A sad truth... that made me happy!

So here's a sad truth I recently discovered: I can buy a Chrysler from F*rd and be treated better at the F*rd shop than any Chrysler dealership! How backwards is that?!

If you know me, (and if you don`t, you`ll find out if I haven`t already said so), I hate F*rd. And there's MANY reasons to do so. I love Chrysler. And I'm on my second one to prove it. But the bizarre thing is I've F*rd to thank for it!

It's like this: ever since April 1, I was driving my BMW M540i and loving every moment of it. But in the back of my mind I knew that when Autumn turned into winter, that I'd have to put it away and rely on my Caddy CTS for winter duties. Sometime during June, I went to remove the winter tires on the CTS only to find the nuts had 'frozen' to the bolts and I couldn't get the wheels off. Ok, so I brought the car home from my buddy's place and was terrified the entire drive back. The steering wheel was doing anything it wanted; the brakes were nearly non-existent, and so on.

It was a horrible drive home and then I took it to Canadian Tire to have the bolts drilled out and replaced. While it was there, I was informed of over $3000-worth of repairs it needed. This car was a nightmare from the beginning and had cost us well over $2500-worth of repairs prior to this. We decided it needed to go. So began the search for a newer vehicle to replace it.

Among the vehicular choices were the Audi A4/A6; Hummer H2; Infiniti FX 35/45 and G35x; Chrysler 300C AWD; and a variety of other models. After an exhaustive search and some useless guidance and time-wasting by our bank, we had narrowed it down to the Infinitis and Chrysler 300s. I posted my car for sale on Autocatch and Kijiji and also a few ads looking for an Infiniti FX and Chrysler 300C.

One day, someone sent me a response via Kijiji that there was an Infinity FX45 at Kanata F*rd. Ok, so why not, I thought, and went to see the FX. When I got there, I came across the gorgeous red 300C you see in the pic above this story. Well, I was there primarily for the FX but I decided to try this 300C. Listed at $22,000 for a 2007, that was a damn good price and with only 50,000kms, the mileage was even better. I took it out, discovered an unknown feature of automated high-beams and found the car drove like it just came off the showroom floor.

So I went back home and discussed it with our revised post-bank BS (take that TD Bank!), budget and then I noticed there was a White 300C AWD at Capital Dodge. I had been there at the beginning of the summer and had tried to purchase it only to find out that the final tally after factoring-in the balance owed on the CTS, that it would be too expensive. However, before coming to that conclusion, the guy I was dealing with was a bit of a jackass, jerking us around, playing up the purchase, the car's many attributes, (and it WAS WELL-EQUIPPED: Nav; 6-cd; AWD; Bluetooth and low mileage), I advised him I'd come back in the afternoon with a down-payment. Well, I returned later and he was gone, nowhere to be found. No one knew where he was. I had to out to the in-laws that evening so when Monday came around, I called him, wondering why he didn't call me on the Saturday after leaving my mobile number with the receptionist. Anyway, when I did get a hold of him, he just flat-out said it would be too expensive for our budget. So the idea here was that we weren't worth the time to call back or to continue discussing it.

So, this happened after I had a horrible experience with this dealership in the Spring in which the MANAGER insultingly said out loud, "..and here is where the sales process comes to an end", when I told him the CTS had 200,000+ kilometers on it. I was so insulted, that I wrote to Chrysler Canada a letter of complaint.

Anyway, I'm getting off-track here. So, unintentionally, we ended up dealing with the same salesman for the same car, because IT DIDN'T SELL DURING THE ENTIRE SUMMER! I went to look at it, drive it and though it was a bit rougher in the driving, (the tranny was slamming into its gears), I was ready to buy it. Of course, this jerk had to argue that the car was fine, "nothing wrong when I drove it earlier", yeah right, do you KNOW WHO YOU'RE dealing with?!!

So, we were to go see our bank to get an idea of what they could do for us per-month-wise and on that day, I get an email from this guy saying the car was sold. Well I watch Autocatch thoroughly through the day to see what has been uploaded, what has sold; etc. I went immediately to see if it had been identified as sold and there it was, plain as day, STILL for sale! And so it remained for a week. So he lied. Didn't even have the balls to call... he'd rather lose a sale than deal with someone who knows cars!

And so, back to the web I went and onto Kanata F*rd's website and lo, they dropped their red 300C to $18,000! Bam, I was on it! I went to see it again and there on the mirror was a tag for $27,000!! HUH?!! Anyway, when I talked to the salesman again, (Blair), he said someone had put it there because they couldn't find the other one. So, again I went back to the bank and within LESS-than-10 minutes, I walked out of the meeting having had enough of TD Bank's crap. I went back to Kanata F*rd, met with the finance manager; we did the figures and put down $500. Within 10 minutes, we were approved! All through this, the salesman answered ALL my questions, never treated me like some dork who thinks he knows something about cars. The finance manager gave us the low-down on what to expect from the bank; what they could do; what the bank wouldn't do; etc.

All through the summer, I went to multiple Chrysler dealerships; surprisingly three times to Capital Dodge despite their shitty and personally-offensive attitudes! I only went for the cars, not for the personnel. Southbank made a few half-hearted attempts at finding me the car I wanted, but never really met my criteria. Dilawri was NEVER on my radar, their prices were always way too high. And their service department are just jackasses not prepared to help a potential customer when I went to them with the VIN in order to find out what warranty-based work had been done on the car and how much warranty remained. They said it was due to privacy laws in regards to the previous owner. Give me a damn break, I don't care who owned it, I just wanted to know what had been done and what was left! BMW gave me that info OVER THE PHONE when I researched the 540! Kanata F*rd answered ALL my questions, even explaining the $4000 drop in price from one day to the next. I even asked them to find out about the warranty, hoping that perhaps professional courtesy between dealerships would help them get the info. And they did... AFTER WE BOUGHT THE CAR!!! At that point, they could have stopped 'working for us', the car was sold. But no, they DID find out and gave me the info requested.

