By on September 12, 2018

Image: Toyota

I’ll admit it — my brow furrowed after first glimpsing the digital side mirrors adorning the Japanese-market 2019 Lexus ES. Strange, foreign, and unnecessary, the automaker’s new “Digital Outer Mirrors” seem like an answer to a question no one asked, but obviously someone did.

My next thought was how this would meld well with automakers’ infuriating tendency to outfit their concept vehicles with narrow, useless blades jutting from the leading edge of the side glass. Thinking it over, I realized Toyota’s little mirror-scrapping experiment has too many upsides to ignore.

Offered only on the next-gen ES in Japan, Toyota Motor Corp. plans to use the limited roll-out as a litmus test, with the possibility of wider availability in the future.

Image: Toyota

We’ve already seen dual-function rear-view mirrors already, with drivers allowed to flip between a traditional reflection or a wide-angle video feed of the car’s aft environs. It’s a feature I found more useful than annoying in recent high-end GM vehicles. Still, replacing side mirrors with two 5-inch screens located at the base of the vehicle’s A-pillar is an extra measure of radical. It’s yet another feature that compels us to never look outside our vehicles.

But how much do we really see in our side-view mirrors?

Image: Toyota

Toyota’s system contains a camera shrouded by a narrow fairing, with the automaker claiming it’s impervious to snow and raindrop accumulation (and quieter at highway speeds). Not restricted by surface area like a mirror, the camera provides a wider field of view, while the screen places the blind-spot monitor more prominently in driver’s field of view. One has to wonder if shoulder checks are on the verge of extinction. More importantly, the camera/screen combo — free of raindrops or some other accumulated muck — can peer through the dark, as well as provide the same type of parking guides as a backup camera.

Despite my rampant traditionalism, it’s the night vision function that won this writer over. Nothing unnerves me more than making a simple right-hander at night, especially from a stop. Why? There’s bike lanes everywhere around Casa Steph, and describing the reasons why would only prompt a rant. Certainly, all road users and pedestrians must remain alert to their surroundings, but some cyclists prefer to go about their lives with the phrase “He’s supposed to see me” floating through their minds. The right-hand turn is often where steel meets bike, especially when the vehicle is accelerating away from a stop.

Please don’t send me hate mail, militant bike lobby (that includes you, sporty guy who almost smacked into the side of a bus after berating me for stopping at a stop sign, then proceeding to make a left-hand turn, signal on, through the intersection you were blowing through at 25 mph.) Oh right, I promised not to rant.

Image: Toyota

Anyway, your local Lexus dealer won’t have any of these trick camera-mirrors available when the next-gen ES goes on sale this fall, but it might not stay that way. While I harbor concerns about the potentially distracting nature of the screen’s placement, it seems to be the way the industry’s heading.

[Images: Toyota Motor Corp.]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

72 Comments on “Digital Side Mirrors Become a Production Reality, but You Can’t Get Your Hands on One Just Yet...”


  • avatar
    jack4x

    I actually don’t mind this concept, it seems like a wider field of view and better visibility at night are always welcome. Hopefully the rear view mirror inside the car is still glass and could be angled for emergency visibility if one of the cameras failed.

    My question though is why the cameras need to be mounted where they are? Another big appeal of a system like this would be getting rid of the protruding mirrors for easier parking. I don’t see why the cameras couldn’t be mounted in the C-pillar or taillights to get the same visibility with a narrower vehicle.

    • 0 avatar
      salmonmigration

      If you mount them in the C-pillars or taillights you wouldn’t be able to see your blind spot.

      Really if anything they should be up front on the fenders to score extra JDM points.

      • 0 avatar
        Lie2me

        I’m guessing there might be some regulation/law compliance involved as to where these cameras are mounted and their field of vision

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          I might note that some of the earliest side-view mirrors were installed just above the headlamps on the front fenders of late-50s, early 60s cars… then moved back to the A-pillar to offer a larger view than they could give nearly 6′ away from the driver’s eyes. The idea of placing those cameras in the head/cornering/marker lamp assembly looking back is a pretty good one and would make any replacement of said camera easier than almost anyplace else offering similar streamlined protection.

