Acadia opens GMC to world of crossover SUVs
By John Gilbert
Last Updated: Thursday, December 14th, 2006 01:30:25 AM
PALO ALTO, CA. — General Motors is rescuing itself from nose-diving market share by changing its manufacturing scope and switching over to high-tech engines, and is now even building trucks that arenÂ’t really trucks, in the traditional sense. The GMC Acadia launch in Palo Alto is the latest example.
General Motors vice president Bob Lutz arrived at the media launch of the Acadia just in time to capture the essence of what such a new vehicle can mean for the corporation. The Acadia is a breakthrough on several fronts. It is the first crossover SUV built by GMC, joining siblings-to-come such as the Buick Enclave, Saturn Outlook, and a Chevrolet to be named later. With lighter, safer, unibody construction attached to car-like, rather than a truck platform, the Acadia handles with impressive agility, particularly when compared to midsize GMC trucks like the Envoy or Yukon.
By not being full-size trucks, apparently they must be called crossovers. Or can we call them trucklets? Whatever, they are zooming past mid and full sized SUVs in sales for the first time ever, so the emergence of the Acadia shows GMÂ’s departure from its dedicated reliance on larger, once-profitable trucks and their revised but aging, pushrod engines.
“This is about as good as we know how to do it right now,†Lutz told the assembled auto writers. “We may know better five years from now, but right now, this is it. This is something new, a crossover SUV. The Acadia has a four-cam, aluminum V6 with a six-speed transmissionÂ… ItÂ’s a traditional design, with great proportions – muscular, stable, athletic, yet with beautiful lines, a unitized body, ultramodern design, car-like suspension systemÂ…itÂ’s aerodynamic, itÂ’s lighter, and it has similar or greater interior volume than an Envoy or Yukon. This is a ‘no excuseÂ’ vehicle, and itÂ’s a perfect fit for the GMC brand.Ââ€
LutzÂ’s candor is always refreshing, and he sliced past GM loyalists in their traditional posture of defending the low-tech-on-a-budget approach that GM rode to supremacy 30 and 40 years ago. Lutz simply acknowledges the importance of high-tech engines.
“The 3.6 multi-valve?†Lutz said, referring to the Acadia engine. “ThereÂ’s no limit to the power we can get out of it. Many of us felt that in this day of customers having increased technical knowledge, it helps our marketability to have an engine like this to compete against the great German and Japanese engines.Ââ€
The “high feature†3.6-liter V6, first designed for Cadillac, has dual overhead camshafts and four valves per cylinder, with variable valve-timing, and makes 275 horsepower in the Acadia. A six-speed automatic with either front-wheel or all-wheel drive. Traction control, and StabiliTrak further aid stability. It swept through a series of hairpin turns in the mountains, even with four on board, and there is room for a couple more in the third row seats. Three rows of seating for eight is a major selling point for the Acadia, and there is still storage room behind the fold-down third-row seats, which are surprisingly large and quite easy to access. Folding down rows two and three creates 117 cubic feet of storage.
The automatic transmission has a neat little “tap shift†button on the side of the shift knob for manual up and down shifts. That proved useful in hustling around the tightly twisting mountain roads, because you can drop down into third and be at the right spot in the power band for the curvy, hilly stuff. The little button is concave at the bottom, where you downshift, so you can do it without taking your eye off the road. I would prefer steering wheel mounted paddles, because then you could shift manually without taking one hand off the wheel.
Lutz discussed the importance of coordinating North American, European, Asian, and Brazilian production as a preferable way to cut costs.
“If you get yourself healthy by sacrificing future products, you could be out of business,†Lutz said. “You have to forge ahead and pour money into new products. You can’t save your way to prosperity. Revenue is the answer, which means making cars and trucks that people will be willing to part with their money for.
“The quality difference is so close now. Every new vehicle has the same quality, the same safety, and all have multi-cam aluminum engines. The difference is – does your vehicle make an emotional connection with the viewer? If not, people go to ‘default,Â’ which is like buying an appliance. The default brand is, obviously, Toyota.Ââ€
When Lutz speaks, crowds gather, and every phrase divulges something special, whether it is within GMÂ’s public-relations parameters, or not. For example, he was asked if the rumored-to-be Chevrolet version of the Acadia might replace the midsize TrailBlazer.
