Bugatti Veyron
The Bugatti Veyron kicks sand in the face of every other supercar. But, says Ray Hutton of The Sunday Times, it’s easier to drive than you might think
This is the fastest, most powerful and most expensive production car in history. The Bugatti Veyron 16.4 will do 253mph, has an 8 litre 16-cylinder engine producing in excess of 1000bhp, and a price of £810,000.
Let’s think about that for a moment: 253mph is faster than a Formula One racing car or Concorde at the point of take-off. The Veyron’s power unit, open to the air behind the driver, is four times the size of the engine in your regular family saloon and, boosted by four turbochargers, 10 times as powerful. And the price is 50 times that of the average car.
Of course it doesn’t make sense. Nobody needs a Bugatti Veyron. But that doesn’t diminish its status as an ultimate in technology. It is a billionaire’s prized possession, the automotive equivalent of one of those hideously expensive Swiss watches. And it will be the stuff of dreams, the bedroom poster for a generation of young boys.
Everyone wants to know what it can do. Last week I was one of the fortunate few to find out first hand.
I drove the Veyron on motorways and mountain roads in Sicily and experienced it on the Enna-Pergusa racetrack. I reached no more than three-quarters of its top speed but that’s okay; my American colleague Csaba Csere of Car and Driver magazine had verified its 253mph maximum at the VW test track in northern Germany.
Within the limits of normal if lightly populated roads and sympathetic local police this is still a car that transcends previous experience; there has never been a 1000bhp production model. Yet it has none of the temperament of supercars that are derived from racing machines.
Climb in, press the starter button, engage D on the gear selector lever and off you go. Neither accelerator nor brake is fierce, the steering is accurate but requires no great effort. The engine dawdles if you want to, docile and undemanding, yet when a clear road opens ahead it is ready for acceleration that is beyond normal comprehension.
The Veyron can reach 62mph from a standstill in 2.5sec and 122mph in 7.3sec. When 0-60mph in 7sec is the mark of a quick car, this one is out of the world as we know it — all two tons of it.
When you press the accelerator to the floor — and you had better be prepared for the rocket-like response — the needle on a dial to the left of the instrument panel flicks round to 1001. It’s a power indicator and it has absolutely no use except to give the driver a sense of awe. It should be called a “boast gauge”.
The 240mph McLaren F1, the previous speed champion among road cars, is much lighter but was designed in the 1990s with a different philosophy that deleted all non-essential features, including many of the safety systems that VW made obligatory in the Veyron. The F1 is an expert’s car.
The Ferrari Enzo, Porsche Carrera GT and other recent pretenders to the supercar throne are essentially racing cars adapted for road use. The Bugatti Veyron is not intended for racing but holds a trump card compared with these: its seven-speed DSG transmission. It works brilliantly and contributes to the Bugatti’s ease of progress and level of driving refinement.
So, the best car in the world? It depends on your attitude. For all its phenomenal range of capability this is not a car for the shopping run (do billionaires go shopping?) or even a weekend away. Its boot can carry just a briefcase, the engine is always noisy, visibility anywhere but directly forward is restricted, it is more than 6ft wide and parking is a nightmare. Oh, and there are no roads where you can do 250mph.
You could also argue that a car that costs so much should be perfect. To do so would be churlish. The Bugatti Veyron 16.4 is a magnificent achievement.
VITAL STATISTICS
Model Bugatti Veyron 16.4
Engine type 7993cc, 16 cylinders in a W
Power/Torque 1001bhp @ 6000rpm / 922 lb ft @ 2200rpm
Transmission Seven-speed DSG, manual and automatic
Fuel/CO2 11.7mpg (combined) / 574g/km
Performance 0-62mph: 2.5sec / Top speed: 253mph
Price £810,345
Verdict Blows away all the other supercars
Rating Five stars
OPPOSITION
Model Ferrari Enzo (was £418,000; no longer available)
For Pure race technology made street legal
Against No creature comforts, brutal F1 gearshift
Model Porsche Carrera GT £321,093
For A remarkably civilised roadgoing racer
Against Tricky clutch and 603bhp is not enough
Page two: Just who is going to buy the beast?()Just who is going to buy the beast?
The Veyron has had a nightmare birth, and the company is being very cagey about its order book, report Joseph Dunn and Nicholas Rufford
This car was created by a boast. Ferdinand Piëch, the engineer who became the boss of Volkswagen, bought the rights to the Bugatti marque — famed for its racing machines and extravagant touring cars in the 1920s and 1930s — and decided to use it to demonstrate that the VW group could surpass all rivals in technology. He pledged the power and performance of the Veyron (named after Pierre Veyron, one of Bugatti’s most successful racers) would be unmatched.
Some called it “Piëch’s folly” and behind the jibe lies a nagging question. Will anyone buy it? Bugatti plans to make 50 a year and says its customers will be discerning individuals who want to own the highest expression of automotive technology. Supposedly the company has advance orders for between 30 and 40 Veyrons, but the customers’ identities are secret.
Reports that David Beckham and Ralph Lauren are among those who have paid the €300,000 (£205,000) deposit are untrue. Other names that have been mooted because they are wealthy car buffs include Sheikh Maktoum, founder of the A1 racing championship, Jay Leno, the American chat show host, and Bernie Ecclestone, the Formula One billionaire.
So far the only confirmed sales are to Piëch’s wife Ursula, who has taken delivery of No 7 (the chassis number is 007), and Thomas Bscher, Bugatti’s president, a racing driver turned banker who has been known to commute from his home in Cologne to Frankfurt at 200mph in a McLaren F1.
An American who reportedly netted millions from the sale of a publishing business was rumoured to have bought No 1 for his private collection and a second car as a runabout. Ricardo Puente is the former head of TransWestern which was the US’s largest independent publisher of telephone directories before it was taken over by UK-based Yell (publisher of Yellow Pages) earlier this year. Bugatti denied the claim and Puente could not be reached for comment.
Even if the Veyron does sell its production run, it may never make a profit or even break even. The cost of the project — another secret — is known to have taken its toll on Volkswagen, Europe’s biggest car manufacturer. The company has been hit by slowing sales, falling profits, cost cutting and a restless workforce, but the money lavished on the Veyron has been seemingly endless.
The engineering team responsible faced technical challenges it did not expect and at one time seemed unable to overcome. There was not enough room for the radiators and ducts needed to cool the W16 engine. No transmission existed that could cope with its monstrous torque. How could a car that could exceed 250mph in a straight line be made safe, stable and yet easily drivable on a wet and twisty road? And, coming from Volkswagen, the Bugatti had to meet the same safety, exhaust emission and durability standards as a Golf or a Polo.
The solutions, when they came, two years later than planned, made this an incredibly complex car. It has four-wheel drive, electronic traction and stability controls, a hydraulic system to lower the body and deploy a rear aerofoil at different angles depending on speed (and also act as an air brake for an emergency stop), ceramic brake discs reinforced with carbon fibre, titanium springs and exhaust system, and special ultra-wide Michelin run-flat tyres rated for 250mph.
Adding to the research and development costs, the car is being built in luxurious style in a French chateau converted into a state-of-the-art production line.
Such flamboyance during tough times has not played well with many VW shareholders and industry commentators, some claiming the project reeks of hubris. “The problem is that the whole idea is simply unsustainable,” says Garel Rhys at Cardiff Business School. “It is impossible for the car to make back the money that has been spent on it, and in this time of cheap imports from Asia threatening the profitability of a company like VW’s bread-and-butter cars, it is sheer madness.”
However, according to George Keller, a spokesman for Bugatti, the exercise is not just about prestige but also the technological advance the car will bring with it. “It is not necessarily about making money,” he says. “The whole philosophy behind the machine is more than that. It is about extending our brand and moving into areas that have never been explored before. There are plenty of people who want to spend €1m on a car — the market is full of them.”
Piëch will not want to be reminded of how Ettore Bugatti’s company was undone by his creation of the world’s ultimate luxury car, the Royale, an eight-cylinder 300bhp beauty that was introduced just in time for the Depression. Only three were sold. A few years after the second world war the company closed.
from: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/new_car_reviews/article578444.ece
1996-1997 Ferrari F50
In its early days, over 50 years ago, Ferrari built cars which could be used, with only a few minor alterations, for Formula 1 or Sportscar events or everyday on the street. However, as Formula 1 cars evolved, it became impossible for someone who was not a team driver or a collector capable of passing a series of private tests on the track, to take the wheel of a racing Ferrari. Ferrari decided to again give all its clients the chance for this experience. The F50 was the response to this technological challenge. Thanks to the research made possible by Ferrari’s vast experience in this field, producing over 45 racing models and over 120 GT and Sports models, the F50 was built to the same tolerances and with the same integrity as a Formula 1 car. The carbonfiber monocoque that enclosed the aeronautical rubber fuel tank, the V12 engine that acted as a load-bearing structure for the transaxle-rear suspension assembly, the pushrod suspension, and separate hand-braking system are formed on the basic principles of a racing car projected into the dimension of normal, safe use in all situations. The result was a car with a specific power output of 109 HP/litre and an extraordinary chassis that combined unbeatable performance with exact handling and ultimate safety even in unexpected or extraordinary circumstances.
Design
The Ferrari F50 was designed solely for its purpose: there was no styling in the normal sense of the word. The surfaces enveloped the mechanicals in a single sweep from the front air intake to the rear spoiler, volumes were kept to the minimum required by the project. Pininfarina succeeded in designing shapes that recalled the great prototype racers.
Aerodynamics played an important role from the beginning of the F50 project because: it was a highly advanced car in terms of performance; there was a link between the internal aerodynamic components (cross-flows) and surface layer flows; there needed to be a balance between aerodynamic loads in the dual configuration (Berlinetta and Barchetta) because of the high performance.
The body was built entirely from composite materials with carbon fiber, Kevlar and Nomex honeycomb molded in one of five available colours: red, red Barchetta, yellow, black and grey Nurburgring. On the Berlinetta version, the function of the integral hard top was to complement the structural elements. On the Barchetta version, the bodywork element incorporated the anchor points for two roll hoops. The engine was visible through part of the transparent, vented engine cover.
The chassis of the F50 was made entirely of carbon fibre, weighing 225 lbs and offering a torsional rigidity of 25,677 lbs-ft/°. Like a Formula 1 car, occupants sat in the central tub formed by the chassis, and the aeronautical rubber fuel cell was located in a protected position between the passenger tub and the engine and rear suspension. The result was in advanced driving position, with a front to rear weight distribution of 42:58. A load-bearing element, the F50’s engine acted as a support for the suspension, rear bumper and bodywork elements. To guarantee perfect suspension operation, the engine-transaxle assembly was rigidly attached to the chassis.
The suspension and engine-gearbox assembly were mounted via low-fatigue light alloy inserts co-polymerized to the chassis. To optimize the structure that made up the fulcrum of the entire system, even from the safety viewpoint, finite element calculation techniques were employed, using programmes that included sandwich elements and multi-ply shells, typical of laminated composite structures. Engineers and designers had to solve problems of the long-term stability of dimensional and structural elements. Tests were carried out on computerized vibration benches.
Drivetrain
In keeping with its brief as a Formula 1 car for the street, the F50 employed a naturally aspirated 4.7 liter narrow V12. The block was in nodular cast iron with Nikasil-coated liners. The seven main tri-metallic-bearing crank shaft was propelled by Mahle-forged aluminun pistons via titanium Ti6al4V alloy connecting rods. Lubrication was dry sump with water cooling. The Bosch Motronic 2.7 engine management system combineed electronic injection and static ignition.
The cylinder head had five radial valves per cylinder. This is an ideal solution for engines capable of high speeds that close valves pneumatically. The five valves (three intake and two exhaust) were smaller and therefore the flutter speed was raised above 10,000 rpm. A five-valve arrangement makes it possible to achieve a high degree of permeability of the intake ducts. The valves were driven by four overhead camshafts. The intake system was of the variable geometry type. The F50 was fitted with an insulated stainless steel exhaust system. A throttle valve driven by the Motronic control unit made two exhaust system lengths available, one was tuned to achieve the best torque values, the other was tuned for better performance at top speed and full load by reducing the back pressure on the exhaust.
The 6-speed longitudunal Ferrari gearbox was designed for short stroke rapid engagement. The synchronizers were ZF twin cone. The gearbox had a manual control with lever, selector fork and rod, and rigid shaft fitted on sliding couplings. The knob was in composite material.
