Jump to content
  • Greetings Guest!

    CheersandGears.com was founded in 2001 and is one of the oldest continuously operating automotive forums out there.  Come see why we have users who visit nearly every day for the past 16+ years. Signup is fast and free, or you can opt for a premium subscription to view the site ad-free.

William Maley

Industry News: J.D. Power Finds New Car Buyers Hate Their In-Car Nav, Want To Use Their Smartphones

Recommended Posts

By William Maley

Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

January 31, 2013

J.D. Power and Associates recently released their 2012 U.S. Navigation Usage Satisfaction Study and the results aren’t that surprising. Consumer happiness dropped 13 points in the study’s 1,000-point scale to 681, one of the lowest scores J.D. Power has ever recorded in the six years the study has been taken. Even worse was the overall satisfaction in voice controls, scoring 544 points out of 1,000.

Even worse news for automakers: people are using their smartphones for navigation and point-of-interest searches.47% of the people surveyed had downloaded a navigation app to supplement their in-car system, up from 37% last year. The survey also revealed that owners “definitely would not” or “probably would not” buy the system in their vehicles if their smartphone’s navigation could be displayed on the screen.

“Manufacturers of navigation systems face a serious challenge as smartphone navigation usage continues to rise and gains preference among vehicle owners. Free apps, up-to-date maps, and a familiar interface allow for quicker routing and improved interaction, including better voice recognition,” said Mike VanNieuwkuyk, executive director of global automotive at J.D. Power.

Source: Wired Autopia

William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.


View full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew this was coming, and it's fine with me.

Having these systems in cars is just foolish, the tech changes too fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprising... When I got the Megane last June I had a choice between ordering with Nav or an extended warranty; I went for the warranty without a doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're less than a tech generation away from having direct links to NAV apps between your smart phone and your car as a regular thing. You can already control Pandora, Stitcher, Siri, and others from your phone and have some of the visuals show up on screen. Why not NAV?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow people are carthing onto what I said YEARS ago. I DO NOT want to pay for crap I'll never use. Built in nav is damn near worthless. I don't want it. I will not pay for it. I will buy a car without it or I will not buy a new car at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I am one of the few that actually hates the smartphone apps and slow 4g LTE response. (Interesting Observation that is confirmed by my wife and kids, we have unlimited Verizon and I have not been willing to resign a new contract. As such it seems even though they denies it that the upload and download has gotten worse)

I would rather have a dedicated Nav in my autos.

What the auto companies need to do is stop trying to reinvent the wheel and partner up with those companies that are already doing nav well and push out via satellite constant updated Nave to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guess I am one of the few that actually hates the smartphone apps and slow 4g LTE response. (Interesting Observation that is confirmed by my wife and kids, we have unlimited Verizon and I have not been willing to resign a new contract. As such it seems even though they denies it that the upload and download has gotten worse)

I would rather have a dedicated Nav in my autos.

What the auto companies need to do is stop trying to reinvent the wheel and partner up with those companies that are already doing nav well and push out via satellite constant updated Nave to begin with.

Once I updated my wife's phone, I had to let go of the unlimited data. :( But if it's slower, then maybe it's ok.

I agree with you about the dedicated nav. My next vehicle will have it, either stock or aftermarket. I do like Google Maps on my phone, but it's rather inconvenient while I drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfect reason for the car companies to partner with others that do it better than do it themselves. GM always seems to be 2 yrs behind on updates. I got the latest DVD for both my Trailblazer and Escalade and while it updated many things, there are roads that have been around for the last year plus that are still not showing up on the nav and yet both Bing maps and google maps shows these roads. Course interesting thing is my son on his iPhone with Apple maps does not show the updated HOV lans/ramps. Wonder if Apple and GM use the same supplier for maps. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow people are carthing onto what I said YEARS ago. I DO NOT want to pay for crap I'll never use. Built in nav is damn near worthless. I don't want it. I will not pay for it. I will buy a car without it or I will not buy a new car at all.

