C-Class rates A-Grade as new Mercedes entry-level sedan
If you can’t remember exactly what the previous Mercedes C-Class sedan looked like, a picture of the new 2001 C-320 won’t help. There is absolutely no resemblance between the two, except for the compact, midsize body. Everything else is new, and, while the previous C-Class was a very good car, it becomes unfairly forgettable when compared to the new one.
The new C-Class comes in two forms, the basic C-240, which starts in price at $30,000, and the upscale C-320, which can be obtained with a bigger engine, more power, more amenities, and at a price that reflects it, bordering on $40,000. If this price shakes you up, you’re not alone. But in this world where we can all get by on ground beef, we must also be aware that prime filet mignon also exists, and to those who can afford it, the price isn’t all that bad. Besides, the C-Class is Mercedes entry-level sedan, with the larger E-Class and the large — and extremely costly — S-Class up above.
The C-Class lives up to the reputation Mercedes has established for automotive buyers the world over, for quality that makes even exorbitant sticker prices worthwhile over the long haul. Take a trip to Frankfurt, Germany, and you’ll notice that virtually all of the taxicabs are Mercedes, many of them diesel-powered, because the vehicles are basically indestructable for upwards of 200,000 miles. Quality, luxury and an understated level of class are the strong suits.
Having driven both the C-320 and the C-240 at the line’s introduction, I was anxious to try a more extended test, and I recently got a C-320 to live with for a week in wintertime. Heated leather seats, and by far the best windshield wiper system in the industry are under-appreciated until you get a chance to engage a snowstorm and temperature plunge with those assets.
The previous C-Class was impressive enough on its own, but with Mercedes taking off on sweeping aerodynamic styling ventures with the S-Class and E-Class, this is the C-Class’s turn to jump into the future, and the 2001 C-Class, to me, is even more stylishly attractive than its considerably more expensive siblings.
A steeply raked front end houses a sleek grille, with enclosed dual headlights housed within a glass cover that resembles a figure-8 — make that a snowman — turned sideways. The lights are very good, and are augmented by foglights housed below the bumper to help illuminate the shoulders.
Angling up to the windshield, which also is steeply raked, the C-Class lines then sweep up and over the passenger compartment, tapering away from the bottom lines of the side to form a slippery-smooth wedge. The uplifted rear houses a large trunk, and the entire package makes it, to my mind, the best-styled Mercedes sedan.
For size, the C-Class is almost a full inch longer than the car it replaces, at 178.2 inches, with an inch-longer wheelbase of 106.9, and a slightly wider body at 68.6 inches, yet it is lower, by almost a full inch. Front and rear head and leg room all are increased, alothough the front shoulder room is about an inch less. Trunk volume is 12.2 cubic feet, which is generous for a sedan of this size. The whole package rates a 0.27 coefficient of drag, in a world where anything as low as 0.32 is extremely impressive.
Under the hood, the C-320 has a 3.2-liter V6, with 215 horsepower at 5,700 RPMs and 221 foot-pounds of torque at 4,600 revs. It weighs 3,397 pounds, which is heavy, but feels light and agile because the balance of power allows for 7-second 0-60 times, and the impressively stable suspension provides the precise control of a sports sedan.
LIVING IN THE COLD
For Up North buyers, there are a couple of shortcomings. Everybody older than 40 can recall driving through the worst of winter storms with front-engine/rear-drive vehicles, maybe even on Duluth’s cliff-dwelling avenues. Yes, we made it, most of us without accidents. Duluth, in fact, probably has the best drivers in the world for being able to remain calm and poised while negotiating icy streets with their hearts in their throats.
Some still swear by rear-drive, but they are only those who haven’t tried front-wheel drive. Mercedes always has made front-engine, rear-drive vehicles, the conventional layout brought to near perfection. Up North, it snows, it freezes, and we get to slithering all over the roadways. Front-wheel drive is an obvious asset, outrun only by all-wheel-drive or 4-wheel-drive when it comes to dashing through the snow. Mercedes does offer a 4-wheel-drive system on some vehicles, although it’s only a partial redirection of power.