All this is to say, the irony of buying my favorite domestic vehicle from my most-hated of brands is not lost on me! I hate F*rd, always have, always will. But the people made the difference! And in today's world, why is it we have to be struck-dumbfounded when we encounter excellent service?! Whatever the case may be, F*rd gpt my money, they have my endorsement! I told them twice, that I would never buy a F*rd but I WILL buy another car from them any day! I love my Chrysler 300C but damnit Chrysler, you need to review who you hire or send them to some sort of Disney-based customer service seminars because with one exception, we were treated like we were wasting their time! And right now, Chrysler doesn't need that rep.

I have the car I've wanted for the last 5 years but I had to buy it from the company I hate the most. Ironic you say?!! F*rd obviously knows how to treat customers, NO MATTER WHAT BRAND OF VEHICLE THEY ARE THERE TO BUY!! They even gave us free lifetime oil-changes!

Kudos to you, Kanata F*rd, you have my vote. And Chrysler: take note!

A V8 more economical than a 4-cylinder? Believe it!

Stay tuned, an interesting article that PROVES my theory on power-to-weight ratios are REALLY where a car's fuel economy is decided, long before you turn the key!!

So here it is: due to a mechanical repair that I didn't have time to invest in, I had to rent a car to go to Montreal to get my son. To keep costs low with a rental, i rented the second-lowest class of car available: a Pontiac G5; basic 4-door; 4-cylinder; bare-bones vehicle. I as lucky to have Cruise Control, (as I later found out).

So here I am, cruise at 120/kph towards Montreal, the usual round-trip comes out to about 6 hours on a good day. This vehicle has a fuel-tank of about 65 liters, about two less than my 2002 BMW M540i; running with a 2.2 liter 4-cylinder. The logic and the common social belief is that the smaller the engine, the better the fuel economy. Well not really.

Ottawa-Montreal-Ottawa consumed one FULL tank with the G5. With my BMW's 4.4 liter V8: 1/2 tank. Why is that, then? Heavier car; bigger engine! Physics. Power-to-weight ratio. In simpler terms, each cylinder had less weight to move per-cylinder unlike the 4-cylinder. And this is with the same number of gears in both transmissions.

Just goes to prove, just because it`s common belief or `popular belief`, that doesn`t make it so, nor right. As an example, building a Prius does more harm to the environment BEFORE it is even on the road than if I spent a year driving my BMW, (which I don`t, I only use it 5 months out of the year and then it goes into winter-storage).

So, again as I`ve said so many times, don`t be a sheep, don`t follow the crowd, rad up on topics of interest, learn the truth, don`t believe everything without learning more about it.

And to those detractors who still want to bash V8s; why don`t you go for a ride on your diesel-chugging GreenPeace Rainbow Warriors and protest against the disinformation Toyota and other `sayers-of-nay` have spread and turned fiction to fact. Look beyond the social-programming! Make up your own mind with facts, not belief, not fiction.

Times are 'a changin'

Once there were three mighty automotive giants in North America... and then these little companies from across the two great oceans eyed us and said, "hmm, maybe we could do something with that market over there."

The Italians, the French, the Brits, the Germans, the Russians and the Swedes; they all say this huge market and expressed a thought: "we can sell some cars over there." And so it was with the arrival of Alfa Romeo; Ferrari; Fiat; Citroen, Renault, Peugeot; Jaguar, Morgan, Triumph, Aston Martin; Land Rover; Mercedes, BMW, Volkswagen; Skoda, Lada; Volvo, Saab, etc.

And they came at the right time. Back then, (in the 50s/60s), North American cars were built well but they were huge and gas guzzlers and no attention to the environment or the passengers' safety. Volvo was the first to change that by adding this unheard-of device called the seat belt. Then crumple-zones, allowing the car to absorb the energies of the impact, instead of conveying it directly to the passengers.

And these new 'immigrant vehicles' did everything so differently. In the 50s, who would want to buy a tiny little Triumph when your neighbor had a 25-foot-long Buick Roadmaster that weighed in at about three tons and took a week to come to a stop. But prevail they did. Hindsight is 20/20 but isn't it always those who choose to do the one thing differently than others who usually trump the norm?!

Here we are, 60 years later give-or-take a few, and some of those foreign cars are gone from North American shores. Some of the American brands are gone too. Packard; Dusenberg, AMC (American Motors Corp.); Plymouth. And now, Pontiac and Oldsmobile are gone. Mercury is dying a slow but assured death.

Was it that the North American cars weren't as good as the foreign ones? Was it that the foreign ones were less costly to run? Maybe a yes to all of the above and more. But here we are and now some of these companies have asked and received money from the respective governments to stay in business. (Must be like Christmas in Detroit).

But now, the 'foreign is better' belief has taken a down turn too. When you look at statistics, really look at them, you see the truth. Honda and Toyota, not as good as they once were. NOT BAD, but NOT as good! Nissan and Suzuki are the quirky Japanese brands that still manage to stay alive despite having some oddball products out there.

And then someone had a thought in a boardroom somewhere in Yokohama or Tokyo and it went something like this: "let's take our existing products, make them larger, more efficient, swimming in leather, better than the regularly-branded products, re-name them and target the upper-middle-class." And there you have the emergence of Lexus, cars that were FAR better than the Toyotas they were based on. Acura and Infiniti belonging to Honda and Nissan. Mazda, Suzuki and Subaru just didn't have the capital to start their own luxury brands.

