Thunderbird roars back to life with future-retro styling appeal
[[[cutlines:
1/ Reflecting its heritage of the 1950s — “Don’t call it retro” — the 2002 Ford Thunderbird is a promote-able eye-catcher.
2/ The long tail is finished with a rear end that could be the front end if you replaced the taillights with headlights.
3/ There’s enough yellow on the Thunderbird’s interior to make you feel sunny on dreary days — or long for fake woodgrain.
4/ Ford has combined trendy/sporty interior cues, and a potent, high-tech engine, but averted high-performing Thunderbird.
5/ On the test-drive $40,000 Thunderbird, there was a foglight switch, but no foglights. ]]]]]]
In a perfect world, the 2002 Ford Thunderbird would roll freely into our consciousness as a pleasurable icon to prove that what once was fun about Ford could be again. And the car has enough positive features to qualify as an attention-grabbing 2-seater that could be a major boost for Ford.
Things are not all fun and frolic for Ford these days. The Explorer mess with Firestone is one example of how things can go wrong, and the introduction of an all-new Explorer for 2002 has been hindered rather than seen as an easy solution to the situation. And last Monday, the depths of Ford Motor Company’s turmoil became stunningly apparent when Jac Nasser, the dynamic, high-profile chief executive officer, was forced to resign and replaced by Bill Ford — William Clay Ford Jr.
Environmentalists should applaud Bill Ford’s takeover, because he was something of the family rebel, playing folk guitar, studying Zen, and — believe it or not — confessing publicly that automobile companies and their trucks were greatly responsible for greenhouse gas problems. That’s a subject that has drawn clear lines of demarcation between the U.S. auto industry and environmentalists.
The Thunderbird might, after all, be a perfect vehicle to roll out in these shaky times for Ford, even though the car has been delayed by production slowdowns and attempts to get the quality control right after recent criticism plagued the introduction of the Escape and the Focus.
One of the finalists for the International Car of the Year award, the Thunderbird is in short supply at introduction, so as a journalist with a vote on the jury to pick that winner, I got a chance to drive one for an abbreviated three-day stretch. In those three days, I must admit I was impressed by how many people strained to drive alongside to get a better look at the Tbird, and how many more people came from out of nowhere to surround the car and peek through the windows at the interior everytime I parked it.
I found some very impressive features about the Thunderbird, and some things deserving criticism.
First, it clearly is a projection at what an original 1955-57 era Thunderbird might be if it had continued to be made as a sporty coupe, instead of carrying on the name while growing larger and larger until it morphed into a full-sized car that some would call oversized. As a 2-seat roadster, which can be bought with a removable hardtop that carries on the round opera-window rear-side treatment, the Thunderbird also promises performance, even if a combination luxury-sporty fashion.
It delivers, partially. The engine is a 3.9-liter V8, which may sound familiar to Ford fans, because it also can be obtained in the Lincoln LS, a car that I found the most impressive and contemporary Lincoln ever. The engine has its roots back to Jaguar, which was taken over in recent years by Ford. While Ford is capable of making very good and high-tech engines, it allowed Jaguar to carry on with the creation of the new V8, and Ford deserves applause for that move.
Jaguar built a light, compact V8, with dual-overhead camshafts and four valves per cylinder, and it was heralded for being lighter and more potent than a similarly sized four-cam, multi-valve V8 being built by BMW. The only engine that rivals that in V8 form from Ford is the hand-built 4.6 V8 in the Mustang Cobra. At any rate, Jaguar used its new V8 in its sports car and in its sedan, and worked a trade with its new parent to sent the engines to be used as the Lincoln LS upgrade while getting Ford’s Duratec V6 for the base engine in the new X-Type Jag sedan that has high hopes for U.S. sales.
So Ford built the Thunderbird by chopping down the length of the LS chassis, and mounting that potent V8 under the hood. It has 252 horsepower in Tbird trim, which is a lot. Ford also offers a 5-speed automatic transmission, which is both good news and bad news. The good news is that a 5-speed automatic is much more efficient than a 4-speed or a now-outdated 3-speed configuration. The bad news isn’t horrible, but that automatic is the only transmission you can get in the Thunderbird.
