• I think this may very well be the most beautiful machine in the BMW stable right now. The fascia, wheels and carbon fiber roof of the M line all help sharpen the standard 6 Series nicely, turning the car from an awkward bubble into a lithe and purposeful grand tourer. It snatches eyeballs like a cleptomaniac Doctor Frankenstein at the optometrist's office: with both purpose and glee.
• The real magic of this car is at its heart: a 4.4-liter turbocharged V8 with 560 horsepower 500 pound-feet of torque. The thrust out of this engine is fiendish in its delivery, and you can't help but get the sense that the only thing keeping this powerplant from leaping out of the coupe's nose and terrorizing the countryside is you. The car strains against the brake pedal at every stop light, and the exhaust burbles and pops in some of our favorite anti-social tones. It is the rolling embodiment of Skynet.
• Our tester came with a seven-speed double-clutch transmission. The logic can be switched between "sane" and "why am I in the next county?" There is no middle ground, but the paddle shifters feel great. The shift lever, meanwhile, might as well have been imported from another planet. In the future. In an alternate dimension. It's that counterintuitive.
• Speaking of switches, there are independent controls for the shift logic, dampers and steering. You can save your presets by plowing through the iDrive system or by pressing and holding a button on the steering wheel, but it all feels like an unnecessary added step. The M6 doesn't simply remember which settings the driver preferred from one jaunt to the next. The result is a car that's in your way more often than not. It's either the best or worst first world problem in the history of our species.
• BMW didn't hold back with the carbon fiber on this machine. Our tester came with a composite roof and carbon-fiber trim indoors. It originally wore the optional carbon ceramic brakes as well, but some yokel had already roasted the rotors off of the car. BMW went back with steel. At $8,700 for the option, we don't blame them.
• This all sounds like a lot of bellyaching, but don't misunderstand. There are only a handful of cars out there that can evoke the sort of emotion this one does, and most of them carry price tags more than double the $123,345 of our tester. That's not saying it's worth the coin, but the car has its place.

2013 BMW M6 Coupe [UPDATE] originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• The cipher to translate the diesel A8, thrown up in the sky like the bat signal, was "24-36-28-857." The first three numbers are the EPA fuel economy ratings for the sedan - 24 city, 36 highway, 28 combined. Take that highway number and multiply it by the 23.8-gallon tank and you get a hypothetical range of 856.8 miles, enough to drive almost the entire coast of California - on the scenic route - from San Diego to the heart of the Redwood National Park near the Oregon border. Or you could go from New York City to Atlanta with ten miles worth of hydrocarbons left in the tank. That's what you call "range."
• The instrument striking the note is a 3.0-liter diesel V6 with a single turbo helping it put out 240 horsepower and 406 pound-feet of torque. That power number could read a little low for a long-wheelbase sedan with a curb weight of 4,564 pounds, but that lopsided torque figure is ready to pull the hard load. In price, weight and torque, it slots in between the long-wheelbase A8s with their 3.0-liter V6 ($79,395, 4,409 pounds, 333 hp, 325 lb-ft) and 4.0-liter V8 ($88,095, 4,630 pounds, 420 hp, 444 lb-ft) gasoline engines, but has 97 less horsepower than the 3.0-liter and is slower than both in the run from 0-60. It gets there in 6.4 seconds, the gas V6 takes 5.5 seconds, the V8 takes 4.7. On the other hand, it's 0.6 seconds quicker than the Mercedes-Benz S350 BlueTec in the same race.
• Don't be duped by the numbers, though - this car is appealingly brisk. All of the torque is called into service from 1,750 rpm, so even though it isn't a firebolt, when giving it the heave at a light or when you need to jump into a (sizable) space in traffic, you never have to worry about having enough acceleration. Give it a running start and it's even sweeter, the sedan being quick to pick up speed when rolling at 45-mph-and-above expressway clips.
• We also enjoyed the way it managed its power. One evening during the race weekend we drove the 4.0 TFSI some 8.9 miles from the track back to the hotel, and it was the celebrated jumping frog of Highlands County - push a couple of millimeters too far into the throttle travel, the turbos kicked in and you were off. It didn't take long for us to keep our right foot resting as lightly as cotton candy on the accelerator, happy to avoid its "Catapult" mapping. The 4.0 TFSI is a fine car, but in just nine miles, we were ready to exchange the keys for the breezy-yet-brisk diesel.
• As for detecting it was a diesel by its noise, you'd have to stand outside the car, be quiet and listen closely, or sit inside the car, turn everything else off, roll the windows down, be very quiet and listen very closely. It's a non-factor.
• The fuel mileage is a factor, and it's why we loved this engine. Look, if we need to start clubbing other drivers over the heads with our V8- and V12-powered nether regions, there is the much more expensive W12 on offer or bottle rocket barges from the voiture couture houses of AMG and Alpina. But the A8 L TDI has everything we're looking for in performance, and after 1,682 miles of city and highway driving at an average speed of 41 mph, we averaged 30.2 mpg. Compare that, in real-world driving, to the EPA's highway mileage ratings for what could be called the competition: 31 mpg for the Mercedes-Benz S350 BlueTec, 25 mpg for the S400 Hybrid, 30 mpg for the BMW ActiveHybrid 7 and 23 mpg for the Lexus LS 600h L. Lest you think the hybrids are at a disadvantage, the S400 and Lexus are rated 19 mpg in the city, the BMW is rated 22 in the city - 5 mpg and 2 mpg down, respectively, on the A8's city spec.
• The bonus: It has the largest gas tank, the furthest range and it's the least expensive of them all. You'd save about $2,000 compared to the ActiveHybrid 7, almost $10,000 versus the S400 Hybrid, more than $10,000 versus the S350 BlueTec and more than the price of a brand-new A4 compared to the Lexus. And inside, it's still all Audi A8 - so if you like the sedan with any other engine, you'll like this one, too. Worlds have collided in this car, and they've gone champagne frugal supernova.

