Finally the RSX gets and award
Roadster2
01-01-2002, 09:24 AM
Acura, GMC/Chevy ride to front of pack
January 1, 2002
BY LAWRENCE ULRICH
DETROIT FREE PRESS AUTO WRITER
Nearly 60 all-new or significantly redesigned cars and trucks went on sale in the United States this year. Looked at another way, that's more than one new model every week.
From this long and often impressive roster, we set about choosing the Free Press Car and Truck of 2002. And a few duds as well.
Auto consumers are one spoiled lot. Adjusted for inflation, theout-the-door price on new models hasn't been this low since 1978. Automakers are climbing over each other to attract and satisfy increasingly sophisticated, knowledgeable and demanding consumers. They're pulling out the stops on design, performance, utility and safety, if not fuel economy. New models in unpredictable shapes and sizes are blurring the definition of cars and trucks.
In choosing the year's best, we typically considered entries by class rather than against one another. It's unfair to expect a $15,000 econobox to compete straight-up with a $40,000 luxury sedan. Models had to be new or substantially redesigned, and available in dealerships before the end of 2001. To judge the cars, we used the same criteria a picky consumer would apply: Things like exterior and interior design, value for the dollar, comfort, performance, driver satisfaction, safety, fuel economy, technology. And importantly, whether a vehicle advances the state of the art in its class.
So, with no further ado, our favorites -- and not-so-favorites -- of 2002.
Free Press Car of the Year
Acura RSX
With the auto awards season in full swing, Ford has been clearing its trophy case, preparing for a golden glut of honors for its reborn Ford Thunderbird. Between the nostalgic hype and the surge in patriotism, Ford's new convertible is an easy -- dare I say too easy? -- choice for the best 2002 car.
But not so fast.
The Acura RSX coupe is the more complete car. It's also a stronger value, selling for half the T-Bird's $40,000 price.
That leaves the Acura the winner in our book.
Break down what makes a car truly great, and the case for the RSX, the replacement for the Integra, becomes clear. The RSX sets a lofty new standard in itsaffordable coupe class. And it hits more home runs in more categories than any new model this year: <gfbullet>Sophisticated performance, with that mystical marriage of clutch, steering, brakes and shifter that few cars at any price manage. <gfbullet>An attractive shape and fresh interior design, with near-perfect seats and ergonomics.
A refined, high-tech, low-emissions four-cylinder engine, the hallmark of Honda and its Acura luxury division.
Impeccable quality and materials.
Convincing value. The RSX starts at $19,950, or just over $23,000 for the 200-horsepower Type-S version.
Now, if this were a beauty pageant, the Thunderbird would hog all the bouquets. It's a lovely car. As with Chrysler's PT Cruiser last year, Ford deserves kudos for reminding the industry that great styling brings great rewards.
Runners-up, best car
Ford Thunderbird/Nissan Altima
But there's a talent portion to our competition. And that left the T-Bird a worthy runner-up. The T-Bird's face is so pretty that it nearly covers its flaws: An interior that's acceptable, not delectable. Performance that's smooth and congenial, but hardly noteworthy for a car in its lofty price range.
The Acura's exterior is handsome as opposed to breathtaking. Still, this is the kind of clean, confident styling that will look good 10 years from now, long after some flashier, trendier cars have gone stale.
It's not a convertible, so you can't feel the wind in your hair. The styling won't send your mind racing back to drive-ins and soda shops.
But we're not selecting the most beautiful car of the year. Or the most nostalgic.
Just the best.
For the Nissan Altima, our second runner-up, an argument could be made that this midsize family sedan will have more impact in a key segment than either the RSX or the Thunderbird. Unlike the Ford or Acura, this is a car hundreds of thousands of Americans will be driving in the next few years.
They'll be well satisfied.
This handsome, affordable Altima grew in size and style to measure itself against the best midsize sedans. Then it added a twist: Power. Hairy, chest-thumping power.
The Altima can't touch the sex appeal of the Ford or the handling of the Acura. But equipped with its lusty 3.5-liter, 240-horsepower engine, it's actually faster than either. Even its standard 175-horsepower engine tops about any four-cylinder in its class for sheer thrust.
