How important are car interiors? In part 1, I roasted Acura for crafting interiors that can’t even match up to Mazda. The truth is I probably could have gone even further. Honda’s luxury brand is competitive with the mainstream automakers, who have really stepped up their game this decade. Some of them, anyway. Others are about what you’d expect. And pretty much every mainstream brand designs their interiors to be all or mostly black. Is that a problem? Maybe. In the six years I’ve owned my Focus I haven’t been yearned for a vehicle with a lighter interior. Of course your mileage may vary. I suspect buyers don’t really prefer lighter interiors for one specifc reason, but you’re not going to hear about it unless you click to read more. So what are you waiting for?
This iteration of the Camry has been out for some time now and I’ve covered it in previous auto show excursions, but I still feel the need to share it because the current model is the first Camry I’d want to own. Even the more basic models look good.
Automakers are starting to inject some color into their vehicles. Toyota did that in a big way with the Camry, and it’s still a bit shocking to see years after it was first introduced. Toyota also deserves some kudos for color matching the center console lid and the passenger side of center stack.
This side-by-side photo shows you the effort both Nissan and Toyota put into making their mid size sedans more exciting. Was it worth it? Probably. As the sedan continues to wane in influence, the remaining buyers are probably going to want vehicles like the ones shown above. Although mid sized sedans are rapidly approaching the “I’m the cool mom” phase of existence and we’ll just have to wait and see if the Regina Georges of the world approve (they won’t).
The sun may be setting on the mid size sedan, but at least they’re going out in style.
Despite the challenges facing the mid size sedan segment, it’s less clear what will happen to compacts. Toyota sold 60,000 less units in 2018 than it did in 2015. The Civic has also experienced a similar drop, but I suspect there will always be a market for entry level sedans. What exactly constitutes entry level is up for debate, as you can easily argue the subcompact segment serves that purpose, but I have a feeling those will largely evaporate as more customers flock to crossovers. America got by just fine without subcompacts before and I think they will do so again.
It’s pretty incredible how far this segment has come in the last ten years or so. The Corolla has even leapfrogged itself. The 2020 model is better than its predecessor in every way. And it starts with the exterior. Seriously, look at this thing. I may be a sucker for blue cars, but Toyota didn’t just make their compact better by slapping a nice new color on it. It’s no longer a formless blob! Also, take note of the roughly trapezoidal-shaped recess around the license plate. In part 1 I talked about how Chevy used this design trick effectively on the new Blazer. Toyota has done the same with this car. And the beauty is more than skin deep too, as the migration to the TNGA (Toyota New Global Architecture) has blessed the Corolla with substantially improved driving dynamics.
As for the interior, I’m sad to say it is a less thrilling affair. The high points? The shifter, steering wheel, and infotainment region are all outfitted with substantial feeling components. Materials are lacking in other areas, with the door inserts not giving off the same premium feeling vibe of other parts in the cabin.
To be fair, the SE is not the highest tier trim. But it is the third trim level in the lineup. And I’m sure Toyota invested more in the technology and overall refinement of the Corolla instead of the interior. I just felt a bit underwhelmed when I sat in the car. And I didn’t feel like this interior was any better than the one in my 2013 Focus SE. It would take a substantial amount of incentives for me to purchase the Toyota, or a compelling feature like all wheel drive, which is definitely possible with the Corolla due to its TNGA underpinnings.
Here is one reason why the interior turned me off a bit. The digital screen is shoved all the way to the lower right corner and it just doesn’t look good. I’m really not sure why they couldn’t just center it. Or use the setup in the upper tier trims.
I’m less conflicted by what I found on the drivers side armrest. Notice the window switch controls? There’s no markings on them whatsoever. I suspect Toyota is confident that this style of switch has penetrated enough of the market to the point where customers don’t need any instruction on how to use them. In fact I can’t remember the last time I saw anything else. Automakers have to cut costs where they can. And I can’t blame Toyota for it.
