Video Review: 2010 Nissan GT-R


Every now and then a car comes along which defies categorizing. The Nissan GT-R is one of these cars. Too inexpensive and attainable to be a super-exotic, but far too high-performance to be a car for the masses. And yet, here it is.

More to the point, here we are with the keys in hand and a great road to drive. Everyday Driver vs. Godzilla, the genre killer from the orient. The technology in this car is very similar to the Mitsubishi Evo, which we love, but is the GT-R worth twice as much? The guys grab this monster by the tail for a wild ride.

Many of you requested we drive this car, and we hope you have as much fun watching as we did driving. And in a few years the prices for a used GT-R will drop to the levels of other sportscars. Then you’ll have a decision to make.

Go HD-full screen, and turn it up!

Courtesy of our content partner – Everyday Driver

August 25, 2010 | Paul and Todd | Tags: | 1 Comment »

Hot Hatches: ’10 Speed3 vs. GTI vs. C30


We love a good fast hatchback. These little cars set out to be all things to all people, with speed and genuine usable space. The VW GTI started the trend in the seventies, and nearly every brand has tried one since. For years Europe has loved them, and finally the U.S. market is starting to get some great options.

So, Paul and Todd gathered up three very different approaches to this all-in-one idea and went in search of a showdown. But they found out that while they may seem the same at first, these cars are very different and the guys couldn’t disagree more.

Here’s the full 2010 comparison of the MazdaSpeed 3, the VW GTI, and the Volvo C30.

And be sure to watch it full screen!

2010 Hot Hatchback Comparison – Everyday Driver from Everyday Driver on Vimeo.

Courtesy of our content partner – Everyday Driver

August 23, 2010 | Paul and Todd | Tags: , , | 1 Comment »

Review: 2010 Honda Accord Crosstour 2WD EX-L NAV

2010 Honda Accord Crosstour 2WD EX-L NAV

Vital Stats
Engine: 3.5 liter V6 (271 HP/254 TQ)
Drivetrain Layout: Front engine/Front-wheel drive
Transmission: 5-speed automatic
Seating Capacity: 5 Passengers
EPA Fuel Economy: 18 city/27 highway
Base MSRP $34,770 + $710 destination
Recommended Options: None

The Basics
Honda hasn’t offered an Accord wagon since 1997, although this Crosstour isn’t exactly what most would call a wagon, per se. It is, however, another entry into the crowded and competitive crossover segment. Available in either front- or all-wheel drive, and with one engine and transmission choice, the Crosstour is basically an Accord V6 for people who want more space, available all-wheel drive, and a bit more of an active-lifestyle appearance. No one will be mistaking the Crosstour for a standard Accord, and its looks are love-it or leave-it.

Exterior (Andy – 2, Tae – 1)
Andy – I’ll just say it: I can’t stand the looks of this vehicle. I want to be able to like it for what it is, but I just can’t. It’s masculine  front end with a muscular grille seems to be contradicted by its feminine, sloping rear. It sits up high off the ground for added ground clearance, but this adds to the car’s awkward appearance. It just does not gel for me, no matter how many times I see it. To be fair, I had a couple of people come up to me and say they liked the look, and asked me what kind of car it was. If I could go directly from the house, and simply end up inside the Crosstour without looking at its exterior, that’d be great.

Tae – Sorry Andy, I’m gonna do one better (or worse?) than you… In some angles it reminds you of a pouty lipped Donald Duck, and it sort of looks like a reincarnated 1980 AMC Eagle. Whatever it is, it is not pretty. Also from judging from the early adopters of these oddbirds, the 1980 AMC Eagle analogy might be right.  Most people who’ve purchased these, at least in the SF Bay Area, are older ladies who might have owned those AMC Eagles back in the day.

Interior (Andy – 6, Tae – 6)
Andy –  The EX-L (with navigation) has an attractive, high-quality leather interior with plenty of room for two up front, and three in the back. Parts of the interior appear similar to the Acura TSX (especially the dashboard), but the Crosstour has more room, especially in the back seat. The car’s front seats are firm and large, but comfortable and supportive. The leather-wrapped steering wheel feels fairly large in diameter, but fits well in the hands, and has a veritable plethora of buttons (I believe about 17, if I remember correctly) to control Bluetooth, audio, and cruise controls.

The big story inside is found behind the rear seats. Open up the rear hatch, and the cargo area appears cavernous. Plus, there are two silver handles that fold down the rear seats for an amazing amount of room for gear. Unfortunately, due to the car’s shape, capacity is limited to not-so-tall items. On a trip to Lowe’s to return 100 ft. of garden hose (which we placed in a square plastic tub so as not to drip water on the upholstery), there was clearance issues with the rear hatch. Let’s put it this way: You can carry a lot of stuff in a horizontal fashion. But tall items could prove difficult. Under the cargo area is a convenient storage area in the center, and it can be removed, too. Great for tailgating at sporting event, I’m sure. There are two smaller compartments to the left and right, as well.

Another downer: Visibility out of the Crosstour is poor. It’s rear hatch creates a strange outward view, which is bisected by a crossmember on the trunk. It’s just hard to see out of, which is not confidence inspiring. Good thing my model had the rear backup camera.

Tae – The interior of the Crosstour is just like the Accord, Acura TSX, and Acura TL, except that some materials are decidedly cheaper. The typical Honda/Acura button porn is present. The cheap, fake simulated wood grain and painted plastic are all there. However, the fit-and-finish is still ‘Honda’ excellent! As far as passenger space is concerned, the front seats are comfortable – if not too flat. The backseats have ample room and leg space, but I’ll echo Andy’s take… the cargo space is limited due to the shape of the hatch area.

Drivetrain (Andy – 7, Tae – 7)
Andy – The 3.5 liter V6 is a smooth operator, as typical for Honda V6 engines, and is mated to a responsive five-speed automatic. Unlike some other vehicles in the segment, such as the Subaru Outback, there is no manual shifting capability, though. My review sample was the front-drive variant, but the Crosstour is available in all-wheel drive to do battle against the previously mentioned Outback. Like the Outback, the Crosstour does appear to have some added ground clearance, and wears some meaty 18” wheels and tires. No qualms here.

Tae – No major complaints here, good power and smooth transmission.

Performance (Andy – 7, Tae – 6.5)
Andy – As expected, the 271 hp V6 has more-than-adequate power. Merging and passing are effortless endeavors; mid-range acceleration is noteworthy. All in all, the Crosstour is pretty quick, especially from a rolling start.

Handling is tuned to ride quality than handling. Although, the car does remain planted in the curves, albeit, with substantial body lean. The car feels heavy, and does weigh on the near side of 4,000 lbs. Not so great for cornering, but the car feels like a tank on the highway; it definitely has a substantial feel. The Crosstour is rated at an estimated 18 city and 27 highway for fuel economy, and I got 18 MPG in 90% city driving.

Tae – Straightline performance is good, nothing spectacular, handling is on par with its competitors – Toyota Venza and Nissan Murano.

Ride Quality (Andy – 8, Tae – 6.5)
Andy –  This is a family cruiser, and it does this well. Ride quality is good, all but the largest bumps are easily soaked up by the fully independent suspension. The car is quiet and very comfortable.

Tae – One might think that wearing the 18″ rubbers instead of the 20-21″ ones found in its competitors (Venza and Murano), that the Crosstour would be quieter and more supple, in this case that would be a ‘no’. The Toyota Venza is a bit more composed and quieter, and the Nissan Murano is slightly more engaging to drive. But, all in all, the Crosstour is above average in this crossover segment.

Technology (Andy – 5, Tae – 6)
Andy – The Crosstour EX-L NAV has a lot of tech features. Problem is, they’re not user friendly. You get navigation; a fantastic seven-speaker, 360-watt AM/FM/6-disc/MP3 stereo; Bluetooth with HandsFreeLink; USB/auxiliary jacks; automatic dual-zone climate control; mirrors that automatically tilt down when you put the car in reverse; and a great back-up camera. However, you need a class on how to work it all. I counted 33 buttons on the dashboard—not exactly intuitive, especially while driving. A few times, all I wanted to do was turn up the heater, but attempting to do so ended up being a lesson in distracted driving. Also, I could not pair my phone with the Bluetooth, and I finally just gave up. Add to this the 17 or so buttons on the steering wheel, and you’ve got a mass of technology that requires an engineering degree to figure out. Without ranting too much, the large display screen is highly visible, and is all controlled via a center knob, just like the Acura TSX. I have mixed feelings about this control. Frankly, the whole thing was a bit frustrating.

The good news is all of the safety technology is there: ABS, traction/stability control, all the airbags you’ll want, etc. Luckily, you don’t have to learn to use those.

Tae – I wasn’t as flustered with the operations as Andy, but definitely ‘user friendly’ is not the ‘word of the day’, here. There’s a dedicated button for every feature/function of vehicle, it seems. Also, getting through the menu in the nav screen is a bit of a chore without the touchscreen, and some of you might already know how I feel on the voice command systems in current crop of cars – too big of a learning curve and too slow.

