Petra

As thegriffon has been saying all along, keep a close eye on Toyota's white-collar workforce. They have about the same # of employees in that field as they did 5-10 years ago, but they now have to work on many more models; just think about the work that goes into the SCION lineup alone, which must be totally refreshed every 4-5 years. The delay of the next-gen. Corolla is, IMO, the tip of the iceberg. I expect to see more delays and more noticeable oversights in the coming years as Toyota continues striving to do more with less.

I've gotta admit, this is one of the best reviews I've read in a long time, simply in terms of "Tell-it-like-it-is" honesty. I found myself agreeing with pretty much everything in here: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drive...photopanel..2.*

It just doesn't look like a Saturn to me.

When I think of "the" '90's car, I think of the Honda Civic.

Yet another enlightening article from Captain Obvious. I wonder what his next prediction will be... "Toyota reaping record profits", perhaps?

This one is on my "To drive" list.

I like 'em, too. The Versa ads are a spoof of said drug ads that everybody hates, and they tickle my funny bone. I guess not everybody finds the same things funny.

Am I the only one who hates the skateboard?

If there was ever a place that Acura's SH-AWD would rightly be at home, it would be underneath the skin of this TL. It almost saddens me to see such an otherwise competitive car hampered by FWD. For the same money, I'd take a G35, IS300 or CTS instead.

I don't like it. It has the same, chunky, bulging, overwrought features as the Caliber, but with a stump of a trunk at the very end and the Charger-style dogleg in the rear quarter panel. I know it's supposed to look all muscular and taut, but to me it looks like an overweight girl squeezed into a teeny pair of jeans. Ah, well. Perhaps, like the Charger, it will look better in person.

I question the need for GM to make a 2nd Minivan at all.

The Rendezvous wasn't exactly an expensive vehicle to design in the first place. It was basically a re-skin of the Aztek, which itself was based on GM's minivan platform, which, furthermore, was already at least 5 years old by the time the Rendezvous came out. GM might not have amde much money leasing the Rendezvous, but they didn't have much money invested into it to lose, anyway. I, too, look forward to seeing a Buick lineup that, while selling a lower number of vehicles, has a more concentrated and solid portfolio of products. Hate to break it to some of you, but it is quite clear that the days of Buick selling 500,000 cars a year are long gone. Why, then, should GM continue to build hundreds of thousands of cars that nobody wants, and then have to sell them at a loss to fleets, or using heavy discounts to lure in buyers? It makes far more sense to build 100,000 cars that the public will actually buy and that will sell at a profit. In fact, GM should have made the move to consolidate Buick, GM & Pontac 10 or 15 years ago.

Looks very similar to the SCION tC to me. If there's one thing I would like to see in the next Corolla, it is that Wagon version.

I like 'em. There is a couple things I don't get, though: -Why with the ancient 4.3L. V6? The i5 from the Colorado/Canyon makes comparable power (especially with its recent upgrade). My guess is that it's probably more expensive to build. -I'm going to agree that the LT interior is messed up. I know this is supposed to be the Workingman's trim level, but, if so, why does it have a Nav system & White Leather seats? These luxury appointments contrast with the work-grade black plastic dashboard. It just looks like a mid '90's C/K series that has been customised by Pimp My Ride. Furthermore, The F-150 still wins in terms of ergonomics, as there aren't as all the tiny buttons all over the place that the GMs have. Look at all those little keys on the left side of the gauge cluster. Who is going to be able to press in one of those with work gloves on? I think these trucks will be successful. However, even if the new Toyota Tundra does not meet its lofty goals, it still will end up taking market share from these two trucks. There's no way to stop it from happening, no matter how good GM made the new trucks. Nevertheless, I am glad that they didn't slack off... Much.

Yeah, right. I used to always wear Dockers, until I discovered that Dockers are garbage. The no name Wal-Mart pants I'm wearing now have lasted longer than any pair of Dockers I have ever owned, and they were a fraction of the price.

Bad drivers come in all shapes, sizes and makes of vehicles; same goes for good drivers. I do not discriminate based on vehicle make, I discriminate based on driving skills. In fact, I find the very notion described in this thread as absurd. I mean, what about used car buyers? They're not supporting "Japan Inc." They're supporting whoever they bought the vehicle from second-hand.

