Posted on

Dear Subie lovers, in the real world, the Evo outruns the STi. Hang me!

Hello Baraza,

Thank you for the thrilling experience you deliver to DN2 readers.

Honestly, it is a key driver for some of us to buy the Daily Nation on Wednesday. Mine is a sharp response to a number of recent scathing attacks you have unleashed on our ‘beast’… yes, the mighty Subaru STi.

While I appreciate the current milestones Mitsubishi Motors have gained on the locally hyped Evo X — I guess due to the current Kenya National Rally Championship (KNRC) standings and your confession of being in the habit of referencing Top Gear — I believe the STi is not a wobbly-crush-you-into-bush contraption, the kind you mystified two weeks ago in your comparison.

Allow me to refer you to some of the ‘allegations’ you fronted against our ‘bride’:

1. The many Subies you have seen crashed: How many? Is the comparison scientific? As a matter of fact, Subies are more in number locally than Evos. Therefore, common sense would expect a bigger risk, even if they were equivalent. So, a proportion would make more sense.

Tell me over a span of three years, 10 Subies and 10 Evo X were driven by X top drivers (Tommi Makinnen, Hideki Miyoshi, Ken Block, JM, et al) on different terrains and a statistical result was found. I mean, if you gave that Evo X to some mannerless rookie to do Nairobi-Namanga, he will end up in some national park trying to do a hairpin turn at 200kph, huh?

2.Please share some statistics on the comparison between the two monsters on world-known circuits. I will give you two: Nurburgring best lap time for Evo X (7.58), and 2011 STi (7.55), setting new saloon record after the Cardillac CTS-V; and Tsukuba circuit, Evo X (1.06.46) and STi (1.05.95).

Don’t forget Mark Higgins (my namesake) has delivered the best lap time on the Isle of Man in the 2015 STi. You haven’t had a chance to test this one, right?

3. In the history of WRC, Subaru stands at fourth position with Toyota, while your ‘copy me to survive’ piece of metal drags at position nine.

Honeslty, Subaru still leads Mitsubish in the ARC producer standings. Subie still leads Evo in the manufactures ARC standings. Moreover, out of the top current ARC standings, we have a 50/50 sharing for slots. Someone tell me how this would come to be if the STi was just a doppelganger of the Evo?

I wish for a one-on-one with you. I have to put my pen down because of family obligations, but before that, could you do a proper comparison of the STi with her peers? I am tired of this belittling activity you have been engaging our monster in.

Next time, write about the 2015 STi, Evo X (they stopped evolving?), Nissan GT-R, Toyota Celica, Mazda RX, Ford Focus, VW GTI, Citroen, Proton S2000, Peugeot 206, and give us full scientific comparison. And please don’t quote the Evo X-crazy Richard, Jeremy, Stig and James.

Let’s settle this once and for all today. Respect our Suba-space. Otherwise, you may be advised to acquire a contraption similar to that armoured presidential ride.
Peace! Marcus (Daddynduks)

Touchy, aren’t we, Daddynduks?

1. The “many” Subies I have seen crash are too many to count. In comparison, I have only seen one Evo crash. So, either Evos are not crashing with Subaru frequency, or if they are, then these accidents are well hidden, a tactic the Subaru Fan Club would be wont to adopt.

I do not have absolute population statistics of these two cars, but if only one in a group crashes against dozens and scores from the other group, I won’t need percentages to determine that there is an obvious pattern here. Subarus crash with alarming frequency. Maybe it’s the drivers, not the car.

2. I don’t drive on the Nurburgring or Tsukuba circuits, so those two locales are largely irrelevant. The professional drivers setting those lap times are also largely irrelevant. In the real world, an Evo would blow the STi out of the water anywhere any time.

If you keenly read my comparison of the Evo and the STi (the real world review I did two years ago), you’d realise that I did not exactly deride the STi. It is a capable car, but where some cars are capable, some are more capable than others. The STi is a very good car. In the right hands, it might even be faster than an Evo. However, those right hands are few and far between. This may explain point 1 above (crashing).

3. I repeat: not all of us go rallying. In the real world, there are many things that will determine the outcome of a race, including vehicle set-ups. A badly set up vehicle will not win anything, nor will a cowardly driver. While motorsports are good advertising avenues for car brands, merit lists are not always an accurate reflection of real world events.

