Reading through the comments in the post about Alfa/Fiat returning to the US I was shocked to see our own William C. Montgomery say the following in regard to the Fiat 500's looks, "…or out-ugly the Aztek." Now, I'm picking on William because I can. But, what?!? Ugly? Fiat? Maybe the Panda, the car the new 500 is based on, but… Huh? Of course, it's not just William. My girlfriend for instance doesn't think very much of the Audi A5, while I think it's the most stunning car I've seen in months. And she knows good looking cars when she sees them (usually), as she's still fawning over the Maserati GranTurismo. Then of course, there's me. Most people look at the R8 and schwing! When I went to see Iron Man they had Tony Stark's R8 parked out front of the theater and the people just loved it. Yet when I look at one, I see a porpoise with thalidomide poisoning. Why? Mid-engine cars (almost) always have odd proportions, and Germans can't do sexy. They just can't. But I'm asking you — what makes a car ugly in your eyes?

We spoke earlier about GM trying to wrangle a $7k tax credit out of Uncle Sam so that (supposed? purported?) Volt buyers won't have to cough up so much green– about $40K at last count. If we look at the problem from General Motors' perspective, nothing could make more sense. But what about the other perspectives? Some will argue that the Japanese government pitched-in some research dollars for Prius R&D and all's fair in love, war and cars. Others will argue that the government has no business interfering with business, period. Still others will point out that the last time the Feds got involved with an automaker we wound up selling Jeep to the Germans. And then there are those who say, "What's the difference? Ever since we went off the gold standard everything (including money) is worthless." My opinion? We're spending a billion dollars a day in Iraq– what's the difference? You?

As auto hacks we spill a lot of ink crying and moaning about a car's interior. And unlike handling, there's not much to debate. Every other journalist I've ever spoken with agrees that Chrysler's interiors are in fact below the bargain basement. While you will find differences of opinions about the layout of a given cabin (I've been catching a lot of heat from my A5 review), crap remains crap while good stays good. Speaking of other journalists, I was sitting around drinking free booze with the usual suspects at a Ford event (soon, soon) and the age-old 911 vs. Corvette debate reared its head. As a natural contrarian I took up the Chevy cause. I explained how getting a hot lap on a runway in a Z06 piloted by King of the 'Ring John Heinricy was the most violent, exhilarating experience of my life. Their rebuttal? The interior sucks. All I could think to yell was, "Who cares?" But the truth is, I do care. A little. I think. Well, maybe just sometimes. Or not. Er, you?

Back on tax day, we asked you what you were paying for gas. I was balking at the fact that I was paying $3.99 per gallon of premium. Well, bring back those salad days. Just five short weeks later (i.e today), I had to shell out $4.27 per premium gallon. And while I have it bad, the Ford Escape-driving lady in front of me had to charge $61 to AmEx. To fill up a teeny little SUV! Gulp. And a barrel of crude now goes for $135 on the open, OPECian market. Which means higher prices are yet to come. Case in point, John Horner shared with us the horrifying news that the IEA is predicting $12 a gallon gasoline. Quick translation: it would cost me $150 or so a tank to fill up my car. Big gulp. So I'm asking you, at what price does a gallon gas make you cry uncle?

If you like to drive fast, you like to drive late at night. Yes, ultimate visibility is reduced, but there's nothing quite like caning a fast car down a deserted road in the dead of night. Distractions– both inside and outside the car– disappear. The entire world is right there in front of you, rushing towards you. The senses sharpen. If you're lucky enough to be driving a convertible, the night smells seem infinitely more distinct, more complex… I remember driving my TVR Chimera in the hills above Manchester (UK) at three am, running Hell for leather, savoring the pop and crackle of the ridiculously powerful re-jigged Buick-evolved V8. And then I saw a Mini up ahead. Not a MINI. A Mini. And no matter what I did to catch up, I didn't. I couldn't. I was humiliated but happy. A like-minded soul was enjoying the night air, doing what I loved doing. Who could begrudge him that? Any tales from the dark side you care to share? 

