TT Coupe leads Audi’s performance jolt for 2000
[CUTLINE STUFF:
#1 (hopefully) / The Audi TT quattro coupe is like a piece of modern art — even against the natural art of a September sunset on Park Point.
#2 (possibly grouping front, rear and inside shots)/ Blunt from the front and the rear, and followed through inside, the TT blends futuristic and retro.
#3/ While Audi built the TT Coupe to attract buyers, it also added impressive high-performance touches to its A4, A6 and A8 sedans, which were introduced at California’s Laguna Seca race track.
[[[GOOD PULLOUT LINE: Some people love it, some think it looks weird. Either way, once your eyes focus on it, you simply cannotstop looking at the TT Coupe. ]]]
Pick an angle, any angle, and examine the new Audi TT sports car.
There it sits, a blunt-looking little thing. High-rising curve to the aerodynamically smooth front end, intriguing angles of lines and curves that include the windshield and the teardrop-shaped roofline, and then an abrupt, blunt, rear end, again following an almost circular series of curves.
The car draws stop-in-your-tracks attention wherever you go. A young woman manning the cash register at a Twin Cities suburban gas station simply abandoned the register to stand at the window and stare, asking me about every detail of the car before processing my credit card.
Out on Brighton Beach, just east of Lester River at the east end of Duluth, I parked by the lake and got out to look at the TT Coupe. A young man and woman came driving by in a well-worn sedan, and I heard the guy let out a whoop, even though his windows were shut. He stopped, right in the middle of the narrow road, and the two of them got out of their car for a closer look, forgetting for a moment that they were blocking traffic.
The best reaction was on a midweek evening, driving across the Aerial Bridge and on down Park Point. A fellow and woman were just about to climb into their car when we went by, and they both stopped, so stunned that, literally, their eyes bulged and their jaws dropped.
Some people love it, some think it looks weird. Either way, once your eyes focus on it, you simply cannot stop looking at the TT Coupe. There is nothing current about the car; rather it is a compelling blend of futuristic and retro. It’s like a piece of modern art, an intriguing sculpture that you keep looking at in hopes of deciphering some mystical, subtle meaning.
Audi, the German builder of substantial cars at comparatively reasonable prices, has been making cars that mostly go after Mercedes and BMW, and stand up very well in such exclusive company, which means they also contend well with any sedans, anywhere. It so happens that Audi outsells its two more prestigious German rivals in the Minnesota region, which is the bold-faced explanation of the value of front-wheel drive or all-wheel drive in Up North winter conditions. Mercedes and BMW makes exceptional front-engine/rear-drive sedans and sporty cars, while all Audis are front-wheel drive or benefit from the fabulous all-wheel-drive quattro system.
So for 2000, Audi brought to life its sports-car concept vehicle from two years ago. Audi wanted to make a statement with the TT, and, after a week-long test drive to reinforce brief introductory drives, that statement ends with an exclamation point!
The statement Audi wanted was that the company builds thoroughly enjoyable and competent over-achievers among its A4, A6 and A8 sedans, and the Avant station-wagon versions of the A4 intermediate and A6 midsize vehicles, and everyone who has driven them realizes it. But it was time for the company to slap the world upside the head and prove that it not only can jump into the current trend of high-performance sports cars, but it can do it with unprecedented flair.
FULL-LINE PERFORMERS
I had a chance to drive the first TT at the car’s introduction in Austin, Texas, last spring. It was only offered in front-wheel-drive form then, but that was enough to indicate Audi had, indeed, built a winner. More recently, I had the chance to drive almost everything in Audi’s line for 2000 at the company’s full-line introduction near Monterey, Calif., around the hilly terrain by Laguna Seca race course.
There were a lot of vehicles there that show Audi intends to upgrade the capabilities of all its cars, stretching beyond high-tech to offer compelling high-performance.
At that time, I got the chance to sample the TT Coupe with quattro, Audi’s legendary all-wheel-drive system. The concept is to give the outside wheels on a curve more power, to equalize their need to turn farther. It makes the car feel like it’s on rails, and foul-weather traction simply becomes a byproduct of the system’s effectiveness.
For the past week, I was able to get my hands on a factory test-fleet 2000 model TT Coupe with quattro, and all my first impressions were reinforced dramatically. As evidence of quattro’s efficient each-wheel-pulls-its-share philosophy, the heavier quattro version has virtually identical acceleration times, within a tenth of a second, and fuel economy remains the same. I got 22 strictly in town, and 26 miles per gallon on combined city-freeway use.
But the rest of the Audi line can’t be overlooked for 2000, and obviously Audi’s plan is for the TT to draw folks to the rest of the sedans.
The A4, the car that turned Audi’s fortunes around in the last five years, and made its used car prices go from the worst to the best in U.S. resale, is being renovated for 2000, and that was one car that wasn’t available at the full-line drive. It will remain the volume leader, with prices starting at $24,000.
However, an S4 was available. That is the A4 after being tweaked for sports performance with the same totality as BMW gives its M3, or Mercedes its C43. It has 17-inch concept wheels, revised suspension points and firmness, a faster steering ratio, larger brakes, a standard 6-speed manual shifter or the auto-manual Tiptronic, plus an amazing engine. While the A4 has a 1.8-liter 4-cylinder or a 2.8-liter V6, the S4 has a 2.7-liter V6, with dual overhead camshafts, 5 valves per cylinder, and twin turbochargers. It delivers 250 horsepower and 258 foot-pounds of torque, peaking at 1,800 RPMs and remaining constant to 4,000 RPMs. With quattro standard on the S4, you actually can drive in sixth gear at 1,000 RPMs — idle speed — and when you step on the gas it simply pulls itself up to speed.