The differential was of the limited-slip type, with a differentiated lock percentage in drive and release. The hydraulic actuated clutch was of the dry twin plate type with self-centering thrust bearing. A water-oil heat exchanger kept oil temperature constant. The gearbox housing was made of magnesium alloy.
Suspension
The length of the locating arms was chosen to keep track and camber changes to a minimum. The front and rear suspension had wishbones and reaction arms that act on spring and damper by way of a push-rod system. The dampers were specially developed by Bilstein. To guarantee the setup and maximum precision in wheel movement over the ground, all the joints linking the suspension to the chassis were rigid, as they are on racing cars. On the rear axle, the suspension arms were fixed to an intermediate element between the engine and the gearbox which acts as an oil tank, as it does in Formula 1. The length of the arms improved the contact between the wheels and the ground, considerably reducing sweep and improving roadholding. The hub carriers were made of a special hot-forged aluminum alloy, which increases rigidity and significantly reduces weight.
The front track was wider than the rear to promote understeer. The spring and damper control mechanism was linked to an electronic damper control system, managed by ECU based on lateral acceleration, the steering angle and longitudinal acceleration. Great care went into the definition of performance in terms of soft and hard handling. The damping control software processed the information received from a series of sensors mounted in the car. This resulted in the best damping in all conditions to optimize contact between wheel and ground, reducing the variations in ground load. Variations due to acceleration were also controlled by the system that reduced bodyshell movement to stabilize the aerodynamic efficiency and guarantee directional stability. Damping was also varied according to speed, independently of this system, making for greater comfort and improving performance at higher speeds.
Cast entirely in aluminum alloy, the steering box of the F50 was the fruit of many years’ cooperation with TRW.
Racing achieved its most extraordinary progress in the field of braking. The F50 offered the braking of a racing car with a system designed in cooperation with Brembo to incorporate four cast iron discs splined directly on the aluminum hub. The calipers were in alumimium with four large ground cylinders, like those used on Formula 1. The braking system was sized so that it would not need servo-assistance or ABS. Cooling was guaranteed by dynamic air intakes front and rear.
The rear wheel assembly, including Titanium hubs, incorporated a Ferrari Formula 1 patent. This system reduces the number and weight of components, and allows extension of the axle shaft reducing power absorption.
The F50’s single-piece Speedline wheels were made of a special magnesium alloy with single-nut central attachment. The choice of a size of 18″x81/2″ at the front and 18″x13″ at the rear, was dictated by the choice of large brake discs and low profile tires. Goodyear designed a special racing-based “Fiorano” tire specifically for the F50 in 245/35ZR18 front, 355/30ZR18 rear.
Interior
The interior was designed with efficient functionality, ergonomics, and safety in mind. The multi-sized composite seats were upholstered in Connolly leather and special “transpiring” material. The driving position was fully adjustable, including the pedals – the control pads adjusted to the driver’s shoe size – with an F1-type heelrest. The gear shift was the classic Ferrari unit, with gated selector, lever, and knob all in composite. The rearview mirror was shaped to improve visibility in both roof configurations. All controls were specially designed to guarantee ergonomy, and the environmentally-friendly climate control unit was designed for maximum comfort even when the car is open.
For racing use, the car has an FIA standard roll bar and 4-point seat belt attachments. The straight forward instrumentation emulated the system designed for contemporary F1. The instruments were managed entirely by an 8-bit microcomputer. The main LCD display had 130 elements and was lit by electro-luminescent bulbs. The major functions were the rev-counter and mileage counter. A panel of tell-tales was positioned to one side, with numerous ideograms representing various alarm signals. It also included a statistics bank incorporating a crash record that memorizes the various use and mission profile parameters of the car, a function that is similar to the concept of telemetric techniques. The gear engaged was calculated by matching engine rpm to the car speed, and is displayed on the panel.
from: http://www.topspeed.com/cars/ferrari/1996-1997-ferrari-f50-ar1952.html
2009 Hyundai Genesis Review
Introduction
What’s New – The Hyundai Genesis is an all-new vehicle for Hyundai, and is the company’s first V-8 rear-drive luxury sedan. It’s designed to be the equal of cars such as the Mercedes-Benz E-Class, and BMW 5 Series and Lexus GS sedans, but at a significantly reduced price.
Competes With: Chrysler 300, Pontiac G8, Lexus GS
What We Think – It’s not often that a car company knocks one out of the park as comprehensively as Hyundai has with the Genesis. It possesses the power, luxury and poise of a much more expensive sedan, with almost zero compromise. If this doesn’t change your perception of Hyundai, it’s likely nothing will.
Hyundai Genesis – 2009 Review: One of the neat things about being an automotive journalist is that once in a while, you get to see a real sea change. One of these happened 20 years ago, when Acura and later the Lexus and Infiniti brands debuted, altering our perspectives of what a luxury car could be, and convincing us that it didn’t have to bear a German nameplate.
Just a few days ago, we were there when another very similar event occurred. Once again, it was the debut of an exceptional luxury sedan, and again, it came from an unexpected source. This time around, the car is the 2009 Hyundai Genesis, and in its own way, it is just as significant a debut as the first Acura Legend, Lexus LS 400 and Infiniti Q45. Genesis is probably the most appropriate name the company could come up with, as the word is defined as the origin of something significant. With a 375-horsepower V-8, rear-drive, a roomy and luxurious interior and all the technology doodads you’d expect in a modern luxury sedan, the manufacturer makes no bones about offering Mercedes-Benz levels of luxury and performance at, well, a Hyundai price. Executives even talk about two levels of competition: price competitors such as the Pontiac G8 and Chrysler 300, and “image” competitors which include the BMW 550i, Lexus GS 460 and Infiniti M45.
Yet unlike Honda, Toyota and Nissan, Hyundai chose to introduce its new luxury car as a Hyundai, and not under a new luxury brand. Carrying that corporate logo on the trunk is a risky move, if there is any one X-factor to this car’s success or failure it may be that chrome “H.” While the Genesis is an excellent sedan by any objective or subjective measure, the fact that it shares the showroom and brand name with Accents and Elantras, may be hard for some to accept. In our opinion though, if luxury car buyers pass up the Genesis for that reason alone, they’re simply missing the point: Hyundai is doing more than just entering a new segment with the Genesis, it’s firmly establishing itself as a capable builder of high-end cars, something it has been building up to for some time now, even if you haven’t noticed.
from: http://www.autobytel.com/content/shared/articles/templates/index.cfm/article_id_int/2948
1997 Honda Prelude
We love the Prelude faithful. We admire their determination to do something with a model that’s never been an instant go-to choice for new or returning Honda heads. And even within the Prelude camp, most enthusiasts seem to gravitate towards the fourth-generation variety. Hence when we see a well-executed fifth-generation, the last Prelude to take a bow, we take notice.
The fifth-gen has never been a crowd favorite, but to us, it’s one of the best styled and most muscular of the family. It’s also the biggest and heaviest, a result of Honda continually throwing new technology until, at least to some minds (especially inside Honda), the Prelude lost its way. The lean, sporty coupe of the late 80′s/early 90′s had evolved into a thick, still performance-oriented slab by the end its run near the end of the decade.
Which is precisely why Alex Nguyen chose to build up a BB6.
“I’m a big fan of the NSX, but couldn’t afford it, and the S2000 wasn’t out yet,” Nguyen explains. “Everybody else was doing Civics and Integras. I had a DC myself. I guess [I picked the fifth-gen] just because no one else liked it. I wanted to do something new.”
His plan took shape when a friend gave up on his own Prelude project and offered up the parts he’d largely sourced from JHP and OTP Auto, including pistons, valve springs, camshaft, and a rear seat from a JDM Prelude Type S. “Once he gave up on the project, everything was for sale,” Nguyen says.
Nguyen and a friend assembled the motor in the garage of a friendly San Diego shop, Aero Cosmetics, and later added an intake from a JDM BB6, Mugen header and Tanabe Racing Medallion exhaust.
But there are a couple of things you can’t help but notice about Nguyen’s Lude. One of them is the deep and rich Nighthawk Black Pearl factory paint, with barely a sticker in sight but for the Mugen stripe running along the top of the rear quarter panel and door.
The second is the stance. Dropped more than two inches at all corners with Tanabe Sustec Pro SS adjustable coilovers and ending in silver 17-inch Mugen MF10′s, Nguyen’s Lude looks all muscle. The look intensifies when viewed from head-on, staring down the gullet of the Mugen front bumper and side skirts. Nguyen even fesses up to swapping in Mugen coilovers for track days, preferring the Tanabe kit for daily duties.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
from: http://www.hondatuningmagazine.com/features/0610_ht_1997_honda_prelude/index.html
2009 Jaguar XF Review
By Justin Berkowitz
March 7, 2008
Last month, U.S. Jag dealers sold just over a thousand new cars, despite cut-rate financing. While the entire U.S. car market is going South, Jaguar’s stuffy image is sending the venerable marque Hades-wise in a supersonic hand basket. The new XF midrange sedan is supposed to reverse these declining fortunes by burying memories of the bulbous, fusty, pudenda-fronted S-Type (not to mention the execrable X-Type). I grabbed an XF fresh off the transporter to see if Jag’s lobbing snowballs in Hell.
Let’s get this out of the way: the new XF’s design is a pale shadow of the C-XF concept’s drop dead gorgeous sheetmetal. We’re talking supermodel versus neighborhood bartender. The XF’s front end is a particularly boring transmogrification; it’s a little weird and the snout’s portal smacks of Volvo’s blandest. The central bonnet creases are a particularly classless affectation. In fact, you could say the XF is nothing more than a Volvo in a slutty dress.
The back end almost saves the day; it looks like an Aston Martin. It’s fantastic. But Ian Callum gets no props for designing the same car over (DB9) and over (V8 Vantage) and over (Jag XK coupe) and over (XF sedan). If Jaguar was going to show a scintilla of individuality, well, they could have hidden the door handles in the B- and C-pillars.
As for the XF’s interior, we’ve all seen the boring press pictures included here. The company’s PR photographer should be fired for not doing justice to this four-wheeled shrine to automotive luxury.
The XF’s interior’s fit, finish and materials are the best I’ve ever seen in a production car, without exception. If you’re the type of person that appreciates exquisite detailing of a fine watch, you can do nothing but marvel at the XF’s cabin. The wood trim in my optionless “Luxury” trim model could have been fashioned by a bespoke furniture maker. The matte finish is both unique and stunning.
The XF’s attention to detail dusts the usual standard bearer Audi. The vents rotate into view when you start the car up (royalty payment to V
olkswagen’s ill-fated Phaeton?). They boast aluminum inserts to move their direction, with the word “Jaguar” elegantly stamped on their surface. We’re talking about slivers of material the size of long grain rice. The same beautifully finished metal sits at the bottom of the cupholders. Every surface is sensuous to the touch. For once, a Jag/Ford product feels… finished.
Okay, so the exterior is lame, the interior is otherworldly. How does it drive? In a word: Yes. Yes as in the new XF drives as well as you’d hope any Jaguar would.
Jaguar wanted to build a luxury-sports car in keeping with its distinguished brand heritage– a tradition of which Larry the Law Firm Partner neither knows nor cares. What Larry does care about: beating the crap out of Bob’s Benz E350. And with this car, Larry’s good to go.
Jag’s 4.2 liter V8– a carry-over from the last generation S-Type– is the XF’s standard-fit powerplant. “But it only makes 300 horsepower! Lots of V6 engines do that!” Quit your bitching brand defilers, lest you taste the business end of my tassled loafers pushing you into an Acura RL. Even with “only” 300 horsepower underfoot, the entry-level XF accelerates from zero to sixty miles per hour in about six seconds. Besides, the Jaguar XF driving experience is fleet footed. The six speed auto is slicker than snot on a doorknob. The suspension feels buttoned down, with just enough feedback to keep it fun without being abusive.
There are downsides. While the XF is light on its toes, changing direction with confidence-inspiring predictability and hoon-compatible ease, it doesn’t have everlasting grip. Canst thou squeal like a porcine? The XF’s tires can. And the sport sedan’s steering is far too light for a car with genuine performance aspirations. But overall, driving the XF is like piloting a BMW without the e-Nanny hovering over your shoulder.
So much of this car is so right – the interior, the suspension, the engine and the transmission. Killer depreciation aside, the $50k asking price for a fully loaded V8 XF makes a mockery of the similarly-priced, stripped-out 535i. Unlike the Bimmer, Lexus or Audi equivalents, driving the XF makes you feel special.
