I got back from the 2010 Toronto auto show after going daily since 2008. I can't really review any of the cars other than the ones I've driven at work but I can give a review about how the cars are inside in general. There would be too many cars to cover so I'll make a general statement about the state of each.
Acura: The entire lineup was so ugly I didn't bother. With cars this ugly I don't care if they're any good.
Audi: The Audi section was one of the busiest and for good reason. From the inside of even the base A4 you can tell the materials are of higher quality than a regular car. The built quality of Audis is extremely well done. There isn't anything to complain about the styling, most sport a very aggressive look. Price is really what may hurt Audi's sales, nothing they offer is worthwhile without spending more than 30K. That said they have lots of interest which is always good.
BMW: Of the three big German high tier companies it was BMW that was the least busy. Their cars are not the most stylish, in fact I found a lot to be either boring or ugly. BMW was hoping the 5-series GT would attract attention...it was rather lonely. The best looking car BMW offers for 2010 is actually the Z4. Inside a BMW its of pretty reasonably quality however there are some poorly designed switches and very cheap stalks on the wheels.
Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep: The Chrysler section was not very busy. I've driven most of the cars that this company has to offer and frankly none have been very good, some are just worse than others. Very poor interior quality and very poor ergonomics is what one can easily see in any of their cars at an auto show. I will say the Fiat 500 and the Fiat 500 Arbarth attracted more attention than anything else this company offered. It was the only reason I visited this section.
Ford: I can easily say Ford spent the most money at this auto show because they have the largest lot. They also strategically positioned their most important cars and had several examples of all of them for people to see. There were a lot of Ford Fiestas and from what I can see its looking like it will be a good car. Ford also had the most upcoming models to display with the 2012 Focus and the Edge both very important cars which will determine Ford's right to return to become one of the most important auto makers. I expect great things from Ford with how eager they seem to be.
GM: Due to how many models GM still has it had the second largest space for its cars. Its really clear GM wants to make a big effort to separate its current cars from its previous one. Their most important car was the Cruze and compared to the Cobalt it replaces its much much better styled inside but its still very plastic. The new LaCrosse has better seats than the old one and seems to be styled well inside, but there are still annoying touches of cost cutting in the materials they were willing to use. The Cadillacs were much better done and had less of the interior woes as the others. Overall it looks like GM is on the right track, its just not looking like it will be as quick as Ford.
Honda: The newest introduction to the Honda section is the Accord Crosstour...and its horribly ugly. Its almost as bad as the Acuras and once again I don't care if its any good its too ugly to be seen driving in. Honda also showed its CR-Z, I'm not sure if its the concept or whether its exactly what the production version will be. The rest of Honda's line wasn't interesting and many showed weak interior trim bits. This is also the final year of the S2000, its your last chance before Honda ruin its lineup with boring cars.
Hyundai: The Hyundai section was ridiculously busy, the key cars they wanted to show were the newly redesigned Sonata and the Tuscon. I can easily say they surpass their predecessors in interior quality. Hyundai has done probably the best job at making plastic not seem cheap and has styled them to work with the interior. If there's anything that might trouble someone, the price is slowly going up. There's a price to pay if you want a higher quality product.
Infiniti: The biggest change to the Infiniti lineup is the new M series. The M is actually a pretty handsome looking car, very nicely trimmed and appears to be priced within reason. The very popular G series of cars are also very nicely done, if you've been inside the Maxima then much of the interior of that car is present in the G cars. Infiniti will do well so long as they stick with what they currently have and continually improve them.
Jaguar: The Jaguar section is very small mostly because Jaguar doesn't offer nearly as many models as they used to. The new XJ is very similarly styled like their current XF. I guess my problem with this is the XJ has always looked the same for nearly 40 years, why not retire the name and call it the XL or whatever new notation they want to give it?
Kia: The situation with Kia is rather similar to Hyundai. Most of the current Kias are much more improved over the previous ones. The new ones are the Forte, Sorento and Sportage. All these cars are much better than the cars they replaced, the Forte particularly is superior to the Spectra it replaces. The prices with Kia are still pretty reasonable so its not yet ready to jack up the prices probably to built its name.
Land Rover: Much like Jaguar the Land Rover section is pretty small. Not a whole lot has changed for Land Rover other than interior improvements to the Discovery. They appear more luxurious inside than the boxy exteriors seem to imply. Tata ownership seems to not have affected Land Rover in any way.
Lexus: The car Lexus wanted to promote for this year was the HS hybrid, unfortunately its part of the brake recall that affected the Prius. As a result nobody was interested in that car, but rather the IS and the GS. Lexus quality is actually still quite high but the interiors are not styled as nicely. Another annoying thing is the prices they're very high, sometimes I'd rather toss out the luxuries in favour of a good driving experience in a high quality car.
Mazda: This is the company I keep scoring very high in my reviews, its a rather busy section in Toronto. The most important car Mazda is launching is the new Mazda2 and very similar to the Ford Fiesta. Several Mazda3s were available including the Mazdaspeed3. The only old vehicles left is the Mazda5 and the CX-9. The Mazda5 you can tell is old as its interior quality is not on par with the newer better design of the 3, the 5 will be replaced next year. The CX-9's future seems to be unknown due to the it being based off the old Edge, Mazda is no longer under Ford's rule meaning its free to use either the new Edge or build off the CX-7.
Mercedes-Benz: Despite their recent failings in quality, the tri pointed star seems to have done a great job at attracting attention. The new E-class is extremely good looking and the release of the new SLS halo car helps the image that Mercedes is serious again. While the C-class is a disappointment with its interior, the E and S are still very good. Its hard to say whether Mercedes produces the same level of durability and reliability they once did in the 80s and early 90s but this batch of cars is certainly better than nearly every car they offered in the late 90s and early 2000s.
Mitsubishi: The newest design at the Mitsubishi section was the 2010 Outlander. The styling of the Mitsubishis are actually pretty good considering their small lineup. Performance also seems to be something their very good at since they're willing to show off their Evo X. Interiors however is something that hurts all Mitsubishis even the 2010 Outlander. With better interior styling and higher quality materials Mitsubishi can rise to the levels of at least Mazda instead of relying on its warranties.
Nissan: Other than the Nissan Cube, very little is different with the Nissan lineup other than having the Quest minivan go missing. Most Nissans have decent interiors, it just depends on where it was built to determine whether it will fall apart or stay intact. The Cube itself is quite a surprise, I was expecting Nissan Versa level of quality due to their shared platform. I was wrong it was of higher quality material and its styled the way one would expect if one bought a car like that. Nissan is on the path to success.