Because of its aim as a boulevardier rather than a sports car, there is probably little reason to arm the Tbird with a manual shift, but an automanual, shiftable by spring-loaded hand shifts, are so commonplace nowadays at all companies other than Ford and General Motors that the Tbird would seem to be the perfect place for such a transmission alternative. But no. So in normal, everyday driving, you might find the Thunderbird is a nice, smooth sporty car, but you would guess the performance is nothing to rave about.
You can, however, hammer the gas pedal, hard and often, and get the little V8 to rev high and show its potency. It just seems a shame that you have to work so hard to find the performance that Ford chose to make obscure.
The Thunderbird is heavier than it needs to be, too, and the suspension is softer than it needs to be to accommodate U.S. buyers who might still want to be insulated from the flat precision of modern suspensions. Again, a departure from its sporty potential.
As for the styling, that’s subjective. Most people find it appealing, and some find it an absolute knockout. I like the look from the front, and the long-tailed flat lines of the silhouette are fine. The rear end seems less-attractive to me, because everytime I see it, with those distinctive round taillights carved into the fenders, I can’t help but think that clear lenses on those taillights instead of the red lenses would make it look like the front end.
Up front, I like the egg-crate grille, but the first time I drove the Thunderbird at night, I was surprised. I like good headlights, and I prefer great ones. I turned the rotating knob to turn on the headlights, and they came on. Then I pulled the little raised-ribbed part of the knob to turn on the foglights, and the switch responded with a nice, firm click. But there was no discernible addition to the light being cast up front.
Because I drive a lot at night, on all kinds of roadways, I appreciate the width of well-aimed foglights, to see those deer on the shoulders as soon as possible, and before they decide they might dash out in front of you. I was amazed to get out of the car and find that there were no foglights on the Thunderbird, only the switch. And this car listed for $40,000. If I plunked that kind of cash down for a sporty roadster, and had to either special-order or go out and buy some aftermarket foglights, I would be perturbed.
The other thing is the color. Ford has done great things with paint jobs in recent years, and this, too, is subjective. It happens that I don’t care for yellow cars, although I did own one once that was bumblebee-like, and I have test-driven various recent cars that were painted such a bright yellow that you felt the car glowed in the dark. But the test Thunderbird, which was yellow, was a pale, nearly pastel yellow. It seemed brighter, in fact, when you were inside the car.
I drove up the West Hillside of Duluth on a grey, bleak sort of a day last week, and I thought with optimism that the sun was coming out. Suddenly I realized that it was not, but that all that yellow — on the dashboard, the seats, the steering wheel even, was giving off a yellowish glow to my eyes. So maybe that’s good. It can bring sunlight, pale as it may be, to the bleakest of grey days.
I’ll take blue. Or black, or silver or red, or even white. And not on my steering wheel or dashboard, thank you. In fact, the yellow interior of the Thunderbird trim was almost enough to make me renounce my long-standing dislike for phony woodgrain interiors. Almost.
Ford marketeers keep stressing that we shouldn’t call it “retro,” and yet it’s hard to imagine a more retro vehicle than the Thunderbird, unless it is Chrysler’s PT Cruiser or the Volkswagen New Beetle. Both of those cars have been landslide hits, and if the Thunderbird mimics them in sales as much as in concept, everyone from Ford executives to marketeers to salesfolks will be thrilled.
The test car was a soft-top, but the optional bolt-on hardtop would probably be a big hit in the Northland. It also, of course, is front-engine with rear-drive, which will make it an automatic handful on slippery hillsides.
But those are nitpicks when we’re talking about serious icons, which the Thunderbird is. Ford is hoping the car will have a shot at the 2002 International Car of the Year award, and it certainly does have a chance, already being one of 10 finalists. The competition is fierce, however. It would seem to me that adding a manual shifter, or at least a clutchless automanual, possibly with a more agile sports handling package, might enhance the Tbird’s chances.
But, judging by the people who parked their cars and walked across the street to ogle the Thunderbird — yellow and all — the Thunderbird is guaranteed to be a hit whether it wins the car-of-the-year vote or not.
Chrysler gives us Liberty to replace SUV originator Cherokees
Give me Liberty, because you no longer can give me Cherokee. It may not sound all that proverbial, but it is the state of Jeeps for 2002.
