http://motortrend.com/features/news/112_news051025_suvoty/ (http://motortrend.com/features/news/112_news051025_suvoty/)
Motor Trend Awards 2006 Sport/Utility of the Year
Diverse field of contenders defines the modern classification of an SUV
Motor Trend, the world's number one automotive authority and part of Primedia's Consumer Automotive Group, has selected the Nissan Xterra as Motor Trend's 2006 Sport/Utility of the Year.
"The Motor Trend awards have become a staple in the automotive industry and we are pleased to award Nissan for stepping up to the plate with this impressive vehicle," said Angus MacKenzie, editor-in-chief of Motor Trend. "Our audience depends on us to honor the new model that best demonstrates overall superiority, significance and value, and the Xterra stood out in each of those categories for its outstanding engineering, impressive on and off-road ability and clear focus on its target customers."
Motor Trend's editorial staff selected this year's winner from a field of 12 vehicles after comprehensive evaluations, which included off-road, street and track testing. Eligible vehicles were new or substantially redesigned sport/utilities scheduled to be on sale by January 1, 2006. This year's contenders included Ford Explorer, Hummer H3, Hyundai Tucson, Jeep Commander, Kia Sportage, Mercedes-Benz ML, Mercury Mountaineer, Pontiac Torrent, Range Rover Sport, Subaru Tribeca, and the Suzuki Grand Vitara.
After many days of grueling testing, the Motor Trend editors agreed the Nissan Xterra raises the bar in terms of engineering, design, performance and safety. This vehicle delivers amazing 'bang for your buck,' thanks to clever product development that ensures versatility and value.
The Xterra's value continues in the interior where savvy technology and electronics add functionality, while passengers experience comfort, space and support. Special attention was paid to the cargo area with an easy to clean cargo floor, rubberized rear seats, ten utility hooks throughout and two adjustable channels in the floor, which make it easy to secure gear and bikes.
"The Xterra is not a truck trying to be a car, or a car trying to be a truck or a minivan trying to be anything else," said MacKenzie. "It is a sport/utility in the purest sense of the term. No matter where the driver decides to go, through a country side road, hauling gear up a mountain, or simply from point A to point B, the Xterra will get them there quickly, quietly and in style."
About the Testing and Evaluation Process
Each year since 1949, the editorial staff of Motor Trend has evaluated eligible vehicles based on three key categories: Significance, Superiority, and Value. Significance refers to innovation in engineering, technology, design, safety and packaging. Superiority levels the playing field and looks for class-leading levels of vehicle dynamics and performance, build quality and execution, and how well the vehicle performs its intended function. Finally, the all-important Value question asks, "What does this vehicle deliver in relation to what the consumer has to pay to purchase and own it?"
The complete report on the Motor Trend 2006 Sport/Utility of the Year testing and selection will be published in the December issue of Motor Trend, available on newsstands November 1, 2005. Multimedia coverage of the testing and selection process will be broadcast on Motor Trend Radio, hosted by Bob Long.
About Motor Trend
Motor Trend, a PRIMEDIA publication, was founded in 1949 and has a circulation of 1.1 million and a total readership of 7.1 million. Internationally recognized as the world's number one automotive authority, Motor Trend is one of the leading brands in automotive publishing. The Motor Trend brand is comprised of Motor Trend Classic, motortrend.com; Motor Trend Television; Motor Trend Radio; Truck Trend; Motor Trend International Auto Shows; Motor Trend en Espanol; and the renowned Motor Trend Car, Sport/Utility and Truck of the Year Awards program.
MOTOR TREND = AMERICA HATERS!
:lol:
THe Xterra, eh? That's a suprise...
QuoteTHe Xterra, eh? That's a suprise...
MOTOR TREND = AMERICA HATERS!!!!Trust me on this! :lol: :P
Hmm. I wouldn't have guessed that. I don't mind the Xterra, but I don't see anything fantastic about it.
[ nissan troll ] (http://forums.maxima.org/images/smilies/worshipnissan.gif) [ /nissan troll ] :D
QuoteQuoteTHe Xterra, eh? That's a suprise...
MOTOR TREND = AMERICA HATERS!!!!
Trust me on this! :lol: :P
Actually, MT has exhibited some domestic bias in the past, they actually named the Thunderbird their 2002 Car of the Year!
