Thursday, January 14, 2010

The Car Exam – Quick Quiz #2: 2010 BMW X5



The Car Exam – Quick Quiz #2: 2010 BMW X5

Good Grades: Good exterior styling, seemed to handle decently, “sort of neat” push- button transmission.

Bad Grades: “Sort of weird” push-button transmission, overweight, terribly underpowered 260 hp 3.0 liter six-cylinder engine, mediocre ride quality, low-rent interior for a $50,000 CUV, lousy I-Drive system, lousy-sounding stereo system, entry in and exit out of the X5 is a pain in the backside!

Final Grade: I don’t care if it is a BMW, I didn’t enjoy the driving experience at all. I expected everything about the X5 to be better than it was—and it wasn’t.

The Car Exam Grade: C-

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

An Impressive American: The 2010 Ford Taurus SHO



The 2010 Ford Taurus is one impressive car. It’s not perfect, but it’s good—one of the best performing cars I’ve driven. The 365 hp twin-turbocharged, 3.5 liter EcoBoost V6 is a sweet power plant. Floor the gas pedal and feel the rush of the twin-turbocharged engine push you back in your seat. Wow! The brakes work well, too. Even more impressive is the fit and finish of the interior. I felt like I was driving an expensive import car. The leather seats are comfortable and supportive.
The interior also has some cool touches, such as the Sync System, which allows the driver to control audio functions with his or her voice. It also had a navigation system, backup camera, a BLIS system (which senses hidden cars in the driver’s blind spot when trying to change lanes) a power rear window shade, and many more features.
The 2010 Taurus SHO also has a has a wide array of safety features, such front, side, and curtain airbags, anti-lock brakes, stability and traction control, and radar cruise control which slow the car if it gets too close behind another vehicle. The Taurus is not perfect, however. Head room in the rear is limited by the moon roof, the rear window is smallish (as are the side windows), and the blind spot is problematic (this is where the BLIS system would pay for itself—if you use it). The Taurus is also heavy car, and while it is fast I know it would have been faster and more athletic if it were three to four-hundred pounds lighter.
Nevertheless, this is the best Ford I’ve ever driven—I even drove a 2010 Mustang GT convertible two days earlier (which I’ll review soon), and I like this better (I would like to drive a 2011 Mustang GT with the 412 hp, 5.0 V8—I may have a different opinion after that). Ford has made great strides with its cars, and the Taurus SHO proves that. If the Taurus (as well as Ford’s other cars and trucks) proves to be reliable like the Fusion has been, it may become America’s top rival to some of Asia’s best sedans.

The Car Exam Grade: A

The Car Exam Quick Quiz #1: The 2009 Nissan Versa



The Car Exam Quick Quiz #1: The 2009 Nissan Versa

Good Grades: Comfy front seats, okay cornering ability, good ergonomics and placement of controls, great visibility for the most part, excellent rear foot room, good low end acceleration, acceptable hill-climbing ability, decent styling and braking (and fuel economy).

Bad Grades: CVT can hunt too much at times (affecting acceleration at important times), coarse-sounding, somewhat loud and unrefined engine, sitting in the back seats feels like sitting on a hard bench, thick rear seat backs lead to an annoyingly uneven rear load floor when the rear seat backs are folded, thick c-pillar leads to large rear blind spots.

The Final Grade: This car has some nice features and attributes, but its short-comings are far too glaring to ignore.

The Car Exam Grade: C-


P. Scott

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Check out the Exams from 2008 and 2009!


Just a Reminder--check out my past reviews from 2008 and 2009! Read how cars fared during those tests! :)

New Reviews for 2010!

