All right, it’s the big close! The one we’ve all been waiting for! Will Bark show his fanboi colors as somebody who owns not one, not two, but THREE Fords? Does GM actually do anything well? Is Chrysler on the road back to respectability? Does anybody really like articles with questions like this? Let’s go!
FCA/CHRYSLER
The Good:
I can go ahead and put JEEP here. Yes, I’m aware of the Compass. I’m even aware of the Patriot.
But the Cherokee has been better than expected, both from a performance perspective and a sales perspective. I’m consistently shocked as I travel the country about just how many of them I see everywhere—they aren’t a regional success, like some cars. They’re everywhere. And the growth is magnificent—the Cherokee continues to climb up the sales charts every single month. It’s come a long way since DK (that’s Derek Kreindler, not Drift King) reviewed it those many moons ago.
To be honest, though, I’d step up to the Grand Cherokee, if it were my money (or my dad’s). It’s the best SUV for the money in today’s marketplace. In fact, you might even be able to take that “for the money” qualifier off of it. We used one to take a crew of four to last year’s New York International Auto Show from Columbus, Ohio to LaGuardia airport. We had to take a Ford Edge back. We were all sad.
And what else can be said or needs to be said about the Wrangler? It’s a goddamned icon. It’s great. We should all be lucky as to have a reason to own one at some point in our lives.
We should all take a moment, as automotive enthusiasts, to recognize that we need to be grateful that the Charger and the 300 still exist. There’s really nothing more American than a full-sized, RWD sedan that can go like hell in a straight line. It straight up befuddles me that Ford and GM just hand over this segment of the business to Chrysler without a fight—if you want a real 300/Charger fighter, you have to go to Hyundai. That just ain’t right, people.
It’s hard to believe that there are now just three vehicles that are sold under the Chrysler brand in America. Luckily, the 200 is no longer an embarrassment to that once-great marque. It outsells the Sonata now, which was probably an unthinkable accomplishment in the last generation of 200s. The rest of the car is now a match for the remarkable Pentastar engine, especially when matched to the 9-speed automatic. My only complaint about the 200 is the dearth of colors that it’s available in. Go build one on the Chrysler site and try to make one that doesn’t look boring as heck. It’s tough.
The Viper goes here. I dare you to tell it that it doesn’t.
Don’t look now, but the RAM lineup is ever-so-quietly sneaking up on the F-150 and Silverado/Sierra twins, and it may have even overtaken them. In fact, if I were buying an entry-level pickup truck today, the RAM 1500 would be my personal choice. There’s a guy in my little Kentucky hamlet who owns a big, yellow “RUMBLE BEE,” and I have jealousy pangs every time that I see it.
The Not-As-Good:
This hurts, but I have to put the Challenger here. Listen, it’s not that I don’t love the Chally, because I totally do. I was moments away from buying one. And I love that FCA has embraced the true nature of the Challenger by building a Hellcat variant of it. But if you stack up the Challenger against its competition—the all-new Mustang and the soon-to-be all new Camaro—it’s genuinely difficult to make a case for buying one. If you have no sporting pretense at all, if you just wanna go fast in a straight line and then have a comfortable cruiser the other 99.9% of your car’s life, then the Challenger is for you. But if you ever have any ideas about taking it to a track that actually has turns in it, then you’d be silly for not buying the Camaro or Mustang. And while the Mustang and Camaro are markedly better on a track than a Chally, the Chally isn’t that much better for daily driving. I drive what is potentially the least comfortable Mustang there is every day, and never once do I think, “Boy, if only I’d bought that leather-seated, softly-sprung Challenger SRT-8 instead.” Does being a very, very good 3rd place out of three mean that you go here, or up there? Oh, boy. I think it means you go here. Sorry, Challenger.
The inventor of the minivan has been surpassed. The Grand Caravan is still a fantastic value, simply because it’s available at under $20K in many parts of the country after rebates and discounts, but neither the GC nor the Town & Country are going to win any comparison tests any time soon. Did you guys know I own a Town & Country, btw? I do. Long story.
The Ugly:
The Journey suuuuuuuuuuucks. It’s so bad. Every time that I have to take one off of rental row, I silently ask God what I did to deserve such a fate. The Pentastar versions are borderline tolerable, but the four-cylinders that are mated to four-speed automatics are miserable places to be. I get why they exist—I mean, special finance has to be available on a crossover somewhere—but, man. The Journey is just light-years behind the competition. Unless you have a beacon score of less than 600, you have much, much better options.
One also has to wonder how Dodge botched the Dart so badly. Terrible engine options and manual-only at launch doomed this car. I’d be curious to know exactly what the market days supply is for the Dart—every CDJR dealership I visit has at least twenty of them on the lot, and nobody’s buying them. Also—why no SRT version? Why not dig up the old SRT-4 Neon engine and throw it in there?
The Fiat 500. I just can’t. A close friend of mine got an Abarth. He sold it six months later and got a Fiesta ST. I think that about wraps up my feelings on that car.
FORD
The Good:
It’s hard not to start this list with the Mustang. In order to dislike this generation of Mustang, you really have to want to dislike it. I admit, I was skeptical. But of you who called me out were right—the new Mustang is just better than the old one. Independent Rear Suspension has been a revelation. Ford is providing warranty support for people who want to boost their EcoBoosts through the roof. And the Shelby. Oh, goodness. It’s just pure perfection. I still don’t like the rear end of it, and I’m not 100% convinced that I’ll be trading my Boss for the GT350 when it arrives, but it’s clear that Ford has, dare I say, a game-changer on its hands here. They’re not going to reach their goal of 100K sold this year—they’ll smash it and probably sell 120-140k.
The Fiesta ST/Focus ST. I can’t think of another car that so many people in the automotive journalism field have opened up their wallets to buy new. I don’t think of myself as a journalist in any way, shape, or form, but I certainly think that Zach Bowman and Matt Farah qualify (but does Lieberman’s purchase cancel them out?). When that many people who write about cars for a living (many of whom have so many testers delivered to them that they have no need to actually buy a car) sink their own money into a car, do you really even need to question its greatness any more? While I certainly think the Fiesta is the better driving of the two, for anybody who actually needs to make his ST into a daily driving machine, the FoST is the better choice.
Is there a better driver in the mid-sized sedan category than the Fusion? I’d say there are equals, but nothing better. Is there a better looking midsizer than the Fusion? No way. Where the Accord, Camry, and Altima blend in, the Fusion is much more likely to make your neighbors think you got a raise, even in SE trim.
The Not-As-Good
When I bought my own Flex in late 2013 (which, by the way, is “Good” but sells like it’s “Ugly”), I also test drove the new Escape. I loved it at the time, but it was just too small for my growing family’s needs. I still would have put it in the “Good” category up until quite recently, however, when I rented an Escape EcoBoost for a drive from Lexington, KY, to Myrtle Beach, SC. OH MY GOD THE FUEL ECONOMY! I think that it would have been cheaper to fly. The EcoBoost 1.6 in the SE is supposed to average 32 MPG—I think I saw around 21. That, combined with the completely non-intuitive version of SYNC that you get on the SE, drops it into the “Not-As-Good” category.
As good as the ST version of the Fiesta is, the regular Fiesta is just…meh. I totally supported Caroline’s decision to get a Sonic over a Fiesta (say, doesn’t she owe us a one-year review of the Sonic?). Virtually none of the fun of the ST makes its way down into the SE. It’s not terrible—although the transmission problems are a bit scary—but I wouldn’t pick it over the competition.
The Explorer is just okay. I would never, ever buy one over a Grand Cherokee, and it’s just about even with the Highlander for me. It’s funny—it’s essentially the same car as the Flex, just lifted up a bit. For some reason, that changes everything. I don’t know why (other than the storage is compromised), but it does.
Here’s the biggest secret in the car business today—Ford dealers are scared to death about the F-150. They’ll whisper to you that Ford made a huge mistake by going aluminum. They’ll privately tell you that the Silverado might be a better value. They worry that the Colorado is eating into their sales. Truth be told, at the end of the year, the F-150 will still come out on top, but I can definitely tell you that Ford dealers aren’t nearly as confident in their halo car as they used to be.
The Ugly:
Will somebody put the Ford Taurus out of its misery? There is literally no reason for anybody to buy this car, or its stablemate, the MKS. The Impala, the Avalon, hell, even the Azera are better—and that’s only if you’re considering FWD! The Charger/300 and Genesis shame the Taurus, too. A rare miss from the Mulally era, the Taurus needs to be replaced immediately. Hmmm, if only somebody had suggested this a year ago.
The Edge needs to die or be replaced. It’s become redundant in its own lineup, and it’s noticeably older than any of its competitors.
