**Testing the Fuel Economy of the 2022 Hyundai G70**

We recently had the opportunity to test the fuel economy of the 2022 Hyundai G70, and we were eager to see how it would perform. Our initial expectation was that driving slower would result in better fuel economy, but we wanted to put this to the test on our actual test route. We drove the G70 at both 110 kilometers per hour and 90 kilometers per hour, and the results were surprisingly close.

At 110 kilometers per hour, we achieved an impressive 68 miles per hour, which resulted in a fuel economy of 35.1 miles per gallon. This is not too shabby for a car with an all-wheel-drive system and a small-displacement turbocharged engine. However, when we slowed down to 56 miles per hour, the fuel economy improved significantly to 40.7 miles per gallon. This shows that, as expected, driving slower does result in better fuel economy.

The question is, is it worth the extra money to save time? According to our findings, for every 5 miles an hour increase in speed, you are losing around x percentage of fuel economy due to aerodynamic drag. This is just physics, and there's no way to overcome it. However, with modern cars like the G70, which have advanced technologies such as eight-speed automatic transmissions and high gearing, the difference may not be as significant.

One more data point that we found interesting was that slowing down can actually save you money in the long run. By driving at a slower speed, you reduce your fuel consumption, which means less money spent on gasoline. This is especially true for drivers who are always on the move and have to cover long distances. Our findings suggest that this is indeed the case, and it's worth considering when making decisions about your vehicle.

**The 2013 Honda Pilot: A Common Issue with Bump-Induced Vibrations**

We also received a question from Chris in Mechanicsville, New York, regarding his 2013 Honda Pilot. Chris described an issue he had been experiencing, where the car would feel like it was losing control for a minute when hitting bumps on the road. The vibration seemed to be more pronounced than just the bump itself, and sometimes even occurred when driving straight at high speeds.

Chris mentioned that he has good tires on his vehicle, which are fairly new with plenty of tread. He was wondering if there was anything we could recommend to help diagnose or fix this issue. We consulted with our chief mechanic, John Ibbotson, who suggested several possible causes for this problem.

One potential culprit is the loose rear compliance bushings in the suspension system. This is a common issue on some models of the Pilot, and it's been reported by numerous owners online. The bushings are designed to provide a certain level of flexibility to the suspension, but over time they can wear out or become loose, causing vibrations like Chris described. While this might not be the sole cause of the problem, it's definitely worth investigating further.

John also emphasized the importance of taking your vehicle to a qualified mechanic to diagnose and fix any issues. The forums and online communities can provide valuable insights and suggestions from other owners who have experienced similar problems. By doing some research and gathering information, you may be able to find a solution that works for you.

"WEBVTTKind: captionsLanguage: enWe give our first impressionsof the 2020 Ford Escape,talk about the latest updatein the California emissionscontroversy and whatit means for consumers,and are car subscriptionservices worth it or not,next on Talking Cars.Hi, and welcome to Talking Cars.I'm Jennifer Stockburger.I'm Jon Linkov.And I'm Jake Fisher.So we're going to startoff with some developmentsin some things we talkedabout and actually gavesome history on in episode 218,particular California's abilityto regulate their own emissions.Two things happeningin the news.One, the Departmentof Justice isdoing an antitrust investigationof the four automakers Ford,VW, Honda, and BMW whohad come to an agreementwith California, and the otheris this potential revocationof California's ability toregulate their own emissionstandards.So Jake, thoughts onhow this is progressing?Well, it's kind of interesting.I mean, you look at VW whenthey were polluting too much.I mean, they hada lot of issues.And now that they'reagreeing to pollute less,they're running into issues too.And what's interesting isyou look at California.It's not just randomnessthat California reallybecame kind of theleading edge in termsof emission standards and allthat because it wasn't thatlong