Robert Samuelson op-ed in the Washington Post: Is the car culture dying? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-the-car-culture-dying/2016/07/10/52a20a56-451e-11e6-88d0-6adee48be8bc_story.html)
QuoteFew technological breakthroughs have had the social and economic impact of the automobile. It changed America's geography, spawning suburbs, shopping malls and sprawl as far as the eye could see. It redefined how we work and play, from the daily commute to the weekend trek to the beach. It expanded the heavy industry – steel-making, car production – that made the Midwest the economy's epicenter for decades. And, finally but not least, the car became the quintessential symbol of American mobility, status and independence.
QuoteNow there are signs that the car and its many offshoots (SUVs, pickup trucks) are losing their grip on the American psyche and pocketbook. The car culture may be dying or, at any rate, slumping into a prolonged era of eclipse. The only question is whether the signs of change can be believed. It's not clear.
QuoteYoung Americans, particularly millennials (ages 18 to 35), have lost their zest for buying and driving cars, it's said. Once upon a time, getting your driver's license – typically at 16 or 17 – was a rite of passage. You were liberated from dependence on the parental chauffeur. It was a big step toward adulthood. But this landmark no longer seems to matter so much.
Seems like the Gen-X crowd is really the last generation that has a somewhat large interest in cars...probably because they were status symbols more than anything though. The baby boomer generation really had their cake when the 60s came around the muscle car era exploded...basically performance was available cheaply for everything. I think if anyone has read any of my other car related posts it's probably pretty apparent really friggin quickly that I'm a car guy and have a huge passion for the hobby. For me though that's the culture I grew up around; had a bunch of GM/Ford workers/managers/engineers for relatives, had a father who always had the latest and greatest car in the garage in my youth, I worked for a race team in high school and I was going to school in an era when automotive knowledge was taught...whether you wanted it or not. :-D
But I think it's a culture shift with society more in general than just cars. Look at how Milennials operate...they are all social butterflies (I had maybe 3 or 4 good friends in high school), they all want to live in urban environments (as opposed to my generation who viewed them as crowded hell holes) and they tend to grow up a lot slower...especially from career or economics. I remember wanting to leave the house so badly when I was 18 that I joined the military to fund it, there is this whole trend with people staying with the parents until they are in their mid-20s now. I think a lot of this is being driven buy the net based culture and social media frenzy that people grow up in nowadays. Does that mean car culture will die out?...probably not but it will have to compete with more things grabbing away at facets of society that grab attention. Even traditional sports seem to be declining in popularity these days....I mean it's down to options for everyone and those being accepted a lot more. Back in my school years you didn't do ANYTHING that might be considered outside the established popular norm. That meant if you liked cars, sports....or drinking you were usually one of the cool kids. It was the kids with the computers, Nintendos or played D&D that were the social outcasts...that kind of stuff is basically mainstream nowadays. The one I really remember which is silly in retrospect was kids being afraid to admit they had a Nintendo. Almost EVERYONE had them by the late 80s but nobody wanted to admit it because they would be classified as a "nerd." The Breakfast Club really hit on 80s stereotypes among young people the more I think about it in retrospect...
But who are we kidding?....basically we're living in the second muscle car era right now. The main difference between the 60s and today is the variety of performance cars is overwhelming as opposed to almost everything being an American V8. Hell those Fast and Furious movies as crappy as they are have a HUGE draw in the movie theater. There is no way those movies could be a success if car culture was anywhere close to dead....what reason is there to watch those things other than the cars?...to watch the subtle performance of someone like Vin Diesel or the Rock? :-D
I read this, I'm not buying it. I think WaPoo got ahold of a few trendies, and has decided that's the future, whether it's real or not.
Quote from: Otto Yamamoto on July 12, 2016, 03:01:11 AM
I read this, I'm not buying it. I think WaPoo got ahold of a few trendies, and has decided that's the future, whether it's real or not.
Wouldn't be the first time a media outlet got the future wrong by doing so.
Quote from: Otto Yamamoto on July 12, 2016, 03:01:11 AM
I read this, I'm not buying it. I think WaPoo got ahold of a few trendies, and has decided that's the future, whether it's real or not.
I think they still believe gas is $4 a gallon and people are still moving in droves to mass-transit options. Or, the people that write this stuff just don't like cars.
I think the Post's editors believe that if they tell their writers to say something often enough, it means it must be true.
Car culture is not dying. This is not the first, nor will it be the last "millennials hate cars" article.
Is society changing? Yes. Society is always changing. Are cars changing and, in a way, reflecting the times? Yes, always have.
And? There really is not much more to say. The only real take is that, because of the continued economic decline, young people HAVE to live with parents and forgo car ownership and other good things. Not WANT to, HAVE to.
Quote from: SP Cook on July 12, 2016, 07:44:54 AM
Car culture is not dying. This is not the first, nor will it be the last "millennials hate cars" article.
Is society changing? Yes. Society is always changing. Are cars changing and, in a way, reflecting the times? Yes, always have.
And? There really is not much more to say. The only real take is that, because of the continued economic decline, young people HAVE to live with parents and forgo car ownership and other good things. Not WANT to, HAVE to.
I don't know if that's a HAVE to. There doesn't seem to be as many people motivated to leave and make it happen. It was a struggle for any generation to leave the house and slog through entry level jobs. About the biggest obstacle I see people going through today at that age is overvaluing a college degree or career experience because it's what their parents told their parents. Student loan debt was bad in my time but it hit the stratosphere in recent years. There is always ways out of the house; roommates and even military service come to mind. But that said there is definitely something there with the average younger person not being quiet as motivated to get that license... It probably has a lot to do with there being so many outlets for things to do these days with the internet age.
One thing for sure: things look different from very large urban area.
Washington Post, New York Times and many others are actually created by living in megapolis and looking from that perspective.
Maybe my example belongs to a different forum, but I was really impressed by a huge "10 travel advice" article in NYT with the first one being "word connection should not show up in your itinerary unless you are flying to a very exotic place".
Maybe that is the case for NYC, but our airport has flights to maybe 10 different destinations (if you count ORD and MDW as two). Actually total population in the airport service area is close to 1 million...
I assume that is pretty much similar for public transportation. You can definitely get along in NYC or DC without a car, moreover - car is often more pain than gain. Doing the same in many midsize cities is more difficult - assuming there is a usable public transportation system.
Of course, by now it is possible for someone to have a remote job, get everything delivered via amazon prime and date online. I am not sure if that would work for high percentage of people. Someone still has to grow crops, deliver all that stuff, build homes and so on - meaning getting outside at least once a day.
Alternatively, we may think about consolidating people to something like "blue banana" in Europe and abandoning most of the continent. Then carless life can become a norm for most people. I really don't like that scenario, but that is the way life looks from DC and NYC, I am afraid.
Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2016, 08:57:55 AM
One thing for sure: things look different from very large urban area.
Washington Post, New York Times and many others are actually created by living in megapolis and looking from that perspective.
Maybe my example belongs to a different forum, but I was really impressed by a huge "10 travel advice" article in NYT with the first one being "word connection should not show up in your itinerary unless you are flying to a very exotic place".
Maybe that is the case for NYC, but our airport has flights to maybe 10 different destinations (if you count ORD and MDW as two). Actually total population in the airport service area is close to 1 million...
I assume that is pretty much similar for public transportation. You can definitely get along in NYC or DC without a car, moreover - car is often more pain than gain. Doing the same in many midsize cities is more difficult - assuming there is a usable public transportation system.
Of course, by now it is possible for someone to have a remote job, get everything delivered via amazon prime and date online. I am not sure if that would work for high percentage of people. Someone still has to grow crops, deliver all that stuff, build homes and so on - meaning getting outside at least once a day.
Alternatively, we may think about consolidating people to something like "blue banana" in Europe and abandoning most of the continent. Then carless life can become a norm for most people. I really don't like that scenario, but that is the way life looks from DC and NYC, I am afraid.
Basically you hit the nail on the head about what perspective this article is being wrote from and that's from a Eastern one. I would challenger the writer of this article to head to places like California, Arizona, Utah and Nevada...then tell me car culture is dead, because it isn't out here. I would even go as far and say that's a large part about what makes the west coast the west coast...car culture. I recall going to a car show that had 300-600 cars every Saturday when I was living in Phoenix....you even had a HUGE tuner crowd that would show up and take a row which consisted of a lot of 18-25 year olds. But then again the way the cities (not including San Francisco) were built out here were largely designed with suburban sprawl, the highway and car in mind...whereas on the east coast they were not. Let's also not for get that the warmer and dryer weather out here has a factor compared to the wet in addition to cold out east. Well I lived in the tri-state area over 20 year ago there was still people that didn't have cars and use mass transit back then. I have an uncle who lives in Alexandria who takes the train to work every day and my cousin's husband does the same after a brief trip down I-66. The irony is out here that a lot of these east coast people move here and freak out about not having mass transit like they had at home...that's how stuff like this high speed rail here in California and the Phoenix light rail gain traction. I'm skeptical about the high speed rail but in my opinion the light rail in Phoenix was a total waste given that traffic flow for a city that large is very good and you have plenty of bus options.
But that's not to say that car culture doesn't have a big as piece of the pie as it once did in cultural significance. But that pretty much goes for anything really these days since there are a lot more outlets for younger people.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 12, 2016, 09:55:19 AM
Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2016, 08:57:55 AM
One thing for sure: things look different from very large urban area.
Washington Post, New York Times and many others are actually created by living in megapolis and looking from that perspective.
Maybe my example belongs to a different forum, but I was really impressed by a huge "10 travel advice" article in NYT with the first one being "word connection should not show up in your itinerary unless you are flying to a very exotic place".
Maybe that is the case for NYC, but our airport has flights to maybe 10 different destinations (if you count ORD and MDW as two). Actually total population in the airport service area is close to 1 million...
I assume that is pretty much similar for public transportation. You can definitely get along in NYC or DC without a car, moreover - car is often more pain than gain. Doing the same in many midsize cities is more difficult - assuming there is a usable public transportation system.
Of course, by now it is possible for someone to have a remote job, get everything delivered via amazon prime and date online. I am not sure if that would work for high percentage of people. Someone still has to grow crops, deliver all that stuff, build homes and so on - meaning getting outside at least once a day.
Alternatively, we may think about consolidating people to something like "blue banana" in Europe and abandoning most of the continent. Then carless life can become a norm for most people. I really don't like that scenario, but that is the way life looks from DC and NYC, I am afraid.
Basically you hit the nail on the head about what perspective this article is being wrote from and that's from a Eastern one. I would challenger the writer of this article to head to places like California, Arizona, Utah and Nevada...then tell me car culture is dead, because it isn't out here. I would even go as far and say that's a large part about what makes the west coast the west coast...car culture. I recall going to a car show that had 300-600 cars every Saturday when I was living in Phoenix....you even had a HUGE tuner crowd that would show up and take a row which consisted of a lot of 18-25 year olds. But then again the way the cities (not including San Francisco) were built out here were largely designed with suburban sprawl, the highway and car in mind...whereas on the east coast they were not. Let's also not for get that the warmer and dryer weather out here has a factor compared to the wet in addition to cold out east. Well I lived in the tri-state area over 20 year ago there was still people that didn't have cars and use mass transit back then. I have an uncle who lives in Alexandria who takes the train to work every day and my cousin's husband does the same after a brief trip down I-66. The irony is out here that a lot of these east coast people move here and freak out about not having mass transit like they had at home...that's how stuff like this high speed rail here in California and the Phoenix light rail gain traction. I'm skeptical about the high speed rail but in my opinion the light rail in Phoenix was a total waste given that traffic flow for a city that large is very good and you have plenty of bus options.
But that's not to say that car culture doesn't have a big as piece of the pie as it once did in cultural significance. But that pretty much goes for anything really these days since there are a lot more outlets for younger people.
If there's no car culture on the east coast, why is there so much traffic congestion?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 12, 2016, 10:30:07 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 12, 2016, 09:55:19 AM
Quote from: kalvado on July 12, 2016, 08:57:55 AM
One thing for sure: things look different from very large urban area.
Washington Post, New York Times and many others are actually created by living in megapolis and looking from that perspective.
Maybe my example belongs to a different forum, but I was really impressed by a huge "10 travel advice" article in NYT with the first one being "word connection should not show up in your itinerary unless you are flying to a very exotic place".