  • avatar
    jmo2

    A heated side mirror for a Camry is $96 and an 8 mega pixel camera is $25. It could be a lot cheaper. But does it have to stick out like that? There should be a combination of lenses and software that would allow them to build it right into the a pillar. Oh and the integration of the screen is terrible.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      They probably are just using the existing hard points to cut down on inventory and cost overhead.

      If a digital side mirror catches on you’ll probably see them go the way of the dodo in a mid cycle refresh or new model.

      Same with the interior screens unless people really like that.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      Apples and oranges.

      A $25 camera won’t be able to deal with vibration, temperature, and moisture extremes for 20 years. Also, once you’ve added a display and vehicle integration, you’re well above $96, for a camera that can’t deal with the environment.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    Good concept, but that ‘blade’ is much too big. With the size of today’s digital cameras, that blade could be both thinner and notably shorter without detrimentally affecting the image quality on screen. It’s an improvement for aerodynamics but shorter and thinner would be much more effective.

    • 0 avatar
      NoID

      Yes, it should be a little dimple near the base of the A pillar, or up on the fender. Or maybe a recessed teardrop like the gunner nacelles on WWII bombers.

      • 0 avatar
        Featherston

        Pontiac Catalina? ;-)

        en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PBY_Gun_Blister.jpg

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        Not a dimple… too easy for rain, dirt, snow, etc. to cover the lens. You need a convex mount, not a concave one; a mount whose shielding is easy to clean and, if necessary, replace. Better yet, covered with real glass, not acrylic, so a coating like RainX can be applied to make such collection of material less likely and, to some extent, self-cleaning.

        Your teardrop idea, NOT recessed, is a good one.

  • avatar
    ACCvsBig10

    What happened to projection side mirrors? i thought that was something subaru was doing with viziv/wrx concept

  • avatar
    NoID

    I appreciate the practical improvements, but I am not digging the interior aesthetics of the two screens jutting from the A-pillar/dash intersection.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      I see it as aftermarket opportunity. novelty – actual side mirror

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        Many of the newer 18-wheeler tractors already come with digital cameras all around, some utilizing only one screen in the cab with split images, others using multiple screens in the cab for the sides, back and overhead (when backing to park). Most have standard front-facing cameras to record travel-events on a SSDD, in case of accidents.

        Tractor trailers went digital (to include cameras) many, many years ago, long before it became a novelty item for passenger cars.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        I would note that I had to personally mount two side mirrors on my first car… it came with none from the factory.

  • avatar
    I_like_stuff

    This is one of those solutions in search of a problem. I have always been able to set my mirrors at a point where the blind spot is all but eliminated. Add in lane assist, and the blind spot is eliminated for everyone. Having a camera constantly streaming a feed just makes driving more distracting, IMO.

    And get off my lawn.

    • 0 avatar
      NoID

      Sorry about your lawn, I was backing out of my driveway and your yard was in my blind spot.

    • 0 avatar
      PhilMills

      Depends on the driver and the car. I can USUALLY get the side mirrors right, but it almost always means I’ve got them to the far extent of their tilt range.

      Cameras are not influenced by the driver’s height or seating setback – they can just be “optimal”.
      With a wide enough FOV, you can even make both the “no blind spot” and “gotta see directly behind me with all my mirrors” camps happy at once.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      Thanks to the bubble that Ford like to put in the corner of their mirrors, I don’t have a blind spot.

      If that’s the primary purpose of these mirrors, bah humbug. However, I can see them having night vision at some point. Then, you’d have a selling point.

      Still one more thing to break. :)

  • avatar
    slavuta

    I was witnessing how my bro’s accord side view was not working. He was turning left but on the screen he saw the right side. Looks like automakers have nothing better to do. How about start with making cars cheaper to repair after fender bender?

  • avatar
    tylanner

    I am glad that the auto industry is slowly pulling its collective head of out its collective bum.

    By 2025, if you are not a “tech company” you are always going to be 6 months away from being stampeded by a heavily incubated market share gobbling machine…

  • avatar
    jalop1991

    Over the shoulder checks disappeared a long time ago, for people who know how to set their friggin’ mirrors correctly.