On a controlled, twisty roadway at Laguna Seca, I red-lined the S4 in fourth gear, and was startled to note that was 120 miles per hour. With two gears to go. The S4 also has a specific interior with unique seats and instrumentation. For all you get, the $37,900 sticker is a bargain for the discriminating — and wealthy — buyer.
The larger A6, which was redesigned for 1999, is a streamlined, stylish midsized car, but its competent 2.8-liter V6, even with 5-valves per cylinder, can’t compete with BMW’s 540 with its 4.4-liter V8. So for 2000, Audi puts the 4.2-liter V8 from the A8 flagship under the A6 hood. At 250-horsepower, the 40-valve V8 is enough of a boost from the 2.8’s 200 horsepower to challenge the 540 BMW very effectively. But Audi also makes available the 2.7-liter turbo V6 from the S4 — offering 300 horsepower that vaults the A6 to new performance levels. The A6 prices are lower than for 1999, ranging from the 2.8 version at $33,950 to the 4.2 V8 at $48,900, but the bargain of the batch might be the 2.7-biturbo at $38,550.
The A8, the all-aluminum, luxury flagship, has had its space-frame body reinforced to be more rigid, and adds all-aluminum suspension parts. The A8 is the only premium sedan to have passed the U.S. government crash tests with 5-star ratings — the highest possible. On top of that, the 4.2-liter V8, but tunes the 5-valve version to 310 horsepower and makes a 5-speed manual available. Built like a jet aircraft and with the 40-valve V8 and quattro standard, the A8 also is lower priced than last year, at $62,000.
AH, BUT THE TT…
Meanwhile, back at the TT Coupe. Audi talks about the “purity and simplicity in design” right from the time it was a concept car-show vehicle. The design touches are neat, and they continue to recur throughout, interior as well. Brushed stainless steel accents the gauge and vent bezels, the console trim, the floor shifter, and the pedals.
The TT comes with Audi’s 1.8-liter 4-cylinder with its 5-valve heads and low-pressure turbo, that runs its 180 horsepower right off the plateau of maximum torque. With the quattro representing the first upgrade since the TT’s introduction, the next will be an increased-power version with 225 horses and 207 foot-pounds of torque. And a roadster version is coming soon.
Not to be overlooked is that Audi made full use of the shorter wheelbase of the TT and the convenient size of the 1.8 engine, and hooked it up to an electronic quattro system, rather than the Torsen quattro of the sedans. The difference is that the electronic system can allow the TT to run almost as a front-wheel-drive vehicle until the computer detects the tendency for one of those front wheels to spin, then it can transfer power to the rear axle, up to 100 percent of the power, in fact.
Getting into the TT requires some care, if you’re 6-feet tall or more. Once inside, there’s plenty of room. The rear seat is, basically, just a token, but the storage area under the rear hatch is surprisingly good, and the rear seatbacks fold down to expand it to the same capacity as the A4 sedan. Still, you need to fold your head down when getting in to avoid a whack on the roof. Inside, the visibility seems lessened by the low, almost retro roofline, although it becomes as convenient as a baseball cap bill when you’re driving into the sun.
At launch, you ride the clutch just a bit to get away, then it zips on off to the 6,500 redline. The 0-60 times are about 7.2 seconds, but the car’s handling, fit and overall aura make such things as acceleration times seem boringly passe. You fit into the sculptured buckets so well, and the pedals and switches are right where they should be. The door grips are angled, and the power window switches are at fingertip reach from there. A small panel ahead of the floor shift slides forward to reveal the switch that opens the trunk and pops the race-car styled gas cap on the right flank.
Headlights are xenon-discharge gas, with bluish brightness and a sharp cutoff, and the tiny lights, and their foglight and high-beam compatriots, shine through a smoked lens for an extremely stylish and quite sinister-looking effect.
The fun-to-drive quotient is off the scale, making it a worthy challenger for the BMW Z3, the Mercedes SLK, the Porsche Boxster, the new-and-coming Honda S2000, and even the Corvette. Unlike all of those dazzling competitors, the TT will flat enjoy the slipperiest conditions Up North winters can offer. And the price makes it more appealing: a base of $30,500, with the quattroa $1,750 option. That makes a car like the tester a $32,250 steal.
The biggest problem a TT buyer might have is that as fun as the car is to drive, you might not be able to pass up the urge to park it every once in a while, just to climb out and walk around it, slowly, examining every contour and blend of retro and future.
Eclipse, Sunfire offer two views of open sky
You walk out of work, enjoying the bright sunshine, and you climb into your car. Let’s say your car is a sporty coupe, such as a new Pontiac Sunfire, or a new Mitsubishi Eclipse. You climb in, turn the ignition key until it starts up, buckle up your shoulder harness, and take off.
What’s wrong with that picture?
Just one thing. You forgot that before you drive off, you were supposed to flip a switch and turn a handle and wait a couple of seconds while the top goes up, back and down — freeing you of all your more mundane earthly responsibilities for the moment, and letting your hair flutter in the open air, against that all-blue sky.
Convertibles: If there were more of ’em, we could get by with a lot fewer analysts and counselors in this world.
And yes, you can get such mainstream, normal sporty coupes as the Eclipse or the Sunfire in convertible form, which proves you don’t have to spend over $40,000 to get a convertible, but you can have the best of both worlds for $20,000 or $30,000.