ago that there wasa serious smog issue.You see the oldpicture about LA thatwere just like youcouldn't even see.It was just smogall over the place.And they've done alot to clean that up,and a lot has todo with Californiasaying, hey, you know what?You want to sell a car here?You got to do X and Y andZ. And that has helped them.And it's worked.And it has worked.It's much cleaner there.And I think the argumentagainst that is that, look,if you have to build the car forCalifornia, then you know what?You're going to windup having to buildthat for everyone else.They almost de factokind of regulatethe rest of the country.It's such a big market.It's such a big market.But the truth is thatseeing it that way,you're almost just lookingat the United States.There are othercountries besides us,and they have seriousregulations too.We're seeing all thesesmall-displacement turboengines and better fuelefficiency and all this stuff.It's not just about California.It's about Europe.You go to China now and ifyou want to go downtown,there are some places thereare regulating you haveto have hybrid or electric.So it is a global market.And because thecompanies, the Big Three,they've had to goand do this, itcan help them be morecompetitive overseas toowhere maybe there's moremoney to be made in Chinaor what not.And I think theideal, to your point,would be harmonization of everycar around the whole world.Around the whole world.If they could build oneversion that met everything,that would be great.Exactly.There's a lot more regulationsoutside of fuel economyand emissions thatare different.Right.That would be the panaceathat just oneand everyone go on thesame side of the roadand everyone hadto either choosemiles per gallon or liters per100 kilometers or whatever.And it even has the-- well,as I was going to say,it even has the potential ofsaving money for the consumer.If they're not building somany different powertrainsto hit each individualregulation--you do have a trueglobal powertrain--sure, that's going to save--that has the potential.Can't guarantee it'll savemoney, but right there,fuel economy and lowercosts for the manufacturer,potentially lowercost for the consumer.Right, and the ultimate arbiteris going to be the market.And we have done-- there'sbeen some survey data,Jon, that says that peopledo want better fuel economy,are, to your pointwith the VW, theyare concerned aboutemissions, obviously,interrelated with that.Well, so first off, ConsumerReports, our advocacy group,they did a nationallyrepresentative survey,and respondents who plan to buya large SUV or a pickup truckactually say that they'rewilling to pay morefor the vehicle forbetter fuel economy,and 73% of peoplewho are driving thesewant better fuel economyin their current vehicle.So as we shift from moreefficient smaller carsand sedans, whichjust inherentlyare-- they weight less.They're going to be morefuel efficient than an SUV,particularly a largeSUV or pickup truck.You're movingtowards that world.These buyers say I love my SUV.I love the room and spacethat I get, the height,but I want better fuel economy.And of the survey,88% of Americansoverall agree that automakersshould improve fuel economyin all types of vehicles.And especially the larger ones.I think there's this assumptionthat we like our big pickuptrucks and we likeour big V8 engines.And what's interesting,when Ford came out withtheir small-displacement V6s--I think we probably talkedabout in Talking Carsso many years ago.And we're like, everyone'sgoing to want the V8and they're not going towant a V6 in an F-150.And boy were we wrongright because now you lookat the F-150 and they'regetting 2.7-liter V6s.That is really popular, andit's a great powertrain,and it does get prettygood fuel economy-- well,relatively better fuel economy.But for the class--For the class, it's great.A number of diesels arecoming out, small diesels.Depending on themanufacturer, yes,they'll get better fuel economy.But gas engine and gasengine, these turbo sixesare battering the V8s,the normally aspiratedconventional V8sand everyone else.And you're not compromising.You look at the new F-150--and look, the fueleconomy, it's not great,but it's gone from like 15for a few years ago to 19,and that is significant.That's a huge savings of fuel,and there isn't a penalty.They're big.They're burly.They do a lot of work--They do a lot of work.