Your comment is what I hear from Baby Boomers all the time. Some finally see the benefit of having NAV in their auto when they go on road trips, others which is most of the baby boomers do not want to learn. I have found that when you stop learning, you die. Example is uncles who have passed away in their 70's as they just wanted to sit around and watch TV and then I have my Grandparents in their late 90's who keep on learning and pushing. My Grandpa died at 95 due to cancer as he hated doctors. But my Grandma who is 96 was just told by the Cardiologist that we will need to plan to replace her pacemaker battery when she turns 100 and he sees no reason she cannot keep going. :P

Learning and change is grand! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use a NAV app that doesn't require a constant signal and includes free monthly map updates. The only time you need signal is to search for your destination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow people are carthing onto what I said YEARS ago. I DO NOT want to pay for crap I'll never use. Built in nav is damn near worthless. I don't want it. I will not pay for it. I will buy a car without it or I will not buy a new car at all.

Do dealers in your area make you order navigation units at gunpoint?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More and more, it's in the nicer cars though, whether we want it or not.

I am proud of GM for being late to the game. Turn-By-Turn through Onstar is a fine way to integrate nav help in a vehicle, but "competitive pressures" forced them to start polluting their dashes with these crappy systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More and more, it's in the nicer cars though, whether we want it or not.

I am proud of GM for being late to the game. Turn-By-Turn through Onstar is a fine way to integrate nav help in a vehicle, but "competitive pressures" forced them to start polluting their dashes with these crappy systems.

In other words, the Impala will finally be catching up to Corolla?

As nav systems have come down in price (which many have), OhStar TBT has looked less and less appealing. Especially to those like me who prefer having dynamic maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this era of satellite nav systems and Google Maps on smartphones, is OnStar really just obsolete in some respects? Are Nav systems just plain obsolete in the smartphone era? It seems that there are only two advantages of nav systems: one can use it without being distracted AND a car nav uses an 7-8" screen, rather than the 5" or smaller smartphone screen. Is that enough anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this era of satellite nav systems and Google Maps on smartphones, is OnStar really just obsolete in some respects? Are Nav systems just plain obsolete in the smartphone era? It seems that there are only two advantages of nav systems: one can use it without being distracted AND a car nav uses an 7-8" screen, rather than the 5" or smaller smartphone screen. Is that enough anymore?

Those are huge advantages, given that everyone's fighting against distracted driving these days... lawmakers and manufacturers alike.

Third advantage: Mobile data plans ain't as cheap as they used to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy, OnStar turn-by-turn, something you have to pay an annual fee for! And there's no map screen. Personally, I like the ability to glance a map to get an idea where an upcoming turn is in a place I'm not familiar with, or a complex highway junction I'm not familiar. That said, I use my Google Navigation on my smartphone. It stays up to date, very accurate, very specific, looks good and has lots of features. Oh and its free. Now, I want to say that an automaker was developing an infotainment system that lets you pair your smart phone's navigation to the car's screen, but I can't remember who.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More and more, it's in the nicer cars though, whether we want it or not.

I am proud of GM for being late to the game. Turn-By-Turn through Onstar is a fine way to integrate nav help in a vehicle, but "competitive pressures" forced them to start polluting their dashes with these crappy systems.

In other words, the Impala will finally be catching up to Corolla?

As nav systems have come down in price (which many have), OhStar TBT has looked less and less appealing. Especially to those like me who prefer having dynamic maps.

