Ranger, Mazda B-4000 are same compact pickup
The Ford Ranger is the nation’s largest selling small pickup truck, and has been for a dozen years in a row.
Mazda pickups have always been tough little competitors that created a smaller but very enthusiastic following of those who admired the easy-to-use B4000.
In past years, if you liked the Ranger, you might not like the Mazda, and vice versa. But for 1999, if you drive both the Ranger and the Mazda B4000, you’ll note some similarities.
For example, both the Ranger and the Mazda B4000 come with optional extended cabs, and they are the only two compact pickups that offer reverse-opening door access to the rear jump seats on both the driver and passenger sides. Interestingly, both offer great access to that tiny little area that isn’t quite big enough to have a regular seat, but it does allow fold-down, side-facing jump seats.
Both the Ford Ranger and Mazda B4000 come with small 4-cylinder engines, of 2.5 liters, and both have optional 3.0-liter V6 engines, plus top-of-the-line 4.0-liter V6 engines available.
Another quite remarkable feature of both vehicles is that they have exactly the same length (201.7 inches), width (70.3), height (67.5) and wheelbase (125.9), if you measure just the extended-cab versions of the two.
The Ford Ranger first came out as a 1983 model, and its manufacturing is done at the St. Paul assembly plant, as well as in Louisville, and in Edison, N.J. It has always been rugged enough for farm or ranch work, carrying loads through fields or woods, while having enough comfort to be used on streets as well. But ruggedness has been a major feature of Rangers.
Mazda pickups also have been known for ruggedness since they started being sold in the U.S. in 1971, but its reputation was more of on-road durability, with overhead cam engines that would easily last 150,000-200,000 miles. In recent years, however, when switching to the 2.5, 3.0 and 4.0 configurations, Mazda has lost the overhead-camshafts and uses more conventional pushrod-style engines. Those newer Mazda B4000s are made, incidentally, in Edison, N.J.
Hmmmmmm. Has anyone yet made the connection?
Sure enough, Ford bought deeper into Mazda, and ever since 1993 Ford has manufactured both the Ranger and the Mazda pickups in the Edison plant. What they do is build the Ranger, then put a Mazda badge on some of them, to be sold as Mazda B-Series trucks.
By doing so, Ford shares the all-new vehicle it had redesigned just one year earlier, and the whole thing seems pretty efficient.
The Ford publicity book for 1999 says that the SuperCab was added to the Ranger midway through the 1998 model year, which means “Ranger is one of only twocompact pickups to offer a four-door model — Mazda’s B-Series is the other.”
And with good reason.
Ford redesigned the popular Ranger for the 1998 model year, with new front end styling and a new interior, plus improved performance and a new front suspension. While a 5-speed manual is standard, you can get a 4-speed automatic, or Ford’s new 5-speed automatic, which, it says here, is “shared by the Mazda B4000.”
We’re not surprised.
The diehard buyers of Mazda pickups of a decade ago might be surprised to find a lot of features they had never seen on previous Mazdas, but they would look strikingly familiar if they had hitched a ride or two in any Rangers of recent vintage.
I had a chance to test both vehicles a while ago, and it was interesting that one followed the other within a couple of weeks. Both were equipped with the 4.0 V6, and both had extended cabs.
The power was good in all citified applications. The Ranger pulled smoothly and quickly enough, and seemed a worthy worker if you had to haul moderate to heavy loads. The Mazda B4000 was equally as impressive.
While seating position and cushion comfort were good in both vehicles, and the visibility from the driver’s seat was equally good as well, I remain puzzled by one identical feature.
While the 4.0-liter V6 is a strong engine, especially at lower RPMs, it is made in Ford’s Koln, Germany, plant, strong and durable but without overhead camshafts. Two years ago, Ford engineers beefed up the 4.0 and reinforced it, then ran it through a makeover that mounted overhead cams on it. It was built for Ford’s Explorer SUVs, and magically, the freer-spinning overhead-cam 4.0 produced nearly as much power as the 5.0-liter V8, and also got as good fuel economy on the smaller, less-powerful V6 engines.
Perhaps Ford is having trouble keeping up with production of the 4.0-V6, because that engine still is being sold only as optional on Explorer models, while the Ranger pickup — which could use the extra punch — doesn’t even get the full-powered overhead-cam version of the V6.
The result is that both the Ranger and the Mazda B-4000 run well up to 70 on the freeway, but if you happen to be cruising along, on the steering-wheel-operated cruise control, and you have a situation where you might want to swing out and pass, you might be surprised to find that you already are on the floor with the gas pedal and the vehicles balk at the idea of going over 75. Pushrods, in this case, are a very effective method of speed control.
The pushrod 4.0-liter V6 in the Ranger (and the Mazda B-4000) delivers 160 horsepower. With the overhead-cam version in the Explorer, that same engine delivers over 200 horsepower. For two years, I’ve assumed it was just a matter of time until the overhead-cam V6 showed up in the Ranger, but it’s an assumption I’m figuring is out of the question.
Dodge has moved its Dakota up to what it is calling “mid-size” — between the compact size of the Ranger and the full-size pickups — and it is offering a full crew cab with four full-sized doors in the new model, and the available power of a big V8. Also, Toyota’s strong and smooth compact pickups are being complemented by a bigger Toyota pickup, and both have strong, overhead-cam engines.
Ford has a good, durable truck in the Ranger, and the new one with its longer wheelbase and styling upgrades, could increase its market share. But it also is going to have Mazda right alongside as a twin, and the question is, will they be ahead or behind those new and impressive challengers for market segment?
