Duncan

the real tragedy is the FJ cruiser.

All of the so-called undesirable parts of the Element (weird side doors, odd styling, spartan interior), and some even worse traits besides (atrocious fuel economy, rough ride, expensive, raping a legendary predecessor in the name of marketing) - it's a real winner for the Big T!

Well, IMHO, I think Honda Element should be called as a 'TOASTER' on wheel, yet the press chewed on Aztec like there's no tomorrow while praised about Element. To me, the opposite should be true.

Sorry Element fans and its PROUD owners, I can't help it.

I have to defend the poor Element here, just a little, because my dad has one (yeah, the irony - he's 60!) and absolutely loves it.

If you take out the back seats (fully removable, of course) and use it to haul stuff (like my 32-inch TV, or my entire assembled computer desk, or 20 bags of topsoil, etc.), then it's perfect. On the other hand, if you're expecting it to be the luxury equivalent of an Audi Q7, then maybe you should lower your sights a little.

The Element is a much better definition of "truck" than most of the other vehicles in its market segment. No, you can't climb the Rubicon with it, but Honda would also readily admit it wasn't designed for that. It's a solid, safe, useful and reliable little hauler - deceptively so, actually.

You can't say that about many other small utes (re: the RAV4 review by Reg, for instance), or even some minivans.

Okay, defense over. Feel free to ridicule away now, but I made my point.

(Oh, about the Aztek - yes, it was certainly useful and reliable as anything else, but you simply can't overlook its hideous exterior design. At least the Element is mostly inoffensive - sure, you notice it, but you don't get a gag reflex either.)

MT's Car/Truck/SUV/$h!box of the year is strictly a marketing exercise, significant of nothing. You'll note that almost as soon (if not before, in some cases) the issue goes out, the manufacturer in question is already pimping their "of the Year" status.

For instance, I saw that the Mazda CX-9 (again, a dubious choice compared to the much more significant Enclave, but there you go) had won via Mazda's own TV ads - I don't even recall seeing the SUVotY issue on the shelves. Then again, maybe I wasn't looking that hard, either.

I wrote MT off as a serious automotive magazine around the time they started devoting about three issues a year to Viper vs. whoever comparison tests. Don't get me wrong, I do love the Viper long, long time, but is it really necessary to "stack it up" against anything and everything with an engine? They also devoted a cover and six thinly-texted pages to a one-off "Suburban-fighter" from Dodge that turned out to actually be a Ram nose grafted to a "real" GMC Suburban, built by some guy who never had any intention of making more.

Same reason I stopped caring about Automobile Magazine (not surprisingly, from the same publisher) - when their annual All-Star awards became less a matter of rewarding truly excellent achievements and more about what the editors' favorites were. Then again, Automobile has always been more dubious as a source of automotive info regardless, so maybe that's not surprising. Generally, they're more excited about the wine selection at the name-drop-special restaurant they took the "long-term" 911 to this month.

The only awards I trust are the Car and Driver 10Best Cars/5Best Trucks (and even then with a grain of salt, since they still can't get off their BMW fixation).

Yeah. This is one of those stories that remind me why I read Autoblog - for their timeliness in reporting, not so much for their writing skills.

And this doesn't scratch the surface of bias - try Autoblog Green on for size...

The pricks who line up to buy this, even more so.

Oh, most assuredly, there are vast numbers of pricks who will buy this. And I will laugh at them incessantly.

The headline of this thread, by the way, is demeaning to the AMC Eagle. At least it offered real utility and honest (if not impressive) styling. Also, it wasn't the TOTAL F**KING ANTITHESIS of what its builder stood for in the automotive market.

Oldsmobile sucking a lemon.

Bonus points for the classic Edsel reference. Nice!

As for this piece of sh...um, "new idea", I'm not feeling it at all. BMW and Porsche are apparently trying to outdo each other in who can have the most wrong vehicle for their brands first. BMW appears to have won this round, but it's only a matter of time until the Panamera sedan arrives from Stuttgart.

I was never a huge BMW fan to start with, though I always appreciated the older (pre-1995 or so) models. I appreciate them even more now...