Scion: The newest badge in the Toronto auto show, its a very old thing in the United States but its arrived in Canada this year. Looking at all its models I know all of them are outdated. Starting with the xD, its very difficult to say its nothing more than a different Yaris. The xB had some of the worst plastic I've seen in a long time. The tC is clearly too old and slow to be worth considering as a sports coupe. Its clear Scion is very late, bringing an outdated lineup is not going to be a good start.
Subaru: Their newest addition is the new Legacy and the Outback. I'm not as thrilled about the styling of the new Legacy as I liked the old one much better. Ever since Toyota bought shares into Subaru's parent company it seems as if the cars started to look duller. Nevertheless the Legacy actually had aluminum interior trim, I wasn't expecting to see that. It makes me wonder why nobody did this and instead went with faux wood plastic. So much nicer and easier to say you bought a quality product.
Suzuki: The newest addition to Suzuki is the Kizashi building on the same principles as the SX4 that was released not too long ago. The interior is of average quality, its not exactly bad but there are some touches not as nice as Hyundai's. The good news is the Kizashi comes fully loaded. One of the key items the Kizashi has is it comes with AWD in a class that only the Legacy offers this choice. If the SX4 is any indication it seems Suzuki is more concerned about the driving experience and offering a reasonably interior and a fully equipped car at a reasonably price. It now makes me wonder why they're keeping the Swift+, its absolutely terrible to the SX4 and Kizashi.
Toyota: The Japanese giant has been hit very hard with a huge string of recalls. Still Toyota is hoping its 2011 Sienna is a sign that change is about to come. Its too bad Toyota doesn't have its FT-86 concept car to wow people who wouldn't normally have been interested in Toyota. Now as for their other cars, you don't have to look too far to see quality is down a whole lot. I've already mentioned the Corolla's interior being terrible, the Tundra is even worse and the build quality isn't up to code. The new Prius still has the flimsy gear lever which I thought was awful on the old one. Toyota has a lot of work to do to fix its image problem, but I personally believe they have to revamp their whole lineup. Its sad to say but Toyota deserves to be in the state its in, they sacrificed its core principles for sales. Its paying the price for that betrayal of its values.
Volkswagen: The current largest auto maker in the world does not do too well in North America at first it doesn't seem apparent as to why. Of all the auto makers VW offers the most amount of diesel options clearly preferring diesel over hybrid. Their newest vehicle is the redesigned Golf and I must say its much better looking. Interiors are of reasonable quality, however in most cases they are rather bland and in some cases boring. Also VW should drop the Routan, nobody will be fooled with a low quality minivan hiding behind German trim. A big problem VW needs to overcome is their awful MSRP, one has to spend at least 20K for their new models. The City Jetta and Golf are outdated models.
Volvo: Finally the Sweedish car maker known for safety. Not a whole lot of changes have occured for Volvo this year but one can tell that despite this Volvo is still relevant. The styling is still pretty good on most of their models and they also are slowly adding more features to each car. Inside you can tell Volvo uses better materials than mainstream auto makers through their plastic quality if they have a weak point in their interiors its the Ford style switches. We'll have to see next year if Chinese ownership will affect what Volvo does.
Anyways that's all I got this week. Hopefully I'll be able to review another car next week.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Thursday, February 4, 2010
2007-2008, 2009 Hyundai Sonata
In an attempt to make up for the lack of reviews I am posting a second review today. The Hyundai Sonata, I split up the 2007 and 2008 from the 2009 because they're surprisingly different despite not looking very different.
Introduction: The Hyundai Sonata is Hyundai's mid-sized car. Originally introduced in 1985 to replace the disappointing Hyundai Stellar and ending Hyundai's rear wheel drive lineup. The Sonata is now in its 5th generation, the new 6th generation Sonata is ready to take over for the 2011 model year.
I wasn't really all that thrilled about the Sonata much like other Korean cars when I first started out. It was the 2009 models where I was surprised about how different Hyundai has become.
Performance: I haven't driven any of the V6 Hyundai Sonatas so my review will stick with the standard 2.4L 4-cylinder engine included in the base Sonata models. The 2009 has an updated version of the engine meaning it produces more power than the original 2007-2008 models. The original engine produced 162 hp and 164 lbs.ft of torque. The updated engine has 175 hp and 168 lb.ft of torque. The differences between the two is rather minimal although I will say the 2009 feels a slight bit smoother and less strained. The acceleration time is roughly 9.5-9.8 seconds from 0-100 km/h. Not a very quick car but its reasonably smooth and modest.
My Score(both): 6/10 - Not a very quick engine but reasonable for its power.
Handling: I've noticed some differences between the two version here. Starting with the earlier Sonata, when you take one of these cars into a corner the body roll and lack of steering feel is very apparent. The wheel isn't exactly light but it doesn't translate into an enjoyable experience. I found the earlier Sonata a rather boring vehicle to take into a corner. Now the 2009 Sonata is a much different experience. The steering is more sharper and a far more willing car to be pushed to its limits and giving a better sense of steering feel that the older Sonata wouldn't give. The roll is also less pronounced and dynamically a better experience overall. I can easily say the 2009 Sonata was my first taste of Hyundai turning its image into a better car company.
My Score(2007-2008): 5/10 - Very boring, quite a bit of body roll and not willing to play.
My Score(2009): 8/10 - Better steering than the previous version, less body roll and far more enjoyable to drive in comparison.
Interior: This is easily the biggest difference between the two versions. The earlier Sonata has a very plain interior design, there is very little styling input into the interior. The plastics look functional but overall not very nice and the stereo is very bad. While the old interior isn't a great place to sit inside it was well equipped and functional. The newer 2009s seemed to completely change and fix what was wrong with the previous interior. The plastics were of higher quality and were much nicer to feel and look at. The entire center console was changed to a higher level which really impressed me. The gauges had a nicer clean modern look with the white and blue touches while the older one was pretty dated. The stereo unit is a far nicer one although its still a troublesome item and likely the only thing in the car that needs repair early. The atmosphere of the newer interior really shows Hyundai's commitment to higher quality. The build quality on the Sonata is very well done either version. Most Sonatas in North America are built in Montgomery, Alabama.
