Saab 9-7X Aero Driven

Product detail lists, the specifications of different equipment lines and their respective features, are not the best part of GoodCarBadCar. In fact, they're completely absent. The Good Car Guy believes in supplying you with opinion, based on knowledge of those product details and experience with the product.

It's been a number of weeks since the Saab 9-7X Aero generated surprise amongst a group of bloggers at General Motors' Milford Proving Grounds near Detroit. I perceived it to be a crazy-fast Chevrolet TrailBlazer - and I was right. But just how fun to drive it would be.... I was yet to see.

Read about other sport-utility vehicles The Good Car Guy drove at Milford

Saab.com will tell you everything you need to know about their aging utility vehicle. They won't display the photograph with a GMC Acadia in the background, showcasing where your SUV$ should go if you're intent on spending those $ at a GM-owned store. The Acadia/Enclave/Outlook are superior machines in both feel and ownership enjoyment.


If, however, performance is your main reason for buying a GM sport-ute (why you're looking for performance in an SUV?), the Saab 9-7X Aero and its Corvette-derived powerplant will stir you to your very core. Besides, amongst all the Buick Rainier's and TrailBlazer's and Envoy's and Bravada's and Ascender's, the 9-7X was and is the best-looking member of the platform.

Check out every piece of information The Good Car Guy wrote regarding drives at Milford

The details are lacking. Even on the website. Clicking through the gallery, I notice the 4.2i, the 5.3i, and the Areo. Hmm? Has Saab forgotten how to spell the model nomenclature of its fastest and most expensive SUV? Out of the virtual world and back into the vehicle, you find an interior straight out of 1998 and a skinny steering wheel more suited to an early 90's Oldsmobile. When spending nearly $50K on a vehicle, you expect top-notch design. Considering that the main point of contact is disappointing and totally out-of-character, that high-dollar figure seems misspent.

Saab has been mentioned at GoodCarBadCar before... twice

For $45,750 in the USA, 390 horsepower and 395 lb-ft of torque is very welcome and appreciated. The 9-7X made every other sport-ute on the Black Lake seem timid. It roared when others growled and punched when others pinched. Straight-line speed was only one of its terrific performance attributes. Cornering in the Aero was as fun as the same activity in the Pontiac Torrent GXP, itself a surprisingly impressive handler.

Yet I stepped out of the 9-7X and wanted to drive something I could recommend to friends and readers. If you're yearning for performance and want extra space, the 9-7X is way down the list of potential suitors. Sportwagons and smaller crossovers make plenty more sense.

The 9-7X Aero provides one very good reason for buying an expensive Swedish/American ute. It sounds like a Corvette. The other European SUV that can perform this trick is in Mercedes showrooms and costs twice as much.

Hummer H2 Driven

Having just stepped out of a Ford Excursion, I had an eery feeling. A been-there-before-deja-vu-all-over-again moment. Something was familiar, and it wasn't just the Excursion. No, I went back in time about a month. Ah yes, I've got it. I basically drove the Hummer H2 today, except without the nice and cozy interior.

Read about the Excursion and GoodCarBadCar relationship here

Oh, I sound so positive. I don't mean to. The Excursion is a must-have. It tows a massive trailer and hauls up to nine fishermen. The Hummer? Nice and cozy interior? "Excuse me Good Car Guy - you sound off your rocker", say you. Well, the H2 does indeed feature one of the most stylish and rugged interiors amongst the cars I drove at General Motors Milford Proving Grounds in September. Too bad I couldn't see what was going on outside due to the gun-slit windows. I understand that's part of the design. After all, the H2 is basically a Tahoe/Yukon/Suburban-based replica of the military original. (Keep in mind, the H1 remains available on special order.)


Which begs the question: why do customers wish to appear as though they're driving through the streets of Baghdad? Albeit, the roads Hummer H2's are typically driven on are far smoother than what you might find in the disaster zone of Iraq. By my unofficial count, most H2's are riding on 22" chrome wheels sprayed with some rubber. These things aren't going off-road. They just look like they're going off-Iraq. And that's not cool.

Which begs the question (actually, it begs other different questions, but I thought I'd continue the theme): if it's not off-roading, what's the use? I don't know. Seat a few of your friends uncomfortably, don't take their luggage, and ask for gas money before you take the weekend trip. You'll pay $90 bucks to fill the H2 in Brooklyn today, up to $111 in LA, and about $115 in Toronto.

And you'll do so often. The H2 weighs 6400 pounds, way above the maximum curb weight where official fuel economy figures are mandated. Outside sources average between 9-11 mpg, indicating that the H2 requires a fill-up every 350 miles - if you're lucky and if you stretch it.

GoodCarBadCar won't be complimentary. Earth has moved on. We use CFL's in our lamps and walk to the convenience store if we can and expect a large vehicle to accomplish something for us if it's going to abuse our wallets. The H2 accomplishes little; next to nothing. Even in the driver's seat I felt cramped, not cozy. Certainly not cuddly. Five miles around GM's own proving grounds was regrettable, to say the least. I wish I'd simply steered the H2 around the Black Lake and given myself time to drive the H3. I didn't. I'm sorry. For myself.

