The 2012 Chevrolet Cruze 2LT reviewed by txGarage

We’ve been looking to get into the Chevrolet Cruze for a full week review for a while now. We’ve actually driven a few different models of the Cruze at some events, but have never had the time to really check out the details. Well, we finally got our hands on one, so what’d we think?

The last two times I was behind the wheel of a Cruze, one was a base and one was an eco model. Both had cloth seats and a lackluster performance. Our tester was a 2012 Cruze 2LT. This afforded us leather seats, navigation, 17” alloy wheels, remote start, and a 1.4 liter turbocharged engine matched up to a 6-speed automatic transmission. This decked out Cruze has a window-sticker of just under $24k (23,980) and is spec’d out the exact way I’d want one if I was dropping the money. But would I drop my own money for this car? Let’s get more into the driving, looks, and feel and find out.

Driving:

You can have the Cruze in a few different engine choices. You can have a 1.8 liter 4-cylinder engine with a 6-speed manual transmission. This combination will be good for 138 horsepower and 125 ft-lbs of torque. If you opt for the 1.8, you’ll be looking at fuel economy numbers around 26 mpg city and 36 mpg highway. As I said earlier, we had the 1.4 liter turbocharged engine, the same as the Sonic we reviewed last week, that pushes out the same horsepower (138 hp) but ups the torque to 148 ft-lbs. This car is said to get 24 city and 36 highway miles and we easily averaged in the lower 30’s during our week with the car. If you are looking at the Eco model, you get the 1.4 liter engine with a 6-speed manual transmission that should be good for 28 mpg city and a whopping 42 mpg highway.

The extra torque from the small turbocharged engine helped push the small Chevy Sonic out of the corners well, but how did it fair in this heavier family sedan?

Well the power just wasn’t there to make this car feel real sporty or responsive. If you’re going for a fun and sporty ride, you might want to keep the Sonic on your test-drive list. Although it wasn’t as sporty, it was still enough power for trolling around town and merging onto highways. Also, because this is a European car, the handling and steering feel were “bang on”.

Looks:

If you pay attention to the European car market, this look might already be growing old as the Cruze was being sold overseas there a full year before it hit American showroom floors. If you’re seeing one for the first time, it’s intently recognizable as a Chevrolet with it’s big two tier front grille. The headlights and lines down the side give it a swooping and sporty look and the 17” alloys we had continued that theme well.

Unlike the Sonic, the Cruze doesn’t really have any radical styling. It’s more of a basic style that looks good but won’t really put anyone off either. The looks outside and the ride were not really the party piece of this ride though. In our tester, the real surprise is the interior. The leather seats and quality material used is very European like. The interior isn’t just good for its segment, it was even better than some Cadillacs I’ve driven and it’s what stood out to everyone that got into this car.

Feel:

Comparing this car to it’s predecessor, the Cobalt, just isn’t fair. Just like the Sonic we drove last week, it’s not just better than the car that came before, it’s a giant step forward for Chevrolet. You can actually buy a smaller family sedan without sacrificing quality and comfort. Compare that to the competition and there is really only one car that can compete. This Cruze sets it’s sites on the likes of the Honda Civic, the Toyota Corolla, the Ford Focus, and the Hyundai Elantra.

I can tell you right now that the interior quality of the Cruze outshines that of the Civic and Corolla easily. It is also a much more enjoyable drive than either while costing less than an equivalent Civic. The Corolla is a little cheaper than the Cruze, but can’t stack up to the options you get. Also, the Corolla only has one engine option, a 1.8, and comes with a 4-speed automatic.

The Elantra is a nice car that has improved in quality over the years. I like the exterior design and what Hyundai is doing with their products. The interior quality is very good as well, but it doesn’t quite hold up to what we got in the Cruze.

The biggest competition for the Cruze is now the Ford Focus. We really like the Focus we reviewed last year, and it was also an all around good car. The interior is nice and put together well, the looks are great, it’s priced well, and it gets good fuel economy. Choosing between these two really comes down to what you personally think looks better. The Focus is probably the better to drive enthusiastically, but the Cruze isn’t bad.

Overall, we’ve been real impressed with the Cruze after our week long test. We’re impressed with the car, but also the attention that GM is giving it’s lineup. The only thing we really see lacking is a real sporty model. In Europe, they race the Cruze in the British Touring Car Championship (BTCC). I think GM would do good to make an RS model with a powerful 2.0 liter engine that’s not focused on fuel economy. Then enter that car into some racing series within the U.S.; maybe Grand-Am racing against the likes of the Mazda 3, Honda Civic, and Volkswagen Golf.

Check out more photos on Facebook or Google+

Subscribe to us on YouTube!

2012 Chevrolet Sonic turbo - reviewed by txGarage

First and foremost, let’s do some house cleaning. The Sonic is a replacement for the Chevrolet Aveo. Don’t look on this site for an Aveo review, because there isn’t one. I have driven a few versions of the Aveo. Back when running a small local dealership in Dallas we would stumble across an Aveo or two. This was always a tough sell as there was nothing particularly good about these cars, except maybe it’s price. I could never recommend it to anyone; not as a teenager’s first car or a cheap family car. There were just too many other products you could get that were much better.

Now we have the Sonic and GM says that it’s not really replacing the Aveo because it’s a whole new car. You see the Aveo was a car built by Daewoo and badged in the U.S. as a Chevrolet. The Sonic on the other hand is all Chevy and assembled in Michigan. So did Chevy do it right this time? Can I finally recommend a Chevrolet, compact hatchback, to friends and readers?

