Just got my rabbit a month ago, came down to driving feel, and price. I dont bother with car stereos as long as they can be replaced. Wanted a stick, but the only sticks left came bloated with body kits, and styling options, that made the auto cheaper. Dont own an ipod, and probably never will, wish someone would make zune intergration.

Very Very rarely talk on my cell while driving, even rarer I'll answer it if i'm in the car, theres hardly anything that could happen in the world that would require my attention right this second, and if it did, would i really want to be driving? In general I have a hatered of people talking and driving, because its rare they drive well when they do it.

Back to the radio. Already replaced the rabbits with an alpine unit. Much cleaner sound.

With the exception of Ford's Sync system, which I think I would really like, I don't see much difference in the mainstream cars I look at. Reasonbly priced (<500)Nav might be something I would consider, but otherwise since I don't want satellite radio and everything comes with an aux input, I don't consider the radio very much.

I do value what I consider long term reliability (1 to 150k miles), not what Edmunds considers long term reliability (less than 100k, somtimes less than 60k), so I still take a gander at Consumer Reports and probably wouldn't buy anything less than average there.

Then looks and surprisingly color. Maybe I'm lady-like, but I'm apparently very particular about color and I don't understand why that's so difficult for dealers to work with.

Of course fuel efficiency is important, and I can't believe there are still large differences in similarly sized and powered cars.

But the most important thing is a manual transmission, which is becoming increasingly difficult to find.

This criteria leaves me with what, the Accord, Mazda6, TSX, Fusion for midsize cars?

The one thing that I need in a car is a manual transmission. It is the one thing that I really don't want to go without. Yes, it can suck in the city, but it also is immenseley fun on the back roads. Plus, sticks usually get better gas mileage than their torque-converter brethren. If I can't get a car with a manual, it is immediately struck from my list.

Another thing is a nice an thick steering wheel. I absolutely hate thin, flimsy wheels. I don't like the way they feel and I don't have the sense of complete control of the vehicle. This one isn't a deal breaker, but it is important; just like good, supportive seats.

Long term reliability and value are important. Most of the vehicles I am considering are pretty good for those.

The rest comes down to styling, color, options and price.

Styling, incentives and warranty are important. There isnt much of a difference in mileage, noise levels, build quality or options between similarly priced cars anymore. What could Consumer Reports do if Americans ever figured out there arent many "bad" cars in 2008?

My next car will definitely have iPod integration. Currently, I just have an AUX jack and I really can't complain since I just use the shuffle function on my iPod but it'd be nice to pick songs through my cars steering wheel buttons while leaving the iPod in the armrest. Ofcourse, the car has to look good and have good space and a decent trunk. Since my four cylinder only averages 18mpg, I might as well have some power to go along with my paltry mileage. I don't have a commute so I don't need bluetooth and I have an ear piece for phone conversations while driving. The car must have HIDs and cooled seats will be nice too. A sophisticated NAV system would be fun to play with integrated with a high end sound system. Rainsense wipers are great and remote start is also a must.

PS- good edition to the site Karl. The iPod article was a good read.

Karl, for me it's three things: exterior style, interior features and driving experience. That's exactly why I chose the Protege5: I still love the styling (especially when it has the roof rack), it has side airbags, and its combination of great handling, manual transmission and a nice engine sound make it a great car to drive........for my budget it was the optimal car to buy.

My priorities for interior features are different. What I really care for are a loud stereo with great sound quality and MP3 and bluetooth capability, safety equipment like side airbags, and leather seats. I will never buy an ipod so ipod integration is a non-isssue.....the only reason I'd like it is resale value.... I also don't like the idea of paying for radio, so I don't like satellite radio either.

Wow, all these comments sound like they come from such old grumpy people! All I need is a flat area to sit on and some tires! I think it might be safe to say that people listen to music more in their cars than anywhere else. To me it is very important. It adds to the driving experience. It may not be as important in the initial purchase as, say, a manual transmission since a stereo can be replaced or upgraded, but it is something I put some thought into.
And those saying they will NEVER buy an iPod sound like my mother who said she would NEVER buy a microwave. I think she could have used three or four of them this Thanksgiving.

pat1usmc, I have some comments about the ipod. You seem to imply that I don't want it because I'm resisting technological progress. But that's far from the truth. I don't want it because I don't need it (and I think it's too expensive). I have so far found MP3 CDs more than adequate. (In my teenage years I used my Walkman a lot, but I no longer feel the need or desire for a walkman, which is what an ipod is.)

There are still some practical reasons I would want ipod integration in my car. One is resale value: it's likely ipod integration will become standard.....and when I eventually sell my car, it'll be an advantage to have it. Secondly, some friends of mine who ride in my car may have all their music stored on their MP3 players or ipods......my current stereo (an aftermarket unit) doesn't even have even an AUX connection.

But for my own personal purposes, ipod integration has the same functionality as the moonroof in my car: both are useless or me.

