Reader Ricky Heang writes in:

Is the 15,000 maintenance really necessary? I have an 2008 FJ Cruiser and I am just hitting 15K. I had the car for about 6 months and the dealership charges $298 for the 15,000 maintenance. I have always thought that these were just traps for dealers to charge a ridiculous amount of money for oil changes and inspection. I checked what they provide and it looks like lots of visual inspections and just an oil/filter change and tire rotation. The car still feels new to me, and I don’t I need anything more than an oil change and tire rotation. What are your thoughts?

Commentator kobo1d writes:

My wife and I are in the market for a slightly used car. I would like to ask the Best and Brightest: what cars should we take a look at in the under $15,000 (out the door) almost new category? Is there anything decent in this range? We want a sedan/wagon/hatch still under factory bumper-to-bumper warranty, long-term reliable, and fun to drive. Wife can’t drive a stick, and ABS is mandatory. Must get 30 Highway MPG to guarantee our low loan rate. Can it be done?

I was driving down the freeway in the left lane just the other day when a quick peek in the rearview mirror told me that another car was approaching me from behind. It was still a ways off, and its silver-gray color barely stood out from the unseasonably gray skies. As it drew nearer at a fairly rapid clip, I had to look again, and after a quick glance my initial identification was “2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo.” It wasn’t until the car was within the two-second following envelope that I realized it was actually a Jaguar XF. Being the considerate driver I am, I pulled over and allowed the Jag to float past on a wave of blandonymity. But not every driver is as ethical with the lane etiquette as me, which is why the Germans came up with the term “Überholprestige.” Roughly translated it means, “the ability of a car to intimidate drivers into moving out of your way,” and the Jaguar XF rates about a 2 on the scale [ED. Out of what?]. In contrast, the Audi Q7 chases you down looking like the love child of a sperm whale and a bullet train. Seriously, the Q’s grill alone looks like most cars could pass comfortably through it and be pulled into the Q’s belly never to be heard from again. So which cars do you think demand respect? Which models part traffic before you like the Red Sea and which leave you stuck behind disrespectful peasants?

Rick Hamilton writes in:

I am seriously considering buying a Factory Five or Superperformance Cobra. I would like to know if there is any real downside to owning one (lots of maintenance, cramped foot area, etc). I noticed one seller said “if you are over 5′9″ do not buy this car.” Somewhere else I read “some models are 4″ longer to accomodate taller drivers.” Is that really a factor to consider at 5′10″?

An anonymous GM retiree writes in:

Does anyone know that New GM is in the process of retiring about 25% or more of their executives with a fairly ‘normal’ retirement package? This means these execs who were at the healm leading into bankruptcy will be be getting almost a full retirement program including 90% of their earned SERP/ERP and half year’s salary in life insurance. This compares to all current retirees who lost 70% of their SERP and all of their life insurance except for $10k when GM came out of bankruptcy. The arrogance of the ‘new company’ that hasn’t made any money and is using public funds to continue in business is what we would have expected from the old company. Since this company is now owned by the government, can’t someone get at look at these numbers and see what the American taxpayer will be paying these people for the rest of their lives? I am a retiree and am grateful that we kept our retirement program at all. I am just shocked that the next retirees are not going to get similar cuts to their package.

Read More >

KBB is ever-so-sensible. Here’s their “top ten back to school cars:” 2010 Kia Soul, 2010 Mazda3, 2009 Ford Focus, 2007 Suzuki SX4, 2006 Honda Civic, 2005 Chevrolet Silverado. Wait! That’s only six! I’ve got to click from the press release to the website to get the last four? The suspense is killing me/you/no one . . . 2009 Nissan Cube, 2007 Suzuki SX4, 2005 Ford Escape, 2009 Honda Fit, 2005 Scion xB. So how did kbb pick their winners? They like them! Mind you, “Every new car listed on this year’s Back-to-School list features New Car Blue Book Values that start at under $18,000. Every used car identified has a Kelley Blue Book Suggested Retail Value of less than $12,000.” I guess they never heard of Beverly Hills 90210. Or college kids with a grand in the hand. So it’s time for YOU to pick TTAC’s top ten “back to school” cars, price no object, on either end of the spectrum. UPDATE: Wow! You guys are a serious-minded bunch. Here are some of your wilder choices and some of mine. Tell me what should stay and what should go (in its place), and why. Or not. Either way, thanks for the help.