Saturn surprises even itself with 3-door coupe
If a third door on a pickup truck is a good idea, then why isn’t it also a good idea on a sports coupe?
That is a question that nobody in the car business has ever asked, apparently because the limited space and the smoothly styled lines of a coupe simply preclude the concept.
The folks at Saturn, however, not only asked the question, but also have provided a worthy answer.
For 1999, the Saturn not only comes in a 4-door sedan, a 4-door station wagon, and a coupe, but you can get the sleek, 2-door coupe with a third, rear-hinged door on the driver’s side.
The placement and operation is the same as with the pickup truck idea of recent years, which, of course, led to a fourth door in many cases, after the idea of the rearward opening third door to allow access to extended-cab pickups caught on and swept through the industry. Some of those front seats in pickups are hard to tilt and near impossible to reach behind, so the third door offers great and quick access to the extension of the extended cabs.
On the Saturn coupe, the rear seat has always had surprisingly good head and legroom. If you’re 6-feet or taller, you wouldn’t want to ride cross-country back there, but it’s definitely adequate or better for short hops, and great for kid-sized passengers.
Still, climbing into the rear seat for anyone has always been an agility project in all coupes. Open the door, wide, tilt the seat forward, then do a gymnastics-like tumble to wind up back there with all your extremities.
With the three-door Saturn coupe, you open the driver’s door, then work the hidden doorsill hand grip to pop the skinny little rearward door open. Without a pillar between the doors, the wide expanse seems even wider, and you not only have easy access for passengers, but it’s excellent for getting your hands on parcels or briefcases that you’ve stored in the rear seat.
Saturns come in the SL (4-door sedan) models and the SW-1 and SW-2 station wagon models, plus the SC-1 and SC-2 coupes — both of which are now offered as 3-doors.
SATURN’S BEGINNING
When General Motors allowed a handful of its rebellious engineers to embark on the Saturn project, which was launched in 1990, it was a bold and impressive step for the biggest, and most tradition-bound U.S. car manufacturer.
And that first Saturn was far ahead of its time, vaulting GM into true competition with the best Japanese compact cars. Since then, an assortment of things has kept the Saturn from leap-frogging forward. Other divisions have seemed envious, and politically have needed some help, all of which might have caused less development and polishing to be done to Saturn’s bold new branch.
The first car had several breakthrough features. For one, the 1.9-liter engine is made with a “lost-foam” technique, in which the engine block is made of styrofoam, then molten aluminum is poured onto the styrofoam, which causes it to evaporate, while the aluminum cools and forms to replace the foam perfectly.
The other main feature is the body panels, which are made from a polymer instead of steel, so they don’t get dings or dents, they just flex and reform.
Saturns originated because some rebels at GM wanted to build a car from the ground up that would compete directly with the best imports. The mainstream concept at GM was to buy smaller cars from the joint venture with Toyota (Nummi plant in California), such as the Prizm, or from Suzuki, for the Metro and Tracker. But when GM decided to let the rebels make their Saturn, the response was impressive.
The initial hype for Saturn was its no-dicker sticker prices. You get a price, and there is no diddling with the sales-person. That’s it. Options can be had a la carte, or in a couple of packages. Adding an automatic transmission costs about $850, adding air-conditioning (standard on the SC-2) costs $960 on the SC-1. But it’s still easy to stay around $17,000 and get your Saturn pretty well equipped.
The difference of the SC-1 and SC-2 (or any 1 or 2 designation Saturns) is the motor. All have a 1.9-liter, 4-cylinder, but the “1” has a single overhead camshaft and two valves per cylinder, while the “2” gets dual overhead-cams and four valves per cylinder. It’s the same with the SW-1 and SW-2. The DOHC version gives you a boost from an adequate 100 horsepower and 114 foot-pounds of torque up to 124 horses and 122 foot-pounds of torque.
The biggest problem, over the years, is that the engine has been noisy. If you run the revs up, it tends to vibrate, although Saturn engineers have worked hard, and annually, to cushion the engine mounts in rubber, or otherwise smooth out the vibration. This year, they have gone to a new engine cover, longer connecting rods, an eight counter-weight crankshaft, and a new, 8-mm. pitch timing chain.
OK, the engines are smoother and quieter. But I never minded the buzzy sound of performance of the old one as it revved toward the maximum. There’s nothing wrong with an audible tachometer, which can tell you when the revs are getting high.
COUPE DE GRACE
For 1999, however, Saturn seems to have surprised even itself with the new 3-door coupe. It didn’t even merit a mention in the notebook-full of 1999 Saturn information — as if, maybe, it was an afterthought that was hustled out after the initial launch of new model cars.
The early brochure lists the sticker price of the SC-1 at $11,945 and the SC-2 at $14,505; the revised sheet shows the SC-1 at $12,445 and the SC-2 at $15,005. That shows strictly the difference in cost with the third door.
I had a chance to test-drive two different Saturns, with one being the 3-door coupe that you’ve undoubtedly seen advertised on television, and the other being the station wagon.
Both zipped through their paces with ease. The wagon offers the versatility of throwing whatever we don’t want in the trunk.
The first Saturns looked good, but there was something about the lines that bothered me. Sort of a trendiness to show something like the angle of a ring around Saturn. The new car, having been extensively redesigned two years ago, looks good from every angle. In fact, it has something of a low, ground-hugging sports-racer.
