If you’re shopping for a sports coupe in the low $20,000 price range that offers the best combination of fuel efficiency and style for the street, along with grin-inducing performance capabilities around a race track, chances are you’re well aware of Honda’s front-wheel drive Civic Si and its high rpm screamer of an engine. At just $21,905 it’s a heck of a value, but you also need to consider Hyundai’s $22,000 Genesis Coupe 2.0T ($23,250 with 5-speed automatic transmission), a rear-wheel drive machine with sexy styling and a taut well-balanced chassis.

FAST FACTS
1. The Honda Civic Si has a power/weight ratio of 14.72 lbs/hp, giving it a slight advantage over the Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T’s ratio of 15.85 lbs/hp.

2. Both vehicles have virtually identical fuel economy figures (21/29 city/hwy for the Civic and 20/30 for the Genesis).

3. Both vehicles are equipped with all-season tires, the Civic with 215/45R17 Michelins and the Genesis with 225/45VR18 front and 245/45VR18 rear Bridgestones.

While these two might not seem like competitors, on paper the Honda and Hyundai are surprisingly closely matched, with 0-60 mph and 1/4-mile times favoring the Honda by 0.2-seconds in both acceleration tests but favoring the Hyundai by 0.1g of lateral acceleration around a 200-foot skid pad. With a power-to-weight ratio advantage to the Civic Si at 14.72 lbs/hp compared to the Genesis Coupe 2.0T at 15.85 lbs/hp, physics should come into play and allow the Honda to accelerate faster and reach higher straightaway speeds around our test track. But with wider tires and better weight distribution (54/46 front-to-rear, compared to 61/39 for the Civic) thanks to its rear-wheel drive design, the Hyundai should be able to close the gap with higher cornering speeds.

Of course how things look on paper is rarely how they play out in the real world, so to put all this theorizing to the test we headed to our local 1.4-mile 9-turn test track on a warm and sunny afternoon. Hey, it’s a tough job, but somebody’s gotta do it!

WE HAVE A CONFESSION TO MAKE

Before getting down to the nitty gritty of the track test, a quick recap of the test vehicles is in order. Because Honda did not have a press fleet Civic Si available for testing, we borrowed a friend’s 2007 Si Coupe and outfitted it with a brand new set of factory wheels and tires supplied by Honda. Although the Si Coupe received a bit of a facelift for 2009, mechanically our ’07 tester was on spec and therefore a legitimate rival for the 2010 Genesis Coupe 2.0T press vehicle Hyundai supplied. The one fly in the ointment – and it’s a biggie – was the 5-speed automatic transmission the Hyundai tester was equipped with, a wrinkle we did not expect and were unsure of how it might impact on the test results since we’d yet to determine how cooperative the ‘sport mode’ paddle shifting would be when pushed to the limit around a race track.

DAVID PRATTE: TEST DRIVER BIO

David Pratte has been competing in Time Attack and Road Racing for a decade and has numerous regional and national championships to his name. In 2006 thru 2008 he competed in the Canadian Touring Car Championship, claiming six race victories and a number of track records in the process. David has turned thousands of laps at the race track used for this comparison test, providing him with the experience necessary to extract the full performance potential from both test vehicles.

TRACK TEST – DRIVING IMPRESSIONS

First up was the Honda Civic Si Coupe. Having driven a Honda in the Canadian Touring Car Championship for the last 3 seasons, I felt very much at home in this front-wheel drive machine. Although Honda’s normally aspirated engines are often erroneously thought of as being peaky, the 197 horsepower 2.0-liter engine in the Civic Si actually has a surprisingly broad powerband all the way to its 8000 rpm redline. The slick-shifting 6-speed manual gearbox is perfectly matched to the engine, making it easy to keep engine speeds right in the sweet spot where it makes the most power. The steering wheel is the perfect size and shape for spirited driving and the aluminum pedals are well spaced for heel and toe downshifting. Clearly this is a car engineered with high performance driving in mind.

Where the Civic fell a bit short of expectations was in the braking and handling balance departments. The brake pedal didn’t provide as firm or responsive a feel as I would have liked during heavy applications, and the handling balance was biased a little too far towards understeer. The all-season Michelins are undoubtedly a totally suitable street tire, but around our test circuit they were simply overwhelmed by the task, overheating in just a few laps to the point that understeer became virtually terminal. If you’re shopping for a Civic Si and plan on taking it to the track from time to time, pony up for the optional summer tires or simply replace the all-season rubber with an ultra high performance summer tire.

