Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

The Forums Test Drive Team

13

Comments

  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Ok so you are sitting here say to yourself "What the heck is Paisan doing test driving a Kia!"?

    Well the truth be told, my parents just bought one so I got to take it out and give it a nice test drive. Overall the build quality of this auto is outstanding, up there with the honda accord in my opinion.

    Interior:
    Brushed Aluminun door sills and dash components, excellent illumination on the dash and gauges. AC controls are simple and manually controllable. Map lights, door switches(backlit) consoles and solid door thunks. Interior is extremely quiet and no vibrations. Rear seating area is large and comfortable, with a center arm wrest that flips down to expose a storage compartment and cup holders. Rear seats also fold down flat for larger cargo to fit in the trunk.

    Exterior:
    Smooth lines, very good fitment of body panels, solid closing doors, trunk and hood. The bottom of the line LX model comes with 15" steel wheels with hubcaps wearing 205 width tires. Headlights include seperate Highbeam and Lowbeams with projector lowbeams. These lights are outstanding great cutoff far better than my SVX, Legacy and Trooper. The rear has strut-style lifts for the trunk with carpeting all over the compartment. Hood also has struts to hold it up and the grille doesn't feel flimsy at all. Engine compartment has everything laid out in an orderly fashion with small items making it finished off. Battery cover/wrap, power steering cooler. Folding mirrors are standard as well as power controls for the mirrors.

    Driving:
    Power from the 4 cyclinder is adquet for daily driving. Use of the 4-speed tiptronic automatic transmission was simple and provided extra umph for the 4 cylinder engine. During spirited drives outside noise was non-existent even in the upper reachs of the speedo. Handling was firm yet provided a very smooth ride. It won't win any auto-xes as it's softer sprung than auto-x would require. In potholes and 2-lane blacktop mountian roads it sucked up the bumps and provided a smooth yet controlled ride.

       Why would you buy this car? It's made by Kia, the ultra low-buck car maker, it may or may not last 100K miles or 200k miles. Well it comes with a 100K warranty so you know it'll run for at least that long. The very best part of this car?

    $13,000 INCLUDING THE TAX OUT THE DOOR!

    I don't know of any car that can touch this car at this pricepoint.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Geez.... I needed to go on a diet—and did! Now 20lb less than those Vegas photos show, and working on another 20...

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    True, and available from the factory with a full warranty. This was some Sport Sedan!

    Yesterday I had the chance to Pilot this beauty. Twin big block V8 engines. Rear drive. Seating for 6 in the cabin, 3 across in each row.

    Acres of wood inside, maple, and plush carpets. Built-in GPS navigation. Heck, it had satellite radio, satellite TV, and satellite internet access. Beat that Maybach!

    Captain's chairs for the first row, with a nice meaty 3 spoke steering wheel, too.

    What is this vehicle? Not a car, but a Carver 360 Sport Sedan yacht. Kudos if you were thinking outside the box.

    Now for some cons, maneuverability rivals the Titanic, perhaps. Though the turning circle is tight. Acceleration is better than you'd expect for a 2 bedroom, 1 bath yacht.

    Braking is horrific, also. Though using reverse does help some. And you need an anchor instead of a parking brake.

    Handling is predictable. You get some understeer, but it leans into the turns nicely, while most cars roll away from it.

    Your view is phenomenal. Climb the stairs to get a birds' eye view of the bay, river, ocean, whatever. No SUV can match this view. And the traffic wasn't too bad, either.

    Price? Ah, if you have to ask, you can't afford it. Choose between this or a Ferrari Enzo. But you can't sleep 6 in the Ferrari, and set up like a remote office you get some tax deductions as well.

    Interesting name for a yacht, 360 Sport Sedan. But that's what gave me the idea for this review.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The Ultimate Event, but it is the Ultimate Compact SUV?

    I arrived early so I had more than an hour to walk around and in the X3.

    They had spec sheets with prices and I have to admit I cringed a little when I saw that metallic paint and cruise control are $475 options, each. That would be OK if the paint didn't have swirl marks all over it.

    Nice beefy brakes, vented discs even in the rear. Unpainted black cladding on the lower portions, plus both bumpers, should be low maintenance.

    The D-pillar really eats up some visibility; the window is smaller than it looks, even.

    Inside: nice headliner and carpeting. Plastics are a mixed bag, many sound hollow and feel hard. The lid on the storage bin at the top of the dash felt particularly cheap, and the aluminum trim looked real but already showed some wear.

    The rubber liners for the bin and cup holders should be removable, but aren't. Odd placing of the cup holders, too, and the passenger one is flimsy. The rear seats get none at all. Stubborn Germans, this is supposed to be a family car.

    Models we drove had the wood trim, but it looks so fake I wouldn't believe you if you told me it's real. Looks like runny paint, brown and tan mixed.

    Visibility was only so-so, big blind spot on the driver's side for me. The cargo area is not very long, but it is tall. Be ready to stack things, bring boxy items. To the right there's a little cooler that looks like it could hold a can or two.

    Seats are nice, but honestly I would like a little more side bolstering. Rear seats offer surprising room. I'd like a little more knee space up front, though.

    Acceleration with the 3.0l was a bit leisurely off the line, this is not a quick SUV by any stretch of the imagination. The Forester XT makes it seem downright slow. Power delivery is smooth and linear, and the tranny shifts smoothly though I noticed some hesitation. This can't touch Porsche's Tiptronic.

    Running acceleration, however, was more than adequate. You feel the mass more off the line, but once it gets going you never feel lacking. I'm not sure I could recommend the 2.5l, which we didn't get to drive. I can't imagine that would be much fun, though.

    Braking seemed great, no fade was noticed even after repeated hot laps. We got 3 laps at a time, and 4 of us did that, so 12 laps with only quick driver changes and it took the punishment nicely.

    Handling with the X3 was good, but you do get a lot of body roll. Dive and squat control is good, but the X3 feels heavy to me and not very tossable. They say you can teach and Elephant how to dance, but you're still dancing with an Elephant. The X3 needs to go on Atkins. Call in Colin Chapman, I think subtracting 500 lbs would make this a hoot.

    I had high expectations for the steering, but left a little disappointed with the slow ratio and delayed turn-in. I did not like the 4 spoke wheel, but a 3 spoke wheel comes with the Sport Package.

    Speaking of which, that might have lessened the body roll a bit, but I can imagine the ride would end up quite stiff. We went over a split in the pavement and you heard each tire pounding over it. The Sport package upgrades the 17" rims to 18"s, plus stiffer springs, and I doubt it would be happy on my commutes to Washington, DC. So the ride, even with the non-sport models, was a little stiff for family duties.

    Kudos to BMW for hosting such an excellent event. We got classroom instruction, sort of a refresher course, then a demo with a pro driver and 3 laps with that same driver coaching us.

    After some more instruction, we got another 3 laps. When we wrapped up, they gave us a quick review on ABS use, and then handed out a couple of awards for Most Improved and Best Performance, a neat little traffic cone.

    I was more than a little surprised when they handed the Best Performance award to me, along with a Sirius logo'd hat. Hey, I'll take it! :-)

    My review sounds critical but I actually really liked the X3. Perhaps I put it to a higher standard because I was aware of the much higher price. The BMW name, service, resale, are all appealing.

    Would I give the X3 the title of Ultimate Compact SUV? Only if you ignore price completely, otherwise the Forester XT offers more thrills in a lighter, nimbler package for fewer Euros.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Vue, Take Two. You may recall my earlier review of the 181hp V6 model, post 5 in this very thread. Back then, I concluded:

    Verdict? A basic, utilitarian sport/cute that ought to keep a former SL owner happy. But I'll wait to try the Redline, hoping for a smoother and more powerful drivetrain and better seats.

    This time I got to sample a proper Redline model, with the 250hp Honda V6. But did they address the other issues I had with it?

    $28.8k MSRP seemed a little steep, but there is a $3k rebate in this region, so $25.8k didn't seem too bad. This had leather and a moonroof, so it was pretty loaded.

    Of course the most noticeable difference is the engine. It's torquier and smoother, by far. Leaves the old V6 in the dust, basically. It is not lightning quick, but there is power to spare.

    Other likes? It's spacious, for people and cargo. Flat floor in the back is good for the 3rd passenger. The leather is more comfortable than the seats I sampled last time, and this sample even had satellite radio.

    My complaints are the same as I had with the old V6 model - cheap plastics, spongy and too-soft seats, low cushions with no side support. Open the doors and you're greeted by several exposed screw heads. Gaps and seams are a lot wider than I'm used to. I realize they leave room for expansion and contraction, but it just looks cheap.

    Lots of unfinished edges on the trim, too. The lids feel hollow, not solid. You see the mold parts on some plastics.

    The front seats has arm rests that help hold you in, but I'd like bigger bolsters, after all Redline implies performance driving.

    The rear seats are awful, way too low, too short for thigh support, and bolt-upright seat backs. It's too narrow for 3 across, also.

    How did it drive? Steering effort is way too light, numb even. Again, Redline models should have tighter steering. The turning ratio is good, though.

    In corners the body leans a lot, it's supposed to have stiffer springs but overall it still feels biased towards ride. Tire noise was a bit excessive, though the rims are very handsome.

    Ours had a rattle in the cargo area that just would not stop. I did a U-turn at one point and we heard a clunk from the suspension, I wondered out loud if the recent recall had been done on this model.

    4 sturdy cup holders were a plus. Child locks for the doors and locking seat belts, too.

    My overall impression was there was a good powertrain searching for a better chassis. Redline is about performance, this niche expects razor sharp steering and tighter handling than what the Vue offers.

    As is, the Vue Redline feels like the old Vue with a nice Honda engine. The Redline package does not go far enough. It needs more starch in the suspension, tighter steering, and a pair of Recaros for the driver and front passenger.

    -juice
  • Karen_SKaren_S Member Posts: 5,092
    subearu "Subaru Crew - Events" Aug 28, 2004 9:58pm
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Went to a MB event at FedEx field just outside of Washington, DC today. This was like most of the ride-'n-drive type of events I've been to, that have been held there. There was an autocross course, where you start off accelerating as fast as you can for maybe an 1/6 mile, then test the brakes by stopping as fast as you can, then follow the twisty course to test the handling, braking, swerving maneuvers, etc.

    There were actually two courses like that, with the other one having some slippery sections to test the 4-Matic AWD models.

    There was also an off-road section where I was the passenger, and an experienced off-roader drove the vehicles, which were ML350, ML500 and G500 models. The off road section had one setup where 1 wheel was off the ground, and another section where 2 wheels were off the ground. Both the MLs and G models handled each section with ease, but the G model did it with extreme ease. The vehicles were in low range and in second gear. I know my 4WD Explorer could not have handled these sections, but that's not saying much...

    The vehicles I drove were: S500 4-Matic, S430 4-Matic, E500 4-Matic, E320 turbo diesel, SL500, SLK350 (all-new), and the CLK500 cabriolet. All were 2005 models.

    All were very impressive, with superb brakes, and strong acceleration. With so many models to drive, under race conditions, it was hard to get a feeling for what they are like to live with. I will say this: the new SLK350 roadster was my favorite from a pure driving standpoint.

