Automotive & Things That Move

“Long Term Test Drive”

In general, the Honda Civic and the Toyota Corolla get lumped into the same "econo" bucket, with good reason. The Civic is our commuter rat. We put at least 82 miles per week day on this car. It’s not so pretty any more and is often adorned with empty coffee mugs and bagel crumbs. We bought the car with about 70k miles on it some 7 years ago. We’re now running 233k trouble free miles, at least relatively trouble free.

The entire time we’ve had the car, the only non consumables I’ve replaced are the C.V. joints, the radiator, a rubber control arm bushing, a ball joint, and the thermostat. Not too shabby for 160k miles of use. The CV’s cost about $100, the Radiator another $100, bushing $50, ball joint $120, and the thermostat with new gaskets about $40. Now if you’re not handy, the CV’s are going to cost you some decent labor. There not difficult to do, but they take time since several major front end assemblies need to be removed for this repair.

As for consumables, the big ones to note are the timing belt and, for standard transmission models, clutch. This is an “interference” engine as in most foreign cars and as such the timing belt MUST be changed on a prescribed interval else you risk a fatal engine failure. The belt doesn’t cost much, $30-60, but the labor to install it is going to run in the mid hundreds. Similar with the clutch, aftermarket parts are available for about $100 but the labor again is going to run in the mid hundreds. I’ve changed the clutch once and need to do the timing belt for the third time now (60-90k interval).

The major bonus on this car however is the fuel economy. You may see this influence my other automotive reviews, particularly American cars. The Civic averages an easy 38mpg. This is not like the Passat where you have to baby it to get 30mpg. The Civic gets 38mpg _all_ the time. On bad days you might get 36mpg. The car isn’t a “write your name on the pavement doughnut monster” by any means, but it moves right along. We typically commute on the highway at 80-90 MPH without any issues regarding available power or fear of being rear-ended while merging. You will have to rev this little motor to generate that merging power which I’ve found seems frighten many American car drivers. But, this really isn’t going to hurt this engine one bit. Redline is in the 7k range.

Interior durability is very high. This car is fitted with tan fabric upholstery. There are no tears or even noticeable wear spots. There are few stains here and there, but nothing that affects the integrity of the seating.

Interior noise and elbow room are the main detractors for this car. There is significant wind and tire noise at all speeds. Elbow room is cramped to say the least. Driver and passenger can’t fasten the seat belt simultaneously and there is no arm rest. Space between the bucket seats is just enough for the hand brake.

Exterior durability is also very high. Now at 13 years old and 230k miles, were getting some minor bubbling on the leading edge of the hood and at the rear of the rear wheel wells. However, these bubbles are _slow_ growing. They actually have been there for a year or two with little noticeable growth. The hood rot is due to road debris damage, and should likely be avoided with a protective clear film. The rear wheel well is a minor design flaw. This area collects road debris and remains damp.

All in all, this is a great car. I highly recommend the brand and the Civic in particular.

We purchased our Passat with 7500 miles on the odometer. Not a new car per say, but pretty darn close. I’ve been driving VW’s from before I even had a drivers liscence. I’ve owned and driven Beetles(type 1), Ghias, Golfs, Jettas, Sciroccos, and a Corrado of various years and use these as comparison.

This is the quetest VW we’ve driven to date, as is to be expected of this class of automobile. The Passat is similar in size, and sharing many components with, it’s sister car the Audi A6. The Passat features mostly the extra leg room over the Jetta or A4. The next newest VW we had was the 2001 Jetta GLS with the same powerplant. My brother also has a GTI of similar vintage also running the 1.8T engine. The Jetta and the Passat are very similar in noise control with a slight advantage to the Passat. I suspect due to the placement of the engine. The Passat differs from most of the VW line with the crankshaft oriented lengthwise in the car. This orientation places the turbocharger between the wheelwell and the engine instead of between the firewall and the engine as on the Jetta platform. As a result, it seems the whisle of the turbo is more muted on the Passat.

Ride is exceptional. The vehicle feels solid and responsive with little chassis roll in corners yet potholes and road imperfections are absorbed with little notice or sound. Performance is spirited with the 1.8T once the turbo is spooled sufficiently, but this can take several seconds as with any turbocharged vehicle.

