Nordic Skiing Automobile

If you look at reliability ratings from RELIABLE sources (as opposed to
hearsay), I think you'll find them to be as high or higher for Subaru
as for Toyota or Honda, or just about anything else except maybe
Lexus. So the implication in a couple of posts that paying more
initially may meanless in the end (with say Toyota), are not that
convincing. I've had several Landrovers from the 60's, Toyota 4WD's
from the 80's, and a 94 Subaru Legacy right now with 225,000 km on
it, and it's the best and most reliable of the lot.

Best, Peter

I don't see a NRW on the Nokian web site. Did you mean the WR?
http://www.nokiantires.com/newsite/t...size=225/60R16
Bob

"Joe Ricci" wrote in message
m...
Hi All-

Here ia a little tire info for you- If you are a tire manufacturer you
can call any tire you want an ALL SEASON tire- you could design it to
be the worst tire mankind has ever seen in the snow & ice and STILL
call it an ALL SEASON- the are no tests to pass- no specs. to meet. To
call your tire a SNOW TIRE you must past some exteme weather condition
tests for braking,lateral grip etc.
There is only ONE tire on the market that passes thoses tests and is
still designed for year round use- it is called the Nokian NRW. It
works as good as 95% of the snow tires on the market and still lasts
around 45-50k miles when used year round. Probably the best choice for
people in "fringe" winter areas.
Their dry road performance is on par with most "all season" tires-
there will be a slight decrease in fuel economy because of the higher
rolling resistance they have-but it will be minor. The price is a
little higher than most tires-but they are worth every penny. I have
had more postitive responses from my customers about this tire than
any other product I have ever sold. By the way- I sell
Nokians,Bridgstones,Toyos,Michelins etc- all lines- not just Nokians.
Hope this helps-

Joe Ricci

Gene Goldenfeld wrote in message
...
In all this discussion, I've been wondering how much snow tires are
really
needed in a place like the Twin Cities where it doesn't snow that much
and
the roads are clear the vast majority of the time. They will help on
some
trips up north or into Wisconsin or Michigan, but even that depends on
the
roads traveled.

An alternative for the Subaru is the ContiExtreme Contact tires
available
from the Tirerack. These are inexpensive all-seasons with a very high
customer rating for snow, as well as everything else, and 80k treadlife.
The only downside for pre-21st century Subies, is that they require at
least 16 inch wheels, which are at least $100 each.

Gene

"Justin F. Knotzke" wrote:

But the real reason I purchased a Subaru and sent back my 4Runner
was
the environmental issues. I ski maybe 20 times a year and I need my
car
for bike racing maybe 15 times a year. That's 35 times a year. The
other
330 days of the year I use it like every other mortal. I simply had a
hard time justifying such an expense to my pocket book and the
environment for that slight convenience of 30 times a year.

I just got the Subie so I don't know first hand how it will behave
this winter but I am going to put Nokians on her. All the AWD or 4WD
in
the world isn't going to help you stop. IMHO if you plan on driving
regularly in snow, get real winter tires.

This is a timely subject for me, because, although I am in denial about the eventual mortality of my Toyota
Camry station wagon (which just passed 210 kilomiles), I've already started to think about its replacement.
I've thought about the Subarus (Legacy or Outback), but the presumptive choice is the Toyota Highlander. I
know one skier who uses this model. Does anyone here have any experience with it?

Lew Lasher
Cambridge, Massachusetts and Stowe, Vermont (200 miles apart)

Yes I did- the WR replaces the NRW which was a good tire- the WR is even better

Joe


"Bob" wrote in message ...
I don't see a NRW on the Nokian web site. Did you mean the WR?
http://www.nokiantires.com/newsite/t...size=225/60R16
Bob

