Leaderboard

I loved the pic NOT because of your cute doggy, RIP. But because of these 3 lovely words: PS: Love the doggy pic too though...

Well, yeah. But one of the talking points of the F.U.D. anti-EV crowd is that they take too long to charge and some people live in apartment buildings. The charging speed aspect attacks that talking point. If you don't need those speeds, that's fine, and it's probably better for your vehicle anyway. Those speeds are meant for people who are on long road trips or who don't have access to charging at home.

A fun random photo from 8 years ago that popped up in my FB feed today--from my back driveway in Phoenix....Raine had hopped up on the dead Merc to look over the fence...

I closed on my new house today. All went pretty smoothly. Only 20 miles from my current house, but bigger, one story, much more storage and garage space, almost 2 acres. I’ll be busy the next month or so moving in and then putting my current house up for sale. Icky weather today though. 34 and sleet.

I had rented a car in an Italian city on the Adriatic side - a small vehicle with an automatic - and once again, got upgraded. This was a substantial upgrade into a larger crossover SUV - a Seat Tarraco. The car is named after the Spanish city of Tarragona. I did not know what this model was, except that it was a SEAT product. Upon getting into the vehicle, one sees the typical graphics and appointments shared by the VW family of brands, which include SEAT and Skoda. It shares a lot of components with the VW Tiguan and is built at the same plant in Wolfsburg, Germany. I set up the car right away and learned the controls. It’s better to do this up front than learn it on the fly when the going gets rough. One of the most interesting things about this SUV was the main instrument pod. The navigation system, and it’s a fairly clear one, is smack in the middle of the pod. Gauges surround it and are readable. I was able to set it to also give me the km/h readout. The infotainment center “laptop left open” screen isn’t too bad because it’s partially engaged. It’s fairly easy to operate. The climate control panel below it is even easier to operate. It’s such a large vehicle that you know it will ride smoothly. And, as you pull out of the rental lot, it’s apparent that the maneuvering will be nimble. The ride is always controlled and road imperfections rarely come through, and neither does much road noise. With the size of the car, especially in a medium sized Italian city and the region around it, its being nimble was important. Where I didn’t push it was in cloverleaf ramps and mountain switchbacks. The higher center of gravity and its curb weight of a little over 4,000 pounds (~1,816 kg) discouraged that. The Tarraco was powered by a diesel. I’ve rarely driven diesels except maybe in moving vans. It, too, was quiet, almost like an ICE 4 cylinder we’d have in America or from Asia. Standing outside of it with the engine running, its being a diesel was more apparent. The displacement was 2.0 liters, or 2,000 cc to Europeans. A turbocharger was included in the package, and that’s what inspired more confidence in getting around in the Tarraco. When it’s the diesel and DSG combination, the horsepower produced could either be 187hp or 197 hp. The transmission was the VW family’s 7 speed DSGs, which operate in automatic mode. It behaved like most of the recent automatics I’ve been rented in Europe, a far cry from the automatics in early Smart cars and Opel Corsas that took long pauses as they changed gears under normal throttle. Shifts were almost seamless, with little rpm noise to convey that and best shown by the tachometer. There was one notable and impressive feature with this vehicle. When the accelerator is pushed to downshift, the uptick in rpms seemed almost “restricted” and not that pronounced like it can be in some automatics and in CVTs, but it’s enough to get the job done – pick up speed, pass, etc. That was probably programmed into the car’s electronics. Given that it was heavy and a diesel, I still didn’t take any chances with tight passes on 2 many lane roads and in the mountainous areas inland from the coast. The car’s seats were firm, and finish was good, but not something one would remember. The seats were flatter and the minimal bolstering gave a lot of latitude to drivers and passengers. The seating surfaces were also fairly flat and didn’t have much sculpting. The car had a lot of legroom up front and in the second row of seats, and there was even a third row that was pushed down and which the retractable cover concealed. The third row would obviously reduce the generosity of the trunk space. The Tarraco reminded me a lot of the Toyota RAV4 more so than something like a Chevy Traverse or other vehicles of this type that I’ve driven. The RAV 4 has a larger 4 cylinder engine (in the U.S.) sending power through Toyota’s slick shifting 8 speed automatic while this unit has 7 gears. The RAV4’s basic shape is probably what reminded me of the Tarraco. Someone at a service area, all of which seem to have an Autogrill (sort of a Denny’s with a mini-market), saw me taking some photos of it and commented that it was a nice car. It’s obviously a matter of context, given the typically smaller vehicles over there. I had it for a week and, frankly, I found it too big for what I needed and for the conditions, even though I managed. Finally, the Tarraco’s shining star was its fuel economy. I drove it for about 1,000 km, so about 600 miles, and, when I was ready to return it, there was a little less than 1/8 of a tank and the low fuel light had just come on. The week long rental included city driving, autostrada driving, and driving into the lower altitudes of the Apennine range. I’m sure that, since VW, Skoda, and Seat are producing increasingly popular and reliable products, it can be recommended, assuming you can deal with its size and want its capacity. It isn’t that thirsty, but with a bigger vehicle and more features, repairs and maintenance will likely be more costly than in smaller cars like VW Golfs and SEAT Ibizas. If this car, or the related VW Tiguan, have good reliability ratings, I believe I’d be inclined to choose it over the Toyota RAV4. - - - - - Photos forthcoming

