turbo200

yes.......................................but it has no armrest, the seats are rather flimsy [though good for small people], the engine is just adequate. It has an incredible suspension and driving feel along with a perfect Honda 5 spd manual tranny...which all make it a cool car. When I look at the exterior package however, I can only think there are better choices for $15k [Fit Sport], even a used car.

to me, phenomonal. but a bit too much like the 5-series. I'm still wondering about possibilities of going with a full width grille.as for the gxp, what year are we living in again?

just saw three at a local dealer. I was impressed when I came close to the cars, the details are fantastic. The extremely exaggerated fenders really work well and dress up the sides and add to the sportiness of the character. The grille looks great up close, as does the detail in the headlights. The further I kept getting away from it the more the new Cadillac didn't looks so fresh or so attention-getting. With a rear end shaped too much like a DTS, sides that looked no different from an STS, and an old hat face up front that is a little too familiar. I think the problem with keeping such a bold front end for so long, is it's very memorable easily noticeable and likeable and therefore can also get tired soon. But up close, the car was remarkable. The details really help; those massive fender flares recall Sixteen so much, and there are really a lot more subtle details from that car. The plumped up sheetmetal, the protruding leading edge sheetmetal from the front to the back that recalls almost a ship-like feel, the nice taillamps, the sidew creases that are more subtle and closer to the beltline. A lot of nice effects when you're up close to the car, and I guess I have to say that's really what matters, the close up effect. I hope the grille will be enough to get the stoplight can't stop staring effect the original CTS had [it probably won't be, for that Caddy would have had to reinvent the face].

STS will lose most of it, CTS will gain considerably. the imports will continue on seemingly unstoppable rise. I guess you'll be looking foward for a considerable amount of time, or at least until Cadillac gets a large sedan that makes an impact.

how often do you use the radio controls? how often is your climate control manipulated? is the center console the "centerpiece" of your interior? can quality be apparent or deduced at every point of the interior? should an interior be consistent and thoughtfully designed, especially when the asking price is above $40,000 and all the way to $60,000?if you answered yes or always to these questions then you understand the importance of a high quality center console.

the grille is ill-suited to this car. The interior redo only addresses some concerns; tactile feel of the center stack switches and buttons were a letdown in the past, and they remain the same. this car is missing just a couple marks to be great.

3 door comes standard with the sport package. i believe that includes 18'' on the XR standard [3-door]. I definitely know I remember reading the press release the 3-door came standard with a sport package that is optional on the 5 door. Pricing looks attractive.

to what? you think GM has no problem developing distinct wheels for the American brands that are suitable to their character and supposed identity?

the problem I have with the HHR goes to its design; it's just not aiming high enough for that quintessential carefree Americana feel. It is too Chevy post-2000 plastic [i'm talking about the exterior] modern wanna be retro. It's not modern enough to be modern and it's not classic enough to be called retro. That's why I don't like it. It's a solid car, and well, no one else could get this right besides a GM or a Chrysler or a Ford, but I just feel like the PT and Mini are doing a much better job at being classically elegant and appealing. The doors are too bland, the rear is too wannabe "Chevy historic", the interior says almost nothing, and the front is too heavy-handed in comparison to the rest of the car. That said, it's a fun car. I was trying to link to the SEMA 06 HHR, that Panel version that had the killer grille up front, I thought that was better detailed than what we got here. What we got though is a car that is cool enough to be called an HHR SS, a great effort along the lines of the Cobalt Supercharged, but there is still room for improvement like with that car. Those wheels are the same as the Pontiac G8, and that blows. If Saab can have 20 unique wheel designs, than GM needs to consolidate and cut the fat even more to have some money to develop unique wheels for every brand. OR just fire all the overpaid designers and bring in Saab's team. Every couple of years they seem to release some current designs for wheels, unlike what we see from most of GM.

i have a suggestion. don't buy one! and while you're at it don't post pointless nitpicking that is inconsequential of the overall car. 5.5 versus 5.9, ya only you care that it's not that fast. if you are looking for ultimate performance, go BMW, the Caddy is about style, bold looks, and luxury while offering a strong performance ethic. you're missing the point of this great car.

