2010 New York Auto Show: Winners and Losers, Crossovers and SUVs

&&&&&EMBEDDED_ELEMENT_START&&&&& {“id”:1420668674103,”originalName”:”2015_03_04_17_02_21_118_http___blogs_cars_com__a_6a00d83451b3c669e201347faa0f4b970c_800wi”,”name”:”MMS ID 49042 (created by CM Utility)”,”URI”:”/70/-1404782722-1425510141670.”,”createDate”:”2015-03-04 05:02:21″,”metadata”:{“AUTHOR”:”automatic-content-migration”,”KEYWORDS”:””},”href”:”https://www.cstatic-images.com/stock/1170×1170/70/-1404782722-1425510141670.”,”description”:”Came from http://blogs.cars.com/.a/6a00d83451b3c669e201347faa0f4b970c-800wi”,”externalid”:”49042″,”updatedby”:”cmuadmin”,”updateddate”:1425511472904,”associations”:{}} &&&&&EMBEDDED_ELEMENT_END&&&&&

A number of small, interestingly styled crossovers made an appearance at the New York International Auto Show, and they were joined by redesigned versions of more traditional larger models. Mike Hanley, David Thomas, Joe Wiesenfelder and Kelsey Mays weigh in on what was a hit and what missed the mark. To check out what they thought of the newly launched cars on display go here.

2011 Porsche Cayenne
Mike Hanley: Winner
What a difference a redesign makes. I never found the prior Cayenne that appealing because it didn’t offer enough Porsche-ness in its looks and interior design, but that’s been handily addressed with the 2011 model. It looks great and is instantly recognizable as a Porsche. The cabin is beautiful, with a lot of Panamera influences. Kelsey Mays: Winner
Porsche turned a corner with the Panamera, matching track-ready performance to a cabin that befits its price. The same is true of the new Cayenne. I still think the outgoing model was recognizable as a Porsche — albeit a specimen that arrived during the brand’s unfortunate era of overstylized headlights. For a lot of reasons, this one looks far better, and a hybrid variant should help its cause.

Joe Wiesenfelder: Winner
It’s much improved, inside and outside. Some of my philosophical issues with the Cayenne remain — mainly that base models are likely to get their doors blown off by cheaper brands. This seems out of character for anything bearing the Porsche name. However, 400 pounds of weight loss, quicker acceleration and higher mileage plus a hybrid model add up to a big winner in the 2011.

David Thomas: Winner
I recently tested a $100,000-plus Range Rover and thought it was the nicest SUV I had ever been in. A few weeks later it has already been supplanted by the Cayenne’s friendliest of confines. It’s not only luxurious but sporty, too. The exterior is less intriguing, especially the bulbous backside, but I’ll take it any day of the week.

MH: Winner

Without question the most unusually styled crossover at the auto show, the Juke’s bizarre looks are sure to elicit love or hate reactions. I dig the design and like the Juke even more for its performance potential courtesy of a turbocharged four-cylinder and an available six-speed manual. In a world where automakers go round and round copying elements of each others’ designs, the Juke is remarkably original.

KM: Loser
Original, yes. Attractive? I surveyed the Juke from umpteen different angles trying to warm up to it, but I can’t abide by the assortment of light fixtures up front. It recalls everything from a Fiat Multipla to the appendage-brandishing creatures in “Starship Troopers.” There’s performance potential in the turbo engine and torque-vectoring all-wheel drive, but the Juke sacrifices a lot of utility in the name of this. The cabin, while inventive, doesn’t set any new quality standards for its league.

JW: Winner
Kelsey’s points about utility are legit, but I’m with Mike on the originality argument. Time will tell if sportiness is enough of a draw, but for now I applaud Nissan’s choice to style the Juke boldly, as well as the results, which many observers appreciate. This is a challenge few automakers accept, at which even fewer succeed.

DT: Winner
The Juke wins strictly on originality. It doesn’t even matter if the aesthetics are pleasing, as they are clearly jarring in one regard or another. I like it most for its ability — at least on paper — to be a Mini Cooper S competitor. I thought some other company would create one far sooner than now. Good for Nissan for taking up that challenge!