Jeep was a hardy, rugged performer that could get you where you’re going on the road, and could also venture off a roadway in the North Woods, or in World War II South Pacific jungles. As it became domesticated, the first U.S. sport-utility vehicle took on multiple personalities. I remember when American Motors owned Jeep, and the Wagoneer was its pride and joy.
I test-drove more than one of those long, chrome-laced beasts, which had as many glitches and weird problems as assets. One time, on a 15-below-zero night, I was driving a factory test-Wagoneer and every time I turned left, the horn honked. As I walked out of a high school hockey arena in the Twin Cities, I heard the wailing of a constantly blowing horn as I walked toward the parking lot. Sure enough, the Wagoneer’s horn was wailing at the cold. There was nothing else I could think of doing, so I popped the hood and pulled the wires from the horn. Then I climbed inside, only to find that the battery was discharged to the point of refusal to start. Times changed, of course.
A companion vehicle came along, called the Cherokee, back in 1984, and I thought it was outstanding, a useful, flexible, solid-feeling vehicle, sort of a tallish station wagon that would go anywhere. How were we to know that it was the ultimate SUV that would ignite such an amazing following? Then there was the Grand Cherokee, which was a Cherokee with all sorts of fancy stuff added on, and it arrived none too soon to replace the Wagoneer.
American Motors, of course, is no more. Chrysler took over the faltering Jeep line, and kept it keeping on. After plugging along since 1984, the Cherokee, which still could offer a bargain in its less-optioned form, has been replaced. Chrysler has been careful to keep the Jeep Wrangler true to its roots, bumpy, bouncy, and comparatively primitive as those roots might be.
The replacement is the Jeep Liberty. It is startlingly different, and yet similar enough to retain those roots.
I had a chance to test-drive a Liberty, and it was interesting. It starts out with some neat, contemporary styling, leading with a tall hood and bulging, bug-eye headlights, and a molded, bulgy lower bumper. Following back, there are stylishly channeled curves leading back from the headlight channels to the hood, and to a nicely angled passenger compartment, with the side windows curving up toward the roof, and lower body-cladding to protect the body from chips and dings. The rear is nicely done, too, with the spare tire and wheel mounted on the outside of the tailgate, and, in one of the neatest touches, an indent on the left bumper for the license plate.
Inside, the Liberty is clean and fresh, with white-faced gauges outlined by round, silver rings — round silver rings seem to be the requisite show of trendiness in gauge-making in the 21st century — and a neat steering wheel with cruise-control buttons located amid the firm-to-grasp wheel. The test vehicle also had leather seats, and a 6-disc in-dash player.
The big news for the Liberty, beside the styling, is that the traditional old in-line 6 is gone, and under the hood is an all-new, single-overhead-camshaft 3.7-liter V6, which has 210 horsepower. There also is a base 2.4-liter 4-cylinder, with dual-overhead-cams and 150 horsepower.
So the Liberty goes well and handles highways and side roads with ease, plus, it undoubtedly would do the job off-road, if you were so inclined.
If I had a complaint, it would not be the styling, inside or out, which I found contemporary and attractive. But the new Liberty seems to be something of a combination of the old square Cherokee and the still-existing Wrangler, making a vehicle with four doors, but still quite tall, and with a comparatively short wheelbase. Altogether, it makes for a vehicle that feels a little tall and bouncy in normal, everyday traffic.
The test vehicle had what is called “next generation, multistage” airbags. Almost everybody refers to their airbags as “next generation,” which makes me wonder what they might call the next generation of airbags.
It listed for a base price of $22,720, and came in with an option-filled sticker of $28,785.
For that, you get a lot of standard equipment, headed by the Command-Trac, part-time 4-wheel-drive, power rack and pinion steering, skid plates under the front end, cruise control, rear defroster and wiper, air-conditioning, power locks with a speed-sensitive lock that can be maddening if you’d just as soon not lock the doors, power windows on the front, a 65-35 fold-down rear seat, the radio with the compact-disc player and six speakers, leather-wrapped tilt wheel, front and rear power outlets, foglights, and a roof rack.
Not bad. From the option bin, the test Liberty was filled to the roof. Leatehr seats, with power front buckets, a SelecTrac full-time 4-wheel-drive system to replace the standard part-time unit, an upgraded stereo with cassette and equalizer along with the CD changer, audio controls, as well as cruise, on the steering wheel, deep-tint windows, security alarm, theft-detgerrent system, and power-heated-foldaway side mjirrors. That all came on a $2,945 option package.