Hmmm...inspiration?

GM X cars begat the FWD A bodies, they were basically X cars with bigger rear seats/trunks. They lasted until 1996, so GM got some $$ out of that platform.

Chrysler has said that the Caliber has brought in more poriftiable sales than the Neon did. But, i do believe that thye need a compact sedan below it, along with a B class subcompact car.

Part of that "profitable sales" bit comes from the fact that they shared the platform and engine development with Mitsubishi and Hyundai, which had to have cut the costs quite a bit. The Neon was developed entirely in-house.

Since the platform is related to that of the Avenger/Sebring, maybe Chrysler felt having a compact sedan with many of the midsize's attributes would cut into the bigger cars' sales. All I know is that the Caliber, to me, is basically a disappointment compared to the very solid Cobalt or even (dare I say it) the entirely out-of-date Focus. And that doesn't even begin to consider the huge image gap next to the Japanese or Korean entries on the market.

The next step is to find a consolidated, consistent system that incorporates all of a car's digital features, sort of like Ford's Sync. If GM could streamline those things along with OnStar capabilities, that would be great.

Also, I know there are a number of cars that have on-board hardrives that can store music and play them by the touch of a button, but do any have video file capabilities that can play on rear-seat screens?

I don't know, but when some of those cars are Chrysler Sebrings, I think more about throwing up than I do about watching streaming video.

What'd be really cool is if International were to get creative and maybe build a new Scout on the H3 platform...use the Atlas five, the 5.3 V8 and their own upcoming small diesel for power.

Imagine it with mini-big-rig styling, and that sweeping waterfall grille...

How about none of the above. I don't think it should come here at all.

Wow, nice point. Glad you put all that thought and effort into it like the rest of us have.

Was there perhaps more to come from this outburst, or were you just gonna throw it out like a live grenade and see what happens?

Can anybody fill me in on what GMC car they will be using as the starting point for the new car-based pickup truck? I can't seem to recall what GMC's car is called. Oh wait, they don't make one!

And they didn't when the Sprint and Caballero were around either. What's your point?

The point of the El Camino was never about what car it was based on, it was about the combination of utility with style. (Ford's Ranchero sold reasonably well regardless of whether it was a Falcon, a Fairlane, a Torino or an LTD II - the same was true for the Elky as a Biscayne, a Chevelle or a Malibu.)

Make it a Chevrolet! It's the only way to go. As it has been said before, 2009 is the year the El Camino turns 50 and the El Camino would be a fine machine to have on showroom floors next to the new Camaro. Otherwise GM might as well just scrap the plans all together, pussy out at the eleventh hour like they've done for the past fifteen years, and go back to working on slightly changing the design of the headlights and taillights on all their front wheel drive crap like they do every year or so. Wouldn't want to make waves or anything.

My thing with making it a GMC is that they are already in the process of reinventing themselves (along with Pontiac, while Buick seems very silent lately). Calling it an El Camino right off the bat instantly saddles the car with all kinds of baggage and expectations. You will recall that when the Monaro-GTO arrived in this country, there was huge fanfare about the car's capabilities - but also huge disappointment in that it had all that classic heritage to live up to, and came off as something less than expected in the personality department. ("Hot-rod Cavalier" was a rather popular epithet.) A new Elky would likely have the same problem, whereas a GMC version of the same could begin anew.

Like I said before in my own proposal, give it to GMC first, let it become a success, then give Chevy a version that would end up being more exclusive and, hence, more "special" in the long run.

And no, there's no reason for Pontiac to have a G8 pickup. One other interesting idea, though, and I'm surprised no one else has thought of it yet:

What if it's coming here badged as a Holden Ute?

Perfect example: Nissan Titan

Damn straight. What happened to that "huge blow against the domestics", anyway? I still see them around, but not nearly in the numbers I would have expected based on the hype of a few years ago.

Toyota's gotten better at the full-size pickup thing - for instance, they now offer a full LINE of engines rather than the same old V6 and an underpowered V8. And we all remember the T100, right? Oh, wait, no we don't.