Let’s start with the looks. The Sonic’s design was given high priority. With manufactures like Ford and Hyundai making not just good products but great designed compact cars, GM couldn’t afford getting it wrong. They haven’t disappointed either. The design is supposed to inspire sportiness and it’s said to be taken direction from motorcycles. I’ll have to say I really like the headlight and front fascia design. Looking from the side you can tell the car leans aggressively forward. This is no mistake as it’s given two character lines running from wheel to wheel showing off it’s aggressive stance.

Step inside and you’ll notice that this is a budget car. Unlike the Hyundai Veloster that offers a big touchscreen with navigation on even it’s base model, the Sonic doesn’t even offer one on it’s top-of-the-line LTZ trim. No matter though, what you really want to be looking at is the gauge cluster. This is more styling taking from “sport-bikes” with a large tachometer showing your 6500 rpm redline. Beside the large tachometer is every other output displayed onto a LCD display.

The rest of the interior is designed well and you don’t automatically notice its cheapness. There are a lot of plastics used but GM did a good job of breaking up the interior and keeping the driver focused on driving. In our tester we had cloth seats that were comfortable and supportive. There were a few times that I longed for leather/heated seats but after seeing the leather seats in the LTZ trim, I’ll stick with the cloth on this car.

The Sonic comes with two different engine options. You can get a 1.8 liter 4 cylinder that pushes 138 horsepower matched up with either a 6-speed automatic or a 5-speed manual transmission. You can also get a 1.4 liter 4 cylinder turbocharged engine with the same 138 horsepower but torque is bumped from 125 lb-ft to 148. This engine can be matched to a 6-speed auto or a 6-speed manual. Our tester was equipped with the 1.4 turbo and a 6-speed manual, so we’re expecting some fun driving!

Ride:

Driving a car with a turbocharged, small displacement engine is a lot different than what I’m used to. Living in Texas our sports cars are equipped with big V8’s or V6’s with lots of low down power. The Sonic’s 1.4 turbo doesn’t have that kind of lowdown power on tap. Cruising down the highway in 6th gear at 70 mph is smooth and fine, but what if someone pulls out in front of you and you need to slow down a little. Slow from 70 to 55 mph and then put the peddle to the floor and you get nothing. No power. Drop a gear to 5th and you get the same result, now people behind you are getting frustrated. Drop it another gear and finally that turbo is spoiling and you can use that 138 hp. It’s the same story around town. Corners I’d normally take in 3rd gear in my car require 2nd in the Sonic.

You might be thinking that this is a slow and un-fun car to drive then. Well you’d be wrong. You just need to adjust your driving style to get the most power of the small engine. Keep the rpm’s above 2500 or 3000 and you’re good. Keep them at the top of 5000 rpm and you’re having a blast! I know 138 horsepower isn’t that much but the suspension and the chassis are tuned for cornering. You can toss this car into corners at speed and you don’t get wobbling body roll. You get decent grip and balanced, level cornering. The steering has good feel as well so it’s easy to predict the amount of lock needed to attack a corner. This would be a great weekend time-attack car.

Economy:

This is a small hatchback and many will buy it not just for the price or utility but also for its economy. Our tester with the 1.4 turbo engine and 6-speed manual transmission is ratted at 40 mpg highway and 29 mpg in the city. Overall, with our fun spirited driving style, we averaged 32.8 mpg.

The Sonic is light and small but feels more spacious inside. I can easily get out of the driver seat and sit in the back without having to adjust the seat and I’m 6’ 1”. The hatch has decent space too and it helps that the seats fold down. The biggest thing that bothered me was the size of the fuel tank. Although you get great fuel economy the tank is so small you’ll be filling up ever few days if you drive a decent amount a day.

Comparison:

So the Sonic is giant leap above the outgoing Aveo and that’s great for GM, but how does it stack up to all the great compact hatches in the American market today? We really like the new Ford Fiesta and the hot new Hyundai Veloster. Not just that but the Mazda 2, Suzuki SX4, Honda Fit, Kia Rio, and Hyundai Accent are all decent cars.

I think the Sonic can be thrown right up there with in the top 3. It’s got good looks, a good engine, and it’s great to drive. This could easily be a weekend time-attack car and still produce good economy on day-to-day runs. My only slight reservation is on the price. When you’re comparing it to the likes of the Fiesta and the Veloster it’s priced similarly, but offers a little less as far as standard equipment. When you start looking at some of the others though, like the Mazda 2, you can find an economical and fun car for a lot cheaper.

Check out our full photo galleries on Facebook and Google+

Subscribe to us on YouTube!!!

The 2012 Mazda 2 reviewed by txGarage

Small, compact cars are really making a comeback in America, and we’ve driven quite a few here, including the new Ford Fiesta. The all new Mazda 2 is based on the same platform as the Fiesta, so you’d assume they are pretty similar cars. While they’re similar in size, that might just be where the similarities stop. We’ve had the opportunity to drive a few different models of the Fiesta and on every occasion we’ve come back with the same opinions. It’s a great car for the money. Lots of fun to drive on tight, twisty roads and economical. So what did we think about the Mazda 2?

Mazda obviously has roots in racing and they have been branding their portfolio to remind you of that fact. So the first area where the Mazda differs from the Ford is in the weight of the car. Mazda knows lighter is better. The Mazda 2 is only a few hundred pounds heavier than the Lotus Elise, one of the best handling and fun cars you can buy. It’s also a few hundred pounds lighter than it’s cousin, the Ford Fiesta.

