Honda and Nissan set to start merger negotiations

[Keithr0]

And possibly including Mitsubishi too

https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda (some Mazda
hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

[Xeno]

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well. LOL

Post by Keithr0
Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda

There's been a tie up between Toyota and Suzuki for quite some time now,
nothing new there. In fact, in other markets Toyota and Suzuki badge
engineer each others products. My wife's Swift uses an *Aisin* (Toyota)
4 speed stepAT though later Swifts regressed to the trouble prone Jatco
CVT. Though they are separate companies, Toyota own ~5% share in Suzuki
and a similar share in Mazda.

Post by Keithr0
(some Mazda hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

Toyota spent a lot of time and money on hybrid development so now they
are licencing the technology to other manufacturers to use in their
range of vehicle - a smart move and, if I must say so, a logical step
forward.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

Post by Keithr0
Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda

There's been a tie up between Toyota and Suzuki for quite some time now,

**And Subaru.

nothing new there. In fact, in other markets Toyota and Suzuki badge
engineer each others products.

**And Subaru.

My wife's Swift uses an *Aisin* (Toyota)

4 speed stepAT though later Swifts regressed to the trouble prone Jatco
CVT. Though they are separate companies, Toyota own ~5% share in Suzuki
and a similar share in Mazda.

Post by Keithr0
(some Mazda hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

Toyota spent a lot of time and money on hybrid development so now they
are licencing the technology to other manufacturers to use in their
range of vehicle - a smart move and, if I must say so, a logical step
forward.

**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more. There
is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

[Xeno]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

Post by Keithr0
Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda

There's been a tie up between Toyota and Suzuki for quite some time now,

**And Subaru.

nothing new there. In fact, in other markets Toyota and Suzuki badge
engineer each others products.

**And Subaru.
 My wife's Swift uses an *Aisin* (Toyota)

4 speed stepAT though later Swifts regressed to the trouble prone
Jatco CVT. Though they are separate companies, Toyota own ~5% share in
Suzuki and a similar share in Mazda.

Post by Keithr0
(some Mazda hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

Toyota spent a lot of time and money on hybrid development so now they
are licencing the technology to other manufacturers to use in their
range of vehicle - a smart move and, if I must say so, a logical step
forward.

**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more. There
is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

I think the CX-80 still uses (some?) Mazda running gear which might
explain the not so great integration. The CX-50 is pretty much all
Toyota running gear (from Camry variants). It could swing me away from
the Toyota brand because in the Mazda CX-50 I could still retain faith
in the running gear. Never liked the way Mazda does start/stop on their
engines.

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

Post by Keithr0
Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda

There's been a tie up between Toyota and Suzuki for quite some time now,

**And Subaru.

Toyota have owned a big chunk of Subaru for a long time.

Post by Trevor Wilson

nothing new there. In fact, in other markets Toyota and Suzuki badge
engineer each others products.

**And Subaru.
 My wife's Swift uses an *Aisin* (Toyota)

4 speed stepAT though later Swifts regressed to the trouble prone
Jatco CVT. Though they are separate companies, Toyota own ~5% share in
Suzuki and a similar share in Mazda.

Post by Keithr0
(some Mazda hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

Toyota spent a lot of time and money on hybrid development so now they
are licencing the technology to other manufacturers to use in their
range of vehicle - a smart move and, if I must say so, a logical step
forward.

**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more. There
is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

That could be simply due to the calibration of the accelerator pedal
being different in each car, could also be because of the different engines.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

Post by Keithr0
Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda

There's been a tie up between Toyota and Suzuki for quite some time now,

**And Subaru.

Toyota have owned a big chunk of Subaru for a long time.

Post by Trevor Wilson

nothing new there. In fact, in other markets Toyota and Suzuki badge
engineer each others products.

**And Subaru.
  My wife's Swift uses an *Aisin* (Toyota)

4 speed stepAT though later Swifts regressed to the trouble prone
Jatco CVT. Though they are separate companies, Toyota own ~5% share
in Suzuki and a similar share in Mazda.

Post by Keithr0
(some Mazda hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

Toyota spent a lot of time and money on hybrid development so now
they are licencing the technology to other manufacturers to use in
their range of vehicle - a smart move and, if I must say so, a
logical step forward.

**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more.
There is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

That could be simply due to the calibration of the accelerator pedal
being different in each car, could also be because of the different engines.

**Nope. It was much more than just that. The Mazda felt like it was
using a tractor engine, whereas the Lexus felt as smooth as butter. It
was easily worth the extra cash IMO. On paper, the two cars could be
twins. Behind the wheel was a different matter entirely.

[Xeno]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

Post by Keithr0
Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda

There's been a tie up between Toyota and Suzuki for quite some time now,

**And Subaru.

Toyota have owned a big chunk of Subaru for a long time.

Post by Trevor Wilson

nothing new there. In fact, in other markets Toyota and Suzuki badge
engineer each others products.

**And Subaru.
  My wife's Swift uses an *Aisin* (Toyota)

4 speed stepAT though later Swifts regressed to the trouble prone
Jatco CVT. Though they are separate companies, Toyota own ~5% share
in Suzuki and a similar share in Mazda.

Post by Keithr0
(some Mazda hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

Toyota spent a lot of time and money on hybrid development so now
they are licencing the technology to other manufacturers to use in
their range of vehicle - a smart move and, if I must say so, a
logical step forward.

**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more.
There is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

That could be simply due to the calibration of the accelerator pedal
being different in each car, could also be because of the different engines.

**Nope. It was much more than just that. The Mazda felt like it was
using a tractor engine, whereas the Lexus felt as smooth as butter. It
was easily worth the extra cash IMO. On paper, the two cars could be
twins. Behind the wheel was a different matter entirely.

Even on paper the two aren’t twins. Mazda uses a 48 Volt mild (serial)
hybrid system. The Lexus uses a (series/parallel) 450-650 volt full hybrid
system. They are worlds apart, even on paper specs, and you have now
experienced that difference first hand. Toyota may be behind the game on
BEVs but that is deliberate since it sees hybrid and PHEV tech as the
current game. The recent slowdown in BEV sales indicates Toyota are on the
money, especially in light of the piss poor rollout of BEV infrastructure
in this country.

____
Xeno

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Xeno

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

Post by Keithr0
Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda

There's been a tie up between Toyota and Suzuki for quite some time now,

**And Subaru.

Toyota have owned a big chunk of Subaru for a long time.

Post by Trevor Wilson

nothing new there. In fact, in other markets Toyota and Suzuki badge
engineer each others products.

**And Subaru.
  My wife's Swift uses an *Aisin* (Toyota)

4 speed stepAT though later Swifts regressed to the trouble prone
Jatco CVT. Though they are separate companies, Toyota own ~5% share
in Suzuki and a similar share in Mazda.

Post by Keithr0
(some Mazda hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

Toyota spent a lot of time and money on hybrid development so now
they are licencing the technology to other manufacturers to use in
their range of vehicle - a smart move and, if I must say so, a
logical step forward.

**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more.
There is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

That could be simply due to the calibration of the accelerator pedal
being different in each car, could also be because of the different engines.

**Nope. It was much more than just that. The Mazda felt like it was
using a tractor engine, whereas the Lexus felt as smooth as butter. It
was easily worth the extra cash IMO. On paper, the two cars could be
twins. Behind the wheel was a different matter entirely.

Even on paper the two aren’t twins. Mazda uses a 48 Volt mild (serial)
hybrid system. The Lexus uses a (series/parallel) 450-650 volt full hybrid
system. They are worlds apart, even on paper specs, and you have now
experienced that difference first hand. Toyota may be behind the game on
BEVs but that is deliberate since it sees hybrid and PHEV tech as the
current game. The recent slowdown in BEV sales indicates Toyota are on the
money, especially in light of the piss poor rollout of BEV infrastructure
in this country.

**I didn't realise that the PHEVs were so different in technology. Mazda
makes a big deal of telling people that theirs is basically Toyota
technology, whereas the Lexus people tell you that Mazda uses an older,
inferior version of Toyota technology. I never bothered to investigate
the fine details, as simply driving the two cars told me all I needed to
know: The Lexus is a VASTLY superior vehicle.

That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

[Xeno]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Xeno

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

Post by Keithr0
Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda

There's been a tie up between Toyota and Suzuki for quite some time now,

**And Subaru.

Toyota have owned a big chunk of Subaru for a long time.

Post by Trevor Wilson

nothing new there. In fact, in other markets Toyota and Suzuki badge
engineer each others products.

**And Subaru.
   My wife's Swift uses an *Aisin* (Toyota)

4 speed stepAT though later Swifts regressed to the trouble prone
Jatco CVT. Though they are separate companies, Toyota own ~5% share
in Suzuki and a similar share in Mazda.

Post by Keithr0
(some Mazda hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

Toyota spent a lot of time and money on hybrid development so now
they are licencing the technology to other manufacturers to use in
their range of vehicle - a smart move and, if I must say so, a
logical step forward.

**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more.
There is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

That could be simply due to the calibration of the accelerator pedal
being different in each car, could also be because of the different engines.

**Nope. It was much more than just that. The Mazda felt like it was
using a tractor engine, whereas the Lexus felt as smooth as butter. It
was easily worth the extra cash IMO. On paper, the two cars could be
twins. Behind the wheel was a different matter entirely.

Even on paper the two aren’t twins. Mazda uses a 48 Volt mild (serial)
hybrid system. The Lexus uses a (series/parallel) 450-650 volt full hybrid
system. They are worlds apart, even on paper specs, and you have now
experienced that difference first hand. Toyota may be behind the game on
BEVs but that is deliberate since it sees hybrid and PHEV tech as the
current game. The recent slowdown in BEV sales indicates Toyota are on the
money, especially in light of the piss poor rollout of BEV infrastructure
in this country.

**I didn't realise that the PHEVs were so different in technology. Mazda
makes a big deal of telling people that theirs is basically Toyota
technology, whereas the Lexus people tell you that Mazda uses an older,
inferior version of Toyota technology. I never bothered to investigate
the fine details, as simply driving the two cars told me all I needed to
know: The Lexus is a VASTLY superior vehicle.

The closest direct comparison you can make is the CX-50 with a 4th gen
Camry. Current Camry uses 5th generation hybrid systems, not a big
difference but a lot more refined - as you have noticed. The CX-80 you
tested isn't even 4th gen hybrid or even full hybrid.

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

Yeah, that'd be bad!

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson
**I didn't realise that the PHEVs were so different in technology. Mazda
makes a big deal of telling people that theirs is basically Toyota
technology, whereas the Lexus people tell you that Mazda uses an older,
inferior version of Toyota technology. I never bothered to investigate
the fine details, as simply driving the two cars told me all I needed to
know: The Lexus is a VASTLY superior vehicle.

Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or are
you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
**I didn't realise that the PHEVs were so different in technology.
Mazda makes a big deal of telling people that theirs is basically
Toyota technology, whereas the Lexus people tell you that Mazda uses
an older, inferior version of Toyota technology. I never bothered to
investigate the fine details, as simply driving the two cars told me
all I needed to know: The Lexus is a VASTLY superior vehicle.

Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or are
you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda buys the
technology from Toyota.

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a Hyundai
Kona EV. They do have a spare.

[Xeno]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
**I didn't realise that the PHEVs were so different in technology.
Mazda makes a big deal of telling people that theirs is basically
Toyota technology, whereas the Lexus people tell you that Mazda uses
an older, inferior version of Toyota technology. I never bothered to
investigate the fine details, as simply driving the two cars told me
all I needed to know: The Lexus is a VASTLY superior vehicle.

Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or are
you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda buys the
technology from Toyota.

Yes, from about 2010, IIRC.

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a Hyundai
Kona EV. They do have a spare.

Current trends.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or are
you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda buys the
technology from Toyota.

You should know by now not to believe a word a car salesman tells you :)

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a Hyundai
Kona EV. They do have a spare.

I don't know if that's a good idea. Most cars that come without a spare
these days also come without anywhere to store one, so unless you want
to have a wheel bouncing around in the back or leaning up against a wall
in your garage it'd be a waste of time buying one.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or
are you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda buys
the technology from Toyota.