When you think of convertibles, you often think of them with the top down, in southern scenarios, with palm trees waving in the background, maybe along the Gulf Coast. You often don’t think of convertibles Up North, where the weather is is simply unsuitable for half the year, and, at best, changeable for the other half.
Both of those stereotypes are inaccurate, however.
First, whenever I’ve been in those southern areas, people spend most of their time trying to get out of the sun, either into air-conditioned apartments, hotels or shopping centers, or into cars with the air cranked up — or into convertibles with the tops up!
Second, while we northerners may grumble now and then when we get those 50 or 60 degree days in what is supposed to be midsummer, but then along comes one of those days like last Tuesday or Wednesday, mid-70s, bright sun, stunning blue sky, no clouds — absolutely perfect. When we get days like that, we tend to do everything in our power to capitalize.
Because of those realities, I believe northern folks enjoy and appreciate convertibles more than southern types.
In the past two weeks, I got a chance to drive both the Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder GS-T convertible, and the Pontiac Sunfire GT convertible, and both serve their clientele in different, but effective, fashion. Both have some similarities, such as in safety equipment, where both have airbags and side-impact braces.
MITSUBISHI ECLIPSE
Mitsubishi’s Eclipse always has been personal sporty coupe that outperforms many sports cars but has the manners of a more docile coupe when the need arises. Mitsubishi used to share the Eclipse with Plymouth as the Laser, and with Chrysler as the Eagle Talon, but even though Chrysler dropped its versions, Mitsubishi still assembles Eclipses for itself as an American car in Normal, Ill.
The Eclipse is front-wheel drive, with the option of all-wheel drive, and you can make it perform tricks with only the basic four-cylinder engine by choosing the turbocharged version.
The test car was the GS-T version, with the turbocharged 2.0-liter Mitsubishi engine, with dual-overhead-camshafts, four valves per cylinder, and the turbo, to make the 2.0 feel like 4.0 liters.
Sleek and slippery as the shape of the Eclipse is, the car takes on a completely different personality when you take the top off. On the Eclipse, all you need do is make sure the power is on, the car is in neutral and the emergency brake is on, then you hit the dash switch and in about five seconds, the top is down and stashed behind the back seat, just ahead of the trunk.
There is some shakiness, typical of cars converted to convertible duty. It is heavy, because it takes reinforcement to replace the structural solidity the roof contributes to the coupe frame, but it doesn’t interrupt the Eclipse’s great stability and hard-nosed cornering attributes.
The 1999 Eclipse Spyder GS-T is the last one before Mitsubishi thoroughly restyles the Eclipse, going to a larger car with a larger V6 engine; no more high-revving four, no more turbocharger. Instead of scaring off customers, this time losing such a mini-classic might cause a rush to get the current model.
The test car came in a color called Sundance Plum Pearl, a rich, dark reddish-purple. It lists for $26,960, with an as-delivered sticker of $27,395, but before deciding that’s too expensive, consider that the car comes completely loaded.
Standard equipment includes the convertible top, turbo engine, four-wheel intedpendent suspension, four-wheel disc brakes with antilock, front and rear stabilizer bars, galvanized steel body panels, air-conditioning, security system integrated on the keyless entry system, cruise, power door locks, windows and mirrors, leather seats with 6-way adjustable driver’s seat, adjustable steering column, Infinity premium audio with eight speakers and a separate amp for the radio, tapeand disc players, 16-inch chrome-plated alloy wheels with locks, and 205/55 V-rated tires, rear window defroster, halogen headlights and foglights.
It’s also got a Homelink transmitter computer built-in.
With all the technical and performance stuff, the Eclipe still delivered 29 miles per gallon.
As for complaints, the 5-speed shifter was a bit balky, but that could be because of the newness of the car. The other thing is that while the trunk is deep and spacious, it is rounded off to meet the stylish tail, which means you can haul your set of golf clubs — but only in the back seat. They simply won’t fit in the trunk.
PONTIAC SUNFIRE
The Sunfire is Pontiac’s version of the Chevrolet Cavalier, which is an entry-level car that is a cut below the Eclipse in sophistication, and therefore is a comparative bargain at a sticker of $21,850, which includes $180 for a sport interior package that includes seat side support and lumbar adjustment and seatback pockets on the cloth seats.
I was prepared to kiss off the Sunfire as a pretender in the sporty-car convertible niche, but the more I drove the car, the more impressive it was.
It had susprising power, even with a four-speed automatic that tended to surge when it shifted, but the power came through because the car had a 2.4-liter twin-cam engine with 16 valves. That’s big, for a four-cylinder, and despite General Motors’ reluctance to switch its mainstream engines over to overhead camshafts, engines such as this one should show the General the benefits of overhead cams. It also should show that with more refinement it could become as smooth and quiet as the Mitsubishi gem.
Along with all the power, the Sunfire delivered over 32 miles per gallon on one tankful, and averaged 29.7 altogether in combined city/freeway driving.
The top on the bright red Sunfire was also easy to operate. You grasp a handgrip on the center-top of the windshield, push a thumb button and rotate the grip downward, then pull it back and the roof goes away. When you want to raise it, you grab the grip the same way, and push forward on it, and the top comes up. Simple.
For the price, the Sunfire GT offers a lot, including antilock brakes, like the Eclipse, but with rear-wheel drums complementing the front discs, instead of discs all around. It has cast aluminum wheels with 195/65 15-inch tires. The handling was good, although not as all-out sporty feeling as the Eclipse.
Air-conditioning, power locks with remote switchwork, power windows and mirrors, and a Delco stereo radio with compact disc player and an equalizer add to the pleasure of driving.
