Wired: We plug in our Toyota Prius hybrid

After a five-month wait, we finally got our Toyota Prius converted into a Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle. PHEVs are considered to be the next step beyond standard hybrids and perhaps an interim step on the way to pure electric vehicles. Our Prius plug-in will be among the many green machines at Friday’s invitation-only Future of the Car event at our Auto Test Center in Connecticut. (Follow the event on Twitter and here on the Cars blog, with coverage continuing next week.)

Getting plugged in
Several conversion kits are available for the Prius. We chose the HiMotion/A123 module. Having impressed us at an industry conference, this seemed like the most mature technology available. The module is installed at seven locations nationwide. It was pricey, though, and cost us $10,875 (on top of the price of the 2008 Prius Touring — $24,803).

This conversion entails installing a lithium-ion battery pack to augment the Prius’s existing nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) battery. That adds 187 pounds to the rear cargo area. An outlet for charging was cut into the rear bumper. The new battery sits in the spare tire well, which now moves the spare onto a secured tray on top of it. All in all, this reduces luggage space.

We’re told that the Li-Ion battery can supply enough juice to propel the Prius on electric power longer distances and up to higher speeds. Battery supplier A123 claims a 35-40 mile electric-only range from full charge to depletion. Recharging is done by plugging the car into a regular 110-volt household outlet and takes about 5.5 hours to fully charge. A spokesperson from A123, as well as other PHEV advocates, claims that the converted Prius can yield more than 100 mpg. However, drawing such conclusion is neither simple nor straightforward. These claims stem from testing on a dynamometer. Plus, this figure doesn’t take into account the amount of electrical energy that goes in to moving the vehicle. We intend to run it through our regimented on-road fuel economy tests and report the findings online and in Consumer Reports magazine.   

For the purpose of testing this kit, we’ve installed a dedicated outlet with an energy monitor. This way we can see the amount of electricity in kilowatt hours (kWh) that’s going into propelling the car on electricity only. We haven’t yet hooked the car up to our fuel-measuring devices.

In a pure urban setting, our Prius runs on electric power more of the time and reaches higher speeds. We’ve teased the car up to 43 mph on electric drive on a level road. Even with the conversion, the engine kicks in every time the car climbs even a slight grade or when the driver tips into the throttle beyond a gentle prod. The energy monitor in the dash shows the state of charge (SOC) of the Li-Ion in blue. It changes to purple as the battery is close to depletion. The Li-Ion doesn’t get any regeneration from coasting or braking as does the stock NiMH battery.

At this point, our plug-in conversion is meant to give a glimpse of an emerging technology, rather than present a viable alternative to a current car. Stay tuned for in-depth testing.

—Gabe Shenhar 

Discuss hybrids in the forums.

Personal Picks: Sporty cars, part 2

Continuing our staff's personal insights into the October-issue sporty car test group. (Read: “Personal Picks: Sporty cars, part 1.”)

Rick Small: I was a bit disappointed in the new Subaru WRX/STi. The cars have more power but lost some of the sporty feel in acceleration and handling, thus losing some appeal. The Evo is much sportier with better low-end power and crisper handling. It is an enthusiast’s car with a stiff ride, limited driving position, and plenty of noise that may be too much for everyday use for some people. Definitely a “try before you buy.” And the Volkswagen R32 is nice. Still, I like the 135i best. It fits my tall body better than most competing models, and it’s quick, refined and sporty (but expensive). For a lot less money, the Cobalt SS is also quick, sporty and more fun to drive than you’d think.

Mike Quincy: I had the pleasure of buying the BMW 135i for the test program. When I drove it off the lot, I immediately knew this car was special. Didn’t take more than a few miles to realize that maybe (just maybe) this is the car that will help get BMW back on track. The 135i is a thrill to drive – it’s light, quick, has sensitive steering and fits me perfectly. But what turns the corner for this car is that its controls are WAY easier than any BMW we’ve tested for the last four or five years. There’s no iDrive, no confusing navigation system (although this stuff is optional…I wouldn’t bother). I wrote in the car’s logbook that the 135i is “magical.” I’ll also add that the 135i is a car that I’d drive for the rest of my life. Yes, it’s that good.

Gabe Shenhar: The Mitsubishi Lancer Evo really gets my adrenaline going and puts a big grin on my face every time I drive it. This road rocket is a true driving machine with terrific handling; it’s essentially a go-kart with four doors. But you’ve got to be the most die-hard type to endure this car with its stiff ride and frenetic highway behavior.

That’s why my pick is the BMW 135i. It’s agile and fun yet smooth in every move, whether it’s the clutch action, shifter, steering, or the punchy, linear power delivery of the twin-turbo six-cylinder engine. It rides compliantly and lets you hear only the noises you want to hear. The seat, driving position, and interior quality are first class, as in every BMW. The car is perceived as small and expensive. But since it provides such a spectacular driving experience, close to, say, a Porsche Boxster, it’s a relative bargain in my opinion.

Tom Mutchler: For me, this group of sports sedans brought a bunch of surprises:

·    It’s amazing how enjoyable the BMW 135i is to drive, even beyond the high standards set by the various automatic-equipped 3 Series models we’ve tested. As I wrote before in “From the logbook,” it’s not perfect, but it’s a whole lot of fun.

·    What isn’t a whole lot of fun is driving the Subaru WRX and STi. Going beyond the turbocharged powertrain, I enjoyed driving our base Legacy 2.5i sedan more; it had better steering and body control. Tellingly, Subaru is making major revisions to the WRX just one year after introduction. Too bad they didn’t get it right the first time.

·    The Cobalt SS is the prime automotive example of making a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. I liked the supercharged version we tested in 2005, but this turbocharged model is even more fun and refined. It’s truly a welcome surprise.

·    One of the few automotive regrets I have is not buying a first-generation (1991-1994) Nissan Sentra SE-R. The new car, while likely empirically better in every way, just isn’t fun to drive.

Since we combined two price classes here, I have two picks this month. (Let’s assume I need a back seat, so a Miata is out of the running.) For $24K, I’d buy a VW GTI four-door – it’s practical, fun, and well-equipped. At $37K, I would find it very hard to resist an Infiniti G37 coupe. This gentleman’s coupe looks awesome (without all of the boy-racer flippery of the Evo or STi), has a great powertrain, and is roomier than the tight 135i.

One last surprise might be on the horizon: Could the Hyundai Genesis coupe be a contender? The specs and tentative pricing look very promising, but Hyundai isn’t known for building sports cars. We’ll see…

300-hp Club Shootout: BMW 135i vs Mitsubishi Evolution vs Subaru WRX STi

It started as a casual conversation around the water cooler. Some time ago, a couple of us threw the idea of measuring lap times around our track when we do our usual "track handling" part of our monthly road tests. Track handling includes driving each car in the test group around our handling course to see what it does when taken to its cornering limits. We evaluate its cornering balance and determine whether or not the car is forgiving when entering a corner too quickly if driven by an inexperienced driver. But lap times? It might be fun, but do our readers/subscribers really care? Yet, when it comes to high-performance cars, lap times are indicative of a model’s combined cornering, braking, and power prowess.

