The O.C.

Unlikely...... A loaded XLE V6 Camry with Navigation has an MSRP of $28,485 according to Toyota's website. I'm sure Toyota won't jack up the price too much on the new model.....so I'd bet you'd still be loaded for around $30K....maybe a bit less.....

Maybe it's the aussie.....but MT used to be THE domestic-favoring rag. Maybe it was with C Van Tune or the guy before (I forget his name) but when, for example, C&D would rip apart a Buick or something, MT would give it a fair-to-even good review..... They seemed better at recognizing a Buick isn't a sport sedan.....and reviewed it accordingly.....for example.....

Hey....I HATE digital instruments.....BUT my point was that I'd take the Civic's arrangement (at least it has an analog tach) in the correct location over the ION's in the center of the dash....

EXACTLY.....! Kia's definitely making better cars now.....HOWEVER, I find NOTHING sporty or youthful about any of their products.....(at least in comparison to Hyundai, not to mention Honda, Nissan, and Toyota.) I saw the new Optima in Frankfurt and it's a total bore-fest......BUT it does have a more attractive interior than the Sonata. The center-stack is more conventional looking (re: the radio is not high above the HVAC vents, etc.)

BAD name....... Probably will be a decent truck...... I actually like the Durango, it has a big interior, it has a great powertrain....it just has a butt-ugly nose. Why they (Dodge) didn't use the VERY similar, yet different, Dakota front-end, I don't know. I think the Dakota looks way better in front, even though it's not THAT different. The Chrysler version ought to fix the one thing I really don't like about Durango. (AND, some nicer interior plastics would be fine as well.....)

mphmag, Not to be off topic, but I like your magazine! HOWEVER.....I'm wondering when you'll do a version for us GUYS......that.....uh.....DON'T like girls....? Get my drift? :P I know there's others on here that would "agree" with me...... I like how your mag plots a different course with your articles and design that obviously differ from the "Big 4" buff mags.... ......it's just those icky girls you slather all over the pages..... :o

Nah....I actually work for an automotive finance company. They give me a certain dollar amount and they let me choose ANYTHING I want to drive as long as.....1) I stay within the dollar amount, or pay the extra and 2) it has four doors. Then, I order the vehicle at the dealer, or pick one off the lot, and the leasing company then leases the vehicle and charges our company for it. My first one with them was the '03 Mazda6 V6 5-speed, and for this next company car, I wanted an SUV, had an automatic Liberty before as a personal car so I know I liked them, and the idea of staying with a manual tranny would be more enjoyable to drive. I think most "soccer moms" still choose Liberty because of styling and looks, and maybe the more "rugged" image. The mileage sucks on the auto, but I've heard other people that got more like 15-17 with them. Not me...my auto averaged 11-13 no matter how light-footed I drove. And they really don't ride that much rougher than an Escape, Equinox....so you don't lose too much there compared to the "more delicate" car-based SUVs

Razor, your comments/attitude regarding the current LaCrosse's interior compared to this new Camry's interior is the same kind of thinking and misunderstanding of the market that has kept GM management/designers/product planners from executing at the same level as most of the imports (or even Ford and DCX.) Lucerne is executed much better than LaCrosse....and yet, even so, we should have had that interior in the LeSabre or Park Avenue 5 YEARS ago.........WITH a navigation system and Harmon-Kardon....I might add.... I get frustrated because, even today, so many people at General Motors.....JUST....DON'T.....GET IT......

"Heated Windshield Washer Fluid?" WTF is that going to do for me in southern California? NOW I know you guys in Canada and the north would find that beneficial....it's just that I can't see basing an entire advertisement on such a feature that only a select part of the country would even care about. I saw the commercial briefly a few days ago, and unfortunately, that's all I remember about it....the "heated windshield washer fluid." Not a good way IMHO to spend your ad dollars. They need to be talking about the Lucerne's engineering, or the (supposedly) european-inspired ride, handling, and feel. OR the NorthStar V8 powertrain. OR the much-improved interior and roominess, yadda, yadda. Who knows....maybe they did talk about those things.....but unfortunately, all I remember, or took away from the ad, was the "heated windshield washer fluid." That won't get younger, import-minded consumers into a Buick showroom.

I agree about the 4.0L......(although I DO like the 3.7L.) It's too bad they didn't re-engineer a new inline-six, eh?