In the C-Class, a highly sophisticated traction-control system restricts power to the spinning rear wheel and apportions more of it to the one with better traction. It works very impressively, but Mercedes engineers, marketing types and the company’s sales force, all of whom insist that it conquers the worst winter has to offer, should try to sit, second in a line of four vehicles climbing Lake Avenue in Duluth after a sleet storm, waiting for the red light to change at 2nd Street. It is at times like that when you realize that the best traction control needs SOME traction to get going.
I had no trouble negotiating icy streets and snowy driveways, although the electronic stability system chattered now and then and switching it off made you realize how appreciative you were that it was available.
The 5-speed automatic transmission worked flawlessly, and you can manually put it in a lower gear for some snow conditions, or to assure optimum traction.
The driving position is classy, with a large speedometer and small tachometer, and wood and leather everywhere you see or touch. Some Mercedes engineer looned out on the heat/air controls, however. Mercedes tradition calls for basic simplicity, but you need a ride-along guide to help you fiddle with the heat and defrost. A system with two knobs, surrounded by optional items, is needlessly complex and virtually impossible to work without stopping, studying and experimenting a bit. It obviously would get easier to operate with time, if you were the owner, but it seems impossible that you would ever feel comfortable enough, ergonomically, to reach over and change things without looking hard at it.
Rear seat room is adequate — not enormously roomy, but good for 6-footers to ride a long way in comfort. The front bucket seats are impressive, also, and have all sorts of electric and manual controls to let you find the perfect settings.
There is one problem, which I laughed at first, but which became a nuisance as the week went along. The front doors are positioned well for your feet and legs, but the pillar between front and rear doors is so far forward that you tend to whap your shoulder on it virtually every time you climb in. Maybe someone smaller than 6-feet tall wouldn’t have that problem — and Mercedes says about half of the C-Class sales might be to the new and widening female customer base — but I had far too much contact with that pillar.
It’s a good thing that once inside, the pillar becomes a firm compatriot in the safety structure. Dual-stage front airbags, door-mounted front and rear side-impact airbags, and a head-protection side curtain airbag all make the C-Class one of the world’s safest vehicles.
Dual controls for heat also are pleasant, especially if your spouse happens to like a different climate than you do (don’t they all?). A 10-speaker Bose stereo system also is impressive.
C-CLASS DEVELOPMENT
Mercedes had the idea of building a compact, entry-level sedan back in 1983, and the 190 model sold well in Europe. It never caught on well in the U.S., where it was sold for 10 years before the nomenclature changed to the letter C-Class designation. The so-called entry-level uxury segment now accounts for over 70 percent of the luxury car market, and Mercedes is hoping to 30,000 C-Classes in its first year of revision, then move upward when production catches up to demand.
Mercedes doesn’t aim at any specific U.S. cars as its targets, although the Cadillac Seville STS might be one. The main targets are the Audi A4, the BMW 3-Series, the Lexus ES300, and the Volvo S70, which are all new either this year or in 2000, and which are formidible targets.
Standard leather interiors, upgraded safety and stability, and the technical touch of the 3-valve-per-cylinder, dual-spark V6 engine allows the C-Class to run with sportiness, and to meet low-emission vehicle standards. Mercedes also has upgraded the warranty to four years, and now has a plan to do all scheduled maintenance in that time — much like Audi’s impressive warranty.
That should soothe the concerns of buyers who recoil when they learn that oil changes might not be required for spans as long as 10,000 or 15,000 miles. The oil not only is constantly monitored electronically, keeping you informed on the instrument panel, but it also is evaluated by how you drive and alerts you when to change the oil by calculating impurities and wear factors. If that seems bold, the warranty proves that if it’s a problem, it will be Mercedes’ problem.
[[[[[CUTLINES:
1/ The dramatic front end of the new Mercedes C-Class knifes through the air with a coefficient of drag of a mere 0.27.
2/ In silhouette, the C-Class might be the most stylish of all Mercedes sedans, even though it is the least expensive.
3/ Rich leather and polished real wood highlight the interior, although you may bump the pillar on the way into those comfortable bucket seats.
4/ The high-rise rear decklid helps aerodynamics, and also helps a spacious trunk stowage area.
