Improved Jetta, Passat move forward with assist from Audi
The resurgence of Volkswagen can be traced directly to the overwhelming, cult-like following for the New Beetle. But VW has far loftier plans, and once you’re lured into a Volkswagen dealership, you might find various other vehicles to tempt your budget.
The reason the New Beetle is so successful is that it has little in common with the Old Beetle except the shapely arch of styling. At the time of the New Beetle introduction, VW was just about to launch a thoroughly revised Golf, which had been the company’s bread-and-butter compact. Always known as a safe, sturdy, dependable car, the new Golf was better in every respect. So VW plunked the New Beetle body onto the new Golf platform and brought it out before the new Golf.
The result was that the New Beetle with its front-wheel-drive Golf powertrain and platform, surpassed all previous small car results in crashworthy safety tests. That wouldn’t have been a surprise for the Golf, but it was for the New Beetle, because the original Beetle had the engine in the rear and all the frontal crash protection of a steel manila envelope.
Subsequently, VW brought out the new Golf, and has since brought out new Jetta and Passat models. Having recently reported on the Golf, we should take a long look at the Jetta and Passat to best assess where Volkswagen is headed under its current head of steam.
While obviously linked to the New Beetle, the models of the Jetta and Passat I tested provide evidence of the more subtle close link Volkswagen has with Audi, its corporate partner and also a company on an incredibly successful roll.
A recent column by veteran Budgeteer columnist Herb Palmer mentioned that Audi was considering withdrawing from the U.S. market. To clarify, an unsubstantiated accusation — later disproven in a countersuit — were broadcast in a “scoop” by 60 Minutes on national television, linking Audi to an unintended acceleration case, and Audi’s U.S. sales dropped to a point in 1994 that the company considered pulling out.
The introduction of the A4 model, however, in 1995 led Audi to an upsurge from worst to first in U.S. resale value, while the A4, A6, A8 and TT models all are currently rated worldwide at the top of their classifications. The new Passat, in fact, came out on the firm and stable Audi A4 platform. The Jetta rides on Audi’s Europe-only A3 platform. And both models I test-drove had Audi engines and drivetrains.
JETTA GLS 1.8T
The Jetta began life as a 4-door Golf with a trunk, and that still remains as its basis. With the Passat entering as a larger, roomier sedan, VW fits the Jetta in between the Golf/Beetle and the Passat, and, whether by chance or brilliant engineering, it fits very well into a niche that is near-perfect for anyone who wants the sporty agility of a sports-sedan but still needs the rear seat for kids and/or occasional full-sized adults.
Volkswagen long has made strong, durable engines, including a 2.0-liter 4-cylinder, which, in 16-valve form, can run at over 140 miles per hour all day on German autobahns, and a narrow-angle 2.8-liter VR6 that has won engineering awards for innovations such as one cylinder head for both sides of the V.
But the big attraction of the 2000 Jetta GLS is the availability of a 1.8-liter 4-cylinder with an amazing five valves per cylinder and a low-pressure turbocharger. If that engine sounds familiar, it is an Audi engine, available in either the A4 sedan or the TT sports cars. It is an engine bristling with technology, with three intake and two exhaust valves on each cylinder, all operated by a slick, dual-overhead-camshaft design and controlled by a sophisticated engine-management system that regulates the turbo.
It produces 150 horsepower at 5,800 RPMs, and 162 foot-pounds of torque, which, instead of rising to and falling from a peak, instead comes in at 2,200 RPMs and remains at that level until 4,200 RPMs, thanks to the computerized engine controls coordinating the turbo.
While the Jetta broke sales records in 1999, it didn’t get the 1.8T engine until midyear, and while you can pay more for a GLX model with the 174 horses of the VR6, the flexible and fun 1.8T has sufficiently spirited performance and delivers improved fuel economy. The EPA estimates are 22 miles per gallon city and 28 highway with the optional 4-speed automatic transmission, and I got 24 MPG combining freeway, city, and Duluth hill-climbing, while proving the automatic would rev freely to 6,200, with a 6,500-RPM redline.
The test car had a base price for the well-equipped GLS at $19,200. The automatic transmission is an $875 option, the luxury package added $1,175, and the Monsoon sound system — a 200-watt, 8-speaker, digital signal-processing unit — is well worth an extra $295. Adding a cold-weather package boosts the sticker to $22,220. The basic automatic transmission worked well, but the fun-quotient of the car could be dramatically enhanced with the addition of the 5-speed Tiptronic, which allows manual shifting of the automatic.
At that, the Jetta GLS is competitive with such stalwarts as the top Honda Accord or Toyota Camry, and beats them significantly in price when you consider the standard equipment. The 1.8-turbo engine, track-correcting independent rear suspension, anti-slip regulation stability control, antilock 4-wheel disc brakes, front and side airbags for front occupants are all standard on the GLS. So are other safety concepts, from side-bolstering tubes and foam-padded doors, 3-point harnesses for both front and all three rear occupants, height-adjustable front buckets, and the usual air-conditioning, power-steering, power locks, windows and side mirrors.
An important element in the success of any midsize sedan is the feel of driving. The Jetta starts out with that solid platform, and laser-welding and high-tech bonding tricks have led to an extremely rigid bodyshell with narrow-gap tolerances. That gives the GLS a firm stance and precise feel to the most abrupt steering input. It also is the perfect basis for deformation crumple zones designed to absorb impacts, front and rear, while accordioning to keep occupants barricaded.