My Score(2007, 2008): 5/10 - Very boring and unattractive, but built well
My Score(2009): 9/10 - One of the best economical interiors I've seen especially at this price range, its plastic but its very nice plastic. The stereo is the only small weak link.
Styling: This is always my problem with Korean cars in the past, they rarely put enough time and effort to style their cars. This 5th generation Sonata doesn't solve this problem but the coming 6th gen shows Hyundai has changed this. From much of its styling its clear the 5th generation Honda Accord was its major inspiration both rear and front are similar. The earlier Sonata does have a nicer grille than the 2009 and 2010s but neither really substantially differentiate themselves from the old Accord.
My Score(both): 2/10 - A nice copy job, but still a copy job and is not good styling by any means.
Value for money: The Hyundai Sonata relies solely on its low price range to take market share away from the bigger automakers. The Sonata does not disappoint here, both versions are very well equipped even in rather base specification. Hyundai's pricing is rather aggressive and trying to take away from Honda and Toyota. The deal looks a bit less impressive when one adds options for the Sonata but ideally the base Sonata will work for most buyers. The older Sonata was not all that refined and is less appealing especially with the updated 2009s which is better in almost every way. The newer Sonata is a very good deal for an inexpensive relatively large car.
My Score(2007, 2008): 7/10 - A pretty good deal but overshadowed by the 2009's improvements.
My Score(2009): 10/10 - Very well priced and far more refined than before, very hard to argue against recommending it.
Overall(2007, 2008): 25/50 - A so-so boring car with reasonable value
Overall(2009): 35/50 - A pretty good budget value mid sized sedan with one of the nicest interiors in a while, easily the most well updated car I've ever encountered.
Introduction: The Hyundai Sonata is Hyundai's mid-sized car. Originally introduced in 1985 to replace the disappointing Hyundai Stellar and ending Hyundai's rear wheel drive lineup. The Sonata is now in its 5th generation, the new 6th generation Sonata is ready to take over for the 2011 model year.
I wasn't really all that thrilled about the Sonata much like other Korean cars when I first started out. It was the 2009 models where I was surprised about how different Hyundai has become.
Performance: I haven't driven any of the V6 Hyundai Sonatas so my review will stick with the standard 2.4L 4-cylinder engine included in the base Sonata models. The 2009 has an updated version of the engine meaning it produces more power than the original 2007-2008 models. The original engine produced 162 hp and 164 lbs.ft of torque. The updated engine has 175 hp and 168 lb.ft of torque. The differences between the two is rather minimal although I will say the 2009 feels a slight bit smoother and less strained. The acceleration time is roughly 9.5-9.8 seconds from 0-100 km/h. Not a very quick car but its reasonably smooth and modest.
My Score(both): 6/10 - Not a very quick engine but reasonable for its power.
Handling: I've noticed some differences between the two version here. Starting with the earlier Sonata, when you take one of these cars into a corner the body roll and lack of steering feel is very apparent. The wheel isn't exactly light but it doesn't translate into an enjoyable experience. I found the earlier Sonata a rather boring vehicle to take into a corner. Now the 2009 Sonata is a much different experience. The steering is more sharper and a far more willing car to be pushed to its limits and giving a better sense of steering feel that the older Sonata wouldn't give. The roll is also less pronounced and dynamically a better experience overall. I can easily say the 2009 Sonata was my first taste of Hyundai turning its image into a better car company.
My Score(2007-2008): 5/10 - Very boring, quite a bit of body roll and not willing to play.
My Score(2009): 8/10 - Better steering than the previous version, less body roll and far more enjoyable to drive in comparison.
Interior: This is easily the biggest difference between the two versions. The earlier Sonata has a very plain interior design, there is very little styling input into the interior. The plastics look functional but overall not very nice and the stereo is very bad. While the old interior isn't a great place to sit inside it was well equipped and functional. The newer 2009s seemed to completely change and fix what was wrong with the previous interior. The plastics were of higher quality and were much nicer to feel and look at. The entire center console was changed to a higher level which really impressed me. The gauges had a nicer clean modern look with the white and blue touches while the older one was pretty dated. The stereo unit is a far nicer one although its still a troublesome item and likely the only thing in the car that needs repair early. The atmosphere of the newer interior really shows Hyundai's commitment to higher quality. The build quality on the Sonata is very well done either version. Most Sonatas in North America are built in Montgomery, Alabama.
My Score(2007, 2008): 5/10 - Very boring and unattractive, but built well
My Score(2009): 9/10 - One of the best economical interiors I've seen especially at this price range, its plastic but its very nice plastic. The stereo is the only small weak link.
Styling: This is always my problem with Korean cars in the past, they rarely put enough time and effort to style their cars. This 5th generation Sonata doesn't solve this problem but the coming 6th gen shows Hyundai has changed this. From much of its styling its clear the 5th generation Honda Accord was its major inspiration both rear and front are similar. The earlier Sonata does have a nicer grille than the 2009 and 2010s but neither really substantially differentiate themselves from the old Accord.
My Score(both): 2/10 - A nice copy job, but still a copy job and is not good styling by any means.
Value for money: The Hyundai Sonata relies solely on its low price range to take market share away from the bigger automakers. The Sonata does not disappoint here, both versions are very well equipped even in rather base specification. Hyundai's pricing is rather aggressive and trying to take away from Honda and Toyota. The deal looks a bit less impressive when one adds options for the Sonata but ideally the base Sonata will work for most buyers. The older Sonata was not all that refined and is less appealing especially with the updated 2009s which is better in almost every way. The newer Sonata is a very good deal for an inexpensive relatively large car.
My Score(2007, 2008): 7/10 - A pretty good deal but overshadowed by the 2009's improvements.
My Score(2009): 10/10 - Very well priced and far more refined than before, very hard to argue against recommending it.
Overall(2007, 2008): 25/50 - A so-so boring car with reasonable value
Overall(2009): 35/50 - A pretty good budget value mid sized sedan with one of the nicest interiors in a while, easily the most well updated car I've ever encountered.
2007-2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser
I apologize for the lack of updates, this January has been particularly tiring and has only recently slowed down. Finally another review and this time of a Chrysler product.