Value (Andy – 5, Tae – 5)
Andy – Your hard-earned $35,480 can nab you a ’10 Crosstour with leather, tons of technology, a somewhat usable cargo area, and front wheel drive. Want all-wheel drive? That’ll cost about $2,000 more in the same trim level. Yes, you do get a gusty V-6 and a good ride. Plus, the build quality is excellent. However, you can get a similarly equipped six-cylinder Subaru Outback Limited (with all-wheel drive) for about $5,500 less than a front-drive Crosstour.

Tae – As expensive as the Crosstour is, when you compare it to the two closest competitors (Venza and Murano) you’ll save about $1,800-2,500. But you’d be losing Venza’s comfort and Murano’s spirited nature, not to mention cargo space and most of all… STYLE!!!

Overall (Andy – 4, Tae – 3.5)
Andy – The Honda Accord Crosstour FWD is essentially Honda’s family wagon. You can get the kids in in, you can haul some cargo, and like the Family Truckster from “National Lampoon’s Vacation,”  it looks a bit goofy. However, if you have to have a wagon-like vehicle from Honda and don’t want to drive an Odyssey mini-van, then the Crosstour might fit the bill. Keep in mind Acura is releasing a TSX wagon, too. Albeit, it will probably cost more, but it looks a lot more attractive to me.  Let’s put it this way: Before I’d plunk down $35K for a Crosstour, I’d Cross-Shop the competition.

Tae – Although the content value is not bad, the poor practicality of the vehicle and the “WTF!” exterior design makes for a vehicle that is very puzzling. Honda is trying to market this vehicle as a trendy, hip alternative to crossover utility vehicles, and they’ve missed the mark – by a mile. From uglifying the Accord and the entire Acura lineup, killing off the NSX project, to hyping the two seater CR-Z hybrid sports car that goes 0-60 in 8 seconds and gets mid 30MPGs, I think Honda is slowly losing grip on reality.

- KF

May 6, 2010 | Test Drive Team | Tags: , | No Comments »

Review: 2010 Scion xB

2010 Scion xB

Vital Stats

Engine: 2.4 liter I4 (158HP/162TQ)
Drivetrain Layout: Front engine/Front wheel drive
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Seating Capacity: 5 Passengers
EPA Fuel Economy: 22 city/28 highway
Base MSRP $15,850 + $670 (destination charge)
Recommended Options: Whatever suits your taste…

The Basics
The original ‘Box’ was a true breakthrough vehicle, not only in design but in marketing. Just about everything about this Scion was a break from the norm. It didn’t look like anything else on the road, you had no-haggle pricing, and Scion employed mainly underground marketing. Affectionately called a Box or a Toaster, these first generation xB’s still enjoy a huge cult following.

The first Box had 1.5 liter 4 cylinder engine that was shared with the Toyota Yaris, Scion xA, and the Toyota Prius (modified for cleaner burn and maximum efficiency). The 2008 and newer models carry the 2.4 liter 4 cylinder engine that was found in the Camry, Rav4, Matrix S and XRS, and Corolla XRS, and it’s substantially bigger in size…

Some will argue that the 2nd Gen xB no longer has the same personality as it did with the first Box (a complaint mainly from the 1st gen owners). In every dimension, the xB is larger – especially the back seat legroom and cargo space. The interior space and utility rivals some of small SUV/CUVs out there.

So, how did Scion do? Is it more of the same goodness, or did they ruin a good thing?

Highs: Larger body, surprisingly good driving dynamics, plenty of power, a comfortable long distance driver
Lows: Coarse engine noise, slightly numb and overboosted steering, fit-and-finish subpar

Similar Vehicles: Kia Soul, Nissan cube, Toyota Corolla/Matrix

Exterior (Tae – 7.5, Brendan – 7)
Tae – The overall design looks as if they took the first Box, made it bigger, rounded off the edges, chopped the roof (hot rod style), and gave it some fender flares. The effect is harmonious yet somewhat awkward, but pleasing to the eye. It is very distinctive, just like the first model.

Brendan – The Box movement still hasn’t tugged my heart strings, but the second gen xB is the best of the bunch. While it might look like you left a stick of butter out in the sun for a little too long, it doesn’t have some of the disjointed design language that the competition uses in vain to stand out (sunglasses wearing bulldog front ended Nissan cube is a great example…)

Interior (Tae – 7, Brendan – 7)
Tae – All the materials are on par with others in its class, but the fit and finish is not up to the Toyota/Scion/Lexus standards. I’ve heard rattling from the top of the dashboard, and some dashboard panels can be pried with fingers. As far as the interior design is concerned, the ergonomics are great. The driver seat is height adjustable and gives great visibility, and overall the seats were very comfortable even in long distance driving (Bay Area to Las Vegas trip).

Brendan – While I’ve never liked Scion and Toyota’s textured plastics, there is nothing terribly wrong here. Similar mouse fur seats that are found in other Toyota products, but they cover seats that are very comfortable. The seats give the interior a very upright feel, which is something I personally find very attractive, as when the seat is mounted too low to the floor, I feel like I’m in a lounge chair. Checking your blind spot can be interesting though, as depending on how you’ve adjusted your seat, you might not be able to see as much as you would have expected.

Drivetrain (Tae – 7, Brendan – 6.5)
Tae – The engine and transmission comes from the current Corolla XRS, Matrix S and XRS, Camry Hybrid, and last year’s RAV4 and Camry, so there is plenty power for this smallish vehicle. There is a slight play in the shifter, but the manual transmission shifts smooth and has a good action. The engine is not isolated as well as the Toyota brethrens, so as the speed climbs so does the noise level.

Brendan – While I’m a self admitted power snob, I would have honestly expected a little more out of a big 2.4L. Rowing the rubbery shifter from 5th to 4th on the freeway gets the xB moving, but I thought the ringer would have done a bit more to embarass the competition. I also noted a fair bit of rev hang with the engine, so it’s easy to complete the gear change, but when wait with the clutch in for the rpms to fall down to where they belong. Suffice to say it takes a few miles before you can drive silky smooth.

Performance (Tae – 7.5, Brendan – 7)
Tae – With the sub-8 second 0-60MPH runs, the xB is the top dog in the compact box segment in performance. From the looks of it, and with the previous xB, one would think that the Box wouldn’t handle that good. Looks are very deceiving with the 2nd generation xB. Side-to-side maneuvers are easy and controlled well, and I might even say borderline very good.

Brendan – While I see Tae’s point with the class leading acceleration, it’s just not that impressive for an engine of that size. Handling is safe and surefooted, but lacks some of the tossable nature that the first gen xB had. All around, what drivers should expect from a competent commuter, with just a touch more straight line gusto than normal.

Ride Quality (Tae – 7, Brendan – 6)
Tae – Basically, the xB is a platform-mate of Toyota Corolla XRS and Matrix S and XRS. They all carry the same body structure, engine, transmission, and suspension components. But in the case of the xB, the engineers skimped on the sound deadening and vibration reducing materials, and it shows. On smooth roads and at low speeds the car is quiet and well composed, but the car becomes somewhat loud at moderate to high speeds or uneven surfaces (California roads). With that said, the noise/harness level is never unbearable or raucous.

Brendan – I was honestly a little surprised the first time I drove the second gen xB, as I had automatically assumed it would be a big step up from the first gen. Sharp impacts are still there, quivers in the chassis exist, and NVH levels are higher than normal. Given the fact that it grew, matured and is better than the first gen in a lot of ways, I had higher expectations.

Technology (Tae – 7, Brendan – 7.5)
Tae – Traction Control System is standard, along with six airbags and ABS, power windows and locks, remote entry, Pioneer audio system, iPod connection and cable, etc… It’s not industry leading or firsts, but you get all these standard – instead of being costly options. The standard Pioneer audio sounds very good, but sound quality worsens as you increase the volume. Navigation System is an option, and it’s an Alpine unit.

Brendan – Hits all the right check boxes for standard features, and most of the goodies that are on my personal wishlist. Seeing navigation offered in this segment is nice, but it is a little costly, and chances are Alpine has a better unit right around the corner for less money.

Value (Tae – 8, Brendan – 8)
Tae – See ‘Technology’. At $16.5k, you get so much… only complaint would be the interior fit-and-finish issues. But for what you get for the price, even that complaint becomes somewhat negligible.

Brendan – Scion offers a lot of car for the money, but bargain happy customers can get a lot more Corolla for their money, which if you plan to do nothing but commute, might be an option worth exploring. You’ll pay more for the same basic car because it looks nicer, and because Scion doesn’t allow the dealers to negotiate.