I think LINCOLN is going in the right direction. Really, I do. The MKC is a good entry into a crowded marketplace (although, again, that fuel mileage). The rest of the lineup needs help. They need the Continental in the worst way—not because I think it will help sell one more MKZ, because I’m not sure that it will. But if it’s everything that it appears to be, it will be the first step in restoring some “premium” to the brand. Right now, there is literally not a single reason to buy a Lincoln over the Titanium version of the Ford that’s sitting across the showroom from it. Make the Continental. Make a bad-ass, four-door Mustang saloon for around $45k. Then we’ll talk.
GENERAL MOTORS
The Good:
Any “Good” list at GM has to start with the Corvette. It’s the best sports car, per dollar, in the universe. The biggest barrier to my purchase of a Shelby GT350 isn’t the cost of the SuperStang—it’s the fact that I have to drive past a GM dealer every day. The dealer where I bought my G8 and my Equinox has been purchased by a friend of mine, and he constantly tortures me with GM employee pricing on a Stingray. I’ve already gotten past the stigma of being a “RUSTANG” owner—I think I could overcome the gold chains and chesthair vibe of the Vette, too. It’s just gorgeous—I’ve yet to see a color that doesn’t look great on it. The fact that I live within a three-hour drive of the National Corvette Museum and its 4200′ straightaway doesn’t help my primal urge to buy one, either. We’ll see.
I predicted earlier in the year that the Colorado/Canyon twins would be a sales failure. Turns out that I’m an idiot. Do they sell as well as the Silverado/Sierra? No, of course not. But GM dealers are literally selling every single one that they can get. Here’s a fun game—go to www.gmc.com and search for Canyons in your area. Now, in theory, they are supposed to start at around $21K. IF you can find one with 50 miles of you, which is a big if unless you live in a big metro area, see, if you can find one for less than $30k. There are 5 within 100 miles of me, and the cheapest one is $31k. Every GMC dealer I talk to says that they haven’t even gotten one on the lot that stickers for under $30k, and most of the special orders are for trucks nearer to $40k. Same thing from the Chevy dealers that I talk to with the Colorado—I was able to find one for $23K, but all of the other examples within 100 miles were at least $34K. I know! I don’t get it either! I drove a GMC Canyon and found it to be just okay, but I’m admittedly not a big pickup guy. The market says they’re good, so I’m gonna take the market’s word for it.
My biggest personal surprise as I have written this series? The fact that I’m going to put BUICK here. Seriously. I kinda dig everything they’ve got going on right now. I’m not sure that I’d actually buy any of them, personally, but I love the fact that the Encore and the Regal exist in this marketplace. And of the full-sized FWD land barges out there, the Lacrosse AWD would be my pick (if I were tied-up, had a gun stuck to my head, and forced to choose one). Did you know that Buick, as a brand, outsells Audi, Acura, and Infiniti? It’s true.
The Sonic definitely goes here. Surprised? I would be too, except that I’ve personally put a few hundred miles on an LTZ hatch, and found it to be very, very good. I think that this might be an example of a car that becomes an exponentially greater value as a late-model, CPO car as opposed to new, more so than your average vehicle. When I see the sticker prices on new Sonics at dealerships, my eyes tend to roll back in my head a bit.
I like the Impala. It’s a shame that such a high percentage of them are sold in rental fleets, because I think that GM has somewhat diminished the Impala by making it seem like a “rental special.” A close friend and colleague has a V6 LT, and it’s a great car. If somebody wants a reliable, powerful car that seats four adults comfortably, and couldn’t care less about driving dynamics…why not pick the Impala?
I am going to reserve judgment on the new Camaro until I see it in the flesh. I would have put the old SS and V6 in the “Not-As-Good” category, and the 1LE and Z/28 in the “Good.”
The Not-As-Good:
The Spark isn’t bad for what it is—I’ve had one or two as rentals, and while they are painfully slow, they aren’t as small inside as you’d think. The interiors are actually quite good, with comfortable seats and gauges that will seem familiar to Millennial types. I think the new one is going to be a marked improvement over the existing model, too.
I struggle with where to put the Cruze. I think I’d pick several of its competitors ahead of it, but would I? Civic? Probably not. Corolla? Definitely not. Elantra? No. Senta? Nope. Focus? Probably. So doesn’t that mean I think it’s the second best car in the segment? So why am I so blah about it? A friend and colleague has been driving his about 50K a year for the past three years with virtually no issues and great fuel economy. I don’t know. I can’t get excited at all about the Cruze, mostly because I every time that I drive one, the seats freaking kill my back. So it goes here.
I think that time has caught up a bit with the Equinox and Terrain. When I bought mine in 2011, I felt it was clearly the best choice in the segment. In 2015, I don’t think I can say the same. Observed fuel economy has never been what GM claimed it would be. The dash and the infotainment feel old in 2015. I’d definitely pick the CR-V and CX-5 over the Equinox/Terrain now, and probably the Escape, too. That being said, it is absolutely the number one choice of traveling salespeople everywhere.
I really wish that GM would figure out what the heck they’re doing with the SS. They fixed the two issues with it—the lack of a manual transmission and the suspension—and then continued to put zero advertising push behind it. If I were just evaluating the SS based on the car itself, it would go in the “Good” category, no questions asked. I mean, Road and Track dared to compare it to what many consider the greatest sports sedan of all fucking time and it held its own. But I can’t reward GM for this half-baked strategy.
The Ugly:
The Traverse/Enclave/Acadia. Ugh. Gross. Overpriced, unreliable, ugly, old. GM needs to do better in this segment.
The old Malibu would definitely have gone here. It’s mindblowing that GM can’t be competitive in the mid-sized FWD sedan playing field. I guess we’ll all see what the new version has in store for us, but I don’t have high expectations.
I’m sorry, Johan, but I gotta put CADILLAC here. I was in a GM store in Indiana last week that had a genuine, no bullshit price of $24,995 on the windshield of an ATS, against a sticker of $35k. I mean, seriously. Is this what the brand has become? Only Volkswagen is shrinking its market share at a faster rate (which seems impossible, what with the miraculous Golf flying out of showrooms nationwide). If you took the Escalade out of the numbers, Caddy would be down twenty freaking percent year over year in a new car market that is actually up over five percent. You’ve GOT to fix your supposed volume sellers, the ATS and CTS, or whatever the hell you’re gonna call them in your numeric naming strategy that was so successful over at your previous employer. Yes, the ATS-V and CTS-V look pretty impressive, but we all know those things aren’t gonna sell in volume that will actually impact your bottom line in any meaningful way.
———————————————————————————————————————————————
So, there you have it. Eleven thousand words or so from one man’s perspective on every major car manufacturer. You don’t have to agree with me—hell, I’m not sure that I agree with me—but I hope that it helped us all realize a few things:
- Every car maker has promise
- Every car maker can screw things up royally
- Most of the world lies somewhere between “rocks” and “sucks
I would never count out a car maker. Every single OEM we discussed has cars I’d love to have in my own driveway, and cars that I would never dream of buying. Three years ago today, I had never owned a Ford. Today, I own three. I’ve owned (in order) cars from Volkswagen, Infiniti, Porsche, Hyundai, Mazda, Scion, Pontiac, Chevrolet, Chrysler, Ford, and Subaru.
As long as you continue to vote with your dollars, you can shape the automotive world to be whatever you want it to be. If you want sportier cars, buy them. If you want V8s, buy them. If you want manual transmissions, buy them. Somewhere, some automaker wants your business.
Thanks for reading.
You may have spoken too soon on the Colorado. Sales are flat this month and GM has resorted to putting $750 on the hood. There are 37 of them on dealer’s lots in my area, and prices start at $20,995 before you deal.
Interesting. The dealers I’ve visited recently in Iowa, Indiana, and Michigan can’t keep them in stock. Could be a regional thing.
Bark – You’re in the Heartland, so I certainly see why more are sold where you are. I’ve seen a handful here in Houston, but nothing much to write home about.
This is a great write up, Bark. I’d put the Chevy and GMC trucks in the win column, if only because their conservative styling (and massive discounts) have sold very well. Personally I think they’ll “age” better as well. Taurus needs to go back to the Five Hundred styling modified…huge room inside, clear view out.
Agreed, and I hope that the 2016 Taurus will have these attributes. Ford will unveil it at the Shanghai auto show in a couple weeks. Media reports suggest it will be a close cousin of the Continental.
I agree.
I am Not A GM Guy by any means.
But their trucks are quite handsome, and by all accounts just as good as the Dodge* and Ford alternatives.
(* I don’t care what FCA says, it’s s Dodge, not a “Ram” at the brand level.)
Interesting. I have yet to see a single Colorado on the street.
I have seen a couple in SE PA.
Ive yet to see a Colorado or Canyon on the roads here either. Never did see many of the last generations either though. My prediction from the get go was that they would be all fizzled out within a few years time. If they were going to be successful they would never have ditched them in the first place. GMs biggest mistake is using Toyota as a benchmark for compact truck sales. FAIL!
