From the logbook: Nissan Murano

The last-generation Nissan Murano was a staff favorite here at the track. Many of us, having no real need for competitors with a third-row seat or big towing capacity numbers, listed it in multiple SUV Personal Picks. Indeed, we mentioned it so often that some of our editors thought we, ah, were mentioning the Murano a little too much. [‘Tis true-Ed.]

But there’s a redesigned Murano now. Based on the Altima sedan, the 2009 Murano moves to the updated Altima platform, a car that now tops our family sedan ratings. The old Murano had a lot going for it, especially its sporty driving dynamics. However, fit and finish wasn’t a strong point (although it got better in a 2005 update) and the swoopy styling compromised visibility.

You’ll have to look close to notice that the Murano is new. Other than a very prominent, very chromed grille, styling didn’t veer far from that of the popular first generation. Let’s flip through the logbook to see what our first impressions are on this new model:

"Instead of building a budget BMW X5 (like the last Murano), Nissan built a budget Lexus RX."

"Engine is punchy and refined. CVT is one of the best—unobtrusive and never needs to rev the engine too much and for too long."

"Seems to have lost a bit of charm from earlier models."

"White-on-silver gauges are not a recipe for easy legibility. Can’t possibly see or read climate control AUTO labeling or indicator – probably seemed fine on the blueprints, but not in the car."

"Two separate levers for steering wheel (tilt and telescope) adjustment is a pain."

"The new Murano is fully equipped and nicely finished—so much so that it should have been an Infiniti."

"Visibility has gotten even worse —thicker pillars, tiny rear window, miserable ¾ sloping side window."

"Power (rear) hatch is slow; I prefer manual override."

"Lost some of the sporty edge from last model."

"Very comfortable and relatively quiet on the highway. Especially with the satellite radio, this car makes for good road trips."

"Very wide A-pillars hurt visibility."

“Seat cushions are flat and not much support on the side – also short cushions."

"Good handling, but you feel its size."

"Nice car and good follow-up to last Murano. Interior design is much less caustic."

At first glance, almost everyone agrees that the inside of the Murano is a much more attractive place to be and visibility remains a problem. But the jury is still out on whether the Murano is as enjoyable to drive or as comfortable as the last version.

So, will the Murano again be a frequent visitor in our Personal Picks, or have newer SUVs usurped its place in our affections? We’ll see how the Murano does against other upscale five-passenger SUVs, including its corporate-mate, the Infiniti EX35, and Volkswagen’s updated Touareg in a future test.

—Tom Mutchler

From the logbook: Land Rover Range Rover Sport

Elegant, exclusive, and expensive (ours is $61,900, with the 300-hp, 4.4-liter V8), the Range Rover Sport competes with other pricy (and gas thirsty) SUVs, including the Porsche Cayenne and BMW X5. How is such a luxurious guzzler fairing under our scrutiny? Are we ashamed to drive it in public, or does merely “arriving” in this prestige machine get us more attention than we deserve? Will the controls be any better than the cryptic ones in the last Land Rover we tested – the LR3, upon which the Sport is based – which we called “confusing [and] poorly located”? Read our first impressions from the logbook and find out if there’s much “sport” in the Range Rover Sport:

"Without the supercharged engine, this drives just like our old LR3 – kind of slow."

"Engine sounds great, but the hefty weight is apparent on acceleration."

"The ride is stiff and has abrupt impacts."

"Steering is short on feedback."

"For such a large vehicle, there is no room for the driver. I feel boxed in."

"The navigation system is the most complicated and least comprehensive I’ve ever used."

"It’s a nice looking vehicle, but $62K should include a backup camera, heated steering wheel, and six months of free satellite radio."

"What kooky controls…same radio faceplate as our LR2: big rotary knob on the right side, but it doesn’t tune the radio frequency…simply idiotic."

"Common controls like mirrors, windows, and door locks are ill-placed."

"Good visibility all around, comfortable seats."

"Thermonuclear seat heaters."

"The shoulder belt tugs hard and my knee bashes against the center console and door panel."

"Cramped rear seat for this class."

"Looks great, nicely done interior."

"Wonderful headlights, especially high beams."

"The solid feel of the car doesn’t carry over to the doors, which are hard to close the first time [you shut them] and have a loose, rattly sound when shutting. The tailgate is the same."

"Comes with lots of prestige, and it might be good off-road, but it’s really not exciting to drive. I can’t understand why this car is so fashionable and popular." [But, of course, this person lives in tony Westport, CT, which is chock-a-block with Land Rovers…]

"Strangely appealing, but not a smart purchase in any sense of the word."

So the debate continues as to whether or not there is much practicality in the Range Rover Sport…or is that missing the point? High-end SUVs look nice, many are seen as status symbols, and they cost truckloads of money both to buy and at the pump. That might address their affluent owners’ goals, but it doesn’t mean they’re good vehicles.  We’re putting together a test group that will include the Range Rover Sport, as well as the Porsche Cayenne, Toyota Land Cruiser, and others to see how these trucks perform as vehicles, not just as rolling jewelry.

—Mike Quincy

How Mercedes’ BlueTec works, and the 2009 clean-diesel SUVs to come

For automakers to bring the innate fuel efficiency of a diesel engine with peppy performance and low emissions to the U.S. market, it required a national change-over to ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel, the development of precisely controlled engines, and extensive treatment of exhaust gases. With these goals accomplished, there is a wave of diesel-powered vehicles coming to America despite the price premium on diesel fuel.