There's a hell of a lot of LX cars (300/Charger/Magnum) selling in the mid-20's with the 2.7L and 3.5L V6 engines. I think at least 50% of them are this configuration....based upon estimations of penetration for the HEMI engine. I wouldn't call the Ford 500 anywhere near "lame." Blandly-styled? YES....but lame? No. It's certainly a way more up-to-date architecture than what we have in the (old) W-body sedans (LaCrosse, Impala, Grand Prix.)

I just picked up my new company car.....a 2006 Liberty Sport 4X4 with a 6-speed MANUAL transmission.....surely a rare bird these days. MSRP - $26,400. Sport package, 4X4, 3.7L OHC V6, manual tranny, moonroof, 6-disc changer, Infinity speakers, skid plate package, alloy wheels, dark tint, 6-way power driver seat, etc. Black with Khaki cloth interior. I looked at everything (in my company's price range) from an Equinox, Escape, Tucson/Sportage twins, RAV4, CR-V, etc. I chose the Jeep because ultimately, I wanted something a bit more than a "cute ute" because I do occasionally do some light off-roading when we go to the desert, and I also want to be able to tow our seadoos (about 3K lbs.) AND, a plus for me was the availability of a manual transmission. I did have to special-order it, however, as I wanted a more-or-less "loaded" Liberty WITH the manual tranny and the ONLY manual ones I could find were base strippy "beer cans." Overall, I really like the vehicle. The clutch and shifter are VERY smooth on this Liberty....not truckish at all like the Wrangler I used to have. That was what ultimately sold me on actually ordering the 6-speed manual was how smooth it drove. i'm a fan of the 3.7L V6....as I had one in my '04 Liberty (with the 4-speed automatic.) However, it's not a revver....more of a torquer....and almost seems like a pushrod motor to me in this sense even though it IS an OHC design. The torque of this motor mates nicely with the manual transmission and makes L.A. rush-hour traffic navigating an easy chore...as you don't have to shift too much in traffic (you can lug it pretty well in higher gears as traffic slows down and speeds up.) The engine DOES seem a bit quieter in this application.....why do some engines seems to thrash or moan less when they are paired with a manual tranny...? However, when you really get on it, it does seem quite a bit peppier than the other Liberty I had. I'm sure the two extra gear ratios definitely help. This Liberty has even better ride quality than my old one (did they retune the suspension in the last few years?) and is damn near the equal of the car-based utes such as Equinox and Escape. You DON'T get the usual "head-toss" motion of many truck-based SUVs. It can't quite go around corners as well as they can....but it really is a nice-riding vehicle on the freeway and around town...and it's QUIET. Fuel economy is already better than my '04 automatic. I got 17.5mpg on my first tank (as the Jeep is hardly "broken in.") I only could average 11-13mpg with my other Liberty. I hope to see the mpg increase a bit to 18-19 as the truck gets a few thousand miles on it. I would consider that MORE than acceptable considering the V6 performance, towing, and off-road ability of the vehicle. The new seats ('05) are an improvement and I still like the attractive interior design and instrument cluster with nicely-grained hard plastics and soft door trim. The only downside is that there is not as much front seat room as in Equinox or Escape. It seems a bit tighter in there. Back seat room is okay. However, since it will usually just be me in the vehicle, it's a perfect size. Finally, I'm happy because IMHO I think it's an attractive 'ute and avoids the "soccer mom" appearance of many of the other car-based SUVs. Any other thoughts/comments/questions?

.....why...? Just because they didn't pick a GM vehicle? At least that's what I read into your posts... Seems a bit narrow view of MT IMHO.....

The only thing "unique" about the ION's dash is the centrally-mounted gauge cluster...and even that is NOT unique as it's been done before. That being said, I'd take the Civic's dual-cowl instrument cluster (in the CORRECT location in front of the driver) over the ION's arrangement. And we don't EVEN want to begin discussing interior fit-and-finish or materials of the ION versus the new Civic.....

Hmmmm........ I'm disappointed that Toyota didn't stretch a bit further with the exterior design.....but it DOES look good in black. I suppose the "SE" model with bigger wheels and tires will look handsome, if not exciting. The interior, however, is absolutely stunning.....! It's the kind of interior that will look and feel good no matter whether it's the base interior or the upscale, woodgrained XLE. We'll see what materials are like, but Toyota has a nack of making even hard plastics look and feel good....so I'm not too worried. The Impala SS might not even be able to spank the V6 version, however. In the recent comparo with the Avalon, C&D got 0-60 in 6secs flat. If the new Camry is a bit lighter, it might even whack a few tenths off that time.....and really stay neck-and-neck with the V8 Chevy (and Pontiac.) Definitely a nice upgrade to the current Camry.....but you STILL won't find me rushing out to buy one.....and maybe that's its success formula.....they aren't looking to appeal to someone like myself.