Continue reading 1,682 miles in a 2014 Audi A8 L TDI - Part 1

1,682 miles in a 2014 Audi A8 L TDI - Part 1 originally appeared on Autoblog on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:57:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• God bless the sweet, sweet turbo thrust of the boxer four. No power upgrades have been given to the Special Edition STI, the 2.5-liter flat-four producing the same 305 horsepower and 290 pound-feet of torque it always did. And while there's noticeable turbo lag down low in the rev range, once you get close to the 4,000-rpm full-torque point, this thing just pulls.
• Thing is, despite it having 40 more horsepower and 46 more torques than the standard Impreza WRX, the STI doesn't feel noticeably quicker, and some independent testing has actually suggested the less-powerful standard Rex will hit 60 miles per hour sooner. The WRX uses a five-speed manual transmission with taller gearing than the STI's six-speed unit, so you can hold onto each gear for much longer. You could drive a WRX in second and third all day long, but in the STI, there's more cog swapping to be done.
• Working the manual shifter in the STI continues to be a joy, however, with short, notchy actions between the gears, and good throttle and clutch pedal feel that allow for solid gear engagement each and every time.
• Where the STI shows its improvements over its less-powerful sibling is in the corners, when its stiffer suspension and driver-controllable center differential settings all work together to give you exactly the sort of driving dynamics you're looking for. During everyday scenarios, the suspension is decidedly harsh, but I'd much prefer to spend five hours behind the wheel of this Subie than a similar Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution.
• A lot of that last comparison with the Evo has to do with the Subaru's better interior refinement, but even then, that isn't saying much. Driving this STI reminded me just how cheap the cabin of the previous-generation Impreza really was, with hard plastics found throughout, very little in the way of emotive styling and a generally drab appearance, even with these bright orange accents. There's a ton of wind noise that makes its way into the cabin, and so many parts of the interior just feel cheap - too cheap for a car with a price tag so high.
• As for creature comforts, well, there aren't really any. The Special Edition cars don't come with Subaru's frankly horrible old-style navigation interface, using the normal radio display instead, and while there's Bluetooth functionality to be had, it's hardly intuitive.
• There are good points, though. I love the sport seats fitted in the WRX and STI - they're comfortable and supportive, and generally speaking, there's a good deal of passenger volume inside this compact sedan. Rear passengers weren't exactly impressed with the fit and finish of the cabin, either, but at least nobody complained about headroom or legroom.
• The STI's biggest downfall continues to be its price - it simply just isn't refined enough to warrant a $35k MSRP anymore, even with the excellent Symmetrical all-wheel drive fitted to each and every Subaru (except the BRZ, of course). That's especially true when you consider that the normal WRX is actually a much better overall value at a lower price point. Still, this sort of coin will buy you a fully loaded Ford Focus ST with change to spare, and despite the Blue Oval bruiser only having front-wheel drive, I'd take its more livable interior and more refined driving dynamics each and every day over the added benefit of AWD.
• Mad little turbo cars like this will always put a smile on my face - my love for the hot hatchback has been well-versed here on the pages of Autoblog. But cars like this Subaru increasingly need to validate their price tag beyond just their performance capabilities, and entertaining as it is, the STI simply doesn't.

2013 Subaru WRX STI Special Edition originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 14:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• This 1.8-liter TSI engine with 178 horsepower and 184 pound-feet of torque we tested in Spain is the currently the top-trim version of the Leon three- and five-door hatchback range. The trim treatment is called FR for Formula Racing. The dash to 60 miles per hour is estimated at 7.0 seconds flat, but it'll do it quicker than that.
• In the US, this all-new 1.8-liter engine is due to become the base engine for the new Golf when it arrives middle of next year, replacing the age-old, hard-working 2.5-liter five-cylinder. What the exact power and torque calibrations for us will be is yet unknown.
• Whereas in the European context, the popular thought is to skip the hotter gas-engined trims and go for the top turbo-diesel trims. I would disagree with that, and mainly on this Seat Leon only. The 1.8 is much sportier throughout a rev range that is capped at just over 6,500 rpm, and this Leon in FR trim is meant to be shoved around without pity.
• I would have preferred to test the standard manual six-speed transmission, but nowadays the seven-speed dual-clutch DSG is better, quicker, nimbler and more fuel-efficient. The efficiency claim is some 25 percent better (with the onboard Seat Drive Profile in Eco mode) than anything the current North American 2.5-liter can produce in the Golf.
• I did feel the tactile difference of material choices on the interior, plus one can tell by just looking at the cabin that the styling and image departments deliberately pulled back from what the A3 and Golf are allowed.
• There was also a notable difference in cabin sounds all around me as I hammered the Leon SC (for Sport Coupé, by the way). The sense is that there is a wee bit less noise-vibration-and-harshness work put into either this Leon or the Octavia I recently tested.
• My wheel-tire combo for the day in the dicey hills around Barcelona was the top, FR-optional 18-inch alloys with Dunlop SP Sport Maxx GT treads, 225/40ZR18 92Y all around, which was a great set of rubber on this dimension of car on these roads.
• This generation Leon - as I learned testing the five-door late last year - has been deliberately shrunk in overall length in order to sit squarely in the middle of the C segment. I love this move in the face of current tendencies to make everything larger as we all apparently fatten up. Despite the shrinkage in dimension, space on the inside is increased.
• The rear axles on all Leons are not multi-link but straight beam units, and this would also count as a cost-saver. Golfs and A3s in the top engine trims get multi-link setups, so the overall drive experience will always be marginally better.
• The exterior of the Leon is really nice to behold and spot-on with the sporting image they need to push for the brand. The heavily studied edgy side mirrors reduce wind drag by huge amounts, and I heard no noise from them at any speeds below 85 mph.
• Now we await the Seat Leon Cupra, the top-most trim of them all with a 260-hp tune of the 2.0-liter TSI engine. This is an excited expectation that is a sort of tradition here in Europe. People say there may not even be need for the ultimate Cupra R trim this time around, because the standard Cupra is so good. I don't buy that story; if there is no Cupra R it means that Volkswagen and Audi don't want a Cupra R barking up their tree and possibly robbing sales.

2013 Seat Leon SC originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• I didn't waste any time gawking at the GT350's aggressive front splitter, substantial functional hood scoop or massive wheel and tire package. Instead, I jumped into the comfortable Recaro seats, inserted the key and cranked over the 624-horsepower engine. A heartbeat later, the 5.0-liter V8 spun to life with a throaty roar out its twin Borla exhaust pipes. The engine idled with an excitement the standard GT could never match match, and once underway, a stab on the accelerator quickly extinguished all doubts - this Shelby is bloody quick. Under the right conditions (limiting wheelspin is the greatest obstacle), this green beast will effortlessly crack the 60 mph benchmark in under four seconds. Few public roads can tolerate its top speed.
• The short-throw shifter proved heavy and mechanical in action, taking a bit of practice to master, but it never felt clunky or not up to the task. Once in gear, throttle response (listen for the telltale supercharger whine) was quick. First gear felt too short for my tastes, and I consistently had traction issues. Third gear was the sweet spot, with the Shelby offering enough torque to pull from just about anywhere on its tachometer.
• Few would call any Mustang small and nimble, but the GT350 breaks the stereotype. Once familiar with the coupe's corners (rearward visibility being the most limited), I was able to push the Shelby surprisingly hard in the California's legendary canyons. Hunkered down on its tuned suspension with four sticky contact patches, the Shelby had me relishing each and every corner. Turn-in was good, mid-corner feel was stable and the brakes were always up to the task. This two-door still felt big from behind the wheel, but each of its physical reactions to control inputs told another story - one of sharpness and agility.
• If forced to list good and bad attributes, I'd lodge complaints against the mostly stock Mustang interior (when the price climbs this high, it's hard not to expect more) and tacked-on A-pillar gauges, which felt cheap. Yet I would applaud the engine's power, exhaust note, suspension tuning and handling.
• The more I thought about it, the clearer it became that the 2013 Shelby GT350 is probably the best Ford Mustang I have ever driven. And, even with a price that more than doubles its donor's cost, history's fondness for Shelby models may someday prove that this car is a worthwhile investment, too. I'll take mine in Ruby Red.