You should know by now not to believe a word a car salesman tells you :)

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a Hyundai
Kona EV. They do have a spare.

I don't know if that's a good idea. Most cars that come without a spare
these days also come without anywhere to store one, so unless you want
to have a wheel bouncing around in the back or leaning up against a wall
in your garage it'd be a waste of time buying one.

**After blowing out the sidewall of a tyre on my Levorg a couple of
years back, in a fairly remote area, I immediately appreciated the
ability to get back on the road, to reach my destination within 20
minutes. Without a spare, I would have watched my car disappearing on
the back of a tow truck. In fact, I needed to have my Stagea taken to my
mechanic a few months back on the back of a truck. After speaking with
the towies, they expressed EXTREME disdain for the lack of spare tyres
on modern cars. They estimated that such issues represented about 80% of
their business today. Most could be solved by simply supplying a spare tyre.

I WILL ALWAYS carry a spare tyre, because I am not a fucking moron. Even
if that tyre is flopping around the back of the car.

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or
are you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda buys
the technology from Toyota.

You should know by now not to believe a word a car salesman tells you :)

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both
cars). Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a Hyundai
Kona EV. They do have a spare.

I don't know if that's a good idea. Most cars that come without a
spare these days also come without anywhere to store one, so unless
you want to have a wheel bouncing around in the back or leaning up
against a wall in your garage it'd be a waste of time buying one.

**After blowing out the sidewall of a tyre on my Levorg a couple of
years back, in a fairly remote area, I immediately appreciated the
ability to get back on the road, to reach my destination within 20
minutes. Without a spare, I would have watched my car disappearing on
the back of a tow truck. In fact, I needed to have my Stagea taken to my
mechanic a few months back on the back of a truck. After speaking with
the towies, they expressed EXTREME disdain for the lack of spare tyres
on modern cars. They estimated that such issues represented about 80% of
their business today. Most could be solved by simply supplying a spare tyre.
I WILL ALWAYS carry a spare tyre, because I am not a fucking moron. Even
if that tyre is flopping around the back of the car.

Is the Levorg spare a space saver?
I can't remember what spare the WRX had but the 2006 Impreza we owned
had a space saver, I only remember that because I remember using it once.
I wouldn't have liked to drive long distance on it, sign on it said not
to exceed 80kph and after ignoring that and trying to drive at 110 I
found out why they say 80kph max, it felt all over the place.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or
are you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda buys
the technology from Toyota.

You should know by now not to believe a word a car salesman tells you :)

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both
cars). Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a
Hyundai Kona EV. They do have a spare.

I don't know if that's a good idea. Most cars that come without a
spare these days also come without anywhere to store one, so unless
you want to have a wheel bouncing around in the back or leaning up
against a wall in your garage it'd be a waste of time buying one.

**After blowing out the sidewall of a tyre on my Levorg a couple of
years back, in a fairly remote area, I immediately appreciated the
ability to get back on the road, to reach my destination within 20
minutes. Without a spare, I would have watched my car disappearing on
the back of a tow truck. In fact, I needed to have my Stagea taken to
my mechanic a few months back on the back of a truck. After speaking
with the towies, they expressed EXTREME disdain for the lack of spare
tyres on modern cars. They estimated that such issues represented
about 80% of their business today. Most could be solved by simply
supplying a spare tyre.
I WILL ALWAYS carry a spare tyre, because I am not a fucking moron.
Even if that tyre is flopping around the back of the car.

Is the Levorg spare a space saver?

**Yep. Unfortunately. However, it is a pretty decent space-saver. Whilst
the Levorg tyres are 225s, the spare is a 200. WAY better than the space
saver in the Stagea, which I think is a 165 or something close to that.
It's rated at 80kph and performed quite well when required.

Post by Daryl
I can't remember what spare the WRX had but the 2006 Impreza we owned
had a space saver, I only remember that because I remember using it once.
I wouldn't have liked to drive long distance on it, sign on it said not
to exceed 80kph and after ignoring that and trying to drive at 110 I
found out why they say 80kph max, it felt all over the place.

**Since my blow-out was a rear tyre, the impact of the spare was barely
noticeable, if at all. If it had been a front tyre, I would have swapped
the tyres around. It would only have cost me an extra 10 mins or so.

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or
are you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda buys
the technology from Toyota.

You should know by now not to believe a word a car salesman tells you :)

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both
cars). Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a
third party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a
Hyundai Kona EV. They do have a spare.

I don't know if that's a good idea. Most cars that come without a
spare these days also come without anywhere to store one, so unless
you want to have a wheel bouncing around in the back or leaning up
against a wall in your garage it'd be a waste of time buying one.

**After blowing out the sidewall of a tyre on my Levorg a couple of
years back, in a fairly remote area, I immediately appreciated the
ability to get back on the road, to reach my destination within 20
minutes. Without a spare, I would have watched my car disappearing on
the back of a tow truck. In fact, I needed to have my Stagea taken to
my mechanic a few months back on the back of a truck. After speaking
with the towies, they expressed EXTREME disdain for the lack of spare
tyres on modern cars. They estimated that such issues represented
about 80% of their business today. Most could be solved by simply
supplying a spare tyre.
I WILL ALWAYS carry a spare tyre, because I am not a fucking moron.
Even if that tyre is flopping around the back of the car.

Is the Levorg spare a space saver?

**Yep. Unfortunately. However, it is a pretty decent space-saver. Whilst
the Levorg tyres are 225s, the spare is a 200. WAY better than the space
saver in the Stagea, which I think is a 165 or something close to that.
It's rated at 80kph and performed quite well when required.

Post by Daryl
I can't remember what spare the WRX had but the 2006 Impreza we owned
had a space saver, I only remember that because I remember using it once.
I wouldn't have liked to drive long distance on it, sign on it said
not to exceed 80kph and after ignoring that and trying to drive at 110
I found out why they say 80kph max, it felt all over the place.

**Since my blow-out was a rear tyre, the impact of the spare was barely
noticeable, if at all. If it had been a front tyre, I would have swapped
the tyres around. It would only have cost me an extra 10 mins or so.

The flat on the Impreza was also on the rear, it was only about 10km
between my mates place where it went flat, mostly 110kph hwy and it felt
very unsafe at 110, yours is more than 10yrs newer so most likely they
have made space savers better in that time.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"?
Or are you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda
buys the technology from Toyota.

You should know by now not to believe a word a car salesman tells you :)

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both
cars). Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a
third party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be
a Hyundai Kona EV. They do have a spare.

I don't know if that's a good idea. Most cars that come without a
spare these days also come without anywhere to store one, so unless
you want to have a wheel bouncing around in the back or leaning up
against a wall in your garage it'd be a waste of time buying one.

**After blowing out the sidewall of a tyre on my Levorg a couple of
years back, in a fairly remote area, I immediately appreciated the
ability to get back on the road, to reach my destination within 20
minutes. Without a spare, I would have watched my car disappearing
on the back of a tow truck. In fact, I needed to have my Stagea
taken to my mechanic a few months back on the back of a truck. After
speaking with the towies, they expressed EXTREME disdain for the
lack of spare tyres on modern cars. They estimated that such issues
represented about 80% of their business today. Most could be solved
by simply supplying a spare tyre.
I WILL ALWAYS carry a spare tyre, because I am not a fucking moron.
Even if that tyre is flopping around the back of the car.

Is the Levorg spare a space saver?

**Yep. Unfortunately. However, it is a pretty decent space-saver.
Whilst the Levorg tyres are 225s, the spare is a 200. WAY better than
the space saver in the Stagea, which I think is a 165 or something
close to that. It's rated at 80kph and performed quite well when
required.

Post by Daryl
I can't remember what spare the WRX had but the 2006 Impreza we owned
had a space saver, I only remember that because I remember using it once.
I wouldn't have liked to drive long distance on it, sign on it said
not to exceed 80kph and after ignoring that and trying to drive at
110 I found out why they say 80kph max, it felt all over the place.

**Since my blow-out was a rear tyre, the impact of the spare was
barely noticeable, if at all. If it had been a front tyre, I would
have swapped the tyres around. It would only have cost me an extra 10
mins or so.

The flat on the Impreza was also on the rear, it was only about 10km
between my mates place where it went flat, mostly 110kph hwy and it felt
very unsafe at 110, yours is more than 10yrs newer so most likely they
have made space savers better in that time.

**When I was checking out the Levorg, I checked out the spare that came
with it. On a quick examination, it looked like a full size tyre. It
isn't, but it is quite a decent chunk of rubber nonetheless.

The standard rubber is 225/40. (I think the MY18 WRX 245/35?)
The spare is 200/50?. So, plenty of rubber.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
I don't know if that's a good idea. Most cars that come without a
spare these days also come without anywhere to store one, so unless
you want to have a wheel bouncing around in the back or leaning up
against a wall in your garage it'd be a waste of time buying one.

**After blowing out the sidewall of a tyre on my Levorg a couple of
years back, in a fairly remote area, I immediately appreciated the
ability to get back on the road, to reach my destination within 20
minutes. Without a spare, I would have watched my car disappearing on
the back of a tow truck. In fact, I needed to have my Stagea taken to my
mechanic a few months back on the back of a truck. After speaking with
the towies, they expressed EXTREME disdain for the lack of spare tyres
on modern cars. They estimated that such issues represented about 80% of
their business today. Most could be solved by simply supplying a spare tyre.

I think Mercedes Benz started this trend by researching the number of
their customers who either knew how to change a tyre themselves, or
would do so even if their car was equipped with the necessary equipment.
Their research told them that as the overwhelming majority of their
owners either had no idea how to change a wheel or wouldn't even if they
did, they gave up on the idea of equipping cars with spare wheels and
instead opted for an inflator kit.

Which, for most people made more sense.

Post by Trevor Wilson
I WILL ALWAYS carry a spare tyre, because I am not a fucking moron. Even
if that tyre is flopping around the back of the car.

Well, for my mind that's a very stupid idea. Your average spare wheel
today weighs around 30kg, and having one lying loose in the back makes
it a lethal projectile in an accident. They are awfully difficult things
to tie down in the back of a wagon when it's not equipped with a
sufficient anchorage point.

For what it's worth, I've bought *many* used cars over the years,
probably in excess of 100, and the number of them that have had spare
wheels that had been unused since new is *staggering*. It would easily
be in excess of 90% of them, which makes me wonder why anyone who lives
in suburbia bothers to carry one at all. When you consider the weight
penalty of lugging one around for the life of the car's ownership, you'd
probably be better off not having one and paying for a roadside
assistance package.

[Daryl]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
I don't know if that's a good idea. Most cars that come without a
spare these days also come without anywhere to store one, so unless
you want to have a wheel bouncing around in the back or leaning up
against a wall in your garage it'd be a waste of time buying one.

**After blowing out the sidewall of a tyre on my Levorg a couple of
years back, in a fairly remote area, I immediately appreciated the
ability to get back on the road, to reach my destination within 20
minutes. Without a spare, I would have watched my car disappearing on
the back of a tow truck. In fact, I needed to have my Stagea taken to
my mechanic a few months back on the back of a truck. After speaking
with the towies, they expressed EXTREME disdain for the lack of spare
tyres on modern cars. They estimated that such issues represented
about 80% of their business today. Most could be solved by simply
supplying a spare tyre.

I think Mercedes Benz started this trend by researching the number of
their customers who either knew how to change a tyre themselves, or
would do so even if their car was equipped with the necessary equipment.
Their research told them that as the overwhelming majority of their
owners either had no idea how to change a wheel or wouldn't even if they
did, they gave up on the idea of equipping cars with spare wheels and
instead opted for an inflator kit.
Which, for most people made more sense.

Very interesting spare in my son's 2002 C Class coupe, its a different
sort of space saver which has expandable/collapsible side walls, there
is also a compressor with it, not sure if it saves all that much weight
but it certainly takes up a lot less space than a full size spare.

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
I WILL ALWAYS carry a spare tyre, because I am not a fucking moron.
Even if that tyre is flopping around the back of the car.