It’s too bad that the mid-size Jag’s exterior went from a quaint retro curiosity to an OMG concept car to a quintessentially boring sedan. If Jag had found a way to keep the CX-F’s drama, they would have had a huge hit on their hands. As it stands now, all they have is a bit of time to kill before Ford sells Jaguar or, let’s face it, pulls the plug. Even as a swan song, the XF lacks the looks it needs to fly.
from: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009-jaguar-xf-review/
Nissan 300ZX Review
Quick Summary of the Nissan 300 ZX
Unearth an unmolested Nissan 300ZX and you’ll have a great driver’s car. No, they’re not particularly cheap to run and yes, there are lot of horrible examples around. Don’t let this put you off. As used proposition, the Nissan is probably the best of the big Japanese super coupes, combining road ability and affordability. Do your homework, look at a few and you could well net yourself a bargain. Watch your neighbour’s face turn green with envy from only £6,500.
ZED’S DEAD
Of the four Japanese super-coupes introduced at the start of the nineties, the Nissan 300ZX enjoyed the most success in the UK. The Mazda RX-7 was a bit too uncompromising, the Toyota Supra twin-turbo extrovert and the Mitsubishi 3000GT expensive and rather dull. The 300ZX, with its aggressive looks and competitive pricing, was a success from day one, and paved the way for newer and more expensive Nissan models such as the Skyline GT-R. Despite only being on sale for four years, the 300ZX achieved a remarkable feat. It made paying big money for a Nissan seem a reasonable course of action, something which had never previously been the case. To be able to change perceptions in this manner requires a seriously credible car.The 300ZX’s credibility was unquestioned. It was hailed as a return to the proper ‘Z’ car philosophy of the seventies, when Nissan Z models were lightweight, Porsche-baiting sports cars, but that may have been pushing things too far. Nevertheless, expectations were low after its frankly awful pair of predecessors, but the big Nissan confounded most cynics. As a used buy it’s possible to get a great car, but watch out for rogues. There are no shortage of ‘nails’ out there that you’ll want to avoid.
Used Nissan 300 ZX for sale
History of the 300 ZX
The Nissan 280ZX and 300Z models that preceded the ‘Series Z32′ 300ZXs were as poor a pair of big sports coupes as you could care to imagine. Overweight, dull, with chintzy interiors and cheesy medallion-man images, these cars thankfully live on only in the £150 Spares or Repair section of the small ads. It’s easy to note that the 300ZX didn’t have much of a task eclipsing these duffers, but the competition had raised the bar considerably during the development cycle of the 300ZX and it needed to be good. When the car was launched in 1990, the market contained some excellent sports models such as the Porsche 944 S2, Audi Quattro 20v and the Ford Sierra Cosworth 4×4. The Nissan scored straight away with its styling, which looked butch and muscular without crossing into crass caricature. The 300ZX changed little during its existence and the choices available were straightforward. All models were equipped with a Targa roof panel, and were available in either manual or automatic guise. In January 1992 Nissan (GB) came into existence and slightly changed the way the car was marketed. Instead of being offered as a manual car with an automatic option, Nissan switched it around. An optional luxury pack was also offered which included leather trim and CD player. The 300ZX then went unchanged until its premature demise in 1994, killed off by emissions regulations. For those who looked forward to a replacement Z-car, there would be a long wait.
Used Nissan 300 ZX for sale
Nissan 300 ZX Road Test
Genuinely hard to pick fault here. The ride on standard UK models is firm but with a degree of suppleness built in. Performance is brisk to say the least. Rest to 60mph in 6.6 seconds are the official figures and they may well err on the conservative. Top speed is comfortably over 150mph which is quick enough for most. Turbo lag is noticeable by its absence, but the turbos do make quite a whistle when 280bhp is being generated, hence the 300ZX’s affectionate nickname amongst Nissan enthusiasts – the flying kettle. The steering takes a little bit of getting used to, being very light at low speeds and firming up when on the move. The steering wheel controls all four wheels, with the rears moving in an opposite direction to the fronts at low speed and in a similar direction at higher velocities. The 300ZX does feel like a big car at all times, lacking the litheness of a Mazda RX-7, but it gets by on sheer bluff and bluster. Both transmission choices are good, though the automatics may be an indicator that the car has been owned by less of a gung-ho driver. The only real complaint is tyre noise at high speeds.
Used Nissan 300 ZX for sale
Buying a Nissan 300 ZX
The 300ZX is a car that rewards hard driving, and as such, despite it being a Nissan, costly problems can crop up in cars that have been neglected. The engine should be neither smoky or noisy, and white smoke from the exhaust coupled with weak acceleration usually spells the end for one or more turbochargers. Unless the car is offered for pin money that’s your cue to walk away. Tyre wear can be heavy, as the big Nissan is a fast, heavy car often driven beyond the limits of tyre adhesion. The power steering pump has been reported as problematic on early cars – check to see that it’s not leaking. Also look at the roof seals and check for water ingress. Lots of bargain priced 300ZXs will have come from Japan. You will also probably see the shorter wheelbase two-seater version, which is very attractively proportioned. Unfortunately many of these cars have been customised with rear spoilers visible from space and huge exhaust pipes that look like something from the deck of the USS New Jersey. They may also have been fitted with aftermarket engine control chips to boost power. Unless this is your thing, avoid these extremes as you will limit your resale market considerably. Although fundamentally sound cars, there’s a lot that can go wrong with an abused 300ZX, so if you want to avoid big bills in future buy as new as you can from as reputable a source as possible.
Used Nissan 300 ZX for sale
Nissan 300 ZX Typical Pricing
Despite the vast welter of Japanese import models that landed on these shores in the late nineties, UK-spec 300ZXs are still the best option. These cars start at just over £2,500 for the first of the 1990 cars. A 1991 J-registered car will be around £3,500 whilst a 1993 K-plated edition will be around £5,500. The last of the 1994 cars will be £8,000. These prices are for manual models; expect to pay another £200-£300 for the automatic version. If you are in the market for an import car, haggle hard for at least a 15% reduction on UK used values. Insurance for all models is Group 18.
Used Nissan 300 ZX for sale
Nissan 300 ZX Parts
(Estimated prices, based on a 1994 300ZX) Any premium sports coupe is going to be expensive to run, and the 300ZX is no exception. A clutch assembly retails for around £260, whilst a new exhaust system is over £500. The price of front brake pads will stop you in your tracks at £70 a pair, with rears costing £60. A new radiator will require you to stump up £275, while a starter motor is around the £250 mark. One of those headlamps is a pricey £235, but spare a thought for Diablo owners who fork out £877 for exactly the same unit from Lamborghini UK. Poor devils.
Used Nissan 300 ZX for sale
from: http://www.compucars.co.uk/car-reviews/nissan/review/?300zx
2009 Chevrolet Corvette Review
The Chevrolet Corvette is the great American sports car. It’s thrilling to drive, with breathtaking acceleration performance and exceptionally tenacious grip for hard braking and high-speed cornering.
Value isn’t the first thing that comes to mind when talk turns to the Corvette but, when it comes to high performance, it might be the best bang-for-the-buck deal on the planet. For the price of a midsize luxury sedan, the Corvette delivers supercar performance. It’s easy to drive on a daily basis and maintenance costs are not exotic.
We love the standard Coupe, with either the manual or Paddle Shift automatic. It quickly infuses a driver with confidence. Its brakes are fantastic. And, it’s blazingly fast. The six-speed automatic transmission works great and lives up to the advanced technology in the rest of the car; it can be shifted manually with levers on the steering column.
The Convertible on the other hand is plain wonderful. Drop the top on a nice day, pop in your favorite CD, and you might have what psychologists call a peak experience, a moment where you revel in being alive. It’s a fantastic feeling, and at those moments the Corvette more than justifies its price. The aural sounds of the burbling V8, the body-colored trim that surrounds the cabin, the feel of power beneath, it is automotive heaven.
The Corvette can be a reasonably comfortable daily driver in most locales, for at least three of the four seasons. The latest-generation Corvette is a sophisticated car, and its performance does not exact a painful toll on driver or passenger. And, with all that performance, it still gets an EPA-rated 26 mpg on the Highway, better than most SUVs.
The Z06 is a true supercar for a price that’s merely expensive, as opposed to insanely expensive. The Z06 is powered by the 7.0-liter 505-horsepower LS7 V8, has a lightweight chassis and is fitted with upgraded brakes. If any $70,000 car can be called a bargain, this is the one, at least in terms of raw performance. The Corvette Z06 accelerates faster, grips better and stops shorter than European sports cars that cost twice as much. And we find it easier to drive than a Viper. Indeed, it takes an expensive machine, well driven, to compete with a Z06.
Moving even further upward is the ZR1, a limited-production extremely high performance iteration that boasts a 6.2-liter V8 that’s supercharged and cranks out 638 horsepower and 604 pound-feet of torque. It is the most powerful, quickest, fastest, most capable and highest-performing production car ever built by General Motors, which also makes it the highest-performing Corvette ever built, and carries a hefty price tag of $103,970. According to Chevrolet, it has a top speed of 205 mph.
For 2009, changes to the Corvette line are minimal. There is a lower-priced Convertible, the 1LT, which makes it possible to have a Corvette Convertible for less money. The power convertible top is standard on the 2LT trim level and all versions above that. The Coupes have a standard power hatch pull-down. And there are some new colors inside and out and minor enhancements to trim and features. The Z06 has new 10-spoke alloy wheels and its engine has a bigger dry-sump lubrication system, with 10.5 quarts capacity instead of the former 8.0 quarts.
from: http://www.autobytel.com/content/shared/articles/templates/index.cfm/article_id_int/6533
2006 Audi S4
- CNET editors’ rating: 4.5 stars Outstanding
Detailed editors’ rating- Comfort: 9.0
Performance: 9.0
Design: 9.0
Overall score: 9.0 (4.5 stars) - Average user rating: 4.0 stars out of 13 reviews
- See all user reviews
Product summary
The good: The 2006 Audi S4′s sophisticated V-8, mated to a solid six-speed manual, delivers steady power throughout its revs, while the Quattro system and associated electronics keep it on the road. And we like Audi’s MMI controls for infotainment functions.
The bad: The Bluetooth interaction with our phone was surprisingly limited in the 2006 Audi S4. Ergonomically, the brake pedal was a little high, and the driver armrest interferes with the hand-brake lever.
The bottom line: The 2006 Audi S4 commands a hefty premium over the standard A4, and although the cabin gadgets are similar, the performance gain is worth it. We had some minor issues, but overall, this is a top tech car.
Specifications: Body style: sedan ; Trim levels: quattro ; Available Engine: Gas See full specs
CNET editors’ review
- Reviewed by:
Mike Markovich
- Edited by:
Wayne Cunningham
- Reviewed on: 12/05/2005
The 2006 Audi S4 attempts to one-up the much-lauded BMW M3 by using the tried-and-true muscle-car practice of stuffing a larger car‘s V-8 under a smaller car’s hood. The current M3 may squirt to 60mph a hair quicker than the S4, but the cachet, not to mention the sound, of the V-8 under its hood will probably make happy buyers out of some would-be M3 customers.Under the hood, technology such as dual overhead camshafts, variable valve timing, and five valves per cylinder help the 2006 Audi S4′s V-8 churn out 340 horsepower. With Audi’s stalwart Quattro system driving all four wheels, the S4 remains composed and predictable, and electronic stability controls keep the power from overwhelming the tires on loose surfaces.
The face of the redesigned S4 features the signature Audi chrome-ringed grille, but the car is otherwise discreetly more masculine than the 2006 Audi A4 and pleasantly purposeful to behold. Sporting the bulging wheel arches of the new A4 but with rocker-panel cladding and a small rear spoiler, the S4 is different enough to be discernable but not showy. Our car’s understated Light Silver Metallic paint ($475) fit the confident character of the styling; brighter colors will likely make the wide snout stand out more.
With an MSRP of around $46,000 and our car’s as-tested price at $56,045, the 2006 Audi S4 is substantially dearer than the V-6-equipped A4, starting at about $36,000 for a Quattro. But the difference is both outwardly visible, if subtly so, and palpable from the behind the wheel. The S4′s combination of performance, style, and AWD controllability is well worth the upgrade.
The 2006 Audi S4 impresses with its interior, as we’ve come to expect from all recent Audis. Materials are good quality, design is tasteful, and the layout and feel of both the mechanical and electronic controls are highly satisfying, with the exception of the hand-brake lever. Overall, it’s a minor complaint, but the driver armrest sits over the lever, requiring the former to be lifted to move the latter.Immediately upon sitting in the bolstered Recaro sport seat and grasping the thick three-spoke steering wheel and leather-clad shifter, the driver anticipates an experience a step beyond that of the average sports sedan. The gauges are large and legible white on black, the speedo and tach separated with an information screen using Audi’s usual red digital LED.