2013 Shelby GT350 originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 31 May 2013 14:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• Without a doubt, the Dinan engine package is the most seamless aftermarket upgrade I have ever experienced. The impressive increase in power is velvety smooth and natural in its delivery, devoid of the negative characteristics (hiccups, peaks and flat spots) that are common to most other tuned vehicles. The 550i lacks launch control, so the twin-turbo S3 requires a delicate right foot, or the rear tires quickly liquefy. Drive it properly, with a light touch followed by heavy throttle a few feet off the line, and the sedan takes off like a missile - quickly embossing your spine into the leather seatback. The smooth ZF eight-speed shifts with authority, yet without any of the harshness normally found with a dual-clutch. Dinan doesn't publish acceleration figures, but my tuned derrière dyno says it slices upwards of a second off BMW's published 550i time to 60 mph... and it runs unrestricted to over 190 mph.
• Dinan touts its S3 550i as "a more luxurious version of the M5" with softer shocks and active roll control that give its car the edge when it comes to ride quality. They aren't fibbing, as the enhanced 5 Series provides a very comfortable ride when the EDC is set in Comfort, and sharp response when configured in Sport and Sport Plus. There is less understeer, thanks to the new camber and control arms, and nothing seemed to unsettle the chassis. The stock adaptive suspension worked seamlessly with the physical and software upgrades - the wide range of suspension settings was impressive.
• If asked what I didn't like about the augmented 5 Series, I'd have to mention the steering. Three years ago, when I reviewed the BMW 550i, I commended the steering's accuracy but complained about its numbness and isolation. That said, Dinan doesn't touch the electric steering, so don't expect it to be improved. Again, this is more of a wish for improvement than a deal breaker.
• Dinan's superb S3 BMW 550i obviously competes nearly directly with the factory's own flagship M5. In terms of power output, the Dinan feels every bit as burly as the 2013 M5 (keep in mind that BMW boosted performance of its M5 for the 2014 model year with the optional Competition Package), but its personality is softer and bit more tame - less high strung would be another good description. Both are excellent examples of the 5 Series. However, if asked which one I prefer, I'd select the hardened M5 for competitive track events but choose the polished Dinan as my daily driver. Where do you spend more of your time?

2013 Dinan S3 BMW 550i originally appeared on Autoblog on Thu, 30 May 2013 14:59:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• West Coast Editor Michael Harley likened the RS5 coupe to a supermodel. The metaphor survives intact when driving around with the RS5 Cabriolet's top down - it's like walking around town with a topless supermodel on your arm. The attention this car receives is surprising considering most people don't blink twice at a standard A5 or S5. I received thumbs up, waves and shout-outs from kids on bikes, one grown man in an Escalade and an entire Burger King cook staff.
• This can partly be explained by the RS5's aggressive styling accoutrements that include wider fenders; 20-inch wheels housing attention-grabbing "wave" rotors; a giant, single-frame honeycomb grille; oversized air inlets and a noticeable rear diffuser. The other reason is that it's rare; only 1,200 RS5 coupes have been sold in the US since last summer, and the Cabriolet has only just arrived.
• Some argue that the RS5 isn't worth the extra $18,000 over the cost of an S5. The RS5 Cabriolet doesn't help itself in this regard with a base price of $77,900 - some $18,600 more than an S5 Cabriolet. This one was loaded up with the optional Estoril Blue crystal effect paint and black roof ($1,075), MMI Navigation plus package ($3,450), Driver Assist package with adaptive cruise control, dynamic steering and side assist ($3,250), Sport exhaust with black finishers ($1,000), 20-inch five-spoke wheels with summer tires ($1,000) and Matte-Aluminum Optic package ($750) for a grand total $88,425, not including an $895 destination charge.
• I don't buy the above argument that the RS5 fails to justify its price premium. That's what people who reach to afford an S5 tell themselves, and they're right in that case: Settling for the S5 is smarter than raiding your retirement account for the RS5. But the RS5 is the better of the two, and if the $18k difference between them is less than a rounding error on your tax refund, then pay Audi's premium for owning the best and enjoy.
• I would reach to cover that $18k difference just to own one of the last and best examples of Audi's amazing 4.2-liter V8. Variants of this eight-cylinder have occupied engine bays all across the Audi and Volkswagen brands since the early '90s, but are now being replaced by a supercharged 3.0-liter V6 and, when more power is needed, a twin-turbo 4.0-liter V8. The two remaining 4.2-liter V8s belong to the R8 and RS5, though they're far from the same engine. From what we've been able to cobble together of Audi's engine lineage, the R8's standard engine is a high-revving version of the 32-valve V8 that was initially used in the Q7. That engine was eventually upgraded with more advanced mechanicals and engine controls and modified to become the 5.2-liter V10 used in the last generations of the S6 and S8. The RS5's 4.2-liter V8 is a version of that V10 but with two fewer cylinders, making it closely related to but more advanced and powerful than the R8's older 4.2-liter V8.
• This engine revs like something with four fewer cylinders, which is fortunate considering how many revs are required to reach its high-for-a-V8 redline of 8,500 rpm. With all 450 horsepower not fully realized until 8,250 rpm and just 317 pound-feet of torque available from 4,000-6,000 rpm, you'll be working the 4.2-liter V8 hard to enjoy its full potential, but it's worth it when you hear the optional Sport exhaust system's baffles barking with every downshift in Dynamic mode. When not being worked, the RS5's engine reveals its ancestry as a luxury motor, quietly and effortlessly going about its job.
• I generally prefer coupes to convertibles, but the RS5 Cabriolet is an effective champion of topless motoring. Raising and lowering the roof is a simple single-button affair that takes no more than 20 seconds to go up or down and can be done while on the move at low speeds. A separate button, meanwhile, raises and lowers all of the side glass. The situation that won me over was cruising along a two-lane state route after the sun had dipped below the horizon but the air was still warm in the breeze. Messed up hair be damned, that was fun. While wind noise was obviously higher with the roof stowed, I was still able to carry on a phone conversation over Bluetooth.
• Would I choose the RS5 Cabriolet over the RS5 coupe? Sadly, no. While I would happily pay for the joys of the RS5 over the more affordable S5, the $9,000 premium required for the convertible is one that's too dear considering my proclivity for coupes. That, however, is a subjective judgment call we all make when faced with the decision of coupe or convertible. The real question lies outside the Audi fold, where BMW and Mercedes-Benz offer equally compelling, powerful and expensive convertibles.