    They also had on hand that new gorgous CLS500, which will be introduced here in about a year. The best way to describe that car is that it's a combination of an S-Class sedan and a CL coupe, because essentially it's a 4-door coupe. Unfortunately it was lockup up tight, so I couldn't sit in it.

    One of the things I really enjoyed today was there were not that many people there, so I had almost unlimited drive time. This was especially true on the course with the 4-Matic models. That's unusual at these types of events.

    Juice and I were supposed to go together, but I had some computer problems this morning which needed to be addressed ASAP, so I ended up going to a later session. We did hook up for about a 1/2 hour, however. I'm sure he'll fill you all in on the details I missed.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    After a long absence, Mercedes finally has decided to bring back a diesel option to America, in this case the E320 CDI. They've been available in Europe all along, so what have we been missing?

    The glorious torque, for starters. This powertrain pulls like a large V8, pushing you back into the seat and creating grins from ear-to-ear.

    I will complain about the turbo lag, however. The engine is completely flat off the line, throttle response is slow. There is about a second or two of delay where nothing happens at all, then you are catapulted off the line.

    Starting off on a slippery surface exacerbated this problem. We had a wet tarp with soap to drive over, the diesel turbo kicked in right when we got the rear wheels on the slippery surface, and then...

    Nothing. The turbo kicked in and created wheelspin, which the traction control tried to fight. The car stuttered and stumbeld slowly forward, until it go to dry pavement and then took off.

    So perhaps not the ideal engine for slippery surfaces given the non-linear power delivery.

    Still, the diesel impresses you. 27/37 mpg is phenomenal, too. Some quick math reveals you can go about 200 miles farther per tank of fuel compared to the gas powered E320.

    In Europe the CDI costs $1000 less, and diesel is much cheaper, so that makes it a no-brainer. Definitely get the diesel option.

    In America, it costs about a grand more, and diesel prices vary but around the nation's capital it costs about the same as premium fuel. Still, you're traveling 200 miles more on each tank.

    So if you can get used to the turbo lag, and range is important to you, the diesel is a nice alternative to the 3.2l gas engine.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Let me get this out right off the bat - I'm a big AWD fan. There, I said it.

    The small penalty in cost up front, plus a little extra fuel usage, is more than offset by the traction advantages offered when you send power to both axles, preferably full-time.

    Mercedes' 4Matic system happens to be a very good system. Power is biased to the rear, but the front axle gets some power full-time and of course it adjusts as needed very quickly.

    I tried RWD first, to establish a baseline. Our course had a wet, soapy surface that simulated black ice. Indeed it was very slippery, as even with moderate throttle the "!" logo on the dash lit up almost immediately. Progress was slow.

    Under hard throttle, things just got plain ugly. The car stuttered and bucked like a Bronco at a rodeo. The car crawled forward slowly but unhappily, and even got a little sideways. All the technology in the world cannot cheat the laws of physics. The E500 was bad and the diesel was worse (see above).

    4Matic, however, has a loophole. You double the available traction, even when there is almost none of it. Better still, it's applying only half the amount of power to each wheel, so wheelspin is far less likely.

    The E320 4Matic got the car across in about 1/4 of the time it took the others. It was also better at keeping the car straight, and didn't stutter embarassingly like the RWD models did.

    Very impressive demonstration, in fact it makes you wonder about the Mercedes that don't offer 4Matic. However, the plan is to make availability more widespread in the future, and that is a good thing.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I own a Miata, and when I drove the previous generation SLK320, I had to grudgingly admit that I liked it more than I expected to.

    Does the new one impress me even more?

    The 3.5l engine is a lot peppier, and Mercedes really tuned the exhaust this time, it's not afraid to growl a bit. In fact engine noise is up, and it's not as smooth as the 3.2l in the previous car.

    Acceleration sure is better, though. The engine revs up quickly and moves the car around briskly. Power delivery is linear as well.

    The biggest improvement? The steering. Now you actually feel the road. Some quick research revealed that Mercedes has finally given up the recirculating ball system for a proper rack-and-pinion, and a quick ratio and good feedback almost had me thinking "Porsche".

    Handling was pretty neutral, less understeer than before. That and the quick steering really helped hit each apex right where you want to.

    The brakes are also good, but again there is not enough feedback, a complaint I have with every single new Mercedes. It's like a video game, in that you send signals to some computer and then there is a distant reaction, yet no direct communication between the two.

    A quick scan of the interior revealed a pretty basic, weather-proof design. The last generation SLK320 I drove had a nice wood package and actually had a much warmer interior, but I can accept the new plastics for durability's sake.

    The bottom line? Well, the bottom line is $45k, and that's my problem right there. The Boxster has a much better transmission and just feels more worthy of that kind of sticker price.

    Mercedes needs an entry level model, perhaps an SLK 230 Kompressor, with the smooth 1.8l engine from the C class. It would still be quick, and if lighter could be just as fun, for a bunch less money.

    Price one of those at around $38k and we'll talk. Just don't tamper with the steering, OK?

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Juice, you and I drove the old SLK320 together at the last MB event at FedEx Field. The all new SLK350 is better in all respects to the outgoing car, except perhaps looks. Frankly, I think the new SLK (and SLR) need a nose job, but it does look better in person, I will admit.

    The new SLK's interior seems roomier to me. I did miss the lack of the typical MB door-mounted power seat adjusters, which I really like.

    Also, the Europeans who really invented good ergonomics, have really fallen behind the Japanese—especially Acura. Acura, and virtually the Japanese brands have large legible secondary gauges (fuel, temp, etc); the Germans, as a group don't.

    One item I did NOT like on the new SLK, was the very small and low-mounted navigation window. If you want to see what a well-designed navigation system looks like, check out the all-new '05 Acura RL. The navigation window is large, and mounted high at the top of the dash center stack. It's very easy to see and read. MB could learn a lot from Acura in this respect.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The power seat adjustments were down by the door sills, indeed hard to reach and operate. For our quick drives I usually just left the seat where it was unless I could not fit.

    Is the new 350 better in all respects? No, I think it's a bit louder and the engine less refined. I remember the 3.2l engine being velvety smooth. The 3.5l reminds me more of Nissan's VQ in the Altima, in good ways (acceleration) and bad (noise).

    But the price is IMHO a bit excessive. $45 grand for your entry-level roadster? They really need to offer a Kompressor model for less.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I went to a Ford Escape Hybrid event yesterday at FedEx field just outside Washington DC.

    It turned out to be a so-so event. I signed up for a Friday, rather than a weekend figuring there would be fewer people there. Was there ever!. There was hardly anyone there, so I figured on plenty of drive time. Well, yes and no. There was plenty of opportunity to drive the vehicle, but the drive turned out to be a "guided tour" of perhaps 10 minutes worth of street time, rarely getting over 30 mph. Yeah, I could have taken the "drive" several more times, but what more would I learn beyond the first trip? Not much, I bet...

    In any event, the car performed much like the Prius I drove a while back. That means it's pretty ordinary, and there were no real surprises. I've yet to drive a regular V6 Escape, but I'm told the hybrid version performs and drives much the same.

    It is a bit strange in that when you start off, it purely on electric power. The gas engine kicks in around 25 mph or so. Funny thing I noted, when at a stop (with the gas engine off), if you blip the throttle a few times, the gas engine starts up. That was weird...

    Good
    • Easy to adapt to. Learning curve almost non-existant.
    • Seems every bit as consumer-ready as the Prius.
    • Has optional 115v/150w outlet on center console.
    • Early demand is very high. Ford will be dramatically increasing production due to early demand.
    • 4WD version is available.

    Bad
    • Towing is reduced from 3500 lbs to 1000 lbs, which is miserable.
    • My guess is the payload is probably reduced too, although I didn't check that.
    • No moonroof option!?! Same with the Accord hybrid, BTW!?!
    • The hybrid option is about $3000.00. A fully loaded Escape hybrid will MSRP around $30K!
    • All the usual long-term unknowns with any hybrid.

    "Full" hybrid vs "Mild" hybrid
    Most people aren't aware that there are essentially two types of hybrid vehicles in production: Those that are called "Full Hybrids," and those that are called "Mild Hybrids." Here's how they differ:

    Full Hybrid:
    • The gas engine completely shuts off when at a dead stop.
    • It can drive up to around 25 mph on the electric motor only.
    • It has a larger more powerful battery pack.
    • It has full regenerative braking.
    • It has better city mileage than highway mileage.

    Mild Hybrid:
    • Always requires some power from the gas engine.
    • It has mild regenerative braking.
    • It gets better highway mileage than city mileage.

    Full hybrid vehicles
    • Ford Escape hybrid
    • Toyota Prius
    • Toyota Highlander hybrid
    • Lexus RX400 hybrid

    Mild hybrid vehicles
    • Honda Insight, Civic & Accord hybrids
    • Chevy Silverado/GMC Sierra hybrid pickups

    Bottom line: Again, I came away feeling this hybrid idea really can work, and that it's not just another pie-in-the-sky engineering dead-end. I can't wait for this technology to spread to more (and larger) vehicles, like what GM is doing with their full-size pickups.

    Bob
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Your comparison of mild vs full hybrids is not quite accurate. For example, the Honda hybrids (Insight, Civic, and now Accord) do shut down the engine at a dead stop. But you are correct in pointing out that these vehicles are never powered by electricity alone. At least, not while accelerating.

    The term "mild hybrid" is misleading in this context. That term has been most frequently used to describe the GMC vehicles on your list. These vehicles use regenerative braking to power ancillary functions, such as electric power steering. These mild hybrids do not provide any power (propulsion) for the vehicle.

    Anyway, there are dozens of threads here at Edmunds where the differences in these systems are expounded upon. I just thought the summary from above might lead to some confusion.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Hyundai first established themselves in this country via pricing.

    Then they made a comeback with a fantastic warranty.

    Now they are topping it off with...drum roll please...good product!

    The Tucson builds off the Elantra platform, but offers a high seating position, SUV styling, and a torquey V6, topped off with optional AWD for all-weather capabilities.

    That engine purrs nicely, more muted than I remember from sampling an early Santa Fe. Torque is good and it gets the job done in a relaxed manner. It's no match for the spunky turbo in the Forester XT, but competitive with V6s like the Escape's and Liberty's.

    I never noticed the transmission, and that's a good thing. Hyundai has made strides with their powertrains.

    The ride is also smooth. It absorbed large speed bumps and a pot hole or two without any hiccups.

    Handling was a bit soft, however, this SUV definitely tuned for comfort over sport. It also leaned a little more than I like.

    Inside, the nice fabric on the seats, combined with multiple adjustments, made for a comfortable throne. Yes, you do sit pretty tall in the Tucson.

    The back seat was also roomy, and while the seat bottom was a bit too low, the backs reclined neatly, and split fold truly flat.

    The cargo area is a sore spot, likely the smallest in its class. Perhaps the 165 lb roof rack capactiry will offset this weakness.

    Interior materials were good, a few hard plastics and an unpadded door arm rest being the sore spots (pun intended). I did feel a bit of a "sea of gray" like you find in some Chevys. They could offer more contrasting colors and textures.

    I did like the padded headliner, and the simple and very ergonomic controls. You feel comfortable right away. Throw the manual in the trash, you won't need it.

    I'll pause here and point out that BMW could learn a thing or two about ergonomic simplicity from them.