Introduction: The Chrysler PT Cruiser was developed from the early Plymouth Pronto concept. Originally slated to be a Plymouth model, but with the merger with Mercedes-Benz the Plymouth line of cars would discontinue. As a result the PT Cruiser was given a Chrysler badge and was first released in late 1999 as a model year 2000 vehicle. Most PT Crusiers were 5-door hatchbacks however for 2005 Chrysler developed a 2-door convertible version of the PT Cruiser. The convertible PT Cruisers stopped production in late 2007 and the final vehicles being sold as 2008 models. 2009 was supposed to mark the final year for the PT Cruiser, however Chrysler has changed plans with 2010 now being the supposed final year for the PT Cruiser.
When the PT Cruiser came out, I couldn't believe how terrible looking the car was. I couldn't believe anybody would buy such a car. That was some time ago and boy was that a wrong assumption, particularly during the early 2000s there were loads of the things. Presented with the opportunity to drive one, I wanted to see for myself whether it was as bad as I believed it to be.
Performance: The standard PT Cruiser gets by with a 2.4L 4-cylinder engine that produces 150 hp and 162 lbs.ft of torque. This engine was developed during the days of the Neon while the standard Neons didn't use this engine, the SRT-4 Neons used a turbocharged version. What surprises me most is why Chrysler decided to use the GEMA engine when that engine is less powerful than the engine the PT uses. Due to the PT Cruiser's weight its acceleration numbers are not so good with a manual its 8.9 seconds but the automatics are 10.8 seconds to get from 0-100 km/h. That said, the engine makes an interesting whining noise when you gun the throttle. Overall though its not a quick car if you settle for an automatic.
My Score: 4/10 - The engine is old and today quite slow, but it does make an interesting noise and if the engine was placed in a lighter car or coupled with a proper transmission its quite competent.
Handling: I mentioned the PT Cruiser is a bit heavy the base PT Cruiser weighs about 3100-3200 lbs. The rear suspension for the PT is a twist beam design, essentially a torsion bar much like the Corolla. Things don't look good so far, they're not helped by the PT's truly poor turning radius. To turn a PT sharply at low speeds sometimes requires a three point turn. However when I drove it at regular speeds it wasn't nearly as bad as it seemed. I did manage to tripod a PT Cruiser meaning it can actually take some aggressive cornering. Steering feel is actually quite appropriate, far better than today's Chryslers. One does have to be mindful of the height where if you really went too far pushing a PT you'll roll it.
My Score: 7/10 - A surprising handler despite the less than ideal components and body, but the turning radius is poor.
Interior: Inside a PT Cruiser its how one would expect an interior from Chrysler. The plastics are not of very high quality and the switchgear is not in an ideal place clustered in the center console. Unlike other Chrysler products though it does have a bright interior instead of the usual darkness. The plastics are also better quality than those used on newer Chryslers too, the newer cars are rough. Due to the unusual shape the rear hatch space is very good, far better than the Caliber's. Another bonus over new Chryslers is the rear visibility, the rear wiper can clear most of the big rear windscreen and the C-pillars are rather small unlike again newer Chryslers. The build quality is actually not too bad, however watch out for factory defects where sometimes an entire batch have the same problem. The PT Cruisers for most markets are assembled in Toluca, Mexico.
My Score: 7/10 - Very practical, excellent visibility but silly switch gear location and not very good plastics.
Styling: This car was a very controversial one, I myself hated the way the car looked. Yet there are people who loved the way the PT looked. This was easily the most polarizing car of 2000, one where people really loved it or hated it. These days in terms of ugliness there are much uglier cars now than the PT. I still don't like the unusual shape nor the way the front looked. That said I'm willing to say Chrysler took a risk and it paid off.
My Score: 5/10 - Very polarizing, for that reason it was interesting and will always be a subject of discussion.
Value for money: A very big reason for buying a PT Cruiser in the early days was down to the way the car looked. It was a great buy in the early days if you wanted the styling and the practicality. Today the car is approaching 10 years old as a design and it hasn't changed almost at all since the early 1999 cars. Normally this would devalue the car instantly, yet among all the Chrysler cars you can buy...I have to say the PT is still the better car. Its design was easily more common sense compared to a newer Chrysler product like a Dodge Journey where ergonomics was thrown out in favour of stupid design. One has to keep in mind you are buying a 10 year old vehicle though and most other manufacturers have a competing product now. A Nissan Cube, a Scion xB or GM's Chevrolet HHR all newer designs. A PT is a reasonable Chrysler buy, just not a reasonable unique hatch buy. I will say the PT has an unusual charm to it, I wanted to hate it but I came out believing different after driving it. I know its not a good car, but its become very difficult to hate it now. I've encountered some former PT owners who miss their PT and likely will buy the final ones.
My Score: 6/10 - The car is outdated but for a Chrysler product its better value than the car intended to replace it, the Caliber. The car has a lot of charm which is difficult to do as well.
Overall: 29/50 - The PT Cruiser is an aging vehicle, sadly its actually still one of Chrysler's better vehicles. What a shame to see a once innovative company make inferior cars.
Introduction: The Chrysler PT Cruiser was developed from the early Plymouth Pronto concept. Originally slated to be a Plymouth model, but with the merger with Mercedes-Benz the Plymouth line of cars would discontinue. As a result the PT Cruiser was given a Chrysler badge and was first released in late 1999 as a model year 2000 vehicle. Most PT Crusiers were 5-door hatchbacks however for 2005 Chrysler developed a 2-door convertible version of the PT Cruiser. The convertible PT Cruisers stopped production in late 2007 and the final vehicles being sold as 2008 models. 2009 was supposed to mark the final year for the PT Cruiser, however Chrysler has changed plans with 2010 now being the supposed final year for the PT Cruiser.
When the PT Cruiser came out, I couldn't believe how terrible looking the car was. I couldn't believe anybody would buy such a car. That was some time ago and boy was that a wrong assumption, particularly during the early 2000s there were loads of the things. Presented with the opportunity to drive one, I wanted to see for myself whether it was as bad as I believed it to be.
Performance: The standard PT Cruiser gets by with a 2.4L 4-cylinder engine that produces 150 hp and 162 lbs.ft of torque. This engine was developed during the days of the Neon while the standard Neons didn't use this engine, the SRT-4 Neons used a turbocharged version. What surprises me most is why Chrysler decided to use the GEMA engine when that engine is less powerful than the engine the PT uses. Due to the PT Cruiser's weight its acceleration numbers are not so good with a manual its 8.9 seconds but the automatics are 10.8 seconds to get from 0-100 km/h. That said, the engine makes an interesting whining noise when you gun the throttle. Overall though its not a quick car if you settle for an automatic.
