2002 Honda Accord Ex Sedan 4-door 3.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2018 Nissan Kicks vs other tiny crossovers: How they compare on paper

Update: As we now have now driven the 2018 Nissan Kicks and have all the specs and figures available, we thought it was time to update this comparison post. The data chart has been updated with final Kicks information as well as changes to competitors made for 2019. Anyone else have "Pumped Up Kicks" by Foster the People stuck in their heads? Well, you do now. I couldn't be the only one. Anyway, the 2018 Nissan Kicks is a thing. It replaces the Nissan Juke, which Mr. Stocksdale thought was a bad idea and Mr. Myself thought was a smart idea. Nevertheless, neither of us were especially pumped up by the Kicks. However, the majority of car buyers are all about SUVs, and this littlest segment of them has been multiplying like Tribbles in the past few years. The Juke was one of the first of these subcompact crossovers, but it was probably too oddball for a mainstream audience (not to mention inefficient) and never really caught on. Newer competitors certainly didn't help. Well, to see how the Kicks compares to those very competitors, lets fire up the Autoblog Comparo Generator 3000 (TM). Specifically, we'll be looking at those subcompact crossovers with similarly small dimensions, especially low prices and/or a disinclination to offering all-wheel drive. We're talking about the Nissan Kicks vs the Toyota C-HR, Hyundai Kona, Kia Soul, Honda HR-V and Jeep Renegade. Now, if you're interested in literally the exact opposite SUV segment, check out our recent Mercedes G-Class comparo. Otherwise, on to the spreadsheet: Dimensions and passenger space In terms of exterior dimensions, the new Kicks is right smack in the middle of the segment. It's virtually the same as the Honda HR-V, yet manages to eek out a few extra cubic feet of cargo space behind its raised back seat. The Honda and its "Magic Seat" still beats it in terms of maximum capacity, but it sure is close. The Kia Soul has the biggest maximum number, but that's largely the result of being a box. Its small behind-the-back-seat cargo number is likely a better indicator of how much you'll be dealing with on a day-to-day basis. And in that day-to-day way, the Kicks is excellent. Backseat legroom seems to be a Kicks downside, as all but the C-HR surpass it. (Seriously, it's almost impressive how large the C-HR is on the outside but cramped inside.) However, the Kicks' tall greenhouse not only allows for ample headroom, but seats that are mounted high off the ground.

2016 Honda HR-V: The first three months with our jack of all trades

We only had the long-term 2016 Honda HR-V in our fleet for one week, and for me, the do-anything crossover was immediately useful. Its honeymoon phase coincided with a number of long-haul drives, plus I had to move. This ambitious start is why we're a quarter of the way through our long-term test, and the HR-V already has over 6,000 miles on the odometer. In classic suburban chariot style, the HR-V is a jack of all trades. And when it comes to road trips, the HR-V is just as enjoyable while slogging up flat interstates as it is along beautiful country roads. I've driven it in all types of weather, packed it with people, and filled it with cargo. I've spent more time in our long-term Honda than pretty much any car that came before it. Here's what I've learned. Long Hauls I've driven the HR-V from my home in Detroit to my sister's place in Traverse City, MI – a 500-mile round trip – four times. On one occasion, an early winter blast hit northern Michigan on my way to the cute, beachside tourist town. From intense fog and rain to sunshine to a sudden snow squall, I had every one of the elements thrown directly at me over the course of one drive. I find a lot of the HR-V's onboard safety technology distracting, and I worry that drivers can become too reliant on these features. Blind spot alerts and cameras are designed to make us safer, yes, but they're no replacement for an attentive, engaged driver. For instance, in the rain and sleet, the nifty Honda Lane Watch camera displayed only gray blobs. Ditto on the back-up camera, meaning that while the technology technically functioned as advertised, the weather rendered it useless. The HR-V has a solid suite of safety tech, but you don't have to rely on the cameras and bells and whistles. The driver's side mirror has an extended-view distortion to the glass. Visibility is great. The HR-V was a champ in the gross weather, and I was thankful for our mid-level EX trim's all-wheel drive. And this was even before we fitted the HR-V with a set of Michelin X-Ice 215/55R17 winter tires – expect to hear about those when we actually get some more snow here in Detroit. Optioning all-wheel drive means you're stuck with the continuously variable transmission (a manual is available with front-drive), which isn't great, but it smoothly delivers the engine's 141 horsepower and 127 pound-feet of torque. Editor Alex Kierstein agreed, writing in our logbook, "Overall, I think the CVT isn't great ...

Why Acura should build a hybrid Integra successor using NSX tech

Yes, it sounds like a heresy. Yes, the Honda CR-Z was not a good hybrid sports car. Yes, we know the RSX officially replaced the Integra here (but was called the Integra in Japan). But, no, we're not crazy. Well, maybe a little bit. But hear us out. At the moment Acura is a bit of an unfocused mess. Its line-up is thoroughly uninspiring, save for its $200,000 NSX supercar – a great mid-engined supercar with an impressive, performance-oriented hybrid AWD system. And yet few people would draw a line connecting Acura's other SH-AWD hybrids, the RLX Sport Hybrid and MDX Sport Hybrid, to the NSX. The first NSX told the world that Acura built cars with world-class technology and performance, and the Integra carried it to people with normal pocketbooks. Since the new NSX communicates a similar message as its forbearer, so too would a new Integra. Now making an entry-level sports car with hybrid technology is tricky business. As we already established, the Honda CR-Z was a colossal flop. It's balance was all off: heavy, expensive, and not very sporty – and it didn't even get very good fuel economy. However, Honda and Acura can learn from these mistakes. First, to keep costs in check, Acura can borrow from Honda's ever-improving parts bin. It would logical to borrow the excellent Civic coupe platform – something the old Integra did as well. It could also attach the proposed hybrid powertrain to the upcoming Si turbocharged four-cylinder. Some added cost will be unavoidable, since the batteries and motors will have to go somewhere. That will cost some engineering dollars, and inflate the price tag a bit. However, since Acura is a premium brand, it has some wiggle room to bump up the price without losing buyers. Weight is another potential issue this hypothetical hybrid will face, and was one of the chief complaints with the CR-Z. Looking at the RLX and the RLX Sport Hybrid, the hybrid bits weigh about an extra 340 pounds. That's not insignificant, but added to the turbocharged Civic EX-T coupe's 2,900 pound curb weight, you would have a car that would weigh 3,240 pounds. That's comparable to the very fun Mustang EcoBoost. As long as Acura keeps the weight under 3,500 pounds, the brand should have an entertaining coupe on its hands. The final piece of the puzzle is to make sure it isn't compromised. Every bit of hybrid tech in the NSX is there for performance. It helps eliminate turbo lag, and it improves acceleration and handling.