Or you can just turn your lights on as soon as you start your car, regardless of conditions as I do......

Sorry. Just bothers me when people choose to do a more expensive, more complicated swap to end up at the same power level as the stock engine could have made for less time/money.

Why engine swap when the KA can handle mild boost and make more than enough power for a fun car?

Funny how both only require proper throttle control.

I want to know more about this:

It’s a CUV, it’s a pile of crap when it leaves the factory.

Yep.

Better looking than the hoards of CUVs plaguing our roads.......

Turbo 4 fun.

Problem is, the EPA doesn’t test most vehicles themselves.

Modern Turbo Diesels are low-end torque monsters.

They seem decent on modern gas vehicles.

And this has 173 hp (supposed to be more for US market) and 310 ft-lbs (again, supposed to be more for US market).

Fuelly gives a far better representation of what you can actually expect for mileage than EPA estimates.

Someone’s clearly never driven a Turbo Diesel......

Someone still uses the Govt’s numbers for looking at fuel economy, time to stop sucking the teat and grow up: http://www.fuelly.com/

I was just going to comment: Real world driving the Diesel will likely blow away EPA numbers.

Now back to my original comment: The electronics of the window are the parts that fail most commonly. Meaning motor (which sometimes requires replacing the whole assembly with regulator), wiring, switches, and in some cases body computers.

After driving pretty much exclusively manuals for many years, I can say a bad knee and a few cars with heavy clutches, has given me a respect for autos.