This really translates into less body roll and more agility around corners. The Fiesta is good on windy roads, but the Mazda 2 is great. We had this car zipping around Dallas, namely some of the back roads around White Rock Lake. If you’ve ever been out there, you’ll know you can’t pickup a lot of speed, but you can have lots of fun in the corners, and in this Mazda, we really had some good fun.

2012 Mazda 2 reviewed by txGarage

The Mazda 2 does have 1 less liter in the engine than the Fiesta. All models come equipped with at 1.5 liter 4-cylinder engine that pushes out 100 horsepower and 98 ft-lbs of torque. Our tester came equipped with Mazda’s 4-speed automatic transmission, but it can be had with a 5 speed manual. This is less than the Fiesta, but remember, you’re pushing less weight around. Obviously this is also the big letdown of these small hatchbacks. You can have fun zipping around the corners, but when it comes to really putting the power down, you’re always left wanting more. Highway driving is decent, but you need to plan ahead when overtaking.

One thing to look forward to with this car, though, is the aftermarket getting involved. We’ve already seen some great concepts from Mazda and others with some real racing potential. The lack of power in this 1.5 liter engine is just begging for an aftermarket turbo kit. It’s already a great handling, light car, all you need now is a few more ponies under the hood.

Standing back and looking at this car, it is unmistakably a Mazda. The “smiley-face” front end runs throughout Mazda’s lineup, and swooping lines down the side plays to Mazda’s key design language. The only real problem with the looks of the Mazda 2 is the looks of the Ford Fiesta. I think the Fiesta looks much better, but that might just be me.

Inside the car looks good, but isn’t as refined as what you get in the Fiesta. Mazda keeps it simple and straight forward. Our tester was nicely packaged for the price with steering wheel mounted controls and some nice red bordering along the seats.

Another difference between the two cars is fuel economy. Although the Mazda is lighter and has a smaller engine the Ford actually beats it out in fuel economy. I think this mainly comes down to the transmission as you get a better geared 6-speed automatic in the Ford. Either way you’re looking at the high 30 mpg range in either of these cars.

The last difference between the two is in price. Picking up a Fiesta hatch will set you back a minimum of $15,965 and the last one we tested with leather seats pushed up to just over $24k. The Mazda 2 starts at $14,370 and our tester as specked out at $17,460.

I can definitely see why these compact cars are catching on. If you live within a bigger city like Dallas or Houston where you’ll be negotiating tight corners and heavy traffic, these cars come in handy. With all the options in the American market you have to choose from now, though, is the Mazda 2 the one I’d buy? Maybe. I do like the way it drives and the way it feels on the road. My only slight reservation comes when comparing it to the Fiesta. I think I’d pay the extra money for the nicer interior and better looks.

More photos on our social sites! Check us out on Google+ and Facebook.

Family wagon, mini-mini-van, crossover, people carrier, or standing in a class of it’s own? The Mazda 5 was introduced in the American market back in 2005. Although small family cars like this are popular in Europe and Asia, they are not prevalent in America. There isn’t much here that competes directly with the Mazda 5 and it’s not terribly hard to see why. We love our SUV’s. If you’re looking for a vehicle to carry 6 people, there are a slew of options that are bigger and have much more interior room. What if you’re looking for fuel economy and price point though?

Being a driver in Texas, you keep in the back of your mind, while car shopping at least, that you never know what kind of terrain you may encounter. The idea of a taller, more rugged SUV is a very appealing one for a family. But SUV’s are expensive, and even the ones that are good on fuel economy, aren’t that great. The Mazda 5 on the other hand is a bargin for a vehicle that can seat 6 people in comfort. In the 2012 model, Mazda implemented more of their flowing design style. This makes the 5 appear smaller than it actually is. So as you stand outside of it thinking, how am I going to fit anyone into that third row, it’s easy to doubt this cars appeal.

Slide the rear doors open like you were getting into a van and step inside this car and it’s a whole new story. The seating arrangement goes by twos. You have the driver and passenger in front, two more passengers behind them, and two more seats behind that. The middle seats can more forward and back to adjust the legroom needed and all the seats can fold flat to give this car an enormous amount of room.

Our tester was decked out in GT trim which gave us leather seats and 17” alloy wheels. The interior reminded us a lot of the Mazda 6 we drove a few months back, which is a good thing. Driving this car down the road was much like driving the Mazda 3 and there is a good reason for that. The Mazda 5 is a bigger body put on the Mazda 3’s platform. This means that it actually feels well balance and stable. The 2.5 liter engine is shared as well and when you don’t have the family packed in the car, the 157 horsepower can make this car even feel peppy. The engine is matched up to a 6-speed manual or a 6-speed automatic which makes this family hauler good for 21 mpg city and 28 mpg highway. During our time testing the Mazda 5 we were able to average a very respectable 26 mpg.

The outside of this “mini-mini-van” isn’t that awful either. You get the same aggressive, yet playful, front fascia as the rest of Mazda’s lineup. You also get some nice flowing lines down the body that help give this a sport look. It is a Mazda so you should expect a little zoom-zoom. The back of this car is big and bloated and not as attractive as the rest of the car, but everyone has to sacrifice a little for the kids.

So it all sounds good and well, but you’re still thinking you’ll just go with a bigger 3-row SUV or traditional mini-van, right? I can’t say that I blame you and the Chrysler Town and Country sold as many units per month as the Mazda 5 did for all of 2010. But with a starting price of $19,345, it’s hard to argue that you’ll find more room for you’re money. Our GT spec’d tester tipped the scales at just under $25,000 and after shopping around, it’s a price that just can’t be beat.