Maybe that is the case for NYC, but our airport has flights to maybe 10 different destinations (if you count ORD and MDW as two). Actually total population in the airport service area is close to 1 million...
I assume that is pretty much similar for public transportation. You can definitely get along in NYC or DC without a car, moreover - car is often more pain than gain. Doing the same in many midsize cities is more difficult - assuming there is a usable public transportation system.
Of course, by now it is possible for someone to have a remote job, get everything delivered via amazon prime and date online. I am not sure if that would work for high percentage of people. Someone still has to grow crops, deliver all that stuff, build homes and so on - meaning getting outside at least once a day.
Alternatively, we may think about consolidating people to something like "blue banana" in Europe and abandoning most of the continent. Then carless life can become a norm for most people. I really don't like that scenario, but that is the way life looks from DC and NYC, I am afraid.
Basically you hit the nail on the head about what perspective this article is being wrote from and that's from a Eastern one. I would challenger the writer of this article to head to places like California, Arizona, Utah and Nevada...then tell me car culture is dead, because it isn't out here. I would even go as far and say that's a large part about what makes the west coast the west coast...car culture. I recall going to a car show that had 300-600 cars every Saturday when I was living in Phoenix....you even had a HUGE tuner crowd that would show up and take a row which consisted of a lot of 18-25 year olds. But then again the way the cities (not including San Francisco) were built out here were largely designed with suburban sprawl, the highway and car in mind...whereas on the east coast they were not. Let's also not for get that the warmer and dryer weather out here has a factor compared to the wet in addition to cold out east. Well I lived in the tri-state area over 20 year ago there was still people that didn't have cars and use mass transit back then. I have an uncle who lives in Alexandria who takes the train to work every day and my cousin's husband does the same after a brief trip down I-66. The irony is out here that a lot of these east coast people move here and freak out about not having mass transit like they had at home...that's how stuff like this high speed rail here in California and the Phoenix light rail gain traction. I'm skeptical about the high speed rail but in my opinion the light rail in Phoenix was a total waste given that traffic flow for a city that large is very good and you have plenty of bus options.
But that's not to say that car culture doesn't have a big as piece of the pie as it once did in cultural significance. But that pretty much goes for anything really these days since there are a lot more outlets for younger people.
If there's no car culture on the east coast, why is there so much traffic congestion?
Cause there is so many of you packed into one place. :-D Put it this way, there are a lot more performance oriented cars out this way. I'm not saying that they don't exist out there on the east coast but they definitely are more of the comfort, daily commuter and FWD variety. Basically everything from D.C. up to Boston is largely urbanized and much more densely populated than other parts of the country. New Jersey is a good example of that since it actually is the population density leader out of all 50 states despite not having what one might consider one of the principle eastern seaboard cities. It's basically all suburban New York or Phili at this point....some segments on the southern tip on the US 9 corridor not withstanding.
Just because there are less young drivers doesn't mean that the cars are going to go away anytime soon. There are plenty of older drivers who'd be willing to buy these cars.
Quote from: Henry on July 12, 2016, 10:53:23 AM
Just because there are less young drivers doesn't mean that the cars are going to go away anytime soon. There are plenty of older drivers who'd be willing to buy these cars.
While true, many of them are aging and will eventually be
forced to give their licenses when they no longer have the capacity to drive or other circumstance. Such is what happened with my then-84 year old father after he took a nasty fall one on Labor Day 2012; and, more recently, when my 79 year old mother totaled her car a month ago and she has no recollection as towards why she veered off and hit a utility pole & a couple of trees. Since there was no other vehicle involved in the accident; my mother's 60 years of driving are basically over.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 12, 2016, 06:32:34 AMOr, the people that write this stuff just don't like cars.
Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! :sombrero:
In all seriousness; it's worth noting that there have been a handful articles that have recently debunked the whole
car culture dying among millennials mantra. Additionally, many millennials once they do marry and start a family more often than not move out of the city.
See 0:13-0:16 in this
State Farm ad. Very true to life IMHO.
Another reason (not mentioned) why some have forgone buying cars or even getting their license is
insurance costs; especially if one lives in an urban or densely populated area where rates tend to be higher... especially for younger drivers.
In other words; move along, there's nothing new to see here.
Not necessarily though. In the Bay Area you need Bart or buses to get to work because the parking fees are big in these areas. Its simply built for public transit. But I think car culture still exists though.
Quote from: Henry on July 12, 2016, 10:53:23 AM
Just because there are less young drivers doesn't mean that the cars are going to go away anytime soon. There are plenty of older drivers who'd be willing to buy these cars.
One thing I'll say....automakers do a really crappy job at making "youth oriented" cars appealing. Usually they are some crappy looking boxy type of car that looks cheap as dirt....and well, that's because it is. It always seemed like no matter what generation if a young person wanted a car, they wanted something that was at LEAST minimally attractive. Some cars like the Mustang and Camaro actually have a huge market of people in their mid-20s simply because they are good look on top of being somewhat approachable to someone finally starting to get a decent income. So why couldn't a Scion in it's mission to be a youth oriented car be at least good looking?...what about cars like the Chevy Spark? It seems like they end up attracting buyers who want a bargain rather than drawing in young buyers...but that's why Scion largely was a failure.
Quote from: bing101 on July 12, 2016, 11:09:51 AM
Not necessarily though. In the Bay Area you need Bart or buses to get to work because the parking fees are big in these areas. Its simply built for public transit. But I think car culture still exists though.
San Francisco ironically is the only western city that has gone through Manhattenization. It has the second highest population density after NYC, I want to say it's about 20,000 people per square mile if I recall the demographics correct. So basically you can't have the same level of roadways being built with all that pre-existing infrastructure in place....it's a very old city by west coast standards. Basically you run into that all over the eastern sea board, a city is small in terms of actual area but the population is very high. Look at something like Phoenix which is 518 square miles and despite almost having 1.5 million residents has a density of about 3,000 per mile. Basically cities like Phoenix, L.A., Salt Lake City and Las Vegas largely grew up in an era where the car was the primary form of transportation which is why they were designed with it in mind.
Maybe the better question is how youths (I still consider myself young at 27) view cars from an emotional/identity standpoint. I personally view it as merely a major appliance, frankly not much different than a laundry machine. I couldn't care less about its diagnostics or performance (RPMs, torque, horsepower, etc) beyond its ability to drive me to work, the store, and other locations. In the same vein, I really don't care about the performance of my laundry machines beyond their ability to wash and dry my clothes.
More to the point, I have no emotional affinity to my car.
When I hear people talk about "Car Culture" I imagine young guys hacking around on their cars in a garage and racing on rural roads. In that regard, they confer a higher status to the car than merely an appliance (as I do), but rather a reflection of their own image.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 12, 2016, 11:14:52 AMSome cars like the Mustang and Camaro actually have a huge market of people in their mid-20s simply because they are good look on top of being somewhat approachable to someone finally starting to get a decent income.
It's probably a reasonable assumption that most younger Mustang and Camaro owners purchased such as used cars; especially ones of the current generations.
Prior to Ford redoing the Mustang for 2015; they noticed that the average age of a new (S197-era) Mustang buyer was higher than it was for previous-generation models. Higher purchase prices, no doubt had something to do with that. Not every young person had nor could finance the $20k (for the base V6 model) to purchase (& insure) a then-brand-new 2005 Mustang.
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 12, 2016, 11:24:18 AM
Maybe the better question is how youths (I still consider myself young at 27) view cars from an emotional/identity standpoint. I personally view it as merely a major appliance, frankly not much different than a laundry machine. I couldn't care less about its diagnostics or performance (RPMs, torque, horsepower, etc) beyond its ability to drive me to work, the store, and other locations. In the same vein, I really don't care about the performance of my laundry machines beyond their ability to wash and dry my clothes.
More to the point, I have no emotional affinity to my car.
When I hear people talk about "Car Culture" I imagine young guys hacking around on their cars in a garage and racing on rural roads. In that regard, they confer a higher status to the car than merely an appliance (as I do), but rather a reflection of their own image.
I agree with this. I enjoy driving, but I don't care too much about the car itself (as long as it works!)
Car culture isn't dying, it's morphing: It's going in various directions, depending on your opinions, local attitudes, financial temperature, or desires.
First of all - Washington, like LA, or New York City (to name a few) doesn't need another damn car in its city limits, because there's no more room. Sure enough, that hasn't stopped everyone from living or working there. It's confirmation bias. Folks in rural areas, suburbs, the furthest reaches of the MSA are going to need a car to get around; there's limited to no mass transit available. We're also a bunch that probably couldn't wait to drive or travel around, but there's also lots more interests out there in which a car isn't a primary ownership goal.
Are there teenage folks who aren't moved by the idea of getting a driver's license: Yes...But it's always been that way. Not everyone I knew was salivating over the prospect of getting a license; they were more interested in getting into college, could have others drive them around, or they could bike. Yup, even 25 years ago in the 'burbs. Not still everyone has shown much interest on what kind of car they drive, nor care what others' own, or care too much about performance; price, comfort, and not much else.
You can't convince me that everyone was hot for V8s even at the height of the muscle-car era. There were tons of V6 and slant-6 engines out there for those who weren't wealthy nor cared about such things. Not everyone drove the biggest nor fastest car back then, not everyone plumped for the top-flight model trim, and certainly not everyone ordered the high-performance package. It's nostalgia which drives that myth...few remember the unimpressive and average models.
Are there folks fed up with living further and further away from the urban core, tired of longer commutes? Sure, but they get married, have kids, and you need a car in most places. Many of them move, and the car is usually needed for that. I think as we age, the romantic aspects of the open road are viewed through many a jaundiced eye. Traffic, delays, construction, expenses, et al kind of dull those senses. The idea of going for a drive for no reason of all is seen as a peculiarity.
Are there less and less people working on their cars? Mostly, yes. Cars can be more complex to work on, and anything requiring computer or software updates/reflashing needs a trip to the dealership, in a lot of cases. Also, increased reliability has made the need for tune-ups and lots of repeated basic checks a less common occurrence. To that, there's less people who work with their hands over the years; thus, less know-how is passed on from generation to generation, because some of it is either outdated or even unnecessary.
It's easy to look at teens and millennials as not caring, but face it: Car insurance is much more expensive than it was with each preceding decade. Lawful drivers license acquisition ages have increased. Their school workload has increased. Parents don't always have as much disposable income to buy their kids a first car.
Teenagers can't get as many jobs because laws don't let them easily get jobs before 16-17, and workplace laws can prohibit minors for safety reasons. More entry-level positions are going to people with previous work experience, except for service industries...The deck is a bit stacked against them in that case; it's not impossible to get a job, but it's much harder to save up for a car before one is 18. As to whether they'd like a phone or a car, it's not even close...the phone is far cheaper to maintain on their own budget (although they aren't replacements for each other - it's like comparing steak with breakfast cereal). There are less things that require repeated driving tasks thanks to computers and hand-held portable technology, but it's really not that much of a change.
Exotic cars of purely mechanical satisfaction is changing - more technology is appealing to some people. Some folks like the noise, feel, odor, and sounds of owning a car. Some really don't want anything more to do with that; a vehicle is a conveyance device which is pretty much an appliance with an exhaust pipe. Electric cars and hybrids are a different form of "car culture", and some people accept that, others proclaim it's heresy.
Again, this isn't about everyone...car folks are going to be car folks, gearheads will be gearheads. Will my son care about cars as much as my father and I do? Hard to say...even my interest wanes a little.
Millennials are simply not buying cars because they can't afford them. Let's face it, if you're eating Ramon Noodles for dinner then you probably can't afford a car, the insurance, the plates, the maintenance on the car, and buying gas for the car.
Quote from: formulanone on July 12, 2016, 12:48:04 PM
Car culture isn't dying, it's morphing: It's going in various directions, depending on your opinions, local attitudes, financial temperature, or desires.
First of all - Washington, like LA, or New York City (to name a few) doesn't need another damn car in its city limits, because there's no more room. Sure enough, that hasn't stopped everyone from living or working there. It's confirmation bias. Folks in rural areas, suburbs, the furthest reaches of the MSA are going to need a car to get around; there's limited to no mass transit available.
