Letters to the Editors
Send a letter to the editors

Subject: Honda Pilot Problems
From: Pierre

Too bad about the Honda Pilot problems. Try this one on for size. Go to google.com and type in "Honda Odyssey transmission problems" and see what comes up. This, apparently, is the same transmission that the Pilot has. I already had my transmission replaced at 24,000 miles in my Odyssey. It was replaced with a rebuilt (not improved) transmission. Needless to say, my faith in Honda is permanently shaken, and I won't let my wife take the minivan more than 50 miles from our house now. Apparently it's a dirty little secret that Honda is just hoping will go away.

Subject: Pilot Woes
From: David

FYI — My wife experienced the identical timing belt problem with her Pilot on the freeway in Atlanta several months ago: engine shutdown, same water pump/timing belt issue, no notice of a recall, three dealer visits with no mention of the recall. This was reported to NHTSA. The engine was damaged on my wife's Pilot (by the dealer trying to drive it with the timing belt shredded)….

Subject: Unbiased?
From: Donnavon

The article "Generations, A Ford Mustang History by John Pearley Huffman Date Posted 03-12-2003" is far from being unbiased when relating to the 1974-1978 Mustang II. This car was in the top of the class when compared to other offerings of the time. The '70s were a horrible time for the auto industry as a whole. Let's not forget that the '77 Camaro came with the asphalt-tearing LG-3 305ci engine putting out 145 hp while the "top-of-the-line" Z-28 got a unbelievable 185 hp out of its 4bbl 350, all this at a curb weight of 3,828 pounds. Sales figures for the 1977 show that the 305ci outsold the 350ci by more than 4 to 1. Now let's compare the prices of these cars, a base model Mustang II V8 coupe was priced at $4,171, while you could purchase the "Powerhouse" Z-28 for a mere $6,500, wow not bad, only $2,300 for those extra 46 hp. Why is it that you did not berate the 1980-1 fox body when Ford dropped the 302 in lieu of the giant horsepower of the 255 ci (119 hp), and the return of the muscle car in 1982 netted the customer a WHOPPING 16 HP!! Finally, you keep harping on the fact that the car was underpowered but fail to note that the 302 was within 10% of all but the HI-POs after you consider the gross to net conversion. Final thought on power, today's Mustang GT is the most powerful non-special edition ever made, but is in many cases overpowered by V6 family cars in the same price bracket (Maxima, GTP for example).

Some points that I wish to point out about the car that you overlooked. The 1974 was the "Motor Trend Car of the Year" even without the V8 (in America). The Pinto was redesigned to take advantage of the front suspension developed for the 1974 Mustang, not the other way around. I believe the "chintzy" factor that you are talking about is the switching to an all-plastic interior, which I believe was forward thinking, but I may be wrong because all new cars have metal interiors, right? I applaud you for the amount of detail that went into your article, but feel that if you are going to have such a "biased" opinion that you should label it as such.

There is a small following with this car, as with any vehicle. We have been fighting negative attitudes from the "Mustang Purists" and the lack of manufacturer and aftermarket support for years. Our little Mustang has been gaining the respect it deserves over the past few years; most onlooker comments have switched from negative to positive. It seems that today the only people who harbor resentment for the II are those 40-60 year-old men who see the IIs as the replacement for the catalog-buildable "Falcon"-based Mustangs.

Editor-in-Chief Karl Brauer responds: I've often wondered if there's a place where the "lovers of unloved cars" get together and hang out. Can you imagine the parking lot, overflowing with Porsche 924s, Fiat X1/9s, Hilman Avengers, Citroen SMs and Triumph TR7s? If anyone out there knows the location of such a car meet, please let me know. I've got a Saab Sonett just looking for an excuse to be driven.

Subject: Too Positive
From: AEH1

I feel your reviews have become too positive, no matter what automobile you are reviewing. Indeed, every vehicle you have reviewed in the last six months concludes with a positive plug for the vehicle, like "this might be just the car you are looking for" or "this automobile offers a lot, and is worth serious consideration for buyers in this segment."

