Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Review: 2020 Lexus UX 200 F-Sport

      When is a crossover, not a crossover?

    Like it or not, crossovers are becoming the de facto choice for many buyers and automakers are responding. There is now a wide variety of crossovers available: From large three-row models to small, compact vehicles perfect for urban environments. The latter is what we’ll be focusing on this review with the latest entrant into subcompact luxury crossover class, the 2020 Lexus UX 200 F-Sport. It’s a late arrival to the class, but as I found out with the Volvo XC40 last year, that isn’t a bad thing. So how does the most affordable Lexus model stack up to the competition?

    Crossover or Hatchback on Stilts?

    It feels odd to think of the UX being more of a hatchback with a taller ride height than a crossover, but allow me to make my case. To start, the overall shape reminds me more of the Toyota Corolla Hatchback than the NX and RX crossovers. The roofline is a perfect example as the shape is similar to Corolla than any Lexus crossover. Second is when you get inside the UX. You may think that you step up to get inside, but it’s the opposite. The lower position might cause you to think that you lose out on the visibility gain with a higher ride height, but that isn’t the case as you have excellent visibility around most of the vehicle. The rear is difficult to see out of due to the thick pillar and it is recommended to order the optional backup camera.

    The UX 200 does make its presence known to everyone due to some bold design choices. Upfront lies the latest iteration of Lexus’ spindle grille along with some deep cuts in the bumper to give the model an aggressive attitude. The side profile features unique sculpting on the doors and the roof steeply raked towards the back. A vibrant color palette such as this orange on my tester only adds to the bold ideal.

    A Small, Premium Interior

    Lexus has mostly nailed the UX’s interior appointments with soft-touch materials featuring stitching on the dash, metal-like buttons for the climate control system, and contrasting stitching for the seats. The only part which slightly ruins this luxury feeling is the cheap-feeling door panels. Leatherette upholstery is used on the seats and it feels quite nice when sitting on them. F-Sport models get heavily bolster front seats which may make some larger people uncomfortable. Power adjustments for the front come standard on all UX models and allows both driver and passenger to find a comfortable position.

    The rear seat is quite snug for two people, while three is severely pushing it. Legroom can range from ok to non-existent if a tall person happens to be sitting upfront. Headroom is decent for most people, even with the optional sunroof. Cargo space is about average for the class with 21.7 cubic feet with the rear seats up. A tall lift-over height does make it a pain to load heavy items into the vehicle.

    Infotainment System is Better, But Still Frustrating

    The base infotainment system is a 7-inch screen, while a larger 10.25-inch screen is available as an option. Controlling each screen is Lexus’ Remote Touch system. The touchpad controller is unwieldy because you need to pay attention to the screen while making a selection. Otherwise, you’ll end up selecting a different function or setting than what you had originally aimed for. Lexus has added a touchscreen to the recently refreshed RX for 2020 and I can only hope this appears on other Lexus models down the road.

    One change that will be a welcome relief to Android users is that Lexus has added Android Auto compatibility to the system, bringing Lexus in line with most competitors with offering this and Apple CarPlay.

    Mediocre Performance Except In Fuel Economy

    Under the hood of the UX 200 is a 2.0L inline-four producing 169 horsepower and 151 pound-feet of torque. This is paired with CVT and front-wheel drive. If you want AWD, then your only option is the UX 250h which pairs the 2.0L with a hybrid system. The 2.0 really struggles at high speeds as evidenced by a 0-60 time of 8.9 seconds. Competitors in the class are at least are a second or two quicker. The engine also has a noticeable drone that appears when you are accelerating hard. But around town, the 2.0 feels quite punchy with excellent get-up and minimal fuss.

    Where the UX does well is in fuel economy. EPA figures are 29 City/37 Highway/33 Combined for the UX 200. My average for the week landed around 31 on a 60/40 mix of highway and city driving.

    I’m wondering if the UX could fit the 2.5L four-cylinder from the Toyota Camry. It would improve overall performance with a slight hit to fuel economy.