Mercedes-Benz has been leading the movement with its 50-state-legal "clean diesels" featuring "BlueTec" technology that mark the culmination of years of scientific research, powertrain engineering, and market preparation. The resulting BlueTec diesels burn cleaner than most gasoline engines and exhibit superior fuel economy at the same time.

This month, Mercedes announced that it would offer a clean-diesel option for three of its 2009-model SUVs: the midsized ML- and R-Class, and the big GL-Class. All will use the same 210-hp, 3.2-liter diesel V6. These should be some of the most fuel-efficient SUVs on the road. Mercedes has estimated that the GL320 BlueTec will record an average of 24 mpg, some 20 to 40 percent better than a comparable gasoline engine. It should also be able to travel 600 miles on a single tank of fuel.

There may have been nothing inevitable about Mercedes’ particular choices for creating a clean diesel. Conceivably a roster of alternative technologies could have accomplished the same thing. Honda, Nissan, and Toyota are all developing clean-diesel technology and they’re apt to use their own strategies to bring them to fruition. But the Mercedes BlueTec system just happens to be the first practical mass-market application available in the United States.

What is BlueTec?
It’s the proprietary name for a series of engine technologies, filters, and catalysts that result in low emissions and high fuel economy. It starts with a high-pressure common-rail turbo direct injection diesel engine. "Common rail" refers to the method for injecting precisely the right amount of fuel directly into each cylinder at exactly the right moment. The turbocharger boosts horsepower, and the system recirculates the exhaust gas that powers it in order to consume any unburned fuel.

When exhaust gas leaves the engine, a multi-phase treatment process begins. By their nature, diesels tend to produce high levels of carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen known collectively as NOx, and particulate matter, also known as soot. Oxidation catalysts minimize the carbon monoxide and further reduce unburned hydrocarbons. A maintenance-free particulate filter, or soot trap, then reduces soot to nearly undetectable levels.

NOx emissions are the trickiest to deal with. NOx forms in the first place as a result of burning atmospheric air, and every lean-burning engine generates NOx as the ratio of fuel to air in the combustion cycle decreases. Current approaches to trapping or destroying NOx emissions all use catalysts that are vulnerable to degradation in the presence of sulfur. That’s why it was necessary to put the whole country on a diet of ultra-low-sulfur fuel.

Mercedes uses two strategies to deal with NOx, one for cars and one for SUVs. The E320 BlueTec sedan, which we tested last year, attacks NOx with a storage catalyst and a second catalyst called SRC (Selective Catalytic Reduction). Periodically the engine runs rich for a little while, which cleanly purges the NOx storage catalyst.

For heavier vehicles, such as SUVs, Mercedes has adopted a urea-injection system called AdBlue. That’s because the NOx trap technology used in cars would require too-frequent purging and thus reduce fuel economy.

The AdBlue system uses the SRC catalyst and a tank of liquid urea, which is misted into the exhaust stream. When the urea comes in contact with the hot exhaust gas, it releases ammonia, which in turn reacts with NOx and emerges as harmless nitrogen and water. The urea supply is said to be good for 10,000 miles, so it only needs to be refilled at the vehicle’s normal service intervals. Mercedes says that the AdBlue system reduces NOx emissions by 80 percent.

The Mercedes-Benz BlueTec SUVs are slated to go on sale this fall as 2009 models.

— Gordon Hard

Also read "A clean diesel' sedan tops a performance-tuned hybrid" (available to online subscribers).

IIHS study contradicts government on roof crush—more lives could be saved

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has recently published a report looking at vehicle roof strength and its relation to protecting people in rollover crashes. This study raises serious questions about earlier U.S. Government studies that predicted a very minimal positive effect from strengthening vehicle roofs to prevent their caving in during rollover crashes. Before this study there was “no conclusive evidence about the specific contribution of a vehicle’s roof strength to occupant protection.” The IIHS report focused only on midsized, four-door SUVs, and it supports CR’s position on the importance of stronger roofs as one way to mitigate rollover injuries and deaths.

Background: The Government’s roof-crush standard, known as FMVSS 216, hasn’t changed in decades. It was implemented back in 1973 for cars, and extended to light trucks and vans in 1994. This standard specifies a test where a steel plate is pressed against the roof’s edge above the driver’s door and loaded up with a force equal to 1.5 times the weight of the vehicle. The roof is allowed to collapse no more than five inches. The federal government’s auto-safety agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), proposed in 2005 a revised test that would increase the load on the steel plate to 2.5 times the vehicle’s weight.

The upgraded standard also specifies that roof crush cannot exceed the space available above the head of a 50th-percentile male crash dummy. In a follow-up proposal dated January 2008, NHTSA suggested it might extend the test to include both the passenger and driver’s side of the vehicle, instead of just one side of the roof.

Benefits questioned: NHTSA has estimated that its new roof-crush standard would prevent only 13 to 44 fatalities per year. That’s out of some 10,000 rollover fatalities that occur annually. If the standard were raised to three times the vehicle weight instead of 2.5 times, NHTSA estimates life-saving at 49 to 135 fatalities. Meanwhile, NHTSA has pegged the cost to the industry for its new regulation at $88 to $95 million for the 2.5-times-weight load, but at more than 10 times that, $1.2 to $1.3 billion, for the 3-times-weight load.