I admit it: Except for my suits and Fedora hats, all my clothes come from Wal-Mart. There are a couple reasons for this: - I have neither the time, money, nor inclination to look "trendy" - I abhor clothing that promenantly displays brand names, and Wal-Mart clothes are about as generic as you can get - This way, when your clothes (esp. pants) wear out, you'll only have to spend $20 to replace them, rather than spending $70 for a pair of Dockers that are no more durable (all CDN. money, BTW).

You know, it occurs to me that I've seen perhaps two of these things on the road in the, what, 2 or 3 years they've been on the market?

Exterior There is no denying that the Mazda5 is a Minivan. A look at the sliding doors and the rounded, two-box profile is all you need to confirm it. However, the vehicle hides its Minivan-ness pretty well, in fact, better than any other Minivan on the road. The triangular headlights lend a sporty look to the nose, like an angry feline, and the trendy clear taillights also create a somewhat sporty credence. And, from the side, it looks more like a lengthened Toyota Matrix than a Mommymobile. Style is a matter of personal taste, and some would laugh at the Mazda5's attempts to cover itself up. But I think that, for a Minivan, this is as good as it gets. 1 2 3 4 5 Interior You can get the Mazda5's interior in any colour you like, so long as its black. I'd like to see at least a beige/tan option as well, because, for one thing, it doesn't get so hot in the summer, and for another, it doesn't always look like you're in a funeral procession. Though it is a dark environment, the Mazda5 does feel a lot more high quality than the HHR. The vast expanses of black plastic do a commendable job of soaking up the sunlight without bouncing it back into your face (though I wouldn't trust that aluminum-look centre console). The switchgear, like the vents and the HVAC knobs, feel sturdier, too. It is a simple layout, but it doesn't remind you every time you look at it that you paid more for less. Quite the opposite effect, I'd say. The little green slit above the controls where the readouts for fan speed, temp, volume, etc. are listed might take some getting used to; it's a lot of information to pack into a small space. The Mazda5's sound system kicks the HHR's butt. It is both louder and it puts out a more defined sound, though it tends toward distortion at high volumes. Another big difference: The Manual shifter is right where you expect it to be... Soul of a sports car, indeed! Get into the second row captain's chairs, and you'll find them just as sturdy and supportive as the driver's and passenger's seats. The Mazda5 offers about the same copious amount of headroom as the HHR, along with the added benefit of being wider and longer, so the second row passengers don't get the feeling they're in a penalty box. Even with my brother occupying the passenger seat and me directly behind, there was still at least an inch of knee room. Also, the Mazda5 has fabric on the backs of its seats... No cheap plastic covers here. A clever feature is two storage bins that can be found underneath the 2nd row seats; you pull a little tag towards the back of the cushion and flip the cushion forward. A great place to put your valuables if you're travelling to the bad side of town. In the GT model, a pair of cupholders also flip out of one of the seats. Only a couple of complaints: Make sure that the headrests are raised at least one notch, otherwise, they will dig painfully into your back. The seatbelt is one of those pretensioning types, but the trouble is that it tensions itself before you've finished grabbing enough belt to strap yourself in! Lastly, there is no real place to rest your right arm (or your left arm, if you're sitting on the driver's side), unless you have the window open, which is ideally located for letting your arm dangle lazily out the side. Not a good idea in the winter, though. The third row seats are best used for children only, or people you really hate. Still, it is nice to know you have them. Never try to sit there without raising the headrests to the maximum height, and make sure that the 2nd row seat in front of you is as far ahead as it will go. Even then, I would hesitate to put an adult back there for longer than maybe 15 minutes. At 5'7", my hair was getting a little too friendly with the headliner... And forget about trying to put on the Fedora. All things considered, it is an excellent interior. I just wish you could get it in a different colour. 