Letters to the Editors
Send a letter to the editors

Subject: Nissan Murano Review
From: Eric

I found your review of the Nissan Murano in your comparison test to be mostly accurate. You are correct in that the difference in feel of the CVT vs. conventional automatic makes the CVT feel a little sluggish. That was something I noticed when I first purchased my Murano. However, comparing every other area, I felt the Murano topped its competition, from styling, interior space and features. You did not mention that the Murano has more available safety features than its competition. While it is possible to get some of the safety features in Pilot, Highlander or Endeavor, none offer HID headlamps. Now with 5,500 miles on the clock, the CVT feels very strong, no more of that sluggish feeling. I wonder if the CVT is programmed to operate conservatively during the break-in period. It's been 2 1/2 months and I love the CVT, it is so smooth and gives this sporty SUV an edge of refinement.

Subject: 350 Z Full Test
From: B.

I was thinking about buying a 350Z in the next couple of weeks so I've been doing a bit of research on the Web about the 2003 Z. I came across your Web site, great site by the way, and read the road test written by Mr. John DiPietro. Toward the end of the article Mr. DiPietro had mentioned the stiffness on the track model of the Z. Is the suspension alone on the model enough to make the ride differ from the other four models? In the past I've driven the touring model on several different make of cars, and it seems to me that touring models are usually stiffer. So in the case of the 350Z would the Touring trim be stiffer than say the Enthusiast or the Performance trim?? Any guidance on this subject will help out a great deal on which model of Z to choose from…. Thanks.
P.S. Keep up the great work.

Road Test Editor John DiPietro responds: Actually, the suspension calibrations on all of the 350Z models are identical. Yet nearly all our staff noticed that the Touring model rode softer than the Track model. We attribute the Touring model's more compliant ride to its plusher seats, which offer more cushioning than the thinner buckets of the Track version. Thanks for your inquiry and for visiting Edmunds.com.

Subject: Advertising Fees
From: Tamara

I just brought a 2003 Hyundai Santa Fe and on the invoice was an advertising fee of $500. The salesman told me that this is a fee that all car dealerships have and it depends on the region on what the price would be. Could you please tell me if this is a true fee or a scam?

Consumer Advice Editor Phil Reed responds: If the advertising fee appeared on the invoice, it was an actual cost that the dealer paid and therefore a legitimate expense. Since ad fees are regional, we have difficulty tracking them and posting them on our Web site. However, sometimes dealers write in their own ad fees on the sales contract which we do not recommend paying. If you shop around and find that all Hyundai dealers in your area are paying similar ad fees then the fee you paid was probably legitimate.

Subject: Least Wanted
From: Anonymous

You should make a list of the least wanted cars, truck, etc. because some of these cars on the road are just plain ugly. A lot of autos just don't seem to have any appeal.

Subject: Selling a Car
From: Harry

I am thinking about selling my vehicle as a private seller.

Does the private seller have the responsibility of collecting local sales tax? I live in Washington state and have so far not been able to find any information related to this question.

Consumer Advice Editor Phil Reed responds: We don't know the specific laws in Washington. However, in most states, the DMV will collect the state tax. I've never heard of the individual being required to collect the tax. In most cases, the burden is put on the buyer. The seller, however, may have to get a smog test for the vehicle. Check with your state's department of motor vehicles. Good luck.

Subject: Mitsubishis
From: Marcio

I use your Web site a lot to find info on cars that I like. I'm 16 and just got my license and I'm going to get my first car for my birthday. I've narrowed it down to either a Mitsubishi Mirage (2001 sedan auto) or a Lancer (OZ rally, auto). So if you could provide me with any info like if you've driven either of them or which one you think is better it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

We've reviewed both of these cars on our Web site. It's a good idea to read the editors' reviews (you can use the search feature on our navigation bar to find the articles). Also, before you go to buy the car, you should review some of our buying advice. And, of course, check the True Market Value pricing for all the cars you're shopping for.

Thanks for your reaction to our Web site. And good luck. — Ed.

Subject: Pricing a Current-Year Demo Car
From: Karla

How could I find out the pricing for a 2003 demo car? It's for a 2003 Murano SL with 4,200 miles. The dealer says it's $29K, but I think that's too much and they're trying to pass it off as a new car with some money discounted for the mileage. Can you help me? Your Web site did not offer pricing for current-year used cars.

Consumer Advice Editor Phil Reed responds: Take the new car TMV price and discount it for mileage (try asking for a discount of 15 cents per mile plus any additional wear and tear you find).

Subject: Impreza WRX Wagon Road Test
From: Ronald

Can you expand on your discussion of manual transmissions vs. automatics in your road test of the 2004 Subaru WRX wagon? For those of us who drive mainly in traffic, manual transmission becomes less interesting. How much is really lost by using the automatic? Are there any intrinsic benefits when using the automatic?

