One of the biggest surprises of the 2009 North American International Auto Show in Detroit was a concept car that won struggling Chrysler a lot of buzz: the 200C. Chrysler showed off the car as a Chevy Volt-fighter. Like the Volt, Chrysler said the 200C would be an Extended-Range Electric Vehicle (E-REV). That means the 200C would function as an electric car until its batteries were depleted to a pre-set level (after about 40 miles of driving, according to Chrysler), after which a gasoline engine would ignite and serve as a generator to recharge the batteries.

Since most Americans drive less than 40 miles in the average day, owning a 200C would be like owning an electric car — except when you needed to travel farther, at which point it could use gasoline to extend its range as far as you needed it to go. “Chrysler has unveiled a surprise new member to the ENVI lineup in Detroit. It’s called the Chrysler 200C EV Concept and it’s surprisingly good-looking.” — Jalopnik

At this point, the 200C is just a concept car — a design study intended to suggest something that the automaker might decide to build, but not necessarily a prototype of a production car. The concept car on the floor at the Detroit show looked surprisingly production-ready — but similar efforts appear on the auto show circuit and then disappear forever every year.

The first reaction of most automotive writers who saw the 200C wasn’t to push for technical details. Their first reaction was to pick up their jaws from the floor. Most of them thought the thing was gorgeous.

Once reporters got over the look and started asking for specs, they didn’t get many solid answers. Details on the car are scarce. “Based on a shortened version of the rear-drive Chrysler 300C full-sized sedan, the mid-sized 200C EV is a performance sedan that blends the style, performance and amenities sought by car enthusiasts and environmentally conscious consumers alike.” — AutoWeek

If Chrysler were to build it, it would most likely replace two of the most disappointing midsize cars ever built — the Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Avenger — which have lurked at the bottom of our rankings since they first appeared. A few media outlets speculate that the 200C is actually the replacement for the aging 300, but we find it unlikely that Chrysler would give the 300′s replacement a name that makes it sound smaller — most likely, this is a new midsize car and the 300, if it survives to another generation, will keep its name.

The 200C is built on a shortened version of the platform that undergirds the large Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger, so the concept car is rear-wheel drive. But modifying it to front- or all-wheel drive would not be difficult.

Chrysler representatives have claimed that the 200C will be able to travel from zero to sixty in about seven seconds, and will have a top speed of about 120 mph and a range of over 400 miles — but the company hasn’t even decided what drivetrain will ultimately power the car.

If the car does come to market as an E-REV, it will probably use the same battery system Chrysler has used in other electric concept cars — a unique hybrid that combines a lithium-ion battery, for quick power and instant torque, with a sodium-sulfur battery for cruising. The gasoline engine that recharges those batteries will probably be turbocharged and around 1.0 liters in size. But the car may come to market with a more conventional engine. Chrysler’s “Phoenix Project” is reportedly working to develop a more efficient V6 engine that could fit easily under this hood.

Tesla Motors, a California start-up company, impressed the automotive world with its first effort.  The two-seat Tesla Roadster offers sub-four-second zero-to-sixty times on electric power alone.  It will probably never occupy more than a tiny niche in the market, however, because it carries a six-figure price tag.

The company’s second effort is intended to be more mainstream in every way.  The Model S is a four-seat sedan with an intended price tag around $50,000, after federal tax credits that may save buyers as much as $7,500.  The vehicle uses the same electric technology as the Roadster, promising sporty performance for a large car.  It may be offered with several different battery packages, varying in price and driving range.  The company says it will deliver the car in 2011, and had already accepted orders for more than 500 Model S sedans within one week of announcing plans to build the car.  But so far the car exists only in concept form, and no factory has been built or engaged to manufacture it.

The automotive press is nearly unanimous in calling the Model S a beautiful car and an ambitious design.  The company’s performance claims for the car are extraordinary, putting it on par with the best performers in the large luxury car class, but no one has test driven the Model S.

Tesla claims that “The Model S will seat up to seven people, will accelerate from zero to 60 in 5.5 seconds with a top speed of 135 mph, and will have a driving range of up to 300 miles….The standard lithium-ion battery pack that comes with the Model S is good for a 160-mile range, the company said. An optional battery pack will extend the range to 300 miles and can be quick-charged in 45 minutes,” writes Edmunds Inside Line.

