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.