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

Crossover SUV Comparison

1105106108110111142

Comments

  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    This forum has gotten so silly. It's stuck in a loop because a couple of people talk out of both sides of their mouth (ex: The CX-9 is not a CUV..then saying it's a great CUV).

    Congrats.

    You win.

    I'm removing this discussion from "My Watched Items," because when it comes to helping readers (and there are LOTS more readers than posters) compare crossovers, this forum fails completely.

    I'm out for now.
  • humblecoderhumblecoder Member Posts: 125
    thegraduate: Yours was probably the most intelligent, on-top post in awhile on here. This conversation has degenerated into "my CUV is better than yours". I think there are a few people on here who are purposefully "trolling" and rather than just ignoring them, others are just "feeding the trolls".

    My advice to everyone is to stop responding to these trolls. Like all attention seekers, they'll go away when they are being ignored.

    To keep this post on topic, I'll throw in some positive thoughts, rather than negative ones....

    A crossover is a "mutt" in that it is a mixture of different breeds. Two vehicles which may seem different can still both be crossovers as long as they don't fall into the tradition car, truck, minivan category.

    When I was shopping for a "family" vehicle, there were so many different choices, which is a good thing. Each vehicle that I looked at had it's strengths and weaknesses. What I had to do was sift through all of them to see which vehicles strengths matched what I was looking for.

    In the end, I settled on the TX. The lambdas were a close second. They are fine vehicles in their own right. However there deciding factors were:

    1. I found that the TX had a much more sedan-like ride
    2. I didn't need 8 passenger capability, so I didn't need the extra space.
    3. Pricing on the TX was less than that of the lambdas. It seemed like GM gave you less flexibility in terms of options, whereas the TX allowed you to add most features that I wanted a la carte.
    4. TX had much better visibility.
    5. TX was Top Safety pick by IIHS. In fairness I don't think the lambdas had been tested, so maybe they'll be just as good.

    Anyway, those were my thoughts. Like someone else say, if you need the extra room, the lambdas can't be beat. Since I didnt need the extra space, the TX was fine. I was impressed by the lambdas MPG ratings, though. Considering it is a 5000 pound vehicle, the MPG is pretty darn good, and Ford isn't known for fuel efficiency.

    The bottom line is that the TX fit my needs the best. I'm sure every vehicle discussed here fits somebody's needs, so I certainly can't bash anyone for their choice of vehicle (unlike some people on here!).

    In closing, I am pleading with everyone to show some civility on here. There are lots of great choices out there, people. I don't think you can go wrong with any of them.
  • jimmy2xjimmy2x Member Posts: 124
    "In closing, I am pleading with everyone to show some civility on here. There are lots of great choices out there, people. I don't think you can go wrong with any of them."

    Could not agree more. Spent a good part of today at the Phily Auto Show and saw lots of people that were obviously in love with one vehicle or another. Just because I did not like some of them does not mean that they were a POS - to each his own. Some of us have specific needs that direct us to one over another. Having grown up in an era where many cars really WERE junk, its great too have so many good choices.
  • jigmasterjigmaster Member Posts: 32
    Agree 100%. Thats and better mpg was the reasons why I got TX as well. GMC can claim whatever numbers they like but real people tell different stories. And it is so funny how some of you call TX a big wagon and Acadia or Outlook SUV like. All cars with 3 row seats look like wagons to me ( maybe CX-9 is exception). To my understanding wagon means exactly what it means - wagon look appearance, doesn't matter what ground clearance is it in the end is not coupe, not hatchback, not sedan. What is the difference looking from the side at Acadia, Outlook, Veracruz, SRX and TX besides ground clearance? slightly rounded edges? LOL - they all are wagon alike.
  • barnstormer64barnstormer64 Member Posts: 1,106
    CUVsare suppossed to act like an SUV and have it's perks (like ground clearnce).

    Nope . . . if you want that, just get an SUV.
  • barnstormer64barnstormer64 Member Posts: 1,106
    So it should act like utility vehicle at least

    Wagons actually have a lot of utility. QED
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    The equinox was out years before the Edge. You could say it's outdated, but that's because it's time for a remodel.