Figures. The ML and Range Rover Sport are too expensive to make the cut, probably, the Explorer and the like are fairly mundane, nothing is revolutionary or stand-out about the Tribeca other than its ugliness, the Tucson and Sportage are other SUVs with nothing special about them, the H3 is really no better than the Xterra. Don't know much about the Commander.
Good choice, though.
Quote[ nissan troll ] (http://forums.maxima.org/images/smilies/worshipnissan.gif) [ /nissan troll ] :D
:praise:
I applaud them for picking the Xterra.
I can't say I'm as surprised as some of you. They are a performance mag and will naturally pick a car liked by it's enthusiast readers. CR, on the other hand, leans toward mainstream for the same reason.
What?!? The Pontiac "Torrent" didn't win?!?
I am with cawimmer on this one. MT obviously hates America!!!
:o
QuoteQuoteQuoteTHe Xterra, eh? That's a suprise...
MOTOR TREND = AMERICA HATERS!!!!
Trust me on this! :lol: :P
Actually, MT has exhibited some domestic bias in the past, they actually named the Thunderbird their 2002 Car of the Year!
I was just trying to sound like PMC. :lol:
Yeah, I know. I just wanted to point out that it is fairly surprising to see the Xterra win over the H3 considering the domestic bias MT has exhibited in the past.
No enthusiast mag could resist the Nissan's vast performance advantage.
QuoteMOTOR TREND = AMERICA HATERS!
:lol:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! IT CANT BE! :o :o :o :o :o
<_< :lol:
QuoteWhat?!? The Pontiac "Torrent" didn't win?!?
I am with cawimmer on this one. MT obviously hates America!!!
:o
Hell, people barely know about that thing. I've barely seen a handful of commercials for it, and that's only in the last month or two.
Maybe Pontiac is purposefully refusing to draw attention to their Equinox clone. <_<
QuoteMaybe Pontiac is purposefully refusing to draw attention to their Equinox clone. <_<
It wouldn't be a bad plan. The only prolific Pontiac commercial (other than for the Solstice, of course) I've seen lately is for the G6 coupe, which looks really nice.
If I am correct, I think they chose the Kia Optima as the best midsize sedan once, but not for an award of anything like that..... So then I stopped subscribing.
That doesn't sound like anything I've seen. The Optima has not earned much praise among enthusiasts.
The stupidest thing they've ever done was name the Thunderbird as the 2002 Car of the Year.
It's called "following the hype". They did it with the 300 too, the only reason they weren't criticized there was because you could put a big engine in it and because it sold well.
That's a little different, the Thunderbird was a terrible car that was horribly overpriced, the 300 on the other hand is a pretty good car (though recent competition has passed it) that is only mildly overpriced.
QuoteThat's a little different, the Thunderbird was a terrible car that was horribly overpriced, the 300 on the other hand is a pretty good car (though recent competition has passed it) that is only mildly overpriced.
What competition has passed it? The 300C and Avalon are comparably priced, and the 300C has a V8 and RWD, whereas the Avalon has a ballooned body on an already overstressed Camry chassis.
QuoteQuoteThat's a little different, the Thunderbird was a terrible car that was horribly overpriced, the 300 on the other hand is a pretty good car (though recent competition has passed it) that is only mildly overpriced.
What competition has passed it? The 300C and Avalon are comparably priced, and the 300C has a V8 and RWD, whereas the Avalon has a ballooned body on an already overstressed Camry chassis.
There are other reasons that the Avalon is more likable from an overall standpoint than the 300. Yes, it has a V8 and RWD, and that's where a lot of it's appeal ends. Unless you like the styling, and then people seem to love it regardless of anything else.
QuoteThat's a little different, the Thunderbird was a terrible car that was horribly overpriced, the 300 on the other hand is a pretty good car (though recent competition has passed it) that is only mildly overpriced.
Let's not get back into this, shall we? I still consider the 300 V6 to be mediocre at best, it just doesn't stand out in any way and is quite expensive.
And I don't think the Thunderbird was a terrible car. It wasn't remotely sporty, but it wasn't designed to be. Think of it as an comfortable cruiser, a value option against an SC430 and a premium option against a Sebring. Nothing wrong with that, except that the retro styling attracted hype that it couldn't live up to.
