2010 Nissan Maxima SV Sport is a lot of car for a lot of coin

Front-wheel drive is a funny thing. When originally introduced during the Thirties in the Cord 810 (then later in the awesome supercharged 812) and the Citroën Traction Avant, FWD was hailed as a major breakthrough, a wondrous technological innovation that allowed for lower ride height and greatly increased passenger space. Postwar consumers got a taste of the wonders of FWD with the iconic Citroën DS. At the top of its game in the Sixties, General Motors reintroduced FWD to American consumers with two remarkable luxury coupes: the 1966 Oldsmobile Toronado and the 1967 Cadillac Eldorado. Come the Seventies, Citroën produced what is arguably the greatest GT coupe of that decade, the impeccable (and FWD) SM.

It's not that RWD is always better than FWD. Only in this case, it is.

Roll the clock forward to the Eighties and suddenly everything was being tugged around by its front wheels. Honda, Toyota, Nissan, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler all jumped head first onto the FWD bandwagon and, for the most part, they haven't looked back. Granted, Cadillac has rethought which wheels get driven, but with the exception of a dinosaur livery-mobile, there isn't a single rear-wheel-drive Lincoln to be found. Even Volkswagen got in on the transversely-mounted engine madness. This left only the Germans – namely Mercedes-Benz and BMW – to seriously carry the rear-wheel drive passenger car torch for nearly a decade. Sure, Lexus and Infiniti brought out some heavy hitting RWD sedans along with a raft of FWD offerings (M30 I30, G20 anyone?), but Acura never bothered.

The average gearhead hates FWD for all the right reasons (weight distribution, steering feel, the front tires being asked to both propel and turn, etc.), and during a recent discussion we had with a half-in-the-bag PR guy, [NAME REDACTED] exclaimed, "Front-wheel drive sucks!" So, how can a technology go from the penthouse to the doghouse like that? One answer (of many) comes from the Minnesotan economist/social philosopher Thorstein Veblen and his book The Theory of the Leisure Class. Here's a quick, ten-cent Cliff Note version: When electric lighting first appeared, only the rich could afford electric lights. As such, electrically lit dinners were considered romantic and desirable. However, once electrification trickled down to the unwashed masses, only the rich could afford both bulbs and candles. Hence, candlelit dinners became en vogue. Which – believe it or not – leads us very nicely to the 2010 Nissan Maxima SV Sport and its $38,384 asking price.
Granted, you can get a new Maxima for less scratch. The base car starts at "just" $30,460. But the car Nissan provided us has a price tag of nearly $40,000. You do get a lot car for that money, but at the end of the day, $38,384 is a big chunk o' change. So big, in fact, that you might be tempted to choose an Infiniti G37 sedan (beginning at just over $33,000), or even a Cadillac CTS (starts at $37,000). Two similarly-sized cars that are, as it happens, rear-wheel drive.

The Maxima's shape is one thing it has going for it. When the third-gen Altima was introduced in 2002, suddenly the once lofty Maxima looked an awful lot like its lower-priced platform mate. Then the Altima was redesigned and placed on Nissan's new D platform in 2007 and it still resembled the more pricey (and very long-in-the-tooth) Maxima. Finally, last year, Nissan brought us an all-new Maxima that didn't resemble anything.



A quick poll of the Autoblog staff reveals that almost all of us like the shape. From the blunted front end to the deeply sculpted sides to the fat, sexy haunches, there is little question that design-wise Nissan's biggest sedan has got the look. Though admittedly strange at first, the harpoon/fish hook head and tail lamps look sharp (no pun, no pun), especially when set off against a dark color. And these are some of the finest looking wheels we've seen on any car, let alone a big FWD sedan.

The interior's nearly as good as the exterior. First and foremost is that thick (we're talking BMW-thick) leather-wrapped steering wheel that is mercifully (nearly) free of button clutter. While all Maximas now ship with a Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT), the large, almost oversized aluminum flappy paddles behind the wheel feel great. The seats are also thick, many-way adjustable and comfy. Though we'd like some more leg and hip bolstering – the seat bottom is a little flat – rear seat customers will enjoy their spacious perch. The instrument binnacle is intelligently designed and filled with big, legible gauges, exactly what one would need if you were to take Nissan up on its renewed 4DSC (Four-Door Sports Car) boast.