{IMG2}
“The TrailBlazer is somewhat similar in size, but IÂ’m not sure weÂ’re announcing any plans to have a Chevrolet version of the Acadia yet,†said Lutz. “Undeniably, midsize SUVs are rapidly declining, going extinct. Right now, we have the Outlook for Saturn, the Enclave for Buick, along with the Acadia for GMC, and theyÂ’re all different. The trick will be to make the Chevrolet version different againÂ…And from what IÂ’ve seen, it will be radically different.Ââ€
So much for not making the announcement.
John Larson, the youthful-looking GMC-Pontiac-Buick general manager, sat back and smiled at the Lutz presentation. It was suggested that being responsible for three brands with impressive new Pontiac Solstice and G6, Buick LaCrosse, Lucerne and now Enclave, and the new Sierra, Envoy and now Acadia for GMC, Larson must have enjoyed the last five years more than his first dozen at GM.
“I donÂ’t know about that,†said Larson, turning pensive. “ItÂ’s been satisfying to see some recent things come together, but for all the successes weÂ’ve had, I canÂ’t help but think about the plants weÂ’ve closed and the people weÂ’ve had to lay off.Ââ€
TheyÂ’d better be careful, or else guys like Lutz and Larson could ruin GMÂ’s image, which has faded from 1970s-era Corvettes and Camaros to a bean-counter-dominated conglomerate that had lost its soul while dwelling on tradition rather than modernization. After driving the Acadia hard through the California mountains, and talking to Lutz and Thomas afterward, it appears that maybe the lost soul has been located, and new and modernized products indicate GM can refocus on its faltering market share.
The feature-filled Acadia, starting in the low-$30,000 range, will help that.
“We see GMC as a complement, not competition, for Chevrolet,†said Larson, who added that he interacts with his counterparts at Chevrolet on a daily basis.
Still, it always has seemed to me that GMC’s motto as “Professional Grade†is a clever way to imply it’s bigger, stronger and more exclusive than competitors, but it more subtly might include Chevy shoppers, even though the GMC and Chevy pickups and SUVs are identical under differing sheet metal.
If I had a major criticism it is that Acadia still feels big for a crossover – big enough to have less of a truck feel than the larger GM SUVs, but more of a truck feel than performance oriented crossover SUVs such as the new Acura MDX, or the Lexus RX350.
Regardless, the Acadia is a breakthrough for GM, and it may become the halo vehicle GMC — the corporationÂ’s second largest division.
Pretty heady stuff, for a trucklet.
Lighter, stiffer, quicker Audi TT stretches beyond cute
SAN FRANCISCO, CA. — Finishing a long day of driving the new 2008 Audi TT through the hills and valleys of Northern California wine country, we pulled off to shoot photos of the car framed by the Golden Gate Bridge, with San Francisco in the background. A tour bus stopped nearby and a middle aged couple hastened over to us, eager to look over our bright red TT Coupe. Turns out, they were from Scotland, on a globe-hopping sightseeing journey, and their interest in the second-generation TT is because they own one of the first-generation TT Coupes — as well as a hot-performing Audi S4 sedan.
Audi fans seem to be everywhere these days, and whether you came from Scotland or Minnesota when you got a late-April glimpse of the new TT from Germany, the car revealed to the nation’s auto journalists in San Francisco resembles its predecessor, which broke all sorts of new ground for size and shape. The 2000 model was a mainstream sports car, coordinating a cute, rounded-blunt exterior, with a fantastic interior filled with round shapes and brushed aluminum trim, even if it was a bit cramped.Almost every sporty car introduced since has copied the TT in some fashion, but nobody has topped it.
The new car is recognizable as a TT, but closer scrutiny shows it is stretched by 5.4 inches in length and over 3 inches in width, making it sleeker, and neat contours carved out from the much more tapered headlights makes it subtly more aggressive, with an increase of 2.5 cubic feet in volume, as well. The redesign from its roof to its wheels makes the new car much more than a concept-come-to-life, and it never feels cramped, either in the 2-plus-2 coupe or the 2-seat roadster.
The new TT comes in either front-wheel-drive with the 2.0-liter 4-cylinder and the S-Tronic automatic, for a base price of $34,800 coupe and $36,800 roadster, while the upscale version has a 3.2-liter V6 with either 6-speed manual or 6-speed S-Tronic, at a base of $41,500 coupe and $44,500 roadster.