The revitalization of the Toyota lineup hasn’t just impacted the sedans. The new RAV4, like its Corolla sibling, also sits on TNGA, which at this point could also stand for “Totally New and Generally Attractive,” because all of the vehicles using this newer platform look much better than their predecessors. And Toyota’s newest compact crossover is quite possibly the model that has benefited the most from the new corporate edict to create more exciting products.
Tundra up front, squared-off Cherokee out back. This rear end is simultaneously clean and busy. There’s chrome underneath the tail lights, black body cladding, and a lighter colored skid plate looking motif above the exhaust setup. It’s a testament to this inoffensive yet attractive rear end that those elements don’t sink the whole thing. The RAV4 is going for a more off road oriented persona, and it shows. There’s even a trim level called “Adventure.” How more obvious could they get?
There’s also a more rugged appearance to the cabin as well. Less shiny plastics and more stitched surfaces (even if they’re fake) seem to be the name of the game here. And some color! My theory as to why car buyers are fine with black or grey interiors is simple: Center stack, driver cockpit gauges, and all the back lighting in modern vehicles are more colorful then they’ve ever been. Fifteen years ago everyone just used that ubiquitous green in their cars, a trend that began to wane around 2005. My 2013 Focus has ice blue back lighting and two 4 inch screens with a blue background and white lettering. I have not had any desire to replace the car due to the color of the interior. Coincidence? I don’t think so.
I am fully on board with additional color inserts in cars, and Toyota did a great job here. They’ve also decided to save money by using one row of identically sized buttons for various functions. And don’t forget the button blanks!
Two things worth noting in the second row of the RAV4: Two charging ports and a single piece rubber floor mat. As someone who has two rubber rear mats that don’t protect the entire carpet, I’d say the move towards factory one piece mats was overdue. Snow and slush can really wreak havoc on car floors. Ask me how I know.
The $22,000 Corolla lacks painted window switches. Ditto the $32,000 RAV4. I’m not sure if it’s a big deal, but it is a newer trend that I didn’t notice until this auto show. Just this week I noticed that my neighbor’s 2017 Honda Accord also lacks window switch markings. Yesterday, Paul wrote about the incessant cost cutting that has characterized the auto industry since day one. Here is a prime example of how that practice manifests itself in modern vehicles.
The resurgence of the mid size pickup is a much more noticeable trend. The Tacoma is the leader of the pack, but will they still be segment leader when the 2019 sales figures are tallied? I’m not sure. But what I do know is that it’s dumb to put a fake rock underneath a truck at an auto show, especially when no one else does it. At least the color is nice.
Toyota should be worried about the reintroduction of the Ranger. Why? Here is one reason: the Tacoma boasts an interior suitable for 2010. Sturdy but old switch gear and a very outdated infotainment system that resembles a cheap aftermarket unit. Not a good look in 2019.
Those are far less serious issues when compared to the seats. The 2019 Nissan Altima has truly wonderful thrones. The 2019 Tacoma? Precisely the opposite. These may be the worst car seats I’ve ever sat in. Actually, that is inaccurate. You don’t sit in these seats. You sit on top of them. They’re about as comfortable as the bleacher seats at a baseball stadium. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that these seats are so uncomfortable they’re unsafe. But they are terrible.
To make matters worse, the leg room in the Double Cab just isn’t there. 2020 will see the introduction of a refreshed Tacoma. A surface level update will likely fix the infotainment and seating issues, but only a full redesign will address a more substantial problem like leg room.
Does the Tacoma have more strengths than weaknesses? That depends. The Tacoma is definitely the truck for customers who prioritize resale value and reliability over everything else. But buyers who want an Android Auto and Apple CarPlay capable truck with seats that aren’t torture chambers would be wise to avoid the Toyota.
Price is another issue with the Tacoma. Sort of. The Toyota isn’t priced any differently than its peers. It seems a lot of people suffer from sticker shock when looking at mid size trucks. Yes, they can get expensive. These trucks aren’t always designed to be cheaper than their larger counterparts. Some folks just want a smaller truck and have no problem paying for it. Are you upset that Ford priced the Ranger at a level you find unacceptable? Don’t hate the player. Hate the game. It’s a segment wide issue that has been around for years.