So here's a question: why didn't you just make your Camry AS good as you made the Lexus LS400?! 17 years on and these original Lexus' are still on the road in very good shape! Acura never succeeded in establishing their luxury marquees as well as Toyota and Nissan did. They're not bad products but they weren't successful in establishing Acuras as not being reworked Accords and Civics.

So where am I going with all this? I don't really know. I can say this: since I was a teen, I often wondered, is there the perfect car? It would be foolish to say yes. There is no perfect car. There are as many cars to choose from in what they deliver to the customer as there are customers who buy them. Let's look at it this way: take a two-million dollar Bugatti Veyron as a starting example. 1001 horsepower, Quad-turbocharged V16, fastest production car in the world and it's an automatic. Anyone could drive it. It also has All-wheel-drive, so it's good for traction. But it IS $2,000,000 and it does have 1001 horsepower which means you could kill yourself just backing out of your own driveway.

Porsche's Cayenne Turbo S is another example. Extremely expensive, incredible power from that engine and fantastic traction with the advantage of it being an AWD SUV. But it's considered to be one of the ugliest vehicles on the road. And that engine is incredibly expensive to repair. Take ANY Ferrari and it has three main things going against them: They're expensive to buy; most of their owners don't know how to drive them; and EVERY speed-bump on the planet is their enemy.

Without going way overboard on naming every products' downfall, the truth is that EVERY CAR IN THE WORLD has a shortcoming. I like the BMW M5. The current model has amazing statistics working in its favor but the body's styling has proven itself to be its negative point. Someone else might like a Ferrari F430... but it only seats 2 and again, watch out for speed bumps! Another person likes a Hummer but the current models aren't even actually Hummers, they're a Chevy Tahoe and the S10 pickup trucks in disguise.

But IS THERE A PERFECT CAR?? Ask 100 people and you'll get 100 different answers. What matters is what it brings to YOU! I currently drive a 2002 BMW M 540i. It looks fantastic, it bloody well moves like nobody's business and there are so many well thought-out features aboard. But it has a few niggles too: the back seat won't fold flat, so that restricts the cargo capacity of the car. The engine only takes Premium fuel. And when something goes wrong with the engine, it's costly. Would I trade it for something else? Maybe. But whatever I'd choose, it too would have shortcomings.

So it's like this: Do you like American cars? Do you like sports-sedans? Do you like only Italian cars? Trucks? SUVs? So on and so forth. Do you like only European vehicles? Classic from the 50s and the 60s? Would I drive one of those 1960s Volvos, tiny and tin-like? YUP! And I know it'd be a hoot!

Today's posting wasn't a rant. I was just trying to put into words some of the thoughts that have been with me for years. Conclusion: there is no perfect car, there is only the perfect car FOR YOU!

Now, get out there and go for a ride, summer's almost over!

A short rant... I hope

I know I'm going to some flack for what I'm about to write from someone I know... but fortunately, I don't know anyone who could be called a 'Ricer'. You know who they are, we've all seen them even if you're not familiar with the term.

My rant today is about how one thing is allowed when another is not. Example: Harley-Davidsons... I can't stand them, everything about them is wrong and a cliché and just plain tacky. But my main complaint is this: why the hell are they allowed to 'rumble' past, making so damn much noise, screaming "look at me"??? Let me make a point about this: Harleys (as I understand it), are NOT built this bloody noisy. They are in fact, built with an ordinary motorcycle exhaust, which is made to be very easily and quickly removed by the dealer or the owner, hence their horrendous, if not a trademark, noise.

However, if you had a car that sounded like it no longer had an exhaust, you'd be pulled over the moment a cop or that retired old goat down the road who is always looking out his living room window to see what his neighbors are up to, calls it in. Mufflers are not only a tool in keeping the noise down, but they're the law!! And yet these damn motorcycles are doing it all the damn time. And almost always is it a Harley.

Why does the law 'look the other way'?

And what about "Ricers"? You've seen them, they come in many forms. 99% of them are Japanese cars. Almost all of them are an automotive abomination! $5000 car with $100,000 of body kit. And it's never really functional or useful 'attire'. usually, it's a fiberglass picnic table attached to the rear-hatch of a Honda Civic. And sometimes, horror of horrors, it's 'McDonald-super sized tires on a 3-series BMW lowered to the point that they are 'sculpting' the chassis' shape into the pavement.

Some of the many forms vary geographically. In Quebec, the car is either jacked so far up in the rear, the driver is practically laying down towards the back seat to get a useful sight line. Or it's a $500 car with a $5000 sound system. In Ontario, it seems it's the "coffee-can exhausts". Those gigantic exhaust ports that make the car sound like it should be a joist at Canadian Tire. In California, it's the wings and the neons under the car. In British Columbia, it's the small pickups lowered to within an inch of the road, which to me, seems contrary to the very reason that the truck exists!!

As you can in the pics above, they can be gawdy, tacky, and just plain offensive to see. So why then does the law ignore these things but were I to trundle down the road with no muffler on my V8, you can be damn sure the cops would be on me within minutes?

We all secretly squint and turn our heads when a chorus of Harleys go by. We all sit quietly at the red light and wonder how the hell can the driver of that used-to-be-a-Civic in front of you, see over the dash of his car when he's practically lying down and the tunes, (which are always gawd-awful and incomprehensible), are just trying to escape through the windows and strangle you.

I hate them, I laugh at them and I sit back and just wonder. And let's face it: They ARE ugly, noisy and just shouldn't be allowed. That's my opinion, yes, but it's my blog!

The truth about the Japanese builders Honda and Toyota

So if I asked you: "What do you think of Honda and Toyota? Are they good products? Are they better products? Are they the best products?", what would you answer? Yes to all, right? Well you couldn't be MORE wrong!!! And it's not really surprising if you look past the marketing, the advertising and the misleading statistics.

