regfootball

my question is, today i got a screen protector for my iPhone. I don't like it. How many of you iPhone/Pod folks have tried any of the different screen protectors? this thread can address all iPhone and iPod and mac products.

i could tell from the pictures it looked like a pretty aggressive winter tread. you could see all the biting edges and siping on the outside edges of the tire that normally do not look that agressive on typical all seasons. After doing the blizzaks on RWD thing myself before, you can spot winter tires from a mile away on a snowy day. in this case, a thousand or more miles, courtesy of a digital photo.

thank you! all the fuss for a trim piece you probably can't even see when you are driving the vehicle. and that piece may have been out of line on THAT unit, could have been perfectly fine on the other 9/10. just like there would be a similar misalignment on 1 out of every 10 equinox that comes out of the same plant. show of hands, all you folks who think you hate the looks of the terrain, have you actually seen one in the real world, two, have you even seen an equinox? The terrain looks very upscale in comparison to the equinox. its more different than the edge is to the MKx or Escape to the Mariner. the ultimate question, if GM killed the Terrain would all the Terrain buyers want an Equinox. It still gets back to 'some folks don't want a chevy'. that's why GMC is GM's big profit maker. If you kill GMC then you have to kill Buick because Buick needs the truck volume to keep the distribution business model going. Buick/GMC will need to sell what, 25% of GM's volume going forward. You really want to axe Buick and GMC and have GM lose 25% of its volume?

--- for the longest time, the a4 and passat were practically indistinguishable from each other for most laypeople. 200hp 2.0 turbo that won't sustain combustion without frequent service visits. nice vinyl seats that cute third window on the side pretty much the same dash design can't recall for sure but one thinks they even had the same chassis i wouldn't have called the w8 a lesser car than the a4 audi moved the new a4 to a more worthy platform now but they kept the coma inducing styling. audi hasn't changed their styling in like 30 freaking years. the TT and R8 are cool, but Audi sedans are about as predictable as David Hasselhoff ending up in detox again.

hhr and Balt SS didn't have much torque steer when I drove them. Nowhere near the TS my 89 SHO had! I can't disagree at all with having different body styles. As far as the hatch goes though, we're getting an Aveo hatch, and the best way to deliver the next segment hatch is the astra. Maybe cruze gets the wagon. For sure the cruze should be a coupe and sedan and maybe wagon. Then the Buick astra could be a sedan, and 3 and 5 door hatches. Cruze SS is a need. More appropriate question is, FWD only or AWD?

and audis are tarted up VWs whats your point. i am not sure how we can say the terrain has terrible quality and the equinox doesnt when they come out of the same plant for cryin out loud. they certainly did not have entirely different assembly tolerances for the terrain vs. equinox.

yes, but the people who get info to shop and buy see 'terrain underpowered' and 'rav4 wins again'. the typical buyer who simply looks at a cpl mags or web sites has just been given enough info to exclude the terrain from their shopping list. that problem is mostly avoided by building the 3.6 as an option. gm should have thought this through.

true, but rav4 won the comparo and partially due to the 268hp + big torque v6 that out accelerated the terrain by over a second and likely got better mpg to boot. simply replace the 3.6 over the 3.0 and you have removed the impediment.

but if the press rakes it constantly, it should have the 3.6. you gotta do it for no other reason than to eliminate the PR impediment to people buying it. just like on the SRX.

the nox and terrain have gotten blasted for the 3.0 and its acceleration numbers arent great. the 3.6 was already done (Vue, which by the way is a cooker), takes the same space, costs the same to make, and gets the same mpg. the 3.6 should be optional. there is no legitimate argument to suggest it should not be on the option sheet, especially if its 'professional grade'. the 3.0 has been panned for poor tranny programming. that really is the root issue as is the torque band. it should be retuned for less hp and more torque in this application if the vehicle is heavier. they obviously didn't get vastly more mpg vs. the 3.6.

