2007 Ford Focus

Here's a car I almost forgot about, I've driven quite a few of the newer Focus but somehow I kept forgetting about the older one.


Introduction: The Ford Focus was an effort by Ford of America to sort of bring its European lineup to North America. The last effort was the Contour being a near replica of the Mondeo but ended up not doing as well as Ford hoped. The North American Focus did not bring a replica of the European Focus but instead used mostly American designed parts and was built in the US. This brought the Focus into attention as one of the most recalled vehicles in US history. A staggering 21 recalls were made for the Focus for the 2000-2003 models. This lead to the Focus to being repealed from Car of the year for a few North American car publications.

My cousin drives one of these cars, he told me things about it so I knew before hand what this car was going to be like.


Performance: I got the base model so it only had the 2.0L 4-cylinder engine that produced 136 hp and 136 lb.ft of torque which is an improvement over the previous unit that had 110 hp. This means the acceleration from 0-100 km/h is about 8.7 seconds which is actually pretty good for a small car with low amounts of power. The engine however is a bit noisy and not very pleasant especially compared to the newer Focus. Not enough however to make this a bad engine.

My Score: 8/10 - A surprisingly quick vehicle considering how small the engine is.

Handling: One of the key items from the C170 platform is this platform is used on the European Focus which did give it a distinct advantage over its European rivals. The North American one uses this same platform but somehow I didn't get the sense its handling was all that brilliant. Possibly one of the annoying things was how stiff the wheel was, I normally criticize cars with very light wheels being vague...this one is very heavy but didn't seem to match how the car cornered. It would be wrong to say the Focus handled badly, but I couldn't say it felt that great to put it into a corner since a car like this would get tiring.

My Score: 7/10 - The very heavy wheel might have ruined the potentially great handling. You just don't feel it because of how much effort it takes to move the wheel.


Interior: This is something that was most displeasing in the Focus. The interior of the Focus all I can say is...cheap. Lots of cost cutting occurred in the Focus and I believe an accountant styled this interior, I just can't think of a real designer going through such lengths to cut costs. The door handles are very cheap, the seat levers are small and cheap, the cup holders are awful looking and removable, its a sea of grey and I just couldn't see anything attractive inside. Don't bother to look the European one looks like this too. As said its built in the USA, the recalls in question...unfortunately a few are a result of how well built this car is. Its functional but compared to its competition its pretty lacking.

My Score: 3/10 - Not a good looking interior, lots of cost cutting and not built very well.

Styling: The North American Focus got a face lift over the original European design. I must say, this face lift actually puts it in line with the rest of the European lineup and even though its not a pretty average looking car...I actually like the way it looks. I actually prefer this to the original style which was a bit more outrageous. Every bit fits the car so well.

My Score: 10/10 - I can't think of anything wrong with the styling, it somehow works so well.

Value for Money: The recalls have hurt the Focus' reputation and as a result it suffered. By this point the Mazda 3 has established its the driver oriented car with the improved C1 platform, while the C170 is clearly outdated. Reliability is already weaker considering the recalls leaving it down to driving something American that is decent but clearly not refined. I guess another reason to buy it is it does look good.

My Score: 5/10 - Not great considering the recalls, if Ford put a lot more effort into making it right then this should have been a success.

Overall: 33/50 - There are worse cars than the Focus but I do think it looks good and after all that's said and done it did need polishing which is what the newer one does.

2008 Dodge Durango

I just realized I reviewed two good American cars...here's a Dodge product, ha ha.


Introduction: The Dodge Durango was started in 1998 when Dodge decided to use its Durango as a base to make an SUV. Back then SUVs were selling very well and Dodge had no answer to the wildly popular Ford Explorer and didn't want to lose out. The original Durango got old by 2003 and was replaced with a bigger full sized Durango in 2004. The Durango was still based on the Dakota but was much wider. The Durango is also the first Dodge models to become a hybrid. The Durango however had its production run end in 2008, the last models being the 2009 hybrids.

