Karl's Daily Log Book

editor_karl · May 2005

I just thought that was amazing, from a vehicle much, much larger, heavier, bigger inside, and 10 grand less. Any comments?

The SRT-8 is an amazing vehicle. The single biggest surprise is how well it handles, as the car's appearance, curb weight and ride quality suggest a cumbersome behavior on twisty roads. Not true! When I took it on my favorite driving route the car floored me with its near BMW-like handling demeanor.

For the record, small differences in slalom speed represent large differences in actual handling behavior. For instance, even an SUV might get as high as 62 or 63 mph, where a full-on sports sedan, like the new 3 Series, would probably score around 68. It's only 5 mph, but it represents a wide gulf in performance regarding the average speed through a 600-foot slalom.

That said, the SRT-8 is a hell of a car, and for anyone wanting near 3 Series/5 Series driving dynamics for less money (and with far more interior space) the Chrysler represents a great buy.

blueguydotcom · May 2005

That said, the SRT-8 is a hell of a car, and for anyone wanting near 3 Series/5 Series driving dynamics for less money (and with far more interior space) the Chrysler represents a great buy.

The 300C SRT-8 with moonroof and gas guzzler tax has an MSRP of 43.5k!

An e90 330i with sport, leather (xenons, moon are standard), and metallic paint is $40,500. You can order it ED to save 4-5k; BMWCCA membership is another $500 off. Regardless, even at sticker it's $3000 cheaper than a SRT-8. And it gets 30 mpg on the freeway (easily). Better mileage and 4 years free maintenance too.

Where's the cheaper part come into this?

kevm14 · May 2005

For the record, small differences in slalom speed represent large differences in actual handling behavior. For instance, even an SUV might get as high as 62 or 63 mph, where a full-on sports sedan, like the new 3 Series, would probably score around 68. It's only 5 mph, but it represents a wide gulf in performance regarding the average speed through a 600-foot slalom.

I agree that small differences translate into noticable differences on the road, but I don't agree that an SUV is going to be in the 60s. According to some stats I dug out, you managed 62.6 out of a 2001 Z06! I have driven a 2001 Z06 - it's a fine handling machine. Even a 2002 WRX managed 64.5. To refresh others, these are being compared to the SRT-8's 65.2mph. Typically big, heavy cars may be capable of high lateral acceleration, but show their weight in the slalom. That's why I'm making a big deal out of this, because the car appears to be slaloming with much smaller, lighter, more dedicated sports cars.
Were there slalom course differences in years past?

210delray · May 2005

A funny thing happened on the way to buying a G35...on a test drive of the 6 speed the back of the car lifted off the ground on a corner while cresting a hill at 80 mph. My stomach came out of my throat and my search continued for a car in the class.

Call me an old fart or a stick-in-the-mud, but driving a car on a what I assume is a 2-lane road at 80 mph on curve/hillcrest is irresponsible if not reckless. Plus this is a test drive, so you're not even familiar yet with the car.

How would you have felt if you had lost control and killed someone in an oncomng car?

kyfdx · May 2005

Okay.. you asked for it..

Old fart

blueguydotcom · May 2005

210,

I have no desire to justify my driving style, skill level or familiarity with the area. No point in defending something I did 2 years ago. Furthermore, the conversation would be moot as you obviously feel you're right and I was in the wrong.

Have a good day,

denver5357 · May 2005

Karl, our family wants to trade in a 2001 Pathfinder LE and its premium fuel for something smaller that will get better mileage, have AWD or 4WD, let us fold down the back seats if need be or otherwise carry two small children back there. And we are hoping for something that is $20K or so. I was pondering the Toyota Matrix but wondered what you thought? We want to keep the car 10 yearas or more. Thanks.

bigdaddycoats · May 2005

Karl -

I noticed in the 2006 Saab 9-3 Aero first drive -

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=105710

that Saab estimates 0-60 times for the auto at 7.9 sec.

Edmunds pulled off a 0-60 time of 8.1 sec. with an auto on the Linear models.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=79822/pageId=36085

I find the numbers with the new turbo 2.8 to be very disappointing. With 250hp and 285 lb-ft of torque I would have expected better times.

Not that you know, but doesn't this seem like not much of an improvement???

mirth · May 2005

...I'm sure Car and Driver could do better by destroying the clutch, but in terms on real-world acceleration that sounds about right. It's about what my Maxima does, and it's a FWD with 255HP.

editor_karl · May 2005

I should have been more specific.