If it weren't for a somewhat chintzy interior,the Altima might have shot past both the T-Bird and Acura to the top of the list.
Free Press Truck of the Year
GMC Envoy/Chevy TrailBlazer
Talk about a fight to the death. The separation between our trio of truck finalists was microchip-thin.
If you're in the market for a midsize sport-utility, the good news is that all three finalists reside in this segment. The bad news is the sleep you may end up losing as you choose your own favorite.
A quart of espresso later, our nod goes to the GMC Envoy/Chevy TrailBlazer. Yes, in reverse order of the Chevy-first tendency of GM's shared truck models.
What tipped the balance was GM's terrific 270-horsepower, inline six-cylinder engine. The 4.2-liter engine truly fulfilled its promise: The power and torque of a traditional V8, with the fuel economy and trademark smoothness of an inline six. The GMC and Chevy can out-accelerate the V8-equipped Ford Explorer. More importantly, their engine feels and sounds smoother and more sophisticated.
Virtually identical under the skin, these all-new GMC and Chevy sport utes are far larger, more comfortable and refined than the models they replace. They're outstanding choices for families who need to haul plenty of passengers, cargo or both. For most people, this is all the truck they'll ever need.
The sport utes manage a surprisingly creamy ride on pavement for a traditional truck with a solid rear axle and body-on-frame design. The Autotrac four-wheel-drive system delivers reliable grip in snow, mud or flood. There's plenty of ground clearance to navigate off-road. Towing power and capability is outstanding, at a maximum 6,400 pounds. And the price -- just over $34,000 for a loaded LT model -- is fully competitive.
As for styling, the GMC's simpler lines earn our nod over the Chevy, but that's purely a matter of taste. And if you're wondering about the omission of the third cousin, the Oldsmobile Bravada: With the Oldsmobile division sliding into oblivion, concerns over resale value make it hard to rank the Bravada alongside its stablemates.
Runners-up, best trucks
Ford Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer
I'm perplexed as to how many truck awards managed to exclude the Explorer and Mountaineer from even their lists of finalists. If the Firestone tire scandal that doesn't even affect this all-new model is to blame, as I suspect, then media in these categories are in serious need of a gut check.
On its arrival, the 2002 Explorer charted new midsize territory with its blend of larger size, rack-and-pinion steering and independent rear suspension. The brilliantly packaged suspension carved out room for a third row of seats, another class first. That third row isn't the roomiest, but neither GM nor Toyota models offer room for seven passengers. The rear suspension also helps deliver superior overall handling. These trucks steer and corner beautifully considering their size and mass. They shine on washboard roads and irregular surfaces that get solid-axle competitors -- including the GM trucks -- hopping and bopping.
Ford did miss an opportunity to seize an advantage with its too-conservative restyling. The Mercury went its own way with an industrial-chic look.
Wherever media wretches rank the Explorer, consumers continue to vote with their pocketbooks. After a slow start, the new Explorer will still finish 2001 as easily the best-selling sport-utility in America, a title it's held since its 1990 introduction.
Not too shabby.
Toyota Highlander
The Toyota Highlander, meanwhile, may be more attuned to today's sport-ute market than anything in its class. Unlike the frame-based GM and Ford trucks, the Highlander is a unit-body design. It's built on the bones of the Toyota Camry, a version of the fine Lexus RX300. It has the trucky look, the tall seating position, the all-wheel drive that everyone wants. But because of its lineage, it delivers a car-like ride and refinement the others can't touch. The engine's terrific: A torquey, oh-so-smooth 220-horsepower V6 transplanted directly from the Lexus.
If you're not spending a lot of time west of the Pecos, or west of the pavement, for that matter, why obsess about off-road ability?
Most disappointing
Jaguar X-Type
We'd laugh if, say, Kia announced it was going to build a $70,000 luxury car. So why did anyone assume Jaguar, which had never so much as dog-paddled in the affordable luxury pool, could immediately swim with the sports sedan sharks from BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Audi, Acura and more? Based on the Ford Mondeo, a European revamping of the U.S. Contour, the Baby Jag has a handsome face and some appeal: The storied name, the Connolly leather, the $29,950 base price. But get the Little Prince outside Jaguar Castle without his pedigree, and he'll find his bottom spanked by a number of sporty strollers in this class. Those Germanic bullies have family crests as well, while the relatively unheralded Japanese are forging their own legends of wizardry and derring-do. They're sure to taunt young Lord Jag, spreading this tale:
Psst, kid -- your real daddy is a Ford.