The IIHS concludes that NHTSA’s life-saving estimates are far too conservative. The IIHS examined just 11 vehicles, midsized four-door SUVs. But it concluded that if they had all had roofs as strong as the strongest among them, the 2000-2004 Nissan Xterra, then about 212 of the 668 deaths that occurred in those SUVs in 2006 would have been prevented.

Both NHTSA and the IIHS assert in their reports that electronic stability control will go a long way toward preventing rollover injuries and fatalities because ESC seems to be highly effective at preventing rollover in the first place. However, even with ESC, vehicles can still trip over a curb and roll, or roll down an embankment. Higher roof strength limits would help prevent injuries form these accident scenarios. Side-curtain air bags are expected to reduce fatalities and injuries when a rollover does happen, both by cushioning occupants and by preventing occupant ejection.

Nevertheless, the IIHS believes that the link between roof strength and injury risk remains. For instance, even if a vehicle is equipped with side-curtain air bags, they may not work so well if the roof collapses and the vehicle’s doors pop open. “There will still be rollovers,” says the IIHS Communications Director Russ Rader, “even when all vehicles have stability control.”

—Gordon Hard

Read “Raising the roof standard for rollover safety.” See Consumers Union’s stand on roof crush from 2005. Learn more about car safety in our Safety section and in the CR Safety blog.

Inside scoop - Chrysler to focus on improving interiors

Chrysler recently invited members of the press to a Manhattan showing of the new 2009 Dodge Ram pickup and Journey crossover SUV, providing insight to the common company weakness--interiors--and what the future holds for its production cabins.

Chrysler executives speaking included Klauss Busse, Chief Designer for Jeep and Truck Interiors, and Mike Accavitti, Director of Global Marketing for Dodge and its SRT high-performance arm. The presentation began with Mr. Accavitti giving an overview of the new Ram. He then turned things over to Mr. Busse, who spent a good deal of time explaining improvements to the pickup's interior (left). The Ram is the first graduate of Chrysler's Advance Interior and Component Design studio, whose mission is to improve the look and feel of the company's interiors.

If production models remain true to the pre-release Ram we saw, the truck's interior could be a more pleasant place to spend time in than the inside of any Chrysler product in recent memory. Padded surfaces cover the door panels and dash, which also features stitching that is real rather than molded in. Rubberized switchgear feels and looks upscale, panel fits are improved, and all materials appear to be of a much higher quality than we've seen lately from Chrysler. The high-end model on display even had a heated steering wheel - said to be a segment first.

All this made the Journey presentation somewhat disappointing, especially when we peeked inside (left). And this time, a discussion of the quality of the interior was not part of the show. Having seen and sat in it, I can see why. While it looks like Chrysler spent a few more bucks on the inside of the top-of-the-line Journey R/T on display than on recent CR test models including the Dodge Avenger, Caliber, Nitro, and Jeep Patriot and Compass, it wasn't anywhere near as nice as the pickup —or as those found in some competing models. When we asked if some of the bits and design cues from the truck might find their way into Chrysler's car lineup soon, Accavatti assured us Chrysler management knows something needs to be done.

"The first step is realizing and admitting you have a problem," Accavatti said. He went on to say that specific complaints including hard plastics, and what he called a "stark" look, would be addressed across the board soon.

Let's hope he's right. While Chrysler vehicles have drawn criticism for their interiors of late, our testing has also revealed some other issues, including coarse powertrains and suspensions that seem noisy and not fully sorted out. Reliability has also been an issue. Among other things, we think the company should focus on the surfaces where people sit, and those that they touch and look at, is as good a place to start making improvements as any.

Plans call for redoing the Jeep Compass and Patriot first, with the updates due to showrooms by the end of calendar '08. New interiors for other models will follow. We look forward to seeing the results.

—Jim Travers

Also read: "Chrysler threatens to pull plastic plug on "Playskool" interiors." For insights on another Journey, view and listen to their discography.

2009 Subaru Forester pricing

Subaru has announced that pricing for the redesigned 2009 Forester starts at $19,995--$1,200 less than the 2008 model. The updated Forester has grown considerably. Subaru says it is three inches longer and 4.5 inches taller. Further, it rides on a 3.6-inch longer wheelbase. This stretch, the company says, improves rear legroom--a critical weakness in on the previous model.

Two of Subaru's signature flat-four engines are available: a standard 170-hp four-cylinder and a turbocharged 224-hp version. The engine has been lowered nearly an inch in the chassis to keep the center of gravity low and Subaru says a new double-wishbone rear suspension improves cargo room.

Standard safety equipment on all models now includes electronic stability control and brake assist, which helps drivers apply maximum braking force in emergencies, as well as standard side-curtain airbags with rollover sensor.

Among the upgrades, the 2009 Forester offers more modern conveniences, including a rear DVD player and a navigation system with traffic updates.

The Forester will go on sale this spring.