Year 2000 shows how far we’ve come, and how far to go, in 2001
Our family’s Christmas Day had been thoroughly enjoyable and mellow, possibly highlighted by my two sons scattering some catnip in a gift box on the living room floor. The family cat, KC — who actually owns the house but allows us to continue inhabiting it — went crazy in the stuff, cavorting and thrashing until little shreds of it were everywhere, throughout the living room.
So on the day after Christmas, I got the mail. After some extensive vacuuming had occupied most of my wife’s morning, there I was, sitting on the couch, opening a nice little white box that had just arrived. It was about the size of a half-pound box of candy, and while I had no idea what it might contain, I must admit that visions of chocolate danced in my head. I popped open the box, and without warning, hundreds — thousands — of tiny little silver shavings, resembling a box of tinsel that had been exploded into confetti by a hand grenade, flew in every direction.
Combining Christmasy tinsel with New Year’s Dayish confetti, the whole thing sheltered a small box, which contained a neat set of cufflinks, with “100” emblazoned on each one. Turns out, it was to commemorate the historic 100th auto racing victory of the Marlboro-sponsored Roger Penske race team, achieved last summer. Maybe Marlboro was trying to get even with me for having never smoked a cigarette. Maybe it was some marketing whiz’s idea of a memorable promotional gimmick. Maybe somebody knows an automotive or racing journalist who wears cufflinks to work.
To me, it goes down as the absolute worst promotional idea of the Year 2000.
The automotive world is already well into the 2001 model year, even though the calendar says 2000 is just ending. In fact, several companies are eagerly waiting for about one more week, figuring that as soon as we’ve reached 2001, they can start introducing 2002 models.
The year 2000 started or ended the millenium, depending on your point of view. We can assume those who claim the new millenium starts with the beginning of 2001 didn’t celebrate their 18th birthday until the day they turned 19. The argument also says the millenium can’t start until 2000 ends, because there was no official year 0 — as in zero. I haven’t heard what those folks have said about living B.C., when, I suppose, people said: “Well, Martha, here we are in the year 10 B.C. — only 10 more years before we hit zero.”
Personally, the year 2000 has extra significance because my dad was born on December 19, 1900. He died back when I was in high school, but I think about him every day. Two weeks ago, he would have turned 100, and in some mystical way, I feel like when 2000 ends Sunday night, he and I will have completed sort of a tag-team handoff of perspective covering the whole century.
He and I never got around to talking much history from his childhood, which I greatly regret. I still enjoy visiting about it with my mom, at Lakeshore Lutheran Home. She’s 98, and she’ll talk at length about the McKay family farm, near McGregor, which she and her family used to visit each summer back in the early 1900s. Sometimes they took the train to get there from Duluth, and she also remembers her brother having the first automobile on their block. Taking the trolley to work at the library back in 1920 was the norm.
Sort of puts things in a different perspective, as we take driving so for granted in the new century.
The Year 2000 brought me several revelations about driving. The most interesting is when, after spending a lot of time driving both in the Twin Cities and Duluth, and on Interstate 35 between the two, I decided to write a column on the maddening and outrageous trend of Minnesota drivers to qualify as the worst in the country because they insist on driving in the left lane, blocking the faster flow of traffic.
To amplify my views on the problem, I decided to venture out on the freeway where it passes through Duluth, and snap a few photos of these jerks driving in the left lane. To my amazement, very few locals drive in the left lane. I shot dozens of photos, and I drove back and forth, from the West End to 26th Avenue East, and it stayed the same — Duluth area drivers stay courteously in the right lane, clearing the left lane for faster drivers.
That was a remarkable thing to witness, and I have continued to notice it ever since, even after amending my column to point out that left-lane hogs were a major problem in the Twin Cities, an affliction that has not infected Up North drivers. Of course, I had long been aware that drivers Up North in general, and on Duluth’s hills in particular, are among the best in the world when it comes to driving on icy roads and streets in wintertime.
The biggest automotive story of the Year 2000 undoubtedly has become the Ford Explorer/Firestone tire controversy, where it has been found that a lot of Firestone tires had their tread separate and a lot of Explorers wearing those tires rolled over. Presumably the two are inextricably linked, although I am not so sure. The greater problem is that all conventional sport-utility vehicles, at least the midsize and large SUVs with predominately rear-drive switchable to 4-wheel-drive, have been found to be secure as fortresses when they crash into a smaller, lighter vehicle, but they are patently unsafe on their own if driven too aggressively.