Brilliant blue lighted instrument numbers with bright red-orange needles worked on the New Beetle and is just as impressive in the Jetta. A 2-year, 24,000-mile warranty covers everything and includes all scheduled maintenance, done free, for that span.
The Jetta rear seat looks cramped from the outside, but I talked to a large, 6-foot-2 and quite stout fellow who rode for 10 hours in that location and said once inside he had excellent comfort, partly attributed to the indentations in the backside of the front buckets to help rear knee room.
PASSAT GLX 4MOTION
The Jetta may well be big enough for a young family with two or three kids, but if not, Volkswagen offers the Passat. Still on the superb Audi A4 platform, the Passat has an enormous rear seat and trunk, more the size of the larger Audi A6, or, to the uninitiated, more like a limousine than a midsize sedan.
The Passat has 106.4-inch wheelbase (compared to Jetta’s 98.9), and overall length of 184.1 inches (compared to Jetta’s 172.3). There is a similarity in looks, with the Jetta having a slightly more-chiseled front and a notched rear compared to the Passat’s sweeping curvature at the rear pillar. That smoother look of the Passat improves on Jetta’s excellent .30 coefficient of aerodynamic drag to an amazing .27.
For 2000, the top-of-the-line Passat GLX also got Audi’s 2.8-liter V6 instead of the very good VW 2.8-liter V6. The difference is that Audi’s engine also has the 5-valve-per-cylinder technology with dual overhead cams, and produces 190 horsepower (instead of 174) and 206 foot-pounds of torque.
But the test GLX takes a giant step beyond all that. It was the “4Motion” model, which is Volkswagen’s name for its all-wheel-drive system. Audi, as car zealots know, have an exceptional all-wheel-drive system called quattro, which just finished 20 amazing years of outstanding duty. Audi always spells “quattro” with a lower-case “q” for subtlety, and, until this year, I imagine Audi couldn’t have imagined sharing that wonderful asset with Volkswagen.
The Passat’s 4Motion combines a mechanical front-to-rear apportioning of torque from the standard 50-50 whenever wheelspin is detected, and it also has an electronic control to split the left-right split by applying brakes lightly to prevent wheelspin and allow the system to pull the car straight ahead even if only one wheel has traction.
The problem, of course, is that the otherwise reasonably-priced Passat climbs onward and upward with the 4Motion, from a base of $27,655 to a sticker of $30,905 for the test car. The big difference is the 4Motion system at $1,650, and the Tiptronic 5-speed automatic transmission at $1,075.
Standard equipment is similar to the Jetta, right down the line on 4-wheel disc brakes, antilock, alloy wheels, anti-intrusion side beams and padding, front and side airbags for front occupants and height-adjustable front buckets. In the GLX Passat it also means genuine wood interior trim and leather seats and steering wheel, a trip computer, rain-sensing wipers, power glass sunroof, heated front seats, rear-seat pass-through to trunk, heated wiper wash nozzles, and the Monsoon audio system.
The Passat has Audi’s 4-link front suspension, which minimizes the torque-steer of front-wheel drive, but, of course, works just fine with the 4Motion as well. The Jetta turns on a dime, at least a 35.8-foot dime, while the longer Passat has a very impressive 38-foot turning radius.
The Passat has an aggressive, streamlined stance and all the comfort and stability of much more expensive luxury cars, and still is fun to drive and performs with some of the best sporty sedans. The only question is that when customers find dealerships — outlets in Duluth, Bemidji and other Up North points closed up shop several years ago — they might be somewhat startled to see how advanced Volkswagen sedans have become. And also, they might question whether the world is ready for a $30,000 Volkswagen.
[[[[[[[CUTLINES:
1/ The Volkswagen Jetta GLS has a new but familiar look, with a surprise under the hood.
2/ Rear-seat room may appear cramped in the Jetta, but once inside it proves to be surprisingly adequate.
3/ The hood’s creases add a note of distinctiveness to the Jetta, compared to the smoother Passat.
4/ The Passat GLX roofline arcs smoothly to cover the large rear seat and meet the extended tail covering an enormous trunk.
5/ Foglights are integrated into the headlight unit in the smooth front end of the Passat, which has an amazingly low 0.27 coefficient of drag.
Sebring, Stratus sedans and coupes are similar but different
Before the coming of the minivan and the sport-utility vehicle, the major decision facing U.S. car-buyers was simple: coupe or sedan? If you got what you “wanted,” it was probably a coupe; if you got what you “needed,” it was probably a sedan.
Over the past couple of decades, the minivan and then trucks and SUVs of all shape and style took over the consciousness of U.S. buyers, as well as manufacturers, who, except for rare success stories such as the Pontiac Grand Am, seemed to pretty well concede the midsize sedan and coupe segment to Japanese car-builders like Honda, Toyota, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan and Subaru.
So here we are, boldly roaring into the new millenium, and Chrysler Corporation — now DaimlerChrysler, thank you — has simplified matters for U.S. car-buyers. Do you want a midsize sedan, or coupe?
I was startled last spring at the stunning looks of the 2001 Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Stratus sedans and coupes when they were unveiled to the media at the New York Auto Show. I haven’t yet gotten my hands on one of them for a normal test-drive, but I was able to attend the driving introduction for the Sebring/Stratus sedan and coupe in Seattle, Wash., a couple of weeks ago, which proved that no matter how impressive the cars looked up on a pedestal in New York, they were more impressive when hurled around the mountainous roads of the Pacific Northwest.