Agree, the OnStar Turn by Turn sucks. The systems look like their from the 80's and I am not at all impressed with them. I would rather have a dynamic map on a nice screen nav system with a ladies voice to remind me of up coming changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be nice to have a standard wireless connection for smartphones & tablets to connect to an external touchscreen. Then buy the car with built in touchscreen, and be able to just connect your device. No more built-in outdated NAV. But of course they can't keep it that simple, cuz they'd be worried you'll play Angry Birds while driving, so there would have to be oodles of complex safety systems involved, etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy, OnStar turn-by-turn, something you have to pay an annual fee for! And there's no map screen. Personally, I like the ability to glance a map to get an idea where an upcoming turn is in a place I'm not familiar with, or a complex highway junction I'm not familiar. That said, I use my Google Navigation on my smartphone. It stays up to date, very accurate, very specific, looks good and has lots of features. Oh and its free. Now, I want to say that an automaker was developing an infotainment system that lets you pair your smart phone's navigation to the car's screen, but I can't remember who.

I think it is Kia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes, Onstar comes with a fee, but how much does a nav system add to the price of a given car, it has a cost somewhere. Anyway, I don't care about Onstar or nav systems.

I admit I have never used turn-by-turn in any of my GM vehicles. I am content without a smartphone, without any sort of nav system. Except for an in-car compass. I love those and find them extremely useful for the kind of driving I do. It's a small, important feature lacking in my Patriot, and it mystifies me why a Jeep ® brand vehicle wouldn't have one. It seems a natural to me.

If nav is going to be a permanent part of new vehicles going forward, I'd rather it be something simple like the smartphone interface through the radio screen some of you are describing. That way when I don't use it I don't feel like I spent money for nothing.

Edited by ocnblu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still use my Garmin. It is payed for, doesn't require monthly fees, won't get me a ticket when it directs me to my destination, doesn't distract me going through menus and looking at a tiny screen, 99% of the time gets a perfect signal and is just as portable going between vehicles. I do have to occasionally update it for a small cost but most of the time it is dead on and gets me right where I need to go year after year. I would never pay for an in built Nav unit in a car unless it was used and already came with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, ponchoman49. My Garmin works just a good as yours and I've had it about 3-4 years now. I've only updated it once in that time and it hasn't gotten me lost. When I purchase my next vehicle, unless another option requires it, I would likely forgo the navigation option. Now the wife's vehicle will be a different story - she has a problem with directions and I don't want her fiddling with her iPhone for directions. Or I can just buy her a Garmin too :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I am one of the few that actually hates the smartphone apps and slow 4g LTE response. (Interesting Observation that is confirmed by my wife and kids, we have unlimited Verizon and I have not been willing to resign a new contract. As such it seems even though they denies it that the upload and download has gotten worse)

I would rather have a dedicated Nav in my autos.

What the auto companies need to do is stop trying to reinvent the wheel and partner up with those companies that are already doing nav well and push out via satellite constant updated Nave to begin with.

Agree..........but they want to sell crap, and some put a gun to their own head and stand in line to buy it. I have a Garmin and I have a smart phone both of which work better than nav that comes in cars with less bs.

Edited by RjION

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought a standalone Magellan GPS so I could have a portable device. Having one hard-wired into a vehicle just seems so impractical for the expense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   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.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      There has been a lot of talk about driverless cars with companies (both automotive and tech) promising a safe and grandiose future and a number of high-profile crashes that have resulted in fatalities. This got us wondering how the general public feels about them. Recently, two studies came asking this and their results are very interesting.
      First up is CarGurus which asked 1,873 vehicle owners in the U.S. between the ages of 18 to 65 about self-driving vehicles. 79 percent of participants said they were not excited about owning a self-driving car. 84 percent said they were unlikely to own a self-driving car in the next five years. This number drops to 59 percent when the window is extended to ten years.
      Here's where it gets interesting:
      In terms of geographical areas, owners on the West Coast are the most excited at 26 percent. The least, those in Central U.S. at 18 percent. When it comes to brands, BMW owners lead the pack when asked if they would consider a self-driving vehicle from their brand - 55 percent. Least likely? That would be Chrysler owners at 23 percent Safety is the key reasons that owners are excited and concerned about self-driving cars - 64 and 81 percent respectively. When asked what company is most trusted to develop self-driving cars, 27 percent of participants said none. Second and a bit of surprise was Tesla at 24 percent. (We're wondering if this survey was done before the fatal crash of a Tesla Model X on Autopilot in late March) The second study comes to us from AAA which asked people how trustful are you of self-driving cars. 73 percent said they would be too afraid to ride in an autonomous car, up from 63 percent in late 2017. Additionally, 63 percent of those asked said they would feel less safe either walking or on a bike if there is a self-driving vehicle. We have to assume that the fatal crash involving an Uber autonomous vehicle made this number rise.
      AAA's study also found a big surprise. Millenials, a group that is quick to accept new technologies, are not as trusting as they once were. In late 2007, 49 percent said they were afraid to ride in an autonomous vehicle. Now, that number rose to 64 percent.