Runners-up, disappointing
Mitsubishi Lancer
Like a Buick in 8/10 scale, only duller. A clear sign that Chrysler should reconsider turning its small-car development over to Mitsubishi.
Mercedes C230 Kompressor Sports Coupe
From the asthmatic engine to its flabby weight and so-so handling, the C230 seems to forget why people buy performance coupes in the first place.
The question mark
Cadillac CTS
Bob Lutz, the newly crowned king of GM products, called his book "Guts."
We're not sure the Cadillac CTS is what he had in mind. But "guts" could easily could apply to CTS stylists, whose tools must consist entirely of straight rulers.
Already, a dangerous word is in play to describe the CTS' angular looks: Polarizing. (This is a polite euphemism the media uses when regular folks are fine with "ugly").
Now, "polarizing" can end up a verb, describing the 10-foot pole that consumers require to touch a particularly egregious design. ("I wanted to sit inside that crazy car, but I thought I'd better polarize it first.") But if an automaker is lucky and good, as with the brazen Chevy Avalanche, consumers fall happily in step with a stylistic leap of faith. Naturally, Cadillac is banking on the latter.
Confronted with the CTS, some observers are reminded of GM's most recent attention-getter, the infamous Pontiac Aztek. Pontiac, needing its own euphemism, called the Aztek "in your face." Consumers agreed, promptly covering their eyes.
But the, um, conspicuous styling is where similarities between the CTS and Aztek end. Peel back the Aztek's skin, and you'll find what was already one of the weaker minivans on the market. In contrast, the CTS' origami wrapper folds its way around a modern, legitimate sports sedan. It's easily the best-performing car in Cadillac's history.
Will people see the CTS' Beauty, inside and out? Or decide it's simply a Beast?
That's all up to you, the beholder.
http://www.fordfans1.homestead.com/FORDFAN1.html
January 1, 2002
BY LAWRENCE ULRICH
DETROIT FREE PRESS AUTO WRITER
Nearly 60 all-new or significantly redesigned cars and trucks went on sale in the United States this year. Looked at another way, that's more than one new model every week.
From this long and often impressive roster, we set about choosing the Free Press Car and Truck of 2002. And a few duds as well.
Auto consumers are one spoiled lot. Adjusted for inflation, theout-the-door price on new models hasn't been this low since 1978. Automakers are climbing over each other to attract and satisfy increasingly sophisticated, knowledgeable and demanding consumers. They're pulling out the stops on design, performance, utility and safety, if not fuel economy. New models in unpredictable shapes and sizes are blurring the definition of cars and trucks.
In choosing the year's best, we typically considered entries by class rather than against one another. It's unfair to expect a $15,000 econobox to compete straight-up with a $40,000 luxury sedan. Models had to be new or substantially redesigned, and available in dealerships before the end of 2001. To judge the cars, we used the same criteria a picky consumer would apply: Things like exterior and interior design, value for the dollar, comfort, performance, driver satisfaction, safety, fuel economy, technology. And importantly, whether a vehicle advances the state of the art in its class.
So, with no further ado, our favorites -- and not-so-favorites -- of 2002.
Free Press Car of the Year
Acura RSX
With the auto awards season in full swing, Ford has been clearing its trophy case, preparing for a golden glut of honors for its reborn Ford Thunderbird. Between the nostalgic hype and the surge in patriotism, Ford's new convertible is an easy -- dare I say too easy? -- choice for the best 2002 car.
But not so fast.
The Acura RSX coupe is the more complete car. It's also a stronger value, selling for half the T-Bird's $40,000 price.
That leaves the Acura the winner in our book.
Break down what makes a car truly great, and the case for the RSX, the replacement for the Integra, becomes clear. The RSX sets a lofty new standard in itsaffordable coupe class. And it hits more home runs in more categories than any new model this year: <gfbullet>Sophisticated performance, with that mystical marriage of clutch, steering, brakes and shifter that few cars at any price manage. <gfbullet>An attractive shape and fresh interior design, with near-perfect seats and ergonomics.