    Ford has the Escape and the Edge, the former of which is the true competition for the Equinox. They still went in a different direction I say.

    Now it is, but in '04, there were no plans for the Flex (the Fairlane don't even exist) and Fors thought the Explorer was fine the way it was. FS wasn't just a spot filler in Ford's garage then.

    The same can be said for the Lambdas. GM was able to get them to market fast because the platform existed overseas. None of the 4 U.S. Lambdas existed in '04 either. Simply put, when the SUV craze died rather abruptly, GM decided to put their large CUVs to market whereas Ford decided to go with their mid-sized CUV first. We have seen Ford's full-size CUV and can buy one in a few months. However, we have not seen any GM competition for the Edge, Murano, etc. Are they planning anything else other than RWD V8 powered cars right now?

    I am mad at GM for that. But you have to admit at least it's 3 -er- 4 of a good vehicle unlike the G5. Ford has severalofferings like this. Did they really have to clone the Fusion twice?

    True. There are actually 3 Fusions if you count the MKZ. Future plans show that Ford may very well be trying to make Lincoln more of a world brand. What that means for Mercury, I don't know. But they have been leaving Mercury versions out of the mix for things like the Flex, MKS/next Taurus, etc. while making the Lincoln versions look nothing like the Ford versions. GM seems to be doing this with their family sedans right now so both seem to be catching on finally.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    hey baggs...I think you're wasting your time responding to that post...just smile and move on

    Yeah, I know. But the Maker's Mark made me do it! :P
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    I'm not knocking Volvo, my point is the ford have not design any new platform for past several years. It's using partner companies car platforms.

    Vad, Volvo is not partnered with Ford. Volvo is a brand within the Ford Motor Company. Mazda is not a partner either. Ford owns a controlling stake in Mazda and therefore makes the decisions for them. Fortunately Volvo and Mazda have some very talented engineers which makes the decision easy as to which parts to use from which division for each vehicle.
  • vad1819vad1819 Member Posts: 309
    What is it utility in your interpretation?
    Is a space inside, or seating high of the ground, or ability to pull heavy weight, 4 WD or AWD?
    My view on this ........ read my posts.
  • vad1819vad1819 Member Posts: 309
    Good. Finally. "Fortunately Volvo and Mazda have some very talented engineers".
    It's not a Ford engineers.
    So for past years, the Ford doesn't engineered anything.
    While GM has been done outstanding job to make new platform - Lambdas, that the most people hate in this forum.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    it's funny how the same poster can say that the TX & Acadia are within a few inches in size, yet te same poster will say one is a wagon and the other a "true" CUV?? So now the definition of CUV is that it can tow a boat...pretty funny

    I've always said the TX and Acadia are close in size. My main point for the TX being a station wagon is the car like groundclearance.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    like you, I've never said the lambda's weren't decent and capable, my biggest and only real gripe has been the weight. I have freely admitted any number of times GM really would have accomplished something much better if they had managed that aspect better simply bringing them in line with the competition as opposed to flying arrogantly in the face of such a major issue with mpg concerns being what they are at this point. A 4200lb lambda would be a much better vehicle on all fronts and could have beat the cx9 to the COY award quite easily.

    And I say GM has still accomplished something- a large CUV that gets good gas mileage while not sacrificing space. Sure lambdas would be better if they weighed 4200 lbs. The Highlander and VC would be too. As we see (being that these two midsize CUVs can't even wiegh that little) 4200 lbs is unrealistic. There is one vehicle discussed on this forum that is lighter than 4200 lbs. That's your all-star- the Ford Taurus X. It's good that it can accomplish that. But that's because all the TX is is a station wagon (a car- the Ford Taurus) with a raised roof for decent third row space. So GM made do in other areas to produce mpg numbers that are better than some of the smaller competition. And maybe next year GM is planning to take steps to shed a couple hundred lbs. Theres nothing wrong with that. Ford took 3 years to add power to the FS.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Nope . . . if you want that, just get an SUV.