Happy New Year! The Car Exam will be packed with a lot of new reviews--the most since I've started this blog back in 2008! I've driven a lot of cars, some with surprising results. Some of the models tested come from Ford, Kia, Chevrolet, Nissan, Toyota, BMW and more! Some will earn high grades, while others will surprise with mediocre and lower grades. Get ready for the new exams--they are coming! :)

Friday, October 2, 2009

The 2008-09 Suzuki SX4: A Decent Alternative


The Suzuki SX4 I tested doesn't really stand out in terms of overall driving experience (the 2.0 liter, 143 hp four cylinder engine handles most situations well enough--yet the fuel economy isn't anywhere near the best in its class), but the SX4 may offer an alternative for buyers wanting something different than its rivals (Civic, Corolla, Sentra, and Focus, Elantra and the new Kia Forte) have to offer.
The SX4 has great all-around visibility. The is a lot of glass, which provides good all-around views of the outdoors. The seating position is high, so you have good vision from the driver's point of view, as well. The driving experience is okay; it picks up speed adequately, and the brakes work well. However, the engine could be quieter, smoother and more fuel efficient (averaging city fuel economy in the low 20's and highway mileage in the mid 20's won't get it done in the compact car segment). Handling seems acceptable, though.
Inside, dash readouts are orange-- my least favorite color, but at least there is an outside temperature gauge--always a handy feature. However, controls and dials are easy enough to use. The Cruise Control and Stereo controls are on the front of the steering wheel, which is a nice touch and helpful to make sure drivers keep their eyes on the road. The seats have adequate comfort. I wasn't crazy about the seat material though, because it feels funny. Trunk space is okay, which should make weekend travelers and grocery shoppers happy.
Is the Suzuki SX4 reliable? That depends on what source you read; its reliability during the last three years has ranged from from mediocre by J.D. Power to excellent by Consumer Reports. If you want something different from the competition, maybe give it try. If you want play it safe, you may choose something different. The ball, as they say, is in your court. :)

The Car Exam Grade: B-

..

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Auto Show Highlights: Part 2

Part 2:

In the interest of time, I'll keep my comments for Part 2 brief and to the point! :) Here are some of the other cars that caught my attention at the auto show:

1. The 2010 Kia Soul: The Soul has the boxy shape like the Scion XB and the Nissan Cube, but it is by far the best looking of the three. It has a 2.0 liter, 140 hp four cylinder engine, and 19.3 Cubic feet of luggage space. If its reliability is good, this may just be a good car.




2. The 2009 Toyota Venza: The crossover based on the Camry sedan looks good. It may be equipped with a 2.7 liter, 182 hp four or a 268 hp V6 engine, depending upon your preference. The blind spot at the rear is a nuisance, however.



3. The Honda Fit: This economical, good-selling car has its advantages, but when I saw a IIHS crash test pitting it against the larger Honda Accord and doing poorly (along with the poor-performing low-speed bumper test), it left me quite disturbed. I like the Fit--but I'm not sold on buying it, in spite of its good reliability.



4. The 2010 Chevrolet Camaro and the 2009 Chevrolet Corvette: The Camaro: the good- retro good looks, great base 304 hp V6 engine; the bad- Tiny windows, placement of some gauges down by the transmission shifter on the floor console (that is retro gone wrong), and wimpy trunk and back seat space. The Corvette: the 638 hp, $106,000 Corvette ZR1 is hot, but it looks too much like a base model--that's inexcusable for a car that expensive. Still, I would like to drive both the Camaro and the Corvette- they would be awesome to drive!





Sunday, April 5, 2009

Auto Show Highlights: Part 1

The Nissan Cube

I paid a visit to the San Diego Auto Show in late December, and I impressed with a fair number of cars that I saw. The first two I'll briefly cover are the new Nissan Cube and the updated 2010 Ford Mustang. I expect both of the cars will have an impact on the sales segment in which each car is sold.

The Nissan Cube has been sold in Japan for awhile now, but we finally get an all-new version here in the U.S. I must admit, I'm not fond of its boxy styling--it looks a bit silly. Nevertheless, it does seem to make good use of the space its boxy styling affords. Add an economical four cylinder engine in the mix, and you have a vehicle younger buyers (and even some older consumers, too) will be attracted to.