I was particularly taken by the look one evening, when we had to move a couple of cars around, and as I drove, my wife drove the Saturn behind me. The headlights are quite close together, but are aimed well and shine well down the road. But the foglights — which are standard on the SC-2, optional on the SL-2 and SW-2, and not available on the other models — not only do a good job of illuminating the lower side extremities, but they are located on the outer corners of the car. So when a Saturn comes toward you at night, you have the horizontal headlights fairly close together, and the lower, outrigger foglights, providing a distinctive and neat look.
The instrument panel is well laid out, free and clear of the gimmicky ideas of the original Saturn. The switches for various controls are a little different than some cars, but you readily get accustomed to them.
With front-wheel drive and the optional traction-control, the Saturn coupe goes in all conditions as good as it looks. And its looks can be enhanced by the optional 15-inch alloy wheels (the SC-2 has special teardrop alloys as the only optional wheel). Typically, you can go off the deep end with audio upgrades as well, including cassette and CD player, some with equalizers.
MINI-WAGON
With minivans and sports-utility vehicles filling the roadways, the station wagon seems to be almost a forgotten entity. There are several good ones on the market, however, and the Saturn SW-2 wagon I drove was a worthy, and inexpensive, idea.
Priced under the sportiest SC-2 coupe but more than the loaded SL-2 sedan, the wagon had the usual utilitity of the 4-door sedan, with the added use of the large rear cargo area. It also has a cover to shield any stuff from outside view.
The wagon I drove had the stronger engine, which is not a racer but performs well, even with an automatic transmission. Tested times for acceleration show the single-cam at about 10.5 seconds 0-60, with the DOHC about a full second quicker. Fuel economy ranges from 27 city to 38 highway for the DOHC with a manual transmission or 24/34 with the 4-speed automatic; the single-cam version gets 29/40 with the stick and 27/37 with the automatic.
A new exhaust system with a larger muffler and altered ductwork has reduced noise considerably, and aided performance. When you drive the wagon, you don’t get any feeling that the boxier rear intrudes on your near-sports-car experience, because looking ahead from the driver’s seat you get the same view as the coupe.
You get the distinct feeling that the little 1.9-liter 4-cylinder could be a world beater with just a few years of constant refinement, which is what Honda does with the Civic, Toyota does with the Corolla, and Volkswagen does with the Golf/Jetta, and even Chrysler does with the Neon. Those are the cars the Saturn must deal with in the market place. And they are tough competition.
Auto option lists include phenomenal features
So you’re cruising down the freeway in your 1999 Pontiac Bonneville SSE sedan, and without ever removing your gaze from the road ahead, you know exactly how fast you’re going, and whether you have gotten seriously low on fuel.
How did you do that? Great peripheral vision? A phenomenal feel for your gas-pedal toe? Or are you on cruise-control?
None of the above. What you have is Pontiac’s “Heads-up” display. When you’re in the driver’s seat, you can switch on a device that beams a translucent, digital number onto the windshield, just below you’re line of vision, or, if you choose, directly in your line of vision. Doesn’t matter, because you can look right through the digital number, and after a few miles, you don’t even think of it as unusual, or as any kind of distraction. You can adjust the intensity of the whiteness of the numbers, and you can move it higher or lower, or you can simply turn it off. It is a sort-of subliminal way of staying totally tuned in on the road ahead, but also always being aware of your speed.
It’s not a new gimmick, either, but one that’s been around for a few years. Remarkably, everybody hasn’t rushed to copy it or come up with a similar version of their own. It’s something that you might anticipate having in a jet fighter, or maybe a Formula 1 race car. But in a Pontiac? On the road?
While test-driving the newest cars on the road, it is impossible to fail to notice the newest gimmicks and gadgets that are usually options on all vehicles. Some of them are simple, some are stupid. All of them are interesting, and a collection some of them make a pretty impressive list.
BEST WAY TO FIND YOUR WAY: Navigation systems are available from many manufacturers these days. I’ve tested them on Cadillacs, Chevrolets, Lincolns, BMWs, Acuras, Mercedes and various others. One of the simplest and most impressive is on the Acura 3.2 and 3.5 luxury sedans. A cassette installed in the trunk unit localizes your region, then you can punch in your destination, and it reads out on a small, TV-like screen on the center dash panel. You can summon up a map of the state of Minnesota, overlapping into Wisconsin, then you can increase or decrease the scale to change from 200 miles to 10 miles. A voice backs it up to direct you through the final intersections to your exact destination.
Still, with all the new ones on the market, it’s hard to beat General Motors’ OnStar system, which used to come in only Cadillacs, but now is spread through various divisions. With OnStar, you punch a button and connect by satellite with the OnStar staff, which has you pegged on a global positioning system. It’s like having an electronic slave at your fingertips, because at your request, the OnStar folks will tell you what sort of restaurants are ahead and even make a reservation for you! It also will make a fair attempt to pull off any reasonable request.
BEYOND CRUISE CONTROL: Obviously, having cruise control is a wonderful feature on a trip, but the new Mercedes S-Class has a cruise device that is guided by sonar, which throws a beam ahead to the car in front of you, and reads the bounce-back reflection. It then commands your cruise control to maintain your speed if possible, but also maintains the interval with the car ahead. It causes your car to adjust its speed accordingly, and if you get cut off it warns you that you may need to assist it by hitting the brakes.
BACK-UP BENEFIT: A device first seen in BMW’s $75,000 740-series sedan, and this year incorporated for a fraction of that by Ford on its Windstar van, is a warning beeper activated by sensors in your rear bumper. You’re parallel parking, and as you back in and start to straighten out, you wonder — particularly in a van — how close you are to caving in the grille of that car behind you. Suddenly you hear a beep, then another, then closer and closer as you keep getting closer, until finally you hear a steady “beeeee-eee-eeeeeeee-eeeep!” Then you know it’s time to stop, that your within 10 inches of your non-target. It also works if a pedestrian walks behind the vehicle, or if you’re backing up toward a wall or other obstacle.
