Craig's Selection

Fool those who don't know cars: The Sonata looks snobby inside

The Sonata is a sales hit, the Impala is not (well, it’s a hit with rental fleets at least). To find out why, I took both for a spin.

One car is made in a foreign country (no, the Sonata is made in Alabama, it’s the Chevy that is made in Canada) and both have about the same space, horsepower, and cost.  Separating them is two decades of engineering and design.

Boy, have things changed in the last 20 years.

The impala is a flashback to 1992 with its simple and somewhat cheesy interior. It’s functional, but seems a few decades behind the times in terms of design and materials. The Sonata appears to be a Lexus circa 2006 (Lexus RX330 comes to mind), which is an achievement in a $20,000 car. On looks alone (inside and out) you would think that the Sonata is $10,000 more than the Impala. In reality the Impala lists for $5,000 more.

Craig’s Wish List after the jump

The Audi Q5 is attractive and borrows some of the swooping lines from the A5 coupe. Check out the lines on the door.

The Q5 is generally considered to be one of the best small luxury SUVs. It’s also viewed as a “chick” car. So, can the Audi Q5 impress a guy? On a three day test drive I put the car though the ringer and a wet gravel parking lot (not what the Q5 liked). A small luxury SUV should be comfortable, competent, and fun. I found it to be competent, but not as comfortable as it should and not as much fun as it could.

For enthusiast drivers the Q5 has limited appeal. The 2.0T engine lacks consistency. Off the line it hesitates, at 4,000 rpm you get a kick in the head, and past 5,000 rpm it runs out of steam. Talk about inconsistent power delivery. Plus, under full acceleration the automatic keeps the engine above 5,000 rpm, which creates a lot of noise but not much thrust. The automatic routinely shifted before the 6,800 redline even with the gas pedal pinned to the floor. Why even have such a high redline?

The Handling is great on curvy roads. The stiff suspension delivers well-balanced and sporty handling. I raced up on a wet and slippery Highway 9 near Los Gatos, CA with utter confidence (I had the optional lager 19 inch wheels, but not a sports package). An Audi A4 (the basis for the Q5) will under steer more than this heavier Q5. The precise steering and well-sorted suspension almost makes you forget that this is an SUV. Almost. On fast bumpy curves the top-heaviness becomes apparent. Other than that it’s fun to drive, even with the lower grip all season tires.

This comparison seems ridiculous, after all the M3 is a small light coupe and the X6 M a heavy truck like vehicle. But hear me out. Last weekend I attended the BMW M-Power driving event in Half Moon Bay, CA and had a chance to test both vehicles back to back. Before I could drive BMW staff explained to us how the X6 M is a worthy “M” or Motorsport vehicle because:
a) it has the same performance level as the M3
b) it was developed on the Nuerburg Ring by BMW’s Motorsport division.

So, did BMW create a larger M3 or just another way to separate well heeled SUV lovers from their money?

On paper the M3 and X6 M have striking similarities.

Both go from 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, both go 155 mph top speed, both wear the “M” badge, both seat only 4, and both have a small trunk. So, you still think you can’t compare them?

When my Audi broke down a few months ago I got a rental from Enterprise, a Dodge Charger. I didn’t have a chance to publish my thoughts until now, so here we go.

The Dodge Charger feels large, sloppy, and bit lazy. It’s not sophisticated in build quality or handling and never pretends to be. There was a very noticeable gap mismatch on the trunk lid. One side was very tight fitting, the other I could almost stick my pinky finger in it. Well, I guess as long as the trunk opens and closes we are in business.

What you get is a big car with lots of sheet metal and an engine that is good, but not great.
Past 5,000 rpm the engine is coarse and you end up lifting off the gas before it gets there. A four speed automatic in a 2009 (and in 2010 models) is an embarrassment and just shows that Dodge does not give a damn. The Charger would be faster, more responsive, and get better gas mileage with a 6 speed automatic. But Dodge needed to save $200 per car. I wonder where else they saved money.

I tried the 178hp V6 base engine previously but the 250 hp 3.5l engine in my tester is the best engine combo for the Charger. The 368 hp V8 is better still, but makes the car too pricey. Checking CarsDirect.com shows that a Charger SXT goes for about 22K, which is a reasonable attractive price. Honda, Toyota, Ford, GM, and Hyundai all only offer 4 cylinders in that price range. And I rather have an unsophisticated V6 than a cheap sounding 4-cylinder.

Having said all that the Charger has attractive qualities.
It has that hard to define American brawn to it.  It’s almost feels like a family pickup truck. It does the job and never pretends to be anything more than a workhorse that just gets stuff done.

I liked the higher up driving position and the spaciousness of the cabin. It was reasonably quite on the freeway and around town. Comfortable, but not very sporty, it still retains precise steering.

If you are into driving a bit sportier you definitely need to upgrade the stock tires and rims. They are skinny and offer too little traction for cornering, accelerating, or braking. I had a hoot spinning out the rear end when late May rain made the northern California roads slippery.
Low traction tires + rear wheel drive + enough torque from the V6 = fun over-steer in corners.

There is one thing that prevents me from recommending the car.
No, it’s not reliability, which is about average with this engine (according to Consumer Reports) it’s the disappointing crash test results that make this a deal breaker for me. This is a family car and you want maximum safety for your family, right? According to the IIHS side impact crash protection is only marginal, the second lowest score, and therefore unacceptable in my book. There are many other family sedans at the same price point that protect you better.

The 535i GT was hit the ugly stick. Take a look at the back and you want to visit the Audi dealer next door.

I didn’t really want to test dive the car, after all it’s just unattractive. And on top of that it’s expensive. Who wants to drive a cross between Minivan and station wagon for almost $70,000?

The BMW GT in all it's beauty ...

Then I took it for a spin. Yes, it’s still ugly and overpriced, but now it sort of makes sense … considering the BMW line up and pricing scheme.

The Good

The car is large inside, think 750i. Font and back offer plenty of room for well-fed adults. The driving position feels like a lowered X5 with great forward visibility. The handling is better than the X5 but still too top heavy for my taste. It doesn’t handle like a 5 series sedan. It’s more like a lowered X5 without a sports suspension.