To me an iPod, (or MP3 player), is sort of like a personal jukebox. I no longer have to worry about what CDs to bring with me, finding the right CD that has the right song and then finding the right track, making CDs, storing CDs....every song I own is in one, compact and portable device.

This grumpy guy has a zune. err Wait, I have to think different and own an ipod. Hey wait a second... isn't that being the same?

Some good stuff here.

Totally with you on color bepper. I know it's supposed to be "girly" to really care about color, but for me it's huge. If I can't get a car in the color I want it falls off the list. Conversely, I'll go out of state and even pay more if I find the exact car I want that's ALSO in the color I want.

Big steering wheel is another good one. Forgot about that, but it's important to me, too. It's why I love BMW M Cars -- BIG WHEEL!

As for iPod, I resisted for a long time because I also burned CDs with MP3s. Heck, most cars will play DVDs now, which means you can store over 7 gigs of music on ONE DVD, so having all your music in one place isn't an issue.

BUT -- I now own an iPhone, and it goes wherever I go in a belt clip. That means if a vehicle has iPod integration I have full access to all my music and playlists just by getting into a car -- no packages, CD cases or other carry-along paraphernelia required.

That kind of convenience is just not debatable (though AT&T's cell service certainly is -- SUCK!).

My first priority is interior room, as a 96th percentile male nearly everything that isn't a fullsize truck feels like sitting in a penalty box to a degree.

As far as electronic gizmos like Nav, ipod integration etc, I don't care. The aftermarket is better, cheaper, and customizable to exactly what I want.

A factory 12V power point and mounting area for a radar detector up by the rearview would be a great feature. Antennas pre integrated into the bumpers would be an even greater feature.

I think people's choices are more random than you might think. I sincerely doubt 99% of shoppers look at every competitor and weigh the options. If they are truly unbiased, I think it's more based on who can offer the lowest monthly payment for the most content, whether the content is useful or not (ie, bragging rights).

But for the majority of shoppers, I think you can determine a purchase by culture. Take a walk through your neighborhood. In most driveways, you find vehicles of the same make. Only in cases where a certain brand doesn't produce a viable product (like my Chevy 2500 crew cab in lieu of a Ridgeline) is there really any discrepancy. Most folks buy what they already know. Alternatively, if a customer had a bad experience with a brand in the past, they won't buy that brand again.

I don't have an iPod because I don't like iTunes and all its proprietary nonsense. I have nothing against them otherwise and would enjoy having full integration in my car. For now, USB or aux inputs will have to do.

To add to the rest of the discussion, I'll say the feel of a car is very important to me. Not only the way it drives/rides, but the way the doors and trunk close, the way the switchgear feels, how the windows sound going up and down. And at 6'4", I really need to fit well in a car, which does not necessarily mean I need a huge vehicle, just one that's designed well. For instance, the enormous Crown Vic I had to drive once several years ago had some of the worst ergonomics I've ever experienced in a car.

Gadgets I'd like to have in my next car:

-Bluetooth. This will probably be standard equipment on every vehicle over $15K by the time I'm in the market again.

-Hands-free entry and starting. I know it's a frivolous little thing, but it's really cool and you get used to it. I love leaving the keys in my pocket or briefcase.

-"Real" iPod integration. I have an aux jack now, and it works just fine, but I'd enjoy control with the steering wheel buttons, and a USB connection to charge it. In the car I mostly listen to podcasts of talk radio shows. I don't mind that they're a day late with the news because, much like the DVR did for TV, I have zero patience for commercials.

-$500 or less nav system. I think Mazda has a great idea with this. Most factory nav's are way overpriced, don't hold their value upon resale, and they're quickly outdated. I'd sooner get a Garmin/TomTom/whatever for $200 or less. I don't have one at all now and have managed to survive, but even a cheapskate like me would pay $500 to have a factory-installed fully-integrated nav system. Especially with traffic alerts, if it was any good. I suppose you have to pay for am XM/Sirius subscription to get that, so maybe I don't need that feature. But the basic nav would come in handy every now and then. $500 is the right price as it wouldn't increase the monthly payments that much. And it doesn't bother me that the screen is smaller in that new Mazda3's unit. Again, it's no worse than a Garmin or other suction-cup thingy.

I should say, even a cheapskate like me would pay $500 to have a factory-installed fully-integrated nav system *IF* it is a stand-alone option. I still want the smaller engine (sacreligious, I know, but going to the office doesn't require more than 4 cylinders), manual transmission, and cloth seats. I'm not getting a $5000 option package with wood, leather, xenons, sunroof, and flappy paddles, just to get to the optional tech package.

Um, do those of you clamoring for wired iPod integration know that A2DP (stereo music over Bluetooth, from iPod/Zune/Sansa/etc to car) and AVRCP (A/V remote control over Bluetooth, from car to iPod/Zune/Sansa/etc) will probably replace it in the future? Currently, iPhone just needs a (not quite yet available) firmware update to enable it.

