regfootball

yes, conventional. not nearly as snappy looking as the sportage. i sort of liken it more to a tall Lancer, or a Japanese Tiguan. The Tiguan is not all that exciting to look at... http://www.autofans.us/2010/07/08/first-drive-2011-mitsubishi-outlander-sport-is-right-sized-at-the-right-time/ there are some good pics on this site. the top level model with AWC is 22,995 list. even the base manual is well equipped. interior is basic and in my opinion, decent. Not as flashy as say the new Cruze. But at least this will have rear leg room. And they should have made the 2.4 an uplevel option. In one article they said this vehicle should get the Lancer Ralliart powertrain. 237hp and I assume AWC, that would make this thing fun. The base model is like 3100 pounds. The Cruze in non Eco trim is not really much lighter. To me I compare this to a Cruze. Prices are sort of close, its juxtaposing a tall hatch vs. a traditional sedan. there are actually some better sites that have reviews with better pictures.

I looked at an LS on a lot yesterday. COuldn't get into it, but i could immediately tell that the two tone interior is much nicer than the flat gray of the one I sat in. It looked really snazzy through the glass. But still, that rear seat is not good at initial impression. the dip$h! who parked the car had both of the front seats back far and there was no way by sight to envision a leg fitting in there. When i did the sit in front, set the seat and get in back test, i had problems getting back there and it felt way too tight. There is no excuse for chevy not making at least 2 more inches of leg room back there. 'epic fail' if you want rear space, i don't think the cruze is your car.

anyone care? When this hits in a few weeks I will be out looking at one. Outlander Sport = Tiguan package for a lot less money. Yes, I know, its not as schwank as the Tiguan. Manual trans is available. Depending on configuration, pricing is attractive. Standard USB, bluetooth, and Fuse. It seems a bit underpowered, but not compared to say, a Chevy Cruze. For the price of a Cruze, the OS compares favorably and is packaged in a hatchback / more utility form. The regular outlander is spacious and the passenger cabin is essentially in tact in the OS. I particularly like the low weight, gas mileage, price, CVT, warranty. I thought i was keen on the Sportage (new one) until i drove it. I am interested to see how this competitor compares.

unless its on a flatbed

HHR is a good vehicle. I think they would likely enjoy it. My friend's mom likes hers. I still have buyers remorse on the Cobalt, not stepping up to get an HHR.

viper if you don't get it, i will fly out there and grab it!

watch a woman cringe in pain and get sliced open to have your child. and do it again, and not complain. ever. hero. a lot of singers or celebrities at one time i may have thought of as a hero in some way, but too many of them now are in the opposite direction and are just self destructive. that and egotism overshadows any good things they do IMO sometimes. Any of us with star income and time on our hands would probably allow ourselves to be just as generous or 'caring about causes'...especially if it keeps our marketability and subsequent income up. i still think police, fire, military are heros. they accept the danger that is there and yet choose to do it. not all are worthy of this sentiment, but many do feel that sense of sacrifice and duty. I've known of people who have helped out in crisis and emergencies that put themselves in danger. that is hero, too. sometimes, just not bailing on the ones you love makes you a hero. I'd like to think hero status requires more, but to so many who have been failed by people they depended on trusted, just to have the confidence to look up to or depend on those people and trust them sort of makes them heros.

I've mentioned before, I have driven the 6 and think its the most 'balanced' of the midsizers. but Mazda has screwed the pooch on in cabin tech. they don't apply bluetooth liberally and I am not certain if they have USB and how sophisticated their NAV is on the 6. they lack telematics too. Major 'yes' though on the 6 being superior to the Accord. The 6 is what the Accord wanted to be. If you are a previous Accord fan, I would say the 6 would feel right to you. I had an Altima for a 1000 mile rental this past January and while it was an ok car, i could tell from a short test that the Mazda had its act together more. Mazda really has a problem with the styling. Its not 'bad' but its kind of on a styling ship that has already sailed. The Altima had its own unique style identity that still is popular even if its dated. The 6 is is mish mash of rice and aero and roundness that either gets lost or doesn't connect with a lot of people. And then the interior is just offbeat and slightly creepy. FOr me, the 6's biggest dynamic problem was that the rpm was just too damn high on the four cylinder at cruising speeds (manual trans). If MAzda came out with a new powertrain like a 200hp 6 speed auto that delivered Sonata mpg, and behaved well, AND had a thoroughly redesigned interior it would be criminal to not see it sell more. The Passat is the only 'midsizer' i can think of that is sorted out more on the cheap versions, but it lacks room and costs more. I liked the Altima but would not buy one as a first choice. I like the Malibu but it had a couple flaws. The Fusion is tight now but is boring to me. I could justify buying a 6 because what you get for what you pay is amazing right now. The Subaru Legacy is the car I would take over the 6 because of the good CVT, better mileage, better styling, nicer interior, and AWD.