      “Despite their potential to make our roads safer in the long run, consumers have high expectations for safety. Our results show that any incident involving an autonomous vehicle is likely to shake consumer trust, which is a critical component to the widespread acceptance of autonomous vehicles,” said Greg Brannon, AAA’s director of Automotive Engineering and Industry Relations.
      Source: Roadshow, AAA


      AAA: American Trust in Autonomous Vehicles Slips
      ORLANDO, Fla. (May 22, 2018) – Following high-profile incidents involving autonomous vehicle technologies, a new report from AAA’s multi-year tracking study indicates that consumer trust in these vehicles has quickly eroded. Today, three-quarters (73 percent) of American drivers report they would be too afraid to ride in a fully self-driving vehicle, up significantly from 63 percent in late 2017. Additionally, two-thirds (63 percent) of U.S. adults report they would actually feel less safe sharing the road with a self-driving vehicle while walking or riding a bicycle.
      “Despite their potential to make our roads safer in the long run, consumers have high expectations for safety,” said Greg Brannon, AAA’s director of Automotive Engineering and Industry Relations. “Our results show that any incident involving an autonomous vehicle is likely to shake consumer trust, which is a critical component to the widespread acceptance of autonomous vehicles.”
      Surprisingly, AAA’s latest survey found that Millennials – the group that has been the quickest to embrace automated vehicle technologies — were the most impacted by these incidents. The percentage of Millennial drivers too afraid to ride in a fully self-driving vehicle has jumped from 49 percent to 64 percent since late 2017, representing the largest increase of any generation surveyed.
      “While autonomous vehicles are being tested, there’s always a chance that they will fail or encounter a situation that challenges even the most advanced system,” said Megan Foster, AAA’s director of Federal Affairs. “To ease fears, there must be safeguards in place to protect vehicle occupants and the motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians with whom they share the road.”
      AAA supports thorough testing of automated vehicle technologies as they continue to evolve, including testing under progressively complicated driving scenarios and under varying conditions, but not at the expense of safety. Additionally, to help prevent the accidental misuse of the systems, AAA advocates for a common sense, common nomenclature and classification system, and similar performance characteristics of future autonomous vehicle technologies.
      “There are sometimes dozens of different marketing names for today’s safety systems,” continued Brannon. “Learning how to operate a vehicle equipped with semi-autonomous technology is challenging enough without having to decipher the equipment list and corresponding level of autonomy.”
      To help educate consumers on the effectiveness of emerging vehicle technologies, AAA is committed to the ongoing, unbiased testing of automated vehicle technologies. Previous testing of automatic emergency braking, adaptive cruise control, self-parking technology and lane keeping systems has shown both great promise and great variation. Future AAA testing will look at how well systems work together to achieve higher levels of automation.