Another package was a towing group, with a Class III receiver and an adaptor for the wiring, while another package was for off-roading, and includes Traction-Lok di8fferential, 235-70 by 16 inch all-terrain tires, skid plates to shield the fuel tank and transfer case, and tow hooks located subtly fore and aft, and a heavy-duty cooling system.
There there were individual options, like 4-wheel antilock brakes, side supplemental airbags, a power sunroof, heated front seats, an engine block heater, and a remote changer device for the 6-disc unit.
The Liberty has a progressive look among compact SUVs, where competition is fast-growing and ferocious. It has an edge on most in power, if not in on-road refinement. When you look at the Liberty from the rear corner, it looks stylish and slick, but it also makes you wonder why they compromised so much to style that they curved the body steeply inward as it rises, which eliminates what might have been useful width inside the vehicle.
But it is stylish, and it is an eye-catcher, which is not bad, when your chore is to replace a legend.
[[[[cutlines:
1/ New Jeep Liberty sports a new, bug-eyed look on an entirely new vehicle that replaces the Cherokee.
2/ Contours and cladding set the stylish Liberty apart from the 18-year-old Cherokee.
3/ Lower foglights are built into the formed, plastic-coated front bumper.
4/ Cleanly restyled interior of the Liberty shows a new steering wheel and new white-faced gauges. ]]]]]]
All-new Camry expands its luxury-appliance image in XLE form
Generally, when I know what test-drive cars are coming, I try not to read too much about the car beforehand. Every auto-enthusiast magazine hits on the new cars, usually before they get to the newspaper motoring journalists, and it’s too easy to get preconvinced about a car if you go too deeply into it before you get the experience of driving it.
The 2002 Toyota Camry is an interesting departure for me. I didn’t get invited to the press introduction of the car, and I knew it was entirely new, from the ground up. When a car that is the No. 1 seller in the country gets totally made over, I confess, I read everything about it I could get my mitts on. Car & Driver, Automobile magazine — my usual haunts.
Everything I read was positive.
From past experience, I’ve observed the industry pretty closely as the Camry came from being a good, solid, everyday, family car and then it slipped past the Ford Taurus and the Honda Accord to take over the No. 1 slot in U.S. customer sales.
The Camry has followed a foolproof method to the top. From the days when cars were judged by their dependability, the Camry and the Accord were often judged the best for the lack of repair calls and the excellence of their quality control. My only reservation about the Camry was that it was so good, so flawless, and so mainstream that it was almost more like an appliance than a car.
Trouble is, a lot of folks don’t hang around the water-cooler at work, boasting about exploits with their refrigerators, or toasters.
Toyota and Honda used to refuse to sell their cars to fleets for sale, while the Taurus did, and was No. 1. The Accord then bypassed the Taurus, which was pretty remarkable, and then Toyota started selling to fleets and vaulted past the Accord, which still sells only to customers. With both those Japanese cars now built in U.S. plants, while U.S. companies are making more and more cars in Canada or Mexico, they rank among the best U.S.-built cars as well.
Meanwhile, Camry has maintained that top spot for two or three years, so coming out with an all-new car is major news. And the magazine reports were of firmer, more sporty handling, and less of an appliance-like attitude.
So finally a new Camry rolls up to my door, and I was impressed from the outside. Toyota has, for years, unflinchingly tried to copy Mercedes when it designed some of its upscale Lexus vehicles, and the Lexus ES300 is actually a Camry with a hundred or so little tweaks to upgrade its features. The new Camry takes that trend to new levels, because it clearly resembles a Mercedes C-Class sedan.
The pointy teardrop headlights, and the narrow grilled, which tapers to points at both sides, and the under-bumper added air-intakes with foglights sunk into that fascia, all have a Mercedes look. The Mercedes-resemblance continues from the side, where the spacious rear doors slant back, and then sharply forward, leaving plenty of room to climb in or out, although from the rear the Camry looks more like itself, with full taillights flanking the trunk seams.
It was eagerly that I first hopped behind the wheel. I slipped the 4-speed automatic into “D,” and hit the gas. The 3-liter V6, mounted sideways and running the front-wheel-drive platform, leaped into action and accelerated with good force.