Sto N Go's big albatross is that is raises the floor so much and the seats are pathetic uncomfortable devices. step in height for the Odyssey vs. the Chrysler vans......the Chrysler vans are taller and it results in no net benefit. Go look at the second row buckets for the dodge van and then look at the Routan's seats. Now tell me which one an adult would rather sit in. The Routan does not drive as well as my Taurus X or a Flex. But the Routan / Chrysler van has the space. So why they muck it up with dysfunctional seating is beyond me. The sto and go worked better on the previous gen vans because it did not alter the packaging of the existing van. When Chrysler redesigned the vans, they made them more ponderous and larger, and there really is not a functional benefit. If you are strictly talking passenger space and comfort (leg room) there is almost no benefit to a Chrysler van / Routan vs. my Taurus X or a Flex. or an Odyssey. Chrysler with Sto and Go and Swivel and Go violated one of the prime attributes of the minivan....maximizing function vs space. Space in the floor for storage is not worth anything when people's feet are on top of it. A typical set of toddlers will pitch junk all over the floor.....hardly making it easy to access the storage. And contrary to belief, you are rarely ever going to have the second row stowed. Its handy when you do, its just not as often as they want you to think. I would rather have the Routan's adult / comfortable seats. And we go to the next level, I'd rather have the odyssey or the Flex with the more efficient floor design.

that's why my other vehicle is a Taurus X. groceries in the trunk, even with the third row in use. my azteks flip/ tumble / remove seats were a godsend. i would never want sto n go. if i wanted a chrysler van, i would get a routan. right now, the new odyssey is the way to go if you want a van.

if you buy a mazda5, you are (or should be) interested in a vehicle of COMPACT size, yet has that occasional bonus third row seat. When the third row is folded down, it has a bit bigger cargo area than a hatchback or smaller crossover. then there is the sliding doors for convenience. anyone with space perception should know on site without a doubt that the Mazda5's interior space is not in any way going to compare to a traditional minivan. In return what the Mazda5 gives you is a more manueverable, flickable, tall expanded compact hatch. The Journey looks to be a decent tweener size between the Mazda5 and a typical minivan. However, the Journeys cargo hold is way up high like the CUV it is. It does not have the interior efficiency of a minivan. Like the Edge, and other vehicles of its type, it just doesn't pack the utility that a true minivan does. ANother valid example is the old Mazda MPV (which I consider to be a very good size minivan for someone who doesn't want the whole massiveness of the current vans) vs. the CX9. The CX9 is fairly useless as a cargo carrier. The MPV was a sweet tween spot between what we see is the current Mazda5 and the size of the grand caravan. MPV was terribly efficient. The public responded by not buying it, Mazda couldn't mark up the price like the CX9. The MPV was also unattractive (and had a bad powertrain). Anyone who says the word 'van' in terms of what they want for a family vehicle, i would send them directly to a Honda dealer now. I saw a new Ody parked at a neighbor's house today and Kardashian butt and all, it looked pretty rakish for a van. Having sat in one, it's VAST, yet doesn't feel like a bus. The Odyssey is the space efficiency template that all van makers ought to follow. CUV's like the Journey in no way should be confused with a minivan. The Aztek like mine and the Rendezvoux were the best rendition of getting a CUV close to a minivan. In fact, I would almost pretty much call them minivans on a short wheel base because the floor was flat from the front all the way back. I can't think of any other CUV's that came as close to van packaging as they did. THe Journey does not. Neither in its look or in its packaging. Any idea what base price on a 4 cyl base Journey would be for 2011? Might be a sleeper great buy. If I were Chrysler I would AX the Jeep Patriot (and what is to become of the Liberty?) and I would move the Patriot name or something like it to this chassis / clone. Patriot is a nasty ride, if Jeep wants a CUV below the Grand Cherokee, it needs to be here.

did the front seat lose its storage below the butt? it said new front seats, I'd be curious if the storage part was sacrificed for a better design for comfort.

exactly FWIW, the Kia Sorento also you do not need to get the third row. The Sorento is a bit larger inside than the journey I think. you can also get a manual in the Sorento, if you so desire. K-K-K-Kia.......(sung just like CH-CH-CH-Chia)

well at least they didn't uck it up. i sat in a new jeep the other day. interior is well done. hope it carries through to this.