My Score: 4/10 - The engine is old and today quite slow, but it does make an interesting noise and if the engine was placed in a lighter car or coupled with a proper transmission its quite competent.
Handling: I mentioned the PT Cruiser is a bit heavy the base PT Cruiser weighs about 3100-3200 lbs. The rear suspension for the PT is a twist beam design, essentially a torsion bar much like the Corolla. Things don't look good so far, they're not helped by the PT's truly poor turning radius. To turn a PT sharply at low speeds sometimes requires a three point turn. However when I drove it at regular speeds it wasn't nearly as bad as it seemed. I did manage to tripod a PT Cruiser meaning it can actually take some aggressive cornering. Steering feel is actually quite appropriate, far better than today's Chryslers. One does have to be mindful of the height where if you really went too far pushing a PT you'll roll it.
My Score: 7/10 - A surprising handler despite the less than ideal components and body, but the turning radius is poor.
Interior: Inside a PT Cruiser its how one would expect an interior from Chrysler. The plastics are not of very high quality and the switchgear is not in an ideal place clustered in the center console. Unlike other Chrysler products though it does have a bright interior instead of the usual darkness. The plastics are also better quality than those used on newer Chryslers too, the newer cars are rough. Due to the unusual shape the rear hatch space is very good, far better than the Caliber's. Another bonus over new Chryslers is the rear visibility, the rear wiper can clear most of the big rear windscreen and the C-pillars are rather small unlike again newer Chryslers. The build quality is actually not too bad, however watch out for factory defects where sometimes an entire batch have the same problem. The PT Cruisers for most markets are assembled in Toluca, Mexico.
My Score: 7/10 - Very practical, excellent visibility but silly switch gear location and not very good plastics.
Styling: This car was a very controversial one, I myself hated the way the car looked. Yet there are people who loved the way the PT looked. This was easily the most polarizing car of 2000, one where people really loved it or hated it. These days in terms of ugliness there are much uglier cars now than the PT. I still don't like the unusual shape nor the way the front looked. That said I'm willing to say Chrysler took a risk and it paid off.
My Score: 5/10 - Very polarizing, for that reason it was interesting and will always be a subject of discussion.
Value for money: A very big reason for buying a PT Cruiser in the early days was down to the way the car looked. It was a great buy in the early days if you wanted the styling and the practicality. Today the car is approaching 10 years old as a design and it hasn't changed almost at all since the early 1999 cars. Normally this would devalue the car instantly, yet among all the Chrysler cars you can buy...I have to say the PT is still the better car. Its design was easily more common sense compared to a newer Chrysler product like a Dodge Journey where ergonomics was thrown out in favour of stupid design. One has to keep in mind you are buying a 10 year old vehicle though and most other manufacturers have a competing product now. A Nissan Cube, a Scion xB or GM's Chevrolet HHR all newer designs. A PT is a reasonable Chrysler buy, just not a reasonable unique hatch buy. I will say the PT has an unusual charm to it, I wanted to hate it but I came out believing different after driving it. I know its not a good car, but its become very difficult to hate it now. I've encountered some former PT owners who miss their PT and likely will buy the final ones.
My Score: 6/10 - The car is outdated but for a Chrysler product its better value than the car intended to replace it, the Caliber. The car has a lot of charm which is difficult to do as well.
Overall: 29/50 - The PT Cruiser is an aging vehicle, sadly its actually still one of Chrysler's better vehicles. What a shame to see a once innovative company make inferior cars.
Monday, January 11, 2010
2010 Nissan Maxima S
Yet another Nissan, this time the flagship.
Introduction: The first Nissan Maxima was introduced initially as the Datsun 810 in 1976 and was called the Nissan Bluebird Maxima in Japan. It eventually was renamed the Nissan Maxima when Nissan decided to retire the Datsun brand in 1982. The early Nissan Maximas had a lot in common with the Nissan Bluebird and thus in 1985 the 2nd generation Maxima switched from rear wheel drive to become front wheel drive like the U11 Bluebird and also switched usage of straight six engines in favour of the V6 engine. By the third generation the Maxima no longer shared much in common with the Bluebird and grew in size as Nissan's flagship vehicle. As the Altima grew in size, Nissan changed the Maxima's mostly unique platform only shared by the Infiniti I cars to the common Altima platform in 2004. This change also meant the Maxima was no longer built in Oppama Japan but rather the Smyrna plant in Tennessee. In its current version Nissan has further changed the Maxima possibly tapping into its roots from the past and brought back the "4 door sports car" from the 3rd generation Maxima.
Ever since I heard we were getting a select few of these cars I was very eager to drive one. After being disappointed with mostly US flagship cars and some Japanese ones, I was hoping Nissan would do the role of a flagship car well. For flagship cars I look at mainly the quality and essentially whether the car is a jack of all trades vehicle, if it isn't...it fails in my mind. A big reason I didn't score the Avalon well.
Performance: Under the Nissan Maxima's hood is a big 3.5L V6 engine, the famous VQ engine to be specific. This engine has been tweaked from the last Maxima now producing 290 hp and 261 lb.ft of torque. The only possible disappointing item for an enthusiast would be that Nissan mates this engine to a CVT instead of offering a manual. That said if you read my Altima review, you would have seen that Nissan's CVT is shockingly brilliant even when given an engine not all that spectacular. The Maxima's 0-100 time is...6 seconds dead. This is easily the quickest car I've ever driven, the feeling of power from this engine makes lots of cars feel slow. The responsiveness from the CVT means this power comes instantaneous and has no lag while changing gear ratios. So performance-wise, this powertrain combo is brilliant. Yet when you want to relax, the engine is extremely smooth and quiet. The noise is also very nice to hear. I can't think of an actual flaw to this combination, that's how good it is.
My Score: 10/10 - Fantastic engine and transmission combo, its extremely hard to beat
Handling: The Altima was not nearly as solid with the handling as I was hoping due to the lack of a sway bar of some sort. I always felt it had potential but could never reach it. The Maxima may share the Altima's platform but boy did they actually focus a lot of attention to the suspension. The Maxima has incredible amounts of grip and even when you're putting more speed into the corners it can maintain flat cornering which I've never experienced in a large 4-door sedan. Not even my car is this flat. The steering is very precise, you can feel how the car will behave just at your fingertips I have no issue with the steering. Yet despite this frankly excellent performing suspension's handling ability, it didn't at all sacrifice a whole lot of the comfort. Going over rough roads the Maxima while it felt the bumps, never really made me question ride comfort.