    But the truth is the Tucson's mission is to haul the small family around in comfort, and it just doesn't have the sporty character of the X3, Forester XT, or Infiniti FX.

    That's just fine with most soccer moms, though. Fitzgerald Hyundai was asking $21,500 for this sample, which only lacked AWD and leather. Add those and it tops off around $24k.

    But this is a new model, once discounts set in, the Tucson could dip below $20k and offer solid value for families that yearn for just the basics.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    That info was pulled directly from Ford material I got at the event. Maybe their published stuff wasn't accurate? Or perhaps a corporate spin was being applied to make their product look good? Or perhaps a combination of both?

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Yesterday I spent about 6 hours driving all sorts of vehicles at a Lexus sponsored event at FedEx field, home of the Washington Redskins. This event was one of the best I've ever attended there. Not only did I have an opportunity to drive every Lexus offered, but there were LOADS of competitor's vehicles to also sample. To top it off, it was catered by Ridgewells, one of Washington's leading catering services. needless to say the food was great. :)

    There were 4 circuits to drive on. A demanding "Performance Luxury" autocross circuit, a slightly less demanding "Luxury" autocross circuit, a "somewhat demanding off-road" circuit for SUVs, and a "less demanding off road" circuit for crossovers. The following is a quick overview of all the vehicles that left an impression with me:

    Acura TL
    At this Lexus event I also had the opportunity to drive the FWD Acura TL. I was curious, as this was the only FWD vehicle at the event. It was grouped with the "luxury" cars, rather than the "performance luxury" cars, nevertheless I was able flog it on the autocross course that was set up.

    Did it understeer? Yes, but not excessively so, or to the point that I wished I was in a RWD car. In fact, I was rather impressed with the handling. It certainly felt like a FWD—a very good FWD, but still FWD. So, bottom line, if you don't like FWD, you probably wouldn't like it. I had no problems with it however.

    BMW 745i, 545i, MB E500, Lexus LS430 w/sport suspension & Infiniti G35
    I was able to flog these cars a the Lexus event and came away very impressed. The 545i and E500 have gobs of power and were absolutely unflappable in the tight twistys. Lots of FUN!

    The Lexus was less fun, but that's to be expected I guess.

    Now the G35, what a nice surprise! That engine is wonderful, and the handling also was great. After driving that car, I'm more convinced than ever that I would love to see a 3.5 H-6 in the new Subaru Legacy.

    One thing I really came away with from this event, the smaller the car, the more I liked it, but that's to be expected. I also drove the the big BMW 745i, and while it too was superb in the tight corners, there's no getting away from its largeness. Also, I can really see why this vehicle has recieved so much criticism for it's Rube Goldberg-like complexity. Not only did I have to ask someone how to adjust the seat, but I had to ask how to put it in Park!!!

    More to come later...

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    SUV and Crossovers

    SUVs I drove: Range Rover, Lexus LX470, Lexus GX470, MB ML500 & BMW X5. The only SUV I didn't drive was the Caddy Escalade, as I have no interest in that vehicle. The MB G-wagon and LR Discovery were conspicuous by their absences.

    Crossovers I drove: Volvo XC90, Lexus RX330 & Acura MDX. I didn't drive the BMW X3, as I had driven one at the last BMW event I went to.

    The SUV Course was sort of a mini Jeep 101 setup. By that I mean a short but very steep hill (very steep going up, a crest, and very steep going down), very rough ground to show axle articulation, gravel, and a side of a hill section. All the SUVs handled these various sections with no problem. The Range Rovers and Lexus models all had their height adjustable suspensions raised. All the vehicles were in high range. Interestingly the high-range-only BMW X5 was grouped here.

    Of these vehicles I liked the Lexus GX470 best and next, the Lexus LX470. The GX had better ergonomics than the LX, so that would be my first choice. They were all excellent in their off-road capability. Other issues, like livability, etc., would determine which one I might purchase.

    Every vehicle including the BMW handled this course just fine. On the section that tested the articulation, every vehicle in that group had at some point at least one wheel off the ground (sometimes 2 wheels were momentarily off the ground), and they all made it through with absolutely no effort. I'm more convinced than ever that these new high-tech 4WD systems that can direct power to wheels with traction are the real deal. They flat out work. Even the oft-maligned Mercedes ML breezed through with ease.

    The Crossover Course had some mild gravel road-like bumps, along with a mild side of hill section. It was basically like a very rough gravel road you might encounter. Of the crossovers, I preferred the MDX, and least liked the Volvo, which just felt heavy and cumbersome.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    was the Cadillac XLR roadster with the Northstar V8. This vehicle based on the Corvette platform. It is very fast, and handles very well.

    Good job Cadillac!

    Least impressive were the Lexus SC430 coupe/roadster and Jaguar XK8 roadster. Both felt big and heavy, and not all that much fun to drive. :(

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I attended the same event, only I went on Saturday.

    The shocker is that to me, the single biggest disappointment was...the Cadillac XLR!

    Nice engine, sure enough, but I felt the interior was just about the weakest in the entire event. I drove the XLR and then the SC430 back to back, and the Lexus interior puts Cadillac to shame.

    Also, the XLR is big and long yet the interior felt more cramped. Specifically the sun visor was too close to my forehead for comfort. I'm surprised there wasn't more room, and I'm barely 6' tall. The SC had a lot more space inside; just ignore the useless back seat.

    The XLR is the sportier of the two, but it just didn't feel very solid. It seemed to jiggle a bit, as if the structure was flexing. Steering and handling were better than the Lexus but it gave up plenty in ride compliance and interior comfort.

    I guess my problem with the new Caddy is that it isn't truly luxurious, so why not just get a Corvette to begin with?

    In my opinion the Lexus SC430 is just better executed.

    Lexus also had a Jaguar drop-top along for the ride but I ran out of time, as the lines were quite long for this event.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The only crossover I sampled was the BMW X3. I learned nothing new from my previous review, and the course was boring, so I didn't even bother taking any other crossovers out.

    Among the true truck-based SUVs, I tried the GX470, and it impressed me.

    I do think that Lexus focused on the upper half of the interior, by that I mean the carpets and plastics/trim below your knee level were the only things lacking.

    Soft leather and gorgeous wood sprinkled throughout the interior made it feel almost worth the hefty price of admission.

    The lines were long and it almost felt silly to me to drive these SUVs in conditions that your average soccer mom owner would never encounter, so I spent my time instead on the other tracks, fine-tuning my autocross skills. :o)

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Here I sampled the BMW 530i, Mercedes E320, C230 Kompressor, Acura TL, Lexus GS300, and Lexus ES330.

    Note that the course for the luxury cars was by far the best, hence I spent most my time there. The Sport Luxury group had a more crowded course, with much tighter turns, which made it a lot slower overall.

    I took the Lexus ES330 out first, and as much as I didn't expect to like it, well, it was worse than that, if you can imagine. Soft and wallowy, it even felt out of control, uncomfortable going at all fast.

    The ES330 has a supremely comfortable interior, wonderful leather and wood, and a cushy ride softer even than the Camry it's based on. If that's what you want, go buy one. If not, read on.

    Good. Like me, you enjoy sportier cars.

    Next I tried the E320 on the same course. It was funny that this bigger and heavier car felt a lot tighter than the Lexus, we had a ball tossing it around the turns. Some controls still feel a bit too numb for my tastes, but anything was a step up from the ES.

    The C230 Kompressor was perhaps the most fun I had on this course. Too much so, in fact, they asked me to slow down, and even after I did I quickly caught up to the person in front of me. Not before this little car impressed me once again, however.

    The BMW 530i was a bit disappointing. I'm not sure this is enough engine for this heavy car. BMW has fallen behind in powertrain performance.

    The other issue I have is with the interior - completely bland and unimaginative. And before iDrive fans (both of them) defend it, I'll say that noone could figure out how to turn on the radio in the 30 seconds or so you had waiting in line for your drive. Even the event staff could not figure it out.

    The 5 series deserves kudos for the best steering and tight handling for the car's size. But some competitors have caught up, and offer warmer interiors with better ergonomics, not to mention more engine power. No wonder 5 series sales are down.

    Next I drove the Acura TL. In strong contrast to the 5 series, it has a bright and warm interior, and the 3.2l engine has more than enough power. That engine revs quickly, too.

    My beefs with the TL are its overboosted steering and a too-soft suspension. They managed to tune this FWD car pretty well, you didn't notice until you approached the limits that it even was FWD. But still, it tilted more towards luxury than sport.

    The Lexus GS300 is a nice car in need of more power. See the GS430. Handling and steering were sporty enough, however. But it felt underpowered in this group, just like the BMW 530i did.

    Overall I think I'd pick one of the Benzes, with the TL close behind those. The others had vices I'm not willing for forgive at this price level.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    On the Sport course, besides the XLR and SC430, the only other car I had time to sample was the G35 sedan.

    Bob must have been there all day! I was there nearly 3 hours, and like I said, lines were quite long.

    Any how, the G35 impresses right off the line with a punchy V6. Better yet, in this RWD car it doesn't create torque steer like it does on the Altima.

    I do think the interior was a step behind competitors, though, these plastics are about where Nissan should be, Infiniti's need to be up to Lexus levels.

    The car handled nicely and even the steering was tight, but there just seemed to be something missing in this package, almost like this car should not be in the same price class as the others here.

    I'm being tough on the G35, it was definitely one of the sportier entries that sacrificed some luxury, but if you're aware of that coming in, I think you'll be quite happy owning this car.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Overall I think Lexus scores big with its interiors. Soft leather and gorgeous wood at a competitive price, with quality and reliability above all. Every car in the lineup pampers you. Every truck, too.

    Perhaps the key is knowing each car's mission. The ES can be forgiven since Lexus has the IS to pitch to sporty car buyers. But the IS is in desperate need of an update (in fairness, it's coming soon).

    Lots of attendees drove the cars slowly, probably taking time to smell the aromas of the expensive materials. These same customers will be the ones Lexus wins in the show room.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Lexus: the Mark Levinson systems were impressive. Keeping in mind we had maybe 5 minutes at a time in any given car, I can't imagine a reasonable person wanting any more.

    Cadillac: another big disappointment. The XLR's system was tinny and hollow. This was excacerbated by the fact that I drove the SC430 back-to-back with it.

    Infiniti: very nice Bose audio, no complaints.

    Mercedes: better only than the Cadillac.

    BMW: I don't know! Noone could figure out iDrive so these cars were muted. Pathetic.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    My comments about the Caddy roadster pertain only to performance, not the interior or anything else. I was just shocked at how well it ran, and didn't really look at the rest of the car.

    As to the SUV's offroad course, I think it was legit, regardless of the customer. I want to know how these vehicles perform, and a simple gravel road won't give me that info.

    You're right about the lines. They were very long. :(

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Like I said, we had long lines. That includes time in the car waiting to get the green light.

    So I played with the stereo in each car, to test the sound system, and looked around in general. I also adjusted every seat for comfort, turned on the seat heaters, etc.

    I have a convertible, so I can understand/forgive the plastics, which may have been chosen for durability, but the Cadillac's interior just had no design flare to it. It could have come out of a 12 year old Buick.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I drove a new black 5-speed 9-2x today. For those not familiar with the car, think of it as a Subaru WRX wagon in designer clothes.