The key phrase there is “if driven too aggressively.” Vehicles rarely if ever are unsafe on their own. It is when they are operated beyond their limits that problems occur. You can generate some pretty heated debates with SUV drivers who think that all little cars are unsafe and that all of us should be in huge, gas-eating SUVs. Every one of those big-SUV advocates also would swear that they’ve never over-driven their SUV, or driven too aggressively. Often, they will argue their superiority while cruising 85 miles per hour down the freeway.
Week after week, I drive between Duluth and the Twin Cities, and if you were to set the cruise control at 70, you would be passed repeatedly. If you inched it up to, say, 75, you would find that you still are routinely passed. And the majority of vehicles passing you, at 85 or more, are SUVs. Sure, they’ll go that fast, and faster. But you need to stop or swerve abruptly in an SUV, you find out what the limitations of handling are in a larger, more top-heavy vehicle.
I love to drive SUVs, both big and small. And, as I have written repeatedly, folks living Up North have more valid reasons for owning such trucks, because of towing and off-road necessities. But, some are better than others, some respond with more agility and safety than others, even though all of them have some assets that make their drivers feel secure and safe.
As a New Year’s resolution, and just for safety’s sake, let’s hope that all SUV and truck drivers rein in their aggressiveness and keep those beasts within the speed limits. Those speed limits are guidelines for the the pace of all drivers, but they also outline the limit for where SUV drivers become over-aggressive, and SUVs change from being safe fortresses to threats to their occupants.
With New Year’s Eve falling on Sunday night, it also will be interesting to note if there is a lessening in consumption of alcohol. That is another major factor in highway safety, of course. And that brings up one other fact of 2000. The attempt to lower the legally-drunk level from 0.10 to 0.08 has met with considerable resistance by the liquor industry as being unimportant in lessening the problem drunk drivers on the road.
However, if that lowered level causes just a few folks who have had a couple of drinks to decide against having one more for the road — knowing that the reduced limit is more easily reached — it could save a few lives on our highways.
Have a happy new year, and let’s make a resolution that EVERYBODY makes it through 2001 without meeting a tragic end on our roadways.
Sedona provides intriguing side-trip to any vacation to Arizona
There aren’t many airline routes busier than from Minnesota to Phoenix, Arizona, and possibly none busier than that route when wintertime gets Up North residents in its subzero grip. Like right about now.
Because of the frequency of the routes, and the number of people filling those planes, the prices for round-trip flights are remarkably reasonable, compared to other vacation destinations. Phoenix can seem like another world from Minnesota winter, but Sedona, Ariz., is another world again from Phoenix.
I’ve had three opportunities in the past year to go to Arizona for introductory test drives of new vehicles, and on two of those trips I’ve found my way to Sedona. Having been there, I’m not sure why anybody would go to Phoenix when they could make it an hour and a half north on the freeway to Sedona.
Arizona is a fascinating vacation spot, and it has varied attractions. Phoenix has a lot of golf courses, and is laid out in a valley where it seems to be perpetually sunny and warm, which becomes triple-figure-hot in the summer, leading to the chamber of commerce disclaimer, “Yes, but it’s dry heat.”
Heading north to Sedona, you can continue for another hour north to Flagstaff, which is chilly, even in the summer, or, once up on the plateau, continue another couple of hours north and come to the Grand Canyon.
But for now, let’s just go to Sedona. It is a shameless center of souvenirs and hucksters, but it also has some of the most strikingly beautiful scenery on this earth. The little tourist town is nestled down in the valleys between abrupt mountain buttes of a pinkish-tan rock that form intriguing borders on the east, north and south.
When the sun starts to set each day, however, those buttes start to darken in the late light, and turn redder and redder until they practically glow in the last moments of sunset. Because of those buttes, the area is known as Arizona’s “Red Rock Country.”
Those mountainous ridges are only accessible by a couple of roadways, entering Sedona from the southeast, north and west, and a tiny, treacherous, winding mountain road from the east. So you pick your route carefully.