Well, for my mind that's a very stupid idea. Your average spare wheel
today weighs around 30kg, and having one lying loose in the back makes
it a lethal projectile in an accident. They are awfully difficult things
to tie down in the back of a wagon when it's not equipped with a
sufficient anchorage point.
For what it's worth, I've bought *many* used cars over the years,
probably in excess of 100, and the number of them that have had spare
wheels that had been unused since new is *staggering*. It would easily
be in excess of 90% of them, which makes me wonder why anyone who lives
in suburbia bothers to carry one at all. When you consider the weight
penalty of lugging one around for the life of the car's ownership, you'd
probably be better off not having one and paying for a roadside
assistance package.

My wife has been taught how to change a tyre but I doubt that she would
since we have RACV Total Care, unless they were very busy and were going
to take a long time to get to her she's better off waiting for the RACV.
Its also not a great idea to try and change a tyre on the side of a
freeway or any road with a high speed limit especially if its a drivers
side tyre, I'd rather drive slowly to the next exit and destroy a tyre
than risk being hit.
A lot of trucks especially those that spend a lot of time in the city
don't carry spares, we weren't allowed to change a tyre even if we had
one and knew how to mostly because of OH&S.

[Noddy]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
I think Mercedes Benz started this trend by researching the number of
their customers who either knew how to change a tyre themselves, or
would do so even if their car was equipped with the necessary
equipment. Their research told them that as the overwhelming majority
of their owners either had no idea how to change a wheel or wouldn't
even if they did, they gave up on the idea of equipping cars with
spare wheels and instead opted for an inflator kit.
Which, for most people made more sense.

Very interesting spare in my son's 2002 C Class coupe, its a different
sort of space saver which has expandable/collapsible side walls, there
is also a compressor with it, not sure if it saves all that much weight
but it certainly takes up a lot less space than a full size spare.

Interesting.

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
For what it's worth, I've bought *many* used cars over the years,
probably in excess of 100, and the number of them that have had spare
wheels that had been unused since new is *staggering*. It would easily
be in excess of 90% of them, which makes me wonder why anyone who
lives in suburbia bothers to carry one at all. When you consider the
weight penalty of lugging one around for the life of the car's
ownership, you'd probably be better off not having one and paying for
a roadside assistance package.

My wife has been taught how to change a tyre but I doubt that she would
since we have RACV Total Care, unless they were very busy and were going
to take a long time to get to her she's better off waiting for the RACV.

I agree. Much safer to do that.

Post by Daryl
Its also not a great idea to try and change a tyre on the side of a
freeway or any road with a high speed limit especially if its a drivers
side tyre, I'd rather drive slowly to the next exit and destroy a tyre
than risk being hit.

Yep.

Post by Daryl
A lot of trucks especially those that spend a lot of time in the city
don't carry spares, we weren't allowed to change a tyre even if we had
one and knew how to mostly because of OH&S.

I don't think many people do it these days, and as I said in my earlier
post, not many seem to. Whether that's because they don't get flat tyres
or they just get someone else to fix it for them, I hardly ever see a
spare wheel in a car that's been used.

And it doesn't seem to be a new thing. This is the original ER70-H14
Aquajet radial that was fitted to the spare wheel in my 1970 Fairlane
from the factory, and it's been lying in the boot of this car for 54
years having never been on the road.

It you look close, you can still see the tits on the tread :)

Post by Daryl
https://ibb.co/0GHwkw6

[Daryl]

Post by Noddy

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
I think Mercedes Benz started this trend by researching the number of
their customers who either knew how to change a tyre themselves, or
would do so even if their car was equipped with the necessary
equipment. Their research told them that as the overwhelming majority
of their owners either had no idea how to change a wheel or wouldn't
even if they did, they gave up on the idea of equipping cars with
spare wheels and instead opted for an inflator kit.
Which, for most people made more sense.

Very interesting spare in my son's 2002 C Class coupe, its a different
sort of space saver which has expandable/collapsible side walls, there
is also a compressor with it, not sure if it saves all that much
weight but it certainly takes up a lot less space than a full size spare.

Interesting.

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
For what it's worth, I've bought *many* used cars over the years,
probably in excess of 100, and the number of them that have had spare
wheels that had been unused since new is *staggering*. It would
easily be in excess of 90% of them, which makes me wonder why anyone
who lives in suburbia bothers to carry one at all. When you consider
the weight penalty of lugging one around for the life of the car's
ownership, you'd probably be better off not having one and paying for
a roadside assistance package.

My wife has been taught how to change a tyre but I doubt that she
would since we have RACV Total Care, unless they were very busy and
were going to take a long time to get to her she's better off waiting
for the RACV.

I agree. Much safer to do that.

Post by Daryl
Its also not a great idea to try and change a tyre on the side of a
freeway or any road with a high speed limit especially if its a
drivers side tyre, I'd rather drive slowly to the next exit and
destroy a tyre than risk being hit.

Yep.

Post by Daryl
A lot of trucks especially those that spend a lot of time in the city
don't carry spares, we weren't allowed to change a tyre even if we had
one and knew how to mostly because of OH&S.

I don't think many people do it these days, and as I said in my earlier
post, not many seem to. Whether that's because they don't get flat tyres
or they just get someone else to fix it for them, I hardly ever see a
spare wheel in a car that's been used.
And it doesn't seem to be a new thing. This is the original ER70-H14
Aquajet radial that was fitted to the spare wheel in my 1970 Fairlane
from the factory, and it's been lying in the boot of this car for 54
years having never been on the road.
It you look close, you can still see the tits on the tread :)

Post by Daryl
https://ibb.co/0GHwkw6

A blast from the past, don't see to many of those any more.

[Noddy]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
And it doesn't seem to be a new thing. This is the original ER70-H14
Aquajet radial that was fitted to the spare wheel in my 1970 Fairlane
from the factory, and it's been lying in the boot of this car for 54
years having never been on the road.
It you look close, you can still see the tits on the tread :)

Post by Daryl
https://ibb.co/0GHwkw6

A blast from the past, don't see to many of those any more.

Not at all. I'll get 500 bucks for this one from some fanatical GT owner
who will stick it on the spare in his boot and put a new replica label
on the tread :)

[Daryl]

Post by Noddy

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
And it doesn't seem to be a new thing. This is the original ER70-H14
Aquajet radial that was fitted to the spare wheel in my 1970 Fairlane
from the factory, and it's been lying in the boot of this car for 54
years having never been on the road.
It you look close, you can still see the tits on the tread :)

Post by Daryl
https://ibb.co/0GHwkw6

A blast from the past, don't see to many of those any more.

Not at all. I'll get 500 bucks for this one from some fanatical GT owner
who will stick it on the spare in his boot and put a new replica label
on the tread :)

LOL.

[Noddy]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
I think Mercedes Benz started this trend by researching the number of
their customers who either knew how to change a tyre themselves, or
would do so even if their car was equipped with the necessary
equipment. Their research told them that as the overwhelming majority
of their owners either had no idea how to change a wheel or wouldn't
even if they did, they gave up on the idea of equipping cars with
spare wheels and instead opted for an inflator kit.
Which, for most people made more sense.

Very interesting spare in my son's 2002 C Class coupe, its a different
sort of space saver which has expandable/collapsible side walls, there
is also a compressor with it, not sure if it saves all that much weight
but it certainly takes up a lot less space than a full size spare.

Interesting.

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
For what it's worth, I've bought *many* used cars over the years,
probably in excess of 100, and the number of them that have had spare
wheels that had been unused since new is *staggering*. It would easily
be in excess of 90% of them, which makes me wonder why anyone who
lives in suburbia bothers to carry one at all. When you consider the
weight penalty of lugging one around for the life of the car's
ownership, you'd probably be better off not having one and paying for
a roadside assistance package.

My wife has been taught how to change a tyre but I doubt that she would
since we have RACV Total Care, unless they were very busy and were going
to take a long time to get to her she's better off waiting for the RACV.

I agree. Much safer to do that.

Post by Daryl
Its also not a great idea to try and change a tyre on the side of a
freeway or any road with a high speed limit especially if its a drivers
side tyre, I'd rather drive slowly to the next exit and destroy a tyre
than risk being hit.

Yep.

Post by Daryl
A lot of trucks especially those that spend a lot of time in the city
don't carry spares, we weren't allowed to change a tyre even if we had
one and knew how to mostly because of OH&S.

I don't think many people do it these days, and as I said in my earlier
post, not many seem to. Whether that's because they don't get flat tyres
or they just get someone else to fix it for them, I hardly ever see a
spare wheel in a car that's been used.

And it doesn't seem to be a new thing. This is the original ER70-H14
Aquajet radial that was fitted to the spare wheel in my 1970 Fairlane
from the factory, and it's been lying in the boot of this car for 54
years having never been on the road.

It you look close, you can still see the tits on the tread :)

Post by Daryl
https://ibb.co/0GHwkw6

[RevKev]

Post by Noddy
For what it's worth, I've bought *many* used cars over the years,
probably in excess of 100,

A claim which you have made many times and for which there is, apu,
absolutely zero proof. Which, *not* coincidentally, is exactly the
"worth" of your claim.

snip bullshit.



alvey
Again noting how Man Who Shows Many Pictures of Car Bits won't show any
which support his challenged claims.

[alvey]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or
are you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda buys
the technology from Toyota.

You should know by now not to believe a word a car salesman tells you :)

Are you claiming to have been a car salesman now?

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
**I didn't realise that the PHEVs were so different in technology.
Mazda makes a big deal of telling people that theirs is basically
Toyota technology, whereas the Lexus people tell you that Mazda uses
an older, inferior version of Toyota technology. I never bothered to
investigate the fine details, as simply driving the two cars told me
all I needed to know: The Lexus is a VASTLY superior vehicle.

Where does Mazda tell people that they use "Toyota Technology"? Or are
you talking about the bullshit the sales droid fed you?

**BOTH the Mazda and the Lexus sales droids told me that Mazda buys the
technology from Toyota.

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

And no spare.

**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a Hyundai
Kona EV. They do have a spare.

Pretty common for cars these days to not have a full size spare tyre.
I recently replaced the tyres on my 22yr old Benz, I noticed that the
spare was OE and by the look of it it had never been on the car so I got
the tyre shop to select the best of my old tyres and fit that to the
spare wheel, it is only 7yrs old instead of the OE 22 yrs old.
The Golf and the Boxster both have space savers spares, better than nothing.

[alvey]

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a Hyundai
Kona EV. They do have a spare.

Idle curiousity... When was the last time you had a flat? (As in one
that was unable to be resurrected enough to get you to a tyre shop?

I think mine was about 1976.


alvey

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a Hyundai
Kona EV. They do have a spare.

Idle curiousity... When was the last time you had a flat? (As in one
that was unable to be resurrected enough to get you to a tyre shop?

**Less than 2 years ago. I hit a pothole and blew out the sidewall.
Fortunately, I was able to swap the dead tyre for the spare and I was
back on the road in 20 mins. I was in the middle of nowhere.

Post by alvey
I think mine was about 1976.

**You might be due for another soon. Why take the chance? Carrying a
spare tyre is just good common sense IMO.

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Yep. It's fucking insane. It seems that I will need to buy a third
party spare for whatever car I buy, unless it happens to be a Hyundai
Kona EV. They do have a spare.

Idle curiousity... When was the last time you had a flat? (As in one
that was unable to be resurrected enough to get you to a tyre shop?

**Less than 2 years ago. I hit a pothole and blew out the sidewall.
Fortunately, I was able to swap the dead tyre for the spare and I was
back on the road in 20 mins. I was in the middle of nowhere.

Post by alvey
I think mine was about 1976.

