2007 Hyundai Azera: A Soft Landing

I'm in Cleveland, Ohio, so our roads are full of pot holes. In addition, construction is one of our four seasons here, so it can get pretty noisy. There's nothing like getting into the smooth-riding, whisper quiet Azera at the end of a long day and enjoying a relaxing drive home. I say the Azera isn't just a car, it's an experience. I also find myself feeling very relaxed and comfortable when I'm in the Azera. On our weekly trips to Chipotle, people in the office almost fight to get a seat in my Azera for the ride to get lunch. It really is an amazing car.

The automotive press are the people who criticize nice riding vehicles so I don't wanna hear this non sense. You people act like every car should be rear wheel drive with a manual transmission when the reality is that 90% of car buyers are NOT enthusiasts. They are trying to go from point A to point B. Example, the best selling car in this country is the Camry. These cars aren't known for handling but apparently enough people are just looking for a good transportation appliance sans 30 series summer tires.
  
You guys (including all publications) rate cars from an enthusiats' perspective which is fine given the scope of the publication. However when the potential buyers sees that a BMW, for example, is ranked higher than than all other entry level lux cars they don't necessarily understand why. They just know first place is first place. IN reality, especially where I live, an ES350 or any other smooth riding FWD car would suite them better in 95% of their potential driving scenarios. However, they go out and get that 3 series because it's rated higher in every category except the ones that will impact their ownership experiences.
  
Another example- in the new Lincoln MKS article, your sub-title pokes fun at the maker: "Lincoln's future is FWD" Um, is that one of the 7 deadly sins? Obviously, there is only one BMW and a whole heap of imposters so why do we need another? I'm in my 20s and after driving a hard riding car for the last 2.5 years my next car will have a much smoother ride. Now if I can afford to have two cars then I'll have a more narrowly focused vehicle for fun but that is a sacrifice I will no longer be able to make if I only own one vehicle.

I've been driving my parents' 2001 Toyota Avalon while the 'Rex has been out of order (I'm getting the replacement LF strut tonight). It hasn't been any fun. Even the bumper-to-bumper commute on the Santa Monica Freeway isn't any better driving it.

What, no comments on the photos??
 
Suby, I may have missed it in some other thread, but what happened to your strut? Is it a warranty replacement?
 
And chavis, I'm not so sure your criticism is well founded. Yes, many of the Edmunds editors are enthusiast drivers and love to talk up the benefits of RWD and manual transmissions. But when it's time to rate more sedate vehicles like the Azera, they give honest assessments based on the vehicle's target audience.
 
In any case, this is a blog describing more informal, on-the-spot reactions to various driving experiences. Chris likes sporty cars, and he now admits to liking a softer ride now and again. What's the big deal?

ewilfong, you can read what happened at http://www.carspace.com/blogs/theoutsideline/
 
I damaged the left front strut running over the apex marker at Turn Six at Laguna Seca Raceway.
 
At 80,000+ miles on my 2004 WRX Sedan, it wouldn't have been a warranty matter anyway.

Amen, brother. I'm glad someone finally said what a bunch of us were thinking - the 35 series tires and 19 inch rims have gotten entirely out of hand. Fact is: what a car can do in a controlled environment (i.e.: on a racetrack) has very little to do with what you will actually use it for. In a way, its the same kind of absurdity the automotive press levels at people who buy SUVs with off-road capability they'll never need. What a car does 'at the limit' is irrelevant for almost everyone - except those who have the time and money for track time, and those who should be arrested for reckless driving. Its just a car, people. It's about time we got over our self-image.

ewilfong,
 
The point is that there is more to car than just it's chassis tuning. I wasn't directing that rant soley towards the author of this blog entry but to auto writers in general. The average Joe does not have the time to take joy rides through the mountains for no particular reason. You have to see the bigger picture- some cars are now being designed to appease the press instead of the public. Edmunds does however do a good job in covering more aspects of the car that matter most and applaud them for that. Still, there is this stigma that cars costing a certain amount of money must be RWD pseudo sports cars or they are immediately dismissed- despite the fact that potential buyer will likely never tap the benefits of his superior drivetrain. Naturally, a lot of this has to do with this country's ridiculous traffic in overly populated areas but that is out of our control.
 