A few media outlets, however, have expressed mild skepticism that Tesla can build this car, since no factory was in place to build it when the company started accepting deposits.  Others note, however, that Tesla has been through a lot as a young company, with repeated doubts about its financial viability and a lawsuit from rival green car builder Fisker – yet it has delivered hundreds of its successful Roadster model to customers.  It may be a mistake to doubt Tesla.

The Model S is a new design from the ground up, borrowing nothing from existing cars made by larger manufacturers.

Tesla says the Model S will be sold with a range of batteries, with each offering greater driving range for a greater price.  The announced base price will purchase a 160 mile battery, while 230 and 300 mile options will be offered for an additional charge.  The company claims the standard battery can be recharged in 45 minutes.  That figure, however, requires a 480-volt outlet, which would have to be specially installed in most households.  The manufacturer says the batteries could also be changed in just five minutes, though it isn’t clear whether that process is easy for an owner to perform alone.

The car is electronically limited to 135 miles per hour, and Tesla claims a zero-to-sixty time of 5.6 seconds.  The standard model is rear-wheel-drive, while all-wheel-drive will be available as an option.  The Model S uses a single-speed transmission, allowing for what the manufacturer says is smooth, even power delivery.

The car seats five adults, with additional seating for two children in rear-facing third row of seats beneath the rear hatch.  The rear seats fold down to allow transport of large items.  Because the car does not have a conventional engine in front, there is a second trunk beneath the hood.

The driver’s instrument cluster and center console are both made entirely of touchscreen panels, which can be configured to offer different performance information or access to climate and entertainment functions.  Internet access is reportedly available through the central touchscreen. Tesla says it expects to deliver the Model S in 2011, though no more specific date has been announced.

The Honda Ridgeline is a good choice for people who need some of the capabilities of a truck, but aren’t ready to commit to a big rig.

The Ridgeline delivers plenty of truck for most people. Though it isn’t as rugged as some competitors, the Ridgeline offers just enough capability for weekend warriors headed to Home Depot. Edmunds says, “While the 2010 Honda Ridgeline might not have the muscle that serious truck buyers demand, its unique combination of a carlike ride and pickup utility makes it all the pickup many buyers will ever need.”

A lure for many buyers will be innovative features like an in-bed trunk and a dual-action tailgate. Those storage solutions give the Ridgeline an edge when it comes to storing outdoor gear or tools for small projects. However, its car-based construction and lack of four wheel drive (the Ridgeline has all-wheel drive) means that it isn’t as strong for towing and off-roading as its SUT rivals are. On the other hand, the same construction details that make the Ridgeline less capable than some competitors also make it smoother and more car-like.

Price is where the Ridgeline takes on many SUTs. The Ridgeline is one of the least expensive SUTs in the class, starting at a price that’s at least $7,000 less than all of its competition, except the Ford Explorer SportTrac. However, when you compare the Ridgeline to a full size truck, the value equation starts to crumble. Base truck models can undercut the Ridgeline’s price by several thousand dollars. If you can do without a full backseat, a regular cab full-size truck may save you a lot of money.

Although the 2010 Honda Ridgeline does not have the performance capabilities and capacities of traditional trucks, of the truck-based SUTs it competes with, writers say it’s sufficient for shoppers using it for play, not work. Its car-like construction leads it to have very car-like performance, which should appeal to many buyers.

Unlike most trucks, the Honda Ridgeline only provides one engine option — a V6 that makes 250-horsepower. A few reviewers find that engine to be underpowered, especially for hauling and towing. The Honda Ridgeline’s transmission is a five-speed automatic with a heavy-duty transmission cooler for towing. The majority feel the five-speed is well-mated to the V6.

Most other SUTs offer V8 engines. While it’s tempting to dismiss the V8 engines because of fuel economy, you should know that the Ridgeline’s 3.5 liter V6 only gets marginally better fuel economy than some of its V8-powered competition. For example, the Ridgeline’s 15/20 mpg city/highway EPA-estimated fuel economy is only one mpg better in city driving than the Chevy Avalanche’s 14/20 city/highway mpg — and the Avalanche has a V8.

By now, we’re all familiar with crossovers — vehicles that often slot in under the SUV name but drive like cars. Sometimes crossovers even straddle the line between SUV and wagons; many have wagon-like length but SUV-like height. That’s the case with the new Outlander Sport, a baby brother to Mitsubishi’s Outlander crossover.