The Hyundai felt far more neutral with regards to handling balance, though some understeer was still present thanks in part to its overwhelmed all-season Bridgestones. But given its rear-wheel drive configuration, the Genesis Coupe 2.0T should have been able to neutralize the understeer with the throttle if it had enough power, but with 210 horses and 223 ft-lbs of torque there simply wasn’t enough juice on tap to induce some throttle-on oversteer. Even in the very tight hairpin leading onto the front straight, only a smidgen of wheel spin was possible. But with some trail braking (or braking while turning) the rear end would willingly follow the front, eliminating most of the speed-robbing understeer. As a result the Genesis Coupe 2.0T felt significantly quicker in the corners than the Honda did.

However, thanks to the very unsporting ‘sport mode’ automatic gear selection (via paddles on the steering wheel or the gear lever on the center tunnel), acceleration out of the corners was severely hampered. For whatever reason, the transmission simply would not downshift while the brakes were being applied (as is standard practice when approaching a corner on a race track). No matter how many times I banged on those paddles or the shift lever, I could only select a lower gear once I was back on the power and starting to acceleration out of the corner. This problem was exacerbated by the fact that the turbocharged 2.0-liter engine under the Hyundai’s hood runs out of steam at about 6000 rpm and doesn’t seem to reach full boost until about 3500 rpm, meaning the usable range of power is fairly narrow compared to the Honda.

TRACK TEST – DATA ANALYSIS

As you can see from the data acquired from the fastest lap recorded for each car during testing (using a DriftBox, a device that uses both GPS and onboard accelerometers to measure speed, lateral g-forces, longitudinal g-forces, yaw angle and much more), the Civic Si had a marked acceleration advantage over the Genesis Coupe 2.0T. You can see this quite clearly on the main graph, which plots mph and lateral g’s on the vertical axis and distance in feet on the horizontal axis. The blue line represents the Civic’s speed and the dark purple (appears black) line that follows below it is the Genesis Coupe’s speed. At the end of the main straightaway, the Honda was consistently reaching 96 to 97 mph before braking for Turn 1, whereas the Hyundai was reaching a maximum of 90 mph at the same point. This trend continued across the entire 1.4-mile distance covered during a lap of the test circuit (the shape of which you can see in the bottom right corner of the data screen), where the Civic’s blue speed line remains above the dark line representing the Genesis Coupe’s speed.

Just as we hypothesized, the opposite proved true in the corners, where the Hyundai consistently achieved higher lateral g-forces and cornering speeds. If you look closely at the troughs or valleys for vehicle speed, you’ll notice that the Genesis Coupe doesn’t have to slow quite as much as the Civic and that it’s generally able to sustain a higher speed across that trough (which represent corners), and you’ll also notice that the lateral g-force line for the Hyundai (the olive green line) reaches a higher point in both left and right turns than the Honda does (the red line).

WE HAVE A WINNER?

Breaking the test track down into three segments, the higher straightaway speed and Turn 1 cornering speed of the Civic Si allowed it to complete the first segment (between the green start/finish dot and the first blue dot on the track map) in 25.9 seconds, 0.5-seconds quicker than the Genesis 2.0T. The Hyundai then holds the gap at 0.5-seconds through the second segment, where its excellent balance and higher cornering power allowed it to stick with the front-drive Honda through Turns 4, 5 and 6. But then in the final segment the Civic extended the gap to 0.8-seconds, thanks to its stronger acceleration out of the Turn 9 hairpin and down the all-important front straightaway. In the end, the Civic Si Coupe completed its best lap in 1-minute and 20.0-seconds, while the Genesis 2.0T coupe took 1-minute and 20.8 seconds to do the same. This may seem like a miniscule time difference, but keep in mind that at 90 mph the Civic is traveling at 132 feet per second, so the gap back to the Hyundai when the Civic reaches the braking zone for Turn 1 is approximately 106 feet. In racing terms, that’s a long way back.