My Score: 10/10 - Excellent flat cornering, despite excellent handling ability ride comfort doesn't suffer all that much.
Interior: As Nissan's flagship vehicle, this car is fitted with a lot of buttons. You'll find buttons all over the place, its easily better equipped than most Altimas. There is a LCD screen fitted above the audio controls, I never really explored the usage but assuming you purchased it this is likely where your navigation package enhances. As for the general interior itself, I really like the seats since they're a combination of luxury leather seats with a racing seat. It provides not only excellent comfort but can hold you in place when you're cornering aggressively. There's quite a bit of room in the rear and the trunk space is pretty good as well. I also like the general atmosphere of the interior, its a lot less fake than many other flagship car interiors. Trim surrounding the buttons look and feel solid and its very simple away from the dash. All the nice items you got from the Altima are all here as well including the nice push button start. Considering how well the Altimas hold up, the Maximas now built in Smyrna shouldn't show any build quality defects.
My Score: 10/10 - Excellent seats, nice trim, very well equipped, has very little fake items, built well...rather hard to fault.
Styling: I wasn't a big fan of the Maxima's styling, I rather liked the previous generation's styling. However the Altima shares a similar look to that and I often confuse the two initially. Nissan wanted the Maxima to be different and when it was unveiled...mostly shock. The car's been here a while and I'm starting to see that Nissan was right. I still don't like the tears on the head lights but overall it looks very aggressive and sleek. The Maxima is very wide but the styling actually doesn't say to me the car looks fat.
My Score: 8/10 - The styling is growing on me, still don't like the tears though.
Value for money: The Maxima is a very expensive car, the starting price is at $39450. This makes it the most expensive of its rivals. In terms of price its rather close to the Toyota Avalon's starting price. Its not the largest at all, in fact the Maxima is shorter in length than the Honda Accord and actually most of the mid sized cars including the Altima. If the Chrysler and the Ford are given their strongest engines its not the quickest that said the Chrysler needs a very large Hemi V8 to reach a time under 6 seconds and the Taurus uses a twin turbo V6. Its kind of a shame, the Maxima could use a ultimate performance trim level. Only the Avalon is as well equipped at base spec and as an all rounder the base Maxima is more than enough. Just the driving experience is enough for me to toss out the Toyota, the Buick and the Chrysler. I haven't driven the new Taurus to compare the driving experience but the Maxima will be difficult to top.
My Score: 8/10 - Its very expensive initially, it also lacks a hyper performance package.
Overall: 46/50 - An absolutely fantastic flagship car from Nissan, easily one of the best cars on sale today.
Introduction: The first Nissan Maxima was introduced initially as the Datsun 810 in 1976 and was called the Nissan Bluebird Maxima in Japan. It eventually was renamed the Nissan Maxima when Nissan decided to retire the Datsun brand in 1982. The early Nissan Maximas had a lot in common with the Nissan Bluebird and thus in 1985 the 2nd generation Maxima switched from rear wheel drive to become front wheel drive like the U11 Bluebird and also switched usage of straight six engines in favour of the V6 engine. By the third generation the Maxima no longer shared much in common with the Bluebird and grew in size as Nissan's flagship vehicle. As the Altima grew in size, Nissan changed the Maxima's mostly unique platform only shared by the Infiniti I cars to the common Altima platform in 2004. This change also meant the Maxima was no longer built in Oppama Japan but rather the Smyrna plant in Tennessee. In its current version Nissan has further changed the Maxima possibly tapping into its roots from the past and brought back the "4 door sports car" from the 3rd generation Maxima.
Ever since I heard we were getting a select few of these cars I was very eager to drive one. After being disappointed with mostly US flagship cars and some Japanese ones, I was hoping Nissan would do the role of a flagship car well. For flagship cars I look at mainly the quality and essentially whether the car is a jack of all trades vehicle, if it isn't...it fails in my mind. A big reason I didn't score the Avalon well.
Performance: Under the Nissan Maxima's hood is a big 3.5L V6 engine, the famous VQ engine to be specific. This engine has been tweaked from the last Maxima now producing 290 hp and 261 lb.ft of torque. The only possible disappointing item for an enthusiast would be that Nissan mates this engine to a CVT instead of offering a manual. That said if you read my Altima review, you would have seen that Nissan's CVT is shockingly brilliant even when given an engine not all that spectacular. The Maxima's 0-100 time is...6 seconds dead. This is easily the quickest car I've ever driven, the feeling of power from this engine makes lots of cars feel slow. The responsiveness from the CVT means this power comes instantaneous and has no lag while changing gear ratios. So performance-wise, this powertrain combo is brilliant. Yet when you want to relax, the engine is extremely smooth and quiet. The noise is also very nice to hear. I can't think of an actual flaw to this combination, that's how good it is.
My Score: 10/10 - Fantastic engine and transmission combo, its extremely hard to beat
Handling: The Altima was not nearly as solid with the handling as I was hoping due to the lack of a sway bar of some sort. I always felt it had potential but could never reach it. The Maxima may share the Altima's platform but boy did they actually focus a lot of attention to the suspension. The Maxima has incredible amounts of grip and even when you're putting more speed into the corners it can maintain flat cornering which I've never experienced in a large 4-door sedan. Not even my car is this flat. The steering is very precise, you can feel how the car will behave just at your fingertips I have no issue with the steering. Yet despite this frankly excellent performing suspension's handling ability, it didn't at all sacrifice a whole lot of the comfort. Going over rough roads the Maxima while it felt the bumps, never really made me question ride comfort.
My Score: 10/10 - Excellent flat cornering, despite excellent handling ability ride comfort doesn't suffer all that much.
Interior: As Nissan's flagship vehicle, this car is fitted with a lot of buttons. You'll find buttons all over the place, its easily better equipped than most Altimas. There is a LCD screen fitted above the audio controls, I never really explored the usage but assuming you purchased it this is likely where your navigation package enhances. As for the general interior itself, I really like the seats since they're a combination of luxury leather seats with a racing seat. It provides not only excellent comfort but can hold you in place when you're cornering aggressively. There's quite a bit of room in the rear and the trunk space is pretty good as well. I also like the general atmosphere of the interior, its a lot less fake than many other flagship car interiors. Trim surrounding the buttons look and feel solid and its very simple away from the dash. All the nice items you got from the Altima are all here as well including the nice push button start. Considering how well the Altimas hold up, the Maximas now built in Smyrna shouldn't show any build quality defects.