Ford is hoping that more people are seeing the light as they are bringing the C-Max to America next year. The C-Max is, and has been, a popular car overseas and is based on the same framework as the Mazda 5. So is the American family ready to move past the big SUV and settle down in a European style people carrier? I’m not quite convinced of that just yet; especially here in Texas. Driving the Mazda 5 worked out well for me and my family. I actually have the real need for a vehicle like the Mazda 5 and it handled everything I threw at it during our week of testing. Still, I can’t get myself to actually go out and buy one.

Check out our full photo gallery on Facebook or Google:

I’ve always been a big fan of small, sporty hatchbacks. As a matter of fact, as many of our readers might already know, my first car was an 88 Honda Civic hatch. My next car was an 88 Acura Integra Special. They were both great little cars and lots of fun to drive. In the past few months, we’ve driven a slew of new, small, sporty cars that look to reinvigorate the compact car in America including the Ford Fiesta, Mazda 2, Honda Civic Coupe, Kia Forte 5, Fiat 500, Scion tC, and Suzuki SX4. While I like all of these cars for their own reasons, I think that the Ford Fiesta is one of the best. When I first read about the Hyundai Veloster, I already knew that it’s toughest competition would be coming from Ford with the Fiesta. So let’s see how it stacks up.

One of the first questions the Hyundai representative asked me as we took our first walk-around was what I thought this car looked like or if it reminded me of anything. Honestly, the only thing that comes to mind nowadays is Hyundai. It looks like a Hyundai, and that’s no longer a bad thing. The front end shares it’s lines and design with the new Elantra, which is a great looking car for it’s class. It’s an aggressive and modern design that really fits this crazy little hatch.

Why do I say crazy? Well when most car companies show off a concept car with a radical design like having 3 doors – two on the passenger side and one on the driver side – you don’t really expect them to keep that design when bringing the car to the market. Well Hyundai has done just that. This is the first ever 3 door hatchback. Looking at it from the drivers side, it has a coupe like design and look. From the passenger side, it looks like a modern 4 door hatch. Around the back is a sleek hatchback with center exiting exhaust. Our test car was fitted with 18-inch alloy wheels that added to its sporty looks.

[SinglePic not found] [SinglePic not found] [SinglePic not found]

Inside the car is the most advanced, standard interior in the Veloster’s market. Our test car was equipped with leather seats, navigation, and Hyundai’s new blueLink. All but the leather seats come standard. The blueLink system was pretty cool and I had nowhere near enough time to play with it all. The system powers Hyundai’s voice response system, enhanced navigation services, and emergency assistance. It also has a music management system, iPod connectivity, Pandora radio, and games you can play with your fuel economy. Cool stuff for the iPad/iPod youth.

[SinglePic not found] [SinglePic not found] [SinglePic not found]

So it’s nice and sporty looking and it’s got a great interior with some cool technology, but does it live up to the sporty looks? The Veloster is powered by a lightweight, all-aluminum 1.6 liter GDi (gasoline direct injection) engine. It comes attached to either a 6-speed manual or 6-speed automatic transmission. The automatic is a dual-clutch setup that puts paddle shifters on the steering wheel. We drove the manual transmission and for a car that can get 40 mpg, it was pretty good. I would have liked the clutch to be a little heavier and have sharper gear changes, but it was still pretty well sorted and wouldn’t wear you out driving in heavy traffic. I didn’t get a chance to drive an automatic, but I’ve heard that’s really the one to get. The dual-clutch shifts smoothly and you still get outstanding fuel economy. We’ll reserve judgment till we get to spend some time in one.

The power in from the 1.6 liter engine is only 138 horsepower, but the lightweight Veloster uses it well. The steering is sharp and predictable, so keeping this in a low gear with high revs through twisty roads is a lot of fun.

After leaving the car for the day, I was left thinking that the Ford Fiesta really has some steep competition. The Veloster we tested was top of the line and topped out just over $22k. When we reviewed the Fiesta, by far one of the most expensive and nicely equipped cars in it’s class, came in at just over $24k. The Veloster’s interior was just as nice, if not more so and it gets better gas mileage than the Fiesta topping 40 mpg in any trim. Hyundai also has one of the best warranties offered by any manufacturer and the cars really are being built well. This car is now one of my favorite compact cars on the market today. It does everything a hot-hatch is supposed to do, and does them all well. If you plan on test driving any of the other before mentioned cars, this is definitely worth a look.

Check out our photo gallery on Facebook or Google:

2012 Honda Civic Coupe reviewed by txGarage

We had a chance to do a Quick Drive review of this 2012 Honda Civic Coupe back during the Texas Auto Roundup where to be quite honest, we were fairly unimpressed at that time. It didn’t help that just before driving the Honda Civic Coupe we took the Kia Forte 5 out and thought it was everything we wanted the Civic to be. We now have this car for an extended period where we can really check it out and let you know what we think.

Exterior
At first glance it doesn’t seem like the 2012 Civic is much different looking than the 2011 model. Take a closer look though and you’ll see the lines are much cleaner and more swoopy. It’s more wedged and has a more aggressive stance making it look more sporty. After spending some time really studying the lines and design of the car I actually quite liked it.

