The ubiquitous Honda Civic, along with Toyota's Corolla, more than any other cars, helped establish the Japanese-designed compact and sub-compact car in the American marketplace. Both have been enormously popular over the years and have enjoyed a well-above-average reliability record along with good resale value. Unlike arch-rival Corolla, the Civic entered the U.S. market in 1973 as a front-drive car and has remained so ever since....the Corolla did not convert from RWD to FWD until 1984. The Civic has also led the Corolla over the years in innovation and powertrain technology, such as the CVCC engine in 1975, VTEC engineering in the 1990's, a hybrid offering in 2001, multiple body styles, natural-gas ( GX ) versions for California, high-performance Si versions, and numerous other features. The latest version, which captured the coveted North American Car of the Year award at the Detroit Auto Show, incorporates numerous styling changes.

Due to the significant level of interest I noticed on CL recently concerning this car, I chose it my latest review project. One of my neighbor's daughters was interested enough in it that she made it her first brand-new car.....a coupe. The 2006 model, like its predecessors, is again proving enormously popular....I see them multiplying like rabbits in this area. I don't have any firm sales figures yet ( I'm sure AmethySC and 1SICKLEX will post them when available ) but it is obvious that Honda, like in the past, is once again going to have another sales winner.

Why did I review an EX? Several reasons. I've said before that I didn't think that the even more expensive Civic Hybrid was, either in the short or long run, worth what it costs compared to conventional gasoline or the CA natural-gas versions....you can buy a lot of gasoline for the extra money that the Hybrid, with inevitable dealer markups, actually goes out the door for. Less-expensive and less-well equipped DX and LX models ( see the accompaning web site for prices ) in this area are difficult to find in stock at dealerships...they are selling as fast as they are unloaded off the trucks. The dealership I was at, for instance, had no DX models and only one LX.....but a number of the more expensive EX's to choose from. The new Si is not quite ready on the market yet. And, of course, as i said, the natural-gas GX model is not sold in this area. So, that pretty much left the EX available for general test-drives.......so that, obviously, is what I reviewed. What did I think of it? Well, as you will see, there were things about this car that really impressed me.......and things that most definitely did not. So, here we are........



Model Reviewed: 2006 Honda Civic Nav EX
Color: Shoreline Mist Metallic. Interior: Ivory cloth.
Base price: $20,550
MSRP: $21,140

Drivetrain: FWD 1.8L in-line SOHC 16-valve VTEC-4, 140 HP, 128 ft.-lbs. torque
5-speed automatic transmission.



PLUSSES:

Swiss-Watch build quality and materials...with one or two minor execptions.

Well-above-average fit-and-finish......again, with one or two exceptions.

Good interior space efficiency.....a Civic tradition.

Slick-precision-feeling automatic-transmission shifter and parking brake handle.

Dash-mounted shift-position indicator for easy reference.....something not always found in entry-level cars.

Good handling and agility for a sedan.


Excellent gas mileage figures, even with the automatic, if driven sensibly.
( up to 40 MPG with the automatic, which outdoes even the manual )....One less reason to buy the Hybrid.



MINUSES:


Dull exterior colors except for the Atomic Blue and Tango Red....lesser Civic models quite limited in color choice, another Civic tradition.

Relatively stiff ride with EX tires and suspension.

Not a lot of low-RPM torque and flat response when warm.

Rather spongy, ineffective brakes.....probably from the small rotor size.

Numb, rubbery-feeling power-steering.

Pint-sized Mickey-Mouse steering wheel.

Odd, split-level dash and gauges.

Featherweight hood can be a hazard on a windy day.

Bright-orange all-plastic oil dipstick flimsy and very difficult to read.

Jumpy off-idle throttle response and bumpy transmission shifting whan cold....much better when warm.

No power seats or leather available even on top-line EX trim level.

Compact spare tire.

Limited visibility around the A-pillars in spite of small see-thru windows.

Cheap 3/36 total-car warranty.



OK...the first impression you get of this car as you walk up to it is exactly what it is......an all-new Civic with Acura-inspired styling particularly in the front end. The hood, grille, and front fenders all have some Acura RSX influence to them.From the windshield back the car is much more like previous conventional Civlcs. The exterior fit-and-finish, for a car of this size and price range, has to be seen to be believed. The door panel gaps are so close it would be hard to stick a piece of paper through them, and all four doors close with the muted sound and precision feel of the workings of a Swiss watch. I've seen $50,000 and $60,000 cars that didn't do that, particularly from Europe. Too bad they couldn't have given the otherwise excellent paint jobs a little more flash. Only one or two colors are actually distinguishable from funeral limos.

