It used to be that we Canadians got ourselves a few exclusive offerings from auto manufacturers that our American friends did not. For instance the Toyota Echo hatchback, Mercedes-Benz C-Class and BMW 323i were all cars Americans had to travel North of the border to get their hands on (the latter of that list is still true). But then it seems like manufacturers were willing to let them in on Canadian-only models. Well, Chevy has decided to break that trend.

The Chevy Trax was officially unveiled and it’s essentially the Chevy version of the Buick Encore, which is smaller than you think. The Trax is expected to come in smaller than the Equinox for reference.

Few details are known of the Trax other than it is a five-seater with a rather sleek looking body that is likely going to be based on the Cruze platform. Given the size and GM’s reputation for fuel efficiency, it will likely garner a 4 cylinder engine that is class leading or close to class leading for fuel efficiency as well.

The Trax marks the second Chevrolet that the U.S will not be getting. The Orlando MPV is also only available in Canada as well.

Stay tuned for more info!

[The Globe and Mail]

By Kevin Harrison

A friend of mine is having some relationship troubles with his girlfriend. He feels as though he just does not know what she’s thinking most of the time and when he tries to predict her mood, he’s more off than six month old pasta. He just can’t seem to understand what she wants – a problem most men seem to have. He recently came to me for advice.

“Have you considered just asking her what she wants?” I replied.

I think I literally saw a light bulb turn on in his head. It was so simple and so obvious that he couldn’t believe he didn’t think of it before.

 
Truthfully, Toyota had a similar epiphany. While the Camry is a name long synonymous with ‘mid-size car’ and sells well no matter what, they must’ve gown tired of the same criticism: It’s fine as a car, but it’s boring. And while the Camry has a loyal following, the mid-size segment is more competitive than ever before with the new Sonata, Optima and Passat – typically non-players in the segment, now offering tremendous value for tremendous cars.

 
So what did Toyota decide to do?

Well, instead of developing a car that they thought might appeal to the public they used that novel idea that I suggested to my relationship troubled friend: why not just ask us what we want? Brilliant, I know. And what people answered with was that they wanted a car that looked perhaps a bit more stylish, except they didn’t want the car to grow in size. Well for the most part, Toyota delivered. The car is a nice evolution of the previous model and overall it looks fairly stylish. The front fascia almost looks a bit to busy to my eye with those grille bars that only partially cover the grille, gaudy decor around the fog lights and those asymmetric headlights, but truthfully if you stare at it long enough, it seems to work. I would prefer more interesting looking 17 inch wheels, especially considering this is the top of the line XLE and the wheels that come on the sportier SE are quite eye-catching, and those tail lights seem like they’re trying a bit too hard to be different,  but overall the look is agreeable and indeed more interesting and stylish than the previous version. The look is more chiseled however I find it can look a bit awkward from certain rear angles.

Another thing that people said they wanted was for the interior to retain that premium feel and it certainly does. In fact, it builds in a more sophisticated look with large stitching on the leather wrapped dash, leather wrapped steering wheel, quality materials, and minimal fake wood. The radio controls and the touch screen in general is responsive, although the colour and font choice makes it a bit difficult to read at a glance. Rear seat leg room and head room is great, which is probably why I’m seeing more and more new Camrys take on taxi duty where I live. In fact, probably the biggest draw to taxi driver’s is the massive trunk, and I don’t think I can overstate that enough. It’s really quite big. Officially, there’s 436 litres of cargo room back there and to my knowledge, that’s only bested by the newly redesigned Passat.

The Camry was always a star performer on the highway with a comfortable, efficient and smooth ride. This generation Camry is no different, in fact I’d argue that’s it’s probably smoother and feels more solid on the highway. Around town, the Camry is quiet and compliant. There was a few times when I thought I was driving in a Lexus rather than a Toyota. But while these character traits may appeal to some Camry owners, Toyota found out that some also didn’t want a quiet comfortable ride to sacrifice a bit of fun every now and then. Traditionally, fun and Camry were polar opposites, but Toyota has actually re-tuned the suspension and tightened up the body structure to improve handling. The result is quite good, although you won’t feel like you’re taking a corner in a Porsche, the Camry does provide more of a planted feel giving confidence to the driver. There’s even a bit of steering feedback for the performance demon that most Camry drivers keep buried away inside.

While these new performance additions help the Camry retain some credibility for handling, they’re really only useful around town which makes the Camry more nimble and easy to maneuver it tight parking lots. Toyota has been so confident in the handling abilities of the new Camry, they’ve decided to do most press vehicle launches at a self made track Auto-cross style. I think this is a bit of a stretch to market the Camry as such, but make no mistake, the Camry will surprise you in the handling department.

Next up, people said they wanted a powerful engine but didn’t want to sacrifice fuel efficiency. In the past, the XLE only came with a V6 engine, being the top of the line trim level. Now a 2.5 litre 4 cylinder engine is available which makes 178 horsepower and 170 pound feet of torque. Is this ever a good engine! It’s buttery smooth and quiet. When pushed, the engine comes to life and is a bit noisy, but it is very peppy considering the power numbers. Put your foot down and you’re off with no lag and you can quickly get out of the way of just about anything. This impressed me almost every single time I put my foot down. The quickness almost had me wonder if there was actually a V6 under the bonnet and not a 4 cylinder. It’s a very good engine, hands down. But it’s agility is partly due to the overall weight loss from the previous model. This generation Camry actually weighs about 200 pounds less than the outgoing model.

Also due to the weight loss, the Camry achieves impressive fuel efficiency numbers: 8.6 L/100 kms city and 5.6 L/100 kms highway making it the most fuel efficient in its class.  What’s even more impressive than that, though, was I was actually able to realize close to those numbers effortlessly, without having to adjust my driving style for fuel efficiency. Typically it’s near impossible to achieve the stated efficiency ratings on most cars. The trip computer record’s your mileage for each trip and then puts it on an easy to read graph. Very intuitive.

So the 4-cylinder’s unexpected power and great gas mileage had me scratching my head as to why anyone would want to opt for the more expensive and less powerful V6. Especially since the Camry Hybrid is the clear winner of all the trim levels. It gets better mileage than the 4-cylinder yet it’s more powerful with 200 horsepower.

