Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 
697 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 250


  Reply # 1642141 28-Sep-2016 22:19
Send private message

shk292:

 

You'd get a reasonably nice '07 Mk3 CRV for your money.  I've recently sold my 09 CRV and it was a great family car, we've had CRVs since our two kids were babies and they never felt short of space.  Quite nice to drive also.  For reliability I'd rate them well above a Mitsu or Mazda

 

 

i think a CRV is out of the OPs budget range unless it is high mileage. I spent a couple of months looking for a CRV and eventually got a 2007 2WD with ~100k for $16k. I imagine they would cost more in the South Island.

 

Bought it sight unseen (plenty of photos) and it got delivered for free a coupla days later - gotta love internet shopping.

 

 


1185 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 113

Subscriber

  Reply # 1642464 29-Sep-2016 11:11
One person supports this post
Send private message

Its horses for courses I know, but I've never understood the whole 'I have kids so I must have a safer car' idea. I have three myself (kids, not safer cars) so have some experience in this ;)

 

The thing for me is whilst an SUV may be safer for it's occupants, it's certainly not safer for those outside the SUV. Whether it's a pedestrian, cyclist or another car you are involved with the other party is always going to be worse off than if you were in a regular car. So is it really safer ?

 

People talk about it being higher so you can see more. But if everyone gets one, you are in the same position as you were previously. My dad was a Road Traffic Accident Investigator and he hated them, 'I'll be safe but it's two fingers to everyone else' is what he used to say.

 

In the 16 years since our first was born we've had a 98 Peugeot 406, an 01 Ford Focus wagon, an 03 BMW 530i and now our family car is an 03 X5. But I've rejected all SUV's until now because I honestly can't stand the whole 4x4/SUV to do a school run thing. The ONLY reason we have the X5 is because it's pretty much the only vehicle we can all fit in which isn't a people carrier or bus. I'm 6'5, my wife is 6', our 15, 13 and 8 year olds are 5'11, 5'9 and almost 5'. We tried 15 different cars to stop having to go the SUV route and they were all too small.

 

If I was in the OP's position right now and pragmatism was my sole reasoning I would buy a 2010-2012 Ford Focus TDCi Wagon. A manual, 1.8l, with multiple airbags, more boot space than most SUV's, can fit 5 'normal' people or even three kids seats across the back and still return 5-6l/100km. There are plenty available for less than $8k meaning you can pocket $4k for when the little one grows up, because you will need it ;)

 

The reality is I would look for a 2004+ BMW 530d Touring and be happy with a car which would last the family for another 10 years, is safe as houses, has all the toys you could want and still scare the bejesus out of any Scooby or Evo on the open road !!

 

Good luck in whatever you choose and congratulations not only on the baby but the fact you have a wife who refuses to drive a people carrier :))


5242 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2132


  Reply # 1642874 29-Sep-2016 18:19
One person supports this post
Send private message

Scott3:

 

 

 

 

AWD adds a lot of safety margin on South Island roads during winter (ice, grit etc).  I wouldn't be without AWD on winter road trips.

 

 

What's peoples justification for comments like this? Sure, AWD help acceleration in slippery conditions, but for safety critical functions like braking, and turning, I can't see how it helps at all. Wouldn't running better tires - all season tires (M+S on sidewall) or winter tires be more useful.

 

Stability control is super valuable if you get onto a slide, but I imagine all car's OP is looking at will have it.

 

 

AWD/4WD basically equals more grip - 4 wheel grip. 

 

Forget acceleration. It's about road holding. It helps with driving on slippery surfaces (ice, liquid water, snow grit, unsealed roads, greasy roads), cornering and towing.

 

If you combine 4WD with stability control you have formidable a traction package.





Mike

14417 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1887


  Reply # 1642878 29-Sep-2016 18:28
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

Scott3:

 

 

 

 

AWD adds a lot of safety margin on South Island roads during winter (ice, grit etc).  I wouldn't be without AWD on winter road trips.

 

 

What's peoples justification for comments like this? Sure, AWD help acceleration in slippery conditions, but for safety critical functions like braking, and turning, I can't see how it helps at all. Wouldn't running better tires - all season tires (M+S on sidewall) or winter tires be more useful.

 

Stability control is super valuable if you get onto a slide, but I imagine all car's OP is looking at will have it.

 

 

AWD/4WD basically equals more grip - 4 wheel grip. 

 

Forget acceleration. It's about road holding. It helps with driving on slippery surfaces (ice, liquid water, snow grit, unsealed roads, greasy roads), cornering and towing.

 

If you combine 4WD with stability control you have formidable a traction package.

 

 

 

 

Many SUVs these days don't appear to be AWD / 4WD. They are basically just higher up minivans. You now also have a new breed of mini SUVs catering to baby boomers, that are built on car platform and raised up, and thus have a higher centre of gravity and have far more body roll. eg causes car sickness with the kids in the back seat I have a 10 year over  SUV, and it has AWD and stability control, but need it as I do a lot of hill driving and the hills oven have snow and ice in winter. If people are just wanting a larger car for kids around town, they are better with something like a minivan, such as the Honda Odessey.