Get inside the rather space-efficient interior and you find, in my opinion, two completely different worlds. One one hand, you have the precision-feel and high fit-and-finish level evident in the hardware, controls, and switches, the delightfully solid sound and feel of the doors closing, plenty of room for tall and broad people like me, a super-slick automatic transmission lever and parking brake handle, nice suede arm rests on the doors, and the usual Honda care of assembly all around you. Then you have to deal with, again IMO, the not-so-nice features.....a Kiddie-Car-sized steering wheel with cheap-looking flat-silver paint on the two spokes, the same cheap-looking flat-silver paint on the door handles and shifter housing, a two-foot-long dash like in the VW Beetle, but with an odd two-tier level with the digital speedometer, temperature and fuel gauges up front under the far-away windshield and the conventional blue-and-white tach, odometer, shift-indicator and trip computer displays conventionally located right behind the wheel....where ALL of the gauges should be, IMO....and scratch the digital speedo and put the regular analog one back in. The ultra-long dash forces the A-pillars up front of you at an angle...and despite the small triangular see-through window in each one visibility to the front and sides, like in the VW Beetle, is somewhat limited.


On the road, warm-up is less than a totally pleasant experience as the new throttle-by wire engine controls give a rather abrupt off-idle when starting from a stop or at very low speeds, and the transmission tends to shift harsh enough to be noticeable. Both smooth out quite a bit and act much better when warmed up...and the overall drivability is quite good, with moderate engine noise...about average for this class of car. Low-end torque when warm, in the Honda four-cylinder tradition, is not good, but of course this car was designed more for gas mileage than to be a dragster, and, as with most Civics, the gas mileage ratings are superb.

Handling is what you expect of non-Hybrid larger-tired Civics.....sharp, quick, with good steering response and agility, but the same old Civic numb, rubbery steering feel. Brakes, another Civic weak point, more or less continue the tradition here with a relatively spongy, long-pedal travel and weak response. Again, as in the past, small rotors may be the culprit. The ride, as expected of a sharp-handling car, is firm, but not excessively stiff, with little wind noise even at cruise......probably a result of those superlatively-fitting doors that close and seal so well.

Space up front is OK for a person my size ( 6' 2" and 275 lbs. ) and marginally OK in the rear....again, not bad for this size car, and indicative of Honda's design abilities in space-efficiency.

The Verdict? I am aware of the awards this car has received, and took them into consideration while doing this review....but it is clearly not the car for me. It would, however, be a good purchase for a college student, first-time buyer, someone who wants high gas mileage ( for a conventional car ) without having to hunt for diesel fuel or the complexities of a hybrid, someone who can put up with ( or likes ) the odd two-tier dash, someone who wants super-reliability and excellent fit-and-finish at a relatively low price, or someone who wants an sharp-handling inexpensive sedan and is willing to accept less-than-BMW steering feel. For these classes of buyers, Honda has another sure winner.....and once again, as in the past, the sales numbers seem to be verifying that, but EX models are definitely lagging the lower-priced DX and LX models in that department.

http://www.chevrolet.com/hhr/

Unlike many of my past reviews, this one was done more out of my own curiosity then out of widespread interest on CL in a specific vehicle. ( although a few of you have been interested in it, and this is for you ). I have noticed the growing popularity of this vehicle...and the fact that dealerships seem to have a hard time keeping them in stock. GM does seem to have a potential sales winner here......but as you will shortly see, beauty is sometimes is skin deep. I did a thread on the HHR's popularity some time ago but at that time had not looked at the vehicle closely myself...I now have.

The HHR is built off the compact Chevrolet Cobalt ( non-SS ) platform and shares common engines, transmissions, and drivelines. The body and interior, of course, is totally different from the Cobalt sedan and coupe.....in a way it could be classed as Cobalt wagon / SUV.......with styling that is reminiscent of late 40's-early 50's Chevy Suburbans.
The HHR ( which actually stands for Heritage, High Roof ) was introduced early last year in an obvious attempt ( despite GM chief Bob Lutz's vehement denials ) to compete with Chrysler's ubiquitous PT Cruiser, though the HHR comes in only one body style ( a good-looking one at that ), two relatively mundane in-line transverse FWD 4 cylinder engines, and lacks the PT's Cruiser's Turbo and convertible options. This lack of power hurts the HHR significantly...as you will see.
The body style, IMO, is an absolute knockout, IMO even more than the PT Cruiser. It is easy to see why this vehicle is popular if, as with so many people, looks alone is the primary reason for buying.....but unfortunately under the skin ( and with some things on the skin itself ) this is not a very impressive vehicle.

