What car should I buy?
 

My 20 yrs. old car is really creaky, and I'm afraid it'll fall apart soon. So, I'm looking around for a new car. When it breaks down, I'd know what I want and go out to get it. Rather than asking only Jim, trusting he knows a lot about cars :D, I thought I'll put it here to see what everyone else thinks.

I'm thinking between the Camry or the Altima. As for the Camry, I'm looking at the LE or SE. What one do you think is better? As for the Altima, I'm looking at the 2.5S. I'm looking for another dependable, stable car that'll last me for 20+ years. If you want to suggest another car, I'm willing to spend around the price range of a Camry or Altima.

The camry & altima are both very good cars & i dont think you'd go wrong with either of them. I'd suggest that whatever you get, get the best you can reasonably afford. Sounds like you'll hold on to the car for many, many years & you want something that has all the bells & whistles that you would want. I've had my car for 7 years now & i wish i had gotten all the bells & whistles i could've. Jim & i have actually had this discussion as i've been dreaming of my next brand new car.

To add another option to the camry or altima, have you looked at a subaru legacy? Comparable in size & price as both camry & altima. I own an impreza & i still love it 7 years later! Ask jim, he says i should be working for subaru since i can't say enough good things about them! They're extremely reliable & dependable & hold their value well. They're all wheel drive all the time so you have more control & really feel the tires gripping the road. You know when you drive through a puddle on a highway & you feel the tire slip? Doesn't happen in a subaru! They use boxer engines, which means it's horizontally opposed so the center of gravity is lower than most other vehicles. This makes going around turns so much fun! I'm at 105,000 miles & (knock on wood) haven't had any issues at all. Just regular maintenance. Ok, i could really go on forever but i'll spare you... I'd highly suggest taking a subaru out for a test drive & see what you think! Good luck!

In the 2014 Consumer Reports buyers guide, the Camry LE scores better than the Altima 2.5, but both are recommended cars. Consumer Reports also loves Subaru as a brand.

Here's the pages for mid sized sedans. They think the $29k Camry hybrid XLE is best overall in that class.
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/12/07/uge5avuv.jpg
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/12/07/vate6a2u.jpg

Consumer Reports gives the Legacy an average owner satisfaction rating Amanda so stop being so satisfied with it…! ‼

But UT, Amanda is above average. :blush:

I know an Altima owner who absolutely loves her Altima. Over 200,000 miles and as reliable as the sunrise.

She's been looking for a year for another Altima the right color/price/mileage, and swears she'll have nothing else.

ETA: She's keeping the old one, too.

Buy a white one, Lola.
You'll look cute in it.

She'd look cute driving a pile of dogshit.

Ewww...I don't think anyone would look cute in dogshit. :-/

There's this lady who's been telling me to buy a new car and sell the current one to her.

I probably will buy a white car. My current one is white too.

SE and LE is mostly about peripherals and colors. How much do you want to spend on the stereo, GPS map system, fancier floor mats, etc.

As others demonstrate, start with Consumer Reports. Then what others are saying will not be overlooked or misunderstood.

Do not waste money on a six cylinder engine or turbo. Those are mostly for the naive who drove, for example, GM (Chevy) cars. And then suffered obsolete technology and balky engines. Better quality and engineering goes into the automaker's benchmark engines - the four cylinder.

View Consumer Report's recommendations and previous year history for each cars. Important facts are in every April issue. All discussed models have a reliable history. But again, never take anyone's word for it. Read it yourself to learn what details are more important.

Also read Consumer Report's page entitled "Used Cars to Avoid". That further illustrates which cars have had 'lesser' histories.

Also view history for the many Chevy models. To appreciate why your considerations are superior and what some consumers (and reporters) foolishly called reliable.