You probably know I don't have very good things to say about Dodge products so you can expect my intial thoughts about seeing this vehicle.


Performance: The Dodge Durango had 3 options to choose from engines a 3.7L V6, a 4.7L V8(flex fuel) and a 5.7L Hemi V8. I only got the chance to drive the Durango with the regular 4.7 flex fuel V8 so it only produced 235 hp and 300 lb.ft of torque which is clearly isn't enough. It could only accelerate from 0-100 km/h in 10.7 seconds...pretty bad. Considering how large this SUV is I thought Chrysler would give it an adequate design to make it not seem so slow...but they failed. I can't imagine how slow the V6 is.

*Note: Sorry about the pic but apparently nobody but our fleet has this engine in their Durango...they all seem to be Hemi V8s. I would take a picture of one of our own...but we retired them all.

My Score: 3/10 - A 4.7 L V8 that moves a SUV this slowly is not a worthwhile engine.

Handling: The Dodge Durango as you can see from the performance section did pretty badly. Its clearly not a light vehicle if 300 lb.ft of torque doesn't move it quickly enough and as a result the handling is pretty poor. Even worse, the steering wheel is very vague...which is a horrible thing in an SUV like this. I'll be honest, I had an accident in this truck with its massive size and vague wheel I scratched the fat rear wheel arch. This thing is terrible to drive, enough said.

My Score: 2/10 - Bad handling and a very vague steering feel, bad enough that its easy to crash it.


Interior: Here we go again, another bad interior design brought to you from Chrysler. First things first, one of the more important items that is more critical to SUVs is how much more blind are you. This is a blind vehicle(another factor to my accident), the seating position is horrible for someone short which I am. Next item, the interior materials are very cheap and ugly as expected from Chrysler. Its not build very well either, a vehicle built in the USA...I just found loose bits and misaligned pieces in a few places on this SUV. Its not all that comfortable either, you do feel its truck roots. The truck is spacious, I'll give it that allowing it to be an 8 seater.

My Score: 1/10 - Big blind spots, ugly and cheap materials, bad seating position and not very good build quality, you just can't expect a good score.

Styling: Normally a Dodge scores much better with styling, I just didn't find that to be the case here. The shape is pretty uninspiring and its doesn't even have a nice looking grille to go with it. The Rams look good, this just doesn't. You can't even confuse it as a possible Ram variant which would be something in its favour. The fat wheel arches unnecessarily increase its width...for no reason.

My Score: 4/10 - Not very attractive, dumbly designed wheel arches...the only thing in its favour is its not really ugly.

Value for Money: This is a budget priced SUV...unfortunately it also looks that way. Its slow, the interior is horrible, it drives pretty badly, its a gas guzzler, nothing really comes into mind about why this SUV is good other than being cheap and spacious and an 8 seater.

My Score: 4/10 - Its the cheapest 8-seater out there...a shame its a horrible car.

Overall: 14/ 50 - What a big pile of rubbish this truck is.

2008 Ford Taurus

Another American car, I guess this update will be full of American cars.


Introduction: The Ford Taurus was one of the most famous cars that Ford has ever made. The original featured the infamous jelly bean styling and shared the #1 spot with the Honda Accord during its prime. Over the years Ford had failed to update the Taurus and quickly the Camry overtook the Taurus. The 3rd generation revamped the styling but was even more controversial than the first two generations, yet the crucial problems from the earlier Tauruses were left unresolved. Lastly the 4th generation Taurus, Ford did listen to the styling complaints but now the car had become so generic and not noteworthy that it survived only as a rental car which led to Ford dropping it in favour of the Fusion. Alan Mulally back then the new and now current CEO was surprised Ford allowed this name to die out, due to some of the success of the Fusion this meant the Taurus would no longer be a midsized car. There was a struggling car by the bland name of the Five Hundred which Mulally decided to rename the Taurus, now the Taurus has become Ford's flagship vehicle.