It also has the typical shakiness that comes with turning a coupe into a convertible, but it is not obtrusive, and is an easily acceptable trade for the sheer enjoyment of open-air driving. The rear deck spoiler adds to the sporty appearance of the Sunfire, which falls into place well in Pontiac’s lineup.
With each GM branch trying to establish its own niche, Pontiac seems far ahead of the pack, with the Bonneville solid among big sedans, the Grand Prix one of the most stylish big cars either in sedan or coupe mode, the Grand Am as an impressive compact, and now the Sunfire falling in as the bottom rung — but a very impressive car for an entry level weapon.
BMW 740, 540 and 323 all stand as instant classics
[cutline stuff:
The BMW 323, redesigned a year ago, has adequate room and exceptional performance.
Clear headlight lenses give the BMW 540 a distinct hawk-like look.
The flagship 740 BMW provides an enormous rear seat and trunk.
(for the accent shots…)
Optional Xenon gas-discharge headlights light up the night with bright precision.
The simplest cupholders of the 323 hold any size cup firmly in place better than more elaborate devices in the 540 or 740. ]
“Beemers,” they call them, a catch-phrase to denote any vehicle made by BMW. That includes the 3-Series sedan and coupe, the 5-Series sedan, the 7-Series sedan, and, more recently, the Z-3 sports cars.
At Bavarian Motor Works, it seems that every model turned out is a classic on its way to being identified. As luck would have it, I recently had the chance to test-drive the 323 entry-level sedan, a 540 Touring sedan, and a 740i Sport sedan. Let’s clear up one thing right away. BMWs are loaded with technical advancements and always combine luxury appointments with spectacular fun-to-drive characteristics, but they are expensive. The 3-Series is BMW’s lowest-priced, ranging from $26,000 on up to the test car’s $30,000. The 540 costs about $54,000, and the 740 about $63,000. All are front-engine/rear-drive, which makes them a handful in Up North winter conditions, even though they are designed to be extremely close to 50-50 weight distribution, front and rear, and have a highly advanced traction-control system.
BMW’s formula goes by body style and engine displacement, with the first of the three letters denoting the body size and the second and third numbers denoting the engine displacement. Simple. No birds, beasts or fish, or computer-selected word inventions for its models.
740 means luxury
You can get a 7-Series BMW either as a 750, with a 5.0-liter V12, or as a 740, with a 4.4-liter (but formerly 4.0) V8. The V8 is plenty, because it comes with four valves per cylinder, pumped by dual overhead-camshafts on each bank, and all choreographed by BMW’s variable valve timing technology. Those four cams and 32 valves responded well to the 5-speed automatic Steptronic transmission, which adapts its shiftpoints to the way you drive it, and which can be shifted manually if you choose.
The 740 Sport has larger 18-inch wheels and tires and firmer suspension, and specially firmed up seats that are adjustable 18 different ways. With memory settings, it is about as comfortable as you can get in a car, and there’s room for a small convention in the rear seat. The test car had light grey leather interior with its real-wood walnut trim on the console and dash.
It would be the car any sane person might choose if he or she could pick any car in which to drive, or ride, cross-country in style, comfort, and with a sporty flair. I got 24 miles per gallon on mostly highway driving, and the always responsive V8 whipped the big sedan around like a lightweight, although it weighs 4,255 pounds. That engine delivers 282 horsepower at 5,400 RPMs, and 324 foot-pounds of torque at 3,700 revs. The V12 offers 326 horses and 361 foot-pounds, but the difference isn’t noticeable, unless you can feel the difference between 6.9 seconds for the V8 to go 0-60, compared to the V12’s 6.6 seconds.
The 740 is most recognizable by its extended rear end, where most of its longer, 196.2-inch length adds to the rear-seat room and trunk space.
There are useful little doors and pockets throughout the interior, and the test car steering wheel had remote audio on the left and cruise controls on the right.
The test car’s base price of $62,400 rose $2,600 with the Sport package, and, even though I got 24 miles per gallon, it had to assess a $1,700 “gas guzzler” fee, which seems pretty silly as legislation goes in this era of 11-miles-per-gallon SUVs. The sticker total was $67,270.
540 Sport is potent
Moving down in size, the 5-Series sedan is 3,748 pounds and 188 inches long, but the 540 gets the same dynamite 4.4-liter, four-cam, 32-valve V8. That allows it to reduce the 0-60 time to 5.8 seconds with the six-speed manual, which has a top speed electronically limited to 155 mph.
The silvery 540 had rich, dark grey leather inside, and more real wood, and the Sport suspension was the perfect complement to the sophisticated hot-rod engine and the stick shift for providing an all-out sporty feel.
The strong engine and the weight of the sedan, coupled with a heavy clutch, made the car occasionally a handful to run up swiftly through the gears. It was always breathtaking, if not always easily mellow.
With more than adequate room in the rear seat, the 540 sets a pretty high standard, and at the price difference, it may be difficult to justify an extra $10,000 or more to get the longer 7-Series, because other than the all-out aura of luxury, the 5-Series offers plenty of everything.
Style wise, the 5-Series also was just redesigned two years ago, with the sleek nose taking on a more hawk-like appearance with the eyelid covers on the headlights.
And the headlights on the 540 test car were the $500 optional Xenon gas-discharge units, which are absolutely the best headlights I’ve ever seen on a car. The light cast is a truer-light blueish hue that makes the foglights appear yellowish. The headlights look almost like gunsights, and they shine with an amazing cutoff that shows brilliant light up to a precise, optically cut horizontal line that leaves total darkness above.