Do not get deceived by an all-wheel drive myth. All wheel drive means getting started easier. To do that, all wheels must fight each other once you get moving; resulting in less stability and control at higher speeds. That means increased tire wear, less gas mileage, and higher costs. Some all-wheel drive models add expensive computers to reduce those problems. If working the farm, then you might need all-wheel drive for the driveway. But all-wheel drive only increases safety and handling in advertising myths.

Why do rental fleets buy white cars? They are statistically safest. The car hardest to see in inclement weather is red. Another critically important feature is orange (not red) rear turn signals. Cars with red rear signals are more often hit because red cannot be easily seen in snow, sleet, heavy rain, fog, etc. Orange cuts through bad weather resulting in increased safety.

My step daughter SWEARS by Altimas ,
her first was an ex rental car ,
she drove the HELL out of that thing (300,000+ miles ) ,
I NEVER had to come rescue her .

Plus Toyotas have TINY steering wheels ,

Just my 2 cents

I have had nothing but the best experience with Toyotas. Bought a Tercel in 1986, back when it came with optional 4-wheel drive - drove it into the ground 15 years later with more than 200,000 miles on it. We similarly drove a Corolla into the ground over 15+ years, and currently own a basic level Camry that will not give up, and a 2005 4Runner that is my 'baby' - it's in Colorado now but will come back east in 2014 with 170,000 miles on it, still going strong. I love and recommend Toyotas. They are reliable, dependable, honest cars.

Lola - buy yourself a bright red convertible and let the wind blow through your head

Yeah, a Volkswagen Beetle convertible. Knock'em dead!

Or additional traction any time you notice slipping happening in a two-wheel-drive system. Or even if you don't notice it even though it's happening all the time.

Meanwhile you may notice that in your standard 2wd car there are often times you have to "get started". You may in fact notice that you have to stop all the freakin time. Stop signs, red lights, traffic, infant in the middle of the road. Remember, infant blood is more slippery than freezing rain. And evil states apply infant blood to finished roads to dedicate them to Satan.

Uh-oh, the 2014 Subarus get MPG in the 30s highway if they have CVT.

ALL 2WD, 4WD and AWD cars have computers. It's 2013.

But mostly AWD reduces those problems through a gearing system called a center differential. If you've had 4WD without center diff, you know what it means. Without center diff you can't even turn the vehicle while in 4WD in dry conditions. With it, all tires can turn at different speeds, and turning is normal.

Marketing? Every FWD car since the late 80s has been marketed as having "traction control" to prevent slippage. Traction control is really a computer. (Not an *expensive* computer. Again, it's 2013.)

And traction control prevents torque steer, where the car actually turns when only one front tire has traction. In my 1985 VW, front wheel drive, the steering wheel once jerked right out of my hands when hitting a bad pothole in wet conditions. By 1988, veedubs had computers, and would apply ABS to individual wheels to avoid that problem. They still do. It's kind of barbaric to have your car hit the breaks on the wheels that are spinning harder, to avoid problems while you accelerate, but that's what all 2WD cars do these days.

Mysteriously, these things apply to farm driveways if you're working the farm, OR if you're just visiting one.

A farm driveway, or really, any stretch of road that has mud, snow, ice, wet leaves, heavy rain, damp grass, sand, large potholes, or gravel. If you don't encounter those, feel free to avoid AWD. Perhaps you live in southern California, or maybe you only drive 2 miles from your garaged home to your garaged office, or maybe you got all your facts in the 80s and stick to them like a religion.

If I have oodles and oodles of money! I'll get a bright red convertible and let the wind blow through my hair as I drive to see you. ;-)

If I have money and don't give a shit about anyone else, I'd buy a mini Cooper. :-D. I share the car with sister, and I have to consider driving my mom and my nephew. And sometimes when I go anywhere with my nephew and his parents, we take my car because they bought a 2 door car. Why? Cuz we have a sedan. :-/

Center differential is also where problems are created. If all wheels run independently (as in other cars to have better safety), then four wheel drive does not get you started. That center differential must have what was called positrack. It intentionally causes wheels to fight for control at higher speeds so that four wheel drive can get you started. It also reduces traction and stability on the highway.