Let's start with the icon of 'affordable and quality': Honda. For well over 50 years, Honda has been with us since the first oil-crisis of the 1970s. The original "Civic Accord" was incredibly small and it arrived on North American shores at the best possible time. With the oil crisis in full-bloom and the 'Big Three' pumping out near-3 ton, 18 foot-long chrome-laden metal monsters. With most fuel stations running out of supplies and the range of the American monstrosities being dismal at best, along came these tiny, (and I mean TINY!!), little Japanese cars that were less than one-quarter the size of the average American land-yacht with the promise of range.

And although there wasn't really much in the way of improved range, it was a matter of 'perception'. "Smaller is better", right? There was the understanding that less wight to move cost less fuel. General Motors' response to this intrusion was the under-rated but incredibly well-built Chevette. (You still see them driving around thirty years later!).

But back to Honda... since it's arrival in North America, they've 'earned' a reputation for quality, fair pricing and fantastic customer service. Well, I can say that this is the farthest thing from the truth. In recent times, I have come to learn much about these two Japanese giants.

Honda's products are NOT of a higher caliber than the North American cars.These days, it will cost you OVER Thirty-thousand dollars for a Civic coupe... A CIVIC!!! That's not even the price of an Accord, their top model!!

And then there's Toyota. They came on the scene not long after Honda and earned the same reputation for build-quality and pricing. Yet today, a Camry can cost you over forty-thousand dollars and yet have the oil pan blow-out from under the car... twice!

However, here`s something you may not know, although I did make mention of it in a prior posting: in Canada, automotive manufacturers are NOT obligated to publish their recalls and very few actually do. In Canada, Transport Canada publishes recalls. If you owned either a Honda or a Toyota and you discovered that there was a recall issued for your model in the US and you brought this information to the dealer, they`ll harp, and and complain and then finally acquiesce, all the while making as if they`re doing YOU a favor.

In fact, it IS law in Canada that if you brought recall information to them and your vehicle IS a part of that recall, they are obligated by law to honor that recall. As I stated in a previous posting, Toyotas are now cars built for people who don`t like to drive. There used to be the Celica GTS and the Supra Twin-Turbo. They were great performers, the last generation of the Supra being co-designed by Ferrari (engine), but sadly, the last generation of Celica was turned into "a girl car", losing it's power-to-weight ratio and it's bang-for-buck value.

And now with automotive duds like the Camry and the inconceivably popular Prius, Toyota has taken a step towards the yawn! Honda's Accord has been a snore-fest for the past three generations before the current model.

But let's get back to the truth. Honda: BAD products, bad customer service. One of my co-workers bought a Civic Coupe, at $34 0000! And it's not even the sports model! I told her, they saw her coming from afar. Yet, she's had to take her car to the shop 7 times just to have the dome light changed. If they can't wire up the car properly so that something as simple as the dome light, how good can the more complex components be?!

My former roommate had a Honda Element and though he loved that 'vehicle', he would be among the first to complain about how Honda was very sketchy in their approach to addressing recalls. The first Elements were known to suffer from structural stresses that would lead to the windshield cracking. This was such an issue that in the US, there was a recall issued. As stated before, in Canada, there is no such regulation that obligates manufacturers to issue recalls, hence they maintain their image and there's no cash lost in costly repairs or part-exchanges.

However, it is YOUR legal right to have a part replaced/repaired should you find that it is part of a recall in the US. They will hem, they will haw, but in the end, they cannot refuse the repair. AND then they'll make it appear as if they are doing you a favor by agreeing to replace/repair the components in question.

As my friend was a member of a Honda Element-owners club, he was privy to the recall information and did indeed bring his Element to the Honda dealership for a replacement windshield. They made such a big deal about it, they disputed the validity of his information but in the end, they did replace his windshield as a favor to him as he was "a valued Honda customer".

Don't fall for it. Know your rights. Know the truth! Look beyond the 'image' of Honda, Toyota, etc. They are not as good as they want you to believe. But they have a fantastic 'publicity-machine' working for them.

The truth will set YOU free!

The New Mercedes-Benz C-Class... has grown up.

Here is the new Mercedes-Benz C-Class, the true entry-level Mercedes. (I don't count the B-Class, c'mon, have you SEEN one??!). It used to be such a cheap car in what it offered, size and performance wise. I'm not trying to insult the C-crowd, one of my colleagues owns one of the very first C-class Benzes. But it wasn't so much of a 'Benz' back then as it is now. Look at the pics above, you can see how the C-class evolved.

It started after M-B dropped the numerical monikers. Remember the 420 SEL; the 300E; the 190E and so on. The 190 was such an embarrassment to M-B, it was said that it wasn't a real Benz. But it did teach M-B that they needed something in the lower pay-scales. They couldn't survive on just selling the big Embassy vehicles. In order to build a loyal fan base, you needed to get the customers interested in your products when they were young and had money. But what 24 year old is going to buy the big long-wheelbase SEL? Enter the new entry-level C-class and the new classing system.

Although a Civic-sized car, it was still a German car, rear-wheel drive, front-engined, independent A-arms suspension, it did a good job of being a mini-Benz. But it wasn't quite 'there' yet. The styling was bland, looking more like a miniature version of the E300, (which was of course, renamed the E-class). And then in the second generation, the styling was far more refined and unique, although it was still a miniaturized copy of the very successful E-class, most notably the twinned oval headlights.

An AMG version was later released as the C32 and then the C55 which housed a robust 5.5 liter V8. Putting such a huge engine in such a small car led to some entertaining blogs, I'm sure. I've never had the pleasure of driving any of these AMG Benzes but I'm sure they'd put a smile on my face. But it was still a subtle, though stylish small car.

