2008 Chicago Auto Show: Winners and Losers
The doors are opening to the public at the Chicago Auto Show, and we would hate for you to head to the show without first learning which new production and concept cars won our hearts and minds. Chicago wasn’t as impressive as Detroit in either the number of debuts or their importance, but for economy-car buyers, muscle-car fans and families, there’s plenty to see. Cars.com’s David Thomas, Joe Wiesenfelder and Mike Hanley weigh in on each of them.
GMC Denali XT Concept Hybrid Pickup
David Thomas: Winner
This was really the only concept car shown in Chicago, but it could have stood out even among the cornucopia of concepts in Detroit. I loved the proportions of this “thing.” In person, it appears much more like a car in terms of size and height. And even if this specific hybrid V-8 powertrain isn’t for real yet, GM could put the splendid V-6 from the Cadillac CTS in it and have a gem of a “thing.”
Joe Wiesenfelder: Winner
I think it’s cool-looking, too, but I appreciate it mainly because it’s a smallish car-based pickup at a time when pickups are largish and truck-based. The notable exception is the Honda Ridgeline, which I like a lot but hasn’t been the success Honda had hoped it would be. The difference in the Denali XT is the midgate, which I think is the key missing ingredient in the Ridgeline.
Mike Hanley: Winner
GMC found a way to make a crew cab pickup truck sporty with the Denali XT, which rides low to the ground like a car but retains the rugged looks of a pickup. With its claimed increase in gas mileage, a production version of the Denali XT would give truck enthusiasts the look they want without the penalty at the pump.
DT: Winner
This is a weird-looking car. I mean, it’s badass and all, but how often do you see a modern car designed just like the classic it’s based on? It doesn’t make sense being on the same show floor as a Toyota Camry, and that’s exactly why it wins for me! Oh, and black is definitely the best color.
JW: Big winner
The excitement around this car is like what happened for the current-generation Mustang — maybe higher. It’s a stunner, especially in black, which you have to see in person to appreciate. The fact that it’s promised to deliver in the performance arena, too, with a 0-60 mph time of 4.9 seconds, completes the picture. Among all the downsizing and fuel-efficiency news of the day — necessary as it may be — it’s nice to have something at the show to get the blood boiling.
MH: Winner
You need to see the new Challenger in person to fully appreciate its clean lines and menacing stare. It’s definitely one of the coolest new production cars at the show, if also probably the least original. This is one of the few cars out there that can pull off a bright orange paint job without looking silly.
DT: Winner
We never get exotic car debuts in Chicago. Never. So this is a special car. The limited run roadster — just 50 are due in the U.S. during its first year — was cool-looking and had the performance numbers to back up those scissor doors. It’s a pain to get in and out of, has no storage and costs as much as a Porsche, but if you love the track, this is the exotic for you. If you just like to ogle wild cars at car shows, well, this is also the car for you. Did I mention it hits 60 mph in under four seconds?
JW: Winner
It’s getting harder and harder for vehicles to stick out at an auto show, but this model does. It has concept car looks, but it’s real, even if in limited production and not exactly cheap.
MH: Winner
Impressive performance specs and an intriguing design give the Yes! Roadster instant appeal — the automaker should have no trouble moving its extremely limited run of these roadsters. If you’re in the market for a highly exclusive performance car and don’t want to spend well into the six-figure range, this might be the way to go.
DT: Winner
Sure, it’s basically the same as the GMC Acadia, Saturn Outlook and Buick Enclave, but with better power and a unique interior design. It does just enough to stand out on its own, but I sure wish they had picked a better color for it to stand out on the show floor.
JW: Winner
I like it for the same reasons I like its sister models. The drivetrain upgrade and likely lower starting price are a bonus.
MH: Winner
This is a winner for GM because the Traverse gives its high-volume Chevy brand access to the automaker’s well-executed three-row crossover platform. The nose of the Traverse reminds me a little too much of the Chevrolet Uplander minivan, but move around to the side and back and it’s a nice-looking crossover.
DT: Loser
Hey, Ford finally brought over one of its popular European models! Oh, it’s an outdated commercial vehicle? Exciting. Wake me when the Verve goes on sale.
JW: Winner
For auto show wow factor, this is a dud, but you probably wouldn’t consider a minivan a winner … unless you were interested in a minivan. The curious Transit Connect fills an unmet need in the U.S. market. To develop a model from scratch to meet that need would be bad business, but bringing this one over is a wise move for Ford. Healthy manufacturers provide better products, and anything that makes a domestic automaker healthier is good for the cause.
MH: Winner
This is one ugly van, but style is not first and foremost for contractors and others who rely on a vehicle for their livelihood. The Transit Connect’s gas mileage advantage over large vans is sure to appeal to this group, with a goofy shape that lets it still carry a bunch of stuff — 143 cubic feet worth, to be exact.