The first comment regarding the SRT-8 versus BMW referred specifically to the car's performance and how close it was to the M3.

From post 611 So I looked up some numbers for sporty cars and discovered that this slalom speed is within 1.4mph of an M3!!! And it was better in 60-0 braking. It even had a 1/4 mile trap speed within 0.3mph (which is useful for comparing power to weight ratios).

So my response was basically "yes, the SRT-8 does almost equate to the M3 in terms of performance, and it does so for less money." It also offers greater interior and trunk space, more comfortable rear seating, and a look that, at least right now, it considered pretty cool.

But I digress. When I said, "near 3/5 Series driving dynamics" I meant exactly that -- driving dynamics. Gas mileage and service contract length were not part of my comment or my point. The 3 Series (non M3) is certainly cheaper...though not by much if you load it up. And the 5 Series is definitely more expensive than an SRT-8 (I guess a stripped 525 starts at a lower price, and how many leave the showroom for under $45K?). And the SRT-8 will smoke either of those vehicles in every performance category. You have to go "M" from BMW to catch the SRT-8, and going "M" will cost you more.

That said, I'm still a huge BMW fan and realize that while the SRT-8 is in the same zip code as a 3 or 5 Series in terms of driving dynamics, it's not on the same block (especially with the new 3 Series, which is astonishing, even by BMW standards).

editor_karl · May 2005

I agree that small differences translate into noticable differences on the road, but I don't agree that an SUV is going to be in the 60s.

Again, I should have been more specific. A performance SUV will get into the low 60s. For example:
2004 Porsche Cayenne full test:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=101078/pageId=57549
Slalom speed: 63.5

2005 BMW X5 4.6ix Follow-Up test:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Followup/articleId=105185
Slalom speed: 62.3

There was no variation in the slalom set-up between the Z06, WRX and SRT-8, but the Z06 and WRX were slalomed by our former road test coordinator. He was good and...well, I'm not prepared to say I'm better, but I did get the SRT-8 through quicker. Seriously, I credit that speed more to the car's abilities than mine. As I said in my road test, once I drove the car on my favorite set of twisties I realized that Chrysler (or should I say Mercedes, since it's really an E-Class platform?) definitely nailed the suspension tuning, thus making it handle like a much smaller/lighter car.

blueguydotcom · May 2005

That said, I'm still a huge BMW fan and realize that while the SRT-8 is in the same zip code as a 3 or 5 Series in terms of driving dynamics, it's not on the same block (especially with the new 3 Series, which is astonishing, even by BMW standards).

Gotcha. My bad for not getting you meant M3 levels of performance.

And yes, the e90 was eye opening for me. If everything goes as planned, I hope to replace my e46 330i performance package with a e90 sports package. I felt so at home behind the wheel of the test car I briefly considered absconding with it. But Jim, my SA, knows where I live.

1487 · May 2005

KArl:

Are you guys going to test a G6 GTP with 6 speed manual anytime soon? It always seems like you guys take a while to test GM products. Is that because you have no control over when you get the test cars or is that because interest in their products is so low there is no rush to test them?

carlisimo · May 2005

I drove my sister's boyfriend's pretty new WRX STi. He's in high school, I just got my masters' in structural engineering from Berkeley last week, and his car cost 100 times what mine did. I will soon do something about that (gonna wait a few months though, I have some more important things to do first). But anyway, here are the impressions that an STi gives someone who's never driven a "nice" car. Can't wait to read what Karl has to say in his upcoming comparo.

(This isn't "review style"... more of how my thoughts were flowing throughout the experience.)

It's huge! Feels like a tank. You sit very high up and you see and feel its bulk all around you. The hood scoop and box wing add a lot to that feeling, but I'm immature enough to love them (especially the scoop, though the wing fits the car better than the low WRX wing, and balances out the scoop).

The AC blows very cold - too cold, on whatever setting my sister's boyfriend had it on. The stereo's very good at the lower volumes that I had it on. The seats are pleasantly firm and kinda big (I'm 5' 6"). I reach for the pedals and they quickly notice how little wiggle room there is down there... any heel-and-toeing will have to be done without actually using my toes and heel (I'm shoe size 10). I try the clutch and the gearshift... and I can't find 5th and 6th. I've never actually HAD a 5th and 6th gear before, but this shifter doesn't help. I honestly didn't like it, the lever never slid right in to any gear.

