Hey Bobw3 and other similar posters, instead of dropping smart-alec comments about automakers, perhaps you could relate some real-life stories of problems you've had with GM/other vehicles? As someone who has driven Nissans, Infinitis, GMCs, Chevys, and Hondas, I take exception to Bob3w's holier than thou attitude, as I've found GM vehicles to be (not perfect but) way above average in reliability (Nissan, for example, is far worse, particular in the first year of a model or redesign).
As for the ongoing debate, I have to say that after test-driving the Acadia, I think it is potential huge hit for GM. It really hits the sweet spot in utility/capacity, driving ability, and looks. As for price, well, try pricing a similarly loaded Tahoe and THERE'S your value. But for everyone out there who keep nitpicking keep these things in mind when you are looking at all of these crossovers:
1) Third-row seats = compromise NO MATTER WHAT! My 2003 Honda Pilot's third-row seat is functional, is it comfortable? Not too much! Is it safe? I hope so. Is it as good as my 1st and 2nd rows? No way! Besides minivans, this holds true for all vehicles and I think the Acadia comes the closest for crossovers. Expeditions probably have the best 3rd row seat overall but they've got their own problems.
2) Fuel economy = depends largely on you. The weight penalty of these bigger crossovers means that driving habits drives this game, especially in city driving.
3) I laugh when I see people argue over torque, towing, etc. Be honest with yourself, you will not tow over 5,000 lbs unless your wife finally lets you buy a boat. You will not race sports cars at stoplights. My Honda Pilot probably has one of the "weakest" engines at 255 hp among these candidates but it has plenty of oomph for the things I need to do i.e. drive on the highway, change lanes, etc.
Hope I'm not rehashing previous points. Good luck!
After attending the Chicago Auto Show and looking at all these vehicles, it becomes obvious that GM has done the best job of repackaging the minivan and calling it a crossover. That's all the Acadia, Outlook and Enclave are, repackaged minivans that hopefully won't carry the minivan stigma. The bottom line is that buyers are paying dearly for the lack of minivan stigma. Is it worth it? Only time will tell.
Re: European-level gas prices...I calculate that I use about 950 gallon per year for about 17K miles. If I add $4 gallon for additional tax that totals about $3800 per year. I don't really want to give the goverment that much additional money for them to waste and the oil companies will only get that when the price goes to $120 per barrel. I guess if you were to take that 10-20 billion out of the economy that would surely put the brakes on any economic recovery.
Some people don't take sarcasm very well, and on the net it is hard to figure out sometimes. I looked at the post you made, and with the in there, you were pretty obviously joking in my opinion.
You should know that fun is not allowed on this board! :P
Hi all - I haven't had a chance to check out a CX-9 in person, but I've seen the cargo numbers. I've owned a Pilot since November 2002. Has anyone compared, in person, the cargo capacity in 5-passenger mode of the CX-9 vs. the Pilot (especially the shape of the available cargo area)? I know that the Pilot is taller and wider and the CX-9 is longer. I'm thinking that might lead to a more useful shape in the Pilot (for our needs, anyway), the cargo area being more "cubic", vs. the longer, narrower CX-9.
We travel 1200 miles to Pennsylvania every summer hauling 2 months worth of clothes and other gear, so the SHAPE of the cargo area is as important as the size. We find the Pilot's more square-shaped cargo area VERY flexible.
The other thing that concerns me about the CX-9 (and ALL Pilot competitors) is the placement of the tranny shift lever. The Pilot has it on the steering column, which frees up the space between the front seats for the Pilot's GIGANTIC center console storage. A small family could live in there. We are so used to having that humongous space for fast foot, drinks, CDs, books, small animals, etc. that my wife will absolutely NOT give up that space while travelling. It looks like every competitor has the shift lever between the front seats, robbing the vehicle of that huge storage space. That may well be the undoing of anything else for me but another Pilot. Anyone have thoughts on that?
I agree that the Pilot has great interior space utilization for a vehicle that's only 188" long. Honda has always been a leader in space utilization. For example, I own a Honda Fit that's only 157" long, yet has 21CuFt behind the second row and 42CuFt with the rear seats folded.
Yeah, right. Add a foot of useless overhang onto the Pilot, add more hard interior plastics, cut its hp, and take away stability control, and you would have something akin to the Freestyle. (Am I glad that running shoe-sounding name is being deep-sixed.)