Then I turned a corner. The Camry tilted a bit, more than I expected, but then I was still dealing with what I had read about the vehicle ahead of time.
As I drove the car through the week, the ease with which it drove and handled were fine, but the roll in the corners — the lack of firmness and anything resembling sporty stability — bothered me, because it was so counter to what I had read.
So I went back and cross-referenced Car & Driver and Automobile. Aha! Both of them had test-driven the SE model, which is Toyota’s new sporty version of the Camry. But I had the XLE, which is the luxury version of the car. Japanese companies have done an excellent job of targeting U.S. buyers for their cars, and Toyota is at the forefront with the Camry.
Maybe the SE is sporty in its approach and handling; maybe. But for sure, the XLE caters to those who like luxury, and in the U.S., that means folks who still recall those commercials of American cars that are as comfortably soft as a good sofa. The Camry was comfortable, and soft, while I had anticipated comfortable, but firm.
Oh well. We all need to have appliances. Even $30,000 appliances. The Camry base LE starts at $24,000, with the SE at $26,000, but the XLE test car, while it didn’t have a sticker price sheet with it, is estimated to come in right around $30,000. Such is the price of seat heaters, a double console, trip computer, sunroof and grey leather seats.
Inside, the new Camry styling is impressive. The speedometer and tachometer are large half-circles, with temperature and fuel gauges inset. The steering wheel is comfortable, with four spokes spaced so you can grip it at 10-and-2, but not quite at 9-and-3.
The dashboard is redone and now tapers away from the occupants in a cleverly styled move that makes the interior feel more open. The upper center dash tapers away smartly, with the audio controls at the top and the heat and air controls on three easy-to-find knobs below. However, one ergonomic glitch, to me, is that the dash tapers away far enough so reaching and changing audio controls is more of a reach now, for the driver.
There remains a lot to like with the Camry, however. I like the fact that the rear windows go down, all the way, into the doors. It’s amazing to me how many companies can’t seem to design rear doors that are large enough to allow the windows to go all the way down, and if you’re a rear-seat occupant that likes the wind, having those two-thirds, or three-fourths opening windows is an aggravation.
The fake wood trim on the dash and console is what sets the XLE apart from the SE or the base LE. There certainly are more options and features than that, but that is one telling difference. The XLE has an information switch on the left side of the steering wheel, with the cruise control on the right. I also like the feature of having struts to hold the hood up, and the side-mounted V6 has dual overhead camshafts and four valves per cylinder — something common to all Toyota engines.
The engine delivers 190 horsepower and 209 foot-pounds of torque, with a redline of 6,000 RPMs. That makes performance quite snappy, and I still got 25.1 miles per gallon on combined city-freeway driving.
Yes, in XLE form the Camry might not be following recent Toyota trends toward sportiness in performance and handling, and it might still be an appliance from the standpoint of trouble-free, consistent motoring. That is not necessarily a rip. We’ve been shopping for appliances lately, and if you’ve seen the newest dishwashers, ranges and refrigerators, you know that technology has come to the appliance world. And maybe we ARE to the point where guys and gals can stand around the water cooler at work, boasting about their appliances as well as their cars.
[[[[[cutlines:
1/ Toyota’s all-new Camry has a slightly longer wheelbase on its new platform, and an entirely new look, inside and out.
2/ Camry is aimed at maintaining its grip on the No. 1 U.S. sales slot with a new vehicle that can range from sporty to luxury.
3/ The well-planned instrument panel is easy to read, although the tapered center-dash makes the radio controls a reach.
4/ The Camry resembles a Mercedes C-Class sedan more than it does its predecessor in the Camry line. ]]]]]
Mingling of foreign, domestic companies changes auto world
[[[[cutlines:
1/ The new Mercedes CLK roadster may be a bit extravagant for common folk, but remember, it’s now a “Chrysler.”
2/ Jaguar’s stylish new X-Type sedan is unmistakably British on the outsideÂ…with Ford motors under the hood.
3/ The Isuzu Amigo is a stylish new compact SUV for 2002, and we can only guess at the influence of affiliate General Motors. ]]]]]
Thanksgiving weekend is always a good time to back off from the buzz of the real world and, well, chronical all the things we should be thankful for. The wonders of the contemporary automotive world are certainly among them.