Are there teenage folks who aren't moved by the idea of getting a driver's license: Yes...But it's always been that way. Not everyone I knew was salivating over the prospect of getting a license; they were more interested in getting into college, could have others drive them around, or they could bike. Yup, even 25 years ago in the 'burbs. Not still everyone has shown much interest on what kind of car they drive, nor care what others' own, or care too much about performance; price, comfort, and not much else.
You can't convince me that everyone was hot for V8s even at the height of the muscle-car era. There were tons of V6 and slant-6 engines out there for those who weren't wealthy nor cared about such things. Not everyone drove the biggest nor fastest car back then, not everyone plumped for the top-flight model trim, and certainly not everyone ordered the high-performance package. It's nostalgia which drives that myth...few remember the unimpressive and average models.
Are there folks fed up with living further and further away from the urban core, tired of longer commutes? Sure, but they get married, have kids, and you need a car in most places. Many of them move, and the car is usually needed for that. I think as we age, the romantic aspects of the open road are viewed through many a jaundiced eye. Traffic, delays, construction, expenses, et al kind of dull those senses. The idea of going for a drive for no reason of all is seen as a peculiarity.
Are there less and less people working on their cars? Mostly, yes. Cars can be more complex to work on, and anything requiring computer or software updates/reflashing needs a trip to the dealership, in a lot of cases. Also, increased reliability has made the need for tune-ups and lots of repeated basic checks a less common occurrence. To that, there's less people who work with their hands over the years; thus, less know-how is passed on from generation to generation, because some of it is either outdated or even unnecessary.
It's easy to look at teens and millennials as not caring, but face it: Car insurance is much more expensive than it was with each preceding decade. Lawful drivers license acquisition ages have increased. Their school workload has increased. Teenagers can't get jobs because laws don't let them easily get jobs before 16-17, and workplace laws can prohibit minors for safety reasons. The deck is a bit stacked against them in that case. As to whether they'd like a phone or a car, it's not even close...the phone is far cheaper to maintain on their own budget (although they aren't replacements for each other - it's like comparing steak with breakfast cereal).
There are less things that require repeated driving thanks to computers and hand-held technology, but it's really not that much of a change.
Exotic cars of purely mechanical satisfaction is changing - more technology is appealing to some people. Some folks like the noise, feel, odor, and sounds of owning a car. Some really don't want anything more to do with that; a vehicle is a conveyance device which is pretty much an appliance with an exhaust pipe. Electric cars and hybrids are a different form of "car culture", and some people accept that, others proclaim it's heresy.
Again, this isn't about everyone...car folks are going to be car folks, gearheads will be gearheads. Will my son care about cars as much as my father and I do? Hard to say...even my interest wanes a little.
A very good perspective. Much appreciated.
Quote from: formulanone on July 12, 2016, 12:48:04 PMYou can't convince me that everyone was hot for V8s even at the height of the muscle-car era. There were tons of V6 and slant-6 engines out there for those who weren't wealthy nor cared about such things. Not everyone drove the biggest nor fastest car back then, not everyone plumped for the top-flight model trim, and certainly not everyone ordered the high-performance package. It's nostalgia which drives that myth...few remember the unimpressive and average models.
Prior to the fall of 1973, when gas prices skyrocketed and long gas lines (& even rationing) formed; the best-selling cars from just about every domestic make in the so-called Big-Three were indeed the full-size (then called standard-size) car. Such ranged from bare-bones, 6-banger-powered (later succeeded w/small V8s) Ford Customs, Chevy Biscaynes/BelAirs & Plymouth Furys to the near-luxury, V8-powered Mercury Marquis', Buick LeSabres & Electra 225s and Chrysler New Yorkers.
Even during the 60s; while Ford Mustang was getting all the fanfare & pomp (it would reach its peak sales year circa 1966), its standard-size models (Custom/Galaxie 500/LTD/XL) was still Ford's overall best seller (over 600k '66 Mustangs vs. just over a million '66 full-size Fords).
Long story short, while the domestic (US) auto market indeed diversified during the 60s (going from offering one or two vehicle types/sizes to 6 or 7 within a decade); the overall market (sales figures) still favored/preferred large, V8 powered cars... until October of '73. Such a change hit Chrysler the hardest since it had just launched its newly-revamped full-sizes (for '74) a few weeks earlier.
While I agree with you that even then, not everybody wanted a big and/or powerful car w/a V8; a sizable chunk of the car-buying masses indeed did and the sales figures are the proof of such.
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 12, 2016, 02:03:19 PM
Quote from: formulanone on July 12, 2016, 12:48:04 PMYou can't convince me that everyone was hot for V8s even at the height of the muscle-car era. There were tons of V6 and slant-6 engines out there for those who weren't wealthy nor cared about such things. Not everyone drove the biggest nor fastest car back then, not everyone plumped for the top-flight model trim, and certainly not everyone ordered the high-performance package. It's nostalgia which drives that myth...few remember the unimpressive and average models.
Prior to the fall of 1973, when gas prices skyrocketed and long gas lines (& even rationing) formed; the best-selling cars from just about every domestic make in the so-called Big-Three were indeed the full-size (then called standard-size) car. Such ranged from bare-bones, 6-banger-powered (later succeeded w/small V8s) Ford Customs, Chevy Biscaynes/BelAirs & Plymouth Furys to the near-luxury, V8-powered Mercury Marquis', Buick LeSabres & Electra 225s and Chrysler New Yorkers.
Even during the 60s; while Ford Mustang was getting all the fanfare & pomp (it would reach its peak sales year circa 1966), its standard-size models (Custom/Galaxie 500/LTD/XL) was still Ford's overall best seller (over 600k '66 Mustangs vs. just over a million '66 full-size Fords).
Long story short, while the domestic (US) auto market indeed diversified during the 60s (going from offering one or two vehicle types/sizes to 6 or 7 within a decade); the overall market (sales figures) still favored/preferred large, V8 powered cars... until October of '73. Such a change hit Chrysler the hardest since it had just launched its newly-revamped full-sizes (for '74) a few weeks earlier.
While I agree with you that even then, not everybody wanted a big and/or powerful car w/a V8; a sizable chunk of the car-buying masses indeed did and the sales figures are the proof of such.
Back when various outputs and displacements were available...many of them were also low-output V8s, right?
Straying from the output part a bit, it's ironic that there's all sorts of pretty good cars and light trucks out there today; and yet kind of ironic that it's supposedly "dying". I think the writer is caught bemoaning the far-off good old days which are vastly different than today. Yeah, there's going to be a time when driverless cars and other forms of transportation take over the automobile. It's a bit too simplistic to raise a theoretical END banner halfway through the automobile's journey with so much more distance to be covered in the future.
Quote from: Henry on July 12, 2016, 10:53:23 AM
Just because there are less young drivers doesn't mean that the cars are going to go away anytime soon. There are plenty of older drivers who'd be willing to buy these cars.
As in SO MANY things that deal with "millenials don't do this or that" issues, YES, YES, YES.
Marketers are obsessed with 25 to 50 or similar. Yes, you can fish that pond with everybody else. It has the most fish. Or you can find a niche and compete with a lot less fishermen.
Remember Del Webb was born dirt poor and died a billionaire. Selling home to retirees.
Quote from: formulanone on July 12, 2016, 02:25:49 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 12, 2016, 02:03:19 PM
Quote from: formulanone on July 12, 2016, 12:48:04 PMYou can't convince me that everyone was hot for V8s even at the height of the muscle-car era. There were tons of V6 and slant-6 engines out there for those who weren't wealthy nor cared about such things. Not everyone drove the biggest nor fastest car back then, not everyone plumped for the top-flight model trim, and certainly not everyone ordered the high-performance package. It's nostalgia which drives that myth...few remember the unimpressive and average models.
Prior to the fall of 1973, when gas prices skyrocketed and long gas lines (& even rationing) formed; the best-selling cars from just about every domestic make in the so-called Big-Three were indeed the full-size (then called standard-size) car. Such ranged from bare-bones, 6-banger-powered (later succeeded w/small V8s) Ford Customs, Chevy Biscaynes/BelAirs & Plymouth Furys to the near-luxury, V8-powered Mercury Marquis', Buick LeSabres & Electra 225s and Chrysler New Yorkers.
Even during the 60s; while Ford Mustang was getting all the fanfare & pomp (it would reach its peak sales year circa 1966), its standard-size models (Custom/Galaxie 500/LTD/XL) was still Ford's overall best seller (over 600k '66 Mustangs vs. just over a million '66 full-size Fords).
Long story short, while the domestic (US) auto market indeed diversified during the 60s (going from offering one or two vehicle types/sizes to 6 or 7 within a decade); the overall market (sales figures) still favored/preferred large, V8 powered cars... until October of '73. Such a change hit Chrysler the hardest since it had just launched its newly-revamped full-sizes (for '74) a few weeks earlier.
While I agree with you that even then, not everybody wanted a big and/or powerful car w/a V8; a sizable chunk of the car-buying masses indeed did and the sales figures are the proof of such.
Back when various outputs and displacements were available...many of them were also low-output V8s, right?
Straying from the output part a bit, it's ironic that there's all sorts of pretty good cars and light trucks out there today; and yet kind of ironic that it's supposedly "dying". I think the writer is caught bemoaning the far-off good old days which are vastly different than today. Yeah, there's going to be a time when driverless cars and other forms of transportation take over the automobile. It's a bit too simplistic to raise a theoretical END banner halfway through the automobile's journey with so much more distance to be covered in the future.
Let's not forget that we're talking pre-1973 ratings of horsepower in gross. Those V8s, low or high output were running with probably 10-20% less power than were put out publicly until the switch to net. Basically you had a lot of variations of displacement with V8s back in the 50s, 60s and early 60s simply due to the fact that they were really the only thing that produced enough power to even adequately power the car. It's funny to think how people have almost completely forgotten about engines like the 307 Chevy Small block or 318 Chrysler LA Block. Those variations of small displacement V8s largely morphed into the I4s and V6s that you see today. So no, the tarted up 454 LS6 Chevelle may not have been the most common trim in the line, but those muscle cars were sure a lot more approachable price wise than cars are today. If you pace inflation with some top trim levels in a lot of 1960s cars it's hard to get a ton of examples that couldn't be had with a top end engine for more than a modern 30k.
But that's not to say the ultimate truth about performance cars....almost anything above a V6 midsize sedan will dust a traditional muscle car. You have so many things going for modern cars like; higher output by displacement, better electronic fuel management, WORLDS better transmissions and infinitely better tires. Basically unless you had a full on racing engine like a 426 Hemi, Boss 429 or 427 L88 you aren't going to keep up with a modern performance car in a straight line....NOT A CHANCE in hell in the turns. That's not even touching on things like safety standards, suspension and modern creature comforts. Even the Asian and European Automakers have gotten into the performance game the last 25 years...it will be interesting to see how people view this era of cars three to five decades from now. Not having that low point of entry price wise is going to hurt growing a crowd for about anything...cars have been going through this since the 70s. Lack of ease of access in terms of working on the cars hasn't helped much either.
Quote from: SP Cook on July 12, 2016, 03:10:27 PM
Quote from: Henry on July 12, 2016, 10:53:23 AM
Just because there are less young drivers doesn't mean that the cars are going to go away anytime soon. There are plenty of older drivers who'd be willing to buy these cars.
As in SO MANY things that deal with "millenials don't do this or that" issues, YES, YES, YES.
Marketers are obsessed with 25 to 50 or similar. Yes, you can fish that pond with everybody else. It has the most fish. Or you can find a niche and compete with a lot less fishermen.
Remember Del Webb was born dirt poor and died a billionaire. Selling home to retirees.
Something I have never understood about marketing is why do so many people target crowds with no money with the expectation that they will be life long customers? It goes back to the example I gave about Scion...those were supposed to be entry level cars meant to appeal to youthful car buyers but ended up being the bargain basement bin for people who viewed their vehicle as a disposable appliance. So why not just focus on making a product that has some desirability for everyone? I kind of look back at something like the tri-five Chevy...that is the one car that I can think of off the top of my head that really resonated with all car buyers. It was a good looking, inexpensive car that preformed well....who really wouldn't want something like that? The 64 Mustang is another example of that approach working...but for some reason there just aren't many examples of that in the post emissions era. Basically I look at something like the 5th Generation Camaro and how it was considered such a sales success while the 6th generation is struggling so much despite being a way better car in every performance measure. The 6th generation Camaro went up market and expected sales to stay the same while the Mustang stayed at the same entry level price coupled with the Challenger coming down in price.
