Porsche 911 makes it spectacular to go shiftless
It must be with some level of professional amusement that Porsche officials and engineers observed the recent trend of high-performance manufacturers to offer clutchless manual transmissions instead of normal automatic transmissions, because Porsche has used that sort of device on its race cars since the early 1980s.
That is in no way to diminish the effectiveness of those competitors. My favorites are the Audi DSG (direct sequential gearbox), which has been around for several years, and the sensational new Mitsubishi unit that works so well in the specialty Lancer Evolution.
But Porsche has decided it’s time to bring out the street-level “PDKÂ‖ which stands for Porsche Doppelkupplungetrieb – we were informed. The device is on Porsche’s newest 911 Carerra, and it is a superb alternative that will replace the legendary Tiptronic in the car from here forward.
The PDK is 10 kilos lighter than the Tiptronic, and it’s sure to pick off a lot of previous stick-shift zealots. The PDK is, you see, more a clutchless manual than an automatic. It has two separate gearboxes, separate wet clutches continuously lubricated, and two separate driveshafts, which overlap. When one geat is engaged, one driveshaft drives the car, and when it upshifts or downshifts, the other takes over. Instantaneously.
While I’m tempted to suggest that no “normal†street driver needs all that the PDK can do, it is a marvel to operate. True, it is costly. We’re guessing about $85,000, and $93,000 for the Carerra 4 all-wheel drive model. For most of us, that’s pure fantasy, but if you’ve got the money, the car performs at a level to make even such a large investment seem sound. You can do a full-throttle upshift, and the device changes gears with no lag, and no interruption of traction. You can downshift, and the thing blips the throttle to match revs, then will go from, say, fourth to third in .25 seconds, or 250 milliseconds. It will go from sixth to second in .4 seconds.
The beast also has something called “launch control,†which means you stay planted until you decide to make a high-rev launch with perfect traction and optimum thrust.
Most of the education required driving on the race track, which had been prearranged, of course. When the automotive media groups gathered in Salt Lake City to be introduced to the new car, it was, however, a bittersweet time.
Bob Carlson, Porsche’s universally appreciated public relations director, was not there. I’d known Bob for 30-some years, back when he did motorsports PR, and because he also was an intense hockey fan, we became close friends. At previous introductions, he and co-worker Gary Fong would coax me to stay late in the hospitality room and recall old Minnesota Fighting Saints stories for them.
But this time, Carlson was back home in Atlanta, getting what was to become his final treatments in his battle against cancer. Everybody in the auto business was pulling for Bob, but this was a battle Carlson ultimately lost, at Christmastime. Nonetheless, his name and his always-pleasant demeanor seemed everywhere during the new car launch. He would have loved to be there, and I’ll always remember that introduction as a fitting 60th birthday for him.
Porsche had gathered some of its top race drivers to guide the journalists around the long and sometimes surprising Miller Park road racing track, and we had a half-dozen 911s for use on the track. We got a preliminary trial on a lengthy drive our of the Hotel Park City, in the mountains east of Salt Lake City, where the 2002 Olympic downhill skiing and other events were located. The track is on the west side of the city, so we pretty well worked out the car’s capabilities on the highway, but it was nothing like on the race track.
The 911, which was introduced at the Frankfurt Auto Show in September of 1963, is in its sixth generation, and it was 25 years ago since the clutchless automatic made its racing debut in the car. For 2009, more than “just†the new transmission is featured. The 911 has an entirely new engine, which is far more than merely expanded from 3.6 to 3.8 liters.
The bore and stroke are different, and so is the fuel intake. Porsche has gone to direct injection, which is a method of metering a perfectly concocted dose of precisely pressurized and temperature controlled fuel into each cylinder. That doesn’t sound especially significant, perhaps, but it meets its air mixture in the combustion chamber, where the resulting combustion is more efficient and more complete. All that leads to more complete burning, which is good for both power and fuel economy. The 3.8 engine has 385 horsepower, up 30, and 310 foot-pounds of torque, up 15.
The power produced by a rear-engine/rear-drive 911 always has been more than anyone anticipated, enough so Porsche’s would roll out of Stuttgart and defeat exotic sports cars with twice as much engine displacement, ranging from Corvettes to Ferraris, on the world’s race tracks.
The new one is mind-blowing, for power, for fuel-injection, and for handling, but mainly because of the PDK transmission. Among the 911s we all drove were six-speed stick-shift cars, as well as the new PDK. Some were all-wheel drive, some just rear drive. But here’s the impressive – and perhaps disturbing – part of the puzzle: The PDK doing all the shifting for you is quicker around the race track than shifting by steering-wheel paddles, or with the six-speed stick.