Heck, you can probably also get XM over Bluetooth and save yourself $500-$1000 on the new car.

Simple truth - no matter what do you think - 80% of buyers will go and blindly buy Camry/Corolla or Accord/Civic regardless of exterior, interior and electronics center. I do not think that today all cars are equal, Camcords are more equal than other brands.

I do not represent most buyers, and I honestly can't understand buying a car or avoiding a car based on styling. The exterior sheetmetal is not an element that will determine if I buy a car. The tech doodads will not determine if I buy a car either. Doesn't enter into the equation at all.

There are very real differences between cars based on handling, acceleration, the transmission, chassis, the ergonomics. Styling and electronics are not selling points to me and really feel they're puff or lipstick floundering warthogs.

The new Mazda6 is a prime example of how improving those two things will do nothing for a car. The Mazda6 has better styling and electronics than the last gen. It's also a boring car to drive now and it's simply not a viable option for me. Why torture myself with a lame-driving car because it looks better than a 3 series or G35 and it has stupid techy bits? Don't think so.

Would I like Xenons on my next car? Sure but I've had them on 3 or my last 4 car purchases. Beyond that a manual tranny is a must. RWD is preferred. Compact size. Sedan or wagon.

Karl wrote: "It is my sincere belief that only two areas remain to truly differentiate modern cars from one another. One is exterior styling, the other is ergonomics/features. Basically, if a car looks good on the outside and has the features you want on the inside, you'll buy it."

There's a giant difference between ergonomics and features. Giant. The e46 BMW had near perfect ergonomics - window switches fell to hand, the center console was canted toward the driver, steering wheel controls were as they should be and the driving position was perfect. Its one downfall was a Byzantine HVAC system involving an idiotic wheel with dots placed at the top of the dash.

The radio, ipod, bluetooth = who cares. Auto headlights, wipers, electric memory seats = don't need em. Moonroof, CD player and trip computer were worthless trinkets. Navi and BMW Assist = uneeded junk. Keyless entry and start made life easier but I could do without it and have since giving it up with my banal 2006 e90.

Admittedly, the the tilt-down right mirror was really nice for parallel parking.

People really, really need to get a freaking clue about iPods. They do not require proprietary music. You can play any MP3 on an iPod. Seriously, ya'll sound totally ignorant when you bash the iPod because of iTunes. The iTunes software isn't even needed to put music on an iPod! We've got a few iPods - they're all loaded with thousands of songs and 95% of the songs came from my CDS that I ripped, not iTunes. My wife uses them once in awhile but for the most part a pile of iPods (a few classics and a Touch) sit in a basket in our office - mostly unloved, mostly uncharged and mostly a sign of wasted cash.

I don't get too hopped up on features. Vehicle styling and ergonomics are much more important to me.

Items like sunroof, electric seats, trip computer, auto-headlights, etc, do not make or break a deal for me. If they are there, thats nice. I've had them before, but I'm driving without them now and I'm surviving just fine. Heaven forbid you have to turn the car headlights on MANUALLY when it gets dark.

blueguydotcom - after that long rant, you then follow up by defending the generico IPOD, with itunes? lol. in my itunes experance (wife HAD an ipod), its amazing that the software has been around so long, maybe it change in the latest rev or 2. But it blew chunks. I geuss if you like inflexiable, hold your hand at every turn software, it worked. To me, it was the idrive of the ipod.

I'm amazed at how many defend the ipod as the end all be all of MP3 players. When it came out, it was easier to use, now its just like the Civic/camery, it gets the job done, but thats about it. (iphone not included).

ipod integration would be nice as would memory seats for my next car. Keyless starting AND remote start would be nice as well since I dont want to chose. Unfortunately there are only a few vehicle that offer both.

opfreak, I don't understand why people complain about the iPod. The one complaint seems to be iTunes and one doesn't need to use iTunes to fill an iPod with music. On the music level, the Touch does exactly the same thing as the Zune and Zen.

Over the past year we've probably taken the touch out of the house 30 times. When we're going on a flight, then we toss a few ripped DVDs on the Touch and it's our little movie player (again no iTunes used). After our honeymoon we tossed our pics from Thailand on the Touch and we would take it to dinner when we knew we were meeting friends - they'd use the Touch like a photo-album. Lastly, the Touch's browser and wifi means we can surf the web with something a bit cleaner/wider than my Blackberry - giving a chance to check out information online, like restaurant suggestions or the news (I won't watch the news on TV).

Yeah, I could all of this with my Blackberry but it's not as fast or smooth doing any of these chores. Really, the Blackberry's good for Google Mobile Maps(GPS-liek abilities), email and phone calling - its other abilities as a movie player, photo album and browser are limited at best.

So what makes the Zune or Zen more usable to you? Seriously, where is it the iPod doesn't match those players?