Dragawn - 2008 Dragotec Detroit - $19920
3.2L I6 Turbo DI - 200hp
64.3 utility
37.3mpg
The Dragotec Detroit is definitely a very interesting car. It’s a two-door, four-seat wagon designed for utility purposes. The styling looks very sleek and futuristic, with a steeply raked windshield and front fascia. While I can’t deny that it looks cool, the styling looks more like “weekend sports car” than “heavy duty work vehicle”. I’m not sure if it’s the right message for my customers.
The interior of the Detroit is quite nice, with premium materials and a standard CD player. This is definitely one of the more comfortable cars I’ve tested, and the excellent crash test scores are good, too. It has a reasonable 1571L of cargo space in the back, below average but probably OK for my needs.
The 3.2L I6 engine is very well designed for my needs. Eschewing VVL for a 5 valve/cylinder setup, the engine runs a very low cam profile which means lots of torque and high efficiency at low RPM. The small turbocharger spools quickly and runs a very small amount of boost, further improving efficiency but sacrificing power. However I think that more advanced ignition timing coupled with lower compression could have made it even better. The engine also seems awfully heavy for its power output - perhaps a smaller, lighter engine could have achieved similar efficiency and power with lower cost.
My test drive with the Detroit was very encouraging. Wheelspin is managed very well, and the 6 speed automatic is well geared. 0-60 is done in 9.1 seconds. The staggered tire setup is a little strange, but it does help with managing oversteer. The brakes are comfortable and nicely balanced, but they feel just a bit too weak for this car’s weight. Adaptive dampers and active sway bars help smooth out the bumps and improve handling.
All in all, I am very impressed with the Dragotec Detroit. The efficiency is great, and the car doesn’t sacrifice too much to achieve this. It’s very comfortable, easy to drive, and has a decent amount of power. Reliability isn’t bad either. The cargo capacity is just a little smaller than I would like, and I’m not sure if the looks are right for me.
HowlerAutomotive - 2008 Gnoo Utilight 160 - $15360
1.8L I4 Turbo DI - 161hp
59.1 utility
47.1mpg
I wasn’t really sure what to think when I first saw the Gnoo Utilight. This thing is tiny. I was ready to dismiss it as too small before the dealer told me the mileage: an awe-inspiring 47mpg! The looks are definitely outdated, but I found myself strangely attracted to them. It’s simple, no-nonsense, and functional, and I think that it sends the right message. I’ll just have to keep it clean, or else my customers will think I just bought some surplus vehicle off the scrap heap.
The interior of the Utilight is, as expected, pretty cramped. There’s four seats but I’m sure it won’t be long before my kids outgrow the rear legroom. The materials look pretty standard, nothing stands out. However, this Utilight does come with a SatNav system, which is perfect for my job. Considering the light weight of this car, safety is a concern, but Gnoo has taken care of that by putting in all the latest safety technology. It still gets tossed around a lot in the crash tests, but that’s because of the weight and that’s a tradeoff I’m willing to make.
Cargo space is, comparatively speaking, very small at just 941L. This is probably OK for my basic day-to-day needs, but if I need to haul any large equipment, I’ll need to tow a trailer. The engine’s 161hp output isn’t great, but since the Utilight is so, well, light, the power/weight ratio is still pretty good. The ladder chassis should also help with towing.
The 1.8L I4 turbo engine is nicely designed, with low turbo lag and an amazingly flat torque curve. I really have no criticisms, except that the exhaust seems oversized, adding unnecessary weight and cost. Also, I would like to see the engine made out of aluminum for lower weight and even better mileage.
On the road, the Gnoo Utililght feels like a Miata compared to all the other big, heavy vehicles I’ve been driving. This thing is seriously lightweight at just 1171kg, and despite the modest engine output, it can reach 60mph in just 7.9 seconds. The six speed manual includes an overdrive gear, and is definitely tuned for efficiency. Closer gear ratios could improve 0-60 time and reduce wheelspin, at a minor cost to economy. Steering is well managed, with a hint of understeer which is fine for my needs. Brakes are well balanced and there is no fade.
This car is quite well engineered and there aren’t too many weaknesses. The cargo size is the big one, but that can be worked around. The utility capability of this car is definitely limited compared to the other vehicles I’ve tested, but this thing is just so efficient, it makes up for that and then some. Plus, this is also the lowest priced vehicle here. With those two factors in mind, I’m going to be saving thousands of dollars over the lifetime of this car, and if I need to tow a trailer every now and then, that won’t be too bad.
