Published by admin November 20th, 2007
in 3.5 Stars and Kia.
The first time I saw a Kia Amanti, before I knew it was a Kia, I thought to myself “What car is that? Is that some new Mercedes or something?” It actually fooled me into believing it was a true luxury car by it’s outer styling and established grill. When I saw who made the car, I blushed and quickly changed the subject. In retrospect, I think it’s the biggest compliment I could have given it. It confused me into thinking it was a true luxury car.

The Kias are coming a long way, and they’ve been winning the hearts of people across the country, but it still seems weird to me to call a Kia a luxury car maker, even though the Amanti is entering into that class.
Related Posts
Smokey and the Bandit turn 30, Beer run ensues in honor2007 Chrysler Pacifica TouringReview: 2007 Dodge NitroWe’re BACK!
Published by admin October 30th, 2007
in 3 Stars and Lincoln.
This week I had the 2007 Lincoln MKZ, otherwise known as the Ford Fusion. This car is nice. “Nice.” I think that’s the best way to put it. There’s nothing wrong with nice. Nice is good. I like nice. But does nice get me excited? Do people inquire about nice? Does nice make you do something you probably shouldn’t, but just can’t help yourself? No. Nice is just… nice.

The MKZ has a sturdy build, while not looking overweight. It’s got very minimal lines, which are pleasant and unoffending. The outside looks slightly agile with a hint of excitement, but never goes overboard and keeps one foot in the safe zone.
Related Posts
Smokey and the Bandit turn 30, Beer run ensues in honor2007 Chrysler Pacifica TouringReview: 2007 Dodge NitroWe’re BACK!
Published by Jason October 15th, 2007
in 3 Stars and Ford.
Take a Ford Freestyle, change the name to a former best-selling car, add an “X”, and well, throw in every feature that Ford offers and what do you have? The 2008 Ford Taurus X. An under-whelming, expensive, and generally uninspiring SUV. OK, that’s a little harsh, but it’s moves like this that demonstrates why American automobiles continue to fall at the hands of Japanese and even Korean automakers.

The Taurus was a great-selling car. Obviously people found it’s value-for-the-money to be about right, but for years, I saw people driving them thinking, “What kind of person walks into a Ford dealership and drives away in a Taurus? And are they content after their purchase?” I think this almost every time I see a Taurus. Who buys these? And now, with the Taurus X, filled to the brim with options, and a sticker at just over $38,000, I’m even more unsure.
Related Posts
Review: Ford Taurus XReview: Ford F250 Super Duty2007 Ford Escape Hybrid2007 Lincoln MKZ
Published by admin October 15th, 2007
in 5 stars and Volvo.
Beautiful, elegant lines is what defines this car, inside and out. And while the differences over the past years’ models aren’t dramatic, the result of those years of refinement to the current styling is. From close up, to far away this car is beautiful, and the inside only amplifies that sentiment.

The interior is definitely one of the nicest I’ve seen in a car under $60k, and while the price of this car reached $56,000, it started at a humble $38,000 (before adding the V8 and a basket-full of features and expensive luxuries). For a car this nice, I can’t believe it has a base price so low. However, I’d be heart-broken to strip out those luxuries which quickly added up to and took this car from one price class to another.
Related Posts
Review: 2008 Volvo V70Review: 2007 Volvo XC90Review: 2008 Volvo XC70Review: 2006 Volvo V50 T5 AWD
Published by Jason August 17th, 2007
in 3.5 Stars and Chrysler.
This is the Chrysler Pacifica. Or, the MiniVan of Dreams. It’s a four-door van with several forward-thinking features. It’s got a power-lift gate. Normal windows for the rear passengers to roll down. A center console between the backseats. About a hundred different seat configurations (some up, some down, some hidden or taken out), and a multi-media mavens dream.

Featuring the UConnect, it allows you to speak commands to the car without taking your hands or eyes off the wheel/road. It sounds fantastic, but I never got it to work (although, I barely gave it the college try, and didn’t read the manual… But I stick by my guns that I shouldn’t have had to.). Did I mention forward-thinking features? Well, it also has the most backwards thinking feature I’ve seen in a long time. Instead of putting the navigation and rear-camera display in the center dash like everyone else in the world, they put it inside the instrument cluster. This makes it almost impossible to look at while backing up (when you’d actually need to use a rear-mounted camera), and extra impossible to use when you’re turning the car while backing up, as your arms and hands and steering wheel all server as obstacles to look past. If you’re going to go through the trouble of putting in these features (camera and nav), please put them somewhere where I can see them, and my passengers can view them. It’s great to have my co-pilot watching the navigation and telling me what to expect, but when it’s out of their view, and ultimately, out of mine, it’s worthless.

By the way, that photo above? DEFINITELY a ’simulation.’ The video doesn’t look anywhere near that clean.
Related Posts
Quick Review: 2005 Chrysler CrossfireReview: 2006 Chrysler 300C SRT-8Smokey and the Bandit turn 30, Beer run ensues in honorReview: 2007 Dodge Nitro