I recognize that you sell advertising to the auto manufacturers, and cannot write an unfavorable review. Perhaps the reviews should be discontinued, or called "review of one of our sponsor's products."

Maybe you should read our long-term Dodge Grand Caravan wrap-up. It was posted three months ago, and I don't think it could be described as a plug for Dodge minivans. Then there's the Chevrolet Silverado SS road test that posted a few weeks ago and wasn't exactly glowing. Finally, the First Drive of the all-new Ford F-150 didn't conclude with a "positive plug" in my opinion: "But even with so much going for it, we can't help but feel that this new F-150 lacks the kind of innovative features that will make it stand out from the crowd. Bigger, faster, stronger may have been enough to impress a decade ago, but these days such improvements are expected. Whether this shortfall will make a serious dent in the F-150's status as the best-selling vehicle in the world is hard to tell, but there's no doubt that it leaves the door wide open for the competition to come storming in."

Having said that, I would note that the automotive product currently being offered to the American consumer has never been better. The fact is there are very few truly bad products out there. We won't hesitate to identify those sub par vehicles when they cross our path, but don't look for us to unnecessarily bash the typical new car or truck as we revel in the tiniest of flaws. That's not our style. — Ed.

Subject: 350Z Review
From: Sherman

I enjoyed your review of the 350Z Touring recently posted on your Web site. However, please note that although some of you mentioned that you felt that the ride was more comfortable (less harsh, less bouncy, but with more body roll) in the Touring model as compared to the Track model, they both, in fact, have the exact same suspension components and settings. The only difference between the two, suspensionwise, is that the Track has lighter forged alloy rims (which may be offset by its heavier brakes).

Any differences your editors noticed between the two vehicles must therefore be illusory.

Actually, if you want to get technical, a vehicle's seats play a role in ride quality as well, and the Touring model has heated, leather, power seats while the Track model has non-heated, manual, cloth seats. We can say for a fact that the Touring model's seats offer thicker cushions, and that difference alone could account for a variation in ride quality, though the lighter wheels further suggest a different response when traversing bumps. Of course, if you want to be sure, we would suggest you drive both models back-to-back (like we did) and then tell us how "illusory" the differences are. — Ed.

Subject: Thank You
From: John

I used your site to educate myself on car buying as well as to determine the regular selling price of the car I chose to buy. The many testimonials on the four cars I was considering led me to settle on getting a Toyota Camry. I went in to the dealer armed and dangerous with your pricing report and a stack of forms from Carfax. I was at first taken to be a car salesman! (Not sure if it was a compliment.)

I used a number of the ploys your two employees used in negotiating as well as a couple that I came up with myself. As a result, I was able to get exactly the car I wanted at almost $400 below the Edmunds price. (I found this car listed at Edmunds.com, as well.)

The salesman at one point offered me a very nice price then came back and said they wanted more for the car. I told him that I had already verbally accepted his offer and that it was a binding contract since it was not for real estate. This jarred him out of that price. The Carfax report showed that the car had been in an accident, which he did not know. I never stayed in the cubicle while he went in to talk to his boss (or whatever they do back there) each time. He always had to look for me when he came back. Finally, I wrote "Final offer!!!" on the price I was willing to pay. Guess what? They took it. I think they knew I would have walked, too.

I also did not bring my wife along, which was very helpful in controlling the emotions.

This was actually a lot of fun. I got a good car at a good price!