462 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 211


  Reply # 1642997 29-Sep-2016 22:30
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

 

 

AWD/4WD basically equals more grip - 4 wheel grip. 

 

Forget acceleration. It's about road holding. It helps with driving on slippery surfaces (ice, liquid water, snow grit, unsealed roads, greasy roads), cornering and towing.

 

If you combine 4WD with stability control you have formidable a traction package.

 

 

It's not like the unpowered pair of wheels don't grip. They provide lateral grip and braking just not acceleration. In a safety critical situation you are unlikely to be accelerating anyway, so no gain to safety. (most stability control systems will override the driver's accelerator input while the car is sliding anyway, and wipe of speed without spinning the car be breaking specific wheels only).

 

F1 cars are 2wd, and they are hardly lacking in grip...

 

Unless you are on a loose surface, and are driving in a rally style awd powerslide, I don't think awd will and any safety advantage to cornering (although it will add performance advantages in that you will be able to put more power down without losing traction.)

 

Heavy towing puts more weight on the rear axle so can make grip at the front end a bit light. Unless you are worried about getting stuck (on steep dirt boat ramp), I haven't found any advantages in towing in awd platforms over rwd platforms. in my experience the hyundai iload van (rwd) tow's much nicer than the 4wd Outlander or the AWD subaru legacy.

 

I think awd/4wd can lull you into a false sense of confidence in bad conditions, as you can accelerate easily, while still having the braking and cornering ability of a 2wd car. It mostly seems to be 4wd's that are in ditches near the ski fields.


Mad Scientist
19161 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2491

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1643006 29-Sep-2016 22:53
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

Scott3:

 

 

 

 

AWD adds a lot of safety margin on South Island roads during winter (ice, grit etc).  I wouldn't be without AWD on winter road trips.

 

 

What's peoples justification for comments like this? Sure, AWD help acceleration in slippery conditions, but for safety critical functions like braking, and turning, I can't see how it helps at all. Wouldn't running better tires - all season tires (M+S on sidewall) or winter tires be more useful.

 

Stability control is super valuable if you get onto a slide, but I imagine all car's OP is looking at will have it.

 

 

AWD/4WD basically equals more grip - 4 wheel grip

 

Forget acceleration. It's about road holding. It helps with driving on slippery surfaces (ice, liquid water, snow grit, unsealed roads, greasy roads), cornering and towing.

 

If you combine 4WD with stability control you have formidable a traction package.

 

 

Up to a point. When the speed exceeds available friction, you're a passenger ... you tend to see as many 4WDs as 2WDs in the ditch. So yes, driving slowly to match available friction 4WD always wins for "grip". That's usually about 10-20kph in icy conditions on summer tyres (sheet ice that's about 0 kph) ... at 50-100kph it ain't matter whether you have 2WD or 20WD ... close your eyes and hope for the best if you hit ice. In the wet yes 4WD should still have friction at 100kph so it is superior to 2WD, but in the wet you are limited not by friction but by aquaplaning which depends on your tyres.

 

In loose gravel it's a different style of driving altogether where mechanical grip and weight transfer become immensely important - haydon paddon driving a RWD will out grip you driving a full time 4wd in automatic. But bear in mind professional racing events mandate full roll cage, five point harness, neck brace and clip, full face helmet, fireproof suit ...

 

f1 Midengine RWD (well, you could argue it's Rearengine RWD) - their friction is generated by upsidedown aeroplane wing (the whole car is the wing) at speed. Drive slow = no downforce = no friction = no grip. 





Swype on iOS is detrimental to accurate typing. Apologies in advance.


Mad Scientist
19161 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2491

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1643011 29-Sep-2016 23:21
Send private message

But yes I live in the deep south, and my last 4 cars are all AWD. But I don't go out when I believe there is inadequate friction. Or if I have to, then - don't exceed available friction. I treat them as 2WD that can go a bit more. But accelerating is the most fun, that's the only bit where you don't have to worry about exceeding available friction. Every other manoeuvre ... friction and aquaplane is the limit not the 4WD. SO don't get me wrong, by all means 4WD can do that bit more. But no more.  





Swype on iOS is detrimental to accurate typing. Apologies in advance.


5242 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2132


  Reply # 1643244 30-Sep-2016 11:47
Send private message

Scott3:

 

MikeAqua:

 

 

 

AWD/4WD basically equals more grip - 4 wheel grip. 

 

Forget acceleration. It's about road holding. It helps with driving on slippery surfaces (ice, liquid water, snow grit, unsealed roads, greasy roads), cornering and towing.

 

If you combine 4WD with stability control you have formidable a traction package.

 

 

It's not like the unpowered pair of wheels don't grip. They provide lateral grip and braking just not acceleration. In a safety critical situation you are unlikely to be accelerating anyway, so no gain to safety. (most stability control systems will override the driver's accelerator input while the car is sliding anyway, and wipe of speed without spinning the car be breaking specific wheels only).