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      There has been a lot of talk about driverless cars with companies (both automotive and tech) promising a safe and grandiose future and a number of high-profile crashes that have resulted in fatalities. This got us wondering how the general public feels about them. Recently, two studies came asking this and their results are very interesting.
      First up is CarGurus which asked 1,873 vehicle owners in the U.S. between the ages of 18 to 65 about self-driving vehicles. 79 percent of participants said they were not excited about owning a self-driving car. 84 percent said they were unlikely to own a self-driving car in the next five years. This number drops to 59 percent when the window is extended to ten years.
      Here's where it gets interesting:
      In terms of geographical areas, owners on the West Coast are the most excited at 26 percent. The least, those in Central U.S. at 18 percent. When it comes to brands, BMW owners lead the pack when asked if they would consider a self-driving vehicle from their brand - 55 percent. Least likely? That would be Chrysler owners at 23 percent Safety is the key reasons that owners are excited and concerned about self-driving cars - 64 and 81 percent respectively. When asked what company is most trusted to develop self-driving cars, 27 percent of participants said none. Second and a bit of surprise was Tesla at 24 percent. (We're wondering if this survey was done before the fatal crash of a Tesla Model X on Autopilot in late March) The second study comes to us from AAA which asked people how trustful are you of self-driving cars. 73 percent said they would be too afraid to ride in an autonomous car, up from 63 percent in late 2017. Additionally, 63 percent of those asked said they would feel less safe either walking or on a bike if there is a self-driving vehicle. We have to assume that the fatal crash involving an Uber autonomous vehicle made this number rise.
      AAA's study also found a big surprise. Millenials, a group that is quick to accept new technologies, are not as trusting as they once were. In late 2007, 49 percent said they were afraid to ride in an autonomous vehicle. Now, that number rose to 64 percent.

      “Despite their potential to make our roads safer in the long run, consumers have high expectations for safety. Our results show that any incident involving an autonomous vehicle is likely to shake consumer trust, which is a critical component to the widespread acceptance of autonomous vehicles,” said Greg Brannon, AAA’s director of Automotive Engineering and Industry Relations.
      Source: Roadshow, AAA


      AAA: American Trust in Autonomous Vehicles Slips
      ORLANDO, Fla. (May 22, 2018) – Following high-profile incidents involving autonomous vehicle technologies, a new report from AAA’s multi-year tracking study indicates that consumer trust in these vehicles has quickly eroded. Today, three-quarters (73 percent) of American drivers report they would be too afraid to ride in a fully self-driving vehicle, up significantly from 63 percent in late 2017. Additionally, two-thirds (63 percent) of U.S. adults report they would actually feel less safe sharing the road with a self-driving vehicle while walking or riding a bicycle.
      “Despite their potential to make our roads safer in the long run, consumers have high expectations for safety,” said Greg Brannon, AAA’s director of Automotive Engineering and Industry Relations. “Our results show that any incident involving an autonomous vehicle is likely to shake consumer trust, which is a critical component to the widespread acceptance of autonomous vehicles.”
      Surprisingly, AAA’s latest survey found that Millennials – the group that has been the quickest to embrace automated vehicle technologies — were the most impacted by these incidents. The percentage of Millennial drivers too afraid to ride in a fully self-driving vehicle has jumped from 49 percent to 64 percent since late 2017, representing the largest increase of any generation surveyed.
      “While autonomous vehicles are being tested, there’s always a chance that they will fail or encounter a situation that challenges even the most advanced system,” said Megan Foster, AAA’s director of Federal Affairs. “To ease fears, there must be safeguards in place to protect vehicle occupants and the motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians with whom they share the road.”
      AAA supports thorough testing of automated vehicle technologies as they continue to evolve, including testing under progressively complicated driving scenarios and under varying conditions, but not at the expense of safety. Additionally, to help prevent the accidental misuse of the systems, AAA advocates for a common sense, common nomenclature and classification system, and similar performance characteristics of future autonomous vehicle technologies.
      “There are sometimes dozens of different marketing names for today’s safety systems,” continued Brannon. “Learning how to operate a vehicle equipped with semi-autonomous technology is challenging enough without having to decipher the equipment list and corresponding level of autonomy.”
      To help educate consumers on the effectiveness of emerging vehicle technologies, AAA is committed to the ongoing, unbiased testing of automated vehicle technologies. Previous testing of automatic emergency braking, adaptive cruise control, self-parking technology and lane keeping systems has shown both great promise and great variation. Future AAA testing will look at how well systems work together to achieve higher levels of automation.
    • By William Maley
      In 2009, the U.S. saw its lowest number of pedestrian deaths. But since then, that number has increased by 46 percent as pedestrian crashes have become more frequent and deadlier. Why is that?
      The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety released a study today investigating the possible reasons. One key indicator is the number of crashes involving SUVs. According to IIHS data, between 2009 and 2016, fatal single-vehicle crashes involving SUVs rose 81 percent - the largest increase of any vehicle segment. Aside from the growing popularity of SUVs and crossovers, the tall body height and larger footprint mean in a pedestrian crash, the vehicle is hitting a person's chest or head.
      SUVs weren't the only metric to see an increase. IIHS reports that urban environments, arterial roads, nighttime, and non-intersection crashes have seen large increases.
      Can anything be done to help reduce pedestrian fatalities? According to the IIHS, there is a lot that can be done.
      Softening the front ends of SUVs Improving pedestrian detection systems and headlights (The latter would be helped if NHTSA can get its act together on updating their headlight regulations) Lower the speed limits Adding more "pedestrian hybrid beacons" - Kind of a sudo-stop light where a pedestrian activates it before crossing. Begins flashing yellow, before transitioning to solid yellow, and then solid double red. "Understanding where, when and how these additional pedestrian crashes are happening can point the way to solutions. This analysis tells us that improvements in road design, vehicle design and lighting and speed limit enforcement all have a role to play in addressing the issue," said IIHS President David Harkey.
      Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
       