Price / Model / Transmission
$19,995 - 2.5X manual 
$21,195 - 2.5X automatic
$22,495 - 2.5X Premium Package manual 
$23,495  - 2.5X Premium Package automatic
$25,995 - 2.5X L.L.Bean Edition automatic
$26,195 - 2.5XT automatic
$28,195 - 2.5XT Limited automatic

An All Weather Package is available ($400) on the Premium Package, and it is standard on the L.L.Bean & XT Limited. An in-dash navigation system is optional ($1,800) on L.L. Bean and XT Limited models.

See our 2009 Subaru Forester preview, complete with photo gallery. Discuss Subaru in the cars forums.

Midsized SUV crash test results - Nissan Murano Top Safety Pick

Nine out of 10 SUVs in the latest tests from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) provide good frontal crash protection. However, the ratings in the side crash tests are mixed, once again reinforcing the need for consumers to carefully review the safety equipment and safety ratings for models under consideration for purchase. (These tests and over 200 others can be viewed in the Consumer Reports crash test video player.)

In this group, the 2009 Nissan Murano was the best performer, getting good ratings for front-, side-, and rear-crash protection. The Murano earned the Top Safety Pick designation, joining a growing list of midsized SUVs to earn that accolade. (However, read "Nissan recalls SUVs for air bag fix.")

At the other end of the spectrum, the Jeep Liberty, four-door Jeep Wrangler, and Kia Sorento are the worst performers in the side test. The Liberty, its mechanical sibling Dodge Nitro, and Wrangler earn the second lowest rating of marginal for protection in side crashes. The Sorento earns the lowest rating of poor.

In 2001 only half of the midsized models that were tested earned good ratings in the IIHS frontal offset test. In the latest evaluations, only the Hummer H3 falls short, and it earns an acceptable rating. The H3 is one of only two midsized SUV designs the Institute has recently tested that doesn't earn a good rating in the frontal test. (The other is the Chevrolet TrailBlazer, and related GMC Envoy, Isuzu Ascender, and Saab 9-7X).

As manufacturers introduce improved designs, the Institute sees more SUVs qualifying for Top Safety Pick by earning good ratings in all three tests and having electronic stability control (ESC).

"Performance of some of these models in the side test was surprising," said Institute senior vice president Joe Nolan in a statement. "SUVs should have an inherent advantage in such crashes because drivers and passengers ride higher up than in cars. People often think they're safer in an SUV, but many cars perform much better in our side test than some of the SUVs in this group."

Midsized, four-door SUVs
The February crash-test group is listed below in rank order, with the specific air bag configuration tested and applicable model years listed.

Nissan Murano
Front - Good; Side - Good
Front and rear head curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front and side: 2009 models

Mazda CX-7
Front - Good; Side - Good
Front and rear head curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front and side: 2007-08 models

Mazda CX-9
Front - Good; Side - Good
Head-curtain air bags for all three rows and front torso air bags
Front and side: 2007-08 models

Mitsubishi Endeavor
Front - Good; Side - Good
Front and rear head-curtain air bags and front torso air bags.
Front: 2004-08 models, side: 2007-08 models

Suzuki XL7
Front - Good; Side - Acceptable; Rear - Marginal
Head-curtain air bags for all three rows
Front: 2008 models, side: 2007-08 models

Hummer H3
Front - Acceptable; Side - Acceptable
Front and rear head-curtain air bags.
Front and side: 2006-08 models. (Head-curtain air bags optional in 2006-2007)

Jeep Wrangler
Front - Good; Side - Marginal
Without optional side air bags
Front and side: 2007-08 models

Jeep Liberty & Dodge Nitro
Front - Good; Side - Marginal
Front and rear head-curtain air bags
Front and side: 2008 Liberty models and 2007-08 Nitro models

Kia Sorento
Front - Good; Side - Poor
Front and rear head-curtain air bags
Front: 2007-08 models, side: 2003-08 models

See how these SUVs perform in the crash test videos.

—Jeff Bartlett

Dear Chevrolet Travers(e) - Welcome to the family

I'd like to take a moment to thank the good people of Chevrolet for naming their latest SUV after me. I'm deeply moved. Really.

I'm so moved I hate to have to point out a couple of problems, but here goes: The first is, as some of you know, employees of Consumer Reports cannot accept gifts from manufacturers—not even small ones. However, given that the Traverse is a clear tribute to my paternal name, it does feel like a gift and it creates an ethical quandary. The second thing is, they spelled my name with one "e" too many. (A clear sign of excess budget.) For the record, it is "T-r-a-v-e-r-s."

Still, it's the thought that counts. And making it all the more of an honor, the Chevy SUV is based on the excellent Buick Enclave and Saturn Outlook, which scored highly enough in our ratings to become our highest ranked recommended large SUVs. I trust our ranking didn't have anything to do with Chevy naming their version after me, but still, it would be more comfortable having my name pasted on the flanks of this thing than say the Chevy Uplander—the minivan with the lowest owner satisfaction rating of any vehicle in our annual survey.

Curiously, this is not the first time I've been so honored. The GMC Jimmy was a popular rebadging of the Chevy Blazer SUV back in the '90s. I could go out and buy a Jimmy and a Traverse and have a garage full of namesakes if I could find a Jimmy still on the road. But then again, it's bad enough having my last name spelled wrong. Nobody gets away with calling me Jimmy.

