2007 Car & Truck of the Year Award Winners Announced

[frogger]

Its a GM sweep, Aura and Silverado after a Honda sweep last year
The Camry got smoked

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070107/FREE/70107002/1056/autoshows

[Badman]

I cant believe this........GM on top for both:|

[Praetorian]

I cant believe this........GM on top for both:|

exactly what i was thinking...rigged, i say, rigged!!

[belfour]

Aura ??

The Carmy should of won... it won its category winner in Canada. (forgot which one it was) Aura wasn't even nomintated.

[new_vr]

I can't comment on the Saturn, but if I had to pick a truck for work, I would have a hard time beating the GMC/Chevy. Now, if I needed something for my soccer wife to drive, for sure, the Ridgeline.

[VivienM]

exactly what i was thinking...rigged, i say, rigged!!

Given how many times GM has lost before, that's hard to believe...

[SkiD]

I can't comment on the Saturn, but if I had to pick a truck for work, I would have a hard time beating the GMC/Chevy. Now, if I needed something for my soccer wife to drive, for sure, the Ridgeline.

Or you could just get the vehicle the Ridgeline is trying to copy but is much better, the Chevrolet Avalanche.

[galanz]

Or you could just get the vehicle the Ridgeline is trying to copy but is much better, the Chevrolet Avalanche.

The avalanche is pretty much the ugliest vehicle I have ever seen. There are no lines, big panel gaps and the first years square meters of cheap plastic made a very expensive truck look very cheap.
They drove very poorly, handled badly and didn't have much practicality especially given the size.
Having driven both the Ridgeline is better in everything aside from raw towing capabilites.

[Anessa]

Toyota is going to take their number 1 crown very soon so GM shouldn't feel too happy.

[Samir]

Can't argue with that truck choice. The new GM trucks are awesome.

Don't know about the other category... it's always some lame-ass family luxo-crate that wins, that's probably the car class I care the least about.

[bembol]

I guess the 13% sales decline in 2006 (I heard on 680 Newss) by Ford & GM doesn't mean anything...

[VivienM]

I guess the 13% sales decline in 2006 (I heard on 680 Newss) by Ford & GM doesn't mean anything...

... given these two models went on sale in like October, not really?

(A lot of truck configurations aren't even available yet, I think.)

And F*rd != GM. F*rd is in more serious trouble right now...

[Spud72]

Having driven both the Ridgeline is better in everything aside from raw towing capabilites.

I would personally take a Ridgeline over an Avalanche, but that is simply not a correct statement. The fit and finish of the Avalanches are fine.

The Avalanche is far larger inside.

With the midgate can carry 8+' of lumber completely enclosed.

4WD system is far more robust and capable.

Develops far more HP and torque and has a choice of engines.

But, ironically, the Ridgeline costs less plus will be worth more in a years time as a used vehicle. GM simply cannot compete against that.

[new_vr]

The avalanche is pretty much the ugliest vehicle I have ever seen. There are no lines, big panel gaps and the first years square meters of cheap plastic made a very expensive truck look very cheap.
They drove very poorly, handled badly and didn't have much practicality especially given the size.
Having driven both the Ridgeline is better in everything aside from raw towing capabilites.
I would say the Ridgeline is uglier.
The Ridgeline drives amazing, but that is because it is closer to a car in it's design then a truck.
If you need something for work, it's hard to beat the 1500/2500 series of trucks.
If you just want a "truck" but you live in Toronto, or wherever, the the Ridgeline is made for you.

[chriswalsh]

Wow, I expected to see the Camry up there for sure... Good for GM, the Aura looks like a decent car although I've never even seen one in person.

New chev trucks are nice but I still prefer the F-series :)

[frogger]

The Ridgeline isn't much of a truck as far as traditional trucks go.. it can't tow much of anything, payload capacity is low. Its not really in the same class as the Avalanche which is bigger in every way and more capable as far as truck utility goes.

Plus the new Avalanche looks pretty good, especially compared to the old one. The Ridgeline, well I guess looks are subjective.

[frogger]

Don't forget the Explorer Sport Trac is all new for 2007 as well and very capable.