The full-color main screen for the multimedia interface (MMI) is crisp, and the system’s combination of a main control knob with four surrounding contextual buttons works much better than the iDrive in the 2006 BMW 750Li we recently tested. Audi Navigation Plus ($1,950) offers clear maps, relatively simple settings, control, and display of the next route step on the smaller screen between the main gauges. A row of hard buttons beneath the screen makes switching between the various infotainment systems quick and easy.
Our car was spruced up with the Premium Package ($2,900): a glass sunroof; heated front seats; split spoke-design 18-inch wheels (different 18-inchers are standard); a HomeLink transmitter; autodimming mirrors inside and out; memory functions for seats and outside mirrors; a light- and rain-sensing system that turns on the headlights and adjusts intermittent wiper frequency; and adaptive headlights. Also checked on our car’s options list was the Cold Weather Package ($400), featuring heated rear seats and a ski-sack pass-through from the trunk.
A six-CD changer resides behind the glove-box door, an arrangement we like better than trunk-mounted changers for easy loading and unobtrusiveness. Our car came equipped with the Premium Audio Package ($1,500), which upgrades the standard Audi Symphony setup to a Bose system with surround sound and a dynamic noise-compensation feature. A microphone in the cabin regulates the stereo’s volume in specific frequencies to compensate for unwanted interference, such as that from passing vehicles. The sound from this system is very refined and doesn’t lend itself to pumping out bass to ridiculous levels.
The 2006 Audi S4′s Premium Audio Package also includes preparation for either XM or Sirius Satellite Radio, controlled via the MMI or steering wheel buttons, as with the other audio features. Also part of the package is Bluetooth phone integration. The Motorola V551 we used for testing linked with the car easily, although interaction was limited to speakerphone usage–phone book information was not displayed, and the car offered no dialing system of its own.
Our favorite of all the 2006 Audi S4′s gadgetry is the SD-card reader in the dashboard. As we saw on the Audi A4, the MMI’s screen tilts down and forward to reveal two slots to accept the portable media. MP3 files are read from the cards immediately, including title and artist information. We’ve been frustrated by the lack of MP3 player inputs for the higher-end factory audio systems we’ve tested of late, with a car’s chance of having an auxiliary jack on the dash somehow inversely proportional to its sticker price. The ability to swap the same storage device from computer to car nicely obviates the need for the car to recognize and deal with a hardware go-between; you can just give the data to the car directly on an SD card. Music played this way sounded similar in quality to CDs or the satellite radio–Sirius, in our car’s case.
While the other occupants of the 2006 Audi S4 will enjoy the luxurious aspects of this car, the driver will understand the true nature of this beast. The S4 seems poised under any and all normal driving conditions, as well as some slightly abnormal ones. A feeling of utter solidity and the confidence of abundant power come together in this car, unlike with a few other four-doors.The component that puts the 2006 Audi S4 in a different league than the A4 is of course the motor. An all-aluminum, 90-degree V-8 displacing 4.2 liters, it feels smooth and eager throughout the rev range. With a two-stage intake manifold supplemented by variable timing on five valves per cylinder, the engine is perfectly suited to the chassis. It also sounds fantastic. Engine braking from 5,000rpm in second gear can become addictive. Replaying this soundtrack may negatively affect fuel consumption, which is already EPA rated at a low 15mpg in the city and 21mpg on the highway.
Some of our staff thought the 2006 Audi S4 felt slightly sluggish moving away from rest, as if the electronics that keep the tires gripping pavement prevented the car from pressing the driver into its seat, but none complained about a lack of power otherwise. Revving to 4,000rpm and dumping the clutch would be a sure way to avoid sluggishness, and despite the antisocial implications of such unrecommended antics, this drivetrain feels as if it would barely notice.
The 2006 Audi S4′s aluminum suspension is sprung and damped more tightly than the regular A4 setup. Handling is precise, thanks to Audi’s Quattro all-wheel drive, and electronic systems work to keep the S4 on its intended path. The electronic stabilization program incorporates the antilock brakes with electronic brake-force distribution (EBD), the electronic differential lock, and antislip regulation to slow individual wheels when diversion from the intended path is detected. The S4′s adhesion limits are high enough that ESP won’t be noticed unless the car is really pushed. Even with a run on a twisty and freshly wet road at speeds that might have triggered it, we were never aware of the system intruding.
We were pleased that our car came with the standard six-speed manual transmission. Weight savings of 75 pounds aside, the direct feel and involvement of this particular gearbox is extremely satisfying. Together with Servotronic speed-sensitive steering and the engine’s reserves of midrange punch, the effort level of the controls complement each other to make this 4,000-pound car feel both tossable and totally safe.
Our only minor complaint about the 2006 Audi S4′s driving experience was the height of the brake pedal in relation to the other two pedals. The clutch effort is just enough to feel direct without tiring the leg, and the brake pedal likes a comfortable shove and allows easy modulation. But the brake felt closer to the driver than we wanted, and more than once, we caught our shoe on the side of the pedal while transferring from the accelerator. Fans of heel-and-toeing will need to spend some time practicing in this car–or we need to do some Achilles’ stretching.
The road-holding ability of the 2006 Audi S4′s Quattro all-wheel-drive system might be said to be its most apparent safety feature, but dedicated systems are ready, should something go wrong. In addition to all the chassis-control wizardry, a number of acronymless features help the S4 further protect its occupants.The expected dual-stage, dual-threshold front air bags are in place, with occupant sensors. Side-impact air bags are integrated into the front seats. Separately, the Sideguard curtain air bags protect the heads of front and rear occupants. Active head restraints on the front seats are standard.
As mentioned earlier, the 2006 Audi S4′s brakes are controlled with ABS and EBD. Also present is a disk-wiping feature that uses occasional soft caliper pressure when driving on wet roads, so the disks will be free of any built-up moisture if immediate stopping power is needed.
Adaptive headlights point into corners to keep the road illuminated. A headlight-washer system, flush to the bumper when not in use, keeps the lenses clean.
Audi’s new-vehicle warranty protection is for 4 years/50,000 miles, extending to 12 years for corrosion perforation. During the main warranty period, scheduled maintenance is covered by Audi, and 4-year roadside assistance is also included.
from: http://reviews.cnet.com/sedan/2006-audi-s4/4505-10865_7-31594347.html
2004 Porsche Carrera GT
First Drive: 2004 Porsche Carrera GT
In a way, the Carrera GT can make an even stronger claim for its racing roots than can the Enzo, as it actually derives from a V-10-powered, carbon-fiber-structured race project that had reached the running-prototype stage, aiming to contest the 2000 24 Hours of Le Mans. But a funny thing happened on the way to the starting grid: Porsche dropped out of racing. In January 2000, Porsche Chairman Dr. Wendelin Wiedeking stunned the racing world, and most of Porsche Motorsport, when he abruptly announced that the factory was halting race-car development and canceling plans to run at Le Mans.
-
-
First Look: Porsche Carrera GT 25093896 -
Future: Porsche Panamera 24965096 -
Why? The official line now is that senior management had identified the need to develop and sell a roadgoing supercar to protect Porsche’s reputation and market strength, and the small, independent company didn’t have the resources to do that and mount a Le Mans campaign. Even if other considerations helped change the priorities (the poor cost/benefit ratio of racing, Audi‘s Le Mans intentions, Cayenne development needs), the real competition car was indeed dead. In its place would come the fastest, most technically advanced street Porsche ever.
Less than four years after Dr. Wiedeking’s policy J-turn, about the time the first customer Carrera GTs were reaching the end of the assembly line in a new Leipzig facility, Porsche invited us to a get-acquainted drive of the car, outside Berlin. Let’s be honest: There are no bad 600-horsepower, half-million-dollar, road-legal super-sports cars from big-time race-winners. We expected to be dazzled, and we were. But the particular wonder of the Carrera GT is how civilized it is. Porsche’s history and philosophy demanded that its flagship be brutally fast, of course, but also refined, comfortable, easy to drive and to live with, safe, reliable, and efficient.
Oh, is that all?
The performance basics were easy, relatively. Bore out the light-alloy Le Mans V-10 to 5.7 liters, tune it for a flexible and responsive 612 horses at 8000 rpm, and put it in a stiff carbon-fiber chassis with highly developed pushrod-operated suspension and massive ceramic brakes. The finished package weighs 3043 pounds, accelerates to 60 mph in the low-three-second range, and goes 205 or better.
from: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0401_2004_porsche_carrera_gt/index.html
1993 Toyota Mr2 Turbo
David Lashbrook may not be lucky by magazine feature standards. When we finally found an envelope with John Thawley’s photos of this 1993 turbo MR2, nearly 18 months had passed. We promptly set about rectifying our neglect, but Lashbrook wasn’t too worried. As MR2 owners go, he’s one of the fortunate.
He only recently learned of his car’s rarity and hasn’t confirmed the information independently, but from what he’s gleaned via an MR2 owners club, Toyota only imported five MR2 hardtop turbos in 1993. Lashbrook says it’s rare to find a non-T-top among the ’91 and ’92 model years, but apparently ’93 was a particularly dry year for a car with minimal concessions to comfort.
“This car even has crank windows,” Lashbrook says. “It was destined to be a race car.”
He bought it sight unseen after a friend spotted an ad in the local classifieds: “Blown headgasket, leaking water pump. First $3000 takes it.” The owner, Lashbrook says, was taking Blue Book price less $2000.
He snatched it up and promptly tried to make it overheat. He didn’t care about the engine; he had another one lined up. But after “driving the hell out of it”, he couldn’t kill the engine. It was only as he went to remove it that he noticed the finish on the fuel tank was stripped, the result of a small coolant leak in the heater line.
He then put the story together. The headgasket was fine, the water pump undamaged. The Toyota dealers where the previous owner had taken it for repair had, says Lashbrook: “lied through their teeth.” He felt bad for the guy, but the deal was done. The build was in motion, no turning back. Though Lashbrook can handle most chores himself (he did the wiring and tuning in this car, and the engine build in his other, daily-driven MR2), he wanted to go big this time. His goal: a nine-second quarter-mile run on street tires. So he sent the engine off to Chris Kattage at Engine Logics in Houston.
The engine build is anchored around a 5S-FE block with 87.5mm bores, modified to accept half-inch head studs. A balanced and chamfered 3S-GTE crank, with an 86mm stroke, spins custom rods attached to CP pistons. The ported 3S cylinder head uses 1mm oversize Ferrea valves. Engine Logics also fabricated an intake manifold to accept two sets of injectors, components of Lashbrook’s dual-fuel system design.
“I decided to do [two fuel systems] when I realized I didn’t want to pay for C16 just to drive the car everywhere,” he says. “I want a streetable car, something I can drive to the track and race. It really wasn’t that much work. I already had another fuel cell and the injectors floating around. I knew the computer could do it. What it really came down to was buying some fuel lines and another regulator.”
It comes down to more than that of course, especially when engine management comes into play, but for the most part Lashbrook says it’s an easy modification. The system, he says, works in a very linear fashion. He fills one tank with regular 87 octane and the other with C16. At around 4psi of boost, about 10 percent of the duty cycle shifts to the secondary 1600cc injectors, blending C16 with the regular octane.
“That turbo is so big that it doesn’t spool fast, so there’s a little bit of time for the injectors to work together,” Lashbrook notes.
from: http://sportcompactcar.automotive.com/46705/0702-sccp-1993-toyota-mr2-turbo/index.html
Pontiac Grand Prix GXP – Road Test
Pontiac rewrites the front-drive-performance rulebook.
BY TONY SWAN, PHOTOGRAPHY BY AARON KILEY
October 2005
Highs, Lows, and Verdict
Highs: Mellow V-8 rumble, plentiful V-8 torque, excellent road manners.
Lows: Hints of torque steer, hefty curb weight, high steering effort at low speed.
The Verdict: A cool idea that would have been even cooler a decade earlier.
Downloads
The obvious part of the formula is obviously far from new: Cram a big ol’ V-8 in there, make the car go faster. Detroit has been doing this since the ’60s. But what may not be so obvious is that there’s a big asterisk to the formula when you start applying it to a front-wheel-drive car. The footnote reads something like this: “Put enough power through a front-drive system, and the driver will find himself turning right or left when he was planning on straight ahead.”