Those limits surprised me a bit, because some TT buyers might like a stick to stir the 4-cylinder — which is turbocharged up to a potent 200 horsepower and almost-instant 207 foot-pounds of torque — and have it with Audi’s superb quattro all-wheel drive. Demand for a stick and quattro means moving up to the 250-horse, 236-foot-pound 3.2 V6. Granted, the 3.2 zips from 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, compared to the 4’s 6.1 seconds. But the turbo 4 goes like a V6 when you stomp on it, and will deliver over 30 miles per gallon (EPA highway of 31) in normal driving, while the V6 shows 20 mpg.
It may indeed be that Audi plans to add the quattro and a stick to the 4 a year into production, and beyond that, the 4 with the automatic might be the way I’d buy the car. The S-Tronic is the best in the industry in my humble opinion. It is a 6-speed jewel with instantaneous clutchless manual controls either with the shift lever or with fingertip paddles, and it sounds like an Indy car with a neat little turbo-burble on upshifts and downshifts. It made the roadster my choice, even when it was a bit chilly at 60 degrees, because a little chill is worth it to drop the top for the better audio coming from that engine.
Wanting quattro seems to be a no-brainer, except that the front-drive 4 handles so superbly. In fact, when the nation’s auto journalists arrived at the San Francisco airport, we were each placed in a car to drive alone downtown to our hotel. We had a choice of three routes, and I chose the 2.0 with the S-Tronic and the longest route, at an hour and 45 minutes, because it twisted through the hills and along the Pacific Ocean-front Hwy. 1. At the hotel, I turned over the keys and remarked how the new quattro system worked amazingly well when I was throwing the car through the tightest turns, and an Audi official smiled and said, “But that one doesn’t have quattro.”
That is the ultimate compliment to how well the front-driver tracked around the most abrupt switchbacks. Naturally, the quattro, which now has 60-percent of power going to the rear under normal driving, feels as though it’s on rails going around similar curves, but it also feels a bit heavier. Also, the V6 sounds good, but not as viscerally exciting as the 4.
In either form, however, there is no question that Audi can challenge the top sports cars from Germany, including the Porsche Boxster S and the BMW Z4, which means it goes well beyond the satisfying and cute sporty-car level of the original TT.
The company has set its sights on raising U.S. demand for its cars to levels enjoyed in other countries, and other prestigious imports, as well as domestics, had better pay heed, because Audi hasn’t missed on its recent objectives. It went racing, big time, and won repeatedly at the 24 Hours of LeMans, adding last year’s title with a spectacular new Diesel engine, which has dominated all conventional gas-engine competitors in endurance racing.
Audi has been the equal of BMW and Mercedes in production cars for years, but I always thought it might lag slightly behind those two in engine technology. That is no longer true. In the last few years, Audi first went to 5-valve cylinder heads, then back to 4 when it applied direct injection and turbocharging technology to its superb 2.0-liter 4-cylinder. In creating a small but amazing engine with the power of a V6 and the capability to top 30 miles per gallon in fuel efficiency, the new engine was an easy choice to make the annual Ward’s 10-Best Engine list.
That engine compares with the best 4-cylinders in the world, including my favorites from Honda and Mazda, and exceeds them, if you’re looking for the sweetest combination of power and fuel economy. Coupled with Audi’s unparallelled S-Tronic transmission, Audi rises to the top, and beyond, other auto companies in high-tech stature, using the turbo and astute engine management to get both power and economy.
The 6-speed S-Tronic automatic has a manual gate, with paddle switches fastened within fingertip reach on either side of the steering wheel — right hand for upshifts, left for downshifts. Even if you haven’t moved the shift lever into manual modeI, you can override the drive setting with the paddles when you want to hasten an upshift or downshift. Like any performance-loving driver, I always have preferred the sporty nature of a manual, and Audi has a fine 6-speed manual. But the S-Tronic is the first automatic in any car I’ve driven that I prefer to a stick.
The magic of the Audi S-Tronic is that it is an automatic that has two clutches inside it, coordinated electronically. The computer is smart enough to know that if you are accelerating hard in second, you undoubtedly are going to upshift. So the clutch that isn’t engaged grabs third, and as soon as you hit the upshift paddle, the transmission changes which clutch is engages. Zap, you’re in the next gear.
{IMG2}
Interestingly, BMW and Mercedes were building new automatic transmissions at the same time. The Audi unit outshifts both, by such a significant difference that BMW is redesigning its new sequential automatic, reportedly to go to some form of “two-clutch” design.