    No- people want to sit up high. If they didn't, they'd be getting station wagons.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Ford has the Escape and the Edge, the former of which is the true competition for the Equinox. They still went in a different direction I say.

    You are somewhat right. GM did intend the Equiox to compete with the Escape, but the Equinox is bigger than even the Edge.And when it's redesigned, that's sqaurely the size Gm's aiming for.

    The same can be said for the Lambdas.

    No- the lambdas aren't marrked by slow sales, nor are they being replace by a different vehicle.

    However, we have not seen any GM competition for the Edge, Murano, etc. Are they planning anything else other than RWD V8 powered cars right now?

    I told you already- the Equinox! And when it is redesigned (I believe soon) it will have a third row and should compete sqaurely with the likes of Pilot VC and Highlander, too.

    There are actually 3 Fusions if you count the MKZ.

    I said they took the ford and cloned it twice. That would mean there are 3 versions. Mercury's future? It's pretty clear that there is none. I'd bet Mercury won't make it to 2012. Is Ford catching on? Barely- not nearly as fast as GM. GM gets it. They have separated their products and brands and don't put wierd unattractive grilles on everything they make. Sorry- back to the topic.
  • barnstormer64barnstormer64 Member Posts: 1,106
    What is it utility in your interpretation?
    Is a space inside, or seating high of the ground, or ability to pull heavy weight, 4 WD or AWD?
    My view on this ........ read my posts.


    Sounds like you want an SUV . . so why not just get one?

    If you can't see how a wagon has utility, then I can't help you. Hint: compare it to a sedan.
  • barnstormer64barnstormer64 Member Posts: 1,106
    No- people want to sit up high. If they didn't, they'd be getting station wagons.

    Apparently you've never sat in a Freestyle/Five Hundred (aka, new Taurus and Taurs X) ?

    I *do* sit higher in my Freestyle and Five Hundred. I used to own a Taurus and a Taurus wagon (the real Tauri, not the new ones LOL). So, I know first-hand that I'm sitting higher.

    I don't need higher ground clearance to do that. And I don't really *want* the ground clearance of an SUV . . . if I wanted that, I'd just get an SUV! I prefer to keep the car closer to the ground, to improve its handling as much as possible. Why on earth do I need extra ground clearance if I'm driving the danged things on the ROADS?
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    For the folks that are logic-challenged, try looking at it this way. The TX has a higher seating position than a normal car (eg, Malibu, Camry, Accord, etc), three rows of forward facing seating, and AWD. So it has some SUV, some car, and some minivan characteristics, therefore it's a CUV. A CUV is more than just a unibody SUV. That's why the Pilot is considered by Honda as an SUV. Nobody there is trying to call it a CUV.

    Of course people can cross-shop SUVs and CUVs, but that doesn't change their designation.

    One could argue that the lambdas are not CUVs, but simply a unibody SUV, since they don't have any car-like characteristics. The CX-9 handling and driving characteristics make it qualify for the car-like characteristics (probably why it's winning all the CUV awards). But we'll be generous and say that while the lamdas are really nothing more than a unibody SUV, we'll call them a CUV. :P
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    NO- most CUV's have SUV like groundclearance

    Exacly like you said, MOST but not ALL CUVs have SUV like ground clearnace. So you're saying that some CUVs do NOT have SUV clearance. The TX is a CUV in the "not ALL" category just like you said ;)
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Is there a Chrysler CUV coming?
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    the Journey - stay tuned, not sure how it's going to fare.
  • vad1819vad1819 Member Posts: 309
    Why do you think CUV should be car like? Is it because you have FS(car like)?
    I can say it can be van like or SUV like. Where did you get this statment, that the CUV is car like? I'll rather say van and SUV like.
    CUV is something between van and SUV.
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    as a few have noted, logic, rational explanation, and facts or any combination of the 3 are simply lost around here lately so in an effort to thwart the elegantly termed "loop" applying any of those three seems to be a waste of your time, i.e. a "feeding" time of sorts.

    this has more than made itself than apparant with the last round of posts before yours and barnstormers. there is simply no arguing, they are right and regardless of the facts or rational arguments otherwise it does not seem to matter. let them play in their sandbox and bask in each others insight into all things automotive as they apparantly seem to have it all figured out regardless of the many opinions and facts proving otherwise.