The Ford Taurus was one of the earliest vehicles I've driven in this job. I drove this one on my first day and back then I had a low impression of American cars. I was not expecting much from the Taurus nor did I think much of it when I saw it.


Performance: The previous Ford Five Hundred suffered with a very weak engine in a market where 203 hp just wasn't enough making it the slowest of the full size cars. Ford corrected this problem in the new Taurus and gave this car a 3.5L V6 engine that produces 263 hp and 249 lb.ft of torque. An incredible improvement and possibly salvaging Ford's full sized car as something viable again. This engine is reasonably smooth for a Ford product back then and is pretty powerful. This meant an acceleration from 0-100 km/h in about 7.5 seconds which is rather good but not nearly as potent as Toyota or Nissan's 3.5L V6s which made all of those vehicles under 7 seconds. Still Ford was trying to rebuild an image and this was a start.

My Score: 8/10 - Not a incredible engine but its smooth and reasonably quiet, a much better engine than the Five Hundred's 3.0L.

Handling: The Taurus is a very large car and as such there will be some drawbacks to the handling over something smaller. Its roughly a 3600 lb car and I was surprised that the handling wasn't as sluggish as I'd expected from a big car. The vehicle also has some pretty good steering feedback, the very first thing I did was attempt to squeeze this big beast out of a tight section in a dealership parking lot and did it without a scratch. I don't know if the AWD handles that differently but the front wheel drive version is pretty good.

My Score: 8/10 - For a big car it is actually easy to drive, has good steering feel and handles surprisingly well.


Interior: The one thing that I didn't like from Ford products from the past were the pretty downright terrible interiors. The Ford Taurus was the first Ford I saw from this era that had a interior worthy of its price. Normally I jump into an American car and I'm shocked how awful it looks inside, I didn't with the Taurus. The materials in this interior were pretty decent and it wasn't as depressing as the old Focus. The downsides however, this interior was sort of generic looking, it just didn't stand out its almost easy to forget it. This vehicle is made in the USA, I didn't notice any problems so I think they're built pretty well.

My Score: 7/10 - A good effort by Ford, this interior was a bit too generic for my tastes.

Styling: By this point Ford had made it mandatory that all of its vehicles had to have the Gillete grille and compared to the old Five Hundred...I don't think it worked for the Taurus. It was a better implementation than the old Fusion but I didn't think it fit that well. The rear was alright looking but with silly tail lights. Its actually the variant of this car, the Taurus X that so far had the best Gillete grille implementation.

My Score: 5/10 - Sorry I didn't like it, but Ford gets a pass score for trying.

Value for Money: The biggest competitor for the Ford Taurus is clearly the Chrysler 300. Unfortunately the Taurus has no V8 to compete with the 300C but the V6 is a better one than the Chrysler V6. The 300 does have RWD as an advantage, but the Taurus does have AWD which may be more appealing. GM and Toyota at this point had a poor vehicle to compete against these two so in terms of value, this is a good Ford product and a decent flagship vehicle.

My Score: 8/10 - Its only got one real competitor at this point, its a much more refined product and its not a total bore like the old Taurus.

Overall: 36/50 - Proof that Ford was turning itself around before the financial crisis.

2008-2009 Chevrolet Malibu LS

Still a lot of cars to post up, I'll see how many I can do today.


Introduction: The Chevrolet Malibu is one of GM's older names the first Malibu was introduced in 1964 until GM canceled it in 1983. The Malibu name was later revived after the demise of the Corsica/Beretta in 1997. I'm not sure why GM had to retire the Corsica name since I've never heard of this one being a horrible car like its predecessor the Citation was. Anyways GM brought back the Malibu and unfortunately for GM it was a pretty weak effort to combat the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry, I remember seeing the return of the Malibu...and the car was pretty dull and the interior was very disappointingly cheap...like you'd expect from the Cavalier. Turns out that it ended up doing only well as a fleet car which is a failure unless the car was designed for fleet sales only ie. Ford Crown Victoria, Toyota Crown Comfort, etc. Finally someone at GM seemed to realize the Malibu had absolutely nothing to convince you to switch from Honda or Toyota and decided the whole car needed...a reasonably budget the result is the newly designed 2008 Malibu.