That makes it great for oncoming cars, because the intensity of the light cuts off at about the grille and doesn’t shine in driver’s eyes. Problem is, the blueish light is so stunning that oncoming drivers tend to stare at the BMW headlights, then later complain that they’re too bright.
BMW 323i
The 323 cheats a little on the engine formula, because it has a 2.3-liter engine, but BMW had a “325” model years ago, and used “323” to give the car a new name.
Used to be, the base sedan got the 1.8-liter four-cylinder, but for 1999, BMW decided to go to the 2.5-liter in-line six. Since the 328 has the 2.8-liter in-line six, the move up from the 1.8 to the 2.5 in the 323 was a significant upgrade.
The 2.5 has dual overhead camshafts and 24 valves — four per cylinder on the straight six — with the same variable valve timing. In fact, if you didn’t know there was a 328, the 323 would be plenty hot-performing for anybody’s taste. It is now made with an aluminum block, another upgrade that reduces the weight of the powerplant by 51 pounds, and it delivers 170 horsepower at 5,500 RPMs and 181 foot-pounds of torque at 3,500.
Because BMW never has overlooked the importance of fun in the equation, it offers a manual transmission in its sedans. The test 323 was such a dark green that it almost looked black, with parchment-color leatherette interior — felt like real leather, but wasn’t.
It also had a 5-speed manual transmission that shifted smoothly and had an easy, positive feel. It was quick, agile and delivered 29.5 miles per gallon, no matter how hard I drove it or how consistently high I revved it. At 3,100 pounds, and with an overall length of 174.5 inches, the 323 doesn’t need as much power to zoom from 0-60, achieving it in 7.1 seconds. Rear seat room is not as vast as its two bigger siblings, but it still is adequate for 6-footers.
The 323 has sensational seats, with every form-fitting bulge you could hope for, including a little pull-out front pad under your knees. It felt every bit as comfortable as the 540 seats, and firmer and with better lateral support than the big 740, for my taste.
And there was one other amazing feature — the cupholders. Now, cupholders are alien to German car-makers, simply because when you’re cruising along at 135 miles per hour on the autobahns, you are so focused that you don’t even think about cupholders. So they are for U.S. market cars, specifically. In the 740, and in the 540, there were neat little pop-out or fold-out devices to hold cups or pop cans, and they worked…OK, but no better.
In the 323, there were two simple little indentations in the center console, with four spring-loaded little clips inside each of them. Whatever size coffee mug or pop cup or can you had, it plunked firmly down into those receptacles and was held precisely in place. The more expensive cars had much more elaborate cupholders, but none of them worked as efficiently as the 323’s, once again proving one of BMW’s most-basic concepts — simple is best.
Once again, BMW has done such a phenomenal job with its lowest-priced sedan, that at a base of $26,400 boosted to $30,545 — and with the same phenomenal seats and Xenon headlights as the 540 — there is no question that the 323 represents a tremendous bargain for any car, and particularly for a BMW.
The people’s choices
At the time I drove the three cars, BMW had a special charity promotion going, where it would match the number of media-test-miles with dollars of corporate donations. The charities did well by me, because it was difficult to NOT drive the BMWs during their assigned weeks.
While buyers would have to go as far as the Twin Cities to find BMW dealerships, that’s not a problem for enthusiasts, which include car-fanatic magazines.
Two of the more prestigious of automotive magazines, Automobile and Car and Driver, rank the 10-best cars in the world in various categories. Car and Driver conducts a readers’ survey, and for the best midsize luxury sedan it picked the 3-Series BMW; for the best sports sedan, it picked the BMW 540 Sport; for the best large luxury sedan, C&D readers picked the 7-Series BMW; and for the best coupe, the choice was the BMW Z3.
Automobile’s list of 10 didn’t go by such specific categories, more going for selections that disregarded size, and it included the 3-Series BMW, the 5-Series BMW and the Z3’s “M” coupe among its picks.
Hardly seems fair. To have three or four selections among the top 10 didn’t leave much room for all the other manufacturers in the world. But that’s simply how good BMWs are. They are, at every level of size and/or price, the standard of driving enthusiasts.
SVT Contour proves FWD can spell F-U-N
[Cutline stuff:
#1 Ford’s SVT Contour sedan was parked among the specialty Mustang Cobra and F150 Lightning, all of which challenged the handling courses at the Dakota County Technical College in Rosemount.
#2 Like all the Special Vehicle Team projects, the Contour has been thoroughly modified with special engine, suspension, interior, wheels, tires and brakes. ]
When it comes to hot cars, there are stock vehicles, modified vehicles, and all-out toys. But when it comes to Ford’s Special Vehicle Team (SVT) projects, all three are united into factory specialty vehicles, built in limited quantities and sold at bargain prices.
I had the chance to drive the latest Cobra, which is an SVT model of the Mustang, when that car was introduced at Road America’s 4-mile road course at Elkhart Lake, Wis., a few years ago, when all the media types got thorough emergency-driving instruction from the expert Bob Bondurant driving school instructors — including Bob himself. And I knew the chance to drive the newest SVT project, the Lightning pickup truck, was coming for an upcoming column.
But when I got the chance to join some SVT owners for a special driving event last Saturday at Dakota County Technical College in the Twin Cities suburb of Rosemount, I knew I could get my hands on an SVT Contour — my personal favorite of all the SVT cars ever built.
It also meant another opportunity to prove my theory about high-performance driving, which is that a well-prepared front-wheel-drive car can not only match, but sometimes outshine traditional rear-drive performance cars.