BMW really shows how to get the most out of less through lower weight, better gearing, optimal weight-distribution, and smooth-revving engines that are easy to keep in the meat of the powerband. e.g.....C&D, 11-05......'06 BMW 325i, 3,348lbs, 0-60 6.1secs, 1/4mile 14.7sec @ 94mph, and "only" $33,190 as-tested. That's with "only" 215hp and an even lower 185 lb/ft of torque. Pretty impressive numbers any way you put it...!

Don't forget that Ford also offers you a base, V6 Mustang for the high-teens, low-twenties that gives GREAT performance (C&D got 0-60 I believe in under 7secs..) for little money. The V6 Mustang is alot of car for the money. You'd have to spend $28K on a GTP G6 coupe to match it.....

......well, BMWs and Corvettes have integrated antennas.....and I've never noticed a perceived lack of radio reception or clarity.....? Anyone remember the A-pillar mounted antennas on Japanese cars that you had to reach up out of the window and manually extend it...? :lol:

I'm curious.....are you speculating, or have you DRIVEN each of those engines? I think you have not.... I have however.....and the 2.4L L4 was a nice and smooth motor in the Sebring sedan rental car I had. The 2.7L is not overpowered, but at 190hp, it's not that bad for its small displacement. BUT, the 2.7L is pretty quiet and smooth.....certainly more so than GM pushrod V6s. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the 3.5L. It DOESN'T lack refinement, revs quite freely and smoothly, and is in every way comparable to GM's 3.6L HF V6. Finally, I've had two Jeeps with the 4.0L I6 and have NEVER had an oil consumption/leak problem. I'm glad you are a GM fan and it's okay if you are not a Chrysler fan.....but let's talk from real experience, not speculation, okay? (AND if you HAVE driven all those engines and still have your opinions....then it is what it is....but I suspect you haven't....or you don't have much of an open mind.)

OK.....good news..... NOW.....let's do the same review of the Lucerne by a panel of consumers in Los Angeles, Dallas, Miami, or New York City. (e.g....NOT in Michigan or the midwest) THAT will be the real test of how the Lucerne might be able to change Buick's image...

Solstice and MX-5 are two of the most evenly-matched competitors we've seen in quite awhile. Both have good points and bad points......I don't like Solstice's interior quality and seats, and I think the lack of luggage room is unforgiveable. However, I think Solistice looks better than MX-5 and handles every bit as well. I think I'd like the MX-5's powertrain better though....I drove one recently and it was beyond sweet....but Solstice is supposed to ride better. Give-and-take....give-and-take. I'd be happy with either of them! It's nice to see GM compete so well.

I absolutely LOVE the HUD in my C6......before I got the car, HUD was a non-issue and the only reason I have it is because it's in the top (#3) package. NOW that I have it, I really appreciate it in even daily driving. One problem, however, is that the HUD speed never matches the analog IP speedometer. I'm not talking 1mph, it sometimes is off around 2-2 1/2 mph. That's kinda bad because now I don't know which one is correct. Also, I'll set the cruise when the HUD says "75mph" but the info center will read "..Cruise Set to 77mph." Once again, which one is right?

I can go ANY day.....if you're available as of 1-11, then I'll stick with you Turbo.... I don't leave for NAIAS until Wednesday night, 1-19-05.

This will be the "new" RAV4......as the others get bigger, Suzuki could really rock with this new "small" 'ute. Thecarconnection has a great production photo of the SX4.....it's got some eye appeal. I just hope the 2.0L L4 it has is not the old hoary 2.0L they've been using in the Tracker and Vitara....

I don't think it looks too bad at all.......but other than maybe the headlights and taillights, I see NO BMW in the design. The interior center stack looks REALLY plain to me.....not offensive, but kinda bland. As far as the materials, don't be fooled by good pics. I thought the Chinese models looked good inside until I saw them and touched them in person at the Frankfurt auto show. They have horrendous fit-and-finish and material quality. Plus, nothing seems to match color-wise or texture-wise. This one could be different, but I looked at a few of this brand of Chinese vehicle (I won't even TRY to spell it correctly....) and they were pretty bad. They LOOK good though. Like I've said before, if they fix the fit-and-finish and material quality, they will definitely be a force to be reckoned with.....