Quote from: 7/8 on July 12, 2016, 12:07:32 PM
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 12, 2016, 11:24:18 AM
Maybe the better question is how youths (I still consider myself young at 27) view cars from an emotional/identity standpoint. I personally view it as merely a major appliance, frankly not much different than a laundry machine. I couldn't care less about its diagnostics or performance (RPMs, torque, horsepower, etc) beyond its ability to drive me to work, the store, and other locations. In the same vein, I really don't care about the performance of my laundry machines beyond their ability to wash and dry my clothes.
More to the point, I have no emotional affinity to my car.
When I hear people talk about "Car Culture" I imagine young guys hacking around on their cars in a garage and racing on rural roads. In that regard, they confer a higher status to the car than merely an appliance (as I do), but rather a reflection of their own image.
I agree with this. I enjoy driving, but I don't care too much about the car itself (as long as it works!)
You're hitting on the reason I never buy a used car...most people do indeed view their vehicle as an appliance...nothing more. Not that we're talking about anything new...it's just more pervasive with unfriendly levels of technology in modern cars compared to the relative ease of working a non-computer controlled vehicle. Cars are also built to infinitely higher standards, require far less maintenance and can survive a lot more abuse from their owners...
It's interesting....performance really is what you make of it. Even an daily driver...at least for me has a measure of performance in regards to fuel economy and efficiency. People think it's weird when they see me out updating the maintenance log in my Sonic or waxing it on a three month schedule just as I would on my Challenger. Fact is...yes it's an appliance but it's an appliance that I want to actually work the best way it can and despite being something I'll get rid of 150-200k....I want to be able to get the max out of and maybe get a little ROI on the back end. It just seemed that 30 years ago and back that there was more at-large attention to detail...but then again there really had to be with poor build qualities. One thing that drives me up the wall though...and I'll never get over it is people never taking care of their paint...that's a truly lost art.
Quote from: formulanone on July 12, 2016, 12:48:04 PM
Are there less and less people working on their cars? Mostly, yes. Cars can be more complex to work on, and anything requiring computer or software updates/reflashing needs a trip to the dealership, in a lot of cases.
Cars are not only more complex due to computers, they are in many cases more complex physically than they once were, or built in a way that makes working on them at home problematic due to inaccessible designs.
For example, Nissan sedans from the early 2000s had a rather annoying design feature where the oil filter was on the back of the engine and not near the bottom. Getting that thing off without a pit under the car to stand in was damn near impossible, you couldn't reach it and get a good grip on it. Newer models have, fortunately, put the filter in a much more easily accessible spot.
Then you have cars like the Focus, which, to increase fuel economy, is now built with very low ground clearance and a solid plate covering the underside of the car to prevent components from getting scraped up when it inevitably bottoms out. Lovely for the stated goals, but again: good luck changing your own oil or doing anything yourself that requires getting under the car. You need to get it nice and high off the ground in order to even crawl under it, and then you have to get that damned plate off before you can do anything else (and get it back on when you're done!).
Of course, it is also true that there is social change at work here. Manufacturing isn't as big of a thing in the US as it once was. Fewer people have regular experience working with their hands on machinery these days; you also have people who uninterested in learning because they would rather learn how to program or otherwise work with computers - arguably a much more valuable skill in this day and age.
This is, interestingly, also related to a shift in car culture amongst the younger crowd - who are not impressed by how much horsepower a car has or how fast it can go from 0-60, but are absolutely concerned with how many features the built in electronics have because they want to plug their smartphones in and have their car play their music, answer their phone calls, read their texts out loud to them as they're driving and send dictated responses, etc.
Quote from: Duke87 on July 13, 2016, 12:58:54 AM
Quote from: formulanone on July 12, 2016, 12:48:04 PM
Are there less and less people working on their cars? Mostly, yes. Cars can be more complex to work on, and anything requiring computer or software updates/reflashing needs a trip to the dealership, in a lot of cases.
Cars are not only more complex due to computers, they are in many cases more complex physically than they once were, or built in a way that makes working on them at home problematic due to inaccessible designs.
For example, Nissan sedans from the early 2000s had a rather annoying design feature where the oil filter was on the back of the engine and not near the bottom. Getting that thing off without a pit under the car to stand in was damn near impossible, you couldn't reach it and get a good grip on it. Newer models have, fortunately, put the filter in a much more easily accessible spot.
Then you have cars like the Focus, which, to increase fuel economy, is now built with very low ground clearance and a solid plate covering the underside of the car to prevent components from getting scraped up when it inevitably bottoms out. Lovely for the stated goals, but again: good luck changing your own oil or doing anything yourself that requires getting under the car. You need to get it nice and high off the ground in order to even crawl under it, and then you have to get that damned plate off before you can do anything else (and get it back on when you're done!).
Of course, it is also true that there is social change at work here. Manufacturing isn't as big of a thing in the US as it once was. Fewer people have regular experience working with their hands on machinery these days; you also have people who uninterested in learning because they would rather learn how to program or otherwise work with computers - arguably a much more valuable skill in this day and age.
This is, interestingly, also related to a shift in car culture amongst the younger crowd - who are not impressed by how much horsepower a car has or how fast it can go from 0-60, but are absolutely concerned with how many features the built in electronics have because they want to plug their smartphones in and have their car play their music, answer their phone calls, read their texts out loud to them as they're driving and send dictated responses, etc.
Some of the 90s cars were great examples of that. I remember how much unapproachable having to take the engine out the bottom of a car on a lift made things, the 4th Generation F-body comes to mind. But you also hit on a huge difference in shift in culture just in general from blue collar to white collar. All those mechanical skills across the board have dropped a lot of the manufacturing capacity moved out of the country due to high labor costs and what remains doesn't require as much skilled labor force. They don't call cities in the midwest the rust belt for nothing....especially Detroit which is a fantastic example about not putting all eggs in one basket with an industry.
You know...you're right and the car sales people have gotten pretty pushy with trying to get you interested in those features. I hit 40 last year, so I think when I walk into a dealership that people seem to think that I'm up on the latest and greatest with communications or media. Generally I've skipped out on infotainment features when they were individual options but now they have generally rolled into trim levels instead. About the only think that I really use at the end of the day is maybe the blue tooth on my phone since I'm fairly certain it's required by law here. Aside from that I stick with the AUX jack and my bargain bin SanDisc MP3 player...just shows that I'm getting old.
I've noticed something about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.
Despite my interest in signs and road projects, I've never had an interest in cars or buying cars. It's partly because I don't like driving much. I don't find it relaxing or enjoyable like most here do.
Quote from: 7/8 on July 12, 2016, 12:07:32 PM
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 12, 2016, 11:24:18 AM
Maybe the better question is how youths (I still consider myself young at 27) view cars from an emotional/identity standpoint. I personally view it as merely a major appliance, frankly not much different than a laundry machine. I couldn't care less about its diagnostics or performance (RPMs, torque, horsepower, etc) beyond its ability to drive me to work, the store, and other locations. In the same vein, I really don't care about the performance of my laundry machines beyond their ability to wash and dry my clothes.
More to the point, I have no emotional affinity to my car.
When I hear people talk about "Car Culture" I imagine young guys hacking around on their cars in a garage and racing on rural roads. In that regard, they confer a higher status to the car than merely an appliance (as I do), but rather a reflection of their own image.
I agree with this. I enjoy driving, but I don't care too much about the car itself (as long as it works!)
Resonates with me.
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 13, 2016, 10:02:53 PM
I've noticed something about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.
It's an expensive hobby and motorsports are inherently dangerous. Or because many folks have limited physical room nor time for a single vehicle. Or, that they really don't externally care about what a "cool" vehicle is, as long as they like it.
One drawback to weekday business travel is that I only have time for one car, and barely much time to drive my own car; I'd rather spend it with my kids. I haven't gone autocrossing more than a handful of times, and very personally, it's selfish because I'd rather give my spare time to the children. I've thought about getting a used S2000 for weekends or regional work, but it seems to have a problem with fitting luggage the size of a roll-aboard suitcase (unless you remove the spare). Secondly, there isn't as much local work to justify the purchase of something that's going to be a roadblock in my driveway for weeks on end. Lastly, I like to go places...not see the same thing over and over again.
Quote from: formulanone on July 14, 2016, 05:55:04 AM
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 13, 2016, 10:02:53 PM
I've noticed something about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.
Because it's an expensive hobby and motorsports are inherently dangerous?
Honestly, I've noticed the same thing of posters on these forums. People love to talk roads and highways and such amongst each other, but when it comes to reading and looking up official material, people shy away from it. Many have no clue how to access transportation documents from their state on the web (some states being better than others, but when you find the info it's amazing the amount of detail some provide). People love to drive, but when I posted about a volunteer driving opportunity, absolutely no one had any interest from what I could tell.
So, going back to the original statement - for many people it's fun to discuss and such, but it's not the 70's and 80's anymore. I wasn't into cars, but yet would know about the various illegal street races in South Philly and elsewhere. Finding places to street race is nearly impossible, with huge penalties when caught.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 14, 2016, 06:06:31 AMwhen I posted about a volunteer driving opportunity, absolutely no one had any interest from what I could tell.
That's largely because most if not all that driving for said-opportunity is
in the City of Philadelphia at a time when there will be road closures & restrictions due to the upcoming DNC Convention. While such will certainly not resemble the lock-down that took place last year during the papal visit; the traffic en route and the
perceived hassle factor (& the fact that delegates (regardless of party) can be arrogant and/or lousy tippers) is enough to take a pass.
Also, most of the users on this board don't live near Philly nor are in the Delaware Valley.
Side bar: had someone made a similar request for the GOP Convention in Cleveland; the level of interest & response would likely be similar.
Most driving enthusiasts loath city driving.
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 14, 2016, 08:43:52 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 14, 2016, 06:06:31 AMwhen I posted about a volunteer driving opportunity, absolutely no one had any interest from what I could tell.
That's largely because most if not all that driving for said-opportunity is in the City of Philadelphia at a time when there will be road closures & restrictions due to the upcoming DNC Convention. While such will certainly not resemble the lock-down that took place last year during the papal visit; the traffic en route and the perceived hassle factor (& the fact that delegates (regardless of party) can be arrogant and/or lousy tippers) is enough to take a pass.
Also, most of the users on this board don't live near Philly nor are in the Delaware Valley.
Side bar: had someone made a similar request for the GOP Convention in Cleveland; the level of interest & response would likely be similar.
Most driving enthusiasts loath city driving.
I'll second this....a lot of the reason I chose a transfer out of the east coast was due to the high volumes of traffic. I love driving but I HATE commuting, especially in traffic. Driving to me is heading out on a country road somewhere...not slogging down I-66 in gridlock for 90 minutes plus every morning. It's funny that Philadelphia keeps getting mentioned. Two years ago my family had a reunion in Barnaget New Jersey. I snuck on through via US 40 but my brother insisted on flying into Philadelphia and staying there overnight. When I drove into Barnaget from Atlantic City that Saturday morning via US 9 I passed probably literally 2,500 cars on the surface streets trying to get to the coast line. So my brother...in his infinite wisdom decided not to leave early ended up being 3 hours late to the reunion despite my warnings to him. Truly it is a different world in that part of the country, you have so many people living in such a small place that driving is difficult pretty much all the time.
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 14, 2016, 08:43:52 AM
Most driving enthusiasts loath city driving.
Mid-day, most big cities have just enough traffic but not too much where it's gridlocked, the sunlight isn't directly your face nor casting deep shadows everywhere, and they're worth touring for the sake of seeing the sights. Not to mention, there's all sorts of old stuff to check out. Drawbacks are finding parking and uncrowded lunch spots.
Not much of a fan during peak travel hours, unless it's a place where traffic doesn't get backed up in the particular direction of travel.
Also the Sunday drive. Never saw the appeal of that.
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 14, 2016, 09:48:09 AM
Also the Sunday drive. Never saw the appeal of that.
Seeing something new? Taking a car out of the garage that only comes out on weekends? For me it's usually been one of the two if not both. But then again out west there is a lot more open landscape to go explore than back east. Part of that is being into the outdoors given that I climb, hike, run, ect...but there are times that I just want to go see a road because it looks cool and why not take the weekend car out to do it? Granted....your screen name is Alexandria, VA, so basically going anywhere in a car even on weekends is probably going to be a slog of misery....at least for my Uncle it is and he lives there as well.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 14, 2016, 10:06:52 AM
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 14, 2016, 09:48:09 AM
Also the Sunday drive. Never saw the appeal of that.