What really bothers me is people have been spelling my name Traverse since at least as long as I've been able to notice. Given the expected popularity of this latest Chevy, I suspect that situation will get only worse. One of our own engineers has already adopted the spelling when addressing me. The only way things might improve is if car enthusiasts rally for the Travers cause and remove the silent E from the end, much like Toyota truck owners removing the "ota" decals from their tailgates.

So thanks again, GM. But honestly, you shouldn't have. Couldn't you have gone with Bivouac? Or Suburbanite?

Dear reader, what about you? Is there a vehicle you'd like named after you? Post your suggestions in the comments below.

—Jim Travers

Vehicles crossing over

Last month, Toyota unveiled a new model to add to its lineup, the Venza, at the 2008 Detroit auto show. Toyota describes it as a “crossover sedan,” although “crossover wagon” would probably be more accurate. Toyota hopes the Venza will launch a new segment and claims that it will provide the comfort of a Camry, the functionality of a 4Runner, and the luxury of the Avalon. Wow. That really covers a lot, doesn’t it? Yet I highly doubt the Venza could scale our rock hill with anywhere near the proficiency of a four-wheel-drive 4Runner. Besides, Subaru could arguably claim owning the sedan/crossover segment this decade with the recently retired Outback sedan.

This so-called “new category” got me thinking as to what exactly is a crossover. The original Subaru Outback wagon and Toyota RAV4, for example, sparked this revolution, using car components to create a soft-roader SUV. The Ford Escape, Honda CR-V, and others soon followed, with car-based vehicles with SUV looks dominating the compact and mid-sized SUV segments from 1996 on.

Likewise, when the Pontiac Vibe/Toyota Matrix appeared early in the decade, these twins were termed crossovers, combing a small hatchback package and soft-roader pretense, like the RAV4. Although, with their puny ground clearance (only 5 inches in our last tested model) meant that dirt roads were as far off-road as they went. Today, we’re seeing more crossovers with car-like unibody structures (rather than body-on-frame construction) and increased versatility. This approach has lead to the development of vehicles that tend to be more fuel efficient and ride better than traditional, truck-based SUVs like the Ford Explorer.

The crossover category continues to grow and become broader, now with large vehicles like the Saturn Outlook offering a milder alternative to the Chevrolet Tahoe. Both offer three-row seating, but the new Outlook (and similar Buick Enclave and GMC Acadia ) are easier to drive and get better fuel economy. Americans are known for wanting everything and more in their purchases, and this is reflected in the popularity of crossover vehicles today.

The Venza is splitting hairs to find its place, being a cross between the original Highlander (itself Camry based) and a Camry. Will this truly be a new segment, or just another means to challenge our staff in establishing ratings categories? Marketing messages aside, it will be the car shoppers that define the segments. What will be cross-shopped with the Venza? A Mazda CX-7, Subaru Outback, or Volvo XC70?

Regardless of what you call it, can the automotive buying public really accept another SUV-like vehicle? Probably so. Models like the Venza can be smart alternatives to larger, rougher, less efficient vehicles. Even if you don’t know how to classify it, crossover whatchamacallits may be worth a drive.

If this trend continues, we may be seeing crossovers establish, or re-establish, more categories soon—a crossover pickup anyone? Remember the Chevrolet El Camino? Well, cue the GMC Denali X/T concept from Chicago…

Liza Barth

Chicago - Show me the green

The Chicago Auto Show seems to fall in a tough place on the calendar, that is, after the Los Angeles and Detroit shows where combined 60-80 vehicles may have been unveiled. Each event has a typical theme: LA is usually on the leading-edge of the Green movement and high fashion; Detroit tends to combine American muscle, technology innovation, and memorable design; Chicago is often a blend of truck news and also-rans (minor updates and decidedly unsexy models).

Disappointingly, the pattern holds true this year. The show itself isn't to blame, being a hapless victim of timing and circumstance. I place the blame on the manufacturers. Hear me out...

Reflecting back on the announcements after one last tour of the show floor, there were more than a fair share of mild updates and rebadged models. These may be all important to their respective companies, but not fodder for fueling consumer (or diehard automotive) passions.

Trucks did rule here in Chicago, with several interesting announcements although little that rocked my automotive world. The Chevrolet Traverse looks great. The Ford Works computer system is quite impressive. The GMC Sierra is welcomed to the hybrid revolution. The GMC Denali XT concept is, well, different.

What I wanted to see was inventive, thrifty trucks and SUVs. Rather than just targeting full-throttle, off-road assault monsters, I was looking forward to more vehicles that could commune in nature in a reasonably environmentally responsible way.

Turns out Detroit was the show for that, with the Ford Escape Plug-in, Hummer HX, Jeep Renegade (shown above), Land Rover LRX, Saturn Vue Plug-in, and Toyota A-BAT concepts. No question the Hummer H3T rocks in its own conquer-the-Earth way, but the HX concept from Detroit alongside it rocks harder. Fit it with a clean diesel engine and consider it the brand's savior.

The show season isn't over until New York next month. Just hope we don't have to wait until the next Detroit show to be tantalized with vehicles that combine fun and "green" in the same exciting package.

Meanwhile, I need to reread the Suzuki Equator materials to learn more about how it has an "exclusive" grille.

—Jeff Bartlett

Read our complete coverage of the 2008 Chicago Auto Show.

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.