**You might be due for another soon. Why take the chance? Carrying a
spare tyre is just good common sense IMO.

I've had 2 on the Benz both recently which is why it now has new tyres.
The tyres were more than 7 yrs old and done about 60k km so maybe that
made them more prone to flats.
One was a just a loose valve but I drove a couple of km before I noticed
it so the side wall was slightly damaged, the other was caused by me
running over something and it cut the tyre right where the tread meets
the sidewall so it was not repairable.
I noticed both flats at home so I was able to use my trolley jack and
impact gun so it was an easy and safe tyre change.
BTW when I ordered my new tyres I wanted Michelin Primacy 4's, the local
tyre shop said that they were out of stock so I got Pilot Sport 4's for
the same price, the PS4's are a performance tyre and whilst their grip
and steering feel is sensational the ride isn't as good, it now rides
more like a sports car than a luxury cruiser.

[alvey]

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

They certainly are. Having suffered through two pairs on a BMW 135 I've
been advising anyone who drives in Australia to *not* get them. Loudly.
They're great driving on a smooth surface, but as we know, that's about
1% of roads in this wide brown land. And then there's fucking speed
humps. How are those bastards legal?


alvey

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

They certainly are. Having suffered through two pairs on a BMW 135 I've
been advising anyone who drives in Australia to *not* get them. Loudly.
They're great driving on a smooth surface, but as we know, that's about
1% of roads in this wide brown land. And then there's fucking speed
humps. How are those bastards legal?

**Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and brutal
Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to negotiate
the fucking things. For weeks I had to suffer with honking from idiot
Ranger drivers which seem to be able to hit speed humps at almost any
speed. A couple idiot ute drivers almost rear-ended me. And the fucking
local shopping centre has replaced some of theirs with new ones. Fuck
me, they are brutal things.

So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can recognise a
pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down, whilst a fucking ute
can careen through a roudabout at any speed they like. It's fucking nuts.

[alvey]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

They certainly are. Having suffered through two pairs on a BMW 135
I've been advising anyone who drives in Australia to *not* get them.
Loudly. They're great driving on a smooth surface, but as we know,
that's about 1% of roads in this wide brown land. And then there's
fucking speed humps. How are those bastards legal?

**Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and brutal
Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to negotiate
the fucking things. For weeks I had to suffer with honking from idiot
Ranger drivers which seem to be able to hit speed humps at almost any
speed. A couple idiot ute drivers almost rear-ended me. And the fucking
local shopping centre has replaced some of theirs with new ones. Fuck
me, they are brutal things.
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can recognise a
pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down, whilst a fucking ute
can careen through a roudabout at any speed they like. It's fucking nuts.

Righteous rant brother.

I've often if someone could sue the local clowncil if someone was
injured by a car breakage which was caused by a "traffic calmer".

Trivial Aside... In an episode of James Mays' new tv series, "Dull Men",
he drove without stopping from one side of Milton Keynes (50km from
London) to t'other. MK being famous for almost exclusively using
roundabouts instead of traffic lights.


alvey

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both cars).
Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

They certainly are. Having suffered through two pairs on a BMW 135
I've been advising anyone who drives in Australia to *not* get them.
Loudly. They're great driving on a smooth surface, but as we know,
that's about 1% of roads in this wide brown land. And then there's
fucking speed humps. How are those bastards legal?

**Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and brutal
Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things. For weeks I had to suffer with honking
from idiot Ranger drivers which seem to be able to hit speed humps at
almost any speed. A couple idiot ute drivers almost rear-ended me. And
the fucking local shopping centre has replaced some of theirs with new
ones. Fuck me, they are brutal things.
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can recognise
a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down, whilst a fucking
ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed they like. It's
fucking nuts.

Righteous rant brother.
I've often if someone could sue the local clowncil if someone was
injured by a car breakage which was caused by a "traffic calmer".

**In turth, I was kinda hoping some idiot Ranger driver would write-off
my Stagea at the nearby roundabout, so I could sue the council for
fucking up the local roads. It seems the local ute driving morons have
determined that proper cars need to slow down before driving over a
speed hump.

Post by alvey
Trivial Aside... In an episode of James Mays' new tv series, "Dull Men",
 he drove without stopping from one side of Milton Keynes (50km from
London) to t'other. MK being famous for almost exclusively using
roundabouts instead of traffic lights.

**Most interesting.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson
**In turth, I was kinda hoping some idiot Ranger driver would write-off
my Stagea at the nearby roundabout, so I could sue the council for
fucking up the local roads.

ROTFL :) May the force be with you. You'd need it :)

[Daryl]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
**In turth, I was kinda hoping some idiot Ranger driver would write-
off my Stagea at the nearby roundabout, so I could sue the council
for fucking up the local roads.

ROTFL :) May the force be with you. You'd need it :)

**Oh, I know there'd be no hope. A council planted tree dropped a 5
Tonne branch on my last Commodore. Squished it. I called the council and
asked for their insurance company details so I could make a claim on
their policy.
I suspect they still laugh about it.

In a way they are saving you money, if councils or Govts in general were
held accountable for their fuck ups they would have to double rates:-)

[Noddy]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
**In turth, I was kinda hoping some idiot Ranger driver would write-
off my Stagea at the nearby roundabout, so I could sue the council
for fucking up the local roads.

ROTFL :) May the force be with you. You'd need it :)

**Oh, I know there'd be no hope. A council planted tree dropped a 5
Tonne branch on my last Commodore. Squished it. I called the council and
asked for their insurance company details so I could make a claim on
their policy.
I suspect they still laugh about it.

They probably found it funny. Different situation though. If they own
the tree then they're liable for any damage it may cause, but they know
that you're not going to spend 10 grand going to court to sue them for
the loss of a 1500 buck Commodore so they just tell you to go fuck
yourself. Totally different story trying to sue them for being
responsible for a loss you've suffered at the hands of a fuckwit driver.

*That's* when they'd laugh.

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
That said, I was a bit surprised at the ride quality (in both
cars). Turns out the Lexus has those horrible run flat tyres.

They certainly are. Having suffered through two pairs on a BMW 135
I've been advising anyone who drives in Australia to *not* get them.
Loudly. They're great driving on a smooth surface, but as we know,
that's about 1% of roads in this wide brown land. And then there's
fucking speed humps. How are those bastards legal?

**Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things. For weeks I had to suffer with honking
from idiot Ranger drivers which seem to be able to hit speed humps at
almost any speed. A couple idiot ute drivers almost rear-ended me.
And the fucking local shopping centre has replaced some of theirs
with new ones. Fuck me, they are brutal things.
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed they
like. It's fucking nuts.

Righteous rant brother.
I've often if someone could sue the local clowncil if someone was
injured by a car breakage which was caused by a "traffic calmer".

**In turth, I was kinda hoping some idiot Ranger driver would write-off
my Stagea at the nearby roundabout, so I could sue the council for
fucking up the local roads.

LOL, almost zero chance of winning such a case, getting them to pay for
damage caused by potholes isn't easy so proving that a crash was caused
by the roads design would be near impossible.
My cousin's husband sued a council after gravel was left all over a
roundabout without any signage and he came off his motorbike, the
council blamed the contractor and he eventually won the case against the
contractor, council paid nothing.

It seems the local ute driving morons have

Post by Trevor Wilson
determined that proper cars need to slow down before driving over a
speed hump.

Post by alvey
Trivial Aside... In an episode of James Mays' new tv series, "Dull
Men",   he drove without stopping from one side of Milton Keynes (50km
from London) to t'other. MK being famous for almost exclusively using
roundabouts instead of traffic lights.

**Most interesting.

Roundabouts are everywhere in the UK, my youngest daughter in law is
from that part of the world and learned to drive there, her comments
about Australian drivers are generally something like "hopeless idiots",
she isn't wrong most of the time.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can recognise a
pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down, whilst a fucking ute
can careen through a roudabout at any speed they like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't handle
certain situations as well as others.

That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

[Daryl]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can recognise
a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down, whilst a fucking
ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed they like. It's
fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't handle
certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

I remember when we first got our WRX thinking that it was very low and
being worried about speed bumps etc but it actually wasn't particularly
low or prone to hitting anything with its lower parts, it looks like it
will hit but it usually didn't.
Certainly wouldn't drive over speed bumps like a 4WD but it didn't ride
that harshly that we needed to go over speed bumps very slowly.
The WRX Sti is a different beast though, very harsh ride and not all
that good as a daily driver.
I don't know the exact model Levorg Trev has but it sounds like its got
some Sti options or its been modified?

[Noddy]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed they
like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't handle
certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

I remember when we first got our WRX thinking that it was very low and
being worried about speed bumps etc but it actually wasn't particularly
low or prone to hitting anything with its lower parts, it looks like it
will hit but it usually didn't.
Certainly wouldn't drive over speed bumps like a 4WD but it didn't ride
that harshly that we needed to go over speed bumps very slowly.
The WRX Sti is a different beast though, very harsh ride and not all
that good as a daily driver.
I don't know the exact model Levorg Trev has but it sounds like its got
some Sti options or its been modified?

No idea. All I know is that he has a Levorg, but I have no idea what
model or if it's been modified in any way.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed they
like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't handle
certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

I remember when we first got our WRX thinking that it was very low and
being worried about speed bumps etc but it actually wasn't particularly
low or prone to hitting anything with its lower parts, it looks like it
will hit but it usually didn't.
Certainly wouldn't drive over speed bumps like a 4WD but it didn't ride
that harshly that we needed to go over speed bumps very slowly.
The WRX Sti is a different beast though, very harsh ride and not all
that good as a daily driver.
I don't know the exact model Levorg Trev has but it sounds like its got
some Sti options or its been modified?

**Nope. Bilstein shocks are standard, as are 40 profile tyres. As I
understand it, the fact that it is a wagon, is part of the problem.
Suspension travel is not as good as the sedan (WRX), hence ride comfort
was sacrificed. Very nice on a good road. Not so good over an uneven
surface. The Levorg STi merely had some pretty stickers, different
wheels, same rubber, same suspension, same engine/gearbox, etc. The only
performance difference was the addition of a crossmember across the
front suspension columns. The difference between the STi and the GT-S
(My car) was, IMO, insignificant. There MIGHT be a tiny difference
around a racetrack. Maybe.

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed
they like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

I remember when we first got our WRX thinking that it was very low and
being worried about speed bumps etc but it actually wasn't
particularly low or prone to hitting anything with its lower parts, it
looks like it will hit but it usually didn't.
Certainly wouldn't drive over speed bumps like a 4WD but it didn't
ride that harshly that we needed to go over speed bumps very slowly.
The WRX Sti is a different beast though, very harsh ride and not all
that good as a daily driver.
I don't know the exact model Levorg Trev has but it sounds like its
got some Sti options or its been modified?

**Nope. Bilstein shocks are standard, as are 40 profile tyres. As I
understand it, the fact that it is a wagon, is part of the problem.
Suspension travel is not as good as the sedan (WRX), hence ride comfort
was sacrificed. Very nice on a good road. Not so good over an uneven
surface. The Levorg STi merely had some pretty stickers, different
wheels, same rubber, same suspension, same engine/gearbox, etc. The only
performance difference was the addition of a crossmember across the
front suspension columns. The difference between the STi and the GT-S
(My car) was, IMO, insignificant. There MIGHT be a tiny difference
around a racetrack. Maybe.

Our WRX had 235/45X17 tyres, not quite as low profile as yours.
Wagon might also be a bit heavier which wouldn't help the ride.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed
they like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

I remember when we first got our WRX thinking that it was very low
and being worried about speed bumps etc but it actually wasn't
particularly low or prone to hitting anything with its lower parts,
it looks like it will hit but it usually didn't.
Certainly wouldn't drive over speed bumps like a 4WD but it didn't
ride that harshly that we needed to go over speed bumps very slowly.
The WRX Sti is a different beast though, very harsh ride and not all
that good as a daily driver.
I don't know the exact model Levorg Trev has but it sounds like its
got some Sti options or its been modified?

**Nope. Bilstein shocks are standard, as are 40 profile tyres. As I
understand it, the fact that it is a wagon, is part of the problem.
Suspension travel is not as good as the sedan (WRX), hence ride
comfort was sacrificed. Very nice on a good road. Not so good over an
uneven surface. The Levorg STi merely had some pretty stickers,
different wheels, same rubber, same suspension, same engine/gearbox,
etc. The only performance difference was the addition of a crossmember
across the front suspension columns. The difference between the STi
and the GT-S (My car) was, IMO, insignificant. There MIGHT be a tiny
difference around a racetrack. Maybe.