Despite its familiar name, the Sport isn’t directly related to the Outlander. It looks similar on the outside, but it’s a different vehicle underneath. Plus, it’s considerably shorter — by 14 inches, to be exact. In fact, the Outlander Sport is so small that some auto journalists refer to it as a “subcompact crossover.”

The new crossover is expected to cost less than the Outlander, and will even boast a higher quality cabin. Buyers will have a choice of more premium options than they do on most Mitsubishi models — including a panoramic sunroof. The Outlander also beats most other SUVs on fuel economy. Its four-cylinder engine is expected to average 30 miles per gallon.Several auto reviewers have tested the Japanese version of the Outlander Sport, which is expected to be similar to the model we’ll get stateside. “This is one new Mitsubishi with at least a fighting chance at sales success. That’s got to look pretty good to Mitsu these days.” — Edmunds Inside Line

Automobile Magazine Writes, “Combined with the electric power steering and a focus on light-weight materials, the Outlander Sport should sit near the top of the class in terms of fuel economy. The being said, swift acceleration probably won’t be this crossover’s forte: the standard 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine produces 148 horsepower and 143 in PZEV states.”

“Unlike the Outlander, which has interior plastics that wouldn’t look out of place in a Little Tikes Cozy Coupe, the Sport has soft-touch materials on the doors and instrument panel, surprising in view of its expected $19,000 starting price,” feels Car and Driver.

Should you wait for the 2011 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport? Yes – or you ought to at least hold off deciding on something else until you’ve had a chance to test drive it. Think of the Outlander Sport as an economical way to get the image of an SUV, the all-wheel-drive capability of a crossover, the utility of a wagon, and the maneuverability of a small car.

The 2011 Outlander Sport comes with a 2.0-liter, 148-horsepower four-cylinder engine that is expected to net an average fuel economy of 30 miles per gallon (for front-wheel-drive models). The engine is paired with a standard five-speed manual transmission or an optional Continuously Variable automatic transmission (CVT) with paddle shifters. All-wheel drive is optional.

Standard features are expected to include steering wheel-mounted audio controls, a tilt/telescoping steering wheel, USB and auxiliary audio inputs for iPods, and Bluetooth — all of which are impressive for a vehicle that is expected to cost less than $20,000.

The 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti ranks 2 out of 7 Exotic Sports Cars. This ranking is based on our analysis of 40 published reviews and test drives of the Ferrari 612 Scaglietti, and our analysis of reliability and safety data.The 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti is a first-rate exotic sports car equipped with enough power and panache to leave most everyone jealous. “Is this the perfect Grand Tourer? No such thing, really, but it’s close,” says Motor Trend.

Since its introduction in 2005, the Ferrari 612 Scaglietti hasn’t changed all that much. While that may bother some critics who feel that its Ferrari siblings look better, others don’t seem to mind at all. After all, few cars come close to matching the 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti’s unique combination of sleek grand tourer styling, hardcore sports performance and high-class interior accommodations. “The design choice to influence the 612 Scaglietti’s styling was its architecture. A mid-front layout with the engine mounted behind the front axle, and the gearbox and differential in unit at the rear ensure that the centre of gravity is kept as far back and as low as possible.” — AutoMiddleEast.com

It’s not a chore to drive on a regular basis either. The 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti’s visceral 540-horsepower V12 engine is loud and intimidating, but it handles comfortably. Plus, it features two small back seats and a class-competitive 8.75 cubic feet of cargo room. “Although the words ‘practical’ and ‘Ferrari’ aren’t always synonymous, the Scaglietti is very usable, with a decent trunk, space out back for reasonably sized humans, and a wonderfully flexible V-12 engine,” writes Car and Driver.

Auto critics are blown away by the 612 Scaglietti’s fierce powertrain. It’s equipped with a 5.7-liter V12 engine that produces 540-horsepower at 7,250 rpm and 433.8 pound-feet of torque at 5,250 rpm. Though a traditional six-speed manual transmission is standard, an FI automatic gearbox — which allows drivers to choose between manual and automatic modes — is available. According to Ferrari, the 612 Scaglietti has a maximum speed of 196+ mph and accelerates from 0 to 62 mph in 4.2 seconds.