Denta - 2008 Pragata Arjuna Te - $19920
3.3L V6 Turbo DI - 196hp
46.5*1.2 = 55.8 utility
31.3mpg
The Pragata Arjuna has pretty appealing exterior styling. As a crossover SUV, it looks modern and athletic, and well balanced. On the front fascia, the large hexagonal grilles complement each other well, although the lower corners look a little empty. The rear taillights also look quite nice. Overall, its personality feels fun and energetic.
Inside the Arjuna, it feels less exciting and more bone standard. The 5 seats are decent enough but the CD player is rather low end. Safety is standard for its class, although it lacks traction and stability control. The cargo space is a rather disappointing 1105L. I was expecting more out of an SUV, and since it’s a monocoque chassis it won’t be quite as good as a ladder for towing.
The Arjuna’s 3.3L aluminum V6 is very interestingly designed. Both cam profiles in the VVL system are optimized for low RPM, ranging from “basically idle” to “city cruising”. Torque peaks early and steadily decreases as the RPMs rise. Early torque is good for pulling power, but the falling torque curve means rather low output for a 3.3L turbo. A differently tuned VVL system and/or turbocharger could increase output without hurting low-end torque or even improving it.
Driving the Arjuna is not bad at all. The well-tuned AWD system, viscous LSD and large tires mean plenty of grip with no wheelspin whatsoever. The five speed manual is well geared, but I would have expected more at this price range. Braking is solid and handling feels neutral with a hint of oversteer. There’s a little too much body roll and the off-road swaybar doesn’t help, but it’s not a huge issue.
The Arjuna is a fairly well-designed crossover. There’s nothing very wrong with it, but compared to some of the others there’s nothing terribly impressive either. Ultimately, it’s not as good at utility as I would like, and there are far better candidates at this price range.
TheDzuiras - 2008 FSD Carger - $19800
3.2L V6 Turbo DI - 200hp
68.8 utility
25.3mpg
Boxy SUVs, like this FSD Carger, tend to be a love-it-or-hate-it design. I think that the Carger looks pretty decent, but kind of empty. The top part of the front fascia looks like BMW but the bottom part is just a big bumper. I’m also not a big fan of the handle-less electrically-opened doors. They’re cool at first, but in practice they seem slow and unresponsive, and an electrical failure would be a big problem. They would make sense on an expensive hypercar, where aerodynamics are crucial and theft is a major issue, but for this boxy mid-range SUV? What’s the point?
The 4-seat standard interior of the Carger feels just like all the others, although I quite like the CD player. However, the boxy shape does improve interior space, and the seats feel quite roomy. It also allows for 1447L of cargo space, which is not bad but I would have expected more.
The 3.2L V6 is designed for low-end torque at the expense of top-end performance. The long stroke engine, combined with fragile cast pistons, forces a rev limit of just 5300RPM. Peak torque comes at 2300RPM and falls steadily after that. I think this engine would be better if there was some more room for the engine to rev, but I understand the trade-off that was made.
Driving the Carger is just OK. The six speed manual would really benefit from an overdrive, but is otherwise passable. The brakes do their job but aren’t very well balanced. Also, I’ve heard that this engine has some overheating issues, which is not a good sign to me.
The FSD Carger is another middling SUV with unimpressive utility and efficiency, and quite below average reliability. I’m surprised it can get the mileage it does considering how heavy and unaerodynamic it is. For this kind of price, there are much better options available.
DeusExMackia - 2007 Erin Tauga S-AllDrive - $18600
2.6L I6 Turbo DI - 159hp
36.7*1.2 = 44 utility
36mpg
I had heard some great things about this British manufacturer so I was excited to try out the Erin Tauga. The front of the car looks clean and sharp, and the rear is just beautiful. The lines are clean, everything feels well balanced, and I absolutely love the design of the tail lights.
The interior of the car is just OK. The materials look pretty standard although they are a cut above some of the other cars I’ve tested, and the CD player feels kind of cheap. This is a passenger car through and through, and cargo volume is only 1099L, which is definitely on the small side. As with the Utilight, this is probably enough for my daily needs but if I need to deliver any heavy equipment, I’ll have to invest in a trailer. And with a monocoque body and a poor power-to-weight ratio, the Tauga isn’t ideal for towing, either. On the other hand, the Tauga has some seriously impressive safety technology and it’s scored at the top of its class in crash testing.