[oldsnail]

saturn aura is a good car. based on the opel vectra in europe which is already a success there

[SkiD]

The avalanche is pretty much the ugliest vehicle I have ever seen. There are no lines, big panel gaps and the first years square meters of cheap plastic made a very expensive truck look very cheap.
They drove very poorly, handled badly and didn't have much practicality especially given the size.
Having driven both the Ridgeline is better in everything aside from raw towing capabilites.

Your probably thinking of the first gen Avalanche, the GMT-900 version is better looking then the Ridgeline.

BTW - The smaller V6 powered Honda gets basically the same fuel mileage rating as the 4-speed, V8 powered Avalanche.

http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/EI/2007/Chevrolet/2007.chevrolet.avalanche.20091000-E.jpg

http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/EI/2007/Honda/2007.honda.ridgeline.20097966-E.jpg

[gilboman]

good feel good win for GM eventhough the camry, accord will easily outsell the aura by a good 4:1 margin:lol:

[weedb0y]

Good for GM!

Signs of good things to come! Competition allows for better pricing for better value.

[belfour]

The overdue redesign of the Accord is coming out... could be a candidate for Car of Year next year... but who knows..

[Samir]

Are you sure? The Accord was just re-designed along with the Civic. Both of them have the same design language now.

Car & Driver just rated all these family cars: Sebring finished last (out of 6), Aura was #4, Altima was #2 and Accord was #1. Camry was #5 because the guys said it felt uncharacteristically cheap for a Toyota and if Toyota doesn't have good interior what does it have?

[frogger]

Are you sure? The Accord was just re-designed along with the Civic. Both of them have the same design language now.

Car & Driver just rated all these family cars: Sebring finished last (out of 6), Aura was #4, Altima was #2 and Accord was #1. Camry was #5 because the guys said it felt uncharacteristically cheap for a Toyota and if Toyota doesn't have good interior what does it have?

That Accord update was just a mid-cycle update - new taillights (LED), updated front end.
Here is a summary C&D article results.. Most surprising was them liking the Kia, and the large drop in score between the Aura and the Camry.
They tested pretty basic models.. the Camry LE though it makes up the bulk of Camry sales is quite a bore in every way.

http://img453.imageshack.us/img453/1649/image5th6vd9.png

[gilboman]

That Accord update was just a mid-cycle update - new taillights (LED), updated front end.
Here is a summary C&D article results.. Most surprising was them liking the Kia, and the large drop in score between the Aura and the Camry.
They tested pretty basic models.. the Camry LE though it makes up the bulk of Camry sales is quite a bore in every way.

http://img453.imageshack.us/img453/1649/image5th6vd9.png

the thing is...in a family car... these are meaningless when people in that segment dont care about most things C&D care about which is why lexus is the best selling luxury make in the US and camry the best selling car 7 of past 8 years

[belfour]

curious anyone know the Canadian Car of the Year? or do we have to wait for the toronto auto show?

[crimsona]

What the hell, no love for the Fit?
It did smoke the Camry at least...

09 redesign then!

[VivienM]

What the hell, no love for the Fit?

Who can LOVE a subcompact?

[galanz]

I would say the Ridgeline is uglier.


Not much of a victory there. I honestly don't care much for the looks of either of them or the Subaru Brat either.

[galanz]

The fit and finish of the Avalanches are fine.

It's the couple inch gap between the plastic panels that gets me. Being able to see different colour paint between panels doesn't help much either.

The Avalanche is far larger inside.

Yet it doesn't seem to have as much capacity. The design of the Honda seems more useful

4WD system is far more robust and capable.

Offroad sure, but on road and especially in snow or on ice I'd take the Honda's AWD and Independent Rear Suspension of the live axle Avalanche.

[galanz]

Your probably thinking of the first gen Avalanche, the GMT-900 version is better looking then the Ridgeline.

BTW - The smaller V6 powered Honda gets basically the same fuel mileage rating as the 4-speed, V8 powered Avalanche.


No doubt that the newer Avalanches look much better than the old ones. But I still don't care much for the looks of them(or the Ridgeline).
The big cheap looking plastic on the original Avalanche looked really, really bad.