Our WRX had 235/45X17 tyres, not quite as low profile as yours.
Wagon might also be a bit heavier which wouldn't help the ride.

**Yeah, the wagon is 100kg heavier.

[Ralph]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can recognise
a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down, whilst a fucking
ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed they like. It's
fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't handle
certain situations as well as others.

What garbling twaddle. *Every* vehicle has "limitations" you babbling
nitwit. Your Ridiculous Ranger frinstance has one huge "limitation". You.

Post by Noddy
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

Right. So a consequence of Trevors' choice of car is the construction of
speed humps. What a blithering idiot you are.



alvey

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can recognise
a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down, whilst a fucking
ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed they like. It's
fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't handle
certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong. I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car. Now, the local
roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell me how that makes
any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want to buy a stupid
off-road vehicle, yet the council appears to be forcing residents to buy
them.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong.

You're a strange man :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car.

Uh-huh. So, take a crack at describing what constitutes a "proper car".

Post by Trevor Wilson
Now, the local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell
me how that makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want
to buy a stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be
forcing residents to buy them.
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where you
mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?

That's where it becomes *your* problem.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong.

You're a strange man :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car.

Uh-huh. So, take a crack at describing what constitutes a "proper car".

Post by Trevor Wilson
Now, the local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell
me how that makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want
to buy a stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be
forcing residents to buy them.
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where you
mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

[Xeno]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong.

You're a strange man :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car.

Uh-huh. So, take a crack at describing what constitutes a "proper car".

Post by Trevor Wilson
Now, the local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell
me how that makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want
to buy a stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be
forcing residents to buy them.
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where
you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Maybe it's the other way around, they are reacting to what ratepayers
*in your LGA* are *buying* and *using* on local roads.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Xeno

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong.

You're a strange man :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car.

Uh-huh. So, take a crack at describing what constitutes a "proper car".

Post by Trevor Wilson
Now, the local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell
me how that makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want
to buy a stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be
forcing residents to buy them.
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where
you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Maybe it's the other way around, they are reacting to what ratepayers
*in your LGA* are *buying* and *using* on local roads.

**Nope. The most popular car in my LGA is a Toyota Corolla (165),
followed by the Mazda 3 (127), then a Hilux (106), then an Hyundai i30
(97). I read it in the newspaper last week.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Xeno

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Maybe it's the other way around, they are reacting to what ratepayers
*in your LGA* are *buying* and *using* on local roads.

**Nope. The most popular car in my LGA is a Toyota Corolla (165),
followed by the Mazda 3 (127), then a Hilux (106), then an Hyundai i30
(97). I read it in the newspaper last week.

Which begs two questions: Firstly, (a) how many of those would qualify
as "proper cars", and (b) how many have the same trouble that you do?

[Xeno]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Xeno

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Maybe it's the other way around, they are reacting to what ratepayers
*in your LGA* are *buying* and *using* on local roads.

**Nope. The most popular car in my LGA is a Toyota Corolla (165),
followed by the Mazda 3 (127), then a Hilux (106), then an Hyundai i30
(97). I read it in the newspaper last week.

Which begs two questions: Firstly, (a) how many of those would qualify
as "proper cars", and (b) how many have the same trouble that you do?

Easy, (a) most of them and (b) most of them - sonce the majority are,
for the most part *cars*. Hilux drivers in the area would be more
sensible than Ranger drivers, they already proved that by buying a
*Toyota*.

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Xeno

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong.

You're a strange man :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car.

Uh-huh. So, take a crack at describing what constitutes a "proper car".

Post by Trevor Wilson
Now, the local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell
me how that makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want
to buy a stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be
forcing residents to buy them.
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where
you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Maybe it's the other way around, they are reacting to what ratepayers
*in your LGA* are *buying* and *using* on local roads.

**Nope. The most popular car in my LGA is a Toyota Corolla (165),
followed by the Mazda 3 (127), then a Hilux (106), then an Hyundai i30
(97). I read it in the newspaper last week.

Must be a very small LGA?
Those numbers are very low, even if you put a zero on the end of each of
those numbers its still not many vehicles?

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Xeno

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong.

You're a strange man :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car.

Uh-huh. So, take a crack at describing what constitutes a "proper car".

Post by Trevor Wilson
Now, the local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell
me how that makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want
to buy a stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be
forcing residents to buy them.
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part
where you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Maybe it's the other way around, they are reacting to what ratepayers
*in your LGA* are *buying* and *using* on local roads.

**Nope. The most popular car in my LGA is a Toyota Corolla (165),
followed by the Mazda 3 (127), then a Hilux (106), then an Hyundai i30
(97). I read it in the newspaper last week.

Must be a very small LGA?

**Oyster Bay: Population 5689.
Median age: 40 years.
Median household income: $159.530.00.
Per capita income: $71,855.00.

So yeah: Quite a small LGA. Which is how we like it. One road in and one
road out.

Post by Daryl
Those numbers are very low, even if you put a zero on the end of each of
those numbers its still not many vehicles?

**So?

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Xeno

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong.

You're a strange man :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car.

Uh-huh. So, take a crack at describing what constitutes a "proper car".

Post by Trevor Wilson
Now, the local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell
me how that makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want
to buy a stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be
forcing residents to buy them.
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part
where you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for
proper cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road
vehicles.

Maybe it's the other way around, they are reacting to what
ratepayers *in your LGA* are *buying* and *using* on local roads.

**Nope. The most popular car in my LGA is a Toyota Corolla (165),
followed by the Mazda 3 (127), then a Hilux (106), then an Hyundai
i30 (97). I read it in the newspaper last week.

Must be a very small LGA?

**Oyster Bay: Population 5689.

With that small a number I'm surprised its considered its own LGA.
I would think of a LGA as an area with the same post code, mine is
Moorabool 3340 and there are approx 40,000 people which is not a large
LGA by any standard.

Post by Trevor Wilson
Median age: 40 years.
Median household income: $159.530.00.
Per capita income: $71,855.00.
So yeah: Quite a small LGA. Which is how we like it. One road in and one
road out.

Post by Daryl
Those numbers are very low, even if you put a zero on the end of each
of those numbers its still not many vehicles?

**So?

The numbers are so small to not tell anyone very much.
I'd be interested in finding out where they got those numbers.
I can't find any data for my post code but if meaningless trivia
interests you the most common make in my street is Mercedes Benz, 4
including mine, there is even 2 Porsche, 4 utes of various makes and a
couple of work vans, a couple of Audi, only 3 Toyota that I can think
of, next door has a Tesla Model Y (I'll have to ask them to park the
ugly thing in their garage so as not to make the street look untidy:-))

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong.

You're a strange man :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car.

Uh-huh. So, take a crack at describing what constitutes a "proper car".

Post by Trevor Wilson
Now, the local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell
me how that makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want
to buy a stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be
forcing residents to buy them.
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where
you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Without seeing the speed bumps you refer to I generally don't have a
problem getting over them in either of our 2 "normal" cars and the Porsche.
The entrance into my local shopping centre has a short sharp speed bump
placed just before a blind corner which works well at stopping anyone
going too fast through that corner, IMHO it does what its intended to do
pretty well and its only a minor inconvenience.
It does seem silly to put speed bumps near a roundabout when the purpose
of the roundabout is to slow traffic, maybe its cheaper to install speed
bumps than redesign the roundabout to make it work properly.

[Noddy]

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Without seeing the speed bumps you refer to I generally don't have a
problem getting over them in either of our 2 "normal" cars and the Porsche.
The entrance into my local shopping centre has a short sharp speed bump
placed just before a blind corner which works well at stopping anyone
going too fast through that corner, IMHO it does what its intended to do
pretty well and its only a minor inconvenience.
It does seem silly to put speed bumps near a roundabout when the purpose
of the roundabout is to slow traffic, maybe its cheaper to install speed
bumps than redesign the roundabout to make it work properly.

Some locations are trouble regardless of what they do. Like the Bacchus
off-ramp that turns onto the Avenue of honour. There have been *heaps*
of prangs there where people come flying off and collect someone going
over the bridge heading into town. They've redsigned the intersection a
few times, and had to resort to putting rumble strips in the lead up to
it to draw people's attention to the fact that they're approaching a
Give Way sign and need to stop if necessary.

I imagine the majority of "proper cars" have no problem at all in the
area Trevor describes, and he's just resorting to ridiculousness because
he can no longer sail through the intersection what whatever the fuck
speed he feels like.

[Xeno]

Post by Noddy

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Without seeing the speed bumps you refer to I generally don't have a
problem getting over them in either of our 2 "normal" cars and the Porsche.
The entrance into my local shopping centre has a short sharp speed
bump placed just before a blind corner which works well at stopping
anyone going too fast through that corner, IMHO it does what its
intended to do pretty well and its only a minor inconvenience.
It does seem silly to put speed bumps near a roundabout when the
purpose of the roundabout is to slow traffic, maybe its cheaper to
install speed bumps than redesign the roundabout to make it work
properly.

Some locations are trouble regardless of what they do. Like the Bacchus
off-ramp that turns onto the Avenue of honour. There have been *heaps*
of prangs there where people come flying off and collect someone going
over the bridge heading into town. They've redsigned the intersection a
few times, and had to resort to putting rumble strips in the lead up to
it to draw people's attention to the fact that they're approaching a
Give Way sign and need to stop if necessary.

The problem is not the road, it's the clowns and idiots who live in your
area - bogans in boganville. The biggest problem your local council has
is that the bogans are like Lemmings, they breed, are uneducable, and
have a death wish.

Post by Noddy
I imagine the majority of "proper cars" have no problem at all in the

You cannot imagine somewhere you have never been. I, on the other hand,
know the intersection of which you speak and have been there, the last
time in December 2019. I had no issue with the intersection, I was made
aware it was an *off-ramp*, the exit sign with speed limit being a
fairly big hint. I don't know what a give way and a stop sign means to
you bogans but to me it's fairly clear what is required of me. I repeat,
I had no issue with the intersection.

Post by Noddy
area Trevor describes, and he's just resorting to ridiculousness because
he can no longer sail through the intersection what whatever the fuck
speed he feels like.

Trevor made it quite clear the reasons why his intersection was
dangerous and it's because his area too is riddled with bogans in
behemoths. Bogans with attitude - the *wrong* attitude.

[Daryl]

Post by Noddy

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Without seeing the speed bumps you refer to I generally don't have a
problem getting over them in either of our 2 "normal" cars and the Porsche.
The entrance into my local shopping centre has a short sharp speed
bump placed just before a blind corner which works well at stopping
anyone going too fast through that corner, IMHO it does what its
intended to do pretty well and its only a minor inconvenience.
It does seem silly to put speed bumps near a roundabout when the
purpose of the roundabout is to slow traffic, maybe its cheaper to
install speed bumps than redesign the roundabout to make it work
properly.

Some locations are trouble regardless of what they do. Like the Bacchus
off-ramp that turns onto the Avenue of honour. There have been *heaps*
of prangs there where people come flying off and collect someone going
over the bridge heading into town. They've redsigned the intersection a
few times, and had to resort to putting rumble strips in the lead up to
it to draw people's attention to the fact that they're approaching a
Give Way sign and need to stop if necessary.

Just proves how crap too many drivers are, they can't see the car they
are supposed to give way to if they don't bother to look, I approach
that intersection very carefully, same on Hopetoun Park Rd Western Fwy
exit, I've almost been hit several times by people not even bothering to
look as they exit the fwy.

Post by Noddy
I imagine the majority of "proper cars" have no problem at all in the
area Trevor describes, and he's just resorting to ridiculousness because
he can no longer sail through the intersection what whatever the fuck
speed he feels like.