Also available was a very successful and popular C230 Kompressor (turbo in German) hatchback. With a short-wheelbase and tinted glass hatchback, this small car was probably its most popular version. Perfect for the up and coming rich 20 year old IT professional with no children and seriously disposable income.

Enter the newer version. Growing in length considerably and taking styling cues from the late 80s models such as the SEL 1000 (very rare) and the AMG body add-ons, which I will admit, the Germans know how to add skirts and air-dams very stylishly. Now the C-class looks like a serious performer. But that's the problem.

Available now in two significantly different body styles and three engine choices, (excluding the AMG engines), the C-class has 'grown up'. Available now is the 'Classic'-themed model with the more subtle and E-class inspired Mercedes styling. And then there`s the more popular AMG-themed models. Available with the 2.3 liter four-cylinder (C230); the 3 liter V6 (C300) or the more popular 3.5 liter V6 (C350), all models now available with M-B`s `4Matic`all-wheel drive system. I was told that after last winter`s record snow fall in Ottawa, their orders for 4matic-equipped more than tripled, they can`t keep up with the demand. Harder to find now is the rear-wheel drive-only models.

And now comes the part where I tell you how fun it was to drive one of these. I must the C350 in that Arctic White with the panorama roof is just a head-turner! It looks fantastic and like one seriously fast and entertaining car. Sadly, it`s in the looks only.

Unable to get my hands on a rear-wheel drive C350, I took what was available, a C350 4matic. Not being particularly fond of all-wheel-drive cars for `fun driving, (not all, it`s just that some are bland as heck), I didn`t have a choice. However, as the day that I took one out was raining heavily, I thought okay, perhaps the M-B AWD system may offer more fun-to-drive cred compared to other all-wheel-drive cars I`ve driven.

Well, unfortunately it didn`t. Add to that the fact that when it rains in Ottawa, it`s as if all drivers are suddenly struck with what I call `Vancouver syndrome`. By that I mean all drivers suddenly drive as if they have NO experience driving in the rain much like drivers from Vancouver would react to driving in snow! They drive either incredibly slow to the point of absurdity or with absolutely no understanding of the physics of driving in the snow!

On this day when I drove the C350, traffic was crawling. So I couldn't 'open 'er up'. But I can tell you this: it was one of the most neutral cars I've ever driven. In the few times I got the speed over 70kph, I could not tell what the wheels were doing. In spirited driving, you NEED to 'feel' or some other way understand what's going on underneath you where the car makes contact with the tarmac. You and the car need to communicate in order for you to get the most out of the driving experience.
It couldn't have been communicating any less with me then if it had been using an Enigma coding machine!

Now I'm sure that the 4matic system performs its traction duties perfectly for snow-laden streets. But for any spirited driving, if you can afford the C62 (6.2 liter V8), go ahead, get one. It's only available in rear-wheel drive. In a comparison test in Spain, Top Gear compared it to the BMW M3 and the Audi S4. The Benz came in second out of the three. Perhaps that shouldn't matter. After all, how much fun would it be to drive a car that's slightly larger than a Civic but is hiding 400+ horsepower under its hood?!

But as muscled as the car looks, the lower models just 'look' faster than they are. The interiors were bland and dull too. Too much of the same color inside and frankly, not much going on inside. There was too much plastic that LOOKED plastic. There was a cheap-looking cubby above the center-console in which the available navigation system is hidden. Frankly, for the near-50K this car costs, the Nav system should be larger, should not "pop-out" of a small alcove atop the console. It should be visible at all times and integrated into the console re the Lexus IS350 / IS-F.

Sadly, this car 'looks' like it's more fun than it actually is. But frankly, how many of us can go out and buy a car just because it's fun? Not too many. And as any drive down the city streets may show you, that's not hampering sales of M-B's baby-Benz.

It's the Consumer's fault that North America's "Big Three" are facing troubles... HARDLY!

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090220/detroit_three_090221/20090221?hub=TopStories

Ok, so in brief, this article says that because consumers were buying big SUVs, we led the collapse of North America's 'Big Three'. Ok, so let me get this straight: because I may have wanted an SUV (there are only two really that I'd take: BMW X5/6, Infiniti FX35/45), it clearly means that I wanted a gas-guzzler. So most SUVs are regarded in this way and it's just not true. It's not so much what's under the hood but how it's driven. I would bet anything that a Honda Civic can be driven in such a fashion that it would consume more fuel than a typical American SUV.

So, getting back to the assumption that the consumer wanted gas guzzlers. Well that's just not true. The consumer wanted a large, capable vehicle, whether it be for work-related reasons or for large families, (I don't count the 'poseurs'... because.... well, they're POSEURS and they ruined the image of a Hummer, it used to be a truck, now it's a joke!) Living in the 'snow-band', I see the logic of having an SUV, most of which is simply related to the fact that they're All-Wheel-Drive and have a huge cargo capacity.

But to apply the logic of the article and the industry-insider's opinion that it's our fault, well, that means, 'oh since I want an SUV, I ONLY want a big honkin' cast-iron block, tree-burning, Earth-choking monstrosity because I want to 'be seen'! Nothing could be further from the truth!

It's insulting to the consumer to suggest it's our fault that GM and F*rd paid their execs such exorbitant salaries and re-invested so little of their profits back into development. Yes, the consumer is not only smarter when it comes to buying a car but now we know more about the cars and what we want and don't want from the cars. We've been demanding more and more from the cars in the last 30 years, in safety, features, value and build quality. I wouldn't want to undo that.

Although it still stuns me that I know more about any specific car I'm looking at than the salesperson, I wouldn't want it any other way. Would you? So if being informed and well aware of what we want, deserve and demand is why the Big three are in trouble, then I bloody well wear the label of fault proudly. I won't accept anything less and neither should you.

How to make a difficult decision

Right. So here I am. Thinking. Wondering. Balancing pros and cons. There's probably another sleepless night ahead of me.