    Actually, it's a very nice car. Everything WRX owners complain about, in terms of content (or lack-there-of), is all there on the 9-2x; heated seats, moonroof, leather seats, ambient temperature gauge, and so on. It even has the headlight adjusters found only on the WRX STi. The one I drove had the optional 17" wheels.

    As I said it's a very nice package—with a very unfortunate MSRP of a bit over $31K as equipped. For that same price you could get a much nicer Legacy 2.5GT, with more power and a much more friendly powerband.

    Bottom line: This is the car the WRX should have been from day one, at least in terms of content.

    Second bottom line: Much has been made of how much nicer the 9-2x is over the WRX. Well, not so quick there Mr. Peepers... The '05 WRX has most of the upgrades found on the 9-2x. If you can live without all the gravy that the 9-2x offers, the '05 WRX still has all the meat and potatoes.

    Bob
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Well as most of the readers have come to know, my test drives generally are not "new" cars out of the showroom all nice and new. Nope mine are usually student's cars that I have the opportunity to drive as a Certified Track Instructor. The good thing about this is the cars aren't all nice and shiny with 200miles on em :)

     

    Anyway I had the opportunity to drive our Race-team Sponsor's Car at the last track event of the year. The RacingBrake 350zx with Tiptronic Transmission. So here is the review...

     

    Good:

    Nice fit and finish, well put together with no rattles even with over 15k miles on it. Steering response was very good on-road. The power that was transferred to the ground was very much adequet for any street driver. Coming from an AWD background I wasn't used to all that power in the rear :)

     

    On track the car did very well, I pushed it slowly faster around Limerock Park and it griped very well for a RWD car. The 5-speed AT with Tiptronic shifted well even under road-race conditions.

     

    Seats and ergonomics were very good. Ride was a bit harsh but expected for a sports car.

     

    Suspension on and off road was excellent, on-road it hugged the back roads well when I took it out to get fuel to a local gas station. I couldn't help but take the roads a little fast. :)

     

    On the track the suspension handled the turns with minor body roll and great steering feedback.

     

    The Bad:

       Found that the traction control was too intrusive for track use, but when off you could easily cook the tires and loose control on or off the road course. The OEM tires were poor choice for any cold weather driving (30s-40s) and I spun the car on-track at one point. Onroad the tires were ok, but I'd swap em out if this were my street car.

     

       DVD navigation was lackluster at best with the most unclear visually Navigation screen I've ever seen. I'm contemplating getting an Armada and won't be ordering the Navi if it's the same quality as the one found in the 350z.

     

    In summary:

     

        Fun car to have as a 2nd car or weekend car, don't think I'd want it as a daily driver due to the RWD + Gobs of Power + Light Weight. Although I suppose I'd learn to drive it as a daily driver if I had to. Definitely more fun than a Front Engine Front Drive car which in the Sports Car Category that this falls in, should be fun to drive. Quality even after 10k of fairly abusive driving is still doing well. I'd recommend this car.

     

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I spent a few weeks in Brazil recently and had a few chances to drive and ride in this egg-shaped minivan.

     

    This is a hot segment in Brazil, people movers that are compact and easy to park. Our vans are way too big and thirsty for Brazilian roads and gas prices ($3 plus per gallon).

     

    Picasso competes with the Renault Megane Scenic and the Chevy Zafira. Megane is made in Brazil and costs a bit less, the others are imported from Europe.

     

    The clutch is light, the steering feels overboosted and sort of numb. Acceleration is slow, but in that market fuel economy is more important. I drove a 2.0l gas model.

     

    The shifter grows out of the dash like an Alfa, and mine was a notchy 5 speed manual that took some getting used to.

     

    The seating position is very high, but arm rests hold in place fairly well. Visibility is excellent, as it should be with so many tall windows for you. The car feels almost as wide as it is long, it's a strange feeling that is hard to get used to.

     

    The dash is rather bizarre looking, with a digital speedometer located in the center and well ahead of the driver, it's a long glance to check your speed.

     

    Ergonomics and controls are totally foreign. Even the icons are different, so it's trial and error to figure things out. The driver only has power window switches for the front seats, so if junior in the back opens a window, you have to rely on him to close them again.

     

    There are no cup holders, but each door has a bottle holder that will accomodate water bottles of varying sizes. Quirky car, I tell ya.

     

    The front has two captain's chairs with arm rests that are very comfortable. But the rear has 3 individual seats that slide forward and recline independently. Theatre seating gives them a good view, as well.

     

    The problem? The outboard seats are too close to the sides of the car, so I kept bumping my head against the trim as we went over the potholes that cover Brazilian roads.

     

    On the other hand, that makes the middle center seat more comfy than average. And besides, it's usually kids back there, and the interior is versatile wheter you have 1, 2, or 3 tykes behind you.

     

    The ride is soft, but it does a good job absorbing those many pot holes. That takes a toll on handling, however.

     

    Interior materials feel built to cost. Plastics are hard and cheap feeling, the cieling liner feels like peach fuzz and was already showing visible wear. Carpets were pilled up, too, so this is a bare-bones car that makes no pretense of being upscale.

     

    One very neat feature is a folding tray that comes out of the back of the front seats, airplane style. Perfect to hold that happy meal. It's a nifty idea I think should be copied by other manufacturers.

     

    Other neat ideas included in-floor storage. There are no less than 18 covered storage bins, though I could only find about half of them.

     

    French cars are alive and well, and they continue to be quirky. I guess we should expect nothing less.

     

    The Xsara Picasso is a neat car for its market, but my verdict is that it's not ready for prime time, and it would need several upgrades before it could compete in the US market.

     

    -juice

     

    http://www.citroen.com/CWW/fr-FR/RANGE/PrivateCars/XsaraPicasso/d- efault/
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The hottest segment in the Brazilian market, by far, is the "carro popular", i.e. the popular car. We might call them subcompacts or even mini cars.

     

    Fiat sells the Palio, Chevy has the Celta and Corsa, Ford has the odd Ka, and VW has the Brazil-only Gol. All of them are offered with 1.0l engines, which are subject to lower taxes. So they're affordable.

     

    Actually, we might not call them at all, such small cars are largely ignored in this market full of 2 and even 3 ton vehicles.

     

    But when gas costs more than $3/gallon, and the per capita income is only a fraction of what it is here, that creates a demand for cheap and frugal transportation.

     

    The Mille in the name is for one thousand, that is the engine displacement in cubic centimeters is 997, so that makes it a 1.0l, like the unloved Geo Metro.

     

    Well, how much sacrifice is it?

     

    Fiat had lots of success with its boxy Uno, a car that is still sold today, but that car is so basic you'd think Rubbermaid could do better. I owned a 1986 Chevy Sprint and it was comparatively luxurious.

     

    The Palio feels more like a real car, and its excellent space efficiency means interior space it better than you might think, far roomier than the Sprint/Metro was.

     

    The tiny little engine now has fuel injection and runs smoothly with none of the sputtering the old carbureted Mille engines were known for. It even managed to be relatively quiet, just don't expect much power - 55 horses match that old Metro.

     

    The clutch is light and the shifter, smooth. Besides that this car is still very basic, with hard plastics and rubber floor mats showing their utilitarian roots. Forget a tach, you're lucky to get a speedo.

     

    At least it has A/C and power front windows to make life tolerable. The rear windows are cranked manually, like the Neon. Bizarre? Sure.

     

    The A/C makes the car feel like is has about 40hp, but it gets the job done and manages good range between fuel stops, which is key.

     

    There is little to like until you consider the sticker price - this car costs less than $8000 at today's exchange rates, and that's with the current weak dollar. Now that is amazing, who couldn't use a cheap beater as a 2nd car for that little?

     

    13" steel wheels with 80 series tires seem like a flash back from the horrible 1980s, and so is the handling, if you can call it that. Worse, the ride isn't really very absorbent either.

     

    Models with bigger engines are available and those have nicer trim, but in my opinion those defeat the purpose of a low cost entry-level car - they cost almost double and use more fuel.

     

    So it's all about expectations. What can you get for $8 grand? Here, only a used car. A 2 year old Accent, perhaps. Still, the Accent has a bigger engine and is more nicely finished. But the Palio is roomier and looks a lot more stylish, plus it would be new.

     

    In Brazil, the popular choice is the Palio.

     

    -juice
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Hi everyone! Our gracious Host has invited me to share my test drives with you. I love cars (duh) but am especially fond of the low-end cars--i.e. those that start under $15k. I figure, anyone can build a great car for $40-50k, or even $30k. But it takes some real ingenuity to design and build a great car that stickers for half that amount. Also, I think small cars are more fun to drive than the big cars and SUVs. But I occasionally drive other vehicles (I did own minivans in the past) so I'll bore you all to tears with those reports too.

     

    To start off, here is a three-way comparo I did recently between the all-new Chevy Cobalt 4-door and two of its main competitors: the Mazda3i and the Hyundai Elantra GLS 5-door (a new model for 2005):

     

    backy, "Low End Sedans" #2859, 30 Jan 2005 2:02 am

     

    It was too long for one post, so here's the wrap-up:

     

    backy, "Low End Sedans" #2860, 30 Jan 2005 2:03 am
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    And just to prove that I don't just look at low-end cars, here's a report on my recent test drive of the Honda Accord Hybrid--which has fuel economy numbers like a low-end car, anyway:

     

    backy, "Hybrid Honda Accord 2005" #2290, 30 Jan 2005 12:52 am
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Just drove a new Xterra S, 4x4. It was the base model, with a 6-speed manual. The only major option on it was the Power Package, which gave you power windows, mirrors and cruise control.

    It's an honest, (fairly) bare-bones, purpose-built SUV, and I like that a lot. No leather. Hard plastic cargo floor, that sort of thing. If you're looking for loads of "gush," look elsewhere. This a vehicle very much like the original go-anywhere Jeep Cherokee; and as Nissan advertises: Everything you need, and nothing you don't need.

    I like that a lot.

    The 6-speed manual is fun to use, and if I were ever to buy one of these, that's what I'd get. Yes, they have an all-new 5-speed automatic, and I'm sure it's great, but in a basic vehicle like this, a manual seems much more in keeping with the theme.

    I will say this: I've noticed with several 6-speeds I've driven, it's sometimes tough to remember what gear you're in, as the gear splits are pretty close. Believe it or not, 6th gear doesn't feel that much different than 4th gear, so a gear indicator in the tach would be very useful. I believe Subaru has such an indicator on their 6-speed STi. Nissan should offer the same.

    Nissan this year has added a new 4.0 DOHC engine as standard, and it's a beauty! What an improvement over the old 3.3, even the 3.3 supercharged unit from last year.

    How's it drive? Well, it's truck with leaf rear springs, so you feel all the little road imperfections. I would have preferred if Nissan used the IRS from the new Pathfinder, but that may run counter to the bare-bones image here, plus it would have cost more too. If you like traditional truck-like ride and handling, you most likely will like this vehicle a lot. If you don't like traditional truck-like ride and handling, if you prefer car-like ride and handling, you'll probably hate it. I liked it!

