A lawyer dies in a car accident on his 40th birthday and finds himself at the Pearly Gates. A brass band is playing, the angels are singing a beautiful hymn, there is a huge crowd cheering and shouting his name, and absolutely everyone wants to shake his hand.
Just when he thinks things can't possibly get any better, Saint Peter himself runs over, apologises for not greeting him personally at the Pearly Gates, shakes his hand, and says "Congratulations son, we've been waiting a long time for you".
Totally confused and a little embarrassed, the lawyer sheepishly looks at Saint Peter and says "Saint Peter, I tried to lead a God-fearing life, I loved my family, I tried to obey the 10 Commandments, but congratulations for what? I honestly don't remember doing anything really special when I was alive". "Congratulations for what?" says Saint Peter, totally amazed at the man's modesty. "We're celebrating the fact that you lived to be 160 years old! God himself wants to see you!"
The lawyer is awestruck and can only look at Saint Peter with his mouth wide open. When he regains his power of speech, he looks up at Saint Peter and says "Saint Peter, I lived my life in the eternal hope that when I died I would be judged by God and be found to be worthy... but I only lived to be forty".
"That's simply impossible son" says Saint Peter. "We've added up your billing hours".
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man adapts the world to himself.
Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
- George Bernard Shaw
Unfortunately, I had a lawyer try to pad his bill with me. It was blindingly obvious his secretary had put together the contract from some boilerplate software. I refused to pay the bill and wrote a letter to the senior partners explaining why. They never bugged my business partner and I again about that bill.
Bought a new 2013 Civic last week. I did a lot of research and the test drive went great. I love the car, except for the driver's seat, which becomes very uncomfortable after a few minutes. The headrest leans forward at a crazy angle and the lumbar support is too hard, too high and protrudes too much. Why I didn't notice during the test drive is a mystery to me, but I've learned I'm not alone. It seems that the seat does feel okay when first driving, but day-in and day-out it just hammers your back.
Taking it back is an option, but I'd lose a few thousand, and I otherwise like the car, so the solution is to fix the seat. Anyone have advise on this? Perhaps get the seat modified by a pro or buy an aftermarket seat.
BTW, the seat problems come up in none of the reviews. Perhaps reviewers are so used to crappy car seats, they didn't notice or they had the same--fine-in-test, bad-over-time reaction I and others have had. In my quest for a solution, I've found that in the past few years there has been a surge in complaints about car seats. It seems that the NHTSA changed standards for head rests in 2008 and it's now having a dramatic and negative effect on car comfort, though some companies are worse than others (I've read that Honda--with the Accord being the worse--Ford and Mazda are notoriously bad, which means going to another car isn't a solution either.)
I noticed that when I had a new Ford Fiesta as a hire car for a month this summer - the drivers seat is frankly appalling. It's based on a "waffle" design, so you are sitting on a bunch of "ridges". It's probably ok if you are on a long journey - couple hundred miles in a single sitting - but for short journeys it really was a PITA...
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
English doesn't borrow from other languages.
English follows other languages down dark alleys, knocks them over and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.
I see a lot of new vehicles with really bad seat designs, especially the headrests. I suspect that the NHTSA has something to do with that. My new Titan truck has head "rests" that are hugely unusable - they protrude forward at a sharp angle, and are entirely unusable for any purpose. But they are "dynamic" by regulation - in a collision, they move forward following the head, then ease back slowly to prevent a whiplash injury. The lumbar support is barely adequate, just enough to let them claim it exists, but it's a whole lot better to use a pillow.
We bought a 2013 Corolla in September. The seat isn't really uncomfortable, but I can't adjust it to my liking. The day after we bought it we drove up to Grand Canyon and back the following day, using mostly back roads, nearly a thousand miles.
The car has just over two thousand miles on it now and my biggest complaint is that the "audio system" doesn't randomize properly. But the 'Webs say it's a Linux system, so maybe I can write an app.
Complaints like yours and mine are what Consumer Reports collects.
All reviewers suck. They either pander to the Car companies best interest or think every car is a race car/luxury car and denigrate everything that isn't both.
With a Civic, there is probably a Recaro seat you can put in, very comfortable but also, very pricey. So you either lose a K taking it back or lose a K putting in a good seat.
Personally, I love the anti-whiplash headrest in my 2012 mustang. Probably the one thing in the car I adore, so I can't say it is about the standards really. I have heard a few people complain about them but after I taught them how and why they work the complaints magically go away. (re, headrest)
Now, with Ford and Mazda you can probably get a one-week loaner and actually evaluate for your self (I suggest doing so). Reviewers can't tell you if you will like the seats.
Lastly, if you want a pair of thrones, I read that BMW's Luxury seating package in the five series is the best in the biz. Never sat in them though.