That transmission, incidentally, made the 2.0 my preference for the A3 and A4 Audis, and the same unit can be found in Volkswagen’s GTI, GLI, and Passat. But it shows its stuff best, perhaps, in the TT sports car.
The 3.2 V6 is no slouch from a technical standpoint. It also has direct injection these days, as does the corporate V8 for the larger Audis, and while the 3.2 with quattro is the upgrade engine for the TT, it now also comes with the same S-Tronic automatic and those paddles.
Still, my driving partner and I agreed in our preference for the turbo 4, and we didn’t agree on everything. He prefers the coupe, with its wonderfully sweeping teardrop silhouette, and its 2-plus-2 interior, even if the rear seat would best be limited to small kids or occasional, and short, trips, while I prefer the roadster, which is limited to the two bucket seats. The power, no-touch soft top unlatches itself, folds itself back under a self-latching rear deck in a mere 12 seconds, and takes 14 seconds to close — easily done at any stoplight, although Audi folks say you can feel free about opening or closing it at anything under 25 miles per hour.
The second generation TT is the fourth generation of Audi’s space frame unibody design, and Audi has developed new methods of sticking steel to aluminum. The coupe is 69 percent aluminum, 31 percent steel, and is both 50 percent improved in rigidity and 166 pounds lighter than the first TT. The roadster is 58 percent aluminum, 42 percent steel, and its rigidity is stiffened a whopping 120 percent, while measuring 188 pounds lighter. The new roadster, in fact, is stiffer than the first-generation coupe.
That stiffness, plus electro-magnetically charged shocks on the suspension (MacPherson strut front/4-link rear) means that either model stays absolutely flat and stable in the sharpest swerves, while remaining comfortably compliant and never harsh over road irregularities. That also, apparently, means that the front-wheel-drive model has enough stability and precision to fool even experienced drivers — including critical auto journalists — into mistaking the front-drive for uattro.
Mazda CX-9 zoom-zooms into larger SUV market
The Mazda CX-7 may have the sportiest design of all crossover SUVs, being more like a sports sedan with the SUV assets of all-wheel drive and a higher seating position. If you like the idea but need more room to haul more people, then imagine stretching a CX-7 out to a length that allows a third-row seat, with 17.2 cubic feet of storage space behind that third row, and with a wider stance that turns it into the largest vehicle ever built by Mazda. ThatÂ’s the new CX-9.
There are enough similarities in style between the CX-9 and the CX-7 that from a hundred feet away, they might be mistaken for each other. But up close, or side-by-side, the difference in size is readily discernable. The CX-9, with three rows of seats, puts Mazda into new territory and fills in the void left by the recently discontinued MPV minivan. Mazda moved instead into the compact crossover segment with the five-passenger XC-7, and the next logical step is the seven-passenger CX-9.
To fully grasp the CX-9, a review of the CX-7 is necessary, as well as a look at the interaction with Ford, MazdaÂ’s chief investor. The CX-7 was good enough to earn the runner-up slot in Truck of the Year competition, outpointing the very good Ford Edge and all the other breakthrough crossovers. A lean and agile four- or five-seater, the CX-7 is powered by a quick and efficient turbocharged Mazda 2.3-liter four-cylinder engine with all-wheel drive.
Both the Edge and the CX-7 began life on a stretched and strengthened Mazda6 platform, and the CX-7 is closer in size to the Edge, both with two rows of seats. Mazda dipped into its own supply bin for the CX-7, using the front structure from the Mazda6, and the rear from the Mazda5, as well as using its own turbocharged four-cylinder.
Aimed at a family that needs more interior room and seating for up to seven, but still wants something that has a futuristic, high-tech look of adventure that goes beyond the boxy, traditional SUVs, the CX-9 is substantially longer than the CX-7 or Edge, at 198.8 inches in overall length and a 113.2-inch wheelbase. It also is much heavier, at 4,500 pounds in all-wheel-drive models, and it carries 56 percent of its weight on the front axle. The CX-9 retains the corporate “Zoom-Zoom†approach with a bold attitude, and its agility is indicated by its surprisingly small turning circle.
Rather than “borrowing†the Edge platform, Mazda more accurately recalled elements of its own platform, which Ford used in the Edge. From the firewall forward, the CX-9 and the Edge have about the same structure, which makes sense, because both house the same 3.5-liter Ford V6 engine. The suspension points on all four corners are also the same, but from the firewall rearward, the CX-9 is Mazda’s own.