Many of us are also fans of the very Infiniti-like nav-cluster. Overall, the quality of the materials is on par with other entry-level luxury offerings with one big exception: The area surrounding the gear selector is not only dull, but almost undesigned. And if the car's got a CVT (i.e. no set speeds), why not follow BMW's lead and move the gear lever to the column so as to free up some space? A minor quibble, maybe, but that area was beneath (again with the no pun) the rest of the rather pleasingly pleasant interior.

In the Maxima, the CVT experience is better than in its smaller siblings.

One justification for the Maxima's pricey sticker is that lump of VQ goodness found under the hood. Heaping praise upon Nissan's wonderful V6 is like calling firefighters heroes – you just do it, and only the crazy will argue. Still displacing 3.5-liters – unlike the Z, G, M and FX, which have jumped up to 3.7-liters – the VQ35DE produces a whopping 290 horsepower and a stout 261 pound-feet of torque, more than enough to scoot the fairly big boy (190 inches, 3,565 pounds) to 60 mph in less than six seconds. In terms of potency, those 290 horsies are more than you get from 3.5-liter V6s found in the Accord (271 hp), Avalon (268 hp), Taurus (263 hp) or Mercedes-Benz E350 (268 hp). And way more than you get in a 211 hp turbocharged Audi A4. But none offer a CVT... (Note: FWD Audi A4s have a CVT)

Allow us to state up front that when CVTs first arrived on the scene they were nasty, despicable things that were constantly whirring, wheezing and searching for who knows what every time you buried your right foot. Much like automatic transmissions – only worse. That rant out of the way, the second generation of CVTs are actually... okay.



The first good one we experienced was in the cyber barge Lexus LS600hL, though we chalked up that transmission's okay-ness to the fact that Lexus had buried the shiftus interruptus beneath the brand's requisite nine tons of sound deadening. Besides, in a $120,000 automobile, the CVT had better be good. Then we got our paws on some down market CVTs – principally in Nissans like the Rogue, Versa and Cube. And you know what? Most of us like 'em just fine. They weren't Lexus wonderful, but they were a fifth the price.

In the Maxima, the CVT experience is better than in its smaller siblings, and about on par with the big, electric Lexus. In fact, for the first 20 minutes we were behind the wheel, we were unaware (fine – we forgot) that the car didn't have a regular old slush box. As our normal testing procedure begins with jamming up the curvaceous 110 freeway to Pasadena to fetch Drew Phillips and his photographic chops, we threw the tranny into manual mode and used the paddle shifters. That's right, the Maxima (like the LS600hL) has six faker-gear ratios (though the Lexus has eight) that allow it to behave just like an automated manual. It was only on suburban streets back in regular mode that we noticed the tach needle slowly rising and falling, as opposed to a regular automatic where the needle falls precipitously with each gear change.



So, how's the Maxima drive? Well, it's very quick. Stomp the gas and this sucker just goes for it. However, due to so much power spinning the front wheels, you are very aware that you are being pulled to extra-legal speeds, instead of pushed. To be fair, this has been a Maxima trait since they first started dropping VQs into the sedan. But in the 2010 Maxima, you really do notice all 290 ponies. The sensation is like holding onto a horse's reins. And torque-steer – the engine's tendency to try and rip the wheel from your hands when you throttle out of a corner – is an all day event.

While there's nothing inherently rotten about FWD, there is something unsettling about big horsepowered FWD cars – unless they've got a fancy way of fighting back against all that power, like in the power-chopping Mazdaspeed3 (fuel gets cut early in low gears at high RPM) or the unequal-tracked Citroen DS/SM (where the front wheels extend out further than the rear ones). With the Maxima, you're just left to arm wrestle the mighty motor. We hope you've been eating your Wheaties.