Read other articles from The Good Car Guy's trip to Milford

Hummer's first 'mainstream' vehicle starts a chunk over $50,000 in the USA and gives you plenty of power and torque. Plenty, that is, if the engine is in a vehicle weighing less than 5000 pounds. 365 lb-ft of torque is useful. The H2 does, after all, pull away from the line cleanly and smoothly and provides a distant rumble. Suiting.

The H1 Alpha uses an even torquier 6.6L diesel. I could suggest to GM that this diesel be installed in the H2, but for what reason? Limited fuel savings, not even enough to compensate for the extra cost? A nicer feeling in the environmental section of my brain when I drive the obese brute? That feeling wouldn't last long.

The H2 is cumbersome. It is one of only a few vehicles I've ever driven that made me wish I wasn't driving. I've often felt like I shouldn't drive because of fatigue or sickness. But the H2 and Tahoe Hybrid made me wish someone; something, would take over. Just robotize the thing. The driver is totally disconnected from the process anyway.

There is good news. The Hummer has more cargo capacity than the GCBC-crowned Hyundai Santa Fe, 8.4 cubic feet extra in fact. True, the H2 is 19.5 inches longer, 11.3 inches taller, and 6.8 inches wider on a wheelbase 16 inches longer. Who cares? More space than a GoodCarBadCar Top 5 winner - Hummer'll take that anyday.

Saturn Vue Driven

GM's invitation to drive a variety of vehicles at their own proving grounds in Milford was not something I would normally turn down. So I didn't. Buick's Enclave, the Cadillac CTS, Pontiac Torrent GXP, Saturn Sky Red Line, and Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid have already been reviewed here at GoodCarBadCar. Now it's turn for a second Saturn in Part II of Milford's SUV quartet.

Read all of The Good Car Guy's Milford posts here

SATURN VUE: The new Vue looks good. In fact, Saturn's new Vue feels good. Better yet, the new Saturn Vue is good. But I wish it were better.

Ironically, a vehicle I mocked here on GoodCarBadCar was the very vehicle I drove first around the proving grounds: Pontiac's Torrent GXP. The existence of the GXP doesn't draw me to the Pontiact brand, and the overall feel of the Torrent didn't draw me any nearer. However, giving a Torrent GXP it's head around five miles of GM's own tarmac proved that a small, relatively inexpensive, American SUV can really cut the mustard. Check out the GCBC Torrent Driven here .

Read Part I of Milford's SUV Quartet here

Why do I mention the GXP's dynamics, especially in such a praiseworthy tone? Becuase the Vue, a vehicle competing in the very same sector at a similar price point, is so good in so many arenas but fails so miserably in one. That'd be driving dynamics.

6-speed automatic, all-wheel drive, 257 horsepower, quiet interior, pleasant materials. Present and accounted for. $26,950 price tag? Also included. 4,325 pounds. Excuse me, what did I just type?

4-3-2-5. P-o-u-n-d-s. Man, it hurts just to type that. Especially considering the fact that a Torrent GXP hits the scales as a comparative lightweight; a few hundred pounds less.

Build your own version of the Vue at Saturn.com

There is one major factor hindering me from recommending a Vue to you: the weight of the Vue, a vehicle with less length, height, and wheelbase than the Torrent, creates a driving experience that feels more Saturn Outlookish than Saturn Auraish. And if you're in the market for a high-priced cute ute, don't you want a carlike experience? The segment, almost automatically; almost by definition, suggests that car-like is what you get.

Where the Torrent was tied down, Saturn's Vue was not. When the Torrent felt as if on rails (no, really..kinda...sorta), the Vue felt as if on butter. On a straight stretch where the GXP felt strong, the Vue felt breathless. When steering needed sharpness, the Vue gave me, umm.... dullness.

I was excited about the Vue, a similar feeling to what I felt as I approached the Buick Enclave. In both instances the excitement felt wrong, but was exhibited because of two things: the old Vue and the Buick Rendezvous, both banished. Thankfully.

The Enclave proved itself to be worth an increased heart rate. No, not because the driving experience was so exhilarating, but because Buick built a true, desirable Buick. With the Vue, my satisfaction with the interior quality and space as well as the refinement and maturity of the vehicle went downhill as soon as I had to drive the thing.

Give me a Saturn Vue. Yes, please do. But only if it drives like that Pontiac Torrent GXP. I never thought I'd want either one, and I still don't. I just wish I could have the best of both world's.

Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid Driven

Tuning into any automotive website, mainstream or otherwise, only to find out they stand firmly against a specific genre of vehicle, is a true disappointment. If you want an honest representation, it's hard to find that from a person or group whose mind(s) are firmly closed.

The Good Car Guy, therefore, keeps an open mind. Search through more than 250 previous posts at GoodCarBadCar and you'll find that a high percentage of articles are car-based. You'll find truck stuff; yes. Sport-utilities are discussed on GCBC, too. A minivan or two may even garner mentions. Typically, though, cars dominate the talk. In fact, small cars generate genuine GCBC hype.

Thus, at General Motors' Milford Proving Grounds, the vast array of sport-utility vehicles had no great effect on The Good Car Guy. Albeit, two of the previous Driven articles taken from Milford test drives dealt with crossover/sport-ute style vehicles. Of the eight remaining General Motors automobiles yet to be discussed, four would be classified by most folks as SUV's and another is a truck. (That leaves a hybrid, a large sports sedan, and America's sports car.)