Fuel economy is good, but not exceptional. We’re spoiled by out 1993 Honda Civic that routinely gets 38-40 MPG with 230,000 miles on the odometer. But the 27 to 30 MPG of the 4 cylinder wagon certainly beats any gas burning Detroit-made vehicle to date.

Interior fit and finish is also exceptional, rivaled only by its luxury sister vehicles in the Audi range.

My only grievances with the car are in the acoustics and rear hatch operation. Both the Jetta GLS and this Passat GLS are/were equipped with the upgraded Monsoon sound system. Interior noise and audio performance were clearly optimized for the front seats only in the Passat wagon as opposed to the Jetta. The Wagon option sacrifices the extreme rear speakers that are traditionally mounted behind the rear headrests on the sedans. This creates a forward biased soundstage for the rear seats. Also to note while seated in the rear is those in the front seats are not subject to the sound of the sunroof while opened. There is almost no noise from the sunroof perceived while seated in the front seats. On the contrary, it is quite loud by comparison in the rear. So for conversations with rear seated passengers, we recommend you close the sunroof.

The second grievance is in the operation of the rear hatch. The hatch is always locked unless the rear hatch lever is pulled or the key-fob button is depressed. Combined with this, the hatch does not pop open like the trunk of the Jetta with either of these two actions. This means you will have to pull the leaver with that hand that is holding the key since your groceries are in the other hand; a disappointment for a vehicle with this price tag.

All in all, we give this vehicle a rating of A-, if not for the two above mentioned flaws, it would be an A.

I was in the market for the cheapest 6 cylinder pickup with air conditioning I could find. The payment on my Jetta was a little steep and we were always borrowing trucks from friends and relatives. It was time for my first American car.

It turned out that the Dodge Dakota SXT fit the bill. For that year, the SXT was only 2WD and only a regular cab. I think the price was about $13k-$14k when all was said and done.

I’ve got a beef with the dealership that I will save for the end. But overall we’ve been satisfied with the truck given what we paid for it. I’m not advocating that this is what a truck should cost, because I don’t. I’ll share a rant on that some other time… But compared to what is on the market, it was the bargain.

The truck has over 70k miles on it now with only one issue so far. At about 20-30k miles, it suffered a crank angle sensor failure while my wife was driving it to work. This left the truck lifeless on the side of the road. It was a 1 day repair under warranty but it even if it didn’t put a dent in our wallet it put a dent in our calendar as I had to take a day from work for towing etc. etc.

Cosmetically, the truck is in decent shape except the bumpers. They must have stamped the bumpers from recycled garbage. They started rusting a long time ago. A symptom I see on most dodge trucks of this era. The body is in fine shape however and the bed has been sprayed with rubber liner so it’s in great shape too. The interior fabric is starting to show it’s age. The spaced in the weave are growing and color isn’t as dark as it once was. But, there are no holes or tears yet.

Torque from the 4 liter six is great. Power, not so great. It will pull over a house from a standstill. But, pulling a 20’ boat on the highway is pedal-to-metal and best you get is about 65mph. Uphill of any sort and your downshifting.

The stock tires are WAY too wide. This thing likes to hydroplane and snow performance is useless. A set of Blizak winter tires makes this problem go away however. I really cant say enough about how the Blizaks changed the snow performance of this truck.

Highway driving on the stock tires can be bouncy, but this also has to do with the heavy load package that came standard. This little truck will haul 2 full yards of mulch without riding the bump stops. Even the guys at the yards are skeptical. They have said 150/1500 trucks often only hold a yard without squatting. We’ve even hauled a full yard of stone dust, (WAY, WAY, WAY over the rated limit. Do NOT try this at home kids) but it was riding the bump stops and the tires were handling all of the road imperfections.

As for the dealer experience I mentioned. I stepped out of a 4 cylinder Jetta into this 6 cylinder dodge. I expected two more torque generations per revolution to produce a 50% smoother engine. To my surprise, this motor shakes the cab at idle. I mean shakes. I raised the issue with the salesman and sales manager. They assured me that if it didn’t drive off (0.5 miles on the odometer) they would take care of it. It was noted on the bill of sales as a condition of sale. Well, 70k miles later and several nasty arguments with the dealership and the truck still shakes and no compensation for the condition of sale. The 5 star people from Chrysler called a few times to ask if I was satisfied with my purchase and I bluntly said “absolutely not” explained the situation factually in plane words every time. They would ask if I wanted the dealership to contact me to which I replied yes. I never heard from the dealership and they stopped calling after three times. 5 star rating is a scam, it means nothing.