--versus a Honda Accord.They have a lotof cargo capacity.A Honda Accord'sjust not towing,not having that cargo capacity.It's going to getdirty or whatever,but also, it's harder tomake-- it's a bigger jump,a bigger percentage jump togo from that 13, 15 up to 19.It is.It is.And those Honda Accords,again, they're quick.They're getting over30 miles per gallon.and they're quick too.Exactly.And they're quietand all those things.Right.You're not compromisingperformance.You're not.So certainly asthese things moveto a court of lawin that Californiasays they're going to suethe federal governmentfor their right to beable to revoke the waiver,as the Department of Justiceinvestigates four automakers,things will slow down,and the expectationis it will takeyears to sort it out.So from the tracks, wehave our first impressionsof a 2020 Ford Escape.So some prettymajor changes, Jon.You want to throw specs.So first of all, it'sbuilt all over the world--Cleveland--Speaking of world cars.--I think Chihuahua, Mexico.It's built in Spain, and therewill be some versions builtin the UK, United Kingdom.So real world vehicle.There will be four powertrains.A plug-in hybridwill come in 2020.There will be a hybrid version.And then the two gasolineengines, a three-cylinder 1.5liter and then a four-cylinderis 2-liter turbocharged engine.Which is the one we have.Which is one we rented,borrowed from Ford.180 horsepower forthe small engine,250 horsepower for the big one.They can run on regulargas, but particularlyfor the 2-liter turbo,premium is recommended but notrequired.Eight-speed automatictransmission.And for the twogas engines, CVT,continuously variablesfor the hybrids.And interestingly enough, 2liters only all-wheel drive.So with that price premiumyou're going to pay,you're only gettingall-wheel drive.Very interesting vehicle.I think each of us drove it.Right.Your impressions?I don't think I had it asmuch time as either of you.What I really found interestingwas that dimensionally it'sbigger than theprevious generation.As everything has gotten bigger.But it feels almostlike a hatchback,like a slightlyraised hatchback.It doesn't feel like anSUV, even a crossover SUV.It feels like a slightlyraised hatchback,and I was shocked thatit is bigger overall.We said nimble before, andI think that's still true.Jake, did you get achance to get in it?So I did, and I'm crackingup by some of the specsbecause it wasn't long ago thatwe had eight-cylinder engineswith three-speedautomatics, and now wehave three-cylinder engineswith eight-speed automatics.The world is upside down.So we had 2 liter, so let'sfirst of all categorize that.So we did not drive the Escapethat we're going to buy.We're going to buy kind of avery mainstream Escape withthe 1.5-liter engine.The one we drove, this isnearly a $40,000 Escape.I agree with you totally, Jon.What's interestingis that this car--so Ford has said we're gettingrid of cars, basically, right?They're gettingrid of the Focus,and they're getting rid ofthe Fusion and all that stuff.So this is not just going totake the place of the Escape.This is kind of like theirmainstream family vehicle,and it does feel very carlike, which is not a bad thing.No.It really drives nice.Again, it's the $39,000.Certainly.But still, the handlingcharacteristics, the quietness,the nimbleness ofit, rides well.And these are the kinds ofthings that Ford has alwaysdone really well.The last generation was agreat driving car, reallymore along the lines of likea BMW SUV than really a--It's towards the Mazdaside of the small carsbecause they're sportyversus the Corolla sideor whatever-- the HRV fromHonda or something like that.Right.Ford, they do rideand handling well.It's very much kindof like world, kindof European kind of feel to it.It's going to be alittle bit more premiumprice than, say, like a CRVor a Forester or somethinglike that.At least you're gettingsomething for that.You are getting something.You're getting kind of likethe new family vehicle.Well, we talked about, as youjust said, the Mazda side.We've always said the CX-5felt a little sportier comparedto the others in the group,so I guess this fits in there.I think Mazda does thesportiness, but it's like--and Mazda's getting into kindof like the quietness and allthe luxuries, but I thinkFord is already there.I think Ford hasalready kind of gotthat really kind ofsophisticated suspensiontuning where it's quietand it rides nice too.The Edge, the previous Escape--you read our profileson consumerreports.organd it always says it drivesreally well and it handles welland the ride is a little onthe firmer side but tied down.It's other stuffthat you get into.I think the questionis-- and again, thisgoes back to our conversationabout world market.Now while this vehicle doesmake sense as a world car,if you think of Escapethroughout the