I have absolutely no need for one at the moment, but if I were in the market, my short list in big half-ton pickups would run as follows:

1 ) GMC Sierra 1500 (best-looking and best-engineered big truck on the market)

2 ) Chevrolet Silverado 1500 (okay, at least the best-engineered)

3 ) Dodge Ram 1500 (still a desirable piece, though it's due to be replaced soon)

4 ) Ford F150 (good-looking and tough, but lacking in raw power)

5 ) Toyota Tundra (best of the imports, though that's not saying much - besides, it's not very attractive)

6 ) Nissan Titan (meh - it looks okay and pulls hard, but it has weird details)

7 ) Lincoln Mark LT (why does this exist, anyway?)

8 ) Chevrolet Avalanche (if I'm buying a truck, why do I need it to be an SUV too?)

9 ) Cadillac Escalade EXT (same question as the Avalanche, but add $20k and stir until nauseous)

Two ideas for the Canyon, Syclone-style:

Canyon SP - a dropped, monochrome edition with standard five-cylinder power and unique trim all around. (The "looks" version.)

Canyon SPX - the same, but with either (a) a twin-turbo 3.5 five-cylinder or (b) a 6.0 V8. Either way, I want at least 350hp under the hood. Standard AWD would also be nice. (This, of course, is the "go" edition.)

See also my plans for GMC's version of the Holden Ute, on page seven of that hotly contested topic within this section of the forum.

A little late to the party, I know, and I don't have the benefit of being that well-known on this board either. However, I've done my share of backseat automotive marketing over the past few years on the net, and I've gotten pretty good at analyzing this stuff.

That said, I'm in the GMC camp on this one. There are several reasons why, and I think it makes a good business case. (NOTE TO CHEVY FANS: Keep reading, you'll see...)

1) GMC gets actual marketing money these days. Back when the Sprint and Caballero were new, they did not get the same attention and the sales figures show it. (It also didn't help that the Sprint/Caballero had absolutely NO distinction from their better-known counterparts over at Chevy, save for the occasional ugly stripe package.) I will grant you that, simply by the realities of their smaller dealer network, a GMC version will not be as visible as a Chevy, but we're all agreed anyway that this is a niche vehicle from the start.

2) GMC desperately needs a halo vehicle. Saturn's got one (the Sky), Pontiac's got one (the Solstice), Cadillac's got two (the XLR and the Escalade), Chevy will have two (the Corvette and the Camaro), and I would argue that Buick now has one too (the Enclave, which seems to be popping up all over the place lately). GMC has...a whole mess of Denali models. Give GMC the Ute and you have the basis for an easy new marketing message: "Redefining Professional Grade." If a sporty sedan-pickup with available AWD doesn't redefine GMC, I'm not sure what else would.

3) Now one thing that everyone's forgetting, and it will be painful, but listen anyway and then take a cold shower. We must do well to remember that we, members of this (and probably other) automotive forum sites, are FANS of ALMOST EVERYTHING automotive. There is a whole other subset of the public known as the "non-enthusiast" who simply see cars and trucks as transportation devices. You know, people who buy Ford Rangers or Hyundai Sonatas because they're just good enough. To these people, a vehicle like the Ute is going to be a non-starter no matter what - "It doesn't have a back seat like other trucks", "It won't carry my Jobox", "There's no trunk", "The back window doesn't open", etc. etc. ad infinitum. Also, there is naturally going to be negative stigma from people who never were fans of the sedan-pickup concept to begin with - they will always deride such a vehicle as a half-breed or a seventies throwback, regardless of whether or not it drives well or looks good. (I consider these people to be narrow-minded and lacking in imagination or a sense of fun, but I digress.) Which all makes the point that no matter what badge you put on it, this truck is naturally going to be a vehicle with a narrow focus.