QuoteQuoteThat's a little different, the Thunderbird was a terrible car that was horribly overpriced, the 300 on the other hand is a pretty good car (though recent competition has passed it) that is only mildly overpriced.
What competition has passed it? The 300C and Avalon are comparably priced, and the 300C has a V8 and RWD, whereas the Avalon has a ballooned body on an already overstressed Camry chassis.
The 300C is not a direct Avalon competitor except that they're roughly the same size and price. And it's not the C that is expensive without merits, it's the V6 versions.
QuoteQuoteQuoteThat's a little different, the Thunderbird was a terrible car that was horribly overpriced, the 300 on the other hand is a pretty good car (though recent competition has passed it) that is only mildly overpriced.
What competition has passed it? The 300C and Avalon are comparably priced, and the 300C has a V8 and RWD, whereas the Avalon has a ballooned body on an already overstressed Camry chassis.
The 300C is not a direct Avalon competitor except that they're roughly the same size and price. And it's not the C that is expensive without merits, it's the V6 versions.
I'll agree with you there. But the 300C represents amazing value for money if it's your style.
Right, I'm not criticizing the 300C at all. If you want a lot of acceleration for the dollar and interior space, it's hard to find a better choice. (The new Impala SS is astonishingly close, however.)
QuoteQuoteThat's a little different, the Thunderbird was a terrible car that was horribly overpriced, the 300 on the other hand is a pretty good car (though recent competition has passed it) that is only mildly overpriced.
Let's not get back into this, shall we? I still consider the 300 V6 to be mediocre at best, it just doesn't stand out in any way and is quite expensive.
And I don't think the Thunderbird was a terrible car. It wasn't remotely sporty, but it wasn't designed to be. Think of it as an comfortable cruiser, a value option against an SC430 and a premium option against a Sebring. Nothing wrong with that, except that the retro styling attracted hype that it couldn't live up to.
Sorry, the Thunderbird was and is pure crap. It has very little over the 30k Sebring convertible yet costs $10k more and is lacking a rear seat. And, I've never seen anyone say very good things about the Sebring.
Also, one could argue that the 300 line-up adds up to good:
300C (GREAT) + 300 Base/Touring/Limited (medicore)= 300 line-up (good)
It's all in the math.
That said, I still don't consider even the non C 300 to be medicore. It may not be at the top of the class, but compared to what was out before it it was nothing short of excellent (XG350, Crown Victoria, Park Avenue, Le Sabre, etc). I simply won't say that a car has gone from top of the class to medicore in 3 months.
QuoteFigures. The ML and Range Rover Sport are too expensive to make the cut, probably, the Explorer and the like are fairly mundane, nothing is revolutionary or stand-out about the Tribeca other than its ugliness, the Tucson and Sportage are other SUVs with nothing special about them, the H3 is really no better than the Xterra. Don't know much about the Commander.
Good choice, though.
I'd say the H3 is a lot worse than the Xterra. More expensive, lame powertrain, and lower visibility.
QuoteRight, I'm not criticizing the 300C at all. If you want a lot of acceleration for the dollar and interior space, it's hard to find a better choice. (The new Impala SS is astonishingly close, however.)
But there's no style or even heavy-handedness that comes with the 300C. I'll be the first to admit it's bad styling over good design (or actually the second, since Robert Cumberford said it first) and of the LX cars it's my least favorite.
QuoteQuoteFigures. The ML and Range Rover Sport are too expensive to make the cut, probably, the Explorer and the like are fairly mundane, nothing is revolutionary or stand-out about the Tribeca other than its ugliness, the Tucson and Sportage are other SUVs with nothing special about them, the H3 is really no better than the Xterra. Don't know much about the Commander.
Good choice, though.
I'd say the H3 is a lot worse than the Xterra. More expensive, lame powertrain, and lower visibility.
True. I just didn't want to be overly harsh on the H3. You all know how much I love Hummers.
:mellow:
QuoteQuoteQuoteThat's a little different, the Thunderbird was a terrible car that was horribly overpriced, the 300 on the other hand is a pretty good car (though recent competition has passed it) that is only mildly overpriced.
Let's not get back into this, shall we? I still consider the 300 V6 to be mediocre at best, it just doesn't stand out in any way and is quite expensive.