generations,when it first cameout, it almostlooked like a littleExplorer, right?It was very kindof-- very two box.And now it looks very much--I mean, it kind oflooks like a hatchback.So I wonder if that'sgoing to impact sales,like the Escape Raptoror something, you know?Right.Well, I went back almostto those really greatfirst Focuses.The four door was really curved.And it's like they pulledout the design and said yeah,we can modify that.We liked that.So two things struck meone is, again, the agility.And we had said the agilitywas great on the old Escape.It was a little laggingin terms of fuel economy,so hopefully these changes,including the eight speed,will address that somewhat.And on the eight-speed thing,we have had other vehicleswhere they went to thesevery multispeed transmissionswhere there were hiccups,particularly at rolling stopsand slow.I did not sense thatin this vehicle we had.It was pretty smooth.I agree with that, but I think--We'll have to see.--what it is, it's acombination of those speedsand not havingquite enough power.And I think that powerfrom that 2 liter,that optional high-levelengine, kind ofcan mask a lot of that stuff.Right.So we'll have to seeon the one we get.And those are targetnumbers, so not finalized,and EPA fuel-economy numbershaven't been finalized,certified at this point either.Yep.Nothing betrayed mein terms of controls.SYNC 3, big screens,big selections.If I could interject.Yeah, absolutely.It seems to bethat the screen isreally nice sized and properlyproportioned for this vehicle.We have the same exactscreen size in our Explorer.Seems too small.It's too small and far away.That's just your eyes, Jon.Yeah, no, no, no.My vision's good.I'm not yet there.There was a conversationwith some people whobrought this vehicle,and they said, look,it's development time,and you're alwaysfighting to keep up.And before they had tinyscreens hidden away.Now they're there upfront.And it's kind of likeTalking Cars 100 something.You said it's almost just likethey're going to just keepdropping tablets in.And as the tablet gets bigger,they'll just drop a new one in.It's a well-proportionedcabin I think.It is a well-proportioned cabin.And I would be remiss, standardFord Co-Pilot 360, includingforward-collision warning,automatic emergency breaking,but also blind-spot warningin the package, which we don'tsee from everybody as well.So I thought that was great too.And high beams-- auto, on, andoff high beams Mrs. Headlight.I was going to say that.And also just a props to Ford.So some of the controls ofthis very complicated, advanceddriver-assist stuff sometimesis very, very difficultto set those adjustments.They do a wonderful job of it.They have little animationsthat demonstrate what it is.We saw it in the--Explorer.--Explorer that wehad, but it's there.It's very, very smart.I think this is somewherewhere Ford is kindof leading all the other car--Little bit of educationin there, yeah.They're leading theindustry in tryingto make this so you canunderstand what the heckyou're actually adjusting.Technology for good versusturning the radio downwith your fingers andswiping virtually.No, you're exactly right.We're seeing a lot ofthese animations, right?And you're like,oh, it does this,and there's a carspinning around,and you can changethe light pipesin the car and stuff like that.It's like, why not usesome of that animationto help you as opposedto just dazzle you,and Ford's doing that.Great.So stay tuned.Obviously we'll begetting our own 1.5 liter,and we'll see how it pans out.So moving on toviewer questions,we have four-- countthem, four video questionswhich we love, love, love.Keep all of your questions,video or otherwise, coming,talkingcars@icloud.com.So we will jump right inwith Amanda from Boston.Hi, Talking Cars.Big fan of the show.I'm considering a carpurchase and wantedto solicit yourcollective thoughtson car-subscription services.I'm specifically interested inVolvo's XC40 through their Careby Volvo subscription service.In your opinion, what aresome of the key benefitsand drawbacks of such a serviceversus the traditional lease?Thanks.So Amanda's asking aboutthe subscription service,in this case Care byVolvo, versus leasing.So just going through some ofthe specs I did look into--the minimum for Care byVolvo is $700 a month,and they make it veryclear that that'sa minimum because insurancecosts and rates are stillsubject to yourown driving record.They're still subjectto your credit,I'm sure your age, et cetera.So even at higher insurancepremiums and lease costsas a comparison, I still think$700 minimum is a lot of money.Positive there, and I'm tryingto do the back and forth, nodown payment.So a lot of times when you'releasing and getting a $369,there's a down payment there.No down payment required.Mileage limitation, like atleast a little bit higher,15,000 miles a year,but still limited.Service andmaintenance included.But the truth isit's a brand-new car.You would think that serviceand maintenance wouldn'tbe a big deal.It's often includedon new cars anyway--Correct.