Overall (Tae – 8, Brendan – 8)
Tae – Perhaps the 2010 Scion xB represents the best value in its category, maybe even the whole entire market. You get better than average handling and performance, standard equipment list that’s second to none, excellent utility space, and great comfort… and all at under $17k! Not to mention that you get a strong resale value, because there are no rebates/incentives and no price haggling.

Brendan – If you want more style than a beige sedan, but don’t want to pony up a ton of money, this might be the best bet. It’s only drawback is a ride that is a little uncivilized compared to its brothers from Toyota. It will do almost everything you ask of it, and will do so in an above average manner every time (except hit potholes).

- KF

April 7, 2010 | Test Drive Team | Tags: | No Comments »

Video Review: Muscle Car Battle

Ever since we reviewed the resurgence of the Dodge Challenger, we’ve wanted to put the Mustang and Camaro head to head.  Now we’ve finally grabbed both the icons, found an amazing road, and pretended it was 1969.

Except, in this era of MPG concerns, Hybrids, and alternative fuel, do these big V8 monsters still bring anything worthwhile?  Plus, it isn’t 1969 anymore. And we really like twisty mountain roads.  So this will either prove muscle cars can now corner, or end in a flaming crash.

Either way, strap in.

Mustang GT vs. Camaro SS Review – Everyday Driver from Everyday Driver on Vimeo.

Courtesy of our content partner: Everyday Driver TV

April 6, 2010 | Paul and Todd | Tags: , , , | No Comments »

Video Review: 2010 Lexus IS 350C

In Toyota’s quest for world-domination, the Lexus brand has become a huge badge and reputation for quiet and luxurious transportation. Yet, the IS series also strives to be a car for enthusiasts. Of course, that means competing in the crowded sports sedan segment.

But the IS didn’t offer a convertible version until recently. And it was launched with a marketing campaign suggesting a Lexus for those who love life and live dangerously. So Paul and Todd set out to see if this Lexus can actually live up to its marketing blitz.

This car was a regular viewer request. Thanks for watching, and thanks for the suggestion.

Courtesy of our content partner: Everyday Driver TV

April 1, 2010 | Paul and Todd | Tags: , | No Comments »

Review: 2010 Kia Soul sport

2010 Kia Soul sport

Vital Stats

Engine: 2.0 liter I4 (142HP/137TQ)
Drivetrain Layout: Front engine/Front wheel drive
Transmission: 4-speed automatic
Seating Capacity: 5 Passengers
EPA Fuel Economy: 24 city/30 highway
Base MSRP $18,195 + $695 (destination charge)
Recommended Options: Sunroof Package $700

The Basics
Thanks to Toyota’s Scion brand, the US automotive marketplace woke up to the fact that there is a significant market demand for funky, distinct, individualistic, customizable vehicles. The new contenders in this segment are the Kia Soul and Nissan cube (oddly enough the Cube was the originator of this segment in Japan). Of the three Boxes, the Kia Soul is the smallest.

Spiritually, the Kia Soul translates the original Scion xB’s DNA better than the Scion’s own 2nd gen xB. The Kia Soul is even more distinctive, and has even more of a playful personality than either generation xB’s. The Soul is about the same size as the first xB and is available in 4 trim levels and two available engines. And who can forget about one of the best automotive advertisements in the last decade, the Kia Hamsters!

Highs: Funky and fun exterior and interior design, good handling dynamics, smooth engine, great steering feel
Lows: NVH (noise, harshness vibration) not as good as others, smallish cargo space, can get pricey

Similar Vehicles: Nissan cube, Scion xB, Kia Forte

Exterior (Tae – 9, Andy – 9)
Tae – Dare I say that the Kia Soul has got some soul? From its sloping roofline, rising beltline, the vents on the fenders, the black door moldings and bumper trimmings, headlamps, tail lamps every design element works. It’s funky, fun, distinctive, and sporty. In the current ‘box segment’, the Kia Soul receives a top grade in styling.

Andy – I think the Soul looks great, however, I’ve found that like the other ‘box cars,’ its looks are polarizing. People either seem to love it or hate it. I happen to love it. It’s sportier than the Cube, and more exciting than the xB. I agree with Tae: funky, fun, and sporty.

Interior (Tae – 8.5, Andy – 8)
Tae – Carrying on with superbs of the exterior styling,  the interior design is top notch. The red/black upholstery is sporty and looks to be durable, dash materials are above average, and the fit-and-finish is very good. The storage compartments in the dash and center console are cleverly designed, and the armrest is nicely done as well – doesn’t feel like an afterthought like it does in the Scion xB. As far as any gripes go… the cargo area is small, and if you have tall front seat dwellers, the back seats will be cramped.

Andy – The Soul’s interior is cool, no doubt about it. There is plenty of passenger room and good interior storage. I found the front seats to be a bit stiff, and not quite as supportive as I like. Unlike Tae, I found the center arm rest to be a bit plasticky and uncomfortable. However, these are minor gripes. Overall, you get a lot of interior for your cash including a great stereo and good ergonomics.

Drivetrain (Tae – 7, Andy – 7)
Tae – Although the engine and transmission are smooth and gets the job done, compared to the 2.4 liter unit in the Scion xB, it feels underpowered. The noise levels from the drivetrain are very good, until the very top end of the engines speeds – by then, the engine sounds like it’s struggling. The 2.0 liter engine in the Soul sport is sporty in nature (more power in the higher revs than lower speeds), and feels reasonably refined. The transmission shifts smooth without a discernable shift-jerk, but the shifting action is not as snappy as I would like.

Andy – Unlike Tae, I didn’t think the Soul felt underpowered. I did, however, feel the engine was a little noisy and unrefined compared to the competition; ditto that with the manual transmission, which feels a bit rubbery and not as precise as the Japanese makes. Gearing is good, and the transmission makes good use of the car’s 142 horsepower. The engine does rev well and offers spirited acceleration; it just make a lot of new doing so.

Performance (Tae – 7.5, Andy – 8)
Tae – The straightline performance is pretty average with something like a mid-8 second 0-60MPH times. In the handling department, the Soul sport shines – even moreso than the Scion xB. It corners with predictability and grippy enough for most joy rides.

Andy – The Soul is fun to drive. The combination of good horsepower and torque figures, proper gearing, a stiff suspension, and strong grip lends itself to spirited cornering. Acceleration is above average. There always seems to be enough power on tap for passing, and freeway cruising is handled easily. The Soul is the athlete in this segment.

Ride Quality (Tae – 6.5, Andy – 6.5)
Tae – Maybe it’s due to the fact that it’s got a stiffer suspension, maybe it’s the low profile 18” wheels/tires, or maybe it’s just that this is an economy car – the ride quality is not as refined as some of the competitors. I would say that the Kia Soul is the worst in the ride quality department out of the Box trio (Soul, xB, and Cube), and by no means that the Soul rides terrible – that type of distinction belong to the likes of Smart fortwo, Dodge Calibur, Chevy Aveo, etc…

Andy –  I agree with Tae.  The ride fees overly stiff, almost like it rides on aftermarket lowering/performance springs—but it doesn’t have them. Is this the tradeoff for the good cornering? Perhaps. The Soul is more of a canyon carver than a comfortable cruiser.

Technology (Tae – 8.5, Andy – 9)
Tae – This top-level Soul is stuffed with just about everything under the sun (sunroof is optional), including Bluetooth and iPod/USB connectivity. Things like traction control, 6 airbags, ABS, and other safety equipment is standard also. The audio system is easy to use and sound better than most of its competitors, and c’mon… it’s got speaker lights!

Andy – It’s hard to beat this level of technology for the price. Its Bluetooth is among the best I’ve ever used regardless of price. The iPod/USB connectivity is good, and the 315 watt stereo (with pulsating lights in the speaker grilles—don’t worry, you can turn them off, too) is outstanding. Combine with the safety features Tae mentioned, and you’ve got a car any ‘techie’ would appreciate, especially at this price level.

Value (Tae – 8.5, Andy – 9)
Tae – Compared to the Scion xB, the Kia Soul sport is not as a good of a bargain. However, when you price out the xB with the 18” wheel/tire combo, metal pedals, and Bluetooth you’ll catch up to the Kia’s price. Items like two-tone interior, sports suspension, sunroof, and speaker lighting system are an aftermarket affair for the Scion xB.

Andy – I’m going to contrast Tae and say the Soul is a better bargain than the xB. I feel you get more for your money: More style, more tech, and more performance (especially in the cornering department) and the same or lower price. The only downside is going to be resale value; something Kias still aren’t known for. Also, the Soul’s 10 year/100,000 mile powertrain warranty, 5 year/60,000 miles bumper-to-bumper warranty, as well as 5 years/60,000 miles of roadside assistance.

Overall (Tae – 8, Andy – 8.5)
Tae – If you are looking for a vehicle that says I’m different, yet not in a ‘weird’ way, the Kia Soul might be for you. It is an excellent option for students and/or city dwellers. You can carry a lot of junk, has a good sound system, handles good, looks outrageous, and full of great personality.