What I didn’t know was that the facility at the Rosemount campus includes some specially designed short road courses — one a .6-mile circuit with about 13 turns in both directions, plus a half-dozen more kinks arranged by cones to prevent speeds from getting out of hand — plus a second course with longer straights that included an optional run into a flooded skidpad area to test steering control around cones during antilock braking on a slippery surface.
The event officially was an SVT owners on-track day, and an assortment of owners of SVT Contours, Cobras and Lightnings were there for a seminar on enjoying their cars’ quite-amazing capabilities in nearly all-out race-quickness situations.
As it turned out, I was the only media-type invited, and I had the keys to a jet-black SVT Contour for four hours.
We all first sat through a seminar on handling characteristics of the cars and how to control them at the edge of traction, then we rode in vans while Bondurant instructors took us around a couple of slow laps, both to acquaint us with the twists and turns and to explain how best to take each turn. The primary trick is to make a “late apex” out of each turn, because in performance driving, it’s not how hard you go into a turn but how swiftly you can come out of a turn that allows you to turn the best lap times.
Going into a turn too fast means you have to get off the power and on the brakes while the actual apex of the turn becomes past the geographic apex, then you’re left without power and having to start up again. If you try to follow the geographic apex, you come into the turn fairly fast, and you come out of the turn fairly fast. Ah, but if you set up wide and drive into the turn carving the apex beyond the geographic apex, you can get around the turn with smooth control and be accelerating hard at the same moment that the early-apex driver is coming off the brakes and fighting for control.
Between sessions on the track, we all were treated to specific seminars on the capabilities of each of the three SVT-built cars.
CORPORATE HOT RODS
Ford’s in-house performance types formed the Special Vehicle Team, which allows them to experiment and use their engineering expertise to take factory cars and redo them in a conversion that stresses higher performance, better handling, but always with a focus on making them sophisticated and easily driveable in everyday circumstances. On top of that, the styling differences follow a neat but subtle tendency.
The Cobra is one example. In Mustang GT form, it is a well-mannered, peppy coupe, and the 4.6-liter V8 performs well enough, with its single overhead camshaft and two valves per cylinder. When the SVT guys get their hands on it, they rebuild the same engine out of aluminum, entirely by hand, with two engineers per engine, and they sign their names on the valve cover of each engine. The result is an engine that is as close to a performance shop’s blueprinted modification as exists, and the horsepower goes up to 320. That proves the benefit of technology, because it matches the hottest Camaro/Firebird engines, which are a full 5.7 liters — 1.1 liters larger than the Cobra engine.
The F150 pickup truck gets major renovation as well, going from a strong-enough 4.6 or 5.4-liter V8 and coming out of the SVT shop housed in a stunning vehicle. An Eaton supercharger boosts the 5.4 form a stock 260 horsepower to 360 horses, with 440 foot-pounds of torque.
The Contour, meanwhile, goes from being a nice, perky 4-door sedan to a subtle screamer. The Duratec V6 retains its stock 2.5-liter displacement, but after thorough and careful revisions to the intake manifolds and expert tuning, the littleV6 turns out 200 horsepower. That equates to 76.8 horsepower per liter — absolutely the best output from any engine made in the U.S. and normally aspirated.
Naturally, all three vehicles are jacked up in price in SVT form. The Cobra goes from the Mustang’s approximate $20,000 to about $32,000, and the Lightning takes a $20,000 pickup and turns it out as a $30,000 boy-racer special. But the reason I like the Contour best is that a very good $18,000 sedan gets radical improvements in power, suspension, braking, wheels, tires, seats, instrumentation — everything — and still costs only $23,000. But consider that the care and engineering in the modifications of each of the three would cost an individual probably over $20,000 to do singly.
The problem is that limited production of these vehicles means not every Ford dealer has them. In Minnesota, Tousley Ford in White Bear Lake and Apple Valley Ford are among the SVT dealers, and a test drive in any of the three is pretty convincing.
ON THE TRACK
That’s what we were about last Saturday, test-driving.
On the 0.6-mile handling course, we lined up for a continuing sequence of three-lap runs. First out in our group was a silver SVT Contour, and when he was about one-third of a lap around, a fellow was waved out in a Cobra. When he got a third of the way around, it was my turn in the black Contour.
Having done a little road racing, and having attended a number of similar seminars, undoubtedly gave me a slight advantage over some of the SVT owners present. And my determination to prove the quickness of the front-wheel-drive Contour had my adrenaline at overflow.
Hard on the throttle, straight, through the quick right-left chicane, then around a sweeping left curve, followed by a kink to the right, then back to the left, then an extremely hard right and a hard left, then a straightway where the little 2.5-liter V6 could rev in second gear up to the 7,000 RPM electronic fuel-shutoff point just as we reached a hard right, back to a left kink, another left, then a little right, swinging back to the left…a short straight to a 90-degree left, then more cones for a right-left sequence, than a sharp right that led to a gentle left, heading back for the first turn.
Focusing completely on hitting every turn properly, the Contour’s power coupled with front-wheel drive performed just as I had anticipated. With rear drive, you need to get off the power or be hard on the brakes at a couple of spots on the track, or you’d simply spin out as the rear drive-wheels sought to overtake the front; with the SVT Contour, when you reach those same moments of crisis, you simply stay on the power and steer through the turn, letting the front wheels pull you straight while the rears simply follow along.
As if to find instant gratification, I overtook the far more powerful Cobra before the end on one lap, and its driver pulled off after one lap to let me by. By the end of the second lap, I was on the rear bumper of the silver Contour, and on the third lap I proved I could make every turn just by modulating the throttle — never once hitting the brakes.