where the flex and taurus x are deficient in terms of cargo are the width of the hatch opening and cargo area, the depth of the well when the third row is up, or the height of the cargo area when the third row is laid flat. the flex and trex probably have identical or close to it cargo area dimensions. I would be surprised if you could get a couch in there, i really don't think its possible. the height of the cargo area decreases moving towards the front of the vehicle, and i don't think the hatch opening is big enough in width or height to accept it anyways. Maybe a really small narrow couch, like a futon. but its just not that often one hauls a couch in their vehicle. i did manage to put the xmas tree in the car this year. 2 feet to spare once i folded the front passenger seatback down. You're not gonna get a sheet of plywood in the Flex. I think the lambdas accomodate plywood. I really think a vehicle's 'trip to home depot' ability takes a major hit if you can't get plywood in it. My aztek will accept plywood, one caveat, with the tailgate down but at least the top part / hatch is covered. minivans still own the utility quotient.

G6 concept styling was awesome but you know the market changed abruptly when the chrysler 300 came out, no one wanted aero anymore. G6 styling was DOA when the production model came out. G6 was too high priced compared to the grand am it replaced also. Plus the new name was confusing. Grand Am had such a bad rap at the time they had to change the name but now it almost looks like they should have kept it.

Dan Neil is overdoing it here. You know, nobody takes the time to lambast Audi for selling an A3 that maybe moved a couple thou units a year. But why does Audi do it? The A4 gets half the business or something like that. They need the paltry volume from the rest of the lineup to make the whole operation viable. Corporate offices, dealers, service department etc. BPG dealers needed a crossover this size to help fill the volume role. I am so tired of the 'there shouldn't be a chevy clone' BS. SOME PEOPLE DO NOT WANT THE CHEVY. In fact, isn't GMC most profitable? GMC's top priority is pickups. GMC and now Buick need a few other GMC models to round out the line. People who don't like Chevy's want something different. Most people do not obsess about the Terrain vs. Nox to the level of detail these guys do. Average people have serious work to do for a living. Dan Neil of course is going to make a bigger deal about it than he should because this is what he does. He writes a couple articles about cars, that is his job. So of course he is going to overdramatize it. Lots of folks like the Terrain's styling. It's unique. It's tough. If you don't like it, then you have two options. three actually. one, buy an equinox. two, buy a losermobile (i.e. CRV, RAV4, Forester). three, f-k off. The terrain weighs a lot. that is a strike but some folks they actually like that it is built more robust. To me the biggest flaw is the 3.0 as top powertrain. The 3.6 is needed if for no other reason than to have in a press fleet. Loaded versions of this vehicle are too high MSRP but i have that complaint will all cars. You'd be a fool to drop 30k on a RAV4 or crV. I do think GM is still using some cheap plastic in the terrain and nox and i can't say the leather is the best, but here is the deal. when i compare it to the other losermobiles, the overall interior is better. cooler design, more space and function.

i would bet most old saturn facilities got replaced with kia or hyundai. in one case i know, VW. Subaru is quietly growing too. GM really wanted to keep saturn for dealer presence but now they have to try to sell the same number of cars or more with a lot less physical presence on the retail strip. hyundai and kia basically stole all that.

there must be a lot of Flex rentals or unsold Flex's that went back as corporate cars and resold at the auctions because the used Flex listings are vast. When i got our taurus X last year the Flex had just come out. I really liked the Flex, the Taurus X is pretty much the same vehicle. So far our Taurus X has been great and has averaged about 20mpg. I wanted a Flex at that time but because they were new they were pricey and they still kind of are. My used T-Rex was well over 10 grand cheaper. How I thought the Flex differed from the Taurus X, the Flex interior obviously is more comfortable and has more leg room, nicer interior. The Flex has greater outward visibility. The Flex rides a bit taller, feels heavier and slower (not that much just noticeable), the Flex doesn't steer as quick or feel as athletic. However, its quieter and more vault like. Many of the features are the same. Overall its still a tremendous ride and handling for such a family type vehicle. Where the Taurus X feels like it has enough gusto with the non turbo v6, the Flex i felt on my test drive could use a bit more punch. All around though, the Flex is a great people mover. It really lacks the cargo capability of a minivan which is too bad but honestly i think the Flex is a better people mover than the minivans are. The Flex still drives better than the Lambdas. Might be a tish slower, but not as ponderous or top heavy. I am certain the ecoboost Flex takes care of the power and handling concerns. I would really love to trade my Taurus X for a white/tan ecoboost Flex. The MKt is a really nice vehicle too FWIW. After seeing the new Edge interior for 2011 I can only hope those upgrades make it to the Flex for 2012 and maybe by then there will be a used ecoboost Flex that will be priced enough so mere mortal like me could spring for it. LOL. Sounds like it was the perfect vehicle for the trip. Flex is an Automobile magazine all star this year.