    While a mirror can break, it can’t fail. Get a mirror that’s large enough with enough adjustment range (sorry, Subaru, but those makeup mirrors you set on the doors of your Outback suck donkey balls), adjust it correctly, and you’ll never have to check over your shoulder again–and you’ll never have to worry about the mirror “suddenly failing” for no reason other than glitchy electronics.

    Everybody, here’s a thought: let’s all learn how to pilot that 4000 pound missile down the road at 70mph instead of adding fragile technology that “does more for you”. I don’t need the car doing things for the driver. I need the driver attentive and on task.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Disagree. I ALWAYS check over my shoulder.

      • 0 avatar
        Featherston

        Agree, FreedMike. jalop1991 gets at an underlying problem, which is that for decades Americans were (still are?) taught the traditional, overly narrow way to adjust their mirrors. I agree that it’s better to use the newfangled way to, in effect, allow your rear and side mirrors to “hand off” a car between each other with minimal overlap.

        That said, it’s good practice to keep your eyes *and* your head moving, and a split-second glance over the shoulder when changing lanes is part of that mindset. (If you’re worried about that car in front of you slamming on its brakes, you’re too close.) If you watch films of Harold L. Smith, he moves his head constantly (if subtly) while driving. Alas, today’s driver seems catatonically fixated on a spot at 12 o’clock, 1-2 car lengths ahead, except when staring down at his phone.

        • 0 avatar
          jalop1991

          If my mirrors are set correctly and I’m on task, I have situational awareness. I know where the cars are at all times, and can track them as they move around. I have no need to turn my head and take my attention 100% away from my direction of travel for even a split second.

          Like I said, stay on task. Have situational awareness. Either that, or don’t pilot the missile.

          • 0 avatar
            Featherston

            “and take my attention 100% away from my direction of travel for even a split second.”

            Who said anything about taking your attention “100% away from the direction of travel”? What I described doesn’t entail that unless you’re missing a huge percentage of your peripheral vision.

      • 0 avatar
        energetik9

        I always look also. Even with my back up camera.

        • 0 avatar
          brn

          “I always look also. Even with my back up camera.”

          As you should. The backup camera is there to supplement looking and using your mirrors. It’s not there to replace it. It’s too bad that so many people don’t understand that, making themselves less safe than if they didn’t have the camera.

    • 0 avatar
      PhilMills

      I agree that mirrors as a category need to be larger, but what many cars really need is more travel range on the mirrors. To get a “correct” mirror position (thank you, Car Talk!) I pretty much peg every mirror I come to against the outer travel stop and it’s ALMOST set wide enough.

      But any car is better than my motorcycle, which just manages to give me a great view of my elbows no matter what I do.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      Problem is, jalop, that side mirrors CAN fail. They get covered with ice or mist from a rainstorm and they’re impossible to clean; that’s why so many cars offer *heated* mirrors as an option but not as standard equipment. Properly placed, a camera need never be covered as long as the vehicle is in motion, though it will likely need clearing much as your existing glass needs to be cleared before driving (though some people still think ‘gun-slit’ ice scraping is safe.) There are ways to keep those mirrors clear but only if you’re willing to put in a tiny amount of extra effort. With proper chemical treatment, these camera pods shouldn’t even need to be cleared… ever.

      • 0 avatar
        I_like_stuff

        Cameras get dirty, covered with dust, grime, etc as well. But my mirrors will never fail completely, while a camera and/or screen can and will fail. As cars age, the screens will certainly fail. And when buying the $2500 car of the future, those drivers won’t spend the money to buy new mirror screens, they’ll go without, effectively having no mirrors.

        The more cool new stuff is added, the more cool new stuff becomes expensive to fix old stuff as cars age.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          Read what I said again, ILS. Installed effectively, they need never get dusty or grimy. They need never get iced over when the vehicle is in motion. They need never physically break to the point where someone takes a hand-held mirror and straps it to the factory mirror mount. (Yes, I’ve actually seen this more than once.) An application of a glass treatment can prevent all of that. And this doesn’t even mention the better field of view a camera can offer.

          Yes, I do know that cameras can fail… but when was the last time your smartphone camera failed? The cameras used in cars are essentially the same as those smartphone cameras. The camera itself rarely fails but the soldered connections can, under the right conditions… just like any other electronic device in your car. But they can’t be broken by someone smashing it with their fist as we’ve seen happen on the highways before…, more than a few YouTube videos of that happening.

