So this afternoon while cruising back into town after a meeting with a graphic designer, I decide to get off the I-17 at Bell Road, where there’s a long strip of car dealerships. The Toyota dealership up there is significantly less sleazy and more customer-friendly than the mid-town outfit, and I want to test-drive the Venza.
After lengthy standing around and gassing with the sales guy, this comes to pass. As a matter of fact, I get to drive both both the four-banger and the six, the salesman (being male) having decided that the Little Woman couldn’t possibly tell the difference.
Well, this little old lady can. And yeah, I still do prefer the six. Heh heh…50 to 90 in less time than it takes to draw a deep breath.
I like the Venza. It’s a pleasant car, modestly luxurious, sort of like a tall, bloated Camry. But I found myself thinking the same thing that I think about the newer Camry: it’s cramped in there.
Maybe it’s not the car; maybe it’s me. After fifteen years of driving a Sienna, maybe I’ve just become spoiled to all that extra space.
One other thing I didn’t care for about the Venza — or about the Tacoma pickup — is that when the back seats fold down, they don’t fit flush against anything. A gap remains between the folded-down seat back and the floor…and that gap is big enough for a corgi to fall into. Or for a bigger dog to stumble into and break a leg. Thanks, but no thanks.
I looked at a Sienna on the lot. Very nice. It doesn’t seem to have undergone much of a redesign since the 2000 model I’m still flogging across the roads. EXCEPT…it’s now billed as an eight-passenger vehicle. That would mean they must have an extra bench seat at the back, or else they’ve installed two more captain’s chairs. That presumably would make the vehicle longer than mine, which about fills up the garage. Since my washer & dryer are in the garage, the Sienna I’ve got is about as long as a vehicle can be and still fit in there.
The Sienna’s seats can be removed. And when you do that — as I’ve done with three of the four back seats in mine — you end up with a VAST cargo space. It really is awesome. You can carry just about anything in the back of a Sienna once you’ve taken out the seats. And it’s flat, so you can either let a dog run around in there or you can pack in a couple of dog crates (more than a couple, actually).
So I may go back later and revisit the Sienna. In a way, it’s a perfect compromise between a pickup and a passenger vehicle: plenty of room to haul gear and critters, and yet a comfortable ride.
Heh. Maybe I really do want a pickup. All that business about the proposed Ram 1500 was a bit of a joke. But…hey. The Ram has a crew cab with back seats that fold up, leaving you with a large interior space to stash dog cages or loose dogs, to say nothing of whatever other junk you’d like to haul around without leaving it out for passing sticky fingers. Plus its back seats are said to be comfortable with plenty of leg room and the ride is said to be car-like.
Still. It’s awfully large. And the price is high.
Not at all crazy about the Toyota’s dashboard. Honest to God. I do not want to go back to school for a bachelor’s in aviation technology to learn to drive the damn car. There is just too much computerized clutter in that thing.
For one thing, I personally do not need or want an animated electronic map. I know which way is north. And I rarely get lost.
I’m sure the GPS map distraction would be handy if you lived in the older cities of the East. But if you live anyplace in the Southwest that’s been heavily influenced by Mormons, then you live in a city or town that’s laid out in a grid. North/south; east/west. Such a city is extremely easy to navigate, and it’s almost impossible to get lost, unless you get into one of the ill-designed suburbs with swirling, serpentine residential streets.
Nor do I wish to have to point and click or tap a screen to operate the radio — one that offers an image of real radio controls. Why can’t I just have a real radio? Why can’t I have analogue everything, come to think of it? I don’t want to have to fiddle with a computer to turn on the air conditioner or unlock the doors.
Please. All I need is a key to turn the thing on (a button is cute, but…why?), a switch to turn the heat and air-conditioner on and off, a switch to turn the headlights on and off, a switch to lock and unlock the doors, a button to open and close the windows, a switch to turn on the radio, and a dial to tune in my favorite NPR and cowboy stations and no I do not need and am not going to pay for satellite radio.
What a curmudgeon, huh?
Maybe what I really need is a horse.
A horse! You crack me up.
Agreed. Cars these days are wayyyyy too complicated.
I *love* my Mazda CX-5 that I got a few months ago. I upgraded from a 2002 Pontiac Grand Am – and LOVE all the new techie bits! The blind spot monitor is wonderful! The rear camera – amazing! My car has a button instead of a key – and a button on the doors – so when I leave the house, I lock the front door, tuck my keys in my purse and LEAVE them there until I get home again.
I wanted something TALLer than my sedan – everything on the road is taller than my grand am – and I want to SEE.