Hard to tell without seeing it but having owned a couple of Hilux one
being a 4WD I know that hitting a speed bump at speed isn't a pleasant
experience and its not good for the suspension, they certainly aren't
designed to fly over speed bumps especially those with leaf spring solid
axle rear suspension.
Might get away with it in something like a Range Rover which has long
travel coils on each corner but hitting a speed bump at speed in a leaf
sprung live axle Ranger is going to be uncomfortable.
Trev might believe it but the majority of utes aren't even 4WD, for
example the 2WD Workmate single cab used to be the top selling Hilux.

[Xeno]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Without seeing the speed bumps you refer to I generally don't have a
problem getting over them in either of our 2 "normal" cars and the Porsche.
The entrance into my local shopping centre has a short sharp speed
bump placed just before a blind corner which works well at stopping
anyone going too fast through that corner, IMHO it does what its
intended to do pretty well and its only a minor inconvenience.
It does seem silly to put speed bumps near a roundabout when the
purpose of the roundabout is to slow traffic, maybe its cheaper to
install speed bumps than redesign the roundabout to make it work
properly.

Some locations are trouble regardless of what they do. Like the
Bacchus off-ramp that turns onto the Avenue of honour. There have been
*heaps* of prangs there where people come flying off and collect
someone going over the bridge heading into town. They've redsigned the
intersection a few times, and had to resort to putting rumble strips
in the lead up to it to draw people's attention to the fact that
they're approaching a Give Way sign and need to stop if necessary.

Just proves how crap too many drivers are, they can't see the car they
are supposed to give way to if they don't bother to look, I approach

If you live in Boganville, expect Bogans.

Post by Daryl
that intersection very carefully, same on Hopetoun Park Rd Western Fwy

Should be approaching *all* intersections carefully.

Post by Daryl
exit, I've almost been hit several times by people not even bothering to
look as they exit the fwy.

If you live in Boganville, expect Bogans.

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
I imagine the majority of "proper cars" have no problem at all in the
area Trevor describes, and he's just resorting to ridiculousness
because he can no longer sail through the intersection what whatever
the fuck speed he feels like.

Hard to tell without seeing it but having owned a couple of Hilux one
being a 4WD I know that hitting a speed bump at speed isn't a pleasant
experience and its not good for the suspension, they certainly aren't
designed to fly over speed bumps especially those with leaf spring solid
axle rear suspension.

Precisely, they are designed to carry loads over uncertain terrain. It's
how my brother used his Hilux 4x4 when he was doing concreting jobs all
over the place.

Post by Daryl
Might get away with it in something like a Range Rover which has long
travel coils on each corner but hitting a speed bump at speed in a leaf
sprung live axle Ranger is going to be uncomfortable.

Not designed for speed, designed for load carrying hence the horsecart
rear end. Also designed to maintain ground clearance - even when loaded.

Post by Daryl
Trev might believe it but the majority of utes aren't even 4WD, for
example the 2WD Workmate single cab used to be the top selling Hilux.

2WD utes are a dying breed. Everyone wants a fourby. For instance, I see
quite a few Navaras around but only one was a 2x4. Ditto with Hiluxes.

[Noddy]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
Some locations are trouble regardless of what they do. Like the
Bacchus off-ramp that turns onto the Avenue of honour. There have been
*heaps* of prangs there where people come flying off and collect
someone going over the bridge heading into town. They've redsigned the
intersection a few times, and had to resort to putting rumble strips
in the lead up to it to draw people's attention to the fact that
they're approaching a Give Way sign and need to stop if necessary.

Just proves how crap too many drivers are, they can't see the car they
are supposed to give way to if they don't bother to look, I approach
that intersection very carefully, same on Hopetoun Park Rd Western Fwy
exit, I've almost been hit several times by people not even bothering to
look as they exit the fwy.

There's some utter fuckwits out there. Had a few close calls and got
some amusing dashcam vids.

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
I imagine the majority of "proper cars" have no problem at all in the
area Trevor describes, and he's just resorting to ridiculousness
because he can no longer sail through the intersection what whatever
the fuck speed he feels like.

Hard to tell without seeing it but having owned a couple of Hilux one
being a 4WD I know that hitting a speed bump at speed isn't a pleasant
experience and its not good for the suspension, they certainly aren't
designed to fly over speed bumps especially those with leaf spring solid
axle rear suspension.

I think anyone in *any* vehicle that drives over a speed bump at speed
is retarded.

Post by Daryl
Might get away with it in something like a Range Rover which has long
travel coils on each corner but hitting a speed bump at speed in a leaf
sprung live axle Ranger is going to be uncomfortable.

It sure is. My kid's Elantra goes over them better than the Ranger does.
But then the Elantra is a "proper car". Not one with ultra low profile
tyres or shocks that are unsuitable for anything but the race track :)

Post by Daryl
Trev might believe it but the majority of utes aren't even 4WD, for
example the 2WD Workmate single cab used to be the top selling Hilux.

My Ranger is a 4wd. Actually it's both 4WD and AWD as it can be used in
AWD on asphalt but also has a selectable low and high range 4WD option.
But I never go off-road and it lives permanently in 2WD. I have zero
interest in ever going off road, and if they made a 2WD version I would
have bought one.

But they don't.

[alvey]

Post by Noddy

Post by Daryl
Just proves how crap too many drivers are, they can't see the car they
are supposed to give way to if they don't bother to look, I approach
that intersection very carefully, same on Hopetoun Park Rd Western Fwy
exit, I've almost been hit several times by people not even bothering
to look as they exit the fwy.

There's some utter fuckwits out there.

Said the Man of Many Crashes(*).
Like the, "130mph in the pissing rain at 2am" crash. Buffoon.


alvey
(*) Claimed, but unsubstatiated.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Noddy

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Without seeing the speed bumps you refer to I generally don't have a
problem getting over them in either of our 2 "normal" cars and the Porsche.
The entrance into my local shopping centre has a short sharp speed
bump placed just before a blind corner which works well at stopping
anyone going too fast through that corner, IMHO it does what its
intended to do pretty well and its only a minor inconvenience.
It does seem silly to put speed bumps near a roundabout when the
purpose of the roundabout is to slow traffic, maybe its cheaper to
install speed bumps than redesign the roundabout to make it work
properly.

Some locations are trouble regardless of what they do. Like the Bacchus
off-ramp that turns onto the Avenue of honour. There have been *heaps*
of prangs there where people come flying off and collect someone going
over the bridge heading into town. They've redsigned the intersection a
few times, and had to resort to putting rumble strips in the lead up to
it to draw people's attention to the fact that they're approaching a
Give Way sign and need to stop if necessary.
I imagine the majority of "proper cars" have no problem at all in the
area Trevor describes, and he's just resorting to ridiculousness because
he can no longer sail through the intersection what whatever the fuck
speed he feels like.

**Wrong. I've watched proper cars traverse the speed humps. They ALL
slow down to around 10kph. Rangers and other idiotic vehicles can hit
the speed humps at 50kph easy. All the speed humps manage to do, is to
slow down proper cars and allow idiotic vehicles to drive through at
relatively high speeds.

IOW: The speed humps are useless.

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson
**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

Without seeing the speed bumps you refer to I generally don't have a
problem getting over them in either of our 2 "normal" cars and the Porsche.
The entrance into my local shopping centre has a short sharp speed
bump placed just before a blind corner which works well at stopping
anyone going too fast through that corner, IMHO it does what its
intended to do pretty well and its only a minor inconvenience.
It does seem silly to put speed bumps near a roundabout when the
purpose of the roundabout is to slow traffic, maybe its cheaper to
install speed bumps than redesign the roundabout to make it work
properly.

Some locations are trouble regardless of what they do. Like the
Bacchus off-ramp that turns onto the Avenue of honour. There have been
*heaps* of prangs there where people come flying off and collect
someone going over the bridge heading into town. They've redsigned the
intersection a few times, and had to resort to putting rumble strips
in the lead up to it to draw people's attention to the fact that
they're approaching a Give Way sign and need to stop if necessary.
I imagine the majority of "proper cars" have no problem at all in the
area Trevor describes, and he's just resorting to ridiculousness
because he can no longer sail through the intersection what whatever
the fuck speed he feels like.

**Wrong. I've watched proper cars traverse the speed humps. They ALL
slow down to around 10kph. Rangers and other idiotic vehicles can hit
the speed humps at 50kph easy. All the speed humps manage to do, is to
slow down proper cars and allow idiotic vehicles to drive through at
relatively high speeds.
IOW: The speed humps are useless.

Made worse by silly low profile tyres, they don't do anything for
handling, its most about looks at the expensive of ride quality.
Also not much effort by suspension designers doesn't help either, to
reduce body roll they just stiffen everything up instead of putting some
effort into matching spring and damper rates, it is possible to have
good ride with good handling if they put a bit of effort into it.
If you think that low profile tyres are good for handling then why don't
race cars use them?
Very uncommon to see low profile tyres at a race track.
Daughter in laws Merc has Low profile tyres and the ride is too harsh.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where
you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

You know Trev, I find you to be a really mixed bag. On occasion you make
some awesome posts which are a great read, yet other times you come
across as a total nutbag.

This is one of those nutbag occasions :)

[Xeno]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where
you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

You know Trev, I find you to be a really mixed bag. On occasion you make
some awesome posts which are a great read, yet other times you come
across as a total nutbag.

You know Darren, I find you to be a really consistent bag - of lies.

Post by Noddy
This is one of those nutbag occasions :)

You *only* have nutbag occasions.

[Daryl]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where
you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

You know Trev, I find you to be a really mixed bag. On occasion you make
some awesome posts which are a great read, yet other times you come
across as a total nutbag.
This is one of those nutbag occasions :)

LOL, agree.
I rarely see "oversized off-road vehicles" anywhere in Melb but then I
wouldn't expect to see than many Unimogs driving around the suburbs.
I recently drove a new Ram, whilst its supposedly a 4WD and it is pretty
big I doubt that its all that capable off road, its 4WD might get you
out of a bit of mud but its certainly not an "off road vehicle".

[Xeno]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where
you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

You know Trev, I find you to be a really mixed bag. On occasion you
make some awesome posts which are a great read, yet other times you
come across as a total nutbag.
This is one of those nutbag occasions :)

LOL, agree.
I rarely see "oversized off-road vehicles" anywhere in Melb but then I
wouldn't expect to see than many Unimogs driving around the suburbs.
I recently drove a new Ram, whilst its supposedly a 4WD and it is pretty
big I doubt that its all that capable off road, its 4WD might get you
out of a bit of mud but its certainly not an "off road vehicle".

You might find they are more designed for *towing*. In the bush a RAM
tends to be too wide.

[Noddy]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy
You know Trev, I find you to be a really mixed bag. On occasion you
make some awesome posts which are a great read, yet other times you
come across as a total nutbag.
This is one of those nutbag occasions :)

LOL, agree.
I rarely see "oversized off-road vehicles" anywhere in Melb but then I
wouldn't expect to see than many Unimogs driving around the suburbs.

Same :)

Post by Daryl
I recently drove a new Ram, whilst its supposedly a 4WD and it is pretty
big I doubt that its all that capable off road, its 4WD might get you
out of a bit of mud but its certainly not an "off road vehicle".

Given his strange perception of a "proper car" it would be interesting
to see what qualifies as an "oversized off-road vehicle".

[alvey]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
Don't get me started. The local council snuck a few in at nearby
roudabouts a few years back. Thanks to the 40 profile tyres and
brutal Bilstein shocks in the Levorg, I have to slow down to 5kph to
negotiate the fucking things

Don't see an issue here? Cool. I'll help you out. See the part where
you mentioned "40 profile tyres and brutal Bilstein shocks"?
That's where it becomes *your* problem.

**Nope. The council DELIBERATELY made the road unsuitable for proper
cars, preferring to see rate payers buy oversized off-road vehicles.

You know Trev, I find you to be a really mixed bag. On occasion you make
some awesome posts which are a great read, yet other times you come
across as a total nutbag.
This is one of those nutbag occasions :)

Odd that Fraudster, a Real Man who sneers at society and government
interference has no problem with these blatant Nanny State speed humps.



alvey

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed they
like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't handle
certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong. I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car. Now, the local
roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell me how that makes
any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want to buy a stupid off-
road vehicle, yet the council appears to be forcing residents to buy them.