EXACTLY! It's all fine and dandy that we all just drive heavy sht. It's the repercussions of said heavy sht that's the problem. I could care less my family hauler weighs 7000lbs. It's that 7000lbs is less efficient and does more damage to roads AND damage in accidents. They're getting there. I know they are. I just don't care about charging speeds beyond what we already have, at this point. If the fastest charging vehicle was a Bolt with 50Kw, that's too slow. But we're up and over 300Kw and that's sufficient, IMO. There are other things that should be addressed and weight and capacity is the top of the list, to me.

Oh I know they're all working on increased density with decreased weight. I just don't care about insane charging speeds, because the current speeds are more than adequate for me. This is also because my goal would be to never have to publicly charge. If I can get 80% of a Hummer battery charged overnight at my home, that's enough to say I'd be able to leave home every single day with a full charge (or as full as I have it scheduled to charge) in anything else. I know solid state is one of the long-term goals and those numbers are EXACTLY what we need. Cut that battery in a third AND add more range?!? Perfect!

Congratulations on this Robert. Very excited for you and your sister and the new chapter of life with this house. Wishing you all the best.

As with this story, South Korea to Invest $15 Billion in New EV Battery Technology - Bloomberg Solid-State is where we are going and with a 4X common density improvement, that would mean that you could reduce battery size to a quarter current sizes and still have the same battery range. Example is the GMC Hummer EV Truck battery is 2,000lbs. With Solid-State that can be cut to 500 lbs with the same range. Korea not wanting to let China lead here is investing heavily to be the first with Mass market production of solid-state batteries. This will be the next generation of EVs for some and first for others. It will be interesting to see how fast OEMs change over.

Ill agree with your post. And having 4000-5000 lbs sedans and 7000-9000 lbs SUVs is more detrimental than we actually realize. From accidents involving compact ICE CUVs (approx 3500 lbs or less) and EV CUVs (aprox 5000lbs or more) ... To huge heavy EVs that collide with one another. The destruction is not nearly enough talked about. Our roads going forward. All that weight in an all EV world will certainly have an impact on road maintenance. Also...think about all the bridges that exist in the world and how fast their life spans will be cut short due to the fact that EVs are AT LEAST 50% heavier than the ICE counterparts that they will replace and that bridges were designed to accomodate the less heavier ICE cars. Parking lots are to be included in this discussion. If proper maintenenance and more frequent maintenance is not done (and calculate how much THAT will cost the tax payer or the owner of the parking lots), now imagine parking lots and bridges collapsing and the devastation that comes with that... Charging times is one thing. But battery tech needs to improve in density to allow for less heavy batteries that equate to similar ranges as their ICE-V counterparts. Putting more battery and increasing weight is NOT an answer. Telling people to be content with less battery with less range is not an answer either to keep weight down. Battery density will improve eventually. But THAT is what we need to focus on. Battery density to allow for better weight vehicles.

I know charging speed is a big deal with EVs but, I just don't see the appeal to EVs if you're publicly charging them. The cost to charge is very similar to gasoline with less range in almost every instance that isn't the 500-mile range Lucid. Personally, I think increased battery capacity is a bigger issue rather than maximum charging speeds. Charging speeds are already quick enough in most instances but if you could cut the battery weight in half and still add like 25% more capacity, that would be a massive win as opposed to just charging faster. I know those are just "thrown-out-there numbers" but that's what's needed. It's just plain silly to have 4000-5000lb sedans and 7000-9000lb trucks.

We're looking at the Digital Green with white/green interior. Limited AWD trim.

It's been a while. I tried it out in a Polestar 2... and it was absolutely not done cooking. Alert windows would pop up behind primary windows and would be unclickable. But the other issue is that I avoid Google products because they invade privacy. When you use Google, you aren't using their products, you are the product, because they will sell every scrap of information they collect on you that they can. Go to the ice cream shop with your kids every Friday at 7? Google will sell that information to Baskin Robins and ColdStone so you get coupons. Now, I know other companies do the same, but Google is by-far the most nefarious. Unfortunately, due to my line of work, I can't avoid Google entirely... but I don't want it installed in my car.

