I have almost entirely fond feelings for my Dodge Caravan, which my family bought new in 1997 and was given to me 11 years and 120k miles later. It will always have the distinction of being my first car, and it has handled all my teenage indignities with aplomb. I've had it for almost 4 years now, and it's taken me to high school, work, college, and a bunch of my friends all across Michigan, stranding me only once in the process (that intermittent no-start issue was bound to happen somewhere inconvenient). The seats are more comfortable than most couches, it has a tape player, manual locks and windows and a single sliding door, and the transmission is still functioning! ~17 MPG kinda sucks, but it's a lot better than a car payment, and maintenance is virtually zero.

My other car, the 1987 924S, sits in my garage, waiting for me to grow a pair and some wrench-turning skills. I know I should sell it and buy something Japanese and reliable, but I don't know if I can; it will always be my Porsche, and the fulfilment of a childhood dream. One of these days...

You hit the nail on the head. The Sentra isn't much better, but the new Versa, just like the new Volkswagens, is significantly worse than the car it's replacing.

Mazda is probably the most enthusiast-friendly brand out there, because, as others have mentioned, their entire model range is fun to drive, not just the top-spec, high-performance models. I would find it hard to pick a Mazdaspeed3 over a WRX, though, and the RX-8 was a relatively poor successor to the FD RX-7. A high-performance version of the 2 would be intriguing, and the new SkyActiv gas and diesels look interesting.

However, what the hell happened to the Mazda6 and, for that matter, the Subaru Legacy? Have any other cars gone from class style leaders to such ugly ducklings in one model generation?

*Insert picture of a Peugeot road bike

When this whole story surfaced, I was surprised both at Jalopnik's audacity to make such a fuss over "matters of journalistic integrity", as well as the speed with which the story circulated through the blogosphere. For Wert & Co. to cry foul over a relatively minor slip-up, when they have produced nothing remotely resembling journalism for a few years is just unbelievable, a sentiment that was echoed by a number of commentors on their story. And Autoblog really should have grown a pair and called out this deficiency between what Jalopnik says and actually does, but it's all water under the bridge now.

Good to have Jeff back, and I think that Hooniverse has done a pretty admirable job over the past two years of creating a community and bringing together vast swaths of obscure automotive knowledge. I don't think that any additional ethics investigations are required here, as the new car reviews are fairly few and far between, and nobody here is all that interested in new car reviews, anyway. Even if there were to be some corporate ass-kissing, I'm sure it would be called out by the commentors, who would almost certainly be talking out of their ass, giving opinions of a car they have never driven. And even if you guys were being paid by the manufacturers to write favorable reviews, with money or sex or vacations, why should I care? It's a car website on the internet, can't we all just enjoy ourselves? I know I'd jump at the opportunity to drive press cars, and I'd probably rave about every single one of them. Sell my soul for a paycheck, we've all done it before.

Disclaimer: I read Jalopnik for the comments, and I kinda like their new format. I read autoblog for the new car reviews. I read motor trend for the new car reviews. I read Car & Driver for their performance statistics. I read TTAC for Murilee Martin. I do not read British car rags, because I cannot afford to pay $10 for a magazine. I'm writing this at 4 in the morning, which may impair my judgement. I am not a crook.

What were we talking about again?

You're right on the money about the Chrysler's inferior rear seating. I've said it before, but I had the supreme displeasure of riding from Michigan to Tennessee and back in the third row of a 2005 (I think) T&C, and it was torture. I'm a hair over 6 feet and 160 lbs; there was insufficient legroom, the seat is very thinly padded, and the bottom is set at an angle to numb your legs. Not to mention that riding in the back of that van, with a shitty driver at the wheel, amplifies the already substantial body roll. Perhaps the seats need to be thin in order for the Stow 'N Go to work?

What kills me is that I daily drive a 1997 base model Dodge Caravan, and it's like a couch on wheels: seats 7 in relative comfort, or pull out the middle seat and seat 5 in absolute comfort, with all the legroom in the world.

Living in Michigan, where insurance is required, I had no idea there were states where it is not. What really kills me is that, at 19, with no tickets or accidents, it would be $1800 annually to get an insurance policy on my 924S. "But that's a sports car," you say, "surely it would be cheaper to insure something like a minivan." And it is, to the tune of a mere $1700 annually to insure the 1997 Dodge Caravan that I drive instead of said 924S. These figures are from multiple insurance agencies, liability coverage only, for a 19 year old with no tickets or accidents. Neither car is even worth that much!

Thank god I'm on mommy's insurance...

You can drive an uninsured car? Not legally, of course. And I guess the case of beer in your trunk won't help your case, either...

Living in Canada seems more appealing by the minute. This 19-year old could legally drive his Kei car from the frat house or co-op down to the liquor store, purchase alcohol, and the free healthcare would take of me after the inevitable accident. And they speak English there!

Oliver was, I believe, an Opel Kadett.