New car review posted on the main page.

1988RedT2 wrote: The wifey just bought herself a 2011 Hyundai Sonata Limited 2.0TGDI. The Mazda 3 Sport 6-speed just wasn't her cup of tea. I gotta admit, I'm a little impressed. The Hyundai turbo 4 makes something like 270 HP, or 100 more than the much larger Mazda 2.5 liter, and gets better gas mileage. Out the door for $26k. Honda is still a good car, but like Toyota, they're sitting on their asses while the competition goes around 'em.

26k would have gotten her a mazdaspeed3 with change left over, but no better mileage

Tom Heath wrote: FWIW, I'd bet a nickel that the Accord would lap Road Atlanta as quickly as a Genesis Coupe.

A whole nickel?

I'll take that bet!

Strizzo wrote:

1988RedT2 wrote: The wifey just bought herself a 2011 Hyundai Sonata Limited 2.0TGDI. The Mazda 3 Sport 6-speed just wasn't her cup of tea. I gotta admit, I'm a little impressed. The Hyundai turbo 4 makes something like 270 HP, or 100 more than the much larger Mazda 2.5 liter, and gets better gas mileage. Out the door for $26k. Honda is still a good car, but like Toyota, they're sitting on their asses while the competition goes around 'em.

26k would have gotten her a mazdaspeed3 with change left over, but no better mileage

Yeah, we talked about that a little before she bought the 3. I don't think she would have liked the Speed any better. Her biggest complaints about the 3 were road noise, stiff jiggly ride, so-so fuel economy, and she really didn't enjoy the manual trans. in traffic. She wanted something a little cushier, and found it in the Sonata. She has a long commute and puts about 25k miles a year on a car, so she bought the 3 for a nice economical commuter and it just didn't tickle her fancy. She'd like another Audi or a CTS, but she doesn't want to pile up that many miles on a pricier car.

FWIW, I REALLY liked the Mazda 3, but we just didn't need yet another vehicle doing part-time duty and taking up space in the garage.

Tom Heath wrote:

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:

Tom Heath wrote: FWIW, I'd bet a nickel that the Accord would lap Road Atlanta as quickly as a Genesis Coupe. Just like the "toughest engine" thread, perceptions are tricky.

Future article? PLEASE?!?!?!?

Just as soon as we double our circulation, online advertising revenue, and staff. Oh, and my kids don't need me to pick them up after school.

Time and money aside this is a good idea, call it The Apples and Oranges Test, do it once a year with wildly incomparable yet surprisingly evenly matched vehicles.

ANY new car with a manual is worthy of note. The manual option is getting too scarce.

I never would have considered the Honda, so the fact that you guys think it is interesting will probably rate a test drive from me. For some reason I have always loved Honda's two wheel offerings, but the four wheel stuff leaves me cold.

IF it were turbocharged and had three door/hatch configuration, I would probably buy one.

I don't think cachet can apply to a car sold in those kinds of volumes.

What kind of volumes are those? v6/6spd accord coupes have been rare since they came out. Ive ridden in one and driven in none in the ~6 or 7 years they've been available. I think the comparative volumes of the things you are talking about might surprise you.

If it's not worth the money to you then of course it'd have to be a steal.

Are you misunderstanding my ubiquitous colloquial term or actually trying to say something about me? Good job on that one.

I had a last gen '07 Accord V-6 EX-L coupe. It was a great car, way better than anyone that has never driven one would think,

WAIT A SECOND, are you trying to imply that the people here comparing the accord in question to a 145hp 1995 3.8 mustang here are full of E36 M3. Because, if you are.. you're completely correct.

nteresting that the Accord is considered an appliance with 271 hp and a six speed, but the closest match from Hyundai isn't available with a manual transmission. FWIW, I'd bet a nickel that the Accord would lap Road Atlanta as quickly as a Genesis Coupe. Just like the "toughest engine" thread, perceptions are tricky.

VERY well put. Some people bring home a paycheck reading the way people vote with their feet, and some people vote with their mouth espousing opinions they dont even understand why they hold.

Yeah, we talked about that a little before she bought the 3. I don't think she would have liked the Speed any better. Her biggest complaints about the 3 were road noise, stiff jiggly ride, so-so fuel economy, and she really didn't enjoy the manual trans,

WAIT A SECOND, are you implying that vehicle platforms have some inherent traits that dont really change just because you stick more HP on them? Because if so, you're completely correct, and you're also proving my point about how any and all SN95 mustangs are vastly aesthetically inferior to a modern accord, REGARDLESS of having 300 or 400 or 500 hp and ESPECIALLY if they have a whopping 140.