    The MSRP on this vehicle was just a bit over $25K. That includes a world-class engine and tranny, ABS, part-time electronic 2-speed 4WD, power package, floor mats, and a few other goodies. I see it as an excellent package, at a very good price.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    A couple of more things:

    • The lower left part of the dashboard is very close to your left leg. So if you get the manual tranny—and depending on how long your legs are in relation to the seat position—it could be problem. When I first got in the vehicle, the seat was up a bit further forward than I wanted, and my leg hit the lower portion of the dash. I wonder if this could become a problem if you were in an accident, and if the the lower dashboard and your leg could get entangled? Not a pleasent thought to contemplate...

    • Also, the Xterra has a nifty side step on the side of the rear bumper to help access the roof rack. This is both good and bad. It's good that it's there, but it's bad that it's so high up. The trick to using this, I found out, was to first put a foot on one of the spokes of the rear rear wheel, then hoist yourself up by grabbing the roof rack, and then put your other foot in the side step. Then, ultimately putting both feet on top of the rear tire. Once there, the roof rack is a breeze to access. The roof rack can hold 150 pounds of stuff. And as before, there is a neat (but now covered) front section for muddy boots, etc.

    Bob
  • grahampetersgrahampeters Member Posts: 1,786
    G'day

    We've hit that time of life where the simple nuclear family of mum, dad and two kids (plus the dog of course) has given way to mysterious hordes of extra children. I'm not sure when it happened but suddenly I’ve gone from fitting comfortably, alone, into a little hatchback to feeling like a school bus driver. My older sister assures me that it lasts through secondary school where her personal best was squeezing in six children (all at that leggy teenager stage where limbs extend everywhere), their school bags, a dog, a budgerigar and a tuba. This seems ominous as our oldest is a musician and has friends with large instruments. She has just taken up the viola to supplement her clarinet and flute. Each time I see her black viola case, I’m reminded of the case’s multi purpose utility in transporting machine guns through Prohibition-era Chicago. At least she passed on the double bass whose case could double for a coffin; I’d need a small truck for that.

    Whilst the Subaru Outback cut the mustard whilst she was primary school age and was the best fun imaginable to drive on muddy mountain roads, I need something a little more flexible now. Subaru’s B9 Tribeca would be an obvious choice if it made it Down Under to beautiful Australia. However, it’s only now being showcased at the Melbourne Motor Show, the local importer wondering whether it might be feasible to import in 2007. The US source and social aspirations would price it against BMW’s X5 and Volkswagen’s Touareg, possibly a stretch too far even for Subaru.

    The alternatives are the ubiquitous people mover, send the kids by train or search for a practical compromise. SUV’s are dirty words here, just as they are in the USA, but they serve a useful purpose. About 25% of Australian new cars are four-wheel drives of varying sorts with the Toyota Landcuriser the clear leader. Beyond the city, they make great sense but their urban popularity is a mystery. Large, unwieldy and dangerous to other road users, they seem the car of choice for many mums collecting children from school. Their glossy metallic paint reminds us that they have never ventured off bitumen, 90% of their potential remaining untapped. Smaller four-wheel drives are also popular but the need for such heavy-duty vehicles in cities is doubtful. Separate chassis four-wheel drives are heavy, big and expensive. I’d much rather a unibody and know its limits.

    My job regularly takes me off road, on farms and construction sites and I have grown used to the luxury of four wheel drive in my Subaru Outback. It’s the first car I’ve owned that did not become bogged at least once. Whilst unbogging cars is a vital life skill for all Australians, it loses its charm when you are wearing a suit and good shoes. The added clearance and superb handling of the Subaru were an added bonus.

    With that sort of background, the Toyota Highlander seemed a good prospect. Sold here as the Kluger because Hyundai had already grabbed the Highlander name, Australians have been mystified by its derivation. The most plausible, and amusing, explanation is that it is the Japanese pronunciation of Kruger, a South African National Park An alternative possibility is word association with the villain of Nightmare on Elm Street. Implausible, I’m sure as the Kluger is mild mannered and very careful. If cars have personalities, the Kluger is a CPA, particularly with traction control. Step out of line just a little and the chimes warn that there is slippage ahead. I clipped a kerb in a tight car park and it told me gently, but firmly that I was straying into danger. If I tried it again, would I have got slapped on the wrist? The overbearing shipboard computer in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy springs to mind. I’m not sure whether to call our Kluger “Mother” or “Mr Smithers”; It will have to be something suitable for a CPA and certainly not “Freddy”!

    Hey, hold on; I’m a CPA! Surely I am as fussed about safety and ensuring my children are well behaved. That’s probably why I bought a car with eight airbags, seat belt pre-tensioners and every electronic traction control known to modern man. The seats are set well inside the bodyshell to provide a wider crush cell for side impacts. Four inches wider than my Outback, it’s also appreciably taller but pleasantly shorter in length. That makes parking easier, as does the pronounced “wheel at each corner” stance. The short overhangs also improve approach and departure angles, permitting dramatically greater off road access than that of many supposedly tougher vehicles. Sadly the Toyo Traction tyres fitted to 16 inch wheels give up far before the transmission’s ability to climb. They will be replaced as soon as cash permits but the slightly unusual size (225/70R16) means suitable replacements are rare. The posher Kluger Grande sports much classier Michelins on bigger alloy wheels but the CVX makes do with lesser rubber, albeit still on beautiful alloys.

    The drive train comes from the Lexus RX330 which in turn derives from the Toyota Camry. A silky smooth 3.3 litre V6 is mated to an exquisite 5 speed auto transmission. In lesser models, this drives through a locking centre diff but for the Grande and Safety Pack equipped CVX, slip control is delegated, very effectively to the ABS system. I’m not climbing Mount Everest in it but the system seems to work well. Some commentators have identified a potential problem with such systems if backing down steep scree where brake lock up is desirable. Under this scenario, the ABS would supposedly kick in, releasing the brakes entirely. Frankly if I find myself in this situation, I’ll have bigger problems than brakes.

    Handling is predictable. Well actually, it’s dead boring. When you have drive a Subaru for years, you know FUN with a capital F, a U and an N. Toyota has rarely made an exciting drive; even the Celica has mostly appealed to hairdressers, but can’t we ask for some feedback. About the closest it comes to thrilling is the gentle understeer warning, “I think you are going too fast for that corner”.

    But ahhh, that drive train. My Kluger is now sufficiently run in to allow full throttle acceleration. Instantaneous kickdown and turbine like wind-up make merging on freeways a dream. Some drivers of Toyota vehicles have complained of a mystery surge or delay in acceleration but mine could not be any more responsive. I wonder whether a steady diet of Shell Optimax is playing to its particular tastes but after using Optimax for six years in my Outback and before that in a Golf GTi I was not keen to switch.
  • grahampetersgrahampeters Member Posts: 1,786
    Delivery of my white Kluger CVX coincided with Melbourne’s wettest ever day, six inches of rain falling in short order. It’s probably the first car that had to wade to the first set of traffic lights. Brakes remain firm under the toughest tests and handling remained predictable throughout. Effective front and rear wipers proved more than adequate for a severe sluicing. Lights are excellent although I feel blind under the dim reversing lights.

    Tonight will be the first time we really try the fold out seats under the rear floor. These are, like the remaining seats fitted with retractable three point seatbelts and headrests. The backrest of each seat reclines allowing even children tucked into the rear compartment to sleep gently. Not so clever are the single height head rests for the rear row which extend for adults (who would never willingly climb in there) but do not have intermittent positions for smaller people. That said, the seats are all clad in soft leather with cup-holders aplenty for the good life. The rearmost seats even get separate heating controls which we suspect will remain unused. Again, CPA-like there are myriad hidey holes for concealing green pens and deep cubby holes for tucking away tax papers and street directories

    Toyota tend to add little details without mentioning it. Try to move off without closing the doors and a warning chime rings out. Not too soon though as it only operates above three kilometres per hour so that you can roll the car forward in the garage. The same holds true for the foot operated park brake, an unusual device in Australia and unloved by many testers. I’ve owned Mercedes before and am therefor used to them although finding the release a little too easy.

    Fit and finish are first class, as for most Japanese cars. The one problem with my vehicle is a hard noise when the front windows open. Mentioned at the first service the dealer insisted on replacing the window seals. Service is quick and whilst the dealership is a bit low rent in the service reception area, the speed of service is first class. That reflects my buying experience where the dealership was professional and efficient without glitzy presentation. I was comparing to Subaru who have focused on presentation at the expense of actually being able to sell a car. Two months after I called on our local Subaru dealer and asked three times for a test drive, I’m still waiting. In that time, I’ve had three Toyota dealers chase hard for my business, bought the car and got on with life. CPAs are like that, getting the paperwork done efficiently and getting on with business. Maybe I should settle for calling the Kluger “Albert”; it's a nice dependable name!

    Cheers

    Graham
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    With the all-new 2006 Hyundai Sonata only a few weeks away from a dealer near you, one might ask, "Why review the '05 Sonata?" One reason is that it is perhaps the lowest-priced mid-sized car you can buy, with the current incentives and discounts available--under $14,000 in base form, and even under $13,000 for current Hyundai owners. It's also garnered high marks on quality from J.D. Power and Consumer Reports; the 2004 Sonata had the lowest incidence of reported problems of any vehicle in CR's latest annual auto survey. Oh yeah--I also got to drive one today as a loaner car while my car was in for service.

    The tested car was a black base model Sonata with floor mats as the only option. That means it had the 2.4L 4-cylinder engine and 5-speed manual transmission. I know most Sonatas go out the door with automatics, and most are probably V6s too. But I prefer a stick, and I was curious to see how well the 138 hp 4-banger would move this rather large car down the road.

    The answer is: just fine, thank you. No, it's no speed demon, but the engine has pretty good torque and gets up to freeway speed with no drama. No excitement either, but that's not the point of the Sonata. Smooth, comfortable cruising is the Sonata's forte, and it handles that role very well. Highway cruising is its strong suit, with a comfortable ride that filters out most bumps and a relatively quiet cabin save for some wind noise above 65 mph and a little engine drone over 70 (turn the 6-speaker CD stereo up a notch and you won't notice). Handling is safe if not sporty, and the car tracks well down the highway on its 15" Michelins. In around-town driving, the ride is not quite as well isolated but it's not harsh by any means, and the independent suspension soaks up most bumps. The car corners with just a bit of body lean, but not so much that it deserves the "Korean Buick" label some have affixed to it. The speed-proportional steering is smooth, and the fat plastic wheel feels good. Shifting is aided by a light clutch, but the shifter is rubbery--I never missed a shift though, and take-up was smooth.

    Few people will buy a 4-cylinder Sonata because of its performance. The real value in this car is the features you get for the money. In addition to those I mentioned, the base model also includes 4-wheel disc brakes, 8-way driver's seat, full gauges, center console with a nicely padded top over the storage compartment, fairly roomy rear seat with center armrest, power windows/locks/heated mirrors, remote locking with alarm, HVAC with electronic push-button controls, lighted vanity mirrors, variable intermittant wipers, cruise control, roomy trunk with 60/40 fold-down rear seat and gas struts holding up the lid, and full gauges. Not bad for a $13,000 car.

    The front seats are broad and comfy, the driver's seat especially so with its dual-knob height adjuster. The back seat will seat two six-footers or three good-sized kids comfortably. The interior on the test car was black, with multicolor specks on the fabric. Not the most luxurious interior in cardom, but the black plastic was of good quality and most surfaces were padded--a rarity in cars nowadays. The switchgear is simple but has a solid, quality feel. And of course the Sonata has Hyundai's 5-year bumper-to-bumper and 10-year powertrain warranty.