And that’s when it hit me. I needed to take my own advice that I gave my friend. It worked for him after all, he is now quite happy with his girlfriend and their relationship is stronger than ever. So I decided to be open and honest with my girlfriend, who knows I’m a performance car enthusiast and shares my views on cars. Knowing full-well and also agreeing with my general disinterest for the Camry, I sent her a text saying “I kinda like this car”. It was quite a shock to her. But it’s true. People need to forget everything they know or think they know about the Camry because it’s now such a good car that it can easily retain its loyal base, all while luring in those who would never give it a second thought.

What a novel ideal it was to just ask people what they wanted in a car, Toyota.

Price As Tested: $29,900

Pros:

• Brilliant engine, smooth and quiet yet powerful and efficient
• Decent handling capabilities
• Lots of interior room
• Lots of cargo room
• Very good on gas
• Easy to park

Cons:

• Can look awkward from certain angles
• Fake wood a bit tacky
• Boring wheels

Overall: 9/10

By Kevin Harrison

Leather seats. Navigation. Bluetooth. Satellite radio. Push start ignition. Keyless entry. Back-up camera. LED lights. 17 inch wheels. Sport tuned suspension.

If you heard all of these things, you’d likely think the car that was being referred to was a BMW or an Audi. And likely the last vehicle to come to mind when hearing all these features is the sub-compact Kia Rio. Well start training your brain to think of the Rio because all that stuff was indeed on the 2012 Kia Rio that I had for a week. It was mind boggling.

The Rio is a close cousin of the Hyundai Accent, both of which were for people who only cared about getting from point A to point B and not much else. The Rio was the favourite for rental car fleets everywhere. It was the butt of most automotive related jokes.

Following the trend of just plain building better cars, Kia has injected the same formula for it’s entry level compact. But there’s obviously more to a car than just fancy features. Does the Rio have the complete package or does it as dull as its predecessor?

While the previous generation Rio’s styling could only be described as bland (and that was when you felt like being polite) the current generation is a sight for sore eyes. It’s easily the best looking vehicle in the compact segment now, hands down. Basically Kia took the sleek and handsome Optima and squished it down to the Rio’s size. It’s a formula that you’d think would result in a horrid and awkward looking thing, but it actually works quite well. The signature Kia grille along with the circular headlights and LED side markers give the Rio and aggressive, yet classy look. The side profile is sleek and those 17 inch wheels are quite eye catching, as is the high belt line and LED tail lights out back.

Inside, the features, quality and layout rival some of the best in the business. Everything feels of top notch quality for the most part. There are switches at the bottom of the centre stack which mimic something you would find in an airplane cockpit. As cool as they are, they seem out of place and don’t flow with the rest of the interior design. The seats are comfortable and supportive and rear seat leg and head room is adequate. With the high rear deck, rearward visibility can be a bit of a challenge, but then that’s where that back-up camera comes in. The image is crisp and clear and even bests some back-up cameras in much more expensive vehicles, in my opinion, such as the Prius and the Equinox. Although they were not needed in the balmy temperatures of April, the heated seats come on quickly as I found out by accidentally hitting the button. That is a good thing is -30 degree temperatures.

The Rio gets its power by a 1.6 litre four cylinder which produces 138 horsepower and 123 pound feet of torque. This is when you become reminded that you’re sitting in a sub-compact car. While the engine can’t be described as sluggish, it’s certainly not going to win you any drag races. That said, it’s competitive for this class and more than adequate for daily commuting around the city. On the highway, the engine tends to be noisy when passing, but it calms down once you’re cruising along. A six-speed automatic came with my tester and it’s generally competent. Shifts are adequate, however they can be a bit delayed when shifting yourself.

As surprising as most of the features were on the Rio, probably the most shocking to me was the decent amount of steering wheel feedback to the driver. Typically in the sub-compact class you’re pretty much lucky to get numb steering, let alone nice weighted steering. In addition, handling is quite good too thanks to the the sport tuned suspension and those 17 inch wheels on low profile tires.  The Rio certainly doesn’t handle like a BMW but it can take a corner with confidence and it is now at Honda Fit or Ford Fiesta levels of agility.

The Rio is rated at an impressive 6.6 L/100 kms city and 4.9 L/100 kms highway. However during my time of mixed city and highway driving, fuel consumption was disappointing, more like mid-size sedan fuel economy. This could be chalked up to the added weight of all those nice features, however I seriously doubt the would affect fuel efficiency to such a degree. I even tried all the fuel efficient driving techniques that I know (and believe me, I know a lot) and I didn’t really see much improvement. Given that the temperatures remained around a steady 12 degrees, I’m not quite sure what could cause this other than perhaps the Rio needed an oil change and new air filters.

So, the Rio is a amazingly equipped, good looking, good on gas (on paper anyway), spacious, sporty car that can definitely give its competition a run for its money. There’s no doubting that.  But there was actually a few troubling things I experienced in just a week’s time:

1) No matter how much I tried to fill the Rio’s tank to the brim, the fuel gauge would never quite read that it was full.

2) The satellite radio signal was about as reliable as a politician’s promise. No matter how long or short the trip, the signal would cut out at least three times per trip. I’ve never experienced a lost satellite signal on any satellite radio equipped press vehicle, let alone several lost signals per trip. It got to the point when I almost preferred listening to pure silence. I’m not sure if this is an issue on Kia’s end of Sirius’ end, but I’m sorry, this is a service people pay for and they should have the ability to use it without constant interruption.

3) After driving a few friends home one evening and dropping them at the front door, one of them wasn’t able to get out. Why? Because the rear driver’s side door wouldn’t open. At least not from the inside. The door could still open from the outside, which was odd. That could get annoying if you transport back seat passengers on the regular.

4) There was about two days when it seemed like I was living in Thailand not Nova Scotia as it pretty much monsooned like nobody’s business. It wasn’t until the next day when I went to put something into the trunk that I realized that it was completely soaked. The compartment underneath which houses the spare tire was pretty much turned into a small pond. I’m not even sure where the leak originated from as the trunk seemed fine after closer inspection.

While it’s necessary to point out those four issues, to be fair, it’s rather unlikely that all Rios experience those same problems and they are probably isolated to this press vehicle. It’s a bit of a shame because it rather spoils an otherwise great vehicle.

But at the end of the day, the real story here is that Kia has essentially taken the bar and raised it rather high. While it’s unlikely that most people will opt for this fully equipped model, lesser trim levels are still decently equipped and, of course, the Rio is available as a hatchback as well. Basically, there is lots to choose from when it comes to selecting a Rio that suits your wants and needs. No matter which kind of Rio you choose, you’ll definitely end up with a winner. And because of that, it’s now time for us car nuts to look elsewhere for the butt of automotive related jokes.