And I don't think the Thunderbird was a terrible car. It wasn't remotely sporty, but it wasn't designed to be. Think of it as an comfortable cruiser, a value option against an SC430 and a premium option against a Sebring. Nothing wrong with that, except that the retro styling attracted hype that it couldn't live up to.
Sorry, the Thunderbird was and is pure crap. It has very little over the 30k Sebring convertible yet costs $10k more and is lacking a rear seat. And, I've never seen anyone say very good things about the Sebring.
The Thunderbird is much quicker, and handles better (though neither are close to any other convertible in that price range) and has much better steering response, has a much nicer interior, and more refinement, and it wasn't close to $10k more after demand dropped.
And the Sebring isn't a bad car either for its market, it has a usable rear seat, reasonable pricing, and a comfortable and quiet ride. It's just not sporty, or rigid.
Also, one could argue that the 300 line-up adds up to good:
300C (GREAT) + 300 Base/Touring/Limited (medicore)= 300 line-up (good)
It's all in the math.
I prefer to separate the two, calling the 300 line "good" in general over-compliments the V6 versions and is unfair to the V8. There's no reason not to separate them when the separation is that easy.
That said, I still don't consider even the non C 300 to be medicore. It may not be at the top of the class, but compared to what was out before it it was nothing short of excellent (XG350, Crown Victoria, Park Avenue, Le Sabre, etc). I simply won't say that a car has gone from top of the class to medicore in 3 months.
Standards change. Let's look at an approximate order of the $30,000 large-sedan options as of six months ago (the specific order is debatable, but not in a way that should make a difference):
1. Avalon
2. Five Hundred
3. Maxima
4. LaCrosse
5. 300
6. Impala SS S/C
7. Crown Victoria
8. LeSabre
Since then, two of the three main cars behind it (four if you go to a lower price bracket and stick in the XG) have been replaced.
Look at the Colorado: it was arguably a class leader when it was introduced in 2004, and then all but one competitor was redesigned, and it's almost universally considered to be the worst vehicle in its class.
And that's an even more extreme example. The 300 V6 was never at the top of its class.
You make a few good points, but I have a few as well:
1. You can't separate the lines, it just doesn't make sense for a magazine like MT to test the different models separately.
2. Excellent point about the Colorado, but I still wouldn't call it medicore and it has moved a lot farther than the 300 has.
3. What exactly was better than the 300 when it came out? Remember that there was no Five Hundred, the Avalon was still in its 3rd gen, and the Lacrosse and Maxima don't really compete in this class anyway, they are too small.
QuoteYou make a few good points, but I have a few as well:
1. You can't separate the lines, it just doesn't make sense for a magazine like MT to test the different models separately.
Who's talking about MT? The 300C has strong points, the 300 V6 does not. It's like separating an Impreza from a WRX. C/D even awarded a 10Best spot specifically to the Mazda6 s once.
2. Excellent point about the Colorado, but I still wouldn't call it medicore and it has moved a lot farther than the 300 has.
The Colorado is definitely mediocre by now. Every competitor advanced past it in terms of acceleration, towing capacity, and interior space, and its ride, handling, and interior quality are midpack at best as well.
It's cheap and fuel efficient, but that's not more than midpack. And I agree that it moved farther than the 300, it used to be a class leader and the 300 (not 300C) definitely never was.
3. What exactly was better than the 300 when it came out? Remember that there was no Five Hundred, the Avalon was still in its 3rd gen, and the Lacrosse and Maxima don't really compete in this class anyway, they are too small.
The 300/300C, Five Hundred/Montego, and new Avalon were all 05 models. The LaCrosse and Impala are larger than the 300, and the Maxima is only inches away.
...
"The 300/300C, Five Hundred/Montego, and new Avalon were all 05 models. The LaCrosse and Impala are larger than the 300, and the Maxima is only inches away."
The 300 was out a couple months earlier than the other three and I can't say much to the last part.
Once again, the 300 was a class leader, the only car that you could even possibly say was better than it when it came out was the Maxima (the Lacrosse didn't come out until fall '04, did it?).
It was never around long enough before the others to be effectively named to be a class leader.
And I forgot about the Park Avenue, that could outclass it even if you do think that being out two months before several redesigned competitors can mean that it was temporarily the best. The old Avalon was deeply discounted as well, so I'd toss that above the 300 as well.