The 2010 Ford Mustang

Muscle Car fans, rejoice! Ford has updated the Mustang with an upgraded exterior and freshened exterior styling. The 2010 Mustang looks leaner, meaner, and more aggressive than the 2009 model. All exterior panels have been changed--except for the roof. The new rear end is fitted with sequential turn signals--a feature that has not been seen on any Ford in about thirty years.

Inside, better materials have been used on the dashboard, as well as on other parts of the interior. No longer does it look or feel lower-quality. More ambient lighting adorns the interior (available on premium versions of the V6, GT, and also on the GT 500). However, the engine in V6 is unchanged (a smaller, yet more fuel efficient and powerful V6 engine would be welcome) but the GT gets a 15 horsepower increase form 300 up to 315, and the supercharged GT 500 now makes 540 horsepower (up from 500 hp for 2009--and matching the output of the '09 GT 500KR).

If the economy improves, and consumers are able to once again get credit to buy new cars, Nissan just may have a hit with the Cube, and muscle car fans will enjoy a renewed rivalry between the new Mustang, the all-new Chevrolet Camaro, and the Dodge Challenger. Bring it on, now--Bring it on!!

Sunday, March 22, 2009

New Posts Coming Soon!




Hello Readers:

Things have been busy lately, but look for new posts coming soon! Coming up: Auto Show News, featuring upcoming models from Nissan (Cube), Ford (2010 Mustang), any many more! Visit again soon!

Sunday, January 18, 2009

The Car Exam Bonus: 2009 Toyota Corolla Standard Model



Having already tested the 2009 Toyota Corolla LE, I thought it would be wise to test a no-frills version, the Standard version. What options did it have? It came with a 4-speed automatic transmission, air conditioning, and heated rear-view mirrors (no power windows, or even cruise control here). However, standard safety features like anti-lock brakes and side-curtain airbags are welcome.

Driving-wise, it behaves much like the LE version: safe, but not spectacular. Nevertheless, the Standard version of the 2009 Toyota Corolla seems to be a tad quicker (but not much) than the LE model (I clocked its 0-60 mph time at 10.52 seconds). Fuel economy was pretty much the same--very good--especially on the highway, where I averaged in the mid 30 mpg range.

Seat comfort still feels the same, and it is still hampered with the cheap plastic interior door handles the other Corollas are saddled with, unfortunately. On the plus side, it has the same useful bi-level glove box the LE model has. If you can live without the comfort conveniences the 2009 Toyota Corolla LE offers, then the Standard model of the Corolla will work just nicely for budget-minded shoppers.

The Car Exam Grade: B

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

This Could Have Been A Hit: The 2008 Toyota Yaris Sedan


The 2008 Toyota Yaris surprised me--seriously, it did. This smartly-styled entry level Toyota had a surprising level of interior room and engine peppiness I didn't expect. The fuel economy in the Yaris is excellent; I averaged in the mid-30 mpg range in mixed driving. Nevertheless, it has serious shortcomings that can't be overlooked. These shortcomings prevent it from being a hit, making it a major disappointment.

When I sat in the 2008 Yaris, I was immediately surprised with the spacious interior. It was much larger than I expected it to be (especially trunk space, which is very good for a small car like the Yaris). Even passengers in the rear seat have good leg room--no small feat. The driver's seat was fine, too. There was good room up front, but here's where the trouble begins.

The placement of the gas pedal is simply terrible! It sits at a 90-degree angle which causes serious fatigue for your foot. It is not comfortable at all, and would make driving a long distance pure torture. Too bad, especially since the engine feels surprising lively. Even with the 4-speed automatic transmission, the 106 horsepower, 1.5 liter four-cylinder engine feels peppy; there is some lag between 40-60 mph, but it was still alright for such a small engine. At least this Yaris had cruise control--so you can give your extremely fatigued foot a much needed break.