But the true wonder of those mountains is that most of them are eminently hike-able. Some have hiking trails carved into them, others have ridges and ledges that make it safe even for novice climbers and hikers. Whichever butte you choose, and however high you climb, you can be assured that your view will be post-card perfect in any direction.
The other unique attraction of Sedona is the fact that it is the site of an occurance of several areas of mystical, if not mythical, vortices. Each vortex is said to hold special powers of healing and mental focus, and there is some basis of fact in the magnetic fields that converge there. Believers claim that you can physically feel an amazing effect on your mental and physical equilibrium, when you find the precise spot of a vortex.
You can find a church located directly on one vortex, and other areas that claim to have one. My wife, Joan, and I searched Boynton Canyon and climbed the butte on the northern edge of that canyon one afternoon. The trails through the canyon were numerous, and locals insisted there was a vortex out there, that we would know when we found it. We must not have found it, although we were both primed and ready to be amazed.
Instead, we had to be amazed with the stunning scenery and the pleasant exhaustive feeling of having climbed and hiked all over the area. You learn the importance of sunblock, and of carrying water bottles and snacks when you’re hiking in that region. We did, as we’d been advised, and we were happy we had.
Because of the mystical reputation of the area, Native Americans have long adopted the region as a spiritual center, and, as we might expect, a whole herd of fortune-tellers, mystics, palm readers, tea-leave readers, scam artists and opportunists have flooded the area, easily outnumbering the legitimate believers who have intriguing tales to tell.
We found a number of moderately priced restaurants, some with a striking view of the mountain range to the east, which is our choice for late-afternoon. The sunset is stunning to watch to the west, but the real treat of Sedona is looking the other direction, and watching those rocks turn red.
One of the rock formations is called “Coffee Pot,” and another is called “Snoopy,” because it looks like a huge carving of Snoopy, reclined and resting on his back.
As the sun sets, the shadows cast fascinating forms on those rocks, adding to the mystical feeling of the place. Dawn is interesting, too, but it has a more contrasty, harsher effect of lighting those rocks. The sunset is mellower, softer, and far more dramatic. The same could be said for Sedona, itself.
[[[[[CUTLINES:
1/ A hot-air balloon cruised lazily past the end of a mountain ridge to the north of Sedona, Arizona.
Nokian Hakkapeliitta Q provides new answer to wintry driving
A lot of people who want the best cell phone choose a Nokia, because of its reputation. A lot of people who want the absolute best in winter driving tires ALSO buy Nokia, also by reputation.
To separate its tire business from its cell-phone operation, the company recently changed its name to Nokian tires, and their reputation for Up North winter driving is unexcelled. And we’re talking Up North whether you’re in Minnesota, Wisconsin or Finland. Nokian tires are made in a high-tech factory in Nokia, Finland, which is a suburb of Tampere. Nokia tires were — and still are — the choice of rally drivers, including the maniacs who love to drive 120 miles per hour while hurling their vehicles around curves in a four-wheel drift on courses somewhere north of the Arctic Circle in Finland. Not a bad test facility.
The primary Nokian snow tire goes by the wonderfully melodic name of “Hakkapeliitta.” Its tough, rugged tread blocks were designed to hold studs in a compound hard enough to last a lot of miles, but tough enough to take a beating. A few years ago, Nokian came out with the “NRW,” an all-season tire with a tread that I’ve found works better in winter than most every other all-season tire and better than some winter tires.
A year ago, Nokian introduced an all new tire, called the “Hakkapeliitta Q,” a studless tire designed to run with a softer compound, which retains its flexibility even when the temperature goes well below zero, giving it a much-improved tendency to stick to the road, whether it’s dry, or covered with ice or snow.
Mark Strohm, a partner in running Foreign Affairs, the repair shop at 722 East 9th Street on Duluth’s hillside, also sells an assortment of automotive equipment, including tires. He’s been selling Nokias, and then Nokians, for over 15 years. When the company came out with an all-new winter tire, he obtained a set to put on the Volvo S40 sedan his wife, Deb, drives.
“She’s my test-bed,” said Strohm. “She knows that everything I hear about and want to try, her car will be our test-bed. She loves these tires so much, she wouldn’t let me drive the car. The other night, we were driving home on a street that hadn’t been plowed, and the radio and the fan blower were off, and I heard something I had never heard before. You know how, when it’s cold out, the snow squeaks under your foot? Well, I heard that same squeaking under the tires of the Volvo.”