2013 Audi RS5 Cabriolet originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 29 May 2013 14:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• Since the Cruze Diesel has the Jetta TDI squarely in its targeting computer, allow me to start off with a tale of the tape for the two engines. Chevy's diesel displaces 2.0-liters, makes 151 horsepower and 264 pound-feet of torque (with an overboost mode that allows for brief moments of 280 lb-ft), consumes an EPA-estimated 46 miles per gallon on the highway and 27 in the city, and launches the Cruze from 0-60 miles per hour in 8.6 seconds. The Jetta TDI has a similar 2.0T diesel, with 140 hp and 236 lb-ft of torque, is rated at 42 mpg highway and 30 mpg city, and will 'sprint' to 60 mph in 8.7 seconds (with DSG transmission). Chevy only offers a six-speed automatic with the Cruze Diesel, while VW will sell you a six-speed manual or a six-speed dual clutch gearbox.
• Turn the key on the Cruze Diesel and, if the windows are down, you'll hear a rather loud, clattering noise from the engine bay, at idle. The sound isn't worse than other small diesels we've heard, but it is surprising since the sealed-cabin quiet of the Cruze is remarkably high. With loads of attention paid to refinement at speed, the Cruze is all but silent on the highway (there's some wind noise), and the exhaust note only intrudes when approaching the 5,000-rpm redline.
• Power from the diesel engine feels super strong from even very low revs, as is expected, I guess. Peak torque is available at just 2,600 rpm, and a full 250 lb-ft can be had over the broad expanse between 1,750 and 3,000 rpm. Much like the Jetta, the Cruze isn't fast from a dead stop, but the acceleration from middle to high highway speeds (60 to 80 mph, let's say), is fantastic.
• I drove or rode for about 90 miles in total over this very short preview program, but early returns on the fuel economy are good. Cruising at around 75 mph on the highway saw the fuel econ meter settle at around 44 mpg after just 15 miles, so my guess would be that the estimated 46 mpg or better is easily within reach. (We know from experience that more than 50 mpg is was possible with our long-term Jetta TDI.) On the second leg of our trip, which started on country roads and headed back to the highway, I saw roughly 30 mpg after starting really aggressively and then settling into speed-limit driving around 40 mph. Again, with an EPA City rating of 27 mpg, I'd guess that the Cruze is set to have better real-world numbers than its window sticker would suggest.
• The overall ride characteristic of the Cruze matches its noiseless cabin, insofar as the car really smoothed out the road underneath me. I drove over some pretty broken down Michigan backroads in the car, and found that only the worst potholes and pavement breaks filtered through the softish suspension setup.
• That softness in the suspension, combined with low rolling resistance tires, meant that when I did try to corner aggressively in the Cruze I was met with a lot of vertical motion from the corners and loss of grip. The small Chevy does have a nicely balanced front-wheel-drive chassis for the most part, but handling is only satisfying up to a warmed-up point.
• In all, I think that the new Cruze Diesel presents an interesting counterpoint and alternative to the Jetta TDI, without being dramatically better or worse than the default diesel standard bearer. You can buy the Jetta for a cheaper starting price at $23,055 with no options, but Chevy has, for better or worse, piled on a good amount of kit to its $24,885 basic Cruze Diesel. That sum (plus another $810 for destination) will get you remote keyless entry and start, heated front leather seating, MyLink with Bluetooth connectivity and a touchscreen interface, 17-inch aluminum wheels and more. I think that the 2LT package ($380 for power, heated mirrors, rearview camera, etc), the $795 navigation option and the $100 option for a heated oil pan (great for cold starts) are really good values, too.
• What you get with the Jetta is an ever-so-slightly sportier package (thanks mostly to the better manual/DSG transmission options) and a little bit more brand prestige in the minds of most buyers. This diesel Cruze will need some time to penetrate the land of enthusiasts and diesel geeks, I'm guessing, but it's a fine sedan in its own right, and worth at least a look from even the most ardent TDI supporter.

2014 Chevrolet Cruze Diesel originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 24 May 2013 14:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• The stock armored Humvee (M1165 in military speak) borders on pathetic in terms of ergonomics, passenger comfort, and overall drivability. Not to be confused with its barely civilianized Hummer H1, the archaic military Humvee was unquestionably the most miserable vehicle I have ever piloted on public roads. Outward visibility, through brick-thick bullet-resistant glass was pulse raising. In stock form, acceleration was dangerously slow and throttle response frighteningly lethargic. Once moving, the heavy body oscillated back and forth as it floated on its squishy off-road tires (in a motion mimicking trailer sway). Hitting the brake pedal initiated a lot of grinding noise and only mild deceleration, as the inboard disc brakes howled while fighting a losing battle against inertia. I exited the M1165 covered in nervous sweat, verbally praising the troops who are forced to drive it daily under far less desirable conditions.
• Banks works its magic on the Humvee in several different ways. To improve breathing, the company fits a new intake and a wastegated turbocharger. A large air-to-air intercooler keeps the charge temperature down, while new injectors (and a new injector pump) ensure fuel flow isn't an issue. A monster exhaust finishes off the power improvements. Another important upgrade is the exhaust brake, aptly named the Banks Brake, which uses the engine to supplement the mechanical brakes and slow the vehicle.
• The modified Banks Humvee was noticeably lighter on its feet (likely strong enough to run neck-to-neck with a 1977 Mercedes-Benz 240D). Twice as quick is a huge improvement, and I was visibly more comfortable pulling into moving traffic. Running acceleration, from 40-60 mph, drops by half as well. This meant around-town throttle response was decent, and not a white-knuckle affair. The Banks Brake was set to automatically slow the Humvee each time I lifted off the accelerator (it reminded me of regenerative braking, but without any additional external noise as our soldiers prefer to arrive silently). Combined with the disc brakes, stopping distances were greatly improved.
• Like the aging B-52 long-range bomber, the multi-purpose Humvee will be in service for many more decades as the military conjures up ways to sustain the program. Age and expanded roles have burdened the original light utility. Nevertheless, my initial impressions say that the Sidewinder Turbo system from Banks appears to provide a necessary shot of adrenaline to a vehicle desperately in need of vitality.

Banks 6.5L Humvee originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 22 May 2013 15:01:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• The 5.0 V8 never gets old. 420 horsepower and 390 pound-feet of torque are delivered with satisfying linearity, as the Coyote motor spins up to redline far quicker than you'd expect for an engine of this displacement. Sonically rich, with just a hint of a hard edge to the exhaust over 5,000 rpm and a satisfyingly lazy rumble at idle, the soundtrack is pure enthusiast driving pleasure at most speeds. Oh yeah... on the first day I had the car I was reminded that the 5.0 Mustang is fast as all hell, too. Don't let its ubiquity fool you, this is a serious performance machine.
• The six-speed manual trans is quite substantial, with a positive, metallic click heard when shifting through the range. The gates are nicely spaced and the throws short. I generally enjoy using this beefy gearbox, though when trying for really fast changes - especially downshifts - a lighter, more accurate action would be appreciated. Clutch action is pretty low effort and progressive, and with so much torque that it's simple to get the GT moving - gently or in a cloud of smoke as your taste and situation dictate.
• As I mentioned, the Mustang I drove was equipped with Ford's excellent GT Track Package. For $2,450, the track pack feels like an excellent value for weekend racers or drivers that might want to upgrade their GT substantially down the road. The options group contains a little bit of what made the Boss 302 cool, in a Bossless model year. (Automobile web editor Evan McCausland quipped to me that the test car I had was, "more of an assistant manager" than a Boss, which is about right.) The most noticeable equipment you'll get if you spec your Stang this way are the larger Brembo brakes and the Torsen helical diff with its more aggressive 3.73:1 rear axle. In a week filled with random quick corners and side-trips to back roads, I can attest that all make the GT feel a lot more sports car-like than less-endowed base GTs. For actual track work, the package's upgraded radiator (from the Boss 302) and engine oil cooler should help keep internals cool, as well.
• Not part of the track pack, my car also had optional ($1,595) Recaro cloth racing seats. A far cry from the fully stuffed leather chairs I'm used to seeing in media-fleet Mustangs, I ended up falling in love with these Recaros. The fabric they're trimmed with is simple without looking downmarket, and the bolsters help them grip the driver firmly without squeezing too hard at the hips. Even my XL frame was a good fit. I'll admit that after about 150 miles, I was feeling the frame dig into my thighs a little bit - these probably aren't the best road trip seats - but for everyday driving or canyon road bombing, they're superb.
• On that same road trip, I should mention that I had no trouble hitting the EPA-estimated 26 miles per gallon on the highway... if I set the cruise right around 70 miles per hour. At a more normal (for me) 75 or 80 mph, the econ drops to about 21 on the interstate. In town I was seeing roughly 11 mpg, though admittedly I was keeping the revs high quite a lot to better hear the exhaust. I think the 17 mph city estimate is doable, if you're willing to blandly shift up into fourth a lot.
• Outside of the great seats, this interior is starting to feel pretty dated. With no navigation screen especially, there's no end to the gray and black plastic you seen in front of you. Accessing SYNC via the standard radio's buttons and knobs is an atrocious way to navigate your digitally stored music, and the voice commands feel utterly unwieldy compared to newer systems like Cadillac CUE. (Dan Roth's, Chris Paukert's and Consumer Reports' protestations to the contrary, CUE feels positively visionary after a week with this low-end, touchscreen-less SYNC.) Both iPhones and iPods were randomly spurned as "not recognized" devices; even after working the time before. And even when I could get my music to play, the sound system managed to sound both underpowered and badly voiced. It's a good thing the V8 soundtrack doesn't get old.