It’s gotta be boosting Silverado sales when consumers show up hoping to take home a Colorado only to find out it’s so scarce.
Just slightly bigger and slightly less cash. Looks the same from a distance. Especially the profile.
Diabolical on GM’s part!
No , not boosting Silverado sales but increasing the demand for the Colorado
Riiiight! If you wan’t a Chevy truck Right NOW, and for the same price (or less) of the Shasta Cola of trucks you can have the The Real Thing™, right now???
Why? If you are missing a putter from your choice of Clubs, would you take nine Iron instead?
There’s a lot of ‘cross over’ between what the two trucks can do and what owner need from them most days. But if given a choice, all things equal, between the Silverado and Colorado, and between buyers not dead-set on one or the other, most will choose the Silverado for obvious reasons. Most have. Get real.
“There’s a lot of ‘cross over’ between what the two trucks can do and what owner need from them most days. But if given a choice, all things equal, between the Silverado and Colorado, and between buyers not dead-set on one or the other, most will choose the Silverado for obvious reasons. Most have. Get real.”
Why would they if they want to specifically want a Specific vehicle? So an owner would not care if he got a RAM instead of a Silverado? get Real indeed. I know both are made by the UAW and the company makes more
Profit on the 1/2 tons
“…the company makes more Profit on the 1/2 tons”
That’s exactly what I’m saying. The Colorado is there (or isn’t there) to steer GM pickup shoppers towards highly profitable 1/2 tons. It’s likely an easy jump for most.
We’re not talking GM vs Ram. Why would you bring that in? Is your tracking that OFF?
What I said was “…buyers not DEAD-SET on one or the other [*specifically*]”. Meaning Silverado or Colorado.
Try to keep with the conversation.
Exactly and that is the reason the demand is so high for the Colorado, outstripping supply
“That’s exactly what I’m saying. The Colorado is there (or isn’t there) to steer GM pickup shoppers towards highly profitable 1/2 tons. It’s likely an easy jump for most.”
The Colorado is there as part of GM’s 3 tier truck strategy.
“Exactly and that is the reason the demand is so high for the Colorado, outstripping supply”
Not necessarily, GM was simply cautious in the manufacturing of these trucks for the first few model years to see how they are to pan out. Remember, they were a dismal failure but a short time ago.
Whats the third tier?
Perhaps the concept of pent-up demand applies here. Tacoma’s been the only real game in town for so long that there were bound to be a certain number of folks holding out for the Colorado. Or anything other than a Tacoma.
Sales in the next two years will be the true test, when the initial shine wears off and it has to compete against a redesigned Tacoma and Frontier.
You posted this earlier that the Taco has no cash on the hood. That isn’t exactly true as Toyota incentives are regionalized.
Do a search on 77070 (Houston) and you’ll find the Taco has $1000 on the hood.
Do a search in the Boston area and you’ll find there are relatively low leases with little down deals.
On the west coast and upper-Midwest there is zilch. So YMMV when looking at Toyota incentives.
I got the $1000 rebate in Texas (77070 specific search) at toyota.com – local deals – and inputting a random Houston zip code. Wasn’t mashing in zip codes until I hit dirt – literally did Houston, NYC, Boston, Chicago, Seattle and LA to check the different regions.
37 Colorados in a 25 to 50 mile radius is nothing. For example the number of Tacos within 500 miles of Houston out numbers available Colorado and Canyons combined more than 5:1.
Within 500 miles of Seattle there is a grand total of 101 Canyons and Coloraos – compared to 787 Tacomas.
Hard to sell vehicles when inventory is that constrained.
Lets drill further. The Colorado and Canyon come in three different body styles each, then either RWD or AWD in each body style. I haven’t even put options on them yet.
Also, I would double check your 37 on lots. I found a higher number of Colorado/Canyons on the lots until I specified on Auto Trader 2015+ or newer (I also did not select new, used or cetified) so I caught everything in the net. You need to look at 2015+ because there are still legacy Colorado / Canyon vehicles collection dust on GM lots out there.
Finally, if someone walked onto a GM dealer lot to look at a Colorado or Canyon, and drives off in a Silverado or Sierra – that’s called winning. GM fullsize trucks are on a tear, and it can’t be on their merits of being awesome trucks that blow away FCA or Ford.*
* since you’re so pedantic with my posts that wasn’t a complement to Sierra or Silverado, which are awkward looking and don’t match the F-series or RAM – but the sales numbers on the twins are going up up up despite the short comings – and have started to accelerate since the Colorado/Canyon showed up on the lots).
** This then doesn’t mean suddenly you’re right that the Colorado/Canyon are a flop. 37 “in your area” is nothing from an inventory point. In the entire USA there are only 2,366 new 2015+ Colorados on lots, and 2,231 2015+ new Canyons. There are 11,496 Tacomas in comparison.
There are over 3000 Chevrolet dealerships in the US – that means a simple distribution would be less than 1 new Colorado per dealer.
Awful hard to sell vehicles you don’t have.
Ford has a new Edge, not sure many are on dealer lots yet though.
Very true. I haven’t seen one yet, but hopefully it is a big improvement.
My sister was shopping for an SUV recently. We drove both the Edge & the Escape. There was no comparison. The Escape drove & felt better in every way.
It seemed that the only reason to buy the Edge was purely if you needed the extra cargo capacity.
The 2015 is so much better than the 2014 and earlier Edge. Think of all the things you like about the Fusion then add the 2.7TT engine and actual buttons on the MFT equipped versions.
Redav-
I’m sure you and your sister test drove the 2014 Edge. The 2015 Edge is so much better than the Escape.
I was in Texas recently and rented a Cherokee. I was pretty disappointed. The seats, the transmission, the cheap interior, the feel. I personally am not are why these are selling so well, but I can guarantee I will never rent one again.
This cracked me up. On the Challenger….”If you have no sporting pretense at all, if you just wanna go fast in a straight line…..” I’ve always felt that way about this car but there seem to be many fans on here. Good to see I’m not the only one.
Agree on the Chellenger. And where’s BSTR who can’t post without turning it into a comment about the Hellcat?
HELLCAT son! SRT HEMI POWA!!
(pops 2 Haloperidol and retreats to corner)
Of the three, the one I want the most right now is the Challenger. The Mustang might be a better handling car, but the Challenger just feels more brash and aggressive in that old school muscle Mopar way.
My bosses wife has a Fiat 500L. She likes it, plenty of room to haul the kids and stuff. Says it’s a lot nicer than her previous PT Cruiser. A friend has a Taurus, because he likes big Fords and can’t afford the Lincoln. Not that any of that changes Bark’s rating, just that for somebody they are the right cars.
I’ve always been more a point & shoot precision guy, but I’m 90% sure my next vehicle is going to be either a blackout Challenger or Charger (if they get the interior upgraded) with the big brake kit and the 485 horsepower/475 lb.-ft. of torque.
It looks bada$$, sounds bada$$, they finally got the beans to handle the torque, and it’s just a powerful, American, stout modern muscle car that is not too over the top yet has serious Mojo.
I have a friend who has both a ’15 Mustang GT and a ’15 Challenger R/T Scatpack 6.4. He bought the Challenger for himself, and the wife wanted the Mustang, but soon after he got it, his wife took over the Challenger, and he’s stuck driving the Mustang most of the time. He doesn’t like it all that much. It drives fine, but he doesn’t really like the looks of it much at all, it was bought for the wife, who refused to drive his old Challenger R/T for some odd reason. One thing he likes about the Mustang is that nobody stops and asks him about it at all, it’s like a bright yellow invisible car, where the Challenger is a bright red magnet for comments and questions. My Challenger is over 4 years old, and I still get asked about it all the time. I’ve driven both his cars, and I like the Mustang, but love the Challenger, and plan on buying one just like it, hopefully Petty blue, yellow or at least Hemi orange, like my present car, next year. Unless the Camaro looks vastly different than it does now, I’m not interested, it’s just hideous and it appears the new one is going to keep looking hideous. As a 4 time F-Body owner, it saddens me that the Camaro is so damn ugly.
I test drove a ’15 B5 Blue Challenger R/T and a ’15 Mustang GT/PP last weekend. Both manuals. I was surprised to find myself really preferring the Challenger. Yeah, it drives like an old-school muscle car, but that’s what I like about it. It looks better (love that B5 Blue), and the ergonomics are just far superior for me.
The 5.7 even sounds better. The reviews are kidding when they say the GT has no sound. That’s probably a good thing at highway speeds, but it’s boring around town.
The Tremec six-speed in the Challenger was a lot better than the Mustang’s Getrag unit as well. Way more precise, and not as cheap feeling. This is coming from someone who drives a NC Miata.
The Mustang just felt so jittery to me. I don’t know why that is, the way Mustangs ride has always bothered me. I was hoping this one would be different, and it wasn’t. F-bodies and Mopars just feel better to me.