We pretty well take for granted things that we desperately need and use several times a day, and cars and trucks fit into that category. But right here, as we barge onward into the 21st century, maybe we should pause to take into account the vastly changing world of autos that will be what we consider commonplace in years to come.
A couple of decades ago, we had the “Big Three,” and we were proud as heck that General Motors, Ford and Chrysler could make big iron things that could get us from here to there and back again, with minimal difficulty, and fair performance, and soft comfort. In those days, it was us against the world, and the world of imports were the other guys — the foreign cars.
But in the last few years, the automotive world has changed so much that a new and worldly concept has crept up, over and past us.
For example, General Motors has owned or now owns several companies in other parts of the world, including Opel in Germany and Saab in Sweden, and GM has very close affiliations and simply rebadges some vehicles from Japanese companies such as Suzuki, Isuzu and even Toyota.
Ford has always had a German outlet, which is where the old Capri and Fiesta came from, and more recently Ford has taken over Volvo in Sweden and Jaguar in England, and has a very close arrangement as a major stockholder in Mazda of Japan.
We also know Mercedes as a German company that has made and still makes some of the world’s finest, and most expensive, cars in the world. We also heard that Mercedes, or more properly Daimler Benz, merged with our own Chrysler Corporation a couple of years ago. More recently, we have learned that it was more of a takeover, that Mercedes now operates Chrysler. Chrysler, in turn, had worked closely with Mitsubishi and exchanged technical and marketing with that Japanese company for years.
This is not news, and it is no cause for alarm. In fact, it probably is something to be thankful for. Technology in the automotive world is so far-reaching, and advancing so far so fast, that it only makes sense for different companies in different countries to share the technology and the benefits.
But it also gives us reason to pause and reassess old prejudices against “foreign” cars. First and foremost, many foreign companies now own plants in the U.S. and build their cars here, which means they aren’t foreign anymore.
Beyond that, Jaguar now is unveiling a new for 2002 X-Type sedan. To most of us, it’s a “foreign” car, British to be exact. But, is it really all that foreign?
Jaguar designed the sedan, to be sure, and the interior reeks of the kind of wood-and-leather class familiar to anyone who has ever ridden in one of those Coventry classics. When you find a Jaguar dealer and buy an X-Type sedan, you get a V6 engine built by Ford — originally for the Contour and Taurus, and more recently in the Escape SUV — residing under the hood. It has excellent power and durability, and good economy, and it gives the X-Type plenty of zip in its full-time, all-wheel-drive configuration.
The fact that you can get a Jaguar X-Type for $30,000 is at least as surprising as the car itself, because Jags usually have sticker prices somewhere over the rainbow.
Isuzu has caught onto the sport-utility vehicle craze and is branching out from its habit of building strong, sturdy little trucks and is now turning out some flashy new vehicles. The 2002 Isuzu Amigo is among these, and we know it’s an importÂ…or is it a General Motors car disguised as an import?
The Isuzu Amigo is nicely sized, compact enough on the outside and roomy enough on the inside, with excellent features and creature comforts throughout. It has good power and handles well, and it meets virtually all needs anyone might have for a compact SUV, all the while looking like one of the most progressive. The front end, for example, has the same massive, tall look that the Cadillac Escalade has had. You can argue about the merits of the high front end, but it certainly looks as though Isuzu designers were very familiar with the Escalade before they got their design pushed through on the Amigo.
Mercedes has upgraded and advanced all of its vast line of luxury sedans, sports cars and SUVs, and there is nary a mention of Chrysler, or even Daimler Chrysler, anywhere when you’re talking about Mercedes vehicles. But when you get into one of those hot-performing sedans or coupes or convertibles, do you notice the side-shifting manual automatic, with action that is remarkably similar, if not identical, to Chrysler’s AutoStick?
The Mercedes line ranges from outtasight $135,000 sedans and coupes, to “mid-priced” sedans and coupes in the $50,000-$85,000 range, and on down to the new 2002 C-Class coupe, which has a stunning sticker price of $26,000 even while being unmistakably Mercedes.
Meanwhile, out here in flyover land, there are still a lot of folks who think that they must favor the traditional “Big Three” vehicles, without realizing how intertwined U.S. corporations are with various foreign manufacturers. As foreign manufacturers have moved their plants into the U.S., the traditional “Big Three” companies have been scrambling to production facilities in Mexico and Canada, closing U.S. plants in many cases so that they can build new vehicles for significantly less expenditure in Canada and Mexico.
