MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

I went to the Atlanta International Auto Show yesterday, as I do every year. It was clear that auto makers are feeling quite a pinch in this economy as there were fewer models, less elaborate displays, and many companies didn't even show up. None the less, I typically share my thoughts here and like to open it up for discussion from you guys so here we go...

Overall Best In show/ Most impressive: 2010 Ford Taurus SHO

Simply put, I was absolutely shocked by how attractive this car is in person, and additionally, how BIG it is- every bit as big as an LS or S. In the pictures I was unsure how I felt about many of the design cues but in the sheetmetal in front of you they all flow together to create a very, very handsome and aggressive looking sedan. The design of the rear end is the only weak point of the car and really does not flow well with the rest of the design but it's acceptable. The only concern that I have was interior space as it didn't look like there was very much in the rear. The driver's seat was pushed back relatively far (but I am 6' and do the same) and there was only a few inches between the front seat back and the rear seat cushion. Could have just been the positioning of the chair so who knows.

Overall, Ford has a huge hit on their hands here

Most Dissapointing/ Worst in show: 2010 Cadillac SRX

For all of the attractive cars that GM has built lately, I was shocked at how awkward, ugly, and misshapen the new SRX is. The side profile looks horrible, the front end is the worst interpretation of the new Cadillac face that I have seen, and the overall design looks like a microwaved CTS on stilts. It's honestly atrocious, ATROCIOUS in person. I predict this to be just as much of a failure as the current SRX. Tacking sharp lines and oversized styling cues onto the corporate small SUV platform that GM uses has failed miserably.

The others...

Lexus HS 250h- It honestly does look a bit better in person, I have to admit. The rear end is really pretty slick looking and there are parts of the design that are pleasing to the eyes. However, there are two GLARING problems: 1) There is a good six inches of wheel gap on this car. I know I am an enthusiast and like my cars to sit aggressively, but this is actually awkward looking. Know how high and awkward the new Lincoln MKS sits? Same thing but WORSE on the HS. Add to this the ugly wheels and it just gives the car a foolish and laughable looking stance in person. 2) The front end. The headlights are probably the only good looking part of the front end in person because otherwise, it looks like an upscale Civic with Corolla body cladding.

The car certainly has angles where it looks good, and all of those angles involve not looking at the front end in any capacity. Rear 3/4 shot is probably the worst because it shows the horrible wheel gap and also the cheap body cladding at the front end. Interior, especially the door panels, looked especially cheap from what I could see as well.

Lexus IS 350c- Looks slightly better in person but overall they really dropped the ball, especially with the G37 Convertible sitting ten feet away. I considered the previous generation 3 series to be the ultimate suburban mom summer toy but this ISc will certainly take the cake. The lines are far too "Toyota" and the design completely falls apart after the doors. I know that some concessions have to be made to accomodate a folding hard top but Lexus has done a far worse job of disguising them than Infiniti or BMW have done. The butt is HUGE...disproportionately so to the front half of the car. From the front end to the doors, they have a reasonably good looking car because it looks just like the IS sedan, but after that you get chunky butt, slab sides, and awkward Toyota-esque lines. Overall I was left cold with the ISc.

Acura TL- The one I checked out was a black on black Type S and I must admit that if they painted the "accent bar" on the trunk, it would be a pretty good looking car except for the front end. I won't harp on about the beak, however. The interior was a real let down though. So many different plastics, textures, and a very busy design. The steering wheel and center stack are especially busy. I also noticed that many of the plastics on the interior felt hollow to the touch and sounded like it if you knocked on them. The door panels were especially cheap feeling. Overall I would say that the plastics they are using seem a solid cut below some others in this class- BMW, VW, Lexus, Audi, etc.

Acura MDX- Same issue with hollow and cheap plastics as the TL. I would venture to say that the Corolla S I sat in had nicer and more expensive feeling trim pieces and door panels. I would feel right to say that the MDX had the worst interior for any vehicle starting over $40K. Design, quality, and materials are simply very lackluster.

Acura RL- Still a great interior after a few years, but after sitting in the A6, GS, and 5, I am really starting to feel like the Acura lacks character or identity. It's pleasant and well built, but forgetful. I also think the changes they made to the RL are relatively attractive. I could do with a little less beak but overall I don't mind it and actually would say it looks good in black. The rear end is nice and I like many of the new changes for the updated model.