Subject: 2003 Expedition Full Test
From: Dave

Love you guys but as an observant reader, had to point out a faux pas in Brian Moody's "Full Test: 2003 Ford Expedition, Exemplary Expedition" review. Brian says, "Up front, the Expedition has a much higher-quality feel than Ford SUVs we've previously tested. Granted this example was a luxurious Eddie Bauer model, but it still felt warmer than Ford trucks of past years that, too often, seemed like work trucks with a bunch of fancy stuff thrown in. With the possible exception of the climate control knobs, the buttons and switches lack the plasticky sensation typical of some Ford products." The '03 Expedition in Eddie Bauer trim has no climate control "knobs" only buttons and complementary steering wheel controls. The rear passengers do have two solid-feeling petroleum acetate derivative (OK, plastic) rotary controls for fan speed and temp of the separate rear A/C system. A complementary pair of overhead controls just aft of the rearview mirror operates the rear climate system or can pass control to row two. One might expect these almost plastic knobs to feel, "plasticky" — ya' think? We love our '03 Eddie B., plasticky BUTTONS and all.

Subject: Traction Control
From: Thomas

I live in the Midwest, and we have a few strong snowstorms each winter. I am giving my Subaru to my son who has just graduated from college. It was nice having it to drive this winter, but I am looking at a new car with traction control. Will this be very helpful in the snow or is it merely a safety feature for wet roads? Reading the information on the Net it is difficult to judge how it will perform and if different cars use different approaches. Any guidance would be helpful.

The purpose of traction control is to prevent spinning tires, a condition that won't get you anywhere and can cause a loss of control, such as when the rear end "fishtails."

As far as how traction control works, simply stated, when tire spin is detected, braking is applied and/or the throttle is decreased. This is all done automatically and in milliseconds, allowing just enough power to flow to the drive wheels to get some grip and propel the vehicle. Traction control makes it much easier and safer to negotiate slippery roads, such as when it's raining or snowing. It's not really a substitute for all-wheel drive, which provides additional all-weather security by utilizing the traction available at all four wheels rather than just two. However, traction control is a good "middle ground" between traditional non-traction-control enhanced two-wheel drive and all-wheel drive. It should be adequate for those who only have to deal with a few snowy days a year. — Ed.

Subject: Honda Horsepower
From: Ernie

I have been told several different figures on the horsepower for my 1997 Honda Accord SE. Can you give me the factory horsepower rating for this car? It seems the dealer doesn't know either. They tell me anything from 130 to 175 hp. What is correct?

The SE has the same four-cylinder engine as the LX, which was rated at 130 hp. The V6 models were rated at 170 hp. For a complete history on the Accord, check out our Generations piece that follows the Accord from 1976 to the present. — Ed.

Subject: Definition of a Muscle Car
From: Chris

Can you please give me the definition of what is a muscle car and what is a sports car?

Muscle car: A term that typically describes compact and midsize American performance cars of the mid-1960s to the early 1970s that had big, powerful V8 engines and firmer suspensions. Examples would include the Pontiac GTO, Plymouth Road Runner, Chevrolet Chevelle SS and Nova SS, Ford Torino Cobra and Dodge Charger. These cars specialized in rapid, straight-line acceleration, and as a result were favored by drag racers. The modern-day definition has come to include powerful coupes and sedans that have far better handling and braking capabilities as well as plenty of horsepower; examples would include the Ford Mustang Cobra (also called a pony car), the BMW M5 and the Mercedes-Benz E55.

Sports car: Some people insist that a sports car must have room for no more than two passengers and a top that goes down. A more mainstream definition is that of an agile, two-seat (though sometimes four-seat) automobile designed for maximum all-around performance, usually with an emphasis on handling. Sleek styling is typically part of the package as well. Examples would include the Mazda Miata, Chevrolet Corvette, Ferrari 360 Modena and Porsche 911. — Ed.