Andy – I’d agree with Tae on all accounts. There’s a lot of car for the cash with the Soul. Plus, buyers get an impressive warranty. The Soul might not be for everyone, but it’s good car for anyone looking for an above-average level of performance, technology, and style at a good price point.

- KF

March 31, 2010 | Test Drive Team | Tags: | No Comments »

Review: 2010 Acura TSX V6


2010 Acura TSX V6 with Technology Package


Vital Stats
Engine: 3.5 liter V6 (280HP/254TQ)
Drivetrain Layout: Front engine/Front wheel drive
Transmission: 5 Speed Automatic
Seating Capacity: 5 Passengers
EPA Fuel Economy: 18 city/27 highway
Base MSRP $37,950 + $810 (destination charge)
Recommended Options: no options, only accessories available

The Basics
The Acura TSX made its debut, in the US Market, back in 2004. It was basically a rebadged European Market Honda Accord (quite bit smaller than the ‘fat American’ version). The first generation TSX looked tidy, handled great (for a FWD midsize car), and was somewhat a good value for the money.

For the 2009 model year, Acura introduced the second generation TSX (also rebadged Euro Accord). It is significantly bigger, especially the width, but its 2.4 liter 4 cylinder engine was a carryover from the smaller, previous TSX. The second generation TSX, being larger and heavier, wasn’t as quick or nimble to drive.

So what did Honda engineers do to remedy the situation? Of course, they went to the School of American Car Engineering… put a bigger engine in it!

Highs: great fit-and-finish, good power
Lows: not as fun to drive as competitors, button-happy interior, no longer charming

Exterior (Tae – 7, Andy – 7.5)
Tae – Love it or hate it, the Acura’s signature shield/tooth/beak grille is present on the TSX… but out of the current Acura line up, the Shield doesn’t look too out of place on the TSX. When you can pry your eyes off from the grille, the rest of the body is modern and the design is inoffensive and neutral. The stance is fairly wide, giving it somewhat athletic look to the car.

Andy – Also not a fan of the chrome grille treatment, although it looks better on the TSX than just about any other Acura. The rest of the car is typical Honda/Acura understatement—classy and sophisticated, but it doesn’t do much to excite me.

Interior (Tae – 7, Andy – 8)
Tae – Can we say button-porn??? Buttons galore! It’s as if Honda’s interior designers purposely dedicated a button for each function of the vehicle, maybe they had old people in mind. They really could have trimmed down on the number of buttons. Another thing is that if you put this interior next to the regular everyday Euro Accord (or even the American Accord); it is pretty much the same – Acura is supposed to be a ‘premium brand’, right? I really hate to keep going on about the negatives about this interior (it’s really not that bad, but the bad parts just really stand out), but the painted silver trim around the center console is cheap and is begging for scratches. Now on to the best feature of this Acura – the steering wheel. The weight, thickness, and size are perfect. Also, the leather is fairly high quality and the stitching is good. The front seats are comfortable and supportive, yet the backseat legroom is a little cramped.

Andy – I liked the interior for the most part. It’s well appointed and has everything you’d expect in a luxury car. Add doors that close like vaults, absolutely zero rattles, and refined switchgear, and you’ve got an interior that feels very well built. However, there are a ton of buttons. About 12 on the steering wheel and probably double that on the dash. I did like the chunky steering wheel, which felt very sporting. The front seats are comfortable and spacious. The rear seats, however, are cramped. My knees hit the seat backs, and my feet were nearly 100% underneath the seat bottoms—I’m only 5′ 7”, too. Overall, the interior is a comfortable place to spend time, so long as it’s not in the back seat.

Drivetrain (Tae – 7, Andy – 8)
Tae – The 3.5 liter V6 and 5 speed automatic transmission combo is found in most Honda/Acura vehicles, and it does the job very good. Good amount of low-end power (torque) and midrange performance is also good. The transmission is quick and smooth shifting, but with most competitors are offering 6 speeds or more. By going to more speeds might give them better fuel economy numbers – not necessarily for acceleration.

Andy – For me, the engine is the highlight of this car. The powerful 3.5-liter V6 revs smoothly, and sounds great all the way up to its redline.  Mash the throttle and traction control will do its best to maintain grip. However, you’ll want to hold the steering wheel tightly, as there is a lot of torque steer. I kept thinking what the car would be like if it were RWD.

The TSX V6 is an effortless cruiser at highway speeds, and has more than ample power for passing and merging. I averaged 19 MPG with the car in mostly city driving—one MPG better than its EPA rating of 18 city. Highway mileage is rated at 27 MPG.

Performance (Tae – 6.5, Andy – 7.5)
Tae – Acura marketing guys have been going on and on about how their cars are superior in performance in the luxury market… sigh. That topic is reserved for another time and section of this website. As with most Nissan and Saab owners already know, FWD (front wheel drive) cars with more than 150TQ will give you a significant torque steer (sudden jerking of the steering wheel upon acceleration). Driving the V6 TSX is just like driving any other FWD ‘performance’ vehicle of today, and I’m sorry to say that the personality that the previous TSX had is mostly gone. The new TSX is big and heavy, it’s not as nimble or fun to drive. As a commuter car, this car would be fine… but as a serious performance vehicle or even a weekend canyon carver, it is not.

Andy – Acceleration is very good with the TSX V6, with 0-60 numbers right around 6 seconds. Really, power is never an issue—something the four-cylinder version is a bit short on. The car’s front double-wishbone and rear multi-link suspension plus its 18” wheels wrapped in meaty tires keep things in check in the curves, too. However, the combination of a FWD drivetrain, all the power, and a 3,680 lb. curb weight keep the TSX from entering ‘nimble’ territory. There’s plenty of power and good grip. Again, if this car were RWD, it might be great.

Ride Quality (Tae – 7.5, Andy – 7.5)
Tae – At a low to moderate pace, the TSX is great. Noise is well controlled, and the bumps and tussling are well damped. Only in high speeds and very sudden, huge bumps that the chassis gets upset. My only gripe is that disjointed feeling in the steering wheel is present when going over bumps, such as railroad tracks.  Lastly, the body feels a bit hollow, going over unsettled roads – this trait is very common in Asian cars.

Andy –  This is a sports sedan, so it’s not going to have a super-cushy ride. As it should, it rides firmly and controlled, rarely feeling unsettled. I didn’t notice the hollowness Tae mentions; everything felt solid to me. However, even considering this is a sports sedan, the ride isn’t phenomenal; I’d say it’s slightly above average, though. One thing I noticed is the car feels heavy.

Technology (Tae – 7, Andy – 7.5)
Tae – In typical Acura fashion, there are no options or option packages – you get everything or you get everything with Navigation.  Items such as Bluetooth, iPod/USB port, high-end audio, satellite radio, and all the safety equipment are there. Our test models had Navigation Systems in it. It is not touchscreen, you control it with either the knob/button combo or your voice. The voice control system is supposed to recognize more than 600 words, and the commands are on the screen as you go. But I’m not a fan of voice control system, just yet… it requires a steep learning curve and the system repeats your command back for confirmation (you can turn off the repeat feature off for smoother interaction). Finally, the ELS sound system is very good, but only with the provided test DVD-audio disc – the radio/CD/iPod sounds are pretty average for luxury car standards.

Andy – There is a ton of technology with this car. However, it’s not all well executed. As mentioned, there are scads of buttons—buttons everywhere! I did like the center GPS control knob/button, which worked well. However, there are so many controls and choices—almost too many—that it becomes difficult to control, especially on the go. I’m also a stickler for simple Bluetooth connectivity, and pairing my Samsung phone with the Acura-Link system was a chore. Plus, every time I got into the car, it would turn on the phone’s music player, thus disabling my phone book. I tried to download my contacts to the car, but it only would download two contacts. If I didn’t know the number off hand (and who does these days?), you’re out of luck.

In addition, the car’s climate control and radio are displayed in a narrow digital display under the color GPS display. This was hard to read, and unintuitive to figure out. All the bells and whistles, but they’re difficult to operate.

Value (Tae – 5, Andy – 4)
Tae – I just cannot give it a very high score here, even if I wanted to. At almost $39k, you can get the scary fast Infiniti G37 with a 330HP engine, a proper rear-wheel drive, bigger interior, better driving dynamics, and 7 speed transmission. You can fancy yourself a fully loaded BMW 328i with the M Sport package for just a couple of grand more. Better yet, for about $500 more you can fetch the larger TL – or even, you can get a 390HP V8 Hyundai Genesis Sedan with a 10 year warranty.

Andy – The TSX Tech V6 is a bit odd to me value wise. You can get into a larger Acura TL with the company’s all-wheel drive system for nearly the same cost. You can even get into a FWD TL for less money than the TSX Tech V6. You will no doubt get class-leading reliability, resale, and refinement, but at what cost? As Tae mentions, there is no shortage of competition out there, and I’d be sure to shop competitors before plunking down nearly $40,000 for a mid-sized FWD sports sedan.

Overall (Tae – 6, Andy – 6.5)
Tae – By adding a V6 engine to the ‘underpowered’ TSX, Acura has effectively priced itself out of market (they are asking $5k more for the V6 engine). Unless you really hate the TL’s looks (and I do), there is not enough justification of purchasing this vehicle. If you’re a diehard Honda/Acura loyalist and must own a European Accord, this is the car for you. For everyone else, there are many better options.

Andy – I’m with Tae on 90% of this. I, too, am not a fan of the TL’s looks, and prefer the TSX’s appearance, which I still don’t find terribly exciting. With the V6, this car is more of a competitor, but the price is just too steep. If I just had to have a TSX, I’d opt for less power, less weight, and less cost and go with the four cylinder model.

-KF

March 19, 2010 | Test Drive Team | Tags: | 2 Comments »

Review: 2010 Nissan cube 1.8 S


2010 Nissan cube 1.8 S

Vital Stats

Engine: 1.8 liter I4 (122HP/127TQ)
Drivetrain Layout: Front engine/Front wheel drive
Transmission: CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission)
Seating Capacity: 5 Passengers
EPA Fuel Economy: 27 city/31 highway
Base MSRP $16,030 + $720 (destination charge)
Recommended Options: Interior Designer Package $230

The Basics
Way back in 1998, Nissan introduced the Cube in Japan to cover the gap between their smallest car (March/Micra) and the compact car (Sunny/Sentra). It was labeled as a mini-MPV (multi-purpose vehicle), and it sort of looked like a tiny minivan. Little did they know that the Cube would be a trendsetter for a whole new segment.

At first, the Cube wasn’t a big seller or did it stand out from the crowd all that much. It wasn’t until the 2002 model (the start of the second generation), that the Cube became sort of an icon in Japan. The second generation Cube is immediately recognizable as a Cube of today, and came in many variants and options. To compete with the Cube, Toyota created the bB (which was imported to US as Scion xB).

Today, the third generation cube (note the lowercase ‘c’) is imported to US to compete with the Scion xB and the Kia Soul.

Highs: Fun and practical exterior and interior design, smooth driving dynamics, high class interior materials
Lows: Not as fun to drive as the competitors

Similar Vehicles: Scion xB, Kia Soul, Nissan Versa

Exterior (Tae – 7.5, Andy – 9, Brendan – 4)
Tae – Think of a block of ice that’s been sitting in the sun for a few minutes, and that’s basically how the cube looks like – a two-box design with rounded off corners. Nissan says the cube’s front end was meant to resemble a Bulldog with sunglasses… and I definitely see that. But the signature styling element of the cube is its wrap-around asymmetrical rear window.

Andy – Do you want something that doesn’t look like anything on the market? The cube is it. Indeed, the wrap-around rear glass is a unique feature which adds to the cubes avant garde styling. Other interesting features include the low-mounted taillights and ‘bulldog-esque’ front end. Plus, there isn’t a true 90-degree line to be found. Like many of these ‘box cars,’ styling is a love-it-or-hate-it affair. I love it; it’s my favorite looking vehicle in the segment, in fact.

Brendan -  Old people will do double takes in disgust, teenage boys will give you enthusiastic thumbs up, and your trendy fixie will look great on the roof. I’ve seemed to have missed the memo on the box cars, and I do not see their design appeal, and the lines are as  soft as week old Jell-O. Humans love symmetry normally, and although the front comes across bland, the rear comes across forced and awkward. If unique is what you are shooting for, you’ll have it here in spades though.

Interior (Tae – 7.5, Andy – 8.5, Brendan – 8)
Tae – Nissan designers wanted to create a spa-like serene feeling, and they’ve succeeded for the most part. The ceiling (headliner) has a rippled effect, much like pebble thrown into a pond, as does the door speaker grilles. The dashboard has a double curve, making it feel airy and bright. Most of the interior materials are great stuff, just like the Nissan Versa (cube’s platform-mate). The front seats are comfortable, but the backseat was a little cramped.

Andy – Although Nissan may have been going for a spa setting, I tend to think of the cube’s interior more as a rolling nightclub than a spa. Its funky styling, available 20-color interior mood lighting, and comfortable seats are cool. And although the seats are indeed really comfortable (and patterned with a funky, modern print), they aren’t very supportive and don’t hold you in the corners very well. However, on long trips, they’re downright cushy—kind of like a plush lounge chair! Unfortunately, the rear seat does not fold flat, hindering it from hauling large amounts of cargo. However, it is comfortable for four adults and some baggage.

Brendan – While I may be at odds with the exterior, the interior is great. In typical Nissan fashion, everything falls to hand easily, doesn’t feel any cheaper than it has to, and it’s easy to see out of. There are a few “interesting” features like the circle of shag pile carpet you can tape to the dash, but it’s a very comfortable place to spend time. This segment doesn’t push sportiness very much, so I appreciate the lack of aggressively bolstered front seats, as the mostly flat cushions work well.

Drivetrain (Tae – 7, Andy – 7, Brendan – 7)
Tae – If you have driven a Nissan Versa, then you already know what the cube feels like. Smooth engine, smooth transmission (CVT has no physical gears), but no excitement. Keyword – smoooooooooooooooth.

Andy – Tae is right: The engine and drivetrain are smooth, but not terribly exciting or engaging. The CVT works well in this vehicle, and provides adequate power.

Brendan – Is there an echo in this review? Smooth, boring, and just enough power to not be annoying. Average is the best term.

Performance (Tae – 6.5, Andy – 6.5, Brendan – 6)
Tae – Although the power is adequate, because it is paired with a CVT, it feels slow. That could be good or bad, depending on your view. Also, the handling isn’t as crisp as the Kia Soul or even the Scion xB. But let’s get real – you are not going to buy one of these for performance or handling. So, for what it is, it does its job very admirably.

Andy – The cube isn’t a slouch, but it isn’t a track star, either. It doesn’t have any issues keeping up with traffic, but it doesn’t feel like a drivers’ car. Driving dynamics are not bad, just not outstanding. Fuel economy also is good, but not amazing (it’s EPA rated at 27 city, 31 highway); I did hit the EPA 27 in mostly city driving.

Brendan – There is a little friskiness to be had, but you never get the feel that it enjoys being driven hard. It does everything mostly correctly, it just doesn’t beg for more. Limits are a little lower than I would have expected, but given that this car is a tarted up basic commuter, there are no complaints other than the overly soft brake pedal.

Ride Quality (Tae – 8, Andy – 9, Brendan – 7.5)
Tae – This department is where the cube shines. Just outstanding, almost luxury car like – also much like the Nissan Versa. The cube is well composed over bumps and almost never jostles, the noise level is very good, and the drivetrain feels muted. If I had to pick out a daily commuter, purely based on comfort, the cube would be the top choice.

Andy –  This is definitely the cruiser of the segment, and it does this very well. The ride is quite soft, which is comfortable on the highways and around town. The tradeoff is the cornering. The cube leans a lot in the curves, and those comfy seats I talked about don’t hold you in place well. If I had to describe the ride in one word, it’d be ‘comfortable.’

Brendan – While the marketing guru’s for Nissan have a lame name for them, the “Ripple Control Shocks” do work as advertised. It takes quite a bit to get the cube upset, and if you do, it tends to calm down quickly. Most small cars would be much better if they paid more attention to how Nissan worked their magic on the suspension. Only issue I found was a certain section of a rough concrete freeway that got the whole car vibrating like a cheap motel bed.

Technology (Tae – 7, Andy – 7, Brendan – 6)
Tae – As is with all the competitors in this segment, most of the ‘optional’ equipment are standard. The iPod and Bluetooth connectivity, traction control system, steering wheel controls, and all safety gadgets are all standard. Sadly, the 1.8 S model has the standard audio and after a brief listening of it, I can only deem it as average quality.

Andy – Tae is 100% right. If you want all the tech options, you’ll need to step up to the SL or Krom (pronounced ‘chrome’) models. However, the S model will get you the safety features as well as decent standard features. FYI, the upgraded SL’s Rockford-Fosgate stereo is outstanding.

Brendan – Technology? In this segment? It’ll play your music, connect with your phone,  and let you unlock from a distance. Pretty standard fare all in all. I agree with Andy though, the Rockford-Fosgate stereo is great.

Value (Tae – 7.5, Andy – 8, Brendan – 7)
Tae – Coming in at under $17k, it’s roughly about the same price as the Scion xB and similary equipped Kia Soul +. The cube and the Soul offer a few things that Scion cannot, factory incentives and dealer discounts, for example. Since the value proposition is pretty high in this segment, they are pretty much a wash.

Andy – This vehicle is pretty much on par with its competition. My guess is the cube’s resale will be a lot better than the Kia Soul’s, and probably equal if not better than the xB’s. Plus, its engine and chassis are proven pieces (from the Nissan Versa), so reliability should be good, too.

Brendan – My rating is a little lower than my partners in Box rating crime due to the fact that this is a tarted up Versa for Sentra money. While it’s priced right against the direct competition, if style isn’t the most important factor, you can find the same for less money.

Overall (Tae – 7, Andy – 8, Brendan – 7)
Tae – The Nissan cube is an interesting quandary, I suppose you can call it the ‘Goldilocks’ effect. Is it the fastest? No. Is it the best handling? No. Is it the most affordable? No. Is it the largest? No. Everything about the Nissan cube is in the comfortable ‘Goldilocks’ middle. It is the quietest, the most comfortable, and the smoothest ride among the Box trio.

Andy – The cube is a comfortable cruiser with a good amount of standard amenities, and should hold its value. It isn’t an athlete, but it’s not supposed to be. The super-funky look isn’t for everyone, but it also isn’t supposed to be.  If you plan on buying a small car and have a long commute, it will be hard to beat the cube for overall comfort. I think this is one of the most unique cars on the market, and won’t drain your wallet at the pump, either.

Brendan – An all around, well executed, if quirky car. If you take the time to enjoy your own quirks and enjoy the fact that you are a little against the grain while still being wonderful in many regards, this might just be the perfect car for you.

-KF

March 14, 2010 | Test Drive Team | Tags: | No Comments »

Review: 2010 Suzuki Kizashi SE AWD

Suzuki’s automotive division is in the midst of a makeover. The transformation began in 2007 with the introduction of the compact and compelling SX4 sedan and crossover. Next, the company jettisoned its rebadged Daewoo-made Forenza, Reno, and Verona, as well as its General Motors-based XL-7 SUV. Its next and latest move might be its best: The introduction of the 2010 Kizashi sports sedan.

The Kizashi, available in four trim levels and with optional AWD, is a jack-of-all-trades that’s ready to do battle against a number of cars simultaneously: Front-drive sedan staples, such as the Mazda6, Nissan Altima, and Honda Accord; all-wheel drivers like the Subaru Legacy; even luxury likes including the Acura TSX and Audi A4 are in Kizashi’s cross hairs. Suzuki needs to hit the targets, too—sales have been down significantly lately as the company tries to figure out its lineup and maintain its relatively small dealer network.

However, what Suzuki has done with the Kizashi is very impressive. They’ve created a sports sedan with world-class driving dynamics, given it unexpectedly high-end features, and priced it on the low end of the spectrum. With the right marketing, this should be a segment buster.

My review model is a mid-level Kizashi SE with AWD mated to a CVT (continuously variable transmission). FYI, this model happens to be very similar in size, fuel economy, power, and price to the 2010 Subaru Legacy 2.5i.

EXTERIOR STYLING
I like the Kizashi’s appearance. It’s not over the top, but it’s not vanilla. Rather, it’s a classy blend of sport and sophistication, and nearly everyone I showed the car to liked its looks. One thing is for certain: Cover up the badges and most people wouldn’t guess this is a Suzuki.

Of note are the car’s signature dual exhaust cutouts, which provide a clean, edgy look to the rear fascia. Also of not is the car’ size. It’s longer than a VW Jetta by 3.8 inches, but shorter than a Subaru Legacy by 3.3 inches.

INTERIOR
The Kizashi’s interior is very impressive and feels, sounds, and looks like it came out of a much more expensive vehicle. The interior is finished in black and tan with silver accents. The dash’s black finish is slightly rubberized, and although not quite as nice as some of its luxury competitors, it’s not plasticy, either. All Kizashi’s also include push-button start/stop and SmartPass keyless entry.

The comfortable, moderately bolstered power driver’s seat (with two memory buttons) allows for a good driving position. The thick leather-wrapped steering wheel feels good in the hands, and it tilts and telescopes. Steering wheel controls include cruise, audio, and trip computer. Two gripes: The driving position I liked made the steering wheel block the top of the speedometer and tachometer, although not enough so I couldn’t read the gauges, but enough that I noticed. Secondly, there was a slight rattle somewhere in the dash.

Rear seating consists of a 60/40 folding bench with center arm rest, cupholders, and pass-through to the trunk. Rear leg room is ample, the trunk is sizable, and overall interior space is on par with the competition.

The SE’s audio fare consists of a seven-speaker stereo with CD player, XM reediness, and USB input; sound quality is commendable. A 10-speaker 425 watt Rockford-Fosgate system, as well as Bluetooth, are available on the upper end GTS and SLS models.

ENGINE/DRIVETRAIN
The Kizashi comes with a responsive, free-revving 2.4-liter four cylinder engine making 185 horsepower and 170 ft./lbs. of torque. This puts it above all four-cylinders in its class, sans the Acura TSX and Audi A4. The 16-valve, DOHC mill is smooth all the way up to its 6,660 RPM redline, although it does make a bit of noise in the upper range. It is, however, very quiet at cruising speeds.

This Kizashi features Suzuki’s optional i-AWD system, allowing the car to be operated in FWD or AWD. I kept the car in AWD 90% of the time, and it performed seamlessly. All AWD Kizashis come with a CVT that includes the ability to select five speeds manually by moving the gear shifter up or down. The system was surprisingly responsive, and less clunky that some “manumatic” shifters I’ve used. FYI, the six-speed manual transmission is only available on FWD models.

Fuel economy for AWD versions is rated at an EPA-estimated 22 city, 29 highway; I got 26 MPG with about 70% highway driving.

RIDE/HANDLING
When it comes down to it, the Kizashi simply out-drives many of its competitors. Its chassis feels like a car costing thousands more than it does.

A fully independent suspension with front and rear swaybars and KYB shock absorbers creates a nicely tuned sport suspension, and the electric-assist steering is quick. The SE models get upsized 17-inch alloy wheels shod in 215/55/17 Dunlop tires.

On the highway, the ride is supple and controlled. However, it’s in the curves where the Kizashi’s chassis comes alive. When driven spiritedly, the car feels planted and solid with minimal body roll. The suspension, engine, and drivetrain work well together, and the car never feels unsettled. I also found this car more fun to drive than the Subaru Legacy 2.5i; it simply feels sportier in just about every aspect. Frankly, the Kizashi is a hoot to drive. Another FYI: Buyers looking to add even more sport to this sports sedan may prefer to upgrade to the GTS or SLS with the larger 18-inch wheels and meaty 235/45/18 tires.

When it comes time to stop, braking is handled by four-wheel disc brakes with ABS, EBD, and brake assist. The Kizashi also has traction control, skid control, eight airbags, and a five-star government crash safety rating.

A TRUE COMPETITOR
Make no mistake: Suzuki has created a very competitive and affordable sports sedan with the Kizashi. My SE AWD stickers for $23,004, the only additional features being $125 worth of floor mats and $130 for metallic paint. It’s a great price for a car with such wonderful driving dynamics, not to mention plentiful amenities. To top it off, Suzuki backs the powertrain with a 10-year, 100,000 mile warranty.

Suzuki needs the Kizashi to be a success, and luckily, it’s built a world-class car. Now, they’ll need some world-class marketing to get the word out.

Don’t let Kizashi’s price fool you: The car is “that good,”and should not be overlooked by people shopping for sports sedans.

Courtesy of our content partner: Subcompact Culture

March 11, 2010 | Andy Lilienthal | Tags: | No Comments »

Review: 2010 Kia Forte SX Sedan

Kia first appeared in the U.S. in the early-to-mid 1990s (Portland, Oregon’s Ron Tonkin Kia was the first Kia dealer in the U.S.), and was mostly thought of as an entry-level automaker offering inexpensive, and, well, basic transportation. Hey—we all have to start somewhere. However, Kia has kept its nose to the automotive grindstone, offering more refinement, more quality, and more models from year to year. The company is quickly making its way up through the ranks to become a brand people want to buy, and not just a low-cost option.

The all-new 2010 Kia Forte sedan (and two-door “Koupe”) are prime examples of Kia’s latest and greatest efforts to date. The Forte goes to battle in the highly populated C-segment, which includes behemoths such as the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla, not to mention Mazda3, Ford Focus, or Volkswagen Jetta. Will Kia be able to woo buyers from more established brands? With its great pricing, expansive list of features, and great warranty, the Forte should definitely be on the the compact car shopper’s list.

Sophisticated Sheet Metal
It’s hard to deny Forte’s attractive exterior, especially in the SX trim. Clean, handsome lines, minimal front and rear overhangs, and attractive 17” wheels make this car look upscale (I think the Titanium paint looks great, too). I had several people tell me they thought it looked like an Acura or Honda, and it does sort of resemble the last-generation TSX, as well as the current Honda Civic.

