Letters to the Editors
Send a letter to the editors

Subject: Flab
From: Steve

It seems that many current cars are plagued by an incredibly high curb weight. Modern bumpers are pathetically thin or are plastic, and drivetrains feature more aluminum than ever, but newer pickups ring in at more weight than, say, a 1976 truck, with far more steel and iron. I hear people claim it's the sound deadening, wiring or airbags, but it seems there must be more to it than that.

Where do you suspect the Chrysler Pacifica or the new F-150 to gain such flab?

I find your long-term tests to be the most compelling part of your site, as I'm the kind of guy who drives Land Cruisers and 4Runners with well over 150K miles on them. Keep up the good work.

You aren't kidding, Steve. We drove the Mercedes SLR last November and were impressed by its nearly 100 percent carbon-fiber construction. Yet it still weighs over 3,500 pounds! Seems awfully heavy for a half-million-dollar sports car with a McLaren pedigree. In the case of the SLR and Pacifica, it's the preponderance of luxury and safety equipment that piles on the tonnage. In other vehicles, like the Kia Sedona minivan (and I suspect, the Ford F-150) it's the desire to build a stiff platform while controlling costs. It takes more time and money to build a frame that is both stiff and light. In these situations, stiff is the more important of the two (the better to score well on crash tests) so many manufacturers simply increase the diameter of various frame sections and/or attach additional bracing in key areas. It makes for an undeniably stiffer, and safer, vehicle, but it also adds to the curb weight figure. — Ed.

Subject: Jaguar
From: Anonymous

I have a 2002 Jaguar XJ8. This is my fourth Jaguar XJ.

This vehicle is the worst Jaguar I have had in any kind of snow. If you stop the vehicle on any snow-covered surface, it is close to impossible to get moving again. I travel five miles to work and could not get the car home. I was stopped in an intersection and the vehicle would not go over the crest in the road. The police officer who arrived could not believe it until he tried to drive the vehicle (he told me to park it until spring because it was not safe to operate).

Tires are another problem, the vehicle has performance tires and the car eats them up in 12,000 to 14,000 miles.

I have talked to other owners at times of service and they have the same complaints.

My lease is up this year and before I take a 2004 could you tell me if you have any knowledge of this problem and if the all-new vehicle is any better?

Again, I'm not talking about deep snow, just a covered road and a slight incline.

A car's performance on snowy roads can be affected by many factors. Some vehicles, like Saabs, are consistently excellent snow cars. Other models, like any Camaro or Firebird built from 1967 to 2002, simply don't seem meant to operate on slick surfaces. However, even a Firebird can outrun a Saab on a snowy road if the Saab has pure performance tires and the Firebird is equipped with serious snow tires. You stated that your Jag has performance tires, and those are certainly contributing to the car's inability to function in the snow. I would suggest switching to either all-season tires or snow tires during the winter months. These tires will last longer and provide far better cold-weather performance — regardless of which generation XJ model you are driving. — Ed.

Subject: "Blinded By Chrome"
From: Adrian

I just read Philip Reed's article, "Blinded by Chrome: High-Priced Dealer Add-ons." Besides the advice on your Web site, can anything be done about these scams?

We just bought a new Range Rover which included a dealer-installed "Safari Package" consisting of some accessories such as brush bars, running boards, driving lights, etc. The package was shown with an MSRP of almost $20,000 (increasing the MSRP of the vehicle to almost $100,000) but we were offered a deal, supposedly at the dealer's cost of $12,834 for the package. We have since found out that the items, if purchased separately from any Land Rover dealer in the area, cost about $5,000 at retail price, including labor for installation.

I've done everything I can think of, even called the local DMV Investigations. They say they don't think a dealer is required to disclose the MSRP of add-ons, only the MSRP of the vehicle itself. Maybe the law needs to be changed?

The best way to avoid paying for dealer add-ons is to never buy them. A dealership is like any business, meaning profit is the motive behind every action. There's nothing illegal, or even immoral, about a dealership wanting to make money. But as our Advice section warns, and as you recently discovered, the amount of profit built into almost every dealer add-on is more than most consumers would pay — if they knew all of the facts up front. If a dealer is promoting add-ons that you either don't want or find highly questionable, at least in terms of pricing, take the prudent route: Just say no. — Ed.