-The Pilot does have less than pleasing interior dated plastics which is an aesthetic issue more than a functional issues -The Pilots hp is plentiful. This is not an issue. How fast and how much do you need. And I'll take the 24mpg (realworld) I got on a trip last summer anyday. -My Pilot has Vehicle Stability Assist.
"Well, that's just not true! As with all humor, delivery is paramount and we cannot be held responsible for deficiencies in that regard."
Wait a minute there... "Fun" is built on a completely different platform than "Humor," and is not just a stretched version of it. They come from totally different factories with different engines. Plus, the reliability record for "Fun" is a lot better than "Humor," so I don't know why anyone would want to have "Humor" when they could have "Fun" for just a little more... :P
-The Pilot does have less than pleasing interior dated plastics which is an aesthetic issue more than a functional issues -The Pilots hp is plentiful. This is not an issue. How fast and how much do you need. And I'll take the 24mpg (realworld) I got on a trip last summer anyday. -My Pilot has Vehicle Stability Assist.
Except for the interior plastic (which I happen to think is better in the Pilot than than in the Freestyle), these were all my points. Maybe I need to be more clear?
The Pilot is more space efficient than the Freestyle, tidier on the outside than the Freestyle, is more powerful, and has stability control, which the Freestyle inexplicably doesn't even offer. Thus, I don't think people would go nuts over the Freestyle if it had a Honda label on it. It also would need to have Honda attributes.
Now why the above defensive comments followed my favorable comparison of the Pilot to the FS remains a mystery to me.
Oh. Well you linked my post saying "hehe" with your post, so I wasn't really sure what you were trying to say, or to what you were responding. Sorry...:)
i think you were responding to my post. pilot is too fat. so are the gm's. i had an expedition and that was the thing i liked least about it. i wish these crossovers had a rear window that could open independently of the rear liftgate.
Yeah, right. Add a foot of useless overhang onto the Pilot, add more hard interior plastics, cut its hp, and take away stability control, and you would have something akin to the Freestyle. (Am I glad that running shoe-sounding name is being deep-sixed.)
Hmmm...I take that foot of "useless overhang" and the greater legroom in the 2nd and 3rd row of the Freestyle (and greater cargo space behind the 3rd row)
'i wish these crossovers had a rear window that could open independently of the rear liftgate.'
7-8 passenger crossovers are req'd to have a fixed liftgate due to safety otherwise rear passengers could fly out the back window in a rear end collision ala Chrysler Caravans early 90s models. Wishing won't help.
My Pilot handles very well and rides on an Accord platform. Mind you it doesn't handle as well as the MDX, which I drove recently, but it doesn't handle anything like the big 8 passenger vehicles it competes with. Oh and I put 100,000 on my first one without it ever seeing a shop..not even a Honda shop. I just changed fluids and brakes. Good luck with competitors as I will guarantee you will pay far more for maintenance and repairs (than I did). Oh and I traded it and got $19k with 100,000 on it. Not many beat Honda for resale.
"Seriously, resorting to implying idiocy because of a car choice certainly doesn't seem needed here."
I wasn't implying idiocy, I was implying the heard mentality.
CR says it's great, ALL my neighbor's drive them to soccer practice, all I can find is good about Honda in the world. The fact is they have their own problem's as a manufacturer, the Pilot is not perfect. I'd argue it's 200lbs min overweight, has less usable space, and with it's horsepower advantage should be faster.
FS is the only CUV that passed with highest marks with its safety testing without the upper canopy installed. Ford deserves credit for the FS package,using the Volvo safety architecture/platform, mileage, price point, and proven Duratec and the innovative CVT in this application and packaging(theatre seating actually provides an adult occupiable 3rd row) is forward thinking. Unfortunately they have been let down by marketing efforts, bias reporting by CR, a public driven by hp numbers, and teething problems that all manufaturer's go through when launching a new model.
It was the best package of it's kind when introduced and with more insightful marketing and engineering(i.e. improved the interior materials) could have forsaken it's name change and been a leader in the segment as opposed to the follower it has become. The FS foibles/problems are indicative of Ford's problems unfortunately, the FS deserves better than it's gotten.
Within $200 of the Freestyle on the base model and that's without any incentives. I'll guarantee that difference will disappear as you won't be getting any real breaks on the Hyundai for a bit like you will on the Volvo based Freestyle...