Then I turned it on backed out. Woah! This is what power steering feels like! The STi has a very fast steering ratio, which takes me some getting used to. How are you supposed to feel anything this way? I take a sharp but clear turn at 25mph - unsettling in my Sentra. The car just turns, and that was kinda boring. I pick another turn that's safe to take quickly and do so, and hey, no problems. I get the feeling that I'll only hear tire squeal once it's too late and I'm rolling over into a house at 60mph... not gonna try it. There's no good place for me to try to show myself what makes AWD feel different from FWD, other than the increased grip (which the tires and suspension could explain anyway).

Meanwhile I notice that on these suburban roads, the ride is quite smooth. The bumps in the road aren't hidden from you, but the car doesn't crash around on them. My passengers have been putting up with worse for years - this would be a big step up. But there's something rattling from the passenger door/mirror/wiper area, and I hear a clunk from the middle of the car (behind me) sometimes when I shift. The differential? It's not a reassuring sound. Meanwhile the engine noise is perfect. Loud when you want it, quiet when you shift up. And you can shift up one extra and still have enough power.

Finally I reach an open road with a 45mph speed limit. First thing I want to experience is turbo lag, so I shift to 4th gear at 25mph and hit the throttle. Normal acceleration... normal acceleration... hey it's going faster... woah it's really going now! It was a smoother transition than I expected, even when I tried feeling turbo lag in other situations. It's surprisingly very similar to when I come out of a stop in 1st gear with my Sentra... nothing initially then it pulls.

I turn around and take it from 5 to 50 pretty quickly, but without redlining. Oh. My. Gods. No wonder people like drag racing! It's more fun than when an airliner takes off! I push the intercooler sprayer just to feel cool. And I do.

The End.

Overall it was awesome, but when I got into my bucket o' bolts later and drove to the market, I had a newfound appreciation for it. I like sitting low - when I was little all my daydreams were of flying just above the clouds or strafing the battlefields in a Messerschmitt Bf 109, and I think that established my desires in a car. Experiencing g's in a turn is fun, but so's the feeling that your angle of attack is too aggressive and you're going to stall (in the aviation sense of the word). I guess I liken that to understeer, which is only a challenge if you can get there without reaching vehicular-manslaughter speeds. And that STi was just so darn big.

So now I know for sure that I'm not the same kind of drive as the guys writing Sport Compact Car, or maybe even edmunds.com. I think the perfect car for me would be an early-90s base Civic (no power steering) with a Civic type-R engine and transmission swap. Tercels and Civics without power steering have much better steering than my Sentra, and better transmissions too. The Tercel has some other downsides that the Civic CX from that era dealt with better. Unfortunately I'm reaching that point in my life where safety is moving up to Priority Number Two (up from Three or Four) so I don't think I'd actually do that.

Sorry about all the autobiographical stuff; didn't know where else to put it :P . I just don't think I'll be here quite so often now that I'm out of school... going to Taiwan for two weeks, then going up and down Cali for a month, then I start my real job. In any case I will be back in two weeks, even if it becomes only occasional. (You don't all write here when you're at work, right?)

denver5357 · May 2005

Are my posts visible only to me? Seriously. I have asked twice in a month in this thread for advice from Karl (and expected anyone else to chime in) on a car that fits specific needs for our family, and while I see post after post about mundane technical details regarding acceleration and other specs for "performance cars" there are no answers to my post. So am I the only one who can see them? Is there a policy about avoiding posts asking for advice, even if it is simply asking for various alternatives? Maybe this thread should be called "Performance cars blog by Karl"?

bryan · May 2005

I can read your post, so no, I don't think you are invisible :shades: You might want to post your question on another Edmund's thread called "Any Questions for A Car Dealer". There is also one called "Chronic Car Buyers Anonymous". Folks on both sides of the car buying process will weigh in on this type of question. I've never seen a shortage of opinions in either of these threads.

seminole_kev · May 2005

well I'm pretty literal, so if you asked for Karl's advice, I'm not going to chime in.

I'd say the Pontiac Vibe/Toyota Matrix would be a good choice for mileage concerns.

Also the Subaru Impreza and Honda Element come to mind as possibly being able to fit your criteria. Oh, I think Suzuki's little hatchback is available in AWD as well. Sorry, I'm not a big AWD fan so I tend not to keep up on which cars have it.

graphicguy · May 2005

OK....here goes.

Can't add much to what's already been recommended. RAV4 ( don't know if you can get one under $20K, though....check with TMV here at Edmunds). Element is another possibility.