We had time for a dozen more three-lap circuits, and it was nothing short of exhilarating.
It was similar on the second course, although it was not as ideal for the Contour’s potential. The second track’s longer straight stretches made me run out of revs in second gear, and hitting third gear meant going too fast and needing to stand on the brakes to get around the turns. The car would do that, and I learned quickly that getting off the power a bit earlier, and stabbing the brakes hard just as I started to turn caused the Contour’s nose to settle flat and aimed at the apex.
Roaring on into the soaked-down segment created an unexpected situation. Instructors advised us to go into that area fast, at about 50 miles per hour, and hit the brakes at the second cones, which should allow us to approach lockup, activating the antilock brakes so we could experience how good the steering remained to negotiate a quick left-right chicane.
I went in at 50, but found I could speed right through the chicane without hitting the brakes, because the Contour handled so surely and evenly. I tried it at 65, and while I hit the brakes firmly, it slowed enough so again I could get through without chattering the antilock. An instructor told me to go harder still, so I finally went in at over 75. Finally, the antilock system chattered to life and, sure enough, I could steer around the cones while braking.
However, I came away more impressed with the car’s handling than the antilock system’s sophistication.
Of all the high-performance cars built, the SVT Contour is the closest thing to an American BMW M3, except that it has front-wheel drive, which means it can work in Up North winters, too.
SVT’S FUTURE PLAN
While the SVT group will continue building Cobras and Lightnings at sellout levels, the future of the SVT Contour is limited.
The Special Vehicle Team seems capable of three simultaneous projects, and nobody will say what the third one will be, but it is certain that the Contour will be discontinued after the 2000 year model run. The problem is this country’s fixation with trucks and SUVs, which is where corporations make their biggest profits these days. Ford currently has the F150 pickup, the Taurus, Ranger, Explorer and Escort among the nation’s top 10 vehicles in sales, but the stock Contour has sort of slipped through the marketing cracks.
Sales of the car in Europe, where it is known as the Mondeo, remain strong, and the Duratec engines built in the U.S. are sent to Europe for use on the autobahns in those German Fords. But in the U.S., the corporate decision has been that the Contour plant could be used to build more SUVs, so the Contour is only scheduled to be produced through 1999 and 2000.
For SVT, that means the current outstanding Contour will finish this year, carry over through 2000, then will be built no more.
With some cars, being discontinued means plunging resale value. With the SVT Contour, discontinuing it means trying desperately to find one to buy, enjoy, and keep for as long as possible.
Revised Outback, Saab wagons might be safer SUVs
These are the times that fry men’s souls.
Temperatures in the 90s may shorten our tempers, increasing the potential of “road rage” when our fellow drivers do something decidedly stupid. But stupidity and the automotive business often seem to go hand in hand. Take the debate over the American trend toward trucks and sport utility vehicles — and it is distinctly a U.S. trend. Basically, those who have ’em, love ’em; those who don’t have ’em, hate ’em.
Both sides have a point. And to qualify it all, SUVs with their predominate all-wheel-drive capabilities, make more sense Up North, where people tend to use their vehicles as workhorses to haul trailers and camping, fishing, hunting gear. And I believe that if those who need SUVs didn’t need ’em, they wouldn’t buy ’em.
A few weeks ago, I test-drove a couple of Audi Avant station wagons, noting that how impressive they were and how efficiently they operated many of the tasks that are considered the domain of SUVs, but with far better fuel efficiency, performance, and ease of operation. I also mentioned how the Audi wagons might be the best-looking wagons in the industry.
Well, there is some pretty stiff competition.
I recently had the chance to drive the 2000 model year Subaru Outback, and the 1999 model Saab 9.5 wagon. Both of them offer further evidence that most people who are contributing huge dollars to companies for SUVs probably would best be served by rethinking the once and future world of station wagons.
2000 OUTBACK
Subarus have always been tough little critters, from the time they consisted only of hatchback coupes and small sedans. Shortly after that, they came out with an efficient, compact station wagon, and it evolved into the Legacy wagon. When the SUV craze started, Subaru was smart enough to put cross-hatch-covered foglights and oversized all-terrain tires on the Legacy station wagon, making it look like an all-terrain vehicle, and calling it the Outback.
The vehicle met with outstanding success, benefiting by the full-time all-wheel-drive that adorns all Subaru vehicles, and by Paul Hogan’s “Crocodile Dundee” ad campaign. For model year 2000, Subaru has renovated the Outback, making it sleeker, longer, and wider, with a revised front end adding little cutout insert panels to serve as blinders for the headlights.
The little, flat-opposed, 2.5-liter 4-cylinder engine remains the engine in all vehicles, and, with the 4-speed automatic transmission, I must say the Outback accelerated steadily, but not with brisk quickness, although it held freeway cruising speeds with ease.
But it a handsome wagon, with great room inside, and the addition of liquid filled engine mounts to shroud vibration, and a standard 6-way power driver’s seat and, on the Limited model, standard moonroof, leather-trimmed upholstery, and an all-weather package that has heated front seats and exterior mirrors, de-icing windsheld wipers, andviscous limited-slip rear end.
The Outbacks are built in the modern, joint-effort plant in Lafayette, Ind., which Subaru shares with Isuzu. The test Outback Limited listed for $27,400.
SAAB 9.5 WAGON
I had previously driven both the redesigned Saab 9.3 and 9.5 sedans, but I was not prepared for the station wagon. I’m not sure how to tactfully put this, but I like the basic eccentricity of the Saab design, but the new look is much more attractive on the SE wagon than on the sedan.