Mazda useda straight and wide ladder frame, with cross members of high-strength steel, and added a lower sub-frame, with reinforced lower side members, wheelwells and pillars. Basing the rear on the MPV design to house the third-row seating, Mazda wound up with a larger, roomier vehicle that is still sporty looking on the outside and rigidly safe under the skin.
Crash tests show impact energy is dispersed and forced downward to the perimeter of the CX-9 frame, and the reinforced lower rails and cross-members allow less deformity in a crash. Being so rigid also made it easy to engineer better directional stability, such as linear steering and the ability to remain flat and stable in emergency swerves.
Having an accessible third-row seat was important, and wide rear doors greet an easy fold-and-slide second row seat. ItÂ’s easy enough for adults, and a snap for kids, to flip a switch to fold and slide the seat and hop back into the third row, where there is surprising room. The second row seat cushion is about 3 inches higher than the front buckets, making for stadium-seating view, and the third-row seat is similarly raised above the second, to ease the feeling that third-row riders are in some sort of cave back there. Naturally, the generous room behind the third seat becomes huge by folding down the second row.
The Ford-built 3.5-liter V6 puts out 263 horsepower at 5,250 RPMs, and 249 foot-pounds of torque at 4,500 RPMs. The engine adds to exchanges between Ford and Mazda that previously saw Mazda send its 2.3 four-cylinder to Ford while making use of FordÂ’s 3.0 V6. With the 3.0, Mazda revised the cylinder heads and added variable valve-timing to make it so much more potent in the Mazda6 that Ford now uses MazdaÂ’s revisions in the Fusion. The new Ford V6 is so good that Mazda engineers say that such tweaking was not necessary with the 3.5.
The new Ford V6 is very strong and technically advanced, with reinforcement ribs improving the stiffness of the all-aluminum block, and a timing chain rather than a belt, for its dual overhead camshafts. Valve timing can be varied on both intake and exhaust sides by reading engine load and RPMs, and the use of electronic throttle control.
In the Edge, Ford uses a new six-speed automatic transmission developed jointly with General Motors with the 3.5. Mazda uses a smooth-shifting six-speed automatic developed jointly by Aisin and Mazda in the CX-9. An interesting difference is that the the Edge and companion Lincoln MKX do not have a manual gate to allow clutchless manual shifting, while the CX-9 has that feature.
MazdaÂ’s own adaptive all-wheel-drive system features an active torque split that responds to computer readings of steering, throttle angle, yaw rate, and both lateral acceleration and wheel speed. In normal driving, 100 percent of the torque goes to the front wheels, and the torque shifts from front to rear up to a 50-50 split when the computer detects any wheelspin or other need for shifting torque rearward.
{IMG2}
Competition is seen as the Honda Pilot, Toyota Highlander, BMW X5, Volvo XC90, Acura MDX, and Volkswagen Touareg, most of which make the CX-9 a worthy challenger and a bargain besides. The CX-9 comes in three levels – the Sport, quite well equipped with 18-inch wheels and lighter, front-wheel drive, starting at about $28,000; the Touring adds leather power seats; and the Grand Touring moves up to about a $32,000 base price, with 20-inch wheels, high-intensity discharge headlights, rain-sensing wipers, and other top-shelf features. If you want to load up from the option list, a 9-inch-screen rear DVD player, or the Bose 5.1 surround sound system, plus a power liftgate, navigation screen with rear-view video, you could get the CX-9 up to near $40,000.
Driving the CX-9 puts you in position to appreciate the effort made to combine luxury and sportiness. It stays remarkably flat even on sharp, quick steering moves, and it never feels as though it might lose its composure. MazdaÂ’s idea that there was room for a midsize SUV that offers more than was available blossomed after interviews all over the country led to various responses, and that information created four objectives for the CX-9: It had to stress sportiness, prestige, versatility, and safety.
Sportiness was achieved by the sporty lines, rigid chassis, and potent engine and six-speed transmission, running on regular gas and with a 3,500-pound towing capacity; prestige meant special attention to the luxury touches of the interior; versatility meant surprising room inside, with storage bins well-positioned, room behind the third seat, higher-rising second seat that slides forward and folds clear for convenient access to the third row; safety demanded that every CX-9 has antilock brakes, electronic brake distribution, traction control, dynamic roll-stability control, as well as front and side airbags.