It’s called torque steer, and it’s the major limiting factor in front-drive performance cars. Despite various engineering advances, the problem persists in cars such as Acura’s otherwise superb TL, which sends 270 horsepower through a six-speed manual transmission to the front wheels via a helical limited-slip differential. But in the Grand Prix GXP, with more horsepower (303 at 5600 rpm) and a lot more torque (323 pound-feet at 4400 rpm), torque steer is not a serious issue. There are hints—a little tugging when the driver cracks the throttle at low speed—but no real wrestling.
How’d they do that? By adopting a measure no one else has ever put into production. More in a minute. But first, another front-engine, front-drive problem, one that’s even more chronic than torque steer. With a design that puts all the heavy powertrain hardware up front, front-drive cars invariably have a pronounced forward weight bias, 64/36 percent in this case. As a consequence, the front wheels carry more than their fair share of the car’s mass, diluting the ability of the tires to transmit steering inputs. Worse, the front tires are also required to transmit power to the pavement, and all things being equal, the poor things just can’t handle their multiple assignments as well as the front tires of rear-drive cars. The result is understeer. The faster the driver herds the car into a turn, the more it wants to go straight.
Pontiac’s solution to these two inherent front-drive directional control problems—understeer and torque steer—is unique. Instead of four tires of equal size, the GXP has a lot more rubber up front than at the rear: Bridgestone Potenza RE050As, 255/45-18 front, 225/50-18 rear.
“We wanted a car to run with BMWs,” says program engineering manager Phil Minch. “But we were limited by the W-car architecture, in other words, by front-wheel drive.
“The rear end never lets go when you have the same size tires all around. So we put our computer guys on it, and they came back with a recommendation for a smaller rear tire, to give the car better balance.”
This is a radical departure from conventional wisdom, and the idea proved out in initial testing. But there was a nasty side effect: Increasing the contact patch at the front amplified torque steer. However, after experimenting with a number of different tires from a variety of manufacturers, Minch and company decided the problem lay in the tire’s construction-the way the plies were wrapped-and not the footprint. With sufficient application of power, the tire sidewalls distort, thus affecting directional stability.
Bridgestone, the supplier of choice, was initially reluctant to accept this theory, but when the GXP team achieved improved results using an off-the-shelf tire from another maker, the Bridgestone people got to work and developed a tire that delivered the desired performance.Continued…
from: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/05q4/pontiac_grand_prix_gxp-road_test
2010 Ford Mustang GT Review
As I turn the key in the ignition, the big 4.6-liter V8 turns over and actually rocks the car from side to side as it roars to life. And does it ever roar!
So often I complain about how muffled the exhaust note is on high performance cars, but that is not the case here. Even at under 3000 rpm it draws stares and gives its owner a sonorous treat. Whether it’s popping and snarling on a high rpm downshift or just rumbling like distant thunder as you crawl along in traffic – this V8 is a treat to the ears.
4.6-LITER V8 GETS SLIGHT BUMP TO 315 HORSEPOWER
And it does more than just sound powerful; the Mustang’s V8 generates 315hp at 6000 rpm and 325 ft-lbs of torque at 4250 rpm. In total, that’s 15 more horsepower and five more ft-lbs of torque than the previous model, which is achieved through a more efficient air intake system, as well as a 250 rpm increase.
Surprisingly the 4.6-liter V8-powered Mustang GT doesn’t feel as fast as its 5.1-second 0-60 mph time. This is partly due to a gas pedal (as well as the brake pedal for that matter) that isn’t overly responsive. Most likely designed this way on purpose to make the car a more user-friendly beast, you really have to put your foot down to get a reaction; but when you do there is a massive surge of power. And because it’s a V8, the power stays on well above the legal limit, pushing the Pony car faster and faster. This engine, unlike a V6, doesn’t fizzle and fade with speed and Ford claims a very-impressive quarter-mile time of 12.5 seconds.
The Stang is also a big car, which reduces the sensation of speed. Although it’s important to point out that it’s not overly heavy. At 3,500 lbs its 300 less than a new Camaro.
My tester had the standard five-speed manual tranny, which isn’t what I would call slick-shifting, but it does suit the car with a big grip and chunky (though short) movements. As for the clutch, it’s light as a feather and unlike some pony cars of old didn’t leave me with a leg cramp after a particularly grueling commute home one day.
The Mustang’s long gears also don’t help in the sensation of speed – or the attainment of it. More hard-core buyers will likely opt for the optional 3.55 rear end (or better yet the 3.73 which is only available on the GT Premium). If you’re buying a Mustang GT for the right reasons (for fun) and not to use as a commuter car, then we strongly suggest the shorter gears.
If Ford offered a six-speed manual, the GT could get better acceleration and fuel-economy, but sadly that isn’t likely. We should also note that there are no optional gearings for the auto-box.
When it comes to fuel-economy, the big V8 does ok with 16/24 mpg (city/highway). Those who choose the automatic will get 17/23 mpg. This is an improvement over the past model, which got just 15/22 mpg. While it is far better than the 13/19 mpg of the Challenger SRT8, it equals the Camaro SS, which, by the way, makes an additional 110hp.
In real world testing, our Stang averaged a reasonable 20 mpg with the shorter 3.73 rear end.
The good news is that if you’re more concerned about the impact a V8 might have on your pocketbook than on the environment, you can always take solace in the fact that this V8 runs on regular pump gas.
NEW LOOK ADDS EDGY MODERN DESIGN TO RETRO STYLE
Along with more power and better fuel-economy, the 2010 Mustang has a whole new look – sort of. With the tremendous success of the past model, Ford didn’t want to gamble too much on a drastic redesign and so have chosen to massage the overall look of the car. And it worked!
Not only does it still have that great retro shape, but the edgier (but less boxy) look is certain to appeal to a younger audience that over the past decade has turned away from American iron in favor of Japanese aluminum.
 |
 |
Being one of those younger types I have to say the look is certainly appealing to me. The subtle trunk spoiler, the large black openings up front and the pointy bow-shaped front all combine for a great look. There are even some important details that add modernity to the classic design, like the use of a “black chrome” instead of a classic chrome pony up front.
MUCH-IMPROVED INTERIOR IS HIGH-QUALITY IN BOTH MATERIALS AND DESIGN
While the exterior of the 2010 Mustang might not be revolutionary, the interior certainly is. Ford has done a stunning job giving modern fit, finish, comfort and utility to what is still a very retro design.
The leather seats are comfortable and reasonably well-bolstered and feature an incredible classic design with leather that has been stitched into bars. The steering wheel is also reasonably retro – although cartoonishly large. As for the gauges, they have a great old-school look, with a nice classic font, but are well lit and have a quality look. As with the last model, the driver can program the gauges to be one of numerous colors – but as that’s probably more interesting to the V6 crowd, I’ll spare the details here.
What is certainly not retro about the new Stang is the optional Navigation system.. or Ford’s SYNC system. It seems like a marketing gimmick, but after a week in the car you really get used to voice activated controls – if only you didn’t have to press the steering wheel mounted button first.
Apart from all this, however, there are two things that really make the 2010 Mustang’s interior stand out – the attention paid to materials and details. From the huge pieces of aluminum used on the dash (and on the steering wheel) to the stitching on that wheel, the interior is all quality. It’s better than the Challenger and infinitely superior to what you’ll find inside the Camaro.
Standard equipment on the GT Premium model includes power locks with remote entry as well as power windows with one-touch up and down. Also included is a tilt (but not telescopic) wheel. The GT Premium gets upgraded leather seats and a six-way power driver’s seat with lumbar support. Also included is the Shaker 500 eight-speaker audio system with AM/FM, a six-CD changer, an auxiliary input and MP3 capability. This is one serious piece of audio equipment and anyone who opts for the more powerful Shaker 1000 system is either half deaf, or will be shortly.
All models get a 12-volt outlet, which, by the way, is one of the few design faults in the interior of the car. It’s just so high up that any cords running out of it will hang over the rest of the controls.
My tester also came with the $595 Comfort Package, which includes a six-way power passenger seat, heated front seats and an auto-dimming mirror with compass. The $2,195 Electronic Package was also nice (if expensive) and consists of navigation, SIRIUS radio with a six-month subscription and dual zone climate control. A $240 rearview camera was also tossed in.
 |
 |
The piece de resistance, however, is the optional $1,995 glass roof. At the price I’m not certain I’d go for it, but I did thoroughly enjoy having it. Sadly it’s a fixed unit and can’t be opened, but it does give an almost open-top feel to the sports car, while at the same time brightening up the cabin and increasing visibility. There’s even a shade you can pull over in case the sun gets too hot.
Standard safety includes four airbags (driver and passenger front and side), as well as a tire pressure monitoring system and Advance Track with Electronic Stability Control.
THE DRIVE
Aside from all these stats and specs, however, the important point is how the 2010 Mustang drives. For that, let’s get back to the beginning.
Not only does the engine rock the car at startup, it continues to send vibrations though the chassis. On most cars this would be a sign of poor engineering, but its so subtle you get the distinct feeling Ford designed it that way. And while I may be a young guy I can guarantee baby boomers will appreciate this little chassis-shudder at idle that takes them back to days when ‘good vibrations’ were commonplace in V8-powered machines.
Once you’re rolling the power evens out and the car makes for a decent cruiser. At highway speeds, however, the stiff suspension does mean that you constantly feel all the larger cracks in the pavement.
I’d fault the Stang for this if the suspension was also typically sloppy, but its not. It will take a corner better than expected, rotating nicely once all that torque hits the rear wheels. And thanks to the optional limited slip differential (worth every penny), the traction control kicks in less often, making for an uninterrupted and, therefore, more fun drive.
It should be noted that a more aggressive traction control program is included in the 3.73 Rear Axle Package, which also includes larger two-piston front brakes and grippier brake pads. The brakes still seemed underpowered though and have to be one of the least confidence-inspiring aspects of the Mustang.
I hate to return to those vibrations again, but there is an inordinate amount of shake that’s carried through the shift linkage, causing the shift knob to buzz away constantly.
As for the steering, well, the wheel is enormous and it’s beautiful design has a practical drawback. While I appreciate the aesthetic appeal of all that beautiful aluminum, much of it runs across the wheel right at the 10 and 3 position, making for an all-too-slippery surface where the driver’s hands should have the most grip.
Overall the diameter is too larger for my liking and the wheel requires a significant amount of input to turn the car in any direction. The wheel is nice and thick though.
THE VERDICT
At a price of $27,995 ($36,999 CDN) the 2010 Mustang GT is still the poor man’s sports car. The great thing about the Mustang, however, is that it’s never looked cheap outside, and now it has an interior to match. We’d suggest the GT Premium model, which starts at $30,995 and while our tester did hit $38,155 ($42,299 CDN) buyers should be able to get an affordable Stang by saying no to the cool but expensive options like Navigation and a glass roof.
We think the 2010 Mustang GT is a huge improvement for Ford, with a look that is both progressive and retro, keeping the company’s heritage and yet moving into the future.
We’d still like to see a smaller steering wheel with more-responsive steering. More responsive pedals would also be ideal, as would a six-speed transmission – something that would help out in the fuel-economy department.
And while the power lags behind cars like the 2010 Camaro SS, Ford’s lighter weight chassis helps make up some of the difference. For many, the price will make up the rest, with the 2010 Mustang GT costing thousands less than a V8 Camaro.
BMW M3 E92 Coupe (2007) – Road Test
It seems the Americans got there first with applying the M3 name to a vehicle. As is the American right to arm bears, the US Military first received the M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle in 1981 a good five years before the E30 M3 would emerge from Germany in 1986. The M3 was good for carrying seven troops, though that was reduced to six eventually, probably because most Americans are either overweight or carry a lot of luggage.
It’s not just tanks that the US of A has used the M3 moniker with. There’s the M3 Grease Gun (it’s a machine gun, not a lubricating device), the M3 howitzer (a light artillery piece), and the M3 Scout Car (another armoured vehicle), to name a few. But don’t think it’s all explosions and carnage – it’s also a record label, a motorway in several countries including England and Pakistan, a rock band, a measure of the supply of money in the world, and most aptly the name of a documentary series on the History Channel “Man, Moment, Machine” that details a particular man in history, the machine he made, and how it went on to change the world.
Let’s not let the plethora of pretenders steal any glory from the M3. Through the years it’s won more road races than any car in history and the E92 with its four-litre V8 brings that entire heritage and more screaming into the future. I say the future because the BMW’s engine is a technological marvel. F1-derived technology sees the V8 reach its peak power at 8,300rpm, just 100 below the redline. While most V8s are about to fracture into lots of tiny and expensive pieces, the BMW is vapourising 420hp worth of fuel (and yes, that also beats the magical 100hp/litre) on the way to 100kph in just 4.8 seconds. I was caught out at first by this – you get used to changing up based on the engine tone, and I didn’t think the M3 was quick because I wasn’t driving it right. But let it loose above 6,500rpm and skinny people will leave ribcage marks in the seats.
