To equate the TCH's VDIM to any other vehicles "Traction Control" is doing the TCH a large disservice. Like comparing Apples and Oranges.
Asking for a VDIM defeat mechanism is like comparing a carburated vehicle and a fuel injected one and wanting a manual choke on the fuel injected vehicle.

 

Great analogy!

 

My 98 Chrysler Concorde has traction control and a switch to turn it off...I never have found a need to turn it off. I live in a snowy area and figured that it was more valuable to me to have it 'on' than 'off'. I appreciate the traction control and have never found it anything but a benefit. I agree that if you are having trouble with it kicking in and not getting you anywhere the gas is probably being applied too much...and is a common problem for drivers in snow and ice.

Yes, my mileage has dropped drastically during the COLD weather...hasn't been above 25 in the past week. I drive short distances and I use a lot of energy just getting my car warm. Once it is warm, however, it stays toasty, which, I know some have also complained about! Taking it to Seattle tomorrow, over Snoqualmie Pass, so will see how the mileage does this time around.

 

The only car I have owned that I wanted to turn traction control off was My "01 Mustang Cobra. I wanted it to always be off in that car as I wanted a bit of wheel spin. Directional control was modulated by the gas pedal as much as it was by the steering wheel. When traction control did kick in, it felt like you threw an anchor out the window. Subtle it was not! On my TCH, I would rather it just do it's job and help keep me out of trouble. Now if I had a sports car, I would want the defeat button, but then again, that button is expensive. I think I went through $1500 in tires for the year we had the Cobra. The rear tire could not stay on that thing.

 

Hell, even top dragsters and funny cars don't spin tires any more. Rolling friction is MUCH higher than sliding friction. On the dragstrip smoking tires WAS more impressive but in reality much less effecient. Where I live, spinning tires on the roadway just gets you a ticket and that increases your time enroute immensely.

 

But if you have ever been in that generation Cobra, you would know that the traction control would kick in before the tires really started to break free. Once that happened, you were lucky if you had 100 HP to work with, and it would take about 3 seconds before the power would start coming back. I think the car was much more dangerous with traction control than without it.

Also, if you can prevent spinning the tires without bogging the engine down, yes you will be faster, but if a little slip prevents the engine from bogging down, it might be faster to have a little slip of the tire. Tire smoking burnout might look cool, but I agree they are the slowest way to get from A to B, and on an IRS car like the Cobra was, it was a little rattling.

 

thanks for writing in reply to my concern about traction control on the TCH. Days passed, threads, books, magazines, and other websites were read, and I’ve come around to thinking traction control is a generally useful, important feature to have. If my next vehicle doesn't have all wheel drive as my 1999 CR-V does, then it ought to have traction control, given where I live (very steep hills, with snow in winter), and the amount of miles I travel.

The Prius, the Camry, the Highlander, the Accord, the Civic, and the RX 400h, (and the tantalizing Tesla, if one is reaching for the moon, or the cool design of the new Toyota hybrid concept sports car recently unveiled)...all these current hybrids are appealing to me for various reasons, but none fill the bill in every way.

I’ve come to love my small SUV. I can see better in traffic than in a sedan. It is better than having a larger SUV, or ‘brute ute’. Someone referred to the Cr-V and others of its size as ‘cute utes’. Someone asked when seeing the CR-V for the first time if it was old enough to leave its mother! Just as some have complained about the Prius, and maybe others too, my CR-V gets buffeted a bit on highways with high wind, but I can live with that. I only have a few quibbles about the CR-V: comfort, mileage, and (dare I say it, being of somewhat Puritan stock,) luxury. The updated CR-V has some improvements, but not sufficient for me to just get the new one. I applaud Honda for having produced a car that has been for me completely reliable, wonderfully safe, just fine to drive, and still going strong at 147,000 miles. I’ve loved having AWD which has worked like a charm and enabled me to get to work and elsewhere even on the snowiest of days on the steepest of hills.

However, front seat is just not very comfortable the longer I’m in it. The mileage, while great for a small SUV, is around 23.5-24. Now that I can see the promised land of 35-75 mpg hybrids, I want to go there myself. My car, purchased with a lower priced option package, did not offer many little frivolous things that we’ve come to know and love in other cars we’ve recently owned. It is funny that when one doesn’t have an option, one doesn’t realize how much one will come to love it when it finally becomes a standard thing. My first car was a 1982 two door Chevette with no a/c, no power windows, little power, and difficulty keeping up steam when ascending the many hills in this area, but because it was mine, I adored it. Now power windows and a/c seem crucial to any new car purchase, and other things have taken the role of frivolous but desirable extras. I look forward to purchasing a vehicle with many of them, when I part with the CR-V.