I've got a Vibe that I use for "daily duty". It's not AWD or 4WD, though. While it's perfect for what I use it for, my understanding is that the added weight of AWD does nothing for already sluggish acceleration. That said, my FWD model is comfy, handles well (for what it is....a small wagon), and gets good MPG. Back seats fold down for hauling bigger stuff. The Matrix is a virtual twin with the exception of some styling cues. After rebates last year (mine's an '04 model), I got one all loaded up with sunroof, upgraded stereo, power everything, alloy wheels, cruise, etc for about $15K. For that kind of money, I considered it a raging bargain and it was cheaper than a Matrix that had less equipment.

If you aren't all hung up about AWD or 4WD, I'd also take a look at a Scion xB. Those are well equipped....has good roominess and gets good MPG, too. Price is certainly a draw (less than $15K).

You might want to look at a Ford Escape, too. You should be able to get relatively close to $20K with any incentives and some bargaining. I think it's Mazda twin, the Tribute, might have more incentives than the Escape. Plus, Mazda offers a longer warranty.

You can research all of the above here at Edmunds....including reviews and pricing.

The research of the above should tell you volumes to help you narrow down your choices and give you a better understanding of what can/can't be had at your price point.

blueguydotcom · May 2005

Congrats on school. As for cars and the "low slung" feeling, I understand where you're coming from. Many of today's newer cars have an odd seating position that's more La-z-boy level than F1 racer. One newer car that might appeal to your low, under the radar approach: RSX S-type. They're pretty cheap, have great power, you sit snug and low and the car flat out handles. The old Celica was similar and the new Scion TC kinda approaches that too - a supercharger kit will liven one of those up fast. VW's upcoming GTI also offers a kinda low, boy-racer position and it'll spring to 60 in the mid 6s.

If RWD is to your liking, two makes spring to mind. Lexus IS300 is all about low, fast, quick, driver-centric car design. It'll last forever, even used ones are kinda pricey and the car is all about boy racer fun. They're also pretty tunable as your post suggests you like the idea of modding. I also suggest you try an e36, e46 or e90 3 series. Those who haven't driven them often don't "get" that the car and the seating position are much more sports car than sedan. You don't sit high in an e46 like one does in say a G35 or even an Imprezza STi. Used e36s can be a bargain and now that e90s are out, the e46's value is tanking. Take'em for a spin and don't worry about the BMW stigma. Once you can get past that, you just might find ya like it.

navigator89 · May 2005

response to post 622

You say you want to trade in a 2001 Nissan Pathfinder LE for a smaller vehicle that has the ability to fold the back seats and seat two children? Fortunately there are many choices out there for you, and I'll be happy to recommend my personal picks.

1) Honda Element - If you want some really cool styling, along with some really cool options, just go ahead and get this vehicle. It can seat 4, carrys bikes, and it's seats are made of a special material so they don't dirty. If you don't like they styling, then move on to another one of my picks.

2) Mitsubishi Outlander - A small SUV loaded with features, but the brakes are weak and the engine isn't as strong as the others

3) Toyota Matrrix/Pontiac Vibe - Small wagons, with the option of AWD, and satellite radio, plus excellent cargo room

4) Ford Escape - It has a hybrid version too, and it's engine and interior should please you

5) Honda CRV - Looks really boring, but the engine is refined, and the build quality is good

6) Hyundai Tucson/Kia Sportage - Low base prices, available stability control, good engines and nice interiors

Hope this helps. The segment that you are shopping has a lot of choices thankfully. If your brand loyalty is with Nissan however, try the Xterra, which offers class leading power and pff road skills.

jchan2 · May 2005

I have a few to add:

In addition to what other posters have said so far, I'm going to add:

2004 CPO Toyota Sienna LE AWD (I don't know how much they are, but they provide plenty of room, reliability and AWD)

Saturn VUE AWD- The prices are non-negotiable, and I don't think you can get even a stick-shift, stripped FWD model for under $20,000, but test drive it anyways and look at the CPO ones.

Jeep Liberty Sport 4WD- if you don't mind a very truck like ride, this could be something to check out.

kevm14 · May 2005

You have to go "M" from BMW to catch the SRT-8, and going "M" will cost you more.

Yeah, and in the case of the E39 M5, which can at least be considered in the same class as the SRT-8 (compared to the E46 M3), nearly twice as much.