    Another plus of the '05 Sonata vs. the '06: it looks different from other Asian mid-sized cars, with hints of Jaguar and Mercedes (or Sable, depending on your perspective). The '06 goes all-out to mimic the leading Japanese mid-sized sedans, which is not a bad thing, but the distinctiveness is gone.

    If you need a reliable and comfortable mid-sized sedan, want a (really long) new-car warranty, and don't feel the need for speed, the '05 Sonata could fit the bill for thousands less than the competition. Or you could get a year-old certified Taurus with automatic and V6 for the same money. Me, I'd go with the Hyundai, but not this Hyundai. The Elantra GLS 5-door offers almost as much interior room and more cargo space, a nicer interior (sport cloth vs. flecked mouse fur), better acceleration and handling, and better fuel economy for less money.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Just drove a 2006 Honda Ridgeline RTL that was loaded with a lot of dealer-added stuff (roof rack, running boards, front bumper thingy, and a few other goodies). It was around $3K in dealer accessories, bringing the price to over $36K. YIKES! And it didn't even have the items that I would want: navigation, tow package, and hard locking bed cover! Fear not, Ridgelines can be had for far less than that. I believe they start around $27K, maybe a bit more…

    Despite the hefty price of the as-tested unit, I think the Ridgeline will most likely be the most significant new model—car or truck—for 2005.

    Why do I feel so strongly about this? Very simply the new Ridgeline has just become the new paradigm by which all future pickups will be judged; especially those pickups that double as family haulers. Just like the trend-setting Honda CB750 motorcycle in 1969; and the trend-setting Honda Accord in 1976; and most recently, the trend-setting Honda Odyssey (with its 3rd-row folding magic seat); the Honda Ridgeline will forever be remembered as the trend-setting pickup that interjected some really new and novel creative problem solving into a market segment that until now was woefully short in that area. Those who use their trucks for commercial purposes will likely scoff at the Ridgeline. But mark my words, even the Ford Super Duty, etc., will eventually see some of the Ridgeline's far-reaching influence.

    Let's look at some specifics:

    • Honda considers the Ridgeline to be a midsize pickup truck; but it is a wide-body midsize pickup truck. It is nearly as wide as many fullsize pickups. This allows it to be the only midsize truck to have the ability to carry 4' x 8' paneling flat on the floor between the rear wheelhouses, as there is 49.5 inches there. That means no more 2-tier loading, using 2” x 4” bed slats to accomplish that same feat. So it can handle this stuff just like the big boys can.

    • It's the first mainstream pickup with a fully independent suspension—finally!

    • That IRS allows for a huge under-the-bed lockable storage trunk. You can put tools back there, thus eliminating the need for those tacky-looking bed diamond-plate toolboxes. You can put several golf bags back there. It's also big enough to hold several suitcases-and if you're into tailgate parties, just fill it with ice to cool a bunch of your favorite brewskies! Have no fear, as there is also a drain plug to rid itself of all the melted ice, when the game is over. Just make sure you have a designated driver assigned to the task of getting home…

    • Then there's the ingenious 2-way tailgate, which works much like the rear gate in your dad's old Country Squire. This allows you to access the rear bed trunk (or the bed) soooooo very easily. In fact, once you've experienced it (I did), you wonder why hasn't some automaker already applied this (really old) idea to pickups before? It's a classic case of the obvious design/engineering solution being right in front of your eyes-yet you never saw it, until now.

    • It's not just a Pilot or Odyssey on steroids. No sir. Honda has taken a unitized body and attached it to a full truck-like box frame. This vehicle is very stiff, very rugged, and I've been told-handles like no traditional pickup ever has before. Think car-like handling and ride, but with a 1500+ pound payload and 5000 pound towing. In addition, all the major components have been beefed up to meet the tasks ahead.

    • The size is reasonable too. No longer does a truck buyer feel he must get a fullsize 1/2-ton to get the room needed for family and/or cargo. This is a BIG deal folks! I have long felt that the fullsize truck market as being completely out of control in terms of vehicle size. It seems long-time truckmakers feel each new succeeding generation of pickup must out-size its previous model, not to mention out-size the competition. To be honest, I really think all current so-called fullsize trucks are really supersized trucks. Now Honda has shown there is another and better way to do business.

    • With its reasonable size, car-like handling, large lockable bed trunk, and 2-way bed gate, this new Honda really does become a true alternative to the traditional family car. And… I bet it will an “easy sell” to your significant other too—an important, but often-overlooked consideration.

    • The Ridgeline is not a pickup designed to impress others. It's for the truck owner who knows what he/she needs in this type of vehicle. There's very little “machismo” here. It's mostly all about what makes the most sense for this type of vehicle purchase. No more, no less.

    • It's the best driving pickup that I've driven, and would love to have one sitting in my driveway. The ride is firm, but not anything like what you would expect from a pickup. Think Pilot, but dialed up a few notches on the suspension settings. It's very quiet, very comfortable, and the center console is super cool in that it can be expanded forward if need be. Speaking of the center console, in its compressed state, it allows you to go from the drivers seat to front passenger seat just as if it we a bench seat. I like that capability. As good as it is, you know it's a pickup when you go to make a U-turn. The 122” wheelbase takes it's toll here, for sure.

    • It's not aimed at those who need a heavy duty pickup truck. Those with Ford Super Duties, et al, need not fear. It's not that kind of truck. It's aimed squarely at the midsize market, and those flirting with the idea of a fullsize 1/2-ton because the width is close to that of a fullsize pickup.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    So is it perfect?

    No, no vehicle is perfect. Here's what I'd like to see improved:

    • The spare tire is located in that bed trunk compartment, which means if you have a flat tire with a load of loose mulch in the bed, you have problem. Maybe that spare could have been engineered so that it could be accessed from inside the rear of the cab?

    • Speaking of the spare, what's with equipping this “truck” with a temporary spare tire? Honda says there is room for a fullsize spare, so why not equip it with one in the first place? Temporary spare tires have no place on pickup trucks or SUVs.

    • There's no low range for those who are the least bit serious about off-roading. I'd like to see that corrected.

    • I'd rather see Honda use a HD version of the Acura RL's full-time SH-AWD, which has a default RWD power bias, rather than the FWD-biased on-demand AWD it now uses. Beef that unit up and add a low range, and it would be perfect.

    • Frankly I'd like some more power. The 3.5L V6 has adequate power with two aboard, but I wonder what it would be like pulling a loaded trailer; or with five passengers and a loaded bed? What I'd love to see Honda do is match the new Toyota Tacoma and Nissan Frontier in terms of engine, as these will be the vehicles most likely cross-shopped with the Ridgeline. That means a 4.0L V6 putting out another 20 - 30 horsepower, as well as upping the torque accordingly.

    • I'd also like to see them match the Tacoma's and Frontier's towing capacity, which means around 6500 pounds or so.

    • Speaking of towing: I would like to see a dashboard-integrated electronic trailer brake control, like that found on the new '05 Ford Super Duty pickups.

    • I'd like to see a 120v power outlet (or two) in the bed, again like the Tacoma.

    Finally, I tip my hat to Honda, for bestowing upon the American public a truly new and groundbreaking-and long overdue-way to think about how pickups should be designed and engineered. Frankly, I think this is very exciting, as I can't wait to see how the other automakers respond to the Ridgeline. You can bet that many auto executives and product planners from Detroit and Tokyo are going to be losing a lot of sleep, figuring out ways to combat this new and very worthy competitor
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    The Kia Sportage is remembered as a tough little SUV, rough around the edges but low priced and able to tackle rough terrain with its truck-based frame. For '05, Kia has reintroduced the Sportage on a car-based platform shared with the Hyundai Tucson, with its heritage in the Hyundai Elantra. I drove a Sportage LX V6 4WD with no options, $20,300 including destination, to see how far Kia had come in the cute-ute market since it temporarily retired the Sportage a couple of years ago.

    The first thing I noticed on approaching the Sportage is that it is IMO a sharp looking little SUV--much more handsome than its cousin the Tucson I think. The Tucson suffers from an ugly snout and a huge D pillar, which to me makes it look frumpy. Perhaps to others, it looks "tough." Anyway, I prefer the cleaner lines of the Sportage, with its smoother nose, pumped-up fenders (think Chevy Avalanche), and large rear side windows that provide good visibility while avoiding the tail-heavy look of the Tucson. The rear breaks no new ground but is clean and inoffensive, with a separate flip-up rear window to ease loading. The standard 16" five-spoke alloys are quite attractive too.

    My Sportage was Smokey Brown, with a light tan interior. Now, brown is not my favorite color on a car, but this deep brown metallic color wasn't bad at all, and complemented the interior well. The paint was glossy, with no hint of orange peel visible under some surface dirt (just got 6" of snow overnight). The seams were tight and even. Just looking at the car without seeing the badge, you would never know it was a Kia instead of a Honda or Toyota.

    Inside, the light tan interior was bright and airy. The seats had tweed-look inserts that I thought looked spiffy, a nice contrast to the monotone cloth and plastic around the rest of the interior. The dash and door trim was hard plastic--quite common these days, unfortunately--but looked high quality, with an aluminum-look surround around the center stack. There was a big oh-my-gosh handle built into the dash on the passenger side, letting you know this is an SUV, ready for action.

    The dash layout is simple but attractive. The sound system has big knobs and buttons. The HVAC controls are three big rotary dials, nicely damped with Acura-like smoothness. The control stalks are smooth also--no cheap feel there. Gauges include a speedo with the required silver trim (sigh) and a tach. The steering wheel felt too thin; the EX gets a leather wrap. The doors are spiffed up with silver-color latches and faux aluminum around the power window switches. There are lots of storage options, including a folding purse/bag hook on the right of the center stack. The center console is topped by a thickly-padded armrest, which raises up for better support.

    The driver's seat is very comfortable. I was glad to see it has a dual-knob height adjuster, which makes it easy to dial in just the right seating position. The steering wheel tilts but does not telescope. Still, the driving position was excellent for my 5' 9-1/2" frame.

    Rear seat room and comfort is very good for a small SUV. The rear floor is flat, so three small adults (or two big ones) can find enough room. The neatest thing about the rear seats is that they fold flat with one simple motion (OK, one per 60/40 side). The seatbacks are plastic, but the cargo floor is a velour material--not a great idea given the tan cloth, almost ivory. If I had young children or expected heavy use, I'd go for the black interior. There's a storage compartment under the cargo floor cover and (surprise!) a full-sized spare tire on a steel rim. Unfortunately, Kia makes you pay extra for a cargo cover and net (standard on the EX). Another glaring omission in a $20k vehicle is the lack of remote locking. Again, you need to move up to the EX to get that feature.

    OK, enough on cosmetics. How does the new Sportage drive? In 4WD trim, the 173-horse V6 has plenty of power for around-town and highway driving. It does not provide neck-snapping acceleration, but if you floor it, it will get you onto the highway with no worries. It growls under full throttle, but is smooth and quiet while cruising at 65 mph. The automatic has a sport-shift feature, a nice surprise on a $20k SUV. I did not test that feature because, frankly, I find it superfluous. (If I want to shift for myself, I'll save the bucks and get a stick shift--which the Sportage offers in a 4-cylinder LX model starting at $15,900 plus destination). The 4-speed tranny was smooth, except I noticed a little hiccup on strong acceleration. I probably wouldn't have noticed it except I was looking for it, after reading about tranny glitches in the Tucson.