Stability control computer is an expensive solution not found in saver cars. Required to monitor those wheels fighting each other. It even applies brakes to one wheel to keep the four wheel drive from doing what is too common - a roll over. That computer is not found and not needed on a 'safer' car. Although GM did try to promote that expensive computer system using expressions such as anti-lock brakes.

All-wheel drive only provides one useful function - to get you started. It does not provide more safety once moving and does not provide better vehicle stability. It means braking may not be as good. Many four wheel drives add that expensive stability control computer and other expensive hardware because four wheel drive can even mean less effective braking. Because so many all-wheel drive vehicles flip or more easily lose control on highways.

Spend more to have less safety? The advertising forgets to mention why these vehicles are more dangerous to people inside and outside. It contradicts to requirements defined by Lola Bunny.

The car guys noted a better vehicles for Alaska. The caller was considering a Jeep. A vehicles better described as barbaric; is that technically obsolete. They recommended something more reliable and better for Alaska's roads - a Subaru. But that is not the relevant venue. Relevant are facts introduced in every April issue of Consumer Reports.

I enjoy how you chose the 60s (!) marketing (!) term "positrack" which was used to market only GM (!) vehicles with RWD (!).

A classic scene which tells us about the benefits of "posi-track" in the 1960s.

I love that movie.

No no no, Positraction was GM's name for their limited slip differential, other companies had other names. The limited slip differential was in the center of the axle, usually rear, to feed power to the wheel with the most traction. Without it, if the right rear was on ice you were going nowhere because only one wheel was driven out of four.
The center differential is a whole different animal, splitting the power between the front and rear axles.
The NHTSA seems to disagree with your opinion.
You do realize stability control systems originated on high end European cars, especially high performance models, don't you? Didn't think so.
Anti-lock brakes are on ALL cars since 2007. It's the law.
With one wheel driving, you'll be in for a lot of fun in slippery going. May? May, from the fountain of truth?
We, along with the NHTSA, already debunked that shit. Talk radio? ADAK, is that you?

Get a Cooper Lola !!!

The quadra driveII system in my Jeep is a mechanical system. Not an expensive computer. It uses the vari-lock gear to slip power to any of the 4 wheels that are getting traction.

http://icpcitation.com/variloc_theory.htm

You are clearly out of your depth, tw. Why dont you sit a few plays out.

Oh, and I was out driving in the snow today, and it works GREAT!

Lola, if you decide on the Altima, give me a call. I'll help you with it.

No don't. It was my friend's dream car and it's gone already. uncomfortable

So that a car does not crash, all wheels must rotate independent of each other. Positrack and other systems used in all-wheel drives must keep wheels from rotating separately. Otherwise one wheel will spin and no other wheel will move the vehicle. Positrack (as noted earlier was just another word for how it is still done.

Four wheel drive gets you going. That same system then makes a vehicles less stable and less safe at higher speeds. Jeeps are particularly barbaric - less safe. Just one of many reasons why all-wheel drive vehicles roll over or spin off roads at higher speeds. And why they eat tires faster.

Many just know all-wheel drive is safer because feelings say so. Same advertising myths ignore another fact. Cars with anti-lock brakes also crash more often. Why do numbers contradict popularly held beliefs? Most of us even believed a lie about Saddam's WMDs - because only spin said it must be so.

A safety feature that should be standard in an Altima or Camry is speed sensitive steering. Far more important than all-wheel drive or anti-lock brakes. Just another reason why those vehicles are rated batter. But rarely known to many only informed by advertising.

So I went to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

ABS not reducing crashes was an early finding during the lifetime of ABS. Studies in 1995-96 showed no differences in crash numbers. and yet ABS dramatically improves your ability to stop. How could that be?