Interior
Inside the car is laid out much like the older Civic. We were testing the EX-L model with navigation, a sunroof, and leather seats. Although this is a good combination it didn’t all work out right. The plastic panels all over the dash, the doors, and the center console where cheap and hard. The leather was also cheap and not as comfortable as leather seats we’ve tested in much cheaper cars.
The double stacked gauge cluster was cool when it was first released and the tachometer is big and right in front of the driver giving you a sporty feel. Still, it just didn’t work for me. You had dials that would change color depending on how economical you drove the car. You have a Prius-like display that shows how economical you are driving. And you have a big green button to the left of the steering wheel that will make sure you’re driving is economical. As sporty as this car tries to look, you quickly figure out it’s all about economy.

Engine
Equipped in this sporty coupe is a 1.8 liter, 140 horsepower engine hooked up to a 5-speed transmission. This results in a pretty slow approach to a sporty coupe. Take this car out of eco-mode, turn the traction control off, and put the transmission into the lowest gear aloud by the automatic transmission, then put your foot on the brake and slam on the accelerator peddle. In most cars this results in some tire-spinning and a jolt of power propelling you forward. In this Civic coupe it resulted in no drama and a slow puttering down the road.

Ride
In most slow cars the lack of power can be forgiven by a sporty chassis with good handling so we stop trying to spin the tires and took this Civic into some corners. Just a few weeks before we test drove the Acura TSX Sportwagon and fell in love with it’s handling, could this Civic coupe be as good? Sadly no. The feel from the steering wheel and the stance on the road just never felt sporty. You always felt as if you were disconnected to maximize economy and minimize driving fun.

Economy
So without sportiness and power and with a large intrusion of eco-ness, this car should get great gas mileage, right? Well yes, and it dose. The EPA ratings on this coupe are 28 city and 39 highway. Keeping the car out of eco-mode doesn’t hurt your numbers either. We were averaging in the low 30’s without being in eco-mode. When we finally broke down and pushed the big green button we saw numbers from 37 up into the 40’s on fuel economy.

The almost sad part is that you should be able to get even better fuel economy. As I stated earlier this car is equipped with Honda’s older 5-speed transmission instead of a more economical 6-speed. Mainly this is because of cost. Our tester already tipped the scale at $24,225 and as I said, it doesn’t feel all that expensive. Others have said they believe that Honda did this so that the Civic wouldn’t beat out their CR-Z in fuel economy. This leaves you feeling like you could have done better in the fuel economy stance as well.

Granted I’ve been talking a lot about sportiness and that’s not really what this car is all about. Honda does have the Civic Si, a more performance driven model if you’re looking for a sport coupe. The problem with that is there is so much competition these days for sporty, cheap, fuel efficient coupes. I have yet to drive the Si Civic but am looking forward to it. But if the interior is still a mess, and the handling and steering feel are even half as dead I’ll be looking at other cars. Cars like the Scion tC, the Kia Forte, the Hyundai Genesis, the Hyundai Veloster, and soon enough Scion will release the FR-S and Subaru the BRZ. These are all great new cars that are more focused on keeping it sporty and still get decent fuel economy. If you are just seeking a nice looking coupe that will get you back and forth with good gas mileage, this may be your car. But for me, Honda has a lot of work to accomplish before I become a fanboy and turn away from Hyundai and all the great new cars coming.

Check out a full photo gallery on Facebook or Google.

2011 Ford Explorer reviewed by txGarage

In the time leading up to us reviewing the 2011 Ford Explorer, I was already quite excited about it. All Ford products we’ve driven in the last few years have been getting better and better and there is no getting away from the fact that this is one nice looking SUV.

Back in the mid 90’s, the Explorer was all the rage and the SUV market was really taking off. Living in Texas, it’s almost guaranteed that you owned one or directly knew someone who owned one. This all seemed to come to a crashing halt when the Firestone Tire scandal started to surface. Moreover, the SUV market was changing. No longer were big gas guzzling SUV’s as practical or popular as they once were. When Ford set out to bring the Explorer back, they had to take all of these changes into mind.

Ford first tried their hand swinging and missing with the Ford Flex. As nice and capable as this SUV was, the styling never really caught on in a major way. The new Explorer is built on the same platform as the Flex, but with a radically different design. The new Explorer borrows from the welcomed styling of the Ford Edge. It shares a more crossover SUV look while incorporating a muscular and modern shape. The three-bar grille has been toned down with paint matching bars and much smaller chrome bars. I’m not the biggest fan of large chrome bits, so to me, it looks really done right. The new Explorer sits lower due to being built on a car and crossover platform rather than being built on a truck platform, but it still has a big and capable appearance.

Inside, like many new Fords, just takes the cake. Our tester was fitted with the LTD trim packing lots of leather and nice features. It also was packed with a 3rd row. Unlike some three row SUVs, namely the Outlander GT we test drove a few weeks back, the Explorer has a very nice set of seats in the back. We are not advocating that they are the most comfortable for adults on long journeys, but for children, they are just right. The seats also had a power folding option. Walk to the rear of the Explorer, hit the power liftgate opener on the keyfob, reach in and push the power folding seat button, and walk away. Not having to dealing with straps or leavers trying to get the seats up and down is a great convenience that you only normally see on much more expensive SUV’s.

Besides the convenience of having a 3rd row, the Explorer is also packed with technology. Our tester was equipped with Ford’s SYNC system, active park assist, a Sony audio system with HD radio, heated and cooled seats, navigation, push-button start, a blindspot alert on the side mirror, collision warning system with brake support, a rear-view camera, and rain-sensing wipers. All this technology coupled together with nice leather and soft-touch materials made this Explorer feel upscale. Not just upscale for an Explorer, but upscale even for a Lincoln, Lexus, or Cadillac.