Driving hard with the stick, I was only in the wrong gear in one turn around the 4.5-mile road course. Shifting another car with the paddles, it shifted smoothly and all was slick, but occasionally I would be off by a gear.
{IMG2}
Amazingly, when I drove one of the Porsches with the PDK,and left it in “D,†the car miraculously knew when to upshift and when to downshift, sometimes blipping its own throttle and downshifting two gears, from fifth to third. It was NEVER was in the wrong gear.
My driving instructor was Kees Nierop, who is Dutch, and who won at Sebring in 1983. He told me he owed his driving career with Porsche to Bob Carlson. We blasted down the straightaway to prove the car’s capability of going 0-60 in 4 seconds, and 0-100 in about 7 seconds.
Later on, I drove back to the hotel with driver David Donohue in the passenger seat, and we had a great conversation. He is the son of Mark Donohue, and we decided he probably was a little kid when I wrote about his late father, racing Can-Am Porsches at Brainerd international Raceway. Donohue, who used to co-drive with Duluth’s Tommy Archer on a LeMans Dodge Viper team, also said that growing up in Pennsylvania, he played hockey until he went off to college.
As impressive as driving the Porsches with the PDK proved to be, a small part of me remained skeptical. Some of us in the media are very good drivers, even on race tracks, but we can’t measure up to former Daytona, LeMans, Sebring champions. So I cornered Hurley Haywood and asked him a hypothetical question.
“If were second by a few tenths of a second to the pole-winner in qualifying, and you had just enough time to go out for one more hot lap, would you want the stick shift, the paddle-shifter, or the PDK?†I asked him.
Haywood, who never would be one to downplay the driver input in racing success, paused, but just for an instant: “The PDK,†he said.
So I went back out for one last turn. I planned to leave the PDK in “D†until the last three turns, then use the paddles to manually shift. But when I got to the last three turns, I left it in “D†and realized one more factor. As you keep your two hands firmly on the wheel, and your brain focused only on steering and driving, without any regard for what gear you’re in, because the PDK assures you of being in precisely the right gear at all times, you should be your fastest and smoothest around a race track. Imagine how good a driver you could be on normal roads.
Everything was in place. The only thing missing was, sadly, my friend Bob Carlson.
Volkswagen’s new CC deserves a grade of ‘AA’
This time, it appears Volkswagen Group got it right.
When Volkswagen brought out the late and only somewhat lamented Phaeton, it shot for the automotive sky, figuring that all those loyal patrons from around the world were just waiting for an extremely expensive luxury car wearing the familiar “VW†emblem on its hood. The Phaeton was a great car, too, and that VW stood huge on the grille. Too huge, most figured. Turned out, luxury car buyers who were used to choosing Mercedes, BMW, Audi and sometimes Porsche for their luxury wheels, wanted their Volkswagens to be Germany’s trustworthy but inexpensive line.
Back when the calendar turned to 2008, VW showed off a sleek, new sedan on the auto show circuit, and some cynics reacted predictably about the company trying to go luxury again. But now it is new car production introduction time, and when the new Volkswagen CC was introduced to the automotive media, it was clearly a hit, because it is larger and more luxurious than the Passat on which it is based, but its price starts in the upper $20,000 range, even though its features go well beyond some of the competition.
VW has come a long way since all its cars were named for winds – Golf for the gulfstream, Jetta for the jetstream, Scirocco for desert winds, etc. — and the obvious question about the new CC is, “Why CC?Ââ€
“It means ‘Comfortable Coupe,’ not ‘Cool Car,’ †said Laura Soave, marketing manager for Volkswagen of America, although she had the bemused look of a marketing type who wouldn’t mind at all if we called it a cool car.
The trend, ever since Mercedes first brought out the CLS, is to make shapely, smoothly-silhouetted four-door sedans that are so sleek they resemble coupes. A few companies have made one, and the rest are trying to. Volkswagen has pulled it off with a flair. Worldwide, with the renewed emphasis on emerging auto markets in China and India, and with new plants in Russia and India, Volkswagen now has passed Ford to rank No. 3 in manufacturing size, behind Toyota and General Motors.
Styling will lead consumers to examine the CC, and once they look, the car has the substance to make new fans. VW anticipates 28,000 U.S. sales in its first year, and is positioning the CC to expand the company footprint.