*Note: Typically my reviews feature a number of pictures throughout the review and in a gallery at the end, however this time I was not able to do this due to a mishap which erased most of the pictures. My apologies! The few that are in the review is courtesy of Garry Sowerby and Lisa Calvi. Thanks guys!

As Tested Price: $21,695

Pros:

• One of the better looking vehicles in the segment
• Well laid out interior
• Good steering feedback and handling
• Setting the bar for standard and available features

Cons:

• Fuel economy ratings hard to achieve
• Transmission shifts can be delayed
• Four flaws pointed out are difficult to overlook

Overall: 8.5/10

As it turns out, if you’re obese, cholesterol and heart attacks aren’t the only things to watch out for. You are also more likely to die in a car accident.

The University of Buffalo has just released its study of fatal accidents which reveals that if you are obese, you are 21 percent more likely to die of your injuries in a car accident. If you are morbidly obese, that number rises to a whopping 56 percent.

“The severity and patterns of crash injuries depend on a complex interaction of biomechanical factors, including deceleration velocity at impact, seat belt and air bag use, vehicle type and weight, and type of impact,” says Dr. Dietrich Jehle.

The population’s obesity levels are rising at an alarming rate, particularly in North America, so what does Jekle suggest?

“Crash test dummies have saved lives and provided invaluable data on how human bodies react to crashes, but they are designed to represent normal-weight individuals. If they represented our overweight American society, there could be further improvements in vehicle design that could decrease mortality.”

Jehle goes on to recommend that  “moderately and morbidly obese individuals to buy larger vehicles with more space between the seat and the steering column”.

While I agree that people in general should leave more space between themselves and the steering column, I feel as though this suggestion just goes along with the uncorrect stigma that “bigger is better”, which is already a huge problem in the automotive industry. If you conduct a very unscientific poll of why people buy massive SUV’s for instance, a lot of people will tell you that they bought them to feel safe. However, feeling safe and actually being safe or two diffent things entirely. Statistics have proven time and time again that just because your vehicle is bigger, it doesn’t mean it’s safer and with SUV’s in particular, it often means they are less safe due to their weight and ride height, making them more likely to lose control or roll over. So recommending that an obese indiviual buy a bigger car only means they’ll be more likely to get into an accident in the first place, which then means that the accident is more likely to be fatal.

As such, the study’s recommendation is largely reactive, as opposed to proactive, of the bigger problem. It did not mention anything about encouraging healthy eating habits or exercise for instance.

The study used drivers who were grouped based on body mass index (BMI) — weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared — into underweight, normal, overweight, slightly obese, moderately obese and morbidly obese categories from accident data between 2000 and 2005.

Thoughts?

[University of Buffalo]

By Kevin Harrison

It’s a formula that has worked for a long time: make something cheap to buy and cheap to run and you’ll penetrate a market seldom paid any attention to which is people who think cars are merely designed to get you from point A to point B. Us car nuts generally are not a part of this crowd. We love to talk about horsepower and handling, style and exhaust notes. Price may be a factor as to whether or not we can afford a particular vehicle, but even when we can’t we still love to study up the specs for a good old fashioned Ferrari vs. Lamborghini debate.

But the fact of the matter is, car nuts are few and far between and it’s really those who don’t care about cars who control the market. Strange, no? Since this automotive indifference is so prevalent, it’s why we’re seeing the death of the manual transmission. It’s why we’re seeing hybrid/electric technology in sports cars. It’s why steering feel has taken a back seat to comfort.

These people who want basic transportation are more concerned about safety, reliability and fuel efficiency and there’s nothing necessarily wrong with that. As such, Toyota has taken a good portion of that market starting with the Tercel, which then morphed into the Echo and now to the Yaris.

The formula has worked for Toyota for a long time. Will it continue to do the trick, or will the competition give the popular subcompact a run for its money?

Toyota has redesigned the Yaris for 2012 and while the original design was never seen as being aggressive, this one can certainly make the case for itself. The front fascia is much less bug-eyed and the rear end is much more agreeable as well with those chiseled tail lights and sloped rear hatch. You’re not going to generate too many stares in the Yaris, especially with my tester’s rather boring silver paint, but again, the average Yaris customer likely doesn’t care too much about that sort of thing.

Inside the Yaris is much improved. I was never a fan of having the dash which houses the speedometer in the centre of the console so I was pleased to see that it had moved to its proper place; behind the steering wheel. This makes it more natural for the driver. The dash layout is much more conservative than before, however it makes it much more user friendly as a result. There are a few hard plastics sprinkled throughout, however they are generally found in places that people wouldn’t normally touch in the first place. Softer plastics on the door handles and centre arm rest are of good quality. It’s been a long time since I’ve driven a press vehicle with no buttons on the steering wheel so the sparsity took a bit to get used to at first but sure enough doing things the good old fashioned way came quite naturally. The seats are reasonably comfortable, although rear leg room is fairly tight. Cargo room is decent at 13 cubic feet and the rear seats fold 60/40. As a side bar, one thing I really liked was the single blade windshield wiper like Mercedes used to use. It looks pretty neat while in motion and it saves the owner from having to replace two wipers at the same time.

One complaint I had was never actually being able to find a comfortable seating position. The driver’s seat didn’t move down far enough and the steering wheel could not be tilted up high enough (it also does not telescope either). As a result, I frequently bumped my left knee against the bottom of the wheel every time I used the clutch. By the end of the week, I got used to it, but being uncomfortable is not something one should simply get used to, especially on a large purchase such as a car. In addition, I found it a bit difficult to get the Yaris going in first gear. It seemed as though the clutch would always bite at a different spot each time, thus making it difficult to get used to.

 The Yaris carries over the same 1.5 litre four cylinder engine found in the old Yaris which makes 106 horsepower and 103 pound feet of torque. If those numbers sound underwhelming, well, they are. It takes quite a bit of effort to get the Yaris up to speed. Luckily with the 5-speed manual you can get the most out of the engine, but the fact is there isn’t a lot for the engine to give in the first place. Even though the Yaris is a small car, it’s still feels quite underpowered. While I wasn’t expecting 0-100 times in the 3 seconds range, I was still expecting a bit more zip which is something the Yaris’ competitors seem to manage.