I hated not liking Fords. The things I found wrong in wrong in the Mustang are the same things I found wrong in the Focus STs I’ve previously driven. Terrible seats. Terrible shifter. No-feel steering. Illegible gauges (not that I can see them through the steering wheel anyway).
And I say this as someone who’s Z-plan eligible. The Z-plan price on that Mustang GT, with performance pack, was under $32,000. The Focus STs were about $5,000 off MSRP. Still, it’s the Challenger that’s haunting my thoughts.
Have to disagree with you on the attention the new Mustang gets. Everywhere I go people ask about my car, I get thumbs up in traffic all the time, people speed up to check it out, etc. They are still pretty thin on the ground around here, while Challengers are literally everywhere. Maybe its a regional thing, who knows… we have a ton of Challenger rental cars here in Florida.
But I am not hating, I really love them both, and I had a hard decision between the new Mustang and new Challenger. IMO they are both really great cars and you can’t go wrong either way. For me it came down to what I wanted to do with it. My Mustang is a 3rd/4th car for me, I don’t have to drive it daily (but I do, I love it!), and I planned to take it to track events. I will freely admit the ride is a bit too rough, its small inside, and it isn’t nearly as usable as a daily driver as the Challenger. Also, my wife greatly preferred the Mustang, the Challenger was simply too big in her eyes. And as you may know, it’s easier to justify the expense if you choose the one the wife prefers!
On my Mustang test drive, I did have two people trying to race me. So yeah, it gets noticed. It was also orange, so it’s kind of hard to avoid. The 5.0 has a lot of pull, I probably could have taken them in 6th gear.
My Mustang is orange too, and I think @nrd515’s Challenger is too, so maybe its more the color than the car attracting the attention??
I was either going to get the orange Mustang GT or the Plum Crazy Challenger Skat Pack, so either way an attention grabbing color. I think people like the colors but most are afraid to take a long term gamble on one themselves. A lot of my friends have asked me if I am sure I am going to like it 3-5 yrs from now. I am.
The Challenger I drove was the bright B5 Blue. Not as out there as Plum Crazy or Sublime, but it sticks out in a field of black, white, and gray cars.
I had a ’70 Charger that was a similar color, and I loved it. Always got compliments on the color. I’ll admit, it’s a big part of the draw to the Challenger. I’m not really a fan of any of the Mustang colors. The orange is a little too dark for me. I thought I would like the Guard (green), until I saw it in person. It’s almost gray. And I was to avoid dark colors that will show dirt and scratches. Doesn’t leave me with many options.
As a muscle car the Challenger does great at it’s job, when you start trying to compare it to a sports car it’s obviously not going to stand up. Two totally different buyers, and comparatively it’s the only Muscle car still true to the segment definition.
If I was going to buy a Muscle car the Challenger with the 6.4l would be my only consideration, and if I were to buy a sports car, it would probably be the new C7.
Yeah, if I wanted a car for going through twisty roads at high speeds, I’d probably buy an older Corvette and throw fancy parts at it. Not gonna use a Challenger for that.
If you really want to use the first definition of “muscle car” — compact or midsize car, big car engine — then the Challenger is too big. Nothing from the Detroit Three quite fits. The closest thing we’ve got to a pure muscle car today is the Benz C63 AMG.
The C63 AMG is a pony car. The last true muscle car was the Buick GNX.
Why,?you know what the shifts are, what the problems are in the factories
The new 3rd Shift is common/public knowledge, if you’re halfway paying attention. And from many sources. Here’s one:
autonews.com/article/20150302/OEM/303029970/pickup-rollout-pinches-supply-of-gm-vans
The C63 coupe might be a pony car. I don’t see how the sedan could possibly be anything but a muscle car.
If the Mustang GT suddenly came with 4 doors, would that make it a muscle car?
Muscle cars were the typical, plain everyday drivers, but with a huge engine or big power output and not much else. Weak brakes/shocks, but maybe rear swaybars and aggressive gears. Open diffs too. Of course a special ‘muscle car’ trim package, hood scoop, wheels, sports seats, full instrumentation, etc.
A Ford Fairmont coupe could’ve been a candidate, even with the Fox chassis, but there haven’t been any 4-door muscle cars anyway.
The Challenger sure does go fast in a straight line – it doesn’t exactly come to a full stop that quick however. Hertz punished me after I wrecked one of there R/7 Challengers out of Oakland by giving me a 40K miles W-body Impala penalty box.
Whether or not a Challenger is a better daily driver depends pretty much on whether you have kids over the age of 12. It really is significantly bigger inside.
But the Challenger is a lot better at doing what most people ACTUALLY DO with these cars. Mostly drive around back and forth to work stuck behind some assclown in a prius (because it drives exactly like a Charger with a shock kit), occasionally doing a burn out from a stop sign to stick it to the man or doing a powerslide out of the gas station because you can (because torques and defeatable ESP). IMHO the Challenger has always been for people who really should buy a Charger but aren’t emotionally ready for 4 doors.
It’s great at what it is and it FEELS the most like a muscle car, no matter how much someone wants to argue about definitions.
***Like to add, the Challenger gets .9 on the skidpad, so it’s not like it instantly spins into a ditch every time you smell a turn.
Not to go full Mazda fanboy, but…
1) I personally believe the 6 is at least the equal of the Fusion in the styling department.
2) No mention of the 3 as a Cruze competitor, but I would assume you would have one of those instead of the Chevy. The Mazda is definitely the better car.
Agreed.
“Is there a better looking midsizer than the Fusion? No way.” The World Design award judges would have something to say since the 6 was in the final 3 against the Jaguar F-type and Aston Martin Vanquish for 2014.
The “World Design Award” judges are, one imagines, not the same as The Market.
(Also, note that the World Design Award judges [http://www.wcoty.com/web/eligible_vehicles.asp?year=2014&cat=2] gave it to THE GODDAMN BMW I3 this year.
So let’s not pretend they’re some sort of Olympian judges of aesthetic value.)
I think the Mazda6 looks better than the Fusion as well. I actually think most everything in the segment looks better than the Fusion. All the Fusion has is a cheap imitation of an Aston Martin at the nose. Ugly from any other view.
I was surprised the 3 was considered as a competitor as well. I don’t know if it is necessarily a better car, but definitely a competitor.
Agreed on the Fusion. It’s like one of those Beetles someone has grafted a JC Whitney Rolls-Royce radiator shell onto, only with less convincing proportions.
The Fusion and 6 are about on equal footing – better front ends than the side/rear.
The outgoing Optima (SX trim) won just about every major design award (including best in show), but unfortunately, the new Optima is a step backwards.
I wouldn’t say “at least the equal of,” I’d say “clearly superior to.” The Fusion looks like a slab-sided family sedan with a rhinoplasty, and in the shortish time it’s been on the market, has aged about as well as the last-gen Sonata did during its lifespan. The Mazda 6 is a coherent and downright attractive car in a way that none other in the category comes close to – though at least the Accord looks expensive.
I agree on this, the Fusion isn’t a very good performer in the looks department. The Mazda 6, and even the Accord are much more attractive choices.
The Accord has a very coherent design that will age well. The Mazda has a coherent and consistent design from front, to sides to the rear. The Fusion is attractive at the front but the sides are slab sided and the design doesn`t flow well from the front through to the rear.
I agree with all the ‘slab sided’ comments, the Fusion just looks fat with a pretty face. I’m on the Accord styling bandwagon with the others, it is a simple and clean design without stupid creases in the sheetmetal to ‘break things up’ to compensate for hugely slab sided doors. Instead, it has a big greenhouse. It is also one of the few mainstream cars to pull off the LED light look on upper trim levels, they really do look like more expensive cars than they are.
I also rather like the looks of the current Passat. Simple and straightforward, it makes no apologies for looking like a large sedan, it embraces the fact, it’s honest.
I also feel the Fusion looks good in front & back, but the sides are pure meh. The Accord looks are not memorable, but I strongly prefer it to the Fusion for driving & use. IMO, the Mazda6 & Accord are the winners in that segment. I haven’t driven the 200, but I certainly prefer its interior to the Fusion.
For the compact segment, I like the Focus & Mazda3 the best–much more than the Cruze, which I have near the bottom of what I’ve driven. I haven’t had a Forte for an extended period, but if I couldn’t get a 3 or Focus, that probably would be my next choice.
I’d move the Tarus SHO up to “Not-So-Good”. It has never been as exciting as I would have wished, but it is a fast vehicle that performs well to modification.
Ford is also piling enough cash on the hood (at least $6K) that a non-haggler can get a SHO performance pack for around $36K.
http://oi57.tinypic.com/qx8i86.jpg
That is within a few hundred bucks +/- of what a loaded Charger R/T with RT or 300S V8 goes for and less than the Genesis V8.
I bought a Charger so I obviously liked it more than the Ford, but I can see people preferring the SHO to the V8/RWD options if they live at high elevations or in snowy areas.
