Help/advice - "hiker car" needed??

[DougPaul]

Jay, you need to lift up the bottom of the rear seat (so that it is vertical) before folding down the seat-back. Then, it will be completely flat and will not have the height discrepancy that some cars, such as Honda Civics, have between the folded down seat-back and the floor of the trunk.

(The following is true for my '02 Outback Wagon, don't know about other model years.) While this does give you a flat bed, it does shorten the available length. If you leave the rear seat down, there is some space between the bed and the backs of the front seats giving you a longer usable area. As Jay H noted, you may be able to put your feet in this space. One's height is probably a deciding factor...

As for venting at night: buy some screen material, cut to shape, and duct tape it over the windows of the doors that you will not be exiting or entering through (i.e. front passenger and one of the two rear passenger doors). Lower those windows. It takes a couple of minutes to set up each night, but is well worth it for well-ventilated, bug-free nights.

I certainly wouldn't use duct tape for fear of damaging the paint. (It also tends to leave a gummy residue.) I'd use masking or paint masking tape. MichaelJ's suggestion of magnets is even better.

Doug

 

[Jay H]

(The following is true for my '02 Outback Wagon, don't know about other model years.) While this does give you a flat bed, it does shorten the available length. If you leave the rear seat down, there is some space between the bed and the backs of the front seats giving you a longer usable area. As Jay H noted, you may be able to put your feet in this space. One's height is probably a deciding factor...


I certainly wouldn't use duct tape for fear of damaging the paint. (It also tends to leave a gummy residue.) I'd use masking or paint masking tape. MichaelJ's suggestion of magnets is even better.

Doug

The 02s are 2nd generation... Now that you mention it, I always throw stuff below the feetwell in the back seat which would mostly prevent one from shifting the seat bottoms anyway because I like space when I sleep in my outback so anything that's back there gets tossed under the rear seat feetspace and into the front seats...

Jay

 

[TEO]

I certainly wouldn't use duct tape for fear of damaging the paint. (It also tends to leave a gummy residue.) I'd use masking or paint masking tape. MichaelJ's suggestion of magnets is even better.

If you tape the screen upon the inside of the car, there isn't any paint to damage, and I've found that the gummy residue is minimal. Duct tape (née Duck tape) has a hard enough time sticking to nylon screen, I'd be surprised if masking or paint masking tape would at all. I agree, MichaelJ's suggestion seems to be excellent, as long as it is effective at keeping the bugs out. Also, it would be dependent on there being metal on the exterior of the column between the front and rear doors (of course, if there weren't you could always tape just that section).

Jay, an online source would suggest that Subaru did indeed change the rear-seat configuration in the third generation of the Outback. Can you verify this for us?

 

[sardog1]

Please excuse my immodesty, but I dare say--and confidently so--that I've driven more in bad weather than virtually anyone except for commercial truck drivers

Sorry, but you don't have nearly enough miles on you to let this one go unchallenged. Knowing the ages and proclivities of some of the other old farts around here (Rooney, Rooney?) as well as my own, I dare say some of us have done a bit more.

 

[SAR-EMT40]

Sorry, but you don't have nearly enough miles on you to let this one go unchallenged. Knowing the ages and proclivities of some of the other old farts around here (Rooney, Rooney?) as well as my own, I dare say some of us have done a bit more.

I tend to agree. I have driven off and in some cases way off road in the military in tracked and wheeled vehicles in all kinds of weather all over the world.

I let it slide because, well, he did say 90% of us. I assumed you, me and a few others were the 10%.

Keith

 

[griffin]

Hi again, whichway - I went back and dug up the website I used when I was car hunting.

Like you, I had a lower price range, and I found more viable candidates on autotrader.com than cars.com (not that you can't check both) - particularly since I suspect you'll be looking at private sales instead of dealerships if you have to stick to a 7K budget.

Either way, you still want to have a trusted mechanic check out the vehicle.

It's also worth subscribing to carfax to get full reports (one car I was thinking of buying had had it's odometer messed with), and to galves.com to get realistic estimates of what various models are worth on the market. Kelly Blue book is completely exaggerated.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

Sorry, but you don't have nearly enough miles on you to let this one go unchallenged. Knowing the ages and proclivities of some of the other old farts around here (Rooney, Rooney?) as well as my own, I dare say some of us have done a bit more.

I hear you. I let it slide, too. To point out that in a good part of your working career that 4WD's and AWD's simply weren't available makes you look, well, old.

Lot to be said for putting studded Hakkapeliittas on a front-wheel drive car, though. I recall one time whaling up and over the notch by Lost River in unplowed, deep snow driving a Geo Prism (twin to the Toyota Corolla before GM called it a Chevrolet Prism). The snow became deeper and deeper, until finally it just flew up and over the hood. The Prism wouldn't stop, although I was getting nervous that it might get "belly-hung" at some point. Once I crested the hill I figured gravity would pull me down towards Woodstock to a point were either the road was plowed or the snow depths were less. On that car I actually ran studded snows on all 4's, with the newer set in front. A bit noisy, but black ice didn't hold much terror with them on.

