at all four corners. Repeatedly. Now, if I were on a track, those little brakes would have been smoking in no time. But that's not what we're talking about is it? We're talking about a panic stop, not competition here.

Upgrade the tires on most any modern car and you'll still be grip-limited.

Really? :lol:

What does it weigh? 5,000 lbs? And it gets 12MPG city and 16MPG highway? I'm sorry, I just think that's an asinine family vehicle.

JST
08-06-2009, 11:35 AM
Yeah--you'd have to be a dope to use a heavy vehicle with a several hundred horsepower V8 that gets mileage in the teens as a family car...

Sharp11
08-06-2009, 11:37 AM
I've driven an R class with a V6 - it was one of the most comfortable and refined "cars" I'd ever driven.

It was also huge and unsuited to the twisty narrow B roads we have around here - plus it got awful fuel economy and hasn't been reliable (our friends had an early example replaced by the CT lemon law).

If I were looking into a "luxury" minivan, I'd seriously consider a Honda Odyssey with a Touring package - those are really nice AND have sensible sliding doors and Honda reliability (provided the auto tranny debacle has been settled).

Ed

Josh (PA)
08-06-2009, 11:38 AM
All I said was that if I HAD to have a ..., I wouldn't see the point of getting one that could haul ass but isn't good at much else (to wit, turning). Especially an ugly, overpriced, overweight one that gets crappy mileage and will cost a lot to maintain and repair.

I understand I'm in the minority on this.

Weren't you the one lusting over a camaro for a while?

BahnBaum
08-06-2009, 11:47 AM
Weren't you the one lusting over a camaro for a while?

Believe that was Clyde.

Alex

Mr. The Edge
08-06-2009, 11:54 AM
I've driven an R class with a V6 - it was one of the most comfortable and refined "cars" I'd ever driven.

It was also huge and unsuited to the twisty narrow B roads we have around here - plus it got awful fuel economy and hasn't been reliable (our friends had an early example replaced by the CT lemon law).

If I were looking into a "luxury" minivan, I'd seriously consider a Honda Odyssey with a Touring package - those are really nice AND have sensible sliding doors and Honda reliability (provided the auto tranny debacle has been settled).

Ed

We have 2 Odyssey's in the family and they are really nice as far as minivans go. My brother in law has a Toyota Sienna minivan and that thing is really nice as well.

clyde
08-06-2009, 11:58 AM
Believe that was Clyde.

Alex

Still is.

Although I would point out to Josh that it:

1) is not ugly

2) is overpriced (save dealer rape adjustments)

3) um, I...really got nothing

4) does not get crappy mileage for its class

5) will probably be rather cheap and easy maintain and repair

As well as the type of car having nothing to do with "family truckster" type duties.

Like I said, I "would" point those things out, but he's a Flyers fan, so reason isn't likely to hold much water. ;)

rumatt
08-06-2009, 12:09 PM
Upgrade the tires on most any modern car and you'll still be grip-limited.


The amount of pressure you need varies though. I had to press pretty hard to get into ABS at 90 MPH in the accord.

So although not a safety issue, it is comfort / feel issue.

JST
08-06-2009, 12:13 PM
The bottom line for me is that I am not going to spend my money on a car that is just an appliance. Even if what I need the car for is primarily appliance-like duties, I need to feel some spark or glimmer of interest in something about the goddamn thing in order to drop a bunch of coin on it. That's why my current "family car" costs twice as much as an Accord, has a lot less space, gets substantially shittier gas mileage, and needs to have tires swapped out when it gets cold.

I completely agree with John that an Odyssey would do everything the AMG R class does and do it for less money, and that it would be vastly more practical to boot. But I'll never buy an Odyssey/Sienna (and Alex, you can bookmark that) because those are cars that represent (for me) the dark side of automobiledom in the same way that the Accord/Camry does--competence at the expense of enthusiasm.

If, some day, I need a car/truck that can do what an Odyssey can do, I have no doubt that I will make the same ridiculous decisions that I've made to date and end up with something just as compromised and nonsensical, from a practical perspective, as all the cars I've ever bought. Why would I do anything else?

Twin turbo Flex FTW.

clyde
08-06-2009, 12:14 PM
Really? You are trying to tell me that if you increase grip significantly you don't get more out of better brakes?

Go back to your question about a single panic stop from 70mph. The answer is no, you do not. Repeated hard braking, probably.

Or that if you grab any stock car you can add unlimited grip and never have to upgrade the braking to take advantage of that grip?

Dive and most of the other stuff you've been bringing in after the fact isn't a function of the brakes, but suspension geometry and tuning among other things.

Look, I know you and clyde are very good at autox and likely racing in general. Far better than me and probably better than I ever could be. But don't forget what I do for a living.