When you're not shredding apexes, the Maxima is a fairly cool customer. The ride is plush and plenty comfy, while the cabin is quiet and nicely shielded from wind and motor noise. Those big, beautiful wheels do make some racket, though. Nothing fatal, but you hear 'em. Should you choose to saunter through corners (instead of play Lewis Hamilton), the well-engineered chassis can carry plenty of speed around the bends. Just watch your right foot.

Far from a four-door sports car (sorry, Nissan), the Maxima SV Sport is a roomy, nearly-luxurious, semi-athletic steed. If we woke up tomorrow and (somehow) discovered we owned a copy, we'd be happy. But would we pay $38,000 for one? Short answer: No. There's nothing really wrong with the car, save for its sticker. Who then would consider a Maxima spec'd out like our test vehicle? Best we can figure, an Accord owner who is quite happy with his/her car but just wants something a little nicer, a little quicker and a whole lot more good looking. Then again, they might not. For our money, we'd take an Infiniti G37 sedan with the six-speed manual and pocket the extra $2,000. It's not that RWD is always better than FWD. But in this case, it is.

Mitsubishi i is a good car with a bad name

We're looking at a long, nearly straight, almost totally traffic-free downhill. We'd climbed up to the base of the Palm Springs to Idyllwild Ariel Tramway. Our goal was to see how fast Mitsubishi's tiny i could go. We're on the gas, and the teensy, turbocharged 660cc three-banger is giving us all its got. The speedometer ticks upwards, now cresting 100. In front of us is nothing but inviting tarmac. Deeper and harder we push and the numbers keep ticking up. 119, 120, 121 and then finally hitting 122. We felt we left a little on the table and could have probably achieved a terminal velocity of around 130. Maybe. 125 for sure.

Before you crime and punishment types climb upon your soapboxes, we should mention that the right-hand drive, JDM-only i reads out in kilometers per hour. Meaning that our top speed was almost 76 mph. And we stand by our assertion that we totally could have hit 80 mph.
The badly named i (sorry, it's true) is an award winning kei car that's been wildly popular in Japan ever since it was released in 2006. Mitsubishi had a couple on hand – one gas, one electric – during a recent press event and they were kind enough to let us take the gas-powered model 3,000 feet up a mountain. Even better, the i made it all the way up no problem. Obviously, Mitsu didn't bring these cars all the way out to California simply to amuse some journalists. The i is coming to America says Mitsubishi. When we asked when that would be, they could only say "soon."




But do we want it here? Quite simply, yes. There's a lot to be said for a car that's essentially all wheelbase. Plus it looks like it popped out of a Robotech cartoon. While the car is narrow, there's a surprising amount of room inside. If you're six feet tall, you'll have more than a fist's worth of headroom and the rear seat can fit two humans, and three if they're incredibly skinny and/or good friends. There's even space for a bag or two.

More interesting (to us) is the i's "rear-midship" powertrain layout, which is a long winded way of saying it's rear-engined. Shoved in behind the rear seats is the aforementioned turbo/interecooled DOHC MIVEC 0.66-liter three-cylinder motor. All that tightly packaged tech is good for about 65 horsepower and around 70 pound-feet of torque. Not much, until you consider that the i weighs under a ton – 1,980 pounds with the automatic like in our test car.



That's actually plenty of gumption to motivate the i around town. In fact, the diminutive little four-door is quick off the line. It was only when pushing the car up into the 70 mph range that we wished for more power. All in all, we were happy with the engine – it suits the car well. But of course, odds are if/when Mitsubishi brings the i over, a more U.S.-market-friendly (read: bigger) engine will somehow find its way into the engine bay. Smaller than 1.5-liters is all we know, aside from the fact that the 660cc turbo won't pass U.S. emissions standards. But that's not the only change we'll see.

The car's insect-like front fascia will fail the fed's five-mph bumper tests faster than Superman running from kryptonite. The i also has the skinniest front tires we've seen fitted to a car since an MG T. As you can imagine, corner-carving is not this vehicle's forte. In fact, with those anorexic wheels, high speed hoonage proved a bit scary. However, the i is kitted out with MacPherson struts up front, so we think that fatter meat would make a difference. though the De Dion tube out back (i.e. a fussed and fettled over solid beam swing axle) might argue otherwise.



