Draco-REX

Subarus have great ease of entry/exit (especially the higher Outbacks/Foresters), are very reliable, easy to work on, and have superb safety in both impact and not crashing in the first place (AWD FTMFW). However, you won't find a 25mpg city rating. I love Subies, but I can't honestly call them fuel efficient. There are rumors of Toyota and Subaru working together on Direct Injection solutions, but that doesn't help you now. So if mileage is very important, then a Subaru might not be the best choice. But if they're flexible, I think a Subaru is the only choice (as evidenced by my two Subies. ).

Fake. I LOL'd hard at post #20. But then I skipped ahead and post #1026:

There's this thing in traffic studies called the 85th percentile. What they found was that the vast majority of drivers drive at a speed they feel is comfortable for the conditions. Numerous studies have found that if speed limits are set to within 5mph of the speed that 85% of the drivers drive at, that accidents drop considerably. The problem with most people is that they think "Speed Kills" so, obviously, slower is safer. What these mentally deficient people don't comprehend that it's not speed that causes accidents, but differences in velocity. Two cars can be traveling at 200mph only inches away from each other, but as long as they maintain the same velocity, they'll never crash into each other. If they raise the speed limit for cars up to 70, they need to raise the limit for trucks as well. Making the difference in speed greater is only going to make things worse.

Compared to a trillion, that's like spending 1/100th of a penny. Cheap!

She's too fucking lazy to turn the steeringwheel.

When the writer can't come up with a better name for an alien planet other than another name for "Earth" it's a good bet the rest of the movie is going to suck. When I first saw the previews, I was confused wonder why humans were invading their own planet. Rent Titan A.E. for the kid.

Not likely. I know Pak, and I don't see him provoking an attack like this.

Dude, your Jeep is marked. Park it, then sit behind some cover with a camera and a baseball bat. Catch the fuckers in the act and then beat the ever living shit out of them.

Good man. I hope you succeed. :thumbup:

I've got a pair from the WRX... I should see about getting some cash for them..

MSRP starts at 18,190.

I hate to say it, but the 09 WRX also has open diffs front and rear. But even the RS won't become one-wheel drive. The center diff is still a limited slip. It's viscous and not very strong (4kg/100rpm) but it is a LSD, and has been much the same on the non-DCCD cars since forever. (The autos have a slightly different center diff, but it's essentially the same deal) Subarus are still nigh-unstoppable in the snow even with the open diffs. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Woot! Great choice. You should bring it to a RallyCross and get sideways on some dirt!

Wow, that was awesome.

Too late, a private company already runs all of the camera and takes a cut. That's how it's done in nearly every city that uses traffic enforcement cameras. So the city didn't get all of that $900,000. In fact, if I remember correctly, the lion's share goes to the private company and the city only gets a small fraction; something in the 25% or less range.

Looks better in black.

Hmm... How are they going to sell all those Chinese cars now?

+100 GM is already fighting a perception of poor quality. This is a band-aid at most. They won't have the same level of quality control there, so this can't be a long-term solution. I think this plan could potentially do more harm to the company than filing for Chapter 11.

Not enough information to make a decision. Can your situation change? If so, Sad and Rich, if not, Happy and Poor. But what is poor? If you're Happy and Poor, does that mean you have all your needs and wants met? Because that's a pretty good definition of happiness. I am happiest, and most at peace when I'm driving my car; especially so when I'm racing. Without the ability to do that, I wouldn't be happy. So there's a paradox, because wouldn't owning a car mean that I'm not poor? I posted something about this in another thread. DOes money buy happiness directly? No. Just buying stuff so you have "stuff" is a recipe for disappointment as you realize that other people don't give a shit about what "stuff" you have. That table in the hallway that looks nice but serves only to hold a vase up? Noone cares about it. Buy a HUGE house? Nobody is going to think you're a better person for it. As was mentioned earlier, Happiness comes from *within.* But does that mean that money is meaningless? No. Money is a tool. It can give you the TIME and CAPABILITY to find your happiness. How can you "Follow your Bliss" when you have to work 60 hours a week to support your family? What if your happiness is in traveling to visit the 7 wonders of the world? Can't do that if you're penniless. So the answer to your question is, I want to be happy. That means my needs are met (food, housing, mental and physical stimulation) and I'm able to race. If that's included in Happy and Poor, then that's the choice. But if having my needs met means I'm Rich, then I can't answer your question. In my opinion, the thought that you can only be happy when you've cast off all your material possessions is naive, and frankly, dumb. At the very least, basic needs must be met. You must eat, you must have shelter, and you must have clothing.

11 over is acceptable.. Otherwise I'll change all my plates to WMWMWWM or ODODDOD or some variant thereof.

My nephew is going to be able to read AutoX cones before he can even drive.

Not to defend the ricer... but the 1970 Olds 442 with the W-30 455 was a low 14 sec car. That's not all that fast now a days. He could have shut them up by taking them for a ride rather than beating on his car and street racing in the middle of the day.

Red Light cameras do a great job of stopping people from running red lights. But they also do a GREAT job of causing more rear-end collisions. As for the speed functions, are they going to ticket everyone that goes 1mph over?

JD is the #1 sold Bourbon Whiskey in the world. I don't drink and even I've had some. Even did the JD Distillery tour this past weekend when my race got rained out; it's really cool.

Funny, the Veyron goes as fast, doesn't look as hideous, and manages to generate downforce. So they felt it was a good idea to have a tail-happy supercar because a wing would make it less pretty? (in their eyes) To generate Downforce and keep the car straight when it is in the air. Are we going to start arguing semantics? Planes fly upwards, cars are pressed downwards. I think it's pretty clear what I meant, let's not start trying to confuse the issue by splitting hairs. Didn't know we were talking just street cars. Then Lamborghini Reventon FTMFW. I brought up Lola and other Lemans Prototype designers as an example of people who KNOW aero using what you called 'ricey' design on a full-bodied car. Not really. http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/pagani-zonda.jpg Highest point is behind the windshield apex, adn the glass doesn't continue around to compete with the side windows for space. Sail panels are windows and have consistent lines so they don't look bloated. One other huge complaint I have about the CCX is the beltline between the front and rear wheels. On the Zonda, it's pinched downwards to give the front and rear fenders clear definition. Whereas the CCX is nearly flat across, making it look like a fat brick. The Pagani flows, the Koenigsegg looks cobbled together. Thanks to the Stig. If Top Gear hadn't flung one off the Test Track, I bet the CCXR wouldn't have a wing.