4. I will review all those cars once I lay my hands on them. I did do a review of the R35 Nissan GTR, which never saw the light of day. Maybe I should redo it. I have not driven the 2015 WRX, so I have nothing to say about it except it looks a lot like the Evo X. If you have an idea where I can get those other vehicles, let me know. I’ll be glad to put them through their paces.

Lastly, Daddynduks, please don’t make threats like the last part of your email there. In this day and age of rampant insecurity and paranoia, it doesn’t… uuumh… sit well with some of us.

Dear Baraza,
I begin by commending you for your work advising and enlightening people oncar matters. Thank you.

I love cars, and my dream car is the Nissan GTR. While my understanding of cars is nothing close to yours, I think what attracts me to this vehicle is, first, the beauty. I imagine myself behind the wheel of a GTR and I can’t describe the feeling I get.

I humbly ask why this sports car isn’t common on our roads. I have this crazy dream of one day importing second-hand GTRs and selling them here, and in doing so, sharing with others the love I have for this car.

I think the GTR and the Chevy Camaro can prove to be popular with sports car lovers, over such offers as the Audi TT. Can these cars survive on Kenyan roads? Do you think they can sell in Kenya? Is the dream achievable (I know it is)? Mighty blessings.-Samuel

I am also enamoured of the Nissan GTR. That is a machine on a whole other level of performance. The reasons it’s not common on our roads are:

1. People were unaware of exactly how good it is (R32 and R33).

2. By the time they realised just what a good car it was, that KRA eight-year import ceiling prevented them from bringing in the less expensive versions. The last two models (R34 and R35) tend to be expensive.

This is further compounded by demand: Sony PlayStation and the Fast and Furious movie franchise have turned the GTR into a much-sought after street weapon.

3. The R34 GTR is very rare. It was produced for a very short time. After going out of production in 2002, you cannot import it even if you find it because of the that eight-year thing. The R35, which is not exactly rare, is quite expensive.

If you can open an importation enterprise, then by all means do so. I know a number of people who would love to get their hands on a GTR, yours truly included.

I don’t think the Chevy Camaro will meet much success locally, mostly because it is available only in LHD, which is a configuration that the government disallows for importation.

However, I have been wrong before concerning these American cars. If they create a RHD version, I am sure there are some locals who would try and get one.

Hello Baraza,

Thank you for all the engaging and informative car articles. I own a Mazda Demio, 2006 model. I recently decided to test a new engine oil treatment after a lot of hype from my brother, who told me I would be amazed at the results.

As he had predicted, I was amazed. Upon adding the 325ml of the liquid to the existing engine oil, everything about the car changed.

First, the engine went silent. Secondly, when I travelled from Nairobi to Nyeri, the fuel consumption went low. I am still in awe because the car’s performance has changed since.

I still do not understand how that product worked on my car engine, but my fuel bill has gone down by half. Please explain what forces are at work here. -Maina

I don’t mean to sound condescending, but how badly were you driving the 2006 Demio for it to undergo such drastic changes after the oily treat?

I too have a 2006 Demio, and it is not exactly what you’d call noisy. How “quiet” has your car become? Is it on par with, say, a Lexus LS460h?

I also do 16-20 km/l in the 1500cc Mazda without even trying. I sometimes top 22 km/l when I go into “economy” mode (those hard times of the month).

What economy figures were you achieving initially for you to experience a 50 per cent improvement? Such an improvement on my end means roughly 33 km/l, which is encroaching on the territory of the difficult-to-believe.

I think what you poured into your engine was some revitalising fluid. Unlike the Harry Potter-style magical forces that people believe to be at work, their premise sounds plausible.

What that liquid does is ‘repair’ scoured metal by filling in and smoothing over scratches and chips on metal surfaces. A 2006 car is still in generally good shape, especially if you have been adhering to service schedules.

So, it wouldn’t really be in need of ‘revitalising’, and if it was revitalised anyway, the change would not be as wide or as far-reaching as you imply.

Your train of thought is also a little misleading because the conclusion one draws from it is that the strange elixir you bequeathed your workhorse somehow restores the engine to factory setting, essentially making it ‘brand new’.

It is not as simple as that. The causes of thirst and/or engine noises may not necessarily be cured by 325ml of some oil.