It also leads to the ironic situation where ultra-patriotic consumers may disregard a very good car being built in a U.S. plant by U.S. workers because it has a “foreign” name, and insist on a car, truck or minivan with a familiar U.S. company’s name, even though it is built in Mexico while that company is closing U.S. plants and laying off U.S. workers.
The thing we should be thankful for in the new world of automotives is that those familiar with Jaguar from years ago might also know how constant the tuneup and maintenance problems were if you owned one. Jaguar has gotten much better for dependability in recent years, and its new connection with Ford will be a distinct benefit to Jag’s success in the U.S.
Same with GM affiliates, and the same with Chrysler products, which long have suffered under the reputation of spotty quality control. Mercedes is legendary for its quality control, so Chrysler can only improve under the new ownership. And if Mercedes adds a few common-man features picked up in its takeover of Chrysler, so much the better.
Chevy blazes new trails with high-tech 2002 TrailBlazer SUV
For about two decades now, I have had various opportunities to visit with engineers from various automobile manufacturers around the world. It is always enlightening, and usually extremely provocative to find out how and why the latest advancements in engine technology have come about. Then there is General Motors. I have wondered aloud, and in print, about why GM has been slow to accept technical advancements such as overhead-camshaft engine valvetrain operation, which led to me being accused by GM types of being too critical, too negative and unfair in those assessments.
In the unusual position of defending my view, I suggested that I had more faith in GM than its own executives, because I feel GM might have the best engineers in the world, but they are trapped up there in white smocks in the tech center, where their only order is to coax one more mile per gallon out of a 40- or 50-year-old engine, because the bean-counters in charge won’t give them a clean sheet of paper with which to design a contemporary, high-tech engine that could challenge the world’s best.
If it was a chess game, I won, because the top-rank engineer I was talking to acknowleged that the kind of engines I would like would be forthcoming. Sure enough, one came out in the Oldsmobile Intrigue, a dual-overhead-cam 3.5-liter V6, and if you can still find a new Intrigue, while Oldsmobile’s imminent dissolution is coming, you can get a heck of a deal..
But the newest high-tech engine from General Motors — phrases that were mutually exclusive just about four years ago — caught us all by surprise. It is out now, for 2002, under the hood of the Chevrolet TrailBlazer. It is also under the hood of the GMC Envoy, and the Oldsmobile Bravada, but it is up for truck of the year in TrailBlazer form.
Chevrolet picked its time for the new engine well, because this is the year to redesign the Blazer, and transform it into the TrailBlazer (the GMC Jimmy became the Envoy, too). The TrailBlazer has and all-new platform, with 5-link rear suspension, including an electronic air-bladder system instead of springs in a package that can maintain level easily. It is wrapped up in new sheetmetal, which is attractive and shows off the all-new image well.
It is also larger, which is a subject of mixed feeling, because Chevy already has the larger Tahoe, and the unbelievably large Suburban. But it is also extremely well thought out and executed. And the star of the whole thing is that engine.
It is a Vortec 4200, which means GM is carrying on the name from recent other more aged engines, possibly hoping that the high-tech image of the new one might rub off on the aging others. The new engine is a 4.2-liter in-line 6 — that’s right, six cylinders all in a row, in this proliferating V6 world — and it’s got all the goodies. Dual overhead camshafts, four valves per cylinder, variable valve-timing on the exhaust side, and a more aggressive overlap in the camshaft’s profile.
The result is 270 horsepower, an awesome amount for an engine this size, and just about the same amount of torque, which is designed to come in at low RPMs and hang around until you get up into the revs, at around 5,600 RPMs, with a redline of 6,300.
When the engine was introduced, engineer Ron Kociba called being chief engineer on the project a “once-in-a-career opportunity” to develop a totally new engine in a totally new plant. Perhaps it is no coincidence that Kociba’s previous project was that same 3.5-liter Intrigue V6. When I asked him about the whole thing, one-on-one, Kociba said: “GM can do anything it sets its mind on.”