    Surprising Handling Characteristics

    Going for the F-Sport version like my test vehicle will net you a revised suspension setup. Going around bends, the UX shows little body roll and quick reactions. The only item that falters is the steering which feels very rubbery and doesn’t encourage enthusiastic driving. For normal driving duties, the UX’s ride quality is on the complaint side with a few bumps making their way inside. I do wish Lexus had done more to keep tire noise from coming inside, especially at highway speeds

    The Price Is Right

    With a starting price tag of $32,300 for the base UX 200, this makes it the most affordable model in the class. It also happens to be very good value as it comes with the Lexus Safety System+ 2.0 as standard. This suite of active safety features includes forward-collision warning, automatic emergency braking, adaptive cruise control, and automatic high beams. The UX 200 F-Sport seen here comes with an as-tested price of $41,285 and that’s with the optional navigation system, windshield deicer, heads-up display, and power tailgate. To get something similar on the competition, you’ll need to spend a few extra thousand dollars.

    The 2020 UX 200 makes a very compelling case for itself in the subcompact luxury crossover class. This is due in part to its low price and a long list of standard equipment. A competent handling package in the F-Sport and decent fuel economy figures help bolster the model further. But there are areas Lexus needs to address, primarily the engine and infotainment system. The good news is that Lexus has the necessary solutions to both these issues in the form of the infotainment system from the RX and borrowing the 2.5L four-cylinder from the Camry. It would move the UX from being somewhere in the competent class to one that can compete for class honors.

    Disclaimer: Lexus Provided the UX 200, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas

    Year: 2020
    Make: Lexus
    Model: UX
    Trim: 200 F-Sport
    Engine: 2.0L 16-Valve DOHC VVT-i Four-Cylinder
    Driveline: CVT, Front-Wheel Drive
    Horsepower @ RPM: 169 @ 6,600
    Torque @ RPM: 151 @ 4,800
    Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 29/37/33
    Curb Weight: 3,307 lbs
    Location of Manufacture: Miyawaka, Fukuoka, Japan
    Base Price: $40,260
    As Tested Price: $41,285 (Includes $1,025.00 Destination Charge)

    Options:
    Navigation System with 10.3-in Color Multimedia Display - $2,200.00
    F-Sport Premium Package - $975.00
    Power Rear Door w/Kick Sensor - $600.00
    Premium Paint - $595.00
    Parking Assist, Rear Cross Traffic Alert w/Braking - $565.00
    Blind Spot Monitor - $500.00
    Head Up Display (HUD) - $500.00
    Heated F Sport Steering Wheel w/Paddle Shifters - $150.00
    Windshield Deicer - $100.00
    Wireless Charger - $75.00


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    32 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    Great write up. Thank you @William Maley I also find this very much a weird body style that is more hatchback than CUV tradition.

    If one did not want an Asian CUV, which would you best compare this to from America and German?

    Possibly the BMW X2 is the closest competitor since it shares that coupe-like shape of the UX. Upside is more powerful engines and better driving dynamics from what I read. Downsides are its slightly questionable looks and how expensive it can get.

    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, balthazar said:

    "OMG, the cladding!"

    'looks terrible, doesn't it?!

    I still cannot understand a luxury branded "SUV" with less than 170hp and a measly 150 torques exists. 

    • Agree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    Don’t forget “$42K base for a FWD / CVT generic appliance crossover?!?”

    He mentions its 32k base price. $32,300 per their website. 

    You can actually get the AWD, hybrid, top trim package, "Luxury", for under 40k. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, balthazar said:

    8 grand for cladding??

    Yes and $2k extra for TRD Pro stickers.  

    I actually think this vehicle is one of the biggest rip offs on the market right now.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    Yes and $2k extra for TRD Pro stickers.  

    I actually think this vehicle is one of the biggest rip offs on the market right now.

    Chevrolet Bolt is probably faster too than this auto. :P 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    14 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

    One question: Why would anybody buy the UX200 when the XT4 is most certainly a better value if not a better CUV?  Why pay the Lexus tax?

    X1, X2, GLA, GLB, Q3 are all better than this thing.  There are 5 better options right there.  Really the XT4 would be an NX competitor.  But Cadillac could easily put out an XT3 at $33k and easily undercut the UX.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    31 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

    One question: Why would anybody buy the UX200 when the XT4 is most certainly a better value if not a better CUV?  Why pay the Lexus tax?

    XT4 is definitely a better SUV : 9-spd transmission and 70 more HP!

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    That leaves room for an XT3 to compete with UX.   Wouldn't surprise me  Given how GM is adding a lot of new CUVs, it wouldn't surprise me if Cadillac doesn't get it's own version of the Encore GX.  Cadillac only has 3 CUVs, compared to Chevy with 6, Buick w/ 4, and GMC with 2...

    Edited by Robert Hall
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Cadillac has a popular, well-executed 181" XT4, why on Earth would they spend a billion dollars to bring out one that's 3-4 inches shorter??
    Duplicity run amok.