..............So now let's get to that..........


Model tested: 2006 Chevrolet HHR 1LT
Base Price: $16,425
Price as tested: $20,990

Powertrain: 2.4L ECOTEC / VTEC in-line 4, 172 HP, 162 ft.-lbs. torque, 4-speed automatic transmission.

Color: Daytona blue, gray cloth interior.





PLUSSES:

KNOCK EM OUT styling that turns heads everywhere.

Bargain price.....but in many areas this shows. ( the base version starts under 16K )

Relatively space-efficient inside considering the compact platform.

Nice assortment of bright and distinctive paint colors, including Daytona Blue, Sport Red, Sunburst Copper-Orange, Ametyst purple, besides the usual funeral-home stuff.

Well-designed transmission shifter.

Engine relatively easy to work on from above.

Hood struts.......unusual in this price range.

Chrome-ringed instruments and vents a nice touch.

Nice cubby compartments in cargo area.

Economical and fuel-efficient compared with similarly-shaped larger Chevrolet SUV's.

Nice steering wheel with the increasingly popular three-spokes at 3, 6, and 9-o'clock.



MINUSES:


Borderline underpowered even with larger optional 2.4L four and automatic.

Spongy brake pedal.

Low-gloss, rather poorly applied paint with some orange peel.

Noisy, raspy exhaust.

Lack of sound insulation.

Crude, tinny body and sheet metal....in spite of very close panel gaps.

Poor-quality exterior trim...even poorer-quality chrome paint.

Drab interior with too much expanse of plain color and only a few nice touches.

Peek-a-Boo windshield and windows all-around from wide, thick pillars and low windshield header.

Roly-Poly handling....but not as bad as larger SUV's.

El Cheapo 3 / 36 warranty typical of many GM products.

Cheap-feeling and tinny-closing rear hatch.

Some unusually-shaped and placed controls and switches

Loud and annoying turn signals.

Too much disassembling of panels in the rear to get to spare tire.

AWD ( currently not available ) should be considered.....along with bigger powerplants.



OK.....the first thing that strikes you when you first approach this vehicle, especially after seeing pictures of it, or even seeing it on the road, is how SMALL it looks....MUCH smaller than you would expect from its general shape. Chevy, from a distance, has cleverly managed, with its retro-Suburban-influenced styling, to make it look like a much larger vehicle than it is, but when you walk up to it and stand next to it.....it is obvious that it is built off a compact-car platform. I'm 6'2" and I tower over it, unlike larger Chevy SUV's. The next thing that hits you as how COOL it looks. That is a term that I, being Mr. Practical, rarely use whan describing a car, but that is EXACTLY what the HHR is......Cool, Chic, and trendy. The styling is just dynamite......Chevy has hit a home run if you just buy a vehicle for looks. I won't say it is beautiful in the sense of a Jaguar XK8 or Ford GT, but it is a ruggedly handsome vehicle whose looks ( from a distance ) can seduce.
Unfortunately, there is a lot more to a vehicle than just looks, and like the new Ford Mustang, what we have here is Nieman Marcus looks on the outside with a Wal-Mart clearance-sale interior.

And even on the outside, excessive cheapness of design and quality show in many areas, from the flimsy outside mirrors to the exposed thin sheet-metal panels under the front and rear doors with drilled and painted holes in them on models without the optional running boards. bolted on. The hatch not only feels flimsy but shuts with a tinny " quaaaaak " sound and contains an equally-tinny-feeling rear wiper. The chrome on the plastic door handles is some of the dullest and most poorly-applied chrome paint I have ever seen..and the handles feel as if they are going to break right off.

Get inside, shut the door ( which shuts reasonably solidly ) and you find a rather high seating position fom the rather well-designed sport bucket cloth seats with 8-way power adjusts. It is not difficult to find a reasonably comfortable seating position, even for tall broad people like me. The large, thick windshield pillars, low windshield, header, and A, B, C, and D-pillars all combine to play Peek-A-Boo when looking outside in almost any direction. Reach down to the well-designed transmission shifter, albeit with a lack of a sport-shift manu-matic slot........straight forward and back.....with none of this idiotic ziz-zag stuff so poplar today. I wish other manufacturers would do what GM has done.....kept the easy-to-use, simple, forward-back shifter.....and toss those gated, idiotic zig-zag things out. That bugs me almost as much as I-Drive.