The EPA reports that the 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti nets a city/highway fuel economy of 10/15 mpg when equipped with a manual transmission and 9/16 mpg with an automatic. “The 612 can’t be classified as a ‘quiet’ car by absolute standards. However, its engine and exhaust notes are an absolute joy to the ears, making mechanical sounds that other automakers can only dream of reproducing.” — Consumer Guide Despite not having been redesigned in many years, the 612 Scaglietti never ceases to amaze test drivers with its masterfully engineered powertrain and superb handling dynamics.

The 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti ranks 2 out of 7 Exotic Sports Cars. This ranking is based on our analysis of 40 published reviews and test drives of the Ferrari 612 Scaglietti, and our analysis of reliability and safety data. The 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti is a first-rate exotic sports car equipped with enough power and panache to leave most everyone jealous. “Is this the perfect Grand Tourer? No such thing, really, but it’s close,” says Motor Trend.

Since its introduction in 2005, the Ferrari 612 Scaglietti hasn’t changed all that much. While that may bother some critics who feel that its Ferrari siblings look better, others don’t seem to mind at all. After all, few cars come close to matching the 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti’s unique combination of sleek grand tourer styling, hardcore sports performance and high-class interior accommodations.

It’s not a chore to drive on a regular basis either. The 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti’s visceral 540-horsepower V12 engine is loud and intimidating, but it handles comfortably. Plus, it features two small back seats and a class-competitive 8.75 cubic feet of cargo room. “Although the words ‘practical’ and ‘Ferrari’ aren’t always synonymous, the Scaglietti is very usable, with a decent trunk, space out back for reasonably sized humans, and a wonderfully flexible V-12 engine,” writes Car and Driver.

Despite not having been redesigned in many years, the 612 Scaglietti never ceases to amaze test drivers with its masterfully engineered powertrain and superb handling dynamics. Auto critics are blown away by the 612 Scaglietti’s fierce powertrain. It’s equipped with a 5.7-liter V12 engine that produces 540-horsepower at 7,250 rpm and 433.8 pound-feet of torque at 5,250 rpm. Though a traditional six-speed manual transmission is standard, an FI automatic gearbox — which allows drivers to choose between manual and automatic modes — is available. According to Ferrari, the 612 Scaglietti has a maximum speed of 196+ mph and accelerates from 0 to 62 mph in 4.2 seconds. The EPA reports that the 2010 Ferrari 612 Scaglietti nets a city/highway fuel economy of 10/15 mpg when equipped with a manual transmission and 9/16 mpg with an automatic.

The 2010 X6 M enters the realm of high-performance luxury midsize SUVs with a bang. In fact, neither of its two leading competitors — the 2010 Mercedes-Benz ML63 AMG and 2010 Porsche Cayenne Turbo S — can match its power output or quick acceleration time. The Cayenne, however, comes close with 550-horsepower and a 0 to 60 mph time of 4.7 seconds. And whereas the 2010 BMW X6 M and ML63 AMG have their top speed limited to 155 mph, the Cayenne Turbo S maxes out at 174 mph. All three, however, are magnificent performers.

Faced with three compelling choices, car shoppers may want to base their purchase decision on utility and practicality. After all, these are SUVs. While the 2010 BMW X6 M only provides seating for four, both its Benz and Porsche competitors seat five. They also provide significantly more cargo room. The Porsche Cayenne Turbo S, however, can’t tow nearly as much as the Mercedes-Benz ML63 AMG or BMW X6 M. What’s more, the 2010 BMW X6 M has them all beat in terms of price. It starts at $88,900, while the ML63 AMG starts at $90,100 and the Cayenne Turbo S at a whopping $126,300.

Come to think of it, there’s nothing practical about an SUV engineered to drive like a sports car. The 2010 BMW X6 M is a luxury SUV that behaves like a sports car. According to Edmunds, “It doesn’t make much sense, but it’s a whole lot of fun.”

The 2010 BMW X6 M is a performance-tuned variant of the 2010 BMW X6, which garners praise for its sporty performance, long list of tech gadgets and high-quality interior finish.

The 2010 BMW X6 M builds upon the base trim, transforming it from a sporty SUV to a true sports performer. Equipped with a 555-horsepower Advanced Turbo V8 engine and a plethora of handling technology, the 2010 BMW X6 M blasts from 0 to 60 mph in just 4.5 seconds — and does it in comfort. While many critics agree that it doesn’t make much sense to soup up an SUV with this much power and capability, most concede that it’s still a helluva lot of fun to drive.