My Score: 10/10 - Excellent seats, nice trim, very well equipped, has very little fake items, built well...rather hard to fault.
Styling: I wasn't a big fan of the Maxima's styling, I rather liked the previous generation's styling. However the Altima shares a similar look to that and I often confuse the two initially. Nissan wanted the Maxima to be different and when it was unveiled...mostly shock. The car's been here a while and I'm starting to see that Nissan was right. I still don't like the tears on the head lights but overall it looks very aggressive and sleek. The Maxima is very wide but the styling actually doesn't say to me the car looks fat.
My Score: 8/10 - The styling is growing on me, still don't like the tears though.
Value for money: The Maxima is a very expensive car, the starting price is at $39450. This makes it the most expensive of its rivals. In terms of price its rather close to the Toyota Avalon's starting price. Its not the largest at all, in fact the Maxima is shorter in length than the Honda Accord and actually most of the mid sized cars including the Altima. If the Chrysler and the Ford are given their strongest engines its not the quickest that said the Chrysler needs a very large Hemi V8 to reach a time under 6 seconds and the Taurus uses a twin turbo V6. Its kind of a shame, the Maxima could use a ultimate performance trim level. Only the Avalon is as well equipped at base spec and as an all rounder the base Maxima is more than enough. Just the driving experience is enough for me to toss out the Toyota, the Buick and the Chrysler. I haven't driven the new Taurus to compare the driving experience but the Maxima will be difficult to top.
My Score: 8/10 - Its very expensive initially, it also lacks a hyper performance package.
Overall: 46/50 - An absolutely fantastic flagship car from Nissan, easily one of the best cars on sale today.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
2007-2009 Nissan Altima 2.5
The first review of 2010 and the 50th review I've submitted. This is a car that I still drive and there are still quite a lot of cars to get through many of which are Korean and American. Still I wanted to finish off the 50th review and the first of 2010 with a rather common sight on today's roads.
Introduction: The original Nissan Altima was a replacement of the old Stanza, it didn't look all that different from the current Nissan Bluebird being sold worldwide. The second generation of Altima become a North American market only vehicle and designed by Nissan's design center in America but it did lose the original's unique head up display. The third generation Altima was significantly different as it was grown into a mid-size car with the Sentra taking over its original role as a compact. Today my review will focus on the 4th generation Altima its done yet a bit more to push Nissan's standards for equipment much like Altimas from the past with exception to the second gen.
When I was shown the Altima I was first amazed at the size of it, next was the key as it looked like no other key I've ever seen. Interestingly enough it was also the first Nissan I ever driven which is why I looked down on that 2006 Sentra.
Performance: The vehicle I have driven only has the 2.5L 4-cylinder engine. This particular engine produces 175 hp and 180 lb.ft of torque. The closest thing I've reviewed is the Chevrolet Malibu which had less power but accelerated in 9.6 seconds, but the Malibu is smaller than the Altima. The Altima comes in with a CVT and the last cars I reviewed that had this transmission are the slow Caliber and the Caliber related Jeeps. Sounds like this Altima will be just as slow around the 10 second region maybe 9. If you thought that...you'd be wrong. The Altima with its CVT accelerates from 0-100 km/h with its 4-cylinder in 7.2 seconds. This is the quickest 4-cylinder car I've driven that doesn't have a turbo. When its pushed very hard the noise the engine makes isn't all that pleasant. Yet despite its ferocious acceleration when driven smoothly its actually a very quiet car. The only time you will notice the 175 hp is when you try to approach the car's max speed, eventually it will slow down a lot. I have to say, this CVT if it can push a big car like this that quickly with that small engine and still make them fuel efficient...an automatic gearbox is obsolete.
My Score: 10/10 - Proof of a CVT done properly, the engine drones when pushed but a small price to pay for excellent performance from a small unimpressive engine.
Handling: Normally when you drive a car this big and family oriented the handling isn't as exciting as one would find on a sports car. With the Altima...its actually not bad on this front. When you push an Altima in a corner you will feel the weight of the car but you will also notice that it can corner well despite being front wheel drive. That said its very difficult to find the limits in the Altima because it rolls rather badly and without a anti-roll bar you're more likely to roll the car or roll out of your seat. It lacks the anti-roll bar because Nissan wanted the Altima to provide a good ride and adding one would spoil that. The steering on the Altima is very light and normally this produces a lack of feel I find, in the Altima's case its somewhat true. In very short turns you will get the feel of precision you get from heavier wheels, its when you make bigger turns that the wheel feels correct and accurate to your brain. All in all, the Altima does a reasonable job at cornering but it needs to be modified to get to its limits.
My Score: 7/10 - Good ability to corner but suffers from bad body roll and the wheel is a bit too light for precise feel, you feel that it could have been better.
Interior: While CVT provided changes for how the car moved, the interior got some changes of its own. Nissan proudly advertise that this car has a push button start, and they're right its standard for all Altimas. There are ups and downs to this arrangement, the good thing is Nissan has designed a slot for the key fob meaning you won't misplace it while driving. The novelty of this however does wear off. The rest of the interior is mostly plastic, the dash made out of decent quality plastic while items like the cup holders...weren't made out of good plastic. I found the seats to be comfortable...but not everyone did. I've only seen two colours for the interior the common one being black and the other is beige. The beige interior doesn't look very good at all. The Altima is very spacious with lots of interior room and trunk space. Also despite being a base model its extremely well equipped with conventional standard features like air conditioning, power windows/locks, etc. Lastly the build quality, now on the Mexican made Sentra I blasted that car for its awful build quality with trim pieces loose or falling off. I'm glad to say the Altima which is made in the United States has none of this. I've driven some aged Altimas and none have actually had issues due to normal usage, I've only seen once case where one cubbyhole won't close...because the last person in the car purposely damaged it. These are built in both Smyrna Tennessee and Canton Mississippi.
My Score: 8/10 - Reasonably well equipped, very spacious, very well built, and a start button, however the seats may not be comfortable for some and interior colour is very lacking.
