I know I'm
, but life's more fun that way.
As I have already have a toy (the RX-7 coincidentally enough (details on yours?), my primary car has to be and do everything. The rear seat not folding down on any car is an inexcusable oversight, and is at the very least a severe utility drawback. The lack of a manual transmission is a fatal flaw. I will not buy a car with an automatic transmission.
I would have the RX-8 high on my list of contenders if the rear seat folded, though it would have to pass winter driving tests.
I was still seriously hoping Lexus would get its anterior out of its posterior and put a MTX in the hatchback, as I agree the car was a blast to drive.
When Mazda brought the 6 out, I no longer was interested in the IS300. The 6 outscored the IS300 as an overall car for about $7000 less. To me, losing the HUD and RWD were benefits. It replaces the SVT Contour in my mind as the closest thing to a perfect no-compromise car.
I hated the G35 personally. The car is just too matron-doing-lunch inside, outside, and in the driving experience. I also agree the car wasn't efficient in its use of space. What I meant in the the IS300 having an interior that became declasse was nothing to do with quality of materials. It merely doesn't look like a car priced in the $33K to $35K range anymore.
I think the overall difference we have different value equations. I place a high value on a car that is more than just a machine. Driving experience, personality, and style count as heavily as features, numbers, and the nuts and bolts. The whole must be greater than the sum of its parts and transcend being just a machine, just an appliance. Then that score is weighed with price to yield the final value-weighted score.
Do I think the Mazda6 is 50% more car than the Stratus? Yes.
I'm not meaning any offense, and I'm sorry if I did offend.