Check Chevrolet.com/hybrid for more Tahoe Hybrid info

So what does GoodCarBadCar do? The website built to dethrone the bad car, the boring car, and the frumpy car - in sight of tons (literally) of sport-ute metal and hardly an ounce of small car on Milford's Black Lake - what are we to do? Well, test drive the sport-utes. Take'em on a lap of the exact same loop the Saturn Sky scoured.




CHEVROLET TAHOE HYBRID: Basic Tahoe's range in price from $35-$45,000, but you could watch the numbers quickly roll when options start flying. The hybrid version of Chevy's venerable SUV hasn't yet received pricing, but don't expect it to be pushed too far upmarket. GM/Chevrolet has been pushing this vehicle way too hard to see it priced higher than consumers are willing to pay; and thereby reducing it to the status of "seen only on dealer lots".

GoodCarBadCar loves driving impressions; not just market studies. This vehicle feels heavy. Of course, you say, it's a massive truck-based sport-utility vehicle. I know that, too. GM's large SUV's have been renowned for shrinking around themselves for a couple of generations now; being far more able at performing that trick than Ford's Expedition, or even the Sequoia and Armada from Toyota and Nissan. While that is still relatively true of regular members of this family like Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon/Escalade, this hybrid doesn't pull off the stunt.

Read other Milford Driven articles here

True enough, I'd driven some very capable handlers that day at Milford, and no SUV - certainly not a hybrid Tahoe - was going to perform at the level I desired. Nevertheless, I felt left out. I was a lonely driver piloting an eery, weary, not-so-cheery boat. Sure, the interior was somewhere near the top of any list entitled, "Best GM Interiors Ever", and the fuel economy will be somewhat better than what you'd see in a regular Tahoe, but I regretted every hour GM spent engineering this vehicle. It will be years; maybe decades, before a monster SUV of this size performs adequately at the pump.

Attempting to market your greenness by hybridizing such a vehicle is a relative insult - this vehicle will cost a lot of money to buy and run. I saw mpg ratings on the onboard computer of 99mpg. The engine was off and I was, in fact, using no gasoline whatsoever. I frequently watched the numbers roll down to 7 mpg and struggled to find more than 13 or 17 mpg during normal cruising. A number of my colleagues were disgusted enough to absolutely discount the Tahoe model (unfairly) as a whole, just because the Hybrid seemed so silly.

Tahoe Hybrid's do feature some aero and weight-loss tweaks. Hood and tailgate have switched materials to aluminum and you'd be pressed not to notice the large front air dam. It would be interesting for Chevrolet to perform highway fuel economy tests on a Tahoe with all non-engine related tweaks, then compare them to a vehicle without those adjustments but with the hybrid drivetrain.

Weight loss and aero work would do wonders for large SUV's. Becuase the core of the Tahoe is heavy, a chain reaction begins. Suspension parts are built stronger. Stronger = heavier. The engine must be larger to maintain modern levels of forward propulsion. Larger = heavier. The wheels, tires, brakes.... everything, must be built in accordance with a genuinely heavy vehicle. Subtract weight, whether through the use of added aluminum or a shorter features list, and this vehicle wouldn't need a huge battery to strengthen its greenness.

The Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid is a really nice vehicle. It just happens to feel like a dead weight. Slow, cumbersome, and lifeless. I appreciate GM's efforts to supply me with a trip, a room, food, and plenty of vehicles. But I wish I'd spent more time in vehicles like you'll see in Part II of Milford's SUV quartet.

SATURN SKY - Driven

Negativity towards the Sky has already been revealed by The Good Car Guy on video. There's more to the Sky than its shaking hood and inner door panel; more even than its vibrating rearview mirror and never-still steering rack. Plenty more.

Positive fact numero uno: it's fast. The turbocharged Saturn Sky that I drove uses 260 horsepower and 260 lb-ft of torque to set its 3,036 pounds into motion. Oh, but wait - here's another negative fact. Three thousand and thirty-six pounds? Fortunately that's just a miniscule weight gain over the standard, non-Red Line Sky in a world where the performance version tends to weigh more than 71 pounds extra. But.... I gotta mention it, Mazda's dominant MX-5 Miata weighs a fair 500 pounds less.



Horses need to be given a run, ya know. Especially when 260 reside in the stable. Tension is building; the legs need stretching; they need to see the great outdoors. Saturn says that, from rest, you can hit 60mph in 5.5 seconds. I believe them. Turbo lag is rarely felt and is never intrusive. Torque seems to be available anywhere and everywhere. In-gear acceleration is phenomenal.

Shifter and steering effort is nice. I'm driving a driver's car, so let me drive it, I say. And the Saturn does. The Sky also expects you to hold down the hood, rest your left elbow in a position that will silence the door panel and forget the windshield mounted rearview mirror. While shifting the snickety-snick 5-speed manual and careening 'round corner after corner at the Milford Proving Grounds. General Motors hosted a group of web-savvy car folks at Milford and supplied a large grouping of Sky's and the Pontiac version named Solstice. I drove only one of these rear-wheel drive roadster, so I'm not qualified to say that all would suffer from the shakes.

Read other Milford articles here.

Perhaps the Sky tries to do too much. And in so doing, becomes too little; less than the sum of its parts. This Saturn grips corners tightly, but doesn't feel at home on the corner or on a straight stretch. Any stretch of road ripples or bumps reveals a chassis unwilling to cooperate with real life; yet, what's worse, the roof is too challenging to operate and luggage capacity is severely lacking.