Comfortable seats they are, too. As you would expect, the interior of the M3 is exceptionally executive with the sporty touches in the right places – bucket seats (trimmed in leather), blue and red stitched steering wheel, M3 detailing on the gear stick, the Power button readily accessible near your left hand, the bonnet bulge visible through the windscreen and the carbon fibre-style interior trim.
There’s real carbon fibre in the roof, and this is part of BMW’s philosophy for the E92 M3 to reduce the centre of gravity – alone this feature saves 5kg. Many of the panels are not steel, the engine is 15kg lighter than the outgoing six-cylinder, and there are many weight-optimised parts in the car. This also helps with the fuel economy. BMW’s EfficientDynamics is its program to give the best driving dynamics along with fuel efficiency. BMW claims around 12.4l/100km, but with our spirited driving (and with the power button on all the time) we got nowhere near.
The M3 is capable of being a comfortable cruising car for four adults, though. The stereo is spectacular – 16 speakers delivering 825W of power – and you can even watch TV stations using the dashboard screen when stationary. This screen functions as the navigation device, accurate down to street numbers in New Zealand, and BMW’s iDrive which I still find a bit complicated but am getting used to.
Having had the pleasure of driving an E30 M3 on the same day (you can read my comparison in the next Classic Car magazine) I was initially disappointed in the E92 M3’s performance. In the E30 every corner is an adventure, and the road and you share the steering wheel in a kind of telepathic harmony. This just didn’t happen in the E92. Until I figured out that you have to be going at least 30kph faster. A corner marked 40 is exciting in an E30 at 70kph, but terminally boring in an E92. A corner marked 40 driven at 100, now that’s when the fun starts. Therein lays the greatest problem: where do you drive a car as competent, powerful and devilishly lairy in New Zealand? We don’t have enough race tracks and our speed limits are low.
The M3 is a car packed to the gills with features, and one that turns you into a touring car hero. I could write a book about the E92 M3, but I don’t need to because the press kit given to us pretty much is one. It has lots of words like ‘unparalleled’ and ‘unprecedented’. I have nothing against this because in reality, they’re mostly right. Short of intrusive road noise and a notchy reverse gear you can’t really dislike the M3. It may not have 600hp and anti-tank missiles, but it has the power to dispatch most enemies.
Price: M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle: NZ$4.1m (average); BMW E92 M3: NZ$169,900; M3 HP $181,900 (derestricted to 280kph, 19-inch wheels, electronic damper control)
from: http://www.carandsuv.co.nz/articles/bmw-m3-e92-coupe-review
Volkswagen Golf GTI DSG Reviews
By Robert Farago
April 6, 2006
I don’t know about you, but I’ve been feeling sorry for Volkswagen for a while now. VW didn’t so much lose their mojo as strap it to the nose of a Titan IVB and fire it into deep space. No disrespect to the world’s fifth most populous country, but was anyone really surprised when a Brazilian Golf turned out like German bobo de camarao? Now that Vee Dub’s got THAT out of their system, here comes the new, Wolfsburg-built Golf GTI. It’s an Old School hot hatch with a Masters in Engineering. Viva VW!For reasons best left to The International Museum of Marketing Doublespeak, Volkswagen decided to begin their mission-critical US Golf refresh with a two-door. More’s the pity. The fifth-gen four-door is a far more handsome beast than the coupe– if only because the Golf’s rear portals soften the enormous disparity between the front windscreen’s bottom edge and the side windows’ lower boundary. This bizarre asymmetry pisses on the Golf’s 32-year history of two-box harmony. The resulting rear end trades brand recognition for something vaguely Japanese– as if the Golf suddenly decided to play the Accordian. And then there’s the front end’s unresolved echo of Audi’s unconscionable house snout…
If you’re offended by the new GTI’s jarring, over-reaching modernity, open the door and clock the retro-plaid seating surfaces. You can almost hear David Hasselhoff burning-up the German pop charts. The rest of the GTI’s interior keeps faith with VW’s noble history of crafting car cabins so dark they make Citizen Kane look like a romantic comedy. Thankfully, brushed aluminum accentuation abounds, and the quality of the polymers almost makes up for their dour demeanor. The switchgear’s flimsy imprecision and the stereo’s ectomorphic timbre are the last remaining vestiges of the Golf’s multi-decade mediocrity.
Wrap your mitts around the GTI’s squashed crown steering wheel and you’ll soon know that beauty is in the right foot of the beholder. Fire-up the uber-Golf’s in-line four and the delightful zizz blatting from the modest twin pipes foreshadows the hoonery to come. The GTI’s 2.0-liter powerplant is a high-tech handbag, complete with dual overhead cams, four valves per cylinder, inter-cooled turbo, drive-by-wire throttle and FSI direct injection. And here’s the kicker: Wolfsburg’s de-pimpers have bestowed its Dual Sequential Gearbox (DSG) upon America’s mid-market motoring madmen, placing the reins to 200 horses in the GTI driver’s fingertips. This, folks, is what the Brits call a serious piece of kit.
Serious as in seamless. With 207 ft-lbs. of torque from the basement (1800 rpm) to the penthouse (5000 rpm), and six gears available for your dining and dancing pleasure, the VW GTI DSG is an express elevator from any speed A to any speed B. We’re talking Johnny Bravo quick; zero to sixty in 6.3 seconds and 14.8 seconds for the quarter. Whoa Mama! (OK, that’s no better than a MINI Cooper S, but I don’t remember anyone calling the other German brand’s hot hatch slow.) The Vee Dub’s power-on-demand paddles are an electro-mechanical all-areas VIP pass if ever there was one, facilitating the kind of instant-on maniacal acceleration normally reserved for $70k and up thoroughbreds.
The GTI’s cornering is equally phenomenal. This time ’round, VW didn’t skimp on the fundamentals; laser welding makes the GTI tight, a fully independent four-link rear suspension, coil springs, telescopic shocks and stabilizer bar make it right. While BMW’s electro-mechanical steering system has about much feel as a phantom limb, the GTI’s similarly-assisted rack-and-pinion helm delivers an endless stream of road info, excellent on-center feedback AND tightens the rack at speed to avoid paddle-disconnecting hand movements. When it’s time for the madness to stop, the GTI’s brakes are powerful, fade-free retards.
Bottom line: you can blast the new Volkswagen GTI DSG through a tight bend almost twice as quickly as you’d imagine possible– at least at first. Once you get used to the GTI’s adhesive tenacity, once you accept the fact that the understeer slide justain’tgonnahappen.com, only the cleanliness of your license, children on board and the stupidity of fellow road users prevent you from endless adrenal indulgence. Although the GTI rides a bit like a proper sports car tied down with rubber bands, it’s comfortable enough to enable a daily fast.
A combination of balls-out fun, affordability and everyday practicality made the original GTI a working class hero. In that sense, June’s four-door GTI will be the better– and better-looking– bet. And while there’s no question that the new GTI represents a welcome return to form for cash-strapped pistonheads, the jury is out on the reliability part of the practicality equation. If that’s an issue, I strongly recommend that you do NOT test drive the new Golf GTI DSG until AFTER you’ve read Consumer Reports.
from: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/volkswagen-golf-gti-dsg/
Hyundai Tiburon Review
2008 Hyundai Tiburon SE Hatchback Shown
When it was introduced to the North American market in 1997, the Hyundai Tiburon signified Hyundai’s first commitment to providing more than just value-oriented but bland economy cars. This coupe-styled, two-door hatchback, though not as refined or as performance-oriented as some of its competitors, was surprisingly affordable and showed that Hyundai was serious about redefining its image. Over time, the Tiburon (the name means “shark” in Spanish) improved in both looks and performance.
Though the Hyundai Tiburon never broke into the upper echelon of performance hatchbacks and coupes, its affordable price could make it a decent choice for used vehicle shoppers. A new front-drive Tiburon is rumored to be in the works, but in the meantime the car’s replacement is the substantially more impressive, rear-wheel-drive Genesis Coupe.
Most Recent Hyundai Tiburon
The second generation, front-wheel-drive Hyundai Tiburon debuted for the 2003 model year. It was available only as a two-door hatchback. Through its life, changes were restricted to exterior and interior revisions for 2005 and ’07. There were also additional trim levels and equipment added over the years.
The base GS trim was powered by a 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine — making 138 horsepower and 136 pound-feet of torque — and came standard with a five-speed manual transmission. A four-speed automatic was optional.
The better choice was the Tiburon GT, which came with a standard 172-hp 2.7-liter V6 engine and several performance features, such as a tuned suspension with firmer spring rates and larger 17-inch alloy wheels. Other amenities included automatic climate control, cruise control, a trip computer and a dramatic rear spoiler. A GT Limited trim level (added for 2006) included leather seats, a sunroof and a 440-watt Infinity audio system.
More performance-minded buyers should look at the Tiburon SE, which paired the V6 engine with a six-speed manual gearbox. Unique exterior additions, such as red front brake calipers, foglamps and a high-mounted rear spoiler, give the SE a sportier appearance. And it came loaded on the inside, with a leather-wrapped steering wheel and shift knob, a premium Kenwood CD/MP3 audio system, metallic interior trim, aluminum pedals and auxiliary gauges.
In road tests, our editors preferred the Hyundai Tiburon with the V6 engine, as it provided the 3,000-pound car with much-needed pulling power. The five-speed manual transmission was user-friendly and the Tiburon GT handled well in demanding situations. The fun factor was high thanks to fairly athletic handling, though the tight suspension gave it a somewhat harsh ride.
Past Hyundai Tiburon Models
As a replacement for the previous Scoupe, the original Hyundai Tiburon launched for 1997 came in two trims: base and FX. The base trim was powered by a 1.8-liter four-cylinder engine developing 130 hp. The FX had a 140-hp 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine. Both came with a standard five-speed manual transmission or an optional four-speed automatic.
For Hyundai’s first attempt at sexy, the Tiburon was a respectable effort. Hyundai equipped it with a number of standard features, especially inside the cabin. The FX got leather seats and cruise control. But it hardly performed like a sports coupe. In road tests, our editors complained of too much understeer. The loud exhaust on the FX made it seem like it was faster than it actually was. For 1998, all Hyundai Tiburons got the stronger engine.
Hyundai dropped the FX for 2000 and made 15-inch alloy wheels and power windows, mirrors and locks standard items on the base trim. The most significant change that year was the redesigned body. The front end featured 4 projector-beam headlights. The front fenders, rear end and taillights were also modified. Mechanically, nothing had changed. This Tiburon carried into 2001 and was then discontinued. There was no 2002 model.
from: http://www.edmunds.com/hyundai/tiburon/review.html
Drifters’ Dream: Nissan 240SX
Thanks to the good weight distribution and sporty suspension tuning afforded by the rear-drive layout, the 240SX spoils its owners with a sense of agility and stability.
by subrew From the Dec. 2003 issue
When Nissan introduced the 240SX in the fall of 1988, some said the spiritual successor of the original 240Z had returned. Enthusiasts were again treated to a car featuring a solid rear-wheel-drive chassis and enough torque to make most tugboat owners jealous. More important, this unique combination was wrapped in a slickly styled package that stood head and shoulders above the squared-off 200SX model it replaced.
Unfortunately, a small but vocal group loudly complained that the 240SX wasn’t all it could be. Sure, it would have been nice to get the mega-boosted turbocharged engine available in other markets, but in defense of Nissan, such a package would have proved difficult to market in the United States, which generally favors torque over turbo lag. Instead, Nissan aimed the 240SX at the burgeoning sport-coupe market, which was poised for takeoff.
Led by the Ford Probe, Toyota Celica and Acura Integra, as well as the Diamond Star triplets—Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon and Plymouth Laser—sport coupes were making a comeback at the beginning of the 1990s. After years of small GTI-like hatchbacks dominating the scene, buyers seemed ready for something slightly larger and more refined.
The 240SX fit in nicely, carving out a niche because it was the only rear-drive car in the group. It was styled a bit less aggressively than some of the others, and it seemed to cater to a more mature or refined driver, someone less interested in body kits and power bulges.
