M6 and Z4 M Coupe complete BMW’s newest classics
ELKHART LAKE, WIS. — Maybe it was just me, but when alternately speeding around the Road America race course in a BMW M6 and a BMW Z4 M Coupe, I felt quicker and more precise in the less-potent Z4 M Coupe.
The opportunity to drive the newest BMW M models through the rolling kettle moraine countryside around the little Wisconsin town of Elkhart Lake was attraction enough. The added opportunity to take them out on the splendid four-mile Road America road-racing circuit was the highlight to an irresistible day. Some of the most threatening black clouds imaginable from the fringe of a severe thunderstorm curtailed some of the later runs, but couldnÂ’t dampen the impressions of the two cars we focused on.
The two cars were the M6, the 650 Coupe upgraded with the potent V10, and the Z4 in M form, which is a dramatic upgrade on the standard Z4 Roadster and Coupe. These cars are similar in their intentions, but distinctly different in how they execute them.
The M6 felt heavier, because it is, at 3,900 pounds, but the weight is incidental when pulled by an incredible 5.0-liter V10 engine. But the M6Â’s paddle-shifted sequential-manual automatic transmission didnÂ’t harness that power with the same quick precision as the six-speed stick shift did in the less-potent 3.2-liter in-line six-cylinder of the Z4 M Coupe.
The truth, of course, was that the M6 was faster. With the “M†button pushed and 500 horsepower trying to show off, I got up to 130 miles per hour on a couple stretches of Road America before getting off the power and engaging the magnificent brakes to make a turn in the M6. In the Z4 M-Coupe, I got up to 120 at two or three places on the track, but its lighter weight made it feel more agile and therefore more responsively in tune with my driving instincts.
Insiders, and those who know various BMW models, will know exactly what the “M†means. So will BMW competitors, which offer rival factory performance teams. Mercedes has its AMG, Audi its S-Class, Ford its SVT, etc., and all of them have a good and productive time firming, stiffening, strengthening and high-powering their sportiest cars.
But throughout the auto industry, BMW stands alone atop the performance pedestal. BMWÂ’s normal cars are what other companies would call high-performance. Competitors would rather not talk about them, but whenever they introduce a new model, they boldly point out that they used a BMW model as their benchmark, as if that proves their intentions to achieve the ultimate performance plateau.
When it comes to similarly benchmarking a vehicle for its next model, BMW can only look within, at its own current models. The 330 sedan is as strong a performing sedan you can find in the compact/intermediate size; the 5-Series sedans are as hot as anyone would want in the full-size bracket; the 6-Series is a luxurious and sleek coupe; the Z4 is a fantastic roadster and now coupe. That is in base form, which is more than enough – as long as customers don’t know that something beyond those cars lurks our there with the “M†designation.
Back in 1972, BMW Motorsport began life, but it wasn’t until 1978 that the company turned the operation loose to make a one-off model, the M1 – a low, sleek, exotic, mid-engine race car. In 1984, BMW made an M6, and then an M5, both factory-prepared high-performance versions of existing coupes and sedans. In 1986, BMW built its first M3, turning its entry-level coupe into a screamer, and later adding the “M†treatment to the four-door 3-Series sedan. In 1988, BMW sold 80,000 M3s. Altogether, BMW has sold 110,000 M models in the U.S., which is about half the total produced. Of the rest, 30 percent go to Europe, and the remaining 20 percent are scattered around the rest of the world.
If you want the pinnacle of motorized performance, you could be happy with the basic cars – as long as you don’t drive the “M†models. Without question, the M6 and the Z4 M models are both exceptional – to say nothing of the M5 or yet-to-be-driven M3 – always my favorite. The 6-Series, remember, starts at $80,000 in normal form, and the technical upgrades to the inside, outside, and that V10 engine, make the M6 worth the $96,795 price tag for those uncompromising customers. The Z4 M Coupe is a comparative bargain at $49,995, making both cars similarly more than the basic, non-M brethren.
For the first time, BMW has four separate “M†class vehicles for 2006, which was the reason to summon an assortment of North American auto journalists for their introduction. We were picked up at the Milwaukee airport in M5 sedans. Fantastic cars. Next morning we hopped into M6 coupes and headed off on charted drives through the countryside, changing into M Coupes before arriving at the race track.
A timed autocross was set up in the paddock, but my partner bailed out on what was supposed to be a combined run, totaling both drivers. BMW fleet distribution manager Vinnie Kung just happened to show up, so he was recruited to be my partner. I tore off around the course, and the Z4 M Coupe was fantastic. It turned and swerved on cue, no leaning, no lack of precision, and as good as the six-speed manual shifter was, the engine pulled out of every turn no matter what gear IÂ’d chosen. At the tightest turn on the course, I floored it but the traction-control system bogged it down slightly, and I should have turned it off to elicit a bit of wheelspin for the ultimate time. When it was all over, though, we finished second, which coaxed my official codriver to come out of hiding to see if we had won a prize.