HAPPY-TRIP INSURANCE: So you’re taking the little ones on a cross-country trip in the Oldsmobile Silhouette minivan, eh? Or maybe the not-so-little ones. It’s illegal to have a television working where the driver can see it in a vehicle in the U.S., so the Silhouette has an optional little TV screen that folds down out of the ceiling, where it can be seen by everyone in the second and third rows of seats. It is an option, and it comes with a VCR, so the kids can watch movies, or home-made tapes, or play video games, while Nebraska rolls by without a murmur of complaint. Brilliant.
PLEASANT HOT SEAT: Saab has had this for years, and Volvo, Lexus, and virtually all other luxury cars have finally followed with seat heaters. The best ones have at least two settings, and five are even better. It feels great on a sub-zero morning to climb into the car, fire it up, hit the switch, and have this wonderful warming effect spread over your body. It’s amazing at how much more pleasant those cold start-ups can be.
MANUAL AUTOMATICS: Porsche started it all, with the Tiptronic, then it let its cousin at Audi use it. Chrysler came out with a version next, and now BMW, Honda, Jaguar, Volvo and others all have caught on. The device takes care of all the drivers who would like to have a stick shift but are either too lazy or have other drivers in the family who haven’t mastered a stick. It is an automatic transmission, but it can be switched to a separate, spring-loaded gate, where you can upshift or downshift by bumping the lever to the plus side or minus side. It’s great for downshifting, or for holding revs into the power band on upshifts, or just for fun. Porsche’s is still the best, and you can get it on the steering wheel, where you can use your thumb to upshift or downshift without taking your hand off the wheel. Just like Formula 1 or Champ Car racers.
HANDS-FREE CELL PHONES: Cell phones might be as much hazard as helpful when drivers pay more attention to their dialing or holding their phone instead of signalling a turn. But I have tested cars fro Audi, Cadillac and Mercedes that have hands-free units — you speak into a tiny microphone that looks like a little vent up by the mirror. Usually, you don’t trust it can possibly work well enough — until the person you’ve called says: “Why are you yelling?”
SHIFTY VENTS: Mazda, on its 626 sedans, has put an optional device on its center vents for what must be 20 years that is positively brilliant. Instead of simply channeling heat or air-conditioned air through the vents in the direction you’ve aimed the vent, the center vent on the Mazda oscillates — it swings gracefully from side to side, spreading the air more than in a straight channel, and it seems to warm or cool the interior much more efficiently. Nobody else has caught on.
SOLAR COOLING: Mazda, again, started this, but now Audi has included a fantastic device on its A8 luxury flagship. When it’s hot out, the solar batteries can not only activate but power the ventilation system to keep the interior moderately comfortable.
TECHNICAL ADVANCES
There are some excellent physical and technical things that have become impressive add-ons to vehicles too, things like multiple-valve engines, and variable valve-timing which can make the engines more efficient in developing power without sheer displacement increases. There are more:
TABLE APPEARS, SEAT DISAPPEARS: Honda is masterful at using space creatively. On the Honda CR-V mini-SUV, the flat panel that hides belongings under the floor in the rear can be lifted out and converted to a unique picnic table. Next, Honda comes out with a new minivan, the Odyssey, and it has a third-row bench seat with a deep, sub-floor well for belongings behind it. That third bench can be rotated to face the rear, and, for those situations when you’d rather have storage room than a third seat, the whole rear seat can tumble into a somersault, fitting perfectly into that sub-floor well and disappearing, leaving a flat, carpeted area instead.
HEADLIGHT WASHERS: Especially in Up North foul-weather driving, whenever your windshield requires washing or wiping, imagine how glopped up your headlights must be. Cars like Saab and Volvo — both Swedish — both have tiny windshield wiper units on their headlights, and when you hit the windshield washer, your headlights also get washed and scrubbed. Audi, too, is among one of the first to have tiny little spouts that rise up and spray a high-pressure shot on the headlights to clean them.
THIRD DOORS, FOURTH DOORS: The concept of adding rearward-opening third doors on pickup trucks made sense, but left the way open to come up with such doors on both sides, thus four-door pickup trucks. That, of course, has led toward the newest trend, of extending the extended cabs and installing four full-size, normally opening doors. We should have seen it coming, but now Saturn has added a third rear-opening door to the driver’s side of its SC-2 coupe.
KEYLESS DOOR LOCKS: The idea of remote door switches is not new, but it has become more and more sophisticated. Now, with the best key fobs, you can lock or unlock just the driver’s door, using a second click to unlock the rest. On some cars, holding the lock switch after you’ve locked the doors also will close the windows and even the sunroof, which is really nice for those times when you get out and are all set to walk away when you remember somebody left a window down.
GOOD NEWS/BAD NEWS
Not all the new magical devices are worthwhile. Some, in fact, are nuisances. This is pretty subjective, but two of my nonfavorites are showing up more and more.
AUTO-LOCKING DOORS: I hate door locks that automatically engage when you hit 9 miles per hour, or 18 mph. First, if it’s driver safety that is foremost, the above-mentioned method of clicking once to unlock the driver’s door, and twice for the rest of the doors, is far superior. But when you can lock or unlock all the doors with a touch of a button from the driver’s seat, all drivers should be responsible enough to push the button — if they want the doors locked. On some cars, thankfully, the doors unlock once you’ve stopped and shifted into park. However, that flies in the face of driver’s safety, because, in some situations, maybe you don’t want to instantly unlock all your doors.