well the new sonata should do wonders for encroaching on the camry. it's interesting, in another thread i commented how the mazda6 sales were sucking arse and its a good car. i really am not a huge mazda fan but i think its rather sad that even mazda gets pushed aside once consumer hype starts to build around another fellow asian appliance brand. Honda probably has the most loyal Asian car customer base. Honda fans are almost in need of a 6 step treatment plan to get rid of their unhealthy honda love. What is happening with Hyundai has been built on a few things i think, a-general boredom with toyota. many folks who heard the hype for years have now owned their first one and probably came to the conclusion that its an unemotional, replaceable appliance. b-the minor chinks and now bigger chinks of the reliability armor and part of it being documented even in CR has the holier than thou educated feeling like they need to find a new savior and that is Hyundai (they have been getting more praise in CR now). c-even though hyundai prices have been rising fast, they are still cheaper and the dealers are likely a lot friendlier. d-'the warranty' although a misrepresentation of what you are really in for has become an indentifier and an edge for the brand and toyota chooses not to meet it. e-some creativity on hyundai with the promotions, i.e. we'll make your payments when it was really timely. f-everyone is always trying to find the upstart, the next big thing. Hyundai is it now. g-hyundai and kia have quietly really expanded their dealer base, sales and marketing, and upgraded their showrooms h-fleet dumping......actually is working hyundai flooded the rental lots and exposed their cars to lots of business people and others who have cash and buy cars. who said rental sales was bad? Hyundai doesn't care much right now about resale....most of their sales from 2 years ago were at absurdly low prices so the used ones on the market now couldn't go down that much more and are good deals used, but it also has allowed them to raise a lot of the the prices of the new stuff j-having a true flagship like the genesis helps a bunch for cred Kia is following a parallel path but you notice they are making headway with cars like the Forte, to erode the civic and corolla, and cars like the Soul, to steal scion and crossover business. Also quietly Kia upgraded the Sorento and added the cheesy Borrego, to round out that lineup. Kia and Hyundai's product do not cross all that much anymore so its like a codependent punch. You keep reading stories a lot lately about the signs of trouble toyota is having and how they are shuffling the deck of the titanic with their execs and stuff and honestly it seems to me like maybe Toyota hasn't got quite enough steam to meet this head on.... If toyota hadn't been wasting so much time on Lexus, and Scions, and IS-F's and LFA's and rwd compact coupes.......... toyota got caught with their pants down, rushing to fill everything because they were expanding but now I think they might take a hurt while Hyundai does the expansion game....

i got the second pkg. the winter hat is nice! lined with fleece. so is the green water bottle, nice!. my kid loves the keychains. as before the mugs rock. now i have a tshirt to offer to my wife (the blue aura shirt).

I thought that as well! thing is on the base wheel it doesn't have the chrome, and it just feels weird. The base wheel is a letdown once you sample the uplevel wheel. I might be crazy, but the ubiquitous GM three spoke wrapped in leather on everything from the CObaltand HHR SS to the Malibu, G6, etc to the Corvette has always felt nice to me, even if the plastic is not even a step above a milk bottle.

