Perhaps. Never say never I suppose but I guess I'm at a stage in life where I no longer look for one solution to solve all my needs. Instead of buying a pair of cross training shoes, I would buy a pair of running shoes, a pair of tennis shoes, a pair of hiking boots, and a pair of basketball shoes. What's my point? Well, it looks like the CX7 is trying to be a sports car, an SUV, a family hauler, and most likely a daily driver. So if I wanted a sports car, I would buy a sports car. If I wanted an SUV as my daily driver, then I'm going to look for the utility and economy (prices and cost) values of the vehicle. I assume everyone knows the difference between price and cost. In 4 years I bought 3 new cars. I wanted a sports car back in 2001 so I got an Eclipse GT. My wife wanted a small car that's fun to drive but can also accomodate a good size dog cage(she volunteers at 2 animal shelters so she has to transport cats and dogs for adoption quite often) so I got her a 2003 Protege5. Last year I wanted a good family sedan with low cost of ownership so I got a 2005 Accord EX. All this while I still have my 1994 Toyota 4x4 pickup. So rather than having one vehicles that does it all but none well, I got different vehicles that do their jobs the best. I'm not bashing the CX7 at all. I think it's an awesome vehicle and it will be a huge contender against the new RAV4. But given the choice between a car that runs on 87 octane versus one that uses 91 where both have similar sticker prices, features, and performance, I would get the one that runs on 87. This keeps the cost of ownership down for the life of the vehicle without compromising anything. By the way, my Eclipse GT used 91 octane and I thought that wouldn't bother me much but it did. Gas prices are high enough as it is. Having to pay $.20 more per gallon for 91 octane is just rediculous and unnecessary. Although I loved the performance, the high cost of ownership took some of the joy away.
, much cheaper than the Forester, how much for the AWD version??