Makes sense right? You've just improved your car's stopping power by a large margin. So now you don't hit the car in front of you, but the vehicle behind you, which doesn't have ABS, rear-ends YOU. The improvement resulted in the crash.

Also, in the first decade of ABS, half the people didn't know how to use it:

So... what happened when ABS became more broadly available? Especially since today it's required on all cars? A 2009 study on the long-term effect of ABS says...

So, ABS improves your chances of not hitting things when you're at non-fatal speeds. Well sure. Under slippery conditions, drivers tend to be below fatal speeds, whereas if you're going 80, fatality is in the reaction time hitting your brakes at all.

Bottom line: once numbers are provided, another tw canon falls.

ABS does NOT allow you stop faster. ABS allows you brake as hard as possible, while retaining the ability to control(steer) the vehicle around shit.

ABS is better than skidding though, isn't it? You can stop faster without ABS if you are very familiar with your brakes and stopping hard just under the threshold of foot pressure that would lock up the wheels and put you into a skid. But most people aren't practiced enough to do that, so ABS gives them the next best thing. And a significant fringe benefit is being able to steer while standing on the brake pedal, pushing it through the floor.

ABS is a great equalizer. Makes average drivers almost as good as top drivers at stopping.

I fucking love my Hyundai Sonata.

217,000 miles with no problems. Just routine maintenance.

Still looking great apart from the rust and the slight smell of dead deer in the trunk when it rains...

All the electronic shit still works.

i'd like to see YOUR numbers that say that 4WD makes a car less stable at speed, tw. or is it just an opinion based in feelings?

If you're going down a wet road at 55 mph, and you hit a long puddle...like the kind that form in lanes where the road has rippled from use..... and the tires on the right side begin to hydroplane.... (most 2 wheel drive cars are actually ONE wheel drive)

.... if that drive tire happens to be the one to lose traction suddenly and begins to spin faster because the gas is still being applied and there is no resistance from the surface...

.... the driver senses the loss of traction, maybe corrects course to get away from the puddle, and now that wheel that had been spinning extra fast because it lost traction, GRABS the drier spot, and weee! your car jerks, maybe you get back into the puddle, suddenly slowing, and wooo! you're in a spin.

the car that shunts power to the tracking wheel when it detects spin maintains even acceleration the whole time as they swerve around the dickhead in the honda that just bought it in front of them.

Roll over occurs more in vehicles that have high centers of gravity and narrow tracks. I don't know what that has to do with 4WD. The Wrangler will roll if it's been lifted 6 inches. The worst culprit back in the early 90's was the Bronco II. VERY tall and narrow. The Suzuki got all the press, but the Bronc was worse. I put 1.5 inch spacers (3" wider track) on my commander and a 2.5" lift kit. It's a 5200 lb vehicle. plus it has YAW control...VDC ...it engages the ABS to correct detected roll....

I'd imagine it would roll more easily than an Altima... but it's not scary to drive at all. It really did do a great job in that snow on Sunday. The Nitto Dura grappler tires are new and excellent, as well.



As for ABS, bruce is right. it's not supposed to make you stop FASTER. it's supposed to help you stop SAFER.

Off road or in deep snow, ABS lengthens stopping distance because a locked up tire will amass a pile of dirt or snow in front and that actually aids in deceleration. but how often do we really drive in that condition?

ABS can lengthen stopping distance on wet roads as well. The focus is on safer stopping, as you say, so the brakes adjust to avoid locking the wheel. You're not supposed to pump or feather anti-lock brakes because the system does it for you.

I love, love, love my 2005 4Runner. And I'm getting it back! Yay! It has never gotten stuck - in deep mud, driving across snowy fields, you name it. Although it did once go into a 4-wheel slide on I-80 in the PA Alleghenies and almost took me through the too-low guardrail of a high bridge. Wasn't its fault; I forgave it, once my heart restarted.