                                                                                                           

                   

 

The Chinese are coming?

Last year, ChangFeng Motors packed a couple of hundred journalists into the bowels of the Cobo Center and announced their plans for building cars for the United States market. The speech by ChangFeng Chairman Li Jianxin was indecipherable, save one curious and embarrassingly mistranslated phrase.   

The buzz from ChangFeng and Geely lead journalists to declare "The Chinese are Coming!" Some of them took the Chinese presence in Detroit as a yet another threat to the American car industry, while others derided the announcement as yet another attempt by China to dump cheap, inferior goods. 

But that wasn't the message that I heard. For example, last year Wayne County Executive Robert A. Ficano welcomed ChangFeng with open arms, almost begging for them to ramp up and export their vehicles here. Keep in mind, Wayne County is the heart of the same automotive megalopolis that includes all three automotive capitals in Auburn Hills, Dearborn, Detroit. 

ChangFeng returned to Cobo Monday. Mr. Ficano came to the stage and bragged that he had gone on three trade missions to China and Chairman Li was again indecipherable, but he soldiered on through a difficult twenty-minute speech anyway.   

During Chairman Li's speech, he unwrapped two of its cars, the Liebao CS7 small SUV concept vehicle and the Kylin, a compact wagon already being sold in China. Pininfarina supposedly designed the CS7, however the exterior was a dead ringer for a Hyundai Santa Fe. Closer inspection of both vehicles showed that there was nothing special about either. They included some blatant copying of well-known styling cues once or currently used by Chrysler and Toyota. And both vehicles were rather crudely finished by automotive show standards. There were plenty of severely misaligned body panels, loose door stripping, and areas of the exterior where the paint goes from shiny to matte, as if they ran out of clear coat before they shipped these cars to the States.   

So, what can we make of this press conference? It's obvious that Wayne County's Ficano wants to find jobs for displaced automotive workers and white-collar professionals. ChangFeng definitely needs to polish their apple before they sell it in an already highly competitive market. And why wasn't an American CEO up there patting Mr. Ficano and Chairman Li on their backs, when such an automotive company stands to gain from a Chinese alliance?

What we're witnessing is a very public feeling out of possible trade and business partners. Detroit has the engineers and designers to make ChangFeng's automotive lineup shine, so the Chinese automaker can compete globally. ChangFeng has inexpensive labor and production costs and could very well sell an insanely inexpensive car and still make decent profit. The last group missing is an American automaker. Wayne County and ChangFeng cannot succeed with their goals unless one of the Detroit automakers becomes a corporate suitor and provides the marketing know-how, supply and distribution network, and dealership group to provide the backbone such a venture needs. 

When it is all said and done, you might not even know it when Chinese cars reach these shores. It may be a car designed in the United States by one group, manufactured in China by another, and sold under varying names in different parts of the world. Look at GM's confusing relationships and international sales efforts involving Daewoo and Suzuki, for example. Throw in General Motors European Opel division in the mix and even astute insiders get confused about who designed what, who makes what, and who markets what for whom. You'll probably see a similarly complicated set of business relationships emerge from this within the next year or two.

Chrysler is already working with Chery of China on the production of a subcompact called the Dodge Hornet, so the Chinese are practically here. So it's not a question of when the Chinese are coming, or a question about how they're coming, the real question is whether or not the consumer will even know it when it happens. 

—Cliff Weathers

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

Kia Borrego - Framing towing capacity

What makes Kia's introduction of the Borrego unique is that it's a truck-like body-on-frame (BOF) SUV in a world of "crossover" car-based SUVs. Kia poked a bit of fun at this trend, noting that on that very same day at the show, some manufacturers were transitioning from BOF to unibody construction—a move that would lower their towing capacity. This jab was probably aimed at Ford, who showed an Explorer America concept that moved the Explorer name from its traditional BOF construction to a 2.0-liter EcoBoost-ed unibody SUV. Ford mentioned that that would give the Explore America "moderate" towing capacity.

But Kia seems to be a bit hasty in condemning unibody construction as being wimpy. (Of course, most families don't tow that much anyway, if they tow at all.) Kia says that the V6 Borrego can tow 5,000 pounds and that the V8 model tows 7,500 pounds.

While those are decent numbers, unibody SUVs aren't that far off. The V6-powered GM Lambda-platform SUVs (Outlook/Enclave/Acadia), for example, are rated to 4,500 pounds. The Acura MDX can tow 5,000 pounds. Honda suggested in their press conference that towing capacity of the Pilot would increase in the 2009 model; the current version tows 3,500 pounds. Finally, the unibody V8-powered Mercedes GL450 can tow 7,500 pounds.

The Borrego does fill an interesting and uncharted niche—an inexpensive alternative to a Lexus GX470 or loaded Toyota 4Runner. But with unibody SUVs becoming more capable each year, it will be interesting to see if buyers are drawn to the Borrego for its construction or more for its combination of price, power (including a promised-in-the-future diesel) and features. 

One last towing note: Ford didn't announce towing capacities of its F-150 at its press conference. That's an odd omission, given the bragging rights that surround towing capacity and that this isn't a new platform. The company only said in the press release that the 2009 F-150 would have "...improve upon the current model's class-leading towing and hauling capability across all cab configurations." Perhaps no one wanted to tow the line...