4) Bob Lutz may actually be right - Chevy does have a TON of stuff on its plate right now. Here's the pipeline for Chevy:

Aveo - new hatch coming soon, sedan recently refreshed

Cobalt - refresh coming soon, along with the revived SS model and its new turbo four

HHR - new turbo SS model, new panel variant, probable refresh in year or two

Volt - however it comes out, this is a big introduction by any stretch

Malibu - all-new stem-to-stern, with a Hybrid model to boot

Impala - soon to be Zeta-fied as the rational person's G8 and (possibly) a new entry in the burgeoning cop car sales race

Camaro - 'nuff said, now it just has to get here

Corvette - gets more power for '08 and there's that lingering rumor of a Z06-Plus version

Equinox - refreshed soon, with new powertrains and improved interior

Traverse (or whatever) - another crossover (sigh)

Tahoe - new last year, with the Hybrid model now appearing

Suburban - see Tahoe, delete Hybrid

TrailBlazer - soon to be dead?

Express - forgotten, but a consistent seller

Colorado - due for a refresh and a possible V8 upgrade

Silverado - new this year, still phasing out the "Classic" models, waiting on a new SS version

Avalanche - new last year, probably due for a special model or two, maybe an SS?

And here's GMC's:

Savana - still around

Acadia - new this year, and definitely the middle sister to the Outlook (default choice) and Enclave (connoisseur's choice). V8 coming?

Envoy - soon to be travelin' on

Yukon - new last year, Hybrid now available, Denali losing out to Escalade among lux-ute fans

Canyon - if anyone remembers it exists, it should get an update soon (I actually see more Isuzu i-Series than I do Canyons)

Sierra - new this year, Denali is a nice exclusive on this platform

You can see the disparity. And even if you add in Pontiac and Buick models, it still doesn't reach the full scope and range of what Chevy dealers have on their lots at any given moment. All of this is meant to make the point that as a Chevy, the Ute would be seriously lost after a short while. And don't say that the Ute is a unique product - so was the previous Camaro, and it eventually settled into the background too.

5) Finally, I honestly think that if the sedan-pickup idea is going to be revived, it ought to get a truly fresh start. And since very few people (outside of we, the fanatics, that is) even remember that GMC once offered such a vehicle, that brand might as well get the shot at re-introducing it to the American market. Even better, GMC as a brand is a bit of a clean slate - it has always been a slave (though never a victim) of fashion and can easily trend toward whatever bent you'd like it to go in (luxury, sports, work, family, etc.). This gives you the chance to try several versions of the concept and see what sticks.

Henceforth, I present the following proposal for what I'd like to call...the GMC Cruz.

(That's "Cruz" as in "Santa Cruz", which is of course a city along California's "El Camino Real". That it happens to sound like the word "cruise" is also beneficial.)

Body styles:

* The basic two-door, two-seat pickup (better known as the Ute)

* A four-door crew cab pickup (better known as the Crewman)

Body options:

* The standard flush-fit bed and tailgate (all models)

* The larger, more robust "tray" bed for heavy-duty work (SLE and SLT models only)

Engines:

* 260hp 3.6 DOHC V6 (standard) - 6-speed manual or 5-speed auto

* 315hp 5.3 OHV V8 (optional) - 5-speed auto

* 365hp 6.0 OHV V8 (performance) - 6-speed manual or 5-speed auto

Models:

* SLE (well-equipped with standard V6, RWD) - two-door or four-door

* SLT (fully equipped with standard V6 and optional 5.3 V8, RWD or optional AWD) - two-door or four-door

* SP (as for SLE, but with sporty trim and standard 5.3 V8, RWD or optional AWD) - two-door or four-door

* SPX (as for SLT, but with sporty trim and standard 6.0 V8, RWD only) - two-door (four-door later?)

* Denali (premium equipment and standard 6.0 V8, AWD only) - four-door (two-door later?)

This is a first-year lineup, of course, and the premium models would naturally follow a staggered release schedule. I'd work it out for the two-door models to arrive first in SLE, SLT and SP trim, then add the SPX a few months later. Four-door SLE, SLT and SP models would then arrive a couple months after the SPX two-door, followed a few months later by the loaded and chromed-out Denali four-door to cap the line. SPX four-door and Denali two-door models would be offered eventually, but contingent solely on sales of the original versions.