Agree on the Mazda6. The Fusion definitely looks great from the front, not so great from the rear. The 6 simply looks great from all angles, and with the new 2016 update, the Mazda has the better looking interior as well.
What I’m curious about since I may be in the market for one of these is the NVAH levels. Prior to the update the Mazda was far too loud, that’s something that the Fusion absolutely killed them on. Supposedly noise levels have been reduced from 10-25%, but I’m not sure what that means. 25% of what? Decibels? Sones? It’s very vague.
It’s also strange that Mazda still doesn’t have the new car on their website. Aren’t they already on dealer lots?
Is the noise reduction claim for the 2016 update vs prior to the update for the same model, or compared to the previous Mazda6?
It’s pretty damn hard to measure noise consistently in a way that is meaningful to everyone. I think you have to try it out and keep your fingers crossed that they improved it enough.
From what I read the NVH improvements were compared to the 2015 Mazda 6. With the 2016 model they seem to have fixed the two “issues” people could come up with – NVH and the infotainment system. They did this after only two model years, so they do seem to listen to feedback and act on it.
I recently drove a 6 (not the 2016). It was noticeably quieter than the 3, but I can’t compare it to the Ford. Overall, Fords seem to be much quieter than Mazdas, so I would assume the Fusion will outperform the 6 in that area.
Also, I would absolutely insist on picking the ’16 6 over the ’15 because of the interior upgrades.
Jeep needs to wrangle in on Amblin for more exposure to the JP franchise. There are more sequals in the pipeline after Jurassic World (June 2015.) Mercedes got way too much of a toe-hold with product less iconic.
And yet nobody remembers the Mercedes ML320s from the second movie, they remember the green and yellow 1st gen Explorers and gray and red Wranglers from the first movie.
So I agree, more gray and red JP Wranglers please. Especially if it means that there could be a dealer installed JP package.
Fantastic post! I could not have written it better than you :)
Show Auto Reviews
Amen on the seats in the Cruze. Otherwise great car – looks good and large enough to be practical. Also has a quieter ride than some cars costing twice as much; it’s fantastic to have an option as a legitimate highway cruiser in that price range. Too bad the seats had me in pain within five minutes.
The Cruze has a “mature” ride – very comfortable.
The new one should be better all around.
Agreed, the Cruze is one sturdy, solid little car. I was bowled over by how “Germanic” the 6spd Eco felt on a test drive. I mean just look at the curb weight of this thing! I was watching a Russian review of the Cruze and they were rather impressed with how beefy all of the suspension components were as well as how big the longerons were (the ‘frame rails’ of a unibody).
$ for $, and in their respective market segments, are not only good to very good vehicles by GM standards, but good vehicles by any standards.
Mazda 6 is beautiful. From the side profile you’d swear it was an Infiniti. Shame the engine isn’t enough to make me happy. That would bring me back to the brand (a manual transmission in the GT trim would bring me back even faster!). I hope Mazda makes a 6 coupe to compete with the Accord, but they have to get a stronger powerplant under the hood first. In exchange for Scion selling the Mazda2 sedan, they should let Mazda put the Camry V6 in some of its cars. :D
In my eyes the rear end of the 2015 Mustang is exactly what it has needed FOREVER. I always thought the previous model was absolutely gorgeous until you got 2/3 of the way back.
Agreed on the S550 hind-quarters, they are my favorite part of the car. I liked the rear of the S197 before they added hips which just seemed to bulk up an already bulking rear end.
My only real complaint with the new Mustang is the faux pillarless B pillar. I’d much rather Ford had kept the B-pillar from the S-197 and the quarter window. doing that would have probably gone a long way toward diminishing the haters observation that Ford essentially aped the Accord’s styling with an Aston nose grated on.
Interesting idea about the Toyota V6 – something has to power the upcoming new CX9 and I would suspect that engine would power speed versions of the 3 and maybe a high powered 6.
A Mazda6 with the Toyota 3.5 would definitely get my attention. I liked the way the last gen looked and drove, but the road noise was unbelievable and the interior chintzier than photos would have you believe.
Love the looks of the new car and the interior’s a big improvement. But it still doesn’t sell worth squat and I can see why Mazda wouldn’t want to engineer a V6 or turbo-four option for a midsizer that can barely challenge the Legacy in sales.
As an Escape owner, I can tell you that Bark is right about the disappointing fuel economy. I can also tell you that mine, at least, is very sensitive to fuel quality. I’ve got a couple fuel stations nearby that sell ethanol-free premium, and my gas mileage goes up about 10% when I use it. The car seems to run better, too, although that may well be in my head. I would bet one of Jack’s guitars that the Escape Bark rented was filled up with the cheapest unleaded regular around.
I’m surprised how much you like the Chrysler 200. The car is beautiful, but almost everything I read about it is that it just isn’t that good of a car. A few friends have driven them and they do not like it at all.
The Cruze? Seemingly millions of them on the road all over. I tried like crazy to find something about it that I do like, but in spite of being a Chevy fan, I just don’t like it and would not consider one. Perhaps it’s the styling with that ugly black plastic triangle at the rear. You have to admit the new Camry, even though it has a black plastic slash of a triangle behind the back door glass, at least it’s a shiny one!
I for one hope the Silverado & Sierra eventually eat Ford’s lunch. Why? because I can’t find a single thing why I would buy a Ford F-150 over a Chevy, although they make cars just as good as anyone else – just my preference. Somebody is going to have to provide concrete evidence WHY it’s better than the GM twins. This from a guy who’s owned two Rangers.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it!
Agreed on the 200. I’ve only driven a stripper four-cylinder model, but that car had the worst handling of any current-gen midsizer I’ve driven.
That’s a shame. Just saw a rental-spec 4-cylinder slate gray 200 parked next to me and it really gives off a premium vibe. Good looking car.
I drove a Pentastar 200, and I know why they sell: they look good, they’re priced well, and that V-6 is a whole heap of badass in a segment that is chock full of wimpy appliances (I’m talking to you, Camry). It’s almost anti-vanilla.
Camry, Accord, Altima have V6 engines that meet the performance of the Pentastar, and they’ve had them for years. While I agree the 200 has personality inside and out, reviews say its driving experience is nothing special and my local dealerships are still advertising over $7000 off the MSRP of V6 models, $6600 off Limiteds with the wimpy appliance 2.4 Tigershark, and have been literally for months straight.
When the biggest heap of badass is the advertised pile of cash on the hood, it’s no wonder they are moving them. In my weekend at a national park gateway town I saw a lot of 200 rentals as well.
I’d like to see a V6 Camry XSE go head to head with the 200S Pentastar and see which one comes out on top in performance. Most instrumented tests by magazines seem to give the Camry an edge of about 1/2 second to 60.
Looking at 4 cylinders exclusively, since that makes up the lion’s share of the market, and the 200 is well off the pace of basically every other midsizer (sub 8 second 0-60 is the norm these days, 200 is closer to 9 seconds).
Sorry but I think the 200 is just all style and very little substance. Having said that, an AWD pentastar might make a nice used car pick in a few years once they’ve depreciated to the low teens.
The performance breakdown between the Camry V-6 and the Pentastar 200 is a bit murky. The only instrumented comparison I’ve found is in Car and Driver – it loses to a Camry XSE by about .2 seconds to 60. But that’s an AWD model, which weighs about 400 pounds more than the FWD, and about 300 more than the Camry. With less weight to lug around, my money would be on the FWD Pentastar.
You can also get the Pentastar in a far more basic configuration (no AWD, nav, or roof, cloth seats, etc) for around $28,000, before incentives. That one would light up a comparably priced Camry (with a four-banger) like a Christmas tree. It wouldn’t even be close.
Not saying the 200 is perfect – it’s got some pretty major flaws, not the least of which is unknown reliability and resale – but to me, after driving a bunch of four-banger vanilla sedans all day, it felt great.
“but to me, after driving a bunch of four-banger vanilla sedans all day, it felt great.”
I can’t disagree with this, but I wonder if you might have felt the same liberation if you simply drove the V6 version of those four-banger vanilla sedans. It may have simply been the power of a V6 rather than anything endemic to the 200.
At some point, doesn’t AWD help the car effectively put down the power without wasting it on wheelspin, thereby improving the acceleration time?
The Camry V6 is faster than the Pentastar 200, mostly because it’s lighter.
I’m going to lay money on the Pentastar 200 if it’s configured as FWD. More HP, more torque, no power-sapping AWD system, and roughly the same weight = bad news for the Camry.
And you can get a Pentastar 200 for about $27,000 before incentives. Base Camry V-6 starts around $33,000.
Yes, every purchase is a vote for better or banal products.
Thanks for your observations.
“no bullshit price of $24,995 on the windshield of an ATS”
That’s a nice start, but I’d go 19,9 on a four banger Pontiac G6, er “Cadillac” ATS.