—Tom Mutchler

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

2008 Lexus LX 570 pricing - more bucks, more lux

Lexus has announced pricing for its new 2008 LX 570 luxury sport utility vehicle, which replaces the LX 470. This new models adds a variety of new technologies, but it comes at a price--a base MSRP of $73,800, plus a $765 destination fee.  The 2007 Lexus LX 470 started at $67,395.

The LX 570 is equipped with a powerful 5.7-liter V8 engine that produces 383 hp, which is 112 hp more than the vehicle it replaces. The engine is matched to a new six-speed sequential-shift automatic transmission, and this powertrain enables the LX to tow up to 8,500 lbs. Lexus says there are also significant upgrades to the suspension and the full-time four-wheel-drive system that allows it to react more quickly and allow for greater range of adjustment.

Lexus has built into the LX a feature called Crawl Control that operates like an off-road cruise control in that helps maintain control and a low speed when driving over rough or difficult surfaces. Another new feature of the LX is the addition of blind-spot cameras within the grille and under the passenger side-view mirror to assist in monitoring hard-to-see areas. The video imagery can be displayed on the navigation screen.

The Lexus LX 570 will go on sale in early 2008.

—Liza Barth

Discuss Lexus in the Cars forums.

First Looks: Latest SUVs and wagons undergoing testing

Every month, we buy several vehicles to put through our comprehensive program of more than 50 tests. As the models progress through our months-long test process, we present our First Look on popular cars based on partial testing. These reports are presented as free, standalone stories and they are also integrated into the detailed model overview pages for online subscribers. The most recent examples include the 2008 Jeep Liberty, Nissan Rogue, Toyota Highlander Hybrid, and Volvo XC70. The full tests of all these vehicles will be published in the months to come, but in the meantime, we offer our initial driving impressions.

2008 Jeep Liberty: The Liberty has established itself as an inexpensive vehicle with off-road capabilities. However, for everyday driving, the Liberty falls short behind other small SUVs. Read the complete First Look.

2008 Nissan Rogue: The Rogue is Nissan’s first entry into the crossover SUV category and will compete with the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4. We found the compact size refreshing, the ride pleasant, and the handing responsive. Read the complete First Look.

2008 Toyota Highlander Hybrid: The Hybrid Highlander quickly follows the release of the redesigned 2008 Highlander, our top-scorer in the class. The Hybrid version offers improved fuel economy, but it’s at a premium price. Read the complete First Look.

2008 Volvo XC70: The new XC wagon version is derived from Volvo’s flagship S80, rather than the midsized S60 sedan as with the previous generation. Boasting the latest in safety gear, this new car is longer than before and again a bit taller than the similar V70 wagon. The good size and versatility make the XC70 an appealing alternative to car-based SUVs. Read the complete First Look.

Every month, we add new First Looks to ConsumerReports.org. These can be found linked on the main Cars page and secondary New Cars page. Older first looks can be found in the model overview pages until they are replaced with a final road test.

We’re interested in knowing what models you most like to see covered in a future First Look. Post your suggestions in the Comments below.

—Liza Barth

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.

Three-row SUV tests and videos

For our test group in the January 2008 issue we drove 3-row SUVs. These vehicles, designed to fit seven or eight passengers, have become the popular choice among families. They also come with all-wheel-drive.

The full road tests from the magazine have been posted at ConsumerReports.org, along with videos from our auto staff experts. These videos highlight our tests of each vehicle, plus they demonstrate the strengths and weaknesses of each model.

"People movers" features the Buick Enclave, Ford Taurus X, Subaru Tribeca, and Toyota Highlander. Watch the videos.

We also look at the redesigned Chrysler minivans—the Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan.

—Liza Barth

2008 Toyota Sequoia pricing--up from last year

Toyota is hoping that bigger is better for its second-generation Sequoia. However, bigger also means pricier. The 2008 Sequoia prices will start at $34,150 for the rear-drive SR5 base model, climbing to $48,450 for the Limited 4WD and $55,600 for the top-level Platinum 4WD edition.

Two engines are offered for 2008: the carryover 4.7-liter V8 (good for 276 hp) and the monster 381-hp, 5.7-liter V8 from the Tundra. The 4.7 is hooked up to a five-speed automatic transmission; the 5.7 gets six speeds. Maximum towing capacity is 10,000 pounds.

The Sequoia has grown in length, width, and height inside and outside. Second- and third-row rear seats are adjustable for easier access and rear doors open wider than before. The third-row seats now fold into a well in the floor, afforded by the move to an independent rear suspension - a first for a truck-based Toyota SUV.

Standard safety features include includes side air bags, three-row roll-sensing curtain air bags, stability and traction control, and ABS with brake assist and electronic brake-force distribution. Unlike the Tundra, the Sequoia comes with selectable full-time 4WD, rather than a part-time system. Other noteworthy features include standard tilt-and-telescoping steering wheel, and available Bluetooth and backup camera.

Toyota's green image has taken a hit with the introduction of this large, powerful SUV, which is aimed at competing against the Chevrolet Tahoe, Ford Expedition, and Nissan Armada. A possible concern is that Consumer Reports subscribers have reported problems with the drive system in the 5.7-liter V8 configuration of the Tundra. Time will tell if this problem has been sorted out for the Sequoia.