    Lexus should've put all their development dollars into 1 CUV then maybe they could've given it a competitive powertrain. Or combine the 2 in the next re-do and call it the NUX.

    Unless you just can't get ENOUGH of 169 HP CVT FWD generic/ugly appliances...

    Edited by balthazar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It won't cost a lot of money for GM to make a Cadillac XT3 out of existing parts.  

    Cadillac could easily do an XT2 at 170" long and $29,990, and XT3 at 175" and $33,990 or something along those lines.  Just like they could do an XT7 easily as well as either an Omega platform SUV, or a fastback roof, coupe style XT6.   All this stuff is in the parts bin somewhere.

    • Agree 1
    • Disagree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

    That leaves room for an XT3 to compete with UX.   Wouldn't surprise me  Given how GM is adding a lot of new CUVs, it wouldn't surprise me if Cadillac doesn't get it's own version of the Encore GX.  Cadillac only has 3 CUVs, compared to Chevy with 6, Buick w/ 4, and GMC with 2...

    Does Cadillac REALLY need a UX competitor when the XT4 does nicely?  NOW, a GLS competitor (based on Omega or its successor) would do very nicely.  Besides, a RWD crossover (not a BOF Escalade) would be a good complement to the Cadillac family of SUVs.

    • Agree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

    Does Cadillac REALLY need a UX competitor when the XT4 does nicely?  NOW, a GLS competitor (based on Omega or its successor) would do very nicely.  Besides, a RWD crossover (not a BOF Escalade) would be a good complement to the Cadillac family of SUVs.

    An XT4 is about 8 inches longer than a GLA, 6 more than a Q3, so there is room at Cadillac for a 175 inch long XT3.    Hyundai Kona is selling well and is 18 inches shorter than an XT4.   And the Hyundai Venue is 2 feet shorter than an XT4.  Not that Cadillac is competing with Hyundai, but the market is demanding SUV's smaller than the XT4, because a lot of manufacturers are bringing out smaller than XT4 vehicles, and GM has some in the stable as well.

    Escalade is their GLS competitor, though I agree using Omega for an SUV would be better than any of the current Cadillac SUV platforms that come from the Equinox,  Acadia and Tahoe.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    27 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

    Does Cadillac REALLY need a UX competitor when the XT4 does nicely?  NOW, a GLS competitor (based on Omega or its successor) would do very nicely.  Besides, a RWD crossover (not a BOF Escalade) would be a good complement to the Cadillac family of SUVs.

    Well, they could do it on the cheap since they already have the hardware, and it gives them one more CUV in a CUV market....  I can't see them doing a RWD unibody CUV since GM is cheap and likes to reuse their generic FWD/transverse platforms...

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    It won't cost a lot of money for GM to make a Cadillac XT3 out of existing parts.  

     

    Yeah, new body and interior on the Trailblazer/Encore GX platform..that's the GM way...platform sharing, same dirty bits...

    Edited by Robert Hall
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Except there’s zero business case for a teeny Cadillac SUV below the XT4. The 4 is in the sweet spot of the CUV segment, strong enough to pull from above & below it. 
    Its nonsensical to propose duplicate SUVs separated by 4 inches in length- there’s no buyer who needs those less 4 inches, and the money is MUCH better spent making an existing entry better the 1,000 other CUVs out there.

    Edited by balthazar
    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    8 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

    That leaves room for an XT3 to compete with UX.   Wouldn't surprise me  Given how GM is adding a lot of new CUVs, it wouldn't surprise me if Cadillac doesn't get it's own version of the Encore GX.  Cadillac only has 3 CUVs, compared to Chevy with 6, Buick w/ 4, and GMC with 2...

    I doubt it will get an XT3 as GM seems focused to change Cadillac into an EV brand.

    They might get an XT3 EV, but I do not see them doing an ICE version.

    Only thing is I wonder what Names they will use for their CUV/SUV line.

    We know that Escalade will stay at the top in both ICE and EV form.

    Other than that, I do wonder what names will be assigned to the EV CUV lineup.

    THOUGHTS? ?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Cadillac_vehicles

    In looking at this list that covers all names used in production and concepts, I do think I could see the following for CUV names.

    • Cadillac Townsman

    I do wonder what the EV cars might be called too. ?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    29 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    ^ Interesting, isn't it, that the vast vast majority of Cadillac nameplates thru their history were numeric-based.