So, you're suggesting that casual book knowledge and the experience gained by designing unrelated objects that are not being discussed in a cubicle/office trumps real world knowledge and experience with the objects under discussion? Interesting. :p

I'm not saying that "better" brakes are bad or worthless or anything like that, just that they aren't necessarily "better" in all circumstances...in this case, your specific example.

rumatt
08-06-2009, 12:22 PM
If I was doing an imaginary 120 on a twisty non banked old ass freeway like the 110 going to Pasadena I would want the AMG R over anything else if the thing that I were to imaginarily do it in has to be a minivan.


:lol: :bustingup

TD
08-06-2009, 12:41 PM
The bottom line for me is that I am not going to spend my money on a car that is just an appliance. Even if what I need the car for is primarily appliance-like duties, I need to feel some spark or glimmer of interest in something about the goddamn thing in order to drop a bunch of coin on it. That's why my current "family car" costs twice as much as an Accord, has a lot less space, gets substantially shittier gas mileage, and needs to have tires swapped out when it gets cold.

I completely agree with John that an Odyssey would do everything the AMG R class does and do it for less money, and that it would be vastly more practical to boot. But I'll never buy an Odyssey/Sienna (and Alex, you can bookmark that) because those are cars that represent (for me) the dark side of automobiledom in the same way that the Accord/Camry does--competence at the expense of enthusiasm.

If, some day, I need a car/truck that can do what an Odyssey can do, I have no doubt that I will make the same ridiculous decisions that I've made to date and end up with something just as compromised and nonsensical, from a practical perspective, as all the cars I've ever bought. Why would I do anything else?

Twin turbo Flex FTW.
But I would imagine you wouldn't ever find yourself in a position where you would feel that a vehicle with that level of functionality/space would ever be necessary. Looking at your current fleet (with one child in the mix), I can't see you thinking you need more than a German wagon of some sort should you have a second. (And I just don't see you guys ever going for three or four kids.)

I remember reading countless posts over the years back at Bimmerfest where people felt the need to sell some 3 series variant in order to get some SUV just because their wife was pregnant with their first child.

We got this far without ever having a vehicle larger than the Saab wagon. I can't see a scenario where we'd get a minivan of any sort.

wdc330i
08-06-2009, 12:44 PM
I know this if kind of off-topic, now that this thread has become a shoot-out between the Odyssey and R. But, I have to say again how pleased I am with the X5 sport. Its only drawback is that the 3.0 gas engine is a bit slow off line (the diesel would solve this). Otherwise, it's a supremely nice, useful, and even fun to drive vehicle.

I bought this vehicle as a family compromise (I wanted a RWD 3 wagon with sport), yet it is a delight in almost every way. Except its size and bulk. But you'd have that with any of the vehicles mentioned above. And I happen to think this is the best looking SUV in its class.

ff
08-06-2009, 12:58 PM
We got this far without ever having a vehicle larger than the Saab wagon. I can't see a scenario where we'd get a minivan of any sort.
3 Kids seems to be the breaking point, where your choice of vehicles gets cut in half (or worse). You start shopping for vehicles that you never thought you'd buy. Like minivans, and SUV's.

John V
08-06-2009, 01:20 PM
Yeah--you'd have to be a dope to use a heavy vehicle with a several hundred horsepower V8 that gets mileage in the teens as a family car...

:lol::lol:

Well I've been monitoring prices of G8s as a possible replacement for the Jetta in a few years. Probably won't happen (I'd be more likely to get the cheapest low mile 328i manual I could find), but if they get cheap enough... :eeps:

Even if we were to start a family I can't see us going with a minivan / SUV. Just don't see the point.

TD
08-06-2009, 01:28 PM
:lol::lol:

Well I've been monitoring prices of G8s as a possible replacement for the Jetta in a few years. Probably won't happen (I'd be more likely to get the cheapest low mile 328i manual I could find), but if they get cheap enough... :eeps:

Even if we were to start a family I can't see us going with a minivan / SUV. Just don't see the point.
We prove that you don't *need* one. Some people may prefer to have one. But you don't *need* one unless you get to 3 kids.

Melissa
08-06-2009, 08:05 PM
We prove that you don't *need* one. Some people may prefer to have one. But you don't *need* one unless you get to 3 kids.

Perhaps, but with all the moves we'll be doing over the years, having the minivan will make it a much more pleasant experience. If we lived in a town surrounded by all of our family, never drove anywhere further than a single trip to Disney every year, I'm sure we'd be fine. But we plan on keeping the Odyssey (it's a Touring model, by the way) for a loooong time which means multiple cross-country moves and possibly a drive up the Al-can and back if we go to Kodiak.

The Honda isn't sexy but it's perfect for us. For now.

Josh (PA)
08-06-2009, 08:55 PM
Still is.