Speaking of the 2019 Ranger…here is one! Yes, I intentionally put the Tacoma and Ranger next to each other. And for good reason. They’re going head to head in a pretty competitive segment. And Ford is leaning harder on its trucks and utility vehicles than ever before. Fortunately, Ford didn’t pull an EcoSport and phone in their Americanized Ranger.
Ford’s 2.3 liter EcoBoost four is the biggest reason why the Ranger will resonate with truck buyers. Unlike most of the entries in the segment, every Ranger comes with the same powertrain. That means a base Ranger, with 270 horsepower and 310 Ib-ft. of torque mated to a ten speed automatic, has significantly better performance than the base Tacoma and the four cylinder variants of the Colorado and Canyon. At 7,500 Ib, the Ranger also has the best tow rating of any gasoline powered mid size truck, which is noteworthy because the cost to upgrade to a diesel is generally pretty substantial.
The Ranger also boasts a better interior than the Tacoma. The seats are far more comfortable, the controls have more heft and are more premium feeling, and the technology is exactly what you’d expect for a contemporary vehicle. The SuperCrew also has more leg room than a comparable Tacoma. Ford recently said the Ranger is selling much faster than they expected. Given the current state of the Toyota, it’s not hard to figure out why.
Ford is also gravitating towards utility vehicles with a sporty pedigree in mind. The Edge ST is a prime example of that strategy. This shot is from the 2018 NY show because the lighting screwed with my front end shot of the Edge at my local auto exhibit, but the ST looks best in Ford Performance Blue, so it’s not a big loss.
Reviewers seem to have two problems with the Edge. The first is the interior. Personally I thought the quality was fine, although the buttons on the center stack are too small and too close in size. I think the issue with the cabin is the extremely basic aesthetic. It’s a bit plain, and that might be intentional because of the existence of the Nautilus. In any event, the next generation should probably have a bit more flair.
The other issue relates to the Edge wearing the ST badge. Pretty much all the critics think it isn’t worthy of being an ST. Are they justified? I suspect a lot of these reviewers are bitter over the loss of the Fiesta and Focus performance variants and are taking it out on the Edge. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them change their opinion of the crossover in a couple of years. Overall, I’d say the new ST is a decent buy if you can get it for a bit lower than what Ford wants for it.
I didn’t take any pictures of the exterior of the F-150 Raptor because it’s been covered before, and also because the interior is worth talking about. The Ram and GM trucks have been redesigned while the F-150 soldiers on in its current form. Neither of those trucks have leapfrogged the Ford, but the Ram does boast a more premium interior. The F-150 splits the difference between the 1500 and the GM siblings in terms of interior trimmings, but I don’t think the quality delta is wide enough to the point where it’s a deal breaker in the non-FCA trucks.
The F-150 has one notable deficiency though: its center console is not as big as the one in the Silverado or Sierra. This is only a problem unless you need to transport one gallon of milk and another half gallon of cow juice and you cannot store it anywhere other than the center console. I hope this observation was helpful.
Here is a vehicle I did not expect seeing at the show. According to the dealer, these have been out in the wild for about a month now. And last week Kia clearly lifted their review embargo because everyone released their opinions on the same day. The consensus? Kia probably has a hit on their hands with the Telluride. It’s got distinctive looks, good driving dynamics, and excellent cargo capacity. What more could you possibly need in this segment?
You might want a decent interior in your three row crossover as well. The Kia has that, with some important caveats. Aesthetically, the Telluride boasts an excellent cabin. It looks like an interior from a much more upscale vehicle.
As for materials quality, it is no different than other products from Hyundai or Kia. The Koreans have gotten better at hiding the inexpensive interior bits from customers, but they’re definitely there. Other than the steering wheel and center stack, the cabin has materials that you’d expect from a brand that typically undercuts the competition on price. They’re cheaper for a reason! Surprisingly, a number of critics have praised Kia for its interior. Motor Trend and Alex Dykes of Alex on Autos really liked the cabin of the Telluride. This is probably the first time I’ve sharply disagreed with Alex, who tends to have pretty unobjectionable opinions on the cars he reviews. He seemed to think the fake wood trim felt authentic while I found it incredibly fake. Oh well. If you’re in the market for a new three row crossover the Kia is definitely worth a look. That’s the bottom line.