    Agree that it is interesting. 1965 is when they started to change over to names I see. Though Fleetwood was assigned behind a number before then.

    I also thought that Mercedes-Benz use of predominately WXXX for so long before changing up with AXXX, BXXX, CXXX, EXXX and SXXX

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mercedes-Benz_vehicles

    Interesting that they had a few FXXX in the 90's but never used DXXX. ? Wonder why?

    This pretty much proves @smk4565 is wrong about going CT# or XT# is Cadillac coping German brands!

    ?

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    43 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    ^ Interesting, isn't it, that the vast vast majority of Cadillac nameplates thru their history were numeric-based.

    You talking about the various Series models from ancient times?    Series 70, Series 62, Series 61, etc?   The only ones used the last 50+ years were Fleetwood Sixty Special and Fleetwood 75 and those haven't been used in decades..

    I don't see the correlation between old, forgotten naming schemes and the modern acronyms... I really doubt if marketing resource units in the late 90s/early 00s that started the acronyms had any awareness of long gone naming schemes, they were trying to fit in w/ the Germans.

     

    Edited by Robert Hall
    • Sad 1
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    21 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    Agree that it is interesting. 1965 is when they started to change over to names I see. Though Fleetwood was assigned behind a number before then.

    I also thought that Mercedes-Benz use of predominately WXXX for so long before changing up with AXXX, BXXX, CXXX, EXXX and SXXX

     

    Actually, with Mercedes the naming scheme prior to the early 90s was a 3 digit displacement number followed by one or more letters  (or not).   The WXXX are internal generational platform codes, not model names.  (like the W126, W140, W220 were three generations of the S-class)... WXXX codes are like GM's codes for the trucks, like GMT360, GMT400, etc.

    Edited by Robert Hall
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    23 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

    You talking about the various Series models from ancient times?    Series 70, Series 62, Series 61, etc?   The only ones used the last 50+ years were Fleetwood Sixty Special and Fleetwood 75 and those haven't been used in decades..

    I don't see the correlation between old, forgotten naming schemes and the modern acronyms... I really doubt if marketing resource units in the late 90s/early 00s that started the acronyms had any awareness of long gone naming schemes, they were trying to fit in w/ the Germans.

     

    One would think if your in marketing and doing a competent job, you would know your history.

    One Would Hope! :P 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    One would think if your in marketing and doing a competent job, you would know your history.

    One Would Hope! :P 

    But during the 90s-00s (even back to the 80s on some models like the STS trim) Cadillac was pushing to become a modern international brand, more like the Europeans and moving away from the cushy grandpa mobile image, so something from the 50s and before would likely not have been an influence...

    Edited by Robert Hall
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

    But during the 90s-00s Cadillac was pushing to become a modern international brand, more like the Europeans and moving away from the cushy grandpa mobile image, so something from the 50s and before would likely not have been an influence...

    See now there you hit the nail on the head.

    Moving away from the cushy grandpa mobile. 

    All those auto's go back in time and to me grandpa cushy mobile is the letter with numbers and yes names. But if your looking at the history, that would tell me that there was more letters with numbers than names and maybe a new name would be better than letter with numbers.

    IMHO :) 

    After all I would rather drive an Escala than a Series 62 or W140 or CTS, CT5, etc.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    12 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    See now there you hit the nail on the head.

    Moving away from the cushy grandpa mobile. 

    All those auto's go back in time and to me grandpa cushy mobile is the letter with numbers and yes names. But if your looking at the history, that would tell me that there was more letters with numbers than names and maybe a new name would be better than letter with numbers.

    IMHO :) 

    After all I would rather drive an Escala than a Series 62 or W140 or CTS, CT5, etc.

    Classic Cadillac names for me that I love are Eldorado, Biarritz, DeVille, Fleetwood, Brougham, Seville....I'd love to see these names over the current acronyms...older names like Series 70 or Series 61 are so far before my time as to have no resonance.  

    Edited by Robert Hall
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 hours ago, balthazar said:

    Except there’s zero business case for a teeny Cadillac SUV below the XT4. The 4 is in the sweet spot of the CUV segment, strong enough to pull from above & below it. 
    Its nonsensical to propose duplicate SUVs separated by 4 inches in length- there’s no buyer who needs those less 4 inches, and the money is MUCH better spent making an existing entry better the 1,000 other CUVs out there.