But again, the i is first and last a city car, not a back road barnstormer. Since lots of Americans live in cities, we're thinking this sharp-looking, alien-esque little guy just might find lots of takers. Especially if Mitsubishi makes it about six inches wider, which they're considering.

The catch? The gas mileage would need to be real good. Mitsubishi is mum on exact mileage estimates, but in Japan it's rated at 90 mpg – take that for what it's worth. As such, we're not even going to guess. Maybe more importantly, we'll also get the i MiEV, an all electric version of the i. We drove i MiEV, too and – as suspected with its electric drive train – it felt even punchier than the gas-powered i. However, as the i MiEV was low on juice and there was no way to quickly charge it, we literally drove it around a parking lot.



Regardless of the MPG numbers, the quirky i has proved to be a pretty big cult hit in Japan, selling over 35,000 units – a sizable amount by Japanese standards. We'd love to see the i given the same chance here. But the name really has to go. Maybe Devo? Hey, it rhymes with Evo...

2010 BMW X6 ActiveHybrid is technologically impressive... but to what end?

BMW's pitch on how great the X6 ActiveHybrid is goes like this: it's the world's most powerful hybrid vehicle, fuel consumption is reduced about 20 percent compared to a similar vehicle without a hybrid drivetrain, and no matter what speed you're going, the incredibly complicated powertrain is performing at the most efficient level possible. All of this power means that the X6 hybrid is no sluggish Toyota Prius, offering frugal but unexciting performance. On the other hand, the size and weight of BMW's luxury hybrid crossover means that, well, the X6 hybrid is no Prius in the mileage department, either.

Let's start by congratulating BMW for bringing its first batch of hybrids to market (the 7 Series ActiveHybrid is launching alongside the X6). In everyday traffic, the hybrid system helps keep fuel consumption down – to a still-lame 18 mpg combined (estimated) – and, since the engine can shut down at stops, the ultra-quiet interior made sitting in Miami traffic during our preview drive almost a pleasure. Nevertheless, there's still a lot of vehicle here that hampers any attempt at real fuel efficiency gains. The X6 ActiveHybrid weighs 5,688 pounds for crying out loud – 400 pounds more than the non-hybrid. This vehicle simply doesn't makes a lot of sense for anyone actually interested in fuel efficiency. Who does it make sense for? Follow us past the break as we try to find out.
The ActiveHybrid powertrain in the X6 is a complex animal, being that it's made up of a twin-turbo 4.4-liter V8 engine, two electric motors (one that puts out 91 hp and a smaller brother that manages 86 hp), three planetary gearsets and a 2.4 kWh NiMH battery pack. All that machinery manages to produce 357 kW (485 horsepower) and 780 Nm (575 pound-feet) of torque. This is what BMW has created out of the two-mode hybrid system that the Bavarians co-developed with General Motors and Mercedes (think Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid and Mercedes-Benz ML450 Hybrid). BMW claims its hybrid SUV can achieve fuel efficiency of up to 9.9 l/100 km (about 24 mpg U.S.) on the European drive cycle, but during our a few hours in the 2010 BMW X6 ActiveHybrid Sports Activity Coupe, we averaged just 14.8 liters (16 mpg U.S.).



On the way to 16 mpg, the X6 ActiveHybrid performs like one expects a BMW to. It wasn't possible to test the handling much on the straight and clogged streets of southern Florida, but the CUV had plenty of punch for entering highways – the 0-to-60 mph time is a quick 5.4 seconds – and keeping up with traffic was a doddle. Power, be it electric or gasoline-fueled, was readily available whenever we touched the accelerator pedal. As much as the drivetrain offered, we didn't get anywhere near the vehicle's electronically limited top speed of 130 mph due to traffic. The good news is that there's no need to go fast to enjoy the drive: at any speed, the X6 offers a comfortable cruise, with bumps and other annoyances passed over with ease. Also, the X6 ActiveHybrid's electrical steering feels about as good as any hydraulic system ever has - at least in these non-challenging circumstances.