Although I would point out to Josh that it:

1) is not ugly

2) is overpriced (save dealer rape adjustments)

3) um, I...really got nothing

4) does not get crappy mileage for its class

5) will probably be rather cheap and easy maintain and repair

As well as the type of car having nothing to do with "family truckster" type duties.

Like I said, I "would" point those things out, but he's a Flyers fan, so reason isn't likely to hold much water. ;)

I find the camaro pretty ugly. My personal taste would rank it last of the three (1. Mustang, 2. Challenger 3. Camaro). In fact, I'd go so far as to say the R class is better looking in relation to its competition than the camaro is compared to other muscle cars.
As far as being a Flyers fan, I'd normally make some Chris Pronger intimidation comment here, but I really don't think Ovechkin is afraid of anything.

TD
08-06-2009, 09:07 PM
I find the camaro pretty ugly. My personal taste would rank it last of the three (1. Mustang, 2. Challenger 3. Camaro). In fact, I'd go so far as to say the R class is better looking in relation to its competition than the camaro is compared to other muscle cars.
As far as being a Flyers fan, I'd normally make some Chris Pronger intimidation comment here, but I really don't think Ovechkin is afraid of anything.
+1 on the Camaro being the ugliest of the 3.

Then again, none of the three hold any real appeal to me.

And I don't think the R is super ugly either. Ugly, yes. Super ugly, no.

Rob
08-06-2009, 10:12 PM
I have said before when this came up . . . the R is a really, really nice place to be on the inside. I would not kick one out of the driveway no matter how ugly my car board friends found it.

I also wouldn't get it to use as a mini van. It's far too nice to let kids loose in it. Even well behaved kids are tough on cars. Especially if their mom insists they be allowed to eat in her car.

Imo, this car failed b/c there really isn't a very big rich old guy market for mini vans.

As for mini van vs. suv, there really isn't any comparison. The only reason to choose an suv over a mini van is towing capacity or image issues. :) (Mind you, I don't drive the thing every day.)

clyde
08-06-2009, 10:26 PM
I find the camaro pretty ugly. My personal taste would rank it last of the three (1. Mustang, 2. Challenger 3. Camaro). In fact, I'd go so far as to say the R class is better looking in relation to its competition than the camaro is compared to other muscle cars.

+1 on the Camaro being the ugliest of the 3.

Then again, none of the three hold any real appeal to me.

And I don't think the R is super ugly either. Ugly, yes. Super ugly, no.

The two of you are nuts.

As far as being a Flyers fan, I'd normally make some Chris Pronger intimidation comment here, but I really don't think Ovechkin is afraid of anything.

Mike Green's shoulder, OTOH... :eeps: :(

3LOU5
08-07-2009, 12:51 AM
Don't forget the most important part.. the badge to show how much money you have.


: ohsnap:

3LOU5
08-07-2009, 12:57 AM
I love my Honda Odyssey. :eeps:

We briefly considered a larger SUV, but one of the main reasons we opted for a van was the height thing and getting kids in and out of the vehicle. (Plus, we already have a full size truck so having an SUV in addition seemed silly.)

I had had enough of climbing up into our F150 with babies and toddlers and back down again. Even with step bars, it was a pain in the ass. Now if I was ten inches taller, it might be easier, but there's still the issue of littles climbing in and out on their own.

Wow. Didn't think I'd ever hear you say that. I vaguely remember how much you hated minivans.

Melissa
08-07-2009, 08:56 AM
Wow. Didn't think I'd ever hear you say that. I vaguely remember how much you hated minivans.

Yes, well. I've been known to change my mind about things. I can think of two big changes especially! :D

Someone asked about the tire thing? If they meant having to buy the special tires, then yeah, I think we'll be spending a grand in a month or so. Otherwise, we haven't had to put any money into it since buying it used last summer.

Rob
08-07-2009, 10:27 AM
The toyota is like that too - closing on 50,000 miles and so far we have had to replace a belt b/c a squirrel used it for a napping place. Other than that, it's been oil changes only.

Oh, and the "normal" runflat tires on the Toyota were someting like $900. Granted, if you aren't stupid enough to get the awd model in southern california, you don't have to use runflats.

FC
08-08-2009, 09:52 AM
The wording of the last sentence of your first paragraph made no sense to me. :dunno:

I put sticky tires on my SHO back in the day (tiny ass 10" rotors, 3500lb car, single piston sliding calipers), and I had no trouble engaging the ABS at all four corners. Repeatedly. Now, if I were on a track, those little brakes would have been smoking in no time. But that's not what we're talking about is it? We're talking about a panic stop, not competition here.

Upgrade the tires on most any modern car and you'll still be grip-limited.



What does it weigh? 5,000 lbs? And it gets 12MPG city and 16MPG highway? I'm sorry, I just think that's an asinine family vehicle.