In the United States, pricing for the Sky begins at $25,595 for 173-bhp and a less aggressive suspension. Pay $30,000 and you'll get that turbocharged engine you want with a little room for an upgraded stereo.

Read other Driven articles here.

Or sacrifice 94 horsepower, gain a retractable hard-top and a more mature driving experience for as little as $25,035. That's called a Mazda MX-5 Miata PRHT. My advice would lead you to this paragraph.

Or, if you prefer the look of a Solstice, take a trip to your Pontiac dealership and save a couple grand. Before you follow the link, check your volume. Especially if you're at work.



Indications were that an official 'positive fact numero dos' would appear at some point: the Sky is the best-looking of this bunch. Handsome, classy, clean, but full of visual impact from any angle. It was General Motors' own styling boss who first suggested that people will buy a car for the way it looks. Saturn's roadster proves Harley Earl right.

CADILLAC CTS - Driven

Once the standard of the world, Cadillac is now in a fight to be considered a worthy alternative to the best of Germany. When it comes to small-to-midsize sports sedans, the BMW 3-series reigns supreme. Audi's A4 and Mercedes-Benz' C-class are major players, and Japan has gotten in on the act, as well, with the Infiniti G35 and Lexus IS.

Parts of the world see a Cadillacized Saab called the BLS. It's a front-wheel drive sedan or wagon; smaller than any American Cadillac. For those of us in North America, the Escalade-SRX-DTS-XLR-STS train ends at the CTS. Up until now, the CTS has been seen only as a 4-door sedan. Its progenitors include the nightmarish Cimarron, the decent-but-dull Catera, and the first-generation CTS.

CTS 1 brought some credibility to Cadillac; the v performance edition even more so. Although not a very small car, this Cadillac competes ably with the small sedans previously mentioned on price and specification, whilst in many cases providing more occupant space.

At one time not so long ago, the minds of young men (such as myself) linked Cadillac with Lincoln as cars for the rich retirees in Boca Raton. To be a Cadillac executive and understand that your cars had become indelibly connected with Floridian communities for the seniors among us - well, that just had to hurt.

The CTS brought change. First generation styling was not to my liking; many other critics used much harsher language. But the CTS was no Catera. There was life inside this car, a little bit of joie de vivre and je ne sais quoi. To be honest, I hated the way it looked. The CTS-v had instant pull and satisfaction, however, with its Corvette engine and BMW M5-baiting performance.

CTS version 2.0 is upon us, and while at GM's Milford Proving Grounds - at their expense - the CTS was one vehicle that truly excited me. Clearly this vehicle is not a Cadillac to be linked with the Boca Raton rich, if I, the representer of a new generation of first-time car buyers, am excited by its potential.

A rear-wheel drive, 6-speed automatic-transmission CTS with direct injection will propel its 3,874 pounds with 304 horsepower. Rough idling apart, this engine is a monster. Its revtastic nature marries well the quick shifting transmission. The 6-speed is abrupt; firm; and immediate, but never - in no wise - in a negative way. To put it simply, forward progress is enjoyable and effortless; the CTS being fun to provoke, knowing that it will always respond and never flounder in gear confusion.




What about the twisties? Our ride & handling loop was furnished with some low-speed cornering opportunities as well as a couple higher-speed sweepers and plenty of nasty bumps, yumps, and holes mid-turn, as well. It was a challenging course for any car. Some failed to generate high ratings on my internal thrill-o-meter, others thrilled but did not succeed in offering an experience. Having driven four General Motors' vehicles in the morning and ten in the afternoon, my five mile journey in the CTS has to rank in the top two drives of the day, right behind the Chevrolet Corvette.

Consider that this is the smallest car in Cadillac's North American fleet and you'll think the CTS is small. It's not - but it does drive small. The tighter the corner, the more nimble the car felt. Stability on the enduring sweepers, one of which would throw the odd bump in for good measure, felt autobahn-inspired.

Cadillac's are not renowned for direct and accurate steering, but the CTS exemplified how fine steering could - if necessary - hide other transgressions. No, I can't say it was particularly feelsome, but in 2007, a communicative wheel is hard to find. There was never a need for readjusting the line in a corner; not because of 17" wheel impacts or lack of driver confidence or an inability to retain speed. Direct the CTS where you want to go, and it'll take you there. Sure, more communication wouldn't go unwanted, but the CTS is a driver's car nevertheless.

Letdowns? Or shall we say letdown, singular? Interior design is pleasant in apperance, but disappointing to touch. It causes genuine consternation in my automotive heart, knowing that the CTS deserves high praise and terrific recognition in almost every area, yet finding that it lets me down in the one area where the driver spends all his/her time.

Cadillac's CTS has a 3.6L V6 that starts at by achieving 263bhp on the dyno. Selecting that engine option would net you a basic savings of $2,300 USD, but you'd be losing a few features as well. If you want full-bore performance and luxury, a $35,290 Cadillac CTS is a decent bet. Waiting for the CTS-v in its second iteration wouldn't be perceived as such a bad idea either.

BUICK ENCLAVE - Driven

Search... I mean, search, for another automotive blog where a young import-loving guy posts twice in one afternoon; consecutively; where the titles both feature the name Buick. Email goodcarbadcar@gmail.com if, not when; you find one.