          As for your, “And when buying the $2500 car of the future, those drivers won’t spend the money to buy new mirror screens, they’ll go without, effectively having no mirrors,” most state laws will require those to be operational in order to be registered, meaning either the buyer or the seller will need to ensure they’re working before money changes hands.

          • 0 avatar
            Ermel

            “Yes, I do know that cameras can fail… but when was the last time your smartphone camera failed?”

            My youngest car is 26. So, how old is your smartphone?

          • 0 avatar
            brn

            “My youngest car is 26. So, how old is your smartphone?”

            Yes, that argument drives me crazy. Cell phones are designed to last 2-3 years. Cars are designed to last 20+ years. Not to mention that cell phones aren’t designed to handle ice and road grime.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            “My youngest car is 26. So, how old is your smartphone?”
            — 12 years old and still serves as an iPod Touch.

      • 0 avatar
        jalop1991

        yes, side mirrors can get covered with mist or ice. That’s why heated mirrors are a huge benefit; they get rid of that crap quickly.

        You should manually clear the ice; but we all know how well people are at even clearing their windshields, which is to say they SUCK at it. (“I can see through this tiny square. It’s January in Minnesota; I had no idea I was going to need a snow brush!) But anyway, heated mirrors are the bomb. And Toyota does it right; turn on the rear defroster, and the mirrors come on. VW does it completely wrong with their “turn the right/left mirror adjustment switch all the way down to 6 o’clock where you’ll completely forget about it” thing.

        So that could break, yes, but not at all like the Lexus thing. And of course, the Lexus lens will also get misty/icy.

        It’s a matter of the odds. I’ll put my money on the mirrors always being available vs the camera thing, especially as people keep cars 10-15 years. That camera thing will never get repaired once it goes on the fritz. Ever.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          “It’s a matter of the odds. I’ll put my money on the mirrors always being available vs the camera thing, especially as people keep cars 10-15 years. That camera thing will never get repaired once it goes on the fritz. Ever.”

          The problem is that the camera is already on the car, covering the back when you go into reverse. And… that camera is mandatory equipment in the US, now.

          • 0 avatar
            brn

            In the winter, our back up camera is mostly useless. For it to be useful, we’d need to clean it every time we get in the car.

            Windows and mirrors, on the other hand, work just fine in the winter. Don’t need cleaning anywhere near as often.

            Being mandatory doesn’t make it good.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            I gather from your statement, BRN, that you do not clean your car off very well. My car’s rear-view camera has never been unusable due to snow or grime after some pretty serious winter weather over two seasons and is now approaching its third winter.

            Of course, our state demands that all snow possible must be removed from the car… including body sides, front, rear and roof. A good snow brush typically does a good job for me. I also typically follow up by using the thumb of my glove to wipe the glass covering the back-up camera’s lens, meaning that I have never, once, had a weather-related failure, though I acknowledge that the original camera apparently had a cold solder joint which made it susceptible to summer heat after the first winter. The second camera has survived the remainder of that first summer, a winter and now a full second summer with air temperatures in the 90s and vehicle temperatures exceeding 115 inside. (I expect the body of the car was notably warmer as it is a dark grey, which absorbs sunlight and infrared heat quite readily. The camera, by the way, typically faces the morning sun as the car sits outside 24 hrs per day.

          • 0 avatar
            jalop1991

            “The problem is that the camera is already on the car, covering the back when you go into reverse. And… that camera is mandatory equipment in the US, now.”

            But when it fails, it’s not like the side or rear view mirror failing. It’s nice that the rear view camera is there, but its presence is nowhere near critical to the regular driving of the car.

            Face it: how often are you in reverse? Calculate the number of minutes in the life of the car in reverse vs the number of minutes driving forward, in traffic. That reverse mirror can break on day 2 and the driver would never notice it.

            That it’s “mandatory” is meaningless.

            The odds remain that the side cameras will be useless long before the car is useless.

            And when you say things like “…for the life of the car,” it doesn’t mean for MY specification of what “life of the car” means. It means what the car company wants it to mean–which is “3-5 years, tops”.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            “And when you say things like “…for the life of the car,” it doesn’t mean for MY specification of what “life of the car” means. It means what the car company wants it to mean–which is “3-5 years, tops”.”