Makes the FS that much better a value and competitior.
I've been driving a minivan since 01 - and was I surprised (plesantly!) when I drove the Acadia - compared to a MV, it's a TON more fun to drive - I'd almost forgotten about the fun of driving! (well granted, it's not a sports car, but that doesn't suit my needs) Plus, compared to the MV, the Acadia tow capacity is 1,000 lbs. more (4500) w/ the tow pkg., giving it just the edge it needed for me. So, that is what I am paying for, & couldn't care less about the MV 'stigma' (tho I can understand those who do!).
my explorer holds 7 and has a separate opening glass panel. i think the lack of one is a money saving measure or the result of styling over practicality.
Good luck with competitors as I will guarantee you will pay far more for maintenance and repairs (than I did
I had a '91 Escort and '99 Cougar, both of which had only $800 in repair costs before 100,000 miles...wow, so you had $400/vehicle less in your Pilot repair costs
Resale & repair costs don't mean much if you're paying $5K more for a vehicle to start with.
What are you talking about? You're not getting any real breaks on the Veracruz but on the Stylefree? What breaks are you talking about? Pricing? The Veracruz is priced aggressive and competitive for what you can get.
You got a great deal on that trade-in...a fully loaded 2004 EX has a trade-in value of about $15k, so you got $4k more. Amazing. Are you sure the dealer didn't make up that money on your new car?
I'm sure the redesigned 2008 Pilot will retain a high resale value compared to the new Lambdas...perception is everything in this business.
I received a firm confirmation today that my local Hyundai dealer will have one loaded SE Veracruz on March 15. He has the invoice in hand. He said he will start receiving regular deliveries about 30 days later.
Read the price paid thread and after that when you compare the sticker and what people are actually paying for a FS they are the best bang for buck going. While Hyundai certainly has made strides recently and by no means the company they were when they showed up on these shores, I'll take Volvo's safety engineering in the FS everyday of the week, oh yeah I did, it's parked out front and is far from style free in basic black on black limited fare, out the door our '05 Limited loaded FWD bought new for $27k. My only gripe has been material selection in the interior, other than that it has been a great ride for my family. You won't be getting anywhere near that deal for the Hyundai any time soon hence making the FS the value leader in my book. I'll keep my money in my pocket and my family safe while we get great mileage and people hauling ability.
Despite the lauded Volvo safety, the Stylefree does not have stability control, a proven safety feature that is standard on the Hyundai. Furthermore, unless the the Stylefree has side and curtain airbags, the claimed safety in side crashes is not good, as was first claimed.
Put those things on the Stylefree, and the playing field is a bit more level. Still, the Veracruz can be had with more power, but still gets decent mileage for the type of vehicle it is, and has a far nicer interior. The Taurus X will be a great improvement (hp, safety, interior). However, it will still be saddled with the Stylefree/Cadillac SRX/Chrysler Pacifica genre-look that people don't seem to warm to as easily as the SUV/CUV look of the others.
Stability control is not the end all be all, You drive a CUV like a sportscar you are going to have problems, you drive it like its meant and you'll be fine, how did we all survive without it for all these years.
As for the testing 5 stars without the optional sidecurtain (http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/3089.html) so unless your uninformed opinion can prove otherwise I'll take my information from the NHTSA. Not to mention the top of the list rollover numbers even without stability control.
With looks being a subjective thing the Freestyle is conservatively handsome to teh benefit of the 3rd row and rear storage and I'll concede the interior material selection rather than styling has been my major gripe about the FS. But if you like warmed over RX-300 styling all the way down to the center cluster then go right ahead and take hand me downs. The FS can more than stand on its own albeit in limited form as I don't care for the 2-tone treatment in the least).
So it seems when you add the '08 stability control(and standard sidecurtains) that you seem to need to keep you and your driving on the road and still line up the MSRP's and find that the FS is still $200 away from your beloved Veracruz and recognize the FS will be available form a company on the ropes thereby you'll be getting some deeper discounts. It represents one of the better buys in the marketplace as nobody is paying anywhere close to list or invoice on these. Buy used and you can keep even more of your money in your pocket and get a ride that is quite capable of hauling people safely and getting great mileage. Pay full price for the new lexus hand me down Korean wonder if you feel you need to, I've had 18 months of enjoying my FS with my family.
