Personal computing discussed
Moderators: askfranklin, renee, emkubed, Captain Ned
End User wrote:It's still on my list but I'm weighing other options too. I really loathe the Civic's center screen, it's a poorly skinned Android interface. Both the Sedan and Hatchback have a physical volume control on the steering wheel but on the sedan it's also touch-sensitive, ie: you rub it by accident while pressing the other nearby buttons and your volume jumps up or down. It's so infuriating they disabled the touch functionality on the Hatchback.Duct Tape Dude wrote:Civic: I'm not sure I can get over the lack of blind spot monitoring and volume knob.
Blind spots on a Civic should not be too much of a problem. I'm looking at buying a 2SS 1LE - now that thing needs a blind spot monitor.
Photos of the 2018 Civic interior appear to show there is a volume control on the steering wheel. Is that not good enough?
The Civic is my choice from your list.
JustAnEngineer wrote:I liked the Impreza too, but the acceleration is lacking. No Carplay on the Mazda Mazda3 seems silly in this age, but I'll bring myself to test drive it eventuallysoon.The Honda Civic and the Mazda 3 are the two cars in that category that have good handling.
Duct Tape Dude wrote:I liked the Impreza too, but the acceleration is lacking.
Captain Ned wrote:Haha, my first ride in a WRX STi had me giggling like a little girl. The second ride was no different. Turbos are like VR--you can read about it all you want, but once it's only after experiencing it that you have to have one.Subaru does have solutions for that, you know (says someone on his 4th Subie turbo since MY 2002).
Duct Tape Dude wrote:Captain Ned wrote:Haha, my first ride in a WRX STi had me giggling like a little girl. The second ride was no different. Turbos are like VR--you can read about it all you want, but once it's only after experiencing it that you have to have one.Subaru does have solutions for that, you know (says someone on his 4th Subie turbo since MY 2002).
cjcerny wrote:Consumer Reports has already covered this topic. They also have data on which makes have more false positives from their automatic safety features. Seek it.
notfred wrote:Check with your public library, some of them have access to Consumer Reports.
Kougar wrote:notfred wrote:Check with your public library, some of them have access to Consumer Reports.
Very very interesting, hadn't heard of that before. Apparently not just piles of the magazines but the actual online subscription too.
Waco wrote:Duct Tape Dude wrote:Captain Ned wrote:Haha, my first ride in a WRX STi had me giggling like a little girl. The second ride was no different. Turbos are like VR--you can read about it all you want, but once it's only after experiencing it that you have to have one.Subaru does have solutions for that, you know (says someone on his 4th Subie turbo since MY 2002).
This is 100000% true; they're like crack. We had no turbos in the house 3 years ago. The wife then turbocharged her Focus, followed by my Miata, then acquiring a Golf R, and just this past weekend an Audi TT 225. The only non-turbo car is now my Corvette.
End User wrote:You prefer turbo to NA?
Captain Ned wrote:End User wrote:You prefer turbo to NA?
What's left out there for current model-year ultra-performance cars that aren't blown in some way? The Audi/Lambo V-10 motor is the only one that comes to mind quickly now that the Viper is dead.
End User wrote:You prefer turbo to NA?
synthtel2 wrote:It's much more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow
synthtel2 wrote:Who wants to have to go to redline for power
synthtel2 wrote:It's a cool engine, sure, but raw performance isn't everything. How much does it cost? What's its life expectancy? How much fuel does it burn? How many opportunities do you get to properly use its abilities?
If you ask me, the most impressive piece of engineering on display in that video isn't the engine, it's the suspension (and other handling factors).
Vhalidictes wrote:for a high-performance car, wouldn't a supercharger be a better idea?
synthtel2 wrote:It's a cool engine, sure
synthtel2 wrote:but raw performance isn't everything
synthtel2 wrote:How much does it cost?
synthtel2 wrote:What's its life expectancy?
synthtel2 wrote:How much fuel does it burn?
synthtel2 wrote:How many opportunities do you get to properly use its abilities?
Vhalidictes wrote:I feel like there's something wrong with me saying this, but... for a high-performance car, wouldn't a supercharger be a better idea?
Sure a Turbo isn't always-on, but fuel economy for a Corvette just seems like a lost cause compared to dealing with turbo lag.
End User wrote:...
Looking for Knowledge wrote:When drunk.....
I want to have sex, but find I am more likely to be shot down than when I am sober.
Vhalidictes wrote:I really like the current Formula 1 motor idea where you have a turbocharger with a motor/generator unit (MGU) attached to it. As you come out of a corner, the MGU can spin the turbo up like a super charger. Going down the straight at full throttle and high RPM, rather than opening the wastegate to avoid overboosting, you run the MGU as a generator and recharge the battery ready to use it as a supercharger out of the next corner or feed it to the other MGU that's connected to the crankshaft (MGU-K) to add to your torque and power.wouldn't a supercharger be a better idea?
notfred wrote:I believe that the simple answer is to have one manufacturer build a single spec MGU-H that all teams use, as Formula One already does with the engine controller.Unfortunately, the MGU-H (Motor Generator Unit - Heat) attached to the turbo in Formula 1 has been a source of many problems over the past few years. Building something that spins at crazy RPMs while being baked by turbo heat and maintains electrical insulation while remaining light is apparently quite tricky!
synthtel2 wrote:For something RWD at the kind of performance level that can do sub-8:00 on the Nurburgring, almost certainly. Precise power modulation is just too important there, and even if traction weren't an issue, getting a quick spool from a turboed big V8 is a tall order.
synthtel2 wrote:That can mostly be summed up as you feeling it reasonable to throw one to two orders of magnitude more money at it than me (as should surprise nobody here).
synthtel2 wrote:getting busted for going twice the speed limit on some twisty mountain road.
synthtel2 wrote:That doesn't mean I can't have fun driving.
synthtel2 wrote:From your examples, the characteristics that make a car fun for autocross mostly aren't the same ones that drive up costs and ruin practicality, and drifty shenanigans work great with a cheap old Subaru if you find appropriate gravel roads.