The others have already provided the numbers, so I'll throw in a little experience ... my 2005 4Runner was one of the last SUVs to have true 4WD. You have to shift over to it manually at low speed. You can then shift to a lower differential if needed. Not only does 4WD get you going, it gives you immeasurably better traction and control in snow and mud of various depths. It's not meant to be used above 50-55 mph and the owner's manual is emphatic about this. Of course - if conditions warrant 4WD, you shouldn't be traveling that fast. But if you have to navigate country roads and steep hills in a severe snowstorm (Canadian or American), you'll do it at relatively low speed, far more safely in 4WD than in 2WD or all-wheel drive. 4WD is good for much more than just getting going. My $0.02.

THIS IS IMPRESSIVE

check out the amount of articulation this thing gets. around 17 & again at 55 seconds... you see the wheels stretch down to stay in contact with the ground, and squish up to allow it to climb over things...

Why do cars with ABS brakes have higher crash rates? And why did GM promote them as a solution to stopping on ice? Spinning myths (and the resulting spinning car) is easy when a majority of consumers are educated by hearsay and advertising. Most people only believe the first thing they are told. Then get angry rather than learn when ABS realities are reported.

Both ABS and all-wheel drive were promoted as safer. If true, then someone said why. Nobody did for one simple reason. Only recited was an impression promoted by hearsay and advertising.

All-wheel drive cannot work properly if wheels are not designed to fight each other. That interlocking means four wheel drive gets one moving. Accurately reported is to not use all-wheel drive above 50 because all-wheel drive means the wheels fight. 50 MPH severely decreases safety. All-wheel drive also decreases safety at 30. Just not as much since at 50, since higher speed means these vehicles often roll over. A result of interlocked and fighting wheels.

Lola Bunny asked about safer and more reliable cars. Speed sensitive steering makes them even safer. Since that means a driver knows about black ice and other dangerous conditions unknown to SUV drivers.

:facepalm: No, no, no. Speed-sensitive steering does NOT mean that a driver knows about black ice (where are your numbers proving that SUV drivers don't know about black ice and other dangerous conditions, tw?). It means that the steering is closer to pure rack-and-pinion at lower speeds and has a little play at high speeds, so that amateur drivers don't inadvertently twitch the wheel at 110 mph and throw themselves across the median.

And you're confusing 4WD with all-wheel drive. All-wheel drive assigns more drive to the wheel(s) with traction. 4WD drives equally from all four wheels. All-wheel drive was engineered for higher speeds; 4WD is meant for low speeds. Do not use 4WD above 50 mph.

Tw, How do wheels fight one another? What do you mean by that? And, how does it results in the rollover?

tw's throwing around information he heard decades ago, and even the little that has some basis of truth is sadly out of date.
But this isn't helping Lola because being an urban Texan, I doubt she needs anything capable of real tough going, just family transportation. ;)

Heavy power steering so common in SUVs means you cannot tell when tires start losing traction. With speed sensitive steering, you can actually feel which wheel has struck ice. Know that a road is turning to ice long before the crash can happen.

There is no significant increased play at higher speeds. Once a car is moving more than 5 MPH, then power steering is no longer useful. It only keeps the driver ignorant of road conditions. Twitching at 110 is not eliminated by speed sensitive steering. Vehicles with worst steering keep power steering always on. To mask an inferior design and poor tracking. Especially true of some vehicles that did not use rack-and-pinion (ie trucks and SUVs).

A 'not informed' driver 'feels' safer when power steering is always left on. No speed sensitive steering is why some SUV drivers *feel* safer on ice. They have no idea. Power steering always left on also masks a crappy steering system. And can increase the automaker's profit by $20.

Lumberjim - why do I keep posting this here and in another thread. And you still do not read it?
Again: All-wheel drive and 4 wheel drive are functionally same. The original 4 wheel drive was so tightly interlocked that Jeeps would even flip over front to back. Newer designs 'loosened' that interlock while new names were invented for each variation. But in every case, wheels still must be interlocked. Otherwise it (4 wheel / all-wheel) does not get you started.