AUTO ON HEAD LIGHTS: I also think drivers should be responsible enough to turn on their headlights, but some cars have either instant-on lights or daytime running lights. These work for added visibility in the daytime, but my findings are that when it’s dusk or dark, you can easily fail to turn on your normal headlights because when you start the car, the lights are already on. And when was the last time you noticed your lights were on, then reached to turn them on? I wrote about that once, and got a hostile note from someone who said the whole thing could be disconnected, or I could have pulled the fuse. My point is that if a gadget or gimmick is so questionable that you also need to learn how to defuse it, then we’re better off without it.
That includes safety devices, such as airbags, which remain questionable as strict safety devices because they seem to malfunction just enough to also be hazardous in some cases.
TT sports car gives heartbeat to Audi concept
For an automobile company, building a concept car for actual production can be therapeutic — an example of turning loose the designers to have a little fun and then dispatching the car-makers to execute a little corporate fun. And the result can be a corporate toy that makes everybody feel good. Especially if it sells.
If that’s all that German manufacturer Audi had in mind with the TT sports car, it would have to qualify as an A-plus success. However, the TT is far more than just a corporate toy. It is a new definition of the true underlying character of the corporation, which so far has spent its considerable energy and technical skills on producing extremely good, basic, substantial but somewhat conservative sedans.
I happened to be in Frankfurt, at the world’s most impressive auto show, four years ago, when Audi unveiled the TT as a concept car. Hundreds of automotive journalists from all over the globe gathered in a little studio arranged in one of the show’s 13 exposition halls to see a little lump of silver. Suddenly, and carefully choreographed to music, the silvery sheath was lifted, and out sprang a half-dozen silver-bodysuit-clad dancers, all leaping around this unusually styled little sports car.
It was neat, but a little strange, with a rounded-off front end, tight passenger compartment that resembled a chopped Porsche Speedster from the 1950s or early ’60s, and a sleek but rounded off rear end. Very unusual, but a striking blend of retro and futuristic.
Flash forward to 1999, and I had the opportunity to join another herd of automotive journalists in the 90-degree heat of central Texas for the first drive-time in the real production TT sports cars.
It was almost left to the imagination of how the metamorphosis must have occurred, from designer’s dream to consideration of production, and then to actually turning the concept car into reality.
Before we got the actual explanation of how it all came about, we were simply plunked into a group of TTs, which had been parked in semicircle inside a hangar at the airport in Austin, Texas. And we were off, running the willing little engines up through the gears with a precise-feeling 5-speed manual gearbox, dashing down freeway ramps and on out I35 — yes, the same I35 that runs from Up North in Minnesota all the way down deep through the heart of Texas, and on through the twisty hill country between Austin and San Antonio.
The car, which will be in Audi showrooms nationwide within the next month, indicates that underneath that stout, sturdy, proud, Teutonic exterior of Audi, there beats the heart of a sports-car enthusiast. For decades, Audi has let Porsche be the German sports-car builder, and Mercedes has been out there with luxurious sports cars as well. Volkswagen even had the Scirocco for years as a sporty coupe, and BMW finally got into the sports car end of things with the Z3 a couple years ago.
In those last couple of years, the new trend has been for a new breed of German sports cars, priced at just around $40,000, that includes the Porsche Boxster, the Mercedes retractable hardtop SLK, and the Z3. It is into that segment that Audi finally burst forth with the TT, which will begin at a base price of $30,000. And it will be highly competitive not only because of its amazingly reasonable price.
THE BEGINNING
Marc Trahan, who is in charge of product planning for Audi’s U.S. arm, and is one of those rare types who can not only answer any questions ranging from technical to marketing but can translate his own answers into understandable terms, explained the quick overview of the car.
“Freeman Thomas, a designer in our Sema Valley design studio, first designed the concept car,” Trahan said. “The idea was to be very pure, and to incorporate geometric shapes. The cylinder and the circle are the purest geometric forms, and you will notice they recur in various places on the car. When you see this car, it looks like the body has been stretched tight over that original 1994 drawing.
“It has Teutonic purity; every line and form must be justified. And it must all come together in an absolutely pure result.”
From Audi’s home-base factory in Ingolstadt, Germany, the TT is built in Gyor, Hungary, in a plant Audi has used since 1992 as the site to produce its extremely efficient engines. While producing over a million engines a year, the plant also has now been altered to ouse a new and efficient assembly plant. Ten trains make the run from Ingolstadt to Gyor every day, and body panels stamped out in Ingolstadt one day can be assembled into a new TT by the next morning.
The TT platform is the same one used for the A3, a blunt coupe that has had tremendous success in Europe and is slightly smaller than the world-class A4 sedan.
The name TT might seem logically to have sprung from Tradition and Technology, but, Trahan explained, it came from the term “Tourist Trophy,” which is what came to be known as the victor’s reward for racing at the Isle of Man, where all comers raced with either motorcycles or cars, from 1905 to 1922. The cars could be any touring cars, you raced whatever you could drive to the circuit. NSU motorcycles, which later would be taken over by Audi in 1969, were primary competitors in those races, making the TT name commemorative for the company as well.
In styling, Trahan went over the look of the TT. It looks like it has a chopped top because it has high door sills, which meet the “eyebrows” of the top of the wheelwells perfectly.