The Yaris will pout if you try to go test out the handling. It’s general size helps it retain some dignity in this department, however with those small wheels, heavy weight and gutless engine, the Yaris will not induce any sort of thrills in the bends. This could partially be blamed on the winter tires, but I honestly don’t think summer tires would help much anyway. While the Yaris is not meant to handling like a BMW, its touted ‘European tuned suspension’ left me quite disappointed. Steering feel is fairly numb, however it is quite direct.

Fuel efficiency isn’t bad, however it’s also not going to blow you away either. The Yaris is rated at 6.6 L/100 kms city and 5.2 L/100 kms highway. While those numbers look good on paper, the fact of the matter is some of the Yaris’ competitors will best those numbers, even with bigger engines which produce more power. On top of that, if you opt for the 4-speed automatic, those efficiency ratings drop to 6.8 city and 5.5 highway.

And this is really where the problem exists for the Yaris. It is by far much improved over the old model, but the issue is, so are its competitors. So much so that they best the Yaris in many ways. However, there are two things that that Yaris has up its sleeve that a lot of the competition does not have. You’ve likely seen Toyota’s marketing department claim the Yaris has ‘epic reliability’. Despite the overuse and the incorrect use of the word ‘epic’, Toyota does indeed have a point. Since the overall power train and internal components of the Yaris have been carried over from the old model, which has indeed proved itself to be a dependable little car, they do have some claim to the reliability factor. The Toyota name alone is synonymous with reliability and it’s a big reason why the Yaris will likely keep its resale value – perhaps more than its competitors such as the Kia Rio and Hyundai Accent, both of which have a bit of catching up to do in this regard.

Typically, most manufacturers send their top of the line, fully loaded models to the media in order to wow them. But the fact of the matter is, it’s pretty rare for manufacturers to sell a car with every single option, which therefore makes the review a bit unrealistic. Toyota has decided to send a mid-trim level version of their entry level car and they were smart to do so because this is the car that most buyers will have their eyes on. Kudos for them for recognizing their market.

And that’s really why the Yaris will do well for Toyota. Despite its faults, they are faults that can be overlooked by the people who want nothing but a regular car. The competition might be getting stiff, but for most, the good old Toyota name and reliability combined with a better looking, better redesigned interior with respectable fuel economy means everything. So long as Toyota doesn’t let the Yaris become completely uncompetitive, the Yaris will still find itself in many driveways across the country. Not messing about too much with something that works really does, well, work!

As Tested Price: $15,990

Pros:

• More aggressive exterior styling
• Much improved, more functional interior
• Likely reliable and will hold its value
• Decent cargo area
• Easy to park

Cons:

• Engine carry over means it’s a bit underwhelming
• Difficult to get used to seating position and manual stick
• Handling could be improved
• Competitors have more features for similar price

Overall: 6.5/10

We all have our pet peeves when it comes to driving. People talking or texting on their phones, people driving too fast or too slowly etc. One of my absolute biggest pet peeve is when people don’t signal their intentions. Not only is it immensely inconsiderate of other drivers but it’s dangerous too and there’s now some stats to back this up.

Distracted driving is generally regarded as the worse offense for accident causes as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration pegged it for causing over 1 million accidents per year in the U.S.

That number doubles for when talking about turn signal related accidents to 2 million per year.

Whether it’s failing to turn when a signal is activated or just plain not using the signal altogether, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) says that this happens over 750 billion times a year. I’m not quite sure how they came to measure that number, but it’s staggering nevertheless.

The solution? Well according to SAE, it resides in creating smarter technology such as “Smart Turn Signals” which could turn off the turn signal automatically if it’s deemed to become a hazard by using sensors, or alert the driver if and when they fail to signal. And here’s why that won’t work:

1) People already feel there is too much out of their control when it comes to vehicles such as seat belt safety warning systems, speed limiters and traction control which, despite being in their best interest, really turn people off. In short, people don’t like being nannied to death.

2) Surely there will be some sort of way of disabling these ‘Smart Turn Signals’ which renders it useless in the first place.

3) Education is the best way to change habits. By making people realize the importance of using their turn signals appropriately, people will start to do it and it will become as common sense and as frequent as putting on your seatbelt – something most of us don’t even think about anymore, we just do it.

What do you think is the best way to get people to use their turn signals properly?

[Society of Automotive Engineers]

By Kevin Harrison

I have an acquaintance named Tim who owns an Audi TT which he uses for his daily driver and who uses a fifteen year old Honda Civic as his beater in the winter months. Yes, I know, he could likely get away with driving the TT all-year round if he puts on a good set of winter tires, but that’s a different issue entirely. His issue, he says, is that his newly acquired fiancée has recently become pregnant.

While Tim always knew that taking the leap into holy matrimony would likely mean getting rid of his beloved TT eventually, he didn’t expect this to happen quite so quickly and as a result, he’s finding it difficult to part with the TT.

“I can’t be one of those guys,” said Tim in a recent phone conversation, audibly stressed and panicked. “I just can’t”.

I reassured him that getting a minivan as he was suggesting probably wasn’t necessary for just one kid, and is still the case if he ends up with twins which, the mere mention of the word forces Tim’s esophagus to swell shut.

Tim loves his TT mostly for its performance, but also appreciates the well appointment interior, exterior style and it’s small and nimble nature. I reassured him that there are great performance cars out there which also double as trusty family vehicles as well. The apocalypse has yet to come where anyone with a kid needs a minivan (which, by the way, I personally think people should be buying instead of monstrous SUV’s in the first place, but that’s for a different post altogether).

So he needs something safe, fun to drive, with the same sort of premium feel that he’s used to with his Audi. Why not stay within family blood lines?

The new iteration of the Jetta GLI has just come to market. Does it have what it takes to do double duty of performance car and family hauler?  

The recent redesign of the Jetta gives it a more tame look all while retaining a certain eye-catching premium feel. When equipped with my tester’s optional 18 inch wheels, it gives it a more aggressive look. In fact, those optional 18′s are really the biggest thing that sets the GLI apart from other Jetta models. The GLI also gets a mesh-styled grille of front, differently designed fog lights and GLI badging on the grille and on the trunk lid. That’s about it. If you look hard enough you’ll notice that the GLI has a slightly lowered stance. All in all, it’s likely that only a car nut would be able to differentiate between a GLI and, say, a Jetta TDI (check out the two side by side below). Overall it’s an agreeable look, however I would prefer there be a bit more to differentiate from the regular Jetta. After all, let’s face it: a big reason why Tim bought his TT was due to the styling.