You'll note that these models, save for the ultra-lux Denali, roughly parallel Holden's own trims: the Crewman comes in base or S forms with V6 power, and in sporty SS guise with the 6.0 V8. I've simply added the 5.3 as a "base V8" option in between, so as to split the difference between the V6 models and the fire-breathing 6.0. Naturally, both V8s would offer cylinder-shutoff technology for improved fuel economy. And hey, maybe we could get that new diesel V8 under the hood eventually...

Marketing would continue to be along the lines of GMC's current "Professional Grade" mantra, but pitched as an executive express (especially in SLT and Denali trim) or the fastest production pickups on the market (in SP and SPX trim, a claim easily made now that the Ram SRT and F150 Lightning have disappeared). And with the serious chassis underneath this thing, I don't think it would be out of line to pit the SPX against, say, a BMW 5 or 6 Series just for giggles.

Assuming success of this "basic" line, one could then look into adding something like a Z71 option with raised ride-height and basic off-road equipment for SLE and SLT models - something like the Subaru Outback in concept, but easily more durable in off-pavement excursions. (Here's an easy ad: tout the fact that, unlike the so-called Outback by Subaru, the Cruz was actually developed and tested in the "real" Outback of Australia.)

Just print up the brochures, and let's get going!

One final note (HEY, CHEVY GUYS! HERE YOU GO): None of these plans exclude the possibility of a Chevy Camino (yes, I dropped the "El") at some point in the future. Offered only as a two-door (to give GMC some retained exclusivity with the four-door), it would offer LS or LT trim with the V6 or 5.3 V8 (AWD optional), as well as an SS model with the 6.0 V8 (RWD only). The key here would be ensuring that it maintains a notably different appearance from its GMC counterpart. In this way, the Camino is actually made MORE distinctive by the fact that it's now the exclusive version, while the GMC is the "volume" model that everyone else has. And besides, Chevy's already got the Avalanche as a four-door sport pickup. (Bigger, yes, but it's obviously got its own fan base.)

The best thing about all this is that there's basically no competition for this sort of car-based vehicle here in the US. The only reasonably similar vehicle of recent years, Subaru's half-baked Baja, recently left the market at about the same level of obscurity upon which it entered.

Comments, questions, and suggestions are always appreciated.

Really liking the two-door hatch, Viper. I can only hope they sell that style here on the next go-round - the Accent and Yaris currently own that market by default, but neither is really to my liking as tiny cars go.

The sedan's good too, but if it were my rendering (I'm okay at drawing, but I can only dream) I'd bump up the line of the rear decklid just a touch - give a little more mini-CTS feel.

Good details, too - love the "hidden" door handles and the big alloys, though both might be a touch expensive in this price class.

*raises eyebrow*

Wowa ... I may have to stop at a dealer or 2 to see what an '06 Dodge Charger might sell for.........

Cort:33swm."Mr Monte Carlo.Mr Road Trip".pig valve.pacemaker

WRMNshowcase.lego.HO.model.MCs.RT.CHD = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort

"Get to what's real" ... Van Halen ... 'Jump'

I'm betting the Charger was not one of the models they had sitting around - more like Durangos, Dakotas and Stratuses.

You never know, though...that would be a good deal if one's available.

Nintendo builds all its game systems in China, and has for many years now. They are generally known for having the most durable products in the video game industry. (For instance, I dare you to find a way to break a Game Boy short of snapping it in half.)

Microsoft, on the other hand, builds all its Xbox hardware in Mexico. At least until very recently, Xbox 360s were some of the most problem-packed units on the market.

You decide where better stuff comes from...

Back to the minivans--I think the way to promote them is to equip the base models of the heavier next-gen models with an engine that's already overworked in the current tubby minivans and hook it to a mashed-potato-drive 4-speed transaxle. And while they're at it, they should make that the only powertrain option for the base models. Finally, for people who want the desirable powertrain, make them jump through at least $10,000 worth of hoops to get it.

That ought to do the trick.