Connectivity is not of my concern. I dont think Id be using the smart phone type features of Apple car play or Snapdragon or whatever... My concern is of the privacy thing. And how somebody, whoever that somebody might be, that may have access to my personal info or my persoanl whereabouts or whatever whether through hacking or the OEM itself trying to sell me user fees for heated seats or whatever. Trackability of anykind, whether its literal tracking of where my car is (good thing concerning theft...) or trackability of what I do with my car and its features and how often I use these features like its Facebook or Youtube algorithm...is what I fear for the future not just for cars, but ANYTHING doing with our internet consumption connectivity going forward with humanity. So...my FIRST sentence is FALSE and YEAH!!! I have MAJOR concerns with this kind of shyte. I honestly wish we could go back to the simpler times...regarding dashboards and pushbuttons and lack of electronic gizmo distractions. Some of those electronic gizmo distractions are necessary. Some of them are an evolution of our day to day life evolution and I get all that. But I feel we have swung waaaay out of the middle of where our fantasy world resides and where are real lives should be... Again...NOT just with cars, but in EVERY aspect of our lives.

Were you-ah been boozin' when you helucinated that? Suckin' back on grandpa's cough medecine? Yeah...you'de be the only one to see that!

Just more UGH. While I get the purpose of this type of system, its obvious omissions are a big "NO" for me but even the Android side is half baked and is limited by the automaker Google partners with. The Polestar example proves this. The entertainment limitations (missing features that companies like Tesla have) and all the "multi-use" Android OS features are hogtied by the parent companies love for all things safety. The missing features are deliberate (although some options may change on that front). Other companies will have plus and minuses in this regard as well. In the end, I just don't get it, long term, other than the pure greed factors I have brought up before. On the one hand (CarPlay Omission and entertainment options) but get it on another (simplified development for automakers). I will be keeping up with this over the next few years, when I may finally pull the trigger on an EV. Right now, I am generally not impressed with the interface options.

