Locate an Auto Repair Shop in Grass Valley, Oregon

Grass Valley, OR Car Consumer Discussions

Re: First 10,000 miles [mazda6dude]

by hiwayman on Tue Jan 08 14:31:21 PST 2008

Mazdadude, We were pretty surprised by the 40 MPG figure, too. We'd never seen the mileage that high. Generally, our combined mileage (city/hiway) runs in the mid 30's. The only thing we can figure about the 40 MPG is that we had a tail wind. As you know, the long stretches of 80 headed back west from the Sacramento area can be pretty windy. We also drove about 30 miles on very slow roads (Hwy 49, from Grass Valley to I-80), so that probably pushed the mileage considerably. Additionally, where I'll drive pushing 80 MPH, my wife is more of a 65-70 driver (she was driving), so that may have contributed to it as well. We see a significant difference in gas mileage when we change the cruising speed from 80-ish to 70-ish. Since we're not seeing that mileage since that trip, there must've been some external factor. And oh yeah, in answer to your question about where I live, it's actually in Marin County, north of San Francisco.....where herds of Priuses roam, free range....glad we have a NAH! I've heard that the computer isn't that accurate. That's cool, because I generally look for trends in gas mileage that would indicate better driving habits or some system problem, and don't trust it completely. However, the thing that should be considered is that there is significant chance for human error when filling a tank with gas. One gas pump may let you fill the tank much fuller before clicking off, than another. If the car is actually getting the same gas mileage from tank to tank, and you don't fill the tank to the same level each time, your calculations of mileage, based upon what you pumped v. miles you drove will differ, even though, in reality, your car is getting exactly the same mileage. A difference of a MPG or two is well within the margin of error for filling a gas tank differently. That is something to think about. When car mags and other organizations do mileage tests, they always try to fill the tank the same way each time, and sometimes even use external, carefully-calibrated tanks, when they do the checking. The car, on the other hand, calculates gas mileage by monitoring the fuel injection system. It knows very precisely how much fuel is being used, since it needs to know that to manage emmissions correctly. In the new closed-loop emission systems, the sniffers in the exhaust system tell the car's computers how to adjust the fuel injection at a very precise level, to assure best performance of the emissions system. Having to do that makes the car pretty precise in its knowledge of fuel usage. If you make the assumption that the odometer is accurate, I'd bet that the car's calculation of gas mileage is probably the accurate number, not the hand-calculated number we humans make...catch my drift? As far as why your gas mileage is so low, it's hard to say. It is unlikely that there's something wrong with the car, since one of those dozens of little lights on the instrument panel would most likely glare at you if there was. It probably has to do with a few things. Thing 1. Your driving style. If you like to squirt through traffic, and accelerate crisply away from stops, and drive fast, that will definitely lower your gas mileage. From the sounds of the cars you've owned, I'd bet ya coffee that's the way you like to drive. It's fun, but it uses gas. Thing 2. The Toyota-based hybrids like ours get their best mileage in stop-n-go traffic, where they can stay in EV mode. If you're not in knotty traffic, much, you won't get the high numbers. This was a lesson we had to learn as we got used to our car. We were disappointed at first, too, until we realized that in our area we do very little "city" driving, and as a result don't see the high-end numbers. The other thing is, when I drive the NAH, I get mileage similar to yours, because I like to drive aggressively too. When my wife drives the car, she probably squeaks out an additional 5MPG, because she's a much more gentle driver, and actually enjoys trying to keep the thing in EV mode. As a matter of fact, I hear about it all the time from her, since she checks the mileage computer frequently. I did get even, though. A few weeks ago, after hearing once again about how low my mileage was, I found a nice long hill. I reset the fuel mileage, and then rolled down that hill, hitting over 50 MPG at one point. I drove like I had egg shells between my foot and the accellerator for the mile or two headed home, and when I pulled into the driveway, my mileage, according to the computer, was in the mid-40's. I left the mileage indicator up, so my wife would see it next time she drove the car. OK. OK. So I cheated. But it WAS funny. She was oddly quiet about fuel mileage for a few days after that (probably trying to match my cheated numbers). When she finally mentioned it, I couldn't stop laughing, so she knew she'd been had.... Hmmmm...wonder if that's the way the EPA works it? ;)

Re: I still [robertsmx]

by boaz47 on Mon Oct 22 11:32:45 PDT 2007

Thanks. I am waiting to see what happens. I am all packed and so thankful my wife is off the mountain and at the house in Hemet. If my truck gets done before they move us I will leave just in case. You hate to leave knowing that the way some people are the chances of looting increases but it is only stuff and it can be replaced. If you see any reports on the Grass Valley fire it is directly north east of me and the fire seems to be heading south west. All the tankers and water dropping helicopters seem to be dispatched somewhere else. But don't worry, I will leave even if my truck is still in the shop. It can be replaced.