NOTE: I've had SIX Mopar minivans down through the years and have really liked them. They offered a lot of comfort, utility and reasonable performance for the price. The new ones are going to be bigger, heavier and in base form anyway, gutless. I think they ought to make the torquier 3.8L/6-speed ATX standard and have the FFV 3.3L/4-speed ATX available as a credit option for fleets 'n' stuff. All of the other minivans have STANDARD engines in the 240-265 HP range; but here's Chrysler coming to bat with a 170 HP wheezer--an engine that does OK in my current "shorty" Caravan, but will be overwhelmed in the bigger/heavier next-gen models. At least the pushrod 3.8L has some torque, in spite of its puny 198 HP rating. The 4.0L/6-speed ATX combo should prove at least competitive--but you've got to pony up for the top-of-the-line model with all the toys in order to get it. Stupid.

Well, that's year one. In '09 they'll make the 4.0 standard on everything while at the same time simplifying the option list - and then say that was the plan all along.

I still think they'll do really well with these vans, though, if only because they're the ONLY American minivans left.

Hey, I kinda like the G6 coupe...

But it would be nice to see a successor for the '97 Grand Prix coupe that my brother's girlfriend has been driving around for a while. Still a good-looking car, but it's getting a little long in the tooth.

they actually might sell a lot of them in a hurry.

And then, immediately thereafter, the market for Equinox/Torrent parts would just collapse.

Gosh, I'm just thinking back to all those times I needed a DVD player in my rugged, outdoorsy fullsize pickup...I mean, what will the family do without it?

Brian's point, though, was still best. (Which is why I think Chrysler's new vans are gonna absolutely clean up against the much more expensive competition.)

I'm referred to truck and SUVs, for people who need those vehicles.

For instance, GM began by offering its hybrid Silverados for sale to commercial fleets only. That is one possibility to keep them out of the hands of show-offers.

We're agreed on that point - the buyers that really need that boost in mileage, like fleet operators, should have it.

Even if show-offers buy them, at least it's not a gas-only truck/SUV.

Which is still a gain. How will you convince show-offers to stop buying a truck of any kind?

There is a large gain in dropping a full hybrid into a truck; 40% for city, as GM stated.

Again, I will grant you that point. However, I think the time of the "family pickup" is finally beginning to wane.

With massive investment by the industry to go hybrid, this technology is well researched.

What will you do to stop GM, Chrysler, BMW, Mercedes, Toyota, Honda, and the licensees Ford and Nissan?

I personally can't do anything to stop them, if that's what you're implying. I just think that their powertrain development money could be better spent on improving and optimizing technologies we already have via use of direct injection, new valvetrain technology, more sophisticated engine management, etc.

These articles say a battery replacement is $3,000-$8,000, but the failure rate is near 0%.

http://hybridcars.about.com/od/hybridcarfa...batterycost.htm

http://www.hybridcars.com/technology-stori...ment-costs.html

http://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/archive...php/t-5847.html

Please provide more links you find.

That's sufficient proof for me, thank you. It's still expensive compared to a plain old engine rebuild, though.

The articles attribute "failures of batteries" to 2 things:

1. Actual battery failure due to Honda's manual transmission use - hybrids require computer control.

2. Corroded terminal - which shouldn't cost much to fix, but people who handled it were dumb or greedy.

The high cost and resistance by mechanics to repair seems to be from lack of training.

The customers, after much stressful arguments, have been sucessful to reduce to cost to <$1,500.

That's not surprising, given the general history of the automotive repair industry. As for the battery cost negotiation - do Toyota, Honda and the others really want to lose that much money in replacement every time a mechanic flubs a repair?

The technology is sound, but people still try to weasel money out of customers.

That has nothing to do with the hybrid technology itself.

Perhaps some new, to-be-drafted fraud laws could cover these things.

Perhaps laws can force hybrid makers to increase warranty on the battery to 200,000 miles

(currently 100,000 miles / 150,000 miles California)... :AH-HA_wink:

Toyota expects the batteries to last 15 years... it'd be nice if they warrant that.

15 years/200,000 miles...