            — Show me ANY company that even implies that.

          • 0 avatar
            brn

            Vulpine, I gather from your statement, you live in the land of make believe. It’s not the snow falling from the sky that’s the problem. It’s the road grime and splash. An eddy gets created by all vehicles that make it particularly bad on the rear.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Design is important, brn. The Jeep’s rear camera doesn’t get all that much spray on the lens. And again, it’s really easy to wipe off.

  • avatar
    stingray65

    I’m not sure why you even need mirror cameras (and associated pods) if you have a top view sonar/camera parking/cross-traffic assist system as offered by many brands already. Seems like some adjustments to the current sensors and cameras would allow the monitoring of vehicles coming up behind, but not yet along-side, and it all could be shown on the navigation/entertainment screen near the driver’s line of sight.

  • avatar
    energetik9

    As an avid road biker, I feel I need to weigh in. For one, I am always hyper sensitive to cars around me and what they are doing. With that, one of the very first things I do when behind a car is watch what the driver is doing and I look into his/her side mirror to see where thier eyes are.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      Very good point that I hadn’t considered. Even as a sedan driver, I often use the other vehicle’s mirror to get an insight as to what the other driver may do.

      It’s just one of many ques that experienced drivers (cyclists) use that autonomous vehicles don’t yet.

  • avatar
    bobtheowl

    Why not put the mirror screens on each side of the gauge cluster? Then you could just do a quick glance down to check the mirrors. Plus it would look better than having the screens tacked on to the inside of the A-pillars.

  • avatar
    eggsalad

    Most states have laws requiring MIRRORS. CAMERAS are not MIRRORS.

    How will this be legal??

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      At the moment, eggs, it isn’t; which is why the article clearly stated this was being sold in Japan, NOT the US. However, many automakers are pushing to have the mirror laws adapted to include cameras as well as mirrors, until the technology can prove itself as reliable, as safe and, if possible, more effective than current mirroring systems.

      • 0 avatar
        eggsalad

        a) being ignorant of Japanese vehicle equipment laws, I did make an assumption that they required mirrors as well.

        b) I’m not sure that any electronic system will ever be as reliable as a piece of silvered glass. I’ve seen 150-year-old mirrors that still reflect an image.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          … and I’ve seen mirrors totally useless in a fraction of that time.

          Yes, I do agree that as a redundant system, mirrors would be effective. But as cars become more streamlined, those mirrors need to become part of the vehicle’s structure, NOT a tacked-on attachment hanging out in the wind stream. Said cameras are far more effective for situational awareness if they can actually show you what’s in your quarters rather than the driver being blinded by headlamps at night or perhaps never seeing a vehicle because of a lack of marker lamps (like bicycles and many cars even today.)

          The need for effective visibility is more important now, more than ever. With the monochromatic paint jobs so common today, certain shades are practically invisible under low-light and certain weather conditions. A camera that can offer effective low-light visibility that is also not blinded by those other vehicles’ headlamps is almost critical for today’s driving environment.

          The concept is a good one, even if you don’t agree with it. And as far as it goes, I will note again that I had to install side mirrors on my first car… because it did not come with factory-installed mirrors on both sides and the driver’s side mirror had fallen or been taken off before I got it. I chose larger, aftermarket mirrors over the simple, tiny, round mirror it was supposed to have. That, by the way, was almost 45 years ago.

          • 0 avatar
            Tele Vision

            I judge people who have the same image in all three mirrors. I can’t see any bodywork in any of the side mirrors I own and, as PhilMills stated, they’re splayed as far as they’ll go. I still shoulder-check every lateral move, though. It’s a small price to pay for 32 years of accident-free driving.

          • 0 avatar
            jalop1991

            “… and I’ve seen mirrors totally useless in a fraction of that time.”

            Useless due to outside factors, sure–like someone broke them. But they’ve never “just failed” like the camera systems will do within the reasonable lifetime of the car.

            A piece of glass with silver backing will always be a piece of glass with silver backing. We’re talking two components here. How many components are in the camera/display system? How fragile are those components?