One of the things Ford knew they had to do is make this new Explorer competitive with it’s fuel economy, but keep the power needed to push around a serious SUV. There has been many discussions on the best powertrain for the big Explorer including the 3.7 twin-turbo’d EcoBoost out of the Taurus SHO. In 2012, Ford will be selling the Explorer with an EcoBoost engine but not the 3.7 V6. Instead they will be offering the 2.0 turbo EcoBoost engine.

No matter what you think about that, for 2011 you only have one option and that’s the 3.5 V6. This engine produces 290 horsepower and 255 lb-ft or torque through a 6-speed automatic transmission while allowing the Explorer to claim best-in-class fuel economy of 25 highway mpg. During our time with the Explorer we easily averaged in the 21-22 mpg range, which was incredibly good in our opinion.

If you’re one of many Texans who need to tow around a trailer or take your boat to the dock, the people at Ford haven’t forgotten about you either. Although you lose some towing abilities thanks to the car platform, they have still given you a 5,000 pound towing ability. They have also thought about things like placement of the rear-view camera allowing you to backup and hookup to your trailer easier. You also have hill start assist and hill descent control systems at your fingertips.

One thing we didn’t get to play with as much as we really wanted to is the Range Rover like terrain management system. This system allows you to shift on the fly from one setting to the next giving you the proper grip, torque, and throttle response needed to tackle the terrain that lay ahead. Your options are normal, mud/ruts, sand, and grass/gravel/snow.

No matter the terrain you find yourself in, the Explorer should give you a comfortable ride. Highway driving is a breeze and the engine really puts out just enough power to give you proper overtaking control. Although you lose some towing abilities the platform gives the Explorer a car-like driving experience and puts it’s comfort up there with the top of its class.

All this technology, comfort, and capability does come at a price though. Our decked out Explorer smashes your pocketbook with an MSRP of $45,475. This to many we talked to was a deal breaker for buying a Ford. After driving it though, I really think the price is well deserved in this marketplace as you look at the cost of even cheap SUV’s these days. A base Explorer starts out at $28,995 and it’s just as nice to look at and drive. Stepping up with the luxury will cost you but I really think the interior is nicer than some way more expensive SUV’s I’ve driven. I really think the new Explorer hit every mark it needed to hit. It’s great looking, has great fuel economy, still has the power you need, has the room you need, and has one of the best interiors for the money. Now all Ford needs to do is stay away from recalls.

Check out the Full Photo Album on Facebook or Google:

2011 Acura TSX Sport Wagon reviewed by txGarage

I’ll admit, after selling my Acura Integra in 2002, I really didn’t pay much attention to the Acura brand. Their styling seemed to go from bad to downright ugly. Their performance seemed to run away after letting the Integra go and featuring the RSX. At the Main Street in Motion event, I test drove the new Acura TSX in comparison to the Buick Regal turbo and was quite shocked at how well I liked it. Then I drove the 2012 Acura TL around the infield track at Texas Motor Speedway. Again, I was shocked at how well the car handled, how balanced it was, how nice the steering was, and how good the paddle shifters on the automatic transmission were.

After seeing the commercials for the new TSX Sport Wagon, my first impression was amazement that they’d bring this to America. My next impression was that it couldn’t be as good as the TSX was. Of course now we have the chance to test it out and see what’s really what.

Let’s take a look at the styling first. As I said earlier, Acura has gone through some bad styling. So much so that they have lost sales and customers have attributed that to the new styling. The front-end styling of the 2012 TL seems to have gotten the point and Acura toned it down a little. The TSX still needs some work in my opinion, but it’s good that Acura is getting the message. Other than the front beak-like grille, the rest of the lines on the TSX are sharp and almost aggressive. When adding the wagon to the rear, Acura took the time to make it more stylish and sporty rather than optimize interior space. So the back end cuts a little forward and the spoiler hangs over the rear windshield giving it a constant in-motion look.

As far as wagons go, I think it looks good. It still looks young and sporty, but wagons haven’t ever really caught back on here in America. We have been seeing more consumers warming up to the fact that wagons are coming back though. This is evident in the Dodge Magnum, the Cadillac Sport Wagon, and now the Acura TSX Sport Wagon. Still, most people I talked to and I’d have to agree, if it was my money, I’d just go for the sedan.

One thing a wagon can offer is more room inside. I never really had the need to fill it up, but there was a ton of space in the back. The rear seats, though, suffered on the roominess front. They were actually quite tight. Up front though, the leather seats were not just roomy, they were incredibly comfortable. The dash seemed sort of plain and Acura admits that this being it’s bottom line car isn’t equipped with as many goodies as others. Our tester was equpped with navigation, Bluetooth, power tailgate, voice recognition, a backup camera, and a decent stereo with 15 GB hard disk and 10-speaker surround. The navigation system and stereo where all controlled by a joystick like knob on the dash and the screen was set back further out of reach. It took a little playing with, but was actually a nice change to touch screen systems. Compared to others like Buick or even Hyundai and Kia, it just didn’t seem as luxurious as I expected from an Acura. That doesn’t mean, though, that it was a bad place to be.