And we ain't joking around. Nor does the joke start at the next sentence. The Enclave is good. I apologize to and for those who can't submit to this fact. Don't believe for one minute that The Good Car Guy would ever buy a Buick Enclave. I started writing about cars when the smart fortwo hit Canada. Polar opposites; the smart and Enclave? Not quite, but pretty close.

I wouldn't be skipping the Enclave, however. I'd be skipping the whole class of vehicles. Large, upscale crossovers aren't my thing and the absence of children in our life doesn't seem to bode well for Buick salespeople who want an Enclave parked outside my door. I don't need it, I don't want it.

But I know the Enclave is good. A fellow blogger at GM's Milford Proving Grounds just two days ago told me that he enjoyed driving the Saab 9-7X Aero a whole lot more, but the 9-7X Aero seemed pointless. And although he'd never have previously considered a Buick, this Wired Magazine correspondent's father just bought an Enclave. Hmm? How's that end up happening later in life?

The Enclave will never handle like that Swedish-American muscle SUV (did I already say pointless?) but it shouldn't and won't. The Enclave should possess true Buick characteristics and have a strong sense of desirability and some urban chicness. Nope, I'm not in the market for an upscale utility crossover, but I do know what a Buick needs to be and represent if I am ever to be tempted by any sort of Buick.

When I broke two wrists at once, the doctor asked me which news I wanted first; good or bad. Well, I asked for bad first. (There was no good.) Call me Dr. GoodCar and let me offer suggestions on treatment for Buick's maladies. 1) Build more Enclave-like vehicles. Not crossover/utility/SUV type cars, but beautiful cars. The Lucerne and Allure/Lacrosse are not beautiful, and that actually hurts the Enclave. 2) Learn to make the vehicles as quiet as the Enclave while also putting them on a diet. Don't lose the quiet, but lose some weight. You're too fat, Buick. 3) Ignore loyal buyers. Sorry to sound harsh and uncouth, but the loyal Buick buyer has a life expectancy which ends..... next year. Don't cater to him. A good car is a good car is a good car. If you make it good, old guys and gals'll like'em, and so will I.

To the Enclave, more specifically we go. Prior to my Enclave drive, I was in a Pontiac Torrent GXP for about five miles. It's worth reading about. Talk about two SUV's with different priorities. Actually, don't talk about it right now. Keep reading - I'm trying to hold your attention. The GXP is a performance edition of a somewhat boring vehicle. Enclave's are an exciting new addition to a traditionally boring brand. Buick's were once an aspirational purchase. When Cadillac's were cool and became the obvious choice for a rich dude in Elvis Presley's era, a Buick wasn't just a respectable choice. These were respectable Cadillac alternatives. Give me an early 60's Electra or a first generation Skylark, please.

Now Cadillac is fighting to be taken seriously as a worthy hi-lux player, and Buick is disregarded by a huge percentage of anybody born after 1950. Yikes. (Read about Enclave's success here.)

Now the Enclave is an aspirational purchase. You would feel good owning this vehicle. You'd enjoy living with it and be, at least, comfortable driving it day-to-day. Enclave has all the luxury you'll ever need (luxury = need?) plus the space your family requires. A luxed-up all-wheel drive Enclave does weigh a hair under 5000 pounds, though, and that's a real down side after driving a Torrent GXP.

Granted, these two GM vehicles aren't competing. (Read the Enclave's 3 To Beat here.) The Enclave has to fight off Saturn's Outlook and the GMC Acadia instead. The Torrent proved the performance SUV case, at least as far as driving dynamics go. Buick's Enclave, on the other hand, is no fun to drive. 275 bhp sounds like a lot, but we're talking about 5-0-0-0 pounds here, folks. No biggie, though. I don't seek more power every day at home - I try to conserve. So, I'm not looking to worsen the 3.6L V6's fuel economy ratings of 16/24 US mpg. Power will suffice.

Nonetheless, the power-to-weight deficit, when combined with a bit of pillowiness over yumps and the disconnected feel of the steering... well, then I begin to mind the dynamics of the vehicle. Then again (again), we're intentionally driving aggressively and a Buick crossover isn't going to - and shouldn't - behave like a Saturn Sky. No, I want some pillow-like qualities. Ya know what; I don't want to submit to a writhing steering wheel fighting to maintain the straight-ahead. I want my Enclave to wrap me in a warm cocoon at the end of a 9am-5pm day, serenade me with satellite radio, preserve me and protect me when necessary, and provide me with the space I need for my peoples and their things. Quickly. While looking goooood.

To meet those demands the Enclave gives you: tri-zone automatic climate control, power seats and a tilt and telescopic wheel; six speakers with speed-compensated volume and XM sat-radio; ABS, StabiliTrak, traction control, Xenons, side curtains for all three rows, cruise control, a 50,000mile bumper-to-bumper warranty and tire-pressure monitoring; seven seats; a capable V6 with a 6-speed automatic; 18 or 19-inch wheels and a really wicked front wheelarch. For proof of that just look at it this pic, edited to really show the wheel, arch, and curves. Taken at Milford by The Good Car Guy just two days ago.

PONTIAC TORRENT GXP - Driven

There's plans to inform The Good Car Nation of all Milford Proving Ground activities, but don't we all love to read a good test drive? Isn't that what automotive media really centres on? 'Where the tire hits the road' ought to be especially applicable to people who care about the tire and the road, no?