The lack of aggressive styling doesn’t mean the 240SX is a slouch when it comes to tackling a twisty mountain road or weaving through the cones at a local autocross. Thanks to the good weight distribution and sporty suspension tuning afforded by the rear-drive layout, the 240SX spoils its owners with a sense of agility and stability. The car’s 2.4-liter engine shouldn’t be looked down upon, either, because it provides significant low- and mid-range torque, perfect for clawing out of tight corners or overtaking slower traffic on two-lane country roads.
The original S13-chassis 240SX was first available as a handsome fastback or notchback, with a convertible version appearing later. The hardtops offered rear seats capable of hauling kids or, for a short ride, even a limber adult. The convertible models—coupes whose tops were chopped upon arrival in the U.S.—retained the overall good looks of their siblings, but unfortunately, Nissan offered them only with an automatic transmission. This was the sole 240SX model available to U.S. consumers for the 1994 model year.
Nissan updated the 240SX for the 1995 model year. Externally, the look was completely new and more up-to-date, with sharper edges and a clean profile. The new S14-chassis 240SX was also slightly larger than its predecessor, offering a longer wheelbase and wider track than the first-generation car.
Sold only as a notchback coupe, the second-generation 240SX received a slight face-lift for the 1997 model year, including slanted, “shark-eye” headlamps and a slightly restyled nose. New taillights completed the look. This car carried the line until it was discontinued in the U.S. market after the 1998 model year.
How to Spot Them
In a world of rounded sport coupes, the original 240SX stands out, thanks to a sharply pointed nose fitted with flip-up headlamps and two small nostrils. It’s styled in the same vein as the Porsche 944 and second-generation Mazda RX-7.
Introduced for the 1989 model year, the 240SX was offered with several trim grades. The fastback models feature a unique blacked-out treatment for the roof pillars, while the more upright notchback does away with this feature, giving the car a more formal roofline. High-end notchbacks received two-tone paint jobs, with the lower body moldings painted black.
Pressed steel 15×6-inch wheels fitted with hubcaps were standard on the base-model 240SX. Nissan shod the 240SX’s upmarket SE and XE models with alloys. On early SEs and XEs these wheels have a 12-hole teardrop pattern reminiscent of early Volkswagen 16-valve alloy wheels, while later cars sport bright machine-finished seven-spoke wheels. All use a common 4×114.5mm bolt pattern, and the stock offset measures 40mm.
For the performance minded, Nissan also offered a handling package for the 240SX. Cars equipped with the package were upgraded to “summer compound” Bridgestone RE-88 205/60R15 tires instead of the standard 195/60R15 Bridgestone SF-406s.
Inside, S13 cars feature a molded dash fitted with a domed instrument pod behind a three-spoke steering wheel. Early S13 cars also have motorized shoulder belts, which run along the doorjamb. Front-seat occupants still had to buckle their lap belts, however.
Another feature of early S13s is the car’s monoform seats, which have a smooth, one-piece molded look. Luckily for the enthusiast, their shape manages to keep their occupants in place, thanks to grippy side bolsters. The rear seat is also well bolstered, but its usefulness is hampered by the car’s low roofline, which makes occupying the rear seat uncomfortable for all but the most petite passengers.
Underhood, early S13s can be identified by the engine’s cast-aluminum valve cover, which features thin ribs and “2400 12 Valve” lettering, signifying the car’s 2.4-liter, 12-valve, KA24E-spec engine. Later cars—1991 and on—use the 16-valve KA24DE engine and can be spotted by the smoothly surfaced rocker cover that incorporates centrally mounted spark plugs and a raised “Twin Cam 16 Valve” insignia. Weight for the early cars ranged from 2730 to 2747 pounds for five-speed hatchbacks, while the coupe came in at about 30 pounds lighter.
Enter the S14
Nissan introduced the second-generation S14-chassis 240SX to the U.S. market for 1995, and this model was offered only as a notchback. The S14, in addition to its longer wheelbase and wider track, sports a taller roofline. It weighs a bit more, too, from 2813 to 2826 pounds for five-speed models, depending on the trim level.
The exterior of the S14 exudes a brawny, wide-shouldered feel that emphasizes the car’s long hood and rear-drive layout. Up front, flush-mounted lights, accentuating the car’s low nose, replaced the pop-up headlights of the S13. Base-model S14s retained the 15×6-inch steel wheels, plastic hubcaps and 4×114.5mm bolt pattern of the S13. Many base models also left the showroom floor with optional 15-inch aluminum wheels that incorporated a fat honeycomb pattern. On the SE model, Nissan upgraded the wheel and tire package to 16×6.5-inch alloy wheels with a clear five-spoke design, 5×114.5mm bolt pattern and Dunlop SP4000 205/55R16 tires.
Inside, the S14 received a new dash with white-faced instruments. The three-spoke steering wheel now housed an air bag, which meant the motorized seat belts were no longer required.
All the Specs
As we’ve noted, two different engines saw duty in the 240SX, the first being the 12-valve KA24E powerplant that was used for the 1989 and 1990 model years. The engine employed three valves per cylinder and generated 140 horsepower at 5600 rpm and 152 lb.-ft. of torque at 4400 rpm. This stump puller originally saw duty—without the free-flowing 12-valve head—in Nissan’s venerable Hardbody line of small pickups.
The foundation of the KA24E is a robust cast-iron cylinder block and counterbalanced steel crankshaft riding in five large main bearings. A rigid one-piece girdle keeps the block stiff while reducing noise and vibration. Connecting rods are H-shaped and attach to cast pistons measuring 89mm in diameter. The stroke is a longish 96mm, giving the engine a total displacement of 2389cc.
The cylinder head is cast of aluminum alloy and features a true cross-flow design, with the intake on the passenger side of the engine and the exhaust on the driver’s side. The compression ratio is set at a low 8.7:1, allowing owners to use 87-octane fuel without the risk of detonation. Two 34mm intake valves are used per cylinder, while one 40mm exhaust valve keeps velocities high at low rpm, boosting mid-range pulling power. The intake system is comprised of a cast aluminum inlet manifold featuring equal length runners with port-mounted fuel injectors.
Nissan introduced the KA24DE engine for the 1991 model year. Horsepower climbed to 155, while torque was further improved to 160 lb.-ft. The basic block did not change, but the new cylinder head allowed for greater flow into and out of the engine. The dual overhead camshafts are chain driven and give the former truck engine a 6500-rpm rev limit.
Both five-speed manual transmissions and four-speed automatics were offered on all models and years of the 240SX, except in 1994 when just the automatic convertible was available. The five-speed unit remained untouched throughout the production run and carries ratios set at 3.32:1 (first), 1.90:1 (second), 1.31:1 (third), 1.00:1 (fourth), and 0.76:1 (a tall overdrive fifth). The final drive is a short 4.08:1, meaning second tops out at an autocross-friendly 60 mph. Top speed is electronically limited to 120 mph.
Stopping power for both the S13 and S14 chassis is provided by four-wheel disc brakes. At the front, vented rotors measure 9.9 inches in diameter and are grabbed by single-piston calipers. Solid rear brake rotors measure 10.2 inches in diameter and again are clamped by single-piston calipers.
The 240SX’s steering is aided by a power-assisted rack-and-pinion box geared to provide a moderate 3.1 turns lock-to-lock, favoring in-town motoring over aggressive back-road driving. MacPherson struts are used up front, incorporating a linear-rate coil spring with a 102 lbs./in. spring rate for the S13 and a stiffer 120 lbs./in. spring rate for the S14. Lower control arms are mounted in large rubber bushings to help reduce noise and vibration. The S13 uses a 25mm diameter anti-roll bar up front, while the S14 chassis employs a 27mm front bar.
Out back, a multi-link suspension featuring Chapman struts, three upper control links and a beefy lower control arm are all mounted to a rubber-isolated rear subframe. This complex system of links reduces camber change during hard cornering and introduces a touch of toe-in to help reduce the car’s tendency toward lift-throttle oversteer. A 16mm rear anti-roll bar was offered on all S13 models, but was only available on the SE version of the S14 chassis.
In 1991, a sport-minded “handling package” became available on S13 fastback SE models and continued as an option throughout the S14’s life. The handling package includes four-channel ABS, a viscous limited-slip rear differential, stiffer springs and a 21mm rear anti-roll bar.
When added to the S13-chassis car, the handling package also included Nissan’s Super HICAS four-wheel steering system. Super HICAS (High Capacity Actively Controlled Steering) changes the toe angle of the rear wheels by up to one degree, depending on the car’s speed: During low-speed maneuvers, the rear wheel angle is not altered; at medium speeds, the rear wheels turn in the opposite direction from the front wheels, helping to rotate the car from the rear. At higher speeds, where stability is important, the rear wheels turn in the same direction as the fronts, helping the car to smoothly make transitions (such as lane changes) with reduced effort.
Hotrod Tricks
The 240SX may not enjoy as much aftermarket support as other compacts, but the cars still have plenty of potential. After spending most of the ’90s on the sidelines, the 240SX has recently been rediscovered by enthusiasts, thanks in part to the growing drifting scene and an increased awareness of the Japanese domestic market.
Most enthusiasts will start the upgrade process with wheels and tires, and lots of choices are available because of the car’s 4×114.5mm and 5×114.5mm bolt patterns. While everything from lightweight 15 inchers to giant 18 inchers can be found, the most popular upgrades include 16×7.5-inch and 17×7.5-inch sizes. To make them fit, a 20 to 35mm offset is needed.
There are countless choices of tires and sizes also, with 205/50R16, 205/55R16, 215/45R16 and 215/40R17 among the most popular. For owners prepping their car for the SCCA’s Street Touring categories—the STS and STX classes—there are several top manufacturers that offer 240SX-friendly sizes, including Falken’s Azenis Sport, Kumho’s new ECSTA MX and BFGoodrich’s g-Force T/A KD.
For autocross and road-race fans wanting a bit more stick, there are several DOT-approved racing tires available in 15-, 16- and 17-inch sizes that will fit the 240SX.
For SCCA Stock class autocross competition—where stock wheel diameter and width must be retained—the 205/50R15, 225/45R15 or 225/50R15 are the top choices for the S13 or base-model S14 chassis. S14 cars with the handling package can select from 205/55R16 or 225/50R16 tires. Kumho’s 205/45ZR16 ECSTA V700 or Hoosier’s new 215/40ZR16 will effectively lower the final drive ratio of the 240SX, and would make great choices for shorter courses.
When running in Street Prepared, or even in the all-out Street Modified category, where changes in wheel width and diameter are allowed, 240SX owners have nearly unlimited choices. Wheels as wide as eight inches in the front and nine inches in the back can fit under the fenders of an S13, while even larger wheels can be shoehorned under the fenders of an S14. And given the allowance for fender flares in Street Prepared, a 240SX should never be in want of more tire.
When it comes to suspension upgrades, there are countless choices for both the S13 and S14 chassis. Some of these options can be hard to find, however, as many are the Japanese domestic market (JDM) products that fill the shelves of overseas tuners. Choices from U.S. suppliers are more limited, but several companies have stepped up to the challenge recently and the situation has improved.
An Easy Place to Start
As these cars are getting older by the day, a simple upgrade can begin with replacing the shock absorbers, dumping the original units for a set of nonadjustable performance struts such as the KYB GR2 or Tokico “blues.” If some adjustment is desired, KYB’s AGX is a popular and cost-effective upgrade for both S13s and S14s. More costly are JDM struts such as the Tokico HTS (similar to the Illumina) and GAB units. All three struts feature single-point adjustability, with combined compression and rebound damping.
Another popular upgrade, especially for Stock class autocrossers, is the use of Koni’s re-valved inserts, which feature a fixed compression setting and adjustable rebound valving capable of supporting higher spring rates.
Speaking of stiffer springs, manufacturers such as Eibach, Tein and Suspension Techniques offer performance springs that also lower the car. Eibach offers its Pro Kit, which lowers the car roughly 1.3 inches and features a progressive spring rate of 114 to 200 lbs./in. up front and 114 to 148 lbs./in. in the rear. Their Sportline kit lowers the car roughly 1.9 inches and features slightly stiffer rates. Tein offers both soft and medium spec springs—100 to 175 lbs./in. fronts and 100 to 162 lbs./in. rears—while Suspension Techniques offers a spring set that lowers the car roughly 1.3 inches and features linear spring rates of 206 lbs./in. up front and 155 lbs./in. out back.
A 240SX owner considering coil-overs also has several choices. Ground Control offers a coil-over kit for the S13-spec KYB AGXs that allows for numerous choices in spring lengths and rates. Companies such as Tein, JIC-Magic and A’PEXi offer coil-overs that are easily available in the U.S., while makers such as Potenza, Buddy Club and Ikea Formula offer countless varieties of JDM products. Even Ohlins makes some remote-reservoir units for those with deep pockets.