What if the thirst is caused by a faulty ECU or a clogged air filter? What if the noises are from a loose exhaust manifold or some bearings on the threshold of failure? Pouring the wonder liquid in amounts copious or conservative will not cure those problems.

I will have a harder look at that product and find a test bed to confirm its effects. Since I do not have issues with noises or thirst in my 2006 Demio, I will have to find another guinea pig.

Hi Baraza,

I have a 4WD Toyota Carib, 2002 model and I am considering changing the rear brakes from linings to discs. My mechanic agrees it is possible to do so. The question is, will I have better brakes or am I on a suicide mission? Kind regards, Mwenda

The result will be desirable. Yes, you will have better brakes if you change the rear set-up from drums to discs. However, this is not a simple exercise.

First you have to find a similar or compatible car with rear disc brakes (an uncommon feature in most affordable cars) from which you will have to take the rear sub-frame.

This naturally involves removing your own rear sub-frame and installing the other one. Removal and re-installation of sub-frames is not entirely dissimilar to reassembling the car. It is a highly technical undertaking.

If your car is fitted with ABS, you will also have to recalibrate the system. If swapping rear sub-frames was extremely difficult, then calibrating the ABS is well nigh impossible.

Car manufacturers spend large amounts of money just getting the ABS to work right. What chances do you have of replicating those results with your budget?

I’d say leave it. What exactly are you planning on doing with your car for it to require a brake upgrade of such a scale?

If your current system is unsatisfactory, then I suggest an overhaul, not a replacement. If those brakes are not well balanced, especially at the back, you will spin out the first time you deploy the stoppers, an occurrence that I have been an unwilling participant of. It is not a funny experience.

The factory brakes should suffice, provided they are in good working order.

Posted on

The non-turbo Impreza is easier to maintain and uses less fuel

 Hello Mr Baraza, I’m interested in buying a Subaru Impreza but there are some things I don’t understand, so I need some clarification: 1. What’s the difference between an Impreza plain, Impreza WRX and an Impreza WRX STi? 2. What are the pros and cons of a non-turbo Impreza and one with a turbo with regard to fuel consumption efficiency, speed and general maintenance?Please highlight any other aspect(s) in relation to the models, their effectiveness, efficiency and engine details.Eric Karani


1. The difference could be as much as 150bhp. The regular Impreza is good for about 150bhp, the Impreza WRX makes roughly 230bhp while various forms of the WRX STi (JDM, factory-spec) develop anything between 276bhp and 320bhp. The Impreza “plain” is naturally aspirated, while the WRXes have turbos and intercoolers. They also have body kits, alloy rims and various addenda, which get less and less subtle the higher you go up the power scale.

2. The naturally aspirated “non-turbo” Impreza is far better where maintenance and fuel consumption are concerned. The turbo cars, not so much. However, if it is speed you want, you can never go wrong with the STi. De-limited, it will clock 260 km/h.

Effectiveness: The STi is very effective at what it does, which is going fast and cornering quickly, hence it’s rally heritage.

Engine details: the 2.0 litre cars all have EJ20 modular engines. With a turbo attached, the engine code is EJ20T.

Dear Baraza, Thanks for the great work you are doing. As a young hustler in Kisumu, I am thinking of getting a Mazda Familia (2000-2003) as my first car. I would appreciate your view on this car in terms of maintenance, fuel consumption, spare parts; in short, I’m interested in the economics of owning one. Regards. Andy

The economics of owning one are good. The car was cheap when new, so it will be cheap used. It uses a variety of puny powerplants, so no worries on the fuel economy front. Just make sure the unit you acquire is in a sound mechanical state. The vehicle is low maintenance (it is Japanese, you know, and small) and spare parts should not be a problem to obtain and/or buy.

Hi Baraza,

I am one of those people the government, and in particular the traffic police, are looking for because of using a Probox as matatu.

I use a 1400cc Probox to transport passengers from one town to another in a rural area  and it has been a very profitable business for a long time because on a normal day, I pocket between Sh2,500 and Sh3,500. That is more than a 14- seater makes, given that a Probox doesn’t have very my expenses because it requires only private insurance.

My question is, what makes the Probox a donkey that never gets tired because I overload it all the time and I have never replaced any part of the engine and it doesn’t show any signs of breaking down soon. I carry 10 to 14 passengers per trip and sometimes even 18, not counting kids, plus luggage like potatoes.