    As for Chrysler they are coming out with the Dodge Journey

    http://www.allpar.com/SUVs/dodge/journey.html?gclid=CMjOzsi7qJECFRF7IgodLmfiYQ

    as has been seen in the not to distant past around here.

    it lists it there with a base 4cylinder engine, wheelbase is only an inch longer than the FS/T-reX so it will be interesting to see how that works out.
  • mpuzachmpuzach Member Posts: 635
    Why is there so much time and energy being spent here arguing which "box" (SUV, CUV, station wagon) a particular model belongs in? In the overall scheme of things, does it really matter? Sorry guys, but I don't get it.
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    sort of a forum cycle thing, you hang around here long enough and if there are not enough "new" subjects to debate or "new" CUV news and you have to argue about something so it falls back to wars fought long ago just with some new and old player's.

    nothing really to get actually...
  • vad1819vad1819 Member Posts: 309
    I agree.
    About 5 years ago I was reading magazine, where for first time I read about CUV or crossover. That time they were defined as a station wagons or 5-door hatchbacks with truck-like characteristics such as elevated suspensions and upright seating.(FS, SRX) So, then 5 years later we got CUV's more look like a SUV's. So now it more SUV then station wagon.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Apparently you've never sat in a Freestyle/Five Hundred (aka, new Taurus and Taurs X) ? I *do* sit higher in my Freestyle and Five Hundred. I used to own a Taurus and a Taurus wagon (the real Tauri, not the new ones LOL). So, I know first-hand that I'm sitting higher.

    A friend had a Montego for a company vehicle, which I sat in many times (and when he ordered his Chevy Uplander, he had the option of a Taurus X- which I did want him to get more than the van). The Volvo XC70 sits higher than a conventional sedan, yet it's not a CUV. And in most CUVs you still get a little more seating height than in a TX.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The MDX is out - the Journey is in. Any Dodge fans out there?

    2009 Dodge Journey Crossover
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    A CUV is more than just a unibody SUV. That's why the Pilot is considered by Honda as an SUV. Nobody there is trying to call it a CUV.

    That statement makes no sense. The Pilot is a CUV. Honda just doesn't call it one because when it arrived on the market SUVs were still popular, and it was developed originally to compete with the likes of the Explorer.

    One could argue that the lambdas are not CUVs, but simply a unibody SUV, since they don't have any car-like characteristics.

    Except for carlike gas mileage and carlike driving. You just don't consider the lambdas ride as carlike because you drive what is basically a car (the FS).

    But we'll be generous and say that while the lamdas are really nothing more than a unibody SUV, we'll call them a CUV.

    And even though the TX is a wagon we will let it play because it has third row seating. ;)
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    wheelbase is only an inch longer than the FS/T-reX so it will be interesting to see how that works out.

    That's huge considering the Journey is 8 inches shorter than the FS. So third row room must not be that bad, but I know cargo space is disaml for the three row midsize CUV class.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    The MDX is out - the Journey is in. Any Dodge fans out there?

    Huh? MDX is out? And I'm a Charger/Challenger fan, but besides that(and the 300C), Chrysler has completely turned me off.
  • albookalbook Member Posts: 1,282
    Since there's nothing purposeful around here, I'm going to try a new discussion:

    Is the Flex a good replacement for the TX? I think the toys and gadgets are good fun and all, but I don't think I'd be willing to may 5-10g more for a TX. Also I think Fords new design language (shaving razor grille) may be too strong for some.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Huh? MDX is out?

    Well, we're easy - we could rotate out the Vue or the Acadia.... We only have 9 slots to work with in the topic categories.
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    ARE YOU CRAZY - the obvious choice is to take out the T-reX since it's OBVIOUSLY ONLY a wagon, I don't know what you guys were thinking INCLUDING it in the CUV forums, low ground clearance and lack of boat towing ability, dismiss it, stop the madness... he says with tounge firmly planted in cheek...
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Good idea.