A refined, high-tech, low-emissions four-cylinder engine, the hallmark of Honda and its Acura luxury division.
Impeccable quality and materials.
Convincing value. The RSX starts at $19,950, or just over $23,000 for the 200-horsepower Type-S version.
Now, if this were a beauty pageant, the Thunderbird would hog all the bouquets. It's a lovely car. As with Chrysler's PT Cruiser last year, Ford deserves kudos for reminding the industry that great styling brings great rewards.
Runners-up, best car
Ford Thunderbird/Nissan Altima
But there's a talent portion to our competition. And that left the T-Bird a worthy runner-up. The T-Bird's face is so pretty that it nearly covers its flaws: An interior that's acceptable, not delectable. Performance that's smooth and congenial, but hardly noteworthy for a car in its lofty price range.
The Acura's exterior is handsome as opposed to breathtaking. Still, this is the kind of clean, confident styling that will look good 10 years from now, long after some flashier, trendier cars have gone stale.
It's not a convertible, so you can't feel the wind in your hair. The styling won't send your mind racing back to drive-ins and soda shops.
But we're not selecting the most beautiful car of the year. Or the most nostalgic.
Just the best.
For the Nissan Altima, our second runner-up, an argument could be made that this midsize family sedan will have more impact in a key segment than either the RSX or the Thunderbird. Unlike the Ford or Acura, this is a car hundreds of thousands of Americans will be driving in the next few years.
They'll be well satisfied.
This handsome, affordable Altima grew in size and style to measure itself against the best midsize sedans. Then it added a twist: Power. Hairy, chest-thumping power.
The Altima can't touch the sex appeal of the Ford or the handling of the Acura. But equipped with its lusty 3.5-liter, 240-horsepower engine, it's actually faster than either. Even its standard 175-horsepower engine tops about any four-cylinder in its class for sheer thrust.
If it weren't for a somewhat chintzy interior,the Altima might have shot past both the T-Bird and Acura to the top of the list.
Free Press Truck of the Year
GMC Envoy/Chevy TrailBlazer
Talk about a fight to the death. The separation between our trio of truck finalists was microchip-thin.
If you're in the market for a midsize sport-utility, the good news is that all three finalists reside in this segment. The bad news is the sleep you may end up losing as you choose your own favorite.
A quart of espresso later, our nod goes to the GMC Envoy/Chevy TrailBlazer. Yes, in reverse order of the Chevy-first tendency of GM's shared truck models.
What tipped the balance was GM's terrific 270-horsepower, inline six-cylinder engine. The 4.2-liter engine truly fulfilled its promise: The power and torque of a traditional V8, with the fuel economy and trademark smoothness of an inline six. The GMC and Chevy can out-accelerate the V8-equipped Ford Explorer. More importantly, their engine feels and sounds smoother and more sophisticated.
Virtually identical under the skin, these all-new GMC and Chevy sport utes are far larger, more comfortable and refined than the models they replace. They're outstanding choices for families who need to haul plenty of passengers, cargo or both. For most people, this is all the truck they'll ever need.
The sport utes manage a surprisingly creamy ride on pavement for a traditional truck with a solid rear axle and body-on-frame design. The Autotrac four-wheel-drive system delivers reliable grip in snow, mud or flood. There's plenty of ground clearance to navigate off-road. Towing power and capability is outstanding, at a maximum 6,400 pounds. And the price -- just over $34,000 for a loaded LT model -- is fully competitive.
As for styling, the GMC's simpler lines earn our nod over the Chevy, but that's purely a matter of taste. And if you're wondering about the omission of the third cousin, the Oldsmobile Bravada: With the Oldsmobile division sliding into oblivion, concerns over resale value make it hard to rank the Bravada alongside its stablemates.
Runners-up, best trucks
Ford Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer
I'm perplexed as to how many truck awards managed to exclude the Explorer and Mountaineer from even their lists of finalists. If the Firestone tire scandal that doesn't even affect this all-new model is to blame, as I suspect, then media in these categories are in serious need of a gut check.