Why? Well, here's the thing: My 2004 Cadillac CTS is on its last days with me. I just can't stand it anymore, honestly. It's been a pain in the *insert noun* since we bought it last February. And it's been such a let-down. Let me explain the history and why I'm now facing another sleepless night just because of a car... or cars.

Because of a totally enraging event last February, my pristine 2003 Nissan Maxima SE was destroyed. And before you wonder quietly to yourself, no it wasn't my fault. I was the 5th car of five involved in a five-car pileup. I ended up underneath a Mitsubishi Lancer. So my Japanese beauty was gone. And I was between the weekends when I have my son, so we only had less than two weeks to find another car.

Because of a rip-off insurance review of my Nissan, (ho-yeah, THAT was an experience in itself!), we didn't have much money to buy another car. But we shopped around and set our budget at $10K. I know, not much today. So, I find this all-black Chrysler 300 and a silver poster-Caddy CTS. We went out to check them both, test drove them both. Oh yeah, there were the odd sounds coming from each, and in the case of the Chrysler 300, funny smells. (Hmm, I wonder if this car was from Toronto...?)

Anyway, we balanced pros vs. cons, they were so closely priced and the mileage difference between the two, negligible. So when we decided on which one we wanted, I called the dealer, said we'd be coming in for the 300 and that was it. So, later that afternoon, we get there to find the 300 is missing and we're told it was sold within the two hours between when I called and when we got there. Hmmm, so which car should we go with then?

So, fate had decided it was to be the CTS. Now, at the time, I was fine with that. It was a well-reviewed car, it resurrected Cadillac and even made an appearance in The Matrix: Reloaded. Besides, we had nearly no other choices. Anyway, we drove away with the CTS. From day one, I had been pursuing the dealer to replace the rear brakes, they were grinding beyond belief. So he sent me to a garage he knows, get this: 'Cousin Eddy's'. Ooh, sounds exotic. It wasn't.

I went there in what was the worst snowfall in Ottawa history for over 50 years. I got stuck in the entrance. I could barely back the car out. The next day, I went back and got the car into the garage's property only to have one of the employees clearly demonstrate that he had no idea why I was there. After 20 minutes of haggling and a phone call back to the dealership, we finally got enough of this mess cleared up for them to understand that I was there for new brakes.

Hmm, 'new'. I don't quite think so. After less than three weeks, the so-called new brakes were grinding again. "That's it!", said I! I went to the local Cadillac dealership for new brakes. And the used car dealership actually agreed to pay for half the work. Wow, I thought, 'that's more than I expected', so at that point, I was content.

But then during the summer, I had to disconnect the battery so I could install the rust-inhibitor. Noting that the frame is aluminum, I realized that I didn't need to install it. It was after this that the sunroof started opening on its own when I brake. (It still does this today). It is incredibly aggravating. I know it's a matter of "re-programming" the car. But I don't think it's necessary to go to the Caddy shop and pay $89/hr so that some guy can sit in the car, open and close the windows and sunroof and then charge me $300 for a day's worth of fictitious work. But I haven't been able to locate the proper coding procedure. Maybe cars were better when they had carburetors and vinyl.

Then on Canada Day, I was driving my son back to Montreal when I was passing a line of cars. As I was doing so, a bright yellow Volkswagen Golf just came up on my rear and was 'pushing' for me to move ahead faster. Now this irritates me too, so I pushed the "Sport" button on my center-console, (this lets the transmission downshift sooner and climb to red-line before shifting, to maximize acceleration and to make up for the absence of a Tiptronic transmission).

Anyway, so I hit the button and BOOM, there's this sudden cloud of white smoke billowing out the back of the car. So I immediately finished passing the line of cars and pull over hard onto the soft shoulder of the road, braking hard too, maintaining a straight line as the car wants to swerve all over the place with braking so suddenly. (The only 'fun' thing about all this was seeing the shit-brown Golf speeding off with his wipers smearing engine fluids across his windshield).

As it turns out, the additional pressure from the higher rpms pushing fluids through the radiator and its relevant hoses, just blew them off the radiator. As it turns out, the fluids had been mixing for months or even years within the radiator. The rad is chambered into two parts, one to cool the engine, the other to cool the transmission fluids. The previous owner probably put in the wrong fluid in one of the chambers and as rubber reacts differently with different chemicals, it was being corroded from within, in which on this day, the pressure just blew it to bits.

$1600 later and a new radiator and hoses, I'm once again looking to get rid of this car. The sunroof's still acting up, the engine is sometimes buzy, the coolant is slowly leaking from under the engine block, this car has been a pain and an embarrassment.

So I want it gone. But what to replace it with and how much can I get for it on a trade. trading a car is just so much easier than trying to sell it privately. You could wait weeks or months and not get enough to have made it worth your effort. So, what should I replace it with? I'm looking at the following cars; Audi A4/A6; Chrysler 300(C if possible); Dodge Charger, if it's 'just right'. Nissan Maxima Se, 2004 and after. Infiniti G35x or Acura TL. There are so many cars to choose from and any given day there will be more or less.

So, I found this awesome Chrysler 300 that I went to see and try. I had noticed it had been for sale for 6+ months. I knew they were obviously desperate to sell it as they're losing money everyday on it. And on the day I finally convince my wife to go look at it, they sold it the night before!!! Once again, fate demonstrates it has a sense of humor and that it's a jerk too! And so we're stuck with either a Dodge Charger that is $5K more than we want to spend. Or we can buy one of two 8 and 9 year old but mint, Audi A6s. Or I could put the 2002 BMW 540i that's in my garage, on the road. the thing with that is A) it's in mint condition because it NEVER went out in the snow, and B) I don't know if my steel wheels will fit on it because of the bolt pattern. And C) I have to sell the Cadillac privately.