“The wheels and tires themselves are a prominent part of the design,” Trahan said. “The gap between the wheel-housing and the top of the wheel are considered very important, and the springs had to fit exact tolerances to maintain that spacing.”
Even the fuel filler has prominence. Most cars attempt to hide the door to the fuel-filler in the bodywork. Audi figured it’s an important item, and decided to show it off with a brushed aluminum circle and a pop-up cap on the flank.
Inside the cockpit, there are no woodgrain touches, either real or plastic. There is only the supplest of leathers and polished — but not too bright — aluminum. That aluminum recurs to circle the instruments, on the cupholders, the steering wheel horn ring, the shift knob and a panel that is hinged to fold down over the 80-watt audio system, and the silvery look also is on the perforated stainless steel facing of the pedals.
“The leather is Valcona leather, on the seats and door panels,” said Trahan. “It is a special Italian leather that is natural, with virtually no coating so that it gets better with age. We’re the first to use this particular type of leather in an automobile.”
THE DRIVING
To compete with such luminaries as the Z3, Boxster and SLK, to say nothing of world sports cars such as Corvette and various alternatives from Japan, the TT had to be more than a unique, attention-grabbing pretty face. It also had to perform.
For that, Audi uses its small but extremely potent 1.8-liter 4-cylinder engine, which, two years ago, was equipped with five valves per cylinder (three intake, two exhaust), run off dual overhead camshafts. Such a small engine might lack low-end torque, so Audi runs a low-pressure turbocharger on it.
For the TT, 180 horsepower peaking at 5,200 RPMs, but a strong 173 foot-pounds of torque as well. That torque number is good, for a small, light sports car, but the beauty of it is that its 173 peak is attained at only 1,900 RPMs, and — imagine this — it remains constant at that peak all the way to 4,700 RPMs.
The result is moderate acceleration from 0-20, then an uplifting surge that can carry 0-60 in only 7.4 seconds, and can go on through the gears to whatever speed you want, with an electronic shutoff at 130 mph. It also can deliver an estimated 22-31 miles per gallon, city or highway.
Aside from its design, the high-performing TT also breaks away from the tired old tradition that says to be a true sports car, a vehicle must have the engine in front and the drive wheels at the rear. Audi, for years, has proven that front-wheel drive designed properly can get you through the tightest curves swiftly and even more surely, because the front wheels pull and the rear wheels never try to pass up the front. And, of course, for over two decades Audi has been producing the incredible quattro — lower-case “q’ please — system of all-wheel drive, which is designed for performance around curves and just happens to be superb in all manner of foul weather besides.
We sped around curves, marveling at the TT’s ability to remain with a flat-based attitude no matter how sharply we hurled it, and the smooth comfort never was compromised, to say nothing of the absolute feeling of control. Nonetheless, somebody in the press gathering sort of moaned the traditional moan at the apparent compromise of front-wheel drive in the TT.
“Audi traditionally has believed in front-wheel drive, or all-wheel drive, as the two most tractable systems,” Trahan said, diplomatically. “We think, quite frankly, that those are the best two drivetrains.”
Then he explained the production plan. First, the front-wheel drive TT hits the showrooms. Then, by late summer, the quattro version of the 180-horsepower TT. The quattro system adds 250 pounds to the 2,655-pound lightweight, but 0-60 times remain the same because the all-wheel-drive system’s dispersal of power compensates for the weight addition by eliminating any wheelspin on hard acceleration.
A year from now, the TT will be available as a roadster, without a top, but with an easy to operate softtop and an available hard cover. And by then, a new version of the same 1.8 turbo engine will be offered with new cylinder blocks, a different turbo and throttle control, delivering 225 horsepower and with a 6-speed manual shifter.
That one will undoubtedly cost around $40,000. As it stands, the start-up TT for $30,500 — with standard leather interior — will be a certain sellout. And when you fling it around a tight series of curves on a twisty road with that new, quick-ratio steering, and find out that all you’re missing by not having rear drive is the lack of heart-in-your-throat feeling that you might spin out.
And when you nestle into that special leather on the seats, it makes you wonder how neat that leather will become with age and as it gets accustomed to holding your body. You wonder, and you can’t help wanting to find out.
TECHNICAL TOUCHES
Along with the ability to go, the TT can stop on the traditional dime, with oversized brakes and an antilock system. It also has airbags, with a shutoff switch for the passenger seat. And while the two jumpseats in back are small, they would work for little kids or for small adults on a short hop. But at least they’re back there, which gives the TT an edge on strict 2-seaters.
In the driver’s seat, you notice the ergonimic detail. Round knobs that can be twisted or tilted perform logical functions. Under the rear hatch, you have a surprising 14 cubic feet of cargo space, and it can be expanded to 23 cubic feet by folding down the rear seats.
With heated windshield washers and retractable headlight washers, the TT is ready for even Up North winters, which would otherwise be justified into ignoring sports cars or at least parking them from November to April.
The TT also comes with Audi’s traditional safety components. It has what Trahan described as 50-hertz bending frequency in its body structure, where rigidity of 25-30 is considered world-class for harmonic frequency of vibration. It also has a side impact bar that includes a rear element that transmists any side impact to the floor.
The body is made of fully galvanized steel with an aluminum hood and still gets a multiple-step anti-corrosion process. It carries Audi’s unique three-year warranty, with all service done free.
In dimensions, the TT is 159.1 inches long, 73.1 inches wide, and only 53 inches high. Its styling gives it the look of an athlete, crouched and about to spring into a 100-meter dash.