The front end is simplified, losing the large grille that seemed to be swiped from Audi, VW’s upscale sibling, and is narrow and horizontal, with more airflow welcomed under the bumper. Foglights flank the lower opening, and well-styled headlights are enclosed behind plexiglass above the foglights. The standout shape, however, is the silhouette, because it is a four-door sedan, but it has a contantly curving roofline that clears the large interior and slopes quite steeply to the rear deck. Its form is stretched just over an inch longer than the Passat, at 189.5 inches, and its width is also over an inch greater, while its height is two inches lower.
That sloping roofline does not intrude on rear headroom, which is easily adequate for 6-footers, and it leaves a deceptively huge trunk. The rear exterior is less creative than the rest of the artful design; taillights resemble the established norm, with two lights encased in red plastic, only the lights themselves are oval instead of round, in an attempt to vary from Jettas, Malibus, Impalas, and numerous others. The overall exterior, however, is stunning, particularly from the side view, which retains the eye-catching lines of the auto show concept.
The idea is that the Passat, currently VW’s largest sedan, competes right well with the Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Nissan Altima, etc., but all of those midsize cars have grown larger. The more-compact Jetta will be aimed more at the enlarged compacts, where it will offer more room than the Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla, Ford Focus, and Mazda3. The CC comes out as an upscale model that shares components with the Passat, and Jetta — and Audi A4 — and can challenge the entry-luxury flock. The CC is a roomy, four-passenger sedan, while the Passat serves the more family-oriented five-passenger arrangement, so the CC aims at the BMW 3-Series, Lexus ES and IS, Cadillac CTS, Infiniti G35, and Lincoln MKZ. Various Volvo sedans, Lincoln’s MKS, and various Acura models also are in the CC’s line of fire, but one vehicle conspicuously missing from that list of competitors is the new Audi A4.
Volkswagen officials insist they find very little cross-shopping between Audi and Volkswagen buyers, which seems curious, particularly because they share some components. When asked about whether the CC uses Audi’s A4 platform, VW officials said that there are many variations in componentry, and they prefer to say the CC, Passat and Jetta share components. In an election year, we shouldn’t be surprised at such question-avoidance. But the comparison to Audi components would seem to benefit Volkswagen, which, parent company or not, must be aware at how consistently successful recent Audi models have been.
The new Audi A4 – a competitor with the CC for 2009 North American Car of the Year – is one of the best all-encompassing sedans introduced this year, if not for several years. Its sticker price has risen to about $34,000, but its design, powertrain and features are outstanding. The CC offers some A4 attributes, while undercutting its Audi cousin by several thousand dollars.
The comparison is begged when you realize that the front-wheel-drive CC’s base “S†model comes equipped with Audi’s 2.0-liter four-cylinder, a turbocharged, dual-overhead-camshaft, variable-valve-timed gem that can be bought with a slick six-speed manual transmission in the CC for a base price of $26,790 – $1,000 more than a Passat. Go up to a six-speed Tiptronic automatic and it’s $27,890.
Moving up to the Luxury model boosts the price to $31,990, still with the 2.0, but still under the A4 sticker.
{IMG2}
Selecting the VR6 Sport means replacing the 2.0 with a 3.6-liter V6, VW’s own well-refined, narrow-angle, transverse-mounted V6 pulling the front wheels, which boosts the price to $38,300. The loaded VR6 4Motion all-wheel-drive model, also with the 3.6, is $39,300 for a base price. All those prices require a $650 destination charge, but nevertheless, if you buy the base CC at around $27,000, you are getting Audi A4 performance with that six-speed stick and saving $7,000 off the bottom line. Model for model, the CC ranges about $1,000 more than the Passat.
Power differs between the engines, of course. The V6 has 280 horsepower and 265 foot-pounds of torque, which makes the CC perform with the stability of a solidly-planted and impressive luxury sedan. EPA fuel figures estimate 27 miles per gallon.
Potent performance from the V6 is a given, but the turbocharger boosts the four to a perfect high-fuel-cost compromise. Its 200 horsepower is backed by 207 foot-pounds of torque, which operates over a wide band, reaching a peak at barely past idle speed and holding it up into the high-revving horsepower band. The result is adequate performance if you don’t get onto the throttle too hard, and over-30-mpg in the process. Get on it, meanwhile, and you get V6-like performance. If fuel economy dips from a heavier right foot application, the driver can make the choice, with both choices available.