Subject: ADM?
From: Anonymous

I recently looked at a Toyota Prius. On the window it had a sticker that said "ADM $5,995." I asked the salesman what that was, and he told me "Additional Dealer Markup." I guess because the cars are scarce, the dealer adds this charge. This doesn't sound right to me. Is this a common practice?

Not only is it common, it's standard procedure at most dealerships. Here at Edmunds.com we often refer to this as the "rip-off sticker," but that's actually a misnomer. The bottom line is that any car, at any point in time, is worth whatever someone will pay for it. Many new cars are sold at a discount (via incentives and rebates) because the manufacturer feels the discounted price is what it takes to move the cars off of the dealer lots. Other cars, like the Prius, are in high demand, allowing a dealer to charge over sticker and still sell the car. There's nothing illegal about it, and some would argue that in a capitalist society ruled by the free market, a dealer would be foolish not to sell a vehicle for as much as he can get. That said, we have a philosophical issue with paying over sticker because we think an adequate profit level is built into the MSRP. Sometimes it means passing on a car we would otherwise buy, or at least waiting until the market demand drops. — Ed.

Subject: 2004 Acura TL Road Test
From: David

I read your review with great interest because I am thinking of buying this car. However, the review emphasizes the variation of the car that few people would buy. Most of us normal people, who look to your review for guidance, would buy the five-speed auto with or without the navigation system. That should be the focus of your review. Telling me about the exotic version of this car, with summer tires, does not provide me with the information I need, especially as I look out my window and see an expanse of snow.

Please serve the overwhelming majority of car buyers. Sometimes when you dwell on the exotic end, one has the feeling that the normal car is dull, not fun to drive and just not with it.

We often test multiple versions of a car to give our readers a chance to see how it performs in various configurations. However, we can't test every version of every car, and we can't control the specific equipment that the manufacturer places on the test cars we are given. Even with those limitations, you can still get a solid sense of a vehicle from reading our road tests. We wouldn't really call summer tires and a manual transmission the "exotic" version of the TL. The differences between what we reported in the road test and how an automatic TL, with all-season tires and no navigation system, will perform are minimal. — Ed.

Subject: Mazda Tribute 2001 Rotor Weakness
From: Rick

I just had my wife's '01 Tribute in for service at 47,000 miles because the brake light came on. The tech reported to the service writer that it needed front brakes. During some quick conversation between the two, I remembered hearing the rotors being mentioned and the wear. I assumed it was a normal brake job at such low mileage, which would include replacing pads and possibly turning the rotors. When my wife picked up the car, and I was able to look at the service receipt, they had replaced the rotors. When I called and questioned them on why would rotors need to be replaced the very first time the car needed new brake pads, the response was that all the Mazda Tributes were like that and that is because the OEM (original equipment manufacturer) brake pads were extremely hard and cut the rotors down so much that they were too thin to turn! The comment was that we were lucky because they sometimes had to be replaced by 25,000 miles.

If this was a known fact by Mazda, why would it put inferior rotors (or incompatible brake pads) in a new model? Is this not a hazard that the consumer should know about? When they, the dealership, perform a front brake job on a Tribute, do they use the same grade of OEM parts resulting in the same thing happening the next time the brake light comes on?

I think that Mazda should cover the cost of rotor replacement, and offer a better quality of rotor that will allow the normal maintenance of turning it for approximately three sets of pad replacements.

What do you think?

We agree. Our long-term Mazda Tribute racked up only 37,000 miles during our two-year test, but it had its front brake pads replaced at 30,000 miles for $200, plus tax. There was never any mention of needing to replace the rotors. You might want to research this some more. I suspect that either the pads were so worn down that they scarred the rotors (not surprising at 47,000 miles) or the rotors didn't really need replacing…. — Ed.

Subject: Excellent 5 Series Article
From: Adam

I wanted to commend you for getting your facts straight and producing such a well-written article on the BMW 5 Series. I am an enthusiast of the first BMW 5 Series, the E12, and while most attempts at BMW 5 Series historical retrospects seem to omit or completely gloss over the E12, your article presented excellent (and correct) factual information about the E12.

More shocking than the great info you wrote on the original U.S. versions of the 5 Series, was your paragraph mentioning the European-only E12 M535i! I own one of the very few E12 M535is that are known to exist here in the U.S. and I absolutely love the car. I had owned an E12 528i (U.S. spec) before and about two years ago started searching for an E12 M535i and found my car last May. Including my car, I know of 12 or 13 M535is in the United States. It doesn't see the winters here in Chicago and is primarily a fun summer car to tinker with.

Thanks again.

Subject: Honda Purchase
From: Andrew

I read your info/reports on small cars and then purchased the Honda Civic LX coupe. I'm very happy about my new car and its price. Your reports on cars are accurate and very helpful. Thanks!

Subject: 2004 F-150 Long Term Test Introduction
From: Aaron

To whom it may concern:

I have been reading and using Edmunds as a resource for new and used vehicles for something like 7 years. It has grown into one of the most respected Web sites for vehicle shopping. Generally, the views and opinions are well thought out and well written, but this article has raised some questions about your credibility in my mind.

I think most of my comments are founded on my perception that the editors who wrote this article evaluated the vehicle based on little experience driving a full-size pickup every day. While true that many owners do just this, they evaluate how a pickup performs compared to other full-size pickups, not small commuter cars (such as one editor's Mini Cooper) or a hypothetical Lexus pickup (which does not exist). The editors also gave some comments that would be true of all full-size pickups. While I think they are valid, it would be more useful if they compared to other pickups to find out how other manufacturers handled the problems, if they even tried. I found the general tone of the article to be unfavorable for what I think are some invalid reasons based on its market.

I have a few comments regarding specific points the editors had.

Regarding the simplicity of Honda shopping: pickups are not just point A to B transportation. There are many types of uses and for that reason there are many configurations and options. Many customers do not necessarily want to step up into the next trim level when they only want a few other options. When one considers the price/equipment spread between a base $33K XLT 4WD Supercrew and a loaded-up $42K Lariat 4WD Supercew, packaging it all into three trim levels is not sufficient for the market.

Karl's Mini parking experience: Being one clearly not familiar with driving a full-size pickup, he should have noted that the reverse sensing system would be a key option if it were his money to spend. His "Too much trouble" comment proved he wasn't going to put any effort into adjusting his driving style and perspective to this type of market customer. Erin's comments were better, but show inexperience to the size/width of this vehicle as well.

Karl's detailed dealer service experience was comical. The combination of circumstances was presented in the article as if it was typical. Because of that particular day's events (I know how meetings suck up the better part of a day), he did not get the phone message questions until the time he expected to pick up the vehicle (3 pm). "I was unhappy with not getting a phone call and barely getting the truck before the dealership closed, but if your service writer goes home sick I'm not sure what official protocol is. At least the cigarette lighter worked and the steering felt better." Karl acts as if he is not dealing with other people who have feelings, get sick, have their own lives to lead. Yet, he did not get out of his meeting until 5:15 and wasn't going to be able to pick the vehicle up any sooner than 5:30 anyway. In my opinion, he should be grateful that he even got his vehicle that day. While my customer service experience generally favors domestic dealers, I have owned a Lexus, which has been in service more often than the Lexus and vehicle average. Lexus has the ultimate customer service reputation so I expected high standards. There are some things that were great, and other things that surprised me. Holding the dealer open for me for a few minutes they would do, but they generally don't work around my schedule if I had meetings until 15 min before close. If there were a better, quicker way to contact a customer (pager, cell phone maybe?) then he should leave it with the service representative.

There are many strong points and opinions (and not necessarily favorable) in the article which I like and learned about the vehicle. However, overall, I do not think the article was written in a manner to accurately reflect the vehicle's intent and give it less credit than some other articles and reviews. I do not own a 2004 F-150, but have owned a couple pickups and I am interested in possibly purchasing a new model.

Karl felt like he did adjust his driving style for a truck when he checked both side mirrors and turned completely around to look behind the truck. That was what shocked him. Even after doing all this, the Mini was completely invisible because of the F-150's tall stature. The Ford seems more on par with heavy-duty pickups than a standard light-duty truck in terms of size (it also comes precariously close to scraping the roof in our underground parking structure). Many truck buyers, by the way, could see this as an advantage to the F-150 versus the Ram, Silverado, etc. But for Karl, if he wants a full-size, yet relatively easy-to-drive truck he would stick with something slightly smaller, like a Ram or Titan. Also, he had staffers helping him try to track down the F-150's service writer while he was in his meetings, and they certainly would have picked up the truck for him without waiting until 15 minutes before the dealership closed. But nobody called him (or his staffers) back after multiple calls to the dealership all afternoon. It was only when he placed a last-minute call, late in the day, that someone told him, "Oh yeah, your service writer went home sick, but the truck is done and ready to pick up." — Ed.

Subject: Off Road?
From: Rich

My wife and I live at the top of a ridge in West Virginia. We're four miles from the nearest paved road. Last year we got more than 20 feet of snow. As I write this, the temperature outside is six below zero. Because getting off this mountain can be a matter of life and death, in 1998 we bought a Range Rover HSE. We suffered with it for three years and finally got rid of it. Anyone who thinks that the Range Rover is a capable all-terrain vehicle thinks the Merrit Parkway is an off-road experience. Our Range Rover was far less capable in the snow than is our Volvo Cross Country. It was constantly falling apart. We finally gave up retrieving the pieces of plastic which dropped off of the vehicle. On three occasions, the fuel door froze shut and we had to take the interior of the vehicle apart in order to add fuel.

When we drove through wet snow, the vehicle's elevator system would go nuts. Sometimes it would oscillate on its own. In one case it raised itself to the elevated position and stayed there — a dangerously unstable condition under highway conditions. The vehicle preferred to go sideways on snow or ice. The antilock brakes did not work on very slick roads and the brakes just locked up. The all-wheel-drive system isn't really all-wheel drive. If you get two tires spinning, you've had it.

We now drive a Dodge 2500 pickup. There is no comparison. The Dodge diesel is reliable, tough and wonderfully capable in the snow. And it gets almost twice the fuel economy of the Rover. Plus, it still has most of its original parts. I hope never to be forced to drive a Range Rover again — unless it's on an interstate where the Rover is, admittedly, quite capable. The only thing capable about the Range Rover was its radio. Nice volume.

We bought the Range Rover based on reviews like yours. Trust me, you guys have no clue as to what makes a capable off-road vehicle. None. Zilch. Only people who have someone else change their flat tires would say something nice about the Rover. On that subject, I actually bent the lug wrench trying to change a tire. I'm a wimpy 60-year-old and I bent the wrench.

The Rover is pathetic. People who admire its capabilities are clueless. Please cease and desist from writing stupid things — like putting "Range Rover" and "off-road" in the same sentence. We wasted nearly $70,000 because of pretenders like you.

Thanking you in advance for not presuming to know what makes a capable off-road vehicle. If you are really interested, come take a drive off-road in my 1980 Scout. Still the best off-road vehicle ever made. Except, perhaps, for my 1951 Austin Western motor grader. No kidding. What you write about stuff like this could get people killed if they really believe you. Please be careful.

You seem to be mixing "off-road" with "all weather." We will put a Range Rover up against your Dodge Ram diesel in an off-road competition any day. As for how the Rover performs on snowy and/or slippery conditions, it's true we've never personally given one a full workout, though we know plenty of people who have and say the vehicle is very capable. Regardless, I think between regular trips to the local off-road park and multiple class instruction sessions by off-road experts (including the good people at Land Rover, who do know quite a bit about off-road vehicle performance) I'm certain the Edmunds.com editors know more than "zilch" about what makes a capable off-road vehicle. By the way, if you've still got the 1980 Scout ("best off-road vehicle ever made"), why are you wasting your time with Rovers or Dodge trucks? — Ed.

Subject: Correction/December Letters
From: Max

You write that the 5-liter E-Class Mercedes puts out 300 hp. That number does not seem to impress me when compared next to the likes of a Volvo S60-R. The Volvo is a turbocharged 2.5L engine that puts out exactly 300 hp. Where is that mythical German efficiency, or has it migrated north to Sweden? I would very much like to see a horsepower to displacement to efficiency comparison in your auto tests.

Horsepower and displacement aren't the only measures of engine performance. The Mercedes makes its horsepower without the use of turbocharging, so the power comes on earlier and the overall power delivery is smoother and more consistent. The Honda S2000 makes 240 horsepower with 2.4 liters of displacement and no turbo- or supercharging, so if anything the German efficiency has traveled east. — Ed.