We’ve just completed our tests of a few sports cars disguised as hatchbacks and sedans. (The complete road test will run in the October issue, online in September.) So when I completed my few obligatory official test laps with the 291-hp Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, I came away with a big grin barely contained under my helmet and shouted, "Where’s the stopwatch?"

Before I finished filling my comments and scores on the test sheet, I spotted my colleague Jake Fisher with a stopwatch dangling from his neck, accompanied by clipboard-wielding data analyst and action photographer Mike Leung.

Quicker than you could say "Subaru Impreza WRX STi," we picked a tar strip line in the pavement that served as the start/finish line. We added a third car, the BMW 135i, which rounded out the list of our approximately-300-hp performers.

Here are the lap-time results of the 300-hp club track shootout in seconds:

	Jake	Gabe
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution	56.16	56.41
BMW 135i	56.67	56.77
Subaru Impreza WRX STi	57.36	57.38

Clearly, all three cars are very quick, completing the almost 1-mile loop in less than a minute. And, although it seems like only yesterday when I showed Jake how to drive our track nine years ago, I’ll be the first one to admit that he’s the better driver.

Significantly, these results echo our collective impressions of these cars. The enthusiasts among us were very fond of the Evo as a track car and rather disappointed with the STi. We all thought the 135i was spectacular to drive, both on road and track. The STi was very forgiving but not much fun. The 135i displayed more understeer than we expected. The Evo had inch-perfect adjustability and can make almost any driver look like an expert with a hint of oversteer that’s controllable and forgiving.

So it’s nice to see our impressions encapsulated in a single empirical measurement that conveys how capable and quick a car is. This playful exercise reaffirmed the maxim that horsepower alone is not the be all end all. The car with the most (STi with 305 hp) was slowest, and the car with the least (Evo with 291 hp) was fastest around our track. Whether this was a one-time exercise or a prelude of things to come remains to be seen.

Make sure you check our October issue to see the full road tests and performance data on these and other high-performance cars. And let us know in the comments below if you’d like to see more lap times in the future.

—Gabe Shenhar

Discuss sporty cars in the forum.

Vespa LX150 scooter – A fair-weather friend

About a month ago we promised to get our hands on some scooters for evaluation. We’ve just added a couple of Vespas to our test fleet, a 50cc LX50 and a 150cc LX150. The LX50 model cost us $3,299, the LX150 $4,399. After some buzzing around (“Vespa” means wasp in Italian) in the immediate vicinity, it became clear that most of us prefer the 150. Though the 50cc model doesn’t require a motorcycle license, it’s limited to only 30 mph and feels sluggish. In order to ride legally and confidently on highways, you’d need a 250cc scooter.

The other day I ferried the LX150 home on a trailer so I could ride it in more urban and suburban settings than the rural roads around our test track. I immediately felt very trendy. Spurred on by record high gas prices, the Vespa has become a fashion statement in my neck of the woods in Fairfield County, Connecticut.

Mind you, I’m not a two-wheeler novice: I used to own a Triumph motorcycle. It took a bit of a mindset adjustment to ride the Vespa, but I’m happy to announce that my ego remained intact. Luckily, everything else also remained intact despite a few nerve-racking moments in rush-hour traffic and a sudden booming thunderstorm. Riding in the rain is very stressful and fatiguing due to the reduced grip, impaired visibility, and the already  oblivious motorists around you.

The 150, with just 12 hp on tap, had no problem keeping up with traffic in the range of 15 and 45 mph. There’s enough oomph for clearing an intersection without feeling overly vulnerable, and for quick spurts to escape from a potentially hazardous situation. Climbing mild grades is also quite effortless, at least when riding solo. The CVT automatic works well and the muted engine noise is unobjectionable. The manufacturer claims 72 mpg “under lab conditions.” We haven’t been able to confirm that yet, but stay tuned.

We’ve reached a top speed of about 65 mph on a long straight, but the scooter’s natural habitat is the neighborhood, not the interstate. The brakes, activated by two levers on the handlebar, work well and are easy to modulate.

From a motorcyclist’s perspective, you’d think that with the Vespa’s small wheels and the floor board, it might scrape the pavement in corners. Actually, there’s ample clearance, and the Vespa feels quite agile and responsive. With just a gentle lean, you round any corner. Low-speed maneuvering in tight quarters is very easy. The ride is firm yet compliant, and very well controlled when traversing dips, swells, and undulations. Notably, there is very little vibration felt through the seat, handlebar, and floor.

The beige suede seat on our LX150 looks sharp and got several compliments from bystanders. Plus, it dispels rain drops easily. Unfortunately, birds like it, too. I loved the ability to store my full-face helmet under the seat. However, I missed not having a side-kick for quick stops, even though the center stand was easy enough to use. I could see that it might be awkward for the uninitiated.

Overall, the Vespa LX150 is a fun little urban runabout that’s very easy to drive. It can serve as a wind-in-your-face ride to the beach or as a frugal commuter to the train station. There is a certain freedom element to driving the Vespa, as long as you keep in mind that it is a limited-use vehicle and a fair-weather friend.

Keep an eye on the blog for additional posts on motorcycles and scooters, including full evaluations.

—Gabe Shenhar

For more motorcycles and scooters coverage, read our blog entries:
Tips on buying and driving a motorcycle or scooter
Downsizing to two wheels - Motorcycle interest revs up
Motorists move to scooters and motorcycles to save
Motorcycle death rates doubled; supersport bikes the most dangerous

Also, join in the Motorcycles & scooters forum discussion. 

Personal picks: Small SUVs, part 2

Continuing our staff's personal insights into the August-issue small SUVs test group. (Read: Personal Picks: Small SUVs, part 1.)

Gabe Shenhar: I really like the new turbocharged Subaru Forester 2.5XT Limited. The car marks a big step forward over the original Forester, which is not something that can be said for every redesign these days. The new Forester provides effortless acceleration, a great ride, lots of room, a quiet cabin and lots of agility. As soon as I brought it home for the first time, I showed it to my wife and made sure it fit in the garage. It would really make a nice family vehicle for us, with enough rear seat room for two growing boys—which wasn’t the case with the original Forester. But after we finished testing it, I realized that it only got 20 mpg overall (on premium to boot). The excitement suddenly waned, which is too bad.

That brings me back to the Toyota RAV4. I’ve always had a soft spot for the RAV4, ever since it pioneered the segment in 1996. Although the design is two years old now, the current generation is still a standout. It looks good, rides and handles well, has many thoughtful interior features, and is roomy inside without being bulky. Even with the V6, I won’t have to feel guilty -- it gets 22 mpg on regular. Being quick, smooth and quiet, is the icing on the cake. So, if I were shopping for one of these today, the RAV6, as we call it here, would be my top contender.

Mike Quincy: I’m in three-row seat mode right now. Every car I look at or envision taking a permanent spot in my garage has to have this feature. Why? Well, like most households, if Mom’s happy, everybody’s happy. (Likewise, if Mom’s not happy… well, you get the picture.) Mom’s not too happy right now. See, we have two small boys who like to bring friends with them when they go places. My wife drives a Camry sedan. To keep everybody safe, all the kids ride in the backseat. Hence, with two boys and only three seating positions, only one can bring a friend. Also, Mom wants a dog. And Mom wants to build a garden. And Mom likes to buy antiques. So we need a vehicle that does everything: carry people, dogs, stuff. We don’t need to go off-road and, with a set of winter tires, we don’t need AWD. And, like everybody these days, it has to get good fuel economy and can’t break the bank. She’d love a Toyota Highlander Hybrid, but they’re simply too pricey (nearly $40,000 with the third row).