Lumberjim, your own video demonstrated 4 wheel drives unable to move when some wheels spin and the interlock is too loose. If any one wheel spins on ice and the wheels are not interlocked tightly, then the engine only spins that wheel faster and spins no other wheel. Even your video demonstrates what I kept saying here and in other threads.

Sometimes you can hear tires fighting even in a parking lot. If tires rotate independently, then a screech on sharp turns does not happen. Some SUVs are so tightly interlocked as to even screech tires while turning into a parking space. Sales brochures forget to mention that.

Interlocking is, for example, why I found a new all-wheel (4 wheel) drive truck under a porch. His truck went off road, through a mailbox, and ended up underneath the porch. Why? He was using all-wheel drive. He believed popular myths rather than learn why interlocked wheels decrease safety and control at speed.

Posted again are many reasons why 4/all wheel drive means less safety at speed. And why it is necessary to get the vehicle started. The next useful reply will finally say why interlocked wheels are safer; why tires do not fight for traction.

Myths about four/all wheel drive and ABS (which the same people repeatedly deny without saying why) are irrelevant to Lola Bunny who is asking for a safer and more reliable vehicle. Who will tell her she needs all-wheel drive ... by saying why.

Lola, have you looked at the new Sentra? It's really come a long way. Looks very similar to the Altima. Much bigger than it used to be.
http://m.nissanusa.com/?original_pat...VehicleLanding

It has speed sensitive variable power assist steering. And ABS!

I think you should get a three wheel drive car, lola. You only need three points of contact to level an object (three points to describe a plane). Four is too many, and invariably one doesn't actually make contact, but will if pressure is applied at the right point causing the object to wobble -like a table or a chair. if we redesigned furniture with three legs, we'd nevery need to wedge wonky legs again. they don't make three wheel cars any more -and they look stupid, but if you have three wheel drive, it's effectively the same. plus you can bling out the fourth wheel or use it as a lazy Susan. You definitely want Abs, but you can always ad them afterwards using an intense workout program.

Do you like the GTi?

I saw a tow truck the other day. I was really annoyed with it because I was waiting to jaywalk, and it was the only car on the road, but it was going really slow, so I had to wait a long time. It was towing a van, and wasn't a very big tow truck. When it got in front of me, I realized why it was going so slowly. the pavement had slight ripples to it, and every time it hit a ripple, the tow truck's front wheels bounced off the pavement and lingered in the air a few inches above the pavement for at least a few seconds. This was at about 10 mph. Almost no weight on those front wheels. I watched it for as long as I could, because I figured it was going to smash in to something, but it was going straight, and had no trouble doing that. I wish I could have seen it try to turn.

Lola,
more important to you than the ABS and AWD debates is the radio.

I'm not being patronizing. I'm dead serious. Many new cars have very difficult to operate radios, controlled by touch screens. You cant' just reach over with your eyes on the road and turn the knobs by feel or push the familiar buttons. You need to pull over to operate the damn things. It's a safety issue. When you get in any of these cars to try them out, see if you can operate the radio while driving. Also see if you can adjust the climate control. Turn on the defrost. These should be very simple things, and some cars get them wrong. It's a trendy thing now to put touch screens in cars and I'm dismayed by it. Touch screens have no business in cars. If you can't operate it by feel with a split second glance, it shouldn't be in a car.

You may find that an otherwise great car is dead to you because you can't operate the radio or turn on the defrost without pulling over.

Having said that, based mainly on the consumer report ratings and my own gut feelings and preferences, I would say that if money is of little concern, you should get the CR top rated Hybrid Camry XLE for $29K. If money is of great concern, you should get the Hyundai Sonata GLS for $22K. If you fall somewhere in the middle, you should look at the Honda Accord LX for $23K and the Camry LE for $23K. I'd also look at the Mazda 6 Sport for $24k and the Nissan Altima 2.5 S for $23K. All are excellent choices.