So I got my Chevy Cruze (which I reviewed) for under $20 a day from Friday through Monday over a holiday weekend because I booked the rental, and the category of car, months in advance. The rate within a week or two of the rental was around twice as much. However, I didn't plan for how I would get around on Tuesday. It's seldom that I don't plan. I was looking at the rental agency sites as that Tuesday approached and was even slightly nervous. I saw some crazy one day rates for that Tuesday, including at neighborhood locations where they don't load you up with airport fees and taxes. Then, about 2 days prior to that, one of the majors was running a prepaid price of about $50, out the door, for a luxury car, which was about the same as they were charging for a Nissan Versa. I called them up and asked what this type of car might me and was told "most likely a Chrysler 300" ... or 'even a Cadillac.' Sold. I prepaid the day in a rental car, a first for me, to lock in that low rate occurring during the week and for that type of car. Wow. Everything went smoothly, quickly, and I even indicated I had seen a dark silver Chrysler 300 in a particular stall that I thought would be nice to have. It was assigned to me. At an airport location, they even pulled it around and put it under the canopy. I hadn't been in a Chrysler product for a long time, so I pulled it back into a stall, adjusted everything, and familiarized myself with the controls. As for this process, it was harder than it is in a GM car yet a little easier than it might be in a Ford, such as the Fusion. Everything about this ride was sort of surreal and a modernized time warp ... especially the whole Gotham City feeling of the car. The dashboard is nicely clustered in the IP zone, with its own lid, as Cadillac is doing, and even nicer in the center stack. The bezels for the speedometer and tachometer are sort of strange, with their different depths and they are blue in color. The center stack, however, is really nice because it's crowned by an old school "chronometer," as Chrysler has historically called it. The silver accents on many of the bezels are a nice touch. Also, hooray for a logically placed trunk release while the release for the fuel door isn't as obvious, which could be a good thing. The car had a push button ignition, which was to be expected. It also had a dial as the gear selector for its 8 speed step gear automatic transmission. While I really like this feature, and the Ford Fusion now has this as well, I found that if I was maneuvering quickly, such as from reverse and back into drive if making a three point turn, I sometimes found myself in neutral. Haste makes waste as they say. The seats are broad, comfortable, and in perforated leather and, for this price point, they are nicely finished. It also had the sliding moonroof with the doubled up effect, meaning it even covered a good part of the rear seating area. It took a while to figure out how to operate the shade, the tilt feature, and the panels, so I just chalked it up to "o.k., cool," kept it closed, turned on the air conditioning, and didn't fuss with it. The sound system was fine but then I don't have a trained ear when it comes to what constitutes a good sound system in a car. I'll listen to anything without static. With approximately 100 miles spent behind the wheel of the Chrysler 300, I got into it only a time or two while getting onto interstate ramps to see what it could do. It packed a lot of punch and didn't need much pedal pushing to work its magic. I didn't have to open the hood to see that this base model featured the 3.5 Pentastar V6 that it also the base engine in the Dodge Charger. This means that 292 horses were at one's disposition. That's about 50% more horsepower than my current vehicle, and I am satisfied with how my own car handles and accelerates. The 8 speed automatic transmission shifts quietly and confidently, though the first, second, and possibly third shift points could be felt, even in ordinary driving. I will say that, on the interstate at about 65 mph, that 8th gear practically makes the engine dormant. I believe it was only turning about 1,400 or 1,500 rpm. This car had less than 10,000 miles on the clock. I can say that the Chrysler 300 feels more steady than it does smooth. It's definitely smooth, but what you feel, first and foremost, is that you're at the helm of a land yacht. I put the power seat adjuster as high as it could go and it still felt weird sensing where the outer edges of the fenders were, even though there are old school fender creases at the tops of them. The C pillar is sort of thick but, because the backlite is more upright than in so many cars, visibility was not a problem. The rear camera in the center stack came in useful when parking and backing up. However, I believe that lane departure warnings were silenced because they would illuminate yet not make any sounds. I didn't bother to pull out the manual because I'd be in it for less than 24 hours. I'm not so sure I liked the steering wheel. It was leather wrapped, with an exposed hard surface at its top edge that would have been the surface material for the entire steering wheel on a Cadillac from the 80s. The few times my hands transitioned from the leather to this surface felt weird and I would have preferred a leather steering wheel all the way around. For its size, it is agile enough but not really nimble. Still, its handling is way better than that of 4,000 pound cars from some 25 years ago. I returned the car, filling it up prior to doing so. The driving was mostly in the city along with some in-city freeway driving. I didn't calculate the fuel economy, but those 100 miles took about $8 of regular fuel. That wasn't bad and I attribute that to some of the interstate segments. In conclusion, I'm glad I got to drive this car. For those who want a retro boulevardier with a commanding presence, an unmistakable sense of holding the road, many bells and whistles, and a rich legacy, I think they'd enjoy owning a 300. I tend to like entry level models and, in that guise, it comes in at a MSRP of $31,000 or $32,000 before discounts. However, even if I was in the market and I had the funds, I would not opt for this car and I sort of can't put my finger on what it is ... and sort of can. I have had a couple of Dodge Charger rentals and prefer those, coming in at an MSRP that is about $3,000 less. Noise suppression and general tightness between the 300 and the Charger, in base form, is hardly noticeable and, over some bumps and pavement gaps, I heard a few minor arthritic creaks from the 300 whereas that Chevy Traverse I reviewed, for example, was tomb quiet under the same conditions. However, back to the 300 and its sibling the Charger, I found that the Charger has a more user friendly dash, even though the shapes on the 300's are more inspiring and the Charger's orange illumination is not to my liking. Not only that, the Charger can be had with cloth seating, has a more rakish roofline, a front grille that I've grown to like, and is easier on the eyes from every vantage point, especially with the more recent thinning and curvature of the horizontal rear light light bar. Make no mistake about it that the Chrysler 300 is a handsome and stately car. It's just that, if I was buying a traditional full size RWD car, I'd buy the Charger and keep that $3,000 difference in my wallet. Also, from having clocked the mileage on a Dodge Charger with the same Pentastar V6, and babying it, I was able to get 31 mpg on the best tank. One had to be overly diligent to do that. I'm thinking that typical highway mileage might be more like 28 or 29 mpg. Front three quarter view - I prefer the front grille from about 3 years ago with the really thin horizontal slats more so than this one with the hexagonal / egg crate pattern I tend not to like high belt lines but, on this car, it is fitting and looks great The rear tail lamps keep getting nicer with their subtle creases and the backlite helps visibility at a time when every large car seems to be going fastback ... also, can you sort of feel the humidity? Really nice clustering and sculpting on the dashboard and a rotating dial for the automatic transmission; the finishes and many features are high grade and make for a nice space to occupy There are the unusual bezels in the dashboard and the blue illumination ... and there is the steering wheel with the transition in its coverings. I love that analog clock at the top of the center stack. This car successfully blends retro and modern. There are the bucket seats with perforated leather, sporty enough patterning, and offering plenty of support ... if only they were in cloth, but you'd never see than in Chrysler's flagship passenger car. As far as color choices go, I think that the basic white with the very pale beige leather seats is the best color combination for this car. End of review

Yes, that's the style grille the rental had. I like the '11-14 front end better than the 2015+ front end. I remember the cloth interior, thinking it was odd. I prefer leather...easier to keep clean.