Styling: The Altima went with a more rounded shape than the previous version. Much of the front styling is a downscaled Infiniti G and with a rather different rear lighting arrangement. As a result I found it worked quite well, the Altima is clearly different from the typical Accords and Camrys, and at the same time looks great. I actually prefer the sedan form over the coupe, the profile flows more nicer in the sedan than the coupe. Yet it isn't on the level of extremely beautiful which is its only flaw.
My Score: 8/10 - Overall a good looking car with a very rounded shape
Value for money: This segment is incredibly competitive and the cars here need to stand out. The Galant and Mazda6 did their best in driving dynamics. I do not believe the Altima stood out there on that level. Performance however and mildly neat features like CVT and the push button start do make it stand out. None of the 4-cylinder cars in this segment match the Altima's acceleration, there are powerful V6 cars that size which couldn't match that. The Altima is as a result a good choice for one who wants an all around good car but needs to satisfy their lead foot. It would be great if it could satisfy all levels of driving dynamics since its well equipped and had the lowest price.
My Score: 8/10 - The CVT and the engine really make the Altima stand out when one experiences the power a transmission can do to a run of the mill engine.
Overall: 41/50 - A very fast family car that overall is pretty good, just some small touches would have made it truly outstanding.
Introduction: The original Nissan Altima was a replacement of the old Stanza, it didn't look all that different from the current Nissan Bluebird being sold worldwide. The second generation of Altima become a North American market only vehicle and designed by Nissan's design center in America but it did lose the original's unique head up display. The third generation Altima was significantly different as it was grown into a mid-size car with the Sentra taking over its original role as a compact. Today my review will focus on the 4th generation Altima its done yet a bit more to push Nissan's standards for equipment much like Altimas from the past with exception to the second gen.
When I was shown the Altima I was first amazed at the size of it, next was the key as it looked like no other key I've ever seen. Interestingly enough it was also the first Nissan I ever driven which is why I looked down on that 2006 Sentra.
Performance: The vehicle I have driven only has the 2.5L 4-cylinder engine. This particular engine produces 175 hp and 180 lb.ft of torque. The closest thing I've reviewed is the Chevrolet Malibu which had less power but accelerated in 9.6 seconds, but the Malibu is smaller than the Altima. The Altima comes in with a CVT and the last cars I reviewed that had this transmission are the slow Caliber and the Caliber related Jeeps. Sounds like this Altima will be just as slow around the 10 second region maybe 9. If you thought that...you'd be wrong. The Altima with its CVT accelerates from 0-100 km/h with its 4-cylinder in 7.2 seconds. This is the quickest 4-cylinder car I've driven that doesn't have a turbo. When its pushed very hard the noise the engine makes isn't all that pleasant. Yet despite its ferocious acceleration when driven smoothly its actually a very quiet car. The only time you will notice the 175 hp is when you try to approach the car's max speed, eventually it will slow down a lot. I have to say, this CVT if it can push a big car like this that quickly with that small engine and still make them fuel efficient...an automatic gearbox is obsolete.
My Score: 10/10 - Proof of a CVT done properly, the engine drones when pushed but a small price to pay for excellent performance from a small unimpressive engine.
Handling: Normally when you drive a car this big and family oriented the handling isn't as exciting as one would find on a sports car. With the Altima...its actually not bad on this front. When you push an Altima in a corner you will feel the weight of the car but you will also notice that it can corner well despite being front wheel drive. That said its very difficult to find the limits in the Altima because it rolls rather badly and without a anti-roll bar you're more likely to roll the car or roll out of your seat. It lacks the anti-roll bar because Nissan wanted the Altima to provide a good ride and adding one would spoil that. The steering on the Altima is very light and normally this produces a lack of feel I find, in the Altima's case its somewhat true. In very short turns you will get the feel of precision you get from heavier wheels, its when you make bigger turns that the wheel feels correct and accurate to your brain. All in all, the Altima does a reasonable job at cornering but it needs to be modified to get to its limits.
My Score: 7/10 - Good ability to corner but suffers from bad body roll and the wheel is a bit too light for precise feel, you feel that it could have been better.
Interior: While CVT provided changes for how the car moved, the interior got some changes of its own. Nissan proudly advertise that this car has a push button start, and they're right its standard for all Altimas. There are ups and downs to this arrangement, the good thing is Nissan has designed a slot for the key fob meaning you won't misplace it while driving. The novelty of this however does wear off. The rest of the interior is mostly plastic, the dash made out of decent quality plastic while items like the cup holders...weren't made out of good plastic. I found the seats to be comfortable...but not everyone did. I've only seen two colours for the interior the common one being black and the other is beige. The beige interior doesn't look very good at all. The Altima is very spacious with lots of interior room and trunk space. Also despite being a base model its extremely well equipped with conventional standard features like air conditioning, power windows/locks, etc. Lastly the build quality, now on the Mexican made Sentra I blasted that car for its awful build quality with trim pieces loose or falling off. I'm glad to say the Altima which is made in the United States has none of this. I've driven some aged Altimas and none have actually had issues due to normal usage, I've only seen once case where one cubbyhole won't close...because the last person in the car purposely damaged it. These are built in both Smyrna Tennessee and Canton Mississippi.
My Score: 8/10 - Reasonably well equipped, very spacious, very well built, and a start button, however the seats may not be comfortable for some and interior colour is very lacking.
Styling: The Altima went with a more rounded shape than the previous version. Much of the front styling is a downscaled Infiniti G and with a rather different rear lighting arrangement. As a result I found it worked quite well, the Altima is clearly different from the typical Accords and Camrys, and at the same time looks great. I actually prefer the sedan form over the coupe, the profile flows more nicer in the sedan than the coupe. Yet it isn't on the level of extremely beautiful which is its only flaw.
My Score: 8/10 - Overall a good looking car with a very rounded shape
Value for money: This segment is incredibly competitive and the cars here need to stand out. The Galant and Mazda6 did their best in driving dynamics. I do not believe the Altima stood out there on that level. Performance however and mildly neat features like CVT and the push button start do make it stand out. None of the 4-cylinder cars in this segment match the Altima's acceleration, there are powerful V6 cars that size which couldn't match that. The Altima is as a result a good choice for one who wants an all around good car but needs to satisfy their lead foot. It would be great if it could satisfy all levels of driving dynamics since its well equipped and had the lowest price.
My Score: 8/10 - The CVT and the engine really make the Altima stand out when one experiences the power a transmission can do to a run of the mill engine.
Overall: 41/50 - A very fast family car that overall is pretty good, just some small touches would have made it truly outstanding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)