Seeing something new? Taking a car out of the garage that only comes out on weekends? For me it's usually been one of the two if not both. But then again out west there is a lot more open landscape to go explore than back east. Part of that is being into the outdoors given that I climb, hike, run, ect...but there are times that I just want to go see a road because it looks cool and why not take the weekend car out to do it? Granted....your screen name is Alexandria, VA, so basically going anywhere in a car even on weekends is probably going to be a slog of misery....at least for my Uncle it is and he lives there as well.
Didn't know people did that...
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 14, 2016, 10:14:18 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 14, 2016, 10:06:52 AM
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 14, 2016, 09:48:09 AM
Also the Sunday drive. Never saw the appeal of that.
Seeing something new? Taking a car out of the garage that only comes out on weekends? For me it's usually been one of the two if not both. But then again out west there is a lot more open landscape to go explore than back east. Part of that is being into the outdoors given that I climb, hike, run, ect...but there are times that I just want to go see a road because it looks cool and why not take the weekend car out to do it? Granted....your screen name is Alexandria, VA, so basically going anywhere in a car even on weekends is probably going to be a slog of misery....at least for my Uncle it is and he lives there as well.
Didn't know people did that...
It's not a big of thing as it used to be... My Dad, me and brother have usually had something additional in the garage for the weekends on top of the daily commuter. But that's what we all grew up in, really it's just a family car nuts doing car things which I realize isn't in the budget for everyone nor the interest might not exist.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 14, 2016, 06:06:31 AM
Quote from: formulanone on July 14, 2016, 05:55:04 AM
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 13, 2016, 10:02:53 PM
I've noticed something about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.
Because it's an expensive hobby and motorsports are inherently dangerous?
Honestly, I've noticed the same thing of posters on these forums. People love to talk roads and highways and such amongst each other, but when it comes to reading and looking up official material, people shy away from it. Many have no clue how to access transportation documents from their state on the web (some states being better than others, but when you find the info it's amazing the amount of detail some provide). People love to drive, but when I posted about a volunteer driving opportunity, absolutely no one had any interest from what I could tell.
I've got two takeaways from that. 1. Public sector websites are often crummy and labyrinthine. Part of it is that the public sector often doesn't get to pay their people as well as the private sector for web design work and the other part is that the sites aren't selling anything or doing it as a passion play. 2. I've noticed that by going to forum meets for other sites is that sometimes the users like the forum's atmosphere more than the subject matter itself. Or they are recluses that use forums and websites as just another way to pass the time at home inside while not at work.
Yeah, I find it ironic to complain on an internet forum about people being armchair enthusiasts.
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 14, 2016, 08:43:52 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 14, 2016, 06:06:31 AMwhen I posted about a volunteer driving opportunity, absolutely no one had any interest from what I could tell.
That's largely because most if not all that driving for said-opportunity is in the City of Philadelphia at a time when there will be road closures & restrictions due to the upcoming DNC Convention. While such will certainly not resemble the lock-down that took place last year during the papal visit; the traffic en route and the perceived hassle factor (& the fact that delegates (regardless of party) can be arrogant and/or lousy tippers) is enough to take a pass.
Also, most of the users on this board don't live near Philly nor are in the Delaware Valley.
No doubt driving will be a pain in the butt, and the recent national issues won't help matters. That said, this is kinda the behind-the-scenes work that allows one to understand those road closures, and depending on what one would do, be permitted thru those road closures. Basically, it would be a chance to drive in a different environment in an official capacity. And you don't even use your own car!
As far as tipping goes, I don't expect anyone to tip. While we are drivers for official people, we're not taxi drivers in that sense. If I was important enough in my day-to-day work to have a driver, I wouldn't expect to tip the driver...he's a driver because that's his job.
It's a volunteer activity, plain and simple. And I think much of what you stated is shared amongst the population in general: If I'm not getting anything (especially money) out of it, why should I do it? Long-time organizations such as the Lions Club, Rotary, Jaycees, etc are all having the same issues: They simply can't get people out to volunteer. The shame of it is that there's a need for volunteers more than ever.
Until last decade, those organizations served as a way for people to interact with each other. Outside of making phone calls or snail mail, people actually had to meet up with each other to talk about what was going on. Today, using a computer is considered outdated...I should be able to tell everyone what's going on by using my phone while driving. And to meet up at a meeting in an organization that you probably have to pay to join up for? Most people would say...why bother?
Quote from: kphoger on July 14, 2016, 10:57:55 AM
Yeah, I find it ironic to complain on an internet forum about people being armchair enthusiasts.
LOL...I figured it would be a way to get people out and about. Maybe if I renamed it a Pokémon Go activity, it would've received more interest!!! :colorful:
I would also say that I enjoy roads, in the sense that I appreciate networks. I also enjoy railroads (the networks themselves) for the same reason, but I am not a railfan. The car is a mere accessory to the roads.
Quote from: AlexandriaVA on July 14, 2016, 11:06:30 AM
I would also say that I enjoy roads, in the sense that I appreciate networks. I also enjoy railroads (the networks themselves) for the same reason, but I am not a railfan. The car is a mere accessory to the roads.
See that's the thing for me, they always seemed to go hand and hand from perspective. I'm not talking about necessarily taking some big block muscle car out onto the roads to explore signage...it just seem like my interest in cars led to my interest in everything else transportation related. The way a lot of these roads were built actually the car was the accessory but then it morphed into the road was the accessory to facilitate the car...especially when freeways leading up to the Interstate were being built. I've always been fascinated by cars and even things like four cylinder run of the mill stuff interests me. Hell look at all the old Motorweek reviews I posted in the 80s/90s car thread, I think the most interesting thing for me was that Pontiac 1000.
And most car people eventually become interested in at least one other type of vehicle be it airplanes, boats, motorcycles and/or trains.
In the US and esp. CA (birthplace of car culture), people (esp. generation Y) seem less interested in cars, driving and road trips like their parents and grandparents were. Cities and metro areas like L.A. and SF are increasingly pedestrians, more bicycles and an interest in taking public transit are trends you would notice there. And finally, concerns about the costs of gas per gallon, insurance and ownership, along with road safety and environmentalism (we're trying hard to undo global warming or climate change), made cars less appealing to people in the 2010s.
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 14, 2016, 11:36:00 AM
And most car people eventually become interested in at least one other type of vehicle be it airplanes, boats, motorcycles and/or trains.
For me about the only thing I never really got into was boats which is incredibly ironic considering I'm from Michigan and how I spent part of my early adulthood. I'm more of a casual motorcycle fan but I spent a great deal of time in my teens building my own dirt bikes. I think it's more of culture thing that pushed me towards cars than motorcycles. It seems like you either have to have way overgrown beard and 50 plus to be Harley guy or some 20-something with a bad DMV record to be into sports bikes. I love tracking old railroad alignments, anything mine related in particular is interesting to me. I would never pass up a quality museum on any form of transportation be it; car, rail, boat, motorcycle, plane or otherwise like a space exhibit.
Quote from: Desert Man on July 14, 2016, 11:44:12 AM
In the US and esp. CA (birthplace of car culture), people (esp. generation Y) seem less interested in cars, driving and road trips like their parents and grandparents were. Cities and metro areas like L.A. and SF are increasingly pedestrians, more bicycles and an interest in taking public transit are trends you would notice there. And finally, concerns about the costs of gas per gallon, insurance and ownership, along with road safety and environmentalism (we're trying hard to undo global warming or climate change), made cars less appealing to people in the 2010s.
And a lot of it seems to be deliberate in regards to legislation to push people away from cars. It's hard not to think that when you see things like the high speed rail possibly being funded by a mileage usage tax.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 14, 2016, 11:47:33 AM
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 14, 2016, 11:36:00 AM
And most car people eventually become interested in at least one other type of vehicle be it airplanes, boats, motorcycles and/or trains.
For me about the only thing I never really got into was boats which is incredibly ironic considering I'm from Michigan and how I spent part of my early adulthood. I'm more of a casual motorcycle fan but I spent a great deal of time in my teens building my own dirt bikes. I think it's more of culture thing that pushed me towards cars than motorcycles. It seems like you either have to have way overgrown beard and 50 plus to be Harley guy or some 20-something with a bad DMV record to be into sports bikes. I love tracking old railroad alignments, anything mine related in particular is interesting to me. I would never pass up a quality museum on any form of transportation be it; car, rail, boat, motorcycle, plane or otherwise like a space exhibit.
I think overall thinks like bikes and boats traditionally have a dearth of 30-45 y.o. participants due to that being prime kid-raisin' age.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 12, 2016, 11:14:52 AM
Quote from: bing101 on July 12, 2016, 11:09:51 AM
Not necessarily though. In the Bay Area you need Bart or buses to get to work because the parking fees are big in these areas. Its simply built for public transit. But I think car culture still exists though.
San Francisco ironically is the only western city that has gone through Manhattenization. It has the second highest population density after NYC, I want to say it's about 20,000 people per square mile if I recall the demographics correct. So basically you can't have the same level of roadways being built with all that pre-existing infrastructure in place....it's a very old city by west coast standards. Basically you run into that all over the eastern sea board, a city is small in terms of actual area but the population is very high. Look at something like Phoenix which is 518 square miles and despite almost having 1.5 million residents has a density of about 3,000 per mile. Basically cities like Phoenix, L.A., Salt Lake City and Las Vegas largely grew up in an era where the car was the primary form of transportation which is why they were designed with it in mind.
True and also Manhattan is just the same size as Vallejo, CA when you take into account land area. But wait Since I mentioned Vallejo its the city where Solano county people do use their cars but they have to park them at the Vallejo Ferry Terminal and a park and ride spot to go to a bus that goes to San Francisco.
Quote from: bing101 on July 14, 2016, 03:59:40 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 12, 2016, 11:14:52 AM
Quote from: bing101 on July 12, 2016, 11:09:51 AM
Not necessarily though. In the Bay Area you need Bart or buses to get to work because the parking fees are big in these areas. Its simply built for public transit. But I think car culture still exists though.
San Francisco ironically is the only western city that has gone through Manhattenization. It has the second highest population density after NYC, I want to say it's about 20,000 people per square mile if I recall the demographics correct. So basically you can't have the same level of roadways being built with all that pre-existing infrastructure in place....it's a very old city by west coast standards. Basically you run into that all over the eastern sea board, a city is small in terms of actual area but the population is very high. Look at something like Phoenix which is 518 square miles and despite almost having 1.5 million residents has a density of about 3,000 per mile. Basically cities like Phoenix, L.A., Salt Lake City and Las Vegas largely grew up in an era where the car was the primary form of transportation which is why they were designed with it in mind.
True and also Manhattan is just the same size as Vallejo, CA when you take into account land area. But wait Since I mentioned Vallejo its the city where Solano county people do use their cars but they have to park them at the Vallejo Ferry Terminal and a park and ride spot to go to a bus that goes to San Francisco.
My favorite comparison is to take NYC at 470 something square miles (water included) with a population density of 28k per square mile to something like Phoenix which is 518 square mile but only has a density of about 3k per square mile. So basically you are literally almost dealing with ten times more people crammed into the same area....so it's pretty obvious to tell which one is going to get around easier by car.
Yeah everyone keeps telling me about the ferries up there in the Bay Area or the trains from San Jose. For me at my ever advancing age...I feel like mass transit is an undertaking that I'm not up to get into learning about. But you figure that a lot of kids grow up around those transportation methods...so it's only natural they are more used to them than say someone like me who grew up in a era where mass transit was largely non-existent.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 14, 2016, 06:06:31 AM
Honestly, I've noticed the same thing of posters on these forums. People love to talk roads and highways and such amongst each other, but when it comes to reading and looking up official material, people shy away from it. Many have no clue how to access transportation documents from their state on the web (some states being better than others, but when you find the info it's amazing the amount of detail some provide). People love to drive, but when I posted about a volunteer driving opportunity, absolutely no one had any interest from what I could tell.
I don't know that looking up official material would really be the gold standard of non-armchair roadgeeking, since it is after all still done from an armchair or similar piece of furniture unless you're the hardcore type who goes to DOT headquarters or libraries to look up stuff that isn't available online.