What about the SRT-8 makes it not on the same block as BMWs? Not that I expect it to feel like a BMW, or even want it to, but could you try to quantify or at least qualify that? Would you say it goes about its business in a less refined way? Camaro vs Corvette?

I couldn't find any slalom specs for the regular 300C. I was wondering how much better the SRT-8 is at the standard performance tests.

kevm14 · May 2005

There was no variation in the slalom set-up between the Z06, WRX and SRT-8, but the Z06 and WRX were slalomed by our former road test coordinator.

Those Bavarian SUVs certainly turn in good performance for something so tall. But who ran the M3 I was comparing to? I assume the previous road test coordinator. What are some cars you've tested that compare to the SRT-8's slalom speed? Any chance you will add lateral acceleration tests to the existing battery?

Sorry to be so one-vehicle-minded...I just hope the resale value of these is terrible, so I can afford one in a few years. Something tells me they'll maintain value.

explorerx4 · May 2005

do you think the srt-8 will be available at msrp, considering it's a low volume item?

rayainsw · May 2005

Glad to see you reading and responding here . .

You mentioned a number of posts back that you had developed over time some insight into evaluating the interior materials quality  based on experience with many test cars.

Would you share what you now look for and how you evaluate inter quality of materials, fit and finish?

Thanks,
- Ray
Looking at a $30K MSRP car  and not expecting $50K worth of interior, but . . .

kurtamaxxguy · May 2005

...will be interesting, Karl, to see how this Dodge Charger version compares with the Chrysler SRT8.

Also, when do you folks at Edmunds plan to test the Pontiac Solstice?

blueguydotcom · May 2005

Solstice is delayed supposedly over quality control issues (big shock). I'd bet they're not gonna get their hands on one for quite awhile. Ditto consumers.

navigator89 · May 2005

Editor Karl,

It's been a while since I posted this, but WHEN do you guys plan on doing a road test of the Chevrolet Cobalt sedan? It's been out for almost 6 months and you guys still haven't tested it????!!!!!!!

Testing exotic cars like the 2006 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti is nice, but remember the average guys out there who can only afford Cobalt like cars.

Last time I made this post, you sent me a link to the Cobalt SS test. I want a sedan test, not the SS coupe.

denver5357 · May 2005

Thanks to everyone for responding! Lots of great advice and a few models I had not considered. I feel visible again!

nortsr1 · May 2005

Go to Cars.com, click on "Reviews" then, Chevrolet, then Cobalt. There is a full automotive review at that site. Hope this helps.You can also try "Motortrend.com" or several of the other automobile magazine websites.Also, go to Google and type in Chevrolet Cobalt.

editor_karl · May 2005

I want to second Denver's "thanks" as it was not my intention to ignore him and I certainly appreicate the "back-up" support you all provided.

Between my schedule and the level of activity in this discussion I can't always get to every question, but I will try.

Thanks again.

editor_karl · May 2005

FYI, we've got a Cobalt sedan on the schedule for July 14, so a road test will be forthcoming.

editor_karl · May 2005

Are you guys going to test a G6 GTP with 6 speed manual anytime soon? It always seems like you guys take a while to test GM products. Is that because you have no control over when you get the test cars or is that because interest in their products is so low there is no rush to test them?

A GTP will be arriving June 6. GM has seriously reduced their press fleet vehicles in recent years, making it a challenge for us (and every automotive publication) to get vehicles for testing.

editor_karl · May 2005

What about the SRT-8 makes it not on the same block as BMWs? Not that I expect it to feel like a BMW, or even want it to, but could you try to quantify or at least qualify that? Would you say it goes about its business in a less refined way? Camaro vs Corvette?
I'm going to sound like a broken record, but steering feel is the key element that even the SRT-8 can't match when going up against a BMW. Weighting isn't bad on the SRT-8, and there's certainly no "slop" but there's an intuitive quality about the 3 Series' steering that's hard to quantify...yet impossible to deny for anyone who's driven a 3. BTW, I'm not as big of a fan of the new 5 Series' steering because the "active" element detracts from ultimate feel IMHO. Thank god the new M5 is foregoing active steering (which is also rather telling, if you ask me...).

One more BTW -- the all-new 3 Series is friggin phenomenal. I've been trying to write a detailed post since driving one last week, but haven't gotten to it yet. I'll try to make it happen now, as I drove that new 3 against the revised A4, back-to-back, at our testing facility. Very interesting...