The Mazdaspeed 3 has a price advantage but its really ugly. I'll still wait till I drive a real GTI but honestly the two compacts I have enjoyed driving the most were the Cobalt SS and Astra. I didn't like the Cobalt's stiff clutch or lack of sixth but the engine and suspension are so sweet it makes up for the cheap interior. People just don't get how nice it is to drive. I still need to try a WRX, although those got pricey in the last couple years again...they were cheap for awhile when the most recent body came out. The basic Imprezza is rather dull and unengaging but at least it doesn't suck like the Forester. A base Legacy is only a pittance more than a similarly equipped Impreza. I need to get in a Kia Forte sport whatever. My Forte test drive a few months ago, to be honest as a commuter car and for comfort is on par with the Jetta. Plus its a bit more accomodating but its loses out in interior and exterior quality. The ELantras I've ridden in is pretty nice actually. TO be truthful, for someone who is interested in driving the SX4 and Fit are more fun than the Jetta SE and base GOlf (caveat, i need to test the golf again when its warm). Lancer hatchback is on my test drive list soon i think as is the Kizashi. In truth if I was thinking about spending the money on a GOlf base or an HHR LS base, the HHR wins for me. THe VW's interior is nice and stuff but the HHR is a few grand less and is quicker and such. And the SS is out there used too. The CIvic and Corolla don't even register. The Mazda3 is ugly. The FOcus is what I call the cheap fallback if I found a good one used. I drove a Focus for 2 weeks back in 08, that's a pleasing commuter but Golf is more desirable, the Astra is even a way more fun car than the Focus. I even like the non turbo Cobalt a lot. I would be pleased to have one of those too. For anyone considering an uplevel Jetta sedan or wagon with the turbo, i would tell them to make sure to drop by a Saab dealer and see if they can find a deeply discounted 9-3 or CPO. The 9-3 is a similar wheelbase and actually has a bit less rear leg room, but it is a much more solid car...I even prefer all the 9-3's to the Passat. I am DYING to try a CC though. The only VW that is HOT. Some Jettas price out near or at CC sport prices. LEasing even the GTI and high end Jettas are the same as the CC sport. Are you kidding me? The CC is the VW to get. Pocket rocket addicts should wait for the GOlf R that might be hitting our shores. It will have a 240hp turbo and will be a Mazda3 slayer. I just wish FOrd would get off its ass and tell me when the four cylinder ecoboost fusion gets here. I need to know if I have to wait for it, especially when the Regal is coming with a stick and my GM card dollars are crying out to me. The CC sport would be one furrin car that might get me instead of the Regal, if I am shopping in that price class. If I can't swing those then the compacts or really cheap mid sizers are what I have to shop for. If I ever decide to get smart and move from this cold hell than its not even an issue, I think the Camaro V6 FTW, although I would prefer they put a new interior in it.

anything you can tell us about the NAV, DVD, audio etc. would be cool.

Well, with the Jetta, its VW's staple product, so since it sells a lot, it also has a full lineup and covers a very wide price swath. The Golf does as well, but it doesn't appeal to as many buyers due to its hatchback configuration, and the hatch stigma (which many in the US still equate to 'should be low priced'. I think its important if someone is shopping the Jetta or Golf line that they should determine what is most important to them when shopping and try to narrow down which of the VW's they are evaluating rather quickly. I would guess most Jettas sold the last couple years have been at lower price points and have gone out the door in leasing specials. A Jetta S or SE five cylinder is pretty well equipped for what you pay (or lease for) and has decent performance to correspond with it. But there is a tipping point where you can move up to say, a Ford Fusion for equal or little more cash....heck, several of the mid sizers....Mazda6, Altima, Camry, Malibu...KIZASHI. And that is a personal preference. But I don't think the Jetta's handling and acceleration and ride are good enough to offset the benefit of at least surverying what that little bit more will get you. The Jetta can even be had as a turbo (wolfsburg) which actually is a good value, but a really loaded Jetta encroaches even on the Passat and CC sport. I know the CC is drop dead I want to have that car, while the Jetta is merely just a Jetta. Of course if diesel and mpg are important to you then that decision is a lot easier to reason. Same if you want a nice tidy wagon. But you really pay through the arse for that incremental mpg increase, or the larger cargo hold (which is prevalent on many crossovers or larger wagons and sedans in the market currently for the same, to less, or just a little more money). For example, if cargo is your thing, you really could reason that a Subaru Outback or even a Pontiac Vibe (RIP) is a better value purchase. Or if saving fuel money is your thing, a cobalt is faster and saves a lot of up front money as well. A focus will get you almost the same actual mpg. Of course if you are merely a sucker for the nicer interior of either of these cars, perhaps that is a justification enough. With regards to the Golf, I have similar feelings and at least with the base five cylinder, I only see a value equation with the absolute base car and even then I don't think the engine or handling elevates the car enough to make it a no brainer, not when there are so many other good cars and the Mazda3 out there. Really all the base Golf and Jetta SE do is make you want the turbo........kaching. there goes the price. Especially the Golf, you'll either want the TDI (apparently has the GTI's handling) so you can have at least the handling with your diesel. Or you pay for the GTI and you get power with your handling. Which begs me to ask, why can't I get one VW with handling, mpg, and power all in one package that is not north of 25k? TO me that is where any value equation to many VW's break down. There's a lot of good cars around 20k that the Golf and Jetta have a harder time competing with...they hold their own, and a Jetta S and SE are what I would term good values. But the assets VW promotes primarily apply to the higher priced Jettas and Golfs and its a tougher sell. I would say the uniqueness of the VW product, at least I think these are cars that have enough appeal that as long as they are not in the shop you will be proud to own and drive after the first year in the payment book. And for most cars these days that is enough to say they have value and to endorse them. You'll like to look at it, and if you don't judge it harshly or by exceptionally tough criteria, then you should be satisfied and feel like your money is well spent. The carefree maintenance and high resale should help your feelings in that regard. I would just say drive at least 5 other cars in comparison first.