1 2 3 4 5 Powertrain There is only one available engine with the Mazda5: A 2.3L. i4, making 157 horses and 148 lbs/ft. of torque. The torque peak is at 4,500 RPM, and the Mazda's dry weight is nearly 200 pounds porkier than the HHR. I prepared myself for an underwhelming engine. I was wrong, but, this time, it turned out for the better. On paper, the 2.3L. Mazda mill looks overmatched. Drive it, though, and you'll find that it is up to the task of hauling ass... up to 6 of them, in fact. The biggest difference? Unlike the procrastinating Ecotec that we sampled in the HHR, the Mazda's engine knows how to rev. Kick the Mazda5's gas pedal and select a lower ratio, and it kicks you back, in the seat of your pants. As you feel the rush of acceleration, you'll also experience a wonderful sound coming up through the tailpipes, music to any gearhead's ears. I don't know how they did it, but Mazda was able to bottle up the might and fury of my Mercury's V8, and with only half as many cylinders! Trust me, this is the Minivan with the soul of a sports car! The 5-Speed Manual shifter complements the engine perfectly. It is a little notchy and the throws are kind of long, but it is still light years ahead of the HHR's soupy stick. Plus, you don't have to reach down for it. It is right where you need it to be. Why anybody with a working left leg and right arm would choose the optional automatic is beyond me. The standard gives so much, and asks so little. Is the Mazda5 really any faster than the HHR? Probably not, or, if it is, not by a whole lot. But I can tell you this much: it feels a heckuva lot faster than it is. It is so much fun to drive, you won't care how fast you are going. I don't know how Mazda got that sports car feeling into the Mazda5, but they deserve an award for it, especially when it has about 700 pounds of humanity along for the ride! 1 2 3 4 5 Ride & Handling Put simply, the Mazda5 drives like a Mazda. The handling is sharp and smooth in snaky corners, even at speeds nearly twice the posted limit. It has a point & shoot interface: Point it where you want it to go, and it shoots to the place. Still, there is a sense of delay between where the front wheels and the rear wheels are, and this, along with a pinch of body roll, ensures you remember you are not quite piloting a sports car. Still, the Mazda3-derived suspension bits are very convincing, and, dare it say it, fun to drive! Not surprisingly, that same fine-tuned suspension has an impact on the ride quality. But not too much. While not as Buick-smooth as the HHR, the Mazda5 has a fairly composed ride. I would imagine that rough stretches of road would shake the Mazda's steady demeanor, but there are none in the area where we did the test drive. There are dealerships from every major manufacturer (and some minor ones, like Jaguar) in this area. Many of the roads have been recently re-paved. Coincidence? I think not. All things considered, I would say that the Mazda5's handling is about as close to perfect as a tall, 3,300+ pound Minivan is going to get. If there ends up being a bit of a tradeoff in the ride, and can deal with it. After all, that is why they make seats with all those adjustments! The Mazda5 earns another solid 1 2 3 4 5 Practicality As I said earlier, the Mazda5's third row seat is pretty well useless, but it is still good to know it is there if you need it. I'm still young and limber, and quite able to clamber in an out of those small seats. Hence, the Mazda5 is about the perfect vehicle to party in with your friends. Think about it: You can take five buddies with you, wherever you are going. Each of them will have at least one cupholder, if not more. Crank up the tunes, hit the gas, and head out on the open road. Perhaps best of all: What kind of cop is going to pull over a Minivan? If that isn't as close to my perfect car as it gets, well... I would settle for an Aston Martin. As far as handling more plebian tasks, the Mazda5 seems like it would be able to handle just about anything you might ask. Every now and then, we have to take my Grandparents with us when we go places. That makes six passengers. The Mazda5 has six seats. While it may not be the most comfortable journey for those in the 3rd row, it beats having to take two cars. For grocery getting, there is very little cargo room with the third seat up. Fold it flat, though, and you open up a caverous space to haul all sorts of perishable goods. Fold down the 2nd row as well, and you've got an absolutely titanic (if not quite flat) amount of space; I can't think of anything that you would have to carry within reason that would not fit. In another contrast to the HHR, it's all carpeted back there, so the denser foodstuffs would have at least a little bit of something to hang on to when you start carving the corners. In terms of practicality, I think the Mazda5 can truly do it all, while still delievering 4-cylinder fuel economy. Maybe it sounds a little too good to be true. Maybe it is. But I'm plenty convinced. The Mazda5 gets another 1 2 3 4 5 OVERALL SCORE: 23 (Max. 25, Min. 5) FINAL THOUGHTS: I came into that test drive thinking that the Mazda5 would be spot on in just about every other field, but then make a huge compromise in the powertrain department. I'm glad to say I was wrong. For my money, there is no better crossover vehicle on the market today. Nothing else matches the Mazda5's remarkable blend of do-it-all utility with such car-like handling, an eager powertrain, and styling that is pleasing to the eye and the touch, inside and out. If me and my parents can afford it, I think this will be the one.