My only complaint is strictly personal. I like the new and well-bolstered seats, and the visibility from the driver’s seat is superb. But the manual shift gate on the automatic makes you push forward to downshift, and pull backward to upshift – counter-intuitive both ways, to me. Mazda and BMW are the only two mainstream companies that insist on using that layout, while other manufacturers seem to agree that logic dictates going forward to go forward, and pulling back to back off. My brain works that way too. But the good news is that Mazda does have a manual gate.
Concept cars put on an auto show of their own
DETROIT, MICH. — Concept cars. What a concept! It used to be that manufacturers would make up weird, futuristic car models and put them at display to draw attention to their “real†cars at auto shows. That was then. Now days, concept cars often, if not usually, are set out to gauge reaction on what manufacturers intend to produce within a year or two.
The battle in the marketplace is only going to get hotter in the future, if the concepts shown at the Detroit Auto Show this week and next are any indication. Typically, since there are various Car of the Year and Truck of the Year awards, some group actually has a “Concept Car of the Year†award voted on by – who knows? – the soothsayers among my fellow-journalists.
At Detroit, the concept cars were spectacular. In fact, with so many manufacturers coming out with new vehicles in the last year, the case could be made that there were fewer newsworthy production vehicles, while an increase in flashy concepts carried the auto show circuit.
If I had to pick one from the Detroit International Auto Show, my vote would go to the Mazda Ryuga. Always among the more creative in concept styling, Mazda has outdone itself with the Ryuga, which is an extremely low, hip-high, four-seater that is actually a foot lower and a foot shorter than a Mazda3 compact. Unique, double-width doors rise up and over the roof to access an ultramodern interior. The driver has a cockpit-style setting, complete with video rear-view enhancements, while the occupants have the form-fitting comfort of a futuristic lounge. If you like aesthetics, consider that the gently angled and tapering headlight slits were designed to mimic the flow of dew off a bamboo leaf.
U.S. companies were prominent in the concept game as well. Chrysler Group, for example, showed off a Jeep Trailhawk, a lowered amalgamation of the Wrangler and Grand Cherokee in looks, with removable roof panels and a four-passenger interior. Then they switched right over to a surprising and well-received luxury-crossover wagon, called the Nassau. It is a tightly styled four-seater with a sloping rear hatch and an impressive, Crossfire/Pacifica type grille. The Nassau has a 6.1-liter Hemi V8 powering a unique personal-luxury vehicle, and even an official from a competitor said, “They’ve got to build it.”
Ford had a major display, including the Interceptor concept, which J Mays introduced as “modern American muscle,†with 400 horsepower and the ability to run as a flex-fuel vehicle. Ford also showed the squarish Airstream Concept that runs on lithium batteries, and a Lincoln MKR with a twin-turbocharged V6. Next to those, an entirely redone Focus – including a coupe model – and revised Five Hundred with a better grille, and Fusion models bolstered with all-wheel drive – were impressive but fought little space in the spotlight.
General Motors, hot from sweeping Car of the Year (Saturn Aura) and Truck of the Year (Silverado pickup), showed off a Camaro convertible, which might have been a first — a concept of a concept. It is a top-down version of the year-old Camaro concept, which remains in the yet-to-become-production category. Chevy also turned out an all-new midsize sedan, bearing the familiar Malibu name.
Bigger news was the Volt, an electric-powered concept with a plug-in recharging system that GM product vice president Bob Lutz called “shocking,” and added that he had never been more enthusiastic about a car, because this one can turn various types of fuel into electric power. For a man who swore off, and at, hybrids just two years ago, Lutz has become a major believer. The Volt is limited to 40 miles on a full plug-in charge, but the system doesn’t need to add to your household electric bill, and can regenerate electricity via a 1.0-liter turbocharged engine with your choice of gas, E85, hydrogen, or even bio-diesel.
Among imports, Mazda was far from alone, as everyone from Acura, Lexus, Volvo, and Mercedes, to Nissan, Hyundai, and Volkswagen, among others, showed off impressive concept cars.
Mercedes displayed the Ocean Drive, a huge, four-door convertible, loaded with features and luxury accommodations. Mercedes was the last manufacturer to build a four-door convertible, back in 1962 when the Type 300D finished a five-year run, so Mercedes brings back the idea with the Ocean Drive.