I should probably bookend this, and try to be quick. In my test drive the Golf base and Jetta TDI had very similar feel in the suspension and steering. To reiterate also, it was COLD out, and maybe this contributed to what i found a rather stiff and harsh ride....as in no suspension compliance and lots of thunking over bumps. Almost like the old GM trick of stiff suspension to make it seem sporty, with the chassis taking all the shots. I think I will give it the benefit of the doubt and reserve final judgment till another drive. What I do recall from a previous Jetta test was sort of a choppy nervousness (not much just a little) in the ride, and I think this is simply a car with a short wheelbase that you just feel it more and it works the car more. Both cars felt undertired; the Golf had steel wheels and base tires, and the Jetta had alum wheels but i doubt they had performance tires. All in all I was sort of surprised as the steering felt a little lifeless, and lacked weight and feel. It felt kind of insubstantial, as if the whole steering assembly felt not quite built for the long haul. Of course, some other small cars feel this way also, most of them in fact. I was just surprised I perceived it on the VW's. I wished the steering had been quicker as well. There was more road and chassis noise than I thought should have been there as well. I will say the roadgoing probably at least in the upper tier of cars like this....and again I will need a warmer weather ride to wring them out. But I don't think one who is looking for a 'sporting car' ought to hastily pick one of these two VW's without a really long and honest test ride. These two cars are built for urban comfort. Not super handling (like a GTI apparently?). Which kind of brings me to the next step, is it a must buy and do you get what you want and is it worth what you pay?

the escape, outlander have the best cargo areas from what i could tell in my own sampling of these vehicles. apparently the terrain's turning radius is 4 feet bigger than a tahoe. now that is not good, i guess, but the wheelbase is 112 inches and that is a partial contributor. the terrain's sliding seat is a huge asset. C/D's test is all about skidpad, acceleration, etc. to me, in this class, function and comfort and durability and solidity are the key. duh a lighter vehicle is going to be more tossable, but part of the appeal of SUV is the feeling of heft. people buying SUV's are more apt to look for the best cruiser than one that will lap the nurburgring. i will say this, i think the outlander has the most flexible and convenient cargo and seating arrangements, although it lacks the sliding seat. to be honest any of the vehicles tested except maybe the escape or mariner or whatever could reside at the top of the scorecard, it would only depend on what the weighting criteria are. as an example, the suzuki was the only one with a real 4wd system. doesn't that count? the ford has sync. the outlander has a 3rd row and flapfold tailgate. the tiguan has no cargo space. the crv is slow and feminine. the RAV is tinny and cheap. the forester is plain old junk if you actually take the time to drive one.

those look like snow tires, can you confirm if those are stock tires? or at least they look like they have an aggressive outer tread for all seasons if that's what they are.

Hyundai is the new Toyota.