I guess if I were to make a concrete suggestion to whichway on a vehicle, I'd tell her to look for an older Toyota RAV4 with just front wheel drive, and put some studded snows on the front, rather than AWD. The RAV4 would give her the clearance without the hit on mileage of an AWD. Toyota designed the RAV4 for women, and could get a good used one within her price range. The RAV4 sits a bit higher than the Subaru too, so it has better sight clearance. But, I must confess a strong biasis for Toyota's, and several of my wife's friends have RAV4's and love them.

 

[DougPaul]

On that car I actually ran studded snows on all 4's, with the newer set in front.

put some studded snows on the front, rather than AWD.

The advice that I have seen suggests that you put the better tires on the rear. Otherwise, the car will be prone to flipping around under heavy braking.

Doug

 

[Double Bow]

I had an '02 Forester and loved it. Perfect for logging roads, great for gear, and alright to sleep in (you'd be fine). Ex has it now. I'd definitely go that route. Finding a used Outback or Forester in your range shouldn't be a problem.

 

[mirabela]

The trouble with the RAV4 is that with the rear seats folded down there's not really enough room to sleep back there, unless you're tiny.

Other than that, it's a great rig. My wife has had one since '03, and we have no complaints. We live in a snow hotspot in the Northeast Kingdom on a tiny dirt road, and it has served us well.

Given the sleeping requirements, I think I'd start looking at a Forester.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

The advice that I have seen suggests that you put the better tires on the rear. Otherwise, the car will be prone to flipping around under heavy braking.

Doug

I've read that, too Doug. And based upon years of experience, it's one of those bits of advice I've deemed to be horseshit.

But, YMMV ....

 

[daxs]

Good friend of mine just bought a rav4 she likes it except she does not think there is enough space in the back

 

[TEO]

I've read that, too Doug. And based upon years of experience, it's one of those bits of advice I've deemed to be horseshit.

It is absolute horseshit. As we all know, the majority of your braking power comes from the front. The better the traction in the front, the sooner you'll stop. First worry about stopping, then worry about the rear-end releasing. If the rear end is releasing, you're driving too fast for the conditions*. Bad tires and/or poor suspension are no excuses for the inability to control your car. If you can't control it--fix the problem.

* This is assuming that most people do not intentionally release the rear-end. Skilled, trained drivers an the exception.

* * *

As for my immodest comment, I realize that there might be a handful of exceptions, but (it got your attention , and) if you've been in a long-term, long-distance relationship spanning several northern states, over the years you put in a lot of miles, and you'll be damned if the weather will stop your weekly pilgrimage. You drive in conditions that most people don't drive in to go work or play.

During those days, I drove a Honda Civic Hatchback (one of the greatest cars ever made?), a Toyota Camry, and a Subaru Outback. When I retired the Subaru at 282k, I returned to a Honda Civic, via Craigslist, by choice.

Between that experience and my experiences as a skier, I've come to the conclusion that the vast majority of people do not, nor should not, be driving an AWD or 4WD vehicle. Are there some people who need a pick-up for work? Yes. Are there some people whose steep driveways warrant the extra traction? Yes. But, the notion that you need a AWD or 4WD because you live in _______ is, like the advice about putting the worse tires in front, horseshit.

Finally, if as the OP mentions, you don't feel comfortable or feel good at driving in bad conditions, there are two things you need to do: 1) make sure that your car is in good working order, particularly your suspension and tires; 2) slow down (unless you're going uphill).

 

[Chip]

The snow became deeper and deeper, until finally it just flew up and over the hood. The Prism wouldn't stop, although I was getting nervous that it might get "belly-hung" at some point.

I've had 2 camaros, a mustang, a chevy monza, an olds cutlass, a nissan pulsar, 3 jeeps, a plymouth grand voyager, a dodge durango and a mercedes. the best in the snow, by far, was the rear wheel drive coupe chevy monza. freakin thing was a snow mobile. we would take it out during storms before the plows came through on purpose. next best is probably the front wheel drive '97 grand voyager. i still drive it. 155k. won't die. i've removed the middle bench and can camp in the thing. cheap transport. my wife drives the durango, which she likes and is great for loading up and heading out, but it's not a $7k vehicle, even with 97k on it. the mercedes' tail pipe shrivels at the thought of snow, but it's a diesel, gets 30mpg, looks great, and will probably be the cheapest "cost of ownership" car I've ever owned.

don't disregard a front wheel drive mini van if you need cheap transportation and something you can camp in. i know it's not cool, but you make the vehicle: it does not make you.

 

[cushetunk]

So, you (and many others) are trading day-to-day performance and sacrificing gas mileage and money all in the interest of having a vehicle that will allow you, on some occasions, to drive a very small handful of miles on the Caribou Valley Road* in order to go...

walking outdoors?