Subject: Plastic Stuff
From: B

Liked your article about Honda Element and I never write in about articles like this but…I just HAD to write you and tell you that some people LIKE all that "plastic stuff" on a car. I'm not a young kid by any means, but I adore the practicality of the Element and I'm always wanting to put that spray-on truck bed plastic stuff all over the bottom of my cars…I WISH my Odyssey had "that plastic stuff" all around the bottom of it — really! I've been thinking about asking the dealer if he could spray on some plastic stuff around the bottom — seriously! I think all cars need to have the option for that plastic stuff around the bottom, like on the SUVs. It gets dirty and grimy and road tar and yuck on the bottom panel so the plastic stuff is what you need down there. And, I think the bottom stuff is really cool-looking and adds pizzazz and a contrast to the "painted" portion of the car. I think the painted portion of a car should be on the minimal side (top, and top half only).

I seem to be one of those people that if I like something, LOTS of other people like it, too. Female baby boomer but husband shares opinion.

Brian Moody responds: Thank you for your feedback. We love hearing from our readers. I hope you didn't get the impression we don't like the Honda Element — we do like it. My concern about the plastic body panels was not that they didn't look cool or offer dent-resistant protection but that the plastic around the fuel filler door was becoming cracked and discolored. Honda said the car we had was a preproduction model, but the company only said that after the article was published and other journalists have told me the Element test cars they drove had the same problem. If spilling some gas on the outside of your car is going to ruin it, then I'd rather just have painted sheet metal. Plus, why doesn't the plastic extend to the door area where most people get small dings and dents when parking in crowded parking lots? I agree, the plastic looks great, but maybe it's not as functional as it could be. Thanks again for visiting Edmunds.com.

Subject: Cadillac EXT
From: Jennifer

I have found your Web site to be informative, and have referred to it several times, to use as a "sounding board" concerning various makes and models of vehicles. I believe that it is always a good thing to keep an open mind, and share in the exchange of ideas and reviews.

HOWEVER, I must tell you that the discrepancy between the review score that you gave the 2003 Cadillac Escalade EXT, and the one that the consumers have given it, has given me cause to write. Your score of 7.8 is considerably lower than that of 9.5, given by the owners.

As an owner of one of these vehicles, I must tell you that the longer I have this machine, and the more I drive it, the better I like it…I don't know exactly what your criteria is, concerning pickups, but I have never driven anything that comes close to this one! I live in the mountainous area of Montana and have driven this vehicle under some stringent testing conditions. No matter what I have asked of it, the EXT has performed flawlessly, and it handles better than any highway car I have had the pleasure of driving. No, it is not a sports car, and it never has professed to be…BUT…for its size, it handles, by far, better than anything I have ever driven does. Its looks are "attention-getting" from the first glance…this vehicle turns heads on the freeway, as well as in street traffic. My EXT is loaded with every available option, and we find the interior to be pure pleasure when taking long drives. I honestly cannot understand your rating.

You really missed the mark on this machine…I take comfort in the fact that the public didn't, and that other owners are enjoying theirs as much as I am mine. You need to take another look at the EXT.

We should note that our primary issue with the Cadillac EXT is that you can get essentially the same vehicle, the Chevrolet Avalanche, for about $20,000 less. We know the Cadillac comes with a more powerful engine, multiple luxury features not available on the Avalanche, and, of course, the large Cadillac wreath and crest on the rear tailgate. And we acknowledge that if you're looking for the ultimate in luxury and truck utility in a single vehicle, the EXT is the obvious choice. The consumer score for the vehicle doesn't surprise us because — while few people truly need a vehicle like the EXT — those who do (such as Jennifer) obviously love it. — Ed.

Subject: Midsize SUV Comparison Test
From: ThinMan400

I was very bothered by this recent comparison test. The Toyota Highlander was questioned for its build quality: how stupid do you think we are? The Toyota Highlander was rated the second most reliable SUV by Consumer Reports this past year, only after its cousin the Lexus RX 300. Also, in J.D. Power and Associates' reliability ratings, the 2002 model was rated PERFECT 5s in every category. This bests every SUV in this test. So I don't understand how you call yourselves UNBIASED?? The Toyota Highlander will continue to sell more than just about any of its competition in this comparison test. By now I'm sick of your Hondas and BMWs winning comparison tests. Why is it that Toyota/Lexus models continue to sell more than any other foreign brand? Because consumers don't listen to your crap. Edmunds.com is becoming more of a joke everyday….