2014 Ford Mustang GT originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 17 May 2013 14:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• For starters, the LS hybrid mates a 5.0-liter naturally aspirated V8 to a 165-kilowatt electric motor. The gasoline engine on its own is good for 389 horsepower and 385 pound-feet of torque, and with the electric motor factored in, Lexus states that the total system output is a robust 438 hp. (All of that, by the way, resides in what editor Zach Bowman refers to as the "world's saddest engine bay.")
• That makes for one quick sedan, even here with all-wheel drive and a hefty 5,159-pound curb weight. Hitting 60 miles per hour takes 5.5 seconds, and top speed is limited to 130 mph.
• Hybrid or no, as you'd expect with a package like this, fuel economy isn't exactly stellar. The EPA rates the LS 600h L at 19/23/20 miles per gallon (city/highway/combined). My average over the week was 19.2 mpg.
• For comparison, let me introduce you to the non-hybrid LS 460 L AWD, powered by a 4.6-liter V8 that makes 360 hp and 347 lb-ft of torque. Compared to the 600h, the 460 is slower to 60 mph by 0.4 seconds and its fuel economy numbers are 16/23/18 mpg. That's right: The highway economy number is the same as the hybrid, and the combined rating is only reduced by two mpg.
• Lexus does call the LS 600h L a performance hybrid, so rather than it being a more efficient version of the flagship sedan - sort of the way a Mercedes-Benz S400 Hybrid is really just a more frugal S550 - this electrified LS is supposed to be the zenith of the line, offering the most power, quickest acceleration, and top-level refinement.
• Thing is, it's not all that good to drive. Even with the Drive Mode Select button toggled to Sport S+, the LS 600h L delivers driving dynamics that are far closer to that of a Hyundai Equus than an Audi A8 or BMW 7 Series. It's a giant rolling couch, with vague steering, plenty of body roll, and a suspension that, even in its firmest setting, doesn't offer a whole lot of sport. Comfy and plush, yes, but hardly engaging.
• The interior is really where the LS excels, yet lags. It has every comfort and convenience feature you can imagine, the materials are top notch, and it's, well, Lexus quiet. But from a user standpoint, there are issues. I know that Audi's MMI, BMW's iDrive and Mercedes-Benz's COMAND aren't always peachy systems to use, but they at least offer more user-friendly controllers than the horrible mouse-like Remote Touch controller in the LS. Several passengers commented on this during my week with the car, each one of them failing to understand the point. Perhaps Lexus could bring that 12.3-inch screen out a little more and just make it a proper touchscreen interface.
• But here's where it totally falls apart: as-tested, the LS 600h L I drove stickered for $135,029, including $895 for destination and handling. Remember that LS 460 L AWD I mentioned earlier? The one that's not much slower and, in most cases, just as efficient as the hybrid? Option it up to the exact same levels of equipment as this 600h and it's still $34,749 cheaper. That's right, nearly thirty-five thousand dollars less.
• Or hey, check out the BMW 750Li xDrive sedan. It has 445 horsepower, gets 24 mpg highway, and completely loaded, is $20,000 less than the LS 600h L. And if efficiency really is your thing, allow me to introduce you to the Audi A8L 3.0 TDI that claims up to 36 mpg highway. It starts at $82,500.
• What we have here is car that is, in a vacuum, fine. Everything that it does, it does well enough. But not for this price. And certainly not when there are so many more attractive options for buyers in the segment. Regardless of your preference for power, efficiency or just straight-up luxury, there are better ways to spend your cash than on this LS 600h L.

2013 Lexus LS 600h L originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 15 May 2013 15:43:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• We have always harbored a desire to fall in love with this swoopy and well-proportioned roadster, but it still strikes us a bit like the way the over-designed Mercedes SLK now strikes us: a really nice lifestyle/reward car, with not much else going on.
• All BMW had on hand for us was this Z4 sDrive35is with its 335-horsepower, 3.0-liter TwinPower Turbo straight-six that also cranks to 332 pound-feet of torque, all spiffed up with the M Sport spa treatment and adaptive dampers. Things could be worse.
• If we were going to take the graying-chest-hair plunge and grab a BMW Z4, it would be this exact car. Otherwise, and despite all the positives of the newer 240-hp four-cylinder sDrive28i model, what's the point? This particular roadster needs its strong six-cylinder to give it some character.
• We would also be happier if this top-trim roadster could be equipped with the six-speed manual transmission that is offered on the aforementioned sDrive28i.
• The optional Valencia Orange Metallic paint does look a bit two-tone precious to us when the black folding hardtop is closed, but it's still a sweetheart to gaze upon.
• Looking at the standard Monroney sticker of $64,800 (the base sDrive28i now starts at $47,950) and then dragging our eyes down the hyper-extended list of optional add-ons until reaching our car's $75k-plus price estimate, one has to pause to take it all in. The Z4 35is is wonderful enough, but, man, it can cost a ton.
• Our 19-inch, $1,200 optional M alloys with Bridgestone Potenza RE 050A run-flat treads, combined with the speed-sensitive electric power steering and Servotronic assistance, made for a usually fine but occasionally woggy feeling under some circumstances. Through series of curves taken at real speed, there was, at times, a vagueness of trajectory, again leaving us with the feeling that BMW wants the Z4 in any trim to be a car of leisure.
• The adaptive M suspension package does help treat this vagueness from behind the wheel somewhat, but overall the various dynamic elements taken together create a slightly confused ride and handling experience for a sexy car that promises so much. Basically, the Z4 ends up feeling every bit of its 3,549 pounds. (For reference, a Porsche Boxster S weighs a tick under 3,000 pounds at its heaviest PDK curb weight and feels like even less than that.)
• Attempting to make up for any black marks on the Z4's resume is this model's sheer power and torque. That final "s" tagged on to the name certainly helps. And while we miss a manual option, the seven-speed dual-clutch transmission with paddle shifters is a sweet setup when its most dynamic mode is selected. However, we understand that BMW has no intention of even offering a self-locking sport limited-slip rear differential. Oh, well.