eh or less imposing/masculine

this sounds like a great plan that avoids unnecessary confusion that is bound to happen.

beautiful. one of the most beautiful GMs ever produced.

well gays do like thier fashionable things and all those are plenty fashionable

you and i and other posters here may have different definitions of what hard plastic means. there is no coarse or rough plastic to be found in the tsx, well from what i can recall of one i was in almost a year ago, there is just plastic that is nicely grained, smooth and soft to the touch. however the plastic covering most of the dashboard is a solid panel that may be nicely grained, but it still is a mostly hard piece of plastic that lacks the "give" of other dashes. the new gen 2006 accord and pilots and ridgeline actually gave me the impression of better plastics thoughout. the lower model i was referring to may have been an early year, but someone drove up in one with a stereo that looked pretty crappy and basic trim that wasn't as streamlined [titanium] or as modern as the other tsx's i've been in.

the impression I got from driving a TSX for over 2 hours a friend of mine owns is one of driving solidarity. i also got to drive a stick shift version and echo the thoughts of siegen in that the engine is very flexible and fun. imagine what a ferrari must feel like, dial back the power a lot and a little of the extreme nature, and there you have the average honda vtec engine. they are fun, refined and when you are going through the powerband feel much faster than they are. tsx felt light, tossable, steering is direct, suspension is precise, similar to all other hondas it feels direct when you want to place it somewhere. the materials could be better, but for a car released in 2002 it still has a fantastic design and feel. the materials are solid yet precise like empowah said. the buttons have a strong durable yet refined feel. the hard materials may be hard to the touch but are nicely grained, everything for the most part feels right [i know there are lower level models that don't feel as good though]. the design is what is most pleasing to my eyes, very sleek very professional executive class saloon type feel. sophisticated is what i think of the interior, still a great value. 9-3 is a nice alternative, but tit for tat i think the tsx offers a little more [though saab design would sway me too].

my bad i was under the impression the ridgeline facelift would be introd MY 08. if that were the case, then as your data indicates it would be receiving an update in only its third model year after being introd. but since it won't be until 09 for the refresh, then, yes, according to the schedule honda would be following precedent. however, the ridgeline isn't doing strongly, and i think it's because outside of the practical midsize and compact sedan market, buyers are looking for more.....more from thier pickup than what honda is offering. and when we get down to it the honda doesn't offer anything tangible, outside of honda reliability, over the silverado for example.

uh no let's not all lie... a refreshening for Honda is typical in its 4th model year.....element just received its first freshening in 07 model year, that car was out in 2003, so it was first intro'd as a 04 MY or possible 03. Accord recieved updates in 4th model year, etc etc. you know if you are anywhere close to the truth you are lying through your teeth that a refresh in the 3rd year is typical. For Honda to be freshening the Ridgeline so quickly is a sort of admission that things are not going so well as they planned. and i like Honda and the Ridgeline, they just aren't moving. as for the looks I like the impression the side gives, and I especially like them with custom wheels, but the front end is typical Honda conservative, not aggressive. Maybe that's what they are changing....

we shall see....it's a good thing that on paper it looks like a solid car. but i already have my doubts seeing as how the aura was the last car they put out in the category and its interior is still pretty bad.

one more direct for the heart of many GM fans [and my intent is not to hurt you, only to wake you up to reality].....go out and test a new civic, and a new accord when they are out in a month, and then go out and test a Gran Prix or a current Malibu [which still will be in production] or a LAcrosse and tell me you're not shocked that these cars are in production at the same time.... the differences are astounding. i've said it time and again many times already....it's been the antiquated design that has hurt GM the most, not thier engineering which by and large has been great, not the best [sometimes close to, or the best], but great, but thier design has consistently let the car down and made you feel like you were in a time warp, especially in the last five years, relative to the competition....