Two other observations about the Telluride before I move on. One: It’s better looking than the Cadillac XT6, which should embarrass General Motors. Two: When I came across the Kia it’s hood was open. The 3.8 liter V6 looked absolutely tiny in the engine bay, which leads me to believe they intentionally left room for a V8 under the hood for some future performance or off road oriented model. I guess we’ll have to wait to find out!
And now we arrive at the Forte. The new Forte looks much better than its predecessor. But seeing it in silver immediately brought to mind my Focus, which doesn’t look much different.
The interior is also reminiscent of the Corolla. No surprises here. The parts you touch regularly are adequate while everything else feels cheaper than what you’d find elsewhere. My conclusion is that I definitely would not upgrade from my Focus to a new Corolla or Forte based on their underwhelming interiors.
Is the 2020 Soul a more compelling Kia than the Forte? Possibly. It’s got more attitude than the 2019 model while retaining the cargo capacity of it’s forebears.
Unfortunately, that cool look evaporates upon entering the cabin. Where is the funk Kia? This is a passionless interior.
To be fair, this particular Soul is clearly a base model LX, which starts at $17,490. A decent price for what it is. The truly disappointing aspect of the Kia is its powertrain, which is a 2.0 liter four with an output of 147 horsepower and 132 Ib-ft. of torque. My Focus also has a 2.0 liter four but has thirteen more horsepower and 28 more Ib-ft. of torque. The optional 1.6 liter has 201 horsepower and 195 Ib-ft. of torque. That is the engine I would get if it didn’t cost a minimum of $27,490 to acquire. That is a staggering price for a Kia Soul, especially since it cannot be optioned with all wheel drive. Might be worth getting used though.
The new Hyundai Veloster N is much more exciting than the Kia models I just discussed. And with a starting price of about $28,000 it’s just as expensive at the top tier Kia Soul. What does that get you? A 2.0 liter turbo four with an output of 250 (or 275 with optional Performance Pack) horsepower and 271 Ib-ft. of torque, all paired to a six speed manual. Decent numbers, and it seems like a reasonable replacement for the Focus ST, which ended production last year.
The interior looks nice but materials are unremarkable. But these cars aren’t purchased for their interiors, are they?
This particular N has the Performance Pack, which adds a limited slip differential, variable valve exhaust, 19 inch alloys with Pirelli P Zero summer tires, a higher output engine, and larger brakes. The key takeaway here is that you probably don’t want to buy one of these used.
Then again, I wouldn’t be surprised if dealers slap an additional “market adjustment” to the MSRP because they think this car is fit only for gods and people with fat wallets. I’m sure the overwhelmingly positive reviews only buoyed their determination to do so. To that end, it seems like Hyundai made the right choice in poaching Albert Biermann from BMW. When in doubt, hire the German, but not for their expertise in vehicle quality. That’s what I always say.
While we’re on the subject of quality we should talk about a vehicle that basically has none. Yes, the Jeep Wrangler. Like other FCA products, it trails pretty much everyone else in metrics related to reliability. But that doesn’t matter for something like a Wrangler. People buy the Wrangler because it is its own singular experience. There’s nothing like it (for now). And that is why it’s more popular than ever. FCA moved about 230,000 of them last year, which put it just behind the Ford Explorer in annual sales. Yes, this is the age of the utility vehicle. Didn’t you get the memo?
This is also the first Jeep with a decent interior. I’m not joking. It’s finally competitive with…whatever people cross shop with the Wrangler.
We all know what people cross shop with the Ram 1500. But the Rebel does sort of stand alone in the segment by being a half step between a regular Ram and a more off road oriented model like the Raptor. Sure, the F-150 offers the FX4 package, but that doesn’t come with a lift kit. How else are you going to see over all the crossovers when looking for a parking space at Dave & Busters?
I’ve been talking about the Ram’s interior for what seems like years now, so here it is in all its glory. Yes, it stands above the rest with its feel good materials. No, that doesn’t mean it’s automatically the class leader, but it might sway some truck buyers away from the Ford and the GM bros.