2014 BMW Z4 sDrive35is originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 14 May 2013 14:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• For starters, the 2.0-liter turbocharged engine is nothing like an actual drawback for the XF. Had I not known the joys of the 5.0-liter V8 in this car - if Jag had launched with the 2.0T as the base engine - I'd never label this as "the slow one." 240 horsepower and 251 pound-feet of torque are solidly competitive with turbo fours in BMW's 5 Series and Audi's A6, and the Jaguar feels just about as quick to get moving as that pair. I mostly didn't like the XF 2.0T when it came to initial acceleration, where the motor needs to get spinning to 4,000 rpm or so before you get any real thrust. Higher-speed passing is a bit less stressed, though still not particularly quick.
• Jaguar gives you a new eight-speed automatic transmission with which to modulate the power of the new 2.0T engine, too. There are manual and sport modes to go along with the default settings, but neither with hold the gear if you are taken with the spirit of wild adventure, and hit the redline. I found the standard shift logic to be, frankly, a bit jumpy around town. Some of my driving style comes in to play here, but the trans seemed almost overly eager to kick down, even if I wasn't mashing the throttle. Slow and fast acceleration are both accommodated well, but the middle speeds caused some mental hiccups in the software. Of course, this was all easily remedied; I simply used the paddle shifters when I wanted to be aggressive.
• Ride and handling were pretty smooth and stress-free, if not terrifically athletic. I've always thought that, for its size and class, the larger Jaguar XJ has always differentiated itself in a sporting way more than the XF. Middle-weight steering is pretty numb and slow to bring the nose around, in the unlikely event that you find yourself in a hard corner. You won't - I had to work myself up to it - as the engine does little to enliven one to seek out fast stretches of road. On the plus side, with the removal of V8, the XF has become almost Lexus-like in terms of quiet at speed. It's a characteristic that fits well with overall character of this 2.0 car, even if it makes the Jag a bit less enthusiastic than its German competitors.
• Here's something you do get with the XF that you won't get with the Bimmer or the Audi: noticed. The slinky XF sedan shape has been around long enough, that I forget that loads have people have never seen one. I drove some friends through downtown Ann Arbor, MI, during the University of Michigan's graduation weekend; no fewer than three passersby stopped to tell me what a nice car the XF was. I've never had that kind of response to an E-Class or 5er, for what it's worth.
• Let's talk price. The XF 2.0T starts at a class-competitive $46,975 (before delivery and destination). That's about a thousand less than a 528i, and a few thousand more than an A6 2.0T with Quattro. Now, my test car was optioned up to - make sure you're sitting down for this - $68,175. The biggest chunk of that $20k-odd glut of options is taken up by the $10,150 "20" Sport Portfolio Pack," which bestows the XF with a luscious set of wheels and a truly palatial interior. Music lovers might also be tempted by the $2,300 Meridian sound system, which I enjoyed listening to a great deal.
• Jaguar has set up an interesting lineup for the new XF, when I consider what's good and bad about the tweaked lineup. For starters, no matter how you spend your money, you're getting a car that's both beautiful and rather unique on the road. Optioning up the thing will be expensive, as it the case for most of the luxury class, but you can now really choose your poison if you've fallen in love with the XF. Should you want a powerful, sports-like sedan, lay off the options list and make sure you've got one of the forced-induction Vs under the hood - the V6 supercharged starts just over $50k. If you just like the deeply luxurious feel of the high-spec XF, don't sweat getting this perfectly adequate turbo-four engine, and enjoy the hell out of your big wheels, soft leather seats and banging audio system.

2013 Jaguar XF 2.0T originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 10 May 2013 15:01:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• Mercedes' new 2.1-liter turbo-diesel engine is good for a healthy 200 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque. This is the first application of Merc's new four-pot diesel here in the US, but we'll soon be seeing it in the E-Class later this year. Compared to the GLK350, the diesel engine has 102 less horsepower but 96 more foot-pounds of twist. What's more, the torque thrust is delivered at just 1,600 rpm in the BlueTEC, compared to 3,500 rpm in the GLK350.
• That said, the GLK250 is significantly slower off the line than its naturally aspirated counterpart. Hitting 60 miles per hour in the BlueTEC takes 7.9 seconds, compared to only 6.4 seconds in the GLK350. Of course, the diesel model is slightly heavier than its petrol-drinking kin - 4,321 pounds here versus the 4,079 of a 4Matic-equipped GLK350.
• Where you really win, though, is fuel economy. Mercedes-Benz rates the GLK350 4Matic at 19/24 miles per gallon (city/highway), but the BlueTEC increases those numbers to 24/33. That bests all other competitors in the class, for now. (Remember, there's an Audi Q5 TDI on the horizon...)
• On the road, the 2.1-liter diesel is perfectly matched with the more relaxed dynamics of the GLK. Even with the more powerful 3.5-liter V6, this CUV isn't one to be hustled, but we rather like the refined characteristics of the Merc from behind the wheel.
• There is a very small amount of turbo lag at takeoff, but once you hit the meat of the torque band, you'll never be at a loss for power. The seven-speed automatic transmission is a smooth operator, and has a sport mode that's more eager to fire off downshifts for spirited driving.
• Steering feel is generally good, but doesn't offer as much feedback as a BMW X3. That said, the suspension is extremely well-sorted for a small luxury CUV application, providing just the right amount of feedback without ever being too abrasive, even on these large 19-inch wheels wrapped in 235/50R19 Continental 4x4 Contact tires. The brakes, however, feel weak in this GLK. You really need to sink your foot deep into the pedal to achieve adequate stopping force.
• The interior of this GLK is as nice as it ever was. Thanks to that upright, boxy shape, and a tall glasshouse, the cabin feels very open and airy, especially with the shade retracted on that panoramic sunroof. It's an attractive interior, too, even in the dark hues of our tester. Everything is nicely organized and material quality throughout is nothing short of premium.
• Naturally, a full host of infotainment and safety technology is available, including Mercedes' MBrace2 system. The interior is quite functional, too, with spacious rear accommodations and up to 54.7 cubic feet of storage with the bench folded flat.
• The GLK250 BlueTEC 4Matic starts at $38,590, which falls in the middle of the $37,090 GLK350 and $39,090 GLK350 4Matic. Our fully optioned tester rang in at $50,485, and before you guffaw, know that an Audi Q5 Hybrid starts at $50,900 - that's without a single option box ticked.
• Considering the cost savings over the GLK350 4Matic and the huge bump in fuel economy, we don't expect that the average GLK buyer will miss the added off-the-line oomph of the 3.5-liter engine all that much. This BlueTEC model is easily the best GLK yet.

2013 Mercedes-Benz GLK250 BlueTEC 4Matic originally appeared on Autoblog on Mon, 06 May 2013 14:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• The V12 engine provides thrust levels that are more common to small jets. Despite the large displacement, there is slight turbo lag as the turbochargers build up their 22 psi of boost. Once pressure hits, a fraction of a second later, the driver plays spectator to a ferocious battle between the engine and electronic traction control system as the 4,940-pound coupe launches to 60 miles per hour in about 4.2 seconds. Triple digits on the electronic display arrive effortlessly and its passing power leaves everyone giggling. The engineers have restricted its terminal velocity to only 186 mph, apparently to prevent it from going into orbit.
• Mercedes calls the CL65's Active Body Control (ABC) underpinnings "arguably the most advanced suspension in production" as its hydraulic systems actively control squat, roll, vibration, pitch and dive during maneuvers - it even mitigates the effects of crosswinds. Despite its AMG-calibration, and a near lack of body roll, the suspension never felt harsh or rough. Truth be told, it was actually much softer and more comfortable than we had expected it to be.
• Twin-sliding front calipers, over 15.4-inch perforated rotors (the holes are cast in place), provide confident levels of stopping power and look great inside the forged 20-inch wheels. The high-performance tires are 255/35R20 front and 275/35R20 rear, with wide contact patches that contribute to stability. Those meaty rubbers are needed to keep the heavy coupe planted on the pavement, but noise from the tires annoyingly permeates the cabin on certain road surfaces.
• Four adults will fit comfortably inside the CL65 AMG. Front passengers have an enormous amount of room to stretch out, but backseat passengers will need those up front to move forward a bit for the most comfortable accommodations. We marveled at the fit and finish, but would pass on the slick steering wheel and gloss black trim in favor of carbon fiber or wood.
• The CL65 AMG feels more athletic and slightly more nimble than the strapping Bentley Continental GT, but not as agile and spry as the smaller and lighter Aston Martin DB9. The Mercedes-Benz CL-Class is a better four-passenger vehicle than both of its competitors, but its discreet badging may not warrant the same attention from an ignorant valet - lest it be confused with a visually similar CL550 - possibly damaging a fragile ego.