Road Test Editor Erin Riches responds: The automatic would be fine if you live in a congested area — driving a manual-shift WRX in heavy traffic can be aggravating. However, because the WRX's turbocharged four-cylinder engine makes its best power high in the rpm range (past 4,000 rpm on the tachometer), you're not going to enjoy it as much with an automatic, which is likely to upshift before you get to the sweetest part of the power band. What's more, when you're talking about a serious sports car (sedan, wagon or coupe), there's a lot to be said for being able to control all of the shift points on your own. Additionally, we've found the automatic available on the WRX in need of more refinement — the auto transmission in the '02 car we tested didn't downshift as quickly as it should have (not a big deal in a Camry, but certainly annoying in a sports car).

Ultimately, your choice in transmission depends on how you're going to drive the car. If you just want a fast wagon and don't plan to drive it all that aggressively on a regular basis, the automatic will be fine — but if that's the case, you should also be looking at wagons like the Volkswagen Jetta, which has a better automatic but not as much performance potential. I hope this helps.

Subject: Bias
From: Joe

I had to chuckle when your SUV review passed off the Honda Element's styling as something out of Japanese animation and then had the nerve to say the Hyundai Santa Fe's "unusual styling won't please everyone." The Honda Element is the ugliest piece of styling doody since the Aztek. I laud Honda's quality, but if I won an Element in a contest, I'd sell it immediately and get something less embarrassing. I laughed out loud the first time I saw one on the road, just as I did when I first saw an Aztek. I think if Honda or Toyota actually made a vehicle out of dog doo, Consumer Reports and Edmunds would hail it as the best thing since toilet paper and rate it higher than anything else in its class, even though it costs 25% more. The Asian/Honda/Toyota bias in some of the automotive press is just too much anymore (I've heard this reiterated on car talk shows on the radio)…and I've owned Jap cars all my life!

A friend of mine is car shopping and I told her three things: Think Japanese, consider certain American models because of the lower cost vs. quality theory (um, I'll take a Taurus and thousands of dollars over a boring Camry — especially used) and don't give too much credence to Consumer Reports or Edmunds because they are so biased toward Honda and Toyota, especially in the subjective areas. Have any of you tried to deal with a Toyota dealer? They are AS#!oles and the main reason I don't drive Toyotas anymore, despite owning 2 beloved Corollas and 2 Celicas in the past. I think the staff at Edmunds needs to get out in the real world for a year or two and see that things are different when you step out of the box for a while.

Yup, sometimes people can be pretty biased about a given brand or nationality of car….

However, our long-term test of over 35 cars in the last six years has told us as much about the ownership experience as any other consumer. If your argument is that all Asian makes have terrible service experiences and all American makes have perfect service experiences, well, you're wrong. Read some of our long-term wrap-ups for confirmation of this. However, even more important is how often you deal with a service department. If car "A" forces me into an unscheduled visit once every three years, and car "B" forces me into the same event every three months, I'll take car "A" no matter how much I hate dealing with the service department. I'll leave it to our readers to figure out which brands we feel represent car "A" and "B" in the marketplace..

And finally, don't assume that saving money at the time of purchase equates to getting a better deal. If you save thousands by buying a Camry competitor and then spend thousands in the first three years or 30,000 miles making repairs that a Camry wouldn't have needed, have you really saved money? This is the exact kind of information our TCO tool takes into account. I suggest you, and anyone looking to buy a car, utilize it during the research process. — Ed.

Subject: First Drive/2004 Acura TL
From: Scott

I am writing in regards to "First Drive: 2004 Acura TL," by Erin Riches, posted on 09-02-2003.

Erin says that Acura PR staff claim that MP3 files have inferior audio quality. I realize this is not a statement made by Edmunds, but I still feel the need to correct this huge and inexcusable error.

Have you ever watched a DVD movie and been impressed by the sound? Have you ever watched a concert on DVD and been amazed by the clarity of the music? DVD movie discs are not only impressive visually — they sound awesome as well!

MP3 files use the exact same technology. Yes, some MP3 files sound awful. Yes, some people make crappy MP3 files. That doesn't mean all MP3 files are bad. Well-made MP3 files sound every bit as good as an ordinary CD, and it's the only way to put over 90 hours of music in a car at the driver's fingertips without forcing the driver to "reload."

I think it's rather ignorant that anyone would say they snubbed MP3 music because they didn't want to tarnish the car's image.

Please pass my comments on to Acura.