I couldn't find any slalom specs for the regular 300C. I was wondering how much better the SRT-8 is at the standard performance tests.
We couldn't use our testing facility when we had a 300C last August, but we did instrumented testing on a 300 as part of our Full-Size Sedan comparison test:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=105147

In that test a 300 Limited ran a 57.2. I'm guessing a 300C might pull that speed up to around 59 or even 60, but I'd have to test one to be sure.

editor_karl · May 2005

Those Bavarian SUVs certainly turn in good performance for something so tall. But who ran the M3 I was comparing to? I assume the previous road test coordinator. What are some cars you've tested that compare to the SRT-8's slalom speed? Any chance you will add lateral acceleration tests to the existing battery?

It was the previous road test coordinator that drove the M3 you referenced. Last week the 2006 BMW 3 Series pulled a 66.4 and the revised 2005 A4 pulled a 64.6.

We've actually been testing lateral G's for a few months now, but haven't made the programming changes to display the data on our Performance & Specs pages...yet. Look for that change to happen soon. FYI, we didn't test lateral Gs on the SRT-8 (ironically, it was the last vehicle tested at our old facility, where we couldn't create a skidpad

).

editor_karl · May 2005

do you think the srt-8 will be available at msrp, considering it's a low volume item?

Probably not, and not just because of the limited volume. While low production is the single most critical factor in dealer gouging, the other element is what the market will bare. Because the SRT-8 offers near E55/M5 performance for just over $40,000, that will drive up the price, too.

It's like the Ford GT issue. Beyond being a relatively limited production vehicle, it also offers F430/Gallardo slaying performance for $40,000 less (at MSRP) so the price is being cranked by dealers. However, production numbers on that car will, eventually, be pretty high (at over 3,500 units) so the gouging can't last...

editor_karl · May 2005

Would you share what you now look for and how you evaluate inter quality of materials, fit and finish?

OK, giving away trade secrets here, but what the hey...

First, I have developed my own, propriety "ring test." This involves tapping my wedding ring on nearly every interior panel. If I hear nothing, or a very muted "thump-thump-thump" then I know the material is at least moderately soft touch (which is generally preferable to most people). If I hear a loud "click-click-click" then I know it's basic, hard plastic, and that the automaker "cheaped-out" when specifying the quality of those interior panels to the supplier.

Second, I look for seams in the "metallic plastic" pieces that are supposed to pass for metal. If the automaker (and the supplier) is good, they hide the seems on the underside of things like the interior door releases and shifter. And if they're really good (Audi A3, Porsche Cayenne, etc.), they don't have any seams at all and they have a certain texture to them that make it tricky to distinguish the plastic from real metal (at which point I resort to temperature checking, as metal will almost always be cooler to the touch -- or hotter if it's a hot day). And sometimes, surprise surprise, it really is metal. Woo-hoo!

Third, I check for gaps between panels. The biggest culprit is the dash-to-door-panel gap at the front doors. It is far too common (on certain brands) for the gap between the driver's side of the dash and the driver's door panel (when the door is shut) to be larger or smaller than the passenger's side. How do you know for sure? Just stick your finger in the gap area (choose finger based on gap size) and then stick the same finger in the gap on the other side. It can be tough to tell small differences, which is exactly how it should be, but you might be surprised at how often the difference is striking (i.e. you can barely get your fingertip in on one side, and you can almost stick your entire hand in on the other...).

Fourth, I make a general inspection of panel edges (looking for flashing along non "metallic plastic" pieces as well, and making sure the edges aren't sharp), the headliner (is it soft and smooth, or does it feel like a smashed styrofoam cup and have fraying pieces?), and the carpet (plush and flat, or fraying and pushing up from the floor at random locations?).

Finally, I check the switchgear. Does it move with a weighty, confident demeanor or is it clickity-clackity? Also, are the icons large and easy to read or small and confusing?

These are the biggies. There are more details but that's the jest of my process.