            It’s all about the odds, and the mirror doesn’t “just fail” or “become useless”.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @Jalop: “A piece of glass with silver backing will always be a piece of glass with silver backing. We’re talking two components here. How many components are in the camera/display system? How fragile are those components?”

            Apparently not very fragile, since they are already mandatory equipment to cover the back of your car while in reverse… meaning you not only have camera but also a display, both intended to last the life of the vehicle.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Broughamization of the industry continues.

  • avatar
    IBx1

    They can do better at the external packaging, but this would be nice to never have to adjust your side mirrors AND see much more on each side.

  • avatar
    Lightspeed

    I think the cameras need to be at the top of the A=pillar, in a much smaller housing, and have the screens on either side of the instrument pod.

    • 0 avatar
      Flipper35

      Or displayed as a HUD in each corner of the windshield.

      By the time these get sorted out we will have self driving cars anyway! :)

      (I hope not for me, but I do hope for those that can’t stand to not be on the phone 24/7 even when driving)

  • avatar
    PentastarPride

    Another potential vector of failure. If the camera stops working, the car is out of commission until it is replaced. You cannot safely operate a car without side mirrors (or in this case, the video feed).

    I can imagine these cars being junked for nothing more than a failure of the camera or its control module, which will no doubt cost significantly more to replace than the car would be worth in 15-20 years’ time, and that’s if the seventh owner doesn’t duct tape a handheld beauty mirror they got from Dollar General to the camera assembly.

    • 0 avatar
      jalop1991

      “I can imagine these cars being junked for nothing more than a failure of the camera or its control module, which will no doubt cost significantly more to replace than the car would be worth in 15-20 years’ time”

      or, in the case of BMW, 4-5 years. “Oh, you’re out of warranty. Well, OK, that’ll be $3595 for the right mirror repair. You’re lucky the inside screen still works; hoo-boy! would THAT be expensive!”

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    “I can imagine these cars being junked for nothing more than a failure of the camera or its control module, which will no doubt cost significantly more to replace than the car would be worth in 15-20 years’ time”

    Nearly EVERY car is more expensive to repair than it’s worth in 15-20 years time already. A side-view camera isn’t going to be a deal breaker unless it is extraordinarily difficult to replace… and so far, they’re not. A couple hours work at most in the shop for those mandatory Back-up cameras.

  • avatar
    wstansfi

    Will it still work after I turn the car off? I sometimes park on the street in the city, and the mirror is part of my routine before opening the door to exit the car. I don’t like passing cars crashing into my door, and the bicyclists don’t like having doors suddenly opened in front of them either…

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    If it’s like other modern cars, the electrics don’t shut off UNTIL you open the door, meaning it should still work. But the moment you pull the latch handle, it will shut down.

  • avatar
    PeriSoft

    I’m not going to take these “Yet another failure point” complaints seriously until the complainers also demand the removal of automatic spark advance, the 12-volt electrical system, and hydraulic brakes.

  • avatar
    church

    Cameras and small lcd screens made in big batches in China have been dirt cheap for few years already, costing often less then some “normal” side mirrors with electric adjustment/defrosting/turn signals.
    Sidemirrors also badly impact aero drag, so getting rid of them will at very least make better highway fuel economy. Or making them small like some aftermarket race mirrors will make visibility less/will require highly distorted reflection to cover higher view angle/lesser blind zone.
    If anything, as tech and costs have been there for quite some time, it amazes me that it haven’t become common tech for most of manufacturers since some 3-5 years already, and only now slowly start to get introduced.

  • avatar
    lon888

    My luck is that I’ll buy a car with them and they’ll be made by Lucas.

  • avatar
    rocketrodeo

    Just checked in to say I miss the Wink mirror I installed in my 2002tii. Complete field of view, nothing outside the car to get dirty or out of adjustment.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • JohnTaurus: You like the car? But $5 gas will be here any day. Shouldn’t he have bought a Prius C? Oh,...
  • SCE to AUX: This takes salesman pressure to another level.
  • sgeffe: I’ve always parked on the end of rows when possible with my current car. It’s mostly worked; my main scratch...
  • JohnTaurus: Should be here next week!
  • ravenuer: So, you’ve seemed to have stayed in hotels before, heh?

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States