It all makes sense, because Audi has been a subtle, almost background performer with its excellent A4 sedan, its mid-luxury A6 sedan, and its all-out A8 luxury flagship, plus its new A4 and A6 Avant station wagons. Under all those conservative but classy outer skins, Audis always have been fun to drive, and satisfying to drive fast and hard, with responsiveness to go with their durability.
All that was missing was a bold statement to the world that an athlete’s heart and mind were working beneath that business-person’s demeanor. The TT delivers that statement.
Midsize Regal GS sets pace for ‘new’ Buick
My favorite Buick is the Regal GS. That might be because the Regal in general and the GS in particular bridges the gap from what Buick used to be to what Buick wants to be — indeed, must become — to stay viable in the future.
The key word among all Buicks, though, is familiarity. If you’re a Buick fan, you might call it stability, and there’s something to be said for stability in automotive building.
Buick has been sticking to tradition for years, and it has established a strong, cult-like following. Solid cars, with traditional American bigness and soft, squishy comfort, coupled with strong, straight-ahead-acceleration power, have been features that run as a common thread tying together all Buicks.
Over the past decade, General Motors has changed philosophies several times, alternating between trying to make models from various branches similar, and then varying them to make them different. Right now, we are in a “different” phase, as GM tries to alter the look and market concepts of Cadillac, Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac and Chevrolet.
The biggest problem facing Buick in the ’90s is encouraging people outside that cult to consider buying a Buick, because the average age of Buick buyers was getting up near 70, and, obviously, diminishing. The older buyers might shy away from the current high-tech trends and gadgets, but the younger buyers might demand them.
The internal fight, then, is how to forge ahead with technology without losing that tradition.
Buicks have traditionally featured the soft, sofa-like approach to comfort, while younger buyers and those more attuned to the modern concept of firm-but-not-harsh comfort has swept through all phases of the market. Firmness means better control compared to the wallowing beasts of the past, and a supportive, firm seat not only can be more comfortable on a long trip, but enhances driver alertness by eliminating a lot of the fatigue of the softer seats.
All Buicks have evolved toward a Park Avenue-like appearance. If you park them, two at a time, a half-block away, it would be difficult even for an expert to differentiate at a glance the Park Avenue and the LeSabre, or either one of those from the base-line Century. All of them have adopted the once-exclusive Park Avenue look of a sort of modified Coca-Cola bottle shape, with a wider hump over the rear wheelwell, at the back of the rear door pillar. And all of them have adopted a Park Avenue-type grille, with a low, horizontal oval splitting aerodynamic headlight covers.
The Regal mid-size sedan has a lot of that family resemblance, except that the GS grille is color-keyed, which sets it apart distinctly. And maybe that’s another reason I like it.
DRIVING FEEL
While driving the Regal GS, I also recently had the opportunity to drive both the Park Avenue Ultra and the Century — both the top and bottom extremes of the Buick line.
Comparing the Park Avenue Ultra to the Regal means switching from sporty and athletic to much, much larger and more luxurious. The Park Avenue is still athletic, but more in the version of a middle-age jogger than one who might still be playing pick-up hockey, basketball or softball. Carrying the analogy further, the Regal buyer might be running Grandma’s Marathon, while the Park Avenue Ultra buyer might be passing out cups of refreshment at stations along the course.
As for dimensions, here’s how the Buicks compare:
Overall length–Century 194.6 inches, Regal 196.2, LeSabre 200.8, Park Avenue 206.8. Wheelbase–Century 109, Regal 109, LeSabre 110.8, Park Avenue 113.8. Rear headroom–Century 37.4, Regal 37.4, LeSabre 37.8, Park Avenue 38.0. Rear legroom–Century 36.9, Regal 36.9, LeSabre 40.4, Park Avenue 41.4. Curb weight–Century 3,353 pounds, Regal 3,543, LeSabre 3,443, Park Avenue 3,884.
It takes personal preference to evaluate luxury touches, but obviously the difference of about a half-inch rear headroom between the Regal/Century platform twins and the LeSabre or Park Avenue, is insignificant, although the extra three or four inches of rear legroom on the larger pair might be meaningful to buyers who want that limousine feel.
You climb into the driver’s seat of the Buick Park Avenue Ultra, and you feel a wealth of luxury, and familiarity. The newly redesigned LeSabre, which is only a tad smaller than the Park Avenue flagship in Buick’s line, shares that familiar feeling. Moving down a tad further, the Buick Regal has a distinctly different feel, but there also are numerous doses of familiarity. Same with the Century, which enjoys a more bargain price range.
The Century starts out at just around $20,000, with the Regal in the mid-$20,000 range. The LeSabre goes up a little, and the Park Avenue Ultra, fully loaded, is around $38,000.
REGAL TOUCHES
The GS is the sportiest model of the Regal, and the test car I recently drove was a rich, dark blue that almost looked black in subdued light. It had a couple of definite assets compared to its Buick relatives, such as a pleasantly padded steering wheel instead of the usual too-thin wheel Buick is known for. It also has some serious bows to tradition — most notably the 3800 Series II V6 engine, which, in the GS, can be had in supercharged form to produce a sporty kick of 240 horsepower and 280 foot-pounds of torque.
The test Regal GS came with the Touring Suspension, which allows it to turn and steer with more agility. In GM’s scheme of things, Pontiac gets the stiffest, sportiest feel, and Oldsmobile the next, leaving Buick to firm up the softest of the corporation’s alternatives, and making the Touring Suspension a valuable ally in the compromise.