When I was given the opportunity to drive this GM car...I knew that GM had to do much more than a mild improvement to even think of challenging the other mid-sized sedans. Up until I drove the Malibu, all the GM sedans I've driven were pretty disappointing and generic. With all the US media hype over this car I had to look at this car more critically to see whether GM finally understood what its been doing wrong for nearly 30 years.


Performance: Well I've only driven the LS model which is the base model and has the not nearly as strong 2.4L 4-cylinder. Its nothing like the first Ford Fusion which had a horribly matched engine but this is not a very powerful car with an engine like this. It only produces 169 hp and 162 lb.ft of torque which is not all that great for acceleration making from 0 to 100 km/h in 9.6 seconds. The engine is refined enough to be quiet enough unlike a Dodge product so in some sense its not all that bad.

My Score: 6/10 - The engine isn't all that powerful, the V6 in terms of power is much better.

Handling: One of the annoying things about American cars has always been the fact they are made purely for the highway, the old Taurus was like this and as a result the handling was often terrible. The new Malibu fortunately avoids this problem, the handling on the Malibu while not being that great is not terrible as one would expect. The big problem here for the car however is its weight, at 3500 lbs its heavy and you start to feel this once you make the corner. Unlike what Toyota has done, the steering for the Malibu isn't vague it actually does feel connected which is a massive improvement over other older GM products.

My Score: 7/10 - Decent handling, good steering feel but the car is noticeably heavy


Interior: This used to be GM's anchilles heel...in the 1990s you jump into a GM car and can see the awful sea of grey, dull plastic. It was so uninspired and very cheap at the same time that you hoped it was a rental or one of the cheapest cars you've bought. The VP of GM by the name of Bob Lutz noticed this and was willing to basically say the GM interiors back then...were crap. The new Malibu made it a goal that the interior had to look like someone actually spent time and money styling it instead of before just throwing cheap parts from a Cavalier and hope the buyer was too dumb to notice. Mission accomplished, there are some noticeable neat looking styling items like the gear shifter with its neat lights, the much much nicer dashboard(a fake digital by the way) and a general inviting atmosphere of the interior. I liked the implementation of this interior. Its not the most beautiful interior because of the plastic but these days, nearly all the interiors of cars are plastic. As for the build quality its made in the USA and so far...I haven't seen a major defect, only a minor misalignment which Toyota these days has.

My Score: 9/10 - Very very good effort, if it didn't have to use plastic it would have been perfect.

Styling: The exterior styling of the Malibu is not something I particularly liked. The good news is its not nearly as dull as the last two generations. The front has a nice headlight set up...but I think it was sort of ruined by how large the grille became, kind of like seeing a person with a massive nose. The rear just didn't really match with the front, they're definitely unique but don't quite have pronouncement that makes certain unique styling good.

My Score: 6/10 - They tried something different, I just don't think it worked out as well

Value for Money: This is really where GM has to fight its hardest, the midsized sedan segment is getting much harder to take on. Accord and Camry are extremely well established and haven't made the major screw ups compared to Ford and its ill fated midsized Taurus. GM has never been considered a major player here and thus needs to prove its better than the establishment. I'm not quite sure it does, the Malibu is several times better than before but I'm not sure it has done enough to prove GM will no longer resort to the old bad days of accountant designed rubbish. If your a American patriot, then yeah this is your best choice and unlike before you'd actually support a good product unlike the Chrysler Sebring.

My Score: 6/10 - In a very competitive market, there isn't anything truly outstanding to make it the new standard for midsized cars. I gave the Mazda 6 a great score because it did quite a few things other midsized cars wouldn't do at those that did, the price was much lower for a still high quality product.

Overall: 34/50 - A pretty fair score, its definitely far from being bad like the last Malibu but its still not quite that brilliant either.