Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Wouldn't Be Caught Dead Driving One
1094 messages, Last post on Jul 28, 2008 at 4:35 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: gsemike (Jan 31, 2007 2:52 pm) But how does she handle and respond to throttle? Overall quality and refinement still has a ways to go...IMO. |
|
|
Replying to: john_324 (Feb 01, 2007 7:16 am) I think the current Chrysler logo actually is a rendition of what they used around 1939...a time when the Chrysler badge was much more prestigious than it is today. I saw a new Sebring at the DC auto show, and in person I don't think they look as bad as they do in pics. The interior is way too plasticky, but hey, that's most cars these days. They're getting better at making it harder to tell the difference between the hard stuff and the soft stuff unless you actually touch it. I remember the front seat being really good, legroom-wise, but the back was pretty cramped. And the trunk was pretty tiny...more compact than midsized. All in all, the '95-00 and '01-06 "cloud cars" made much better use of interior space. They also had a few Avengers at the show, and I liked the styling of them much better. But they run into the same poor space packaging problems, and its back seat actually felt smaller than the Sebring's. In the end though, if I were shopping for a new car, I doubt that either one of them would have a good chance of ending up in my driveway. If I was dead-set on a domestic nameplate, I think I'd prefer a Saturn Aura or Ford Fusion to the Sebring/Avenger.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Feb 01, 2007 7:57 am) Still, in this class at this price range, contrary to trend, Mazda would most likely get my dollars...
|
|
|
Replying to: wale_bate1 (Feb 01, 2007 8:47 am) |
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Feb 01, 2007 8:54 am) Light weight, great suspension, sticky tires and (most shocking to me) the best clutch in the Ford lineup all add up to make for a totally enjoyable driving experience apparently. Only thing keeping it down is the 9 second 0-60 mph time. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Feb 01, 2007 8:54 am) The Ford looks a little more substantial, beefier, and the Mazda, to me, a little more nimble and, well you know, "zoom, zoom" and "heart of a sportscar" and all that rot, which I find appealing. Proof positive that platform sharing has validity on a number of levels I think...
|
|
|
Replying to: wale_bate1 (Feb 01, 2007 9:28 am) It's when auto makers engage in the badge-engineering nonsense that the problems start.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Feb 01, 2007 9:44 am) |
|
An escalade is the embodiement of a very little ego. A vehicle that is total flash with absolutely no substance and a dose arrogant ignorance with it. It's the philosophical antithesis of the Prius which in itself is another histeria vehicle but from the opposing camp. I could be caught dead in a prius but not one that I ever paid for 
|
|
|
|
|
There are several cars(and an entire lineup of cars) I would never be caught dead driving... 1. Most everything in the Pontiac lineup from 1985 to 2005: The Grand Am: are waaay too common, there's like 10 of them in my high school parking lot, half are the too small 1992-1997 models and the other half are the ugly duckling 1998-2005 models. They are just cheap crap. The Grand Prix: was a sharply styled model up until 1997 when they gave it the 'Wide Track' treatment, which is more like the 'Bloated Whale' treatment; particuarly ugly with Pontiac's massive factory spoiler. They drive nice, especially in GTP form, but the styling completely polarizes me. The Sunfire: twin sister to the Cavalier. Need I say anything more about it? The Aztek: Pontiac had a great oppurtunity here and wasted it by completely f***ing up the exterior. I have two friends who own Aztek's, and the interior packaging on them is actually quite amazing. And when equipped with Versatrak AWD, they actually are fairly capable over moderately rough trails. And they're suprisingly fuel efficient, getting 20 around town, 23 in mixed driving and 27 on the open road. But... the exterior styling is so incredibly hideous I think even Mr. Hyde would cringe at its visage. I think the closest thing that exists in nature that would be comparable to an Aztek would the bulldog(though I'm sure this particular comparison has been drawn before this time... ) The only two Pontiac's you would ever catch me driving would be either a Bonneville or a Firebird. I've always liked Bonnevilles, the styling of the 1992-1999 models was attractive and the 2000-2005 styling was even more so, especially the 2003-05 models which had the silly bumper and side cladding shaved off. And the Firebird... just a hot car. Too bad they let it die. 2. Toyota Camry/Honda Accord: It's not that these are BAD cars, persay, just too common and too whitebread for my tastes. My uncle is head of the IT department for a land title corporation and drives all over the state of Colorado to their satellite offices on a daily basis. He had a silver '99 Accord LX that he bought with 45k in 2002 and managed to pile on 140k in three years. It never gave him any problems at all and was still running perfectly when he traded it in for an '03 LX last year. I also know some people who've put over 200,000 miles on Camry's and never had to do any major repairs. They're both very reliable cars with spacious interiors/trunks and not bad to drive (Accord is definitely better in driving characteristics than Camry), but I like to be able to find my car in the parking lot, thank you very much. 3. Ford Taurus: Original 1985-1990 and lightly updated 1991-1995 models still are pleasant designs and would be an acceptable third car if I ever needed one. You would never catch me dead, however, in a 1996-1999 model. Oh Ford, why the OVAL-KILL!  2000 and on models were better, but Ford just let the Taurus coast when they should have been updating it... they let a great nameplate die without dignity, but at least by resurrecting it and putting it on the 500, at least it will reside on a car worthy of bearing the nameplate. 4. Basically any compact/subcompact (Hyundai Accent/Elantra, Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla, Chevy Cavalier/Pontiac Sunfire, Dodge/Plymouth Neon, Suzuki Esteem, VW New Beetle/Jetta) chiefly because I'm 6'2" and don't fit into most of them comfortably and they don't have enough cargo capacity to fit my needs, secondly because I feel extremely vunerable in them with all these full size pickups and SUV's lumbering about.  The only two I would ever consider would be a VW Golf (I know they're considered chick cars, but I dare anyone here to call the GTI or R32 a chick car, and plus they have excellent interior packaging) or a Ford Focus wagon (suprisingly decent build quality and excellent cargo capacity for a small wagon). And driving an subcompact, particuarly the VW and Toyota models, doesn't exactly shout masculinity... 5. Honda Element/Scion xB: shipping containers on wheels. Enough said. 6. Any Buick model between 1987 (last year they manufactured GNX's) and now. I don't want to drive a geriatric car until I'm at the appropriate age, and even then I'll probably still eschew them for a nice Mercedes or BMW. The only recent Buick model that holds any interest for me is the Enclave because the styling and interior design is beautifully executed, I believe this car is a future classic. Otherwise, fugheddaboudit. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Wouldn't Be Caught Dead Driving One
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