The 2.0-Turbo feels distinctly different, although both cars are models of precise steering and handling, but the four feels lighter, undoubtedly because of an altered weight-distribution because of the lighter engine, and it remains the jewel. On our introductory test, we drove from Atlanta to Nashville, which is about a four-hour drive. Without advocating that anyone should drive beyond the speed limit, we zeroed the trip computer at one spot where the traffic flow on that interstate was well above the posted 70. Some intrepid auto writers will do anything in the name of science (wink-wink), and we found ourselves cruising at 80 with gusts to 85, just to be amid the flow. During that stretch that included the 80-85 pace, we averaged 30.9 miles per gallon with the 2.0-Turbo four and the six-speed manual.
All the expected safety features of German cars are built in, with airbags all around, and interior features include an enormous moonroof, an excellent navigation system with a back-up video monitor, and all the multimedia devices to interact with audio and satellite radio systems.
New seat designs add comfort and support, and the various interior color schemes are pleasant and easy to like, with brushed silver trim instead of glare-sucking bright silver, and the instruments and controls laid out with predictable German ergonomics. Rear seat room is spacious, and the trunk is large enough for a family-of-four trip.
Challenger SRT8 powers Dodge to future-retro peak
PASADENA, CALIF. — The Dodge Challenger won’t be officially reborn until late this summer when it reaches showrooms. But trust me, it will be the biggest hit Chrysler Corporation has enjoyed since the minivan.
If you want the new “future-retro†Challenger, you would have to plunk down $38,000. Correct that. You would have HAD to plunk down $38,000 already, because the first-year’s allotment of Challengers lnumber 6,400, and all of them are bought and paid for. So you could queue up in line for one of next year’s expanded crop.
It appears to be a clever bit of marketing by Dodge, and everything has fallen into place very neatly. First, the only Challengers for its first year 2008 run will be SRT models, which means that Dodge’s Street and Racing Technology (SRT) high-performance gang is building the first batch. Having SRT build your car is a lot like having Ford’s SVT redo your Mustang, or Mercedes turning its coupes and sedans over the its AMG arm.
The difference is that Dodge decided to let SRT build the hot, high-performance Challenger version before the mainstream, everyday-performance model comes along, which undoubtedly will come with a V6 and be about not much more than half the price of the hot one. The best news there is that when Dodge puts, say, its 3.5 V6 into the car, and takes away the costly Brembo brakes, high-end suspension goodies, and maybe backs off a little on the interior, it still will be an outstanding car, because nobody is about to sabotage the car’s great balance, and, above all, its killer looks.
Extensive wind-tunnel testing and design engineering kept finding revisions tto make to the popular auto show-circuit concept car for production. And each time they made a revision, for technical reasons, the car took on less of the concept car’s look, and more of the original Challenger’s resemblance.
That should be seen as a good thing by most potential consumers, because the original Dodge Challenger is one of those rare cars that was great looking, and moderately popular, but has enjoyed increased popularity among car restorers, street rodders, and classic car fanciers. It could be argued that it is more popular now than it ever was when it had to slug it out against the original Mustang, Camaro, Firebird, Javelin, AMX, and its cousin, the Plymouth Barracuda.
The concept car Dodge designed three years ago was a hit of the Detroit and Chicago auto shows, and got such favorable reaction that there was no doubt Chrysler would follow along and build it as a production vehicle. Ford had done as much with the Mustang, recreating it more as a retro-styled copy of the 1970 car and revitalizing its popularity. Chevrolet did a similar design exercise as a retro Camaro, and it, too, met with considerable reaction, but its supposedly inevitable production is not yet determined.
So the new Challenger has the retro classic stage to itself, even in this era of $4 gasoline. Its looks are stunning, and its availability in red, black or silver further narrows the focus. At this point, there is no “plum crazy,†as in the original Challenger, which was its best in 1970, ’71 and ’72, and it came with numerous engines, from the everyday Slant 6 to a hot 340 V8, the venerable 383 V8, and the potent 440 V8, with special editions fitted with the 426 HEMI. The original HEMI was a 425-horsepower fire-breather that became more popular than the cars when it dominated NASCAR stock car racing and NHRA Pro-category drag-racing.
When the first emission-control standards of the 1970s ended performance among production cars, thanks to motorsports, the HEMI engines lived on. That engine’s basic design still dominates Top Fuel and Funny Car NHRA racers, where engine-building specialists start out with that block and wrench over 1,000 horsepower out of supercharged, nitro-burning versions. That was during and after the time that stock car racers like Richard Petty drove Plymouths and Dodges to NASCAR stardom. In those days, stock car mechanics and engine builders didn’t need much modification to make those HEMIs howl, because after being first built in 1966 it grew into the most powerful engine ever built by the corporation, when the stock 7-liter 426 produced 425 horsepower.