[MrDisco]

Car & Driver just rated all these family cars: ...and Accord was #1.

C&D rated the Accord #1? I'm *shocked* <sarcasm>

curious anyone know the Canadian Car of the Year?

AJAC Car of the Year award is presented in Feb.

[Spud72]

It's the couple inch gap between the plastic panels that gets me. Being able to see different colour paint between panels doesn't help much either.

A couple of inch gap? Please. Every Avalanche I've looked at the gaps were all uniform, and for the most part, very small. Probably around .125" or so.

Yet it doesn't seem to have as much capacity. The design of the Honda seems more useful

Doesn't seem? Are you joking? 8' of internal storage doesn't seem as useful as 5' (maybe? Is it even that big?) of outside storage? The interior isn't even close. You can set 6 quite comfortably in an Avalanche. (It is a Suburban at heart). Honda isn't even in the same class.
Offroad sure, but on road and especially in snow or on ice I'd take the Honda's AWD
That's insane. The Honda system is a reactionary AWD system. It is primarily a FWD vehicle until it senses slippage. That might be OK for in the city or at slow speeds, but unless they've changed it, you cannot lock it into 4WD at all speeds and stop slippage from occuring in the first place. Ice and snow is exactly where you want a system to be locked up so it is less prone to slipping in the first place.

Hondas system is great for saving 1 or 2 MPG, but as a multi duty system or (gasp) as a Truck, it's insufficient. Might be OK for most who buy a small SUV like say a CRV or Element, but simply not even in the same league as a Avalanche. Even Subaru's system has power going to some extant to all the wheels before slippage.

But, like I said in my first post, personally, I'd take a Ridgline over an avalanche as a personal vehicle, but the Avalanche (especially the new ones) is far from being inferior in most ways to a Ridgeline.

[new_vr]

Hondas system is great for saving 1 or 2 MPG, but as a multi duty system or (gasp) as a Truck, it's insufficient. Great for a small SUV like say a CRV or Element, but simply not even in the same league as a Avalanche.


Is it the same system that is in the MDX? If it is, apparently it's pretty amazing for your bad weather conditions. My brother-in-law is a big time chevy guy, and has a Silverado 4X4, and an off-road truck too. He said he was amazed at how good the MDX was on the ice.

[afong56]

That Accord update was just a mid-cycle update - new taillights (LED), updated front end.
Here is a summary C&D article results.. Most surprising was them liking the Kia, and the large drop in score between the Aura and the Camry.
They tested pretty basic models.. the Camry LE though it makes up the bulk of Camry sales is quite a bore in every way.

http://img453.imageshack.us/img453/1649/image5th6vd9.png

hmmm. . .i wonder why they chose to compare the camry le model against those other cars, when it's blatently obvious they should have used the se model, especially since it's the altima s and accord se, and that the s/se models are priced most comparatively?

does this not strike others as a faulty comparison?

[galanz]

A couple of inch gap? Please. Every Avalanche I've looked at the gaps were all uniform, and for the most part, very small. Probably around .125" or so.

You haven't looked very closely then, there are huge gaps in the vinyl siding and you can see the different coloured paint between the gaps, which just adds to the low-end look.

That's insane. The Honda system is a reactionary AWD system. It is primarily a FWD vehicle until it senses slippage. That might be OK for in the city or at slow speeds, but unless they've changed it, you cannot lock it into 4WD at all speeds and stop slippage from occuring in the first place. Ice and snow is exactly where you want a system to be locked up so it is less prone to slipping in the first place.

Uhmm nope, the last thing you want is to have your 4wd system locked when driving down the highway. A proper AWD system will outhandle a locked 4wd system in these conditions everytime. Now if you're talking about plowing through 3' of snow(which is quite handy after your locked 4wd system crab walks itself into the ditch) then yes a locked 4wd system will do better, but that's not what I was talking about.

[B0000rt]

The only COTY award that really matters, is the one handed out by Motortrend.

Camry, GL-Class & Silverado

[Spud72]

You haven't looked very closely then, there are huge gaps in the vinyl siding and you can see the different coloured paint between the gaps, which just adds to the low-end look.