--and much cheaper.It's under warranty,right, you'd think.And then the appeal, I think,of some of these subscriptionservices as they'vebeen rolled outis the ability to get anew car when you want one--in this case for Volvo, avehicle upgrade after one year.But just reading thefine print, you'rethen in for another two-yearcontract if you take that.It's not like you remain withinyour original 24-month care.I'm pretty sure you haveto get another Volvo too.I think that mightbe ..Yes, you have toget another Volvo.But if, say, Amandawas looking to upgradeand she wanted to start withthat XC40 and then move to an--60 or something.XC60 or 90-- so myopinion is I thinkI would still stickwith the leaseif you have the downpayment, unless it was justa way to try a Volvo.But you're in for two years.And Jake, I know youhad some thoughtsabout Volvo .I think Jon's got some too.Or Jon's got somethoughts, yeah.Early termination leaseprograms out therewhere you may have to pay abit to have someone take over--but I have a neighbor who'sdone it five times with BMWs,for example.Loves it.You know, he gets a good deal.Just breaks the lease.Well, someone elsebreaks the lease.He comes in and islike, well, you'regoing to cover $1,000 ofthe $10,000 left on this?All right, it's a deal.So there's some negotiatingthat can be done.There's negotiatingyou can do as well.So it's good for both people.The $700 a month, I would eventhink that in a luxury car--Audi, BMW, I believe Mercedes--they all have theseextra service programsyou can pay for.So maybe Volvo says it'sall included, but isit just the cost of the extraservice program rolled through?That's something to check.Again, what your insurancewould be per month dependingon all those parameters.The one thing I'm surprisedat is the 15,000 miles a yerbecause they are going to bepulling these vehicles backand then putting themin their preowned fleet.A vehicle with 30,000 milesmay not sell as well asa vehicle with 20,000 miles.And a three-year lease,you can average that out,so you have an extra year.But if you're going backfor a new Volvo after a yearand it's 15,000, it's 15,000.RightSo look, I think the bigselling pitch here is like, oh,it's convenient-- one-stopshopping or whatever.One bill.But you know what?Sometimes--This has its advantages.--having that convenienceis costing you.I mean, look, you know what?If you're the type of personwho goes to the big-box storefor something, the electronicsstore for something else,the grocery--you could go to a drugstoreand you could probablybuy most of your stuff.It's convenient, butit's going to cost money.So sometimes maybe you're betteroff searching around for good--where you could get a dealfor car insurance and whatnot.And the other thing is, again,do you really want to committo a Volvo because we havea lot of data on Volvos,and the reliabilityis not that great.Now I get it.They're going tobe under warranty.But still you can't lookpast the inconvenienceof when the car's not working.And just because it'sall covered doesn'tmean you don't haveto keep on bringingthe car back in or potentially--I mean, even if you're strandedor something like that.You're not going to be stranded.They're going to comeback you up or whatever,but still, it'snot the greatest.And if you decide,hey, you know what?I don't want to get the 60.I want to get the90 or whatever.A lot of the newVolvos do you havea lot of reliability problems.So for Amanda,investigate thoroughlyand maybe consider a differentoption than the Volvo XC40.Great.Thanks so much.Next question is from Sark.Hi, Talking Cars.So exciting tosend a question in.I recently wentto driving school,and I was just wondering ifyou ran a driving school,what car would you buy for thefleet for new drivers to drive?Thank you.So this is kind of acool question from Sarkin that we are pretty big fansof driving schools, especiallywhen they're teachingskills over and abovea typical driver's ed course.Of course we host theStreet Survival School herea couple of times a year.So really think there'sbenefits to that.So Jon, you own yourown driving school.What's in the fleet?So small car, Ford Focus,Honda Civic, something