Larger anti-roll bars will go a long way toward reducing body roll during hard cornering, and adjustable units give greater flexibility in tuning a car’s handling behavior. Suspension Techniques and Whiteline both offer stiffer anti-roll bars with urethane mounting bushings for the 240SX.
Another popular upgrade is to install urethane bushings in place of the stock rubber bushings, and just about every rubber bushing found under the car can be sourced in urethane or even spherical bearings. The most beneficial upgrade is to change the tension-compression rod bushings in the lower control arm, since the stock bushing is a silicone-filled unit that degrades over time, allowing the control arm to move around.
Keeping the chassis stiff will go a long way toward improving the performance of a 240SX, especially one destined for autocross duty. This is best accomplished by installing a quality front strut tower bar. A rear strut tower bar is also a popular upgrade. It helps to keep the independent rear suspension’s alignment from wallowing around during aggressive driving. Manufacturers such as Pilot and A’PEXi offer both front and rear bars, while several JDM offerings include trick carbon-fiber bars. These same companies are also beginning to offer numerous chassis stiffening bars that fit inside the rear footwell, trunk and even under the front subframe.
Unless camber plates have been installed, camber is not adjustable up front on the 240SX. The rear camber is adjustable, however, and should be checked after a car is lowered.
Power Upgrades
For 240SX owners seeking more power, there are numerous options for intakes, cams, headers, exhausts and even JDM-spec engine swaps.
Since Nissan specified an already large throttle body for the 240SX, there isn’t much point in going any larger. A large-diameter exhaust system, on the other hand, will provide some gains in both useable torque and top-end pulling power. Many creative SX owners have been successful in having a local exhaust shop build a custom system using 2.5- or 2.75-inch diameter piping. You get what you pay for, though, so shop around and find a shop with quality construction techniques and a good reputation.
Most off-the-shelf exhaust systems feature large 3-inch diameter piping suitable for Japanese-market turbo engines, but since the 240SX packs a meaty 2.4-liter engine, these systems don’t seem to hurt torque levels. The most popular is the A’PEXi N1, but of course, just about every JDM manufacturer makes an exhaust system.
Several companies also offer exhaust headers for the KA24E and KA24DE engines. These include Hotshot, S&S, Pacesetter and Gude. GReddy offers a header for the KA24DE-equipped S14 chassis only. Each design is a little different in terms of power output and build quality, and most owners seem to believe the Hotshot header offers the best bang for the buck.
Speaking of bang for the buck, one area where both the KA24E and KA24DE can pick up some performance is in the area of fuel management. Jim Wolf Technologies (JWT) offers a custom replacement ECU for the 240SX that has proved to gain upward of 10 horsepower at the rear wheels. JWT also offers a line of performance camshafts that produce similar results and really help to open up the top-end pulling power of the two engines.
If a 240SX owner craves even more power, engine swaps and turbo kits are an option. The ultimate power booster is to drop in the SR20DET-spec engine from Japanese-market cars. These engines deliver more than 200 horsepower in their stock configuration, and they can be modified to produce more than 300 horsepower reliably. That should prove sufficient for even the most power-hungry 240SX owner.
Wedge Fun
The Nissan 240SX has always been a unique car, willing to take the high road against its techno-boosted, jelly-bean-shaped competitors. The same holds true today. A nicely turned out 240SX will draw admiration from true enthusiasts, who don’t get the opportunity to see such a creature every day.
A true enthusiast was the sort of person who ended up buying a 240SX originally, whether off the showroom floor or used. Today, a 240SX owner is someone who appreciates the car’s precise handling, as with the S13, or its smoothly contoured body lines, as on the S14. Enthusiasts tend to converge on similar ideas, which is why, when you see one Nissan 240SX at an autocross or track day, you usually see two or more. After all, great minds think alike.
from: http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/drifters-dream-nissan-240sx/
1970 Dodge Charger R/T
The Fast and The Furious I
The Dodge Charger is one very popular “American Muscle Car” model that is used in the movie and TV industry. Probably 90% of car-themed films have this car in it. The most famous “star car” identified with this model would probably be General Lee from the Dukes of Hazzard. General Lee is a 1969 Dodge Charger colored orange with the [01] painted on both sides of the door and a confederate flag painted on the roof. Another film, that this car model played a major role in is Blade’s (Wesley Snipes) vehicle.
For the TFATF (The Fast and the Furious), we have here a black 1970 Dodge Charger R/T fitted with a turbocharger. This was driven by Dom Toretto (played by Vin Diesel). Of course, the Fast and the Furious movie that we are talking about here is the first installment out of the current 3 TFATF movies. The car saw action in the last portion of the movie when Dom had to go after the villain then raced Brian (Paul Walker). Too bad, that the Dodge Charger got wrecked after hitting a truck when Dom was racing Brian.
BTW, my collection shown here is a 1:24 scale. It also came with a Dom Toretto figure. I did not include the figure anymore when I took these shots. The details are pretty impressive. (Notice the plates between the real car and the model car?)
________________________________________
Images from the movie:
from: http://www.andydy.com/hobby/dodge_charger.html
BMW M5 Review
By Robert Farago
January 23, 2006
When I saw a mustard-colored Bentley GT rocketing towards my all time favorite highway exit, I knew lunch was served. Paddling from seventh to third and pressing go, I closed the gap between the M5′s voracious prow and Bentley Boy’s behind before the adrenalin could hit my bloodstream. As we entered the ramp, the Bimmer’s heads-up display assured me I had enough rpm-age to blow-off anything that wasn’t built out of carbon fiber and/or jet-powered. When the off-ramp widened for a few yards, I dove inside and dusted Bentley Boy into a fine powder. Despite my obvious, riotous supremacy, nothing changed. BMW’s uber-sedan was not my friend.Supercar scalping in a family four-door is a terrific way to kill an afternoon, but the original M5 earned its place in automotive Valhalla as the consumate all-rounder: a car that can schlep, thrash, coddle, cruise, potter and impress with equal aplomb. Make no mistake: while the M5′s accelerative aggression and Nürburgring-fettled handling got the headlines, the uber-Bimmer’s core appeal lay within its relatively humble origins, daily practicality and circumspect sheet metal. No other car– at any price– offered such a potent blend of ability and humility.
Well, you can forget the stealth part of the proceedings. The “flame surfaced” donor car is so fundamentally bling that the old M5′s appeal– a set of nudge nudge, wink wink performance cues grafted onto an accountant’s daily driver– has been lost. The prominent lips above the M5′s quad pipes and the in-yer-face indented 10-spoke wheels are hopelessly, needlessly crass. It’s the John Gotti of everyday supercars: dapper, powerful and as subtle as a bullet to your brain. Sporting drivers who understood the legal advantages of owning a car that performs like a Ferrari without looking like a Ferrari will not be well pleased.
You can also disregard the cruising part of the program. That pain has a name: SMG (Sequential Manual Gearbox). Why BMW would give one of the world’s fastest sedans the world’s worst gearbox (a mistake first inflicted on the otherwise sublime Eurospec E36 M3) is a question almost as difficult as finding a suitable way to use the damn thing. Drivers must choose their preferred shifting mechanism (paddles, center stick or auto), horsepower configuration (400 or 500hp), shift mode (eleven choices), suspension adjustment (three levels) and traction control intervention (three levels). The total number of permutations isn’t as annoying as the M5′s inability to deliver rapidfire quickshifts or, more to the point, mindless Mercitude.
To achieve a [relatively] smooth shift in the new M5, you have to dial-in the SMG’s most aggressive setting and paddle the beJesus out of its V10 engine– which eliminates the possibility of effortless low-speed cruising. At low revs in autobox mode, the torque-challenged engine and dim-witted gearbox make for slow, annoying advancement. Floor it and the engine just up and dies– until the computer can blip the throttle on your behalf. And then the M5 takes-off like a scalded cat shot from a big bore Winchester– a turn of events that isn’t exactly conducive to around town ambling. Anyway, what’s the point? Whereas the previous M5′s V8 burble was a pistonhead’s siren song, the V10′s low-speed clatter has all the sonic allure of a diesel delivery van.
Thankfully, the M5 isn’t appointed like a commercial vehicle. The cabin materials are faultless and faultlessly assembled: a sumptuous, tasteful gathering of suede, leather, brushed aluminum and wood. The perfectly-proportioned accommodations and generous trunk space remind you why the 5-Series is such a hit with money both old and new. Unfortunately, the M5 also suffers from the same technological overkill bedeviling a “normal” 5-Series: iDrive [you nuts], turn indicators you can’t cancel with a stick and lots of little buttons that do God knows what. More worryingly, the key kept falling out of the slot during hard cornering.
And there’s your upside. The new M5 handles a lot better than the old car, and not a lot worse than a race car. Although you can still feel the M5′s mighty mass shifting around you through a turn, the new car’s rack and pinion steering (sans BMW’s lamentable Active Steering) is ideally weighted for fully committed hooliganism. The M5′s 19′s hold an apex-hunters’ chosen line like grim death, at speeds that defy the G-force gods. It’s a corner carver par excellence.
In fact, the new BMW M5 only makes sense in two situations: driving like a lunatic around long sweeping bends and driving like a lunatic from 100mph to V-Max. In both cases, rapid progress demands that you stay in 500hp mode at the top end of low gears, guzzling gas like a dragstrip refugee. Sure it’s exciting. But then what? In the old M5, you could have just as much fun doing other stuff. In this car, you
from: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/bmw-m5-2/
Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Review
2009 Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Convertible
The Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren is an expensive supercar that boasts a top speed in excess of 200 mph and sprints from zero to 60 mph in 3.8 seconds or less. Unless you’re a CEO or media mogul, the SLR is unlikely to show up on your shopping list, as a new one costs around a half-million dollars. It’s equally unlikely that you’ll ever even see one, since overall production numbers are only in the hundreds.
In a nod to the original 300 SLR, the SLR McLaren features doors that swing forward and up in a sort of gullwing-scissor combination. It may be largely a gimmick but it does make getting in and out easier than in some other high-dollar supercars. While the interior includes many tasteful features like aluminum and carbon-fiber trim with leather seats, we think it looks too much like a standard-issue Mercedes sedan. For such an exclusive car, we’d like to see a more distinctive cabin.
The bottom line is that the Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren is very fast and very expensive. Also, enthusiasts wanting a manual transmission will find that no such option exists for the SLR McLaren. Given the lack of a manual transmission and the SLR’s ultra exclusivity, we’d rather have an exotic from Aston Martin, Ferrari or Lamborghini. CEOs and media moguls out there, we hope you’re listening.
Current Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren
The Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren is currently available as a two-seat, soft-top convertible in either base or limited-edition 722 S trim. The base SLR’s hand-built 5.4-liter supercharged V8 pumps out 617 horsepower and 575 pound-feet of torque. A five-speed automatic transmission sends power to the rear wheels and features a shift-it-yourself feature with steering-wheel-mounted paddles. According to Mercedes-Benz, the standard SLR can achieve a top speed of 206 mph and go from zero to 60 mph in 3.8 seconds. Since that’s clearly not enough speed for some folks, the 722 S ramps up output to 650 hp.
The SLR offers a high level of comfort and luxury features considering its supercar pedigree. The seats are covered with Alcantara suede, and a Bose surround-sound stereo with six-CD changer is included, as are adaptive cruise control and dual-zone climate control. There are three soft-top convertible color choices. Carbon-ceramic antilock brakes with brake assist are standard, as is a rear-deck-mounted airbrake that automatically deploys under aggressive braking.
Used Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Models
The Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren was introduced for 2005 in a two-seat coupe body style only. For 2007, the SLR McLaren could only be had as the 722 Edition coupe. The 722 name comes from the car driven by Stirling Moss and Denis Jenkinson in the Mille Miglia race in 1955 (they were piloting a 300 SLR). Only 25 722 Edition coupes were imported into the United States, so finding one will be rather difficult. Nevertheless, this special edition featured a more powerful version of the SLR’s V12 that made 641 hp and 605 lb-ft of torque. It also received larger brakes, an adjustable rear spoiler, firmer suspension dampers, a slightly lower ride height, a carbon-fiber front air splitter, carbon-fiber seats and cockpit trim, red stitching and gauge faces, and “722″ badges and embroidery. From 2008 onward, a roadster replaced the coupe as the only available SLR body style. The 722 S roadster appeared for 2009.
from: http://www.edmunds.com/mercedesbenz/slrmclaren/review.html