When ever i get the oppurtunity to "zoom zoom" there's always something that gets in the way. I mean, I could drive through the local park over and over in circles, but gas costs to much for that! For every one time I get to drive aggressively, there are 20 potholes that make me wish for a more compliant suspension.

I can't apply the term sexy to a Lexus hybrid, but I CAN apply it to that pillow ya got there.
 
Chavis, I agree with you somewhat. As you stated, Edmunds writes for its scope (read: target audience). My question to you would be: How do you get people who view cars as appliances to write articles about them?

The question also is, why do people who don't know what RWD stands for buy BMWs? There is a definite enthusiast market who will buy these cars and appreciate them, but there are a lot of people who will buy them just to have a piece of 'German Engineering.'
 
I also agree with gabbo that a lot of car purchases are influenced by image. That is fairly dumb, but it is very possible to enjoy the handling of a car without driving recklessly (when one ignores the bureaucratically imposed speed limits).
 
I can appreciate the difference between a softly sprung car (2000 Buick Century) and a more aggressive one (2005 Mazda3), and they definitely appeal to different demographics. The Buick was great for puttering around town and soaking up potholes, and for mindlessly cruising down the highway. However, whenever I drive on any other road (or 90% of the time), I don't miss the Buick at all. Would I drive faster on back roads in a BMW M3? Probably not, but (for a 17 year old at least) there's a lot of fun to be had in just shifting through the gears even if I am just driving through town at 30 mph. And on the deserted secondary roads around my area, where there is nothing but farmland and forests most of the time, I see nothing wrong with some sporty driving.
 
However, I can see the other school of thought in driving. Some people think that the less demanding a car is for a to b driving, the better. And for a lot of people, that is a perfectly reasonable and intelligent argument. I, however, side with enthusiasts in thinking that the best way to get from a to b is the most fun way.
 
This is why capitalism gives us the choice to by an Azera or a WRX.

nice pillow! lol

That's a new meaning to pillow head.

chavis,
I can certainly see your overall point. I remember flipping through my stepfather's auto mags as a kid and thinking the coolest cars were the ones with the highest top speeds. It never occurred to me then that I would never have a chance to drive 189 mph. Heck, I think I liked Hondas better than Fords because Honda speedos went into triple digits. That part of me still exists, albeit in more educated form, and it makes me lust after M3s and RS4s. Of course, I drive a Toyota Camry.

estreka makes a fantastic point. "How do you get people who view cars as appliances to write articles about them?" Better yet, how do you get people who view cars as appliances to READ about them? There’s a huge difference for most of us between cars we love and cars we own. In my daily life I want from my car: 1) value, 2) reliability, 3) practical functionality, 4) relatively good gas mileage, 5) some unnecessary comfort/tech perks, and 6) conservative but attractive styling. Maybe not in that order. I currently own an old Accord and an Acura MDX and I’ve owned a VW Passat and more than my share of GM pickup trucks. Not exactly a glamorous line up that inspires jealousy, and yet I LOVE reading Inside Line.

"My question to you would be: How do you get people who view cars as appliances to write articles about them?"
 
We have that already... Consumer Reports!

Bimmerjay,
 
lolol. you're right.

Bingo.
 
People who aren't interested in cars will research in magazines about general consumer recommendations not related to car only. They're respected magazines that help educate about products that are safe, lasting, valuable, etc.
If I am not in the least bit interested in mountain gear products, why the hell should I write a review of such?
 
You only write articles on things you had an interest in. Otherwise you're writing a user review of something you bought.

bimmerjay, you're right on . . . though I'm not sure I'd call that "reading". more like fact gathering/research. : ) I always feel like CR is missing one crucial element--it doesn't really tell me if I will really LIKE driving (or "using", if we're of the car-as-appliance ilk) the car. That's why these blogs are great.