What’s the best choice here? The Mazda5. It’s not a minivan, it’s not an SUV, and it’s not a wagon. But it can get done what Mom wants in her hectic life. Even a top-level Grand Touring model tops out at $24,000 (thousands less than most in the small SUV group when popularly equipped), and still gets 23 mpg overall. Exciting to drive? Well, she’s been driving that Camry for several years, which isn’t exactly a carnival on wheels, so the Mazda5 will likely feel like a new beginning. So, as it turns out, this isn’t exactly my personal pick, but it’s the pick for domestic harmony.

For more on this small SUVs group, read the road tests and watch our review videos.

The Smart and I

After commuting in the Smart ForTwo a few times, I couldn’t help contemplating how little the world of automobiles has advanced over the last fifty years.

My motorized career began in the early 1960s, with a 1957 BMW Isetta 300. At the time, my parents couldn’t afford much more than the second-hand post-war bubble-car. At least it was a major upgrade over the Lambretta scooter my father owned before he got married. I was placed on the package shelf – baked from below by the single-cylinder, 298 cc engine, and broiled from above by the scorching Israeli sun through the rear window. Perhaps that explains how my love of cars was seared into me at an early age. Infant carrier? Forget it. Seat belts? Not a chance. Air-conditioning? Only by opening the fabric top. Clearly, today this would amount to child abuse; back then it was hip.

You might think it’s off the wall, but actually it’s not so crazy to compare the Smart with the Isetta. Both are two-seat micro cars with a rear engine. One had a BMW badge on its front-swinging door; the other is marketed by Mercedes-Benz. The Smart has a three-cylinder engine and—with some patience—exceeds 90 mph; the Isetta could barely bump 50 mph with a stiff Mediterranean tailwind. But I bet even now, the Isetta would draw at least as much curiosity on the street as the Smart. Granted, the Smart has a lot more safety equipment. (Score an extra point for the Smart.)

The 2009 Smart ForTwo we’re testing makes you feel vulnerable with its lethargic take-off. The bone-jarring ride is fatiguing. And, at every up shift, the automated manual transmission creates a nauseating heave and pitch. While the 39 mpg overall we attained with it is good, it needs to be put in perspective. The discontinued Toyota Echo four-door sedan we tested in 2000 got 38 mpg overall (with a manual transmission). The Volkswagen Golf diesel we tested back then got 41 mpg. Both cars were practical five-seaters that drive much more “normally” than the puny Smart.

Since the Smart becomes such an instant conversation piece. It’s kind of like walking your new puppy... Here’s a sample of the most common questions I've been asked about the Smart:
“Is it electric?”
“Is it a hybrid”
“Does it get, like, 80 mpg?”

Granted, 80 mpg would be nice (and maybe even make up for all the compromises this car requires), but even a decent scooter doesn’t do that. According to Vespa, its GTS 250 model gets 65-70 mpg under laboratory conditions. In other words, even with today’s technology, we have to settle for a dinky, $15,000 two-seater to get 39 mpg, if we don’t choose a more expensive hybrid.

That brings to mind another forgotten car. Remember the Honda Insight? The first hybrid car, offered from 2000 to 2006 in the U.S., sold for $19,000. It was also a two-seater, but accelerated from zero to sixty in a respectable 11.2 seconds (with the manual tranny) and got 51 mpg overall. In my view, settling for a klutzy, limited use two-seater might as well bring dividends in other areas and the Insight did so more than the Smart.

So, looking at the historical evolution of cars, if the Smart marks a half–century’s worth of automotive progress in terms of inexpensive, frugal motoring, it doesn't exactly leapfrog over the Isetta. Overall, it’s not a particularly impressive record for us as a society.

—Gabe Shenhar

Discuss Smart in the Cars forum.

Personal Picks: Gas-saving sedans, part 2

Continuing our staff's personal insights into the July-issue gas-saving sedans test group.

Gabe Shenhar: The small sedans we call entry-level cars here serve as mainstream family cars in many parts of the world. We see a lot of people looking down at these cars, but there’s no reason for this. Some of the better ones in this class are well-rounded, fun to drive, just roomy enough, and get great fuel economy.

I may be in a minority, but the Hyundai Elantra SE doesn’t really do it for me—it’s just not engaging enough to drive. And if that wouldn’t be a priority for me, I’d choose the Toyota Corolla for a slightly more mature demeanor and its excellent 32 mpg overall.

I like the looks and the spirited powertrain of the Honda Civic. But for me, taking into account handling agility, seat comfort, and decent interior quality brings me to the Mazda3. When I drive one, I feel like I’m driving a small package, but without being deprived of anything that would frustrate me.

Mike Quincy: How often can you get something for nothing? I recently drove from CR’s home office in Yonkers, NY, back to our test track here in CT – typically a two-hour trip. I spent those miles in the Chevrolet Cobalt. It drove OK, but I felt completely anonymous. However, when I drove a Mini Cooper last week to my son’s soccer practice, I (almost) felt like Beckham arriving at a posh L.A. nightclub. Even though the modern Mini has been around since 2002, this car still makes people smile. And I doubt any car in this month’s test group will get a wave or headlight flash from another driver of the same car. Compared to the Cobalt, for roughly $2,500 more, I can get a Base Mini (with minimal options) that gets superior fuel economy but have loads more fun. I understand that almost no one pays sticker price for a Cobalt (hence, the price difference argument is tougher to make), but I’d be willing to get something (an attractive, entertaining package) and not give up fuel economy. Bottom line: The beauty of the Cooper is that you don’t feel like you’re driving a cheap-o tin can or a forgotten rental car.

For more on this gas-saving sedans test group, read the road tests and Personal picks: sports sedans, part 1, and also watch our car review videos.

Personal picks: Hatchbacks

This month's group almost seems like a blast from the past. Hatchbacks are back and we are excited about driving them because of their combination of pretty good fuel economy and versatile cargo carrying capacities. Many of my colleagues have owned hatchbacks in the past. Here's a look at their picks:

Tom Mutchler: We heard it from family members and friends. We even heard it from contractors visiting the track. People see this group of hatchbacks and say, "Wow, you're testing a group of #@$%boxes this month." Sales figures of these hatchbacks versus their sedan counterparts hint that many Americans feel the same way.

But my fellow engineers at the track and I bristle at the dismissal of these logical cars. They do an awful lot of things right. They get good fuel economy, they can haul a wide variety of cargo, safety equipment is up to snuff, and the best ones can even be fun to drive. All this for not much money. In fact, before this group of cars, my top choice for "If I Had to Buy a Brand New Car Today, What Would I Buy?" was a Mazda3s Grand Touring hatch.

But the VW Rabbit vies for my affections and theoretical dollars. The Rabbit is fun to drive, comfortable, and has better crash-test data and a more substantial feel than the nimble Mazda. I really like that the Rabbit defies the logic that all German-designed cars must have inscrutable controls (Exhibit A: the Saturn Astra. Exhibit B: the Mini.)