Now, what amazed me was the speed, because the traffic police chased me using their 110 Defender for an hour but didn’t catch me; I had 18 passengers and it was on a rough road. What’s more, it is a hilly village, so I became the village star.

How strong and durable is the 1400cc Probox engine, considering that I have had it for three years, I bought it second hand, and it doesn’t have any mechanical problem.


Interesting confession, this. Also, one that is difficult to believe. If you earn Sh3,500 per day, which is more than that made by a 14-seater, exactly how much does a 14-seater make daily? I expect it to be more. But I don’t own a 14-seater matatu, so I wouldn’t know.

Cars don’t get “tired”. They are not living organisms, least of all donkeys, which is what you describe your Probox as. Provided they have fuel in them, motor vehicles will run endlessly until certain parts break/explode/shatter/disintegrate/fall off. Cars only suffer wear and tear.

So you carry between 14 and 18 passengers in your illegal PSV, plus luggage? How do they all fit in? Please, send in a picture of the 1.4 litre donkey in action. I have seen videos of similar vehicles used to smuggle would-be terrorists… sorry, illegal immigrants – from our unstable neighbour in the north-east into the country and the best they did was 12 (not counting driver and “conductor”). How to fit in six more people yet the ones already inside don’t even have breathing room?

The least credible part of your story is the point where you say a police Defender 110 pursued your overloaded (18-deep plus luggage) donkey over rough ground and lost. Either your Probox is not really a Probox, or the ground was not rough, or you didn’t have 18 people on board, or maybe even the pursuit didn’t happen.

Whichever of these factors applies, there is one undisputable fact glaring through this seemingly tall tale: you have cast aspersions upon the abilities of police drivers, and I don’t know what the boys in blue have to make of this. You will not outrun a Land Rover Defender 110 over “rough ground” if the helmsman of the said Land Rover is even remotely capable of driving. If this gets published, I guess it is “Goodbye Probox”, not just to yours, but also to all others operating in shadowy ways like yours.

To conclude: much as the veracity and quality of your email is in question, this I can say with confidence: The Probox is not built out of titanium or granite. It will give in eventually if you continue using it like that. There is nothing special about its construction or its engine, it is just a cheap car which is easier to drive flat out compared to something costlier.

Hello JM, Towards the end of last year, the motor vehicle enthusiasts’ fraternity and the fans of the series Fast and Furious suffered a tragic loss following an accident that occurred somewhere in the US.

It cost the life of one Paul Walker (RIP) and a colleague of his. More importantly though, is that he and his colleague were driving a Porsche Carrera GT, V10 engine capable of churning out around 600hp even though it is a 2005 model.

I have read some reviews online and some imply that the vehicle is quite aggressive and would require expert skill and experience. Do you have any idea what it feels like sitting behind the wheel of such a beautiful monster, plus I thought these kinds of vehicles (really powerful vehicles since there were those who believe that the particular Porsche in this case was modified to produce more power) have magnificent braking systems?




Paul Walker’s demise was a shock to many, yours truly included, and very untimely: it came while filming of the seventh Fast and Furious movie was still under way. It is particularly galling, given that Paul Walker was a real-life motoring and racing enthusiast who owned a selection of potent and interesting motor vehicles, up to and including, but not limited to, a BNR34 Nissan Skyline GTR (the exact same car used in the 2 Fast 2 Furious film opening sequence) and a V8-powered Volvo station wagon.

The car that killed him is aggressive and difficult to drive. It takes a lot of skill to push it, and not many people can get anywhere near its limits. Theories abound as to what actually happened, and they vary from speeding (widely dismissed by on-the-ground witnesses), to street racing (also widely dismissed, though there was a yellow Honda S2000 on the scene immediately after the crash, the occupants of the Honda say they were going about their own business and were there to rescue any survivors), to avoidance of yet another accident, to the most absurd-sounding: that the man was murdered. I am not a CSI agent, so let us leave it at that.

I have sat behind the wheel of similar fare, literally sitting, but when it comes to driving, the farthest up the ladder I have reached is a 2012 R35 Nissan GTR. Its performance parameters compare thus to the Carrera GT’s: Power is 542bhp compared to the Porsche’s 620. Acceleration: the Nissan takes an otherworldly 2.8 seconds to clock 100 km/h from rest, while the Porsche takes about 3.5. Top speed of the Nissan is about 318 km/h, the Porsche pushes matters to the scary side of 330 km/h.