Modern technology smooths out the brutish potential of 30 years ago in the new Challenger. The 6.1-liter SRT8’s engine is a full liter of displacement less than the one that was stashed under the hood of the 1970 Challenger, but it develops the same 425 horsepower at 6,200 RPMs, and even more torque, with 420 foot-pounds peaking at 4,800 RPMs. Electronically limited to 6,400 RPMs, the new 6.1-liter HEMI has 69.8 horsepower per liter, which exceeds even the legendary old powerplant.
That engine and platform allowed the SRT fellows to make a couple of shortcuts, because they already had proven it in the Charger SRT8 and the Chrysler 300 SRT8, so laying it out with updated revisions and then plunking that sensuous Challenger two-door coupe body on it created a ready-made potent package. Stomp the gas at a stop and the Challenger SRT8 lunges from 0-60 in only 4.9 seconds. It takes 11.5 seconds to go from 0-100 mph, and a quarter-mile can be covered in 13.3 seconds. Top speed is 170 mph.
When the new Challenger was introduced to the media, we got a chance to drive it from Pasadena out to Willow Springs, a legendary old road-racing circuit with some twisting curves and a few hilly parts, and a couple decent straightaways. The great thing about that experience is that despite the fame the HEMI engine has gained from stock car and drag racing, the Challenger itself became famous in the heyday of the Sports Car Club of America’s Trans-Am road-racing series.
Sam Posey drove a lime green Challenger against the Mustangs of Parnelli Jones and George Follmer, Mark Donohue drove a Roger Penske Camaro, Swede Savage drove a Barracuda, and Jerry Titus drove a Firebird. I used to write about those races, which were among the most exciting motorsports events in the country. SRT has made sure that the Challenger’s legacy also would be translated into modern, real-world performance. A sophisticated suspension holds the car stable as it records 0.88 g on a skid pad, and its giant Brembo brakes stop it from 60-0 in only 110 feet. Test-cars have gone 0-100-0 in just under 17 seconds.
It was a fun day, overall, and Willow Springs offered a good chance to be impressed with how tight and solid the Challenger SRT8 is. But being on the highways, particularly the curving, mountainous highways between Pasadena and the track, was maybe more fun, and being in the car in city traffic was better yet, just because of all the waves, nods, smiles, and thumbs-up that the car inspired from everybody you went past.
The actual price is $37,995, which is a lot, but is a better deal when you realize that every facet – suspension, aerodynamics, interior, brakes, wheels, tires, and driveability – are revised and tuned to optimum to make sure the car works on everyday roads as well as when you push it all-out on a race track.
{IMG2}
Statistically, the Challenger is Overall length is – four inches shorter than the Charger sedan, at 197.7 inches, on a 116-inch wheelbase. Width is 75.7 inches, it stands only 57 inches tall. Ground clearance is 5.5 inches, and be careful not to roll up to a curb too eagerly with that chin spoiler. Curb weight is 4,140 pounds, with 55.6 percent on the front and 44.4 at the rear.
The coefficient of drag is an unspectacular 0.353, but partly because the spoilers front and rear are coordinated with anti-lift characteristics in mind, besides just drag. The concept car had a very different front end, but the production car resembles the 1970’s manner of having the upper leading edge of the grille protrude a bit. Wind tunnel testing divulged a problem with front lift with the original, to the point it threatened to tear off the front edge of the hood until designers stretched it out into a graceful beak.
From the side, the Challenger has the long hood/short rear deck of the ’70, as well as a similar rear pillar and the stdylish contours of the side of the body. Unique 20-inch Alcoa aluminum wheels are fully-forged, which eliminated about 6 pounds per wheel.
Antilock brakes and traction-control are standard, and Electronic Stability Control maintains directional stability in all conditions by deploying selective braking and throttle input to assure the car goes in the direction the steering wheel is suggesting. Those are safety features beyond the safety cage body structure, with crumple zones, side-guard door beams, and supplemental side-curtain airbags.
Limited room for two – preferably kids – make the back seat workable as a 2-plus-2, and trunk space is decent. Under normal conditions, I’d say the knockout design is the car’s strong point, but thanks to SRT, there might be an equal argument that its performance is the Challenger SRT8’s prime asset. Even if you never wanted to go faster than the freeway’s 70 mph, What goes unsaid is the extra thrill whenever you step on the gas, because the deep-throated rumble of the HEMI resonates to put your whole being on red alert.
By the time you’re able to buy one, the Challenger will have more models to choose from than the SRT8. But until more come along, the SRT8 is more than capable of standing alone.
Dodge Journey features, price shine in any weather
The longest journey may start with but a single step, but the best journeys are also those that bring us back home. The subject here is Journeys – as in the 2009 Dodge Journey – which was brought both of those phrases to life.