So Mark put the truck version of Nokians on his Dodge Ram Turbodiesel.
I learned of his endorsement after I already had bought a set of Nokian Hakkapeliitta Qs, which Foreign Affairs installed on our personal car. I had bought some earlier Hakkapeliittas and NRWs in past years, and they worked so well I also got them for my two sons’ cars. It helps them get through winter, which helps our peace of mind.
After spending the first weekend trying out the new tires on the steep and snow-ice covered hills of Duluth, I am convinced that the new Qs will be hugely successful in providing the secure feeling that we all crave in winter driving. Several other Up North outlets handle Nokian tires as well, but Foreign Affairs sells them for $97 apiece — that’s a bargain, for premium tires, and it’s about the same as the NRW and only a few dollars more than the more rigid Hakka 1s.
WORST FEELING OF ALL
Maybe you’re on the freeway, driving as delicately as possible because of the snow or sleet coating the roadway. Or starting from an icy, uphill stoplight, where you’re more likely to spin than to move. Or, perhaps you’re just trying to get in or out of an inclined driveway, and you know that without a run, you are destined to spin. The ultimate, of course, is when you come to a curve in the road during a storm and you turn the steering wheel, but the car feels as if it’s on wax as it chooses to go straight ahead.
You know the feeling, and there’s nothing worse. Instability can turn into danger, which is only a hair’s-breadth away from tragedy when you’re driving in icy conditions.
Because I drive a wide variety of vehicles every year, I feel comfortable with almost any set-up, but I have come to realize that front-wheel drive is vastly better than rear-wheel drive, and that all-wheel drive is the best of all. But that is just for going; stopping is a whole ‘nother ballgame. No matter how well you can get traction and accelerate, there is no assurance you’ll be able to stop in an adequately short distance.
No matter what the configuration of your vehicle’s engine placement and drivetrain, the most important element in successfully negotiating winter driving is your tires. I had first sought to find tires that would provide maximum security in the foulest of weather, and over the years, I tried exotic Michelins, Goodyear, Vredestein, BF Goodrich and others, with mixed reviews. Then I found out about Nokia, and the first Hakkapeliittas we tried were outstanding.
Bridgestone came out with the new Blizzak, a unique tire made with a cellular tread that is designed to decompose as you drive, and those little cells make abrasive edges that help the tire stick to the icy roads. I’ve tried them, too, and they work very well, while also allowing you a surprising ability to stop on ice. However, Blizzaks also wear out quite rapidly, because no matter how severe the winter, most of our driving is on bare pavement, and that decompozing tread compound decomposes in a hurry.
The best technique for handling winter driving is to buy a second set of wheels, mount snow tires to use from November to April, then swap back for the best-handling summer tires. However, some of the best all-season tires, such as the Nokian NRWs, work so well both summer and winter they make an effective compromise. Besides, the last couple of years, we’ve become spoiled with our winters without winter, so to speak. Light snowfalls, moderate temperatures — it was joke. Who needed winter tires?
Ah, but payback is here, this year. Extreme cold and heavy snowfalls, although the Up North area has so far been spared the heft of snowfalls as close as the Twin Cities. We had about 15 inches of snow in December, while the Twin Cities had about 40 inches, according to reports I heard. Strohm said his shop sold more batteries last month than it did the previous two years, but that tire sales have only increased marginally, by less than 20 percent. That means some are trying to get through with their existing tires.
But for me, it was time to make the move, and get the optimum winter tires. After checking thoroughly, I decided the Nokian Hakkapelittaa Q was the best, so I went for ’em. On Day 1, I thought the tires spun a bit, but I wrote it off to being too exuberant with the clutch and putting too much power down. On Day 2, they didn’t spin. On Day 3, they churned through plowed-up snowbanks and unplowed driveways, and held remarkably firm on icy parking lot attempts to swerve and spin.
It’s a great feeling. Bring on the blizzards, we’re ready for the worst.
TECHNICAL SUPERIORITY
In the tire business, over a dozen elements go into the construction of the tread compound. All tire companies, understandably, want their tires to last the longest, handle the best and run best when heated up at high speed. In order to accomplish that, the compromise is made with the tread compound, altering the mix for firmer, tougher tread. The tradeout almost always has been that making a harder tread to work and last longer means that it loses its warm-weather flexibility when it gets cold out — as in subzero.
That’s why some of the biggest companies, with the best reputation for long wearing and high-performance cornering, have a lousy history of cold weather traction. Those of us living Up North in the snow belt are too few in number to affect the mass-production of the largest companies.
That may be why Nokia has worked out so well for Up North driving. In Finland, it gets cold, especially farther north. A tire company making a tire to work in Finland has to start out being good in winter driving, then it can go after the high-performance end of the compromise from there.
As for the new “Q” tire, Pat Greer, a Nokian distributor in Chicago, explained it. “In going to a studless winter tire, Nokian made a softer compound, because it didn’t need to be hard enough to hold studs,” he said. “The secret to success as a winter tire has to do with siping, the little grooves that go crosswise in the tread. The sipes can cause the tread to flex, which helps traction, but too much flexing causes the tire to wear faster, too.
“So Nokian has put a sophisticated compound on the ‘Q’ and it also has put in spiral sipes. The sipes are cut into the tread, but every ¼ inch, the groove turns 90 degrees, then turns back, so it’s a zigzag sipe. Doing that gives the ‘Q’ less flexing, and takes away the squishy feeling you’d get otherwise from the tread flexing. As it wears, the zigzag sipes also give you more edges to bite into the ice and snow, too.”
Greer, and Strohm, assume the new “Q” will wear out at a faster rate than the other Nokian tires, but not as rapidly as the other competing premium snow tires with softer tread compounds. If it is good for 30,000 miles, and you switch out of them every spring and back into them in the fall, you should get four or five winters out of a set.
And those will be winters free of that horrible, white-knuckle feeling of losing control or spinning every time it snows.
[[[[[[CUTLINES:
1/ This may go down as the Winter of Blizzards, which causes treacherous times and scary feelings for drivers.
2/ Nokian, a Finnish tire manufacturer, has created the new Hakkapeliitta Q tire, which seems perfectly suited to Up North winter driving.
3/ The Q combines a special tread compound with “spiral siping” for the cross slits to enhance ice and snow grip.
4/ Aggressive tread block pattern effectively puts the unique compound to use to bite into snow and help handling on ice.
5/ Mark Strohm, co-owner of Foreign Affairs, tried out Hakkapeliitta Q tires on his wife’s car, with impressive results.
Mercury Mountaineer’s stable handling proves biggest surprise
At the end of an introductory day of test-drives of the new Mercury Mountaineer, the assembled media types gathered at the large, paved parking lot at Phoenix Municipal Stadium, where Ford folks had assembled an interesting mix of sport-utility vehicles.
There was a Mercedes ML320, a Lexus RX300, a Jeep Grand Cherokee, and a Dodge Durango. Plus about a half-dozen 2001 Mountaineers. And there was a group of Bob Bondurant driving school types who had laid out two different pylon-lined autocross courses to thoroughly test the acceleration, braking, swerving, steering, controlling tendencies of all these vehicles.
Now, the Mountaineer is Mercury’s version of the new 2001 Ford Explorer, which is a completely renovated and improved midsize SUV. There are some significant differences, including the style touches that give the Mountaineer front end a bold, almost concept-vehicle look. Another large difference is that the Mountaineer has full-time all-wheel-drive, while the Explorer has the switchable differential that allows you to drive in rear-drive and flip a switch on the dash to engage 4-wheel-drive, and also has a low-range lock.
The biggest improvement in the Mountaineer (and Explorer) is the new design of the frame and rear axle, where engineers fitted the half-shafts through the broadest beam of the frame an directly to the wheel on either side. That allows for the amazing feat of lowering the side rails and therefor the floor, while raising the ground clearance by one inch. Is it any wonder why the previous version — and almost all other SUVs — have a too-high center of gravity?
Still, I thought Ford had made a tactical blunder in bringing out the selection of competitors it chose. I checked over the Grand Cherokee and the Durango, and noted that while they had good power, they had the base suspensions, so obviously they would be easily outclassed by the upgraded Mountaineer suspension.
But we all know about the superb handling of anything by Mercedes, and of Japan’s best copies of Mercedes products, by Lexus. Besides, I’d driven the Mercedes ML430 at its introduction, at Road America’s race track at Elkhart Lake, Wis., and I was able to send it flying into tight corners at 110 miles per hour, as well as churn through the off-road portion of the test. And the Lexus RX300 handles so car-like, it should almost be considered a quirky station wagon than an SUV.
At the same time, we know far too much about Ford’s problems with rollovers of the Explorer/Mountaineer vehicle, which is somewhat due to a problem with Firestone tires, but also might have something to do with the inherent stability of a top-heavy vehicle when driven too aggressively.
And here I was, about to drive too aggressively on purpose. I climbed aboard, quite sure that the Mountaineer would be overmatched. First I drove the RX300, and I accelerated hard to the three stoplight lanes, one of which turns green as you enter, and you must swerve abruptly to make it through the proper lane. The RX300 leaned steeply, but swerved accurately enough to make it. Same with the other tests, where I zoomed through them, a bit surprised at how soft the suspension seemed, and how much the RX300 leaned, but always confident in controlling it.
Then I got in the Mercedes, and I hammered the accelerator. The thing flew ahead, and it was touch and go whether I’d make the properly lighted lane. I did, but barely sparing the pylons that I thought I would collect. Later, we agreed that the power of the larger-engined Mercedes SUV gave it so much acceleration that I got to the lane-change area at such a high rate of speed, I scarcely had time to make the swerve.
It, too, leaned quite a bit on the turns, but was easily controllable. I know that Mercedes and Lexus both have aimed their softened suspensions at U.S. buyers, so I wasn’t shocked at the amount of lean. I did screech the tires and make it through the rest of the course.
Then it was time for the Mountaineer. I took off, quite swiftly with the new 4.6-liter, overhead-cam V8 power, and darted through the lane change to hit the proper lane as the light changed with amazing ease. It was remarkable how flat and stable the new Mountaineer stayed, even during that harsh swerve.
Around the other cones, through the intricate curves and braking areas, and I was very impressed.
So I switched to the other course, which was longer and faster, but with a couple of very tight turns. Same order, I thrashed the RX300 around first, and while I literally hurled it into a couple of turns, it was predictable and handled well, even though it leaned over quite a lot.
The Mercedes did the same. Very swift, and I had to toss it into the hairpin and steer like crazy while staying on the power in order to complete the turn with the tires screaming for mercy. The fastest part of the course was easily covered, but I had to get off the power at a couple of turns, or risk losing it and knocking cones flying.
Still, both were very impressive. They both leaned a lot, but they are SUVs, not race cars, and I anticipated a fair amount of top-heavy leaning.
Then I climbed aboard the Mountaineer, and I was off. It was swift through the first bit, which included a washboard-rough stretch leading into the hairpin turn, and it sailed through the fast part, but what was most amazing was that it stayed flat and stable through the tightest hairpin turns, and was, by far, the most controllable of the batch. I swept around the final turns and parked it, thoroughly impressed.
It hit me later, about how far the SUV industry has changed.
German vehicle builders always have had firm, secure suspension systems. Japanese companies have made lighter cars, but since they’ve gone after the best competitors, they, too, have firmed up their suspensions. U.S. companies, meanwhile, are still stuck to some degree in satisfying the aging customers they have long had, who prefer a softer, squishier ride than the firm — stiff, to some — ride and handling of the import companies.
But now we get to the latest generation of top-shelf SUVs from Mercedes of Germany, and Lexus of Japan, and the new Mercury Mountaineer is the stiffest and best-handling of the three, with the least amount of leaning and the flattest attitude in the tightest of turns.
Ten years ago, if you had suggested that a vehicle from Ford would handle more firmly than the best from Mercedes and Lexus, you would have been considered out of your tiny little mind. And now it’s happened.
[[[[[[CUTLINES:
1/ The 2001 Mercury Mountaineer leaned only slightly, considering it was driven hard enough to screech all four tires during a media test.
2/ The mountains of Sedona, Ariz., formed the perfect frame for the 2001 Mercury Mountaineer at its introduction in October.
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