Only one misgiving: having owned a VW, my attitude toward the company’s overall reliability history is "once bit, twice shy." The reliability charts for older VWs show that, as those cars aged, reliability went super bad. Hopefully the Rabbit can shake this history…

Gene Petersen: I love hatchbacks. My first brand new car was a three-door Honda Accord hatchback, the only way you could get one back in 1978. I would fold down the rear seats and use it like a station wagon to carry lumber, garden supplies, or move smaller pieces of furniture. This new crop of hatchbacks reminds of the versatility of that old Accord, plus these cars have four doors for getting passenger out of the rear seat in a respectable manner. My choice here is the Mazda3. It offers versatility, is roomy for four adults, and has a sporty flair that makes it fun to drive. It's also well finished, nicely styled inside and out and gets a respectable 25 mpg with the 2.3 liter engine and five-speed automatic. In this age of $4.00 gasoline, it may be time for me to consider a hatchback again…

Gabe Shenhar: It's too bad the Volkswagen Golf (sorry, Rabbit) isn't available with the 2.0-liter, four-cylinder engine attached to the DSG (automated manual) transmission. On second thought, it does exist, only then it's not a Rabbit anymore—it's called the GTI. Such a combo would give me greater agility, punch and fun-to-drive quotient as well as versatility and affordability. But I already had my GTI days in the 1980s (I owned two of them), so it’s time to move on. Besides, we’ve classified the GTI as a sporty car, so I better re-gear for the hatchbacks at hand.

Both the Rabbit and the Mazda3 hatchback possess similar driving characteristics: agile handling, decent ride and some zip in their acceleration. Both also have comfortable seats and interiors that are solid and pleasant and make you feel like you are surrounded by a nicer environment than is typical for the class. However, the Rabbit's standard 2.5-liter, five-cylinder engine sounds too coarse for me and it doesn’t help that it has a relatively big thirst for fuel. The Mazda's 2.3-liter four-cylinder has a sweeter nature to it and sounds happier when it’s revved. So I’m leaning toward the Mazda3. And then there’s the likelihood of the Golf (woops—did it again—Rabbit) having more problems over several years then the Mazda3. But then again, the Rabbit has better IIHS crash test results than the Mazda3.

This has become a much bigger dilemma now, so I think I'll go with the Mini Cooper. All the Minis (S, non-S or Clubman) are a blast to drive. They look like nothing else and ooze charm and character. Good fuel economy is an extra bonus.

Rick Small: These small models are enjoying a surge in popularity due to the ever rising gas prices. The Subaru Impreza is a nice car but only comes in AWD, hurting fuel economy, and the driving position doesn’t fit my tall body as well as some others. The Saturn Astra has a nice ride, but it is slow responding and fuel economy falls short for this class. Of this group, I like the Volkswagen Rabbit the best. It feels more solid and sporty than the others here and has a good driving position for taller people. I also really like the Mini but not this Clubman version. While the "bigger" Mini does provide a little more room in the back, I dislike the split rear doors and big blind spot they create. The Clubman's handling is not as crisp as the other Mini versions, either. The Base or Mini S are a blast to drive, get very good fuel economy and (surprisingly) have a very good driving position for tall drivers like me. The back seat is petty much for storage or very small passengers, though. Fuel economy for this group is pretty good, but if you want even more mpg get the manual transmission.

Mike Quincy: My first new car was a 1987 Honda Civic Si. It was a three-door hatchback, got great fuel economy, and was more fun to drive than the car I replaced it with—a 1985 Mazda RX-7. To this day, it was one of the best cars I ever owned. Hence, I have a soft-spot in my heart for these little hatches. I think the Mini Cooper (Base model, manual transmission) comes closest to the fun and value of my original Honda. And while it's small inside, it doesn't drive that way. It's not too noisy, the ride is tolerable, and it overflows with personality. The Clubman is almost practical, but its styling seems just a bit out of proportion. Go easy with options and the Mini is affordable. Go nuts and you wind up shelling out money that could buy a larger, more comfortable car. Like I said: Base model Mini Cooper is the way to go.

Electric cars take charge in Israel, Denmark

When I attended the Electrical Vehicle Symposium 23rd (EVS23) last year, I wondered: After 23 symposiums, why are there still no electric vehicles to speak of? Does that mean a collection of scientists, academics, and government officials have just been talking about the subject since 1969, when the first EVS conference was held? It may seem that way on the surface. However, we've recently driven electric vehicles, some of which seemed almost ready for prime time. (Read our EVS23 report "Who revived the electric car?") Beyond those commendable vehicles, a few other developments are lurking behind the scenes.

For Earth Day, we thought it would be appropriate to highlight some of the ongoing projects that may advance the international electric car cause.

At the 2008 New York auto show, Mitsubishi showed the iMiEV an electric car based on the "i"—a rear-wheel-drive micro car that's sold in Japan. Subaru has a fleet of electric micro cars, called the R1e, that are used by the Tokyo Electric Power Company. Nissan is also testing an electric-powered version of its Cube - its home-market competitor to the original Scion xB. All three use lithium-ion batteries.

If any automaker is poised for real-world mass-market electric vehicle, it might be Nissan. Here's why: The alliance between Nissan and French automaker Renault will soon be selling electric cars in Israel. Renault has recently partnered with a Silicon Valley based Israeli start-up Project Better Place (PBP) to supply electric-powered Renault Megane sedans to be sold in Israel starting in 2011. PBP, in turn, will create a network of 500,000 battery charging and replacement stations throughout Israel, as well as charging points in public parking garages and along streets.

Israel seems an unlikely candidate to be the first county to adapt an electric car, where environmental causes are not generally considered a top priority. However, it is a country where driving distances are relatively short, which alleviates the main concern associated with electric vehicles' inherently limited range. In fact, 90 percent of car owners drive less than 44 miles a day and the country's three largest cities are within 100 miles of each other.

The electric Renault Megane, a sedan the size of a Volkswagen Jetta, is said to be able to accelerate from 0-60 mph in eight seconds and have a range of 125 miles. Purchase price is expected to be similar to that of an equivalent-sized car with a 1.6-liter engine, according to Carlos Ghosn, President and CEO of Nissan Motor Co. and Renault S.A., and Shai Agassi, CEO of Project Better Place. A generous tax subsidy by the Israeli government will help make the price of the car competitive.

Megane EV owners will subscribe to a battery replacement or recharging plan that's based on their mileage. An onboard computer will indicate mileage left and the location of the nearest battery replacement or recharging spot. Removing and replacing the battery is planned to be performed by a robot. Operating costs are expected to be significantly cheaper than filling up with gasoline. This is no surprise, as a gallon of regular unleaded costs about $6.90 in Israel.

A similar experiment is planned for Denmark, another country known for relatively short driving distances. In the Danish scenario, cars would be plugged in for recharging and that energy will be generated from renewable wind power. In Israel, most electric power comes from coal power stations; coal is neither a renewable source nor clean. Consequently, a mile covered by the electric Megane emits no CO2 compared to the 293 gram per mile for the conventional model, there would be added CO2 emissions at the power plant.   