That would be nice to see.

Write your congressmen!

Fully agreed on the need to warranty the batteries - I wouldn't expect anyone to write a law requiring it, though.

GM just signed 2 contracts for advanced development of lithium batteries.

Do you think the scientific community and GM is that stupid?

No - but that's only because I think GM's hybrid concept (more like a locomotive, which they're pretty familiar with) is a better design to start with.

To compare, it'd be interesting to look up the average life span of gas vehicles.

Engine failures, transaxle failures... there's plenty of costly repairs on regular vehicles already, limiting their lifespan.

This undated article says the average non-hybrid lasts a mere 145,000 miles, 13 years, assuming without any major part replacement.

http://www.safecarguide.com/gui/new/neworused.htm

This is possibly what the California law is based off of.

Calculating US non-hybrid 13 years, 12,000 miles = 156,000 miles lifespan.

UK data is 13.95 years, 8000 miles = 112,686 miles lifespan.

http://www.cfit.gov.uk/docs/2001/scot0122/scot0122/02.htm

Overall, as Toyota predicts, if the battery fails, it's time to junk the car.

And that's no earlier than non-hybrids.

I'm just not fond of the idea of a "general car fault" - why, if I like the car, should I be forced to dispose of it after 13ish years? It's much like the Microsoft model - keep maintaining support on the old stuff just long enough to get people used to it, then get rid of it all in one fell swoop and force everyone to upgrade.

Note that the diesels to come to America are new, experimental techologies on demo cars.

Not the diesels of old.

The Prius and Insight were demo cars for hybrids.

Now come Mercedes' and Honda's diesel demos.

The new diesel technologies haven't been tested for long, and will take a while before they demonstrate their durability and become widespread.

Not even one model year of the new diesels have been tested by the public yet.

What is their failure rate, and what does it cost to repair those newly designed drivetrains?

The hybrid demo, the Toyota Prius, went on sale in 1997.

It's been in public test for 10 years to demonstrate the technology.

Mercedes is hardly new to diesels - I'd think they have a pretty good handle on how to design them to last. (You'll note the numbers of 1970s Benz turbo-diesels that are still chugging along happily and with minimal smoke today.) And Honda, as far as I'm concerned, knows how to design engines - it's kinda why they exist. Granted, they are relatively new to diesels, but I think they've earned the benefit of the doubt.

For that matter, so has GM - because honestly, if there's one thing they do better than anyone else, it's certainly powertrain development.

I don't think we actually disagree on the merits of hybrid technology - I just think there are better ways to use the standard engines we've got now, and that's worth exploring along with side trips into hybriddom (if that's a word...).

I don't understand you guys. The Grand Vitara is about the only mini-ute I would seriously consider for myself - it's the only one with a real body-on-frame structure, which means you could potentially take it somewhere that actually counts as off-road. That, and you can get it with a stick, which is always a plus. (Also, I'm partial to the engine - it's a 2.7-liter derivative of the same fine KL-series V6 that powers my current Mazda 626.)

My dad just bought a Honda Element, which is an absolutely perfect update of the Volkswagen Bus concept (roomy, easy-to-drive and supremely economical) - haven't taken it off-road, though, so we'll see about that yet.

As for the rest: The Torrent/Equinox still strike me as cheap, the RAV4 is now way overblown from its original concept (remember the first one in '96?), the Tucson/Sportage are boring as hell, the CR-V is even uglier than before (if that's possible), the Escape/Mariner/Tribute are incredibly old, the Nitro is a badly-designed piece of crap, I'll wait for the new Liberty, the Outlander is at least quick but has the unfortunate problem of being a Mitsubishi, and the Forester is barely more than a car.

And no, I'm not a big sport-ute fan. Why do you ask?

True, like the Cavalier..it was popular and a big seller for decades, but was still a &#036;h&#33;box.

I guess this is 20th anniv. of the Corolla built in Canada?

I think you're right, but...

Maybe the 20th anniversary of the last reasonably interesting Corolla? The sporty rear-drive ones (SR5 and GT-S) died out in 1987.