For all the work that BMW engineers did to make the X6 ActiveHybrid burn less fuel, they haven't chosen to apply some of those same easy tricks across the X6 lineup. For proof, take a look at those special aerodynamic wheels that are available only on the gasoline-electric version of the X6. While they do reduce emissions by 0.1 grams of CO2 per kilometer, don't try to order them for your standard X6. The reason? BMW wants to give its first hybrid in the U.S. a distinctive look and those special wheels are one way the driver can make a statement. All is not lost, though, and BMW told us that making the aero wheels an option on the standard X6 is "in discussion."



Of course, the real efficiency gains come from the battery, not the wheels. The liquid-cooled 2.4 kWh NiMH battery pack sits between and above the rear wheels, offering the powertrain 1.4 kWh of its total power. The part-electric set-up gives the X6 four operating modes: eDrive, eBoost, Charge and Drive. eDrive is the most efficient and uses nothing but electrons to attain up to 37 mph for up to 1.6 miles. It's not a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV), but it works great in parking lots and during stop-and-go traffic like we experienced in Miami. eDrive doesn't help drivers who like to engage the manual shifter, however, as it's available only when the transmission is in D, not in manual shift mode. eBoost, on the other hand, uses the two electric motors to boost the internal combustion engine's performance when needed and is the reason this beast never feels sluggish. 'Charge' mode means the regenerative brakes are capturing energy that would normally be lost from the discs, and finally, 'Drive' just means the X6 is using nothing but the V8 to move forward.

The good news is that the complicated transmission of power goes completely unnoticed, showing that BMW's engineers have done a tremendous job of blending the vehicle's electric and gasoline-fed powerplants. Shifts are wonderfully smooth and the switch from electric to hybrid to pure gasoline drive just happens. You can hear the changes if you pay close attention – and there is an analog display under the speedometer showing the battery's state of charge and whether or not it is charging up – but the best way to tell what is happening under the hood is to have the drive mode displayed on the iDrive's info screen.



Even though there are two different brake systems on the X6 ActiveHybrid, don't look to the brake pedal to reveal which is engaging. The brake pedal is decoupled from the actual brake system and uses simulated feedback to tell the driver what is happening. Most of the time (up to 0.3 Gs), only the electric motors are used to brake the X6 ActiveHybrid. In other situations (read: emergency or sudden stop), the standard friction brakes kick in. The decoupled simulation is meant to make sure the driver experiences the same feeling at all times, and it easily passes for the real thing. Because the regenerative brake system in the X6 uses both electric motors, it is able to capture about 25 times more energy than the company's other regen systems. This isn't as big a deal as it sounds, since BMW's Brake Energy Regeneration is fairly wimpy. The two 60 kW motors are theoretically capable of capturing up to 120 kW of energy, but the battery can only handle 57 kW.

The X6's design has its fans and detractors, but the Kammback shape does help the X6 stand out – for now. We can deal with the hood hump – excuse us, PowerDome – and the tall rear end most of the time, but from inside, the design is troubling. Backing-up is terrible, and the rearview mirror only serves to make the back of the car look like it's a million miles away. Luckily, BMW has installed an almost-magical back-up camera system, which, like Infiniti's Around View Monitor, uses cameras built into the rear end and under the side mirrors of the X6. When driving backwards, an image appears on the navigation screen that looks like a camera is floating above the car and showing the close surroundings. Using this screen and the curved side mirrors, it's possible to back out of a garage or parking spot safely. Trying to do so just by turning your head? Not so much.



While we're still waiting for the EPA's official figures, BMW expects the X6 ActiveHybrid will to achieve 17 mpg in the city, 19 on the highway and 18 combined. That's better (except on the highway) than what the best non-hybrid X6 can muster: 15/21/17 for the 2010 X6 xDrive35i. A better comparison for the X6 ActiveHybrid is to the X6 xDrive50i, which also has a V8 engine and gets 13/18/15. The X6 ActiveHybrid goes on sale in the U.S. next month and will be built in Spartanburg, South Carolina. The starting price is $89,775 (including an $875 destination and delivery charge), which would make it even more expensive than the 555-hp X6 M.