Anyway, despite the lousy dealership and that I would personally never buy another new Dodge for that reason, the truck gets a B+. It is what it is. It’s a truck and it performs the tasks I expect of a truck reliably. So for that it gets a high rating.

Well, this car fits the bill as “Your Fathers Oldsmobile” as the jingle used to say. I grew up driving my parents Cutlass Sierras and Centurys, so I’m a little familiar with this car’s lineage.

I hoped that some fifteen years of development would have resulted in some significant changes in this cars styling and handling. I was disappointed. While some more modern materials and techniques were used in the cars interior and some sleeker lines were used in the familiar body shape, the car is almost the same as the ones my parents drove. The bucket-looking seat felt like a split bench, I slid on the leather surfaces at every turn. The dash certainly looks better than the mid 80’s vintage GMs I was used to, but it still seemed lacking. Certainly compared to what the GM and Pontiac lines have introduced.

Power was sluggish for this size car and engine. Certainly it felt like a mass issue, but I have not checked the GVWR. Steering was equally poor. After turning a corner, one practically has to steer the car back to a straight line. Fortunately/unfortunately the power steering makes turning the wheel effortless to the point of no feedback.

Fuel economy is “American” bad at about 23 MPG, mostly highway.

Overall I give this car a D. Lousy seats, lousy handling, old fashioned styling, and as I’ve commented with the other American cars, poor fuel economy.

2006 Pontiac G6

I’m typically not a fan of Detroit iron, but I have to admit that they are getting a little better. Particularly Chrysler now that they get some German influence. But were talking Chevys here…

I drove the newly released G6 for several days in the mid Atlantic states of Virginia and North Carolina, a lot of highway driving and a decent amount of city and back-road driving. Much like my impression of the Monte Carlo, GM is making headway in my opinion of them. The exterior styling is improved, but reminds me too much of the grand-am which just carries along emotional baggage I guess.

Interior styling is nice. I particularly liked the choices of seating fabric. A weave pattern is used in the center panels and takes on the look of perforated leather without being obvious synthetic leather. We will have to see if it stands the test of time like the interior of our 230,000 mile Honda Civic (no rips, pulls, or holes). The dash is again sleek and stylish and incorporates a similar sound system designed by Monsoon as used in our Volkswagens. Interior noise levels were low at all speeds. Ergonomics were not bad but still needed some work, specifically the elbow rest locations.

Handling was firm, but not quite as sporty as the Monte Carlo, but good for a daily driver. Body roll was a little more pronounced but still quite better than the Buick LaCrosse. Fuel economy was better than the Monte Carlo at about 25MPG highway but not nearly as good as the much larger Passat Wagon 1.8T that gets 27-30mpg on average. Detroit really needs to do some work in this department.

Overall I give this car a B-. Again, theres still room to go on interior style and ergonomics as well as fuel economy. The exterior styling is too close to the Grand Am to make me feel it’s a different car.

I’m typically not a fan of Detroit iron, but I have to admit that they are getting a little better. Particularly Chrysler now that they get some German influence. But were talking Chevys here…

I had the opportunity to take a long drive from Washington DC to New Hampshire in a 2005 Chevy Monte Carlo not too long ago. My first impressions were mostly positive. Let me say I have never really liked the style of the Monte Carlo of any year. This really is no exception, but I’ll concede that it’ not nearly the ugliest car I have ever seen. Interior styling is something altogether different. American car makers are making leaps of headway to designing attractive AND functional interiors. I place a large weight to ergonomics of driving since I spend a lot of time in cars. I like to be able to activate controls with fingertips without removing my hands from the wheel. I like for the shifter to be directly under the fall line of a hand sliding off the steering wheel. I like the arm rests at comfortable positions to allow proper wheel grip ( a most challenging feat considering the difference in peoples proportions). The interior styling of the Monte Carlo is nice. It doesn’t meet all of these requirements but enough to be comfortable. It had comfortable bucket seats with lumbar support (often missing in American cars). The dash layout was sleek but functional. Steering column controls were in reach of my fingertips, but perhaps not those with shorter fingers.

