regfootball

Wow. Great mpg. I bet the diesel will top 30.

great write ups, thanks, keep posting more! A young Asian dude passed me on the freeway last week, in a new ATS coupe. The young buyers I assume is what Caddy is hoping to get with the car. It was a sharp looking car in coupe mode. I hope Caddy pushes them and they get snapped up.

Yeah, never in any Hyundai have i gotten the sense that they have crossed that line and joined the big boys.

DRIVEN: 2015 Ford Focus SE 1.0 Ecoboost 6MT hatch, msrp a tish over 20k (my fave colors for Ford, Tectonic and stone interior) HIGHS: Sleek hatchback shape New physical controls in center stack for climate, radio, etc, overall nice dash layout and gauges, driver oriented Nice plastics with the dark and light in most places, stone interior really lightens up the interior Nicely composed and quiet for an econocar at speed, feels solid and stable Finally gets a six speed! Very good shifter, snick, snick Feels exactly like the Fusion MT, same powerband, same road feel, just a smaller version NO vibration from the powertrain. Seems impossible, but almost entirely creamy smooth, and revs freely. Once wound up, provides decent momentum that belies its displacement. Low rpms at higher speeds due to gearing. Capless fuel filler!!!!! LOWS: The original Focus had class leading room and felt very spacious. This body style, is closed in and tight. All metrics are tight. Dash intrudes on what space you may have from the arms down. Roof intrudes on everything arms up. Smash down roofs and claustrophobia on these cars these days is getting old. Interior feels cheap in places if you start to nitpick, yes its a low cost car. But the seats felt weak and thin and unsupportive in the lower back. You have to work the shifter to keep the car on the boil if you want to keep up in the stop and go and freeway merging Shifter is tall, and too far back. The Cruze shifter is perfectly placed and the perfect size. This misses the mark some. Tiny trunk considering its a hatch. The three cylinder, which is shockingly quiet most of the time, makes a uniquely crass and disturbing sound during harder acceleration and from a stop that lets you know its an odd bird. Ultimately, its really missing a cylinder, makes you feel the car is missing out providing its worth compared to MSRP. SUMMARY: A cute curiosity this car is. Keep in mind there was large me and sales guy in the car during the test drive. I really wanted to take this out myself, because with only one litre of dispacement, i know every pound along for the ride would make a difference. If you were a 110 pound college girl driving solo, your results may vary. The numbers on this engine are paltry, but surprisingly overall it felt nearly as fast as my 2.2 Cobalt. But it is way more refined as you would expect. Overall I am calling the car refined. The 3 popper is amazingly quiet at certain speeds or rpm and the car is REALLY smooth most of the time. It is not however a really good stoplight to stoplight car. It really is meant for long cruises and higher speeds. This is directly opposite of my Cobalt. The Focus would be a perfect car for my situation that recently ended (driving 90 miles a day almost all interstate or 4 lane roads). I would be able to put this 3 cyl Focus into 6th and rack up big mpg due to its gearing. And furthermore, this Focus felt exactly the same as the Fusion 1.6 MT i drove before....just a smaller version. Ford is doing a good job at making a consistent feel across their vehicle line of world cars. But despite the refined feel, ultimately there is enough of the 3 cylinder showing its spots with a nasty sound when working hard....and there is a lot of extra shifting in traffic. THe clutch i think is good but i wasn't able to drive it smooth...it would take some time to get used to. It can seem exceedingly fussy at times (maybe not if you ever owned a Geo Metro or Suzuki Swift of yore). Ultimately you wonder, the Cruze Eco gets better mpg and has burst. It has a fourth cylinder. I think the good qualities of this Ecoboost 6MT Focus would also be similarly enhanced if it were not missing the cylinder. Everything about the car is livable and even a bit rewarding. But I think that three cylinder noise needs to be toned down and they need to beef up the drivers seat. A 1.4 or 1.5t would be perfect for this car, and probably make it a little rock star. A GOOD 8 speed dual clutch might be a better tranny choice too. If the car had the fourth cylinder, I would give it a B+. With the price it is, and the need for more go juice down low and less thrash when working it hard, I might have to give it a B-. Maybe we say B since Ford was willing to try something daring and new, and the Tectonic color is cool.

Drove a 2.0 AWD today. Was a bit cranky because i told guy i wanted to try a FWD SE 2.0. The 2.0 had nice extra burst, like expected. A bit of lag, though. I was able to feel the extra heft of the AWD system and other junk, I really wanted to find out the zip on the FWD. With the extra weight, it did not feel as nimble. In all, the 2.0 should satisfy the needs of anyone looking for more burst than the already sprite 1.6.