In the end, we're not sure who will want the X6 ActiveHybrid. Most likely they'll be people who own an aging BMW X5 and want something new with more power and no penalty at the pump (at least compared to the rest of the X6 lineup). If past popularity of big BMWs is any indication, there is certainly a market for the X6 ActiveHybrid. Today, about 20 percent of BMW sales are X models. Introduced in 1999, the X5 was the brand's first SUV and remains the most popular, with 911,000 sales. The X3 has sold 554,000 and the X6, introduced just last year, has already sold 57,000 units.

We need more time with this big hybrid crossover to be sure, but based on our short drive, the BMW X6 ActiveHybrid will probably not find itself on our shopping list. All that extra hardware (and weight) and what we expect will be the highest price of any X6 model is balanced only by a marginal gain in MPGs. For us, although it's a laudable technological achievement, the value just doesn't add up.

2010 Hyundai Tucson a green machine with few compromises

Little more than ten years ago, the meat and potatoes of the automotive universe were C and D segment sedans. Think Corolla and Camry; Focus, Fusion and (old) Taurus; Civic and Accord. But then, for better or for worse, something significant shifted in that old sales paradigm. Specifically, crossovers. Also known as CUVs, the overgrown wagons still ride around on C and D platforms, only a foot higher off the ground. Why? Blame the SUV craze and/or what automakers refer to as the "command seating position," an odd euphemism for sitting up high.

A momentary flirtation with $4 per gallon gasoline has – for the most part – shut down the large SUV game. But for whatever reason, consumers still want and demand command seating, so much so that Hyundai believes the compact CUV segment will experience more growth than any other niche in the market. Hyundai knows this specialized segment well, as the outgoing Tucson – the Korean brand's previous generation small CUV – has sold more than one million copies. However, the Tucson has been around since 2005, and to put it nicely, the old Tucson wasn't exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. And this is a gun fight. Knowing that, Hyundai has just rolled out its newest car, the 2010 Tucson. But is it a killer?

Judging by nothing except the flowing new sheetmetal, we'd argue yes. Hyundai has banned boxy from its styling lexicon and is calling its design language of both the new Tucson and the coming-in-January Sonata "Fluidic Sculpture." The name is so contrived that Hyundai's affable President and CEO John Krafcik apologized for the art school jargon during the Tucson's introduction. But silly name notwithstanding, the results are noteworthy, if not striking. The central idea is that, "the line flows around the vehicle." As opposed to say one box grafted onto a larger box. Like the old Tucson.

Hyundai is actively seeking to establish an emotional connection with its customers. Something that, no matter how you slice it, the previous Tucson could never do. And really, most older Hyundais. No one's every been turned on by inoffensive and generic. Fluidic sculpture on the other hand, is anything but. The new curves have the potential to attract some while turning off others. That's a good thing. The best view of the Tucson is the front three-quarters where, starting with the fancy wrap-around headlamps, you can see the thrust of the design's flow and how winds its way around the car.



The sloping hood and highly raked windshield, combined with the grille, comes off as distinctive yet pleasantly restrained – especially in this era of giant, gaping maws. And while there's a little bit of an insect face to the front end, it's used to good effect. Our least favorite angles are from the side. Not only is there too much Buick Enclave going on, but the black plastic chunks below the doors look like the afterthoughts they are. The rear end is pretty simply okay, though it does resemble a Subaru Tribeca. Just a smidge. Besides, SUVs and CUVs never look great from behind. We should point out that the rear spoiler is standard – not because it looks good (it does), but because it aids fuel economy. Overall though, the new Tucson looks several orders of magnitude better than the old one. And much of its competition.