"Joe Ricci" wrote in message
m...
Hi All-

Here ia a little tire info for you- If you are a tire manufacturer you
can call any tire you want an ALL SEASON tire- you could design it to
be the worst tire mankind has ever seen in the snow & ice and STILL
call it an ALL SEASON- the are no tests to pass- no specs. to meet. To
call your tire a SNOW TIRE you must past some exteme weather condition
tests for braking,lateral grip etc.
There is only ONE tire on the market that passes thoses tests and is
still designed for year round use- it is called the Nokian NRW. It
works as good as 95% of the snow tires on the market and still lasts
around 45-50k miles when used year round. Probably the best choice for
people in "fringe" winter areas.
Their dry road performance is on par with most "all season" tires-
there will be a slight decrease in fuel economy because of the higher
rolling resistance they have-but it will be minor. The price is a
little higher than most tires-but they are worth every penny. I have
had more postitive responses from my customers about this tire than
any other product I have ever sold. By the way- I sell
Nokians,Bridgstones,Toyos,Michelins etc- all lines- not just Nokians.
Hope this helps-

Joe Ricci

Gene Goldenfeld wrote in message
...
In all this discussion, I've been wondering how much snow tires are
really
needed in a place like the Twin Cities where it doesn't snow that much
and
the roads are clear the vast majority of the time. They will help on
some
trips up north or into Wisconsin or Michigan, but even that depends on
the
roads traveled.

An alternative for the Subaru is the ContiExtreme Contact tires
available
from the Tirerack. These are inexpensive all-seasons with a very high
customer rating for snow, as well as everything else, and 80k treadlife.
The only downside for pre-21st century Subies, is that they require at
least 16 inch wheels, which are at least $100 each.

Gene

"Justin F. Knotzke" wrote:

But the real reason I purchased a Subaru and sent back my 4Runner
was
the environmental issues. I ski maybe 20 times a year and I need my
car
for bike racing maybe 15 times a year. That's 35 times a year. The
other
330 days of the year I use it like every other mortal. I simply had a
hard time justifying such an expense to my pocket book and the
environment for that slight convenience of 30 times a year.

I just got the Subie so I don't know first hand how it will behave
this winter but I am going to put Nokians on her. All the AWD or 4WD
in
the world isn't going to help you stop. IMHO if you plan on driving
regularly in snow, get real winter tires.

Just test drove the Honda Element today. Nice size cross between a station
wagon and a suv/minivan. Interior is very washable/water resistant. 160 hp
and real time/auto 4 wheel drive. Drove nicely, same feel and balance as
every other Honda I have driven. Maybe a little spartan for some, not too
many accessories offered, maybe in a few years they will add the toys.
Mileage rated at about 21/24 EPA auto trans. Has some nice options like
attachable tents, removable skylight (and can insert screen), etc for the
camping crowd.
gr
http://www.hondacars.com/models/engi...elName=Element

"Matt Morency" wrote in message
om...
What would be the ultimate nordic skiing automobile? The Volvo Wagon
is popular among skiers and a recent thread discussed Subarus.
--Matt

Lew-

I have about 4 or 5 customers with them- all are happy. The highlander
is on the camry platform- which should make you happy. Just had one in
tuesday to install 4 nokian wr tires as replacements after 40k miles.
To this date we have done only pm service to it- no repairs- no need
to return to the dealer for any warranty defects. As a matter of fact-
none of my customers with highlanders have been back for any warranty
claims. If it is the right size, you like its styling and it is
comfortable for you- go for it! Good luck-

Joe

Lew Lasher wrote in message ...
This is a timely subject for me, because, although I am in denial about the eventual mortality of my Toyota
Camry station wagon (which just passed 210 kilomiles), I've already started to think about its replacement.
I've thought about the Subarus (Legacy or Outback), but the presumptive choice is the Toyota Highlander. I
know one skier who uses this model. Does anyone here have any experience with it?

Lew Lasher
Cambridge, Massachusetts and Stowe, Vermont (200 miles apart)

Referring to Consumer Reports is setting up a straw man. I seem to
recall that my main source has been the "Lemonaid" series of Phil
Edmonston, though must admit that I haven't looked for a couple of
years, since the 225,000km Subaru has been so good that buying another
car hasn't crossed my mind. I shall sneak a peek at the latest edition
the next time I'm in the library (or maybe Chapters) and report back.
Previous times Subaru has certainly been right at the top for
reliability, and I expect their statistical base is somewhat larger
than Joe's.