Obviously the purpose of speed bumps is to slow vehicles down, 4WD's may
be able to go over them faster than a lower car but that will come at a
cost, uncomfortable ride and increased suspension wear so a sensible
4WDer would slow down.
Maybe you should be blaming hoons in turbo cars or drivers in general
for speeding, I see too many drivers in all sorts of vehicles treat
roundabouts like a chicane on a racetrack so its no wonder councils feel
the need to do something.
I don't like speed bumps but I like idiot drivers even less.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed
they like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong. I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car. Now, the
local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell me how that
makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want to buy a stupid
off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be forcing residents to
buy them.

Obviously the purpose of speed bumps is to slow vehicles down, 4WD's may
be able to go over them faster than a lower car but that will come at a
cost, uncomfortable ride and increased suspension wear so a sensible
4WDer would slow down.

**Except that such vehicles are designed for off-road use, not driving
around the suburbs.

Post by Daryl
Maybe you should be blaming hoons in turbo cars or drivers in general
for speeding,

**As I said, I have almost been rear-ended by Rangers (or similar).
Proper cars have to slow down. Rangers don't. They are just driven by
aggressive, stupid cunts. They expect me to be able to drive over speed
humps at 50+kph. I cannot.

I see too many drivers in all sorts of vehicles treat

Post by Daryl
roundabouts like a chicane on a racetrack so its no wonder councils feel
the need to do something.

**The explain why they slow down proper cars, but don't slow down
off-road vehicles one bit. I will remind you that off-road vehicles
cause more damage to other road users than proper cars.

Post by Daryl
I don't like speed bumps but I like idiot drivers even less.

**True that.

[Xeno]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed
they like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong. I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car. Now, the
local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell me how that
makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want to buy a
stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be forcing
residents to buy them.

Obviously the purpose of speed bumps is to slow vehicles down, 4WD's
may be able to go over them faster than a lower car but that will come
at a cost, uncomfortable ride and increased suspension wear so a
sensible 4WDer would slow down.

**Except that such vehicles are designed for off-road use, not driving
around the suburbs.

Post by Daryl
Maybe you should be blaming hoons in turbo cars or drivers in general
for speeding,

**As I said, I have almost been rear-ended by Rangers (or similar).
Proper cars have to slow down. Rangers don't. They are just driven by
aggressive, stupid cunts. They expect me to be able to drive over speed

Yep, that describes Darren, in part.

Post by Trevor Wilson
humps at 50+kph. I cannot.
 I see too many drivers in all sorts of vehicles treat

Post by Daryl
roundabouts like a chicane on a racetrack so its no wonder councils
feel the need to do something.

**The explain why they slow down proper cars, but don't slow down off-
road vehicles one bit. I will remind you that off-road vehicles cause
more damage to other road users than proper cars.

Post by Daryl
I don't like speed bumps but I like idiot drivers even less.

**True that.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl
Obviously the purpose of speed bumps is to slow vehicles down, 4WD's
may be able to go over them faster than a lower car but that will come
at a cost, uncomfortable ride and increased suspension wear so a
sensible 4WDer would slow down.

**Except that such vehicles are designed for off-road use, not driving
around the suburbs.

Actually Trevor if you took your nonsensical blinkers off you'd find
that they're designed to do both.

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl
Maybe you should be blaming hoons in turbo cars or drivers in general
for speeding,

**As I said, I have almost been rear-ended by Rangers (or similar).
Proper cars have to slow down. Rangers don't. They are just driven by
aggressive, stupid cunts. They expect me to be able to drive over speed
humps at 50+kph. I cannot.

Have a word with Alvey. He'll give you all the help you need at being an
attention seeking twat when it comes to slowing down for speed humps :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
 I see too many drivers in all sorts of vehicles treat

Post by Daryl
roundabouts like a chicane on a racetrack so its no wonder councils
feel the need to do something.

**The explain why they slow down proper cars, but don't slow down off-
road vehicles one bit. I will remind you that off-road vehicles cause
more damage to other road users than proper cars.

And how the fuck do you work that out?

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed
they like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong. I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided to
deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car. Now, the
local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell me how that
makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want to buy a
stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be forcing
residents to buy them.

Obviously the purpose of speed bumps is to slow vehicles down, 4WD's
may be able to go over them faster than a lower car but that will come
at a cost, uncomfortable ride and increased suspension wear so a
sensible 4WDer would slow down.

**Except that such vehicles are designed for off-road use, not driving
around the suburbs.

Which vehicles do you have in mind?
Landcruisers etc and 4WD utes are dual purpose so whilst they have some
off road capability they are also designed for general use, suggesting
that they are not designed for driving around the suburbs is nonsense.

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl
Maybe you should be blaming hoons in turbo cars or drivers in general
for speeding,

**As I said, I have almost been rear-ended by Rangers (or similar).
Proper cars have to slow down. Rangers don't. They are just driven by
aggressive, stupid cunts. They expect me to be able to drive over speed
humps at 50+kph. I cannot.
 I see too many drivers in all sorts of vehicles treat

Post by Daryl
roundabouts like a chicane on a racetrack so its no wonder councils
feel the need to do something.

**The explain why they slow down proper cars,

Tell me again what is a "proper car"?
A car like your Levorg is more or less a WRX wagon and WRX's are more
sports cars then "proper cars".
Each vehicle has compromises, you buy a sports car because you like the
way it drives but that has many compromises such as a stiffer ride and
lower ride height which can be a problem on poor roads.
My Boxster and Benz are very different, the Boxster goes around corners
like its on rails, the Benz isn't as good at handling but it has a nicer
ride, the Benz is also very quiet, the Boxster is quite noisy.
Take the Boxster if you want to have some fun or the Benz if you want a
smooth quiet cruise, horses for courses.


but don't slow down off-

Post by Trevor Wilson
road vehicles one bit.

I will remind you that off-road vehicles cause

Post by Trevor Wilson
more damage to other road users than proper cars.

For a start they are not "off road vehicles", a Ranger is okay off road
but they aren't in the same league as a Landcruiser or Patrol.
EV's being very heavy do even more damage than a "proper car" but you
seem to think that they are okay?

[Xeno]

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
So, now we have a situation where a VERY safe car (which can
recognise a pedestrian and brake automatically) must slow down,
whilst a fucking ute can careen through a roudabout at any speed
they like. It's fucking nuts.

Actually Trev, it's driving a car with limitations that doesn't
handle certain situations as well as others.
That's a consequence of your choice, and no one else is to blame for that.

**Wrong. I bought the Levorg long before the local council decided
to deliberately make the roads unsuitable for a proper car. Now, the
local roads are more suitable for OFF ROAD vehicles. Tell me how
that makes any kind of sense in this universe. I don't want to buy a
stupid off- road vehicle, yet the council appears to be forcing
residents to buy them.

Obviously the purpose of speed bumps is to slow vehicles down, 4WD's
may be able to go over them faster than a lower car but that will
come at a cost, uncomfortable ride and increased suspension wear so a
sensible 4WDer would slow down.

**Except that such vehicles are designed for off-road use, not driving
around the suburbs.

Which vehicles do you have in mind?
Landcruisers etc and 4WD utes are dual purpose so whilst they have some
off road capability they are also designed for general use, suggesting
that they are not designed for driving around the suburbs is nonsense.

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Daryl
Maybe you should be blaming hoons in turbo cars or drivers in general
for speeding,

**As I said, I have almost been rear-ended by Rangers (or similar).
Proper cars have to slow down. Rangers don't. They are just driven by
aggressive, stupid cunts. They expect me to be able to drive over
speed humps at 50+kph. I cannot.
  I see too many drivers in all sorts of vehicles treat

Post by Daryl
roundabouts like a chicane on a racetrack so its no wonder councils
feel the need to do something.

**The explain why they slow down proper cars,

Tell me again what is a "proper car"?
A car like your Levorg is more or less a WRX wagon and WRX's are more
sports cars then "proper cars".

Nope, a WRX is a proper car, as is a Levorg - the 4 or 5 doors, 4 or 5
passengers give the game away.

Post by Daryl
Each vehicle has compromises, you buy a sports car because you like the
way it drives but that has many compromises such as a stiffer ride and
lower ride height which can be a problem on poor roads.

Trev lives in an *inner urban* environment.

Post by Daryl
My Boxster and Benz are very different, the Boxster goes around corners
like its on rails, the Benz isn't as good at handling but it has a nicer
ride, the Benz is also very quiet, the Boxster is quite noisy.
Take the Boxster if you want to have some fun or the Benz if you want a
smooth quiet cruise, horses for courses.

How you love massaging your ego.

Post by Daryl
 but don't slow down off-

Post by Trevor Wilson
road vehicles one bit.

 I will remind you that off-road vehicles cause

Post by Trevor Wilson
more damage to other road users than proper cars.

For a start they are not "off road vehicles", a Ranger is okay off road
but they aren't in the same league as a Landcruiser or Patrol.

Rangers are designed to be a 4WD, no ifs or buts. SUVs, on the other
hand, are not. They are occasional off-bitumen road but are usually
limited to gravel and sometimes dirt roads because most do not have the
necessary ground clearance.

Post by Daryl
EV's being very heavy do even more damage than a "proper car" but you
seem to think that they are okay?

Red herring!

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

I think it's more a case of Renault wanting out rather than Nissan
looking to dump them. Nissan is a liability to Renault.

Post by Trevor Wilson
**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more. There
is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

For 14 thousand bucks extra, it would *want* to.

[Daryl]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

I think it's more a case of Renault wanting out rather than Nissan
looking to dump them. Nissan is a liability to Renault.

Post by Trevor Wilson
**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more.
There is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

For 14 thousand bucks extra, it would *want* to.

Lexus has combined power of 254kw compared to the Mazda's 209kw, when
you read the specs they sound like very different hybrid systems, Mazda
describe theirs as "M Hybrid Boost 48V" so no wonder it felt different.

[Xeno]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

I think it's more a case of Renault wanting out rather than Nissan
looking to dump them. Nissan is a liability to Renault.

Post by Trevor Wilson
**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more.
There is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

For 14 thousand bucks extra, it would *want* to.

Lexus has combined power of 254kw compared to the Mazda's 209kw, when
you read the specs they sound like very different hybrid systems, Mazda
describe theirs as "M Hybrid Boost 48V" so no wonder it felt different.

It felt different because it is different. Not comparable to the Toyota
series in any way with the exception of the use of an ISG. The M Hybrid
Boost 48v is a *mild hybrid system* and, as such, only supports an IC
engine with a single motor that combines functionality as an ISG. This is a
Mazda system. Toyota does not make mild hybrids in their general fleet.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/a36331077/48-volt-hybrid-system-explained

Toyota uses the hybrid synergy drive system. System voltages get up to 650
volts to feed, in most cases, 2 motors and sometimes 3. One of the motors,
MG1, serves as an ISG, the other(s) as regenerative motors. That means the
synergy drive system can run on battery alone or any combination of ICE and
motor. MG2 is the secret sauce to the Toyota hybrid system aided and
abetted by the much higher voltages available. The Toyota synergy drive
system is far superior to the Mazda and other mild hybrid systems but all
have their place. This is why Toyota is able to licence its hybrid system
to other marques even if, as in the case of Mazda, they have their own
system. Trevor’s experience with the Lexus merely serves to illustrate the
point.

[Noddy]

Post by Daryl

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson
**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more.
There is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels
far better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me
when I stomped on the accelerator of each car.

For 14 thousand bucks extra, it would *want* to.

Lexus has combined power of 254kw compared to the Mazda's 209kw, when
you read the specs they sound like very different hybrid systems, Mazda
describe theirs as "M Hybrid Boost 48V" so no wonder it felt different.

Indeed.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

I think it's more a case of Renault wanting out rather than Nissan
looking to dump them. Nissan is a liability to Renault.