DT: Loser
When the RL first came out it was totally underrated. The V-6 had plenty of power (290 hp at the time, now 300 hp) the AWD system was terrific with tons of grip and the interior was luxurious for its time. And no one bought it. I don’t think these minor upgrades will help sales, and others in the segment — especially Infiniti’s M — have caught up.
JW: Loser
I like driving the current RL overall, and I see no reason why that should change with this new one, but the exterior changes aren’t enough to make it an auto-show attraction. Radical grilles are a risky business, and the MDX just skates by. This one, not so much.
MH: Loser
The new real-time weather information system available in the RL is a useful feature, but the other tweaks here and there don’t go far enough to improve the car, and the new grille is a step backward.
DT: Winner
I was totally ready to hate this rebadged Chrysler Town & Country, but the VW looks much better in person than it did in pictures. It’s sharp, elegant and contemporary, unlike either of Chrysler’s minivans. The interior maintains a lot of the same shapes and looks of the Chryslers, but they’re covered in much nicer materials. A starting price under $25,000 doesn’t hurt. However, without Stow N’ Go or Swivel N’ Go, who knows if the Routan will win over families.
JW: Loser
The problem I foresee for the Routan is that it’s based on a Chrysler. That’s not a knock against the Town & Country; the simple fact is that VW has a reputation as a premium brand. People are fundamentally leery of cars based on other companies’ models — and that’s especially true when the base model is a more modest brand. The Routan would have to be a lot nicer, especially inside, to draw buyers into an all-new minivan brand. Could this be Phaeton, Chapter Two?
MH: Loser
I agree with Dave that the Routan is one of the more stylish minivans around and is much more appealing than the frumpy Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan models on which it is based. The interior is slightly better, too, but it’s still a Chrysler minivan underneath. There are better vans out there.
DT: Loser
Another rebadged vehicle. This time a Nissan Frontier is playing in the Suzuki tent. The interior is so similar to the Frontier I’m afraid for Suzuki’s future. Why isn’t this company bringing out a small car-based pickup instead? Or more all-wheel-drive models like its popular SX4? I don’t get it.
JW: Loser
Sometimes automakers produce vehicles not because buyers want them but because dealers do. I can’t imagine Suzuki has a following loyal enough to have demanded and waited for a pickup. I can imagine that dealers have asked for a more complete model lineup. Perhaps that’s what’s happened here. For the buyer, I’m seeing no reason to buy the Equator over the Frontier, unless it’s priced significantly lower.
MH: Loser
While the Equator may satisfy Suzuki’s desire to reach buyers of its non-automotive products, the Equator doesn’t bring anything new to the table for midsize-truck buyers, which is why it gets the thumbs down here.
DT: Loser
It’s honestly not worth wasting the virtual ink to explain why the mild tweaking to the front and rear of an already underperforming sedan gets the big L from Dave.
JW: Loser
Agreed.
MH: Loser
The competition in the family sedan segment has left the Galant behind, and the updates for 2009 aren’t enough to change that.
DT: Winner
The new grille works for the Eclipse. I’m not sure why it didn’t find its way to the Galant, too, but it works on this coupe and convertible. I don’t think it’s a huge improvement from the past model, but it certainly looks a bit better.
JW: Winner
If it’s not obvious, losers tend to be cars that needed significant changes and didn’t get them, and winners are cars that were already good and, when changed, weren’t screwed up. The Eclipse is an exceptionally stylish car for the price, and the update has added a little and taken nothing away.
MH: Winner
I like the Eclipse’s new front-end styling, and it should be aggressive enough to find fans in the sport-compact world, too.
DT: Winner
Let’s see: Miniscule changes to the exterior, radically improved interior, more features, small price bump, available navigation, more power, better mileage. Where do I stop before it earns a win?
JW: Winner
Hyundai has the right idea. In a market where quality keeps improving, competitive interiors don’t stay that way for long. The upgrades here will keep the Sonata in the game until its next full redesign.
MH: Winner
I agree with Joe. Newer competitors like the Honda Accord have made the Sonata’s cabin — the part of the car most in need of an update — look dated, but the new interior of the 2009 model delivers a quality space that goes toe-to-toe with the best in the class and does so at a lower starting price.
DT: Winner
I like the Hummer H3 SUV, and the H3T actually looks great as a truck. If Hummers aren’t your thing you certainly won’t like this one either, but if you want a recreational truck instead of a work truck, why wouldn’t you go this route?
JW: Winner
I’d prefer if it had a midgate like the H2 SUT, but even as a conventional pickup truck, the H3T works. I don’t know if the market needs just another midsize pickup, but this one, being a Hummer, isn’t just another midsize pickup.
MH: Winner
I wasn’t that enthusiastic about the H3T after scanning some pictures of it, but it looks a lot better in person. The show truck’s graphite-colored rims really enhance the appearance.