And last but not least, here is the center console in the Ram 1500. I apologize to the milk storage enthusiasts who were hoping for another vehicle that could meet their needs, but the Ram just won’t cut it. You’re stuck with the Silverado or Sierra for now.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic Visits The 2019 Hudson Valley Auto Show, Part 1
Great write up! Instrument panels and interiors have become as dazzling and distracting as those over chromed and complex examples of 1950’s American cars. Please give it rest! Why do I need led strip lighting surrounding everything?
Agreed – I’ve had issues with chrome trim reflecting the sun into my eyes, and at the other end of the spectrum on quiet rural roads I want as little light inside the car as possible
The american car has definitely gone.
Nice.
I was hugely impressed with the interior of a RAM 1500 on display at the fair. It was the $55K version. The Ford and Chevy with similar MSRP weren’t nearly as nice. Interesting that tough-guy RAM is trying to speak to buyers through squishy dashboards, stitching, Jumbo-tron infotainment screens, and other keister-coddling details.
Jeep knows how to hit the Wrangler out of the park. The new interior is an improvement and I like the retro flat-faced dashboard that is color-keyed to the exterior. It’s still an awful place to spend time, though. The seats are bad, the driving position is compromised, its generally uncomfortable and poorly packaged, and this is before it even gets in motion. I don’t get how people are daily-driving these and spending $40-50K in order to do so.
The Tacoma/Ranger contrast is an interesting one. They’re both old. The Tacoma needs a complete redesign. They nailed the looks and image with this refresh, it has the off-road ability to back up that image, and it is selling very very well. But the fundamentals are wrong. Wrong engine/transmission pairing. Wrong driving accomodations–the front seats require someone with a 5’5″ stature and the arm & leg proportions of an orangutan in order to be comfortable, and the backseat is really tight. Just get the 4Runner if you don’t need the bed, it fixes all of these issues. The legs-out sports car driving position on bad seats while two feet in the air is kind of fun just for the novelty of it, but you know it would wear thin very quickly. I’ve got a big old soft spot for Toyota trucks, but the Ranger is more appealing.
The new RAV4 is very nice inside and out, Toyota should do well with this model and it’s probably critical that they do. I poked around in one on the showroom floor, the ADVENTURE! trim. Nice marketing, but you’re going to need to keep your adventures on the down-low because the ground clearance and angles are still pathetic like most other crossovers and it had the same effective price as an SR5 4WD 4Runner or the XSE V6 Camry with its blood-red leather and 300 horsepower, both of which seem like a better use of the money.
Of all the vehicles you’ve shown me in both posts, the Corolla appeals to me the most. A three year old Corolla with 30,000 miles on the lot in 2022 for $15,000? Sign me up!
I think the idea is that you’re supposed to buy them NEW.
Then again, that wouldn’t live up to the stereotype of the auto blogger.
I don’t buy new cars anymore. A three year old car with 10-12 thousand per year on the odometer is the sweet spot as far as depreciation vs. amount of car still left to use up.
Put me down as a fan of the Telluride’s interior. I like the horizontal layout — it sort of exudes a feeling of spaciousness. And while many of the buttons appear to be similar in shape, and probably not the most intuitive in the world, the overall appearance of the dash is much more pleasant than the typical all-black dreariness or in-your-face techiness of many of the other cars in your writeup.
Incidentally, I’ve been generally pleased with the quality of the materials in our 2018 Kia Sedona, but one glaring exception is the feel of the steering wheel. The steering wheel rim is thick and plastic, and just feels cheap… looks like the Telluride uses the same materials, which I find surprising.
And personally, I don’t like black interiors because they get hot and show dust easily, which drives me nuts. Plus, I find all-black interiors depressing. On the other hand, the light-cream color of the Telluride interior is probably too light for me (shows dirt and scuffs too easily). Somewhere in between would be nice.
“The steering wheel rim is thick and plastic, and just feels cheap”
A sure cure for this disappointment in the new steering wheel is to drive one of the older Sedonas for awhile. 🙂
Or a steering wheel cover.