Whether or not the red Carrera GT was modified is moot: even in stock, factory-spec condition, that car tries the abilities of anyone who dares drive it. The Nissan’s abilities look quite similar (and superior in some cases) on paper, but the Nissan is harder to crash because it uses many computers to achieve stability and it has a very complicated 4WD system.

The Porsche is RWD and the last of the purpose-built no-frills supercars. The chips in the Nissan will intervene in the event of loss of directional stability, but even before that, they ensure that loss of grip does not occur in the first place.

Meanwhile, the Porsche will show you up for the driver you are, and the outcome is you will see God. Even BBC Top Gear’s anonymous race driver (The Stig), arguably one of the world’s most capable drivers, spun the Carrera GT several times before completing a full lap in it. That is how “dangerous” the Carrera GT can get.

The Porsche can get dangerous, but it is not dangerous. Advanced aerodynamics (including the deployment of the rear wing once a certain speed-110 km/h- is reached), a very low centre of gravity, even weight distribution, top-tier braking ability (100 km/h – 0 in 31m only) and fat tyres make for a stable and very fast car in the right hands.

The question is: was Paul Walker’s friend and business partner that much less of a driver? No. He and Walker both had racing experience, and their joint business interest dealt in vehicles of that calibre. Clearly, they knew how to drive these vehicles, and doing abnormally high speeds in a restricted zone in a flashy car would just be asking for unwanted attention from the authorities. Were they speeding? I don’t know. Does the Carrera GT require advanced driving skills to push hard? Yes. Is the Carrera GT dangerous? No.

RIP Paul Walker.

Hi Baraza,

I am looking for a Japanese import car to buy. I have a question, though. How do I know if the vehicle’s odometer has been tampered with? I learnt from a car importer that odometeters are tampered with in Mombasa, then the vehicles are advertised as having low milage. Is there a definitive way to tell what the actual mileage is? Thanks


Well, there are ways of checking this:

1. Examine the odometer. Cars do an average of 20,000km per year. Use that against the age of the car. If the figure comes up short, get suspicious. Look closely at the numbers in cluster. For some analogue systems, a white space instead of a black space between the digits means the system has been tampered with. For some digital systems, interference with the mileage causes an asterisk to appear next to the readout.

2. Ask for FSH (full service history). Use the number of services against the service intervals to calculate a ballpark figure of the vehicle’s actual mileage.

3. Look for missing screws on or near the dashboard.

4. Check the pedals and floor mats. If they are shiny and/or worn out, that is a car that has seen many miles.

5. Inspect the vehicle for wear and tear. It should be consistent with the alleged mileage.

6. Check the tyre tread depth. Some people may roll back the od,o but their subterfuge may not be elaborate enough to get rid of such telltale evidence. Or the tyres might be too new for the indicated mileage, while the indicated mileage, might not being high enough to warrant a change of tyres.

Dear Baraza,I have a Nissan Navara  DCI D40 model Ex UK year 2006 and would like your professional opinion on what engine oil I should use. Currently, it is being serviced at D T DOBIE  and they are using normal oil 15w 40 but a friend of mine recently advised me to switch to full synthetic oil 5w 40 if I want a longer engine life for this vehicle. What’s your take on this?Kind Regards, Appi

What does the vehicle handbook/manual say?

Tell your friend to sod off. Unless the oil s/he is talking about is cheaper than yours, then s/he doesn’t have a valid point to make. The 15W 40 oil means the viscosity index is 40 for normal conditions, and 15 for winter conditions. The 5W 40 means a VI of 40 for normal conditions and 5 for winter.

We don’t have any winter here, do we? No. So we have no interest in the winter rating for the oil. It follows that the two of you are discussing the same bloody oil: one with a viscosity index of 40. If, for the sake of argument, we had winter, then “your” oil would be better than “theirs” due to the higher winter VI. So, again, tell your friend to sod off.

Mr Baraza JM,

I wish to thank you for the good work you are doing, educating us on various issues touching on different types of motor vehicles and motoring in general every Wednesday. I would like you to compare and guide me on which the better vehicle is between a Mitsubishi Outlander and a Rav 4, each of 2400cc or thereabouts in terms of:

Safety of passengers

Fuel efficiency

Availability of spares and cost thereof

Comfort on and off road.