The rest of the interior, except for some nice chrome-ringed instruments, nice, solid-feeling circular vents, and nice-looking and feeling climate controls, leaves a lot to be desired. There is too much solid expanse of color, cheap, flimsy-feeling switches and hardware, and a general atmosphere of cost-cutting. Like the Mustang, you get the feeling this car was designed and built to a budget.....it shows. The power-window switches are in the forward part of the console, 4 abreast, with little checker-board patterns on them to show you which window each one controls. The wiper stalk, on the right side of the steering column, has confusing markings on it for off, low, and high, though the intemittent-function is conventionally marked. The steering wheel, with integrated buttons, while nicely-shaped and designed, likewise feels a little thin on the materials too. There is space behind the rear seats to stow things and contains some nice little covered cubbyholes for small things, although the vehicle's compact size limits the cargo room a little in spite of its space efficiency, and there are too many panels to disassemble and remove to get underneath to the spare tire.

OK....enough of the interior. Let's drive it. On the road, the first two things you notice taking off from a stop is the notable lack of torque and the loud, raspy-sounding exhaust.....and I am not a hard or demanding driver by any means. The 2.4 L's 172HP and 162 ft.-lbs. torque with the automatic is just barely adequate for this car....I did not drive the smaller 2.2L 143HP / 150 ft.-lbs. standard engine but that one would probably be even worse...at least with the automatic. The automatic itself I was pleased with in spite of the only 4 speeds.....it was smooth, quiet, and well-designed......and the throttle-induced downshifts ( which you were doing almost constantly to keep up with traffic ) were no problem. I am not usually a big critic of a lack of power, but IMO this car badly needs a larger 4, a turbo / supercharger, or a V6.....both of the HHR engines would be over their heads with a substantial load in the vehicle in hilly country. The brakes work fine except for a spongy pedal.....again something characteristic of many GM products. The handling reflects the higher center-of-gravity compared to the Cobalt sedan and coupe.....a little more body roll, but nothing unmanageable, and besides, you don't buy this vehicle to be a sports car. Then, just as you start to get really bored, signal for a turn and you come back to life quickly as the loud clack-clack turn signals come on with enough noise to wake up the dead.

The verdict? A dynamite-looking, relatively low-priced, versatile and economical vehicle that will turn heads and give big retro-SUV-looks but much better fuel mileage....important now with gas prices starting to rise again. It has major flaws, however, in the quality of materials used, fit and finish, and a noticeble lack of power with the automatic. Despite some nice touches like hood struts, well-chromed gauges, and a well-designed shifter, GM has some major work to do on this vehicle to make it more attractive inside and out....not in exterior looks where it excels but in quality. The new Tahoe's interior would be a good starting point......that appears to be a superb job. AWD for foul weather, like on the larger GM SUV's, should also be considered for this vehicle.....one more reason to give it a larger engine. The present fours would be even more burdened down with AWD's weight and drag.

To sum up......a fun-to-look-at vehicle but not fun or pleasant to drive. This vehicle is obviously selling on its looks and low price and little else. Was I too harsh on this vehicle, considering its low price? No, not in my opinion...especially considering the way Bob Lutz ( who I generally respect ) is hawking GM's new products, like this one, and bragging how well they stand up to the competition.....and he doesn't even acknowledge the PT Cruiser's obvious competition to the HHR to start with. Subaru, Toyota, Honda, and Mazda all make vehicles of this general type and in the HHR's price range, that, while they don't have the HHR's looks, they blow the HHR away in the quality of materials used in their construction.

The Acura TL is a car that has generated a lot of interest recently here at CL. A number of you already own one, are in the market for one, or are interested in one.....so I felt that it should be the next vehicle on my review list. The TL replaced the former Acura Vigor a number of years ago and was last significantly redesigned for 2004. The 2002 and 2003 models were noted for automatic transmission problems....the 2004 and 2005 models less so. Only time will tell, of course, with the new 2006's.