While recreating both models for showroom introductions that are happening right now, DaimlerChrysler has created an interesting sort of competition between the two brands, and between the sedans and coupes. For example, when I first saw them, I liked the look of the Sebring far better, with that Ferrari-esque nose. My wife, Joan, first saw them and declared that she liked the Stratus far better, with its Viper/Intrepid-like front.
“If people like one distinctly better than the other, great,” said Gary Kanarek, project planning engineer on the coupe project. “Mainly, we wanted to separate the two, with the Stratus designed to be bold, capable and powerful, while the Sebring is expressive, athletic and refined.”
That same concept carries over to the sedans as well, but here is the interesting twist — the coupe is not at all a 2-door version of the 4-door sedan. In fact, it is an entirely different car, with entirely different engines and entirely different teams working from start to finish.
The sedans were both done by Chrysler’s “large-car” team, which had done such an impressive job on the current Dodge Intrepid and Chrysler Concorde/LHS/300M. The sedans are being built at Chrysler’s Sterling Heights, Mich., assembly plant. The coupes were designed by a separate team, working with engineers from Chrysler’s Mitsubishi partner, and they are assembled at Normal, Ill., at the DiamondStar plant Chrysler has shared with Mitsubishi for two decades.
So while the sedans and coupes retain a family resemblance that is close to identical except to the most discerning eye, they are entirely different from the ground up. All of them have some impressive attributes, such as progressive computer design that should assure closer fit and finish, four-wheel disc brakes on all models, and the availability of both a strong 4-cylinder and an extra-strong V6, with AutoStick manual-automatic transmissions and some 5-speed manual shifters.
With base prices under $18,000 and a totally-option-loaded ceiling of $25,000, the Sebring and Stratus could be the best U.S. sedans and coupes ever devised for challenging such stalwarts as Accord, Camry and all comers.
SEBRING/STRATUS SEDANS
As curvy and sporty as the coupes are, the Sebring and Stratus 4-door sedans appear every bit as sporty. Chrysler knew that the outgoing Stratus and Chrysler Cirrus — a name dropped in place of Sebring for 2001 models after only the coupe and convertible were Sebrings before — had impressive quality-control figures from J.D. Powers. Eager to keep those buyers, Chrysler also wanted to reduce wind and road noise, and to improve safety characteristics, power and handling in hopes of attracting new buyers.
With an all new body that is beautifully styled with tightly stretched lines over the cab-forward/upraised-rear shape, the Sebring/Stratus were given a new underbody platform with a 13 percent reduction in twisting flexibility and a 33 percent reduction in bending. In past years, cars had platforms that were pretty flexible, and the focus of the suspension had to be on stiffening it; the new design of the Sebring/Stratus and various other cars can be made so stiff that engineers can fiddle with the suspension to soften the ride to a more compliant level.
Chrysler’s engineers seized that opportunity to aim the Dodge Stratus at sporty performance in its handling, and aim the Chrysler Sebring a little more toward comfort and luxury. Same for the steering, where the Stratus requires a bit more effort, enhancing that performance feel. The Stratus also offers an R/T model with better handling because of firmer suspension.
But make no mistake. Luxurious as the Sebring is, it stays flat and has very good performance, and, as sporty as the Stratus is, it is plenty comfortable and luxurious. And while their styling takes cues from the much larger Concorde/Intrepid, the Sebring/Stratus sedans are much smaller, but still more than adequate in interior and trunk space.
Both the Sebring and Stratus share as base engine Chrysler’s 2.4-liter 4-cylinder, which is a dual-overhead-camshaft, 16-valve piece that has 150 horsepower at 5,200 RPMs and 167 foot-pounds of torque at a peak of 4,000 RPMs.
The heartbeat that sets the Sebring/Stratus apart, however, is the 2.7-liter V6, an underrated and underappreciated gem Chrysler built only after doing 1,500 versions on computers, and which is strong enough to serve as base engine in the larger Intrepid and Concorde. It is a chain-driven, dual-overhead-cam V6 with 24 valves and a hearty 200 horsepower at 5,900 RPMs, plus 192 foot-pounds of torque, peaking at 4,300 RPMs.
What the Sebring and Stratus get with the 2.7 that the Intrepid/Concorde lack is Chrysler’s AutoStick, which is a strong, 4-speed automatic, with a notch at the bottom that connects the shift lever with a manually-operated, spring-loaded connection. Bump it to the right, it upshifts, or to the left, it downshifts. Running that 2.7 all the way up to redline with the AutoStick provides all the kicks any sports-car zealot could desire.
“The 2.7 gives us best-in-class power, with 0-60 times about 1.5 seconds quicker than the 2.5 V6 it replaces,” said John Tak, the engineer who was chief prodct planner on the sedans.
The seatbelt harnesses have been improved with pretensioners and the airbags have been supplemented with an optional side airbag curtain to enhance the head protection of front and rear occupants in the event of a side impact. The platform stiffness also improves crashworthiness, and the improved handling improves the sedans’ evasive ability.
The headlights have been redesigned and refocused to provide a broader and longer beam, improving brightness by 25 percent. One neat touch is that in its attempts to cut noise, the Sebring/Stratus have 5 mm. Glass in the windshield, compared to 3 mm. in cars such as the Accord.