Tim would likely feel right at home inside the GLI, however. A flat bottom steering wheel is standard on the GLI which I initially thought to be a bit gimmicky, but ended up appreciating the added grip that it provides during most turns. The red stitching on the wheel and on the seats adds a nice sporty look as well. One major criticism of the redesigned Jetta is that Volkswagen scaled back significantly on interior materials to keep the price lower from the previous generation and that remains true on this top trim level GLI. However most of the hard plastics are on places like the dash which rarely gets touched in the first place, and all the usual places the driver might touch gets higher quality materials like the arm rest and door grips. The GLI gets a push-start button, as is the new trend with pretty much every manufacturer, but unlike other manufacturers, you don’t simply push the button to start. You have to hold the button down for a few seconds before the engine comes to life. I’m not sure why this is the case as I don’t remember any other Volkswagen’s requiring the driver to do this. Volkswagen’s touch screen display is very large and clear although from time to time it requires two or three tries before it answers your command. Rear legroom is good as is headroom and the trunk is definitely large enough to swallow a whole host of Tim’s baby diapers, strollers and toys.

The GLI gets the same engine in its hatched brother the GTI which is a 2.0 litre turbocharged four making 200 horses and 207 pound foot torque. You’ve likely heard the praises of this engine’s refinement, smoothness and power and unfortunately you’re about to hear about it again. It really is a tremendous engine. Lots of torque at low RPM’s (around 1750) and it lasts until about 5,000 RPM. Peak horsepower at about 5,100 RPM keeps the engine from losing its breath all the way to the 6,000 RPM redline.  These days 200 horses doesn’t seem overly powerful, but for every day driving, believe me, it’s more than adequate. My only complaint is that while the engine emits a nice throaty burble, it’s almost impossible to hear from the outside. In fact, if you rev the engine a bit from stand still, it sounds like a plain gutless old four cylinder. Another reason why someone might mistake this for a regular Jetta. I’m guessing this would be a bit of a shock to the nice exhaust note that comes from his TT.

Handling is about as good as it gets for a car of this size, which admittedly is pretty large when comparing to previous generation Jetta’s. The GLI will happily take a corner with ease with little body roll and plenty of sure-footedness. Steering feedback to the driver is a tad on the light side,  however oddly enough, I didn’t find that this hindered performance. 

However as good of a handler as it is, you won’t be setting any lap records on the track due to the electronic nannies which seem to kick in sooner than expected. Eventually you become impatient with this and turn them off. Be aware though, if you do, you’ll experience some moderate under steer in hard cornering. My tester came with a slick shifting six-speed manual and believe me this is the transmission to get. I’m not suggesting that the DSG automatic is a bad transmission, it’s actually among the best and it shifts a few milliseconds faster than you ever could with a manual, but that only counts on the track. In real world city and highway driving, it makes not a lick of difference how fast the transmission can shift on public roads. So do yourself a favour and save yourself a thousand bucks and opt for the six-speed manual.

Basically the GLI is an excellent city car for the guy or gal who needs extra room for the kids, but doesn’t want to give up on performance. After my time with the GLI, I recommend that Tim take one out as its performance oriented (but not overly so in case Tim forgets he’s got a kid in the back seat), is refined, good looking and safe. It’s decent on gas, has a tremendous engine and can haul all kinds of stuff. But here’s the thing. Tim went to the dealership looking for a GLI and tried a GTI as well. The hatch offered additional versatility, a few more styling upgrades and much better and consistent Volkswagen quality. The GTI is built in Germany, while the GLI is built in Mexico. To each their own, but this was enough to convince Tim that the extra few grand was worth it for the hatch and in fact, he said of the two it’s the better performer. So all in all, it really comes down to personal preference.

Tim may have been swayed by the GTI, but honestly there is a very strong case to be made for the GLI as well, not least of which is the fact that it’s cheaper with the same engine and similar driving characteristics. But no matter which you opt for, you’ve definitely made a good choice.

Base Price: $27,475

Pros:

•  Refined, competent engine
• Best interior of all the Jetta trim levels
• Good handler in the cornersComfortable ride for cruising
• Decent fuel efficiency and interior room

Cons:

• Noticeable difference in interiors between GLI & GTI
• Exhaust note is almost inaudible from outside
• Not enough done to differentiate it from regular Jetta’s
• Touchscreen can be a bit finicky

Overall: 8.5/10

Remember that commercial that Acura apparently spent top dollars for to advertise for the new NSX for the Superbowl? It had Jerry Seinfeld wanting to be the first owner of ther new NSX, but a random guy beat him to it. Seinfeld then spends the whole commercial trying to sway said buyer with fairly ridiculous offers and in the end Jay Leno ended up getting the keys to the first NSX. What a brilliant premise.

The commercial was a pretty big hit and seemed to be fairly harmless and G rated, which earned Acura decent praise. Apparently behind the scenes though, this was not the case.

The company that Acura hired to cast for the commercial made a big no-no in the casting sheet. The company advertised for the salesman, who interacts with Seinfeld at the beggining, to be African-American. Nothing wrong with that, right? Well apparently they also stated that the actor was required to be ”not too dark”.

According to TMZ, the ones who unearthed the casting sheet from an unamed source, the PR company that Acura hired put that caveat in there because it had to do with lighting and special effects, and nothing to do with being racist. Here’s the thing with that though:

It’s. Still. Racist.

What they are essentially suggesting is that dark skinned African-Americans can’t be on TV. Really? Due to lighting? That’s what you came up with? Then buy more lights. Buy more expensive equipment. Spend hours or days on the lighting if you have to to get it right. Don’t stunt the growth of a young African-American’s acting career for something he cannot help. The Cosby Show was able to get by just fine lighting dark-skinned actors, after all. Putting “not too dark” into a casting sheet is just going along with a larger issue that’s developing in TV today, which is perpetuating  the stereotypical social issue that dark-skinned African-Americans aren’t to be trusted and that we should all tremble and clutch our valuables should we see a dark skinned male approaching. I wish I could say it’s becoming ridiculous, but unfortunately this sort of attitude has been around for a long time, especially when it comes to TV.