The question we pondered over pizza and ice tea at the end of the day was on obvious one: had the Hyundai been equipped with a 6-speed manual transmission as we originally intended for this test, would it have made a 0.8-second difference? We’ll never know for sure (unless we redo the test), but in my mind the answer is an almost certain “yes.” With shorter gearing, the 6-speed manual would have allowed me to keep the 2.0T engine operating in its most efficient rpm range, and more critically it would have allowed for proper downshifts in each braking zone so that acceleration out of each corner was done in the correct gear. This would have largely negated the acceleration advantage the Civic Si showed during the test and allowed the Hyundai to further exploit its cornering power advantage. If I had to make an educated guess at how much faster the Genesis 2.0T would have gone around our test track with a 6-speed manual gearbox, I would wager something in the neighborhood of 1.5 to 2 seconds.

We should note that while the Si is as high-performance a Civic as you’ll get from Honda, our Genesis Coupe 2.0T tester is almost the bottom of the barrel for that particular model. You can get plenty more performance from a Track model with a stiffer suspension, limited-slip differential and huge Brembo brakes, but then you’ll pay $5,000 more than the Honda. The same goes for the 306hp V6.

Regardless of lap time guesstimates and stubborn slushbox transmissions, both cars proved they are very capable track day machines, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. For some drivers the roar of the Civic Si’s engine at 8000 rpm and its well-documented build quality will win out when it comes time to sign the ownership papers, while for others the Hyundai Genesis Coupe’s classic rear-wheel drive configuration, cutting edge styling, and tuner-friendly turbocharged engine will tip the scale in its favor. Both represent a tremendous value at around $22,000 and with high performance summer tires would be much quicker and more fun around a race track or around town.

HONDA CIVIC SI:

If there’s a big engine oil temperature gauge on the dash, you know it’s a serious sports car. If that gauge threatens to explode in just three laps, either the engineers didn’t do their job, or the accountants, lawyers and product planners perhaps did theirs a little too well. Both are true of the Nissan 370Z NISMO.

FAST FACTS
1. The NISMO 370Z gets a massaged 3.7L V6 engine to create an extra 18-hp for a total of 350-hp.

2. Other upgrades include a fully re-worked suspension, 19-inch Rays forged alloy wheels with significantly wider tires and a sport brake upgrade.

3. The NISMO Z’s aggressive bodykit is actually functional, delivering 150 lbs of downforce at 75 mph.

4. Special edition NISMO Z models start at $40,830.

Built with input from Nissan’s NISMO motorsports division you’d expect the NISMO Z to be the most capable Z car yet. And it is… but only for a limited time. This hard-core tuner-meets-track version suffers from the same problem as the rest of the 370Z line, namely, it overheats, causing the engine to go into a “limp mode” reducing maximum rpm levels from the lofty 7400 level to a somewhat less-fun amount that differs depending on exactly how hot the car is. The idea here is to protect the engine from further damage, which is smart, but this just raises the issue of why Nissan wouldn’t just use an oil cooler, helping to keep engine temps down and lap times up. We have a theory… and the blame lies not with the nerds in accounting or the legal department but from those guys you’d like to think are your friends: the product planners.

You see, the Z might be an impressive track machine, but it also looks just like a hard-parking tuner car. And it would seem Nissan thinks the vast majority of buyers fall into the latter category, more interested in polishing the stunning 19-inch Rays wheels or talking about the big 4-piston front brakes, then actually using them. And so while an oil cooler could be standard equipment, or offered as an option, the take-rate is likely too low for them to even bother with the R&D.

Do we blame the product planners? Perhaps not. Heck, we can’t even blame those owners. Who wouldn’t want to park such a fine looking machine in their driveway. It generated more feedback on the street (particularly from the 18-30 male demographic) than anything we’ve driven in a long, long time.

WILD NEW LOOK THAT’S FUNCTIONAL TOO

Better yet, the Z’s aggressive stance and yes, even the wild aerodynamics, are all a part of what make it such an impressive performer. The custom NISMO bodykit, complete with its massive rear spoiler, actually generates as much as 150 lbs of downforce at speeds of 75 mph. On track at Toronto Motorsports Park we’re not hitting 75 mph anywhere but on the straights, so while we might not be taking full advantage, we’ll take whatever we can get through the fast turn 1 and 2 sections.

[vs-jwplayer movieid="bC-XtYSsj9U" width="600" height="368" autoplay="0"]

Particularly enjoyable is Nissan’s SynchroRev Match 6-speed manual transmission. Purists may protest against the computer-controlled rev-match on the downshift, but if they insist, it can be turned off. Besides, we’ve already established that most Z buyers, even the NISMO ones, aren’t weekend track warriors. For those who might make the weekend journey to their local lapping day once, it means never having to worry about heel-toeing, letting you give more attention to driving the right line.