Great writeup, as is your part I. This one interests me as I have been begun to contemplate replacing my 2002 Tacoma with this newest generation.
As with many cars these days, it seems the latest gens have been de-contented from their predecessors, maybe it’s a lower price point for the Tacoma that they’re hoping to stay competitive with this glut of newcomers. Your right up tells me that I better test drive one and maybe a Ranger and a Frontier before just assuming the Tacoma is the perennial go-to.
I work for a rental car agency. Most of the cars we get are the lower end end of the market cars/SUV’s/ cuv’s. I am appalled by some of the cost cutting measures employed by the manufacturers. Open the hood of a new Sentra and you are greeted by a prop rod for the hood that looks to be the diameter of a coat hanger, hidden by the base of the hood. Interiors are so sparse as to be barren. The surfaces are plastic junk. Windshield wipers have to work hard to move even a small amount of snow off the windshield. You still can get a lovely, well equipped vehicle – as long as it is a $50,000 pick up.
Market pressures, I suppose. People will pay for bright screen graphics and an equipment list and rated fuel economy and all this secondary tinsel that will get noticed and compared to competitors. You get a far, far longer checklist now for your money than you used to. They make the sale.
But will anyone give up some of that for solid construction and long term durability? Reliable powertrain tech with fewer mpg on the Monroney? The latest infotainment for an interior that doesn’t creak, squawk, and rattle after the first year? Thick paint that doesn’t glisten any more on the showroom at sale time, but will look far better in 5-10 years? I feel like most of the market is buying for short-term whether they mean to or not.
I am liking that Telluride, though I might have done something differently on those taillights. I am not so sure about the new Soul, however.
I have developed the idea that the Toyota Tacoma is the pickup for people who want a Toyota. I think Japanese companies have, in the past, showed some discretion about competing in every single segment where there is money to be made. Between the chicken tax and possibly a recognition that an assault on the pickup market might spark enough political backlash to be a problem, I wonder if Toyota just concentrates on building a good Toyota and leaving the midsize pickup market at that.
Toyota has had a severe production constraint on its pickups. people wonder why the Tundra doesn’t break out of its 100k unit ranger per year: it’s because there’s no capacity at San Antonio to build more, unless it was at the expense of the Tacoma, and they’ve favored the Tacoma because it largely had its market segment to itself, and could be sold with very lofty transaction prices. My son and his GF waited almost 6 months for their ordered Tacoma a year or so ago.
Toyota is expanding its Tacoma production (in Mexico, IIRC), which will allow increases in both pickup lines. But there’s no doubt the Taco is getting might long on tooth. It needs a completely new taller body with better seating arrangements. I hate riding in them; it reminds me way to much of the way one sat in Japanese pickups in the 80s: on the floor.
And it will be interesting to see how much of an effort Toyota makes in expanding Tundra sales once it has more capacity. it largely sells itself at good prices to loyal Toyota buyers and because of its #1 reliability and resale numbers. But Toyota knows that trying to make serious inroads against the Big 3 would be very difficult and expensive. They might be quite happy to just keep selling 100-150k Tundras quite profitably instead of waging war.
I think the 2007 Tundra may well validate your last point. When it debuted, it was a serious contender against the Big 3 half-tons. The 5.7 V8 seemed class-leading, it was now unarguably a Full Size Pick-em-up Truck, and the styling would look normal with a domestic badge on it.
If barely made a blip on the scene. I’m not entirely sure why since I’m not a full size pickup buyer, but I’m sure brand loyalty played some part. I imagine it was a costly redesign and if I were Toyota brass I wouldn’t be pouring capital into the massive arms race the Big 3 are engaged in.
I like the new Soul’s styling. They’re coming out with a 243-mile Soul EV later this year, with 291 lb-ft torque, DC fast charging and pricing in the mid-$30Ks. Got my attention.