It should be pointed out that neither Jerry Seinfeld nor Acura had anything to do with this racist blunder so refrain from sending them your angry letters. In fact, Acura has issued an apology:

We apologize to anyone offended by the language on the casting sheet used in the selection of actors for one of our commercials.

We sought to cast an African-American in a prominent role in the commercial, and we made our selection based on the fact that he was the most talented actor.

The casting sheet was only now brought to our attention. We are taking appropriate measures to ensure that such language is not used again in association with any work performed on behalf of our brand.

 If by “such language is not used again” you mean getting rid of that language altogether then that’s great, Honda. But if you mean  you’ll simply word it differently next time around then that does nothing to fix the problem.

What do you think about the casting sheet?

[TMZ]

 The pioneers of the Scion brand, which Toyota created in the hopes of snagging a good portion of the youth market, are apparently on the choppong block. The Scion xB (pictured above) and the xD are reportedly going to get the axe.

The xB quickly became an iconic symbol helping to brand the new marque. Whenever you saw an xB, you simply said “I saw a Scion today”, which is pretty much every manufacturer’s main goal. It also helped that Toyota was among the first to introduce the box-on-wheels styling and was the first to make it cool. Or the first to make you want to scratch your own eyes out whenever you saw one. The xB’s styling was certainly polarizing when it was introduced back in 2004.

A few years later demand for cube-like styled cars started to dwindle. Honda recently killed off its boxy Element as a result, Kia tried a more shapely approach with the Soul and Nissan’s Cube became all but forgotten. In an effort to regain sales, Toyota redesigned the second generation xB with softer, more tame lines. This pretty much backfired as it very much upset xB loyalists who loved the sharp edged styling of their box, while it did absolutely nothing to entice naysayers at the same time.

The xD was an econobox that failed to catch on as well (even in our sub-compact loving market). Prospective buyers decided to opt for the Yaris and Corolla which are both much better known and thus much more likely to retain they’re value.

But don’t think that the Scion brand is dead in the water on the whole. The FR-S is expected to bring back former Celica and MR2 owners and Toyota hopes it will introduce some newcomers to the brand, while the innovative iQ will likely bite into a big chunck of Smart Fortwo sales as it’s more practical, more refined and just as good on gas. It seems Scion is still aiming at the youth market with these models, just taking a different approach.

Will you miss the xB and/or xD?

[Ward's Auto]

The brand synonymous with Zoom Zoom is reportedly dropping an engine synonymous with decent power: the V6. Strange, no?

Mazda is certainly proud of its new SkyActiv engine (of which I enjoyed for the most part as well), and is likely looking to expand its availability across the lineup. It appears that Mazda may be focusing much more on fuel efficiency than injecting sport into every model it makes by going this direction, but at the same time, that’s the direction the overall market is headed. As such, Mazda USA boss Robert Davis has confirmed that they have no plans on developing a new V6 power plant.

Currently the CX9 and Mazda6 are the only models available with a V6 option, both of which are well overdue for a model redesign. Since most of the industry is dropping V8 engines like hot potatoes, it stands to reason that the replacements of both vehicles will downsize to a 4-cylinder with a SkyActiv trim level available. There is a good possibility of a turbocharged 4-cylinder taking the engine bay of the top trim level, however Mazda remains quite tight lipped on that possibility.

What do you think of ‘performance’ brand downsizing their engine options?

[Autoguide.com]

]]> http://www.cardriven.ca/2012/04/mazda-to-rid-itself-of-v6-option/feed/ 0 http://www.cardriven.ca/2012/04/toyota-looking-to-make-more-exciting-vehicles/ http://www.cardriven.ca/2012/04/toyota-looking-to-make-more-exciting-vehicles/#comments Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:08:37 +0000 admin http://www.cardriven.ca/?p=4530

 Supra. Celica. MR2.

All names associated with performance, all names which no longer exist in today’s car world. A while back Toyota took a new direction with its product concentrating more on reliable and fuel efficient vehicles. While that may have worked (Toyota was the number one auto manufacturer in the world for while), it definitely alienated their loyal performance nuts who were forced to look elsewhere to brands like Honda, Nissan and Volkswagen for their performance pleasure.

With the introduction of the Toyota GT 86 (that’s Scion FR-S in Canadian-speak) it seems the company may be looking to real back some of those customers. CEO Akio Toyoda recently mentioned that they are implementing a new development and manufacturing framework to come up with more exciting cars which will allow them to design multiple vehicles at the same time, reducing costs and adding the ability to cut the amount of people involved in the approval process. This means less people to focus on the vehicle’s potential negative’s and focus more on the vehicle’s strengths.

So does this mean more cars like the GT 86? Or does it merely mean a more rigid structure with enhanced springs and stabilizers like on the redesigned Avalon? Tough to say, but at this point anything to help get the ball rolling on a next generation Supra (one of my fave cars as a kid) would be much appreciated.

[Automotive News]

By Kevin Harrison

Bigger is better. We hear that cliché all the time, but just how true is it? I recently went for a six inch sub at Subway instead of the foot long and I must admit, my stomach sure did appreciate that rather than stuffing it with another half of sub. Surely I alleviated myself of stomach cramps by going for less.

The bigger is better notion is a problem we hear all the time, and the auto industry is among the worse for employing it. Every car has grown in size from its original inception and every car now has a bigger engine. For Subaru they had a somewhat similar problem.

The motto: Most true Subarus should have all-wheel drive standard.

The problem: All-wheel drive means increased fuel consumption.

Subaru has been struggling with this dilemma for the past few decades as gas prices climb and show no signs of slowing down. Not wanting to fully abandon their all-wheel drive heritage (making the rear-wheel drive BRZ is probably as far as Subaru is willing to go), the only solution seemed to remain in the power plant.

But increasing horsepower or making a bigger engine would surely affect fuel consumption. Famous for their boxer engines, Subaru has concluded that to ditch the boxer could mean losing some of their loyal fans, so rather than putting in a diesel or making a hybrid powertrain, Subaru has gone to the drawing board with a new smaller engine - bucking the trend to upside, to match their newly redesigned compact offering.

Have they come up with a credible solution to their dilemma or is this just some great spin from their marketing department? I drove one to find out.