Re: Let's Talk Shop [rheller]

by bri66 on Sat Mar 24 10:06:44 PDT 2007

Randy, here's a thought for you. When I bought my house in 86 the previous owner had made a set of pressure treated ramps that were a good ten feet long. They began flush with the ground and only went up the height of a filled cement block 12"x6"x8". He had the Pressure treated 2"x10"'s laying on the ground and built up under them with dirt right up to and around the cement block. He then dug out a narrow center section down about a foot and he did all this on a slight downwards grade in my back yard. He had grass growing to hold the dirt in place. Primitive, but................If you do this make sure you screw down some stops so you don't drive off of them and don't forget to block the back of the rear tires. Home made oil changing ramps. That's how us New Englander's living here in the valley do it. HA! HA! I took my baby to work last night and it is filthy. I need to give her a bath tomorrow with my Mr Clean wash do hicky. :shades:

Freelander vs Liberty vs XTerra

by ulynch on Thu Mar 08 15:20:22 PST 2007

And what the hey, let's throw in a RAV4 with off-road tires, a 1" lift kit, and whatever skid plates can be had for it. Obviously, off road capability is essential. No, an Outback won't cut it, nor will all the other SUVs built for the 99% who will never take it offroad. I'm in the 1% who will. I throw in the RAV4 in case someone has opinions on whether it can be made trail-worthy while keeping its on-road cred. Late model used is preferred - '03-'06-ish. Other priorities are not necessarily in order: - fuel economy (this will be a 60 mile/day commuter too) - above average reliability (good warranty, good CR ratings) - on-road manners (handling, ride noise, braking, etc.) - above average safety (more than one airbag per person is preferred) I don't need: - external storage (no pickups) - towing capacity - 3rd row seating Opinions anyone? Real-world experiences? Is there a car missing I should consider? Thanks for any ideas. Dan in Grass Valley

Re: 1487 [1487]

by merc1 on Wed Jan 31 00:12:02 PST 2007

When the CTS came out no one said it handled like a 10 year old BMW except you. Again, why dont you provide a reference for this assertion. This is your opinion, it's not grounded in reality. The CTS was definitely on par with the 5 series of that era and I'm sure that reviews reflect that. You are losing touch with reality. Really, apparently you're defending GM cars on too many fronts to remember which criticism to say wasn't made. I'll direct your attention too: Get past the styling that, to some, has been carved from a bar of soap, and underneath lies a first-rate effort to bring Cadillac into the 21st century. The target is BMW. It is still wide of that mark. A bull's-eye, perhaps, on a 10-year-old 7-series sedan, but not against a current 3- or 5-series from Munich. C&D Comparo Again, you asked for proof and there it is, let the excuse making begin. The CTS has never, ever been par with a 5-Series or 3-Series, only in your mind. You're the one that never was in touch with the reality of the CTS. Wrong again. None of the quotes you provided addressed poor build quality. From what I remember they commented on the cheap look of the CTS/SRX interior and said the XLR's interior wasn't as nice at is should be for the price. Not the same as criticizing build quality. Why dont you provide the quotes you hold so dear to your heart? Classic case of denial. The quotes spoke about build and material quality, again you say they didn't. Why keep going over and over the same thing when all you'll do is say that it isn't so? Never said the interior was nice. Yet every chance you get you'll tell us how competitive the CTS' interior was and how it didn't deserve the rep it got. Which is it? Your right, it was up against the 530, 300, S80, S-type, A6, etc. None of its direct rivals. How did I miss that? Excellent point, its direct rivals are cars that beat it in a comparison I assume. Yeah you missed it as always. Do you honestly think anyone looking at a 5-Series or A6 is going to look at a CTS? Not hardly. A Volvo S80 and S-Type aren't as defined and their prices aren't as steep as the German cars so they might be. Still I guess you've got to hang your hat on one comparo in which the CTS won against a group of cars that it isn't typically cross-shopped with. Typical GM denial and excuse making. Yes it was out of touch. It had 300hp, did 0-60 in 6.5secs, had DVD nav, HIDS, heated seats, stability, 425 watt Bose 4.0 Sound System with 12" sub in the back, Magneride, CVRSS and all the luxury features expected of a car in this class. The car went out of production in 2003 so it cant be compared to what is on sale now, but to what was available in 2003. It held it's own even if you hate the car. You just don't get it. Why is that when people defend GM cars they rattle off the spec sheet in a futile attempt to prove that GM cars are the equal of their competitors? All that junk doesn't mean squat if the car itself isn't built or performs as well as the competition. It is the details that GM doesn't sweat and their fans don't get. The Lucerne, CTS, G6, 300 (not just C), Deville/DTS, '98 STS and 300M were (are) all successful. Whatever that means. They sold, and all of them except the 300 were about exciting as watching grass grow. The fact that you can't see where those older cars like the 98 STS weren't anything compared to the competition of the day tells me you'll defend any and everything GM till the end of time. According to you everything GM makes is competitive and the equal of the competition. Then you turn around and say: Only problem is I never said the STS was a great car. Then what the heck is the point? Doesn't every car company strive to build great cars? If not then what is the use or motivation? Nothing but massive contradictions and excuses over and over and over here. The STS was success, but wasn't a great car? Who the heck cares about it then? Most cars are "successful" if you're going to add up sales numbers and call it day. My goodness the GM ailment is serious and seemingly incurable. This is all part of your notion that GM never had any decent models on sale right now, they are always saying "wait until next year". Right I missed the part in which you agreed with Rocky at every turn about what GM was going to do next year and how the "2007" models are no so much better, while trying to forget the crap GM already heaved onto the road prior. In five years you'll be saying the '08 CTS is crap because newer models will be on the market. Just like you're likely to be saying that it wasn't perfect, like you're doing with the old CTS...yet at the time you hyped it to be a BMW competitor, which it wasn't. All in all another round of defending the old cars like they were something special and championing their flaws and saying they "held their own" when they did anything but. Denying proof when presented just like 1999 all over again 1487. M

Pre-sale mechanic suggestions?

by johnv on Fri Jan 05 13:09:39 PST 2007

Hi Crew, I'm looking at a used 2004 Forester in CA. Anyone have a suggestion for a pre-sale inspection mechanic somewhere between Sacramento and Grass Valley? I talked with the local dealer but their inspection price is on the high side and it seemed like he wasn't sure what I was asking for (isn't "pre-sale mechanical inspection" fairly straightforward?)