siegen

What if the editors spent 80% of their time on the track or going through twisties at WOT? Would 13.8 still be bad in that case? How can you make a judgement with absolutely no information? Comparing a Tahoe to an RDX is like comparing an Avalon to a Cobalt SS. How could the Avalon get better mileage in a road test? It's twice as big! Maybe because the editors drove the snot out of the sportier vehicle while they merely cruised around in the other.

?? Are you talking about the RDX or MDX? Regardless, you said yourself road tests aren't a good way of determining mileage. Whether it's the RDX or MDX, the guys at Road & Track undoubtably beat on it pretty good.

That looks very similar to the current Yaris 5-dr hatch available in Europe mixed with the front end off the current Yaris sedan here. I doubt the new Corolla would look that much like it. This might just be concept pics of the Yaris redesign for the European 5 door.

Except all you will see is Malibu's and Impala's, cause the only Camree's Hertz has get snatched up by the vacationers long before the others.

Why would they drop? If they're advertising 300hp, then it was tested and received that rating. Why?

No they just made up the 300hp figure for fun and are still waiting on the real results. There is no hope for you.

Autoweek has pictures and some info on the new 2007 MDX. These are the first production photos I've seen. Full Article 300hp and 275tq. Those are good numbers for a V6 in this class.

I would rather put my own gas in there, since depending on the dealer and location of the nearest gas station, they may be filling it up with something like Arco. Or they could just stop paying their executives so much.

I think most new Hondas and Acuras are good looking. Not necessarily exciting, but good looking. Here are some:

Oh yes, I forgot Toyota does get the award for the most boring sports car. I hope the next one looks better.

Holy hell, how do they get away with that?? Maybe by stealing just half of a car from each manufacturer, they can get away with it and let their lawyers take care of the rest. Do Kia's still come with standard front-end damage caused by bad brakes? Or did they fix that?

You're joking? Now I see why you don't like new Honda's, you're stuck in the 90's.

Emunds got 18.3 in their 1-year test. Then in their full test where they had it for a week: "Overzealous use of the throttle will lower mileage, however, as we managed just 15 mpg over a week." I think it's pretty safe to say the RAV4 got 16 mpg in that C&D test do to overzealous throttle usage as well, as is often the case in short magazine tests. In fact, if you read the article you referred to (and actually read it, not just look for numbers), you will find they stated clearly: "Our fuel card reported 16 mpg overall, but we feel duty-bound to disclose that it was set mostly during hard mountain driving". Here is the link to the test drive. Not that any of those test drives matter, wasn't it you who said mileage figures calculated over a short time, like a week, don't matter? You said yourself that you need to do at least 10,000 miles to get an accurate figure, and that even 650 miles is no better than worthless (link).

I doubt it. But we'll see. The Grille is, but the headlights look extremely similar to the MDX prototype headlights, and they defintely look more Acura than Honda. I wouldn't be surprised if that is an MDX prototype with the prototype Grille from the Pilot grafted on and a few other modifications, but still retaining the MDX headlights.

Really? Looking over at www.fueleconomy.gov, most users report 17-18mpg with 4wd, and 19mpg with 2wd, in combined driving. Given there's only about 30 entries for the Pilot, it's probably still more accurate than what an auto journalist gets. The Pilot is larger and 600-800 lbs heavier than the RAV4, so it should get less mileage.

If you are a journalist and are handed a 270hp mini-SUV, wouldn't you romp on it too?

You're joking, right? It is completely full of sarcasm, stereotypes, and half-truths.

They're probably talking about the Stream, which you can see pictures here. I really hope they bring it over because it is a very nice looking vehicle. It's like a stretch-Fit.

How is Acura losing their way? Because the RL isn't selling as well as they thought? Has GM ever had a model that didn't sell as well as they thought? Have you actually looked at the sales and compared? Acura has essentially 5 models. Of those 5, the RL is the only one not meeting expectations. The RSX and MDX, which are both old and on the way out, are still selling well. The TL and TSX haven't missed a beat since they were released. Acura has been holding steady with only small dips compared to last year. How much you want to bet when the new MDX and RDX go on sale things will make an abrupt turn? How are Cadillac sales doing? Down 20%? They must be losing their way. Here's a little chart for those that care. Did you know Acura sold almost 2,000 NSX's in 1991?

I think this is part of the reason nobody can take you seriously

Lol. So what's your definition of a good looking car? A dump truck?

Nope I was right. Here are pics. They aren't "released", just more spy shots, but fully un-camo'd.

Pics have been posted, full un-camo'd production model. I don't remember where though.... Honda will release full production information and specs september 1, although I'm sure there will be one or two mags that will blow it a couple days earlier (as is the usual occurance). Edit: after looking around, I'm not so sure about the pics. They have the slightly camo'd ones and that might be it right now. Good review. Sounds like the CR-V will be a very good vehicle. Not surprising considering that market is a big one right now.

I wasn't referring to your post exactly, just everyone else who is trying to judge the 2008 Pilot by this mule. I think Honda's Pilot, CR-V and MDX are on the bland side actually, unoffensive, but well styled (nothing to make them stand out much). The Element is goofy looking though. But the new Element SC is very nice IMO, the head lights really make the front bumper look less.... disney. At first I didn't like the Civic, but after seeing a lot more in person, both the Coupe and Sedan, it really is a nice looking car. People who like the traditional look (like the Cobalt), won't like it as much though.

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. By affordable, the Corvette is more affordable than most cars in that class. That is what I meant. I haven't heard much of anything about the LF-A though, so I'm just guessing. The NSX will have a V10, it was announced about a year ago. Still no solid news as to whether it will remain MR or go front engine with SH-AWD, or just RWD.