78 Custom 18 Window Sunroof on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Least satisfying vehicle rankings seek to highlight the worst cars of the year

Consumer Reports polls its members on all sorts of topics related to how they buy and use products ranging from mobile phones to humidifiers for indoor plants. Cars are regularly one of CR’s most interesting topics, and its recent study on the least satisfying vehicles to own offers insights into the cars people wish they hadnÂ’t purchased. CR polled thousands of members with questions about what they liked and disliked about the vehicle theyÂ’d owned for a few years. When asked if they would definitely repurchase the same car, the following vehicles came back as the least likely to be purchased a second time: Kia Forte: 51% would buy again Nissan Altima: 51% would buy again Nissan Kicks: 49% would buy again Volkswagen Taos: 48% would buy again Kia Seltos: 48% would buy again Jeep Compass: 46% would buy again Mercedes-Benz GLA: 45% would buy again Infiniti QX50: 40% would buy again Mercedes-Benz GLB: 39% would buy again Volkswagen Atlas Cross Sport: 38% would buy again When Autoblog tested the VW Atlas Cross Sport in March 2022, we liked the styling and the price was right, but it lagged rivals in driving excitement and interior quality. A number of recalls donÂ’t help the Cross SportÂ’s cause much, either, as some models have more than a dozen actions by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Even the 2023 model already has four recalls. The annoyance of recalls and the hassle of just-average reliability ratings could have played into the Cross SportÂ’s place as the least satisfying vehicle. On the other end of the spectrum, the Chevrolet Corvette earned the top spot as CR's most satisfying car. The Porsche 911, Rivian R1T, Ford Maverick Hybrid, and Hyundai Ioniq 5 round out the top-five most satisfying vehicles to own. Given the rabid following the 911 has built over the years and the insane performance Chevy derived from the latest Corvette, itÂ’s not surprising to see them in the top spots. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Green Infiniti Jeep Kia Mercedes-Benz Nissan Volkswagen Car Buying Used Car Buying Consumer Reports worst cars

Ford Mustang Mach-E fails Sweden's moose test

The infamous moose test has claimed another casualty. This time it's the Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD Long Range, which was tested in an electric four-way alongside the Tesla Model Y, Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Skoda Enyaq iV (an electric utility vehicle closely related to the Volkswagen ID.4 that is sold in the United States). According to the Swedish testers at Teknikens Varld, Ford's electric car not only failed to hit the speed necessary for a passing grade, it didn't perform well at slower speeds, either. To pass the outlet's moose test, a car has to complete a rapid left-right-straight S-shaped pattern marked by cones at a speed of at least 72 km/h (44.7 miles per hour). The test is designed to mimic the type of avoidance maneuver a driver would have to take in order to avoid hitting something that wandered into the road, which in Sweden may be a moose but could just as easily be a deer or some other member of the animal kingdom elsewhere in the world, or possibly a child or car backing into the motorway. Not only is the maneuver very aggressive, it's also performed with weights belted into each seat and more weight added to the cargo area to hit the vehicle's maximum allowable carrying capacity. The Mustang Mach-E only managed to complete the moose test at 68 km/h (42.3 mph), well below the passing-grade threshold. Even at much lower speeds, Teknikens Varld says the Mach-E (which boasts the highest carrying capacity and was therefore loaded with more weight than the rest of the vehicles tested in this quartet) is "too soft in the chassis" and suffers from "too slow steering." Proving that it is indeed possible to pass the test, the Hyundai and Skoda completed the maneuver at the 44.7-mph figure required for a passing grade and the Tesla did it at 46.6 mph, albeit with less weight in the cargo area. It's not clear whether other versions of the Mustang Mach-E would pass the test. It's also unknown if Ford will make any changes to its chassis tuning or electronic stability control software, as some other automakers have done after a poor performance from Teknikens Varld, to improve its performance in the moose test. Related video:

Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski  Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.