“You’ve GOT to fix your supposed volume sellers, the ATS and CTS”
JdN really can’t “fix” those because they evidently suck. Realistically until the next product cycle those will continue to languish, even with revised drivetrain options (read: better) the models seem to have their own share of issues. Depending on what happens with the new Seville and how expensive the platform *really* is to spin up, perhaps something could be done to replace CTS on the Omega platform and ATS can be dumped. (I know I know there won’t be any legroom)
The irony is as phoned in as Merc CLA is supposed to be sounds similar to how phoned in ATS is supposed to be, only the former moves the metal.
That’s because the CLA is a $30,000 Mercedes, 28. And it looks good. No mystery as to why it sells – plenty of wannabees in the world.
And that’s the problem Cadillac has – it’s not something wannabees aspire to, at least not at this point. It took Mercedes a LONG time to build its brand to the point it could get away with the CLA.
@FreedMike
I agree, but I look at things from a fit and finish standpoint and not a badge. I wonder if somehow you could debadge them and bring in non-car folks, if they could tell you which one the “Mercedes” is and which one is not?
@DeadWeight
Given the reality the marque finds itself in, maybe the model can be used as incredibly cheap lease-bait to lure in the sensible minded kids to get them into the showroom and aspire to something better later (this assumes the product the next rung up is aspirational, which of course it is not as of now)
As much as I despise the ATS as it should have truly been a Pontiac with a 20k base price, I have to be honest and admit that I’d still take it over the Mercedes CLA if these two vehicles were the last two available in the world.
That’s in no way praising the ATS but acknowledging that the CLA is a horrid, horrid vehicle, grossly overpriced, sloppily designed, engineered & assembled, and that, in a just world, would produce painful, adverse consequences for Mercedes brand equity over the long-term.
I dislike both the CLA & the ATS. Both are cramped and uncomfortable. Neither is deserving a luxury emblem, IMO.
The ATS is definitely not the last word in cabin quality but it’s put together better than the CLA.
“who owns not one, not two, but THREE Fords?”
At some point I owned three Fords, but one of them ’94 Taurus GL was mostly parked because had transmission problem – eventually I donated it to some veteran organization. It was a beautiful car even though being low quality. I mean it looked good if to look at it from distance. Design was great but execution bad – thank you UAW! Only if it was made by Toyota.
Regarding Mazda6 and Fusion – neither of them look as elegant as Audi (only FWD car available). Agree that Fusion has slab sides and hood is too high and bulky, they should lowered the whole thing. But it has fantastic interior, seats (in Titanium trim at least) and it IS a fantastic driving machine in FWD universe, with 2.0 Ecoboost of course.
Mazda6 looks too Japanesee to be considered elegant. Its hood is too long, wheel arcs ugly and overall design is unbalanced. Interior is gloomy and dated, it is slow and driving it is not a good experience overall. I would choose Accord over it any time and it says something. I am not sure that Mazda can survive with cars like that. Sad but fact. But at least it is not as bad as Altima, is better than Sonata/Kia and not as boring as Camry and I hope they do not sell it at discount as Nissan does. Cannot compare it to 200 or Passat since never drove one but certainly it is not a competition to Fusion or Regal (I have to ignore Malibu for apparent reasons so Regal represents GM).
“At some point I owned three Fords, but one of them ’94 Taurus GL was mostly parked because had transmission problem – eventually I donated it to some veteran organization. It was a beautiful car even though being low quality. I mean it looked good if to look at it from distance. Design was great but execution bad – thank you UAW! Only if it was made by Toyota.”
No it’s not the UAW’s fault for a poor transmission design.
Workers are given tools and parts with a specific time frame to install them. The automaker gives specific tolerances on how parts are to fit together. If for say piece of interior trim has a larger gap on one side, but not the other, how is that the workers fault? The worker finds the locator and seats the part and moves on to the next job. Maybe if the parts were spec’d with tighter tolerances from the manufacturer the perception of “poor quality” wouldn’t be an issue.
Now if a part wasn’t secured properly, missing, or blatantly not assembled properly (such as tossing extra bolts inside doors) then I would agree with it being the worker fault.
My ’89 Taurus SHO had lots of issues. Some of them were design issues and others were clearly UAW assembly issues. Ford’s Atlanta plant that assembled many 1st- and 2nd-gen Tauruses did not do a good job.
I don’t even agree with that last statement. Where I work, a union shop, ALL work is inspected by management, and if it ain’t right, we get to make it right. These anti-union people are a hoot. Do they think that the company lets workers get away with bad work? Mine doesn’t. If you get written up three times for faulty work, your ass is grass. The management buys materials, tooling, and hands us the prints. We put things together the way THEY say they want it done, not the way we would. And woe unto one of us if we don’t. So for the folks who hate on the UAW and other unions, here’s some info; the people who are trying to destroy unions do not have any more respect for you than they do us. They are laughing behind your back all they way to their banks in the Caymans.
Just back from the NYC auto show. My thoughts: The 200s interior was a letdown. The materials weren’t that great and that center console took up a lot of space yet the storage was inconvenient. The F150 didn’t give me any reason to regret my GMC purchase, and I mistook the 2015 Ford Focus 1.0 ecoboost ($20k!!) for the Fiesta. The new Malibu looked ok, but not as good as the Fusion or Mazda6. And why was the new Malibu being hidden behind a wall at the back of the floor?! The Continental Concept looked great, but those weird door handles have to go.
Agree on the 200, dwford – it’s not up to snuff inside. I’m not crazy about the exterior fit and finish either.
But, man, after a day spent driving Fusions, Accords, Camrys and the like, that Pentastar makes you forget a whole host of sins. It’s a hoot.
I have checked a couple of 200s up close, and it looked like they had great fit and finish exterior-wise, as well as good panel gaps.
“I have checked a couple of 200s up close, and it looked like they had great fit and finish exterior-wise, as well as good panel gaps.”
They do have very good fit and finish for the segment. A lot of investment was made into the metrology for this car and it shows.
I am curious about these poor mileage figures for Ecoboost engines. At the auction I work at, I drive dozens of late model Ford products. As I have mentioned before on this site I randomly push the fuel economy readings on the cars when I drive them through the lane. Most are either former daily rentals or lease turn ins. Escapes with the 2.0 Ecoboost are consistently in the 22- 24 mpg range. I was in a 1.6 last week that showed 25mpg. Remember these are rentals, I can’t imagine that many renters even bother to figure how to reset the readings so I think this is a fairly accurate sampling of cars with 15K to 35K on them. Fusions are similar although I have seen several with the 2.5 non-Ecoboost showing 25 to 28 mpg. A friend has a Fusion Titanium 2.0 and got 30 mpg on a 600 mile round trip several months ago. By the way, I have never seen an Altima with a 38 mpg reading, their much touted figure in all of their ads. Usually 27-29.
Essentially all reviewers drive with their right foot planted to the floor at all times. The EcoBoosts seem to respond poorly to that treatment. Honda engines and VW TDIs respond well to it, so they get good mileage figures in reviews.
The 2008+ EPA cycle is pretty good at imitating non-aggressive, but normal, driving (although it has issues with hybrid drivetrains). If a reviewer gets way below EPA on a non-hybrid, you can assume driving style has something to do with it.
I can attest from personal experience with lots of rental Altimas that 38 mpg highway is no problem if you’re gentle with the throttle. They can do 40+ at 65 mph.
Of my coworkers with the 1.6L ecoboost, they are not pleased with its efficiency, either. It seems to be that engine has less margin for error for economy than other engines.
On the Escape, you might as well get the 2.0T. For most people, the 2.0T and 1.6T get the same real world fuel economy. I usually get better FE with the 2.0T.
Nothing new under the sun!
Back in the 1970s, the same thing was going on between 6 and 8 cylinder cars.
My neighbor got rid of his Dodge pickup with the 225 slant six, and replaced it with a newer Dodge having the 318 V8, and the V8 got better fuel economy.
My real life long term average combined freeway/city cycle is 27.5mpg on Fusion Titanium and 33mpg on Altima 2.5L, This difference in mileage worth every extra drop in 2.0 Ecoboost – it is much more powerful and better engine in general. Probably Honda or Toyota Camry V6 are better but I cannot testify for that because never had one for long term. But Fusion is superior as a good handling car so engine is just the part of equation. And smaller displacement has advantage in better weight distribution. Probably Americans would not care because they drive strait line almost all the time.
“To be honest, though, I’d step up to the Grand Cherokee, if it were my money (or my dad’s). It’s the best SUV for the money in today’s marketplace. In fact, you might even be able to take that “for the money” qualifier off of it. We used one to take a crew of four to last year’s New York International Auto Show from Columbus, Ohio to LaGuardia airport. We had to take a Ford Edge back. We were all sad.”
Vindication is mine (b/c Bark is correct. JGC & Durango are solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime not just in their segment and for the $$$, but solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime AT ANY PRICE POINT. GRAND SLAM VEHICLES.