Under the hood sits a 2.4 liter 4 cylinder engine. This is your only option in the sport wagon while the sedan offers a V6. One of my first concerns with this car was would it be sporty enough with the added mass and no optional V6. This question was quickly answered after a few minutes of driving around. Yes, they can lay claim to it being a sports wagon. Although the 2.4 liter engine only pushes out 201 horsepower and 170 foot-pounds of torque, it rev’s up to 7,000 rpm and feels quite peppy. Your only transmission option is the sequential sportsift automatic 5-speed. You can put this in manual mode and shift with the paddles on the steering-wheel, and it actually works quite well. It seems a little disappointing that you only have 5-speeds instead of the 6-speed transmission you get in the TL. It doesn’t really hinder the sportiness that much, but seems that you could achieve better fuel efficiency that way, not that it’s necessarily bad on fuel economy. During our daily driving, we were averaging 26.3 mpg; so surprising that we posted the picture up on our Facebook page.

It really all makes sense after driving the TSX and the TL for short but enthusiastic drives. This is why they did so well. Even in the wagon, you felt like this car was nimble and sporty. Acura throws words around like coil springs, balanced chassis, independent double-wishbone suspension, independent multi-link rear, and thicker rear stabilizer bar. All these equate to a great driving experience. It’s quiet and comfortable as it should be, but it also feels light and direct. This is what sets this car above cars like the Buick Regal, Hyundai Sonata, and Kia Optima. This would be my main reason for spending my hard earned money on an Acura today.

How much exactly do we need to spend though? Well the base TSX starts at $29,610. For the sport wagon you’ll need to shell out at least $30,960. To get one equipped with the technology package and all the goodies we had, then you’re tipping the scales at $35,970. This seems like a lot for a car with less technology and luxury than we expected, but it makes up for everything when you’re driving a back country road with enthusiasm and a smile on your face.

Video of the 2011 Acura TSX SportWagon on YouTube:

Check out our full Photo Gallery on Facebook or Google

2011 Mitsubishi Outlander GT reviewed by txGarage

A car manufacture tries to instill in his brand a certain look and feel to help distinguish that brand from many others in the market. The idea is to have a consumer instantly recognize that vehicle as being a part of the brand, even if they couldn’t see the badging on the car. This is a good thing to strive for as a company, but it also helps progress the design and style of cars over the world. Where these ides sometimes go awry is when a manufacture is so dedicated to it’s design that it crosses car design with SUV design, or truck design with car. Two big examples are the Porsche Cayenne and the first design of the Ford Fusion. In Porsche’s case, the Cayenne is made to look like a huge 911, and it’s never really worked. In Ford’s case, they tried implementing their trucks “three bar” grille design into a car. Although the Fusion isn’t a terribly ugly car, I would say that keeping a distinguished design like the one found in the new Focus is a better way to go.

Why am I going on about the design of cars versus SUV’s and Trucks? Because that’s exactly what Mitsubishi has done with the new Outlander. The Outlander is built on the platform of the Mitsubishi Lancer and shares a lot of design cues as well. The only thing is, I think Mitsubishi nailed it. I really like the design of this small SUV as it really stands out from the crowd and screams Mitsubishi. It doesn’t hurt that the Evo is such an iconic car for Mitsubishi, and having this SUV mimic it’s styling makes it that much better.

The front end is aggressive with a big gaping mouth and long hood. The headlights are HID Projector lamps that are styled to be sleek and aggressive matching those found on the Evo. Around the side are some slight wheel arches and more of an ordinary SUV profile. The rear windows have been sloped back giving a more stylish and aggressive looking stance. Around the back is more of the same with undoubtedly Mitsubishi styling cues and LED taillights which are angled down in a glaring fashion.

Our tester was the Outlander GT, which sits in the middle of Mitsubishi’s SUV lineup. The smaller Outlander Sport is styled even more aggressively.

Mitsubishi talks a lot about the sportiness and capabilities of the Outlander, even going as far as making the roof out of lightweight aluminium to keep the center of gravity low, and it works well as this 3-row SUV handles quite well. Being built on the Lancer chassis doesn’t hurt either.

Keeping the sportiness alive in the Outlander is it’s 3.0 V6. You can get the Outlander with a 2.4 liter 4 cylinder engine, which we didn’t get the chance to drive, but the fuel economy savings come at a big cost and that’s performance. I have a feeling that if you are looking at this aggressively styled SUV and thinking it’s the one for you, you’re going to want the 230 hp and 215 foot-pounds of torque offered by the V6. The numbers don’t really sound like much, but Mitsubishi did a great job translating those numbers into results. The Outlander GT feels surprisingly sporty when you really want it to be. Helping along here is the six-speed Sportronic transmission with metal paddle shifters for manual control. These are the same shifters found in the Evo; go figure.

More shared with the Evo is the Outlander’s Super All-Wheel Control (S-AWC) system that is one of the most advanced all-wheel-drive systems out there. It integrates standard all-wheel control with a dynamic front differential. It can also adjust the torque and braking force to each wheel for stability and control. You can choose from 3 driving modes; tarmac, snow, and lock. As we are in Texas and don’t see much snow, especially in August, we left the setting on tarmac mostly the entire time.

We hit a little bit of gravel roads in the Outlander and it held pretty well. Not as shockingly well as the Ralliart we drove with the same system, but not bad at all for a bigger SUV.

Sitting inside the Outlander reminded us of the Ralliart as well. Not for it’s racing style because there really wasn’t much, but for the materials and interior quality. The Ralliart was a small step forward from the Lancer with extra leather and trim and the same goes for the Outlander. The interior was fitted with leather seats that were comfortable enough, but not very sporty or supportive. The dash was pretty plain but had a little leather wrapping thrown in. All-in-all, the interior quality didn’t impress, but it’s a cheaper SUV, so it never really disappointed me too much either.