    Since no two of us can agree on what the definition of a CUV is anyway, we can just remove all of them in the category. :P
  • ylzylz Member Posts: 45
    Hello all. I was interested in both the 2008 Subaru Tribeca and the 2008 Mazda CX 7 and I have test drove both several times. I just keep coming back to the Tribeca. I mean, it's not even close. The acceleration is great on both cars but the CX 7 is way too noisy even at 50 mph. The Tribeca is a smooth ride, very comfortable, predictable, and yet has sufficient passing power. The only thing the CX 7 does better is handle around curves but the Tribeca is no slouch in this either. And as far as the interior goes, I love the Tribeca's swoopy dashboard, makes me feel like I'm in a cockpit or something. I will say the CX 7 has a nice sporty interior but the leather is not as quality as I would like. And the exterior looks I would have to give to the CX7 for it's futuristic thing its got going on. But I feel that the Tribeca is a nicer and softer ride which is important to me. All and all I pick the Tribeca hands down and people are telling me that I'm nuts to not pick the CX 7. What are some of your thoughts out there. Is the CX 7 a better vehicle? Let me know.
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    we're all nuts around here, plain and simple if you haven't noticed.

    buy what YOU like as it's your money. check the tribeca and cx7 forums to see if specific problems/issues from OWNERS that come up consistently and maybe that helps sway one way or the other but short of that buy what you like and enjoy.

    the only other advice is to maybe look at all of them if you haven't as there are virtues/shortcomings to all of them but if you have done that and are focused on these, go get the best deal you can and start driving.
  • barnstormer64barnstormer64 Member Posts: 1,106
    Since no two of us can agree on what the definition of a CUV is anyway

    That's easy.

    If it's clearly not a truck, and clearly not a sedan, and clearly not a minivan, and you want to make it part of the hottest growing market segment so you can sell it, you call it an SUV. :P
  • barnstormer64barnstormer64 Member Posts: 1,106
    this has more than made itself than apparant with the last round of posts before yours and barnstormers. there is simply no arguing, they are right and regardless of the facts or rational arguments otherwise it does not seem to matter. let them play in their sandbox and bask in each others insight

    I'm not sure I like being thrown into the same sandbox. :P

    It's fairly clearl that he wants an SUV . . . he hasn't really shown any reason why he'd rather have a CUV over an SUV. (Maybe he just wants an SUV that's unibody?)

    I think it's rather clear, though, why the Freestyle/Five Hundred aren't just normal station wagons and sedans . . . it's that higher seating level.

    Basically, I'm going by the "first" definition of a CUV . . . which was something more car-like. Since that time, people have added the SUVs that are unibody rather than body-on-frame as another addition to CUV.

    Since mine was one first, I think it's comical that he should try to exlcude it from being called a CUV . . . it would be more rational for ME to say that his isn't a CUV . . which is what I was trying to point out . . . apparently the irony/humor didn't really come across correctly.
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    I wasn't throwing you in with "them", I thought I was being clear about that.

    I'm just not relpying to those two anymore as there is no debating rationally with them...
  • allison5allison5 Member Posts: 130
    I have posted before and here i am again. I am getting closer to getting the Acadia, I have a 04 GMC Yukon that it will be replacing. I am doing more research right now because I am home recovering from surgery for another week or so. Maybe i will have another car by the time i go back to work :( . I have driven Acadia 2x really liked it, was a little bothered by the fact that people have had transmission issues but 08 is better from what people say. I have 3 kids 13 -7 ages and a 90 lb dog that goes to Lake Tahoe, Ca, beaches etc. I started wondering about Ford Expedition, like the new look but am leary about fords. Have had them before, don't want another Yukon and want something different .. Anyway wondering if Acadia's gas mileage is better and do people think it has almost as much room as Expedition/Yukon? Thanks in advance
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    you'll probably get a few opinions here but your best bet may be the acadia specific forums for the info you are looking for.

    good luck
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    Good. Finally. "Fortunately Volvo and Mazda have some very talented engineers".
    It's not a Ford engineers.
    So for past years, the Ford doesn't engineered anything.