Kind regards,


Greetings Stephen,

I wish you had been more specific about the vintage of the vehicles in question. Factors like safety ratings and fuel economy tend to vary quite a lot from generation to generation. For your query, I will assume a 2007 car.

1. Passenger Safety: Interesting result here. The RAV4 scores 4 stars out of 5 for the UCSR (Used Car Safety Rating) while the Outlander scores the full 5 out of 5.

2. Fuel Economy: Again another interesting result. The RAV4 does 9.3 km/l while the Outlander out-teetotals it at 10.5km/l.

3. Spares: these vary widely in availability and cost, depending on where you look and who you ask. But trust Toyota parts to be widespread, though they may not necessarily be “cheap”
Comfort: broadly similar all round.

Posted on

Which is king between Mazda RX-8 and Toyota Celica GT?

Dear Baraza,
I am an ardent reader of your informative column and I thank you for the great work and research.

I am planning to buy my first car and I plan to use it to travel approximately 140km to Nairobi every Saturday and Monday.

I am a fan of sports cars, so when I came across Mazda RX-8 with a 1.3-litre engine, and fell madly in love with it.

However, I realised that the car uses a rotary engine which makes its fuel consumption very high. I would like a car that is economical with fuel and has a high resale value. Kindly advise me on the following,

1. Whether it is possible to replace the RX8 rotary engine with another one that is not as thirsty.

2. How does the RX-8 compare with Toyota Celica GT? Kindly advise me on any other better sport car models.

3. Finally, since I would like to import the car, is the import duty for sport cars higher than that of ordinary boxes?

Duncan Muthoni

The Mazda RX-8 is a sweet little car, but the rotary engine technology was doomed from the start, which was way back in the late 1960s, because it was not really a workable one.

Mazda just insisted on exploring that option as a way to look “unique” from other manufacturers, but even they had to eventually accept the circumstances and adapt accordingly. The RX-8 was the last car ever to use a rotary engine and it is no more.

Anyway, the high fuel consumption comes from the fact that there are three power strokes per every revolution of the crankshaft for a single rotor — the Wankel equivalent of a reciprocating engine piston — as compared to “half” for the piston — one power stroke per two revolutions of the crankshaft. The power stroke is the phase when fuel is burnt to produce power.

Other complications connected to a rotary engine are high oil consumption, lack of torque, which necessitates a high-revving engine, which in turns leads to even higher fuel consumption (the RX-8 revs to 9,500 rpm) and is expensive to maintain since the rotor tips, made from carbon, get cooked very fast and are always in need of replacement.

Anyway, to your question:

1. Yes, it is possible to replace the rotary engine with a reciprocating one. However, the work and money involved are off-putting, especially in fabrication and computer work.

At the end of it all, you may have even forgotten that the original intention was to save money. You might be better off sticking it out with your rotary and replacing it with another rotary once it goes bang. With good care, this might not necessarily happen.

2. The Mazda RX-8 is “sportier”. It has more horsepower (230hp vs the Celica’s 190hp), it is revvier (9,500 rpm is not a joke), it looks more snazzy, handles better, and is generally quicker. Other options would be a Nissan 350Z, a Honda S2000, Mercedes-Benz SLK, Chrysler Crossfire (stay away from this one), and BMW Z3 or Z4.

3. This I am not sure of, but I hardly think so. A friend just imported a crazy-fast sports car (R35 Nissan GTR) and initial calculations based on KRA’s universal customs duty criteria closely matched what the actual payment made was. So I do not think there is a “special” sports car importation tax.

Dear Baraza,

I have have been seeing buses with engines mounted at the rear and I am curious to know the following:

1. How does this setting compare with engines mounted at the front in terms of transmission, efficacy and maintenance.

2. Assuming two buses with the same engine specificiations (with one having the engine in front and the other at the rear) are going uphill, how would they compare? I am assuming one engine is pulling the load and the other is pushing.

3. Do the rear engine buses have a drive shaft since the engine is on top of the driving wheels?

Chris M M

I have had this debate between rear-engine and front-engine buses before. We had some interesting points, but these are the ones that stood out regarding your question:

1. Transmission: Front-engine buses have some advantage here because a rear-engine bus requires remote controls from the driver area to the back, where the engine is. These remote controls include the accelerator and clutch (for buses with a manual transmission). Also, the placement of the transaxle (gearbox, engine, and diff is all in one unit) means repairs and maintenance is a lot more complicated than in a front-engine bus.

