On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 23:21:06 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Mercury?


Yeah ... a "Mountaineer" or something like that.
Another example of a basically decent vehicle with too many
doo-dad things like hydraulically operated running boards with
a windshield wiper motor for the hydraulic pump that
crapped out, motor driven rear seats that she never uses because
the thing is basically a hay wagon, and a bunch of electronically
controlled operator controls that are nothing but confusing. I think
I've driven it once since she bought it. Runs good, rides good, has
plenty of "pep" but too complicated for it and the driver's own good, IMO.

I am a believer that the more crap you put in front of a driver, the
more the crap takes away from the driver's attention to what he or she
is doing. That's why, after owning several "exotic" cars, I am happy
driving my plain jane F-250. I rarely even use the radio.

The only one I had that was an exception was the Porsche. Simple, fast,
and handled like it was on rails.




Sounds like the Lincoln. The damned owners book is an inch thick and I
know there are lots of things we have never turned on yet.

Had to drive on it some distance to destroy it so completely.

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:21:50 +0000, RGrew176
wrote:


Mr. Luddite;1053002 Wrote:
Mrs.E. came home from running down to the local store this afternoon
and told me she thought she was getting a flat tire. Said she heard
something and car felt funny after that.

Went out to check. Yup. Flat tire alright.

She should stick to riding horses.


http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/y...sboch/tire.jpg

Had to drive on it some distance to destroy it so completely.

Not really. These low profile radials pretty much self destruct when
the belt separates. The one I had, looked like that in about a mile
maybe less. It was enough time to slow down from about 85, cross 3
lanes of traffic and get to the right shoulder. (the left side was a
death trap if I stopped there, concrete barrier and a narrow
shoulder.)

On 1/15/2016 1:21 AM, RGrew176 wrote:
Mr. Luddite;1053002 Wrote:
Mrs.E. came home from running down to the local store this afternoon
and told me she thought she was getting a flat tire. Said she heard
something and car felt funny after that.

Went out to check. Yup. Flat tire alright.

She should stick to riding horses.


http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/y...sboch/tire.jpg

Had to drive on it some distance to destroy it so completely.






Less than 3 miles at about 35 mph.

Mr. Luddite
- show quoted text -
"Yeah ... a "Mountaineer" or something like that.
Another example of a basically decent vehicle with too many
doo-dad things like hydraulically operated running boards with
a windshield wiper motor for the hydraulic pump that
crapped out, motor driven rear seats that she never uses because
the thing is basically a hay wagon, and a bunch of electronically
controlled operator controls that are nothing but confusing. *I think
I've driven it once since she bought it. *Runs good, rides good, has
plenty of "pep" *but too complicated for it and the driver's own good, IMO.

I am a believer that the more crap you put in front of a driver, the
more the crap takes away from the driver's attention to what he or she
is doing. * That's why, after owning several "exotic" cars, I am happy
driving my plain jane F-250. *I rarely even use the radio.

The only one I had that was an exception was the Porsche. *Simple, fast,
and handled like it was on rails. "


Yup..if she was driving a basic compact car she would probably have had a better feel for what was going on.

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:05:07 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

Yup..if she was driving a basic compact car she would probably have had a better feel for what was going on.

The Mountaineer is basically the same vehicle as the "Roll Me Another
One" Explorer so it could get exciting.

On 1/15/16 11:09 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:05:07 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

Yup..if she was driving a basic compact car she would probably have had a better feel for what was going on.

The Mountaineer is basically the same vehicle as the "Roll Me Another
One" Explorer so it could get exciting.



About six months ago, we got my wife a new car, maybe one step up from
your basic compact. We shopped five or six dealers, looking at several
brands of four door sedans, including two "fancy lines." She ending up
liking the Toyota Camry best because "it's a simple car, well-made, nice
ride, and peppy." I was pretty surprised at how well it performs, since
she opted for the naturally aspirated four cylinder engine.

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:21:45 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 1/15/16 11:09 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:05:07 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

Yup..if she was driving a basic compact car she would probably have had a better feel for what was going on.

The Mountaineer is basically the same vehicle as the "Roll Me Another
One" Explorer so it could get exciting.



About six months ago, we got my wife a new car, maybe one step up from
your basic compact. We shopped five or six dealers, looking at several
brands of four door sedans, including two "fancy lines." She ending up
liking the Toyota Camry best because "it's a simple car, well-made, nice
ride, and peppy." I was pretty surprised at how well it performs, since
she opted for the naturally aspirated four cylinder engine.

===

If you want "peppy" take a ride in the V-6 Honda Accord, zero to 60 in
6 seconds.

On 1/15/2016 11:09 AM, wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:05:07 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

Yup..if she was driving a basic compact car she would probably have had a better feel for what was going on.

The Mountaineer is basically the same vehicle as the "Roll Me Another
One" Explorer so it could get exciting.

Depends on the year of the Explorer or Mountaineer. Both evolved from
the Bronco II which also had roll over problems. The Explorer was
introduced in 1991 and it's basic, original design continued to the 2001
model year. The roll over problem affects these years. Ford engineers
determined what the problem was and recommended a design change to
increase the track by 2 inches and lower the center of gravity. In the
meantime the problem was addressed by lowering the recommended tire
pressure to 26 psi. Tires were supplied by Firestone at the time and
that's where the finger pointed began.

In 2002 the Explorer and Mountaineer were completely redesigned which
included the recommended increase in wheel base width by 2 inches and
lowering the vehicle overall to reduce the center of gravity. Those
produced in 2002 and after don't have any higher incidence of rollovers
compared to other SUV's.

Wife's is much newer than that.

On 1/15/2016 11:21 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/15/16 11:09 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:05:07 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:

Yup..if she was driving a basic compact car she would probably have
had a better feel for what was going on.

The Mountaineer is basically the same vehicle as the "Roll Me Another
One" Explorer so it could get exciting.



About six months ago, we got my wife a new car, maybe one step up from
your basic compact. We shopped five or six dealers, looking at several
brands of four door sedans, including two "fancy lines." She ending up
liking the Toyota Camry best because "it's a simple car, well-made, nice
ride, and peppy." I was pretty surprised at how well it performs, since
she opted for the naturally aspirated four cylinder engine.



If this house deal goes through and I find myself in a position where I
don't need a big truck for plowing or towing, I'll probably look for a
small, economical car like the Camry. Haven't done a lot of looking or
researching yet but I wouldn't mind getting something smaller as long as
it is comfortable. The Mini Cooper I had a year or so ago was a lot
of fun to drive but it was like riding on a high performance roller
skate. I can't imagine taking a long distance trip in it.

Kinda like the looks of the Ford Fusion also but don't know much about
them. Only problem with the imports ... Toyota, Nissan, etc., is that
they all look the same to me. And most I see are grey for some reason.