2007 Veracruz will start at $26,305, not including a $690 destination charge, when it goes on sale later this spring.
That’s less than the Saturn Outlook, Mazda CX-9 and V-6 Toyota Highlander, but for some reason Hyundai compares it to the much more expensive Lexus RX 350. We like apples and apples around here, and if you beat the real competition on price, why not say so? Full price breakdown on all trims below.
Veracruz GLS FWD $26,305 Veracruz GLS AWD $28,005 Veracruz SE FWD $28,005 Veracruz SE AWD $29,705 Veracruz Limited FWD $32,305 Veracruz Limited AWD $34,005 $690 destination charge not included
You haven't by a significant margin by a long shot buck rogers, just because it looks like a lexus doesn't mean it is one.
'07
FS SEL 26,670 AWD SEL 28,500
LTD 29,955 LTD AWD 31,805
Even if you split the difference between the GLS & SE for the VC the FS still wins the price-point battle.
I gave you the VC seemingly has the nicer interior(it's OK but i'd even like a nicer interior in MY FS), the FS is still the better value because in the real world you are never going to pay list/invoice like you will be at the Hyundai dealer because of fanboys like you.
Those prices are INCLUDING the $750 destination charge
Cargo room
behind front row VC 86.8 cuft FS 91.7 cuft behind 2nd row VC 40 cuft FS 47.9 cuft behind 3rd row VC doesn't even list this figure probably because it's 9 in shorter and they sacrificed useful storage space here FS 20.7 cuft
Going by the numbers the VC is comparing a FS apple to a VC lemon, they made a nicer interior you win that round, the FS is the better package and value.
I saw the prices posted for the Veracruz in this weeks Motor Trend news letter and I definitely am not a fanboy of Hyundai or Kia. Personally I wouldn't buy either one. :sick: I guess if you don't mind sitting at your Dealer waiting for parts or just waiting to get your vehicle back a couple times a month for the next ten years, well then maybe yes they do carry a fair warranty. :P
Comments
As for the ongoing debate, I have to say that after test-driving the Acadia, I think it is potential huge hit for GM. It really hits the sweet spot in utility/capacity, driving ability, and looks. As for price, well, try pricing a similarly loaded Tahoe and THERE'S your value. But for everyone out there who keep nitpicking keep these things in mind when you are looking at all of these crossovers:
1) Third-row seats = compromise NO MATTER WHAT! My 2003 Honda Pilot's third-row seat is functional, is it comfortable? Not too much! Is it safe? I hope so. Is it as good as my 1st and 2nd rows? No way! Besides minivans, this holds true for all vehicles and I think the Acadia comes the closest for crossovers. Expeditions probably have the best 3rd row seat overall but they've got their own problems.
2) Fuel economy = depends largely on you. The weight penalty of these bigger crossovers means that driving habits drives this game, especially in city driving.
3) I laugh when I see people argue over torque, towing, etc. Be honest with yourself, you will not tow over 5,000 lbs unless your wife finally lets you buy a boat. You will not race sports cars at stoplights. My Honda Pilot probably has one of the "weakest" engines at 255 hp among these candidates but it has plenty of oomph for the things I need to do i.e. drive on the highway, change lanes, etc.
Hope I'm not rehashing previous points. Good luck!
What post# are you talking about? Post #13 was a joke!
You should know that fun is not allowed on this board! :P
Well, that's just not true! As with all humor, delivery is paramount and we cannot be held responsible for deficiencies in that regard. :shades:
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
I haven't had a chance to check out a CX-9 in person, but I've seen the cargo numbers. I've owned a Pilot since November 2002. Has anyone compared, in person, the cargo capacity in 5-passenger mode of the CX-9 vs. the Pilot (especially the shape of the available cargo area)? I know that the Pilot is taller and wider and the CX-9 is longer. I'm thinking that might lead to a more useful shape in the Pilot (for our needs, anyway), the cargo area being more "cubic", vs. the longer, narrower CX-9.
We travel 1200 miles to Pennsylvania every summer hauling 2 months worth of clothes and other gear, so the SHAPE of the cargo area is as important as the size. We find the Pilot's more square-shaped cargo area VERY flexible.