I've been reading through the comments y'all are gracing my Audi A5 review with. Roughly half of you seem to feel that the latest from Mr. d'Silva's studio is so good looking, that's its fancy price, drowsy mechanicals and counterintuitive controls pale when compared to its sensuous shape. The other half offer up the quite logical chestnut, "Bah. 335i ." I of course, reserve the right to sit on the old fence. Yes, the 335i trumps the (as tested) A5 in every meaningful way — and costs less — but holy dog food, Batman! In coupe form, the 335i is the ugliest car in production. Just… ick. But then look at me. I drive a station wagon version of the world's second ugliest car (a bright blue flying vag WRX) because it is such a practical car. And (again) look at me. I'm young (ish), single (ish), childless (probably) and relatively affluent (compared to Turkey). I should be driving a Boxster or a Miata or an Elise. But, you can't run to Target for paper towels and mops in those cars now can you. Can you?

I had an interesting conversation this morning with one Mr. Justin Berkowitz. Among other topics we discussed: the fact that most people are happy with their cars. As car scribes, we have the luxury of ripping apart $44k BMW convertibles because, well, we didn't buy 'em. As RF often points out, an automobile is the average person's second most expensivepurchase. Or, if you live in New York (like Justin) or Los Angeles (like me), a car is by far the most expensive good you can afford (though I did see a lovely two bedroom, one bathroom for the reduced price of only $640k the other weekend…). Years ago a friend of mine bought a 2001 Ford Escort. Horrid, nasty little thing. Ugly, slow, worst build quality imaginable and awful to drive. I told her, "Don't buy that." But, she did. Even after multiple "issues," she still claims she loved it. She even shed a tear when it was totaled. Me, I love my car. It's my second WRX wagon (a 2006). And the more press cars I drive, the deeper I fall head over heals in love with my own car. I can't believe anyone drives anything else. Now, am I that much smarter than my fellow man, or just blinded by love? And what about you and your car?

Last week we learned that GM has acknowledged Saturn has an image problem. Now, since TTAC started blogging, we've been stating that Saturn has an image problem, among other issues. But this is the first time the Detroit General has fessed up to it. How are they going to address this problem? Through advertising, stupid. Which got us thinking (I know, I know). Obviously Saturn's current Rethink campaign is not working, but are there others? And that thought led me to none other than Subaru. Have you seen the commercials for the Forrester? They're going after the CamCord demo. Look, we're big advocates of "know thy brand." Subarus appeal to Lesbians, hoons and people living in Oregon, Vermont or Colorado. And that's basically it. That said, can anyone explain this? At least in Canada they're getting closer. Can you think of other brands more out of touch?

The Altamont 24 Hours of LeMons race finished yesterday. If I shut my eyes, I can still see $500 beaters running around a track– and nothing else. I can't even think of thinking of anything else. Now, I've always been– at best– a casual fan of racing. When I was a kid, I'd watch the Indy 500 with my dad, intermittently. As I got older, I discovered different forms of racing. Rallying piqued my interest, as did European-style GT racing; as the cars running around the track bore a passing resemblance to what you see on the street. F1 cars just didn't do it for me. For a time, I became fascinated by historical racing. The 60's racing cars– Jaguar E-type, Ferrari 250 GTO, Shelby Daytona Coupe, etc.– really got my blood pumping. Then I discovered LeMons. Say what you will about the Burning Man aspect of $500-or-less art cars banging around a track. But this, to me, is pure racing. There's no money in it; the winner gets $1000 in nickels. Other teams are constantly asking to borrow a cutting torch or mooching a control arm. Due to the low cost of entry, almost any group of friends can run a car and live out the dream. And finally, while you might see some LeMons cars on the street, most are in the junkyard. So, you? 

We've all heard the stats. Flying is safer than driving. Bicycling is safer than driving. Swimming with sharks with lasers on their heads is safer than driving. And despite Volvo's claims of an ultrasafe, fatality-free car in the next ten years, cars are destined to remain killers. You can't argue with physics. And there's always the human element: we're fallible. Not to conclude that cars will kill us all, but the risk is out there. Real hardcore motorcycle riders say to "ride the bike you want to die on." Which brings us to the question of the day: if you could know it was going to be your last drive, what would it be in? My choice is a classic 12 cylinder Ferrari, like the 275 GTB. The magnificent sound of the engine is what I'd want to hear if I was on my way out. As the Simpsons' Sideshow Bob once averred, "I shall send you to heaven before I send you to Hell."

