2018 Toyota Rav4 Xle on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Here's the 2017 Toyota 86: Don't call it a Scion

After we heard the bells toll for Scion yesterday, we told you that the Scion FR-S will transform into a Toyota. That's right: just a rebadging. The practical question is, which badge? The philosophical question, which we can't answer yet, is where it'll sit in the pantheon of front-engined, rear-drive Toyota sports cars, of which the Supra was the last one to visit our shores, from 1992 until 1998 in its fourth generation. And as if summoned by this conversation, this camouflaged prototype appeared. Our best guess is that this is going to be the US-bound, Toyota-badged version of the Subaru BRZ and all the other 86-badged variants: the Toyota 86 (in Asia, Australia, New Zealand, South America, and South Africa), Toyota GT86 (in Europe and New Zealand again), and Toyota FT86 (in Nicaragua and Jamaica). For simplicity's sake, let's call it a Toyota 86. Peer into the 86's swirly camo, and it looks like the car is going in for a light refresh. The lower intake in the front fascia, if it's representative of a production part, adopts a different shape and is considerably wider and narrower than either the BRZ or FR-S units. It also appears that the turn signal and its surround are reshaped, different than any of the current variants. Changes out back appear mild. The area around the license plate seems to be smoother, and there is likely a predictable light restyle of the bumper skin and defuser under the camo. We don't expect a significant power increase, and certainly not a turbocharger (sorry!), but crossing fingers wouldn't do any harm. Related Video:

Toyota Sienna vs Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid | Minivan comparison test

Shopping for a new car can be difficult due to the sheer number of choices. Which brand do you start with, which do you skip and are you missing something worthwhile? Thankfully, minivans are much simpler. There are effectively only four choices, they're all pretty good and they're even different enough to make choosing the right one for you a bit easier. This comparison features the two most recently updated minivans: the Toyota Sienna versus the Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid. Besides their common newness, they stand out in another fundamental way: they're both hybrids. Now, they're very different hybrids – the Toyota comes standard with a traditional gasoline-electric system like that of a Prius, whereas the Pacifica is offered with an optional plug-in hybrid system that provides an estimated 32 miles of all-electric range before effectively turning into a traditional hybrid – but in both cases, fuel economy is the priority. With the rare exception, the minivan segment has exclusively used V6 engines, which provide sufficient power to move hefty loads of people and stuff. The Chrysler Pacifica comes standard with a V6, while a V6 is the sole powertrain option for the Honda Odyssey and new 2022 Kia Carnival. The fuel economy difference between those and our hybrid competitors is staggering: The new Sienna gets an EPA-estimated 36 mpg combined while the Odyssey and V6 Pacifica get 22 mpg. That equates to saving an estimated $750 every year on gas, according to the EPA. And the Pacifica Hybrid could potentially save you even more as long as you routinely utilize its electric range. This frugality alone could send the Sienna and Pacifica Hybrid to the top of many shopping lists, but as we've seen in previous tests, they offer more than enough in other respects to warrant top consideration. But which is better, Sienna or Pacifica? Well, we knew this was going to be close, and we were right. After averaging the scores from 16 categories, the difference between first and second was a mere 0.06 out of 10. When we added extra weight to key minivan-buying attributes (second-row space/versatility, safety features and functionality, infotainment, interior storage, cargo space/versatility, value and fuel economy), the gap was only 1 point out of a possible 230. We then triple checked and conducted a recount, but the order remained. In the end, there are no losers here.