When I test drove a Premier I gave the car a cornering workout - the suspension was way too soft. I like to feel the road and the Premier's suspension hides the road from the driver.
When I test drove a Premier I gave the car a cornering workout - the suspension was way too soft. I like to feel the road and the Premier's suspension hides the road from the driver.[please tell me if I should be starting a new thread]
So... LT or Premier? Any insights?
I *think* I really want Adaptive Cruise Control. However, that appears to be a VERY expensive option. +4100 for Premier (to allow Driver Confidence II package, which is required), + 575 For Driver Confidence II, +575 for Driver Confidence (required for II), + 1375 (ACC itself) = $6625!! Granted, other stuff comes with that, of course. But unless I'm missing something, these are the perks:
- Slightly different wheels (I really couldn't care)
- Leather-Appointed Seat trim (I prefer cloth, generally. However I do like the pictures of that "Brandy" leather)
- Bose sound (does the basic system really suck?)
- Very limited safety enhancements (auto brakes sort of work but only at low speeds and not if the object about to be smooshed is smooshable... do I have that right?)
- Beeping things if the car thinks I'm not driving well (great... my wife gets the car backing her up!)
I think I've just talked myself into the LT, but I'd like to hear from owners if there's more to the Premier that I'm realizing.
Gen 2 fold manually too. I had no idea, so many tidbits here ...The side mirrors do fold manually, they pivot when you pull on them, but that part is not motorized
I think if you like the VOLT, you will be very happy with a LT.So... LT or Premier? Any insights? ...
I am 6'4" too, and the fit is very comfortable. Plenty of leg room (I actually don't have the seat all the way back!) and head room is fine. One minor issue is the forward view is somewhat impinged from above by the roof line. When waiting at stop lights and I am the first in line, I often have to duck down a bit to see the lights. I consider it a very minor annoyance.#3 - How is it for tall guys? I'm 6'4, mostly in the legs. For anyone that's driven a Honda Fit... that's about as tight as I can go. I wouldn't call it comfortable, but I manage.
I think it depends on the light placement at the street corner. Most lights are on poles that protrude out from the far side of the street, so no ducking required for those. But if the lights are hung across the code side of the street and you are first in line, then yes some ducking is required as it would be with all cars.I never expect to sit in the rear seats. My only concern with the rear is that my 5yr old and his booster seat can fit back there at least slightly better than my Honda Fit. I was going to be no better off in that regard with the Model 3, so whatever.
As for having to duck to see lights... that's an annoyance I just accept as part of driving as a tall person. Do I wish a car designer could figure it out? Sure... but I'm not holding my breath.
Actually my 2005 diesel smart car was the best for that. it had a glass roof that was far enough forward that I could just look through the roof to see lights when I was in the pole position. I kind of miss that car. Even as big as I am, that little car had the room. Got rid of it when we had the kid (no back seat at all).
The Gen2 Volt is even better in the mountains. More battery and ICE at your disposal. I ran 70-80 MPH uphill on I-70 last week out of Denver. Yes I was on battery but the only time I've seen the car struggle was driving across Kansas at 78 MPH into a 30-40 MPH headwind for nearly 400 miles. Even mountain mode couldn't hold the battery level but I never did get the dreaded "Propulsion Power Reduced" message. Once I got out of the wind in Kansas City the car recharged mountain mode in about 15 minutes.Joe! That was so on point, it's creepy! I'm not sure if that was intentional, but the mountain range route in that video is EXACTLY the one I travel. I can't even come close to that kind of performance in my Fit. Surprisingly, the Fit isn't that horrible in the mountains. I pass a LOT of cars going up the steepest parts. It just sounds like I'm killing it (and I probably am) because it drops down a bunch of gears and whines like a banshee. But it isn't great either. Near the end of the video he goes through the tunnel... coming out of that is the hardest stretch. Big trucks are sometimes in the far right lane doing no more than 30kph (20mph). Most vehicles struggle to maintain 90kph (55mph), but with knowing the route and beginning acceleration in the tunnel, I can usually hold 110kph (70mph). Speed limit is 120kph (75mph). The guy in the video, unfortunately, didn't show his speedo at that section. For much of the drive he shows going 140 to 150 (85-95) but I suspect he wasn't able to there. He mentions he's at 130. But whatever the case, that demonstrated sufficient power in my view.