The Journey was introduced for media test drives through the moonscape-rock country of Nevada, and it surprised me. Then I promptly found a Journey R/T delivered for a test-drive back home in Minnesota, where I was able to confront some homespun snow and subzero cold for a week-long trial. And I was further surprised.
Maybe I’ve gotten crusty at driving so many crossover SUVs and lookalike/drivealike vehicles that all try to be segment-breakers, but when I traveled to Las Vegas to spend a couple of days, I anticipated that the highlight might be escaping the windchill factor, and our e at the Four Seasons resort-hotel was distinctly windchill-free.
But the Journey overshadowed even the view from the 39th floor. It performed well up and down the rocky highways and desert roads, and it combines so many impressive features from the best SUV with the most significant elements from the new Grand Caravan, resulting in a firm, secure, seven-passenger family hauler.
Dodge says the Journey fits in between the compact Caliber and the Grand Caravan, but I think you can throw the large, truck-based Durango into the mix as well. Dodge engineers took the solid new Avenger midsize sedan platform, stretched and stiffened it, and plunked the unique Journey body atop it.
All the features and impressive driveability come in three Journey models, and equally surprising is that they are priced from $19,985 for the basic Journey SE, to $22,985 for the mid-range Journey SXT, and $26,545 for the top-end Journey R/T. That means you could add on some high-end features from the extensive option list and still be below the $30,000 figure that most competitors might start at. A pleasant surprise, indeed.
Having returned to Minnesota both surprised and impressed, I quite promptly found a Journey appear from Chrysler’s press fleet, wearing my favorite “Deep water blue pearl coat†color. And the surprises kept on coming – even BEFORE I climbed in for what could be called a Journey journey. And there’s more to celebrate than the chance to shoot photos of the Journey against both Nevada desert rock formations and a Great White North snowscape.
It was below zero outside, and I was in the cozy confines of a third-floor apartment, looking out on the parking lot. I held out the Journey’s key fob, and clicked the proper symbol twice. A fleeting blink of the Journey’s lights showed that it received my message, and the engine calmly spun to life. I’ve used “remote start†features on vehicles several times, just not in such ideal conditions for implementation.
The doors stay locked, the engine is running, the interior is warming up, the ice on the windows is melting, and in the few seconds of arctic blast you endure from doorway to the vehicle were insignificant. Click the fob again to unlock the doors as you approach, and hop inside. With others I’ve driven from, for example, General Motors, you have to shut off the engine and put in the key and restart, as a fail-safe against some bozo breaking in and stealing the vehicle. In the Journey, I put the key into the ignition but didn’t need to restart; simply turning the switch to operating position worked. And we were off.
My wife, Joan, drove the Journey to work a day or two, and had to remember that feature, so accustomed she was at doing the Sgt. Preston bit across the parking-lot tundra. What a great feature. We appreciated it even more after driving to Duluth for a few days, where there is more snow and, lord knows, lower temperatures. It wasn’t more than 20-below-zero, but it wasn’t much less than that, either. And the device was awesome.
“I loved the auto-start, and I liked every little feature,†said Joan. “The only complaint I can think of is that I’d like better gas mileage.Ââ€
True, the remote-start is an add-on, but it was so slick that it seemed to make all the other little standard items that much better. Equally true, the top R/T model with the 3.5-liter V6 had to work to get 20 miles per gallon around town, and you’d have to keep 70 mph as a limit to get 25 on the freeway. The global 2.4-liter 4-cylinder would undoubtedly do better, and has adequate power, but the V6 is the engine for the top-end versions.
But the things that set the Journey apart from so many wannabe-unique competitors are its features, not the least of which is a basic front-wheel-drive layout that is transformed to a seamless all-wheel-drive if you so choose. The exterior has a nicely refined Dodge-family look, sort of a combination of the Grand Caravan and Avenger, with the cross-hairs grille, but detailed very well. For other features, step inside.
The back doors are large and wide, and open a full 90-degrees. That allows easy access to the second row, and a well-designed set of seat switches allow you to slide the second-row seats forward and tilt the backrest all at once to facilitate hopping into the rear-most seats. In fact, flip the switch harder and you can cause it to slide forward and the backrest to fold down flush to the floor, in stow-and-go style from the Caravan.
You can also fold down the third row seats, and the front passenger bucket, to form one long, flat, carpeted expanse – 9 feet from tailgate to dashboard. Nobody uses interior room better than Chrysler, and interior designer Scott Anderson has two young children, so when he incorporated so many things into the interior of the Journey, he was fully aware of what was important and what would be most appreciated.