Traditionally, the styling for most Subaru’s were quirky and polarizing with the Impreza being the most guilty of all the models. When a complete redesign came in 2002 with a ‘bug-eyed’ look, most Subaru most were shouting blasphemy, while regular folks couldn’t quite decide if they liked what they saw. Today, the Subaru has evolved from awkward looking to sharp and chiseled. The new front end mimics that of the Legacy and the side profile has some style injected in the Sport trim level with mutlispoke 17 inch wheels, side skirting and a large roof spoiler out back. A colleague of mine complained that the sharp lines particularly in the back end made it look too much like the artless and chunky Dodge Caliber while another complained that the roof spoiler was too much. I disagree with both of their analyses as I think the new look is quite attractive to the eye and is probably the best looking Impreza to date.

 The interior has also been reworked and there is no polarization here. It’s all around a good looking interior with decent feeling materials that are laid out in a smart manner. The controls on the centre stack are noticeably placed higher and are easier to reach and rear legroom is much improved as well. The Impreza can be had in either sedan or hatchback and the latter provides an increased cargo area of 638 litres and around 1,485 litres with the seats folded down for a nearly flat cargo area. Basically the Impreza is definitely versitile enough for most of your stuff and is one of the few in the segment to offer a hatchback version of their sedan. Kudos to Subaru for making both available, which the hatch only costing $900 more than the sedan.

 So that new engine that I alluded to? Well believe it or not Subaru has bucked the trend of upsizing engines for new models. The new 2.0 litre 4 cylinder replaces the 2.5 litre four for 2012. Don’t worry Subie fans, this engine is still horizontally opposed, but it makes less power. The 148 horsepower and 143 pound foot torque is a lot less than the 170 horses and 170 pound foot torque that the old unit used to produce, but in actuality there’s only a 1 second gain from 0-100 and let’s face it, in real world driving one second really doesn’t matter a whole lot. If you want to track race your Impreza, Subaru will be happy to offer you their performance laden WRX or STi, however for most city dwellers, this kind of power is adequate. With that said, 0-100 is a rather longish 11.1 seconds.

So, performance is a bit of a sacrifice, however that means that the Impreza returns some impressive fuel efficiency numbers. It’s rated at 7.5 L/100 kms city and 5.5 L/100 kms highway with my CVT equipped tester, which is the most fuel efficient vehicle sold today with all-wheel drive. Considering most compact offerings is the segment get similar numbers with just front wheel drive, Subaru has essentially eliminated any worry of fuel efficiency penalty for anyone who prefers all-wheel drive. Looks great on paper, however my real world test revealed a combined highway and city driving rating of 10.1 L/100kms. The Impreza can’t necessarily be blamed for this higher fuel consumption, however. Most of my time with the Impreza was spent in rather cold temperatures which negatively affects fuel efficiency no matter what you drive, and on top of that, I live about a 10 minute drive from my day job.  Shorter trips generally mean the vehicle has less time to adequately warm up which means more fuel consumption. And no, idling a vehicle in your driveway does nothing to warm it up, it just wastes more gas.

While the CVT transmission is not ideal from a performance perspective it is part of the puzzle of why the Impreza achieves such amazing fuel efficiency number. However Subaru fitted the Impreza CVT with paddle shifters which gives the allusion of performance. While shifts are quick and smooth while using the paddles, they are pretty much useless from a performance perspective. It doesn’t matter how quickly you can shift gears with an 11 second run to 100 kph. With that said it’s a smooth transmission, however it can be a bit intrusive to the cabin when pushed. Once the Impreza is all warmed up, however, engine noise is less noticeable.

Despite that all-wheel drive system, the Impreza reaches its limit of grip sooner than expected in the corner, and this is where the Impreza actually feels like a heavier car. Granted my tester was equipped with less grippy winter tires, however if you’re not careful you can get the Impreza out of shape fairly easily. The traction and stability control ensures that there are no unfortunate consequences, however.

Recently Subaru earned the top spot on Consumer Reports Rankings list and a big reason why was due to the redesigned Impreza. It’s redesigned, more user friend and upscale interior along with its impressive fuel efficiency rating helped Subaru’s smallest offering achieve that accolade. And for its few shortcomings, I can safely conclude that Consumer Reports was bang-on to praise this new Impreza. I’d be curious to see if the Impreza can meet or even beat it’s fuel efficiency ratings in warmer weather because if it can, Subaru has essentially come up with proof that bigger is not better. They got essentially the same power from a smaller engine which is more efficient without having to sacrifice something that is synonymous with their brand name: all-wheel drive. Bigger is better? Not where the Impreza is concerned. While other brands continue to put foot long subs for their engines, Subaru has proved that you can go with a six inch and still be satisfied.

Base Price: $26,490

Pros:

• Best looking Impreza to date
• Attractive re-worked interior
• Lots of usable cargo space
• Good fuel efficiency without sacrificing all-wheel drive

Cons:

• Engine noise can be intrusive
• Feels heavy when cornering
• Generally can be slow

Overall: 7.5/10

You’ve probably seen videos like the above before: a driver pulls into a parking spot in front of a business or restaurant then without warning the car plunges itself through the store window. How on earth can such an accident occur? Well apparently most times it’s a case of the driver accidently hitting the gas instead of the brake. As unthinkable and as unusual as it sounds, it happens more often than you think.

A new study has actually revealed that more often than not it’s older female drivers behind the wheel when this inattention occurs. Nearly two thirds of all car-into-building accidents occurred with an older female driver. In fact, most were over the age of 76, while most of the rest were under the age of 20. Pretty big difference in age there. Why the difference?

It likely has to do with female brain patterns. Researchers speculate that the area of the brain which is used for driving in females probably isn’t as robust at a younger age (20 or younger) and probably deteriorates more as the driver gets older (76 or older).

Before us men start to gloat and tout the stereotype flag, the study also noted that men have more accidents in general. About 60% of all types of car accidents had a male behind the wheel.

[Wheels.ca]

By Kevin Harrison

By all indications Pablo Picasso was mad. The famous Spanish artist could easily turn everyday life scenarios and paint them into a seemingly twisted snapshot that is both awe inspiring and head scratching.

People with distorted unconventional faces and sometimes with twin faces would relentlessly be found on mismatched bodies with questionable colour choices. It was sometimes a stretch, but look closely and you’ll notice that Picasso wasn’t exactly mad, he just saw things in a different way. So differently, in fact, that he is credited with inventing a new style of painting called Cubism. It was a way of painting in which Picasso analyzed and painted objects in terms of picked apart shapes and put them back together in an interesting and austere way.