Speaking of placement, I don't know why Toyota found it necessary to place the speedometer and other crucial instrumentation in the middle of the dashboard. It looks absolutely ridiculous. While I did adjust to it somewhat after a while, it never seemed right. The instrumentation was easy to read, though. The climate control knobs are big, but difficult to turn. The stereo is fairly simple to operate, but it sounds lousy. Bass seems practically non-existent. The quality of the interior materials seems to be adequate, however.

Another problem with the 2008 Toyota Yaris is its handling, which is also terrible. It feels unsettled; emergency maneuvers feel "darty" and unstable. It does not relay confidence to the driver at all. Braking feels acceptable, certainly aided by the anti-lock brakes. Regardless, the driving experience is marred by the poor driving dynamics of the car.

To sum it up, the 2008 Toyota Yaris could have been a hit. It has great fuel economy, nice interior room, and a peppy engine. However, its flaws far outweigh the positive aspects of the car--and that makes it a huge disappointment from Toyota.

What a shame.

The Car Exam Grade: C-

It Is What It Is Supposed to Be: The 2009 Toyota Corolla LE


The Toyota Corolla has been one of the best selling small cars in the United States for a very long time. It one of the most fuel efficient small cars on the market. While the Corolla used to be a cheap, no-frills basic transportation, it has evolved into a larger, nicely styled (it looks like a smaller version of the Camry), better appointed, and more economical mode of transportation. It doesn't have the crude feel that small cars of the past had; however, you still know that the Corolla is meant to be a reliable economy that does everything alright--not exceptionally, but alright.

My Driving experience in the 2009 Toyota Corolla LE was unexciting, to be frank (if you have read my review of the 2007-2008 Camry, or will read my next review of the 2008 Toyota Yaris, you will see a definite pattern here). Acceleration in the 132-hp, 1.8 liter four cylinder, 4-speed automatic transmission-equipped Corolla LE was fair; I reached 0 to 60 miles per hour in about 10.6 seconds. I expected a better time than that. However, I did average about 30-32 miles per gallon in mixed driving--and that was superb fuel economy.

Handling was fair and safe enough, but uninspiring. Steering was okay, but more feedback would have been nice. The brakes worked very well; stopping distances seemed to be short and crisp. Side curtain airbags, along with anti-lock brakes enhance the safety of the car. The Corolla LE was also equipped cruise control, a nice feature I like to use when I'm driving long distances.

The interior was generally good. The seats were decently supportive and fair comfortable; I had a good view of the road from the driver's seat. The ergonomics were also good. AM/FM CD stereo controls (as well as the climate control knobs are large and easy to use (there is an auxiliary jack for MP3 players and IPODs). The bi-level glove boxes are a very nice touch, adding extra storage for those who need it. The gauges are easy to read, but my only gripe is the LCD screen in the tachometer that has too many functions.

It's a clock, outside temperature gauge, and fuel economy computer. A separate temperature gauge and a separate clock is desperately needed, because attempting to use it while driving is needlessly annoying and a bit distracting. Interior plastics were decent, Trunk space is very good, and split-folding rear seats help increase cargo capacity.

The 2009 Toyota Corolla isn't the most exciting car to drive, but it is what it is supposed to be: a solid, reliable, economical car that gets the job done for people on a tight budget.

The Car Exam Grade: B

Monday, December 29, 2008

A Modern Interpretation of Affordable Family Luxury: The 2007-2008 Toyota Camry CE Four Cylinder


Being the driver that I am, I generally like to enjoy the total experience when I drive a car: the acceleration, the interior comfort, the handling, and even the security of solid braking. Enter the 2007-2008 Toyota Camry CE: a nicely styled, roomy, and modern interpretation of the American Family Sedan. Comfort-wise, it feels good, it is easy to drive, but it’s the driving experience that leaves you begging for more in terms of overall driving pleasure.

Okay, I know the Camry CE is not supposed to be a sports sedan; it is meant to be a reliable, affordable family car that can haul a family in reasonable comfort. It does that just fine. The seats (both front and rear) are very comfortable and supportive, and passenger room is very good (front and rear), and should accommodate four to five people in reasonable comfort. It makes a good car for long trips. Trunk room is very good, and split-folding rear seats provide even more hauling flexibility.