However, rear-engine buses have been found to be much quieter than their front-engine counterparts because there is noise isolation. The rear-engine setup also means the engine and the driven wheels are at the same end of the vehicle, eliminating the need for long prop-shafts travelling along the centre line of the bus from the front to the back axle.

This absence of a lengthy prop-shaft means that the bus body can be fabricated with a much lower floor, thus maximising the available space from that chassis and hence optimising efficiency.

2. The difference would be hardly noticeable. Buses rarely suffer from loss of traction, and I know this particular question concerns that. In both cases, the engine would be pushing  the bus because either way, drive is going to the the rear axle. Placing the weight over the rear axle will not really make much of a difference.

The difference between pushing and pulling usually comes from the driven axle and not engine position. A front-wheel drive car pulls, while a rear-wheel drive car pushes, irrespective of engine placement.

3. Yes, they have to have a drive-shaft. There is no other way in which power from the engine can reach the wheels for a traction engine without drive-shafts. (Note: traction engines are the sort where the engine power directly powers the wheels.

The other type is a reaction engine where the vehicle motion comes from Newton’s most famous law. A good example is a jet engine, where the momentum of the exhaust gases pushes the entire vehicle)

Hi Baraza,
I have noticed that Scania F330 buses are quite adept at scaling steep sections, and that Isuzus, on the other hand, are more of jacks of all trades but not good for speed and power on either flat or steep surfaces. Nissan Diesels, I have also learnt, are quite underpowered when going uphill but become beasts on flat surfaces and even outsprint the Scanias and Isuzus. Could you kindly demystify this phenomenon and also drop in a word or two on efficiency and durability of the three.

Victor Dola.

From your description, I would guess either you are referring to obsolete models of these buses or maybe the respective drivers had different ideas on how to approach bus driving. The F330, for starters, is no longer on sale. It has since been replaced by the F310, which is just as quick but more fuel-efficient due to having a smaller engine, a 9,000cc five-cylinder unit compared to the F330’s 11,000cc six-cylinder.

When you say the Isuzu is “not good for speed and power in either flat or hilly surfaces”, I am tempted to think that you are referring to the old Isuzu MV118, which has been out of production for, what, 13 years now? It was replaced by the Isuzu MV 123, which is turbocharged and intercooled up to 270hp and 980Nm of torque, with a six-speed gearbox, and, from experience it is not exactly slow.

It might not have the sheer go of the Scania pair (which have 330hp and 310 hp respectively), but is works just fine on hilly and flat surfaces. Unless you were referring to the smaller FRR, in which case that is a lorry dressed as a bus, so forgive its lethargy on mountains.

The Nissan Diesel UD is another one. The CB31 SXN is a weak noisy thing which eventually found its calling in life — ferrying prisoners between courtrooms and jail. The updated version, the CB46 Turbo Intercooler, is a lot better: It is quieter, quite fast, and hugely reliable. Again, it is no match for the Swedes in making molehills out of mountains, but then again it is not THAT bad now, is it? Have you ever been in a CB31? Now, that one was POOR on the hills.

Anyway, the phenomenon of different performance capabilities… The Scanias use close-ratio gearboxes and taller final drives in the diffs (mechanical devices that transmit torques and rotation). This gives them almost unbelievable acceleration and hill-climbing power, but trims down their top speeds somewhat.

Not forgetting the advanced turbocharging AND turbo-compound technology that yields massive outputs from the relatively small engines — the F310, like I said, has a 9,000cc engine but it also develops the most torque: 1550Nm. The Nissan Diesel UD CB46 Turbo InterCooler does 290hp and 1,079Nm of torque, but from a 11,670cc engine. The Isuzu MV123 Turbo Intercooler also has a small unit; 9,800cc, giving 270hp and 980Nm.

Though the UD and the Isuzu are also turbocharged and intercooled, theirs are much simpler setups and are combined with taller, widely spaced ratios in the gearboxes and much smaller diffs to give high top speeds, but the acceleration and climbing power are slightly compromised. I hope this helps.

In terms of efficiency, the Scanias rule. Both of them. The Isuzu is not so bad, but sadly for the UD, it comes last. Durability sees the list almost being reversed. UDs do not die; they get sold and continue working on other routes.