1487 · May 2005

Karl:

Do you feel that too much importance has been placed on interior plastic quality when it has no bearing on how reliable a car will be? I have written to Edmunds before after reading certain road tests because it bothers me that automotive writers pretend there is a correlation between material quality and durability. Generally German cars are thought of as well engineered and well built primarily because of their interiors and the way their doors close. However, survey after survery show that the big German 3 are not building cars as reliable as the Americans and Japanese cars on the market. While I admire the thoroughness of your interior evaluation, I do think that the press had gotten carried away in terms of placing importance on interior quality. For one thing, I don't know that interior quality can be judged objectively because I have been in several import cars that are lacking in terms of quality but I have never read any criticisms of those cars in the press. If a car has a nice interior it can do no wrong in spite of its other flaws. A perfect example of that is the Jetta. The Jetta is completely behind the competition when it comes to styling, power handling, etc. but all the press seems be able to say about it is that it's interior is class leading. Personally, I am not going to buy a dull, underpowered car just so I can cuddle up in its quality plastics and for true driving enthusiasts power and styling come first. When it comes to "domestic" cars it seems that "cheap" interiors are a sign of how poorly the car will hold up in the long term. When it comes to European cars it seems that the high quality interiors are suggesting just the opposite when we know the facts don't support that notion.

explorerx4 · May 2005

love your 'bio, i assume it's tongue-in-cheek. interior design/construction is a factor in choosing a vehicle, but i doubt if it's the only one. maybe it's just me.

editor_karl · May 2005

Do you feel that too much importance has been placed on interior plastic quality when it has no bearing on how reliable a car will be?

I think you're taking a few scattered cases and generalizing. First, you're suggesting that interior quality is somehow trumping the importance of long-term reliability across all automotive media. I can assure you right now that for some people, interior quality does matter far more than long-term reliability, and for other people (I suspect you are one of them) interior quality means almost nothing compared to reliability. Some people don't care about either and only focus on horsepower figures and zero-to-60 times (these people can't believe the Camaro died, even though it was bad at both interior quality and reliability). Then there are the fuel mileage people, who think anything than can't average more than 30 mpg should be put out to pasture immediately.

The point is that all of these areas are important to somebody, even if not every area is important to everybody. At Edmunds we dig into all of them and call out the strengths and weaknesses. You mentioned the Jetta having a good interior but being weak everywhere else. I couldn't agree more, and if you read our recent road test you'll see that exact opinion stated regarding the car:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=105254

For one thing, I don't know that interior quality can be judged objectively because I have been in several import cars that are lacking in terms of quality but I have never read any criticisms of those cars in the press.

You need to read our reviews more carefully. Almost every Nissan we've driven over the past three years has been hammered for its cheap interior:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=100347
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=101056/pageId=57506
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=104774/pageId=62737

It sounds like you may be assuming that poor interior ratings are the entire reason that certain (mostly domestic) vehicles get consistently poor ratings from the press. For me, it's the poor interior quality...plus the often archaic engine designs (Ford 500), the high NVH (almost every domestic midsize and compact sedan), and the preponderance of recall notices and mechanical failures (and the resultant low residual values) that hurts so many domestic models in my mind. True, the interiors are often faulted for looking and feeling cheap, but that's just one aspect of why domestic cars may fare poorly in automotive reviews (obviously I'm speaking in generalities here, so all of you out there driving a Ford/Chevy/Dodge XYZ can just settle down; I know each domestic maker has at least a few strong products -- but residual values and recall notices don't lie, and generally the domestics continue to do poorly in these areas).

Also, with regard to European mechanical problems, there's no denying that in recent years manufacturers like Mercedes, Volkswagen and BMW have fallen down somewhat, but the key phrase here is in recent years. They don't have a 30-year history of trying to play catch-up in this area. Furthermore, after bottoming out a couple years ago, BMW, Mercedes and Volkswagen are already showing signs of improvement. And even at their worst they were still approximately in the same area as the domestics with regard to reliability ratings.

In the end, for a lot of people, a superb ride quality, exceptional handling and plush interior materials count for a lot. Even enough to overlook reliability issues. At least the Europeans had three out of four going for them...even when they were at their worst.

nitromax · May 2005

Karl: You need to read our reviews more carefully. Almost every Nissan we've driven over the past three years has been hammered for its cheap interior:

I know that I was all excited about the new Nissan Altima back in 2001 and then I finally got to test drive one. Loose carpeting, plastic seams on the door handles, hard plastic everywhere.
...it just felt cold and uninviting while sitting in it.

I ended up with an Acura RSX.....HUGE difference in interior materials, rubberized dash, split suede (or something resembling split suede ) on the CLOTH seats and also on the door panels.

Nissan has supposedly addressed these issues, but it's 2005 and it's a little late for me.

seminole_kev · May 2005

"plus the often archaic engine designs (Ford 500)"

Karl, could just be semantics, but I don't think I'd call the 3.0 Duratec V6 "archaic". Is the Ford 500 underpowered against many in the midsize or fullsize department?.....Certainly, but I don't see that motor as archaic.

