2011 Lx Used 2.4l I4 16v 4wd Suv on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2023 New York Auto Show Editors' Picks

The New York Auto Show has typically marked the end of the auto show season. That's arguable now that shows have been shuffling around, but if we stick with it, that means that show season wrapped up with a modest bang. While the number of reveals were a bit modest, some of them were some seriously big deals for the car industry. Some of them were also literally big. And these are the reveals that were our favorites. They range from updated classics to the latest EVs. Read on to see what topped the list. 2024 Jeep Wrangler 4xe View 22 Photos 5. 2024 Jeep Wrangler The 2024 Wrangler is impressive as mid-cycle updates go. It's both a reflection of the longevity of the Wrangler's product cycles (we get a redesign once a decade, almost on the dot) and the Ford Bronco toppling Jeep's once firm monopoly on soft-top off-roaders. The cheaper 4xe entry is a welcome addition, and the ongoing one-upmanship between Ford and Jeep will continue to serve enthusiasts who want the best of the best. This is why competition matters, folks. — Associate Editor Byron Hurd Genesis GV80 Coupe Concept View 9 Photos 3. (Tie) Genesis GV80 Coupe Concept Even though it was far from the most important vehicle at the show, the Genesis GV80 Coupe Concept weirdly stole NY for me. IÂ’ve been largely unimpressed or neutral on most SUV coupes, but now thereÂ’s finally one that I love. Genesis design in general has been on fire lately, and the fact that it can turn out a crossover coupe that actually looks good is more evidence of its excellence. The stunning interior with those orange-backed seats and sporty-looking orange accents everywhere probably wonÂ’t make it into production, but IÂ’d love to see Genesis really amp up the performance angle with the coupe version of the GV80. Oh, and please offer the conceptÂ’s orange paint in the production carÂ’s palette, too. — Road Test Editor Zac Palmer 2024 Hyundai Kona Electric View 21 Photos 3. (Tie) 2024 Hyundai Kona The Hyundai Kona has been a favorite mini-crossover of ours for a while, but it has had some foibles. Most notably, it's been almost too small in some areas. That's been fixed and then some with this new one. It also doesn't lose any of the funkiness that made the model so distinct in the first place, while also gaining some fun styling cues from its bigger siblings.

2017 Kia Cadenza First Drive

"Garbanzo? Costanza? Credenza?" I can't tell if the guy at the bakery is trying to be funny or if he's genuinely forgetting the name of the car – I've told him twice; it's the 2017 Kia Cadenza. But you know, maybe the miscommunication is just fine. Like the Cadenza itself. It's fine. You shouldn't read that negatively. Every now and then in this job, you drive a car and simply come away thinking, "it was fine." And if you're building a car in this particular segment, that's practically the response you hope to elicit. A comfortable jack-of-all-trades at a price that isn't going to bankrupt the owner. Consider the Cadenza's competition: Toyota Avalon, Nissan Maxima, Chevrolet Impala, Buick LaCrosse. These aren't groundbreaking luxury vehicles, masters of utility or fuel economy, or Nurburgring-smashing sports sedans; they're... fine. You almost feel bad saying it – from a very reasonable angle it's a great segment, populated with cars offering a lot of the same equipment and a little more bang for the buck than a full-on luxury sedan, and tending to be roomier, too. And yet it's that dilution of dedicated purpose that keeps these models stagnant in showrooms compared to the more luxurious – and certainly to the more economical. It's hard to raise an eyebrow here. So it goes with the Cadenza. Despite looking a heck of a lot like the previous car, the new Cadenza has been reworked significantly – the use of high-strength steel has doubled, to over 50 percent; the use of hot-stamped steel has tripled; the doors are 16 percent more dent-resistant; the chassis has 35 percent greater torsional rigidity; there's a new subframe (similar to that of the Optima); the front windows are now laminated and there's 13 percent more sound insulation in the A-pillars; there's a full underbody cover and wheel air curtains; it has a new eight-speed transmission – developed in-house; there are 40 fewer pounds of unsprung weight thanks to aluminum parts; the brakes are bigger; and there's a bevy of upscale tech features – but we lost you halfway through that paragraph. The styling is a little sharper than the outgoing model's – it's not going to blow your pants off, but it's hardly a bad-looking car. The updated design features Kia's now-trademark quad-LED setup within the lower front grilles, and the main grille is a concave affair – base models get a "Diamond Butterfly" insert you know from other Kia models, and higher-end Cadenzas get "Intaglio" vertical slats.

What do J.D. Power's quality ratings really measure?

Check these recently released J.D. Power Initial Quality Study (IQS) results. Do they raise any questions in your mind? Premium sports-car maker Porsche sits in first place for the third straight year, so are Porsches really the best-built cars in the U.S. market? Korean brands Kia and Hyundai are second and fourth, so are Korean vehicles suddenly better than their US, European, and Japanese competitors? Are workaday Chevrolets (seventh place) better than premium Buicks (11th), and Buicks better than luxury Cadillacs (21st), even though all are assembled in General Motors plants with the same processes and many shared parts? Are Japanese Acuras (26th) worse than German Volkswagens (24th)? And is "quality" really what it used to be (and what most perceive it to be), a measure of build excellence? Or has it evolved into much more a measure of likeability and ease of use? To properly analyze these widely watched results, we must first understand what IQS actually studies, and what the numerical scores really mean. First, as its name indicates, it's all about "initial" quality, measured by problems reported by new-vehicle owners in their first 90 days of ownership. If something breaks or falls off four months in, it doesn't count here. Second, the scores are problems per 100 vehicles, or PP100. So Power's 2015 IQS industry average of 112 PP100 translates to just 1.12 reported problems per vehicle. Third, no attempt is made to differentiate BIG problems from minor ones. Thus a transmission or engine failure counts the same as a squeaky glove box door, tricky phone pairing, inconsistent voice recognition, or anything else that annoys the owner. Traditionally, a high-quality vehicle is one that is well-bolted together. It doesn't leak, squeak, rattle, shed parts, show gaps between panels, or break down and leave you stranded. By this standard, there are very few poor-quality new vehicles in today's U.S. market. But what "quality" should not mean, is subjective likeability: ease of operation of the radio, climate controls, or seat adjusters, phone pairing, music downloading, sizes of touch pads on an infotainment screen, quickness of system response, or accuracy of voice-recognition. These are ergonomic "human factors" issues, not "quality" problems. Yet these kinds of pleasability issues are now dominating today's JDP "quality" ratings.