NOTE: I was dumb enough not to bring my camera along for this test drive, so this Edmunds stock photo will have to do. More to come! Exterior I wouldn't be the first to suggest that the HHR looks like a more muscular PT Cruiser. That formality aside, the HHR's styling is pretty good to my eyes. Tall, boxy and, most importantly, it looks pretty unique parked in a lot full of Impalas. Those who are attempting to wean themselves off of SUVs will find the HHR's bold chrome grille and trucky stance especially inviting. One feature I thought was really nifty: The gas cap is flush with the body, but, rather than pressing a release inside, you push the cap in to release it, rather like clicking a mouse. Nevertheless, no matter how good the HHR might look, there is no denying that it is copying directly from the PT Cruiser, so I give it 1 2 3 4 5. Interior This is where that tall roof pays big dividends. My brother, who, you may recall, is about 6'3" and 300 lbs, fit into the front seat with no problem. Even with my Fedora hat on, there was still at least 3 inches of headroom left for me. Plus, you could probably carry some big stuff in there with the seats folded. However, that is about the only bright spot. Not that the rest of the interior is bad; compared to GM products of the past, it is a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, it's still a step or two behind the Imports. As a result, the interior comes off as merely average. The front seats are comfy and supportive, but the rear seats are stiff, and the back is slanted too far back to be comfortable. Also, there is a plastic panel on the back of the front seats, which dug into my femur at about its halfway point... Ouch! The dash plastics, though they have a nice grain, glare in the bright sunlight (a big automotive peeve of mine). There was a noticable gap in between the plastic panel that connects the steering wheel spokes to the wheel, and it looked extremely cheap. The sound system, despite its gee-whiz iPod jack, had medocre sound quality, and the GM corprate faceplate screams "Rental!" Lastly, the Manual shifter, which has a pretty chrome top, is mounted one or two inches too low. The HHR's interior is neither particularily stylish nor does it posess any substance, though it does show a few signs that someone at GM is paying attention. For an average performance, it gets an average score: 1 2.5 3 4 5. Powertrain Oh, lord, where to start! The base model HHR we tested was fitted with the base model powertrain, a 2.2L. Ecotec i4 that (supposedly) dishes out 140-ish horsepower and 150 lbs/ft. of torque. On paper, that sounds like decent, if not thrilling motivation. But not all four-cylinder engines are created equal, and you can't believe everything you read on the spec sheet. I'll come right out and say it: The base Ecotec motor is an absolute dog. It provides adequate acceleration around town (but who wants "adequate"?), where the torque curve serves its purpose. Still, there isn't that much twist to be had... It's just the nature of Detroit engines, which always seem to provide more torque down low than an Import can muster. However, this engine also has one of the worst traits of Big 3 blocks: A distinct, pushrod-like slothfulness when raising the revs. Getting out onto a multilane Highway or Freeway, we instinctively mashed the go pedal. We waited for what seemed like forever as the tach begrudgingly crawled towards the redline. There is no kick-in-the-pants burst of acceleration, no growl from the exhaust pipes, no nothing. Just quiet, and the two dashboard needles slowly moving towards 12:00. Needless to say, the HHR's powertrain hardly lives up to the hot rod styling. Bear in mind, too, that we were sampling the 5-Speed Manual transmission. I shudder to think how the optional 4-Speed slushbox performs. The stickshift itself, along with the aforementioned problem of being to short, is rubbery and vague, offering little insight with regards to where one gear ends and the next begins. It is like pushing a teaspoon through a big, thick bowl of porridge. The clutch is very nice, but, after all of the above, it is tantamount to saying, "Well, Osama Bin Laden may be an evil man who wants us all to die, but darn if he doesn't have a well-groomed beard!" While I have no doubt that the optional 2.4L. motor, delivering some 170 horses, would provide a more lively driving experience, the base 2.2L. Ecotec can only be described by one word: Pathetic. It gets a 1 2 3 4 5. Ride & Handling I begin to wonder if the HHR was sent to the Buick Academy of Blandness for tuning of the ride & handling characteristics. If there is one thing they got very right, it is the quietness. The HHR cruises in serenity, with a quietness that seems astonishing given its breadbox shape and humble, Cobalt roots. If you're not going anywhere in a hurry, the HHR is a nice place to be. I predict lots of buyers from the 50+ market will be getting into these little trucks... You know, the guys and girls who remember the original Suburban that the HHR is supposed to emulate. Other than that, it is another average performance. It doesn't do well at anything, and it doesn't stink at anything, either. The ride is okay. The handling is decent, though there is some noticable body roll in the corners, especially freeway ramps. It responds briskly enough to inputs, but not with any particular clarity or precision that some Import models provide (more on that later). On the other hand, though, the two cars I drive at present are a Grand Marquis and a Grand Caravan. Even with such an milquetoast performance, the HHR could outhandle either one of those boats with little effort. Thanks to the successful quiet tuning and my own bias, I'll let the HHR slip by with a 1 2 3.5 4 5. Practicality The HHR's tall interior wins it a few points here. Like I said, it makes sense when you've got a big dude like my brother to cart around. And it would be great if you ever had to carry something very tall and long, like a large TV set... Just flip down the rear seats by pulling up on the golf tee-looking thing near the headrests, which GM finally figured out at least a decade after Toyota. With the rear seats up, there is a decent amount of cargo space. A plastic panel can be removed from the bottom for an extra two inches or so of depth, and the panel can be set up as a picnic table. A splendid idea... If only Chrysler hadn't thought of it years before. As with an increasing number of vehicles on the market, the cargo area and the backseat-backs are covered in hard plastic, which, while easy to clean up, invites a mess by offering virtually no traction for grocery bags and the like... Good thing the HHR doesn't invite spirited driving! On the downside, the HHR simply doesn't have the versatility that only a third row of seats can offer. What if I want to go somewhere with more than four people, and go there comfortably? And, if you have a third row, you can always take it out/flip it down for tons of cargo room whenever you don't need it. That said, the HHR does great for a conventional, 5-seat vehicle, so I'll award it a solid 1 2 3 4 5 in this category. OVERALL SCORE: 15 (Max. 25, Min. 5) FINAL THOUGHTS: I wanted to like the HHR, I really did. Sadly, though, the HHR is yet another vehicle from GM that manages to be merely competent at its debut. Time will not be friendly to this little trucklet, as it ages and far more superior competitors arrive on the scene. Like all GM products, it is a great leap forward over the GM model that preceeded it. But it is not a great leap forward over its competitors in any way. My advise to GM: Don't benchmark the competiton. Rather than taking a look at the PT Cruiser and saying, "We need one of these! Clone it!", you need to take a look at the PT Cruiser thoroughly and think, "If I was Chrysler, what would I do to make this better?"