They are harder to kill than a cockroach on steroids. Isuzus (MV 123) are ephemeral by comparison and are prone to turbo failure, especially when driven by people who did not take the time to listen when care for turbo engines was being explained to them. The Scanias fall somewhere in between.

Dear Baraza,

I am a die-hard enthusiast of the Peugeot pedigree and happy that for the first time in many months you critiqued the ‘Simba’ but dwelt on an old model. Anyway, to my problem. I have owned the Peugeot 405GL for six years and cannot complain except for a rear right suspension, which was eventually fixed.

However, due to two factors — my retirement and and the high cost of fuel— I approached my mechanic who suggested that we change its double carburettor to one fixed on a 305. It was fine until I noticed an increase temperature.

He replaced the cooling fan but now my three-month-old Chloride Exide battery is unable to crank the engine if the car stays static for a day. What is the problem? Would a 305 carburrator compromise power?Any known/tried benefit and/or damage?


I believe you installed the wrong carburettor in your Peugeot 405 GL. It is a, what, 1.8-litre? 2.0-litre? The smallest I would give it is 1.6 litres. The Peugeot 305, on the other hand, was most commonly found in 1.3-litre guise.

By installing a carburettor meant for a smaller engine into a bigger one, you are starving the bigger engine of fuel. The result is that it burns air and fuel in incorrect ratios. The ideal or stoichiometric air-fuel ratio is around 14.7:1. If it goes any lower, say 10:1, then the car is running rich — burning more fuel than it should for the air coming into the engine. If it goes any higher, say 17:1, then the car is running lean, i.e it is burning a lot less fuel for the air getting into the engine.

I believe the smaller carburettors have led you to the second circumstance: You are running lean. The symptoms are typical: a lean-running engine also runs very hot and it is hard to start because a lot of fuel is used in the cranking process and yet here you are, starving the engine even further with your small carburettor jets. And once it is running, yes, power will be severely compromised.
The only remedy is to revert to the original carburettors.

Dear Baraza,

First, you are doing great work. Your column is witty, informed, and clever. Keep it up.

Now, I like to keep my car very clean, so I hose down the engine, wax the body and tyres, and spray the undercarriage.

1. Does hosing the engine have any effect on new V-Tech engines?

2. Is it true that a buildup of dirt and oil affects the engine’s ability to cool down?

3. Does waxing and polishing affect the paint work?

4. What is dust-proof car paint?

5. Why does local paint work seem inferior to the original?

Lastly, I have come up with a fuel dispensing pump concept after getting conned by my driver. Who can I pitch this concept to?

Mathers Davies.

High praise indeed, Davis. I am flattered. Now, to your questions:

1. Hosing down the engine is never advisable. That powerful jet of water could easily make its way into nooks and crannies where it is not needed i.e into an electrical system, then you will find yourself in undesirable circumstances where your car will not start, or will not run properly, or the Check Engine Light is on and the diagnostics are not isolating the problem.

The best thing would be to wipe the engine with a wet/damp rag using water where the dirt is easy to get out and the relevant cleaning agents (degreaser and such) where necessary. Yes, it is more taxing physically, but it is the way to go.

2. Yes, that build-up causes cooling issues. While it may not interfere directly with your cooling system components, the grime and dirt around the engine forms an overcoat or a sweater. Part of the heat loss form an engine is through radiation. The heat build-up may sometimes exceed the cooling capabilities of the equipment available.

3. Only if you are using bad quality wax or polish. If anything, waxing and polishing your car is supposed to IMPROVE the appearance, not deteriorate it.

4. Some paints/waxes/polishes can get sticky in very hot sun, and then attract dust which then embeds itself in the goo. I think (I am not 100 per cent sure) dust-proof licks are those that stay crisp even when baked to within an inch of their lives, thus whatever dust falls on them can still be wiped off without any risk of damage to the paintwork.

5. I would say poor business practices. Profiteering. The need to make a quick buck without having to invest too many resources in a venture.

This device of yours: There are two ways you can sell it. The first is if you can mass-produce it yourself after approaching owners/proprietors of various petrol stations and convincing them that not only does the device actually work, but that they also need it, and need it now.

The second is to approach the multinationals that own the oil companies. You could sell you intellectual property rights to them or enjoy royalties for the rest of your life but that will only happen if they believe that it benefits them.