low,kind of benign in thesense of not too fast.Goldilocks.We talk about Goldilocks.Yeah, and also it's goingto teach young drivers howto deal with seeing aroundvisibility challenges.You put them in a bigSUV, and then one daythey rent a small caror the car their parentsgive them is a small car.They're not going to be used toseeing around in parking lotsand around traffic lights,right-angle intersections.One thing is if my drivingschool has access to a giantopen parking lot without lightstanchions-- tall lights--I would also include a late'80s, early '90s CapriceClassic with abench seat in therebecause, much like thedriving-school handlingeducation at some racetracksthat I've been to,the passenger can hit the brakeor hit the gas for the driverto teach over- and understeer.Oh right, yeah.And it's not fordrifting, but it's for--Why are you looking at Jake?But it's forlearning car control.You skid, particularly ifyou're in the Northeastor even down Southwhere rain versus snow.You learn to steer correct,and that's very important.Yes, there's electronicstability controls out,but not everyone'sgoing to be given or buya vehicle that has it.There's plenty of mucholder cars out therethat are handed down.Though we recommend it.We recommend it, but thereality is it's just notgoing to happen necessarily.And it's great.It's a great lesson.And I certainly remembergoing around a skid padand keeping control.In a Caprice Classic?In a Caprice Classic.Look, there's tons of oldConnecticut police carsthat are going to be available.And the guy in the passengerseat nails the throttle,and you're like ah!Great lesson.It could be at theend of the sessions.So there's an assumption thatto put a car on the trackand put it to thelimits you need to geta BMW or something like that.And I would say right now, no.And we know that because wehave some tire-test cars thatare Camrys who see enormousamount of full stops, quarterlimits, and these things,they hold up incredibly well.But I'm going to say if Iown that driving school,I would actually do whatStreet Survival does and nothave a fleet of vehiclesbecause the mostimportant thing forsomeone to learnis how to optimizetheir vehicle.If they come in and they knowhow to handle a Camry reallywell and they drive asmall SUV or if theydrive some Caprice Classic, it'snot going to help you as much.You need to know how to getthe most out of your car--Good point.--and that's what I would do.It also keeps your costs down.Yes it does.That's true.That's true.It's a win-win.You don't have to buy a fleet.Just invite them.So I was kind of on thesame boat of the carthat I would want for mydriving school was notthe car I necessarily wantedto put a young driver like Sarkin.But I wanted theability to teachthe physics, particularly if--you know, you can overrun theelectronic stability controland teach those drivingskills like you both said.So maybe a later-modelCamry that's reliableso I don't have topay a lot for my fleetbut that I could shutoff stability control.Maybe not a Caprice Classic, butat least no stability control.So great question.I know they're cheap.Yeah.So our next questioncomes from Canada.Take a listen.Hello, Consumer Reports.I have a new Genesis G70,and I have a question.Every day I have a longercommute, and I'm Canada,so my commute is 60 kilometers.Now I was wondering,how do they calculatethe fuel economy of my car?It is 20 MPG in the cityand 30 MPG on the highway,but at what speed do theycalculate highway driving?I have one route where I cando 90 kilometers an hour,and I have anotherroute where I coulddo 110 kilometers an hour.On which one of those routesis my car more fuel efficient?Thank you.So there's really kindof two questions there.One is about regulation, andone is his specific questionabout his very own commute.So the regulation, at leastfor the United States,there's kind oftwo highway cyclesthat make up thathighway-fuel-economy number.There's the old one, averagespeed 48 miles per hour.It didn't go about60 miles per hour.But in 2008 they addedthe US06 driving cycle,and it was meant to be alittle more real world--some accelerations and braking,hard accels, hard brakes,goes up to 80 miles per hour.So those are thetwo cycles that gointo creating the fuel economy,the highway-fuel-economy numberfor EPA.But Jake, can you addresshis more specific questionabout his commute and speeds?Well, yeah.And it's interesting.Yeah, you're right.The cycles are verycomplicated, and thenthey put some kind of numbers,and there's a correction factorand whatever.So it's not like they just goout and run a certain speed.But