The other thing that concerns me about the CX-9 (and ALL Pilot competitors) is the placement of the tranny shift lever. The Pilot has it on the steering column, which frees up the space between the front seats for the Pilot's GIGANTIC center console storage. A small family could live in there. We are so used to having that humongous space for fast foot, drinks, CDs, books, small animals, etc. that my wife will absolutely NOT give up that space while travelling. It looks like every competitor has the shift lever between the front seats, robbing the vehicle of that huge storage space. That may well be the undoing of anything else for me but another Pilot. Anyone have thoughts on that?
Thanks,
Dave
-The Pilot does have less than pleasing interior dated plastics which is an aesthetic issue more than a functional issues
-The Pilots hp is plentiful. This is not an issue. How fast and how much do you need. And I'll take the 24mpg (realworld) I got on a trip last summer anyday.
-My Pilot has Vehicle Stability Assist.
Wait a minute there... "Fun" is built on a completely different platform than "Humor," and is not just a stretched version of it. They come from totally different factories with different engines. Plus, the reliability record for "Fun" is a lot better than "Humor," so I don't know why anyone would want to have "Humor" when they could have "Fun" for just a little more... :P
To address these issues:
-The Pilot does have less than pleasing interior dated plastics which is an aesthetic issue more than a functional issues
-The Pilots hp is plentiful. This is not an issue. How fast and how much do you need. And I'll take the 24mpg (realworld) I got on a trip last summer anyday.
-My Pilot has Vehicle Stability Assist.
Except for the interior plastic (which I happen to think is better in the Pilot than than in the Freestyle), these were all my points. Maybe I need to be more clear?
The Pilot is more space efficient than the Freestyle, tidier on the outside than the Freestyle, is more powerful, and has stability control, which the Freestyle inexplicably doesn't even offer. Thus, I don't think people would go nuts over the Freestyle if it had a Honda label on it. It also would need to have Honda attributes.
Now why the above defensive comments followed my favorable comparison of the Pilot to the FS remains a mystery to me.
GLS 3.8L V6 6-Speed A/T w/SHIFTRONIC® Front-Wheel $26,305
GLS 3.8L V6 6-Speed A/T w/SHIFTRONIC® All-Wheel $28,005
SE 3.8L V6 6-Speed A/T w/SHIFTRONIC® Front-Wheel $28,005
SE 3.8L V6 6-Speed A/T w/SHIFTRONIC® All-Wheel $29,705
Limited 3.8L V6 6-Speed A/T w/SHIFTRONIC® Front-Wheel $32,305
Limited 3.8L V6 6-Speed A/T w/SHIFTRONIC® All-Wheel $34,005
Great Pricing!!
I think we're talking crossovers here!
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
There are many things that will always be a mystery to you.
pilot is too fat. so are the gm's.
i had an expedition and that was the thing i liked least about it.
i wish these crossovers had a rear window that could open independently of the rear liftgate.
Hmmm...I take that foot of "useless overhang" and the greater legroom in the 2nd and 3rd row of the Freestyle (and greater cargo space behind the 3rd row)
honda sheep
baaaaaa.
Seriously, resorting to implying idiocy because of a car choice certainly doesn't seem needed here.
That made my night!
7-8 passenger crossovers are req'd to have a fixed liftgate due to safety otherwise rear passengers could fly out the back window in a rear end collision ala Chrysler Caravans early 90s models. Wishing won't help.
pilot 0-60 8.6sec
FS 0-60 8.2sec
"Seriously, resorting to implying idiocy because of a car choice certainly doesn't seem needed here."
I wasn't implying idiocy, I was implying the heard mentality.
CR says it's great, ALL my neighbor's drive them to soccer practice, all I can find is good about Honda in the world. The fact is they have their own problem's as a manufacturer, the Pilot is not perfect. I'd argue it's 200lbs min overweight, has less usable space, and with it's horsepower advantage should be faster.
FS is the only CUV that passed with highest marks with its safety testing without the upper canopy installed. Ford deserves credit for the FS package,using the Volvo safety architecture/platform, mileage, price point, and proven Duratec and the innovative CVT in this application and packaging(theatre seating actually provides an adult occupiable 3rd row) is forward thinking. Unfortunately they have been let down by marketing efforts, bias reporting by CR, a public driven by hp numbers, and teething problems that all manufaturer's go through when launching a new model.