    Good grief vad!!! Did you read the rest of the post? VOLVO AND MAZDA ENGINEERS WORK FOR FORD MOTOR COMPANY!!! Therefore they ARE Ford engineers. :sick:
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    So you say this:

    You are somewhat right. GM did intend the Equiox to compete with the Escape, but the Equinox is bigger than even the Edge.And when it's redesigned, that's sqaurely the size Gm's aiming for.


    Then this:

    I told you already- the Equinox! And when it is redesigned (I believe soon) it will have a third row and should compete sqaurely with the likes of Pilot VC and Highlander, too.


    So I'm supposed to believe that the next Equinox is going to compete with the Escape, Edge, Pilot, VC, and Highlander? Now that is impressive! GM IS smarter than I thought. I can't wait to see how they pull this off! :P

    I don't know why you can't see that Ford has more new small CUVs than GM and GM has more new large CUVs than Ford. That's all I'm saying. Is it that hard to understand?

    No- the lambdas aren't marrked by slow sales, nor are they being replace by a different vehicle.

    Exactly what can't be said for the Lambdas? I was telling you that the Lambdas didn't exist in 2004 as neither did the Flex. Do you know something we don't?

    Look albook, I don't think Ford did the right thing in going with the FS/TX and staying faithful to the Explorer. They probably wish they had put a new large CUV to market sooner like GM did. They chose to put their new small CUVs out first and that's a fact. Why you are arguing against that fact is for you to work out yourself.

    Is Ford catching on? Barely- not nearly as fast as GM. GM gets it. They have separated their products and brands and don't put wierd unattractive grilles on everything they make.

    Since you're basing that opinion on current product I'll let it go because it is very valid. However, I've seen the future, and it looks bright.
  • freealfasfreealfas Member Posts: 652
    cleansing breath...

    stop the feeding, it's working out quite nicely as it just doesn't matter what any of us say to offer rational response, we'll simply be "wrong" again or they'll twist/turn something around to get the ire up yet again.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Why do you think CUV should be car like
    Try reading my post...some of each characteristics...car, SUV, minivan
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    The Pilot is a CUV
    Wrong...just because you call it a CUV doesn't make it so.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    It's easy to define a CUV...it's whatever certain posters say it is...not the manufacturer :P
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Good grief vad!!! Did you read the rest of the post?

    baggs...please, you're asking too much ;)
  • hoser0ehhoser0eh Member Posts: 46
    Like the superbowl, is there an upset in the works for our Crossover pick?

    Wow, what a week. We drove the Highlander and Enclave, each for the second time, and the Veracruz and CX9 for the first time. I must say, that they are all wonderful vehicles. Each one had its’ strengths. And depending on the needs of the purchaser, they are all good choices. The comments below describe what we liked about each vehicle as tested. All vehicles are base models priced, from 40-41 K (Canadian). I do not plan on adding many options, as I’m trying to keep the total negotiated price below 45K (including taxes, etc.).

    CX9- Best driver of the bunch. For a vehicle this big, it’s as sporty as you can get.
    Enclave- Has the most interior room and flexibility. Smoothest ride. Unbelievably quiet. A luxury vehicle.
    Highlander- 4WD in base model. Best visibility. Very competent.
    Veracruz- Probably second place in almost every category. Nice leather seats. An excellent vehicle overall.

    We have come to the conclusion that our choice will be between the CX9, Enclave, and Veracruz. The Highlander, though excellent, does not suit our particular needs as well as the others do. We will not bother to drive any other Crossovers as it is becoming too time consuming, and we feel that any of these three vehicles can meet our needs.
    We still have to go back to talk price with each salesman. We will probably drive some of the vehicles again, to fine tune our opinions. If the deals are similar, I think the Enclave has the edge. If we can get a much better deal on the Veracruz or CX9, then it’s still anyone’s game to win.
Sign In or Register to comment.