In automotive jargon, the TL is considered an entry-level luxury / sports sedan. As such, it competes with similiarly-priced cars from Lexus, Audi, Infiniti, Jaguar, Cadillac, Lincoln, BMW, Mercedes, and Volvo. It is based on the general FWD U.S.-market Honda Accord platform but incorporates numerous small changes, though the similiarity to the Accord is there when you drive it. It also competes to a lesser extent against its own smaller brother the Acura TSX, though the TSX is not quite in this class and has a VTEC in-line four instead of the TL's V6. Its single closest competitor in the marketplace is probably the front-drive Lexus ES330...but there are noticible differences between this car and the ES330, especially in ride.
The TL is generally available in only one trim line, in manual or automatic sport-shift versions, Nav or non-Nav, and the A-Spec package, which adds some cosmetic body and trim parts and some chassis / tire revisions but nothing in the way of added engine power. The car has generally.....apart from the weak transmissions.....been reliable, and is on Consumer Reports' recommended list. They gave it a very high rating in the upscale sedan category. I generally agree with CR's rating but disagree on a few issues...as you will see. And, as usual, I chose an automatic because of the controversy over this transmission's design and durablity....I wanted to see for myself how it performed, although, of course, you cannot necessarily detect pending early failure on a brand-new transmission.

So....on with the review:



Model tested: 2006 Acura TL automatic, non-Nav, non-A-Spec

Base price: $33,325
MSRP as reviewed: $33,940

Drivetrain: 3.5 L SOHC VTEC V6, 258 HP, 233 ft.-lbs. torque, 5-speed automatic with Sportshift.

Nighthawk Black Pearl exterior, quartz gray interior.



PLUSSES:

Smooth, quiet, well-designed V6

Better-than-average build quality ( though a step down from some previous Acuras )

Well-done paint job.

Well-done interior fit and finish

Slick-feeling, solid, high-quality hardware and switchgear.

Slick-shifting transmission.

Automatic tilt-down side mirrors in reverse gear...a nice feature

Tilt and telescope ( manually ) steering column.

Convenient, ingenious access to spare tire in the trunk.

Nimble handling.

Quick steering response.

Moderately-priced compared to its competition.

6 / 70 and 4 / 50 warranties match Lexus.



MINUSES:


Automatic transmission significantly blunts acceleration.

Low-RPM torque level not impressive.

Temporary spare tire and wheel.

Less-than-perfect seating position for tall, broad people.

Sunroof impacts headroom.

Ride too noisy for an entry-level luxury car.

Low ground clearance from body-skirt trim.

Funeral-home paint colors ( typical of many cars today )

Similiar-platform Accord V6 almost as much car for significantly less money.



The first thing you have to do as you walk up to this car is to make sure you have a TL....the similiarity to little brother TSX is astonishing on the outside, although the two interiors are a little different. The TSX is only slightly smaller, and it is easy as pie, at a slight distance, to confuse the two at first glance....even for an experienced person like me. This is truly corporate-brother styling at its peak.
Then you notice the next major exterior feature......the low ground clearance.....mostly from the low-profile 45-series rubber and the low body side-skirts which are somehow Acura's attempt to try and make the body look sporty. That it does, but at the cost of rather low ground clearance. High or significant speed-bumps, if possible, are to be avoided in this car, and it will be rather difficult to get a hose under the car to clean the underbody after driving on winter roads...which the FWD layout is generally pretty good for, traction-wise, as it comes with all-season tires standard unless you get the manual or A-Spec model. The paint job is first-rate and is one of the few cars outside of an Audi or Mercedes which really gives Lexus a run for the money in the paint department. There is an almost total lack of orange peel, a smooth, even coat, brilliant luster, and in general a class act from the Acura paint shops.

Same inside the car, though the seating position is not the best for tall, broad people like me, and unlike some other state-of-the-art cars the dip in the roofline inside for the sunroof does impact headroom a little, even with the 8-way power seat cushions with power lumber support adjusted all the way down. But, generally, like the paint job, a class-act and well-done interior with typically A-1 Acura fit-and-finish, although not quite up to the levels of fit-and-finish that we have seen on some previous Acuras. The switchgear and controls all had the typically Honda / Acura slick feel, clear design, and operation. The stereo, while not world-class, was as good as you would expect in this price category, and the gauges had the typical red-white-blue Acura design but with a new twist.....concentric blue radial lines instead of the more usual blue semicircles. Like other Acuras, and like most Lexus products, they are white-electroluminesently-lit from the rear. Seating space itself was fine in the front and OK but not great in the rear...again, about what you expect from this size and price range. The leather quality was typically Acura......better-then-average, not quite to Jaguar or Lexus levels. The non-power tilt and telescoping steering column helped in the comfort department but the column did not tilt quite high enough for my tastes. As with a growing number of cars in this type and price range today ( and as with its sibling TSX ) there are two basic interiors....a dark gray one with brushed-metal / carbon-fiber pattern or a two-tone gray / beige one with both brushed-metal and wood-paneling....I usually like the beige / wood pattern myself.