{IMG2}
Volvo, always conscious of new safety technology, has a new XL60 concept model, a compact SUV loaded with new safety features but also with a dashing new style.
Another dazzler is the Acura Advanced Sports Car Concept, a sports car that will become the next NSX. Acura brought out a long, low, LeMans-racer-type sports car in the mid-engine NSX in 1992, and except for changing the headlight design, it remained the same as a limited production gem all these years. The concept will be the NSX replacement, with a V10 engine and SH-AWD. Designed in the U.S. and assembled here as well, the car is expected to set styling and technical standards for future Acura sedans.
Nissan, another company that has tried out new production vehicles as concepts first, has both the Rogue, a new, personal conveyance, and the Bevel SUV, described as a “single purpose, multi functional vehicle. It has a hybrid engine, with a 110-volt outlet for power-tools, computers, etc., in the rear and it has its power source recharged by solar roof panels.
Toyota spent its concept energy on a FT-HS, a new sports car design with a 400-horsepower hybrid using a 3.5-liter V6 with electric power. It also turned to upscale Lexus for a fabulous Super Car LF-A concept, which is a revised version of a concept model brought out two years ago. This time,it has a V10 with 500 horsepower and a rear transaxle. The car appears aimed at Porsche and Audi type sports cars – as well as, uh, NSX replacement cars.
Hyundai put the Veracruz on display, but if it was a concept vehicle, it didn’t work – because it looked good enough to drive away on the spot.
Imagine that. A concept that works, right now. Among the outgrowth of concept cars, that’s what we can hope for.
New Patriot adds more-rugged twin to Jeep’s Compass
SCOTTSDALE, ARIZ. — The biggest news from Chrysler Group in the past couple of weeks is the financial situation, in which owner Daimler Benz is investigating possibilities of selling off the U.S. brand. While the news is not exactly uplifting, the fact that Chrysler Group continues to turn out interesting vehicles that could have a solid future is a definite positive.
The new Jeep Patriot actually is a feel-good story for those who like to have “domestic†manufacturers build domestic vehicles in U.S. plants. While Chrysler joins General Motors and Ford in closing U.S. plants with high-paid United Auto Workers in favor of less costly production in Canada and Mexico – which can be called domestic because of the odd workings of the North American Free Trade Association – the Patriot is built in the Belvidere, Ill., plant.
That is the same plant that builds the Dodge Caliber and the Jeep Compass, and the Patriot joins those vehicles as being based on the same platform. Sharing platforms just makes sense, although the vehicles have distinctly different personalities. The Caliber is a neat do-everything vehicle for consumers with active lifestyles, but itÂ’s not an off-road churner.
The Compass and Patriot are closer, and they are an interesting pair of Jeep twins. The Compass came out almost a year ago, and its gently rounded edges and stylish rear made it look like a Jeep that got hit over the head with a contemporary-styling magic wand. Predictably, hard-core Jeep off-roaders ridiculed the Compass for being a “chick car.†And in a way, they were right.
It’s not a putdown to say women will be attracted to the Compass – and 55-60 percent of Compass buyers are women. But in these emancipated times, who’s to say women don’t like to live active lifestyles that may include a little off-roading? But while women will buy a car seen as a rugged, macho “guys’†vehicle, men won’t go near a car if they perceive it as a chick car.
So Jeep quietly slipped out with the Patriot, which takes its place alongside the Compass, but is aimed at attracting about 60 percent male customers. The trick is a new outlook for Jeep, as an entity.
“We have Jeep Modern, and Jeep Rugged,†said designer Don Renkert. “The Grand Cherokee and the Compass fit into Jeep Modern, as family vehicles that men can appreciate, but which also serve women and the family. The Wrangler and the Commander fit into Jeep Rugged, with capability for doing serious off-roading.Ââ€
The Patriot, then, is sort of a crossover among crossovers – being a modern Jeep that also is rugged. It’s slightly longer and within an inch of the height and width of the old Cherokee. Built in the familiar Jeep “two-box†format, the basic Patriot Sport comes with a 2.0-liter four-cylinder world engine with variable valve timing and 158 horsepower bolstered by 141 foot-pounds of torque. A CVT (continuously variable transmission) and front-wheel drive are included in the $14,985 base price. Adding Freedom Drive I all-wheel drive adds the 2.4-liter version of the engine and boosts the base price up to $16,735. Going up to the premium Freedom Drive II with an off-road package takes the sticker to $19,175.