Easy (Warm-Up for TTAC’s Best and Brightest)

1. Major Anthony Nelson on I Dream of Jeannie drove a convertible of what 1960s muscle car?

A. Chevrolet Chevelle SS396

B. Buick Skylark GTX

C. Pontiac G.T.O.

D. Oldsmobile 442

Read More >

I’ve never hid my contempt for run-flat tires. And for good reason. When testing a BMW 5-Series equipped with the technology, the driving experience was so bad I returned it to the dealer to try a car without the tough-as-nails (and then some), tram-lining donuts. Sure enough, the “normal” tires delivered infinitely superior, brand-faithful ride and handling. I also got caught-up in the Honda Odyssey – Michelin Pax class action debacle; I shelled-out huge money for two sets of tires so stiff they’d make French soufflé makers envious. Autoweek recently reported that run-flats are in retreat, accounting for less then one percent of the U.S. market. That’s one percent too many—and not just because of the expense or compromised driving dynamics. As this email from rspaight indicates:

Read More >

Barron’s [sub] lobs Ford CEO Alan Mulally enough underhand pitches to sink the Yankees, and then offers this strangely incomplete and mislabeled guide to future FoMoCo products. The most convincing part of Big Al’s spiel: cutting costs. Before reading this excerpt [after the jump] from the Q&A, ask yourself this: are these the cars that America wants? Does the Ford brand, and its marketing mavens, have enough oomph to go the distance? Stay tuned . . .

Read More >

Are consumers receiving a government “rebate” for their clunker paying LESS for their new car than they would have without the rebate? I know that seems like a no-brainer, but never underestimate the perfidy of car dealers. Or, to quote Shakespeare, there’s many a slip ‘twixt the cup and the lip. Equally salient (if less erudite), the laws of supply and demand can not be denied. With Cash for Clunkers hoovering-up the supply of applicable new cars, why would dealers give their best price on said new car? The statistical data on the question is out there, with hundreds of thousands of transactions logged at US DMVs. A new website and future TTAC partner is on the case. TrueCar.com will share the results of their data dive ASAP. Meanwhile, how about some anecdotal evidence or baseless conjecture from TTAC’s Best and Brightest? Did Cash for Clunkers participants get a better deal than they would have if the program had never existed?

Daimler’s mob have filed a patent with the IPO re: a three-seater smart [download German language pdf here]. CNET connects the [dipping] dots: “Obviously drawing inspiration from the McLaren F1 supercar, the rumored Smart will feature a 1+2 layout with a centrally positioned driver’s seat flanked by two passenger seats mounted slightly behind. To facilitate easy entrance and egress, the driver’s seat looks like it should be able to rotate slightly and slide on rails toward the door. Also, depicted in the patent drawings is a trick fold-flat pedal, which should clear the footwell when seats start sliding.” Yes, well, who wants a three-seater anything? McLaren amusement park ride or not (anyone remember the UK accident where a test drive turned fatal?), are we looking at TWO backseat drivers?

Reader chris (who apparently missed Farago’s declaration of the end of wagons in today’s podcast) writes:

Hi, I’m looking to purchase a used wagon for under $25K. It should have good reliability/quality, be full size, meaning good back seat room. I don’t like SUVs for their poor handling ang gas consumption. I’ve looked at volvo V70 (back seat too tight), Saab 9-5 (reliability is questionable on pre 2006 models, the later models are a bit more money). I’ve looked at the VW Passat, couldn’t stand the around town throttle control/drive-ability. The 2005 or so MBs E320 have issues with relieability and goofy electronic brakes that are defect prone after a few years. The Suburu Outback is too small in the rear seat, (and gutless). The Audi A6, is too exensive and reliablity is again questionable prior to 2006 models. VW Jetta, too small. What else is there??