The shifter itself is excellent, operating smoothly with short gear changes. The clutch feels a bit heavy on the street with an engagement point that’s hard to miss, none of which matters on the track.

LONG LIST OF UPGRADES IMPROVES PERFORMANCE IN ALL AREAS

Back on public roads the wide wheel and tire package does get pulled around on the ruts quite a bit and the stiffer suspension setup might be a bit much for many shoppers, even conventional sports car buyers. The tuner crowd isn’t likely to mind, however, and anyone who’s ever driven a car with an aftermarket suspension will probably find the NISMO to be downright comfortable.

Spring rates get a modest boost by 15% front and 10% rear, with 40% stiffer shocks, while the sway bars go up in stiffness 15% front and 50% rear.

There’s no need to fret the braking zones thanks to 4-piston front calipers and 14-inch rotors up front with 2-piston rears with 13.8-inch calipers. Part of the optional Sport package on all Z models, they’re standard on the NISMO and not once did we detect any fade.

Corner entry and exit come with a lot more speed than the standard 370Z, and not just because of the tweaked 3.7-liter engine that delivers 18-hp more for a total of 350-hp. No, perhaps the most significant factor is the added grip provided by noticeably wider wheels and tires. The light weight 19-inch Rays wheels allow for 245 wide front tires and 285 wide rear tires, compared to a 225/245 combo on the standard car. Combined with some sticker rubber it’s got more grip on turn in and more power can be applied sooner at corner exit.

The NISMO Z is excellently well-balanced, transitions easily with very little body lean and delivers plenty of confidence, allowing you to push it harder and harder.

About the only complaint we do have, apart from the overheating issue, is that hitting the traction control button doesn’t necessarily mean all systems are off. We actually never had any issues with it cutting power while applying throttle, allowing for all the oversteer we could ask for. But in a higher-speed understeer situation the built-in Active Brake Limited Slip, sensing a high speed loss of control, unmistakably activated, straightening out the car’s trajectory, but also shedding some speed – neither of which were necessary, nor wanted.

BACK-TO-BASICS INTERIOR

The car responds quickly to inputs from the thick-rimmed steering wheel, with its NISMO-specific red stitching. That same stitching pattern runs throughout the cabin, across the dash, on the shift knob boot and even on the seats. Don’t look for leather here, however, as the NISMO Z comes exclusively in a black and red fabric coating, designed more for grip and aesthetics. And that’s not entirely a bad thing. The standard Z, even with the high-end Touring package, is a disappointment when it comes to interior luxury. The NISMO car’s cockpit is redeemed by forgetting pretensions and instead going the Spartan route, evidenced by the numerous blank place-holder buttons decorating the decontented cabin. Even the seats are manually adjustable, although the car does get power windows and Nissan’s Intelligent Key access with a push-button start.

Along with those seats, model-specific trim updates do include a NISMO branded tachometer, aluminum pedals and a numbered plaque behind the shift knob.

THE VERDICT

As disappointed as we are with the overheating issue, the NISMO Z should not be written off. Either you won’t take it to the track, and so it doesn’t matter, or you will and should invest in a quality oil cooler, which you can buy and have installed for around $1,000.

Even if you add that price in, the NISMO 370Z is an incredible bargain retailing for just $40,830 ($46,898 CDN). That’s just a little more than you’d pay for a top-level Touring model with the Sport Package added on. And to give you an idea of how great that price is, it’s a solid $20,000 less than the BMW Z4 sDrive35is.

By including all the performance options, adding on plenty of NISMO extras and then deleting the frivolities, Nissan has created an incredible performance machine that doesn’t cost a fortune.

It would seem that Nissan and Honda need to switch marketing departments. The all-new 2011 Nissan Quest minivan is being billed as the family hauler that ‘gets’ parenting more than any other. Arguably, however, it’s Honda’s Odyssey that includes the most unique parent-oriented features – and lots of them. To keep the ironic twist going, Honda bills its van as the most attractive vehicle in the segment to your adventurous right brain, and yet it’s the Quest that’s easily the most exciting to look at.

FAST FACTS
1. After a brief one-year hiatus, the Quest is back competing in the minivan segment with a dramatically new look.