{IMG2}
For example, when the seats fold down so fully, Chrysler designs the bins for them to drop into, and the Journey – like the new Caravan – puts those bins to work full-time, when the seats are up. Five open storage areas are complemented by eight covered storage bins, including a molded area located under the front passenger seat cushion, designed to keep valuable items secure and out of sight.
By stretching the platform for a 4.9-inch increase in wheelbase compared to the Avenger, engineers also slid the powertrain unit forward 2 inches. The Journey measures 2.1 inches taller than the Avenger, which isn’t much, but the chair height of the driver’s seat is 6 inches higher, the second-row buckets sit 1.6 inches higher than that, for a “stadium seating†view over the front-seat occupants, and the third row is another 0.6 inches above the second for more of the same, and less of the solitary-confinement feel of other third rows.
Sitting in the front seats, or the second row, you can easily access large storage bins in the floor just forward of the second-row seats. One of them is a “Cool-Zone†bin, which is a removable liner that holds 12 cans of pop and all kinds of ice.
Otherwise, there are enough storage bins for a variety of kids to have their own stuff in their own bin. A full-width storage area under the third-row seats can hold most of your worldlies. For added touches at both ends of the interior, there is an iPod connection in the glove compartment, so you can plug in and recharge the unit while playing it through the audio system, and at the rear end, a rechargable lithium-ion flashlight is right there for use any time.
The base audio system has a 6-CD changer. The upgrades go onward and upward to include a MyGig rear video screen, even if you don’t get the navigation system, and in the Journey you can get both.
The SE comes with the 2.4-liter 4, which has 173 horsepower and 166 foot-pounds of torque, and a 19/25 EPA range for city/highway fuel economy. In brief driving, the engine wheezed a bit when pushed, and hunted for shift alternatives frequently, which is probably because it uses a 4-speed automatic. The STX allows you to upgrade to the 3.5 V6, with 235 horsepower and 232 foot-pounds of torque, and 16/23 EPA estimates, and Chrysler’s 6-speed automatic with the Autostick manual control gate.
Another factor to differentiate models is the SE has 16-inch wheels and a base suspension; the STX and R/T have 17-inch alloys and available 19-inch wheels and a touring suspension. The 19-inch alloys, either brushed or chrome, with a performance suspension that firms up the ride for better handling and a sportier feel, come with the R/T.
Six airbags and full-curtain side bags for two or three rows, joins other standard features, which include antilock brakes, traction control, stability control with roll-mitigation, brake-pressure assist, and tire pressure monitor. Towing capacity is 3,500 pounds with the towin package, which includes an anti-sway control that involves the stability control to keep the vehicle straight.
The structural integrity is enhances by use of ultra-high-strength steel in the “B†pillars, and by triple door seals, which add to the quiet feeling. Expandable foam also is injected at 22 locations to fill cavities and isolate noise.
The Journey will be sold in Europe as well, which is why it was first shown at the Frankfurt Auto Show in September. European Journeys come with a different 3.4-liter engine with either manual or automatic, as well as Chrysler’s 2.7-liter V6, and a 2.0-liter turbodiesel, with either a manual or a dual-clutch automatic 6-speed.
The single-overhead-camshaft 3.5 is a fully adequate V6 engine, but it now finds itself against dual-overhead cam engines such as the 3.6 from GM, the 3.5 from Ford, a 3.7 version of Ford’s engine from Mazda, and an outstanding array of high-tech V6es from Honda, Nissan and Toyota.
If the low price is partly due to the simplified 3.5, I have no quarrel. But I’d like to try the 2.0 turbodiesel, or the Mercedes-issue 3.0 turbodiesel V6 available in the Grand Cherokee, as powerplants that could take the Journey on the quite-small journey from a unique to spectacular family truckster.
BMW, Mercedes, Audi mean business with concepts
While European auto companies seem too serious to get mixed up in the splashy world of concept vehicles, top German competitors all displayed their version of concept cars at Detroit’s North American International Auto Show, which runs through January 27 at Cobo Hall.
Their version is merely a preproduction view of what surely will be coming to showrooms all over the world within a few months.
Hard to say which was the most impressive among the top three luxury German brands.
Audi introduced its all-new A4 sedan, the bread-and-butter car for the company, which will have turbodiesel and hybrid models, as well as an uptempo TTS version of its just-introduced TT sports car. The prize of the Audi stand was the killer version of its new R8 super sports car (featured with a photo in an earlier overview of the show on Newcarpicks.com), with a V12 turbodiesel boasting 722 foot-pounds of torque, coming fresh from Audi’s LeMans winning turbodiesel race cars.
