
I am becoming convinced that car reviewers, not consumers, are at the heart of the problem America has with getting good autos.


Witness this week's auto reviews in the New York Times:
2009 Matrix/Vibe
2009 Murano


The Matrix/Vibe, with a 1.8L engine, runs on "squirrels". And having manual windows and locks is apparently a crime, in the reviewers opinion. I drove a Matrix in 2004 when looking for a car, and I found it had more than adequate power. And the mileage, for the smaller engine, at 24/32, is hardly great. The larger engine gets a pathetic (for that car's size) 21/28.


The Murano, despite being large and IMO unattractive, and not offering a 3rd row of seats, and having a ridiculously large engine, meets with praise. I find it hard to think of a scenario where a Murano will meet needs that a large station wagon wouldn't, but a wagon would cost less, get better mileage, be less likely to roll over, and be less hostile to other cars on the road in an accident.


It looks like I'll have to wait for several more years to see if the higher gas prices affect car design in a positive way. I sure hope so. I'd also like to think that, if more reviewers could get over their need for penis engine envy, and realize that, for most people, most of the time, even a 1.8L is more than adequate power, perhaps fewer people would insist on the overly large engines we put in our cars. I don't mind their existence, per se, I just mind not being able to put in an econo engine like one could in Europe for the same offering.