DRIVEN: 2015 Hyundai Genesis RWD 3.8, msrp around 38k. No options, i believe HIGHS: Looks good on its own, but especially for a Hyundai Big car chassis and RWD, a rarity these days, and in that regard, at a decent price Wide and long, low center of gravity, we need more cars to come back to this Feeling of heft and being anchored to the road Engine has some guts to it......steps down alright when you gas it. Nice muted snarl Simple interior layout and hints at luxury that exists in other marques Nice interior convenience features Lots of features and tech, including 4g Leather is nice and has nice stitching Seats were firm and supportive Decent view out to the road Very quiet on the road, does an ok job of absorbing the bumps Spacious trunk luxurious quiet 'thunk' when shutting the doors CHEAP lease deals right now SERIOUSLY if want a lot of MSRP for your lease payment LOWS: No part of the drive sets itself apart in a dynamic way. No compelling vehicle dynamics. Dead steering + thin steering wheel = this doesn't feel like a lux car Large RWD cars are supposed to glide. This car doesn't do that either. Feels confused as to whether it should be a soft cruiser or a faux sport sedan wannabe. Didn't feel like a barge but did feel heavy, not athletic (and this was not the AWD) I would think the plastics and parts of the dash would be nicer in quality if this car aspires to compete in the luxury arena Firm and supportive seats are hard and could have more cush really Rear seat doesn't have as much leg room as you would think for the physical size of car Powertrain was not liquid smooth either No sense that any exceptional engineering went into this car. Extra features rack up the price very quickly I didn't exit the drive of this car with any OHMYGOD feelings or any desire to really want to drive it every day I was impressed driving a 2.5L ATS and would enjoy and look forward to driving that, why am i not impressed by this? At the end of the day, it is still a Hyundai. No compelling reason to want this car. SUMMARY: I might fill in more on this later, but really the above sums it up pretty well. For the right person, this car would be a good value and enjoyable. But it is not fun, not cushy, and not anything aspirational. I think if Hyundai would pick a direction (cruiser or sport sedan) they could refine the heck out of this thing. Right now its neither. To me, it is still classic Hyundai. You buy it because it is supposedly more stuff for the money, even if its second tier. I give it a "C", ok, a "C+" due to a bit extra props for nicer than expected styling.

Just to elaborate: FIT- new one seems smaller than the old one. The interior seems a step back also. The lack of spaciousness to me, i had no interest in even seeing if it drove well. The last Fit I recall was loud and noisy and rode crappy. Enough of that crap. HRV- it's a good looking little rig, and it looks like it would be spacious, but once inside, it really doesn't seem all that more spacious than the Fit. The seat is a bit higher and it feels a touch wider. The rear seat cushion is actually very high (it has the Magic Seat too) and so for a tall guy like me the back row was comfy in that regard. But the headroom was tough. The front row is comfy and the console is pretty nice. The dash has a simple design that looks cheap in pictures. In the EX i sat in though, the lack of crap on the dash was a nice deal.. Just the radio and the lower control. It looked a bit contemporary. The stuff that is at high level and on the dash in the EX was good quality and the leather smell was nice. But bend down and look at the $h!ty cheap carpet and plastic trim and you see why this is just another version of the cheap ass Fit. The Encore is nicer inside all around and feels more comfy (even if it feels a bit narrower). No way I look at one of these. At least the expensive HRv's are a great way to upsell to Accords and CRv's. The new CRv interior is finally acceptable.

yup, in this case i think that is what hurts this car. there is no lunge.

I went in to test drive a new HRV and then decided, nah. I can't do this. I am sitting here drinking their free coffee now and eating their free cookies though at least Hondaphiles are all over this place and are like stink on sh-- all over the HRV. This thing will sell like hot cakes.

XTSes depreciate rapidly. you can get a certified pre owned one cheap beat me to the punch. i think some nice CPO XTS are out there now and not terribly priced.

Continental is a dud compared to these

it may seem strange, but i see hints of the Lincoln MKs in the greenhouse and flow into the rear quarter and trunk. Then, from other angles i see a hint of last gen Hyundai Genesis or one of those molten Infinitis that no one buys. Then from the rear at some pics just a hint of Accord. It actually looks better than I expected, but it still is not stunning. I think the CT6 will hold up pretty well in the exterior styling standoff. Overall I think the CT6 looks leaner. Its less expensive too. The badge shoppers will like this enough, I don't see Caddy stealing sales from the new 7, but overall the interest in the class of car should draw some new attention Caddy's way, and i think it will represent itself well.

and you thought GM and Ford had long cycles. I give Mits credit for this. 10/100 warranty + 5/60 BTB and not much else.

Regal is a great car, I'd love one, but here is what ruined it. 1-Regal name i think still carries old image, despite that it has lots of equity with the older demographic. Hard to envision a new Regal with a Euro personality when the old Regals reek of typical domestic. Should they have called it Insignia? 2-Heavy 3-Poor mpg in just about all configs, the base 2.4 non turbo in particular has no mpg benefit 4-Expensive MSRP, but GM has this issue in general. 5-The 2.4 was in a lot of the 2011, 2012 when they launched it and it has no performance in addition to the poor mpg 6-Verano is not significantly smaller but is noticeably cheaper 7-LaCrosse is larger in the back but not much more pricey 8-Malibu is possibly perceived as same car and is cheaper, hurts Regals ability to sell for more 9-tight back seat 10-melted styling 11-GS performs but is not bleeding edge in that regard 12-GS lets you have AWD or a stick, but not both 13-many/most Regal interiors are ALL BLACK, so much black its dreary and needs SOME brightwork or relief 14-Adding a coupe or wagon to the line may have helped 15-AWD late to the party there's more should i keep going. keep in mind, i love the car.....

sure, if you run full throttle all the time. Stoplight to stoplight it doesn't feel punchy.