Consumer Reports and J.D. Power are two sources of information; the test cars we spend a week with are another. The Highlander that was in our test had numerous problems relating to build quality. And the fact that we've noticed this more often on recent Toyota test vehicles is something we are going to relate to our readers (Consumer Reports and J.D. Power be damned). And even if the Highlander (or any car) is perfect in terms of build quality and reliability that doesn't automatically make it the best choice in a given segment. As for Hondas and BMWs winning comparison tests, you might have missed the fact that the Honda in this test didn't win either. You might have further missed the Toyota Matrix that won our recent Compact Wagon Comparison Test and the Toyota Sequoia that won our last Full-Size SUV Comparison Test. Do these tests also support your "joke" theory? — Ed.

Subject: Cargo Weight and Rollovers
From: Nikola

I found your excellent article "Cargo Weight and Rollovers — One Part of SUV Safety" but it raised one question: Does max payload capacity affect towing capacity? Can I load my '99 RAV4 4WD with 1,102 pounds (as listed) plus tow 1,500 pounds (as listed), or is it only one or the other? Your answer will be very much appreciated.

The number you have to be careful not to exceed is the Gross Combined Weight Rating (GCWR). The GCWR is the weight of the vehicle itself, all occupants and cargo plus any weight being towed. Most vehicles will list this information in the owner's manual. — Ed.

Subject: Not Enough Convertibles
From: Lori

What…not enough "young at heart" editors?

Afraid to get your hair messed up?

Still young at heart, but not enough hair to get messed up. — Ed.

Subject: Evo-versus-STi rematch??
From: Greg

Thinking of buying one and just interested on when you'll have a comparison test now that both are out.

We have just conducted exactly that rematch (including time at the racetrack) and the piece should be on the site the first week of August. Thank you for your inquiry and for visiting Edmunds.com. — Ed.

Subject: Renault
From: Jeff

Renault is one of the largest automobile manufacturers in the world. I wish you would include them in your reviews. I am planning to buy a Megane II Sport Hatch in August and am looking for any news — good, bad, whatever advice is out there. We have a home in Portugal. That's where I will be doing my purchase.

Because Renault does not (currently) sell any cars in the U.S., and because we don't have a European version of Edmunds.com (yet), we can't justify reviews of Renault automobiles. If either of the previous situations changes, we'll be sure to include Renault in our editorial coverage. — Ed.

Subject: Heel-and-Toe Technique
From: Nitin

This e-mail is intended for Brent Romans — I found your e-mail address from your Web site. I read your very interesting article on "heel-and-toe downshift" at www.modernracer.com and was wondering if I could ask you a question about the technique.

I have read a lot of car magazine talk about "heel-and-toe" but until I found your article, I had no idea how to implement this in my driving. For this I would like to thank you, since I am now beginning to get the hang of the technique and am really beginning to enjoy the increased control I have over my car when cornering. I drive a 2002 Acura RSX by the way, and "heel-and-toeing" is making me enjoy my car all over again, like when it was brand new.

Anyways, my question has to do with downshifting in general. Is heel-and-toe only recommended when cornering? How about when I'm coming up to a red light and just need to slow down? There are two schools of thought here, some people say to just brake, and others say to downshift AND brake. If I choose the latter option of downshifting to slow down my car coming up to a stop, should I still heel-and-toe? That is, do I need to rev the engine to slip into the lower gear? Furthermore, then how does this help me with slowing down? Does this mean I should be downshifting with heel-and-toe, rev the engine, but keep the brake applied as I let the clutch out? This seems counterintuitive and I'm worried about the wear and tear on the car.