 

F1 cars are 2wd, and they are hardly lacking in grip...

 

 

The simplest possible explanation is this:  Take a 4WD and 2WD version of the same car.  Under the same conditions it takes more force to cause the 4WD to lose control.

 

 

 

 





Mike

462 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 211


  Reply # 1643597 1-Oct-2016 00:53
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

 

 

The simplest possible explanation is this:  Take a 4WD and 2WD version of the same car.  Under the same conditions it takes more force to cause the 4WD to lose control.

 

 

I've done that plenty (Including SUV's like the outlander AWD/4WD is user selectable)

 

Obviously part time 4x4 systems (such as common in utes) offer no safety advantage for normal as it is both bad for the car, and unsafe to activate the 4x4 system on high friction surfaces like tarmac due to the lack of a center differential.

 

Most non-premium brand AWD cars & car based SUV's run in FWD most of the time and only send power to the rear if wheels start slipping. (exceptions are subaru (with symmetric allocation) and audi (Plus most high performance AWD) which are Rear biased). Under your standard traction critical safety situation (rounded corner too fast on low friction surface, car in slide, Traction control keeping you from spinning while scrubbing off speed, Or, Full ABS emergency stop on low friction surface), the awd/4wd system adds nothing.

 

I can think of 4WD/AWD helping with safety on an on road situation is if you were descending a hill (4wd decent style), where available friction is insufficient to hold you on the slope. With a AWD/4WD, you can use engine braking to keep the wheels slowly turning as the car slide down.

 

If 4wd/Awd was so important for winter safety I would expect most car's in places with really cold winter like germany / scandinavia to have them. Instead winter tires on 2wd car's seem the norm.

 




 

OP, What car's have you taken for a test drive?


780 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 189


  Reply # 1643870 1-Oct-2016 15:21
Send private message

If you are worried about safety ensure that it will take a rear facing carsheet and have some one in the passenger sheet as it should be rear facing for at least 2 years.

I have an 06 legacy wagon. Heaps of room. ISO fix (lots of even modern cars don't have them. Paid 6000 for it. It rides lower than the outback but I have never had an issue putting my daughter in.

SUVs have the added risk that is is difficult to see around the vehicle, ie in carparks. I notice it everyday during school pickups. Children are shorter than the bumpers and I have seen a few close calls.



5 posts

Wannabe Geek


  Reply # 1644024 1-Oct-2016 23:15

Thanks for all your responses, community members. I've read all of them, the banter was amusing and many comments very informative indeed.

 

Since I first posted, wife and I have checked out a few cars, with baby in the rear seat in her capsule.

 

We test drove the Toyota Kluger 3.0 V6 (2004), Honda CRV 2.4 (2005) and the Mazda CX-7 2.3 Turbo (2007). I have test driven a Nissan Murano 2.5 (2005) in the past.

 


Of these cars, the Toyota Kluger was by far my favourite. It seemed to be a logical choice. It is incredibly spacious, not top heavy, feels firmly planted on the road, and the 3.0 V6 was silky smooth and a joy to drive and was on sale for $12k.
If it was a car I was buying for myself, I would've bought it in a heartbeat. It was a 2004 model however and I was unable to convince my designer wife to overlook the rather dated interior and 'boxy' (her words) exterior look.

 

This afternoon we've brought home the Mazda CX-7. It is the 2.3 litre turbo motor, 2007, Japanese import. Its a color she likes (yeah, that was the first priority *facepalm*), it is spacious, powerful, has relatively less body roll and the interior looks modern and comes with the reversing camera, bose speakers and other mod-cons. It has the iso-fix thing and most other amenities one would expect from a car in this category.

 

With the capsule (which, by the way, takes more space than a rear facing child seat) in the back, the front passenger still has acres of legroom. Massive boot.
It has 90k on the odo and we paid $12k for it, so stayed true to our budget.

 

Again, thanks for all the feedback. I was pleasantly surprised by the active support in this community and will be more regular in participating in the forums here.
Cheers.


5242 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2132


  Reply # 1644135 2-Oct-2016 13:33
Send private message

Scott3:

 

Obviously part time 4x4 systems (such as common in utes) offer no safety advantage for normal as it is both bad for the car, and unsafe to activate the 4x4 system on high friction surfaces like tarmac due to the lack of a center differential.

 

....

 

If 4wd/Awd was so important for winter safety I would expect most car's in places with really cold winter like germany / scandinavia to have them. Instead winter tires on 2wd car's seem the norm.

 

 

I have a part time 4WD (pajero).  It can be shifted into AWD at any speed up to 100km.  To lock the centre diff (proper 4WD) I make sure it's stationary.  The 1997 Terrano I used to own was similar.

 

4WD isn't essential for winter driving, just safer.  For example you will on occasion hear a road advisory for somewhere like Lewis Pass that says chains or 4WD are required.  There is reason for that.





Mike

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.