    Ride and handling were pleasant--smooth and compliant, yet with some road feel. There was no body lean on regular cornering around town. The Sportage is based on the Elantra chassis, and I'd say the ride is between the softness of the Elantra GLS and the firmer ride of the Elantra GT. A good compromise given this vehicle's mission in life, I think. I noticed no rattles, just feeling of solidity. Noise was low, with only a bit of wind noise at 65 mph and a faint hum from the engine. The 6-speaker CD stereo was more than adequate for my tastes--but it's in a rectangular opening in case you feel the need to upgrade it.

    One thing worth mentioning about the Sportage are its safety features--none of which I tested, thank goodness. They include front side airbags and front and rear side curtain airbags, four-wheel discs with ABS and traction control, electronic stability control, and 3-point seatbelts in all positions. Note that all of these features are standard even on the $16k base Sportage.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    In the '05 Sportage, Kia has delivered a good-looking, comfortable, roomy small SUV with V6 power, great safety features, and 4WD for $20k MSRP. In features and performance, it competes well with the likes of the RAV4, Escape, and CRV. But it costs thousands less than the 4-cylinder RAV4 and CRV, while offering safety features those vehicles can't match. And it comes with the famous Kia "Long Haul" warranty.

    What's not to like? First, it's a new design from a company not renowned for making reliable cars. Kia has made great strides in the past few years, but it still is not up to the level of Honda and Toyota. The Sportage appears at first drive to be a high-quality machine. Long-term reliability is a question. The long Kia warranty helps mitigate that risk, of course. Second, depreciation on Kias has historically been steep. So if you like to trade cars every few years, maybe a cute-ute like the RAV4 or CRV, which hold their value better, might be the better buy. Third, I really don't think I should have to buy the top-end trim level just to get remote locking.

    But that's about it. The new Sportage has a lot going for it, and few vices. The salesman I talked to told me they had sold ten already this month and they were jumping off the lot fast (they had three in stock, all LXes). Unusual for a Kia, the Sportage has no rebates on it yet (just a local $500 auto show rebate). Its only real competition may be its cousin the Tucson. But if I had to choose between them, loyalty rebates notwithstanding, I'd pick the Sportage if only because of its more pleasing exterior and interior styling. As soon as the dealer gets a 4-cylinder 5-speed FWD model in stock, I will check it out to find out what kind of SUV you can buy for about $17k.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    First things first... Note to VW: WHY WHY WHY did you confuse everyone by giving the all-new Jetta the same model year as the old Jetta? Oh sure, this is the new Jetta, so that makes everything hunky-dory, doesn't it? When people buy one, what are they going to tell their friends? "Hey, I just bought a new New Jetta!" Doesn't that sound a little ridiculous? This is something that an automaker like Kia would do (and did). Do you want to get a reputation as a follower of Kia?

    OK, now that I have that out of my system, on to the review. I drove a New Jetta 2.5 with no options. I actually wanted to drive the Value Edition, but they only had one and it was on the show floor. The test car was Platinum Gray with a gray interior. About as nondescript and boring a combination as you can get on a car, but quite tasteful on this not-so-little-anymore sedan. Automobile Magazine et. al. have noted that the New Jetta bears a strong resemblance to a Corolla. I agree. But the New Jetta looks more substantial than a Corolla, and it has that swath of chrome up front that makes me think either VW just bought a chromium mine or has developed sudden pangs of nostalgia for those halcyon days of big chrome-fendered cars. Personally I don't like all the chrome, but it didn't stand out much on the gray test car.

    The first impression I got upon approaching the New Jetta (after thinking about a late 50s Buick) was, "This is a big car", for a compact sedan. Much bigger than the Old Jetta, which looks diminutive in comparison. VW has put that space to good use in the rear seat, where there's room to spare when the driver's seat is adjusted to my 5'-9.5" frame, and in the 16-cubit-foot trunk--now big enough to hold golf bags horizontally, the brochure exclaims triumphantly. At over 3300 pounds, the New Jetta is also quite heavy for a compact. That may contribute to its rather low 23/30 EPA ratings, but no doubt it also contributes to the solidity of the car and its excellent crash test ratings.

    The next thing I noticed, upon climbing into the car, is that the reviewers who have raved about the quality of the interior were spot-on. It is one handsome cabin, arguably the best in its class. The seat fabric on the VE is nothing to brag about, but its knubby texture grips well and it feels durable. The test car had leatherette (i.e. really nice vinyl) seating surfaces. I'd much rather have the cloth seats, even though the test car had seat heaters. The plastics are first-rate, and even the hard surfaces look like they might be soft-touch--until you touch them. The fat 3-spoke plastic steering wheel is about as good as plastic wheels get, and it tilts and telescopes.

    VW claims that the driver's seat and front passenger seat have 8-way adjustments. I'm not quite sure where they come up with eight; I counted five: fore/aft, angle (power on the tester, knob on the VE), lumbar (I cranked it and didn't notice any change), headrest, and height up/down. Even if I count fore, aft, up, and down separately that's only 7. At least both front seats have the adjustments. The driver's seat was comfortable except I wished for the ability to raise and lower the front and back of the seat bottom independently. This is a common problem with single-lever seat height adjusters. Since Hyundai, Kia, and Suzuki/Daewoo have figured out how to put a seat like that into cars that sell for $10,000, I'm not sure why VW et. al. can't do it. At least there was a big deadpedal.

    Controls and displays are numerous and high-quality. They include separate temperature and oil pressure gauges and a multi-function display in front of the driver with an outside temperature gauge and trip computer (not on the VE). All the controls had a quality feel, although the stalks on the steering wheel felt a little flimsier than in some Asian cars, and I would have liked the cruise controls on the wheel instead of on a little stalk on the left (especially since I'm right-handed). The test car had dual-zone automatic climate control, which I didn't play with, and a 10-speaker 6-CD/MP3 system which had good sound, but I had it off most of the time to listen to the music from the car.

    Before I got in the car, a salesman watched as my sales rep started the car. "Let's see how she does," he smiled. "The clutch has a quick take-up." She did just fine bringing the car around. However, I immediately noticed the quick take-up and actually killed the engine at the first stop sign. First time I'd done that in many years. Otherwise, the clutch was easy and the short-throw 5-speed shifter precise, if a little notchy. But then, the car was brand-new.

    The Jetta (enough of that "New" stuff!) has 150 horses and 170 foot-pounds of torque. In a 3300-pound car, 150 hp doesn't make it very quick. It has plenty of power for normal driving, but lesser cars will dust it. However, I appreciated the plentiful torque. I could easily start from almost a dead stop in 2nd with no grumbling from the engine. The engine was smooth and quiet at cruise, with a not-unpleasant growl spooling up. Fifth is fairly tall, 2750 rpms at 70 mph. In fact, the cabin is hushed most of the time, with the only intrusions being a little wind noise on the highway and a rather unpleasant thrumming sound when going over even small tar strips. On a couple of roads with close-spaced tar strips, the noise was tiresome--especially since an Elantra that costs half as much sails over them without a wimper. But there was no quivering from the car over bumps, and no rattles or squeaks.

    I appreciated the taut suspension on curves. I took the Jetta around some wet cloverleafs and hairpin turns at much higher-than-recommended speeds, and there was no body lean, no tire squealing, no drama at all. The test car had stability control standard (n/a on the VE), along with ABS and traction control. Braking was smooth and easy to modulate; I didn't test the ABS. The handling, along with the interior, are probably the Jetta's biggest strong points. Safety is also a selling point, with standard side bags and curtains, active front head restraints, DRLs, and as noted, ESC, ABS, and traction control on the test car.

    (continued)
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    All in all, the Jetta is an impressive car. Compared to other compact sedans, the car has ample if not class-leading power, superb handling, a smooth powertrain, a roomy back seat and trunk (a very nicely finished trunk I might add, with a full-sized spare even on the VE), a classy interior, and excellent safety gear. However, equipped as tested, the Jetta is just over $21,000. Alloys and moonroof will set you back nearly $2000 more, and a loaded car with leather, wood trim, power seats and a few other niceties will run almost $25k. That is encroaching, even surpassing, the realm of loaded V6 mid-sized sedans and even near-luxury offerings like the Acura TSX. And many of these competitors offer features not available in the Jetta, such as nav systems and V6 powerplants.

    For me, the choices boil down like this: if you want something compact but sporty, and want to spend minimal bucks, the Mazda3s is probably a better choice. Quicker, more economical, as good if not better handling and shifting compared to the Jetta. If you want the most car for your money, you're probably better off in an Accord EX, or maybe the new Sonata LX if you're more adventurous. But if you want a compact with excellent handling, safety, and interior ambience plus a German nameplate, for close to $20k, the Jetta is the only game in town. If it were me, I'd go for the Value Edition with the cloth interior for around $18k and maybe use some of the extra bucks to buy some nice alloy rims.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    EPA ratings of the New Jetta are 22/30, not 23/30. Curb weight w/manual transmission is 3230, automatic 3285.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I drove an entry-level 5-passenger Tribeca today, just long enough to get a feel for it, perhaps 3 – 4 miles or so, mostly on city streets—and in the rain. It stickered at $31,320.00, and FitzMall's Internet price was $29,917.00.

    I liked it a lot. It handles much more like a good sports sedan than a tall crossover SUV. In fact, I bet a lot of Outbacks will be cross-shopped with the Tribeca. The vehicle had most of what I would require: moonroof, cloth seats (I prefer cloth to leather), 5-passenger (7-passenger is nice, but I don't need that), 250 HP 3.0 H-6, 5-speed Sportshift auto, and Subie's top-of-the-line VDC AWD—this is all in the base model!

    The reason I think it will be cross-shopped with Outbacks, at least in this configuration, is that it offers a lot for about the same money, and it is much roomier than the Outback, both in front and rear seating; or at least I think it is.

    Much has been said about the relatively small 3.0 engine. This is the same engine found in the 600 pound lighter H-6 Outbacks, and yes, to a degree it struggles. Let me rephrase that: The tranny seems to downshift a the mere hint of giving it gas, and that can be annoying. So, yes, I would love to see this vehicle with a larger 3.5 engine with more low-end torque, so it wouldn't have to downshift so much. I suspect a larger and lazier 3.5 engine would give as good if not better gas mileage than the hardworking 3.0 engine it is now saddled with. I will say it felt spunky, if not quick, but I can't help but wonder how it will be when carrying a full load...

    Other nits? A few, and all minor:

    • In sportshift mode, the upshifts seemed slow.

    • Also, the gear indicator (in sportshift mode) at the bottom of the tack is sometimes hard to see depending on the position of the steering wheel. I would move that indicator higher up on the tach face, so that it's easier to see.

    • On the 5-passenger model there is a covered storage compartment in place of the 3rd-row seat. That's good, however it's divided into 4 relatively small subsections. Why? You can't fit anything large in it. Dumb design and/or thinking!