you sell chevys for a living. you probably wouldn't even step foot into a honda dealership to test the accord. it's true over time the vast differences grow more appreciable. so had i spent more time with the malibu i might have grown on the hatchback utility ever more [though that for me is a great selling point]. but it's the differences that you grow to appreciate over time. and after spending time with the maxx, it was clear to me there was an ocean of difference in terms of refinement, and you know what one of the biggest reasons for that impression was how cheap and unsolid and how loud everything was in the malibu in direct comparison to the accord. even the radio font on the LED unit [or whatever that is] looked like it came out of the '80s in comparison to the accord's streamlined modern display. so, you see, it really wouldn't have taken GM much work to move out of the unrefined category with the malibu, as i stated one of the biggest impressions was the cheap stuff right before my eyes, like the craptacular steering wheel that was the most awful design remnant from the '90s GM could have sought to put in it.

i will never critique something without merit or good reason for doing it. for example, i didn't mention that it "only had a 4 spd auto", because to me that was the least of its problems and while i did notice a lack of gears when i switched to manumatic feature, that is no a big enough problem to me to warrant criticism. relative to the competition, yes the 4 spd was behind the times, but that's another argument for another day, i was merely critiquing what i found to be glaring defficiencies that a consumer with a high level of discernment and one that is comparing the import competition directly might notice immediately. no, carbiz, i never stated i spent several years with the car, as i guess, according to you humans must spend at least a required 10 days of service with a car and followed a specific regimen in order to gain an accurate impression of the car. I said I like the maxx, so therefore there are many good things about it. that was my point, and the second part of that would be how GM yet again failed to live up to the expectations for that car since it had a lot of hype around the new platform and possibility since it was yet another shot at the midsize sedan segment, that if you think about it, we were in a totally different climate than we are in today. any semblance of GM not being a king of rental car companies in image is gone now......why, because of squandered opportunies and time. like spending 5 years with this current malibu in production. As for the quality of the plastics. yes, GM's plastics don't usually break, but this isn't the 60's when GM once owned the maket and set the trends. There are other automakers out there setting the trends and winning all the market share from GM. they are chasing a moving target, and that target has declared that the interior ambience of a car should not be something akin to soft cushiony seats revolved around blocks of rubber anymore. it should have design flair and be comfortable and desirable to spend some time in. it should say things about the owner, it should be creative and continue the design theme of the exterior. plastics also have a more refined feel and a less refined feel. those that feel coarse and rough and bulky to the touch and immovable maybe, those are unrefined. the ones that flow in thier movements feel soft to the touch feel strong but totally intuitive, those are more refined. as for the engine, I don't know. i'm not with you on making excuses like it's a compromise, it gets good gas mileage even though it sounds like a horse getting up there. i didn't like how the 3.5 sounded, however, i wouldn't say the experience in that car gives me finality on how the 3.5 performs. that was a used rental car........but i did test it in another rental, this time a G6 with about 2000 mi on the odo, and that one also left me with unfavorable impressions.

end cue on poster with wisdom [that's a direct comeback to carbiz, not the actual owner of the maxx who gave good personal insight]

a malibu maxx i once drove was hampered by the usual GM pitfalls, subpar plastics and fit, thrashy/loud engine, loose disconnected steering, unrefined suspension characteristics........but it was a car that could fit people comfortably and had a heck of a lot of utility, and I actually like the way it looks in the rear and from the side profile. the front ruined it as it did the entire malibu line, but the maxx concept really could be something special, if the rest of the car that was bolted to it were up to toyota/honda standards instead of kia standards.

being first in any tech doesn't mean anything, and neither does having the best tech available. it's a good thing to have on your side, however.most importantly is the quality and design impression one gets from the look inside and out, as it applies to luxury cars. if buick wants to be a luxury car it has go far beyond lucerne interior for stylishness and quality. enclave is going forward, i agree with you on that. though enclave is finely crafted, i wouldn't call it the most original, daring, or provactive interior in its class. to get people to really switch sides and run to GM to see what they are offering, we need dramatic interior and exterior design that has not been seen before. on a par with the shanghai riviera concept in terms of stunning uniquenss and useability. enclave has a lot of things going for it, and it's one of the first no excuses car from GM in a long while, but with that I still find the interior somewhat dull and uninspiring. not totally dull, but there is room for improvement. i remember seeing a sneak peak at a trailblazer MCE interior long ago [the one that got cancelled], and that was anything but dull. the cts interior is anything but dull, its design truly reaches for expression and richness, but it also is playing catch up. the problem is the competition is moving fast.