No Reserve!!! 2003 Acura Rsx Base Coupe 2-door 2.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

These are your top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2012

Despite 2012 being the best year of auto sales this country has seen since 2007, not every vehicle got an equally large share of the sales pie. Some barely got a sliver, as evidenced by this year's list of the top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2012. We've dug through sales data from every automaker to come up with this year's list and, like last year, we've set some parameters to ensure it includes legitimately bad-selling vehicles. The first parameter is a starting MSRP under $100,000, which automatically excludes what's parked in most one-percenters' garages. We're also excluding vehicles cancelled in 2012, even if they garnered sales through the end of the year while dealerships sold off remaining inventory. This includes models like the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Mercedes-Benz R-Class and last year's worst-seller, the Acura RL. Next, vehicles are considered as they are reported by the automaker, which means that, while sales of the Murano CrossCabriolet were probably low enough to make the list, because Nissan reports only one number for all Murano sales, it was excluded. Cadillac, however, reports sales of the Escalade EXT separately from the Escalade, hence its repeat appearance. Finally, there was the question of whether or not eligibility should be given to Suzuki vehicles, as the brand announced in November that it would end sales in the US as soon as its current inventory ran out. We decided Suzuki vehicles should be included as the brand was offering 2013 models at the time of the announcement, and as far as we can tell, inventory levels remained high enough to satisfy demand through the end of the year. Without further ado, below are the top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2012. Top 10 Worst-Selling Vehicles of 2012 10. Volvo C30 MSRP: $25,500 Units Sold: 2,827 Last Year: – 9. BMW Z4 MSRP: $47,350 Units Sold: 2,751 Last Year: – 8. Audi TT MSRP: $39,545 Units Sold: 2,226 Last Year: – 7. Subaru Tribeca MSRP: $32,595 Units Sold: 2,075 Last Year: 10 6. Suzuki Equator MSRP: $19,449 Units Sold: 1,966 Last Year: 7 5. Cadillac Escalade EXT MSRP: $63,060 Units Sold: 1,934 Last Year: 6 4. Nissan GT-R MSRP: $96,820 Units Sold: 1,188 Last Year: – 3. Acura ZDX MSRP: $50,920 Units Sold: 775 Last Year: 4 2. Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback MSRP: $18,495 Units Sold: 702 Last Year: 3 1. Mitsubishi i-MiEV MSRP: $29,125 Units Sold: 588 Last Year: – Want a little more "worst-selling" data? Check out our list of the top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2011.

Lincoln Aviator vs Cadillac XT6 | How they compare on paper

There have been big, three-row family crossovers for quite a while now, but until recently the luxury market hasn't fully embraced them. Sure, you could literally get one with a third row, but unless you were a kid, chances are the term "dungeon-like" was going to be tossed around. Things are changing now, however, as new and redesigned entries are starting to hit the market. We've recently had a chance to get our first drives of the 2020 Lincoln Aviator and 2020 Cadillac XT6, two all-new three-row crossovers from American luxury brands. We also got a turn behind the wheel of the updated 2020 Volvo XC90. However, since none of our editors have yet to drive to drive them all, we wanted to see how they compare on paper, examining their engine specs and interior dimensions. We also included the 2020 Acura MDX, the original three-row luxury crossover, which continues to sell well despite approaching the end of its current generation. That it offers a hybrid model makes it that much more applicable given the Aviator and XC90 also offer gasoline-electric powertrains, albeit of the plug-in variety. 3 Row Luxury Crossovers Powertrains View 1 Photos Non-hybrid MDX has a 5,000-pound max tow rating. How do their performance and fuel economy compare? This one is absolutely no contest. The 400-horsepower Lincoln blows away its competitors despite having a price tag that's similar to the 310-horsepower Cadillac and in between the XC90's T5 and T6 models. At least the Acura is considerably cheaper. Besides the eye-popping output, the estimated 0-60-mph time of 5.5 seconds (gleaned from the mechanically similar Ford Explorer ST) is appreciably quicker than the others. Now, fuel economy is a bit lower, but the efficiency of Volvo's four-cylinder engines are likely more susceptible to varying due to driver differences. It should also be noted that the Cadillac gets the same combined fuel economy estimate as the Aviator despite having 90 fewer horses and 144 fewer pound-feet of torque. Just one of the ways where the XT6's prospects dim in the presence of its cross-Michigan rival. The Cadillac is also not available as a hybrid model. The others are, but are disparate. The Lincoln Aviator Grand Touring and Volvo XC90 T8 are similar in concept: range-topping models that are as much about adding performance as they are fuel economy. Their hefty price tags certainly reflect that as well.

Acura RDX Luggage Test | How much cargo space?

The Acura RDX is considered a compact luxury SUV, but there's actually very little that's compact about it. When lined up against its competitors, you can see that it enjoys a clear dimensional advantage. In fact, the RDX is pretty close to the Lexus RX, with an identical rear legroom figure and considerably more cargo space with the back seat raised. Obviously, I'll be addressing the latter here. On paper, Acura provides several cargo numbers calling out specific SAE measurement standards for each one. Basically, it has 31.1 cubic-feet behind its back seat when you include its underfloor storage and 29.5 cubic-feet when you don't. Even that smaller number is superior to everything in the segment save the Volvo XC60 (29.7), while the Lexus RX apparently has a seems-way-too-small 18.4.   Let's see what that size advantage means. It's obvious that this is a comparatively deep and wide space with plenty of air above the back seat line for bulkier items. Note that the cargo cover was not present in this test vehicle, so I couldn't test capacity with it in place. As in every luggage test, I use two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D). There you go, all the bags fit easily. This is pretty much identical to the Lexus RX (below left) and a much easier fit than the Mercedes GLC, which is  one of the only other compact luxury models I've tested. Both of these examples are more capacious than their specs would indicate. However, this is not the end of the RDX story. Remember when I mentioned that it has 31.1 cubic-feet when including its underfloor storage? Well, that might actually be underselling the extra space gained. First, I like that the floor flips back and rests flat so you can easily use the extra space. You can also fully remove the floor piece to gain access to the aft bin, which is deeper but oddly shaped.  Here are my four largest bags standing up, with sufficient rear visibility maintained, and you still have the full-width section of the cargo area including the underfloor bin. What can you fit there? How about a 38-quart cooler and the remaining two bags stacked haphazardly around it.