Curious if you see that motor as installed in the Mazda 6 in the same light?

ford624 · May 2005

The Chrysler 300C SRT8 is certainly a awesome vehicle. When one considers a loaded 300C to the loaded 300C SRT8, its only about 5 or 6K more. Yet, when I went to the Normandan’s Chrysler Dealership and sat in their 2005 SRT8 yesterday, the salesman said that they would not take a penny less than the 15K mark-up. I talked with another dealer and he said I should jump on that deal, since 25K mark-up is common. If that is the case, how does Edmunds get a 2.5K mark-up? I wonder what the answer would be if someone asked the Department of Consumer Affairs about MSRP's and additional mark-ups on new non delivered vehicles? Could this be "Bait and Switch". Maybe I will just have to settle for a regular old 300C.

editor_karl · May 2005

Curious if you see that motor as installed in the Mazda 6 in the same light?

Nice try, but those engine aren't really the "same." In the Five-Hundred, the Duratec has no variable valve technology, in the Mazda 6 it does, plus a bunch of other subtle changes that I don't want to get into, but they exist. That's why the engine makes 220 horsepower in the 6, and only 203 in the Five-Hundred.

But, if you want to talk Mazda 6, ok. When I hop from the Mazda 6 into an Accord, Camry or Altima, yes, the Mazda 6 engine still doesn't feel as advanced, and the specs back it up. Two of the competitors offer more horsepower (Accord, Altima), all three offer more torque and superior acceleration, yet all three offer superior fuel mileage than the Mazda 6, too. Better performance and better fuel mileage? How is this possible?

Probably because even beyond the variable valve timing (all four engines offer that), the Honda, Toyota and Nissan have other features that make the engines even more advanced. I can tell you that, based purely on NVH and driving experience, I KNOW the Honda, Toyota and Nissan are more advanced (the Nissan doesn't have much of an NVH advantage, but it has a major performance advantage).

Regardless, all of these engines are far more advanced than the Five-Hundred's.

seminole_kev · May 2005

I could be mistaken, but doesn't the Mazda 6 call for premium gas while as installed in the 500 it calls for regular. Wouldn't that account for most of the HP increase right there? Also, I would be curious to see the torque curves for both motors as I'd suspect they would be darn close.

As far as MPG, well we both know that a lot more than just the engine go into that. Again, I'm not saying that this 3.0 is the most advanced motor on the face of the earth, just that "archaic" may be a little bit over the top.

rorr · May 2005

"I could be mistaken, but doesn't the Mazda 6 call for premium gas while as installed in the 500 it calls for regular."

According to Edmunds, the Mazda 6s (w/ the 220hp 3.0l V6) takes regular unleaded. Of the competing vehicles (Ford 500, Honda Accord V6, Nissan Altima V6, and Camry V6) only the Altima requires premium.

editor_karl · May 2005

The volume leaders in this ultra-competitve segment (Accord, Camry) have variable valves, an average of 225 horsepower and 216 lb-ft of torque.

The "all-new" Five-Hundred doesn't have variable valves, makes 203 horsepower and 207 lb-ft of torque.

Waaaay back in 2002 Nissan introduced the "all-new" Altima with 240 horsepower (and it weighs 300 pounds less than the Five-Hundred).

To me, this qualifies as archaic.

seminole_kev · May 2005

Thanks rorr, I wasn't for sure on that.

seminole_kev · May 2005

well jeez the Altima is a 3.5L, not 3.0 (and this is excluding the base motor comes with a, what 2.4-2.5L 4cyl) some how bore and stroke (sounds like a fun movie

) doesn't equate to being a technilogical advance........but I do generally prefer a larger engine.

Again, could just be semantics, but I think your beef is more that the Five Hundred is underpowered or undersized in motor, not that the motor is archaic. To me archaic (when refering to engine design) might be OHV, crude fuel injection systems, possibly single cams (although I would disagree with that) or possibly iron block (although it has its place). Again, probably semantics, but going by what the word archaic means, I just don't see it as applying here. However, I'm always willing to admit that I may not be on the right side of an argument.

savetheland · May 2005

Karl you have to consider costs. More advanced engines cost more, there is no free lunch. Imports have more advanced engines because anything V6 outside USA is considered as a luxury and people are ready to pay. Almost everybody in foreign countries drive I4s, and I4s with displacement that Americans wouldn't even consider.

The beauty of 500 or 300 is that they almost full size and do not cost a lot.

Karl's Daily Log Book

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles