General Car Discussion

Proof that the MDX is not as competitive as you say?

Also, the NSX is going to be rare - it's a goddamn exotic, after all.

 

Sure the Mazda 5 goes into that category, but still lasted until 2018, the last year of production for the Premacy. (The Premacy is the 5.)

It might also be because people aren't into Acuras now, and now are continuously going for Hondas instead. I already know that an NSX wouldn't be common.... but I don't get why everywhere I went (especially the East Coast of USA), there was no NSX when I'm in a car or outside. It's like the NSX is now on-par the rarity of an Expo in America.
I do see a few Integras, mostly the most-known generation of the model. TLXs and RLXs are about less than 25% common, although I have seen it more than how many Traverses I saw.

 

Why do you skip from 5 to Premacy and back?

Also, why are you so fixated with the Expo? It's not even good for an 80s/90s compact van. Doesn't have the Prairie's silding doors, the Civic Aeroback's handling or the Tercel's nigh-legendary A-Series engine.

 

Isn't the Premacy the 5 then?

 

Just stick to one term.

Also, what's the deal with Expo? No Nissan practicality, Honda sporting prowess or Toyota reliability.

 

It's... more interesting than an old Serena.

 

Also I think no one really think that Honda can make Luxury Cars, I mean Honda are known for a lot of good things like they're reliable, they're good on gas etc etc, but being a car that will impress other people and having seats that feels like heaven yeah no.

 

It's like calling yourself an athlete because you can run faster than my 2-year-old cousin.

Also, living in Moldova is better than living in North Korea; does it mean Moldova is a good place to live in?
--- Post updated ---

That's the reason Genesises don't have anyhting in common with Hyundais, and the Lexus LS400 shared nothing with Toyotas.

 

It's more of an sports car, really.

Can we go back to the 5? I'm more into that car now, atleast for the MPV section.

 

OK, another argument won for me.

On the Mazda 5: rust galore, as I said.

 

...and results for side and small overlap crashes being poor (SOC) and marginal (SC).
Other than that, it's good.

 

You chose the wrong van to think of as a cool car.

No van fits that, but the Focus C-Max at least has rear multilink, and the Chevy HHR and Chrysler PT Cruiser can have over 200 HP.

 

When did I say it was cool? Also, who would ever mention the failures from Chevy and Chrysler to compare to an Mazda?

 

Because the bar set by the Mazda 5 is so low, and because the PT Cruiser Turbo and Chevy HHR SS are surprisingly good sub-$3k performance platforms?

 

...maybe because the 5 was just meant to be an normal MPV, and nothing else.

 

So why do you care about a car targeted a people who should have been accountants, but calculated it was not worth it?

 

It's decent to say the least.

 

Decent. Not special.

 

So, does that always matter? People liked the MDX (the model, no specific generation), but that doesn't mean it was special, but it was good.

 

It does matter.

Why like a car that should have been better?