2013 Mercedes-Benz CL65 AMG originally appeared on Autoblog on Thu, 02 May 2013 15:44:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• It weighs 4,774 pounds, nearly 550 kilograms more than the 3,573-pound SLS AMG GT. The weight difference comes from the heft of the lithium-ion battery array, composed of 12 modules of 72 cells that weigh 1,208.1 pounds. The batteries change the weight balance of the coupe by one percent: the SLS AMG GT is balanced 54/46 front-to-rear, the Electric Drive is 53/47.
• It's an energetic beast: The 400-volt, liquid-cooled, 60-kilowatt-hour battery is rated at 552 740 horsepower and 737 pound-feet of immediate torque. According to Mercedes PR, that makes it "the most powerful AMG high-performance vehicle of all time." The run from stationary to 60 miles per hour takes 3.9 seconds, top speed is limited to 155 miles per hour and range is pegged at 155 miles. For comparison's sake, take the aforementioned SLS AMG GT with its 6.2-liter V8 blending up 583 hp and 479 lb-ft that gets from naught to 60 mph in 3.7 seconds and will run out of acceleration at 197 mph. Also compare the Electric Drive to the philosophically similar Tesla Roadster (a two-seat electric sports car) that weighed 2,723 pounds, had a 53-kWh battery, 288 hp, 273 lb-ft of torque, a 245-mile range and performed the same sprint in the same time. But remember, we're just putting these cars on a piece of paper together to see where they fall; the SLS AMG Electric Drive has zero interest in being a Tesla or its GT kin.
• Those batteries juice four synchronous electric motors - a pair in front and another pair in back that sit astride the center line of the car, each pair flanking a single-speed, direct-drive transmission. In front, the setup necessitated a new multilink suspension with horizontal pushrod dampers replacing the aluminum double wishbones of the standard car.
• The AMG Drive Unit knob takes its usual place and is inscribed with its usual markings: C for Controlled Efficiency, S for Sport and S+ for Sport plus. They alter the linear, straight-line driving characteristics by changing the amount of power delivery: the coupe uses 60 percent of its power in Comfort, 80 percent in Sport and the whole shocking lot of it in Sport plus.
• Behind the AMG Drive Unit are the buttons for ignition and traction control. The next illuminated circle is the AMG Torque Dynamics button, which has three settings for altering the cornering dynamics. Each wheel can be driven and retarded by its dedicated motor to optimize the vehicle's cornering properties - go into a tight right-hander and the right-side wheels are slowed down to expedite the pivot. The three settings provide conspicuous differences, each step up delivering tighter cornering and wider tail-sliding latitude than the rung below. At its sportiest, the 4,774-pound coupe becomes freakishly capable through high-frequency trials like the slalom.
• Behind the Torque Dynamics button is one for AMG E-sound. Potential customers told AMG that they wanted the same kind of aural feedback in the SLS AMG Electric Drive as they get in their gas-powered rides. The result is an augmented whine that we thought not only hard to parse from the other various whines of the electric powertrain, but unnecessary and a refusal to embrace the future-fantastic nature of the car. You can listen to it in the Short Cut video below.
• The steering wheel is affixed with paddles, but they don't change the single gear. Rather, they let you choose any one of four levels of brake regeneration. When you lift off the throttle at the max setting, the car responds as if you were giving the brakes in a traditional car a not-inconsequential push.
• It's a hoot to drive, satisfying not only because of its performance, but also in how far away that performance is from convention: It feels like a high-dollar sportscar, goes like a hi-performance sportscar, corners like a much lighter hi-performance sportscar and sounds like a desktop computer. There are a jillion different ways Mercedes could have built an electric sportscar, and the SLS AMG Electric Drive represents an approach from the "fabulously berserk" end of the spectrum. Still, all of its components utilize current technology, so there's no reason they couldn't tone it down and produce an electric-drive version of the next-generation C63 AMG. Hint...
• The price in Germany will be 416,500 euros (about $544,000 US). Buyers might as well add $10,000 for the 22-kilowatt quick-charger wall box. Otherwise it takes about 20 hours on a 220-volt plug, and that's just silly.

Continue reading Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG Electric Drive [w/video]

Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG Electric Drive [w/video] originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:57:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• The size of the Tacoma is nice. While fullsize trucks can feel a bit like the automotive equivalent of relaxed-fit jeans, the Tacoma does the Goldilocks "just right" thing for my purposes.
• Yet the cozy cockpit of the Access Cab I drove can become uncomfortably tight if you've got adults using the jumpseats regularly. If you travel in a pack, get the Double Cab. That goes double if you've got kids still in child seats, it's the better choice.
• You have to be really committed to buying a compact pickup to ignore the extra value that goes along with the usually useful size available in the hyper-competitive fullsize class. The Tacoma starts at $21,260 with a four-cylinder engine, but the one I drove was a V6 4x4 with an automatic and the $4,035 TRD Sport Extra Value Package, not to mention a few other options to drive the price up to $32,791.
• You do get a pretty heavily loaded Tacoma for your money, though. To compare, a Ford F-150 STX SuperCab 4x4 rings in at $32,145, but doesn't come with the navigation, hitch, cargo-management features in the bed, running boards and TRD Sport package goodies like foglights, hood scoop, TRD graphics, alloy wheels and specially tuned suspension of the similarly priced Tacoma.
• Still, the 4.0-liter V6 and five-speed automatic combo is just as thirsty here as a larger truck would be, returning only 18 mpg in my hands.
• Despite its big V6, the Tacoma feels sluggish, too. The 4.0 V6 in the Nissan Frontier feels a lot more eager.
• The interior was updated for 2012 too, getting water-resistant seat fabric with the TRD Sport package, along with black center console and door trim. It's hard plastic and shows scuffs easily, but it otherwise looks nice, and it's not like the rest of the class is any better.
• The classic Toyota small-pickup traits remain. You sit low to the floor with your legs splayed out a bit, just like you always have, and the steering is tight and direct. Keep your boot out of it, and the V6 and five-speed auto are smooth operators, too.