A pity they never built it, but I can see where it influenced other Buick models, like the 1997 Regal. It also pretty much set the tone for every Buick concept that followed it for 5 or so years.

Actually, Chrysler's V6 engines are pretty torquey. The trouble is that, in most applications, they are hooked up to power-sapping, ancient and woefully unreliable 4-Speed Automatic transmissions.

Not quite yet, at least in this market. I'd say give it another 10 years. Japan is a different story. "Unfocused?" Most Toyota models that I can think of are about as non-descript as you can get. As for having too many products, I would say yes. However, they do a much, much better job of disguising their cloned models that GM has done until now/the near future. Only in the field of engineering staff, as the recent Corolla delay demonstrates. From any other perspective, they do amazingly well. They employ only enough people to get the job done, and no more... Unlike the bloated staff of the Big 3. Time will catch up to Toyota in another 10 or so years when the first generation of workers begin to retire en-masse, but, even then, it shouldn't be nearly as big of a thorn in their side as the UAW is for GM, Ford and DCX. Toyota's quality isn't really suffering... It's just kind of stagnant. I'd say they still make about the same percentage of duds that they did 5-10 years ago. Of course, they have increased production signifigantly since then, and the more cars you make, the more bad cars are going to be built. Also, a couple of competitors have managed to improve dramatically and sneak past Toyota's stagnant scores. It will take a while for the buying public to catch onto this, though... and, even when they do, Toyota will still be making cars that are within a few percentage points as good as the next rung higher up on the ladder. It's just a result of overall quality improving for all automakers. Since most folks these days only "own" their car for 4 or 5 years, anyway, that point is redundant. We're living in a time of plenty, and folks have the money and the means to purchase a new set of wheels every couple of years. Combine that with the overall improvement of quality for all automakers in the last decade, and reliability really doesn't count for much anymore. It still is a strong selling point, though.

I dunno... It looks sort of like an overfed Pontiac Torrent with a Yukon-ish interior to my eyes. Better looking than the Outlook, but I think it would be a stretch to call it pretty (except in comparison to past GM products). I gave it a 2.

Well, if that doesn't convince people that Cadillac is serious about their interiors, I don't know what will. If this is a foregleam of what the next CTS is bringing to the table, I think Cadillac will have a very bright future. I'm betting, though, that all this hand-stitched leather and exotic wood and so on will cost a pretty penny. Not as though the SRX is cheap now (especially when you pile on the options), but I'd expect to see a noticeable bump in price.