This story from early August reveals my true feelings towards the purpose and necessity of a vehicle like the Pontiac Torrent GXP. I see numerous points anybody could put forth to show that the Pontiac Torrent GXP (a high-powered small utility attempting to be an inexpensive BMW X3) doesn't need to exist. Nobody needs this kind of performance in a vehicle that fails to live up to the standards we set for 'feel' and refinement. I'd love to see an interior that beckoned me with quality and materials, for instance. Plus, I think it would be great to see a Pontiac crossover that wasn't available at the Chevrolet dealership.

However, there is praise to be showered upon the Torrent GXP. When I first set foot outside the luncheon area at General Motors Milford Proving Ground and walked around the vehicles to see which I needed to drive; wanted to drive; and felt responsible to drive, the Pontiac's Torrent GXP stuck out as a vehicle I should drive based on the responsibility I have to the Good Car Nation. Well, Nation - awaken. The Torrent GXP is ready for takeoff.



For somewhere between $26-28,000 USD, you can have a GM-built SUV with 264 horsepower. And this ain't 264 horsepower from a piece of unfortunate mess of thrashing metal. Old-tech is not found under this hood. Along with the gains under the hood (79 bhp up from the base Torrent), you can also count on an extra gear in the automatic tranny. Steering switches from electric to hydraulic assist. (Take that as a positive sign for GM's future performance vehicles.) Equip with bigger wheels and a true sports suspension and you've got yourself a GXP.

While maintaining a civil ride, the GXP is tied to the tarmac in a way that BMW consumers would enjoy. I'm serious. Reasons to avoid the purchase of a Torrent GXP can't include 'poor driving dynamics'. Direct and weighty steering - admittedly feelless - is just the start. Body roll is not nearly as prevalent in the GXP as it was in, say, the new Saturn Vue. (Build an SUV with the Vue V6 AWD's look and overall feel & refinement & interior with the Torrent GXP's dynamics and you've got yourself a great vehicle.) Problems only arose when cornering quickly on rippled roads. Seriously bumpy, screwed-up, rippled roads. Out of ten vehicles driven on this 5-mile trek, maybe two were calm through that section.

Possessing such levels of horsepower in a vehicle of this type and weight would commonly be useless and unadvisable in my mind. The GXP copes with the power admirably, mostly because it does more than simply power out of corners. It copes with the twists, too. I had the benefit on this first trip around our section of Milford to have a GM engineer alongside directing me. Like the rest of my 46.5 hour Milford trip, he was free of charge.

Even so, the parenthetical sentence two paragraphs above regarding the Vue/Torrent combo all too often replicates the typical GM story. We'll see if the other nine vehicles you'll read about here can sing a different song.

TOYOTA YARIS - PART II - DRIVEN

Prince Edward Island receives a fair amount of attention on GoodCarBadCar. There's a few simple reasons: vehicles we test seem to end up on PEI roads; that happens because PEI is the home province of The Good Car Girl and her family and the home province of The Good Car Guy's own family. We holiday there as much as possible. (Follow this link to Part I of the Yaris overview.)

Thus, the Toyota Yaris we took possession of in August for 48 hours spent about slightly more than half of that time on PEI roads, much of which is shouldered by PEI's famed red dirt. The pictures you see in this post were taken on that trip on our own Nikon.

You can see the view back to Nova Scotia from the Northumberland Ferry, Holiday Island, as well as the boat itself, which is the elder statesmen in NFL's fleet. The parked Yaris is at Cavendish's busiest shopping mall, The Boardwalk and the view of the Yaris' profile is seen at a lookoff near New London.

Our blue 5-door hatch was equipped with the 1.5L four-cylinder just like every other Canadian-sold and American-sold Yaris. Suggesting reading on that topic is found in Yaris Part I. Power is plenteous enough, but the 4-speed auto not only crippled the umph of the 106bhp engine, it also produced unwanted gear-hunting and caused pregnant pauses in between gears. All of which would lead the not so horsepower-familiar consumer to believe this car has 15-20 fewer horses.

14" wheels are never going to work with electric steering to provide a stirring driving event. The steering is lifeless and way too light. Understeer is prevalent, but no more so than expected. With light and uncommunicative steering, you find yourself entering a corner and adjusting your line constantly, regardless of the attack-level you assume on your commute; 10/10ths or 4/10ths.

The side-effect you get to enjoy as a result of this weightless and lifeless steering is ease-of-use. Parking the Yaris is smart fortwo-like, or as close as a normal car can get to smartish parking. Interior controls are placed where you want them to be. Combine that with parking ease, an automatic transmission and a suspension that manages to soak up bumps despite its short wheelbase and you have an easy car. An easy car could be considered a good car, although I would prefer some measure of challenge.

Other contributing factors which could be applied in an argument which could conclude that the Yaris is a good car include Toyota reliability/dependability/quality, impressive fuel efficiency, and its shadow-to-space ratio. Toyota's generally stick together. Nobody can say for sure if a ten-year old Corolla will last another 10 or 15 years, but it's not terribly unlikely. Put that in the Yaris' good column. We consumed 6.45 litres of gasoline for each 100km we drove. Energuide.ca estimates 7L/100km in the city and 5.6L/100km on the highway. Judging by our results, that's perfectly believable. If we were to assume the ratings which the United States website, fueleconomy.gov, applies to the Yaris, we actually finished 1mpg better than its highway estimate but 3 worse than the old standard's rating of 39mpg.