On its arrival, the 2002 Explorer charted new midsize territory with its blend of larger size, rack-and-pinion steering and independent rear suspension. The brilliantly packaged suspension carved out room for a third row of seats, another class first. That third row isn't the roomiest, but neither GM nor Toyota models offer room for seven passengers. The rear suspension also helps deliver superior overall handling. These trucks steer and corner beautifully considering their size and mass. They shine on washboard roads and irregular surfaces that get solid-axle competitors -- including the GM trucks -- hopping and bopping.
Ford did miss an opportunity to seize an advantage with its too-conservative restyling. The Mercury went its own way with an industrial-chic look.
Wherever media wretches rank the Explorer, consumers continue to vote with their pocketbooks. After a slow start, the new Explorer will still finish 2001 as easily the best-selling sport-utility in America, a title it's held since its 1990 introduction.
Not too shabby.
Toyota Highlander
The Toyota Highlander, meanwhile, may be more attuned to today's sport-ute market than anything in its class. Unlike the frame-based GM and Ford trucks, the Highlander is a unit-body design. It's built on the bones of the Toyota Camry, a version of the fine Lexus RX300. It has the trucky look, the tall seating position, the all-wheel drive that everyone wants. But because of its lineage, it delivers a car-like ride and refinement the others can't touch. The engine's terrific: A torquey, oh-so-smooth 220-horsepower V6 transplanted directly from the Lexus.
If you're not spending a lot of time west of the Pecos, or west of the pavement, for that matter, why obsess about off-road ability?
Most disappointing
Jaguar X-Type
We'd laugh if, say, Kia announced it was going to build a $70,000 luxury car. So why did anyone assume Jaguar, which had never so much as dog-paddled in the affordable luxury pool, could immediately swim with the sports sedan sharks from BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Audi, Acura and more? Based on the Ford Mondeo, a European revamping of the U.S. Contour, the Baby Jag has a handsome face and some appeal: The storied name, the Connolly leather, the $29,950 base price. But get the Little Prince outside Jaguar Castle without his pedigree, and he'll find his bottom spanked by a number of sporty strollers in this class. Those Germanic bullies have family crests as well, while the relatively unheralded Japanese are forging their own legends of wizardry and derring-do. They're sure to taunt young Lord Jag, spreading this tale:
Psst, kid -- your real daddy is a Ford.
Runners-up, disappointing
Mitsubishi Lancer
Like a Buick in 8/10 scale, only duller. A clear sign that Chrysler should reconsider turning its small-car development over to Mitsubishi.
Mercedes C230 Kompressor Sports Coupe
From the asthmatic engine to its flabby weight and so-so handling, the C230 seems to forget why people buy performance coupes in the first place.
The question mark
Cadillac CTS
Bob Lutz, the newly crowned king of GM products, called his book "Guts."
We're not sure the Cadillac CTS is what he had in mind. But "guts" could easily could apply to CTS stylists, whose tools must consist entirely of straight rulers.
Already, a dangerous word is in play to describe the CTS' angular looks: Polarizing. (This is a polite euphemism the media uses when regular folks are fine with "ugly").
Now, "polarizing" can end up a verb, describing the 10-foot pole that consumers require to touch a particularly egregious design. ("I wanted to sit inside that crazy car, but I thought I'd better polarize it first.") But if an automaker is lucky and good, as with the brazen Chevy Avalanche, consumers fall happily in step with a stylistic leap of faith. Naturally, Cadillac is banking on the latter.
Confronted with the CTS, some observers are reminded of GM's most recent attention-getter, the infamous Pontiac Aztek. Pontiac, needing its own euphemism, called the Aztek "in your face." Consumers agreed, promptly covering their eyes.
But the, um, conspicuous styling is where similarities between the CTS and Aztek end. Peel back the Aztek's skin, and you'll find what was already one of the weaker minivans on the market. In contrast, the CTS' origami wrapper folds its way around a modern, legitimate sports sedan. It's easily the best-performing car in Cadillac's history.
Will people see the CTS' Beauty, inside and out? Or decide it's simply a Beast?
That's all up to you, the beholder.
http://www.fordfans1.homestead.com/FORDFAN1.html
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2024