    A Cadillac XT3 would outsell the CT4 or CT5 easily and would maybe outsell the Escalade but not have nearly the margins Escalade does.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Maybe, but at what cost to the other model lines?
    Cadillac does not manufacture in volumes that necessitate being in every vehicle segment. Not EVERY brand can or should be in every segment. Once hyundai is building cars that can be cross-shopped with mercedes, you know the Apocolypse is near. Or Mass Consolidation, whichever comes first.

    There's no business case for anything smaller than the XT4 @ Cadillac. IMO, there should be no CT4 (despite some wags believing it makes sense "to line up with the XT4, because '4s' ").

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I saw a spy shot somewhere of a partially uncovered prototype of the upcoming Cadillac EV CUV.  "Crap DuJour" was spelled out in a beautiful script on the quarter panel.

    • Haha 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 2/28/2020 at 7:49 PM, ocnblu said:

    Right up to the moment it needs recharged

    Yeah, guess it s good thing that gas powered cars forever on a single tank of guess. Wouldn’t want to run out of gas now would we?

     

     

     

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

    tank of guess

    No, but if we do, it's great knowing how easy it is getting going again, fully replenished.

    400 miles of new possibilities in five minutes. 

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, ocnblu said:

    No, but if we do, it's great knowing how easy it is getting going again, fully replenished.

    400 miles of new possibilities in five minutes. 

    You must be driving one of those camo craptastic Prius with 52 mpg to get 400 miles in 5 min.

    2 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

    Yeah, guess it s good thing that gas powered cars forever on a single tank of guess. Wouldn’t want to run out of gas now would we?

    @ocnblu forgets he is no different than an EV needing about 8hrs to recharge every day himself. :D 

    • Haha 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Lately, there has been a trend in the large crossover segment to replace naturally aspirated V6es with engines containing two fewer cylinders and some form of boost, either turbo or hybrid, sometimes both. The Infiniti QX60 is the latest model to join the trend. For 2025, Infiniti is switching the QX60 to its 2.0-liter Variable Compression turbo-charged engine, also found in the QX50 and QX55. The engine produces 268 horsepower and 286 lb-ft of torque. This represents a drop of 27 horsepower but an increase of 16 lb-ft of torque over a broader engine speed range. The QX60 retains its 9-speed automatic and gains a transmission fluid cooler, bringing the tow rating to 6,000 lbs for every trim. Like the V6 before it, the 2-liter VC-Turbo runs on premium fuel.  The new powertrain slightly increases fuel efficiency to 22 city / 28 highway / 24 combined over last year's model specs of 20 city / 25 highway / 22 combined for front-wheel drive models. Compared to front-wheel drive, all-wheel drive models lose 1 mpg highway. The most direct competitor to the Infiniti QX60, the Buick Enclave, also moved to a 4-cylinder turbo for 2025, and we expect others in this segment to follow suit. View full article
    • They have lockable boxes you can mount the charger in.  I agree that there's no rush to get the charger, but if you're already doing construction work inside, run at least any conduit or wiring needed now and leave it disconnected.    I found out about 30 minutes ago that I didn't get the job.  Back to the drawing board, I guess.  I hate job hunting.
    • I haven't actually done anything about it but we have plenty of power and the electric box is mounted on an exterior wall and I'm sure it would be as simple as running wire through the wall and mounting a charger outside. We still don't have a garage so I'm a little iffy if I want anything electric until that's done, so it can be inside. I know they make exterior chargers, but I'd just feel better if it was inside.    Yaaay, public transit! I take a bus every day to STL. I drive 1 mile to the bus and the bus does the remaining 29 miles. I did the math a couple years ago and I think in just fuel, I saved like 15k in the 7 or 8 years I had been here. Tomorrow will actually be my 10-year anniversary at my company. I'm sure my savings are around 20k in gasoline alone, let alone maintenance and tires. 
    • You're right ... it would also have to be trimmed out.  I don't think wheel well skirts were the way to go since Pontiac tried to purvey the image of being the sportiest among the full-sized GM boulevardiers and the skirts don't work well with their trademark rally wheels. Also, as I got closer to that Bonneville coupe in Yosemite, I believe the fabric seats had this cool tweed-like look - in that apple green I mentioned - instead of the over the top velour pillowed seats you might see in the upline Grandville Brougham. I would have loved to have driven one of these cars at some point just to see what they feel like.  I'm sure they're fine on the freeway, but it would be interesting to know how they behave on the 2-lane mountain roads into Yosemite and other mountain destinations.
    • I use the Minions voice in Waze.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search