Karl's Daily Log Book - READ ONLY

2391 messages, Last post on Nov 30, 2005 at 6:50 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Coupe, Sedan, SUV

Karl Brauer is the Editor in Chief of Edmunds.com, which means he finds himself in a different vehicle almost every day of the week. If you want a daily road test review regarding the latest cars and trucks to hit the market, along with commentary on everything from auto industry happenings to L.A. drivers to his latest close encounter with Johnny Law, this is the place to be.

Outline

Messages Page 3 of 239: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; ...; 239; Prev; Next; Last

#21 of 2391 Re: What they've done with Aston is truly remarkable [editor_karl] by andys120 Mar 09, 2005 (6:44 am)
Replying to: editor_karl (Mar 08, 2005 6:35 pm) I'm not so sure that they have Land Rover firing on all cylinders yet. They have some good new products but some think the LR3 is so good it makes the top-of the-line RR irrelevant. Let's see if their dismal FOR improves.
#22 of 2391 March 9 by editor_karl Mar 09, 2005 (8:02 pm)
Drove a 2006 Audi A4 Avant home tonight. PCH is a mess; even though the rain has stopped, the shifting earth has not. There are lane closures just north of Sunset Blvd. from another mudslide, and it's causing massive back-ups in both directions. The drive in this morning took me two hours, and the drive home about 90 minutes (normally it's a one-hour affair). At least this car is a joy to sit in for such long stretches. I absolutely love Audi's MMI display screen. The colors, fonts and user interface are much slicker than iDrive. But it still took far too long to figure out how to manually tune the radio (which has excellent sound quality, BTW). The latest A4's look is appealing, and the Avant looks even better than the sedan. Yes, I know the front grille is somewhat controversial, but the wagon still works for me overall. Actually, that's been the case with every A4 for the last 10 years -- I've always liked the wagon versions better in terms of styling. Same thing with Saab's 9-5. Maybe there's just something inherently cleaner about a wagon's shape versus its sedan counterpart. Too bad their sales still pale in comparison to SUVs. Bring on the S4 Avant, please. Replies to this message: andys120 (Mar 10, 2005 7:23 am)
#23 of 2391 Re: March 9 [editor_karl] by andys120 Mar 10, 2005 (7:23 am)
Replying to: editor_karl (Mar 09, 2005 8:02 pm) It's interesting to note that 80% of Audi's European buyers choose the Avant, just about the opposite of here. I think the 9-5 wagon's shape is better resolved in the rear than the sedan's which looks like they didn't quite know what to do with it. Audi Avants are the best looking wagons made but you could say that about their sedans too.
#24 of 2391 Some wagon love by cti Mar 10, 2005 (2:05 pm)
I, too, think the A4 Avant is a gorgeous car. My pet theory is that minivans became popular partly because wagons looked so ungainly and ugly. Despite low sales volumes, I think it is wonderful that we still have a good selection of wagons and hatchbacks. If/when my wife and I have kids/pets we will seriously consider a wagon as we are never, ever going to own an SUV of minivan. If it weren't for cost reasons I might already own one - or a V50 or a 325i wagon. How is the reliability on the A4, anyway? Replies to this message: andys120 (Mar 10, 2005 3:58 pm) daddyd (Mar 18, 2005 12:06 pm)
#25 of 2391 Re: Some wagon love [cti] by andys120 Mar 10, 2005 (3:58 pm)
Replying to: cti (Mar 10, 2005 2:05 pm) How is the reliability on the A4, anyway? In the case of my B5/'98 Avant 2.8 it was quite good with a fan motor being the most major item needing repair and replacement (about $600 parts/labor) outside of tires, rotors and other wear items and damage caused by mice chewing on underhood wiring.. It was more reliable than either of the 80's era Hondas I owned. The car was acquired second-hand (CPO) 23K and traded in 5 years and 100,000 miles later. . Replies to this message: daddyd (Mar 18, 2005 12:06 pm)
#26 of 2391 March 10 by editor_karl Mar 10, 2005 (9:07 pm)
And at the opposite end of the A4 Avant spectrum is what I drove home tonight: 2006 Honda Ridgeline. I'm not sure what's more bizarre, that Honda is now in the truck business, or that its first truck seems inspired by a Cadillac (Escalade EXT). Remember, not so long ago Cadillac had never made a truck, either. Of course, unlike the Cadillac, the Honda isn't a real truck. The Escalade EXT is based on the body-on-frame Chevy Avalanche, while the Ridgeline is based on the unibody Pilot/MDX, both of which are largely based on the Odyssey. But this is not a knock against the Ridgeline. Car-like trucks are in these days, as proven by the sales numbers of the Toyota Highlander versus any Jeep or Isuzu product. The Ridgeline is easy to drive, very refined and has all sorts of cool features (love the "trunk" under the bed). People wanting the look/image of a truck with the friendliness of a Pilot or Highlander will love it. People expecting the off-road or towing ability of a real truck will not (its maximum towing capacity is 5,000 lbs while the Tundra is 6,500 lbs and the Big 3's trucks range from 8,200 to 9,400 lbs). But I still wonder how much of a market exists for non-truck truck buyers. SUVs offer seating for up to eight and/or the ability to haul delicate items (groceries, luggage, tax audit paperwork) in a safe environment. The Ridgeline maxes out at five passengers, and except for the relatively small "trunk" area it risks getting its cargo wet during a rainstorm. As long as it doesn't end up being Honda's Blackwood... Replies to this message: varmint (Mar 11, 2005 10:37 am) editor_karl (Mar 11, 2005 2:17 pm) rsholland (Mar 13, 2005 3:25 pm) kurtamaxxguy (Mar 22, 2005 1:35 pm) and 7 more...
#27 of 2391 Adverts by mirth Mar 11, 2005 (7:32 am)
What I don't understand is Honda's advertising for the Ridgeline. They show it bouncing and leaping over boulders on a tough off-road course. Realistically speaking, this is not the Ridgeline's forte. Maybe it's to make the person who moves up from a 4-cylinder Accord feel more macho. Replies to this message: andys120 (Mar 11, 2005 8:21 am)
#28 of 2391 Re: Adverts [mirth] by andys120 Mar 11, 2005 (8:21 am)
Replying to: mirth (Mar 11, 2005 7:32 am) Maybe it's to make the person who moves up from a 4-cylinder Accord feel more macho. Bingo! In advertising we say "perception is reality."
#29 of 2391 macho by davem2001 Mar 11, 2005 (9:30 am)
Considering that probably at least 50% of truck buyers never go off-road, or tow anything, etc...the 4 cylinder Accord would probably do what they need just fine (commuting to work, going to the grocery store, etc..) ! Replies to this message: lev_berkovich (Mar 11, 2005 9:52 am)
#30 of 2391 Re: macho [davem2001] by lev_berkovich Mar 11, 2005 (9:52 am)
Replying to: davem2001 (Mar 11, 2005 9:30 am) Or a Hyundai for this matter, which with its 100k warranty looks even more practical. But, it is not a point. There is a very large population of the car buyers, who looks at the car as an expensive toy, a pleasure item, rather than a pure utility. I am one of them.