The Yaris drove exactly as I expected it would. No excitement - more fun than the Nissan Versa but less of a thrill than the Honda Fit. Comfortable and obedient - more so than both the Versa and about equivalent with the Fit. Perhaps the Yaris isn't real-world spacious like a Versa or Fit, but it sure is space efficient. Do a blindfolded entry, remove the blindfold, feel around, and estimate the exterior size of the car. You'd be wrong. An exciting car - no. The Yaris does not go above and beyond the call of duty, but it fulfills most buyer's demands. Without visiting the Shell station too often.

VOLVO XC70 T6 DRIVEN

Latin scholars want you to believe that Volvo means "I Roll". Translated into Swedish, it is my personal belief that Volvo means "wagon". 

In fact, GoodCarBadCar.net made this very clear when the core Volvo wagon, the V70, was named to The Good 12 at the end of 2007. Specificity was required, and the XC70 didn't make the cut. Increased toughness doesn't garner you a spot in the 12 cars recommended for The Good Car nation for 2008.

Seven or eight months later, Volvo Canada offers to park an XC70 T6 underneath GoodCarBadCar Towers. Coincidence? It appears as though more recognition is sought. Perfectly logical arguments start with the fact that the XC70 T6 is a V70 plus more: more height, more driven wheels, more power, more visual impact.

And more money; and more fuel consumption. That's where The Good Car Guy's argument has always rested, even when Volvo permitted five days in a previous-generation XC70 a few years ago. $1,600 fewer dollars allows you entry into the V70 club in Canada. South of the border, Americans can access a V70 for $4,310 less. This argument will continue in a moment.

After all, the XC70 has a case to make. It was mentioned earlier in this XC70 experience that Volvo sells three Vs. Versatility is obvious. Just a couple nights ago, the XC70 was turned into an RV when we threw our luggage in the front seat, folded the rear seats flat, sent the mother-in-law and brother-in-law into tents of their own and slept underneath the stars roof. Two sleeping bags, two pillows, and one comforter completed the package. Indeed, there was no difficulty finding sufficient capacity for all our assorted junk in the front seats, either. Were it not for the bugs in Kejimkujik National Park, the sunroof and windows would have been opened to enjoy nature's opera. 

Versatility? The XC70 is whatever you want it to be.

Volvo sells safety more actively than any other automaker on the planet. Thoughtfully, the most obvious safety feature to my naked eye stood in stark contrast to a much smaller and less expensive automobile that appeared in a Driven article here on GCBC a couple weeks back. Although the Chevrolet Cobalt weighs less than 3,000 pounds (comparing favourably with the XC70's 4000+ lb. girth) and has a fraction of the cargo capacity, it was the XC70 that allowed me to see around corners as well as to the sides and rear of the car. Pillar width has rapidly become a serious problem in modern automobiles. Stringent crash standards are forcing automakers to strengthen their roofs in the event of a rollover, leading to worsening visibility inside the car.

Somehow, Volvo manages to combine both crash safety with driving safety. At least let me see what I'm about to crash into before you save my life.

Joie de vivre is hard to define, but the XC70 makes life comfortable, relaxing, and easier. Space is plentiful for all occupants. Interior simplicity has been improved over previous generations. Passing power is easy to tap into and even the suspension can be adjusted ever-so-slightly to account for rough roads (turn off the Advanced) or enjoy serene ride quality (Comfort it is). Surround sound stereo quality would be mighty challenging to match in your own home. The front seats are suitable for a comfortable and contemporary luxury living room.

That's not to say the XC70 is faultless. Fuel consumption, as evidenced at AutoEnergy three times with the likes of Lexus and BMW, is much worse than its wagon origins would lead you to believe. 21 miles per gallon might be acceptable, but city driving resulted in 13.8mpg.... which is terrible.

Granted, this is a 281-horsepower car. Even there, the Volvo disappoints slightly. Part of a modern vehicle's safety setup is excessive obesity. Turbocharged, all-wheel drive six-cylinder wagons from Sweden aren't light on their feet. Thus, 281 horsepower doesn't feel like it until the time comes to knock the shiftable six-speed auto down a notch and rocket past slow-moving rural traffic.

It must also be recognized that the XC70 brings joy to your life but isn't fun to drive. This car is too heavy, too high, and too comfort-oriented to be fun to chuck around corners. Fun to own? For sure. 

To nitpick, it must be mentioned that the whole centre console sits a little low for a tall driver. Every button is simple to decipher but a touch too far away. Something is wrong with the steering wheel; it's either too thick or too small in diameter. It could've been the result of an abused press car, but upon taking off from rest, disturbing vibrations traveled through the front of the car to the gas pedal. And only because of the price, upwards of $54,000 CDN, would we seek out a larger sunroof. I have no bald spot and therefore nothing to burn. Let me have light.

Taking it all in is much easier to do in a week than the very brief test drives to which auto writers are typically exposed. Each passing day revealed more reasons to appreciate Volvo's development and understand its expense. In the cargo compartment, the secure area underneath the floor is revealed by a strut-held trap door. Qualitaaay. Tie-down hooks are everywhere. Rear seats fold with a click. Doors thunk. 