The battery for the Renault is an advanced lithium-ion type, developed by Nissan and NEC of Japan. This type of battery is commonly considered the next step from nickel-metal hydride batteries used in today's production hybrids. Li-ion batteries are still considered by many experts to be in their developmental infancy for automotive use and concerns about its longevity, charging time, and potential to overheat are still being addressed.

When it comes to electric vehicles, it's hard to determine if the number of enthusiasts outnumber the skeptics. Nevertheless, such mass-market experience gathered in terms infrastructure, and especially in battery charging/replacement, may give Nissan a competitive edge. More importantly, it may significantly push the EV cause forward. If the Israeli and Danish tests prove successful, it would be only a matter of time until other markets take a serious look at the potential.

Hopefully, by the time EVS24 convenes in 2009, 40 years after the first EV symposium, even more promising electric vehicles will emerge.

—Gabe Shenhar

For suggestions on how to live more green, visit Consumer Union's Web site Greenerchoices.org and our Earth Day special section. For more tips on saving fuel and alternative fuels, see our fuel economy guide.

Discuss alternative-fuel vehicles in the forums.   

Personal picks—convertibles

To say that we're all not eagerly anticipating warm spring breezes here in Connecticut at the Consumer Reports Auto Test Center would be a gross understatement. The gray, cold weather is quickly turning to warm, bright skies and the 300 acres surrounding our track is becoming green again.

Slogging through the winter with these cars wasn't exactly joyful. Even with heated seats on several of these models, I wasn't tempted to drop the top until the temperature reached at least 50-degrees F. Finally, we can all drive the convertibles from the May issue with the tops down and truly enjoy the open-air experience.

With that in mind, here are our Personal Picks for convertibles.

—Mike Quincy

Tom Mutchler: This is a tough group to pick a favorite, mostly because my favorite cars in this group leave me feeling ambivalent (and somewhat poor). The BMW 328i feels just like a coupe, making it the best to drive of this bunch. Problem is, it's just barely under $50K even if you go light on the options. That's serious money.

I could console myself with our $37,000 Volkswagen Eos. It makes the more-expensive Saab 9-3 and Volvo C70 convertibles seem redundant. I would go with a base-level Turbo with leatherette and DSG for under $31K.

But driving with the top down isn't fun unless the car itself is fun, and I don't want to break the bank. My solution: a used 2006 Mazda MX-5 Miata. Yeah, it only has two seats. And unlike later Miatas, the 2006 isn't available with Mazda's clever folding hardtop that improves visibility and noise without giving up trunk room or adding much weight. But all of the back seats in these cars are near worthless, and the Miata's manual top is the best out there. Surfing on AutoTrader, I can find a loaded 2006 Miata Grand Touring with stability control for around $19,000 with under 20,000 miles on the clock. That's a lot of fun for the money.

Gabe Shenhar: These convertibles are really not my type of car. If there's a choice between the open-top car and a coupe version, I’d always go with the more solid and rigid structure of the one with the fixed roof. For me, I can’t imagine a Porsche 911 with an open top or a BMW M3 convertible. If I already sacrificed practicality, it might as well be for some serious driving fun.

But let's say my kind of fun is having some wind in my hair and catching some rays, rather than blasting down a race track. In that case, I have two favorites. If money was not much of an object it would be the BMW 328i. First of all, it looks gorgeous; second, it drives every bit as wonderfully as its sedan counterpart with a sweet powertrain and a rewarding chassis that's agile and easy to control. Third, for a convertible, it's astoundingly free of the typical nasty body shakes of most drop-tops.

But the BMW, mind you, (and this is a 328i without the sports package) is scratching the $50K mark. This is where my rational choice comes: I'll take the $35,000 Volkswagen Eos. It's easy to consider it merely a Jetta convertible, but the Eos is actually a sophisticated, upscale car with a plush cabin. It's quick, gets good fuel economy, and the automated manual dual-clutch gearbox gives it a sporty character with its quick shifts and an interesting soundtrack. The Eos has a sunroof-only mode, which I find extremely useful when you don't feel like stopping, waiting and fussing with the full-blown, top down experience.

Mike Quincy: Honestly, none of these really lit my fire. The 'fun' factor must be high to put up with the inherent drawbacks of a convertible: noise, limited trunk space, and usually shaky structure. And while the 328i convertible is a refined and "nice" car, it’s not fun—and for less money, I’d get a 335i sedan and probably enjoy the drive more. Back to fun: I’ll take a Mazda Miata any day of the week. It is so perfectly balanced in its handling, steering response, amazingly satisfying shifter, and its just-enough-horsepower. But if I had to have a couple miniscule rear seats (my two young sons like convertibles), I’d choose a Ford Mustang GT. Amazing V8 sound, classic looks, and more-than-just-enough-horsepower. In fact, there are gobs of it. And that’s always fun.

For more on this convertibles group, read the road tests and also watch our car review videos.

Personal picks: sports sedans, part 1

This month's selections come from an entertaining group. Sports sedans have been favorites of ours for a long time. Most are fun to drive, deliver decent driver comfort, and just enough luxury touches to remind you that you're in something special. There were miles of smiles during the testing, with all of these cars having fairly distinct personalities.

Which ones rose to the top? Take a look.

Tom Mutchler: This group of sports sedans raises a basic question: Is it more important to look good or to feel good? And is either enough?

Two cars in this group appeal to me: the Cadillac CTS and BMW 328i. The CTS simply looks awesome, inside and out. It blends a uniquely American audacity without going over the top. This great-driving car requires very few excuses, something that couldn't be said for the last CTS (and I was a fan of that one, too).

But, the BMW 328i drives better. There is no getting around that. We drive our one-day trip test convoy over some very enjoyable, twisty roads. When driving the BMW, I wanted to run over the car ahead of me, like the one I was following was holding me back. Cliches fall easily to hand, like "The BMW is a back-road scalpel."

Does that alone make it my pick? After our sports sedan report was published, I read some enthusiast forum comments from BMW owners sniffing about where the 3 Series placed. Sure the car drives great. But in this class that isn't enough. It's small inside; it costs a ton of money for not much power; the standard 16-inch rolling stock looks lame in this class; and even without iDrive, some controls are stupid for stupid's sake.

So, while some online BMW owners deride it as the "blue light special" in this class, my vote winds up with the Infiniti G35. The combination of big power and exuberant handling goads you to have fun with the car. It's attractive inside and out--something I can't say for any current BMW. And unlike the 3 Series, you don't have to pay a big premium for decent tires and big power.

Gabe Shenhar: Out of this group, as well as this whole category, there's no question that I'm going with the BMW 3 Series. It's such a terrific driver's car that's thoroughly enjoyable, yet totally livable. In terms of what makes a sports sedan a sports sedan, in my opinion, no one has yet surpassed it, even though several competitors come close.

What makes the 3 Series special? It's that extra measure of steering feedback and response, tied-down ride control, and good compliance that speak to driving connoisseurs.

Unfortunately, BMW chose to equip the non-sports package cars with underachieving Bridgestone Turanza run-flat tires, which cost the car points in our testing in terms of empirical stopping distance and avoidance maneuver speed. To make this car really spectacular, I'd buy the optional sports package, bringing sharper steering response and more grip, yet a negligible loss of ride comfort. I realize I'd have to switch to winter tires, as the performance tires are not all-season, but I do that anyway.