“We suspect that, like the Porsche [Cayenne Turbo S], the BMW will rarely be seen on a track in any role other than impressive tow machine,” writes Popular Mechanics. “But it might just be the quickest tow truck in the lot-and it’d likely make for a really great ride out to the local steakhouse at the end of the track day.”

If you are looking for a super luxury sports car, the 2010 Dodge Viper would be a good choice! The 2010 Dodge Viper SRT10 is an amazing performer on both road and track, but its sports-tuning and limited convenience and safety features make it impractical for everyday use. “Explosive power and surprising handling prowess make Dodge’s flagship vehicle a thrilling ride,” writes Consumer Guide. “Beyond that, though, Viper is an emotional statement that makes little sense as daily transportation.”

Engineered for folks who care more about mind-numbing sports performance than comfort and luxury, the 2010 Dodge Viper SRT10 offers no compromises. It is as bare on the inside as it is powerful and capable on the track. Automobile Magazine explains, “The Dodge Viper has always been a raw sports car with very few frivolities.” The 2010 Dodge Viper SRT10′s lack of convenience and safety features is proof of that. “The new Viper may not be perfect, but it’s perfect for weekend track driving and collecting lusty stares. Creature comforts — lacking here — are for the weak and pampered (though the new Viper does offer a navigation system). This car is the best piece of pure American muscle on the road today.” — Detroit News

True sports enthusiasts, however, won’t mind — as few vehicles priced under $90,000 can keep pace with this beast of a machine. And yes, equipped with a 600-horspower, 8.4-liter V10 engine that launches it from 0 to 60 mph in just four seconds, the 2010 Dodge Viper SRT10 is indeed a beast. The track-tuned American Club Racer (ACR) trim is even more impressive. In fact, it beat the Chevrolet Corvette ZR1’s Nurburgring record in 2009 and just recently snagged the production car lap record at Laguna Seca Raceway in California.

The 2010 Dodge Viper SRT10 proves itself a competent super car on both road and track, but isn’t comfortable to drive on a daily basis.Auto reviewers are enamored by the 2010 Viper STR10′s explosive 8.4-liter V10 engine. It generates 600-horsepower at 6,000 rpm and 560 pound-feet of torque at 5,100 rpm. A six-speed manual transmission is standard. According to Dodge, it can accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in just four seconds.

A Viper American Club Racer (ACR) trim is even wilder. Automobile Magazine reports: “Last year, the car was able to snag the Corvette ZR1′s Nurburgring record. This year, the Dodge crew took the 2010 Viper ACR back to Laguna Seca Raceway in California to recapture the (unsanctioned) production car lap record. With a time of 1:33.915, the team drove away with the mission accomplished.”

The 2010 Audi TT is attractive, luxurious and sporty. However, many of its rivals provide greater sports performance. “For those interested in a little sport coupe or convertible that offers luxury, style and all-weather traction, the 2010 Audi TT won’t disappoint,” writes Edmunds. “However, those in search of a true sports car should probably look elsewhere.”

Compared to other luxury sports cars, the 2010 Audi TT is no back-road burner. It is, however, an enticing choice. In addition to its unique, attention-grabbing exterior design, the 2010 Audi TT features a lavish interior cabin and standard all-wheel drive system. It may not hold its own in street races, but the 2010 Audi TT’s balanced handling dynamics make it comfortable to drive on a daily basis.

“Audi TT is a luxury tourer that’s closer to being a true sports car than the previous generation was, especially in TTS trim,” writes Consumer Guide. “While Porsche’s Boxster and Cayman might ultimately be sportier, the TT’s more civilized demeanor might be just the thing for more casual motoring.”

While the 2010 Audi TT is an attractive package, shoppers in the market for more punch are better served looking elsewhere. The 2010 Porsche Boxster and Cayman, for example, offer more horsepower and sportier handling dynamics. And though many car shoppers will write them off as being too expensive, their starting price is actually close to that of the 2010 Audi TTS.

Shoppers more impressed with sporty looks than real sports performance should check out the 2010 Infiniti G37 coupe and convertible. All-wheel drive is available on the G37, but not standard or on the convertible. However, the drop-top G37 does feature an automatic retractable hard-top. The 2010 Audi TT convertible, on the other hand, does not.