Like the bodywork, the innards of the Tuscon have received a thorough makeover. The outgoing model had all the inner charm and sophistication of a 2005 Hyundai. The new car (obviously) raises the game, but those looking for a lot of trickle down from the Genesis are advised to keep looking. Though we can reasonably compare the Tucson's innards to a Genesis Coupe, it might be damning with faint praise. Not only is there plenty of ticky tack plastic covering wide expanses (something that probably only bothers us nit picky journalist types), but you're forced to touch some of it. Specifically your elbows and knees. As the driver, your left elbow rests on a surprisingly thin piece of faux-leather covering up some rock hard plastic. After an hour, it's both noticeable and uncomfortable. And while the center stack's design is refreshing, it's bordering into Honda's weird territory of organic shapes and spread out buttons.




The 2010 Tucson comes in two flavors, GLS (standard) and Limited (premium). We tested the Limited, which adds a good deal of content to the Tucson's interior. Namely a 6.5-inch navigation screen, leather seats and Hyundai's first "panoramic" sunroof, which is a fancy way of saying two panes (though only one opens). Hats off to Hyundai for nice, comfy leather seats. You can get leather in practically any vehicle these days, but the quality is often times closer to dorm couch than anything resembling luxury. The Tucson not only uses a high grade of leather, but goes the extra step and furnishes the seats with two types of leather. A rougher, stickier grade for your thighs and shoulders, and a smoother, more butter-like surface for your butt and back. An unnecessary step perhaps, but a good one that pays dividends during the drive. The rear seats might even be better than those in the front, reminding us of the Infiniti FX's rear quarters – a compliment, to be sure. Thanks to a three-inch overall stretch versus the previous Tucson, rear passenger leg room is good, even for six footers.

At 6.5-inches big, the nav screen is only one and half inches larger than modern smartphones. Meaning it's difficult to clearly see streets and, frankly, just too small. However, when displaying the contents of your iPod (or similar), the touch screen works exceptionally well and the iPod integration is worlds better than the last generation Hyundai software we experienced in the big dog Genesis. Speaking of MP3s, those who opt for the navigation package get treated to a sweet sounding 360-watt stereo system that takes iPod, Aux or USB. The nav system also includes a back up camera, a first for the segment. Overall, the Tucson's interior is a big improvement over the last generation, but constrained by the reality of the vehicle's $18,995 starting price. As such, a completely tricked out Tucson Limited with every option including all-wheel drive will set you back $28,695.



The new Tucson is motivated by Hyundai's Theta II 2.4-liter I4. The power numbers are class-competitive, but nothing to phone home about – 176 horsepower at 6,000 rpm and 168 pound-feet of torque at 6,000 rpm. For comparisons sake, the 2010 Honda CR-V produces 180 hp and the 2010 Toyota RAV4 generates 179 hp and 172 lb-ft or twist. However, there are a few howevers. The big one being gas mileage. Hyundai is serious about becoming the "global fuel economy leader," and as such has bent over backwards to ensure the new Tucson gets more MPGs than the competition. Despite every emotion in our being shouting "WRONG!" at the top of our lungs, higher mileage is probably more important than beating a CR-V in a drag race. Those wanting to beat up on a CR-V (or even the mighty 269-hp V6 RAV4) will have to wait until 2011 when a turbocharged version of the Theta II finds its way into the Tucson. Curiously, Hyundai elected not to put the Theta II GDI (gasoline direct injection) motor from the upcoming Sonata into the Tucson (reason: cost benefit of having just one motor), though we were told that mill will eventually be offered.

Equipped with the optional six-speed automatic (a six-speed manual is standard) and front-wheel drive, the 2010 Tucson delivers 23 mile per gallon in the city and 31 on the highway. None of its class competitors can even claim 30 mpg on the highway, let alone 31 (the larger 2010 Chevrolet Equinox claims a freakishly high 32 mpg highway, but Hyundai doesn't consider the two vehicles in the same class). In a suddenly mileage conscious America, this is a big selling point.