Performace and handling were very good. The car had great pickup as to be expected with a decent displacement engine. Interior noise was quite low unless you had the pedal to the floor. Handling was also surprising to me. I grew up driving my parents Oldsmobiles and Buicks and have driven a handful of other, more recent, American cars. The Monte Carlo handles quite well. Very firm as a sports coupe should be. Very little chassis roll in hard corners, and nimble self centering steering control.

Downside other than exterior styling is the fuel economy. The best I got was about 23 MPG and it was ALL highways. We need to turn our engine efficiency gains from technology into fuel savings instead of power. The Japanese and European car makers are way ahead on this.

Overall I give this car a B-. Styling can be a people to people thing, but theres still room to go on interior style and ergonomics as well as fuel economy.

We’ve now owned the ST4 for about two years. We bought the bike “new” from the dealer with 7000 miles on the odometer. As a demo bike, the vehicle had never been titled. We now have over 13000 trouble free miles on the machine.

First impressions of the ST4 as a driver upgrading from the Monster 750 are power and comfort. My wife certainly enjoys the significant increase in seating area and leg room. The Monster passenger seating position pushes the passenger’s legs up very high and the seat area is little more than about 10X7 inches. The seat area on the ST series is at least double with much lower foot pegs.

The ST4 features a very similar engine to the 916 Superbike, but not the same. By specs, it seems aimed at the target market producing a little more lower end torque. By feel, it’s still a blast. Power rolls out in gobs at about 4.5 to 5k rpm and keeps getting better all the way up to 10k. As with most Ducati motors, you get about 80% or greater peak torque throughout most of useable rev-range. This is the differentiator for a big twins and closed cam (Desmodromic in Ducati speak) valve trains. For those not familiar with the valve train, Ducats are known for not having valve springs. Traditionally engines are equipped with one cam and lifter per valve with a spring that closes the valve and maintains lifter contact with the cam. Valve timing greatly impacts the power and torque performance of an engine. Traditional spring lifter systems are limited in their range by the capability of the spring to push the lifter and valve back up fast enough to maintain contact between the lifter and the cam. Should the cam spin too fast, the lifter will float off the cam like passengers on a roller coaster going over a peak. When this happens, the lifter slaps back down onto the cam surface and causes surface damage that deteriorates engine life. A closed cam system like the Desmodromic valves of a Ducati on the other hand has a lifter and closer instead of a spring. This nearly eliminates the problem of valve float and provides the engine designer with the ability to create some fairly extreme cam profiles resulting in gobs and gobs of torque throughout the rev range.

So back to the bike. I like most everything about this machine. It’s fast, it’s agile, and most fun is that it is a sleeper with the hard bags attached. Many kids think you’re on a gold wing or something at the stoplight. They don’t seem to expect the wheelie and big twin bark that leaves them scratching their heads.

Things I don’t like are all maintenance related. Servicing a Ducati is expensive. It’s cheaper to drive my Dodge pickup getting 20MPG in terms of regular maintenance and gas. Fuel economy is fine on the ST4 coming in around 40MPG most of time. But, tack on the ~$800-$1,000 service every 6000 miles for valve shimming and tires and you’ve nearly doubled the cost per mile of the Dodge. Living in New England means wintering the bike. Wintering means battery maintenance, which is not considered in the design of the bike. Granted, Ducatis are race bread. Meaning, there is little on the bike that isn’t A: to make it go faster, or B: to make it turn or stop better. But who hasn’t accidentally turned the key one stop too far and left the lights on for the afternoon? The other is charging in the winter months. The entire fairing system has to be removed including the dash surround and the mirrors to access the battery, even just the terminals. After performing this operation two time, I made some modifications. I corrected a wire undersize issue that affects warm start (and weak battery) condition by upsizing the wire from the battery to the starter and ground. Also, I added a short lead, with a rubber cap on the end, to the positive post of the battery that can be pulled out of the cooling duct when I’m having a stupid moment and need to jump start or recharge the battery.

I give this bike a B+. A great blast to ride, but the cost of ownership makes me think twice about riding it, which is sad. Unfortunately, Ducati will not likely make this valve train less maintenance heavy as it drives their service revenue.