Cars like that will pose a dilemma for me. We’ve got the Fiat 500e EV on lease, which is up in a year. It’s great fun around town, we love it. And there’s the 2010 Prius hatch which we use for trips, the dogs and bigger loads. We don’t drive the Prius that much, it’s been super-reliable and it’s paid for, but it does burn gas (around 45 mpg). A longer-range fast-charging hatchback EV like the new Soul might replace both cars. Sure wish that Tesla Model 3 had a hatchback, people are so crazy about it. Maybe wait for the Model Y? Decisions, decisions.
Call me old fashioned, but I would keep the Prius around since running on gasoline can have its benefits.
I thank my lucky stars that I am out of the market for good and much to the dismay of the manufacturers.
I’m afraid that elegant looking cars are now just a distant memory.
Toyota styling inside and out on all the models the writer enthused about is overwrought trash.
These posts always bring out these comments…
I don’t see Toyota sales sliding. And you’re entitled to your opinion but, while I can see your point on the Camry and Corolla (which I like), the new RAV4 is relatively cleanly styled.
As to your comment, David: Aston Martin DB10, Aston Martin Rapide, Volkswagen Passat, Audi A4, Volvo V90, Jaguar XF, Chevrolet Impala, Genesis G80, Mazda6… Literally none of those are elegant in your eyes? Again, you’re entitled to your opinion but I’m always flummoxed by some of the more vocal anti-new car people.
I had to look up Regina George. I assume your comment was about the mean girls character rather than the sprinter. Not having seen that movie I still don’t really know what you meant. But, that’s on me for being out of the loop on pop culture.
All interesting observations.
The Tacoma has been making steady and noticeable climbs in sales. I’ve got an article (I still need to schedule the silly thing) that mentions the Tacoma and how its sales have increased in the US by around 100,000 units per year since, I think, 2014. That’s no small accomplishment given the modest market here for mid-sized pickups.
However, the Ranger is going to give it a challenge. The base Tacoma has a 2.7 liter with 150-odd horsepower versus a standard 2.3T with just over 300. That said, I have yet to see a new Ranger on the road.
My overarching concern about all of these is the ever-expanding amount of infotainment. Sure, it’s a big selling point to some, but distracted driving is distracted driving. And rarely has distracted driving led to a desirable outcome. But, then again, I’m turning into a cranky old fart.
On anther car message site, someone posted a comment from a woman they know who got a new Accord, instead of a CUV. She said “I’m not looking to be a Mom for quite some time, yet”.
Could the CUV be at its peak? All it takes is being called “Mom Jeans”. Another post I’ve seen on Facebook was sales guy who had older lady call her new Hyundai CUV a “van”.
Don’t write the obit for sedans just yet. CUV’s may be the “minivans” of 2010/20’s. And BTW, they aren’t “dead” either.
I definitely perceive that crossovers aren’t all that popular with millennials. For them, it’s like station wagons were in the ’70s or minivans in the ’90s – the vehicle they associate with their parents driving them to and from school. My 20 year old nephew for example has a mom whose kid shuttle is a Highlander and a dad who drives a nine year old Lexus RX. He gets to borrow the Lexus occasionally, and while it’s quite nice he’d never consider a crossover for himself. His aspirational car is a Tesla Model 3 with the performance package.
Interesting! I’d love to see how this pans out. I should ask my friends, most of whom my age, what their thoughts are. None of them drive crossovers but I don’t know how they feel about them.
Great write up again!
Calling the EcoSport “phoned in” is being a bit charitable. We cross-shopped it in 2018 and what a disaster of a vehicle it is. An interior worse than a friend’s 5 year old Ford Fiesta, possibly the least comfortable vehicle seats I have ever sat in, and a bizarre side swinging door out back (I guess no one at Ford ever parks on the street?)
It’s a shame, because I think from the outside it’s a reasonably attractive vehicle and it definitely hits a size point that’s hard to find in the US market.
I have an Escape, and to this day I struggle with what to call it in plain conversation. The car? Well, no. The truck? Not really. The SUV? I hate that moniker, the thing is not sporty, it has less utility than a minivan, and vehicle, is just a generic term. I’d prefer Compact Light Truck instead of the industrial sounding SUV/CUV.