*Really, there aren't all that many other rough roads that hikers commonly access in New England. Maybe a few more in western Maine, some of which are long enough to indeed require driving.

But the Caribou Valley Road is what, five or six miles at most?

 

[DougPaul]

It is absolute horseshit. As we all know, the majority of your braking power comes from the front. The better the traction in the front, the sooner you'll stop. First worry about stopping, then worry about the rear-end releasing. If the rear end is releasing, you're driving too fast for the conditions*. Bad tires and/or poor suspension are no excuses for the inability to control your car. If you can't control it--fix the problem.

Your logic is flawed. Yes the most of the braking power comes from the front because most of the weight is generally on the front wheels and the center of gravity (CG) is above the wheel-road contact plane (which effectively transfers more weight to the front wheels during braking). Dynamic stability (the tendency of the car to stay straight or rotate when perturbed during braking) depends on the location of the center of braking force (CBF) with respect to the CG of the vehicle. If the CG is in front of the CBF, the vehicle is stable; if the CG is in back of the CBF, the vehicle is unstable.

Better tires (which presumably have better grip and less tendency to skid) would tend to move the CBF toward them--thus moving the better tires aft would tend to increase the stability under braking.

Whether a particular car with a particular set of tires is stable under a particular set of braking conditions I cannot say. However, I do not accept your assertion that it is not an issue--it may or may not be an issue depending on the details. With modern anti-lock braking and automatic stability control it is probably less of an issue than in the past.

Anyhow, while important, this is somewhat off topic.

Doug

 

[MichaelJ]

Once you go wagon/hatch/gate instead of a trunk, you'll never want to go back. It's incredibly easier to deal with large quantities of gear in the back of a wagon or hatchback or SUV tailgate than in a trunk. The flip side is it's a lot less private than enclosed in a trunk.

Note that there are a lot of sport hatchbacks and wagons out there, should you decide that standard ground clearance is adequate. I decided that I've done all the NW Maine logging roads, I've done CVR, if I go back, I'll be a passenger, and I've set aside the ground clearance and have a tiny wagon. I only missed the ground clearance once, when I got hung up on some packed snow.

But I did not give up the AWD. For unplowed scenarios, it's a must for me. My driveway is plowed by a service, I can't wait for them to show up for me to get to work. My campground isn't going to be plowed out at 7am when I want to get out and get to a ski area after a fresh dump. And in years past, I never knew when I'd come out of a winter backpacking trip to find my car buried in an unplowed, or even worse, plowed-in, lot.

So while you should have in mind what the majority of your driving is (to/from job or school), those rare events are not necessarily so rare. It all depends on where YOU go and what YOU do in the winter.

 

[Stan]

I'd never argue with Doug Paul over a technical issue ... but I would buy a car based on my instincts and drive carefully no matter what it is.

If you brake carefully (i.e. not locking the brakes), the weight distribution etc. shouldn't matter because you're not going into a skid anyway. Same with ABS which most newer vehicles offer standard don't they?

Permanent AWD seems like a waste to me. It is less than optimal when you really need 4WD and lessens gas mileage when you don't. But to go anywhere anytime really does take 4WD unless you carry chains which will get you over a mountain pass but probably not bail you out after CVR has its usual washouts.

whichway ... are you glad you asked??? I can't wait to hear what you buy.

 

[DougPaul]

Permanent AWD seems like a waste to me. It is less than optimal when you really need 4WD and lessens gas mileage when you don't. But to go anywhere anytime really does take 4WD unless you carry chains which will get you over a mountain pass but probably not bail you out after CVR has its usual washouts.

The penalty for permanent AWD in some vehicles (such as my '02 Outback) appears to be pretty small--I get about the same mileage as my prior 2-wheel drive car. I am completely unaware of the AWD in normal road driving and when conditions get nasty I'm happy to have the extra capability, but I'm not looking to be able to climb cliffs etc with it. (I also used to have a steep road access to my parking spot. It required chains on my 2wd or other extraordinary measures to get up to it on more than one snowy occasion...)

FWIW, I made it up CVR as far as the steel bridge in 3 or 4 inches of fresh snow without difficulty. (Didn't try to go beyond the bridge--we were there to ski the road.) Gave a ride to someone who was unable to climb one of the hills in a 2wd car...

Any car design has a number of tradeoffs--this one works well for me and my needs/desires. YMMV.

Doug

 

[Chip]

The penalty for permanent AWD in some vehicles (such as my '02 Outback) appears to be pretty small--I get about the same mileage as my prior 2-wheel drive car.
Doug

my awd durango with the 5.7l hemi actually gets better mileage than my 4l 2wd/4wd jeep grand cherokee did.

hey whichway...how about a small front wheel drive or 2wd/4wd pickup truck with a bed cap ?

if this in diesel was available here it would definately be my next used vehicle purchase: