NeonLX

But then we're back to the styling issue again. One thing I don't like about the PT Cruiser, and maybe the HHR too, is the rather tubby curb weight. The PT weighs a good 600-lbs. more than the now-discontinued Neon. Don't know if the HHR has a comparable weight problem relative to the Cobalt...

Is that the little wagon dealie? We may look at one of those too. Both my wife and I have commented that we'd love a Cobalt wagon (kinda like the old Cavalier wagon, but much better built!). We sure liked the Cobalt LT we rented for two weeks on vacation back in 2005.

This will primarily be my wife's car, and there are two vehicles that she really REALLY hates--the PT Cruiser and the HHR--and her hatred of both is based on the styling. They really turn her off. Me? I happen to like them both. However, she does like the Vibe/Matrix. I'd prefer the Vibe myself, if only because I know the Pontiac dealer very well (same place we've been getting our Mopars for decades). I've sat in a Compass and a Patriot. I like them well enough, though their fuel economy is only so-so with the 2.4L/CVT combo (24/27 MPG; our current Caravan is rated 19/26 MPG).

I may be the only one who cares but does anyone know if the Vibe/Matrix will be available in '08? Reason I'm asking is that we will likely be downsizing when the lease is up on our '06 Caravan in March of '08. The next-gen. Mopar minivans are simply going to be to big for us--and more importantly, we want something that gets better fuel economy. We'd like to stick with a wagon-y vehicle. I drove a Caliber and it wasn't too bad, though I started feeling claustrophobic inside of it pretty quickly (that cursed high beltline). One of the vehicles we are thinking of is the Vibe, but I don't know if it's still going to be around next spring. Anyone else know?

I'm cautiously optimistic. But the big fly in the ointment for me is that Dan Quayle is one of the principals in this company. Disclaimer: I'm not a democrat or a republican.

Jeeps and I go way back. I learned to drive in a '48 CJ2A. We've had various Jeeps in the family over the decades as well. That being said, I actually like the Compass. Now that (Daimler)Chrysler has richarded up the next-generation minivans, we are seriously considering a Compass (or Patriot) as a replacement vehicle for our '06 Caravan when the lease expires. I like the Compass's size, relatively decent fuel economy and even the styling. The 2.4L w/CVT is certainly adequate for a daily driver.

V6-powered, I'd take the Impala. V8-powered, I'd take the 300C!

I've been a Riviera fan since I first saw a new 1963 model. I used to almost constantly draw them in the margins of my notebook during study hall. I came mighty close to buying one of the boattail 1971-'73 models and I still love those cars. For many years, my mother-in-law had a '96 Riv with the SC 3800 engine. That car was very close to perfection, in my book. But they've lost me with this concept. Maybe it'll grow on me but right now, it hurts my eyes. And my brain. Could be that I'm just too dambed old.

I've always thought it was insane that Chrysler has the 2.7L engine in the heavy 300 series, even if it is in the base model. Reminds me of the 1979-'81 R-bodies (Plymouth Gran Fury, Dodge St. Regis and Chrysler Newport/New Yorker) that came with the 225 Slant Six. But at least that engine had a modicum of torque down low in the RPM range. It seems to me that many Chrysler products are becoming "under-engined". The 2.7L in the base 300 (and Magnum wagon) is an example. So is the upcoming larger & heavier next-gen minivans that will come standard with the aging 3.3L V6--a good, durable engine that is already on the verge of being overworked in my '06 SWB Caravan. And with the new Sebring, you've got to order up to the "Limited" level in order to get the desirable 3.5L V6--and it's STILL an option at that point.

The lot I was at had about 25 Ions. They seemed like a pretty good deal for someone looking for an inexpensive, reasonably economical car. I've never driven one but I sure liked the Cobalt LT I drove for two weeks back in the summer of 2005 (drove it all over Alaska). The Astra looks like a nice car but I'm not nuts about a smaller engine and a higher price.

I went back to look at the stickers again and indeed, some of the Aura XEs with the 3.5L/4-speed were rated at 20/29 MPG, while others with the same powertrain (and options) showed 20/30 MPG. And all were 2007 models. I'm wondering if some were earlier production models and had some sort of estimate shown for the fuel economy before the actual testing was completed...

I checked out some Saturns earlier today and I have to say I like what I saw. But I have a couple of questons that I wasn't able to ask the "knowledgeable salespeople", mainly because the dealership was closed. So youse guys will have to indulge me here: 1. The Aura XEs on the lot had two different EPA fuel economy ratings in spite of (apparently) being equipped with the same powertrain. About half the cars were rated at 20/29 MPG, while the other half had 20/30 MPG ratings. They had similar option loads and the sticker showed the 3.5L VVT & 4-speed ATX in all cases. OK, so it's only one MPG, but I'm just curious where the difference in the rating might be coming from. 2. Some Aura XEs had wood trim on the dash & door panels (me likey!) while some had the brushed metal look (me not likey so much). Does a customer have the option of either/or with the trim? If so, that would be most excellent. 3. Is the Saturn Ion based on the same platform as the Chevy Cobalt? If yes, I might be very interested because the Ions seem to be priced better than the Cobalts. Looks like the powertrain is the same as the basic Cobalt setup from what I can tell (2.2L I4 & 4-speed ATX). Thank ye.

I'm with you. I liked the "5" until I looked at the EPA ratings on the window sticker. Jeez, it doesn't do hardly any better than my current larger, heavier & more powerful Caravan. But at least it has far less interior room. If they could somehow keep the interior volume maximized AND give fuel economy at least as good as the current Malibu V6 (21/32 MPG), I might bite.

Heh. With gas topping $3.259 per gallon around here today (and who knows where it will be tomorrow), I'm quickly warming up to the Aveo and cars like it; ugly or not. My Neon w/ ATX is rated at only 25/32 MPG--but I'm sure glad I have it now instead of my old '72 Olds 98.

Fascinating. As a long-time minivan owner (and also fan of the class of vehicles), I was curious to read someone else's opinion. I checked out a "5" back in April and was mostly impressed. I loved the styling and the general drivability of the thing. What I didn't like was the fact that it cost as much as a well-equipped standard length Caravan (which is a lot roomier) and the fuel economy w/auto tranny wasn't appreciably better than the heavier Caravan's either. (Caravan is rated 19/26 MPG with the torquey 3.3L V6, while the Mazda 5 w/ ATX is rated 21/26 MPG. Interestingly, the more powerful Mazda 6 wagon is rated 20/27 MPG). I like the size and concept of the 5 but I was hoping for better fuel economy.

OK, thanks for that info. I got my wires crossed there (probably Lucas electrics in my head).

Back to the Malibu--the stunning thing for me is how this roomy car manages to have so much real-world power AND still return such excellent gas mileage (rated 22/32 MPG with 3500 V6 & ATX). I really wish GM would advertise this car (and the Cobalt, for that matter). People are starting to look for better fuel economy and with the Malibu, you don't have to sacrifice power for the fuel economy.

That's actually pretty lousy. My low-tech Neon with auto tranny is rated at 25/32 MPG--and will get better than that if I keep my foot out of it. Heck, the larger & much more powerful Chevy Malibu with 3500 V6 is rated at 22/32 MPG!

I remember driving the first Rabbit to hit town back in 1975. It was a 2-door, base model with a manual tranny and CARBURETOR-fed engine (wow!). I couldn't believe how zippy a car could feel with "only" a 1.6L engine under the hood. Those early Rabbits weighed something like 2000 pounds. Wonder what the new ones weigh? (I'm too lazy to go looking for myself, but I'm guessing they are at least 3000 lbs. now--though I'll bet their gas mileage is at least as good as the first Rabbit's).

I used to drive a Dodge Spirit. That thing had the most amazing rear seat room for such a "short" car (103.5" wheelbase, 175" overall length). That upright, K-derived styling was certainly good for something. Actually, it was a good car overall--comfortable and reasonably exciting with the mistersh!tty 3.0L V6 under the hood.

We've got the quad seating in the middle & the split rear bench in the rear of our Caravan. They are a snap to take out and put back in. Not too heavy either; something like 40-lbs. Yeah, the stow & go is nice though--especially if you don't have anywhere to stash the seats when they aren't in your minivan (ours fit up in the front of the garage with no problem).

Don't think that's true about the fuel capacity--both stow & go and non-stow & go models have a 20 gallon tank; same size as it's always been (or at least that's what my current '06, former '02 and '99 models had). Just confirmed it on the Dodge website too. http://www.dodge.com/caravan/index.html I personally am not nuts about the stow & go feature because it adds weight to the vehicle (and puts the spare in an awkward location). That's one of the reasons why we are driving a loaded up "standard length" Caravan (plus added maneuverability & excellent price).

Not the one I drove. Actually, I also drove a Maxx LT & a different Malibu LT sedan last year and neither of these had any of the issues you described either. If I had to buy a good family sedan right now, I'd get either a Cobalt, Malibu or G6. If I was looking at a minivan however, I'd get another SWB Mopar like the one we've got.

Heh. Sounds like you and I agree on that point re: the so-called liberal media (sometimes my sarcasm is a little too low key). Sorry, I'm kinda crabby today--storm came through last night and blew down a tree in our yard, which fell on top of the garage & pulled the power line out of the house...jeez!

Thanks for the enlightenment. It's good to hear that the automotive journalists are fair & objective, just like their counterparts in the "liberal" news media.