Chevrolet Camaro- Stunning, polarizing, and aggressive exterior in person. I really love this thing Interior design was really quite unattractive in my eyes, but I know they were going for a retro look which, at 22 years old, I can't really relate to.

Chevrolet Traverse- One of the cheapest and worst interiors at the show. Parts of the door panel felt like they could snap off in your hand. The usual dose of low grade, gritty, shiny plastics throughout the entire cabin. It seems functional though.

Cadillac CTS-V- From pictures I would have told you that I thought this was one of the most beautiful interiors produced in the last few years, but in person I was very, very disapponited. It lacks the luxury touches of the regular CTS model and the sporty bits they tried to tack on simply look cheap. The cheap, high gloss black plastic they put on the center console is particularly economy car and some of the interior panels are relatively low grade. The IS-F has the nicest interior in this class IMO, and is built with the nicest blend of luxury, design quality, and sport. CTS-V interior just screams, "Hey I I'm sporty, right??!!" whereas I would have preferred something that actually gave you that impression when you sit down.

Also, the exterior panels of this car felt very thin and quite cheap as well. The sheetmetal seems like it would dent very easily because it's so thin...not sure how this would fare in an accident.

Cadillac CTS Wagon- Very attractive in person. I really think they should move several thousand of these. Easily the best looking wagon in it's class.

Infiniti G37 Convertible- Far better execution than the ISc overall. It's really no contest when you see them both in person. With the top down the G37 hides it's hard top awkwardness and manages to look quite attractive. They did a nice job with this car and managed to maintain the attractive proportions.

Infiniti EX35- Beautifully crafted interior- easily the best of any of the other small lux 'utes that I sat in. Great layout and features, high quality with numerous nice details. With that said though, the rear seats are practically useless and the exterior design is atrocious, IMO.

Infiniti FX- Pretty good overall but it has the same cheap, black, high gloss plastic on the center stack that I really despise. It shows fingerprints and reflects light, both of which I hate. Aside from that it was definitely one of the better interiors at the show. Very nice.

Infiniti M- Still one of my favorite cars on the road, and unfortunately it tends to be an afterthought in it's class. I love the interior and think it's one of the best on the market, though the roofliner is horribly cheap. Feels like a cross between an ace bandage and a fish net. They could have done something nicer. Overall, still love the M

VW Passat CC- I know it's essentially the "four door coupe" version of the Passat so I expected a bit more interior room- it felt somewhat cramped. It also seems a bit smaller than the Passat when you see it in person. Nice interior, though not my style.

BMW 1- I maintain the fact that this is the worst interior, per dollar, on the automotive market. The design is disgustingly cold and economy-car, especially considering the price tag. Good quality of course, but the design is just awful.

2010 BMW Z4- Looks great in person, much moreso than the current Z. The front end looks very aggressive...they did a really nice job designing the car. It looks a tad bigger than the old one too. Overall I'd say it seems like a great improvement.

2010 BMW 7 Series- it surprisngly does not look much different than the current car in person at first glance. Obviously the front and rear ends look different than before but when you see it in person, this could probably pass off as a refresh of the current design to the untrained eye. It's very handsome, restrained, and somewhat understated- almost more LS like in presentation than the 7 Series that I have always been used to. The interior seems wonderful and uber high quality though I don't care for the seam that goes across the dash in front of the passenger, or the design of the door pulls. The door pulls are a minor issue and would probably grow on me over time. Overall it seems like a great progression from the old car.

Hyundai Genesis- This is not my first time playing with the Genesis but I continue to remain unimpressed. Interior quality is decent- I would say a cut above the Avalon + co, but an obvious cut below the GS, 5, and E that it is allegedly targeting. The whole car is very "cookie cutter" and predictable inside and out. It lacks any character, but they pulled design cues from every other brand so this is not surprising. If it was not RWD, I would struggle to see what was so special about this car. Still not impressed...

Hyundai Genesis Coupe- As some reviews have said, the interior is quite cheap. They got some of the critical touch points right with decent materials, but door panels, the top of the dash, and some other points are surprisingly cheap. If the Mazda 3 and Corolla can pull off reasonably nice interior quality for $14K, so too should the Genesis coupe. Additionally, the exterior door panels felt extremely thin and light weight. The trunk lid and bumper especially felt like they could be significantly bent apart at even a 5-10mph impact. The rest of the exterior door panels felt thinner than normal, but not as bad as the trunk and other parts of the rear.