Vinyl siding? What are you talking about? The old cladded version? Man, they have hardly sold any of those since 2004 and none with the redesign at all as it isn't even an option anymore.

Uhmm nope, the last thing you want is to have your 4wd system locked when driving down the highway. A proper AWD system will outhandle a locked 4wd system in these conditions everytime. Now if you're talking about plowing through 3' of snow(which is quite handy after your locked 4wd system crab walks itself into the ditch) then yes a locked 4wd system will do better, but that's not what I was talking about.
Don't confuse a "locking" as not allowing for wheel any wheel slippage at all that's not what I'm getting at. Most modern transfer cases in conjuction with traction control can transfer torque around the wheel sets.

The problem with the Honda system is it sends virtually none - if any- torque to the real wheels unless it senses slippage. Which, depending on your speed it could be too late. A system that sends a large percentage to each axle drastically reduces its chance of slippage in the first place due to the torque split. Putzing around town at 20 KPH is a far cry from 80+ on the freeway in mediocre or poor conditions.

You are correct though - a well designed AWD system can be extremely good for all weather driving. The problem is that Honda's isn't all that good. If they would have constantly sent a large percentage (say, 30+) to the rear wheels, or at least had the option to do so, I'd have a lot more respect for it. It doesn't, and compared to most others out there it is simply outclassed and is another reason why the Avalanches is simply a better 4WD system.. Especially considering it's supposed to be a "truck" or, at least, that's how they're marketing it.

[mlc2000]

Winning a battle does not win the war.

AS far as I can tell the score is


Honda/Toyota 20

GM 1


Yea, GM's on a winning streak !!

Incidentally, a very large portion of my business relies on the sale of Silverados
so hopefully lots of people continue to buy them.
Frankly, I've had my share of bad GM experiences.

[galanz]

Vinyl siding? What are you talking about? The old cladded version?

Yeah, I think that should have been pretty clear in my original post that that's what I was talking about.

Don't confuse a "locking" as not allowing for wheel any wheel slippage at all that's not what I'm getting at. Most modern transfer cases in conjuction with traction control can transfer torque around the wheel sets.

Oh, I'm sorry I assumed when you said 'lock it in 4wd' you meant lock it in 4wd.

[SkiD]

hmmm. . .i wonder why they chose to compare the camry le model against those other cars, when it's blatently obvious they should have used the se model, especially since it's the altima s and accord se, and that the s/se models are priced most comparatively?

does this not strike others as a faulty comparison?

Nope because without knowing what the criteria was for the test, why complain about which cars they tested with?

Without reading the article, there are some conclusions to pick up in C & D's numbers, that even a more expensive model might not have changed.

Accord - "great" car overall but expensive for what you get (total score, features and ammenities - 2)

Altima - almost as "great" as Accord and expensive for what you get (total score, features and ammenities - 2)

Kia - A "good" car and great value for money but maybe a little underpowered(features and ammentities - 10, 1/4 mile - 16)

Aura - A "good" car with lots of power and exterior looks, could still use a little more refinement (exterior styling - 10, 1/4 mile - 20, average scores for everything else)

Camry - A "good" car but boring (overall score, exterior style - 6, rebates - 1, gotta have it - 12, fun to drive - 10)

[Spud72]

Yeah, I think that should have been pretty clear in my original post that that's what I was talking about.

You should have been but you weren't. You said:
There are no lines, big panel gaps and the first years square meters of cheap plastic made a very expensive truck look very cheap.

You didn't say panel gaps between the plastic, you said big panel gaps and then talked about the plastic about the first years. I assumed (how silly of me) that you're talking about panel gaps in general, even with the new gen, as opposed to, well, knocking a vehicle that isn't even made anymore.

And I have looked at them closely as I darn near bought one a couple years ago and even then there was no 2" gaps anywhere on the truck, cladded or not... except maybe the grill. Where they're kind of important to have.