I just wish there was a single vehicle that combined the best attributes of my CR-V and the hybrids which are highest on my potential to buy list. I wish there was a small-ish SUV that in addition to having great mpg (35 or higher), great safety features, great reliability, being more environmentally responsible, reasonably priced, having AWD or traction control, A/C, power windows and locks, a cd player, a power key, a one step process to get into trunk or hatch area, had the following
had the following things going for it: (in no particular order)
1.sunroof,
2.heated seats,
3.heated mirrors,
4.heated wiper blades,
5.greatly adjustable front seats
6.really comfortable front seats,
7.dual climate controls,
8.steering wheel controls for audio and cruise control,
9.satellite radio and cd player
10.is fun to drive.
11.is $30,000 or less.
12.hatchback for transporting pets to the vet without getting the passenger seats all furry
13.and finally, pizzazz (the wow factor). I know it is a matter of opinion, but I find almost none of the hybrids particularly exciting. They mostly just look nondescript and dependable. They provoke in me the same level of interest and thrill that a lot of sports cars and concept cars do.

I want my cake and eat it too, I guess. I recognize that mine are unrealistic expectations. I’ve never yet had the perfect car. I realize that such a vehicle may not exist on the planet. I really like the Prius, the Accord, the Civic, the Highlander, the RX400h, and the Camry except for…
The Prius – dashboard seems too austere to me, the seats are not much of an improvement for me over my CR-V, and the visibility out the back window would be irritating to me I think. I like the idea of the Prius more than I imagine I’d like the day to day reality of it.
The Accord, the RX400H, and the Highlander seem great except for the mileage (assuming the averages on this site of 30 mpg, 25, and 26 respectively are accurate). Their miles per gallon are all too close to what I’m already achieving with my existing vehicle. The RX400h and the Highlander are both a bit larger than I actually need too, so if there were smaller versions of these but still hybrids I’d be interested.
The Honda Civic Hybrid lacks traction control so owners depend on great winter tires instead, as far as I can tell based on reading posts on different websites.

All this brings me to the Camry, likely to be my next vehicle, unless I hold out another year to see what results from the Nissan Altima Hybrid, and the Honda Fit Hybrid, and any others that are in the news, but not yet available. Maybe there’ll be updated and improved versions of any of the hybrids I already mentioned. The Camry is a sedan not an SUV, has mileage that is great compared to my nonhybrid car, but still less than I’d get if I got the HCH or the Prius, and appears to dependable but flirting with boring.

Ultimately I believe, to paraphrase Martha Washington, that one’s happiness usually depends more upon one’s disposition than one’s circumstances. Once I make my mind up to be satisfied with whatever I get, I’ll probably come to love it. Now to try to decide how many more miles and years I’ll stick with my good old CR-V.

 

Sounds like you want a Ford Escape Hybrid or a Mercury Mariner Hybrid. They seem to have all the atributes you are looking for.

Also the Nissan will only be available in the "california emissions" states.

 

Sounds like you want a Ford Escape Hybrid or a Mercury Mariner Hybrid. They seem to have all the atributes you are looking for.

Also the Nissan will only be available in the "california emissions" states.

Well, thanks for your reply. Actually, I've considered both of these but have my reservations. Meaning no disrespect to those who are quite happy with them, I'm spooked by reports of tip-ups in government safety testing of those vehicles. I seem to remember having read about it both in various Consumer Reports publications and possibly also on the NHTSA website too. Although I don't have my research materials in front of me right now, I seem to remember them being less reliable than I'd like. If I were going to switch to a hybrid that only gets 5 mpg more on average than what I currently get, I'd probably be looking at most of the other choices, rather than a Ford or a Mercury. Maybe I'll eat my words later, but that's my attitude now. Plus, I have to admit to a fondness for Toyota and Hondas over Fords and Mercurys, stemming from many years of reading CR's reliability comments for those automakers in general.

Back in 1982 when researching the purchase of the very first car I ever bought for myself, I gradually realized that for me at least, there was no purely guilt free 'all American' vehicle out there. The American cars I was most interested in had lots of imported parts, and the Japanese cars that seemed better alternatives often were the result of American and Japanese business ventures, and in fact were made in this country. I didn't have to agonize over choosing between a kind of 'patriotism' versus good sense (choosing a car based on its reliability, and good reputation). I still believe this to be true. We ended up choosing a Chevy Nova, a sibling car to the Toyota Corolla, and it was a gem. In the years since, every mostly 'American' vehicle we've had has been less reliable, gotten worse mileage, and been less enjoyable to drive than our various Hondas (civics del sol, cr-v, and now accord).

I realize that the Nissan Altima is only going to be available in the 8 states or so that have been mentioned in every news report about the car, but that is more tantalizing than off-putting. I find it interesting that you already drive the very vehicle I'd be currently likely to purchase if I absolutely had to go get a car today.

Anyway, happy and safe driving to you, and thanks for writing,
swvsings

 

Source of information is where?