As usual, cost was a factor. The idea that GM might have copied a couple of pretty impressive precedents — BMW and Lexus, who also make exceptional in-line sixes — is intriguing, but financial considerations might have figured even more prominently into it. For example, designing the in-line 6 for optimum reliability, durability and affordability, as well as fuel-efficiency and future technical applications, is significantly less costly when you’re working with one cylinder head, one head gasket and one bank of pistons, rather than two in a V6.
The translation of all that is a vehicle that performs impressively. You can step on the gas hard, and run the revs up quickly and willingly to 6,000 for the shiftpoints on the automatic 4-speed, and the TrailBlazer feels more like a race car than an SUV. It is designed to give you up to 21 miles per gallon, and it might, if you kept your foot out of it.
The engine is so smoothly efficient and potent to drive, it makes you wonder when Chevy — or Pontiac, or Buick — plans to give its car customers the same sort of high-tech engine. You would LOVE an Impala or a Grand Prix with that in-line 6.
As it turns out, I first test-drove an Envoy that was loaded to the skies with optional equipment, and listed for $36,435. One of the advantages of getting the smaller, midsize version of GM’s SUV family is supposed to be to keep your sticker shock down under the mid-$30,000 range of the larger SUVs, but spending over $36,000 for a midsize SUV might be stretching the good nature of our SUV customers.
The TrailBlazer I test-drove was pretty basic, an LS version costing $29,450, much more reasonable, even though my basic instincts flinch at calling $29,000 “reasonable.” More impressively, the test vehicle came last week, which means I drove it into this week, which means I had the chance to drive it through our first wintry blast of blizzard-driving.
The TrailBlazer was at its absolute best in the most foul of driving conditions. Among its best features is an on-the-dash button to control the drivetrain. Click it left, and you’re in 2-wheel-drive high, which is standard for operating on highways in normal dry conditions. All the way to the right gets you 4-wheel-drive Low, which is intended for driving down or up extremely steep inclines in off-road use. Second to the right is 4-wheel-drive High, which is for normal on-road driving or light off-road duty when you can get the speed up, but want the security of all four wheels pulling you simultaneously.
The trick setting, though, is second from the left, which is full-time all-wheel-drive, which means the transmission transfers power from rear to front axles depending on tendency to slip. In that form, the TrailBlazer shot up the steepest of Duluth hillside avenues in the worst blowing, drifting, ice-covered fury of that Monday morning storm. It also did a great job of getting us amazingly close to the full hurricane-like waves of Lake Superior out along Brighton Beach on the North Shore. We were down on that road shooting pictures when the city trucks closed off the entrances, unaware that anybody had ventured down there.
For the base price of $27,530, the TrailBlazer gets you the trick motor, 4-speed automatic, the Autotrac 4-wheel-drive system, dual-zone air/heat controls, trailer hitch with wiring harness, two-sided galvanized steel on the body, front and rear stabilizer bars, premium suspension system, 16-inch alloy wheels, specially hydroformed frame structure for improved safety rigidity, front and side airbags, 4-wheel antilock disc brakes, split folding rear seats, cargo tie-down hooks in the rear, five cupholders, three power outlets with caps, and full instrumentation.
Options on the test vehicle were all-season tires, and a preferred equipment group with power heated mirrors, rear defogger, cruise control, leather-wrapped steering wheel, retractable rear shade, theft-deterrent system, and remote keyless entry. That totaled $1,320 to boost the sticker, along with destination, to $29,450.
Naturally, more trick stuff is available, such as a power sunroof, foglights, leather upholstery, Bose premium audio system, running boards, an increased 5,750-pound hauling limit, a headlight washer system, steering-wheel controls, and various other features.
So you can spend anywhere from $27,000 to something much closer to $40,000 for a TrailBlazer, and whatever form you choose, with however much you want to pay, you’re going to get the best vehicle ever to wear the Blazer nameplate. And, perhaps, the most high-tech engine currently built by all of General Motors.
[[[[[cutlines:
1/ On a pre-blizzard day, the 2002 Chevrolet TrailBlazer struck a stylish pose at sunset on the North Shore, concealing the fact of the high-tech engine lurking under the hood.
2/ When the first blizzard of winter blew in off Lake Superior, the TrailBlazer changed demeanor and became a rugged, off-road or slippery-weather standout.
3/ Restyled for 2002, the new TrailBlazer’s stylish rear end houses all sorts of upgrades, from chassis to suspension to interior. ]]]]]
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