SEBRING/STRATUS COUPES
Major national magazines have suggested that the Sebring/Stratus coupes are built on the Mitsubishi Eclipse platform, but Chrysler engineers said it was a hybrid platform, with the front resembling the Eclipse and the rear more similar to the Mitsubishi Galant.
The outgoing Dodge coupe was the Avenger, and both Dodge and Chrysler coupes had very good, but unexciting, Mitsubishi 2.0-liter 4-cylinders or 2.5-liter V6s. The new car has a 2.4-liter 4 and a 3.0-liter V6. Yes, the sedans also have a 2.4 as base engine, but the sedans use the Chrysler engine used in the minivans or the new PT Cruiser, while the coupes use Mitsubishi’s 2.4, which has 147 horsepower at 5,500 RPMs and 158 foot-pounds of torque at 4,000 RPMs.
The coupe V6 is Mitsubishi’s smooth 3.0, with a single overhead cam and four valves per cylinder. It matches the 200 horsepower of the sedan engine, at 5,500 RPMs, and delivers 205 foot-pounds of torque at 4,500 RPMs.
At first, my thought was that the sedans with the DOHC 2.7 would blow away the SOHC 3.0 V6, but after driving them, the power seems pretty comparable. The coupes also differentiate, with the Sebring getting a bit more luxury and the Stratus going toward the R/T settings for firmer handling.
Both engines can be obtained with the 5-speed manual transmission, which is a fine Mitsubishi unit that shifts smoothly. That’s something not yet available with the 2.7 V6 in the sedans. The 4-speed automatic in the coupes is also Mitsubishi-built, and it also has a clutchless-manual setting that, for 2001, is also called AutoStick. But it’s different from Chrysler’s.
Porsche was first out with that sort of transmission, which allows the driver to shift the lever into a little adjacent gate, where it can be nudged forward for upshifts or backward for downshifts. Because of the patent, Chrysler uses a side-to-side gate for its AutoStick. Mitsubishi, however, paid Porsche to use the patented system and the AutoStick in the coupes goes forward or backward instead of side-to-side.
Chrysler also used computer tricks to make the Stratus exhaust sound a little more throaty, in keeping with the high-performance image. The concept of sportiness, as well as safety, is aided by a body with 9 percent improvement in torsion rigidity and — get this — 99o percent improved against bending. Improved suspension, with isolated front crossmembers and stabilizer bars front and rear, give the new coupes a real handling flair.
The coupes could be enormous hits, particularly Up North, where you could think of them as a Mustang/Camaro challenger with front-wheel drive and a real, usable rear seat and surprisingly roomy trunk.
In fact, the Stratus or Sebring might be the sportiest looking coupes around. The big question is whether they’re as sporty looking as the Stratus or Sebring sedans.
[[[[[CUTLINES:
1/ The 2001 Chrysler Sebring LXi sedan felt right at home on twisty roads in the mountains of Washington.
2/ A Stratus R/T coupe showed off its lines on the highway leading to Hurricane Ridge, on Washington’s Olympic Peninsula.
3/ The smooth lines of the midsize Sebring resemble the Chrysler 300M, and the 2.7 V6 might challenge the performance of its larger sibling.
4/ A bridge along the rocky coast of Whidby Island provided a mystical backdrop for the sleek 2001 Dodge Stratus R/T coupe. ]]]]]]]]]]
BMW M5 and Audi A6 4.2 cruise at the top of car fantasy list
This is the age of excess in automotives, and it’s the time of year where fantasy football teams are in fashion. So let’s combine the two. We’ll fantasize a bit by picking a star performer as the world’s most nearly perfect car, with money being no object.
Nominations could run up to a couple dozen, but the chances are very good the final pick would end up being German. And expensive. Very, very expensive.
Two final candidates for our ultimate-car competition would have to be: the BMW M5, and the Audi A6 4.2, with an assist from the A8.
In our perfect-car world, sports cars are exciting and fun, but aren’t every-day useful. Trucks and SUVs are useful, but their heft overcomes any tendency to be fun and pleasurable to drive. Besides, the sedan world combines the best features of sports car performance and luxury car comfort, and even handle most people-hauling assets of SUVs.
The above-mentioned German sedans do that, and, in fact, are over-achievers in virtual any automotive category you could dream up.
BMW GOES OVER THE TOP
BMW sedans run hard and long at rates that most normal drivers find unreasonably swift, and that most competing companies find unreachable. In current configuration, BMW’s basic three sizes of sedans are the 3-series, the 5-series and the 7-series, with the larger number meaning a larger car.
The 5-series, right in the middle, has sleek and flowing aerodynamic lines, and gained a large dollop of performance when BMW dropped its 4.0-liter V8 into it from out of the 740. That engine grew to 4.4 liters, providing even more punch. Armed with that engine, the 540 sedan would be more than enough to satisfy the most discerning sports-sedan customerÂ…if only the M5 didn’t exist.
BMW takes the fast and strong 540 sedan and refines every characteristic. Better wheels (18 inch), better tires (low profile), better brakes, suspension, exhaust, interior, and even an improvement on that dual-overhead-camshaft, 32-valve V8, which is enlarged from 4.4 liters to 4.9 liters, close enough that BMW can call it a 5-liter. The M5 has 400 horsepower, sent from under the hood to the sticky tires via a 6-speed manual transmission.