As far as cost cutting, they go so far as to save a nickel on each of 100,000 (round numbers) vehicles to save a few thousand bucks, but have they ever looked at their advertising budgets? How many millions do they waste on (repetitive) TV ads that people tune out, or like me, skip over on their digital recorder? Nissan has some of the worst ads for their Rougues and Qashqais with all that dumb snowball fight and jumping off the highway to have a random picnic somewhere. Don’t even get me started on GM ads either.
They all make sure to put a corporate logo right in your face on the steering wheel too, as if you need to be reminded what the hell car / CLT you are driving. Nutty.
“Qashqais”? i guess you are in the UK?
Or Australia. Although actually we call the Rogue the X-Trail here. But for the current generation model, we got the odd Qashqai name. The first Qashqai was called Dualis here.
It is interesting to see how the car market shapes up for those (the vast majority, I would guess) who shop based on style.
When I see those bulbous mouths and body panel creases, it is obvious to me that even a moderate mixup will total the car. The same with increasing reliance, in all systems, on expensive technology. Much of this stuff will be way too expensive to fix long before the drive train calls it quits. (Although that was not what the above article focused on).
The new car buyer creates the choices others have to deal with further down the line.
For the first buyer, as was noted above, it is a short term decision. But I don’t see anything good in the longer term arising from today’s offerings for the rest of us, or for any of these glittering pieces of eye candy to end up curbside in the future.
I have to say that the trend of plain, unmarked window switches is not new. Here’s what the window switches my car looks like. It’s a 1999 Infiniti G20 so take that as you will. The “AUTO” means that if I push it down an extra click it will fully open the window automatically without having to hold the switch the whole time. Only the driver’s window does that.
I will say I’ll take plain over painted switches as the paint inevitably wears off.
Well if the paint inevitably ends up, you have your preferred option anyway. 🙂
I think I’d like to see some writing on my switches, at least for a little while…
Also, how do they illuminate an unlabelled switch – or is that another area for cost-cutting?
Also does anyone look at those switches and get confused? At this point perhaps they shouldn’t be allowed out on their own. Toyota has been using those exact switches unchanged for about 20 years, and I can’t think of another manufacturer that has anything substantially different apart from TVR with their “bet you can’t find the window switches”.
It is interesting to see Toyota have finally changed the mirror controls though.
If I was in the market for one, the Ranger seems interesting and seems to have a lot going for it.
Jeeps are still cool. Always have been.
I liked the Telluride well enough at a recent auto show but would have been more impressed if I hadn’t just come from the Mazda display and spent time in the CX-9 that was priced exactly the same as the Telluride I looked at. The Kia was definitely roomier but the inside of the Mazda was much nicer inside.
Yipppeee! Another SUV, the Telluride joins the parade.Ho-hum. At least it IS nice to see a red interior, even if it`s in a Camry.Will this start a trend away from black, gray, and tan interior colors?
I love the red Camry interior but it’s not like it’s the first colourful interior since the 1980s. Saturn had a terracotta leather interior in its Aura over 10 years ago. Dodge has done red leather interiors. There have always been colourful options in recent history, just sadly not anywhere near as plentiful as they once were.
It’s not just that automakers keep making black interiors, it’s that people seem to genuinely like them (whether from a practical or aesthetic standpoint) and so they continue to be popular.
Be thankful you don’t live in Australia, where every car inexplicably has a black interior even though we’re awfully sunny down here. The new Holden Commodore literally only comes with a black interior, regardless of trim level. It’s dumb. At least Americans have consistently had a beige option always available in cars for decades now.
Fords Ranger remains the best selling new vehicle here auto or manual but I dont know if we have a gas engine option, I mean why would you want it the five banger diesel goes just fine.Why do you need window switches marked its not like anyone ever looks at them, yes the ones in my car are marked and backlit but I never look at them, I use the master control and its intuitive.
Can’t believe nobody noticed the black plastic triangle of death on the sedan version of the new Corolla.
https://www.autoblog.com/buy/2020-Toyota-Corolla/photos/#slide-1301
I despise these ever huger screens, especially when they rise above the dash as though they should retract with the touch of a button, BUT DO NOT. HATE THEM!