What I also love about this car is the pull of the straight six-cylinder engine, which sings a perfect soundtrack, be it the 230 hp in the 328i or the 300 hp in the 335i. Thankfully, our 328i also delivers decent fuel economy, so I won't feel guilty. That awesome powertrain (even with the automatic) and sporty handling, augmented by supportive seats and the innate quality of the interior can really start my day on a good note. Yes, the car has a few flaws, such as some unnecessarily complicated controls and a cramped rear seat. But ultimately, when it comes to sports sedans, what matters is which car puts a bigger smile on your face.  And, for me, my smile is never broader than when I'm driving a 3 Series.

For more on this sports sedan group, read the road tests and watch our review videos.

Personal Picks - Family sedans

The February-issue family sedan test group represented the vehicle type that, still, many people buy. Sedans remain such good sellers because most combine decent handling, interior room, and fuel economy and low noise levels. Not every car company carries monstrous SUVs, wicked-fast sports cars, or pickup trucks, but almost all sell a variety of sedans.

This group included our first test of the redesigned Honda Accord (both 4-cylinder and V6 versions), as well as a handful of larger sedans, including the Ford Taurus and Kia Amanti.

Here are the personal picks from the Auto Test Center:

Rick Small: My favorite family sedans continue to be the Honda Accord and Nissan Altima. Being the tallest auto test engineer (at 6' 4"), they fit me well. The Altima has one of the best driving positions for tall people, because of the generous head and leg room. Also, both are sportier than most family sedans. The Altima four-cylinder model with the CVT delivers better performance than many V6 family sedans, and its fuel economy is among the best. The V6 versions of both the Accord and Altima are quick and responsive, and they deliver respectable fuel economy. I also like the Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan sedans; they also have a sporty feel and good performance.

Gabe Shenhar: Although, technically, the Nissan Altima outscores the Honda Accord, I'd go with the Accord. The Altima, with its CVT, optimizes fuel economy and acceleration, but to me the Accord is both a more satisfying drive and a roomier family sedan -- not to mention it's better looking. The Accord also comes with standard stability control, which is a major safety advantage. You can't even get that on a four-cylinder Altima that's not a hybrid. An Altima V6 with stability control easily shoots past $30K. So, if you're asking my advice, I'd get an Accord EX either with the four-cylinder or V6.

But why be such a conformist? Who says you can't think outside the box? A Volkswagen Jetta GLI, with the wonderful DSG transmission (a manual that shifts like an automatic, but with a great soundtrack), could serve both my family and sporty driving needs. It's essentially a GTI with a huge trunk.

Tom Mutchler: A wealth of great choices means that this is a great time to be in the market for a family sedan. The Nissan Altima has an amazing blend of acceleration and fuel economy. Even though Internet Toyota Camry-bashing (some of it deserved, based on reliability issues) has become such a game that it will likely be an exhibition sport at the next Olympics, the Camry remains a very quiet, comfortable, and efficient car.

Those cars score well in our tests, but I want a family sedan to do it all. I want enjoyable handling (something the Camry lacks). I want easy-to-get (if not standard) stability control—tough with the Altima. So, out of this month's group, that adds up to the Honda Accord. I'm impressed by the Accord's great driving position, generous visibility, huge rear seat, standard stability control, and entertaining handling. (I'd get a loaded EX-L four-cylinder instead of our LX-P or EX-L V6, though.) But the Accord isn't perfect: it drives me nuts that you don't get a temperature display unless you get leather and you can't get a trip computer. Plus, Honda can develop a business jet but can't seem to conquer road noise. And what's with the cheapo gooseneck hinges that crush ill-placed luggage? Meanwhile, the Chevrolet Malibu handles well, has less road noise, and has all of those little trinkets—temperature display, trip computer, classy scissor-hinges in the trunk—that the Accord lacks.

Mike Quincy: Last year, I chose the Accord because of its combination of good steering, excellent fuel economy and rock-solid reliability history. Thankfully, Honda didn't mess with such good DNA for the new Accord. It still drives like a car that you'd think cost thousands more. It still looks good and does nearly everything well. I drove our V6 model to Saratoga Springs last fall and (despite some road noise) came away deeply impressed. Yes, this is a car I could drive every day.

Behind the wheel: fuel-cell vehicles

We recently had the chance to drive some fuel-cell vehicles that aren’t for sale to the general public, giving us a behind-the-wheel view of the possible future. Many of these research vehicles  impressed us and show the promise, and appeal, of electrically powered cars, in this case through fuel-cell technology.

A potential alternative to gasoline-engine-powered cars, these electric vehicles produce their energy on board via a chemical reaction in a fuel-cell stack. Hydrogen is consumed in the process, with water as the only tailpipe emission.

In spring 2007, we drove the impressive Honda FCX sedan. It has since been renamed the FCX Clarity, and was shown at the Detroit auto show. Since then, we drove a hydrogen-powered BMW 7 Series, which is propelled by an internal combustion engine rather than an electric motor.

This past fall, we hosted an unusual guest here at our track in Connecticut. For a few hours, we got to experience the Chevrolet Equinox FC fuel-cell vehicle. It looked like a regular Equinox, except for the slightly raised floor that was concealing three hydrogen tanks and a symbol of a blue water drop on the shifter. The tanks hold 4.2 kilograms of compressed hydrogen at 10,000 psi. The claimed range is 200 miles. That translates to about 48 mpg in terms of gallon-of-gas-equivalent (gge) consumption. (One kg of compressed hydrogen is about equal to one gallon of gasoline in terms of energy density.) With the electric propulsion, the Equinox FC was much quieter than a regular Equinox V6. There was a noticeable, but unobjectionable, whine when accelerating on a highway ramp and the vehicle felt responsive. The car kept making all sort of whirrs and fan noises after we parked it and left a small puddle of water under its tailpipe.

Late last year, at the EVS23 (Electric Vehicle Symposium) in Anaheim, CA, I drove several electric vehicles. Also on hand, were several other fuel-cell vehicles.  I sampled them on a short driving loop and some of them were quite impressive:

Nissan X-Trail: The X-Trail is a small SUV that was never offered for sale in the United States. This fuel-cell version had a tank of compressed hydrogen at 10,000 psi and a relatively long claimed range of 300 miles. The tank holds about four kilograms of compressed hydrogen, which translates to 75 miles-per-gallon-of-gas-equivalent (mpgge). The X-Trail was quiet and refined. From a standstill, it launched decisively and kept accelerating smoothly. It handled and rode soundly. All that was happening underneath was rather transparent without intruding into the cabin. The car was free of strange and unpleasant noises.

Toyota Highlander FCHV: Based on the previous-generation Highlander, this fuel-cell vehicle is able to propel itself only on battery power, without drawing directly on energy from the fuel-cell stack and depleting the hydrogen. That’s the reason for the H (for hybrid) in the FCHV name. It has a claimed range of 350 miles, and Toyota says it can sprint from 0-60 mph in 10.5 seconds. The compressed hydrogen is stored in two tanks under the floor at 10,000 psi. With a little more than four kilograms of compressed hydrogen, it would consume 88 mpgge. It drove like a Highlander hybrid, which is quite slick with a comfortable, quiet ride and smooth acceleration; The hum of the traditional V6 engine was conspicuously absent.