Explorer plays more to the SUV folks....higher ride height, butch styling, etc. A new Flex should consider sliding doors. After having them in our new Town and Country, they are really handy as long as the auto closers are working. At least on our end, I sort of wanted to go with a Flex, but it was dated and didn't offer the room of the van.....neither did the Explorer. I looked for some used MKt's but decided the extra cost wasn't worth it.

My Taurus x was pretty similar to the MKT and flex. Mkt and flex both great vehicles but became dated. I would imagine mkt/aviator will be next explorer clones. Ford had to prove they could successfully take the truck based version and move it to a car chassis, which they did. That means since they plan a new one in the future, they just clone a Lincoln version off it. All he next mkt needs to be is a 3 row edge really. I would like to see them still do expedition and navigator. I would like to see a Flex replacement, but more of a cross between a minivan and wagon. Sounds strange but I think it could be done. Something not as lumpy as bloated as a van but not as boxy and strange as the flex. Really, just a three row Edge.

This is why CarPlay compatibility will be good for the entertainment and phone. Climate should hVe redundant physical buttons. Radios should have volume seek And scan bass treble and fade physical buttons.

they had so much equity in the Maxima name, good thing they kept it. The Altima is a driving dud and at least still having this in any form keeps Nissan on the map from not being Toyota, part deux. So the trend is going to go back to driver oriented interiors again now? instead of all the T shaped dashes that we may be all getting sick of now. Auroras and Bonnevilles had driver oriented dashes. If all Nissan does with this is put out a 'sporty altima alternative' it will have done its job. the interior is a big departure from the Altima. Overall there is still a huge number of buyers who want a FWD car due to winter and want something leaning to a sport sedan so they don't have to settle for a Camry or an Accord or an Avalon. Remember the Grand Prix and bonnevilles? The cvt has evolved but i still think one version of this car with a better auto trans would be a good idea. No need to offer a stick with this thing anymore. With all the crossovers being sold, i am amazed sedans are suriviving as much as they can.

its all about campaign and lobby money?

i never wanted to lease ever again but we leased our new town and country in January. I could not justify 500/mo for an explorer/traverse or sim that was 3 years old and had 50k on it on a 5 year loan. I chose to lease a new mostly loaded T/C for the same payment as to buy a 1-2 year old grand caravan with lesser kit and 30k on the odometer already. it comes down to stagnant wages vs. msrp's going way up, also in this instance, the residual after 3 years is far less than what the loan payoff would be at after 3 years on a traditional buy. If the value tanks, I walk away or by then with so many leases out there, they may offer them for sale to the lessee for a price cut at the end. I don't want own a van anyways. Sure I am left with nothing but i paid 6 years on my Taurus X, the tranny started going out, and it was only worth a small dimple in the down payment of a new one. Yes there is a huge bubble coming, or...... The automakers have succeeded in making a 'first market' where then they get the vehicle back after you paid most of the depreciation. Then they get to sell the vehicle again as a CPO with low miles and make money on a new loan and sell extended warranties..... The second cycle, people will trade it in at about the 6-7 year mark, 100k or so, and then the dealer will obtain that trade with you at a loss, roll your deficit into a new loan for someone else with low wage and bad credit......so they will be buying 6-7 year old vehicles at 12-18 percent and 5 years again and will be almost forced to get a warranty AGAIN. Then once the vehicle is 10-12 years old, the vehicle hits the cycle again and money is made again....... Think of how much $$$$ banks make off that one vehicle over its life. Think of how much states make off sales tax and vehicle tabs for that one car. I was all for paying off my cars but the last two i did, within less than a year, they had tranny issues and it was either put big bucks into them or take what i could get and put it into the new vehicle. Just paid off the cobalt and now its approaching 100k, the past tells me my trouble free car, something will start to go amok, so i should go look for a lease.....can't replace that 207 payment with a 5 year loan comparable car for less than 300-350 unless i lease.... and even then that's still almost impossible..... My last few weeks in my selling cars gig i recall the people at the sister Ford dealer had been starting the lease push back again (2012). The initial targets were like 30-33 percent lease and eventually over time if it hit 40% they said it was not impossible. You get people on the 3 year cycle, just like cell phones, get people on a cycle where their decision is forced otherwise they sit and do nothing and spend no cash.

nice write up, thanks

If GM wanted to, at any time, they could build a model S competitor, undercut Tesla, and offer real distribution. GM doesn't want to jump in with both feet just yet. I have a feeling there is a point they will. Some think GM is in lock step with oil, though. Volts only exist for some PR. GM should invest in developing supercharging solutions at gas station / convenience stores. Tesla only gets the buzz it does because its from California, and they like to think its all that out there.....'we invented silicon valley so now we can reinvent the car'. Tesla would be Fisker if not for Musk, when will they make $$$$$

What other vehicles currently have 21,000 or more pre-orders which require a substantial down payment? hellcats?lol