What more can we ask for? Perhaps.... a little less. Less cladding, less power, less fuel consumption, less height, and less expense. That'd be a V70 then. 

Internal Links:

All XC70 posts

Complete GoodCarBadCar.net XC70 Photo Gallery

XC70's City Economy

Volvo XC70 D5 Across The Pond

XC70 Links

XC70 Hill Descent Control In Motion

XC70 Interior

Volvo XC70 Currency Differentiation

XC70 Early Impressions

Volvo XC70 History

VOLVO XC70 PHOTO GALLERY

Pictures from The Good Car Guy's week with the XC70 are in the gallery below. To see all articles related to the XC70 driven by The Good Car Guy, click here. A formal Driven article is upcoming.

CHEVROLET COBALT DRIVEN - Part 2

Excellent fuel economy alone is not enough to secure buyers. If only one demand was made by the collective consumer world, we'd all be riding bicycles and burning calories. 

Chevrolet has been selling plenty of Cobalts this year. Most manufacturers are seeing gains in their small car sales and the good news for General Motors (and Ford; with the Focus) is improving sales of aging models. What can be better than cars that have paid off their maker's investment and sell better than ever? Umm... I don't know.

Again, we want more than fuel efficiency. After 1083.9 kilometres (673.5 miles) in a 2008 Chevrolet Cobalt equipped with a 2.2-litre four-cylinder and an automatic transmission, The Good Car Guy exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency's highway mpg rating and during one sting (Cape North, Nova Scotia to Baddeck to Halifax, Nova Scotia) matched the department of  Natural Resources Canada's highway rating. 33 miles per gallon is an excellent statistic - more about which you can read at AutoEnergy - but a figure that numerous cars exceed by a significant measure.

Thus, the Cobalt needs more. For a brief rundown, click here for Part 1 of the Cobalt series. Since you're into learning more, keep reading.

Chevrolet offers multiple small car options in Canada. Along with the Cobalt sedan and coupe, HHR retro wagon, GM also commissions Chevrolet to sell the Aveo hatch and sedan after formerly commandeering the Suzuki/Daewoo Reno and Forenza to sell as the Chevrolet Optra. General Motors is not the last great bastion of small car hope and until the Cobalt is replaced with the Cruze, GM won't be competitive with the Japanese greats from Toyota and Honda. That is, if the Cruze is great.

Strangely but not surprisingly, GoodCarBadCar is completely averse to declaring the Cobalt good or bad. Decent in almost every way, the Cobalt is an attractive purchase at a discounted price but never when the monthly payment matches what your local Honda dealership will offer with the Civic.

For starters, perceived quality - the feel of the car in areas you can see, touch, smell, and hear allowing you to calculate what build quality may be like in areas you can't see, touch, smell or hear - is not a Cobalt positive. Switches, buttons, knobs and surfaces are either excellent or terrible. Blinker noise, a seriously subliminal but effective selling point, is hi-lux. The materials covering the instrument binnacle looks and feels like something out of a '97 Cavalier. 

Finding a comfortable driving position was easy. With three days of heavy driving across from the capital of Nova Scotia to the northern section surrounding Cape Breton's national park and back to Halifax, comfort would be a major factor. The driver was fine. Rear passengers happened to be alright, as well, but only because of a short front passenger and one rear passenger being a toddler. Front-left seat height adjustment functioned nicely in terms of aiding comfort. However, comfort couldn't overcome a massive A-pillar that posed numerous problems on sharp downhill left turns. 

Unfortunately for the small Chevy, the Cabot Trail prides itself on exposing every fault. Ride quality was superb despite the noise during pothole exit that would lead you to believe the suspension was being realigned. Chanelling its inner turbocharged SS, this base Cobalt limits body roll but takes its set awkwardly. While it feels like the Cobalt wants you to drive slower, grip isn't actually that low. Communication via the steering column is basically nonexistent although the effort weights up in typical General Motors fashion.... only better.

Accelerating out of small look-off parking areas back onto the Cabot Trail without being able to see what kind of gigantic RV is about to take corners to the right or the left is fun in a "how 'bout a game of chicken?" kind of way. The Cobalt copes. 

Then cometh a hill. Maybe its only a slight incline. Perhaps that's not a hill but a perfectly level two-lane with an overtaking option. We're spitting along at just 80km/h (around 50mph) but there's no way the Cobalt wants to attempt that pass. Partly in order to achieve terrific fuel economy and partly out of what we'll have to call poor engineering, the Cobalt's 4-speed automatic hates downshifting and doesn't find much in reserve. True it may be that the 5-speed manual would suit better in a low-powered car like this, all 148 horsepower (upgrading to 155 in 2009 with slightly improved efficiency) don't arrive until 5,600 rpm and must haul 2,780 pounds as well as driver and passengers. 

You can figure it out. Chevrolet sells one sports car, the Corvette; large utility vehicles and pickups; a stylish retro coupe, the Camaro, and some very decent cars. The Aveo disappoints. The Malibu is stylish and high-class. The Cobalt?

Pure, unadulterated transportation. Not much more and not much less.

Photo locations top to bottom: lookoff near French Mountain in the Highlands National Park of Cape Breton, driveway of Normaway Inn in Margaree Valley, wharf in Pleasant Bay