I will admit that the minivans are far superior in terms of cargo space – you can fit ANYTHING into the back of a minivan, when you take the seats out 🙂
Hmmm…. Okay, I’m definitely looking into that one. My son nixed the Mazda for reasons I don’t know; will ask WonderMechanic for his far more experienced opinion.
For awhile after the large dogs passed on to their Furry Fathers, I coveted the adorable Mazda Miata. Don’t know if it’s still available with the hard top — a soft top isn’t very practical in lovely uptown Arizona, given the harsh weather. But then decided I’m with you: I want to be able to SEE!
Also in old age I find a taller car is much easier to get in and (especially) out of. Getting out of a seat in SDXB’s Camry is really a struggle.
My 2009 car has a lot of electronic gew gaws, too, but I like most of them. I like the smart key system which works like spiffikins notes above (no need to do anything with the key but carry it in your pocket/purse), and I like the bluetooth connection for my mobile phone. I’m fine with the regular old radio, too, and my car has a few old-fashioned buttons for that. (I have to use the touch screen to update the pre-sets, though.) I also like how many of the controls are on the steering wheel. I sometimes have the navigation screen up, but I rarely use it because it is usually easier to use the maps program on my mobile phone. Plus the navigation is via discs which are several years old.
My friend just bought a new Subaru and loves the EyeSight Driver Assist. The car will automatically brake if it senses a collision, adjust the cruise control, and warn when the driver is straying out of the lane. Considering that she was just in a major accident (totally not her fault since the other driver ran a red and hit her) she is loving this safety feature.
Subaru, eh? I’ll check that one out, too. If memory serves (heh…it doesn’t much, anymore…), Subaru is well liked by Edmunds. I personally find the big ugly stanchions in the back of current models all across brands to be a menace to navigation — that was what brought me to consider a pickup: you can see out the back windows. A rear-view camera and collision sensor would be helpful…but it would be even better if you could be allowed to just see out of the damn car.
Even my Sienna has a substantial blind spot, and it’s not where you’d expect it. You have to remember to LOOK OVER YOUR SHOULDER before even so much as thinking of a lane change. Every now and again I’ll find some idiot parked right beside me at 70 mph, apparently oblivious to the possibility that he might be invisible to the car on his left.
The elderly Sienna also has controls on the steering wheel. Love it for cruise control and that kind of thing. Hate hate HATE it for radio controls: if my hand accidentally brushes against the steering-wheel radio doo-dads, it changes the station or switches from FM to AM. Then I have to fiddle with that or, when driving at speeds in excess of 70, just shut off the radio until I can get off the freeway.
My son likes the electronic fancies, too, and I will say that from a distance I think they’re very cool. However…up close is another matter. Riding in the car with him, I’ve observed that to do tasks I can do with my eyes closed — or, ahem, better yet: focused on the road — he has to take his eyes off the road and a hand off the steering wheel to fiddle with a computer interface.
In the Sienna’s analogue interior, I know exactly where the controls are and I recognize them by touch. I don’t even have to look at the dashboard to adjust the radio, the heater, or the air-conditioning, or to turn on the emergency flashers.
Not being able to do that leaves you with three options: either to take an extremely dangerous risk for a very low-reward action like changing a radio station or turning up the AC; or to put up with annoyance or discomfort until you can get off the road, stop in some parking lot, and fiddle with a computer; or to shut everything off and proceed without the amenities that you’ve paid 30 grand to have.
And speaking of computers, we all know what happens when our laptop or desktop goes down, eh? What happens when one of these onboard computers, which apparently control just about everything the driver can operate, breaks down? At 80 miles an hour, say? And forgodsake, what does it cost to get a thing like that fixed?
for visibility in this class nothing beats the Subaru Forester – that thing is ALL windows! I just couldn’t get comfortable on the seat – I felt like I was sitting somehow “twisted”.
I tried the Nissan Rogue, Ford Escape, Subaru Outback and Forester, Mazda CX-5 and VW Touareg. I sat in the Toyota RAV-4 and Honda CR-V and just…walked away.
The RAV-4 isn’t bad – but the seat was ridiculously uncomfortable. The CR-V – eh, everyone has one, and I don’t like the new style.
I came from a 6 cylinder sedan with plenty of oomph – so I was nervous about going to a 4 cylinder vehicle that is heavier than the sedan. But, the CX-5 – in the 2014/2015 version with the 2.5L engine – has some pep! The older models and the 2.0L engine are wimpy and sad.