Mercedes GLK 350- nipping on the heels of the BMW 1 series for worst interior per dollar award. The design is flat, cold, and ininviting- the details look like afterthoughts with little imagination. The rear seats are tight and the storage area is practically useless. This whole car, IMO, is useless.

Mazda 6- Like the last generation, still my favorite midsize family sedan. It's extremely handsome (IMO), the right size, has a stout V6, and a nice interior. A few of the plastics on the interior could have been higher quality, but with the recent quality dip from the Camry and Accord and lack luster Aura and Malibu, the 6 is a standout in terms of design and overall execution. they really did a nice job with this one


Overall, one common issue I found in almost all of the GM products, Nissan, Infiniti, Acura, and others were EXTREMELY cheap plastic, light weight, could-break-in-your-hand interior and exterior door handles. The interior door handles of the TL were by far the worst. I have pens on my desk at work that feel more substantial. Some of the exterior door handles, especially for Infiniti, Acura, and GM, felt like they would break upon letting them go as you open the door.

Allen K

iTrader: (4)

Good observations, thanks for sharing. I just checked the intro article Edmunds' Insideline has on the new Z4 and I really like it ! Can't wait to see it in person.

DASHOCKER

iTrader: (2)

You went to the show & did not take any pics?? Disposable cams are $6.00 a pop now.... I'll do the honor of taking pics for the NYIAS come April..

IS-SV

I agree, some good feedback from the show. I had similar observations after attending the SF and SJ auto show in November and January.

MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

I just figured it was stuff that almost everyone had seen before so I didn't bother

One last thing...for the 2010 MKZ Lincoln made the tail lights even BIGGER and LONGER than before. It really looks awful. I'll upload the (cameraphone) pic later.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

great write-up, thanks!

about the cheap/light plastic in so many interiors - you can partly thank increasingly tight mandated and customer-driven fuel economy and safety needs for that, plus, don't forget, plastic is made of OIL too, so its cost has fluctuated wildly.

IS-SV

Pics are nice, but seeing some of these cars in person makes a difference.

LexBob2

Thanks for the recap. Any thoughts/comments on the Audi Q5 and Buick LaCrosse? They were drawing some attention (mine included) at the Chicago show.

MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

That makes sense, though it seems like some manufacturers are doing a better job of hiding the cost cutting than others. Oh well...

MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

Now that I recall, I don't know if Audi had a Q5 at the show. I saw all of their other models but do not remember seeing a Q5 which is odd since they have been pushing it so hard.

The LaCrosse looked nice from what I saw, though the GM displays were almost completely barren and nobody seemed to pay any attention. It's definitely more attractive than other recent Buick sedans but I am not sure how I feel about the character line on the side of the car

mmarshall

Thanks............nice write-up.

I saw most of the vehicles you named at the D.C. show in February (and I have reviewed some of them). I didn't get to see the Taurus SHO or the Lexus HS250....they weren't ready yet. I agree with you that the Acura RL is well-built, and, as you note, head and shoulders above the rest of the Acura line. I also agree that the new Cadillac SRX is disappointing....it is essentially a redone Saturn VUE, and, IMO, smaller than it should be, especially compared to the present SRX. Cadillac denies that it is a redone VUE, but they aren't fooling anybody; certainly not me.

Did you get to see the concept VW two-seater roadster? That was one of the most interesting displays at the D.C. show.

LexusChris

iTrader: (1)

Thanks for your thoughts on these vehicles, read every single comment you had. Very nice reviews.

LexBob2

Audi had just one Q5 at the Chicago show and it was locked. They didn't seem to be featuring it too much considering it was just hitting dealerships. One of the women working at the display unlocked it for me though.

I noticed that there were fewer people wiping fingerprints off of the cars than in previous years. Usually there are a lot of them walking around with Quick Detailer keeping the cars looking good. Probably a sign of the tmes.

MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

I am glad you agree! I feel like GM has really stepped up their game with styling and design in the last few years and once I saw the SRX in person I was sort of shocked by how awful it looked. Cadillac's big, brash front end and dramatic sharp creases just don't work on an SUV of that size. I feel like the styling is overdone and too theatrical for a small/midsize SUV.

I didn't see the VW concept. The VW display was rather dead as a whole, and the Audi setup was dominated by people waiting to sit in the S5.

MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

That really is pretty odd. They have been pushing and advertising it pretty heavily (at least here), so I feel like it would only make sense for them to follow that up with at least one Q5 or two for people to sit in, touch, and experience at local auto shows. Oh well...