Half-joking, I estimated that the M5 probably wouldn’t go a bit over 175 miles per hour. Then I found out it has an electronically governed maximum of 176. It also has a sophisticated traction control system, which can be shut off, which can allow you to hear the chirping, I’m told, of the M5’s tendency to spin the rear drive wheels when accelerating as high up as 110 mph.
The black and red leather bucket seats are firm and contoured, with the extendable cushion under your knees. Coupled with the fantastic suspension, BMW has proven that you can have supple luxury and razor-sharp performance handling with the same package. Drive up to an intersection and make a 90-degree turn at 40 mph, with absolutely no leaning from the car. That was my self-imposed limit, just to prevent your insides from splattering themselves on the far half of your ribcage.
Advanced safety devices are included, and those huge brakes haul the M5 down with as much precision as it goes or turns. With all that power, EPA fuel estimates are 13 city and 21 highway, but I got 19.5 miles per gallon in 400 miles of combined city-freeway driving, and over 22 mpg on the freeway only portion.
You can get a 3-series for under $30,000, and the new Z3 sports car for just over $30,000. You also can get a 5-series sedan for right around $40,000. But the M5 is rare, with all those upgraded components, and you have to pay for it. An M5 has a base price of $69,400, and the test M5, gleaming white, had a sticker of $72,070.
The navigation system worked well, and among the impressive touches is the tachometer, which has a 7,000-RPM redline, with a yellow warning strip at 6,500. When you first start up the cold engine, however, you notice that the yellow warning band on the tach has electronically stretched down to around 5,000 RPMs, and it slowly moves back up the dial as the engine temperature rises. Just to remind you not to hammer the M5 until it warms up.
AUDI A6, A8
The Audi A4 sedan saved the company in the U.S., and competes with BMW’s 3-series in size. The A6 is larger and roomier, more like the 5-series BMW, and the A8 flagship is way up there with the 7-series BMW, in a stratosphere that only the Mercedes S-class and, from outside Germany, Jaguar can hope to challenge.
Audi’s secret to success has been its exceptional quattro all-wheel-drive system, available on all models, as an upgrade from front-wheel-drive, which, in itself, is a big edge in Up North winter driving over the front-engine/rear-drive BMW and Mercedes competitors.
Performance has been another matter. The A4 is good, and the A8 is exceptional, but the A6 has been overmatched by the 540. So during model year 2000, Audi not only brought out the TT sports car, but it gave the A6 two heavy doses of performance. I previously wrote about the A6 with the 2.7-liter, twin-turbocharged engine, which boosted it to 250 horsepower and allowed it to run with the 540. If it was still a tiny tad short of the 540, the A6 had the quattro system as a boost.
But Audi went beyond the 2.7 twin turbo for the A6, which requires a look at the larger A8 luxury sedan. The A8 is a one-of-a-kind vehicle, built all of aluminum, like a jet airliner. The platform, the body panels and the superb 4.2-liter V8 engine are aluminum, which, pound for pound, is structurally stronger than steel. For 2000, Audi has offered a stretched version, called the “A8 L,” which is five inches longer than the standard A8 and gives rear-seat occupants almost three inches more legroom and virtual limousine space.
The 4.2-liter engine was a strong-performing V8, but after Audi developed 5-valve-per-cylinder technology, with variable valve-timing on its smallest 1.8-liter 4-cylinder, and then applied it to its other engines, too. So the A8 L 4.2 now has 40 valves and 310 horsepower with which to pull its heavy, 4,100-pound quattro frame around, and it performs very well, under all circumstances. It also costs over $70,000 — a base-price $67,900 increased to $70,825.
Sure enough, Audi decided to stuff that 40-valve, 4.2-liter V8 under the A6’s gracefully sloping hood this year. With the quattro splitting 300 horses and 300 foot-pounds of torque among all four wheels, the lighter A6 4.2 also jumps away with Audi’s 5-speed automatic transmission, which has the Tiptronic hand-shifting capability to bump it forward for upshifts and back for downshifts.
The A6 starts in the $30,000 range, but equipped with the 4.2 and all the associated upgrades it starts at $48,900, and rises to an as-tested sticker of $52,225. I got 20 mpg combined, while EPA etimates show 17 city and 24 highway. All in all, the A6 4.2 makes an interesting match with the 5-series BMW in comfort, performance and luxury.
The power upgrade and the quattro make the A6 4.2 handle as if on rails — very swift rails — and its foul-weather performance makes it a true 365-day car, even Up North. For speed and power, the A6 probably can outrun the BMW 540, although the M5’s all-out speed and power would be another matter. Hmmm. Good thing this is just a fantasy, otherwise we’d have to make an extremely difficult choice.
[[[[[CUTLINES:
1/ BMW M5 has only subtle exterior clues that set itself apart from the 540 sedan.
2/ Four tailpipes, tiny “M5” badges and 18-inch wheels tip off the all-out performance M5 model.
3/ Understated interior has special black and red leather seats, with brushed metal instead of wood for trim.
4/ The graceful lines of the Audi A6 are augmented by wheel flares, special wheels, and a small “4.2” emblem on the rear to denote the 4.2-liter engine inside.
5/ The new, stretched Audi A8 L rested comfortably amid a flowering field of Up North canola plants.
New 2001 vehicles overflow from every marketing niche
The 2001 car and truck models just out or just coming out will have a significant impact on the marketplace as the most technically and technologically advanced cars ever imagined. And some go well beyond imagination into future-world.