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      In 2009, the U.S. saw its lowest number of pedestrian deaths. But since then, that number has increased by 46 percent as pedestrian crashes have become more frequent and deadlier. Why is that?
      The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety released a study today investigating the possible reasons. One key indicator is the number of crashes involving SUVs. According to IIHS data, between 2009 and 2016, fatal single-vehicle crashes involving SUVs rose 81 percent - the largest increase of any vehicle segment. Aside from the growing popularity of SUVs and crossovers, the tall body height and larger footprint mean in a pedestrian crash, the vehicle is hitting a person's chest or head.
      SUVs weren't the only metric to see an increase. IIHS reports that urban environments, arterial roads, nighttime, and non-intersection crashes have seen large increases.
      Can anything be done to help reduce pedestrian fatalities? According to the IIHS, there is a lot that can be done.
      Softening the front ends of SUVs Improving pedestrian detection systems and headlights (The latter would be helped if NHTSA can get its act together on updating their headlight regulations) Lower the speed limits Adding more "pedestrian hybrid beacons" - Kind of a sudo-stop light where a pedestrian activates it before crossing. Begins flashing yellow, before transitioning to solid yellow, and then solid double red. "Understanding where, when and how these additional pedestrian crashes are happening can point the way to solutions. This analysis tells us that improvements in road design, vehicle design and lighting and speed limit enforcement all have a role to play in addressing the issue," said IIHS President David Harkey.
      Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
       
    • By William Maley
      More and more automakers are launching subscription services as another option to get into new or used cars. But a new report shows the subscription services are still flying under the radar for most consumers.
      Autolist recently conducted a survey with 1,428 car shoppers in the second half of April. This is what they found out.
      70 percent of shoppers had no idea that such a thing existed Out of the 30 percent of shoppers who knew about subscription services, only half could actually name one 33 percent would consider a subscription service for their next vehicle. The number climbs to 45 percent when asked if they would consider it in the future The big draw to subscription services? 37 percent of shoppers said the ability to switch between different types of vehicles. This was followed by no long-term commitment (32 percent). The results aren't really that surprising. Only one subscription service, Care by Volvo is available nationwide. All of the other services are in limited to one or a few cities. Book by Cadillac is only available in New York, but there are plans to expand it to Dallas and LA in the coming year. Not helping is most of the services being offered come from luxury automakers which means high prices. 
      Source: Autolist

      View full article
  • My Clubs

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.