Interior Attractiveness
Looks aren’t skin deep on the Forte SX. The leather-clad interior is very nice. The comfortable seats offer decent bolstering to hold you place and the headrest actually allows you to rest your head. The driving position has that just-right distance to grasp the chunky leather-wrapped steering wheel (which has both cruise- and audio controls). Ergonomics are also good: Everything feels like it’s where it should be. If fact, this actually feels like a driver’s car.

Impressively, all Forte trim levels get standard features, such as a USB and port, three months of satellite radio, and Bluetooth integration—all standard. Speaking of, Kia’s Bluetooth has to be one of the easiest, most straight-forward systems to use. A couple of callers said the clarity wasn’t the best, though. It could be my archaic phone, too.

Stepping up to the SX model nets you a nice-sounding six-speaker sound system, and the easy-to-read “Supervision” gauge cluster with multi-function trip computer that displays engine temperature, trip/odometer, fuel economy, range, and more. One thing that drew mixed criticism was the red illuminated ring surrounding the speedometer. Some thought it was annoying. I thought it looked cool.

Back seat room is adequate for two adults, and the rear seats fold down revealing a pass-through into an ample-sized trunk. Speaking of trunks, one thing that was a bit awkward: There was no way to open the trunk without using the keyless entry system or pulling the interior release. No exterior keyhole, no button to push.

Powerful engine, stiff ride, fun to drive
Make no mistake about it: The Forte is a lot of fun to drive. In fact, it’s probably one of the more fun-to-drive vehicles I’ve piloted in a while. Under the hood lies a powerful 173 horsepower 2.4-liter DOHC four cylinder with continuously variable valve timing making a respectable 168 ft. lbs. of torque. My review vehicle came with the five-speed automatic transmission with manual shifting capability; a six-speed manual transmission is also offered. EPA rating on the automatic SX is 23 city, 31 highway; I got almost exactly 23 mpg in mostly city driving. This is slightly better than the Toyota Corolla XRS, Honda Civic Si, and Mazda3 S Sport.

Forte has an independent front suspension and a torsion beam rear (the Civic and Mazda3 have a fully independent suspension; Corolla also uses the torsion rear). Suspension tuning is on the stiff side, which I like, although, it might be a bit stiff for some. The car handled very well and cornering was nice and flat. The meaty 215/45/17 tires had little problem putting the power to the ground. Braking is handled by front and rear disc brakes with ABS, brake assist, and EBD. The Forte also has traction control and stability control.

A truly competitive compact
There’s a lot to like about Kia’s Forte SX: Great driving characteristics, long list of available features, and attractive styling. This car offers similar performance to the Toyota Corolla XRS and Mazda3, but for thousands less. It’s still slower than the Civic Si sedan, but costs less and doesn’t require premium fuel. Plus there’s that warranty: 5 year/60,000 mile basic, 10 year/100,000 mile powertrain. You can’t get that standard on the Toyota, Mazda, or Honda.

Then there’s the Forte SX’s price $18,195; $20,490 as tested (which included $1,000 leather, and $600 heated seats, $695 destination).

That’s a lot of car for the money. Refinement is still not quite as high as the Japanese, but it’s getting better and better. And although Kia still has a ways to go to bring long-time Honda and Toyota buyers to its side, with cars like the Forte SX, consumers should take note: this is a very viable competitor for your hard-earned dollars.

Courtesy of our content partner: Subcompact Culture

February 11, 2010 | Andy Lilienthal | Tags: | No Comments »

Review: 2010 Subaru Legacy 2.5i Limited

There are a lot of Subarus in the Pacific Northwest. There is a lot of rain in the Pacific Northwest. Coincidence? I think not. All Subarus come with the company’s famous all-wheel drive—great for the area’s rain-slicked roads and snow-covered mountain passes.

The newly redesigned 2010 Legacy offers more interior room, more MPGs, and more features and options. The Legacy can be had with your choice of three engine, three trim levels, and three transmissions, and you can mix and match most of the features to get the car that you want. Choice is good, right?

My review subject was the 2.5i Limited. AKA, the 170 hp engine (the least powerful, highest mileage option) with the top-of-the line trim level. A good combination for someone looking for optimal MPGs, all the gadgets, and even a touch of luxury. Think of the 2.5i Limited as “frugality plus.” This isn’t the model for those looking for ultra-rapid transit; these people will want the turbocharged 2.5GT or 3.6R models. Rather, this is the version for those more concerned with thrift than thrust. The Legacy 2.5i Limited starts at $24,995; my test vehicle was about $29,000. I consider this to be a reasonable price for a sedan with so many tech features, a bit of luxury, and AWD.

ENGINE/TRANSMISSION/DRIVETRAIN
The Legacy 2.5i’s non-turbocharged 2.5-liter flat-four engine crates 170 hp and 170 ft./lbs. of torque. In my case, the engine was mated to Subaru’s Lineartronic CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission). This combination returns a very respectable EPA MPG rating of 23 city/31 highway—quite an achievement for an AWD vehicle weighing 3,451 lbs. The CVT also includes steering-wheel-mounted paddle shifters if the driver cares to manually select six speeds instead of putting the car in “D.”

I found this combination to yield adequate acceleration; speed demons will want to opt for the turbocharged 2.5GT instead. However, my 2.5i did return 25 MPG in mixed driving.

One thing the Legacy—and all other Subarus have—is tenacious grip. The all-wheel-drive system coupled with 17-inch alloy wheels and Bridgestone Turanza tires made the car stick to the road, wet or dry. Traction was not an issue.

A DEFINING EXTERIOR DESIGN
The Legacy’s new shape maintains Subaru’s nonconformity. Although perhaps not revolutionary, the Legacy does not look like every other sedan on the streets. Its rounded off corners, accentuated wheel arches, and low-slung side skirts are defining, as are the upturning headlights.

The styling does seem polarizing: Some people I talked to thought it looked very upscale, almost Lexus like, while others thought it looked a bit bulbous. Unique? Yes. For everyone? Nope. Then again, Subaru’s styling has never been for everyone.

LOTS OF INTERIOR FEATURES
The Limited trim level makes for a very well-appointed Legacy. The heated front leather seats are very comfortable, and were great on my 200 mile road trip to and from The Dalles, Oregon. The back seat is also comfy, and offers good leg room. The trunk is huge, easily gulping my bulky paper towel and toilet paper purchase at Costco.

There are tech gadgets aplenty: Navigation, Bluetooth, automatic headlights, automatic climate control, electric parking brake, rear vision camera, and USB port with iPod integration. The Limited trim level also includes an outstanding nine speaker 440-watt harmon/kardon stereo. Plus, the system’s USB port offered one of the better iPod integrations I’ve used. (There’s also an auxiliary input.) Another great feature? The USB and auxiliary inputs are located in the center armrest, hidden away from potential thieves. Nice touch!

The stereo and navigation are combined into one touch screen, which does have a learning curve. There were a couple of very frustrating times where I could not get the GPS to shut it’s digital mouth. Frankly, it isn’t completely intuitive to use, so buyers will want to familiarize themselves with the unit before heading down the road. In addition, the automatic climate control requires a bit of time to become familiar with. However, both worked well once you got the hang of them.

One thing I didn’t get the hang of was the car’s Bluetooth system. No matter what I did, I couldn’t seem to get it to do what I wanted. Voice commands, calling features, you name it. Probably a bit steeper learning curve on this feature.

Two of my favorite features on this car were the rear vision camera, which was great for parking; and the electric parking brake. Simply press a rectangular to set the brake, and pull it from behind to disengage. Plus, the Legacy had a hill-holder mode. When you press the button to activate the feature (which can can leave on all the time), the car automatically puts the parking brake on when on an incline of more than 5% grade. When you press the accelerator, it disengages.

DRIVING
The Legacy 2.5i offers adequate acceleration, and passing was never a problem. The car rides nicely on both city streets and highways; it always felt solid and surefooted. The steering is taught and precise, with suspension towards the upper end of the soft spectrum—what you’d expect from the non-GT model, though. This makes Interstate cruising a comfortable endeavor, and lessens the blows from potholes around town. If I had to describe the ride in one word, I’d say: comfortable, yet firm, but not too firm, and not too soft. OK, so that’s 11 words.

Courtesy of our content partner: Subcompact Culture

February 1, 2010 | Andy Lilienthal | No Comments »

Review: 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 Grand Touring

2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 Grand Touring
Vital Stats
Engine: 3.8 liter V6 (306HP/266TQ)
Drivetrain Layout: Front engine/Rear wheel drive
Transmission: 6-speed automatic
Seating Capacity: 4 Passengers
EPA Fuel Economy: 20 city/30 highway
Base MSRP $30,000 + $750 (destination charge)
Recommended Options: Floor and Cargo Mats ($185), iPod Cable ($35)

The Basics
This vehicle represents part two of the Hyundai’s image revitalization in the US. In Europe, and (of course) in Korea, the Hyundai’s brand name is very strong. However, Hyundai has had less than an ideal image in the US market… and it’s fully understandable – i.e. Pony Excel?