Oh, I'm sorry I assumed when you said 'lock it in 4wd' you meant lock it in 4wd.
I know you're being sarcastic, but "locking" is a relative term and depending on the 4WD system can have different meanings. In the Avalanche, you can "force" or "lock" the system by putting it into 4H which will force torque to the front wheels but power will vary due to the traction control. On a system, like say, a 4Runner or FJ Cruiser it actually has a true center diff which you can more truly "lock" a fixed ratio between front/back (generally 50/50). I guess I could have been clearer, but since it isn't applicable to either of the vehicles we're talking about in this discussion, I didn't bother.

But, I assume we'll have to agree to disagree. The Ridgeline is a nice vehicle, but to be fair to both of them, they're actually in different classes. The only thing they really have in common is a not so subtle resemblance. However, the Avalanche is a very capable truck and there is very little the Ridgeline can do "better." But, some of the things, such as resale and generic "Honda quality", are huge.

edit - On re-reading my post I may have came off a little stronger than I meant too - sorry. As I mentioned before - I would likely buy a Ridgeline now even over a new Avalanche as it would better meet my needs, but the Avalanche, for what it's supposed to do, is a decent truck and what you were knocking it for simply wasn't true - and it can simply do many things that the Ridgeline cannot. (Other than your driving comments as they are largely personal - even though I thought the Avalanche was fine)

[frogger]

Winning a battle does not win the war.

AS far as I can tell the score is


Honda/Toyota 20

GM 1

Actually the awards have been pretty well spread over the years.. They're more about interesting/segment standout vehicles than reliabiliy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Car_of_the_Year

[afong56]

Nope because without knowing what the criteria was for the test, why complain about which cars they tested with?

Without reading the article, there are some conclusions to pick up in C & D's numbers, that even a more expensive model might not have changed.


are you kidding me?

the trim lines between the honda and the toyota are not even close to being the same--it's like saying it's okay to compare apples with oranges.
if i'm shopping for a mid size, i'm not shopping the camry le against the accord se, i'm comparing it to the dx-g trim.

it doesn't matter what criteria they are using, if you begin the comparison with an uneven playing field, the comparison is faulty.

accord se, 5mt: $26,500
camry se, 5mt: $26,605

accord dx-g, 4at: $26,000
camry le, 4at: $25,800

then you go down the line with features and specs, and you can see which models truly match up.
then you actually drive the models and you will see a large difference between base models and se models--handling, features, appointments, you name it.

i have no doubt that the accord is a good car, and who knows, maybe in a true comparison an accord dx-g would still win out over a camry le, but why didn't they do that in the first place? those final scores are deceiving. i have no doubt that a camry se would score very, very well against an accord dx-g--but that's because it's not a fair comparison.

[SkiD]

afong56, I'm sorry you feel so strongly about the review, maybe you should complain to C & D.

I highly doubt that the SE version of the Camry would have made a 26 point difference in this comparison, the Camry came in 5th place because C & D basically felt that the Camry is a boring/bland car (look at the individual numbers in their chart) and they would rather drive that particular Accord model.

No matter how good the reliability and perceived quality is of the Camry, it is not a vehicle that car enthusiasts want to drive (you should have read the debate on TheTruthAboutCars about whether or not the Camry should be nominated for a Ten Worst Automobiles Today award), it has become the new "Buick" of the midsize market. It will continue to sell well until people realize that there are "better" vehicles out there and Toyota will be in big trouble, do they continue on the path they established and lose market share or change directions and risk alienating their established customer base.

[afong56]

afong56, I'm sorry you feel so strongly about the review, maybe you should complain to C & D.

I highly doubt that the SE version of the Camry would have made a 26 point difference in this comparison, the Camry came in 5th place because C & D basically felt that the Camry is a boring/bland car (look at the individual numbers in their chart) and they would rather drive that particular Accord model.