The redesigned Sequoia is scheduled to go on sale in late December.

—Liza Barth and Mike Quincy

For more photos, see our LA Auto Show coverage.
Discuss Toyota in the Cars forums.

Ford recalls over a million full-sized trucks, SUVs, and vans

Ford Motor Company is recalling 1.18 million 1997-2003 model year Ford F-Series Super-Duty trucks, E-Series vans, and Excursions currently registered in the U.S. due to a concern over the cam position (CMP) sensor that may result in degraded engine performance including hesitation, stumble, or stalling.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) says an engine stall could result in a crash. Ford reports there have been 14 allegations of minor accidents or loss of control concerns, but no injuries due to this concern in over 10 years of vehicle service.

This recall involves older vehicles that are powered by 7.3-liter diesel engines manufactured by International. The 6.0- and 6.4-liter diesel engines on current models are not affected.

Owners will be notified by mail beginning mid-December and instructed to take their vehicles to a Ford or Lincoln/Mercury dealer, who will then inspect the camshaft position sensor and replace it at no charge.

For more information:
Ford: 866-436-7332
NHTSA Safety Hotline: 888-327-4236

—Jeff Bartlett

Discuss Ford in the Cars forums.

Personal Picks: Small SUVs, part 2

Continuing our staff's personal insights into the January-issue small SUV test group...

Eric Evarts: None of this month's tested small SUVs makes a compelling choice for my personal pick. If I were in the market for a small SUV today, the smooth, roomy, and tough-looking Toyota RAV4 would be a simple choice. Unfortunately I don't find it very sporty in anything but looks, so I'm intrigued to spend some time in the new Nissan Rogue. The more-expensive Murano is popular around here. [A little too popular here in the blog—Ed.] I'm curious to see if the Rogue lives up to its billing as a more affordable alternative or if it just proves to be an also-ran.

Personally, I would love a Honda Element as a fuel-efficient successor to my old Volkswagen Bus, with its huge interior space and buck-the-mainstream personality. But as a family car, I find the Element's rear-hinged doors a daily nuisance and cargo room is lacking with the back seat in place.

So for my money, among the cars we tested in January, the Kia Rondo and the Suzuki SX4 are the only contenders. The Rondo would make a great space-efficient family car, but Jim Travers takes the joy out of that idea by suggesting putting Rondos into service as New York City taxicabs. So my choice would be the Suzuki SX4, which delivered an observed 27 mpg on my mixed rural/highway commute, is the cheapest all-wheel-drive vehicle on the market, and proved a perfectly livable and handy companion as a daily runabout.

Jeff Bartlett: This was a tough test group for me. The Ford Escape was disappointing in its ho-hum execution. The Jeep Patriot looks great to my eye, with the off-road heritage and military stylings warming my little rock-crawling heart, but this repackaged Compass leaves nothing to love from behind the wheel. I had modest expectations from the Kia Sportage, having driven the original when it first launched, then again with this redesign. But I came to enjoy our '07 test model; it is pleasant to drive, simple to operate, and delivers as promised. The Saturn Vue was a nice surprise, feeling solid, modern, and refined. But the fuel-economy and heavy feel turn me away.

In the end, and you can't know how much this pains me, I agree with Eric. The RAV4 continues to own this segment, and it would be my intellectual choice. On the other hand, my frisky, adventure-seeking pick would be the Honda Element. Yeah, it has its limitations, but don't we all. What it does have is personality. It dares to be different and offer unique abilities in the process. And despite looking like the box a CR-V comes in, the Element still bests these newcomers in fuel economy. Among our January-issue SUV alternatives, I was impressed with the Kia Rondo's smart, efficient packaging, polished manners, and overall value.

Liza Barth:  My favorite small SUV? That's easy, the Toyota RAV4. In fact, I like it so much that I bought one last year, and despite fresh competition, it remains our top-rated vehicle in the category. The small SUVs we tested for the December test group just don't compete with the RAV's comfort, fuel economy, and refinement. However, as an alternative to the small SUVs, I did enjoy the Kia Rondo. I liked the driving position—it was easy to get in and out and the ride was smooth and comfortable. It's also a great price for a seven-passenger vehicle. I'm looking forward to our upcoming hatchback test—specifically the redesigned Toyota Matrix/Pontiac Vibe, Scion xD, and Subaru Impreza. These SUV alternatives provide good fuel economy, several have all-wheel-drive, and are roomy and flexible to carry extra cargo.

Read Personal Picks: Small SUVs, part 1
Discuss SUVs in the forums.

Personal Picks: Small SUVs

This month’s group of Small SUVs takes us away from the gargantuan monsters, like the Chevrolet Tahoe, Dodge Durango and Ford Expedition, and instead introduced us to a few smaller, new and redesigned models. All are competitively priced (around $23,000 for the Kia Sportage to almost $28,000 for the Saturn Vue), and none dipped below 17 mpg overall. The big SUVs mentioned above only get from 12-14 mpg. The smaller models are also somewhat agile, easy to park, and simple to live with. Naturally, their size doesn’t suit everyone’s needs. But if you don’t require three-row seating or huge towing capacities, you might take a look at a smaller ‘Ute.

Here’s what we like:

Gabe Shenhar: In the small SUV class, provided you’re not going to tackle the