It's only possible to get additional playing time on a CD by reducing the amount of information placed on the CD. In the case of music files, this means compressing the original digital information by cutting the "bit rate" or the amount of information being processed in a given amount of time (bits per second is the most common measurement). While MP3 compression tries to reduce the size of a song's data stream without affecting its sound quality, the bottom line is that a percentage of the uncompressed song's information is removed as part of the MP3 encoding process. Some people can hear the reduced bit rate (and subsequent reduction in sound quality) better than others, but the reduction in sound quality is not theoretical, it is factual. Thus, if Acura's goal was to create uncompromised (or in this case, uncompressed) sound quality in the new TL, they essentially couldn't have designed an audio system that supported MP3 encoding. — Ed.

Subject: Focus vs. Mini vs. Global Warming
From: 537

Reading your article I was surprised by a lack of commentary on the fuel economy of these little gluttonous beasts. I rented a Ford Focus a few months back that had less than 1,000 miles on it and was appalled that on a highway drive from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara I had attained only 20 mpg — until now I thought that I had been left a depleted tank at the start. Now I see that 23 mpg is typical. That the Focus and the Mini are similar in this regard and that this is overlooked by your staff shows a certain lack of social awareness or a subconscious desire to increase Earth's temperature by a great many degrees (or both).

Why not call a spade a spade…the Focus and the Mini Cooper are mini guzzlers.

Our long-term Mini Cooper S has managed as much as 28 mpg, depending on how it is driven. During the course of this test we weren't being particularly easy on the throttle so the 23 mpg figure might not be accurate for everyone. As they say, "your results may vary." — Ed.

Subject: Microbus
From: Jay and Tracy

I have been reading several articles on the Net about the 2001 auto shows previewing a concept version of the Microbus. Will the American consumer see them on the market in '04 or '05?

Not in 2004, but the Microbus should be at a Volkswagen dealer near you by 2005. You can learn more about this car, and other future vehicles, in our Future Vehicles section. — Ed.

Subject: Horsepower per Gallon
From: Thomas

I am something of a driving enthusiast but more recently I've been bitten by the bug of ecological responsibility. I was wondering if you would ever have a feature, top 10 lists or an additional stat under your specs pages that could give us an idea of engine efficiency — maybe an average horsepower per gallon or something along those lines? I'd like to find out which cars can make good solid (fun) power without breaking the budget or the planet.

There's really no way to compute "horsepower per gallon" because a vehicle can make its peak horsepower with only a few ounces of fuel (though it would run out of gas very quickly). There has to be a time/distance factor, which is where mpg comes in. You could divide peak horsepower by average mpg. For instance, a 2003 Dodge Viper produces 500 horsepower but gets an EPA average (city mileage plus highway mileage divided by 2) of 16.5 miles per gallon. Divide 500 by 16.5 and you get the number 30.3 — but what is that? Is it 30.3 average mpg per peak horsepower? Now take a Honda Insight that makes 73 peak horsepower and divide it by the EPA average of 64.5 mpg and you get the number 1.1. So the Honda gets 1.1 average mpg per peak horsepower? Based on these numbers it seems the Viper is about 30 times more entertaining — or wasteful to drive…which seems about right. — Ed.

Subject: Ford vs. Mini
From: Sarunas

Your comparison test — Ford Focus SVT v Mini Cooper S — left me somewhat amazed. My only explanation, having read your article, would be that either your choice of cars or the conclusions were wrong. These cars simply cannot be compared. While Mini Cooper S is a seriously hot hatch, Ford Focus SVT could, at the best, be classified just as a little bit warmed-up Focus. It is too underpowered, too soft to deserve an epithet such as "hot" or even "sporty." If the concept of hot hatches is understood properly, then Mini would always come as a winner in this pair of cars by any standards: speed, handling, etc. That's why your conclusion seemed to me quite a surprise: you say that "SVT Focus offers greater cargo capacity, a softer ride and more intuitive interior features" — but these are not the qualities of a proper hot hatch (even a sporty hatch)! At least Mini, let alone Mini Cooper S, was never built with an idea of having a cargo capacity addressing the grocery needs of an average American family. I'm sorry to say that but, if these are your values, then you should not be looking any further than Toyota Camry or Ford Explorer. But that's probably just a clash of (driving) civilizations.

No, what we said was that the SVT Focus offers superior ride and cargo capacities while giving up almost nothing in terms of performance. If the cars were essentially a tie in acceleration and braking, and one of them has superior ride qualities and cargo capacity — and it costs less — then that car is the superior "hot hatch." It provides an equal level of performance and a superior level of functionality and value. — Ed.

Subject: MB C320 Wagon vs. Passat Wagon
From: Jef

I just read your follow-up report on the M-B C320 Wagon. Your report seems pretty favorable, and it's a really nice-looking car. We're torn between this car and a V6 Passat wagon. Have you done a comparison of these two cars that I can get my hands on? If not, can I ask which would you pick? Speaking of the Passat, I've read horror stories about coil pack problems. Do you know if that's still an issue with 2002s?

What you'll get with the Passat is far more value because it costs about $10,000 less and it is still an excellent vehicle. The Mercedes offers the three-pointed badge, and a few luxury features not available on the Passat, but it really comes down to what you want more, value or a premium brand name. The ignition coil problem with the 2002 Volkswagen and Audis engines has been addressed by the automaker, but if you encounter this problem the manufacturer will fix it under warranty. — Ed.

Subject: Strange Choice
From: T

I was surprised to see the BMW 3 so highly thought of by your editors when Consumers Reports says it's such a poorly built car they can't recommend it.

We had a long-term BMW 328i from 1999 to 2001, and we currently have a 2002 BMW 330i in the fleet. The 1999 3 Series had some mechanical glitches, but nothing so severe that we forgot about its amazing driving dynamics, excellent interior materials and attractive styling. The 2002 model currently in the fleet has been trouble-free for the past year.

If you really have concerns over the long-term reliability of a vehicle, we suggest you use our Total Cost To Own (TCO tool), which takes everything from resale value to maintenance and repair costs into account before giving you an accurate appraisal of how much a car will cost to own over a five-year period. — Ed.

Subject: PT Cruiser Turbo Review
From: John

I couldn't believe your review of the new Turbo PT Cruiser. You must have gotten a car with a rag stuck in the intake or something. We just traded in our 2001 Cruiser for a turbo model and are very happy with its performance. We were very careful with it the first 500 miles or so, but after that it was time to wring it out. I find that the engine has a whole lot of low-end torque and virtually no turbo lag. With the traction control turned off, I can smoke the tires so much that I can hardly breathe from all the smoke if I have the windows open. And as the car gets more miles on it, the performance continues to improve. And if that isn't enough power for you, for a measly $400, you can order the Stage I kit that adds another 35 to 40 hp. I found that even without that kit, I had enough power to keep up with a supercharged Pontiac Grand Prix, which is supposed to do 0-60 in under 7 seconds.

Subject: Best Bang for the Buck
From: Dan

We in the European car community feel you completely missed the mark with your last article on Cheap…fast cars. Not only was the Jetta 1.8T not included, but the original pocket rocket, the GTI, was also not invited to the challenge. While the prices of these cars have gone up over the years, I can assure you, they can be found for less than the SRT-4, and definitely less than the new Mazdaspeed. We anxiously await your reply (read excuse)….

The comparison test you're referring to was for four-door (or five-door, in the case of the Focus) performance sedans. The 2003 GTI comes only as a three-door hatchback. — Ed.

Subject: Thanks
From: Greg

I have just completed reading the entire article, titled "Confessions of a Car Salesman" on the Edmunds Web site. I was not only greatly enlightened about the entire car dealership business, but was able to relate to the article on several levels, after having bought many cars through dealerships myself. I, too, was a salesman although not in the same league as a car salesman. I worked for a very popular electronics retailer, typically emblazoned with a large "R" in a circle. Their sales meetings and sales tactics are very similar to those of the ones pointed out in your article. This is how I relate to your article on "the other side" of things.

I feel that your article is a much needed eye opener into the realm of car dealerships, and hope that many more people read it and become as enlightened as I have. I hope that not only consumers read your article, but owners of the car dealerships as well. Since two of them were infiltrated by an investigative reporter, and have exposed many (but probably not all) of their secrets, things will start to change, and then the consumer can start to win.

Subject: GT40
From: Najeeb

I enjoyed reading your report on the GT40 on Edmund's Web site.

In your interview of the GT40 team, Mr. Jamal Hameedi, Ford GT program manager, is quoted as saying "We talked to a lot of exotic car owners who said, 'I'd love to buy an American super car but they're just not around. There are no American super cars, so we have to go get Ferraris and Porsches. But we are so excited that finally someone is making an American super car.'"

Wouldn't you agree that the Viper is a super car? I mean, if it is not a super car, then what is it?! I don't know how Mr. Hameedi could agree with those owners that there is no American super car. Sure, the GT40 might have heritage, but there is no denying that the new Viper is a superb exotic on par, or maybe even better than the upcoming GT40 as regards performance.

Why didn't you kindly correct Mr. Hameedi and show him the folly of his thinking?

P.S. Even the Corvette could be considered as a "super car" by some! What was Mr. Hameedi thinking?

Mr. Hameedi was referring to the fact that no American car company produces a midengine, highly exotic vehicle similar to the vehicles produced by Ferrari, Lamborghini and Porsche (yes, we all know the 911 is a rear engine design, but that design is still less conventional than a front engine design). Additionally, while the new Viper has a much improved interior, it still doesn't measure up to the term "exotic" car or "super car" like a modern Ferrari — or the Ford GT. The Corvette is similarly lacking in "super car" status based on its interior design. A super car also can't be mass-produced (the Corvette is "out" again). Finally, a super car should have a justifiable (once again, a JUSTIFIABLE) price tag in excess of $100,000. — Ed.