All major manufacturers suck, then. Why not just go to tiny-ass 10" rotors and save several pound sand cost out of the cars?

Beyond that. The braking event goes beyond grip. Suspension geometry and and many other factors affect how effectively you use the brakes and how much control you have in the process as well as how it feel sto the driver - and I'm not just talking about YOU or any other gifted driver, but a mere mortal as well.

And let me point out that I started this thread as a joke. Like JST, I will probably never have to seriously consider a minivan but find it cool.

I'm really not in the mood to go ack and forth forever, so I'm done.

FC
08-08-2009, 09:59 AM
Go back to your question about a single panic stop from 70mph. The answer is no, you do not. Repeated hard braking, probably.

See reply to JV's post.

Dive and most of the other stuff you've been bringing in after the fact isn't a function of the brakes, but suspension geometry and tuning among other things.

And when did I explicitly exclude those factors?

So, you're suggesting that casual book knowledge and the experience gained by designing unrelated objects that are not being discussed in a cubicle/office trumps real world knowledge and experience with the objects under discussion? Interesting. :p

I'm not saying that "better" brakes are bad or worthless or anything like that, just that they aren't necessarily "better" in all circumstances...in this case, your specific example.

Wow.:lol:

That's why racers are racers and engineers are engineers.

BahnBaum
08-08-2009, 10:02 AM
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b382/OneofDem/not_this_shit_again.jpg

Alex

FC
08-08-2009, 10:03 AM
:lol:

Sorry, business trip got in the way. I'm done. I promise.

clyde
08-08-2009, 11:38 AM
I'm really not in the mood to go ack and forth forever, so I'm done.

I don't believe you.

blah blah blah

I'm done. I promise.

I still don't believe you.

:p

John V
08-08-2009, 02:08 PM
All major manufacturers suck, then. Why not just go to tiny-ass 10" rotors and save several pound sand cost out of the cars?

I didn't say that.

The braking event goes beyond grip.

Of course.

Look, there's nothing wrong with wanting a 5,000lb+, 500hp Mercedes minivan with big racecar brakes and big wide wheels and sticky tires so you (collective, not YOU specifically) can pretend to be a racecar driver while you shuttle your rugrats to and from daycare. I just happen to be of the opinion that it's really, really lame. :)

That's why racers are racers and engineers are engineers.

Sometimes we're both.

http://forums.carmudgeons.com/showpo...5&postcount=51

Change the pads to a higher torque compound. While bigger rotors will give you more brake torque, they're probably sufficient from a dissipation standpoint so changing the pads will give you the same result for less cost.

Josh (PA)
08-08-2009, 09:28 PM
Look, there's nothing wrong with wanting a 5,000lb+, 500hp Mercedes minivan with big racecar brakes and big wide wheels and sticky tires so you (collective, not YOU specifically) can pretend to be a racecar driver while you shuttle your rugrats to and from daycare. I just happen to be of the opinion that it's really, really lame. :)


I have to admit that's pretty much the reason I owned the 540 wagon and I loved that car all the way until the cooling system sh*t the bed. This thing is kind of like the wagon with the ability to haul around two of my kids friends. That is a necessity at least twice a week for us.

John V
08-08-2009, 10:39 PM
A 540 wagon, especially with a stick, is very cool, IMO.

An R-class is painfully lame. Again, IMO. :dunno: why.

lemming
08-11-2009, 09:26 AM
A 540 wagon, especially with a stick, is very cool, IMO.

An R-class is painfully lame. Again, IMO. :dunno: why.

what about that upcoming new 5 series GT thingy?

:dunno:

is that an R class type vehicle or a 5er wagon niche replacement?

lemming
08-11-2009, 09:28 AM
My mechanic can do the conversion including used tranny for about 4 grand.

We passed ultimately because we wanted something with more power than 286HP.

The E34 M5 wagon was perfect, same HP as the S4 Avant, same weight, but RWD. Ultimately, we just couldn't pay 30K for one.

for slightly different reasons, i'm likely to get a CTS wagon.

FC
08-11-2009, 10:28 AM
I wold definitely consider one if my wife didn't hate the looks (yes, shes pretty crazy sometimes - she also hates the look of corvetes and Ferraris).

John V
08-11-2009, 11:00 AM
The 5 series GT is heinous.

The CTS wagon is pretty cool looking. IMO.

FC
08-11-2009, 11:17 AM
The 5 series GT is heinous.

The CTS wagon is pretty cool looking. IMO.

Yes.

lemming
08-11-2009, 11:41 AM
Yes.

it'd be a natural successor to the current utility vehicle with basically the same power to weight ratio, AWD, (prob slushie only) but with a lower C.o.G.

:dunno:

the DI 3.0L making 270hp is spot on with what is already there but the 3.6DI would be some gravy, i think.