Setting the history of Hyundai Motors in America aside, the Genesis Coupe is a very, very solid attempt at a personal sports coupe. Style-wise it sets its target straight at the Infiniti G37, and it is a gawdy $20k less than a 3-series BMW. So the question is can you pay $10k, $20k extra for these premium vehicles and live with yourself?

Highs: Exceptional value proposition, solid driving feel, smooth engine, high design execution
Lows: Interior suffers the same illness of the previous generation Infiniti G35 Coupe, slow shifting transmission

Exterior (Tae – 9, Ilya – 8)
Hyundai set the Infiniti’s previous G35 Coupe as a benchmark and tried to make improvements wherever they saw fit. Infiniti did basically the same, hence the two vehicles’ similarity. If you prefer the classic flowing lines, you’ll lean toward the Infiniti… and if you like a more progressive design, you’ll take the Hyundai.

Interior (Tae – 6.5, Ilya – 6.5)
If they have done the same thing they did on the Genesis Sedan, then this car would be an absolute home run. However, the Genesis Coupe is marketed toward a younger audience at a lower price point – which translates into… cheap plastic! Mainly, the silver tone painted center stack is the big culprit. The Grand Touring trim specific brown leather upholstery is of high quality, but the dashboard and door panels are about average.

Drivetrain (Tae – 7.5, Ilya – 7)
The engine is pretty much the same one that’s found in the Genesis Sedan (ie luxury class), so it’s super smooth with plenty of mid-range grunt. It does run out of steam toward the high-end. The transmission is a little bit of a disappointment. Hyundai’s engineers must be using the software they using on the Genesis Sedan, or they designed it with a overly aggressive ‘fail safe’ mode. You click on the paddle shifter, and… you wait for the shift to come. The up-shift is slow by today’s standards.

The 6-speed manual, while crisp, feels notchy and heavy. Also, the clutch pedal takes quite some work to get used to. Pressing the clutch takes the strength of a strongman, while letting off involves having the reflexes of the Speedy Gonzalez.

Performance (Tae – 8, Ilya – 8)
This car is plenty quick! With 0-60 times under 6 seconds, it is slightly slower than the G37 Coupe we’ve tested. We think it’s mainly the transmission that’s slowing down the sprint times. When you toss this car side-to-side, it is pretty comparable to the G37 – but not quite as sharp as a BMW 335i Coupe with Sport Package, per se. With some aftermarket upgrades, the Genesis Coupe might become a very fun car.

Ride Quality (Tae – 8, Ilya – 8)
Not too many complaints here, although expansion cracks in the road will transfer into the cabin a little more than the Infiniti or BMW. Also the NVH (Noise, Vibration, Harshness) levels seem as if it’s a tiny downgrade from those two competing vehicles mentioned.

Technology (Tae – 7.5, Ilya – 7.5)
Since we did not get to test the model with Navigation System, we can tell you that the Infinity Audio System does indeed sound better than the Infiniti’s Bose Audio system at normal listening levels. The premium features such as keyless entry with push-button start, automatic climate control, power moonroof, and Bluetooth and iPod connectivity are all present. So are all the standard electronic nannys are on-board like Traction Control System, Stability Control, etc…

Value (Tae – 9.5, Ilya – 9)
The tested car comes at a tick over $31k. The standard equipment list is so long on the Grand Touring model, that there is no option packages – only a few accessories are available from your dealer. For a similar offering at a Infiniti dealership, you will spend about $13k more… add another $8k, and you can buy yourself a BMW 335i Coupe.

Overall (Tae – 8.5, Ilya – 8.5)
The Genesis (both Coupe and Sedan) offerings from Hyundai are just stellar, and just might be compelling enough for non-believers to convert. Only time will tell… but from the market reaction, the Hyundai dealers are already having hard time keeping the Genesis Coupe 2.0T models in stock.

Can you swallow your pride and walk into a Hyundai dealership? If you can, this is one hell of a car!

-KF

January 13, 2010 | Test Drive Team | Tags: , | No Comments »

Video Review: 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 Track

Hyundai has long been the butt of jokes in the US car market. Their cars were known to be cheap in both price and feel. But change is upon us.

Beginning with their aptly named “Genesis” platform, Hyundai has put their Japanese rivals on notice. The Sedan targets the best of Lexus, and this coupe version aims for the Infiniti G37 coupe and Nissan 370z. But Hyundai offers these cars for thousands less than the competition… just like the Toyota and Nissan did years before.

The guys get the chance for a quick review in the most unforgiving place for a sports car, the track. Can this little upstart from Hyundai really offer worthwhile performance for thousands less?

January 11, 2010 | Paul and Todd | Tags: , | No Comments »

Review: 2010 Nissan Z Coupe 370Z

2010 Nissan Z Coupe 370Z
Vital Stats
Engine: 3.7 liter V6 (332HP/270TQ)
Drivetrain Layout: Front engine/Rear wheel drive
Transmission: 6-speed manual
Seating Capacity: 2 Passengers
EPA Fuel Economy: 18 city/26 highway
Base MSRP $29,990 + $720 (destination charge)
Recommended Options: Sports Package ($3,000)

The Basics
Take whatever you didn’t like about the 350Z, improve on those said items, then chop about 4 inches in length… and voila! All kidding aside, what Nissan did with the 370Z is what exactly what other manufacturers should follow suit.

The 350Z was a good, back-to-the basics, sports car – if not a little raucous. The 370Z is quieter, handles sharper, lighter, more powerful, and oh gawd… huge improvement in interior design and materials!

Highs: Interior design and materials, near top-notch driving dynamics, SyncroRev Match gearbox, fun-at-anytime power delivery
Lows: Coarse engine noise at high speeds, awkward exterior styling, floaty clutch engagement

Exterior (Brendan – 7, Tae – 6)
Basic design architecture is similar to the 350Z, but the 370Z feels like a hodge podge of design studies. Take the 350Z, shorten it by a few inches, slap on the new corporate boomerang headlights and tail lamps, give it a catfish bumper, copy the GT-R roofline, and finally graft a rising beltline from the 240Z for heritage sake. The overall effect is not offensive, but compared to its brother, the Infiniti G37, it leaves a lot to be desired.

Interior (Brendan – 7.5, Tae – 8.5)
Gone are the days of massive, pockmarked, giant piece plastic door panel. From the soft-touch plastics to high quality cloth, the execution of the interior design is spot on. Just one minor complaint – the top of the door panels and dashboard is made of this new textured plastic that resembles painted styrofoam.

Drivetrain (Brendan – 8, Tae – 8.5)
Pretty much a twin brother of the Infiniti G37, except that it feels more refined in the G Coupe. Excellent power from off-idle to redline, but the engine noise becomes a little harsh as the RPMs rise. The addition of SyncroRev Match technology might trick you into thinking that you can take on Takumi Fujiwara in his tofu delivery Panda Hachi Roku (Initial D). Very, very cool piece of technology!

Performance (Brendan – 9, Tae – 9)
It will do 0-60mph in under 5 seconds and a 1/4 mile in the 13 second range. Even just 5 years ago, this is a supercar territory. And, oh yes, this car will more than keep up in the handling department with those supercars of yesterday.

Ride Quality (Brendan – 7.5, Tae – 7.5)
In a car like the 370Z, the point is to feel the road, except that in the 350Z, you felt a little too much of it. The new Z Car’s chassis soaks up most bumps just fine and the steering feels nicely weighted. Compared to the 350Z, the car feels lighter (it actually is lighter by about 100lbs), more nimble, and more solid.

Technology (Brendan – 8, Tae – 9)
Some will argue that the 370Z with the SyncroRev Match technology is the most advanced non automated manual transmission in the world- and we won’t argue against that. The black box below the shifter senses the movement of the shifter and will send a signal to the engine computer to blip the throttle, effectively giving you a virtual heel-and-toe. Perfect for the lazy manual transmission drivers!

Value (Brendan – 9, Tae – 8.5)
The 370Z starts at $30k for the standard model, and tops out at just shy of $47k (convertible with every option). The Z we tested (at $34.5k) is about half the price of a comparably equipped Porsche Cayman S, it’s most direct competitor. This is a very broad segment though, and just about anything with 2 doors and a six-cylinder engine can compete with and will be compared to the Z.

Overall (Brendan – 9.0, Tae – 8.5)
The 370Z will give you one of the most enjoyable driving experience under six-figures. Loads of fun when you want, and just civil enough that you can live with it on a daily basis. Handling is nearly razor-honed, and more than capable. In the ’affordable sports car’ segment, there isn’t car vehicle that combines the power, handling, and value like the 370Z.

-KF

Paul and Todd’s Z Car Comparison (2009 Nissan 370Z) Video Review

January 3, 2010 | Test Drive Team | Tags: , , | No Comments »
« Older Entries