So as I started out to describe, I have a difficult decision. My wife is opposed to the Audi because of their age however Audi ARE cars that can still be running by the age of ten years. But then I would have to say goodbye to the BMW and I really don't want to do that.

As I said, Fate has a sense of humor however, I ain't laughing!! So, it's a toss-up for what's to come next. Despite this experience, I will never say the CTS is a bad car, only THIS one is! Counter to my belief that whomever would pay almost $50,000 for a car, would treat as a $50,000 investment, the previous owner of this specific car didn't. The neglect shows in the disrepair of the car. I honestly can't understand that. How can someone be so intelligent as to earn such a salary that can afford them such a car, yet be such an idiot as to never invest in the care of the car? It totally escapes me.

To demonstrate further, when we took ownership of the car, it seemed to me odd that when sitting at idle, the car sounded like a diesel: clakclakclakclak, but not when I'd engaged the throttle. Well after two subsequent trips to 'Cousin Eddy's' who could not determine what was wrong, I decided I'd look too. I went under the hood to check the oil level. BONE-DRY! Good Gawd, how long had this car been running without oil?! That goes to show A)how bad the previous owner was at car-care and this is what led to the imploding radiator, and B)just how bad the mechanics are at 'Cousin Eddy's'.

So, other than the fact that this story has yet to conclude, two things are to be learned from this adventure: 1) never buy a car from two guys in a trailer, and 2) Don't go to a garage called 'Cousin Eddy's'.

Hopefully, this story will end happily and without any more folly... I doubt it though.

Front or rear... where do you want your traction?

Well, here we are in an age in which it can be easily said that at least half of the motoring world is front-wheel drive and the other rear-wheel drive. (I know, I know, 'what about Audi and Subaru and all the rest that offer AWD?' Another blog for another day).

It's already been a fairly long time since front-wheel drive became 'the norm' among the North American driving public. I'm old enough now to say I remember when cars weren't measured in meters or feet but how long it took them to stop bobbing back and forth at the red light. I also remember that all American cars were gigantic and not particularly efficient. I remember all 'foreign', (as in not built on this continent), cars had this unusual configuration know as front-wheel drive. Only the foreign cars had this set-up. (I'm also old enough to have seen the 70s fashions come and go twice... I hope they stay gone, gawd!)

Now, back in the day, when more and more people were buying the tiny Japanese Civic Accords (that's what they called them back then), they were about as large as the trunk of a modern-day Chrysler. And you had the likes of Fiat, Renault, Peugeot back then too. Most of them were running the front-wheel drive platforms. But why? Well, for those of us in the snow-belt of North America, the belief was that since the weight of the engine is above the the wheels with traction, that this additional weight over the wheels would allow for more grip.

Remember, this is easily 25-plus years before traction-control systems. When your father lost control of his 21-foot-long Imperial in the snow, it could take hours to dig out the ten feet of it that got rammed up inside the snow bank. The thinking was that despite the huge girth of the North American cars, they were too light over the rear wheels. So, in principal, the front-wheelers had the traction advantage over their Yankee counterparts. It was also the growing belief that since there was less weight involved altogether, since there was no heavy and long drive-shaft running down the middle of the car mated to a huge and clunky differential, the front-wheelers had the fuel-savings advantage. In theory.

However, here we are some nearly 30 years later and half the American brands are front-wheel drive and the remainder rear-wheel drive. So... which is better?

That's a helluva question that most people probably wouldn't think about. What's really the best? All-wheel drive. But that's not today's discussion. For the casual driver, front-wheel drive is probably what they've grown up with because mommy had a Renault Alliance and daddy had a Lincoln Towncar that was as big as most country villages today. You were more than likely to have learned to drive, (whether you had a learner's permit or not... hehehe), on Mom's silly little French car. So, most of today's over-30 club grew up with front-wheelers and know how to drive them in the white stuff. But do they know what's actually happening when they're driving through Mother Nature's dandruff? Probably not.

So, enough dodging the ultimate question: which one's better. It depends greatly on how you drive. Are you a driving enthusiast? Yes? Then it's a rear-wheeler for you but you already knew that, didn't you?! Are you a 'greenie' driving a useless Prius? Then it's front-wheel drive for you. But I'm ignoring two important scenarios here: Winter driving and sport driving.

Well, personally I love combining the two, though it's very not-easy to do so, so let's keep them separate. As i said earlier, it was thought that front-wheel drive wold provide more traction because of the additional weight over the nose. Well... it doesn't work. Ever get stuck in a Camry or Civic, etc? Ever try to 'rock the car' with the transmission, shifting forward, then reverse, then forward again? Doesn't work, does it with a front-wheeler?! The reason is because the directional wheels are ALSO the traction wheels, they are essentially being compromised at both tasks by converging energies.

Huh, you say? Well, it's like this. The front wheels are trying to do two things: steer the car and pull the car. Both actions are canceling each other out slightly. Surely you've been in a front-wheel drive car and the wheels are spinning crazily and nothing's happening but the melting of the snow under the tires to turn into slightly-less 'tractionable' ice!

And in the summer, when your driving down that winding country road with the tight but perfect s-curves, do you let off the gas just a little as you enter the corners? I bet you do. Do you know why? You probably never noticed that you noticed that when taking turns at high-speed in a 'fronter', that the car never really takes the line your aiming for. The turning radius is just a bit larger than you want. You don't really know but you do, that in power-on turns, the car's losing traction, basically sliding just a little bit sideways on the front wheels. Scary, isn't it? It's called understeer and can be quickly quite deadly in certain situations.