I, personally, am glad the car reviews are online. I read them online, invest what time of my own i think they are worth, but i dont pay for them, and that is what makes them ok. I dont feel that the extremely basic format and small amount of opinion they present is worth pages i would pay for in the printed magazine (disregarding the indirect way that paying for the mag does pay for these too). So i say keep doing them and ill keep reading them online for free, and their main benefit for me will be to 'familiarize' me with the personalities and opinions of the reviewers, which makes me feel more like part of a community rather than part of an audience. As for the opinions presented, i find them most unique in their 'average joe-ness' and pragmatism, which is not enough to get me to pay for them (directly).

I guess it's worthwhile to point out that while i will read your reviews online but would rather not in the mag, i WONT read motor trend's online and WILL read them in their mag, and that's because their site presents and demands too much. There's a whole lot of site there, and a whole lot of content in each review, but id rather read something that lengthy on paper with all the pretty pictures and page layouts etc, while something shorter i would rather read on a website that doesn't clutter my brain with the page having 8 million embedded links behind flashy, distracting pictures, etc.

/longwinded.

ansonivan wrote: Time and money aside this is a good idea, call it The Apples and Oranges Test, do it once a year with wildly incomparable yet surprisingly evenly matched vehicles.

+1

Hmm I didn't realize they were so heavy.

Sharp looking cars for sure though. how is the exhaust note?

I liked the styling and performance number for the previous accord coupe, also available with the v6/six speed combo. They are quicker than I imagined too.

I also recall reading an article recently comparing the accord coupe to the deceased prelude.

You'll find people here saying preludes are too heavy as well.

Vigo wrote: You'll find people here saying preludes are too heavy as well.

Well.....

Just the name accord makes me go cold on reading it. Perception thing. Now if they called it the Accord "sport" or some other such marketing ploy, I might have my interest peaked.

I actually think the 86-88 or so accord was a great, underappreciated, very light car that noone seems to care about. Id rather have one of those than a prelude of the time.. although id take a mid 90s accord wagon over a mid 90s prelude... and a late 90s prelude over a late 90s accord.. I care more about styling than whether something has 2 or 4 doors on it, i guess. hehe.

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:

Vigo wrote: You'll find people here saying preludes are too heavy as well.

Well.....

In the case of many here, I think it might be the pot calling the kettle black.

I also like the new car reviews but I could care less about an Accord. I look forward to reading about the new Hyundai you mentioned and am also curious about the Kias and Suzukis.

I like the new car reviews. I especially like that you guys archive them. I just test drove a 2008 G8 GT and read GRM's review for comparison. Spot on review too. Having historical data is awesome when shopping used.

The Accord. Perception is hard to change. I've got it in my head that Honda's are dead boring. 271 hp and a 6 spd are interesting but my Speed3 has that (Thanks AEM CAI I read about in GRM) and I find it a lot more interesting. The Honda reliability isn't there. I say that because it currently has a blown turbo seal that will, Mazda willing, be covered under warranty.

So I can't gather much excitement about an Accord. Maybe if it were a V8 sedan that would light my fire more. I just don't see that car as being sporty or significant.

The new cars are useful, to a degree. It's nice to have a like minded individual reviewing potential purchases. Not EVERYONE here's content with beaters, just most of us.

I like the new car reviews. I especially like that you guys archive them. I just test drove a 2008 G8 GT and read GRM's review for comparison. Spot on review too. Having historical data is awesome when shopping used.

THIS!

If I may add some feedback though (I'll be happy to do it in detail in the 'feedback' section,) 'apples to apples' comparisons are nice.

The "Hottest Hatch?" article made zero sense to me, from the standpoint that they were three completely different cars, and I couldn't figure out exactly how the 'best' car was determined. Wouldn't a Honda Fit be a better more appropriate car to put head-to-head against the Mazda2? Do I just need to be beaten over the head with the "CR-Z'S ARE COOL DAMNIT!" hammer more often? Isn't the Mazda2 the best value over the bunch, being WAY cheaper, WAY lighter, handling well enough for 2nd(?) fastest lap, and getting killer gas mileage to boot?

I understand the cars are all supposed to be classed in H-stock. If it was strictly a "Here's the new hot car for H-stock" article, it would've made sense.

My $.02.

poopshovel wrote:

I like the new car reviews. I especially like that you guys archive them. I just test drove a 2008 G8 GT and read GRM's review for comparison. Spot on review too. Having historical data is awesome when shopping used.

THIS!

Yup, all over that. There's a reason I'm lugging around twenty-five years of R&T every time I move. When I'm considering a 1995 E36 M3 I can read a review, check specs, etc. I just did this for a buddy looking at a 1999 Jaguar. Your reviews are worthwhile and record valuable information. A big part of the value is that I value the GRM perspective on cars, even new cars.

David

Tom/David, I'm with 92celica on this one. I'm not going to buy a new car anytime soon (especially since I just learned I'm being laid off from work at the end of March). OTOH, if y'all are just testing the kind of stuff that might make cool cars 5-10yrs from now, that's OK. I actually enjoyed the article on the CRZ.