The Tauga’s turbocharged I6 engine seems to be very strangely designed to me. While advertised as a VVL engine, this engine doesn’t actually change cam profiles at all. Yet all the VVL parts are still there, adding weight and cost while doing basically nothing. The rev limiter is also set at 6800RPM, well past the engine’s max HP at 5400RPM. While this doesn’t hurt reliability all that much because of the short piston stroke, it does make me think that an actually working VVL system could have produced far better high-RPM performance while still being efficient at low speeds. As I mentioned before, the 2.0L I6 turbo I worked on for Inline Designs produced 187hp while being smaller, lighter, and just about as efficient.
My test drive in the Tauga was quite enjoyable. The all-wheel drive system provides excellent traction in all situations. The 6 speed manual is decently geared, but I feel that more spacing between the gears and a higher top gear could have allowed for better acceleration and economy. The Tauga is also fitted with a staggered tire setup to reduce oversteer. The solid disc brakes are well balanced but they exhibit quite a bit of fade. Vented discs are needed, and using a conventional tire setup could have easily freed up the money for them.
While the estate body does add some cargo volume, the Tauga is simply not designed for any sort of heavy duty work. With a better designed engine and some tuning improvements, I’d be very happy to buy the Tauga for my wife and family. But it’s not something I can seriously consider for my work vehicle.
Rcracer11m - 2007 Mott Works Vigor - $19920
3.0L I4 Turbo DI - 245hp
60.1 Utility
40mpg
The Mott Works Vigor is sleek and angular, and looks like a spaceship straight out of Star Trek. The styling is at once both futuristic and dated. However, both the front and rear fascias look rather bland. As with the Dragotec Detroit, the looks aren’t bad, but I don’t think they send the right message to my customers. Aside from the appearance, it can’t be denied that the Vigor is extremely aerodynamic, as the steeply raked front contributes to a drag area of just 0.432 square meters.
The interior of the Vigor is pretty nice. There’s only two seats, but that should be sufficient most of the time. They are comfortable and made of premium materials. There’s no SatNav, unfortunately, but the CD player is well designed and the sound quality is higher than some of the other cars I’ve tested. Safety is very good for its class. In the rear there’s an excellent 3576L of cargo space.
Under the hood is a 3.0L I4 turbo made of AlSi, giving it a good power-to-weight ratio. The big cylinders mean that smoothness is below average, although it’s not as bad as I would have thought. Long strokes necessitate the need for more expensive forged components, while most other engines can use cheaper and more efficient cast parts. The turbo is sized nicely with very little lag and a relatively flat torque curve. Overall, it’s a solid engine that’s economical and powerful. I’m a sucker for an inline six, but I do think that it would have been the better choice here.
The Mott Works Vigor is actually quite fun to drive. With its oversteering characteristics, a capable 0-60 time of 7.3 seconds, and excellent aerodynamics, it’s probably the most sporty-feeling of all the vehicles I’ve tested. However, that sportiness comes at the cost of utility, as several factors combine to limit the utility potential of this van. The six speed semi-automatic transmission delivers good efficiency with the ease of use of an automatic, but it still can’t match the torque converter for utility. The alloy wheels and lack of any sort of locking differential also hold it back. The wishbone and solid axle coil suspension setup is a little strange, compromising on both sportiness and utility. I would have preferred a more conventional strut and leaf combination to maximize load capacity.
All in all, the Mott Works Vigor has many redeeming qualities. High efficiency, good comfort, and lots of cargo space definitely puts it on the short list. Unfortunately, the design just seems full of untapped utility potential. For now, it’s still neck and neck with a couple of the other competitors.
AirJordan - 2007 Smooth Tool V8 - $19680
4.4L V8 NA DI - 216hp
68.7 utility
23mpg
The Smooth Tool V8 looks pretty unique. The front grille resembles something between a frowny face and a mustache. The rear looks quite nice, although it appears the the license plate has been mounted backwards. I don’t love the looks, but they aren’t bad, either.
Like many other vehicles I’ve tested, the Smooth Tool comes with a 5-seat standard interior and CD player. The materials look a bit better than the rest. The crash test scores are pretty good. In the rear there’s a sufficient 2152L of cargo space.
The 4.4L V8 engine is… pretty unimpressive. For an engine of this size, the 216hp power output is quite low. While the cam profile is optimized for low RPMs, the 279 ft-lb of torque isn’t all that great, either. And the engine efficiency is still well below average. Ultimately, the technology in this engine is just too simple and outdated to be competitive. No turbo, no VVL, SOHC, and only 3 valves per cylinder severely limit the efficiency and power of this engine. The simplicity does make the engine very reliable, but that seems to be its only redeeming trait.