The controls are well laid out and easy to use, making it generally easy for the driver to make basic climate and radio adjustments at a quick glance (the AM/FM stereo CD player had a good sound quality—there is even an MP3 player jack and an auxiliary mode to accommodate audiophiles who may want to bring their portable music player. The a/c and heat work very well, also. The climate controls knobs are large and very easy to use.

The driving experience is unexciting, but then again, it's not meant to be. The 2.4 liter, 158 hp four-cylinder engines sprints quickly from a standstill and works well with the five-speed automatic transmission, but mid-range power between 40-60 mph is somewhat weak, and needs extra coaxing to achieve maximum acceleration. The more powerful V6 option would be a better choice for those who would sacrifice fuel economy for more power.

Speaking of fuel economy, it’s decent—as long as you don’t drive with a lead foot. I averaged 18-21 mpg in the city and 23-29 on the highway, depending on my driving habits. The Camry’s braking is good (this car is equipped with anti-lock brakes) and secure with a fair amount of nosedive; as far as handling goes, it does its job adequately, with a bit more body lean that I would like. The ride is soft and comfortable, but I would prefer the suspension to be firmer. The steering could provide a bit more feedback to the driver, as well. Safety-wise, anti-lock brakes and a full array of air bags (including side-curtain, as well as a driver’s knee air bag) are included to enhance the safety of the Camry.

Nevertheless, the Toyota Camry is not meant to be a sporty car—just an affordable, reliable, economical, good-looking family sedan to haul families around in reasonable comfort. The Camry accomplishes those tasks very well.

The Car Exam Grade: B

Written by P. Scott

Photos by P. Scott (Copyright 2008)

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Review #2: "It Could Have Been So Much More: The 2008 Dodge Grand Caravan SE"


Quick Impressions:

When Dodge totally redesigned the Grand Caravan for the 2008 model year, I was expecting big things from it. After all, since Dodge created the mini-van segment in the early 1980's, one would think they would still be the leading innovator in this market. However, when I saw the first spy photos of it in the major car magazines, its ugly "refrigerator box" styling was not exactly encouraging to me; the class leading Honda Odyssey and Toyota Sienna both look great (my test van was dark blue--it would have looked worse in white--or in any other lighter color).

Now having spent a day driving the Grand Caravan SE, I can see that my concerns for it were more than just "skin deep." This version had a Flex Fuel, 3.3 liter V6 engine with 175 hp and 205 foot-pounds of torque. It felt quick from a standstill, but it was all downhill after that. My driving companion clocked its 0-60 mph time at a pathetically-slow 14.03 seconds, demonstrating that 175 horsepower is not nearly enough for a 4300 pound minivan (potential buyers should opt for Grand Caravans with the 3.8 liter, 197 hp engine or the 4.0 liter, 251 hp engine). It had a four-speed automatic transmission with manual shift mode, but due to the placement of the the gear shifter on the dashboard I never felt comfortable when I tried to use it--it was just downright awkward.

What was even more awkward and disturbing was the Grand Caravan's tendency to "roll back" much too easily on hills when pulling off from a complete stop. Automatic transmissions tend to "lock" somewhat when on a hilly grade; however, twice when I began to pull off from a green traffic light on two separate hills, I had to hit the gas quickly and peel rubber to avoid rolling back on the vehicles behind me. That was quite unnerving, to say the least.

On the plus side, the Grand Caravan seemed to handle very securely. Its list of safety features includes four wheel anti-lock brakes (and they worked well, by the way), electronic stability control, and side curtain air bags. It also had cruise control, always a nice feature to have on long trips. Interior room was cavernous, and seating comfort was generally good and supportive. However, the second row seats lacked the innovative "stow 'n go" capability that should have been standard equipment (but the third row seats did have it). Removing the heavy 2nd row seat was a painful process (literally) that required two people to accomplish the task. In fact, the things this van is lacking is problematic and inexcusable.