MH: Winner

I wasn’t sure Mini needed a crossover in its lineup to continue being successful, but the Cooper Countryman looks like it has success written all over it. It maintains familiar Mini design cues in a package that offers all-wheel drive, four regular doors and a backseat that’s comfortable for adults. I imagine people somewhere are already putting deposits down for this.

KM: Winner
Mini fans who want a bit more room have their answer here; it doesn’t appear the brand watered anything down to accomplish that. Provided its driving dynamics hold up, the Countryman makes sense in Mini’s lineup. In an earlier age I would have said otherwise, but brands from Porsche to Mercedes agreed long ago that the U.S. market loves SUVs. Even Mini can provide what they want.

JW: Winner
Mini’s move to a larger vehicle coincides with other brands’ moves into smaller ones, including crossovers introduced at this auto show. While the Nissan Juke is short on utility, favoring sportiness, the Countryman is more versatile. If it also delivers the regular Cooper’s driving experience, Mini will have found the sweet spot.

DT: Winner
I predict the Countryman’s pricing will fall in the obscene category when it’s officially announced, but that possibility is the only turn-off about this terrific little SUV. The styling is sharp, the interior room is terrific, even in the back, and it has available all-wheel drive. Even if the Mini driving experience is slightly diluted because of the height, I think the Countryman will woo more people than it turns off.

MH: Winner

Kia’s design group is on a roll these days, and the edgy Sportage small crossover is just one of the latest examples of how styling is reshaping the brand. There’s a premium quality to the Sportage’s look that some of its competitors lack. Even though I’m not the biggest fan of the short side windows and the reduced visibility that comes with them, the Sportage is more evidence of Kia’s positive momentum.

KM: Winner
I agree with Mike’s points. The Sportage on display suggests an impressive menu of available features. Heated rear seats and a ventilated driver’s seat? Kia is optioning its way out of its budget-car heritage. Though the uninitiated might mistake the new Sportage for the recently redesigned Sorento, it’s clear the brand has found its way out of the styling wilderness. That’s crucial. The past year might suggest otherwise, but cars can’t be sold on value alone.

JW: Winner
What they said. Kia’s interiors haven’t lived up to Hyundai’s, even in recent rollouts. The Sportage show car changes that. I’m still not clear on why Hyundai owns this brand, whose products and philosophy compete more closely with it than any other, but it’s hardly a new phenomenon. I suppose if you’re going to have competitors it’s better to own them than not.

DT: Winner
I’m not as impressed with the Sportage’s design as I am with what Kia did with the Optima sedan, but it’s still above average. The fact that Kia can execute such an interior and likely offer it at an attractive price is more important anyway. The most intriguing thing about it though is how it impacts the class and the competition like the …

MH: Winner

Yet another mini crossover to appear at the show, and I think the Outlander Sport looks great. Its grille styling is similar to the larger Outlander, but the Sport has a better stance and proportions. Mitsubishi models are often fringe players in the segments they compete in, but the Outlander Sport has a chance at being one of the main attractions in its class.

KM: Winner
Outside and in, the Outlander Sport is a better-looking Outlander. The Lancer’s 2.0-liter four-cylinder doesn’t suggest a particularly energizing driving experience, but the Sport satisfies elsewhere, with impressive — if not always consistent — interior quality and a decent-looking cargo area. (Mitsubishi has no cargo specs available yet.) The Nissan Juke may drive circles around it, but I think the Outlander Sport comes through in a lot of smarter ways.

JW: Winner
I couldn’t be happier to see this model because I was disappointed in 2007 when Mitsubishi abandoned the original tall-wagon Outlander for the larger generation sold today. The Sport’s proportions are much better than the regular Outlander, and it’s more versatile than the Juke. Though the current engine is modest, I wouldn’t count Mitsubishi out for the driving experience, either. This is the company — and the platform — that brings us the Lancer Ralliart and Evolution. The potential is here.

DT: Loser
See, this is where I was going with that last entry on the Sportage. The Outlander Sport is nice enough, but it doesn’t move the needle as much as Mitsubishi needs it to. However, it does show how much better a car can look when the front end is designed in conjunction with the rest of the body, unlike the regular Outlander that got a new schnoz slapped on haphazardly. I also disagree that the Juke competes with this or the Sportage. I see Nissan’s Rogue in that opposing corner, and perhaps winning.