2013 Toyota Tacoma TRD Sport originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 14:59:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• Despite a passenger load of four and a hotel suite worth of associated luggage and travel paraphernalia (pillows, blankets, iPads, Nintendo DS, etc...) there was still plenty of room remaining within the Explorer's cabin. Nobody complained about a lack of shoulder room, legroom or a need for more personal space. Acknowledging today's digital needs, an assortment of outlets (including lighter plugs, USB and 110v household) meant everyone was able to keep their electronic devices charged while on the road.
• Power from the 3.5-liter Ecoboost was strong under nearly every driving condition, but I came to loath the significant torque steer off the line. If the throttle was floored while pulling away at a corner, the inside front wheel would briefly spin - absolutely maddening - revealing the Achilles Heel of its front-biased "Terrain Management" all-wheel drive system.
• Fuel economy was surprisingly good. Total trip distance was 691 miles. During the highway portions, where I cruised mostly between 70-75 mph, the Ford averaged 22.6 miles per gallon. During the climb into Yosemite, driving the scenic valley and climbing back out, the onboard computer registered 20.4 mpg. We never dropped into the teens.
• The Explorer Sport drove like a big front-wheel drive sedan. Even with the firmer suspension matching European touring levels, there was nary a complaint about harshness or ride quality from my family. Straight-line stability at high speed was excellent, and the cabin was acoustically quiet, making long-distance travel effortless. The tight route into Yosemite, on twisty California 41, was a pleasure thanks to the Sport's accurate (but lifeless) steering, lack of body roll and high level of grip - no squealing tires. Much to the dismay of my passengers, I enjoyed mile-after-mile of this slalom exercise.
• Everyone found the MyFord Touch interface infuriating. Aside from the unattractive finger prints on its screen and its unintuitive interface (why does it require a series of inputs for even the most basic of functions?) the touchscreen was difficult to use while driving and it didn't always immediately respond. The capacitive-touch interface controlling the audio and HVAC was even more frustrating. My radar detector and iPhone cable kept brushing against the buttons and eerily changing the cabin settings. To circumvent the annoyance, I wrapped the cords awkwardly around the wiper stalk.
• In the category of other gripes, I found the exterior mirrors were too small for a vehicle of this size. Even with the assistance of Ford's Blind Spot Information System (BLIS), I was constantly moving my upper torso around in the seat to double-check blind spots and surrounding traffic. Plus, the halogen projector-beam headlights were inadequate and dim, especially at higher speeds. My thumbs were too big for the steering wheel controls (causing a few accidental phone calls) and the vents don't allow the air to be deflected upward.
• Nevertheless, the good greatly outweighed the gripes during our trip, and it left us all with a new appreciation for Ford's unibody utility. While its doesn't possess the Olympic muscle or agility of an SRT8, X5 or Cayenne - I never assumed it would - the Explorer Sport is as comfortable, competent and athletic as any family will ever need on public roads. It goes on my recommended list.

2013 Ford Explorer Sport originally appeared on Autoblog on Thu, 04 Apr 2013 15:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• After a brief walkaround/history lesson, the two-man crew with the 1910 Benz 21/80 Prinz Heinrich got to work getting the car started. The first step is delicately removing the engine cover and priming the engine with a hectane fuel. Then comes the hard work. While one man adjusts the various steering-wheel controls and foot pedals, the other stands in front of the car to crank the engine over. It took four good attempts at the hand crank, but the 80-horsepower, four-cylinder engine finally came to life with fuel leaking on the ground and the exposed cylinder valves clattering away. Life was good!
• With the big Benz running, I hopped in the back seat... almost literally hopped. Back in the day, the car's single-piece, wheel-to-wheel running boards helped occupants get in the car, but you simply don't step on the freshly painted metal of a 103-year-old car. Getting into the back seat was a feat requiring athleticism and flexibility, but once in, it was like being transported a century back in time. There's just something very majestic about being chauffeured around on a cool Florida afternoon in a car with a suicide shifter.
• Taking off was no easy task either. As the driver started to work the gas and clutch pedals, it felt like we were rear-ended by another car to get our forward momentum kicked off. Once up to speed though, there is nothing as exhilarating as driving through a neighborhood with the wind in your face watching as local residents and motorists alike do double, triple and quadruple takes of the car before letting out a grin and a friendly wave.
• One of the requirements for the Prinz Heinrich racecars was that they must be production vehicles with seating for four passengers. Now while I'd like to tell myself this was one of those "bendable" racing rules, it's more likely just a telling sign that passenger size and personal space have both grown exponentially over time. I was obviously also a little taller than most 1910s-era passengers as the majority of my useable legroom was taken up by the spare tire, but some slightly banged up knees were more than worth it for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
• The driving route we took was along a standard side street, but at times it felt like the car was driving over whoopty doos thanks to its four-wheel leaf spring suspension, massive wheelbase and the fact that the rear passenger - me - was positioned directly over the rear axle. During this ride, we got up to around 40 miles per hour, but the car's handlers said that it is more than capable of hitting triple-digit speeds. Achieving such high speeds would surely have been thrilling in its time, but I can only imagine that things would get a little hairy every now and then considering that the car only has rear brakes.
• Just sitting still, the Benz 21/80 Prinz Heinrich was imposing. About as long as the GL-Class we pulled up in, this car was painted in a dark green hue accented only by subtle pinstriping and various racing decals and badges. One interesting part of the car was its added nose piece, which I was told helped improve aerodynamics and controlled air flow to the radiator. The simple cockpit of the car featured just four gauges - we couldn't figure out what any of them were used for - mounted into the wooden firewall (how ironically dangerous does that sound?).
• As exciting as it was to ride as a passenger in this timeless car, it was almost as fun to see it on display at Amelia Island the very next day alongside another Prinz Heinrich car - a privately owned car that eventually went on to race in the very first Indianapolis 500.

Continue reading 1910 Benz 21/80 Prinz Heinrich [w/video]

1910 Benz 21/80 Prinz Heinrich [w/video] originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 02 Apr 2013 15:01:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

• Despite its omnipotence, the S65 looks rather low-key and almost indistinguishable from its siblings. Observers will note the "V12 Biturbo" badging on each front quarter panel and the "S65" on the rear decklid. Those with really good eyes will catch the slight difference in the horizontal slats on the S65's front grille (three twin-parallel slats, upgraded from four thick bars). Most all of the other sporty cosmetic enhancements are shared with the S63 AMG.
• It is impossible to defeat the traction control on the S65 AMG, meaning mile-long burnouts aren't going to happen. While acceleration off the line was dizzying, the real fun happened above 50 mph when the explosive power under the hood spooled to its full potential (it's a treat to watch the traction control light blink at highways speeds). An illegal coast-to-coast run at 150 mph would be joyful and effortless, but I would hate to foot the fuel bill (or pay the fines).
• Of course, the S65 will never feel as nimble as smaller sedans, but its active suspension was more than competent through every series of curves I tossed it into. There is no getting around two-plus tons of mass, but the aggressive staggered tire package (255/35ZR20 and 275/35ZR20) provided plenty of grip at the limit. The unique twin sliding-caliper brakes fitted over cross-drilled rotors effortlessly bled off the speed with very good pedal feel. It is a very large and comfortable luxury sedan, yet it is still very entertaining to drive - much to my surprise.
• Those who couldn't care less about the S65's mechanical brilliance will find plenty to soothe their souls inside the cabin, as the opulence of a standard S-Class sedan has been turned up a full revolution on the dial. Supple seat leather is stitched, quilted and perforated (heated and cooled too) and the trim is polished to a mirror-like finish. Passengers in the second row will find leg crossing room, power seats and video entertainment. The cabin smells even better than it looks. I can't wait to see how the next S-Class looks and feels inside.
• As fabulous as the S65 AMG is, the enthusiast in me still prefers the S63 AMG. Its twin-turbo V8, exhibiting almost no turbo lag, is better suited to our stop-and-go congestion and restrictive speed limits in North America. It is slightly lighter, nearly every bit as luxurious, and it only gives up a tenth of a second in the 60 mph sprint. Plus, I can buy a new C63 AMG with the money I save.

2013 Mercedes-Benz S65 AMG originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 26 Mar 2013 14:59:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.