I'm not generally a fan of 6 cylinder engines. They have more power, which comes in handy about 1% of the time you are driving, but is never absolutely necessary. And they get poor to mediocre fuel economy 100% of the time you are driving. I'd focus on the 4 cylinder models. They all go fast enough to get you a speeding ticket and will keep up with traffic.

Just turn on the cruise control, that way the car drives itself and you can devote your full attention to the radio... or making a sandwich. :unsure::smack::lol2:

Maybe sixes aren't needed where YOU live Glatt, but around here with micro short passing lanes, curvy roads, and a preponderance of cotton tops and seasonal tourists, not having six cylinders adds 15 minutes to a commute.

It's true that more power can come in handy. But it comes with a tradeoff.

YMMV, literally.

I don't call trading safety for savings a good deal. :headshake

I'd be curious to see any studies that show cars with 6 cylinder engines are safer than cars with 4 cylinder engines.

I would expect insurance rates to be higher on cars with 6 cylinder engines based on them being more likely to be involved in accidents because there's more power in a 6 cylinder engine for a driver to abuse.

I would like to see a study showing 6 cylinder cars have more accidents than 4 cylinder cars. I think that's complete bullshit, along with the idea that drivers of 6 cylinder cars drive faster, or more recklessly. You said yourself speed is limited by the rest of the traffic.

I will agree however, if your situational awareness, and driving skills suck, having the power to evade and avoid is useless to you. You might as well get a 4 cylinder and spend the time until somebody nails you, daydreaming about how you'll spend that 12 cents you saved on gas this week.

It's amazing how much our sense of identity gets wrapped up in cars. Myself included.

Kids today don't even really want cars. Not in the cities anyway. Car club memberships like zip cars are all the rage. We've got 3 car sharing companies in DC.

I was just as much of an asshole driver when I had 4 cylinders as I am now. Maybe more so. Being stuck behind someone, unable to pass for 45 minutes because they wouldn't pull over and my 4 cylinder car unable to over take them and get back into my lane led to me taking risks so I didn't have to get stuck like that again. I also got one of the two tickets I've gotten in my life for unsafe passing because I couldn't get back into my lane before the stripes changed.

My mileage is usually 26mpg, but I have a sticky caliper and haven't had a chance to fix it so my mpg has dropped to about 20. It's taking about 100 miles of travel from a tank of gas. (about $20 bucks - I need to fix that asap)

I admit to being impatient when I am going to an appointment, I can be perfectly chill otherwise. Still, slow driving, e.g., 40 in a 55 frosts me. Especially when the driver is blissfully unaware of other cars and is marveling at the local splendor.

40 in a 55 is completely unreasonable. Unless there's ice on the road or something. Even then, you should pull over and let cars pass.

I can only think of a couple times in my life where I really wished I had that extra power. And one time was in a rental car. I had pulled over at some roadside vendor north of Toronto on Canadian thanksgiving weekend. Traffic was extremely heavy with absolutely no breaks and the ramp to get up to speed was relatively short with no merge lane. After waiting several minutes for any break, I just pulled an asshole move where I got up to speed and barged my way in. Somebody let me in. Come to think of it, accelerating wasn't the problem, it was simply finding a gap to coincide with the end of the ramp. I didn't like that.

You're right, it wasn't the rental car - it was the insane traffic and bad design of Hwys 400 and 11, north of Toronto. (And Hwy 69, which is a death trap.) Driving there anytime is hair-raising. In winter, just to add spice, Hwy 400 routinely gets white-outs.

It helps though, if you're able to accelerate fast enough to be going faster than traffic by the time you get to the end of the merge lane.

CoughHemiCough
AhemV8Ahem
Snort 5.7LTRSnort