“When it first hit the streets for the 2000 model year, the radically styled Audi TT – sleek and bulbous and minimalist at once – left not a single head unturned in its wake. Eight years and a truckload of design awards later, that car has earned for itself a place in automotive history. While it would be unrealistic to expect the same kind of visual impact from its follow-up, with its second-generation TT, Audi has delivered a car that’s even more exciting than the first.” — Kelley Blue Book

Test drivers report that the TT’s combination of power and comfortable handling make it a sports car that’s easy to live with. Though competitors might offer better straight-line performance and sportier handling dynamics, few can match the TT’s total package of sports performance, ride comfort, and luxury.

Despite some reported turbo lag, test drivers find that the TT’s two engine choices operate smoothly and provide ample power. What’s more, both its manual and automatic transmissions work well with their powerplants.

The base-model TT 2.0 TFSI features a 2.0-liter turbocharged I4 engine that produces 200 horsepower at 5,100 – 6,000 rpm and 207 pound-feet of torque at 1,800 – 5,000 rpm. An S tronic six-speed automatic transmission is standard. According to Audi, the TT 2.0 has a top speed of 130 mph.

Introduced just last year, the TTS features a 2.0-liter turbocharged I4 engine that generates 265 horsepower at 6,000 rpm and 258 pound-feet of torque at 2,500 – 5,000 rpm. A manual six-speed transmission is standard, but an S tronic automatic is also available. Audi claims that the TTS has a top speed of 155 mph.

When the 2010 Buick LaCrosse first appeared, the automotive press collectively gasped, “That thing’s a Buick?!” With a Lexus-like interior, and elegant exterior and better road manners than anything the brand has put out since its heyday in the 1950s, the entirely new LaCrosse is a triumph for GM. We read thousands of car reviews, but rarely have we seen the automotive press so stunned. They’re not speechless – these are journalists we’re talking about – but they’re universally shocked at the sight, sound and feel of the 2010 Buick LaCrosse.

Buicks have earned a reputation in America as huge, ponderous cars with forgettable bodywork, flat bench seats, and decent engines but the road manners of a cabin cruiser. More than one reviewer has remarked that only senior citizens who can remember the fine Buicks of the 1950s and ‘60s tend to buy them. The 2010 Buick LaCrosse, by that standard, has left a lot of jaws hanging open. It was so well-recieved, it was a finalist for the North American Car of the Year award.

It’s a sharply styled sedan that rewards a second look with unexpected, fine details. Its interior is one of the most luxurious available at its price point, with soft leather, French seams, intuitive electronics and edgy, cool blue lighting that appeals to a younger crowd. It offers a choice of two responsive V6 engines, and while it doesn’t handle like a rear-wheel-drive sport sedan, it acquits itself quite well on a winding road for a front-wheel-drive four-door.

This car is in close competition, along with the Cadillac CTS, to claim the title of GM’s best sedan. It compares well to some of the best entry-level luxury cars on the market. The Los Angeles Times says the LaCrosse “was built to put the cross-hairs on a single bogie, the Lexus ES350, and I’ll tell you right now, it blows the Lexus out of the sky. Pow. Parachute. Smoking crater.” And the Times fails to mention that the LaCrosse’s starting price undercuts the ES by a few thousand dollars.

In the recent past, Buicks were known as slow, sluggish and floaty cars. Their ride was a throwback to an earlier time, and they lagged well behind the performance of most modern sedans. With the 2010 LaCrosse, all that has changed. Test drivers say the 2010 LaCrosse is a capable performer. It offers confident acceleration with either of its two available engines, and while it doesn’t handle with the sharpness of a sport sedan, reviewers say it handles as well as any family sedan and should easily meet the needs of most drivers.

The LaCrosse is available with a choice of two V6 engines. A 3.0-liter unit making 255 horsepower drives the CX and CXL model, while a larger 3.6-liter engine putting out 280 horsepower powers the CXS edition. Reviewers like both engines, but the smaller of the two is so capable that there may be little reason to pay for the added power of the larger engine. The only transmission offered is a six-speed automatic. The EPA has given the LaCrosse a 17/25 mpg rating when equipped with the 3.0-liter engine, and 17/27 mpg with the 3.6. Shoppers who aren’t planning an immediate purchase might want to note that Buick plans to offer a twin-turbo four-cylinder engine later in the model year, but few details on its performance are available at this time.