And yes, there are some people who like roads but don't enjoy being in a car so they don't do much firsthand exploring. But then there are people who would love to drive all over the place and explore and such, but for one reason or another cannot at present - too young to have a drivers' license, not enough money to pay for a car or long trips, not enough spare time to do any significant roadtripping, etc.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 14, 2016, 11:03:44 AM
It's a volunteer activity, plain and simple. And I think much of what you stated is shared amongst the population in general: If I'm not getting anything (especially money) out of it, why should I do it?
Also worth noting that even if someone enjoys driving, that does not mean they enjoy driving on someone else's terms serving someone else's needs.
There has been, for example, more than one occasion where I started to raise my hand that I'd be willing to drive a couple people somewhere, and then put my hand down and said "nevermind" when it was made clear to me that I would be expected to drive directly to the destination and would not be permitted to take six hours to get somewhere that's three hours away by the fastest route as I was intending to.
Only people outside of the car culture think it's dying - just like how they think the manual transmission is dying. What they fail to realize is that cars are much cheaper (relatively) than they used to be which means a lot more people are driving them - and this is watering down the numbers. The percentage of car enthusiasts may be lower, but our numbers most certainly are not dwindling.
Car culture won't die until cars are simply outright banned for consumer operation.
Quote from: 8.Lug on July 16, 2016, 01:41:05 AM
Only people outside of the car culture think it's dying - just like how they think the manual transmission is dying. What they fail to realize is that cars are much cheaper (relatively) than they used to be which means a lot more people are driving them - and this is watering down the numbers. The percentage of car enthusiasts may be lower, but our numbers most certainly are not dwindling.
Car culture won't die until cars are simply outright banned for consumer operation.
Actually in terms of pace of inflation they are way more expensive than ever before but it hasn't outpaced something like the cost of a college tuition let's say. I'm talking even the cheaper cars too....say you took $4,000 dollars in 1969 that comes out to $26,271 dollars today. Could you imagine the 2016 Camaro SS being had for 26K instead of an entry of of 39k?...damn there would be a lot more on the road. So basically unless you are getting in through the used car market the entry level price of car culture just isn't what it once was. I wouldn't go as far as to say the manual transmission is going to die out but it certainly won't ever see 10% of the market ever again. It's pretty telling how far manual transmissions have really fallen behind automatics with multimatic technology when makers like Ferrari won't offer them anymore.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 16, 2016, 07:13:42 AM
I wouldn't go as far as to say the manual transmission is going to die out but it certainly won't ever see 10% of the market ever again. It's pretty telling how far manual transmissions have really fallen behind automatics with multimatic technology when makers like Ferrari won't offer them anymore.
More than 10% in the US - maybe.
Worldwide, it is more like 50%. Don't try to rent a car in Europe if you don't drive manual...
http://www.statista.com/statistics/204123/transmission-type-market-share-in-automobile-production-worldwide/
Maybe that can be related to US car culture evolving a different way?
Manuals are definitely dying out in the states, outside of perhaps a few models. Even in models that offer them, they don't make many... when I got my Civic, it was the ONLY manual Civic on the entire lot (didn't check the other models, so it may have been the only manual period). Many makes/models don't offer manual transmission at all any more, and that number will only increase as self-driving cars emerge. Soon, I predict that those of us who want a manual but don't need or want a fancy sports car are going to have nowhere to go.
Wasn't the buying rate for manual transmissions down to 6.7% in the U.S. back in 2010?...someone correct me if I'm wrong or please feel free to share a number from 2014/2015. I'd like to point my finger at the Interstates opening up having something to do with the automatic catching on so quickly state side..but more or less that's just speculation on my part. The last pure manual I owned was my 02 Mustang GT.....and while shifting around on a mountain road might have been fun it sucked on city surface streets or in a traffic jam. So for me when I look at something like the Challenger I just bought it's even more difficult to justify the purchase of the manual especially when I get two extra gears and a computer that can shift things way faster than I can...even when I use the taps. But that's the thing, almost every level of car offers some level of multimatic for manual shifting. Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...lest we forget automatics typically are pulling better EPA fuel economy figures pretty regularly over manuals these days. But then again that's just my perspective on the U.S. market, what's going else car wise in the world asides from Canada really isn't some I interact with all that much. But it would be interesting to find out if there is a similar wave of disinterest in cars that's growing in the European and Asian car markets...I would speculate that answer probably is a no for Asia given the automotive boon there in the last decade.
All three of my current cars are manual. My next two (newer daily driver and JDM import once it's old enough) will be, too.
Quote from: Takumi on July 16, 2016, 07:27:41 PM
All three of my current cars are manual. My next two (newer daily driver and JDM import once it's old enough) will be, too.
Seems like almost every JDM car that I've seen floating around is a manual. I can't ever recall off the top of my head seeing an automatic JDM even at car shows...I sure there must have been but it really isn't my scene.
My younger brother got a used manual Volkswagen Jetta a year ago. I'm not sure if I'd buy one since it would be crappy using it in traffic, but I can see why they'd be fun to drive. I've only driven it once so far, but I think I would enjoy using it on road trips :)
I think the death of "car culture" has been greatly exaggerated.
First–I dispute that the love of
cars-gratia-cartis was ever as pervasive as many claim. For every budding teenage George Barris in the '60s, there were a dozen plain Ednas and nerdy Eugenes whose slant six Valiants and bone-stock Volkswagens were simply transportation appliances–a way to get to after school jobs at Korvettes and chess club meetings. For Baby Boomers whose parents had isolated them in newly minted suburban housing tracts, the car was often the only way they could meet up with friends or even keep in touch with the outside world. Except perhaps the phone, which the family likely had only one, maybe two of...and definitely not in the teenager's room.
Today, kids are constantly in touch with one another...
except when they're in the car (hopefully). And at the same time, there seems to be less enthusiasm about physically being together with friends. Anytime I see young people together, they're all staring off in different directions, silent, on their phones. Ironic.
But even if America's total car dependence is fading somewhat, it still has a long way to fall. The per capita vehicle miles traveled, currently just under 10,000, could drop by half and would still be well ahead of where it was in 1960. Take a look at the most transit-oriented nations on earth, and you'll still find active subcultures of die-hard gearheads. In a transit-embracing America, "car culture" would have merely lost the people who were forced to drive a car because it was the only way to get home from marching band practice.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 14, 2016, 09:38:33 PM
For me at my ever advancing age...I feel like mass transit is an undertaking that I'm not up to get into learning about. But you figure that a lot of kids grow up around those transportation methods...so it's only natural they are more used to them than say someone like me who grew up in a era where mass transit was largely non-existent.
I don't think that's necessarily the case. I grew up in a small city where busses were the only form of public transit, and the only people who used them were the elderly, the abject poor, and the moderately poor who had racked up multiple DUIs. I used a city bus
just once in my hometown and felt as if I had been an interloper in a milieu where I did not belong. Absolutely everywhere I went as a child and for years after was in a private automobile.
Fast forward through a decade and a couple hundred thousand miles of driving, and I've learned to embrace transit. You see, I love cars and truly enjoy driving, and I think it would be a tragedy if I grew to hate driving simply because I put myself in a position where I was forced to drive everywhere, particularly in urban areas where driving is unmitigated hell. I endured several soul-crushing months of that living in Los Angeles. Never again.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 16, 2016, 06:36:09 PM
Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...
Speed has nothing to do with it. It's the graceful choreography of clutch in...clutch out...shifter forward...shifter back... that becomes both fun and familiar once you've mastered it. Yes, it can become a pain in heavy traffic, but as I indicated above, if I'm spending my life in heavy traffic, I'm living wrong.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 12, 2016, 12:32:42 AM
But I think it's a culture shift with society more in general than just cars. Look at how Milennials operate...they are all social butterflies (I had maybe 3 or 4 good friends in high school), they all want to live in urban environments (as opposed to my generation who viewed them as crowded hell holes) and they tend to grow up a lot slower...especially from career or economics. I remember wanting to leave the house so badly when I was 18 that I joined the military to fund it, there is this whole trend with people staying with the parents until they are in their mid-20s now. I think a lot of this is being driven buy the net based culture and social media frenzy that people grow up in nowadays.
I don't want to get this too political or off-topic, but as a borderline millennial myself it irks me when people look at us and say "the kids these days, they don't have the jobs or the houses, it's cause of the technologies!" The millennials started entering the workforce in 2008 or later. That was when the big recession hit. The workforce contracted due to the poor economic conditions, and in many businesses, staff was let go and the remaining employees were required to take on more work to make up for it.
Since then, employers have gotten complacent and used to one employee doing the work of two or three. They get away with posting positions that require numerous years of experience for entry-level pay. A lot of companies are still carrying on in this way even though it's not 2008 anymore and they're not in any imminent danger of going under any time soon.
So this is the world the millennials walked into and are tasked to adapting to. When you have a college degree and can't get a job with it, you're forced to economize. Some choose to do this by staying with their parents. Others do it by eschewing the car and the attached gas, maintenance, and insurance costs.
Quote from: briantroutman on July 17, 2016, 01:03:38 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 14, 2016, 09:38:33 PM
For me at my ever advancing age...I feel like mass transit is an undertaking that I'm not up to get into learning about. But you figure that a lot of kids grow up around those transportation methods...so it's only natural they are more used to them than say someone like me who grew up in a era where mass transit was largely non-existent.
I don't think that's necessarily the case. I grew up in a small city where busses were the only form of public transit, and the only people who used them were the elderly, the abject poor, and the moderately poor who had racked up multiple DUIs. I used a city bus just once in my hometown and felt as if I had been an interloper in a milieu where I did not belong. Absolutely everywhere I went as a child and for years after was in a private automobile.
Fast forward through a decade and a couple hundred thousand miles of driving, and I've learned to embrace transit. You see, I love cars and truly enjoy driving, and I think it would be a tragedy if I grew to hate driving simply because I put myself in a position where I was forced to drive everywhere, particularly in urban areas where driving is unmitigated hell. I endured several soul-crushing months of that living in Los Angeles. Never again.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 16, 2016, 06:36:09 PM
Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...
Speed has nothing to do with it. It's the graceful choreography of clutch in...clutch out...shifter forward...shifter back... that becomes both fun and familiar once you've mastered it. Yes, it can become a pain in heavy traffic, but as I indicated above, if I'm spending my life in heavy traffic, I'm living wrong.
Okay so it's just not me that gets that weird feeling on mass transit. :-D I honestly just get this vibe that it's unapproachable for whatever reason. About the only one that I ever kind of found somewhat easy to use was the trains on the east coast, it felt almost identical to going to the airport but with a much more laid back and quicker process. Funny thing is that I find major train stations be really good places to park even if I don't use the train. I used to park at Union Station in D.C. and walk to whatever I had to do.
That's just it though, a lot of these people with manuals DO live in heavy traffic. You see it all the time down in Los Angeles, watching someone flip through the gears in a traffic jam (when did we start calling it congestion now that I think about it?) since it stands out so much against the automatics. I could see someone wanting a manual for performance reasons out in a mountain state...I don't know, I guess to each their own. What I don't understand is how the overwhelming majority of the U.S. Market is automatics but on cars that offer both types for some reason the manual which is much lower in volume somehow is the base transmission while the automatic costs you usually a grand.....really?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 17, 2016, 03:55:06 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 12, 2016, 12:32:42 AM
But I think it's a culture shift with society more in general than just cars. Look at how Milennials operate...they are all social butterflies (I had maybe 3 or 4 good friends in high school), they all want to live in urban environments (as opposed to my generation who viewed them as crowded hell holes) and they tend to grow up a lot slower...especially from career or economics. I remember wanting to leave the house so badly when I was 18 that I joined the military to fund it, there is this whole trend with people staying with the parents until they are in their mid-20s now. I think a lot of this is being driven buy the net based culture and social media frenzy that people grow up in nowadays.
I don't want to get this too political or off-topic, but as a borderline millennial myself it irks me when people look at us and say "the kids these days, they don't have the jobs or the houses, it's cause of the technologies!" The millennials started entering the workforce in 2008 or later. That was when the big recession hit. The workforce contracted due to the poor economic conditions, and in many businesses, staff was let go and the remaining employees were required to take on more work to make up for it.
Since then, employers have gotten complacent and used to one employee doing the work of two or three. They get away with posting positions that require numerous years of experience for entry-level pay. A lot of companies are still carrying on in this way even though it's not 2008 anymore and they're not in any imminent danger of going under any time soon.