Mercedes-Benz A-Class: The A-Class is the smallest Mercedes (not counting the Smart-branded products) and was never offered in the United States. The company boasts that through its fleet of 60 A-Class fuel-cell vehicles, it covered over four million test miles in four years. The A-Class stores 1.8 kilograms of compressed hydrogen in two tanks at 5,000 psi. It has a claimed 100-mile range, which translates to about 55 mpgge. The design of the A-Class fuel-cell research vehicle dates back to 2002. From behind the wheel, it  felt rather slow and noisy. The stiff ride was probably inherent to the A-Class. The slow acceleration and noisy whirs and swooshes, however, were attributable to the fuel-cell conversion. Mercedes is now in the midst of phasing its fuel-cell efforts into the larger B-Class. (Read the B-Class first look. Our B-Class road test is available to online subscribers.) The B200 we tested is sold in Canada but not in the United States.

Hyundai Tucson: The Tuscon fuel-cell vehicle has three tanks of compressed hydrogen at 5,000 psi and it holds 3.5 kilograms of the gas. This small SUV has a claimed range of 190 miles, which translates to 54 mpgge. Kia also featured the same technology in the essentially identical Sportage. The Tucson didn’t feel as slick as the Nissan or Toyota but better than the Mercedes-Benz A-Class. It drove pretty much like a regular Tucson, which is pleasant enough. Acceleration wasn’t quite robust and the vehicle was considerably noisier that a regular Tucson.   

Bottom line
In the effort to wean us off petroleum and slow global warming, at this point, it is safe to say that in the long-term future we will see vehicles powered by either hydrogen or electricity (or some combination of both). Automakers are reluctant to put all their technology eggs in one basket and are developing more hybrids and plug-in hybrids, which are likely to proliferate in the short-term. For now, electric vehicle development is mostly relegated to the aftermarket or specialized manufacturers.

Before these cars of tomorrow reach consumers, there are several obstacles to each technology as they race to go mainstream. For example, hydrogen lacks storage and delivery infrastructures; the fuel stacks (which use expensive platinum) are costly and may not last as long as gasoline engines; and the public remains skeptical. Further, batteries for plug-in hybrids or electric cars are still too expensive, and effective thermal control strategies have not been verified.

At this year’s Detroit Auto Show, GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner said he expects fuel cells to be the long-term solution, while plug-in hybrids will fill the gap in the medium term. Some electric-car advocates and environmentalists, however, have suggested that fuel cells are just a distraction from development of battery electric vehicles.

It’s too early to tell who is right. But we’d like to hear your opinion on fuel-cell and electric cars. Let us know what you think by posting your thoughts in the Comments section below.

—Gabe Shenhar

Learn more about fuel cells and alternative fuels in our fuel economy special section.

Detroit auto show - Personal picks

The Cars team reflects on the 2008 Detroit auto show, selecting their personal picks for the most memorable, significant, or simply favorite cars at the event.

Audi R8 V12 TDI:
Last week, I gushed over the brilliant Audi R8 V12 TDI concept (see blog). The intoxication of it has stuck with me like a bad cold...I can't seem to shake it. The look is mean. The headlights squint at you like Clint Eastwood. The engine looks like it should be in a museum of modern art. And while Audi also had a "standard" R8 on display, it was one of only a few cars people were waiting in line to sit in. This car could reside in my garage forever.—Mike Quincy

Chevrolet Corvette ZR1/Hummer HX:
These pure vehicles push American icons to new reaches. The ZR1 is history in the making. It is an amazing performance machine that will fuel my automotive fantasies for quite some time, and is certain to be chronicled for generations to come. The Hummer HX represents the long-rumored H4, a Jeep Wrangler alternative intended to provide an attainable entry to the off-roading brand, and, now it may also represent a potential production savior for a brand that has become the pariah of the Green movement. Make it affordable, with a traditional square back and a thrifty diesel, and watch the Hummer "jamborees" flourish. Granted, the Corvette and Hummer are quite  different vehicles, but each represents extreme fun, and who doesn't want more of that?—Jeff Bartlett

Fisker Karma:
Designed by custom car designer Henrik Fisker (who also penned the BMW Z8, one of my favorite cars ever), the Fisker shows that hybrids -- even futuristic advanced plug-in hybrids that will run all day on electricity -- aren't just for environmentalist ninnies. It looks great and reportedly goes fast. (A top speed of 125 mph and 0-60 mph in less than 6 seconds are as fast as any mere mortal should need to go on land.) In short, it should give even the most jaded car enthusiasts an environmentally friendly hybrid they can lust after.

In terms of affordability, however, I've got to name the Honda CR-Z as my runner up. It marries hybrid efficiency to sports-car fun just like the Fisker. It isn't as advanced, and it is limited by being a two-seater. But it has the fun-to-drive element sorely lacking in Honda's last mileage champ, the Insight. And best of all, most car shoppers should be able to afford it.—Eric Evarts

Jeep Renegade/Cadillac CTS coupe:
This was my 15th time attending the Detroit auto show and, overall, it was a relatively boring event. There were no outrageous introductions such as a Chrysler minivan landing on stage, no retro chic surprises like the Volkswagen New Beetle, or first-time viewings of highly anticipated significant vehicles.

That said, I'd have to go with styling features that caught my eye. The Jeep Renegade concept, for example, was eye candy that I hope someday becomes a modern beach buggy. Forget the electric drive. Cash-strapped Chrysler is busy enough trying to survive. Not to mention the paradox of"go anywhere" marketing and getting stuck with an empty battery. A much more realistic and closer to production styling statement was the Cadillac CTS coupe. Even though I'm not much of a coupe fan, it looked spectacular.—Gabe Shenhar

Honda CR-Z:
I really liked the Honda CR-Z. With styling that is a dead-ringer for the old (and beloved CRX), the CR-Z's possible hybrid powertrain looks to vault this little runabout to the top of the fuel economy mountain... just like the original CRX. Honda is also disciplined at keeping weight low and suspension tuning interesting, so I imagine driving one will be a ball. Let's hope it's affordable.—David Champion

Toyota Venza:
Over the course of the show I was consistently drawn back to one car: the Toyota Venza. But not because I'm wowed by its styling, price, powerplant, or features. It's because I have no idea where it will fit in the Toyota lineup. Between the RAV4, Highlander, Avalon, and even the base Sienna, how many 5-passenger people movers are needed from one manufacturer? This odd vehicle certainly drew my attention each day... and the resulting quizzical stares as I tried to determine its niche.—Jon Linkov

Also read Cliff Weathers' pick for best in show.

See our complete coverage of the 2008 Detroit auto show. And discuss the event in our auto show forum. 

                                                                                                           

                   

Detroit - Small lux SUVs, the next big thing?

The question of "What's the next big thing?" often hovers at every auto show and is the topic of every chat during press days. After attending endless press conferences and walking the floor until my feet ached in Detroit, I came away with this: upscale SUVs are getting smaller. The new ones certainly gave me a "Honey, I shrunk the SUV" impression.