For instance, why no tachometer? With the weak, coarse-sounding 3.3 liter v6 engine being overtaxed like it was, it definitely needed one. Secondly, I found the AM/FM CD stereo (which thankfully did have decent sound quality and an mp3 player jack) and climate control buttons and knobs to be far too small to look at at a quick glance and use effectively (although it did have dual-zone climate controls for the front seat passengers, and rear climate controls for back seat passengers--a very good thing).

I've seen dashboard layouts far better than this one in the Grand Caravan. I also expected the dash materials to be better than what it had, too; it looks good at a distance--but feels cheap and hard up close. Finally, I found the interior noise level to be a bit higher than I would have liked; it was a combination of both wind and road noise.

The Caravan's fuel economy in mixed driving (city and highway--much of it in the mountains) averaged about 19 miles per gallon. Non-mountain driving yielded a two to three-mile-per-gallon increase in fuel economy. Okay, considering gas prices have dropped below $2.40 a gallon recently, and may continue to fall in the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, my day in the 2008 Dodge Caravan SE verified to me that the Chrysler Corporation missed a huge opportunity to create another benchmark vehicle. The Grand Caravan could have been a "Grand Slam," but instead--it merely turned out to be a bunt single.

Too Bad.

The Car Exam Grade: C+

Review and Photos by P.S. (11-11-2008)
Test Date: 11-09-2008

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

The First Review: The 2008 Subaru Legacy Sedan


My Quick Impressions:

I recently drove the 2008 Subaru Legacy Sedan. Besides having goodies like power windows and door locks, it had a tilt and telescopic steering wheel, cruise control, moonroof, outside temperature gauge, and an AM/FM CD stereo with XM satellite radio. The powertrain was a 2.5-liter horizontally-opposed (or flat) four-cylinder with 175 hp and 169 foot pounds of torque, with a 4-speed automatic transmission (with manual shift mode). Safety-wise, it came with a full assortment of front and side airbags, as well as anti-lock brakes.

Acceleration from the 2.5 liter, horizontally-opposed 4 cylinder engine seemed merely adequate; even when I utilized the manual shift mode, it just seemed a bit underpowered--and I was craving for more. Perhaps an additional 10 to 15 more horses, or even something as simple as a fifth gear for the transmission would have provided swifter acceleration and better passing power. I found the driving experience in the Subaru to be decent during my 400-plus mile trip; the seats were generally comfortable with good support.

Passenger and trunk space were good, and the interior pieces seemed to be made of nice materials--they did not look cheap at all. The ergonomics of the interior were also very good. While the cabin was quiet for the most part, it could have used more sound insulation. The ride and handling was okay, but it was far too easy to feel bumps in the road--it seemed to "bottom out." The suspension could have been a bit softer sprung for more ride comfort. In short, I found that my driving experience in the Legacy was quite unremarkable--not sporty as I had hoped.

The styling of the Subaru Legacy is nice at all angles--except for the rear end of the car. The rear bumper styling is unattractive, ruining what could have been an overall terrific exterior design. Fuel economy was decent; in mixed driving, the Legacy's average MPG was in the low to mid-20's. Finally, I found myself wanting to like the Legacy a lot; nevertheless, its shortcomings left me wanting much more from it. However, the Legacy has good resale value and and a decent reputation for reliability, so shoppers should, at the very least, give it some consideration as a satisfactory new or used car choice.

The Car Exam Grade: B-

Written by P.S. (11/5/08)

Photos by P.S.

If you have any comments, feel free to respond. :)

Monday, October 27, 2008

The Car Exam - The Mission and Goals of this site

All-new, no-nonsense online reviews of road tests for cars 2008 and newer. Road tests of older models may be available in the future; information about vehicles in the used car market is an undoubtedly important tool for consumers today. This site is in its early stage, so check back periodically for new reviews. (the first review should be posted within a week--current as of 10-28-08). Hopefully, this site will be an important resource that will help consumers make solid choices when choosing a new or used car. Thanks for stopping by!