Sold! (almost). The only hesitation I have is at the end where he says he "hopes" GM can pull that off in a Gen 2. Is there some reason why Gen 2 cars wouldn't be as good on the mountains?? Am I missing anything where extra range is traded off for performance?
Thanks.
Why would you want to recharge in MM when in KC? Asked the KC guy... That's a waste of gas. There's no mountains to climb...... Once I got out of the wind in Kansas City the car recharged mountain mode in about 15 minutes.
One of the reasons the volt performs so well in high altitudes is because electric motors are unaffected by thinner air. The gas engine of the volt might be bashing for air, but the load on the engine is one of the generators, not the heavy car itself.Joe! That was so on point, it's creepy! I'm not sure if that was intentional, but the mountain range route in that video is EXACTLY the one I travel. I can't even come close to that kind of performance in my Fit. Surprisingly, the Fit isn't that horrible in the mountains. I pass a LOT of cars going up the steepest parts. It just sounds like I'm killing it (and I probably am) because it drops down a bunch of gears and whines like a banshee. But it isn't great either. Near the end of the video he goes through the tunnel... coming out of that is the hardest stretch. Big trucks are sometimes in the far right lane doing no more than 30kph (20mph). Most vehicles struggle to maintain 90kph (55mph), but with knowing the route and beginning acceleration in the tunnel, I can usually hold 110kph (70mph). Speed limit is 120kph (75mph). The guy in the video, unfortunately, didn't show his speedo at that section. For much of the drive he shows going 140 to 150 (85-95) but I suspect he wasn't able to there. He mentions he's at 130. But whatever the case, that demonstrated sufficient power in my view.
Sold! (almost). The only hesitation I have is at the end where he says he "hopes" GM can pull that off in a Gen 2. Is there some reason why Gen 2 cars wouldn't be as good on the mountains?? Am I missing anything where extra range is traded off for performance?
Thanks.
Except for the fact that my battery charge went from 8 miles EV when I got on I-70 in Limon, CO to 0 miles EV when I got off I-70 to bypass the Kansas Turnpike in Topeka, KS. I was in mountain mode the entire way. The head wind I experienced on I-70 gave the car an effective wind speed of well over the vehicle's top road speed, which consumed more power than the ICE could provide for an extended period leading to a drain on the high voltage battery. Power requirements for a car go up as the cube of your velocity and this very definitely was one of those times.Why would you want to recharge in MM when in KC? Asked the KC guy... That's a waste of gas. There's no mountains to climb.
The Volt if a great 150 HP hybrid when it is done being an EV.
The normal hybrid battery buffer is more than enough for anywhere but climbing long mountain passes.
You're making it too complicated.
That certainly suggests there is such a display, yet it isn't mentioned at all in the section regarding the instrument cluster, etc. I also see that there's an "Ice possible" warning that can come up.Outside Air Temperature Sensor
The outside air temperature sensor
is behind the front grille of the
vehicle. The vehicle uses the sensor
information to display outside air
temperature.
Yes. Normal/Sport/Hold/Mountain are all selectable by the driver.This mountain mode thing... I'm assuming it is selectable on the fly, right? I looked in the manual and it doesn't specify. I'm sure it is, but thought I'd check. It would be kind of annoying if I had to select when stopped.
Outside temperature is on the infotainment screen.Something else I'm not finding in the manual... does this car have an outside temperature display and/or (at least) a frost/ice warning indicator?
[edit]
I finally found this in the manual:
That certainly suggests there is such a display, yet it isn't mentioned at all in the section regarding the instrument cluster, etc. I also see that there's an "Ice possible" warning that can come up.
Lol. Yes it was intentional and you are welcome. Seeing your location and having watched that video in the past (prior to my test drives in the Volt), I felt it would speak to your situation. Now, if some of our Colorado members would suddenly decide to start posting some drives through that beautiful scenery...or some of the other mountain drives I read about on here...Joe! That was so on point, it's creepy! I'm not sure if that was intentional, but the mountain range route in that video is EXACTLY the one I travel.....
The guy in the video, unfortunately, didn't show his speedo at that section. For much of the drive he shows going 140 to 150 (85-95) but I suspect he wasn't able to there. He mentions he's at 130. But whatever the case, that demonstrated sufficient power in my view.
Sold! (almost). The only hesitation I have is at the end where he says he "hopes" GM can pull that off in a Gen 2. Is there some reason why Gen 2 cars wouldn't be as good on the mountains?? Am I missing anything where extra range is traded off for performance?
Thanks.