Nissan is one of the few automakers to do the same with their designs. If you haven’t noticed, the compact CUV segment is about as interesting as spending an evening with a goldfish. Same general shape, same general function. But Nissan has decided to take a leap with their latest CUV design in the hopes of coming up with a Cubism (and no, I’m not referring to their other compact offering, the Cube).

The Juke has found itself on many top ten ugly vehicle lists and has even been accused of being a modern day Pontiac Aztek. While Picasso’s work was certainly polarizing, most of his paintings were concluded to be literal works of art from a hand which produced strokes of genius.

Has Nissan hit a similar point in design, or have they merely produced something only a mother could love? I drove one to find out.

There is nothing like it on the road today, and as a result, the Juke generates lots of stares. Some are looks of intrigue, while the Juke’s design had others finding something to vomit in as I drove by. At the Juke’s introduction to the market a few years ago, I would’ve been one of those reaching for a barf bag whenever I laid eyes on a Juke. I even jokingly called it the ‘Nissan Puke’. However, now I’m not a part of that group. The look has grown on me, so much so that I consider it to be a quirky look that forces the eye to look more closely at the unique styling cues. Once you take the time to do that, the Juke’s appearance is much more tolerable and even perhaps endearing.

The front fascia is by far the most unique piece of the Juke’s styling puzzle with large round headlights where you’d expect fog lights to be, and turn signals directly on top of the hood where you’d expect the head lights to be. It’s a bit like Picasso’s faces where the eyes were on the forehead and the nose was where the mouth is. The large black grille stretches from end to end while the front bumper is aggressive and SUV-like. The side profile continues the mismatched Cubism theme with lines that are both curvaceous and angular. Out back the very slanted roof line helps with uniqueness as does the skinny Volvo-esque tail lights. As I alluded to before, it takes time, but eventually you start to appreciate the Juke’s appearance.

The Juke’s uniqueness continues inside as well, although much more sedately. Trim pieces that match the exterior colour can be found, along with a logical, if  too conservative layout. The center piece mimics the fuel tank of a motorcycle which is pretty neat. But if you’re going to make a statement in design, it should flow to the interior as well and I feel the Juke comes up a bit short in this area comparatively. Still, my SL tester was decently equipped and most of the controls are where you expect them to be, though one noticeable omission appears to be a lack of auto headlights.

The Juke is a smaller vehicle than you think and as a result rear legroom is tight as is entrance and egress. Cargo room is a tad on the small side too, but the folding seats can easily take care of that issue. The Juke’s form is definitely taking precedent over function here. The Juke has a small screen which controls the driving settings and there’s three of them for normal driving, sport, and eco modes. There is a noticeable difference between eco and sport, although not so much between normal and sport. A small display screen in sport lets you know what the torque vectoring system is up to and how much G’s you’re producing. While that kind of gadgetry is a bit of a gambit, the Juke can be flogged about quite effortlessly and for the most part it feels sure-footed. My only complaint is that the screen is located a little too far down on the centre console, almost at the height of the gear shift which causes the driver to really take his or her eyes off the road.

The torque vectoring all-wheel drive system can essentially split the torque from front to back or from side to side depending on which wheels need the most grip when cornering. It’s a bit like Honda’s SH-AWD system and I must say, it works marvelously. It’s likely one of the best handling crossover’s in the segment.

Under normal driving conditions, the Juke is a zippy little city dweller. It’s nimble and easy to control in parking lots and small spaces. Due to the uncharacteristic exterior shape, backing up and checking blind spots can be a bit of a challenge, but my tester had a back-up camera to make the former a bit easier. The ride is a bit choppy, but it’s not unbearable.

The Juke uses a 1.6 litre direct injected turbocharged engine that makes 180 horsepower and 170 pound foot of torque, which is readily available in the mid RPM range. Pick-up off the line is good, especially in sport mode, but the CVT transmission (which is standard on the AWD model) leaves a less than desirable engine noise which is intrusive to the cabin. That said, the CVT transmission is quite smooth although it works better with Nissan’s bigger engines. For highway cruising, the CVT happily calms down in the 2,000 RPM range which helps it achieve an impressive 6.1 L/100 kms highway rating.

After just a few days in the Juke, it’s quirky nature left me quite  fascinated. Here we have a CUV that has the audacity to stare you in the face with that mug. Yet a lot of the time, I couldn’t look away. I had to stare at every single angle intently to form my opinion on whether or not I liked what I saw. It was a bit like, oh I don’t know, what happens when people stare at Picasso paintings in art galleries around the world. Like Picasso paintings, I knew that I (eventually) liked what I saw, but couldn’t quite explain why. And that’s really what the Juke is; a modern day Picasso. It’s not for everyone, but for those who enjoy challenging their eyes and their mind with unique design will certainly enjoy the Juke. The fact that it is relatively cheap, fun to drive, versatile and good on gas is just the icing on the cake.

Base Price: $26,778

Pros:

• Good AWD system
• Decent fuel efficiency
• Easy to maneuver
• Respectable acceleration in Sport mode
• Good handling for a CUV
• Unique, eye-catching looks

Cons:

• Unique, eye-catching looks
• Shape creates a few blind spots
• A bit of a choppy ride
• Noisy CVT

Overall: 8/10

Volkswagen certainly seems to be making a valiant effort trying to get us Canadians the models that we want. First they considered offering the Passat Alltrack here, and now it seems they may be considering offering the Scirocco as well.

The last Scirocco to be sold here was the 1988 model year. After that, the only way to get a current generation Scirocco in Canada was through a very expensive loophole and even if you wanted to spend insane amounts of cash for one, your chances of nabbing one were quite slim. If you don’t know much about the Scirocco, it’s essentially a sleeker, better looking version of the GTI (and it’s also around the same price), although in Europe it can also be had in diesel form as well.

But at this year’s New York Auto Show, Johnathan Browning, CEO of Volkswagen of America, told the press that the next-generation Scirocco could find its way to our shores. Although it wasn’t clear whether Browning was referring to the facelifted Scirocco which is expected next year, or if he was talking about a brand new redesign a few years down the road. It’s likely the latter.

Also interesting news about the Passat Alltrack is that a diesel variant is being considered here too, which all but confirms that the Alltrack is on its way. It’s one thing to speculate about a model being sold in a market, but it’s another to start suggesting potential powerplants for a ‘concept’ that isn’t even sold here yet. That’s good news, wagon fans!

[Autoblog Canada]