Two features on this car that I particularly liked were the automatic tilt-down feature for the side-mirrors when you hit reverse gear that help you see to back up and see the curb more clearly. ( though I know some other cars have it too ) and the ingenious carpeted flip-up panel built into the trunk floor that allows very easy access to the not-so-nice temporary spare tire and wheel.....a car in this category, IMO, should have a real spare tire and wheel, as my 2001 Lexus IS300 did. I also particularly liked the design of the V6's dipstick , as I almost never test-drive a car without first checking engine fluids. The dipstick was one of the best I have ever used.....high, up-front, right where you want it, made out of some of the best -quality materials I have seen, clearly marked, with no friction or hang-ups going in or out. Other manufacturers ( including Lexus )....take note.


On the road, the V6 did not have quite the performance one would expect in the range of the engine power figures. Of course, it was a new car, and I typically do not go over 4000 RPM or push a new car very hard. I also paid close attention to the transmission's design, performance, and shift characteristics, as this is one of the areas that past models of this car have been weak in...transmission quality. The transmission itself showed no odd quirks, problems, or evidences of poor design, and usually shifted quite smoothly and quietly, unlike the somewhat jerky Honda / Acura automatics of years ago. The manual Sport-Shift function worked smoothly, slickly, and quickly without a lot of hesitation on shifts. The transmission, however, along with the high-RPM nature of Honda / Acura engines, did seem to sap acceleration...more than the usual amount with an automatic. It semed to be geared fairly tall......more for cruising and gas mileage then acceleration, and the engine's torque peak at 5000 RPM ( higher than I ran the engine ) does not bode well for low-RPM acceleration. So in a nutshell, this car will get out of its own way...it was far from sluggish....but it is not the car to go around drag-racing Corvettes and Dodge Vipers in. If acceleration in this car is important to you, get the 6-speed manual, even for urban areas. You will save money as well...the manual version is cheaper. Otherwise it is hard to fault the drivetrain.....smooth, quiet, refined.....typical Acura.

Braking is about what you would expect in this price range and auto type....4-wheel discs with ABS and Electronic Brake Assist and work quite well. Manual-transmission and A-Spec cars get bigger, all-four-ventilated Brembos.

Handling and steering response reflects the rather firm and buttoned-down design of the chassis, along with the car's rather low center-of-gravity. Handling is quite good and steering response , while also quite good, does not have quite the road feel of the BMW 3-series ( but then what DOES ? )

But that semi sports-sedan chassis feel and low-profile tires also means a less-than-perfect ride, with road noise being particularly intrusive for an entry-level luxury car in this category. Bumps, while not harsh, are definitely felt both through the steering column and through the seats and chassis. The road-noise issue may be just the particular tires on this car or it could be the result of insufficient sound isolation in the body and chassis...I suspect the latter. Consumer Reports gives this car very high ratings for noise isolation.....I disagree. I feel the car should be a little quieter......the Lexus ES330, one of this car's primary FWD competitiors, eats this car up in the ride-noise-level department, but of course it doesn't have this car's steering response either.

So....the verdict? A nice car with excellent workmanship....a good entry-level sports / luxury sedan. There is nothing really terribly wrong with it........it is a very well-built car with some clever and well-designed touches for convienence and should run for years without problems if the transmission durablity problems are finally over.......but I find it somewhat lacking in noise refinement and low-RPM acceleration with the automatic.

At 33-37K, it is not overpriced but I'm not sure that it is worth the extra money over what a Honda Accord V6, another superby-built car, would run...which is the basic platform for this car to start with. In other words, it is a little nicer car than an Accord V6 but I'm not sure that small extra " niceness" as you would put it, is worth an extra 5-8 thousand dollars over the V6 Accord.....an already superb mid-size car for the money. The TL has a few features that the V6 Accord doesn't....but nothing that is really critical or in the " gotta-have " category. Personally...if it was a choice between two nice cars...the TL and its closest competitor, the ES330......I'd take the Lexus.