‘We should all take a moment, as automotive enthusiasts, to recognize that we need to be grateful that the Charger and the 300 still exist. There’s really nothing more American than a full-sized, RWD sedan that can go like hell in a straight line. It straight up befuddles me that Ford and GM just hand over this segment of the business to Chrysler without a fight—if you want a real 300/Charger fighter, you have to go to Hyundai. That just ain’t right, people.”
Vindication is mine (b/c Bark is correct. The 300 is solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime not just in its segment and for the $$$, but solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime AT ANY PRICE POINT. GRAND SLAM VEHICLE. A Better Cadillac than Any Things Cadillac at 1/2 the price (with standard equipment, standard V6 power, standard ride comfort & solidity, and rear seat & trunk room, along with gauges, instruments & Uconnect that EMBARRASS Cadillac’s SH!T.
“I’m sorry, Johan, but I gotta put CADILLAC here. I was in a GM store in Indiana last week that had a genuine, no bullshit price of $24,995 on the windshield of an ATS, against a sticker of $35k. I mean, seriously. Is this what the brand has become? Only Volkswagen is shrinking its market share at a faster rate (which seems impossible, what with the miraculous Golf flying out of showrooms nationwide). If you took the Escalade out of the numbers, Caddy would be down twenty freaking percent year over year in a new car market that is actually up over five percent. You’ve GOT to fix your supposed volume sellers, the ATS and CTS, or whatever the hell you’re gonna call them in your numeric naming strategy that was so successful over at your previous employer.”
Wait. Bark, Archie & the “Troll!’ brigade are going to launch a smear campaign against you for daring greatly to speak the plain TRUTH.
Prepare for the pitchforks as you so perfectly, succinctly call out the ATS, CTS & XTS for the absolute failures, and Cadillac management, for the absolute, pathetic dismal failure that it is, by any metric of measurement.
Cadillac = Grossly overpriced, unreliable, cheaply finished, poor riding, cramped vehicles that a
have sadly destroyed whatever little goodwill & equity Cadillac had left as a manufacturer & designer of luxurious, roomy, powerful, prestigious vehicles.
Once again, I AM VINDICATED.
“To be honest, though, I’d step up to the Grand Cherokee, if it were my money (or my dad’s). It’s the best SUV for the money in today’s marketplace. In fact, you might even be able to take that “for the money” qualifier off of it. We used one to take a crew of four to last year’s New York International Auto Show from Columbus, Ohio to LaGuardia airport. We had to take a Ford Edge back. We were all sad.”
Vindication is mine (b/c Bark is correct. JGC & Durango are solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime not just in their segment and for the $$$, but solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime AT ANY PRICE POINT. GRAND SLAM VEHICLES.
‘We should all take a moment, as automotive enthusiasts, to recognize that we need to be grateful that the Charger and the 300 still exist. There’s really nothing more American than a full-sized, RWD sedan that can go like hell in a straight line. It straight up befuddles me that Ford and GM just hand over this segment of the business to Chrysler without a fight—if you want a real 300/Charger fighter, you have to go to Hyundai. That just ain’t right, people.”
Vindication is mine (b/c Bark is correct. The 300 is solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime not just in its segment and for the $$$, but solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime AT ANY PRICE POINT. GRAND SLAM VEHICLE. A Better Cadillac than Any Things Cadillac at 1/2 the price (with standard equipment, standard V6 power, standard ride comfort & solidity, and rear seat & trunk room, along with gauges, instruments & Uconnect that EMBARRASS Cadillac’s garbage
“I’m sorry, Johan, but I gotta put CADILLAC here. I was in a GM store in Indiana last week that had a genuine, no bullshit price of $24,995 on the windshield of an ATS, against a sticker of $35k. I mean, seriously. Is this what the brand has become? Only Volkswagen is shrinking its market share at a faster rate (which seems impossible, what with the miraculous Golf flying out of showrooms nationwide). If you took the Escalade out of the numbers, Caddy would be down twenty freaking percent year over year in a new car market that is actually up over five percent. You’ve GOT to fix your supposed volume sellers, the ATS and CTS, or whatever the hell you’re gonna call them in your numeric naming strategy that was so successful over at your previous employer.”
Prepare for the pitchforks as you so perfectly, succinctly call out the ATS, CTS & XTS for the absolute failures, and Cadillac management, for the absolute, pathetic dismal failure that it is, by any metric of measurement.
Cadillac = Grossly overpriced, unreliable, cheaply finished, poor riding, cramped vehicles that a
have sadly destroyed whatever little goodwill & equity Cadillac had left as a manufacturer & designer of luxurious, roomy, powerful, prestigious vehicles.
Once again, I AM VINDICATED.
“To be honest, though, I’d step up to the Grand Cherokee, if it were my money (or my dad’s). It’s the best SUV for the money in today’s marketplace. In fact, you might even be able to take that “for the money” qualifier off of it. We used one to take a crew of four to last year’s New York International Auto Show from Columbus, Ohio to LaGuardia airport. We had to take a Ford Edge back. We were all sad.”
Vindication is mine (b/c Bark is correct. JGC & Durango are solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime not just in their segment and for the $$$, but solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime AT ANY PRICE POINT. GRAND SLAM VEHICLES.
‘We should all take a moment, as automotive enthusiasts, to recognize that we need to be grateful that the Charger and the 300 still exist. There’s really nothing more American than a full-sized, RWD sedan that can go like hell in a straight line. It straight up befuddles me that Ford and GM just hand over this segment of the business to Chrysler without a fight—if you want a real 300/Charger fighter, you have to go to Hyundai. That just ain’t right, people.”
Vindication is mine (b/c Bark is correct. The 300 is solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime not just in its segment and for the $$$, but solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime AT ANY PRICE POINT. GRAND SLAM VEHICLE. A Better Cadillac than Any Things Cadillac at 1/2 the price (with standard equipment, standard V6 power, standard ride comfort & solidity, and rear seat & trunk room, along with gauges, instruments & Uconnect that EMBARRASS Cadillac’s garbage
“I’m sorry, Johan, but I gotta put CADILLAC here. I was in a GM store in Indiana last week that had a genuine, no BS price of $24,995 on the windshield of an ATS, against a sticker of $35k. I mean, seriously. Is this what the brand has become? Only Volkswagen is shrinking its market share at a faster rate (which seems impossible, what with the miraculous Golf flying out of showrooms nationwide). If you took the Escalade out of the numbers, Caddy would be down twenty freaking percent year over year in a new car market that is actually up over five percent. You’ve GOT to fix your supposed volume sellers, the ATS and CTS, or whatever the hell you’re gonna call them in your numeric naming strategy that was so successful over at your previous employer.”
Prepare for the pitchforks as you so perfectly, succinctly call out the ATS, CTS & XTS for the absolute failures, and Cadillac management, for the absolute, pathetic dismal failure that it is, by any metric of measurement.
Cadillac = Grossly overpriced, unreliable, cheaply finished, poor riding, cramped vehicles that a
have sadly destroyed whatever little goodwill & equity Cadillac had left as a manufacturer & designer of luxurious, roomy, powerful, prestigious vehicles.
Once again, I AM VINDICATED.
Derek or Cameron – please erase two duplicate posts. Spam filter auto-moderated comment b/c I quoted Bark’s use of bullsh1t in quotes.
Thanks!
“JGC & Durango are solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime”
Funny how even though they’re on the same platform and perform essentially the same they have such different images. JGC is acceptable absolutely anywhere. Durango still hasn’t outlived its first generation and is thought of as a car for white trash meatheads.
“The 300 is solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime not just in its segment and for the $$$, but solid, quiet, smooth, refined & Grade A Prime AT ANY PRICE POINT.”
I know you like the 300, but this is just way too much hyperbole. The 300 interior is nice for a mainstream product. It would be justly hammered for being cheap, ugly, and gaudy if it were in a luxury brand product (including a Cadillac). The leather is Grade B, the gaps on the dash are Grade D, and the switchgear looks like it came from a Dart. Still a great car *at its price*. Above $50,000 it would go sour real quick unless it had a 392 or Hellcat.
I agree that the 300’s interior could use a refresh, but it’s still far from drab or cheap in fit/finish or materials, and the 300 has the luxury car bona fides (ride, comfort, quiet, space) of many cars costing a lot more.
What I really want to know, however, is when the slings & arrows come out for Bark for saying the same thing I’ve been saying about the ATS/CTS – which is the straight dope, by the way.
You know, DW, the fact is that most people AGREE with you about Cadillac. I even agree with some of what you’re saying.
Where they disagree is simple: they don’t need to do daily, primal scream spleen-venting.
Then again, not everyone has the need for attention you clearly do.