The second row had ample legroom and the bench was easily slid back and forth. Folding the seats down and getting them back up on the other hand was more of a chore. Accessing the 3rd row was about as pathetic as the 3rd row itself. The 3rd row isn’t as much a seat as a makeshift lawn chair like afterthought. It was covered in cloth, not the same leather as the other seats, and was as thin as a folding lawn chair. The thing is the kids still fit quite well and never complained once. As a matter of fact they liked it. Folding the seat up and down is a little more complicated or enduring than most. With it’s afterthought like design, the rear actually had a decent amount of room even with the third row in place. Obviously this isn’t a seat for adults, but if you have children and need the extra room, as I often do, then it’s actually a good design.

Our Outlander GT packed with features cost $32,275. For the quality of interior that you get, at first I thought that was way too much. Then I started realizing that for leather seats, navigation, power and heated seats, rear-view camera, and 3 rows that it’s really a good deal. This SUV reminds me mostly of the Suzuki XL-7, which is now out of production. It is an inexpensive 3 row SUV with nice styling and a sporty ride and not so flashy of an interior. If you don’t need the 3rd row and like the styling, look at the Oulander Sport. It’s base price is $28,495 and I had the chance to drive one of these and really liked the way it felt. If you are looking for a better 3rd row there is always the Endeavor to test drive as well with a base sticker price of $28,299.

Check out the Full Photo Gallery on Facebook or Google!

2011 GMC Terrain SLT-2 review by txGarage

Writing and editing for txGarage has its perks. I had a very special trip planned to one of my favorite destinations on the Texas coast, Port Aransas, and needed something that could haul me and my friends down there in comfort, plus handle the terrain when we got there. We considered a few different options for this trip, but when GM offered to us the GMC Terrain, we thought it sounded like the perfect choice.

We actually test drove the Terrain at it’s launch in Las Colines back in 2009. Adam had the opportunity to swing it around the urban roads of the area and said he really liked the looks and the way this SUV handles around town. That’s great to hear, but we are taking it on a long cruise to the coast and then looking for some “on the sand” abilities. So how did it fair?

First of all, lets take a look at this car. The exterior design is pretty unique compared to most of the smaller crossover SUVs out today. Knowing that this GMC is built on the Equinox platform makes it’s design stand out even more. Unlike GM of old where they’d just slap a GMC badge where the Chevrolet one used to be, this is radically different than its Chevrolet cousin.

I like the design. I’ve read some complaining about the Tonka-truck-like looks with its bulging wheel arches and boxy style, but it definitely stands out and has a more masculine appeal. We happen to be rolling in the SLT-2 which afforded us features like 18” aluminum wheels, fog lamps, extra chrome bits, and dual exhaust. I could have done with less chrome, but America as a whole seems to enjoy it.

Look more inside the Terrain and you’ll start to notice a little more carryover from the Equinox. The center-stack and gauge cluster are basically the same in the two, although you get red interior lighting in the GMC rather than the ice-blue in the Equinox. The navigation system was on par with other Chevrolet products we’ve tested. It’s pretty easy to figure out and everything seems to be laid out well and easy to read. The seats were wrapped in two-tone black and gray leather with semi-supportive bolsters
for the driver and passenger. They definitely keep you pretty comfortable on a 7 hour trip.

This is GMC’s smallest vehicle and as such only seats 5 passengers. They don’t make it in a 3-row, for that you’ll have to step up to an Acadia. Nevertheless, we all fit comfortably and had adequate room for all our party gear…ummm luggage.

Powering us down the long, straight, Texas highway system was GM’s 3.0 liter V6 engine matched to a 6-speed automatic transmission. The Terrain can also be had with a 2.4 liter 4 cylinder engine also matted to a 6-speed transmission, but it doesn’t pack the same punch as the V6 we tested. With the 3.0 V6, you get 264 horses and 222 pound-feet of torque to help move you along. We were happy with the V6 and it’s extra power. As you know, driving from north to south Texas can be an exercises in altitude. The Terrain never seemed to let us down, always powering over the next hill in the horizon.

The overall ride quality was pleasant. There is nothing real exciting about driving a Terrain, but it’s comfortable and smooth with car-like dynamics. Our tester was a simple front-wheel-drive setup; even so it also handled the little bit of beach driving we threw at it. We happened to be down the same time a tropical storm was rolling into town, and the last thing we wanted to see was our press car heading out into the Gulf of Mexico, so we stayed on fairly dry land for the most part.

The fuel economy ratings are a little less than those of an equally equipped Equinox thanks to it’s more boxy design. It’s not bad though. In the city, you should expect to see somewhere around 17 mpg, and on the highway, a little closer to 24mpg. During our highway driving with the cruise control set, we averaged pretty close to the 24 mpg range.

So, if it’s basically the same as an Equinox, yet a little worse on fuel economy and more expensive, why get the Terrain? Simple. The Terrain is more about style and class. The interior has just the right touche of extra class to make it a nicer place to be. The outside is drastically different and if you like the styling, that could be a major factor. Our tester tipped the scales at $36,335 (without destination), and compared to it’s non-GM competition, that’s not too bad. If you are looking at the Terrain, you probably won’t be interested in the Honda CR-V or Toyota RAV4. You’re most likely more of a Land Rover or Yucon kind of guy. The Terrain offers that kind of class and style in a smaller package at a decent price.

Check out more pics on Facebook or Google.