No matter how good the reliability and perceived quality is of the Camry, it is not a vehicle that car enthusiasts want to drive (you should have read the debate on TheTruthAboutCars about whether or not the Camry should be nominated for a Ten Worst Automobiles Today award), it has become the new "Buick" of the midsize market. It will continue to sell well until people realize that there are "better" vehicles out there and Toyota will be in big trouble, do they continue on the path they established and lose market share or change directions and risk alienating their established customer base.

actually the reliability of the camry has been dropping, and it's well known about the problems with the slushbox trannies in the '07s. . .i have no problems with criticising the toyota.

but, have you actually driven these models? i have. there is a significant difference in the styling, performance, handling, appointments, suspension, features, specifications, etc. between the le model they tested, and the se model they should have tested. to suggest that the le model would be bland in comparison to the se is fair, but if you were to stack the camry se against the accord se, the '26 point' difference would disappear very, very quickly.

the fact that you don't see this comparison as flawed from the outset is stunning. it is an obviously unfair matchup.

[frogger]

Unfortunately fair comparison tests are almost an oxymoron, there is pretty much always a few models in a comparison that are not similarly equipped.

[afong56]

Unfortunately fair comparison tests are almost an oxymoron, there is pretty much always a few models in a comparison that are not similarly equipped.

yes, i'd agree with you, except that they did have a camry se model to compare the accord se with--i went to their website and found a review written about the 4cyl 5mt camry se from way back in march of 2006. . .

. . .i also found some explanation of why their review didn't match my experiences with having test driven both accord and camry se. after reading their whole review, their biggest complaint was the traction stability control (tcs) system that all american camrys came with--this directly led to an 8 point difference in "fun to drive" score between the camry and the accord--but which the canadian model is free of.

[TrevorK]

but, have you actually driven these models? i have. there is a significant difference in the styling, performance, handling, appointments, suspension, features, specifications, etc. between the le model they tested, and the se model they should have tested. to suggest that the le model would be bland in comparison to the se is fair, but if you were to stack the camry se against the accord se, the '26 point' difference would disappear very, very quickly.

There are differences in the Camry SE but to say it's going to make a huge difference is absurd.

Here is the Camry SE handling/suspension:
The sport-inspired Camry SE lives up to its promise by delivering sportscar-like performance with minimal compromise in ride comfort. Borrowing from Toyota's F1 experience, the SE boasts a flattened underbody and rear floor cover for optimal downforce and front-to-rear balance enhancing stability at higher speeds. In addition, a sport-tuned suspension features stiffer springs, solid rear stabilizer bar, and a V-brace connecting the rear suspension tower with the floor cross member for greater rigidity and better handling. Performance-tuned Power Steering puts total control in the driver's hands.

So, in the daily driving you notice the difference that the rear floor cover offers in providing additional downforce? Or does a daily driver typically corner at 40-50KM/H to notice what the V-brace/stab bar offers?

The SE basically offers a rear stab bar, a rear strut bar, stiffer springs, and most likely a different steering ratio (I'd assume that's "performance tuned"). This isn't going to make a huge difference to most drivers.

[afong56]

There are differences in the Camry SE but to say it's going to make a huge difference is absurd.

Here is the Camry SE handling/suspension:
The sport-inspired Camry SE lives up to its promise by delivering sportscar-like performance with minimal compromise in ride comfort. Borrowing from Toyota's F1 experience, the SE boasts a flattened underbody and rear floor cover for optimal downforce and front-to-rear balance enhancing stability at higher speeds. In addition, a sport-tuned suspension features stiffer springs, solid rear stabilizer bar, and a V-brace connecting the rear suspension tower with the floor cross member for greater rigidity and better handling. Performance-tuned Power Steering puts total control in the driver's hands.

So, in the daily driving you notice the difference that the rear floor cover offers in providing additional downforce? Or does a daily driver typically corner at 40-50KM/H to notice what the V-brace/stab bar offers?

The SE basically offers a rear stab bar, a rear strut bar, stiffer springs, and most likely a different steering ratio (I'd assume that's "performance tuned"). This isn't going to make a huge difference to most drivers.

how about the fact that the se has a stick, while the le is only available in auto? that's a huge driving difference, no?

add to that a 8 way power adjustable driver's seat with lumbar support, leather steering wheel and shift knob, and a bunch of other features. so yes, the drive and driving experience is very different.

have you actually driven both le and se? i think you will find the same thing i did.


p.s. those were only the 'handling/suspension' differences that you quoted--only part of the differences that exist (which i cited in my post you quoted).