Post by Trevor Wilson
**You'd think. However, I test drove a Mazda CX-80 and the equivalent
Lexus (LS-450h+, I think), back to back. The Lexus cost $14k more.
There is a WORLD of difference between the Lexus and the Mazda. The
integration between the Electric motor and the petrol engine feels far
better resolved in the Lexus. At least that's how it felt to me when I
stomped on the accelerator of each car.

For 14 thousand bucks extra, it would *want* to.

**14 Grand in a $100k car is not a huge jump. $14k is a $50k car is.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
For 14 thousand bucks extra, it would *want* to.

**14 Grand in a $100k car is not a huge jump. $14k is a $50k car is.

ROTFL :)

So if there was a 14% tax imposed on cars valued at a hundred large that
would be okay because it's not huge according to you?

I really struggle to work you out sometimes :)

[Xeno]

Post by Noddy

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Noddy
For 14 thousand bucks extra, it would *want* to.

**14 Grand in a $100k car is not a huge jump. $14k is a $50k car is.

ROTFL :)
So if there was a 14% tax imposed on cars valued at a hundred large that
would be okay because it's not huge according to you?

Not when the $14k is bringing you extra *value*. From what Trev has penned
he sees the enhanced drive experience as worth the extra $14k. You, on the
other hand see the price of everything, the value of nothing.

Post by Noddy
I really struggle to work you out sometimes :)

You would have that problem with everyone smarter than you. Hint: that’s
most of the people in the world.
What’s more, truth and honesty are a real struggle for you.

____
Xeno

[Clocky]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that needs
to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent vehicle
in decades and it's holding Renault back.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that needs
to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent vehicle
in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea

I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi. It makes
Commodores of the same age look like tractors.

Or these?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Skyline_GT-R

I understand that the current model is a most formidable sports car.

Or these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_370Z

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-
start- talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent
vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi.

**....of the time. And I don't just mean performance. I mean the
refinement, sophistication and features.

[Xeno]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-
start- talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent
vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi.

**....of the time. And I don't just mean performance. I mean the
refinement, sophistication and features.

Nissan began its downward trend when it was bought out by Renault in
~1999 because Nissan was broke. By 2005 the shit had hit the fan and
Nissan quality plummeted from its already low base.

[Xeno]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-
start- talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent
vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi. It makes
Commodores of the same age look like tractors.
Or these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Skyline_GT-R
I understand that the current model is a most formidable sports car.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_370Z

Nissan was Ok in the past but you are showing vehicles which had much of
their development done before 2000. The last 20 years has been a very
downward trend for Nissan and now the company's credit rating is junk
status as of last year - that will totally cripple any further
development in future so Nissan can only go downhill from here unless it
finds a wealthy benefactor with money to burn. Maybe the Chinese will
buy up the brand just to get western market penetration.

Jeep was ok too - until 2000, same as Nissan. Now both Nissan and Jeep
look like being confined to the dustbins of history.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky
You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent
vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi. It makes
Commodores of the same age look like tractors.

ROTFL :)

You *really* have NFI here.....

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-
start- talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent
vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi. It makes
Commodores of the same age look like tractors.

23yrs old so not relevant.

Post by Trevor Wilson
Or these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Skyline_GT-R
I understand that the current model is a most formidable sports car.

They are awesome cars but they aren't made in big numbers

Post by Trevor Wilson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_370Z

A mate owns a 1989 300ZX TT, nice car to look at and drive but like the
370Z they didn't sell all that well because they are bastards of things
to work on.
They are also halo models and not volume sellers and volume sellers are
what keeps car companies in business.

[alvey]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start- talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent
vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi.

Really? I thought you once said that your Stagea 0-100kph was 6.0s. Is
that a correct recollection?

Post by Trevor Wilson
It makes Commodores of the same age look like tractors.

Tractors were bigger. And had a better build quality...
They've just about disappeared from our roads, but those Commodes must
have had the worst paint jobs in Oz history. They absolutely dominated
the Faded and Rusting section of the used shitheap market.


alvey

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-
start- talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent
vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi.

Really? I thought you once said that your Stagea 0-100kph was 6.0s. Is
that a correct recollection?

**I added a correction. I was not referring solely to acceleration, but
the entire car, which includes:

51:49 weight distribution
All wheel drive
An absolutely gorgeous engine
Fabulous reliability
An air conditioner (climate control system) that is the best I've ever
experienced.
Sat nav
Mirrors that turn down, when reversing to show the gutter.
Reversing camera
HID headlights (levelling adjustable from the dash)
Smooth and quiet to drive
Etc etc

I was referring to the whole package. Acceleration is decent (for a 2001
wagon), but certainly not amazing. FWI: It is sub 6 secs to 100kph. It's
a great car to drive.

If Nissan bothered to import them to Oz, I reckon Holden and Ford sales
of wagons would have ceased overnight.

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
It makes Commodores of the same age look like tractors.

Tractors were bigger. And had a better build quality...
They've just about disappeared from our roads, but those Commodes must
have had the worst paint jobs in Oz history. They absolutely dominated
the Faded and Rusting section of the used shitheap market.

**You just reminded me. The Stagea sits outside all the time (as it did
with the previous owner). The paintwork is still perfect.

[alvey]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-
start- talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent
vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi.

Really? I thought you once said that your Stagea 0-100kph was 6.0s. Is
that a correct recollection?

**I added a correction. I was not referring solely to acceleration, but
51:49 weight distribution
All wheel drive
An absolutely gorgeous engine
Fabulous reliability
An air conditioner (climate control system) that is the best I've ever
experienced.
Sat nav
Mirrors that turn down, when reversing to show the gutter.
Reversing camera
HID headlights (levelling adjustable from the dash)
Smooth and quiet to drive
Etc etc
I was referring to the whole package. Acceleration is decent (for a 2001
wagon), but certainly not amazing. FWI: It is sub 6 secs to 100kph. It's
a great car to drive.

Fairy Nuff.

If GMH was still making (subsidised) Holdens they probably wouldn't be
as good as that 23yo package.

Post by Trevor Wilson
If Nissan bothered to import them to Oz, I reckon Holden and Ford sales
of wagons would have ceased overnight.

The Free Market is a myth.

[Daryl]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-
start- talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a decent
vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi.

Really? I thought you once said that your Stagea 0-100kph was 6.0s. Is
that a correct recollection?

**I added a correction. I was not referring solely to acceleration, but
51:49 weight distribution
All wheel drive
An absolutely gorgeous engine
Fabulous reliability
An air conditioner (climate control system) that is the best I've ever
experienced.
Sat nav
Mirrors that turn down, when reversing to show the gutter.
Reversing camera
HID headlights (levelling adjustable from the dash)
Smooth and quiet to drive
Etc etc
I was referring to the whole package. Acceleration is decent (for a 2001
wagon), but certainly not amazing. FWI: It is sub 6 secs to 100kph. It's
a great car to drive.
If Nissan bothered to import them to Oz, I reckon Holden and Ford sales
of wagons would have ceased overnight.

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
It makes Commodores of the same age look like tractors.

Tractors were bigger. And had a better build quality...
They've just about disappeared from our roads, but those Commodes must
have had the worst paint jobs in Oz history. They absolutely dominated
the Faded and Rusting section of the used shitheap market.

**You just reminded me. The Stagea sits outside all the time (as it did
with the previous owner). The paintwork is still perfect.

I doubt that they would sell all that well simply because they not a
good looking car, I'd even call them ugly, that shouldn't matter but
many people are dumb enough to buy cars because they look good and don't
care about the most important things.
If Nissan had imported and sold them locally I'd also expect them to be
pretty expensive.

[Trevor Wilson]

Post by Daryl

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Clocky

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-
start- talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Two failing companies merging, that should go well.  LOL

**I dunno. When Nissan dumps Renault, things may turn around for them.

You have that the wrong way around. Nissan is the boat anchor that
needs to be cut loose. Nissan haven't consistently produced a
decent vehicle in decades and it's holding Renault back.

**Really? How about these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi.

Really? I thought you once said that your Stagea 0-100kph was 6.0s.
Is that a correct recollection?

**I added a correction. I was not referring solely to acceleration,
51:49 weight distribution
All wheel drive
An absolutely gorgeous engine
Fabulous reliability
An air conditioner (climate control system) that is the best I've ever
experienced.
Sat nav
Mirrors that turn down, when reversing to show the gutter.
Reversing camera
HID headlights (levelling adjustable from the dash)
Smooth and quiet to drive
Etc etc
I was referring to the whole package. Acceleration is decent (for a
2001 wagon), but certainly not amazing. FWI: It is sub 6 secs to
100kph. It's a great car to drive.
If Nissan bothered to import them to Oz, I reckon Holden and Ford
sales of wagons would have ceased overnight.

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
It makes Commodores of the same age look like tractors.

Tractors were bigger. And had a better build quality...
They've just about disappeared from our roads, but those Commodes
must have had the worst paint jobs in Oz history. They absolutely
dominated the Faded and Rusting section of the used shitheap market.

**You just reminded me. The Stagea sits outside all the time (as it
did with the previous owner). The paintwork is still perfect.

I doubt that they would sell all that well simply because they not a
good looking car, I'd even call them ugly, that shouldn't matter but
many people are dumb enough to buy cars because they look good and don't
care about the most important things.
If Nissan had imported and sold them locally I'd also expect them to be
pretty expensive.

**Well, I would call my Stagea ugly. It sure ain't pretty. However, the
2001 model Commodore wagon (VT, VX, VZ) was as ugly as a hatful of
arseholes. Uglier than the Stagea? Maybe. I think so. It was not until
the VE (but more particularly, the VF) was released that Commodores
looked pretty nice.

You're right about the cost though. Even in Japan, they weren't cheap.

[Noddy]

Post by Trevor Wilson

Post by alvey

Post by Trevor Wilson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Stagea
I own a 2001 model and I can tell you that it blows the doors off
ANYTHING else, outside an AMG Benz, M series BMW or hot Audi.

Really? I thought you once said that your Stagea 0-100kph was 6.0s. Is
that a correct recollection?

**I added a correction. I was not referring solely to acceleration, but
51:49 weight distribution
All wheel drive
An absolutely gorgeous engine
Fabulous reliability
An air conditioner (climate control system) that is the best I've ever
experienced.
Sat nav
Mirrors that turn down, when reversing to show the gutter.
Reversing camera
HID headlights (levelling adjustable from the dash)
Smooth and quiet to drive
Etc etc
I was referring to the whole package.

You were doing no such thing at all. You were banging on about
performance with your "blows the doors off ANYTHING else" rubbish, and
now you're adding all this other crap that has nothing to do with that :)

Post by Trevor Wilson
Acceleration is decent (for a 2001
wagon), but certainly not amazing. FWI: It is sub 6 secs to 100kph. It's
a great car to drive.

For it's day perhaps. Today a Hyundai I30N would beat 7 different
colours of snot out of it.

Post by Trevor Wilson
If Nissan bothered to import them to Oz, I reckon Holden and Ford sales
of wagons would have ceased overnight.

Yeah, I doubt it. Even by that stage of the game the only thing keeping
Holden and Ford alive were their rusted on supporters who would drive
nothing else regardless of how much better it may have been.

[Daryl]

Post by Keithr0
And possibly including Mitsubishi too
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/honda-nissan-set-to-start-
talks-on-blockbuster-merger-20241218-p5kz69.html

Not ideal but better than both going down the toilet.

Post by Keithr0
Also noted that Toyota now has stakes in Suzuki and Mazda (some Mazda
hybrids have Toyota drive trains).

Those sorts of deals have been coming and going for decades, for example
in the 80's Ford owned a big chunk of Mazda.

[alvey]

Keithr0 wrote:


Having stuffed up over door locks *and* old group photo, Richo scurries
off to a change of subject.

[Clocky]

Post by alvey
Having stuffed up over door locks *and* old group photo, Richo scurries
off to a change of subject.

Yep, trying to bury his turds...