Also of note is Hyundai's new six-speed autobox, which it developed and built in-house. Hyundai claims to be one of exactly three automakers in the world that builds its own six-speed automatic transmission, no doubt at a huge expense. Why invest that kind of coin in R&D? Because Hyundai's new transmission is 24 percent lighter than the old five-speed auto, has 62 fewer parts and gets 12 percent better mileage, all of which allows the Tucson to achieve its class-leading fuel economy. Remember, Hyundai is in the volume game, and once that initial cost is amortized out across a few million vehicles (you can rest assured that this transmission will appear in many other models), the money will have been well spent.

Hyundai turned us loose on some of our favorite Los Angeles canyon roads (Kanan, Latigo, Decker). Our initial thought was that such winding, treacherous asphalt might be wasted on a compact CUV. We were half right. On the plus side, the Tucson feels (and is) remarkably stiff, especially for a little crossover. Due to higher federal roll over standards, Hyundai was forced to use higher strength steel for the unibody, resulting in a tight, vibration and body-movement free vehicle.



Hyundai also put MacPherson struts in front and a sporty multi-link setup out back, just like you'd find on a whole host of higher-end performance cars (the BMW 3 Series, for instance). There's a also a thicker – but hollow, to save weight – front sway bar. The Tucson is light for a CUV – 3,331 pounds in Limited FWD Auto trim and just 3,179 as a manual GLS. As a result, the Tucson can carry a great deal more speed than you'd think into, through and out of a turn. The body also stays flat – some might say weirdly flat – through corners. Seriously, there's almost no body roll. Interestingly, there doesn't seem to be a penalty for all that stiffness in terms of ride quality, though the Tucson is on the more rigid side of the suspension aisle. Will the majority of Tucson buyers appreciate the trucklette's newfound athletic prowess? We'd wager not.

Obviously, the Tucson is not a Lotus Elise. And every reason why it's not (besides the blatantly obvious) is tied into Hyundai's quest for higher fuel economy. For instance, like the new Ford Taurus, the Tucson features electronic power steering. You can just go ahead and get used to this in most new vehicles, Hyundai or otherwise. Hyundai claims e-power steering adds three percent to a vehicle's MPG rating, and while the steering isn't bad, it's just different than a traditional hydraulic setup. How? It takes more effort to "crack" the wheel out of its on center position, meaning you initially have to put more muscle into turning the wheel and find yourself turning a degree or two more than you intended, especially at higher speeds. However, we got used to the sensation fairly quickly. We should also state that like with most new technologies in cars, the feel of electronic power steering will improve over time. In fact, Hyundai's toying with the idea of letting drivers select the amount of assist they want, though that's still further down the line.



Then there's the issue of visibility. Keep in mind that almost every aspect of the Tucson was done for fuel economy reasons – including the extreme rake of the windshield. Forward visibility is great, especially as the hood drops off so precipitously. Turning right isn't an issue either. However, when you're making a hard left, the A-pillar almost completely blocks your line of sight. It's not as bad as the new Camaro, but it's still an annoyance. We also found that during really sporty driving there's a dead spot in between second and third gear. Second leaves you too close to redline to be smooth and third leaves you torqueless. Yes, we're aware that 99 percent of Tucson buyers could care less. And we're not sure we care, either. Despite what BMW believes, no one buys a small CUV to carve canyons.

While not our first choice in performance machines, the 2010 Hyundai Tucson might in fact be our first choice if we needed a small crossover. There's little doubt that Hyundai's bringing forth the right vehicle at the right time. Its competition is not only getting long in the tooth, but all the segment stalwarts were designed prior to the recent spike in gas prices, meaning that fuel economy wasn't their overriding design concern. But it was Hyundai's. It even included a little green "Eco Indicator" light that shows up when you're driving in a fuel-friendly manner. Hyundai claims that paying attention to the light can increase mileage by 15 percent. We personally found it distracting and were happy to learn we can shut it off. Those foibles aside, we know there are a lot of folks who will appreciate the Eco light and the fact that Hyundai was just named the most fuel efficient automaker in the U.S. And even more will appreciate the combination of style, value, versatility and fun that comprises the new Tucson.