After reading Wilkinson's GT-R review, I sent him an email expressing how much I enjoyed his take on Godzilla. And how I'm humbled by his wordsmithery. More importantly, I agree with his impression of the baddest ever Nissan. Are we driving cars or driving computers? Several of TTAC's Best and Brightest (however) highlight the fact that the ex-Car and Driver editor didn't grow up playing video games. He can't possibly "get" the car. (Which is a polite way of calling him old.) One commenter asked to hear Stephan's 28-year-old daughter's take on the car, assuming her age would make her take more relevant. While I'm older than his daughter, I'm in the demo that came of age with a joystick in hand [Ee: so to speak] First of all, what kind of a car is only enjoyed by a single age range? A bad one. Look– a friend of mine in his late 50s says that selling his '65 GTO was the dumbest thing he's ever done, I get it. I get it, big time. Just like he gets my WRX– although he thinks it looks stupid. But you know something? It does look stupid. It's a station wagon with a spoiler– it's supposed to look stupid. Oh right, the question. Do certain cars only work for certain age groups? 

U.S. Presidential Candidate Barack Obama recently called the Ford Granada "the worst car Detroit ever built," providing us with his answer to a question that every American pistonhead asks himself at least once in a while. The Free Republic has its own list of "worst American cars" including such luminaries as the Chrysler TC by Maserati and the Chevette. MSNBC's poll of automotive excreta lists the Vega as the worst ever. But Obama's busy with campaigning, and it's been a long time since the Illinois Senator learned to drive in his grandfather's Granada. So, the question goes over to you, the Best and Brightest. Has a nastier hunk of metal than the "tin foil" Granada rolled off Detroit's production lines? I'd say the Caddy Cimarron should be up there, but then the Volare/Aspen twins have to be in the running too. Worst ever? I'll say the X-body Chevy Citation. What say you?

My buddy Mayor sent me this paleolithic (in internet terms) clip of Jay Leno hooning it up in a Tesla Roadster. Production model #1, owned by RSA-born Elon Musk of PayPal, SpaceX and Tesla Motors, in fact. And it looks like a lot of fun (the car). Sure, Leno glad hands the Tesla suit a bit (like when the guy says it "only" takes 3.5 hours to charge), but the car itself  looks pretty damn drool-worthy. 100% torque at any time, at any speed– what's not to love? Now, of course I'm skipping over the part about Tesla Roadsters not– you know– actually existing. And if they did, costing $100k. But let's ignore all that. As "car guys" (and gals), should the opportunity arrive for you to drive electric, would you? I'm a fence sitter.

BBC America's version of Top Gear is a mixed blessing. I'm not happy how they edit the episodes– like removing the Cock-O-Meter sequence entirely from the M3, AMG C63, RS4 comparo (if Americans hear the word "cock" we'll drop dead). So I've spent six months of my life watching every single second of Top Gear on YouTube. Only now BBC shows 'em in high def. My point? Last night I watched the episode featuring Jezza making love to the Ascari A10. In case you haven't heard, the manic, shed-built Ascari can hit 60 mph in 2.8 seconds (that's faster than a Veyron), weighs less than 3000 pounds and de-perched the Koeniggsegg CCX from atop of the fastest Top Gear lap time board. And I couldn't have cared less. Am I getting old? Are there just too damn many of them these days? Or is Mike Bumbeck right: supercars are for people who can't drive?

In today's Cayenne GTS review, we learn that the autobox-equipped porked-out Porker blasts from zero to sixty miles per hour in 6.1 seconds. So what? Aside from the fact that doing so costs about $4 worth of gas, sprinting from rest to five miles over the double nickel is not something you could or indeed should do on a regular basis. More specifically, TTAC does not condone racing for pinks or blowing someone off at a stoplight (as stoplights tend to indicate areas with speed limits well below 60mph). More importantly the sprint stat tells you nothing about general driving pleasure; such as the fact that the Cayenne GTS' befuddled gearbox makes the SUV lousy at smooth in-gear acceleration. While we're at it, what's the point of knowing a 730hp modded Merc's zero to sixty time? So, is it time automotive journalists ditched this shopworn performance metric? Is there a better way to measure a car's accelerative excellence and/or general desirability? Quarter mile? Just kidding.