Agreed, dal, I love the 300 but once you start looking hard at the details, you understand how Chrysler sells this much car for so little money.
Still, at $40,000 or so, it’s far from unreasonable. And at $25,000 or so for a gently used two-year-old model, it gets REAL attractive.
Chrysler 300 base models (that’s with leather and many features other automakers charge extra for, btw) sell new for 26k plus TTL all day long in the greater metro Detroit area (a 4.3 million tri-county area), and just as inexpensively in at least 5 other major markets I’ve seen, Atlanta, the Carolinas, the satellites city of Dallas (like Randall Noe in Terrell, TX), and Minnesota, and Virginia/Maryland, that I know of.
That’s incredible value.
I like the Sonic, too. I would probably buy one if it weren’t for two things: 1) I have serious doubts about their reliability (especially coolant leaks, the 6MT, and the suspension) based on what I’ve read in the Sonic forums. 2) As Bark noted, the prices the dealers are asking for them right now are too high. FitzMall, for example, has LT auto hatchbacks for $18,500–about $2000 more than I’d want to pay–and an LTZ sedan (albeit very well equipped) for $21,500. No way.
@Bark:
“Is there a better driver in the mid-sized sedan category than the Fusion? I’d say there are equals, but nothing better.”
I’d disagree here. Far as I’m concerned, as a driver’s car, the Accord Sport with the six speed manual beats the Fusion hands down. I drove both basically back to back, and the Fusion came off as very refined, almost like a German car, but I was able to catch the turbo four napping any number of times, and it disturbed the handling balance. I also hated the LCD tach.
The Accord felt direct, light on its feet, plenty powerful, and engaging as hell to drive. Nothing fancy, but it all works really, really well.
At 24 grand all in, I take the Accord, even with no sunroof or nav.
I also don’t think it’s a mystery why the 200 sells, either – it’s a good looking car, drives nicely, and that Pentastar makes it into a quasi-beast. It’s almost enough to make you forget about the chintzy interior and the iffy panel fits I found on the one I looked at (in fairness, I drove one of the first ones that hit the lot, so they might have nailed this down by now).
Not sure if you can compare a manual sedan to a sedan that is primarily a none manual sedan. And if you took the nameplate off a lot of sedans and drove them back to back your perspective may be different.
True, but I call ’em like I see ’em. I’d wager the Accord Sport still feels nimbler than the Fusion with the automatic.
I have to say that the Accord seating position is excellent along with the visibility. But, the leather seats in the Fusion were extremely surprising. Some of the best seats in any car under $45k I think they the none sport seats. But with leather.
People in Chi are buying Cruzes’ like they are free … I’ve seen a different one every day, sometimes two, varying areas. No idea what the deals are, though. That’s a shock, Buick selling that much? Not too surprised, though. Also surprised that the 200 is outselling Sonatas, but again not too surprised .. and the Fusion throws shade over most of it’s segment. You told the stone cold truth on that, it just looks better than it’s competitors.
Great post and you are dead on with your points. But a $25k ATS is damn good deal. But, not if you already own an ATS. Interesting mpg on your Escape. Because I rented a 2.0 AWD last year and drove it like a rental and I avg over 23mpg. It would be nice if autos could be all equal when it comes to mpg. The exact same model can deviate so much in the mpg department. I average over 31mpg in my Elantra and drive it hard and can get around 41mpg going little over 70mph. And others cannot avg over 25mpg.
It makes me sad when the car I own and really like is publicly declared to “SUUUUUUUUUCK”. If the Cherokee and Escape and Equinox don’t have enough luggage capacity, and you want an occasional use third row but not a CVT with sketchy reliability (Pathfinder), then the Journey is pretty much your only choice. We love our RT. More space than a Grand Cherokee and good enough AWD system for most people, more power than it needs, okay leather, very good UConnect….how does that suck?
I guess it just goes to show that almost every car is a perfect fit for *somebody*. Not sure why folks in the US hate them so much. In Canada they sell like crazy.
I agree that the saying “like what you drive, drive what you like” applies here. When you come to the conversation of people’s first cars, you inevitably will get love stories about cars with bad reputations or reliability. Congrats on being happy with what you have. That’s half the battle in life. Besides, somebody’s got to buy the Journey!
I have a Colorado for work. I certainly hope it cost less than $30k. It’s a 4 cylinder extended cab WT. I keep threatening to write a review for it, I just can’t seem to motivate myself when I’m home. Especially since no one seems to read the forums.
We have a mix of the old Colorados and new. The new isn’t as glacially slow as the old ones but I wouldn’t call it quick either. It’s bigger than the old one yet doesn’t require a 6 point turn around on a 2 lane road like the old.
You know what, maybe I’ll write it tomorrow, it’s supposed to rain anyway.
I sent pics to DK, not sure if they actually went through. I’ll try to post them anyway.
I could go after my usual suspects: The Mustang is nice but I wish it were lighter; and as nice as the ST twins are also nice you will never see me in a 4-door car. So I just went after my usual suspects, but I am going to leave it there.
Instead, I am going to go after the Taurus/MKS. I saw them at the Dallas Auto Show lately. I will put it very simply. How does a “full size” car have a back seat that small? It feels almost as slim as my parents’ Prius. The hard numbers say that it IS bigger than the Prius, but it sure doesn’t feel like it.
But then, look at the Lincoln MKT. It’s basically the Lincoln MKS station wagon with a 5″ stretch (112.9″ vs 117.9″ wheelbase), and suddenly you have a back seat worthy of a full size car. My wife and I were actually very impressed with the Flex/MKT.
“If you have no sporting pretense at all, if you just wanna go fast in a straight line and then have a comfortable cruiser the other 99.9% of your car’s life, then the Challenger is for you.”
This is EXACTLY why it should be sold as a 300 Coupe or a 300 Imperial or something. With a different, more elegant body.
“If somebody wants a reliable, powerful car that seats four adults comfortably, and couldn’t care less about driving dynamics…why not pick the Impala?”
I thought the Impala was good to drive now, and drove like a much more expensive car? That seems to be the consensus of every review I’ve seen on it.
It’s a shame that such a high percentage of them are sold in rental fleets, because I think that GM has somewhat diminished the Impala by making it seem like a “rental special.”
You’re talking about the previous generation, which did the nameplate no favors.
I’m sure the swoopy new Impala is still in rental fleets, but in nowhere near the numbers. I thought GM was making a conscious effort to sell more Impalas to consumers than fleets this generation around, which explains why overall Impala sales are down.
The upcoming new Malibu looks really good though: Perturbed Toad-faced refinement.
I’d wager fleet will eat up the new Malibu as a replacement when the W-Impala goes away in 2016. The EpII-Impala may also see fleet use as a “premium” but it might also not if some other model supplants it (Maxima?).
The Impala has the highest percentage of sales attributed to fleet sales of any car on the market. I don’t believe that GM breaks out the “Impala Classic” versus the regular Impala, so it’s difficult to tell how much of that can be attributed to the fleet only model.
However, from a purely anecdotal experience, I can tell you that the Executive Aisle at National is dominated by the new Impala. Sometimes, at ATL, that’s ALL they have. I don’t see the old W-body anymore.
Went truck shopping with my son-in-law. He wanted a Ram or Ford, I asked him to check out GMC first just to get his opinion of the Canyon. It reminded him of his old Sportback, he liked it, but when he drove the Sierra he bought an SLT model. I would have never expected him to buy a GM truck, but there you go. I have to say that for the price of a KIA Sorrento, the Sierra SLT is a much better vehicle as well as a better value. Same mileage too. One last thing. I think Bark’s concerns about the Malibu may also be a knee jerk opinion. GM has pulled off one of the biggest transformations in the industry with the introduction of the new Impala and I have a feeling they will do the same with the Malibu. Now the Camaro has to really pull itself up to match the Mustang and I think GM may have been caught with its pants down and may not be able to pull that one off.
The Regal needs to be tweaked as well. Good car, a little heavy and in need of about thirty more HP.
Chrysler T&C is underrated IMO. We bought one over the Honda and Toyota and don’t regret it one bit. Mostly due to the Pentastar, but also changing out those crap tires for some nice Michelins.
Mazda 6 is better looking than the Fusion.
Lincoln styling needs a reboot and it looks like it is coming, finally.
Corvette – I don’t know. I am not quite PeterMJ, but the crap paint, the potential heat soak issues, the lack of a Ring time, the general feeling that the ZR1 was the better car… I want to like it, and I hated the last gen, but I have substantial concerns on the actual performance of the car.
The Grand Caravan should be considered bad until its transmission issues finally get sorted out. Chrysler is well aware of the transmission issues, they just refuse to engineer a better one.
I honestly don’t know of a minivan model that hasn’t had a much higher issue with transmission problems vs passenger cars.
Whether Honda, Chrysler/Dodge, Toyota, GM, etc., automakers seem to put too fragile transmissions in their minivan offerings.