I hope I am making myself clear with my question, I'm a little confused about this, and hope you do not mind me dropping you an e-mail with a question like this. I am just so happy to have read your article on the basics of heel-and-toe, and am hoping you will not mind answering a follow-up question.

Brent Romans responds: I'm glad you enjoyed the article. Before I worked at Edmunds.com, I, too, once read about "heel-and-toe" downshifting in the car mags and wondered what the heck it really was. That's why I decided to write up a story about it.

To answer your question: Yes, you can use HT downshifting when braking in a straight line. In fact, during street driving, applying this technique when coming up to a stoplight will give you many more opportunities to practice as opposed to only doing it when cornering. However, keep in mind that HT downshifting has nothing to do with slowing down. It's simply a technique to keep the engine speed and transmission gearing in the best possible combination for acceleration. I suppose there is a very slight advantage to HTing during heavy braking as this should keep the revs higher and gears shorter, thereby improving engine braking. But engine braking is a very minor factor in slowing down; the car's brakes should be doing all of the work.

For our 60-to-0-mph performance test, we keep it real simple: once the test car reaches 60 mph, we apply maximum braking pressure and then measure the distance it takes for the car to stop completely. We don't bother with HTing because in situations like that it's a distraction and, again, adds little or nothing to the slowing down of the car.

Hope this helps. What's interesting is that someday HTing will become a lost art. I suspect that sequential manual transmissions, such as the ones on the BMW M3 and Ferrari 360 Modena, will become even more popular and trickle down to basic cars. Once this happens, there will be no need to know how to HT as the transmission automatically does the engine speed match and clutch engagement.

Subject: Trans Am
From: Alan

Do you have any prior articles on Trans Am cars? I have a 2002 WS6 Trans Am and would like to read about this vehicle.

You should read our final Trans Am test — a 1999 30th Anniversary edition, which came with the WS6 performance package (the car is essentially the same as your 2002 WS6 T/A). — Ed.

Subject: Crossover Review
From: James

Simply do not understand your review of the Murano. I drove every crossover out there and the ones you tested. The Murano is soooo much better than your review. Not only does it have more headroom and legroom (front and back), I have a sunroof and I'm six-foot-five and have plenty of room. The CVT is far superior to any of the other transmissions. I'm thinking your test drivers needed more time to understand what they were driving. It's the future of transmissions and I will not drive anything but a CVT now. Zero to 60 in 8 seconds? Were you towing a boat? I really don't want to spend too much time picking apart your review since it's only Edmunds.com and not a serious review by a major company.

That's an understandable feeling. Often it just isn't worth the time to pick apart a given piece of text. — Ed.

Subject: Full Test/2004 Audi A8
From: Craig

Great article! One thing that I feel might be helpful to readers is to mention in the text somewhere that it is an AWD car. I read the article once and then skimmed it again and couldn't find it mentioned (maybe I missed it).

When comparing the A8 L with the 745i and S500, the A8 L comes with AWD at the $68,000ish price. It is a $2,900 option on the S500 and not available on the 745i. Besides the many things mentioned in the article, the AWD feature is a commanding reason to buy an Audi. Traction in the rain and snow, and the feeling you get when you pull yourself out of a fast tight curve in the Audi just doesn't compare with the others without AWD. They just can't compete with the secure feeling. I have never been in a car that felt more "stuck to the pavement" in all driving conditions than the Audi.

The first mention of the car's all-wheel-drive system comes in the ninth paragraph: "A new six-speed Tiptronic automatic transmission channels the power to all four wheels via the standard quattro all-wheel-drive system." Your feelings about the car in terms of price and performance are accurate, and echoed in one of the Second Opinions that appeared in the road test: "Editor in Chief Karl Brauer says: The new Audi A8 L probably doesn't have the 'passionate driving' pedigree of the 7 Series or the 'engineering excellence' reputation of the S-Class. But, it also doesn't have the 'interesting' design elements of the latest 7 nor the 'budget-busting' price of the S. As the perennial upstart to those iconic pillars of German luxury, Audi has always tried to offer more for less. In the case of the new A8 L, the 'more' includes standard all-wheel drive (optional on the Mercedes, not available on the Bimmer), an all-aluminum body and space frame (similar to the new Jaguar XJ) and high-end features that are usually on the options list, even at this price point. Items like a DVD navigation system, heated seats and steering wheel and power lumbar adjustments for rear-seat passengers certainly suggest value in a segment not often associated with that word." — Ed.