It was the best package of it's kind when introduced and with more insightful marketing and engineering(i.e. improved the interior materials) could have forsaken it's name change and been a leader in the segment as opposed to the follower it has become. The FS foibles/problems are indicative of Ford's problems unfortunately, the FS deserves better than it's gotten.
Hyundai Veracruz
Looks like they're being very aggressive at $26-34K...
23 Civic Type-R / 22 MDX Type-S / 21 Tesla Y LR / 03 Montero Ltd
Makes the FS that much better a value and competitior.
Wow, where did you get it? The normal Pilot shares it's platform with the Odyssey...
i think the lack of one is a money saving measure or the result of styling over practicality.
I had a '91 Escort and '99 Cougar, both of which had only $800 in repair costs before 100,000 miles...wow, so you had $400/vehicle less in your Pilot repair costs
Resale & repair costs don't mean much if you're paying $5K more for a vehicle to start with.
You know what they say about assuming and no it was a 2004 with 95k....nearly 100,000. U think what you want.
I'll take my Pilot anyday over any other 8 passenger since I paid $28k loaded for it!!!! That is basically a steal.
I'm sure the redesigned 2008 Pilot will retain a high resale value compared to the new Lambdas...perception is everything in this business.
Put those things on the Stylefree, and the playing field is a bit more level. Still, the Veracruz can be had with more power, but still gets decent mileage for the type of vehicle it is, and has a far nicer interior. The Taurus X will be a great improvement (hp, safety, interior). However, it will still be saddled with the Stylefree/Cadillac SRX/Chrysler Pacifica genre-look that people don't seem to warm to as easily as the SUV/CUV look of the others.
As for the testing 5 stars without the optional sidecurtain (http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/3089.html) so unless your uninformed opinion can prove otherwise I'll take my information from the NHTSA. Not to mention the top of the list rollover numbers even without stability control.
With looks being a subjective thing the Freestyle is conservatively handsome to teh benefit of the 3rd row and rear storage and I'll concede the interior material selection rather than styling has been my major gripe about the FS. But if you like warmed over RX-300 styling all the way down to the center cluster then go right ahead and take hand me downs. The FS can more than stand on its own albeit in limited form as I don't care for the 2-tone treatment in the least).
So it seems when you add the '08 stability control(and standard sidecurtains) that you seem to need to keep you and your driving on the road and still line up the MSRP's and find that the FS is still $200 away from your beloved Veracruz and recognize the FS will be available form a company on the ropes thereby you'll be getting some deeper discounts. It represents one of the better buys in the marketplace as nobody is paying anywhere close to list or invoice on these. Buy used and you can keep even more of your money in your pocket and get a ride that is quite capable of hauling people safely and getting great mileage. Pay full price for the new lexus hand me down Korean wonder if you feel you need to, I've had 18 months of enjoying my FS with my family.
That’s less than the Saturn Outlook, Mazda CX-9 and V-6 Toyota Highlander, but for some reason Hyundai compares it to the much more expensive Lexus RX 350. We like apples and apples around here, and if you beat the real competition on price, why not say so? Full price breakdown on all trims below.
Veracruz GLS FWD $26,305
Veracruz GLS AWD $28,005
Veracruz SE FWD $28,005
Veracruz SE AWD $29,705
Veracruz Limited FWD $32,305
Veracruz Limited AWD $34,005
$690 destination charge not included
'07
FS SEL 26,670
AWD SEL 28,500
LTD 29,955
LTD AWD 31,805
Even if you split the difference between the GLS & SE for the VC the FS still wins the price-point battle.
I gave you the VC seemingly has the nicer interior(it's OK but i'd even like a nicer interior in MY FS), the FS is still the better value because in the real world you are never going to pay list/invoice like you will be at the Hyundai dealer because of fanboys like you.
Those prices are INCLUDING the $750 destination charge
Cargo room
behind front row
VC 86.8 cuft
FS 91.7 cuft
behind 2nd row
VC 40 cuft
FS 47.9 cuft
behind 3rd row
VC doesn't even list this figure probably because it's 9 in shorter and they sacrificed useful storage space here
FS 20.7 cuft
Going by the numbers the VC is comparing a FS apple to a VC lemon, they made a nicer interior you win that round, the FS is the better package and value.
I guess if you don't mind sitting at your Dealer waiting for parts or just waiting to get your vehicle back a couple times a month for the next ten years, well then maybe yes they do carry a fair warranty. :P