    • The rear seat reclines (good), but the center fold-down armrest opens to only one position (bad). That means if you recline the backrest, the armrest (depending on how much you recline it) could be at an awkward angle—and since it has two cupholders, there could be a problem spilling drinks.

    • Tow rating is so-so, at 3500 (with optional tow package). I would have preferred a 5,000 tow rating, but I think a more torque-friendly engine is needed in order to do that.

    On the plus side:

    • Well, the room I mentioned.

    • Bang-for-the-buck I think is very good.

    • It's very quiet and refined.

    • It's probably one of the more fun to drive crossovers out there. Subaru benchmarked the BMW X5 for handling, and I think they scored well here.

    What would I like to see (other than what I mentioned)?

    • I would LOVE to see Subaru mate this engine to the 6-speed manual found on the Legacy 3.0R Spec B that is sold overseas! That tranny is perfectly suited to the somewhat peaky powerband of the 3.0 engine. That would be a real sweet combo. Bring it on Subaru!!!

    • If they do offer a manual version, the foot-operated parking brake would have to go, and replace it with a proper hand brake.

    • I would like to see a more off-road oriented version offered too.

    Both juice and I have just been invited to a Tribeca Ride-and-Drive next Tuesday (ironically while I was out driving this one!), so I'm sure we will both have much more to say after that. So that's it for now.

    Bob
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Lay-deeeeeez and Gentlemen! Welcome to this Battle Royale for Supremacy of the Family Sedans of the World! In the near corner, standing 188 and 9/10 inches and weighing 3,266 pounds, the Challenger, from the Republic of Korea--the 2006 Hyundai Sonata GLS! And in the far corner, the reigning Champ-eeee-on of the Family Sedans, standing 189 and 1/2 inches, weighing 3,203 pounds, from Marysville, Ohio--the Honda Accord EX! ARE YOU READY TO RUMMMMMMBLE???

    Round 1: MSRP

    Sonata GLS I4 with automatic transmission and Premium Package: $21,345
    Accord EX I4 with automatic transmission: $23,515

    The winner of Round 1: The Hyundai Sonata!

    Round 2: Feature Content

    Unique to Sonata: Electronic Stability Control, 8-way power driver's seat, auto-dimming rearview mirror with HomeLink, MP3 player, SHIFTRONIC, speed-sensing wipers, traction control, heated outside mirrors, leather-wrapped steering wheel and shifter, fog lamps, smog-sensing air quality system, active front head restraints, automatic on/off headlights, trip computer

    Unique to Accord: 5-speed automatic transmission, double wishbone rear suspension, remote power window control, folding outside mirrors, telescoping steering column, progressive self-illuminating gauges, 6 CD in-dash changer

    The winner of Round 2: The challenger, the Hyundai Sonata!

    Round 3: Interior Room

    Sonata: 105.4 cubic feet passenger space, 16.3 cubic feet trunk space
    Accord: 97.7 cubic feet passenger space, 14.0 cubic feet truck space

    The winner of Round 3: The upstart Hyundai Sonata!

    Howard, this is indeed a surprising development! The youngster from Korea has come out swinging, besting the Champion in each of the first three rounds. Can the Champion recover from this early setback? Let's find out...

    Round 4: Engine

    Sonata: 2.4L I4 DOHC, 16 valves, CVVT, 162 hp, 164 pound-feet torque
    Accord: 2.4L I4 DOHC, 16 valves, CVVT, 160 hp, 161 pound-feet torque

    The winner of Round 4, by a nose: the Hyundai Sonata!!

    Round 5: Fuel economy

    Sonata: EPA 24 city, 33 highway
    Accord: EPA 24 city, 34 highway

    The winner of Round 5, by a nose: The Honda Accord!

    The Accord claws its way back into the fight! There are still 10 rounds left--which car will prevail??

    Round 6: Exterior

    Howard, this one looks really close. The Sonata came to this contest in fighting trim, with no traces of excess weight. Some say the Sonata copied the training regimen of the Champion, but that is speculation at this point. Other reliable sources say that the Challenger got more help in this area from the Germans than from the Japanese. The Champion does show the results of his years in the ring, with a face that, well, has seen better days. The Sonata's face is clean and unmarked. Its panel gaps are even and tight. There is just a trace of orange peel on the Sonata's white pearl paint. The Accord is similar, but its silver paint looks smoother than the Sonata's. The Accord scores points with folding side mirrors, which are absent on the Sonata--a big gaffe by the Challenger. One thing we will say about the Champion--he is wearing classier shoes than the Challenger, and the chrome jewelry on the Champion is befitting his status.

    The winner of Round 7: Too close to call.

    Round 8: Interior

    You could say the Sonata threw in the towel in this round, folks, with the terrycloth-like surface in its light gray interior. But the material is comfortable and grippy. Some might prefer the smoother cloth of the GL model. The Accord is dressed in black mouse fur, with colored flecks--which reminds this reporter of the black cloth in the previous-generation base Sonata. The Sonata is roomier than the Accord but feels much roomier because of its light-colored interior vs. the cave-like black confines of the Accord. The Sonata's driver benefits from the optional 8-way power seat. However, this reporter wished that the front of the seat cushion could go higher. Otherwise, the seating position was quite comfortable, even though the steering column tilts but does not telescope as in the Accord. The main flaw is that the accelerator felt too close. The Accord's drivers seat has a single-arc power height adjuster and manual adjustments for fore-aft and rake. Therefore, the seat could not be positioned quite as comfortably as the Sonata's, but it was not uncomfortable. The telescoping steering wheel on the Honda helps make up for fewer seat adjustments compared to the Accord. Both seats have a manual lumbar support adjustment. The passenger seat on both cars has only basic adjustments. The rear seat of the Sonata is a friendly place for two adults or three youngsters to spend time, with copious leg room and generous toe space under the seats. There's also plenty of headroom thanks to a cut-out in the headliner, and the seat cushion and seatback offer good support. The Accord's rear seat is not bad either, with good legroom, but toe space is tight and headroom is not as generous as in the Sonata. Fit and finish is excellent in both cars, with nicely-textured plastics. Both camps cut costs by limiting the use of soft-touch plastic to surfaces you are likely to grab. The brushed metal trim in the Accord looks richer than the plastic trim in the Sonata (the tan interiors on both cars get unconvincing wood trim). Drivers of both cars benefit from a thickly-padded, adjustable armrest with dual storage compartments. The Sonata's steering wheel and shifter are laced up in leather, the Accord's make do with plastic. The Sonata's interior was free of rattles and squeaks, while the Accord suffered from one rattle coming from the passenger side. Controls and gauges were generally good on both cars, with the Sonata's being marred by two cheap-looking plastic knobs on the radio and the Accord's by an overly-complex design for the HVAC and radio controls.

    The winner of Round 8: The Challenger--Hyundai Sonata!

    Round 9: Ride

    The Sonata glides smoothly over all but the biggest bumps. It has lost all traces of the floatiness of the previous Sonata. Large bumps such as railroad crossings elicit sharp but controlled kicks. The Accord's ride is noticeably firmer, and passengers can feel even small road imperfections. However, the ride is never harsh.

    The winner of Round 9: it's the Hyundai Sonata again!!

    Howard, I can see growing concern in the Champion's corner. If the Champ is going to mount a comeback in this contest, it had better be soon!
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Round 10: Handling

    The Challenger's handling is pleasant, and it negotiates sharp corners and cloverleafs at super-legal speeds without complaint or drama. The car feels surefooted and safe. There is a hint of body lean on tight corners conducted at high speeds, to remind you that this is a family sedan, not a sports sedan. In contrast, the Accord's handling is as close to a sports sedan as a family sedan can get; its body stays flat even in sharp turns, and its nicely-weighted steering is a joy to use.

    The winner of Round 10: The Champion--the Honda Accord!!!

    A big win for the Champion! Now let's see if he can continue to take the fight to his upstart opponent...

    Round 11: Performance

    The power of these fighters is roughly the same. However, the Accord's DOHC 4-cylinder engine seems a little more eager and also smoother than the Sonata's. Both cars have plenty of power when floored. The automatic transmissions (4-speed on the Sonata, 5 on the Accord) shift smoothly in general. There was a half-second pause on a couple of full-throttle downshifts on the Sonata. The Sonata does have the flexibility of a SHIFTRONIC manumatic shifter, which drops back to first gear when stopping. The Sonata and Accord have equal EPA fuel economy ratings, and the Accord has a small advantage on the highway (34 vs. 33 mpg).

    The winner for Round 11: The Honda Accord!!

    Round 12: NVH

    The Sonata's cabin is very quiet, with only a growl from the engine when accelerating hard and some wind noise around the mirrors at highway speed (albeit on a windy day) intruding. The Accord's engine is a little quieter when pressed, but there is constant tire noise from the 16" Michelins. Otherwise, the Accord's interior is hushed.

    The winner of Round 12: The Challenger wins again--the Hyundai Sonata!

    Round 13: Safety

    The Sonata came ready to tangle in this round. Its standard safety equipment is the best of any car in its class: ABS with EBD, traction control, Electronic Stability Control, six airbags including side curtains, and active front head restraints. The Accord, however, fights back with a full complement of airbags and curtains and standard ABS. It also has a solid record in previous fights, with great results in the NHTSA and IIHS bouts.

    The winner of Round 13: The Hyundai Sonata!!

    We're getting down to the finish, Howard. Can the Champion come back against this surprising young contender from Korea?? Just two rounds left!

    Round 14: Reliability and Resale Value

    The Sonata is a new design and has no reliability or resale record. The last-generation Sonata made a reputation in its last few years of good reliability, but its resale value was low compared to the best in the family car class. The Accord has a solid record for long-term reliability plus excellent resale value.

    The winner of Round 14: No contest--the Honda Accord!

    Round 15: Warranty

    The Accord came into this final round gunning for a knockout. But wait... what is this? The Sonata delivers a solid blow to the body: a 5-year, 60,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty including roadside protection. The Accord counters with its 3-year, 36,000 mile guarantee but it's not nearly enough, ladies and gentlemen. Oh, and here is another slam by the Challenger--a ten-year, 100,000 mile powertrain warranty! The Champion is staggered!! Can he recover??? Wait--there's the bell! This fight is over, ladies and gentlemen--who will emerge the winner??
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Lay-deeeez and gentlemen! The final score of this fight for Family Car Champion of the World is:

    2006 Hyundai Sonata GLS: 9
    2005 Honda Accord EX: 5
    Draw: 1

    The winner, and NEW Family Car Cham-peeee-on of the World: the 2006 Hyundai Sonata!!

    That's it, there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. The brash challenger from Korea has pulled off a huge upset victory here tonight. Down in the ring, the former Champion is already talking about a rematch as early as this fall, when he claims he will be back, better than ever, and ready to re-take the title. But who knows, perhaps the other challengers such as the Camry from Kentucky, the Altima from Tennessee, or the Mazda6 from Michigan will demand a shot against the new Champion. Can the new Sonata fend off these determined challengers? It's very hard to stay on top in this business.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Correction in Round 11--it should have said the Sonata and Accord have equal city EPA ratings (24).

    Also, I got the rounds messed up in composing this dissertation, so there were in fact only 14 rounds and the final score was 9 to 4 with 1 draw. :blush:
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles