Eclipse Spyder GT, Volvo C70 test vanishing top-down weather
[[[[cutlines:
Eclipse 1/ All sorts of grooves and scoops enhance the flashy Eclipse Spyder convertible.
Eclipse 2/ The newest Eclipse GT is as sleek as a jet fighter or powerboat from the side.
Eclipse 3/ Cylindrical tubes could better augment the gauge package if tilted toward driver.
Volvo 1/ The Volvo C70 looked good on Hawk Ridge, even when there were no hawks.
Volvo 1 alternate/ Hawk Ridge’s view formed the backdrop for the Volvo C70 convertible.
Volvo 2/ A seat in the Volvo C70 was the perfect vantage point from the cliff of Hawk Ridge.
Volvo 3/ Inside, the Volvo C70 provides actual rear seat living room, unlike most convertibles.
From the standpoint of an automotive columnist, this is the time of year to be in a hurry.
First, September is the last time to drive the remaining vehicles from the outgoing model-year before the new-year changeover. And second, when those late-arriving cars happen to be convertibles, it’s time to race to complete the reports before the fast-changing Northern climate renders them invalid.
So, when both a Mitsubishi Eclipse GT Spyder and a Volvo C70 showed up back to back — both convertibles, and both 2001 models — it made sense to combine them into one evaluation. If we hurry, we can beat the hauling out of fleece pullovers.
Convertibles, in case you haven’t noticed, have made a healthy comeback from near extinction a decade ago. Cars were getting more conservative and more boring, and there seemed to be no place to promote or market a car that had fun written all over it. And convertibles definitely have enjoyment as their basis.
During their comeback, an entire new group of sports cars have emerged, and various coupes have had their tops peeled back to capitalize on the resurgence of ragtops. Mitsubishi has been building the Eclipse for three generations now, and the newest one, which has a sleek, racy nose and all sorts of grooves, lines and contours along the sides, makes a striking visual impact as a convertible.
Volvo, on the other hand, has restructured its whole line, into new and contemporary sedans and wagons. So taking the roof off the 70 model makes it the C70, and it takes on an entirely new personality as a classy, though costly, convertible.
ECLIPSE SPYDER GT
Ever since the first Eclipse rolled off the line at Normal, Ill. — either as Mitsubishis or as Plymouth Lasers or Eagle Talons — I’ve enjoyed driving them. The first ones were tight little wedgy coupes, with driver and passenger seats that more resembled jet fighter cockpits than car interiors. The second version was much more rounded and appealing to the general coupe buyer than the harder-edged originals.
The third one tries to encompass both, with a sporty flair, but also with a lot of creature comforts. For 2001, the Eclipse convertible takes on the unwieldy monicker: Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder GT.
It is a stout performer, however, and my older son, Jack, thinks it is in the class with the hallowed Volkswagen GTI as a fun machine. I’m a bit more reserved about it. But there is no question it is armed and dangerous with a 3.0-liter V6, complete with four valves per cylinder, run by single overhead camshafts on each bank of cylinders.
Sure, the Eclipse has some shakiness, as do most coupes-turned-convertibles, but it also goes swiftly and straight-on wherever you aim it, with smooth and efficient performance. Its suspension holds you flat, aided undoubtedly by stabilizer bars and gas-filled shocks with firmer settings on the specially tuned 4-wheel independent suspension. The big 17-inch by 6-inch-wide alloy wheels and the 215-50 tires also help plant the footprint.
With a 5-speed manual, the 3-liter V6 flings you on down the road impressively. In fact, I’d like to have a sixth gear for freeway cruising. Fuel economy is estimated at 20 in the city and 27 on the highway, and I got about 25 miles per gallon in combined driving.
When you do stop for gas, there is no insistence of premium, which is important if you want to save a dime or more per gallon on fuel that is creeping toward $2 a gallon. And it is a joy to fill the tank, because there’s a spring-loaded silver alloy fuel-fill cover that you can pop up, very race-car like.
I like the swoopy look of the front, and the side view is flashy, with too many grooves for my taste, but I particularly like the rear end design, with those huge taillights and a curving spoiler arcing up and across the trunklid. So what if it blocks some of the view through the rear-view mirror?
With dual front airbags and side impact door beams, with front and rear crumple zones to absorb energy, the Eclipse is as safe as possible against crashes. The 4-wheel disc brakes also help haul the Spyder down from speed.
The power roof has rear glass, and it goes down and comes back up easily, with the flip of locking switches and a heavy hand on the electric switch. With the top down, you’ll be tempted to leave it that way, regardless of the weather, and throw on a turtleneck, jacket and cap. Plus, in the Great White North, you can always cheat and put the top down but turn on the heater.
Halogen headlights and halogen foglights are impressive, too, although I would have to tinker with them before being convinced they couldn’t be aimed better for more massive road coverage. The optional leather seats are part of a GT package that also includes atilock brakes, a power driver’s seat, the front seat side airbags, and a 7-speaker sound system with a 4-disc changer in the dash along with the radio and cassette.
The price sticker is $28,297, which is a lot for a car, but not a lot for a loaded-up convertible sporty coupe.
My biggest criticism of the car is the same as when it was first introduced. You sit in the driver’s seat and look at large speedometer and tachometer, and flanking them, you have a decent sized fuel gauge on one side and temperature gauge on the other.
However, Mitsubishi designers insist on placing those exterior gauges in cylindrical housings that would be pretty neat, if they were angled in to be aimed directly at the driver. They aren’t. Instead, the cylinders point straight back. They don’t actually cut off your view of the dials or the needles, but they do cut the gauges off almost by half, so you tend to feel as though you might not be seeing the whole gauge on either side.
They aren’t about to change it, so if I bought one, I would take a small saw, and hack down the inside edge of those cylinders to afford a clear view at a glance.
VOLVO C70
The Swedish car business has undergone a few changes in recent years, with Volvo and Saab still competing for the nation’s automotive superiority, but with Ford taking over Volvo much the same way as General Motors has taken over Saab. In both cases, the new parents have let the adopted offspring run free, thankfully, because they are among the world’s neatest cars for safety, performance and eccentricity. The auto business needs more of that.
Volvo has redesigned its full model line, rounding and shaping things into something other than squares or rectangles, which is pretty revolutionary for Volvo. Also, the company that used to insist on rear-drive only, now builds all front-wheel-drive cars, except for a couple of all-wheel-drive wagon versions.
The new sedans are fine, solid vehicles, so it is no surprise to find that the C70 convertible is also a fine, safe, solid sporty machine. Some Volvo models are also surprisingly inexpensive, but not so the C70 convertible. The base sticker price is $45,550, and as tested it was $48,825 — thanks to a cold-weather package with heated front seats and stability and traction control. A premium sound system and 17-inch wheels are the only other options.
A 5-speed automatic transmission is smooth and efficient in getting the car through its paces, and while the EPA estimates show 20 city and 26 highway, I got 24.7 miles per gallon in combined driving, and a dip under 20 in town.
Under the hood, there is an oddity, a 2.3-liter, in-line 5-cylinder engine, with dual overhead camshafts and a turbocharger. The turbo emits a telltale whir every once in a while, otherwise the only indication it exists is that the C70 takes off with more power than a 2.3-liter engine should allow.
All sorts of safety things are included, because it’s a Volvo, starting with the unit body construction with its roll-cage design of high-strength steel and energy-absorbing materials. A side-impact protection system with side airbags in addition to the front bags, and a whiplash protection system, and automatic safety tensioners on the harnesses, plus something called rollover protection pretty well fills out the chart.
Integrated foglights are another touch that could be considered safety related. Leather seats, an in-dash 3-disc changer in the dash as a feature of the 400-watt, 12-speaker audio system, and a trip computer are other added features.
Everything worked well, including the no-latch power top, and the 8-way power driver and passenger seats were neat.
There also is real room in the rear seat to put people, unlike most convertibles. However, that was my biggest complaint against the Volvo C70. The power seat switches let you move the buckets fore, aft, up, down and tilt. When you get out, you find another switch, mounted higher on the backrest. Pull up on the switch, and the backrest whirs as it tilts forward, which allows you to easily reach into the rear seat for stuff.
In case you want to let someone enter or exit the rear seat, you can hold onto the switch, and soon the whole seat starts whirring as it moves slowly forward, until a large gap is opened to allow rear seat access.
The only problem is, if you just want to reach back there to grab a jacket or brief case, and you want to simply flip the seat backrest forward and then back, you’re out of luck. Once forward, I couldn’t find any way to simply return the backrest to its assigned position. Instead, I had to hold it until it slid slowly, slowly, slowly forward, after which it would let me slide the backrest back. Then I had to hit the other button to make the whole seat slide back — slowly, slowly slowly again — until I could climb into the front.
Maybe this is a sign that Volvo has let Ford sneak in with an idea. Otherwise, it is distinctly un-Volvo-like to have some nuisance gadget like that anywhere on board.
I drove up to Hawk Ridge on Hawk Ridge Weekend last Saturday and Sunday to check out the scenery and to show off the Volvo, both top-up and top-down. It made for nice picture background, and there weren’t many people around. Planning Hawk Ridge Weekend for a specific date in September is a lot like driving a convertible in Northern Minnesota in September — risky. You should never risk taking Mother Nature for granted. Luckily, the C70, and the Eclipse, for that matter, look good even with the tops up.
Cars and trucks of all shapes and prices highlight 2002 models
[[[[cutlines:
1/ Ford is reintroducing the Thunderbird in a slick package that combines the retro trend with /futuristic touches.
2/ Chevrolet continues to stress large trucks — large in size and in profit margin — such as the 2002 Avalanche pickup-SUV.
3/ Volkswagen has restyled the Passat for 2002, with smoother aerodynamics and increased power on a solid family sedan.
4/ The Toyota Camry has been the top-selling car in the U.S. for several years, and it is totally redone for 2002.
Do you like cars? Do you like trucks? Do you like all things in between the two?
Stick around, because there is sure to be something, and more likely dozens of somethings, that will catch your eye and attract your attention among the new vehicles already turning up in automotive dealerships everywhere.
The big news of recent years, such as the outburst of Sport Utility Vehicles, the resurgence of retro cars, sports cars and convertibles, and the introduction of crossover vehicles that blur the lines, has led the automotive industry to a world where anything goes.
There are domestics made in the U.S., imports made in foreign countries, domestics made in other countries, and imports made in the U.S. — enough to further blur the lines of nationalistic pride. There remain a few uninformed who think a “foreign car” is anything not made by General Motors, Ford or Chrysler, and who may yet find it hard to accept that Chrysler is now DaimlerChrysler, having been bought out by that storied old German company.
As has become the trend in recent years, however, the once-Big Three of the U.S. are stressing trucks more than cars, because people not only continue to buy SUVs, pickups and minivans in amazing numbers, but they continue to be willing to assure the manufacturers of enormous profits in the process.
Tops among the truck segment are a barrage from General Motors, including the new Chevrolet Avalanche and the GM threesome of the Chevrolet Trailblazer, GMC Envoy and Oldsmobile Bravada, plus a Cadillac Escalade that is a Caddy version of the daringly styled Avalanche. Buick introduces its first SUV, the Rendezvous, which is a sleeker version of the star-crossed Pontiac Aztek.
A sleeper among the GM entries is the new Saturn VUE, yet another new SUV, but a compact one with a lot of cleverly designed interior amenities, and powered by the proven Saturn sedan engines.
Ford also has big truck news, with the Explorer and Mercury Mountaineer all new and with a much more stable chassis design. And the large, specialty aimed Lincoln Blackwood combines SUV and pickup in a flashy model that cannot, for some reason, be obtained with 4-wheel drive.
Dodge comes out with an all-new Ram, full-sized pickup, and Chrysler breaks out the new Jeep Liberty, which replaces the venerable but tired Cherokee.
As for the cars, it is still far too early to assess what will be the hottest sellers among the new 2002s, but that doesn’t stop us from hitting the high points in offering an assortment of what’s new and what is sure to attract some attention. Among the traditional domestic manufacturers, Ford will have the biggest car news with the reintroduction of the Thunderbird.
Built as a roadster but with an available hardtop, the Tbird has a retro look to it that will remind purists of the mid-1950s original. The car will be a touring joy, although it will stop short of being a hot-performing sporty car. Not that it couldn’t be. The Thunderbird will be powered by the Jaguar-built 3.9-liter V8 that is also used in the Lincoln LS, and it will turn out 252 horsepower, but it will be filtered through only a 5-speed automatic transmission that is geared for smoothness, not neck-snapping performance.
Ford also will introduce an SVT (Special Vehicle Team) version of the subcompact Focus, making it a true pocket-rocket to complement the high-volume economy models.
Chrysler was quite active in 2001, introducing new Sebring, Stratus and minivans, on the heels of the sizzling PT Cruiser. So for 2002, Chrysler is throttlng back, with about the only new model a special version of the sporty full-size sedan, the 300M.
General Motors also had a fair number of introductions in 2001, and the only completely new car from GM is the Cadillac CTS, which will replace the Catera and is a bold new design that is sort of a block shape chiseled down into a unique form. It is aimed at the top European entry-level sedans from BMW, Audi and Mercedes, plus such Japanese entries as Lexus, Acura and Infiniti.
Elsewhere at GM, change is coming. Oldsmobile is about to be eliminated, although it will continue to sell existing models as long as there is some demand. Chevrolet loses the Prizm, which is in its final season as a rebadged Toyota Corolla, and the Toyota connection switches to Pontiac, where a crossover vehicle called the Vibe will debut.
The Chevy Camaro and Pontiac Firebird get collector’s editions, which come just before the end of their long and storied histories. Some say the names will be resurrected on new models after a couple of years away. Buick remains unchanged, trusting stability and consistency might continue to attract a loyal following.
From the European side, where all the companies seem to be riding the crest of success, Volkswagen is making the most moves. Having made an early introduction of the Passat full-sized sedan, which comes with a strong 190-horsepower, 30-valve V6, also will be available with a unique new V8 that is actually configured like two small V4 layouts, one on either bank of the V. In addition, Volkswagen increases the power of the GTI in either 4-cylinder or V6 form, and the Beetle and Jetta also share in the power surge, getting the same engine upgrades from 150 to 180 horsepower with the 1.8-Turbo 4, and 201 horses with the VR6, which shows up with four valves per cylinder and dual overhead-cams.
Audi will start selling a renovated A4 model in the sub-$30,000 bracket. The outgoing model clearly rejuvenated Audi’s position as a world player in the sedan business, and the new model has bobtailed rear lights and an all-aluminum 3.0-liter V6 replaced the iron-block 2.8, and it comes blessed with five valves per cylinder and Audi’s unexcelled quattro all-wheel-drive system if you so choose. Strong as it is on innovations, the A4 also will offer a continuously-variable automatic transmission on the front-drive V6 and all 4-cylinder models.
BMW has a new 7-Series luxury sedan field coming out, with infinitely variable intake valve timing and a 6-speed automatic transmission, plus adjustable stabilizer bars front and rear. The popular 3-Series sedans and coupes will introduce a new M3 version for 2002, with power boosted to 333 horsepower from its 3.2-liter in-line 6. For those who can’t get enough fun touches, the M3 will offer shift paddles behind the steering wheel for sequential shifting.
Mercedes has a new C230 coupe, which is a sporty 2-door version of the entry level C-Class, and it comes with a 192-horsepower turbocharged 4-cylinder engine, with either a 6-speed manual or 5-speed automatic.
The other big news from Europe is the introduction of the X-Type Jaguar, a $30,000 entry-level sedan that performs impressively and has full-time all-wheel-drive. Volvo, also, goes to all-wheel drive in the S60 sedan. Saab offers the 9.3 only in sporty Viggen form, stressing the bigger 9.5. Britain’s Land Rover brings out the Freelander, a more compact and affordable SUV.
Swinging to the other side of the world, the Far East has some impressive new entries. Just when you think they must have exhausted all the ideas on technology, along comes Toyota, with a new Camry redesigned from the ground up in an effort to maintain its hold as the top-selling U.S. sedan. The Camry comes with plenty of luxury and a new sportier version as well, and its styling looks remarkably like the Mercedes C-Class.
Toyota also introduces the Matrix, a neat little sporty wagon that will be the basis for the Pontiac Vibe, as well. The Matrix was introduced at the auto show circuit last year, and was a big hit. It will have the hot powerplant from the Celica sports coupe. The Highlander is yet another in the ever-expanding fleet of Toyota SUVs. In upscale Lexus form, Toyota offers a new ES300, which continues to be based on the Camry, and the SC430 sports hardtop was introduced as an early 2002. The sporty IS300 sedan adds a SportCross wagon back.
Honda with a new Acura RSX sports coupe, and a hot Si version of the Civic, making up for the demise of the long-popular Prelude, which will cease to exist. The CR-V small SUV is also all-new, with different styling, and more power from its engine, and the highly successful Odyssey minivan gets a whopping boost up to 240 horsepower with a 5-speed automatic and rear disc brakes in a thorough upgrade.
Nissan has been busy, too, with a new Sentra SE-R performance sedan, and an all-new Altima midsize sedan that gets V6 power, while offering a new Q45 luxury sedan from its upscale Infiniti branch, which also has a new G35 sports sedan, priced more moderately.
Mazda has a new prize with the Protégé compact sedan redesigned and featuring the Protege5 as a slant-back wagon version. Mitsubishi has a competitor for the Protégé with the introduction of the Lancer, which replaces the Mirage in the compact sedan segment. The Galant and Diamante get cosmetic styling changes.
Subaru has a couple of hot numbers, with the Impreza WRX and WRX STi rally-based compact sedans, loaded with 227-horsepower, turbocharged engines. On a more sedate note, other Impreza models are very impressive both as a sedan and sport wagon. Suzuki brought out the XL-7, a larger small SUV, if that makes sense, just after the first of the year as a 2002. Isuzu drops the high-style VehiCross after a brief run, but comes out with the Axiom, another new SUV.
Korea also has become a major player in the auto business, and Hyundai leads the way with a new Sonata sedan and the XG300 becomes the XG350 with its engine enlarged. Kia makes big news by introducing the Sedona minivan, priced under $20,000 and with a 195-horsepower V6. Daiwoo models remain basically unchanged.
Chevy jumps into the trendy forefront with huge 2002 Avalanche
[[[[cutlines:
1/ The Chevrolet Avalanche is a large and opulent combination vehicle that can be converted from SUV to pickup truck.
2/ A lot of molded plastic cladding accents the long Chevy Avalanche, protecting against rock chips and encasing the pickup box.
3/ A rear window behind the 5-passenger interior can be removed to allow open air all the way to the tailgate.
4/ A mammoth and stylish display of high-tech headlights and grillework set off the unique look of the Avalanche. ]]]]]
We’ve seen it coming, from a long way off, and it’s not just because it’s so big.
General Motors, accused of falling behind in the technology race as well as in the progressive styling competition, is making 2002 the year it takes giant steps to catch up. And the Chevrolet Avalanche is the Bigfoot of giant steps.
GM in general, and Chevy in particular, have certainly not lagged behind in the truck end of the current SUV/pickup craze. With the Silverado, Chevy has the second-most-sold vehicle on the planet, second only to Ford’s F150. And with the large Tahoe and the very large Suburban, Chevy has set standards for the trend toward huge SUVs.
But the competiton is pecking away from all sides, and the most recent trend in the truck business is crossover vehicles, those machines that can convert to fit an assortment of lifestyles and trends. The trendiest vehicle of the future might be the one that can best meet the most current trends.
With Ford coming out with various versions of its pickups, and the Lincoln Blackwood, which is like a giant Navigator SUV with the rear third cut off and replaced with a pickup box, Chevrolet has responded with the Avalanche, and it is, in a word, formidible.
From the outside, the clear-lens headlights and driving lights are both above and below the signature Chevy horizontal grille bar, and they are angled off in all directions, almost as if Chevy is trying to come up with a massive front end that can take on the Blackwood, the Navigator, the Dodge Ram and possibly any Kenworth you might spot.
The lower bumper area is covered with thick plastic stuff that looks and feels pretty bulletproof to the touch, and probably is to any stray boulders as well. The plastic stuff continues around on the lower sides, and has stylish little notches in it here and there, heading toward the pickup box rear, where it visually meets the sloping shaft coming off the roof of the crew cab.
On top of the box is more heavy-duty plastic, a secure cover over the box itself, with side troughs for storage of smaller items that can be locked away for privacy.
Inside, the test vehicle was a five-seater, with two bucket seats in the front, and three rear seats, inside those full-size back doors, and they are arranged in a 60/40 split to fold down. A normal customer might wonder why the rear seat in a two-row interior would be designed to fold down, but that’s where the biggest difference — beyond style — comes in.
The Avalanche pickup box is 5-foot-3 in length, which is pretty good, but it’s short by large pickup standards. But the design allows you to fold down the rear seatbacks, then flip a switch and the “midgate” folds down on top of that to form a flat floor that goes all the way back, extending that pickup box to 8-foot-2 — which is long, by big truck, small truck or SUV standards.
The glass partition that looks like a rear window has two switches at the top, and turning them allows you to drop that rear window out, which opens the whole thing all the way from the folded-down rear seats to the tailgate. The glass stashes away in a fitted indentation in the midgate.
As an eye-catcher, the Avalanche stops and seems to startle onlookers. It is not unlike the Pontiac Aztek, which met with unanimous disapproval for being hideously ugly when it was introduced a year ago, looking like a fat Grand Am run amok on steroids.
The Avalanche is nowhere near as disagreeable looking as the Aztek, make no mistake. But when you drive down the street and notice people looking at you and smiling, you become immediately aware that if they are Chevy fans, they generally think this is the greatest looking vehicle ever built, and if you’re a Ford or other non-Chevy person, you think it looks ridiculous.
I found myself between the two extremes, but then I got to sit inside and drive the Avalanche. True, the full-four-door crew cab and the pickup box collaborate to make it extremely long — 221.7 inches, on a 130-inch wheelbase — as well as heavy. That doesn’t help the maneuverability, but the Avalanche proved to be plenty agile in spite of its heft.
With a 5.3-liter V8, the Avalanche takes off and runs fast and strong, with 285 horsepower at 5,200 RPMs and a whopping 325 foot-pounds of torque at 4,000. Even though it hulks at 5,820 pounds, the Avalanche will launch from 0-60 in just over 8 seconds. The Tahoe, and even the Suburban, also go fast, because of the tremendous power from the big V8, so the fact the Avalanche goes swiftly isn’t a big surprise. Those trucks aren’t known for great fuel economy, either, and the Avalanche fits that bill, too, with EPA estimates of 13 city and 17 highway. I got 13.1 miles per gallon on combined driving.
More surprising, the Avalanche handles surprisingly well for a hefty truck. The test vehicle had 17-inch aluminum wheels with 265/70 tires mounted. The independent front suspension and multilink coil rear suspension, bolstered by an off-road package that includes tuned shock absorbers and springs, help keep the big beast flat and stable in cornering, and a pleasing lack of tippy feeling that might be assumed from a high-center-of-gravity truck.
The other thing that is big about the Avalanche is the sticker price. Brace yourself. The test vehicle had a base price of $33,245, and as-tested, it came in at $37,406.
For that, however, the Avalanche is clearly loaded.
To start with, you have 4-wheel disc brakes, front and side impact airbags, a trip computer, leather seats, a trailer-towing package, a towing/hauling transmission, the convert-a-cab (Chevy’s choice of words, not mine), and the assortment of rigid composite covers and boxes on the pickup box. It also has a neat heavy rubber mat on the cargo floor.
Options that helped boost the price include 6-way power seats with the leather trim, electric sunfoor, the off-road package, which also add skid shields, special floormats and some off-road quality air filters and suspension parts. Also, the OnStar communication global-positioning and help system, electronic climate control, tilt wheel, cruise, and a potent stereo with CD player.
The looks of the Avalanche may be somewhat controversial, but big, bold and brazen seems to be in these days.
Driving the Avalanche came at a useful time for me, too, because among other things, we were looking for a few large boulders to haul up to our home, which is being renovated. We spotted a good spot, and I loaded a dozen or so into the rear, onto that thick, rubber mat, and inside the composite tailgate. No problem, and I drove away. I actually forgot about unloading the boulders for a couple of days.
I remembered with a bit of a surprise, when I had to make an abrupt stop to avoid one of those wonderful folks who ran through a red light to make a right turn right in the path of this three-ton monster. I hit the brakes, and slowed without trouble while swerving to miss the bozo. At that time, I heard a rumbling sound coming at me from behind, with some degree of force. They bumped, comfortably, up against the front edge of the pickup box.
But I couldn’t get over the irony of it all, that I almost got nailed by an avalanche in my Avalanche.
Disclosure that fuel economy can improve is blatantly obvious
[[[[cutlines:
1/ A National Academy of Sciences committee has verified the obvious — fuel economy could be improved from readings such as 12.7 miles per gallon.
2/ The extremes of lifestyles range from cars such as the Mercedes “Smart” car (left) popular in congested European cities, to the SUVs and trucks such as the Ford F150 (right) that dominate U.S. driveways, roadwaysÂ…and fuel stations. ]]]]]
Have you heard the news? A committee organized by the National Academy of Sciences brought out the revelation that the technology actually exists to allow U.S. automotive manufacturers to increase the fuel economy on the vehicles they build.
Talk about an amazing grasp of the obvious!
The good thing about this disclosure, which was played as big news in the media, is that the Bush administration has said it would use this report to possibly alter the dormant standards on fuel economy, which haven’t been altered for a decade or two.
Over those two decades, U.S. automakers have devoted considerable energy to two things: 1. Building bigger, bigger, less-economical and far-more-expensive vehicles for the U.S. marketplace; and 2. Lobbying the government to not raise the fuel-economy standards because it would cause them to stop building the cars “America wants,” which just happen to coincide with the trucks those companies have been building and which have produced obscene profits for the companies.
We, as consumers, have been left in the dusty assumption that we don’t comprehend how much we’ve been had by spending enormous amounts of money to buy large vehicles with large engines, which get 10-15 miles per gallon.
Meanwhile, over in Europe, or Japan, or in every other nation where people drive cars, those people are driving small, compact vehicles with high-tech and efficient engines that produce tremendous fuel-economy figures.
I recently drove a couple of Ford F150 pickups with four-door cabs and flashy trim and huge V8 engines. My fuel economy figures showed 14.4 miles per gallon in city-highway driving. And the Fords are not the worst. I’ve driven Chevy Suburban/Tahoe models that got 11 miles per gallon. And I more recently drove a Durango with a big, throaty V8 that got 12.7 miles per gallon.
In Europe, Volkswagen engineers have refined their turbo-diesels to get over 100 miles per gallon, with a giant assist from the more-refined, less-foul fuel they get — at great expense. What continues to go unreported, or uncriticized, is that the fuel we get, whether gasoline or diesel, is so unrefined that it is filled with nitrous oxides and pollutants. Not only is it of poor quality, but the most high-tech engines from foreign auto-builders can’t even be brought into the U.S., and wouldn’t work efficiently on our fuel if they could.
So, if you’ve ever wondered why cars sold both in Europe and the U.S. can run stronger, faster and with better fuel economy with smaller engines in Europe than they can in the U.S., the focus of the consumers, the responsibility of the fuel refiners and the technical wizardry of the auto manufacturers have conspired to give them safe, high-tech vehicles with good power and great fuel economy.
When I visited France a couple of months ago, I was astonished to see all the tiny commuter cars zipping around. They handled congestion better, because more of ’em can fit in a prescribed space, and they make a lot more sense when you try to find a parking place in a city that has very few of them. But mostly they make sense because they are major expenses for buyers, who demand long-lasting durability and excellent gas mileage, because gas costs close to $5 a gallon.
Mercedes and Audi make tiny cars, as do Peugeot, Renault, Volkswagen and Fiat. Mercedes makes one intriguing vehicle called the “Smart” car, which is a very cute, very efficient two-occupant vehicle. You can find ’em everywhere, even parked on sidewalks. Might be the ideal commuter car, and it must get 50 miles per gallon..
Meanwhile, back in the U.S., where SUVs and large trucks fill the roadways, it takes a national organization to put together a committee to say that there might be a better way than to build 40-year-old engines, with ancient technology, and lousy mileage.
For decades, the U.S. government standards have declared that a company’s cars must meet a corporate average fuel economy (CAFÉ) average of 27.5 miles per gallon, while trucks must only average 20.7 MPG. In the decade that law was enacted, trucks generally meant work vehicles, pickups and delivery trucks. In the 30 years since, trucks have come to replace sedans and station wagons as mainstream commuter vehicles — possibly bought to tow trailers, but ultimately used as single-occupant commuters.
But by clever lobbying, the U.S. automakers have persuaded the government to back off on proposed increases in standards for trucks.
Now, I’m not suggesting that everybody who likes trucks, minivans and SUVs should dump them for tiny cars. We’ve gone this far, and there is no easy and efficient way to get back to reasonable size.
A whole new bracket of consumers insists it wants and needs large trucks for the safety of size, for the up-high visibility, and for the four-wheel-drive capability in wintertime. As I’ve written repeatedly, Up North drivers have more legitimate reason for such trucks than anyone, because of cabins, outdoorsy things like fishing, hunting, snowmobiling and hauling. But the country is filling up with unneeded trucks, used to replace sedans.
We are only now learning that such trucks are less agile, less maneuverable, and prone to rollovers if you try to handle them as you ordinarily would handle a car. True, you are safer in a big truck if you hit a small car, but it’s also true that you are far less able to miss hitting something if handling and steering control is required. Conversely, the small car driver might be more at risk of being injured if hit by a large truck, but the small-car driver also has a far better chance to swerve, steer, brake or otherwise duck the accident.
There is no reason we should assume accidents are inevitable. Avoiding them is still the best course of safety.
The logical course of action is to work hard on making smaller cars safer — something Europe has done very well. Volkswagen’s Beetle and Golf rank among the safest vehicles of their size ever built. Meanwhile, the large, overweight and ill-handling trucks — the biggest fuel-economy culprits — could be made leaner, tighter, slightly smaller, and be fitted with higher-tech engines that would deliver adequate power and also greatly increase fuel economy while limiting emissions.
In our runaway surge to buying and owning large trucks, we have allowed the car-makers to insult our intelligence by tantalizing us with more power and looking the other way when it comes to gas mileage.
Because we actually buy more trucks than cars nowadays, it is staggering to learn that in the face of advertising and marketing about more power and modern engineering, in the year 2000, vehicles built by U.S. companies got their poorest fuel economy since 1980.
If you don’t think our government was intimidated into inaction on this issue while greenhouse gases, global warming and costly fuel refills took over our lives, consider that the government is nearing the end of a 6-year prohibition that has prevented the Department of Transportation from even studying any changes to the fuel economy standards for U.S. cars.
Ford moved ahead of General Motors and Chrysler a few years ago when it introduced overhead-camshaft engines on its pickup trucks and SUVs. Chrysler responded by offering some OHC engines on its Jeeps and Durango and Dakota pickups, and now on the new Ram. General Motors was the most stubborn, but GM also is coming out with new, in-line 6 engines with dual-overhead cams, multiple valves and all the latest high-tech touches.
It’s taken years, but the U.S. is finally getting with it. In this computer era, when your kid won’t consider a computer that might be six months old, it’s hard to believe any major company could assume we would think 40 or 50 year old engines were high-tech.
Or that getting 10-14 miles per gallon made any sense, whether fuel costs $1.50 or $3 per gallon.
The Europeans realized that, out of necessity, years ago. And they didn’t need some well-funded, national association committee to tell them the obvious news. Saying our auto-makers could find ways to improve fuel economy is a lot like declaring it’s better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick.
When it gets too hot, convertible drivers have to put their tops up
[[[cutlines:
1/ The BMW 325 convertible retains its classy good looks even with the snazzy fabric top up.
2/ With the top down, the BMW 325 convertible is an eye-catcher, as long as it’s not too cold — or too hot! ]]]]
One of the great bits about the old Johnny Carson Tonight Show was when Carson would get going in his monologue and say something about it being hot, prompting the audience to chorus: “HowÂ…hotÂ…wasÂ…it?”
Carson would then give any of dozens of catchy punchlines.
This past week in Minnesota, and all across the Upper Midwest, has been scorching hot, setting records day after day, and also bringing up such trivia as the “hottest low temperature of the day” records, which Duluth set several times.
I love the weather and its changeable characteristics. I love it when it’s hot, when it’s cold, when it’s chilly, when it’s raining, when it’s foggy and grey, when it’s unseasonably cold, hot or whatever. That’s why Minnesota, and particularly Northern Minnesota, and most specifically the North Shore region, is my ideal country.
This past week, however, my limitations were reached. I thought it would be a perfect time to be driving a convertible — any convertible — to take advantage of the wind-in-your-hair freedom from the oppressive heat. When my random sampling of raod-test vehicles showed up, and the car of the week was a BMW 325 convertible, it seemed too much good fortune to be true.
Now, however, I must confess to a new and previously unanticipated new answer to Johnny Carson’s old crowd-baiting question. If Carson returned and his crowd asked “How hot was it?” — I would have to answer that it was “So hot I had to put the top UP on my BMW convertible!”
Yes, I learned the hard way, or at least the hot way, why people in Florida, or Arizona, or California, buy convertibles but mostly drive them with the tops up instead of with the tops down, as the auto-making gods intended. I used to think it was strange that folks in Florida probably didn’t put their tops down as much as Minnesotans, who took their punishment from the cold winters to appreciate it when the temperature got warm, and anything above 55 degrees was a good reason to put the top down on your convertible.
Late last fall, dangerously close to winter in Northern Minnesota, I got a chance to test a BMW 323 convertible, and I reflected on how it looked so good that I couldn’t resist driving it with the top down whenever I got the opportunity. Often that meant turning the heater on with the airflow aimed at my feet, and even wearing a fleece jacket and cap so that I could make the car live up to its flashy potential even while overcoming potential hypothermia.
Why, I wondered, didn’t I have the luck to get a BMW convertible in the summertime? Now I have, and I’m crying out for moderation.
Sixty degrees, or even 50, is better for convertible driving than 95. Those people who calculate heat index from combining temperature with air movement and direct sunrays and humidity — as well as those skeptics who would rather not believe in such figures — should come up with a new category. Something like “heat index in a convertible.”
Modern convertibles are so neat that they have pretty well mastered the ways to keep cold air off your face and body, and the quest to make convertibles comparatively quiet while running with the top down has impressively been conquered. But when the sun is scorching us at 90-plus, and the humidity pushes the heat index over 100, having the top down to enjoy the sun is too much of a good thing.
We were in the Twin Cities last weekend, and the onboard thermometer climbed to 96, 97, 98, and 99, and I wondered if it wasn’t possible that BMW had cut a corner by not having a three-digit thermometer in its readout. An hour later, there it was: 100, and even 101. At the time, I was wishing we could be in Duluth, knowing full well we could be driving along the North Shore and it would be 75, or even 65, right at that moment.
But we weren’t. We were being fried in our seats in the BMW, so I raised the top. True, I felt as if I had committed some sort of crime against nature by putting up the top and turning on the air-conditioning. Especially when I’d see a Miata or a Chevrolet Cavalier convertible with the top down. I’d envy them for an instant, and then I would look into their faces and see pure agony. For the chance to look “cool” in a figurative sense, they had abandoned any chance at being cool in a global-warming, where’s-the-ozone-layer-when-we-need-it sense.
As it turned out, we journeyed north to Duluth Sunday night, and it was surprisingly warm, even then. Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday came and went, and by then, I had capitulated. When it hits 90 or more in Duluth, and along the North Shore, it is time to raise my convertible roof and contemplate solar-powered cars.
Cars are tested severely when it’s that hot. We in the North Country are wise enough to take care of our cars for the winter, when cold temperatures are an obvious threat. But we sometimes are guilty of overlooking maintenance in the summer, when hot weather can be just as bad, if not worse, for your car’s parts.
If you wind up on a freeway where construction forces lane reductions that make the term “freeway” wistful thinking, at best, and the term “gridlock” is much closer to reality, your car can suffer from overheating, which can leave you stranded by the side of the road, and also can do serious, almost terminal damage to your car’s engine.
If you see the temperature gauge climbing seriously high, you can do a couple of things to help it get you home. For one, the idea that if you let the engine idle or run at low RPMs it will stay cool is completely backward. Run the revs up a little, which will cause the fan to spin faster and the cooling system to circulate better, which can reduce the internal temperature. Turning off the air-conditioning is another good way to save your engine’s energy.
By far the most effective way to bring down your engine’s radiator heat is not pleasant; it requires turning on your heater, full-blast. That way, the car’s heat is dissipated by force-feeding it into the passenger compartment. Good for the engine, not so good for barbecued occupants.
The problem with a car overheating carries with it the problem of the driver overheating. Drivers become irritable, hostile and aggressively angry when they get hot, and when you couple that with freeway slowdowns and other construction ventures, it can escalate dramatically.
In the far north, that usually isn’t a problem, because people have gotten along just fine without house air-conditioning or car air-conditioning for decades, because you could always count on it to cool down, especially by the big lake, at night, no matter how hot the daytime hours were. But that may no longer be valid.
Maybe it’s global warming, but our temperature and weather has been severe rather than moderate for two or three years now. Think about it: We don’t have a gentle rain shower, we have either dry conditions or a monsoon. We don’t have pleasant fall afternoons in the 50s, it seems to go right from summer to winter. We don’t have many lazy snow flurries, where we get just enough to put a white coating on everything; it’s either no snow until Christmas, or record-setting blizzards whenever it snows.
Same with the heat. Where are those perfect, Duluth-legend 75-degree days? Instead, we get strangely chilly 60 degrees with fog, or else we get what we got in the past week — 90-plus temperature, with serious impairment threatened by the temperature index.
With all that in mind, the BMW 325 convertible is still an awesome car to drive, never mind the $40,000 price sticker. BMW has converted its base engines for the 3-series to six cylinders, in-line, and amazingly smooth and strong. Dual overhead camshafts with variable valve-timing make the 2.5-liter six a potentially hot runner, with 0-60 times that make you forget you’re in a classy boulevard-running convertible. The test vehicle didn’t have the manual shifter, which elicits those hot times. Instead, it had BMW’s slick 5-speed automatic, with a separate gate for clutchless manual upshifts and downshifts.
Handling suspension and steering are typically taut, enhancing driver control over all aspects of driving. That is something BMW will never compromise, and keeps that Bavarian company as among the world’s standards for performance sedans, coupes, sports cars, and now SUVs.
The fierce-looking, enclosed quad headlights, and well-aimed foglights set off the sleek front, and the whole thing fits a styling package that has elevated the 3-series coupes and sedans to becoming the standard of most auto-fanciers’ idea of ideal.
Adding the convertible top is interesting. Most convertibles look good only with the top down, and they look stodgy with the top up. Which always made me snicker when folks used to put vinyl fake-convertible tops on their sedans, just to pretend they had a convertible, and overlooking the fact that a sleek sedan looks better than a convertible with its top up.
The BMW 325, however, takes a different tack. With the top down, it’s sensational. With the top up, it looks very good, almost as good as the 325 coupe itself.
The true beauty of the 325 convertible is, however, like all BMWs, in the engineering attention to detail. Putting the top up and down is an exercise in engineering that you can use to impress people. Push one button on the console and hold it down, and all four windows drop down, then the top lifts off the front and starts back, then the whole top kicks forward, letting a motorized hatch open toward the rear, then the top resumes its journey, back and down until it is completely nestled inside the cubicle, which the hatch then closes with a snap-shut finish.
All of that takes longer to describe than it does to make it happen. Putting it back up means pushing a different button on the console, hold it down and the whole process reverses, with the hatch rising to the back, then the top coming up and forward, moving far enough to let the hatch come back forward and lock in place, then the top spreads fore and aft and locks in place. Keeping your finger on the button after the top is up and secured will cause all four windows to rise also.
Similarly, on the console where the four power window buttons are located, a fifth button will allow you to raise or lower all four windows at once.
Very impressive, and I showed off the mechanical marvel of the power roof going down dozens of times to friends and bystanders.
But during the last week, I almost always followed the demonstration of putting the top down by another demonstration of putting the top up, the windows up, and turning the air-conditioning on. Full. Johnny Carson would understand.
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