The fancier Patriot Limited starts the front-wheel-drive model at $19,985 for the larger 2.4 engine with 172 horsepower and 165 foot-pounds of torque. It goes to $21,735 for the Freedom Drive I version, and $23,530 for the Freedom Drive II off-road package-equipped top model. The 2.4 coaxes estimates of 26 miles per gallon city and 30 on the highway from the EPAÂ’s often-bewildered computers with front-wheel-drive and the 5-speed manual transmission, which matches the 2.0. As you add features, the mileage dips a bit, but still is 21/23 with the full-boat off-road model with special low-range features.
Other than ruggedness, the main differences between the Sport and Limited are interior amenities. You get a decent two-town interior of vinyl or fabric on the Sport, and leather is standard on the Limited, it either a pebble beige or slate grey. There are a lot of little storage bins, and the lid on the console can store an iPod. The rear hatch opens upward, and you can reach an audio unit built into the hatch, folding it down to aim the two speakers for optimum tailgate/picnic needs. The spare tire is under the skidproof floor of the storage area. The rear seats fold down flat, in one-third and two-third segments. The front passenger backrest also folds forward to make a longer flat surface, so if you needed to haul some 8-foot boards or other lumber pieces, or a stepladder, you could do it.
The rear dome-light also pops out and turns into a bright, LED flashlight that recharges when itÂ’s in place in the Patriot.
Describing the various powertrain choices gets a little technical, because Jeep has developed so many off-road units. Best to remember that in the Patriot’s case, going to anything called “Freedom Drive†means going to the CVT as well, but Jeep has made the pulley-based steel-toothed belt work in off-road circumstances is impressive.
Once you move up to Freedom Drive I, you get the 2.4 with the CVT and an electronically controlled clutch with four-wheel lock up to assure 50-50 split of torque to the front and rear axles.
{IMG2}
The Freedom Drive II has a different gear set that includes a 19-1 low ratio, plus tow-hooks front and rear, a 3 mm skidplate under the engine and fuel tank, heavy-duty cooling to allow higher engine speed and lower speed for off-roading, and upgraded fan motor, alternator and other elements – including an inch taller ride height for a 9-inch underside clearance. The vented differential is located higher than the 19-inch river-fording height.
The top model gets the “Trail Rated†designation Jeep uses on its most-rugged vehicles, and the CVT is an example of how Jeep engineers have made use of the always-shifting, belt-drive transmission.
We drove off into the desert and hilly mountain areas near Scottsdale, and the Patriot handled all chores of normal highway use with ease. It also did a good job on a rugged off-road area through some rocks and river washes.
The Patriot proves that things like antilock brakes, an electronic stability program, roll-mitigation sensors, and side-curtain airbags to augment front and side airbags can fit well into a multi-purpose compact SUV. For off-roading, there is a hill-descent-control device, which holds at anything 5 mph or under for climbing down rocky slopes. Step on the gas or brake, and the control releases. The brake-lock differential, and brake-traction control work to transfer power across the axle to the other side, with obvious benefit to anyone doing some serious off-roading.
Our test was serious enough for me. With the wheels pushed out to the corners, the PatriotÂ’s design provides 29-degree approach angle, 34-degree departure angle, and 23-degree breakover angle, which Jeep claims are all best-in-class figures. What impressed me as much was the quick steering, and the 35-foot turning radius, which was surprisingly tight.
My codriver was a woman journalist who is a fairly-aggressive driver. She enjoyed the roominess and safety characteristics of the Patriot, but also had a good time going over the steep, rocky off-road stuff, where the stiffness of the frame caused it to hoist a rear wheel a foot or two off the road, while the engine/transmission combination kept feeding power to the wheels still in firmer command of terra firma.
Going down such extreme stretches allowed us to experiment with the gear sets. Shifting the CVT into low-range, then engaging the hill-descent control, meant you could creep down treacherous areas by trusting the Patriot choose its own pace.
With large SUVs and large sedans faltering in the marketplace, and compact cars and compact crossover SUVs leading the upswing at the other, more fuel-efficient end, JeepÂ’s timing looks pretty good. Having the Compass join the fray as a smaller vehicle for Grand Cherokee types is one good idea, and now sending the Patriot out as a more streetable partner for the Wrangler, but also a more rugged twin of the Compass, pretty well covers the marketplace.
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