MH: Winner

The redesigned Touareg’s exterior styling may not look that different but there are big changes underneath. It’s dropped more than 400 pounds, which should help improve gas mileage — a weak spot for the SUV — and the backseat gains some much-needed room. It’s also easier to fold the backrests, which was another area where the Touareg lagged the competition. Combined, these changes make for a more appealing SUV.

KM: Winner
Volkswagen improved on nearly all the prior Touareg’s annoyances, and there were many. Officials at the media unveiling told me the car’s technological opulence had been toned down for the sake of weight savings and, hopefully, improved reliability. Let’s hope the latter proves true. Volkswagen has emerged from the reliability backwaters on a number of models; the Touareg, unfortunately, remains a major offender.

JW: Winner
The Touareg wins for a few of the reasons its platform-mate, the Porsche Cayenne, does: improved styling, lower weight and a new hybrid version. There’s no data yet, but it’s likely the regular model will be quicker and more efficient, like the Cayenne. For a unibody crossover, it’s still heavy, something I’ve considered a strategic blunder since the model made its debut. But significant improvement makes any redesign a winner.

DT: Loser
VW has seen success recently with diesel engines, a Jetta wagon and a stylish new version of the Passat called the CC. What it has never had success with is the Touareg. The new version may be better in every respect, but VW needs to face facts that its customers turn their noses up at expensive SUVs. Especially now that the SUV fad is dying down.

MH: Loser

The R-Class’ revised styling didn’t wow me, and the interior is much the same as before. This model hasn’t been particularly popular, and I don’t see how the updates for 2011 change that.

KM: Loser
The R-Class’ sagging profile and possibly its dismal reliability have banished it to ice-cold sales popularity. I’m not sure a new face can salvage things. That’s a shame, really. As it turns out, this is actually a fairly practical ride.

JW: Loser
There aren’t many large luxury crossovers to compare to the R-Class, and I’ve always appreciated its roominess and comfort. American buyers apparently have not. The new styling helps a bit, but only a bit. As I said of the Touareg, significant enough changes make any redesign a winner. These changes aren’t, so the R-Class is not.

DT: Winner
As the only parent of the group let me just say that there isn’t much out there in the minivan-alternative space, and clearly none besides the R-Class that plays in the luxury field. The new version probably isn’t radical looking enough to turn heads, but it is a clean update. The interior remains bright and airy thanks to huge windows and moonroofs.

MH: Loser

While I like the QX56’s clean profile lines, its grille is cartoonishly large and doesn’t offer any of the intricacy of a Cadillac Escalade’s. The appliqués on the front fenders look a little cheesy, too. At an auto show where the focus was clearly on small crossovers, the QX56 seemed awkwardly out of place.

KM: Loser
In last week’s introductory QX56 post, Kicking Tires’ first commenter opined that the QX looks like it’s melting in the sun. Yes, it sort of does — even in person. Cabin quality is excellent, and Infiniti officials bandied about a purported 16 mpg in the EPA’s combined city/highway ratings. That’s a good step over the old QX, but these days the prospect of mid-teens mileage will make a lot more buyers consider whether they really need a full-size SUV’s capabilities. For an increasing number, I suspect the answer is no.

JW: Loser
It is as a fan of the Infiniti FX — both current and past designs — that I say the QX56 is a styling misfire. The interior is two steps above the previous generation, but shoppers are unlikely to see it. Typically I leave the aesthetic judgments to the observer, but in this case I’m confident in saying the big QX’s styling makes it a big loser.

DT: Winner
Yes, you read it right, Winner. First, let’s just all agree that the QX56 looks better in person than in photos. But unlike the others, I think the obnoxiously cartoonish front end will win over the shoppers who buy this type of vehicle. If you sat it next to Lexus LX 570, the QX56 would look stunning in comparison. Or jaw-dropping. Either way, others would take note. In this class that’s what wins over a lot of buyers. The top-notch interior — far more sophisticated than the LX — is a deal closer, as well.