because we are a testingorganization and we do our ownfuel-economy tests--when you look atConsumer Reports,you're not reading aboutEPA numbers or whatnot.Right, on the road.You're reading our numbers.And we go throughevery car that we test,and we splice into thefuel rig, and we havefire extinguishers standing by.And we'll go actuallymeasure how many--We have skilledmechanics, right.We don't mess around here.But we measure how many exactCCs of fuel on certain cycles.So when we saw this I'mlike, let's go try it out.So we happen to have a G70 thatwe tested, and we actually wenton our actual testroute and drove itat 110 kilometers per hourand 90 kilometers per hour.And look, I thinkwe've said it before.It's like you drive slower andyou get better fuel economy.But because we have theequipment and we have the car,let's go findexactly what it was.And these were kindof close together.90 kilometers per hour,56 miles per hour.110, 68.So they weren't that far apart.So at 68 miles perhour we got 35.1 milesper gallon out ofthe G70 that we have.It's an all-wheeldrive 2 liter--so 35.1.And then when wewent to the lowerspeed, the 56 miles perhour, which is the 90,it went to 40.7.So you got about another 5miles per gallon at lower speed.You have the option.Is it worth the extramoney to save the time?And the extra time, gettingto work a little slower.It's kind of like whatwe've found over the year.For every 5 milesan hour, you'relosing x percentageof fuel economy.You're fighting aerodynamicdrag at that point.Right, exactly.It's just physics, right?There's no overcoming that.It is interesting.I don't mind actually--I'll have to make it up tothe guys who were just like,we had more testing to do.But the truth is thatwith modern cars,with theseeight-speed automaticsand these high gearing andthe small-displacement turbos,it's like let's go makesure that still is true,and it still is true.The faster you're going,the more fuel you're using.Right.One more datapoint-- slowing downis better for your pocketbook.Yep.Yeah, cool.Great question, and we werelucky to still have the G70.I love it.So last question is from Chrisin Mechanicsville, New York.Hi, Talking Cars.I'm a huge fan andhave a question todayabout our 2013 Honda Pilot.So what happens is you'redriving along, usuallyabout 45 miles an hour,and the car hits a bump,and it feels like it losescontrol for a minute.It's maybe a lateralshift, but it alsohappens when you'regoing straight.Better way todescribe it might bethat there's avibration in one area,and then it sort ofshakes to another areaand then it shakes itself out.And I have prettygood tires on it.They're fairlynew, tons of tread,and I was wonderingif there was anythingyou would recommend looking at.So pretty specific questionfrom Chris about his 2013 Pilot.Jon, do you haveanything for us?So I hunted down JohnIbbotson, our chief mechanic--Literally.--when he wasn't rigging--When he wasn't rigging the G70.--the G70 or reporting.Look, we're not going to beable to-- hit first qualifier iswe're not going to be able todiagnose a vehicle from afarwithout seeing it.But some of thethings to look at--look at the shockabsorbers first.Is the vehiclebouncing and the wheelactually leaving the ground?If the shocks are bad--Chris says it'shappening with a bump.Right, or the towerwhere it mountsthe vehicle there's an issue,though the ABS may activatewhen that happens--so you may feel breaking.So maybe that isan aspect of it.But a quick look online,a lot of complaintsfor that era on the Pilot.It's called the loose--well, there are looserear compliance bushingsin the suspension.A lot of peoplehave similar issues.That would be somethingto talk about.But the best caseis to go take itto a qualified mechanic, whethertaking it to the Honda dealer,taking it to an independentmechanic that you use.But it's more than just tires.He talks about the tires beingnew and having good tread.There's more to itto the front end.It's kind of interestingyour point about the forums.There's probably a forumfor every vehicle there isand how it may notbe the diagnosis,but it certainlygives you an areato look at when yougo online and look.It's the amazing thing of massproduction and interchangeableparts.Chances are whateverproblem you have,there's others who have it too.And find out what they did--Yeah, it's a great----and what they have.--great resource.So anyway, so that willdo it for this episode.As always, keep thequestions, the videos coming,talkingcars@icloud.com.Any information on the topics wetalk about, see the show notes.Thanks for watching.Thanks for listening.See you next time.\n"