Couldn't have said it better. Journey is not a minivan. it doesnt have the deep cargo well. the cargo well on the journey is SUV high it doesnt go into the floor.

the 2 has been getting good reviews. its way lighter than the fiesta so it has more zing to it....even with a '4 speed'

did Stang hurl when he saw your Mazda with the smiley front?

i test drove a 6 a few months ago and I felt that its probably the most balanced midsizer / fewest flaws of the whole pack right now. that is because each entry in the midsize class has one or two or three things that really keep it from being a default sort of choice. the mazda is not overwhelmingly good in any one area, yet it does not seem deficient really in any areas. I don't much care for the interior, especially in black, its fairly morose in that color. The design of it is just offputting....however not so much as to be a deal breaker to me. Some folks do not like the exterior. I like it a lot in some colors, and in others I don't like it. It looks nice enough so that the styling is not an issue for me. Dynamically it just seemed like its the midsizer that has the most issues sorted out. It's quiet, ride and handling are a nice balance. The car is spacious and the powertrain is not behind the curve too much. It has the NVH edge and polish to it that is keeping the Sonata from being an A grade car right now. The only midsizer that immediately struck me as more engaging and a better drive was the Passat. The Passat is probably the most sorted out midsizer, but there's the rub. The Passat is tighter inside, and its interior is not really super duper for this class either IMO. And of course the Passat cannot be had near as cheap as a 6. I saw plenty of new 6's in the 17,2, 18,3 20k price range on lots recently. And i ask WHY DO PEOPLE BUY ACCORDS AND CAMRY'S? I even liked my 900 mile Altima some that i rented back in Jan. and still I think the Mazda6 is a better car after just a test drive. THe first four cars I would shop to buy in this segment right now are the 6, Malibu (GM fan and I like the styling even thought the inside has some cheap and the powertrain could use some extra oomph and refinement), Sonata (and prob Optima) and lastly the Legacy. The Legacy and 6 are a draw for me mostly but the Legacy has a couple of intangibles (CVT, AWD) that would sway me, price independent. The great deals on the 6 right now though, you'd think it would be a no brainer for most folks just commodity car shopping. Mazda must have a $h!ty marketing department because its a car that should be selling A LOT better than it is. PM called it the best midsizer in a comparo test it did awhile back.

OMG, so cool!

that is a SMOKIN VW that needs to be in the USA, instead, VW is dumbing down their lineup and fattening it up, that alone should tell you what VW thinks of the USA.... I love that Scirocco....HOT HOT HOT

wrung out a used Outlander today at a local car broker, lots of the same impressions. good vehicle once up and cruising. very good front seats. space efficient but needs interior update and some NVH and things like better sounding door closing etc. am going to take a serious look at the outlander sport when it arrives next month.

yesterday i saw another new Jetta out in the wild. this time, white, must have been an SEL....a MUCH better impression. the turd brown color i saw the other day brought out everything bad in the car. the new Jetta in white in motion was not bad. Again, sort of a poor man's A4. Not that the A4 is stunning....... but the new Jetta in white made a much better cause for itself than the turd brown.

everything i hear makes me think France is the worst possible example of a society in the world. an entirely sidetracked sort of priority system that if it yielded a productive result could be defended. wine is nice and the women put out, do kinky $h!, and let you have mistresses. but they revolt there, unemployment is insane, and the rest of Europe hates France. they don't have any solid economic background, and they really don't lead or innovate in much. i don't get the impression they have a success based culture, or any sort of real drive for self reliance. You never hear of French being pleasant, and often you hear of French being self absorbed. I dunno, I have relatives that visited Ireland, all of a sudden, that was the place to move to. SOme other friends went to Austrailia, and they came back and said, we want to live there. I visited California and thought the wine road was cool and thought wow i should move here (and since i haz wisely come to my senses). All the annoying scandinavians think their point of view is the way to go and they may be the most backwards jerks on the planet. We started a new country to get away from Europe, i see no reason to want to emulate them now. Real truth is marraige requires compromise to work, the same analogy has to be drawn to politics. No one side will ever fully get their way, and in order for it to work and be FUNCTIONAL, there has to be a balance. Note how all the extreme swings left and right in this country have left us in a huge mess. France does not offer solution examples to us that are in the middle. And they don't really have much in the way of success proved on a global scale to offer them as an prime example either. Maybe some aspects of French way of life are worth considering, but holistically I would never pattern society after France. THere is not a buttload of French women I have seen that I find stunningly hot either. They all seem to have a sort of underfed and ungroomed sort of look to a lot of them that I am not hip to. Laetitia Casta is OF COURSE an exception to this.

"you had me at hello" "you lost with graphics and flow charts" seriously though, in concept, why not try it? i truly believe electric motors will ultimately be a major force BECAUSE they are so doggone simple.

all of the above powertrain tech - GM is getting there, but they just don't apply tech fast enough across their model lineups. interior quality - where GM has failed the most, and one that gives buyers the biggest initial impression on the quality of a car. reducing weight, hows about not using so much cheaper steel? bold exterior designs, sure, but then you have issues like the camaro with no back seat, or the sky solstice with no trunk, or the CTS coupe with no view out the back. warranties, GM is not bad but it is behind a few key competitors. AFFORDABILITY - GM is not stocking entries in cheaper segments like other makes are. and GM keeps trying to push prices up for stuff they shouldn't be. GM is going to be getting seriously undercut in pricing in lots of volume segments. they can't maintain their market share unless they go where the customers are.