A performance switch allows you to hold the car’s shiftpoints to higher revs, letting you get more into the power band of the big engine’s capability. And a traction-control button on the console further enhances driver control by allowing you to disengage the traction-control when you might need a little wheelspin to enable the front-wheel-drive platform to escape from slippery conditions.
The upgraded audio system is nice, with cassette and CD players along with the radio, controllable by remotes on the steering wheel. And the trunk is spacious, with a cargo net to hold valuable things from slip-sliding around, although those features, too, are common among other Buicks.
The feel of the Regal GS’s steering and handling is improved by the heft of the padded steering wheel.
But my preference for the Regal goes beyond its sporty look and feel. The front bucket seats seem to have more firmness and support than traditional Buicks, which always have tended to give my wife, Joan, a sore back on any trip longer than 20 minutes. Beyond that, if you’re 6-feet tall and climb into the rear seat, you will note that you have adequate headroom under the ceiling, and adequate legroom for your knees behind the front buckets.
Adequate is not the same as spacious, or cavernous. But adequate is good enough for such a feature, especially for car-buyers who won’t be having a daily or regular passenger list of over-6-footers in the back.
OLD V6 REBORN
The 3800 V6 in the Regal GS is the same engine you can get in the base Regal without the supercharger’s extra power, and which also is the standard engine in the bigger LeSabre and the biggest Park Avenue Buicks — normally aspirated in the LeSabre and base Park Avenue, and supercharged in the Park Avenue Ultra.
The Century, which, nowadays, is pretty much an entry-level Regal, was powered by the 3.1-liter V6, while the other three all had the Series II version of the 3.8-liter V6. Both engines are impressive from the standpoint of power and fuel economy, and from the standpoint of being upgraded by modernizing tricks. But both are aged in terms of contemporary high-tech competition.
The 3.1 began life as the Chevrolet 2.8-liter V6 over three decades ago. It was expanded to 3.1 more recently, and it churns out an adequate 160 horsepower and 185 foot-pounds of torque in the 3,353-pound Century. The 3800 was a Buick original in 1975, and it has taken over as GM’s standard V6 in many applications, turning out 200 horses and 225 foot-pounds of torque in normally-aspirated form, and the supercharged 240 horse/280 torque upgrade.
Neither engine has overhead camshafts, although GM is to be praised for spending so much engineering energy to make a pushrod engine keep competing. In its 24-year history, the 3800 has had its valves, ignition, and fuel-intake systems thoroughly renovated, and a decade ago it added a counter-balance shaft to ease vibration. In 1995, the 3800 was totally redone to make the Series II, with a lowered deck height, reduced weight, improved internal strengthening, stiffer valvetrain, and virtually all other components revised or redesigned to improve efficiency.
Both engines are commonly found in models from Chevrolet, Pontiac and Oldsmobile, and are made more efficient by a seamless 4-speed automatic transmission that is exceptionally smooth in its performance and shiftpoints.
Still, it was only a matter of time until GM came out with a new, modern V6, which it has done for 1999, with the 3.5-liter, dual-overhead-cam, four-valve-per-cylinder engine. But this year, it goes only to Oldsmobile for the Intrigue, where it is an extra-cost option beyond the 3800. All the Buicks, including the Regal GS, will be just that much better when they, too, get the new engine.
CRTICISM REVISITED
The Regal GS also has had its ergonomics improved. The Park Avenue, for example, has gotten tangled up a little in trying to add gadgets and keep the old feel. The door handle, for example, is difficult to reach under the new panel that contains the window switches.
And there are eight switches, two of which are two-way rockers, to control the heat-air system. To add to the high quality, Buick has mounted Michelin radials on the Park Avenue, but while driving the car in February, the Michelins proved they prefered to slip and slither a bit before finding traction.
On the other hand, the big Park floats over bumps with graceful ease, and still handles pretty well for such a hefty vehicle. And the sloping hood makes it easy to see the road better than ever.
I have always complained about gadgets such as power locks that don’t unlock, and stay-on headlights that leave you wondering if they’ll ever go out. And, of course, the heated seats are a wonderful option in Up North winters.
Buicks all have that automatic lock mechanism that clicks all the door locks when you move the shift lever out of park. Then when you stop, you have to fumble to find the inside door lock switch to let yourself or your passengers out. However, one of the nuances of that feature is easy to overlook during a short test drive, and I confess I have been guilty of criticizing something I didn’t fully understand.
You can program the standard power door locks on all but the LeSabre, on which it is optional, so taht it locks automatically when you shift out of park, but either unlocks when you again engage park, or stays locked until you push the unlock switch — that’s the way the test cars were set up, which was maddening.
Turns out, you can program the new Buicks with memory locks for various combinations. You can set it to lock when you shift out of park and then unlock when you again put it in park; you can set it to lock but then only unlock the driver’s door after reengaging park; you can simply have all the doors lock and stay that way (which was the way all three test cars were set); you can have it lock all the doors when you shift into park; or you can set it so there is no automatic lock or unlock.
Hallelujah.
About the Author
John Gilbert is a lifetime Minnesotan and career journalist, specializing in cars and sports during and since spending 30 years at the Minneapolis Tribune, now the Star Tribune. More recently, he has continued translating the high-tech world of autos and sharing his passionate insights as a freelance writer/photographer/broadcaster. A member of the prestigious North American Car and Truck of the Year jury since 1993. John can be heard Monday-Friday from 9-11am on 610 KDAL(www.kdal610.com) on the "John Gilbert Show," and writes a column in the Duluth Reader.
For those who want to keep up with John Gilbert's view of sports, mainly hockey with a Minnesota slant, click on the following:
Click here for sports