Small SUVs are not a new thing. In fact, it's a category that's now quite saturated in the $20,000 to $30,000 price bracket - playgrounds of the successful Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V. But not just "affordable models, but also compact, sporty, upscale versions, such as the BMW X3 and to some extent the Land Rover LR2. Now, an entire wave of these versatile lux-boxes is coming. The Acura RDX arrived in 2006 and the Infiniti EX35 is just hitting the streets. In Detroit, the Cadillac Provoq, Mercedes-Benz GLK, and Saab 9-4X were shown in concept form, and provided the decor for the obligatory token green power of hydrogen, diesel, or ethanol powertrain. Tucked in a corner, was a production version of the Volkswagen Tiguan. The list grows with the imminent Audi Q5 and the Volvo XC60. (The latter will be unveiled at the Geneva auto show in March.)

Some say that this is too small a niche, but with the current aura of guilt surrounding SUVs, this move makes a lot of sense. I don't know anyone who has owned an SUV in the last decade who wants to give up the versatility, raised stance, and AWD in their next vehicle. But virtually all of these owners are eager to get better fuel economy and a more manageable SUV that is easier to park and more maneuverable. I'm also hearing a lot of owners asking that their next vehicles have high levels of luxury amenities and sporty on-road dynamics. Models in this emerging sub-category might fulfill these demands.

This year's Detroit auto show theme was in stark contrast to years past, where bigger was most certainly better. But now, instead of high-horsepower V8s, big performance and size, there was more greenness and downsizing in the air. The "next big thing" seems to actually be downsizing, which might be the right thing for many consumers.

—Gabe Shenhar

See our complete coverage of the 2008 Detroit auto show. And discuss the event in our auto show forum.

                                                                                                           

                   

 

Personal picks: 3-row SUVs

This month’s test group, 3-row SUVs, covered a segment often cited as the family vehicle of choice for many suburban families. The reason? Three-row SUVs have near-minivan practicality but with an adventurous, truck-like appearance. Several staffers here at the track praise minivans as the single, best family vehicle of all time. Yet, at least in my kid-filled neighborhood, I hear parents say over and over, “I know minivans are practical, but I just can’t see myself as a minivan driver.”

Along with 3-row SUVs, we also tested the redesigned Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan minivans. Neither impressed us very much and didn’t come close to unseating the perennial top-scoring Toyota Sienna and Honda Odyssey.

Here are our picks for this month:

Rick Small: My choice here is the Honda Pilot. Being the tallest auto tester (I'm 6’ 4”), I appreciate the roomy, comfortable driving position with ample leg and head room. The Pilot is reliable and has a responsive drivetrain. It also has more car-like in handling and ride than many SUVs in this class. It excels in utility by having three rows of seats and being able to carry 4x8 building materials. Finally, it has a decent towing capacity. I would also consider the new Mazda CX-9, since it also has three rows of seats and feels sporty for its size. Its driving position is also roomy. The new Saturn Outlook/GMC Acadia is also worth a look, but the drivetrain tends to shift gears more often than I like.

Gabe Shenhar: After our July ’07 group of upscale SUVs, my choice was the Acura MDX. But in this category of mid-priced $30,000-$40,000 models, it’s not so clear-cut anymore. Now I would probably choose the Honda Pilot, since it feels very similar to the MDX but costs a whole lot less. Plus, this way I would be putting my money where my mouth is—I’ve recommended the Pilot to several of my friends and neighbors. (They’re still my friends, by the way.) But the Pilot’s redesign is right around the corner —the 2009 redesign arrives in early summer 2008—and I’m hoping Honda does away with the column shifter, which was the only thing that bugged me about the Pilot.

Tom Mutchler: My family has owned Buicks in the past—my first car was a hand-me-down 1981 Buick Electra. I also drove my dad’s ‘86 Park Avenue to my prom. So driving our Buick Enclave creates something of a disconnect for me, as it is a clear sign of how so-very-far Buick (and GM) has come. This big SUV looks great, inside and out, and handles quite well. I took our Enclave to Pennsylvania with our kayaks in the minivan-like cargo area and found it to be a wonderfully quiet and relaxing way to travel.

Well, mostly. I also drove our Enclave to Lime Rock Park race track for a Skip Barber driving class. There’s nothing relaxing about how the 3.6-liter V6 has to struggle to keep the 5100-lb Enclave at speed on hills. Despite having the transmission reprogrammed, it still has to frequently shift two or three gears to keep up, creating big jumps in engine rpm that break the calm and frustrate the driver. Several of my fellow staff members consider this a deal-breaker. A bit of advice: if you’re considering one of GM’s excellent Lambda SUVs (Enclave/Saturn Outlook/GMC Acadia) and you live where there are hills, make sure your test drive ventures from the straight and flat. Rumor has it that GM will add the more powerful direct-injection version of this engine at some point—it needs it STAT.

So what would I pick? The Toyota Highlander is very, very competent, but I find it downright boring. Same goes for the Ford Taurus X. Sure, the cramped Subaru Tribeca is enjoyable to drive. But the stylish Mazda CX-9 has more room and an earlier trip on the back roads to Lime Rock showed that it’s ready for the hills and curves. (Pity about the below average reliability, though.)

Mike Quincy: Since all these models make fairly decent family vehicles, I spent a lot of time in all of them. My young sons loved the rear-seat DVD player in the Ford Taurus X that we drove to Maine. I appreciated the Subaru Tribeca’s handling on some of CT’s beautiful back roads en route to the Fall Vintage Festival at Lime Rock Park. And the Buick Enclave’s cavernous cargo area has made holiday shopping a snap. All of them are remarkably adequate, but none (especially the top-scoring Toyota Highlander) are engaging. However, I like the approach GM is taking with the Enclave/Saturn Outlook/GMC Acadia. With a bit more horsepower under the hood and better transmission performance, these, to me, are the ones to beat. And if GM could put a torquey turbo-diesel engine in them, the bummer of the standard V6’s 15 mpg overall might be solved.

No flash-to-pass for Cadillac CTS, part 2

We've received an unusually high amount of feedback in response to my piece "The stalk that broke the Cadillac CTS' back" concerning the lack of flash-to-pass feature on some 2008 Cadillac CTS models. Some people's posts were more civilized than others, and evidently, a few hadn't finished reading the piece before (a-hem) pouncing. The common theme was how such a missing "minor feature" could detract from a car that's otherwise very impressive. Thanks to all who wrote. Well, almost all.

To restate: Flash-to-pass is a handy driver-communication tool. It's often used as a courtesy, say, in front of a school entrance, at a four-way stop sign as a "go ahead, after you" statement, or "Please let me pass, thank you" on a freeway. Other uses are to signal to a tractor-trailer truck that just passed you that it's OK to merge back to the right lane.

The feature also has safety implications. Let's say you are on a two-lane highway and a distracted motorist is veering toward you, poised for a head-on collision. Able to get his/her attention with a few high-intensity flashes with a simple pull of the stalk gives you a fighting chance to avoid a disaster. (Sounding the horn is unlikely to help in this instance because of the speed and the direction of the sound waves.) I experienced such a scenario years ago in Arizona. Luckily, flashing my high beams alerted the other driver in time to avert a potential crash.

Some posters/o