The Saab’s new look starts out sleek and tapered at the front, and comes back in a wedge — staying with the aerodynamic efficiency Saab uses in building jet fighter planes — which winds up meeting up with an angled rear pillar before continuing on to the spacious rear section in a series of complementary angles.
A week with the car makes me revise my previous suggestion about the Audi: I think the Saab 9.5 SE might be the best-looking station wagon on the planet. At $40,000, the Saab SE wagon is a considerably larger investment than the Subaru, and more in line with the Audi A6 Avant or the Volvo V70 wagon. In that range, it does perform well, with a dual-overhead-cam 3-liter (2,962 cc.) V6 and a 4-speed automatic running the front-wheel-drive platform. It has 200 horsepower and 229 foot-pounds of torque and it accelerates swiftly and impressively in all circumstances.
It, too, has a lot of rear storage area, with a fold-up cover to hide belongings. It also has a typical Saab interior, with cockpit-style instruments and controls, and at least part of the SE’s price is because of the rich leather seats, which should be investigated. If you like leather, and leather car seats, the exotic scent of the Saab’s high-class leather is captivating, and might be an unfair lure. Typically, they also are wonderfully supportive seats, certain to eliminate driving fatigue.
The comfort for four, or five, is good in the rear, exceptional up front. I had the chance to haul all sorts of stuff in the rear, which proved, again, that a good station wagon can match some of the best features of an SUV.
SUV ALTERNATIVES
A lot of folks who but big SUVs claim bigness and safety as vituous reasons, and they are eager to hear lobbyists tell how unfair it would be for the government to impose car-like limits on trucks for fuel economy. They say that forcing tighter CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards on trucks would force auto manufacturers to make smaller and therefore “less safe” vehicles.
The opposing view is that it’s absurd for families to buy big, powerful, gas-guzzling SUVs for one or two people to ride in to the mall and back, so therefore trucks should meet the same rules as cars.
Let’s try to get a couple of things straight, here. U.S. auto makers make virtually all their profit on trucks, from pickups to SUVs to vans, and car-selling has virtually become a loss-leader scheme that can eventually lead more customers into trucks at a later time. So the auto makers send lobbyists to Washington, pleading with (bribing?) our governing folks to vote against tighter fuel-economy standards on trucks.
The lobbyists may not know a 5.7 V8 from a 3800 V6, or a 2.4-liter 4-cylinder from a 1.0-liter 3-cylinder. Behind the lobbyists’ subterfuge is a facade, behind which corporations hide the rip-off concept of their marketing.
Worst of all is when corporate types and lobbyists play the “safety” card, claiming that tighter fuel-economy rules would force them to quit making oversized vehicles with huge engines, so families would be less safe in crashes. You and I might assume that the sheer bulk of the big, heavy SUVs makes occupants inherently safer, but the actual facts indicate that many well-made compact, midsize or large cars protect occupants as well, and in some cases better, than SUVs.
I saw one test that said occupants in a Nissan Altima had a better chance of escaping injury in a crash than those in a Chevrolet Tahoe, and another that said those in a Saturn would be safer than those in a Ford Expedition.
We don’t know exactly how occupants would do when hitting a wall straight on, although we DO know that most accidents have nothing to do with running into a barrier at a fixed speed, whether 20 or 30 miles per hour, or 55, for that matter. Most accidents happen left corner to left corner in the real world, which is the way European crash tests are conducted. Reality says that the vast majority of crashes occur while the driver is swerving, braking or skidding, but nowhere do the U.S. crash tests take that into account.
The crash tests also assume that crashes are inevitable. They aren’t. They can be avoided, which means braking distances and avoidance agility also should be listed. Let’s examine an assortment of vehicles, based on the consistency of Car and Driver magazine’s tests.
When it comes to stopping distances from 70-0 miles per hour: Among SUVs, the Cadillac Escalade (same as the GMC Denali or Chevy Tahoe) takes 220 feet, the Lincoln Navigator (sames as the Ford Expedition) takes 222 feet. As for pickup trucks, the the Ford F150 takes 232 feet to stop from 70; the Chevy Silverado 1500 4×4 needs 220 feet, and for compact pickups, the Nissan Frontier King Cab needs 224 feet; the Ford Ranger SuperCab 213 feet; the Chevy S10 222 feet.
On Car and Driver’s 300-foot skidpad, where the higher number (closer to 1.00) is better, here’s how those vehicles fared: Escalade 0.71, Navigator 0.66, Ford F150 0.74, Chevy Silverado had no score, Nissan Frontier 0.68, Ranger 0.78, and Chevy S10 0.77.
As for the Subaru Outback (based on the Legacy wagon) and the Saab 9.5 SE wagon, the 70-0 braking shows the Subaru stops in 183 feet and the Saab wagon in 181 feet. In agility, the Outback is at 0.79 on the skidpad, and the Saab 9.5 wagon scored 0.78.
The trucks and SUVs were good enough to be surprisingly close in maneuvering, but the Saab and Subaru Outback stop in at least 38-40 feet less roadway than the Navigator or Escalade, and the Saab wagon stops in 51 feet less than the Ford F150 pickup!
Both the Saab and Subaru are built with all the latest crashworthy technology, can steer out of some problems, and can stop short of all kinds of others. If an accident in a Saab or Subaru is inevitable, it might be only because bigger, bulkier SUVs simply can’t stop in time to avoid crashing into them.
So check out and buy the pickup or SUV of your dreams, if you need one for hauling, cargo or work. But if you value your driving ability enough to consider avoiding accidents, don’t overlook one of the new-age station wagons that might be a better alternative.
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