The future-is-now category starts off with Chrysler’s PT Cruiser, a fascinating compilation of current wants and needs with styling that is both heavily retrospective and futuristic. The enormous splash made by the PT Cruiser may obscure the extremely important introduction of new Stratus and Sebring midsize sedans and major revision of the highly successful minivan line of Caravan, Voyager and Town and Country.
General Motors is pretty much standing pat as far as its vast fleet of cars are concerned, but is going onward and upward to expand and improve its truck outlay, ranging from newly redone pickup trucks to all-new sport-utility vehicles and heavy-duty trucks, and to the bizarre and possibly outrageous Pontiac Aztek.
Ford, having achieved car-of-the-year status with the subcompact Focus in 2000, also is not in a major car-overhaul year, but is bringing out its revised Windstar minivan, and all-new Escape compact SUV, while readying an all-new Explorer for 2002 — right in the face of the current controversy over the Firestone tire/Explorer problems.
Creature-comforts and gadgets and gimmicks are proliferating. It wasn’t long ago that cupholders were gimmicks, and to consider how far that notion has advanced, you will now be able to buy a Ford Windstar minivan with a rear hatch that opens to reveal a microwave oven and a mini-washing machine, as well as a refrigerator.
In brief overview, trucks continue on their unbelievable upward surge of popularity with more proliferation; sports cars continue to show flashes of popularity; luxury sedans (and near-luxury) keep getting better; normal, everyday sedans have risen further in excellence; super-economy models are making a surprising comeback; and alternative-fuel vehicles are here and promise expanding popularity.
Occupant safety continues to be a major element of new cars, even as high-performance elements of bigger and more powerful engines proliferate.
As for the Asian influence, Honda comes out with an entirely new and well-kept secret Civic, even while Toyota is also coming out with a new, recently introduced Corolla. Nissan also has introduced its new Sentra; Mazda has redone the Protégé — a major player in the Civic/Corolla/Sentra battle; Subaru is branching its Outback into a separate line and installing a new 6-cylinder engine; and the upscale side also grows, with a new Lexus LS430 and sporty IS300, and new Acura 3.2CL coupe, and Infiniti’s new Q45 coming in the spring. Korean companies are striving to move up to the Japanese strata with Kia offering a Rio at under $10,000, and a new Optima coming in December; Hyundai goes large with the XG300.
Those Asian companies also are intensifying their bite into the SUV craze. Toyota leads the way there, with the smaller RAV4 completely redone, and an entirely new Highlander coming in between RAV4 and 4Runner, and an entirely new Sequoia coming out at the high end, built on the new Tundra pickup platform and larger and more luxurious than the Land Cruiser. Honda counters with an all-new MDX for its Acura line, a slick SUV that Honda hopes will prove coming in late to the SUV party is not too late. Mazda offers the Tribute, built in conjunction with the Escape for Ford, Nissan has already brought out its redesigned Pathfinder, with companion upgrades to its Infiniti QX4 models, and Mitsubishi has an all-new Montero. Hyundai, from Korea, enters the SUV field with the Santa Fe.
Going the other direction, to Europe, Mercedes has produced an all-new C-Class sedan that will be a worldwide success with excellent styling and advanced technology all starting at a bargain (for Mercedes) $30,000 price level; Audi, which brought out its TT sports car and follow-up roadster already for 2001, and made quantum advances in performance for 2000, goes part way to the SUV segment with the Allroad, a reinforced quattro station wagon that can rise up on its axles by command for off-road ground clearance; BMW reinforces its M3 sports coupe and sedan with an all-new version, and produces the Z8 roadster. Sweden continues to challenge those German strongholds with Saab offering its aero version on the 9-5 sedan and wagon models, while Volvo comes out with an all new S60 sedan and a revised XC model of the cross-country V70 station wagon.
CAR, TRUCK OF YEAR
The preliminary candidates for the 2001 International Car of the Year voting displays the wide variety of models available. Alphabetically, new cars include the Acura 3.2CL, Audi allroad quattro, Chrysler PT Cruiser, Sebring and Town and Country, Dodge Sebring and Caravan, Honda Civic and Insight, Hyundai XG300 and Elantra, Kia Rio and Spectra, Lexus IS300 and LS430, Mercedes C-Class and CL coupe, Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder, Nissan Sentra, Olds Aurora, Subaru Outback HD6, Toyota MR2 Spyder and Prius, Volvo V70 and XC and S60.
Truck of the Year prospects are: Acura MDX, Cadillac Escalade, Chevy S10 Crew Cab, Ford Escape and Explorer SportTrac and F150 SuperCrew and Ranger, GMC Yukon Denali, XL, Sierra C3 and Sonoma Crew Cab, Hyundai Santa Fe, Infiniti QX4, Mazda Tribute and B-Series, Mitsubishi Montero, Nissan Pathfinder and Frontier, Pontiac’s Aztek, and Toyota’s RAV4, Sequoia and Tacoma Double Cab.
That’s a large batch of new-enough 2001 models, surely, and those lists will undergo a preliminary cutdown and then a further refinement to get to around 10, and then the final vote.
It appears that the PT Cruiser is a cinch to be car of the year, as much of a cinch as was the Volkswagen New Beetle. The Cruiser appeal crosses all age boundaries, with its stunning styling. True, some dislike it completely, but Chrysler stylists insist they intended to elicit emotional responses, and fully anticipated getting a love-it-or-hate-it reaction. So far, the Cruiser has been overwhelmingly loved.