With the scenario described above out of the way, we can talk about rear-wheel drive. Now, the classic set up of having the engine's power being put down onto the road by the rear wheels is the oldest setup in automotive history. It doesn't automatically mean it's outdated or the right way to go. But humans have been driving cars of all sorts now for over a century-and-a-quarter and we all started with the rear-traction back in the 1800s. From the old days of Mercedes-Benz' bicycle-wheeled steam-engined car to today's Ferraris, the original setup had the traction coming from the rear. it was easier to push rather than to pull.

So, we have an inherent capacity to "drift" a car through a corner. Or in more physics-related terms, to oversteer or power-slide. All these terms really mean the same thing: the rear is sliding out of alignment with the front wheels, so basically they are turning a wider circle than the front wheels. The rear is 'coming out'. Despite how that sounds, the car is still under control. (If you intended for the car to do this, that is). You can still drive a car through a corner with the rear out, basically still pointing the car in the direction you want to go and still getting there intact. In this scenario, each set of wheels is doing only one thing: the fronts are steering, the rears are pushing. Even in the snow, you can still control your car with the rear going out, you can bring it back in to where it needs to be. If you were trying to turn in the snow, under power, you'd more then likely end up going in a nice straight line into a situation that you would best want to avoid.

I've learned this to be the truth as I've owned cars with both setups. My wife's car is a front-wheel drive Cavalier and mine's a rear-wheel drive CTS. Now I grew up in the age that rear-wheel drive was a nightmare in the snow. Well no more. With today's cars being as computer-equipped as the bridge of the Enterprise, the Traction-Control wizard is making sure you don't slide around like a fool. In my CTS, the computer allows a little bit of slide, but then it tells the brakes to be all grabby-grabby and it applies the necessary pressure to the appropriate wheels to make there's the right amount of traction. (Then again, I can always turn it off and go whizzing around in circles at the nearest Costco parking lot on a Sunday night after a snow fall... not that I'd do such a thing... *ahem*).

So, in cornering in the snow, today's rear-wheel drive cars are once again the better of the two to choose from. However, the front-wheel drive cars have a fun spot of their own. If your car happens to have a hand-brake sitting beside you, oh the fun you can have. If you're going into a tight turn in snowy conditions, halfway through the turn, pull the handbrake up, hold it and then drop it back. You've just simulated a power-slide.

Now, all of the above is moot if you factor-in All-wheel drive cars. That goes without saying. So, is the conclusion that today's modern rear-wheel drive setups are better for low-traction scenarios and playing with slightly above-the-speed-limit jaunts? Yes. And to prove it, just look at any form of car racing. Are ANY of them front-wheel drive cars? Not a one. They're either rear-wheel drive or for the off-road racing, all-wheel drive.

So, if you're looking for another car and you enjoy the occasional burst of speed in a corner or you're worried about traction in the snow, think about the car's setup. Front-wheel will let you drift wide in corners and offer less traction in the snow or rain or even on dry roads. Rear-wheel will provide traction with a higher tolerance before losing that traction and sliding out, but remember, you can control that slide and still put the car where you want.

And don't forget this thought: don't bother going on the cheap and buying all-season tires. They compromise traction in both winter and summer. It's just smarter to put on winter tires when it's winter. In not so long, it'll probably be law throughout Canada to do so. And when you really think about who will be on board along with yourself, your spouse, children, even strangers sharing the same road as you, isn't your life and theirs worth the extra bucks of putting winter tires on?

Things that bug me...

Ok, today I thought I'd do things a little differently. I've been thinking of what the next post should be about and I kept thinking of a few dozen items but none of which were topics that I could fill an entire blog with. And so I decided, why not just list them as the blog. I'm sure some are topics that bother you too. You'll recognize them as you come across them.

Here they are in no particular order:

- "Children on Board" signs in cars that have NO children aboard.
- Stop signs in parking lots. WHY??
- Speed limits in parking lots. Again, WHY??
- People who drive in the left lane at ten below the posted speed limit.
- Asian drivers who always look terrified behind the wheel.
- Stupid road signs: "Caution, falling rock", then why did you build the road so bloody close to the rock wall??
- Elderly drivers who can barely see UNDER the top-half of the steering wheel.
- People who use maps... while driving!
- People who drive Priuses... it's NOT a car!!
- City bus drivers.
- Billboards that say you should be watching the road!! WTF??!
- Drinking and driving.. d'uh.
- Police road blocks... "Have you been drinking, sir", "Why yes, why do you ask... is it the plastic horse from the mall sticking out of my hood that gave it away... *hic*?!"
- F*rds... do I have to say more?!!
- People who buy pickup trucks as a family vehicle... what ARE you thinking?!
- Those people who ruined Hummer's rep. It used to be a utilitarian vehicle.. I know, I know, too many syl-labels for them!
- Always moving into the faster moving lane of traffic only to have it come to a stop and then the lane you WERE in starts to move.
- Laws that say you can't use a cell phone in the car but you can apply makeup.
- These same laws are those that once said that if you put radios in cars, the drivers would be too distracted to drive and we'd all die in one horrific crash.
- Front-wheel drive cars with all-season tires.
- Cops who use their emergency lights for the heck of it.
- Green or brown cars... they're GREEN or BROWN!!!!
- First year drivers in Quebec, practically lying on their backs, driving their $500 car while listening to terribly-distorted dance music on their $5000 sound system.
- A fleet of Harley Davidsons driving by... five blocks away and you can still hear them!
- Fire trucks at the grocery store... do they really need to take a 50-ton truck to do the groceries??!
- Sex pill ads at the back of car magazines... what does one have to do with the other?!
- Parking spot hunters.
- People who pass you on the right, in a left-handed merging lane!
- The BMW 3-series.
- The Porsche Boxster.
- The tree-huggers driving Subaru Foresters.
- Diesels.
- Driving behind diesels.

That's all for now... if you can think anything more, let me know, I'll post it.