regfootball

volt system needs to work its way into the mainstream vehicle lineups. they had better get the price down, range up, and size and weight down also.

new XTS like 8k off sticker right now. Impalas selling for close to MSRP. loaded impala or base XTS standard? almost close in price.....

no one will miss it

i'd like to see the sonic hatch move a little closer in packaging to the Fit. The Fit has no sound deadener tho.

Bubble! Too many new car sales time to scale back new push and let used come back a bit. Or, time to loosen up credit on used.

Excellent writeup, excellent pictures. Love the writing style. In this case, framed the premise of the car perfectly. I bet the twin turbo of this car is a fantastic road car.

well to be honest, packaging and styling aside, it's not a bad car! in the grand scheme of things it's still a pretty good car but the competition is so stiff.

yes but the sonata back seat and the Azera back seat are nearly equally spacious and both are adequately roomy. Plus on the Sonata, the cushion is reasonably high. The Malibu packaging is botched in the back in many ways. It's not rocket science. Despite however they tried to manipulate SAE measuring standards to claim they have good space, the reality is the ingress and egress, seating height and knee space and especially foot space all suck balls. I was able to ride in a relative's 08 malibu recently and was in the front seat. It was tight in width! Plus hard to get in and out of the low window head. Back seat seemed to have SOME leg room though. So what do they do in 2013? Wider, maybe a BIT. But they butcher the back seat. The roof line comes too low too far forward. The seat bottom is too low. The seats in front are too bulky. The door opening all around is too tight. Worst is the footwell is majorly intrusive and the base of the seat in front is so badly done and bulky you have to wedge your feet in there. Now go sit in a 13 Passat. Packaging, when i was selling the Kizashis, some people said they were a bit short of leg room to select competition. But absolutely in a car that is like 10 inches shorter than the 13 malibu, it had livable rear seat space. I could get my feet under the front seat. I had tons of knee room. The seat was high enough and had enough head room. I could take road trips in the back of that car. The Malibu is too tight in back. I look under the hood of the 10 inch shorter Kizashi and there is no wasted space. Why is the Malibu so much longer overall yet less commodious back seat. Answer, too much hood. Too long, too high, tons of empty space under the hood. Why did Chysler go cab forward? SPACE. New fusion is all hood and has a tighter backseat although not as bad as the Malibu. New Mazda6 is tight in back too. I sold a used Sonata to our detail guy because he needed the extra room beyond the Kizashi. The Sonata is quite large inside, so the argument that the Impala is the big car now and the Malibu has to be much smaller does not wash. Simple truth is the Epsilon disease and decisions GM made on packaging the past epsilon cars hurts their packaging. Even the new Impala is still narrow, that is why the door panels are so thin, to maximize interior width. Impala would benefit from 2" extra girth. Look at how narrow the XTS is. Why is a new sentra so much better for leg room and rear seat comfort than a Malibu?

well yeah its about packaging. the malibu is terrible. the leg room specs flat out lie in terms of real leg room. what is missing is the pic of the malibu underhood and 9 inches of open air space between the motor and bumper. that would have been useful leg room.

well hopefully they decided to build a large cadillac and not just an expensive one. S class size, not 100k, start at 60k.

looks good

good riddance to any mini

still reeks of imposter.

my favorite elantra. but it is not low and sleek like a mazda3. thing is, this is really more of a vibe / matrix / jetta wagon thing more than anything. So it kind of tries to look sporty but its so tall it doesn't go all the way. And in that regard it makes it good, but you notice then the dash and interior aren't all that sleek like you see in the regular elantra or a competitor like say a Cruze or Focus interior. It's more of a plain utility vehicle interior. This version doesn't have as much trunk / boot as the last one but it is still nice and large. This is another vehicle I thought of that may make more sense to buy than that Fiat 500L i tested and wrote about. Bottom line is this is a nice choice fucntionally but it lacks some sizzle that compels you to buy and its performance is not off the charts either. One niche this does fill. An econocar that fatties like me and large people can fit into. Or like my BIL who is 6'4 bought one of the original Focus...few econocars can fit large and tall people.

Cruze 1.4 turbo manual has no such issue!