The Smooth Tool is quite easy to drive compared to some of the other vehicles. The six speed automatic is fairly well geared, but there’s still a bit too much wheelspin. The brakes are comfortable and well balanced, although I noticed a little bit of fade in the rear. Steering is neutral because of the staggered tire setup.
In the end, the Smooth Tool V8 is decent enough, but it really doesn’t stand out from the crowd. Both utility and efficiency are far from the top of the list, and it doesn’t excel in any other areas.
Koolkei - 2007 Vanartic Trans - $19200
5.5L V8 NA DI - 269hp
74.2 utility
25.8mpg
The Vanartic Trans’s styling is… interesting, to say the least. The bright purple paintjob and liberal use of LED strips make me think of street racing tuner cars. I’m also really not sure what is going on with the rear tail lights. I know that there are those who would appreciate the styling, but I don’t think it’s what I would want to show my customers.
Despite the exterior’s edgy looks, the interior feels pretty standard for a family van, with 6 seats and a CD player. Safety technology is good, as you’d expect. Since there are 3 rows of seats, the rear cargo space is actually quite small at only 962L. While I would prefer more space dedicated to cargo, it’s not a big issue to simply fold down the seats.
I was taken aback when I first saw the Trans’s engine. This thing is freaking huge. But despite its massive 5.5 liters of displacement, it only puts out 269hp. It’s a big, heavy-duty truck engine stuffed into a van, with a low cam profile and lots of low-end torque. And while that makes it a great engine for hauling cargo, it comes at a cost: weight. The big engine is made entirely out of cast iron and it weighs close to 300 kilos. While the mileage is respectable, I can’t help but think that it could be much higher with a lighter engine.
Besides the weight, the Trans doesn’t feel too bad to drive around. The six speed automatic is well geared, with an overdrive gear and not too much wheelspin. Acceleration is pretty quick at 7.6 seconds to 60. The brakes are reasonable, with a hint of fade in the rear. I think that a single piston rear caliper would have been better for balance.
The Vanartic Trans seems to be a mish-mash of different goals. The body and interior say family, the engine says heavy-duty truck, and the exterior styling says street racer. Ultimately, it’s a highly capable utility van that can haul both people and cargo. But the gas mileage is unimpressive and the looks don’t agree with my needs.
Nerd - 2006 Rado T500 - $19080
2.8L I4 Turbo MPFI - 145hp
47 utility
21mpg
I had gone through quite a few vehicles by this point, and I had already cut down the competitors to a few finalists. However, as I was mulling things over and beginning to come to a decision, I had a new problem on my hands - my car failed to start!
I know my way around an engine, but fixing this car would take time and money that I really don’t have right now. Luckily my longtime mechanic friend Dave offered to take it to his shop and fix it for free. He even let me borrow one of his trucks so I wouldn’t be stuck at home. What a nice guy!
I was a little less impressed when Dave showed me what he let me borrow - a 2006 Rado T500. While Dave told me it was “military green,” the paint job on this T500 looks more like puke green to me. The styling is boring and unimpressive, although the front does remind me a bit of a Miata.
The interior of this truck actually isn’t that bad, although with 6 seats it can feel a little bit cramped. There’s also a luxury SatNav system which looks so out of place I’m sure Dave must have stolen it from somewhere and hacked it into this T500.
In terms of performance, the Rado’s engine would find it hard to compete with engines from the 80s. Despite 2.8L of displacement and a turbocharger, it can only muster a laughable 147hp. The rev limiter cuts off at just 4000RPM, and it has to, because otherwise the stupidly heavy pistons and conrods will cause the engine to self-destruct.
Driving the T500 is an incredibly unpleasant experience. Starting the engine, I’m greeted with one of the most pathetic exhaust notes I’ve ever heard. Pushing the engine even a tiny bit feels like riding on an earthquake. The skinny tires provide basically no grip, and 0-60 takes an agonizing 15.4 seconds. Steering is terrible, with tons of understeer even at low speeds. And I think I’d rather jump out of this car rather than hope that the brakes will stop it in time.
After a few days of torturing myself and my family, I finally got my car back from Dave. He returned my car with a suspicious-looking grin on his face. “Just some problems with the spark plugs,” he said. “No biggie.” How could… wait a minute! Did he sabotage my car just to get me to drive the T500? That sick bastard!
(we all know how those things were), it had the handling of a Ford Explorer, the wheel spin of an El Camino 