2. Unlike many competitors, the Quest comes standard with keyless access and a push-button ignition.

3. It shares the same turning radius as the Altima, making it easy to maneuver.

4. A 3.5L V6 makes 260-hp and delivers a claimed 19/24-mpg.

5. Pricing ranges from $27,750 to $41,350.

PLENTY OF SWAGGER IN THIS WAGON

Nissan has taken Toyota’s ‘Swagger Wagon’ a step further, with a box-on wheels that brings to mind the Mercedes Viano – a sort of executive van offered briefly in Europe. Pick a dark color like the purply Black Amethyst and the chrome trim pops. While the previous Quest would have been lucky to even attend an automotive beauty contest, let alone compete, this new 2011 model is a stand-out in its class with a slight urban vibe that will have you perusing a DUB catalog so you can toss on a set of 20s. (22s if they’ll fit)

Park this thing in your driveway and the neighbors will talk. “What is that thing?” “Where did he get it?” they’ll whisper. “That’s pretty sick… for a van,” their kids will say.

HIGH-GRADE TRIM LEVELS GIVE LUXURY FEEL

Inside, there’s a strong continuation of the luxury vibe, or at least there is if you opt for the higher-trim SL or LE models. That’s quite likely, as Japanese minivans tend to attract shoppers willing to spend a little extra and so the more expensive trims have become the volume sellers.

Both SL and LE versions were available to test (no cloth-interior versions were), and we can say the van delivers a positive and premium impression, although it does depend on the color of leather. Gray leather seats give a rather drab feel to the cabin, whereas the light tan leather contrasts with the black dash top and faux-wood for a true luxury look.

Compared to some of the rivals (Honda in particular) there’s a notable absence of dash clutter. Simple audio and climate controls sit on the center stack, topped by an LCD screen on most models with a familiar knob and buttons to operate through the menus. Top trim LE versions get an 8-inch screen with Navigation, while middling SV and SL get a 4.3-inch unit (with rear-view monitor) that’s certain to make the cabin look even more sparse.

Unlike the Odyssey there aren’t storage innovations galore, just a simple center console with two cup holders, plus two more that pop out of the lower section of the dash. Do you need more than this? Honda would say yes, and while they might come in handy the odd time, we don’t often find ourselves drinking more than two Grandes from ‘Buckies at a time.

INNOVATIVE ONE-TOUCH POWER SLIDING DOORS

A key feature that’s included on all but the base trim level are power sliding second row doors that open or close with the touch of your finger (or knuckle if your hands are full of grocery bags). The doors can also be opened or closed using buttons on the dash to the left of the driver, or with the key fob. That fob even allows keyless access to the front doors, plus there’s a push-button ignition so you never have to reach for your keys. We commend Nissan for making this standard and can’t stress how much other minivan makers should do the same.

What isn’t standard, on the Quest or any other minivan for that matter, is a blind-spot warning system. Considering the size of these glorified school buses, it should be at least optional, although Nissan only offers it on the top-trim SL, where it’s standard. We’re at least thankful the Quest has mirrors large enough for an ensuite bathroom.

Hop into the second row and you’re greeted by two captain’s chairs, plus there’s a three-seat bench in the back. Second row room is plentiful, although the 3rd row is just sufficient for adults. Unfortunately, sunshades for the back two rows come standard on LE models only.

Nissan has lowered the 2nd row step-in height to make ingress and egress easier, but we couldn’t help but notice the hard plastic step has an open space underneath for the sliding door mechanism. It seems sturdy enough, but just looks flimsy, and one has to wonder how it will hold up to 10 years of repeated thuds from a three-pack of obese siblings.

CARGO ROOM LACKING, OR IS IT?

Vans need to be able to haul stuff as much as people and the Quest takes a bit of a different approach. Rather than traditional 3rd row seats that drop into the rear well, the Quest maintains that space for a constant total of 37.1 cubic feet out back. The third row then folds forward for a total of 63.6 cu-ft, and you can drop the 2nd row seatbacks to expand that to 108.4 cu-ft. Two sturdy flaps can cover the cargo well behind the third row, which is perfect for either hiding items below or for making one long flat bed in the rear. Total volume isn’t near what rivals offer, but for many those massive expanses only come when you remove seats, which Nissan product experts insist no one ever does.