TESTED 2014 Fiat 500L East MT and AT, prices, MSRP 20,995 and 23,045 HIGHS Efficient packaging for space and function, especially for such a small physical size; perfect for condo parking or small townhome garages. More space and utility for a lot less dough than a Buick Encore or Mini Countryman (or whatever that is) Cheap way to go for space and mpg combo. Fix It Again Tony, as long as Tony is working in the dealer service department - the 500L has a 4 year, 50k warranty. Cheeky Italian personality translates well from its smaller sibling the 500 Easy steering, parking, maneuvering. Not an intimidating vehicle to drive. Room and comfort in all dimensions for passengers. Chair high seating all around. Lots of room for shuttling kids. High visibility all around. Commanding view of the road through the front bubble. Does not possess the SUV character; its more like a small minivan. Being billed as a 'urban utility vehicle' is basically spot on. Interesting interior has good gauges and nice radio setup. 6MT shift lever is very nice to grab and the shifter and clutch itself are very slick. Automatic transmission equipped version is much snappier and can be driven without fear in traffic. Gets up to speed nicely. Engine is actually otherwise smooth in operation. Quiet inside, no harsh riding, you don't feel bumps much. Handy fold and tumble second row seats, that plus a wider hatch, you can really get a good sized tall box in the back. LOWS Unacceptable and borderline unsafe turbo lag and lack of throttle response in MT vehicle. No confidence in ability to accelerate, or guess when your speed will build. Severe torque lack until turbo lag is over. Lag is much much less with AT but still exists. Overall powertrain refinement and delivery is not really up to standards of a drivable car in the US, the MT anyways. The AT is probably passable. Track feels narrow, can feel tippy with squishy soft steering when driving even the slightest bit aggressive. Like the 500, the seat bottoms are contoured the most bizarre way and also the seat adjuster bar is way too far back. Climate controls too far down. Quirky, odd character and Euro-palatable style is out of the mainstream in the US. Can feel like a bubble machine, and otherwise odd, depending on your vehicle tastes of the past. If you get down to brass tacks, you can buy something like an Escape S with almost the same mpg and with more space, better dynamics, and an overall more palatable package for less money. SUMMARY This is a great choice for consumers to have. Something different, and something for someone who likes the 500 but needs more space. If you are attracted to that and need a good urban and suburban getabout that is functional for shuttling family or stuff and doesn't take up much space, this is a nice choice. This vehicle would benefit from some added sportiness in ride and handling and steering. It is biased for soft ride and easy steering now, but it makes it squishy when you get the slightest bit of road ambition. There is no scenario yet by which I would recommend the MT version (despite the slick shifter and clutch) until they fix the major problem with turbo lag and throttle setup. It's dangerous and in 2013 needs to be upgraded. The AT allows you to get up and go much quicker and smoother, and has more than enough juice for the task at hand. The seating is still a bit screwed up like it is on the 500. For some reason Fiat has a very odd conception on how seats should be shaped for the USA. It is possible the higher models drive a little better, but I did not test them. The packaging and design of this vehicle need to be evaluated separately from the powertrains and handling / driving / ride. Therefore I am going to break my grading out separately here. design- A- packaging- A MT powertrain C-/D+ (maybe someone else can choose for me here) AT powertrain B+ ride and drive B- If Fiat invests in some ongoing tuning of some of the these things, I think this could really spearhead a big push from the brand in the US. Even as it is, you'd have to really think twice about spending the extra dough for an Encore or Countryman, if this is the type of vehicle you want. For me, personally, I would get like an Escape S. Where GM is concerned, it really makes you wonder why they do not sell the Trax here in the US.

Tested 2014 Fiat 500L Easy, MT and automatic -----more later------

I tried to scam an Impala test drive today but they were sold out? So I tested the diesel again, and right after, an LT1 automatic. The diesel powertrain has a little more smoothness and refinement for cruising. The gas car has more snappiness in throttle response and actually acquits itself pretty well in comparison as far as acceleration. The gas powertrain feels a little cheaper though. Sales guy was doing everything to push the cheap leases on the gas car and just stopped short of not even wanting to talk about the diesel at all. They do not want to promote the diesel because the cost difference in lease and buy is so much. The diesel needs to be priced close enough so those conversations can take place. Overall in some cases the diesel feels faster and stronger and in some cases the gas car does.

and probably the same amount of countless hours in the shop for repair work too!!!!!!!!!!!

I guess GM doesn't see the ROI in designing and building such product in-house. If they can't find the ROI in designing and building a global small delivery van, likely based off of Delta III, then they just need to pack it up and stop building cars. FORD CAN WHY CANT GM

YES! TAKE THE LEAD AND BE THE BEST otherwise it gets reduced to how well you market the same stuff that everyone else is selling. it becomes more about marketing and not about superior product.

the 5 is junk, this offering puts VW on the map for me, at least the Passat. They should've done a 2.0 maybe too. 1.8 is a nice blend between mpg of a 1.6 and more displacement of a 2.0 E85!

convertibles are not necessities, they are toys. So you gotta have free $$$$ to get one, and nobody has any money laying around these days.

That Passat diesel really makes great mpg for a large car.

sounds good. congrats, glad you are doing better.