If there is a complaint about the Cruiser, it is that it lacks the neck-snapping power its modern-hot-rod appearance might imply. But its 2.4-liter 4-cylinder is fully adequate, either with the 5-speed or automatic. The utility of the Cruiser actually approaches the assets of why the majority of SUV buyers choose bigger, bulkier vehicles. You sit high enough to have excellent visibility, and you have plenty of room for a couple of kids — or adults — in the back, plus a load of stowage room for all the worldlies you need on any trip under that squareback, which houses a platform that can turn into a tailgate-party table.
The Cruiser handles well, if not like a sports car. All in all, it is perfectly on target to be every-families’ vehicle. And that styling remains a major asset. No matter how much you like or dislike it, you find yourself spotting it and then being unable to look away.
Chrysler, now DaimlerChrysler, appears headed for a big year, because its minivans, long the standard of the industry, have been thoroughly overhauled for 2001, although the styling refinements are more subtle than the handling and internal revisions. Also, the Stratus and Sebring, both of which are available as sedans and coupes, are breakthrough vehicles that are impressive enough to take on such luminaries as the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry in the extremely competitive intermediate size class.
General Motors is continuing to stabilize its automobile models. The Pontiacs have their performance flair, the Buicks retain a similarity that stresses stability as a virtue, Oldsmobile, with the new Aurora tightened considerably, also has a family-trait similarity among the Aurora, Intrigue and Alero, Cadillac rides the revisions of a year ago, and Chevrolet also has subtle refinements from its recent changes.
With its new heavy trucks, and the 2002 introduction of impressive new lines of SUVs such as the Blazer and Bravada, two of the more interesting GM products for 2001 are the Corvette and Aztek. Corvette retains its recent changes, but now offers a mind-bending Z06 model, which comes with the rounded hardtop only, and is more for the all-out enthusiast than the boulevardier cruisers. With 385 horsepower and 385 foot-pounds of torque, the Z06 goes 0-60 in 4-seconds-flat, and is off the scale as far as power-to-weight ratio compared to any other Corvette.
The Aztek is also mind-blowing, but in a different way. In the love-it-or-hate-it world, the majority opinion of the Aztek seems to be that it isÂ…in a wordÂ…ugly. It resembles an old American Motors Hornet station wagon on steroids, with a tall, bulky demeanor and a sloped rear hatch. The front end is stretched upward, and the thing looks a lot like a weird concept vehicle that was brought to life. The Aztek’s controversial looks obscure a whole lot of very impressive features and gadgets that underscore “utility” in the sport-utility vehicle phrase.
Ford is planning to bring out an all-new Thunderbird for 2002, speaking of concept-cars brought to life. For 2001, though, it is one year past introductions for the Focus, and barely into the new run of Taurus and Sable. So Ford’s big news is SUVs, too. The top-selling Explorer is being brought out as a 2002 model, just after the first of the year, which gives time for Ford to properly promote the new Escape.
Designed by Mazda, originally, the Escape is smaller than the existing Explorer but has the same interior space. Plus, it rides on a front-wheel-drive platform that transfers torque to the rear axle whenever front-tire slippage is detected. The engines are Ford’s good Zetec 4-cylinder, and excellent Duratec V6, and the Escape not only will be worthy of battling the Toyota RAV4, the Honda CR-V and the Nissan Xterra, but it might also carve away some customers of midsize SUVs, including Explorer.
Safety moves to forefront in 2001 vehicle marketing
It used to be that styling was all that mattered in the automotive industry. Then buyers became more sophisticated, and substance moved up to rival style. That substance took the form of performance, handling, comfort and economy. In more recent years, safety has also become a primary concern for car-buyers.
Many of those who have followed the current trend to buy sport-utility vehicles will claim that safety is a main reason. Among Up North buyers, the utility of towing and hauling capacity makes such SUVs more obvious choices, but across the country, and here, a majority of buyers purchase large SUVs for security. That security is the logical thought process that says bigger, heftier vehicles will be safer in a crash.
Overlooked along the way has been the obvious factor that if crashes are inevitable, a larger, heftier vehicle should win out against a smaller, lighter one, but that there is always a compromise. Crashes needn’t be inevitable in most cases, and for every pound of heft or inch of height, a vehicle gives up some handling agility — call it accident-avoidance capability — in the exchange.
The recent controversy about Ford Explorer problems with Firestone tires has renewed the ongoing challenge to automakers to create vehicles that are fast, efficient, comfortable, and still safe and secure for occupants.
Car-makers have made amazing gains in safety. Crash-test sophistication has shown what happens when a vehicle hits something, and engineers with ever-increasing computer technology have been able to address it. Thirty years ago, Swedish car-makers Volvo and Saab, and very few others in the world, stressed safety, and it has been interesting to watch the progression.
Up through 1966, for example, Volvo made strong, sturdy sedans in Sweden that were big sellers Up North. The safety concept was to build the car like an impenetrable shell, and the 122 model Volvos would take a tremendous lick without yielding. Same with Saab 96, which simply wouldn’t bend on impact. Then in 1967, Volvo came out with a revolutionary new car, the 140-series, which had a rigid, crush-proof box surrounding the passenger compartment, but designed the squarish front and rear sections to collapse. It was revolutionary, but the concept was not to merely collapse, but to collapse at a controlled rate measured to absorb the energy of an impact.
That concept has advanced through the automotive industry and is now the standard. Seatbelts came in, then 3-point harnesses, and finally, in the last decade, airbags. Auto companies fought a lot of the advancements, and some are still open to dispute. In fact, there is a school of thought that a 4-point harness would be vastly better than a 3-point for holding occupants in place, because no matter how safely a car is structured, an occupant that can bounce around — or slide out even a little from the diagonal upper strap of a 3-point harness — is much more vulnerable to serious injury.
Airbags were first instituted to protect those who wouldn’t help themselves, those who refused to buckle their harnesses, and there is still some question about their value if better harnesses were in place. Besides, they go off in error sometimes, and have been fatal to smaller occupants and injurious to others by their mere deployment.
The biggest trends for 2001 are more useful applications of airbags — two-stage deployment and side-impact airbags. The original airbags exploded in the face of the driver and front passenger only on frontal impact. Side impacts and rollovers would not even cause the bags to go off. But in the past couple of years, manufacturers have improved airbags greatly, with two-stage front bags designed to go off at different intensities depending on the force of the impact and/or the weight of the passenger.
And manufacturers for 2001 are expanding their use of side airbags. These can consist of a narrow curtains in the headliner, just above the door, that drops down to help shield an occupant’s head from striking the side pillar or window in a side-impact. Others install the inflatable bag in the seat itself, and still others have found a way to incorporate it into the side harness strap itself.
Along with that, manufacturers are augmenting the crushable-zone front and rear body segments with strong beams in the doors and fenders to reinforce against side impacts.
Many different cars offer side airbags for 2001, and some SUVs, also. Ford, in fact, is incorporating several such safety devices including a side air curtain in the new-for-2002 Explorer. Ford also has built recent SUVs such as the Expedition with a bar designed to engage any other vehicle at a level that will allow the other vehicle’s safety devices to function, rather than riding up and over smaller vehicles.
It’s ironic that Ford seems to be at the forefront of SUV safety, given the current difficulty Ford is having because of the highly publicized rollover situation involving Firestone tires. There have been a lot of fatalities involving SUVs, which might be a shock to those who are convinced that they are safer because they’re bigger, and 85 percent of SUV fatalities have been because of rollovers.
Tires remain the major safety item on any vehicle, and there is probably less known about tires than cupholders on any given vehicle. For example, Firestone was bought out by Japan’s Bridgestone, just as B.F. Goodrich was bought out by Michelin. All of those companies make tires that range from expensive to inexpensive, and from exceptional to marginal in performance.
There are several problems at issue in the Explorer/Firestone mess. First, SUVs and other trucks are inherently less stable than cars, because they’re taller, with higher centers of gravity. Four-wheel-drive doesn’t help a vehicle stop shorter or swerve to avoid an accident while maintaining proper control. Like all manufacturers, Ford contracts with various tire-makers to build tires to certain specifications for specific vehicles, and Firestone was its choice for the Explorer and other truck applications.
Firestone’s plant in Decatur, Ill., had some serious labor problems in recent years. There has been no indication that that is related to the current problem, but a Ford official indicated off the record that there might be a connection, after it was disclosed that an inordinate number of Firestone tires built at that plant had a problem with tread separations, and the Explorers involved tended to roll over.
On such radial tires, there are two steel belts running around the circumference of the tire. Sometimes, because of impacts with curbs or misuse — or quality control — a tire might fail by having a separation between the belts and the tread. In such cases, the tire shreds and bad things can happen to the vehicle. In other cases, a vehicle might swerve out of control because of its instability, and the tire might shred from the abuse of being scraped severely in a skid.
Firestone indicated the Explorer tires should be inflated to 32 pounds of air pressure. Ford, in testing the vehicles, noted that they were more stable in slalom agility runs for crashworthy tests if the tires had 26 pounds instead of 32. So the tire manufacturer specified 32 and Ford specified 26. Now the government is involved in investigating whether Firestone or Firestone and Ford are guilty of not preventing serious problems.
In this case, both might be guilty. Ford might have taken steps to stabilize the Explorer with the tires at 32 pounds, but when was the last time you checked the air-pressure in your tires? It’s very possible to have a tire go down from 32 to 26 without the driver even noticing it, and we’d like to presume such an oversight wouldn’t necessarily mean the tires’ treads will separate.
In light of all this, all vehicles are getting safer and are improving their accident-avoidance capability by stiffer suspensions and various technical advancements. Plus, the newer and smaller SUVs may provide a preferred compromise. Vehicles such as the Honda CR-V, Lexus RX300, and the new Ford Escape and Mazda Tribute are front-wheel-drive that transfer power to the rear wheels only when wheelspin is anticipated by the computerized engine management system.
As with cars, a lot of people are steadfast in wanting rear-drive, which is better for heavy towing, but creates a tendency of lighter steering with rear wheels that want to power past the front in abrupt swerves and can tend to tilt a tall vehicle out of control. With front-wheel drive, vehicles are steered by the same wheels that supply the power to the road, so a sudden swerve or other emergency action prompts the vehicle’s front to turn, while the rear merely tends to follow along.
The good news is that manufacturers were well along the route toward making all vehicles safer and more secure, long before the current problem specific to Ford and Firestone arose.
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