So this is the world the millennials walked into and are tasked to adapting to. When you have a college degree and can't get a job with it, you're forced to economize. Some choose to do this by staying with their parents. Others do it by eschewing the car and the attached gas, maintenance, and insurance costs.
It's not to say that I haven't had people under the age of 25 that have worked me that haven't been quality people. In fact there was a guy who just moved on since he got his BA that probably would have been one of the top three people that ever worked for me. But I would be remiss to not mention he went through the military and was out using the G.I. bill...so I don't know if it's an apples to apples comparison. But then again I've known guys my age that had that exact same situation that screwed it all up. Every age group has their people who have success, fail or generally just float around somewhere in the middle. I guess it's really no different than someone like my baby boomer parents looking at my generation and saying we would all be screw ups because of boom boxes, MTV or a Nintendo....something. Could be that's just a sign that the previous generation is getting "old" when they don't understand things the younger generation is into.
One positive that did come out this recession...at least in my eyes (and this might not be depending where you are in life) is that work experience and known job history really took over in importance than a college degree. When I was growing all that ever got beaten into my head was a college degree and really at the time that's all an employer wanted. I think that had a lot to do with the baby boomers wanting to shift out of blue collar work and projecting that onto their kids...which was fine at the time. If I had to weigh who is usually a better employee it's typical the one who has been doing something for a longer period of time rather than someone just entering the field...degree or not, the colleges really aren't teaching you a lot that applies to real life. That's not to say that having AA, BA or MA isn't something that isn't helpful but I would think that in today's atmosphere it's better to do school part-time to get the work history going and accumulate the education over time, with things like online schooling it seems to be a lot easier to juggle both. What has happened in the four year colleges is a huge outpacing of inflation for tuition, books and pretty much anything that goes along price wise to a major "name" college.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 16, 2016, 06:36:09 PM
Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...lest we forget automatics typically are pulling better EPA fuel economy figures pretty regularly over manuals these days.
Go over to the economy/compact car segment, where the automatic transmissions are usually a decade or two behind the times, so having 5-6 gears instead of four makes a noticeable difference in performance compared to the slushbox. If the car is only equipped with a little over 100 horsepower, every little bit counts. (In my car, first and second gear is a good deal shorter than the automatic gearset; in tests, this means a bit over a second to 60mph.)
Fuel economy is usually a negligible difference, because programmed shift logic will upshift at 2500-3000 rpm during most driving, avoid first gear during partial-open throttle starts, and reach for the tallest gear as soon as it detects a lack of hurry-up from the driver.
Lastly, it's a bit more engaging to have a lever which makes it inexplicably more fun.
From what I can tell, its a case of people not being able to afford cars, or wanting to live in San Fran or NYC because its "trendy" or percieved as more LBGT friendly. I tell people, I wouldn't mind a cabin in the middle of New Hampshire away from the crowds and hustle and bustle, but that's just my preference since I enjoy the quiet of the outdoors.
Tho lot of my friends in my age group (late 20s early 30s) have cars, albeit older models. I also know quite a few car guys and one or two car girls also. Subaru seems to be really popular among people I know.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 16, 2016, 07:31:37 PM
Quote from: Takumi on July 16, 2016, 07:27:41 PM
All three of my current cars are manual. My next two (newer daily driver and JDM import once it's old enough) will be, too.
Seems like almost every JDM car that I've seen floating around is a manual. I can't ever recall off the top of my head seeing an automatic JDM even at car shows...I sure there must have been but it really isn't my scene.
They're out there. There's a company here in Richmond that imports JDM cars like Nissan Skylines, and some of them have automatics.
Quote from: formulanone on July 17, 2016, 09:36:16 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 16, 2016, 06:36:09 PM
Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...lest we forget automatics typically are pulling better EPA fuel economy figures pretty regularly over manuals these days.
Go over to the economy/compact car segment, where the automatic transmissions are usually a decade or two behind the times, so having 5-6 gears instead of four makes a noticeable difference in performance compared to the slushbox. If the car is only equipped with a little over 100 horsepower, every little bit counts. (In my car, first and second gear is a good deal shorter than the automatic gearset; in tests, this means a bit over a second to 60mph.)
Fuel economy is usually a negligible difference, because programmed shift logic will upshift at 2500-3000 rpm during most driving, avoid first gear during partial-open throttle starts, and reach for the tallest gear as soon as it detects a lack of hurry-up from the driver.
Lastly, it's a bit more engaging to have a lever which makes it inexplicably more fun.
Last two sub-compacts I had were the current Chevy Sonic and a Ford Fiesta. That Fiesta was a beast on fuel economy with that twin clutch automatic, I averaged usually 42-44 MPG most trips on the car and 42.4 through 49,000 miles when I had to take the battery out. That thing shifted HARD though and pretty deliberately, a lot of people who rode in it thought it had a bad transmission. :-D If I recall correctly the manual Fiesta had 37 MPG rated on the highway and the it was 38 MPG for the twin-clutch. Basically I wouldn't call that transmission anything advanced but it was built for economy and it was actually pretty friggin robust considering I put 143,000 miles on that car mostly on mountain roads over the roughly 3 years I had it.
That Sonic on the other hand is a more conventional 6 speed auto and it feels like it. It doesn't shift anywhere near as hard as the Fiesta but averages maybe 38 MPG in the same driving conditions I illustrated above. The shifts are slow and I often put it into multimatic for grades in excess of 6% since it doesn't want to find a gear quickly on it's own.
Quote from: mariethefoxy on July 17, 2016, 10:04:02 AM
From what I can tell, its a case of people not being able to afford cars, or wanting to live in San Fran or NYC because its "trendy" or percieved as more LBGT friendly. I tell people, I wouldn't mind a cabin in the middle of New Hampshire away from the crowds and hustle and bustle, but that's just my preference since I enjoy the quiet of the outdoors.
Tho lot of my friends in my age group (late 20s early 30s) have cars, albeit older models. I also know quite a few car guys and one or two car girls also. Subaru seems to be really popular among people I know.
Just my observation but it seems like NYC really has dropped out the whole "trendy" part of modern culture. I remember in the 1980s that was the place to be, it was all over the place and the setting in a whole lot of movies. Now it kind of feels like...old money...I suppose, seems like Boston is the more popular of the cities these days on the east coast.
I'm an outdoors guy too...I'm about 20 years from retirement but I'm trying to figure out what mountain state build my isolationist "cabin in the woods." So far I got the list down to Nevada, Arizona, Wyoming, Colorado and Montana.
Quote from: Takumi on July 17, 2016, 10:07:58 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 16, 2016, 07:31:37 PM
Quote from: Takumi on July 16, 2016, 07:27:41 PM
All three of my current cars are manual. My next two (newer daily driver and JDM import once it's old enough) will be, too.
Seems like almost every JDM car that I've seen floating around is a manual. I can't ever recall off the top of my head seeing an automatic JDM even at car shows...I sure there must have been but it really isn't my scene.
They're out there. There's a company here in Richmond that imports JDM cars like Nissan Skylines, and some of them have automatics.
Interesting, I'll have to look into that more. I wouldn't mind trying to import something like a Falcon...specifically a 73 XB GT for some special modifications of course.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 14, 2016, 09:38:33 PM
Quote from: bing101 on July 14, 2016, 03:59:40 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 12, 2016, 11:14:52 AM
Quote from: bing101 on July 12, 2016, 11:09:51 AM
Not necessarily though. In the Bay Area you need Bart or buses to get to work because the parking fees are big in these areas. Its simply built for public transit. But I think car culture still exists though.
San Francisco ironically is the only western city that has gone through Manhattenization. It has the second highest population density after NYC, I want to say it's about 20,000 people per square mile if I recall the demographics correct. So basically you can't have the same level of roadways being built with all that pre-existing infrastructure in place....it's a very old city by west coast standards. Basically you run into that all over the eastern sea board, a city is small in terms of actual area but the population is very high. Look at something like Phoenix which is 518 square miles and despite almost having 1.5 million residents has a density of about 3,000 per mile. Basically cities like Phoenix, L.A., Salt Lake City and Las Vegas largely grew up in an era where the car was the primary form of transportation which is why they were designed with it in mind.
True and also Manhattan is just the same size as Vallejo, CA when you take into account land area. But wait Since I mentioned Vallejo its the city where Solano county people do use their cars but they have to park them at the Vallejo Ferry Terminal and a park and ride spot to go to a bus that goes to San Francisco.
My favorite comparison is to take NYC at 470 something square miles (water included) with a population density of 28k per square mile to something like Phoenix which is 518 square mile but only has a density of about 3k per square mile. So basically you are literally almost dealing with ten times more people crammed into the same area....so it's pretty obvious to tell which one is going to get around easier by car.
Manhattan is really if the entire population of the San Fernando Valley lived in Vallejo. But Then again we need both public transit, bikes and cars at the same time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallejo,_California
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan
Looks like the idea of even driving is going to go by the wayside soon... Israel has stated its intent to outlaw driving in favor of self-driving cars: http://www.jpost.com/Business-and-Innovation/Tech/By-2040-people-wont-be-allowed-to-drive-on-Israels-roads-459514
Quote from: formulanone on July 17, 2016, 09:36:16 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 16, 2016, 06:36:09 PM
Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...lest we forget automatics typically are pulling better EPA fuel economy figures pretty regularly over manuals these days.
Go over to the economy/compact car segment, where the automatic transmissions are usually a decade or two behind the times, so having 5-6 gears instead of four makes a noticeable difference in performance compared to the slushbox. If the car is only equipped with a little over 100 horsepower, every little bit counts. (In my car, first and second gear is a good deal shorter than the automatic gearset; in tests, this means a bit over a second to 60mph.)
My 2012 Colorado and my 1987 IROC-Z have essentially the same transmission, the 700R4/4L60-E. I like the transmission in the IROC which is modified to make 400ft-lb of torque, but hate it in the Colorado with its 180ft-lb. It always tries to grab 2 gears when I don't want it to in the truck, but pretty much does as I command in the car. This means I often avoid accelerating as fast as I want in the truck to avoid having to immediately let off to let it slide back into 1st or 2nd and discombobulate the vehicle. People have been involved in asphalt racing hate it when things don't happen smoothly and the vehicle is unsettled. In the car, the trans does have a shift kit and according to the guy I bought it from a "Corvette servo". Nonetheless, I don't feel installing those things in the truck would make me like the transmission better. They might make me hate it more in the truck, actually. That truck really needed a five or six speed auto to be current in 2012 or even 2007.
I still would way rather have a T56 manual in the IROC though. I might have one put in over the winter.
If by car culture, we're referring to usage as opposed to enthusiasts or gearheads; it certainly hasn't died... at least in terms of overall traffic.
In some areas, there indeed seems to be an increase in traffic on the roads. Recently, I made several trips to eastern MA (to visit my mother who was injured in car accident over a month ago) and I have noticed that more highways in the Greater Boston area have more traffic now than such did even just a year ago; and I'm not just referring to rush-hours.
Example: I-95/MA 128 between I-93 (Woburn) and US 1 (Peabody) seems to be jammed w/traffic except during late night hours... even on weekends. This wasn't the case about a year ago. Both my older brother & I have noticed such.
But how many of those people genuinely enjoy driving? In my experience, most people drive only because self-driving cars haven't been invented yet and view driving as a chore.
Quote from: vdeane on July 28, 2016, 02:36:38 PM
But how many of those people genuinely enjoy driving? In my experience, most people drive only because self-driving cars haven't been invented yet and view driving as a chore.
I do....but people these days think that it's weird as all hell. Given that someone on here was surprised that I enjoy a casual day off drive I would suspect a lot of people on here think the same. Even commuting....sometimes it's fun to find the alternate route since the main one usually gets boring really fast. NOW....I don't enjoy freeway driving...to me that's commuting in it's purist and more inanely boring form.
Interestingly though...I think a lot of young people in general don't have as much interest in being outside or exploring their surroundings. I would be interested to see some sort of study on things like National Park visitation among age groups and how that has changed over the last half century. I would suspect that if such a survey existed it would show a gradual decline through to modern times. It's like I've said repeatedly already, there are so many social outlets and generally more things to do these days that the older forms of entertainment are going to have to take a reduced share of the interest....including car hobby culture.