I can't compete with a professional in terms of experience, though I
certainly fixed my own car almost every time for 30 years (including,
for example, going so far as to change a clutch despite not having
access to a hoist!)

Is the Edmonston thing strictly Canadian?

Best, Peter

wrote:

Is the Edmonston thing strictly Canadian?

Best, Peter

According to his website, he lives in Florida but, of course, spent some
time in Canada. Lots of valuable information on the site:
http://www.lemonaidcars.com/

Gene

The size of any test group is not as important as the quality of the
test group. Consumer Reports relies on feedback from consumers who are
very often NOT an unbiased group. They are also NOT a knowledgeable
group. The AVERAGE automotive consumer does not have the proper
knowledge to make good decisions.
Many people also have a hard time admitting that they made a bad
purchase. I prefer to rely on automotive professionals for
information. I am not the ONLY auto repair shop owner who thinks this.
I think doctors are a good source of
medical information, auto repair professionals are probably a good
source for automotive information. Auto sales people are not in the
same group as auto repair people.

I will try to give an example of another problem I see quite often-

In 1998 a customer of mine was thinking of buying a 1995 Ponitac Grand
AM for his son. I mentioned to the customer that brakes were a big
weakness on this car. He said he knew about that for 1993 & 1994 Grand
Ams, but Consumer Reports rated the brakes on the 1995 Grans Am as
good. Well guess what?- the brake parts on 1993,1994 & 1995 cars are
all EXACTLY the same. How can 1995 be better? THEY ARE NOT any better!
This problem with their reporting happens all the time.

I am not saying you should not read Consumer Reports- I am saying that
you should not use it as your only source and you should be carefull
about how much you trust the information.

Just my opinion-

Joe


() wrote in message ...
It was Joe and Gary who questioned the value of Consumer Reports auto
reviews, not me. I've got no basis for opinion on them. "Lemon-aid"
has everything in convenient tabular form, is relatively complete,
and gives (at least me) the impression honesty and statistical
significance. But I'll report back on the most recent AWD Subaru-Honda-
Toyota ratings in a day or two.

Best, Peter
.

Joe Ricci wrote:

The size of any test group is not as important as the quality of the
test group. Consumer Reports relies on feedback from consumers who are
very often NOT an unbiased group. They are also NOT a knowledgeable
group. The AVERAGE automotive consumer does not have the proper
knowledge to make good decisions.
Many people also have a hard time admitting that they made a bad
purchase. I prefer to rely on automotive professionals for
information. I am not the ONLY auto repair shop owner who thinks this.
I think doctors are a good source of
medical information, auto repair professionals are probably a good
source for automotive information. Auto sales people are not in the
same group as auto repair people.

I'm glad you made this latter point, Joe, because throughout this thread
I've been thinking..."This guy really wants me to hold in high esteem a
sample of opinions that includes all those auto repair guys and chains that
have been trying to rip me and everyone else off forever, whether through
willful dishonesty or just plain incompetence." Likewise, one can speak of
a sizable proportion of doctors...well, I'll stick to the topic. The irony
is, Joe, that the biases of tens of thousands of CR's respondents you are
criticizing are in good part shaped by the auto repair professionals they
come in contact with, the ones that provide them the explanations of what's
wrong with their cars; i.e., people like you. Nonetheless, if the
long-term trend in U.S. and Canadian sales figures for Toyota, Honda,
Nissan, Mazda, Subaru and a very few others are good indicators, I'd say
that consumers are a lot better at making car decisions than you give them
credit for.

I think the smart consumer, and perhaps most, take a look at a variety of
sources and try to make the best of them in the context of their needs and
desires. To that end, thanks to Peter Hoffman for mentioning Lemon-Aid,
which I'd never heard of. Phil Edmonston's site is probably the most
intelligent (and modest) discussion of auto recommendations, problems and
fixes for the consumer that I've ever come across.

Gene Goldenfeld