The Forester is 4 cylinders and the Outback does come in a 6 – I wouldn’t test drive that one, on the theory that I would like it SO MUCH MORE than the 4’s and I was *trying* to get something with decent gas mileage 😀
I’m averaging about 25-27 mpg in my cx-5 – and I have a lead foot 😀 I was getting about the same – 23-26mpg in my 12 year old grand am – so I’m feeling pretty good about going up to a mini-suv and not going under 20mpg!
oh also – the Ford escape was ALL fancy electronics – including the a/c, heat, fan etc. I was not a fan of that – I prefer my combination – the radio/nav is a touch screen, with volume and forward/back buttons on the steering wheel.
The a/c, heat, fan, defogger etc is all knobs that I can turn without looking.
I didn’t think I would like buttons on the steering wheel, but I really do like having the volume and fwd/back buttons available – I haven’t bumped them accidentally yet!
Of all the cars I’ve tried, the Honda CR-V seemed the most comfortable. LOL!
I still think it’s underpowered. Yeah, the new 4-bangers are a lot more peppy than they used to be. But if I’m going to drive up a steep grade like Yarnell Hill, I want horses: a LOT of them. Ditto for the I-17 where it climbs the Mogollon Rim — it’s just not safe to be puttering along on that thing at 50 or 60 mph.
A couple observations from my friend’s car shopping/buying experience are memorable to me. She also did not like how those big stanchions created such a large blind spot. Apparently they are necessary for the side airbags in back, though. (Interesting how this safety “improvement” creates a safety hazard!) The other thing she didn’t like much was that all of these larger vehicles (she was looking at crossovers and small SUVs) have tinted windows in the back. She thought the combination of those two things made the blind spot much more difficult to effectively check.
In AZ there’s a legally mandated limit on how dark they can be. You not only have the blind spot issue, you also have the nervous cop problem. A traffic stop is actually one of the most dangerous things a cop can do — right up there with domestic disturbance craziness — and an officer really needs to be able to see inside a vehicle to feel a little safer as he or she approaches it.
However, with the heat and road glare, darker is better here. Also, drivers around here become even more arrogant and aggressive if they can see into the vehicle and spot an elderly woman (or even an elderly man) behind the wheel. So as long as you’re minding the rules of the road and driving no more than 11 mph over the speed limit, you would like not to be easily seen.
Since I haven’t been pulled over in more than 30 years, I think I’m going with the “don’t see me” option. 😉
Being a cyclist for many decades, the one thing I hate is tinted driver’s side windows. I badly need to see you and which way you are looking in order to determine if you are indeed aware that I am whizzing toward you as you wait to turn right. If I see two eyes looking at me, we exchange a friendly smile. If I see two eyes and a cellphone held to the cheek, I prepare to take evasive action. If I see an ear and no eyes, I prepare to meet my Maker.
In my hometown, front window tinting is illegal and the police occasionally enforce the law with a nice big ticket and a summons to show evidence that the tinting has been removed. But the local yeomanry still insist on going gangsta and getting the full black-out treatment on their hoopties.
So there are good reasons to be visible even if your anonymity is compromised.
Yup. Roger that. But there also are good reasons for a woman not to advertise that she is alone.
So…waitaminit here: You’re flying up the street toward a car that is signalling to turn right. The car is in front of you — it’s gotten there first, right? But you feel you should be able to shoot past the driver on the right and cut him off, willy nilly?
In Arizona, bicycles are regarded as vehicles. That’s why you’re not allowed to ride on the sidewalk. The only exception I know of is that under some circumstances bicyclists are allowed to cross at an intersection against the red. But it’s illegal to pass on the right…one would think common sense or courtesy, if not the law, would apply, no? If you can see the person is turning right, why not stop and wait for him or her to complete the turn, rather than barging into harm’s way?
nah, bicyclists think they are cars – until they *want* to be pedestrians and use the walk signal as an excuse to zoom past the cars turning right…
LOL! I think most bicyclists are pretty law-abiding. They are, after all, interested in living.
Biking on a main drag is extremely dangerous, IMHO. Hereabout we have a few bicycle paths on what I’d call feeder streets — some east/west or north/south roads that go for quite a long way. But gosh, they’re narrow! I find them very scary; when I ride my bike, it’s only on residential streets at times of day when everyone’s at work.
We do have some splendid paths along the canal, and the Arizona canal goes for mile after mile after mile. You can ride (or walk, or run) from way to heck and gone on the west side all the way across Phoenix, into Scottsdale, and down into Tempe. So if your destination is roughly along that corridor, it makes commuting more or less doable, at least outside the hot summer months. But if I had to go from point A to point B on a major thoroughfare, I sure wouldn’t do it on a bike. Speaking of wanting to live…