And...I'm sorry, I don't think anyone can convince me to hand over the reigns of driving to a Cylon. It's not a distrust thing...at least not a big one, I just don't like the idea of something I for the most part enjoy being automated. What the hell am I supposed to do with all that time the car drives itself?
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 28, 2016, 02:03:42 PM
If by car culture, we're referring to usage as opposed to enthusiasts or gearheads; it certainly hasn't died... at least in terms of overall traffic.
In some areas, there indeed seems to be an increase in traffic on the roads. Recently, I made several trips to eastern MA (to visit my mother who was injured in car accident over a month ago) and I have noticed that more highways in the Greater Boston area have more traffic now than such did even just a year ago; and I'm not just referring to rush-hours.
Example: I-95/MA 128 between I-93 (Woburn) and US 1 (Peabody) seems to be jammed w/traffic except during late night hours... even on weekends. This wasn't the case about a year ago. Both my older brother & I have noticed such.
Most of that increased traffic has more to do with the increase in population nationwide though. You were looking at roughly 180 million people in 1960 country wide as opposed to the 320 something million that here now. And for what it's worth I always thought this thread pertained to "gear heads" specially state side ones.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 28, 2016, 10:18:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 28, 2016, 02:36:38 PM
But how many of those people genuinely enjoy driving? In my experience, most people drive only because self-driving cars haven't been invented yet and view driving as a chore.
I do....but people these days think that it's weird as all hell. Given that someone on here was surprised that I enjoy a casual day off drive I would suspect a lot of people on here think the same. Even commuting....sometimes it's fun to find the alternate route since the main one usually gets boring really fast. NOW....I don't enjoy freeway driving...to me that's commuting in it's purist and more inanely boring form.
Interestingly though...I think a lot of young people in general don't have as much interest in being outside or exploring their surroundings. I would be interested to see some sort of study on things like National Park visitation among age groups and how that has changed over the last half century. I would suspect that if such a survey existed it would show a gradual decline through to modern times. It's like I've said repeatedly already, there are so many social outlets and generally more things to do these days that the older forms of entertainment are going to have to take a reduced share of the interest....including car hobby culture.
And...I'm sorry, I don't think anyone can convince me to hand over the reigns of driving to a Cylon. It's not a distrust thing...at least not a big one, I just don't like the idea of something I for the most part enjoy being automated. What the hell am I supposed to do with all that time the car drives itself?
I enjoy driving too, though my older brother
hates it! :-D It's funny how that happens.
My fear is that the future will be like "Red Barchetta" by Rush, where they'll prohibit certain cars (in our case, human-operated cars) and only allow self-driving cars. I know logically it would be safer, but I would miss driving too much :-(
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 13, 2016, 10:02:53 PM
I've noticed something about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.
Pretty much this in my case, but there's an additional reason: utility. There's no way I'm packing everything I own into a Mustang or Camaro. So my next vehicle will be a pickup truck (but NOT something as new as a 2000), a van, or a larger SUV like a Suburban.
Quote from: Darkchylde on July 28, 2016, 10:51:52 PM
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 13, 2016, 10:02:53 PM
I've noticed something about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.
Pretty much this in my case, but there's an additional reason: utility. There's no way I'm packing everything I own into a Mustang or Camaro. So my next vehicle will be a pickup truck (but NOT something as new as a 2000), a van, or a larger SUV like a Suburban.
That's the thing...I got a kid and a wife and I STILL don't understand why everyone needs a honking huge truck, SUV, CUV or mini-van. The Sonic, Focus, Fiesta, Camaros and Challenger have always been adequate for the task. I carry a crap ton of emergency gear in the Sonic and it still has plenty of room and cargo weight capacity to go even with two extra bodies...sometimes a dog.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 28, 2016, 11:05:54 PM
Quote from: Darkchylde on July 28, 2016, 10:51:52 PM
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 13, 2016, 10:02:53 PM
I've noticed something about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.
Pretty much this in my case, but there's an additional reason: utility. There's no way I'm packing everything I own into a Mustang or Camaro. So my next vehicle will be a pickup truck (but NOT something as new as a 2000), a van, or a larger SUV like a Suburban.
That's the thing...I got a kid and a wife and I STILL don't understand why everyone needs a honking huge truck, SUV, CUV or mini-van. The Sonic, Focus, Fiesta, Camaros and Challenger have always been adequate for the task. I carry a crap ton of emergency gear in the Sonic and it still has plenty of room and cargo weight capacity to go even with two extra bodies...sometimes a dog.
Frequent long-distance moves have taught me the value of having a vehicle large enough to
literally throw everything you own into.
Quote from: Darkchylde on July 28, 2016, 11:36:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 28, 2016, 11:05:54 PM
Quote from: Darkchylde on July 28, 2016, 10:51:52 PM
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 13, 2016, 10:02:53 PM
I've noticed something about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.
Pretty much this in my case, but there's an additional reason: utility. There's no way I'm packing everything I own into a Mustang or Camaro. So my next vehicle will be a pickup truck (but NOT something as new as a 2000), a van, or a larger SUV like a Suburban.
That's the thing...I got a kid and a wife and I STILL don't understand why everyone needs a honking huge truck, SUV, CUV or mini-van. The Sonic, Focus, Fiesta, Camaros and Challenger have always been adequate for the task. I carry a crap ton of emergency gear in the Sonic and it still has plenty of room and cargo weight capacity to go even with two extra bodies...sometimes a dog.
Frequent long-distance moves have taught me the value of having a vehicle large enough to literally throw everything you own into.
Right...but I'm on my 9th state and even with the last move from Florida a couple years back everything fit pretty well into a car that was 173 inches long. Everything else just went with the movers, I think that I had 6,000 pounds I want to say which included another car. Maybe this is me just living a spartan existence since I move so much?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 28, 2016, 11:48:10 PM
Quote from: Darkchylde on July 28, 2016, 11:36:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 28, 2016, 11:05:54 PM
Quote from: Darkchylde on July 28, 2016, 10:51:52 PM
Quote from: GCrites80s on July 13, 2016, 10:02:53 PM
I've noticed something about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.
Pretty much this in my case, but there's an additional reason: utility. There's no way I'm packing everything I own into a Mustang or Camaro. So my next vehicle will be a pickup truck (but NOT something as new as a 2000), a van, or a larger SUV like a Suburban.
That's the thing...I got a kid and a wife and I STILL don't understand why everyone needs a honking huge truck, SUV, CUV or mini-van. The Sonic, Focus, Fiesta, Camaros and Challenger have always been adequate for the task. I carry a crap ton of emergency gear in the Sonic and it still has plenty of room and cargo weight capacity to go even with two extra bodies...sometimes a dog.
Frequent long-distance moves have taught me the value of having a vehicle large enough to literally throw everything you own into.
Right...but I'm on my 9th state and even with the last move from Florida a couple years back everything fit pretty well into a car that was 173 inches long. Everything else just went with the movers, I think that I had 6,000 pounds I want to say which included another car. Maybe this is me just living a spartan existence since I move so much?
Can't afford movers. We hauled close to that
in and on the Explorer.
This past week was the first time since I got rid of my F-150 more than two years ago that I truly missed my truck. We had a tree that got blown over in a thunderstorm that I needed to to haul off. Luckily, I know the guy that eventually bought my truck and he let me borrow it.
Other than that, I have found that my Mustangs have more than enough room to handle all of my day to day goings on. Every week or so my wife fills her trunk with $500.00 worth of groceries, and she doesn't even remove her "beauty kit" (a Rubbermaid container that holds her microfiber towels, Meguiars Quik Detailer, Ultimate Quik Wax, glass cleaner, etc.) to do that. The rear seats do fold down if we really needed to expand the cargo area but I haven't needed to do that, yet.
I can fit pretty much whatever I need to into my Preludes. The back seats are more or less useless for carrying people, but my dog fits great back there. Although he would rather be in the front.
(https://dnbforum.com/data/avatars/l/100/100352.jpg?1449719583)
Quote from: Takumi on July 29, 2016, 09:05:57 AM
I can fit pretty much whatever I need to into my Preludes. The back seats are more or less useless for carrying people, but my dog fits great back there. Although he would rather be in the front.
(https://dnbforum.com/data/avatars/l/100/100352.jpg?1449719583)
It looks like he's yelling "Hurry UP, Let's GO already!!"
Quote from: slorydn1 on July 29, 2016, 09:21:01 AM
Quote from: Takumi on July 29, 2016, 09:05:57 AM
I can fit pretty much whatever I need to into my Preludes. The back seats are more or less useless for carrying people, but my dog fits great back there. Although he would rather be in the front.
(https://dnbforum.com/data/avatars/l/100/100352.jpg?1449719583)
It looks like he's yelling "Hurry UP, Let's GO already!!"
I use some old bed sheets for mine to cover the back of the front seats so my dog can't get over very easily. He usually just sits there with his head on the passenger seat to look out the front window. I try to bring him along as much as possible provided the places I'm going allow dogs, he loves a good car ride. I've actually moved across the country twice with him in the back seat.
But in regards to cargo capacity...I'm going to run outside here in a minute and get a picture of the Sonic to show what can easily fit even in a small car.
Typical shopping trip:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi703.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww34%2Fslorydn1%2FMustang%2520Pics%2FIMG-20120222-00216.jpg&hash=0ad1ae6471f58926db9e835d8cc78cd3b0bc1b6c)
This is what I'm carrying in the Sonic:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1255.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh630%2FMadMaxRockatansky73%2Fimage1_zps9hvr32he.jpg&hash=f46c9a73ab869f0a182d0d115cf625a0ff2199ec)
Basically a lot of this emergency gear carry over from when I was driving 60,000-80,000 miles a year. Basically I have a full size tire, donut spare, extra coolant, wind shield wiper fluid, a high torque lug wrench, one gallon gas tank, a box of various tools that I might need, a full tool box set, a socket wrench set, snow chains, cold weather clothes/blankets and enough water to last three days. About the only thing that I don't have that I used to carry back then was a extra 12v battery. Basically I had about anything and everything happen over those years and a lot of times I was in areas where I was on my own with no cell phone coverage. Even with all that I'm still under 100 pounds in the trunk and it leaves me a crap load of room for 3/4 four bags of stuff. So basically even on a "family" trip the Sonic has been more than adequate for the task, there will be no oversized vehicle for daily driving or trip purposes. So it brings me back to the original point..how many people with an SUV, CUV, mini-van or truck really need them? The typical argument that it's for "family cargo" doesn't hold weight in most normal circumstances.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 29, 2016, 10:42:26 AM
So it brings me back to the original point..how many people with an SUV, CUV, mini-van or truck really need them? The typical argument that it's for "family cargo" doesn't hold weight in most normal circumstances.
Just a thought.. 2 years ago my better part hit a deer with her CR-V on the interstate. Thanks Geico for footing $7k bill (mostly body work).... Anyway - when I pulled in my civic half an hour later, road service guy who arraigned things to be sorted out (two disabled cars, dead dear, broken glass etc), looked at my car and said "and if she was driving this thing, a deer would fly through the windshield and break her neck". That was a nice touch!
She is now refusing to ride any sedan...
Quote from: kalvado on July 29, 2016, 11:16:46 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 29, 2016, 10:42:26 AM
So it brings me back to the original point..how many people with an SUV, CUV, mini-van or truck really need them? The typical argument that it's for "family cargo" doesn't hold weight in most normal circumstances.
Just a thought.. 2 years ago my better part hit a deer with her CR-V on the interstate. Thanks Geico for footing $7k bill (mostly body work).... Anyway - when I pulled in my civic half an hour later, road service guy who arraigned things to be sorted out (two disabled cars, dead dear, broken glass etc), looked at my car and said "and if she was driving this thing, a deer would fly through the windshield and break her neck". That was a nice touch!
She is now refusing to ride any sedan...
Yeah I got a sister that is paranoid about crashing and has an SUV for that reason along with ride height. Never mind the fact that she has about half a dozen speeding tickets over the last 10 years and drives while texting constantly. I had a elderly parent argue she liked the ride height since she was short which made sense from that perspective.
If we're going somewhere for 3-4 days with both kids, then we can all fit comfortably in my Scion, with no difficulty closing the trunk. But for 7-10 days, we need the minivan, because there are usually greater distances involved which probably means extended family has bought the kids things, or we're taking home heirlooms/junk.