Subject: Audi Developments
From: Roger

At present I am driving my fifth Audi, a 2000 model A6 4.2. My wife and I are in the market for the new A8 L but have some questions that our local dealers are either unable or unwilling to answer; namely, what additional options are going to be made available and when? I keep hearing and reading that within several months of introduction, Audi will increase its options offering to include adaptive headlights, LCD screens on the back of the front headrests for DVD movies, voice-activated controls, fingerprint recognition and steering wheel mounted paddles for the Tiptronic transmission; additionally, I hear that a shorter wheelbase or S8 will be available, but the question(s) is, when? While I'm quite prepared to purchase now, I'm also reluctant to do so if a number of these options become available in the not-too-distant future. Can you shed any light or point me in the right direction?

We have heard no official word from Audi about any midyear additions to the A8's options list, but with many of its competitors offering those types of features, we wouldn't be surprised to see such features added at a later date. A short wheelbase version is certainly a possibility, but it's not likely to show up until next year if it ever does. The prospects for a high-performance S8 model are much the same — definitely possible, but not likely until next year at the earliest. — Ed.

Subject: Envoy and Plywood
From: Edmund

In your First Drive review of the 2004 GMC Envoy XUV, you repeated a bit of propaganda that I don't think is accurate: you said, as GM's press releases say, that the Envoy XUV can haul 4-by-8 sheets of plywood.

"Even 4-by-8 sheets of plywood can be transported by lowering the tailgate and sliding 'em in over built-in side rail supports."

The thing is, the XUV can only haul plywood with the tailgate down and the plywood strapped in. That isn't very special. Really, a Ford Aspire can haul plywood if you strap it to the roof, but no review of the Aspire would tout its plywood-lugging abilities.

The plywood benchmark used to apply to station wagons — when I grew up, my dad could (and did) haul 4-by-8 sheets in his 1980 Buick station wagon. However, when he got a 1989 Ford Crown Victoria wagon, the interior was about two inches too narrow to carry plywood laying flat.

So the plywood benchmark served to tell whether a vehicle could fit a 4-by-8 sheet of plywood without fuss. And the Envoy XUV doesn't pass this test because the tailgate must be down and the plywood tied down.

Granted, your review does mention that the tailgate has to be lowered, which I don't remember the GM press release saying. But, really, if GM's PR didn't tout plywood-hauling for this SUV, I doubt it would have come up in your review…and I think you could have been clearer (or more in depth) about how the XUV really isn't a good plywood hauler, despite GM's claim.

You might wonder, is this really an issue? Are there people who will be driven to purchase this XUV on the claim that it can haul plywood? Well, there's at least one: my dad. He didn't buy the XUV, but he was very excited about it coming out until we saw one at the 2003 Cincinnati Auto Show and determined that there was no way it could haul plywood home in the rain.

Anyway, thanks for reading this far. I should mention that I love Edmunds.com, and used it as my primary resource when shopping for a new car last year (I got a Subaru Outback — station wagons must be in my family's genes). I check up on the site everyday and read everything that's new, so, thanks.

I'm also curious to know if you've ever received an e-mail that uses the word "plywood" as many times as I have (16).

We can't believe you trumped us on making fun of the number of times you used "plywood" in your letter! This could be the start of a trend that eventually leads to a world where every reader provides his/her own comic relief within their own letter, thus reducing the need for automotive editors. Stop that! — Ed.