BMW also attracted a lot of attention with the unveiling of its new 1-Series convertible. It had shown off the 1-Series coupe before, and the two made a smashing presence as twins. Nearby is the new X6, which can be pictured best as a neaerly coupe-version of an X5 4-door SUV – although BMW prefers to call it a “Sports Activity Coupe,†as if the auto anagram business is going to incorporate “SAC†among its SUVs.
The biggest news from BMW is the 1-Series, because it is a stubbier, entry-level coupe and convertible that is reminiscent of the popular 2022 model that became the company’s first hot-car hit back in the late 1960s and 1970s. A small, 2-door coupe with surprising interior room, the 2002 showed off the Bavarian company’s technical engine touch, and because popular throughout the U.S.
The new car looks like a shrunken 3-Series, which is not at all a bad thing. It will come as a 128 or a 135, which surprises me, because that means both cars will start with a base 3.0-liter inline 6. A 4-cylinder would seem a perfect fit for the car, whereas the 128’s version of the engine will have 230 horsepower and 200 foot-pounds of torque, and the 135 will get BMW’s twin-turbocharged rocket version of the 3.0, developing 300 horses and 300 foot-pounds of torque.
BMW showed them off amid boasts that 40 percent of all BMWs worldwide are powered by diesels. The best example coming into the U.S. is in the new X6, which will start with a 3.0 twin-turbo diesel, with more-than-adequate 265 horsepower and WAY-more-than-adequate 425 foot-pounds of torque. That’s as much torque, from 3 liters, as BMW gets out of its powerful 6.0-liter V12.
Over at Mercedes, an updated SLK entry sports car was displayed, and a pair of gleaming S-Class sedans sat there with great class but comparatively unassuming. The splendid sedans were bristling with future technology, however. The S450 has a two-mode hybrid with a V6 engine. Mercedes worked with General Motors on the two-mode combined gasoline and electric hybrid, but unlike GM, which first put the system to use on large V8s in trucks, Mercedes links the electric motor system to its fine V6, which will mean very adequate power and superb fuel economy.
Next to it, the S300 goes one better, in my anticipation. It is a large sedan, but it is powered by a hybrid system that includes a 4-cylinder Bluetec diesel and the electric motors. Both the S300 and S450 are “future†vehicles, Mercedes insists, but undoubtedly they will be produced for European markets almost immediately, and trickle in to the U.S. in another year or two.
{IMG2}
The bigger flash at Mercedes was the Vision GLK, which looks very squarish compared to Mercedes’ own ML and GL SUVs. But the plan is brilliant, similar to what Mercedes did with its exemplary new C-Class sedans, which come only in sport or luxury. The Vision GLK comes as Freeside or Townside models.
The Freeside is designed for those who want to make forays into off-road areas or over rough terrain. It goes so far as having removable body parts for such ventures. The Townside is aimed at those who aren’t pretending to go off-road, and will spend their time on highways. It even comes with a sport suspension.
The best news for the two blunt instruments is that Mercedees is putting its 4-cylinder Bluetec diesel under the hood of both, with a 7-speed automatic geared for the optimum purpose of both.
Audi, aside from its stunning R8 and TTS, indicated it plans no letdown from recent sales success with the new and more stylish A4. Nearby, almost overlooked, was a new A5. Audi brought out a spectacular S5 high-performance coupe last fall, and said the mainline version of it wouldn’t be out until March. I was happy to see a preproduction version of it, because while the S5 is a comparative bargain at $50,000, the A5 will be more like $35,000, with more than adequate power from its direct-injection 3.2-liter V6 – and the same great looks as the S5.
Volkswagen, Audi’s parent partner, showed off a 4-door-coupe version of its Passat sedan. And BMW’s Mini Cooper branch displayed its new Clubman, an extended- length boxy subcompact that has a small rear-opening “suicide-door†on the passenger side for easier access to its much more spacious rear seat.
So in all, the Germans seem too serious, too pragmatic to get caught up in the headline-grabbing show of futuristic display concept models. They make a concept car, and believe it, it will be coming soon.
From Sweden, Volvo didn’t have much new stuff, having already introduced the outstanding C30 hatchback and the smooth and excellent S80 sedan for 2008. Saab, as a full-fledged branch of General Motors, showed a bio-fuel power 9-4X, with Saab’s 2.0-liter 4 running everything to corporate boss GM’s favorite E85 to a full turbo, which means it ranges from 245 to 300 horsepower.
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