If you opt for the top LE trim the third row seats are power operated. We expected a system similar to the Infiniti QX56, but thankfully these ones don’t take as much time to fold down or pop up. Also of note is the rear liftgate (power on the top two trims), which opens high enough for a 6-footer to walk underneath.

DRIVING THE BUS

When it comes to minivans, what you get is really more important than how it drives. That being said, the Quest is both comfortable, quiet and reasonably car-like, feeling smaller to drive than its cube van dimensions would have you guess. Particularly impressive is that it shares the same turning circle as the Altima sedan, meaning pulling a U-ey is a cinch.

Power is solid at 260-hp and 250 lb-ft, although again, it’s not all that important and give or take 20-hp isn’t going to matter at all in this segment. The CVT automatic transmission is smooth and we found ourselves reluctant fans.

Fuel economy of 19/24-mpg is as good as the 4-cylinder Sienna, although the V6 Sienna is nearly identical at 18/24. All models in this class fall well short of the Odyssey’s 19/28-mpg high and our brief time behind the wheel of the Quest turned out some unimpressive numbers with a brutal average of just 18.5-mpg.

Another drawback we discovered was the windshield washer jets that hit only the bottom third of the window, limiting visibility at times. A small issue perhaps, but one that ultimately involves the safety of all involved.

The Quest does get one surprising convenience/safety feature; a tire pressure monitoring system with Easy Fill Tire Alert, which notifies you with a beep of the car’s horn when the tires are at the ideal pressure.

MODELS AND PRICING

Starting at a competitive $27,750 the Quest S gets 16-inch wheels, Nissan’s Intelligent Key, a four-speaker audio system and the usual power options including a 6-way power driver’s seat. Upgrade to the SV ($30,900) and add in aluminum wheels, Tri-Zone climate control, a 4.3-inch audio display, USB and iPod connectivity, Bluetooth with steering wheel controls, a backup camera and a leather wrapped steering wheel. Quest SL ($34,350) models bring full leather with 18-inch wheels, a power liftgate, heated front seats, auto on/off headlights, a quick-release fold flat 3rd row and more. Top of the range is the LE ($41,350), adding navigation, a 13-speaker audio system, a 4-way power passenger seat, 8-inch in-dash display screen, blind spot warning, HID headlights, and a DVD entertainment system with wireless headphones.

THE VERDICT

Marketing departments are paid to come up with slogans and to create a story about a car, and often rather than working with what they’re given (even when what they’re given is pretty good), attempt to twist the facts and force a message. This is one of those cases.

Overall the Quest seems to be missing some of the really innovative features that sets the Odyssey apart from the crowd, although that’s not to say it's without its virtues, like the power touch doors and keyless access. It has, however, out-Sienna’d the Sienna with more swagger than a limping Jay Z. From the point of view of practicality and functionality, the Quest doesn’t reinvent the minivan but it does do the basics right, with style.

According to a report by Bloomberg, Chrysler Financial Co. could soon begin offering loans to consumers and dealers again after losing its status as the primary lender to Chrysler dealers last year at the height of the crisis in the automotive industry.

The company would begin with loans to buyers with near-prime credit according to an unidentified source "familiar with the company's plan." The same individual indicated that Chrysler Financial is attempting to raise capital and is contemplating a name change.

Benefiting from an uptick in used-car prices, which reached record highs in May 2010, Chrysler Financial now has collateral with more value and may thus be able to raise more money and accelerate and extend the rate of its lending.

Maryann Keller, president of Maryann Keller Associates in Stamford, Connecticut was quoted in the Bloomberg report. "There's always a place for another lender. Chrysler Financial has to come up with a business plan that identifies who its dealer partners are and how the company will raise capital."

When Chrysler went into bankruptcy in 2009, Chrysler Financial was replaced by GMAC as the primary lender for Chrysler dealers and was regarded as no longer a viable lending agency for big scale loans to dealers seeking to finance inventory.

Since that time, Chrysler Financial has mostly collected payments on outstanding loans. The company has a loan portfolio of $26 million and has issued less than $100 million in new loans this year.

Driver's Log Gallery: 2010 Mazda MX-5.

Driver's Log Gallery: 2010 Mazda MX-5.

Driver's Log Gallery: 2010 Mazda MX-5.

Driver's Log Gallery: 2010 Mazda MX-5.

Driver's Log Gallery: 2010 Mazda MX-5.