On the race track itself, the M6 was a pleasure. The normal 650 has a 4.8-liter V8 with 360 horsepower and 360 foot-pounds of torque. To make the M6, the car has been lightened with carbon-fiber and thermoplastic panels, and aluminum chassis and suspension parts. The engine is a 5.0-liter V10, a direct descendant of BMWÂ’s Formula 1 engine, with 500 horsepower and 383 foot-pounds of torque. Skip Barber driving instructors sat in the passenger seat for all of us, and we were able to drive two hot laps in succession, which ended all too soon.
The M6 will go 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, with a top speed electronically governed at 155 mph. The redline is 8,250, and there is an “M†button you can push to go to full power, hold the revs longer before each shift, and amplify the performance by restraining the stability-control system a bit longer. The tremendous power of the V10 can send you thundering down the straightaways, but I found the sequential automatic unsettling. The shift lever goes from R to N to D. There is no “Park†setting, so whenever you stop, you go to neutral, then pull on the hand brake. Once in D, moving the lever to the right engages the manual phase. Large paddles left and right on the steering wheel enact shifts of the seven-speed automatic, right for upshifts and left for downshifts.
I’ve driven the new Audi DSG, an incredible quick-shifting automatic that shifts faster than anyone could shift a stick. I also drove the AMG models from Mercedes, and their paddle-shift automatic mechanism works quickly, too, if not quite as immediate as Audi’s. By comparison, the BMW system, which is smooth when simply left in Drive, took a couple of seconds – minimum – for each upshift when done manually. I tried letting up on the gas, holding steady on the gas and stepping harder on the gas, but regardless, there was a nagging hesitation before each shift was engaged. Another contribution to my unsettling feeling with the hesitation is that I recently drove the normal 650 for a week, and found its six-speed stick perfect. The M6 comes only with the automatic, however, which, when shifted manually, is less fulfilling.
Countering that power, the enormous, cross-drilled disc brakes are astounding. They will stop the car from 100 km. per hour (62 mph) to zero in 2.6 seconds. So, 0-60 in 4.5 seconds; 62-0 in 2.6 seconds. There are other electronic gadgets, such as three modes of electronic driver control, and two different phases of the stability control. ThatÂ’s designed to let you program in a little more tail-wagging slippage before engaging, for those who want to hang out the rear end in performance escapades. I would need a lot more time to feel comfortable with those switches, and at first they seem to be attempts at micromanaging driver instincts.
{IMG2}
The Z4 M Coupe goes after high performance in a more traditional manner, without any intrusion of electronic gizmos to enhance the driving experience. It is simple, basic, direct. There isnÂ’t even an iDrive system to control all car interior functions, as there is on the M6.
I liked the Z3, and thought the Z4 Roadster was a worthy successor, perhaps the best version of Chris BangleÂ’s sometimes controversial styling ideas. The just-introduced Z4 Coupe is an artistic masterpiece, in my opinion. I think the sloping fastback roof fits well and amplifies every contour and curve of the car.
In standard trim, the Z4 has a 3.0-liter inline six with 255 horsepower, and it will zip from 0-60 in 5.6 seconds. The “M†version takes the upgraded powertrain out of the M3 sedan and inserts it in the 3,230-pound sports car. At 3.2 liters, it delivers 330 horsepower – an increase of 75 horsepower – and 262 foot-pounds of torque, and lowers the 0-60 spurt to 4.9 seconds. You can hit a button on the console and engage a stiffer attitude with the Z4 M Coupe, but the six-speed stick and smoothly balanced engine power are constant and fully compatible partners.
While both cars exhibited flawless manners on the twisting roadways, they never flinched when pushed on unlimited race track runs. But with the Z4 M Coupe, every turn, every angle of entry or exit, every tap of the brakes, and every snick-snick gear change was as precise as a driver could make it.
Maybe that’s what I liked best about the M Coupe – it rewards you if you’re a better driver, without trying to electronically help make you a better driver.
As the black clouds rolled in, we headed for temporary cover. It didnÂ’t bother me, because I had my runs in with all the cars, and no thunderstorm could dampen the performance on the track.
New-generation Mercedes E-Class leaves no gap
ST. HELENA, CALIF. — The 2007 Mercedes E-Class is the most refined midsize sedan ever produced by Mercedes, but at first glance, the styling gap is almost imperceptible between the new seventh-generation model and the current 2006 E-Class. That prompts the question: Can there be a new-generation car if there is no generation gap? Or is that the automotive equivalent of the rhetorical question: If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there to hear it, does it really make a sound?
The sound, or more accurately the lack of sound, is one of the impressive features of the new E-Class, which has enough significant improvements to justify Mercedes giving it its own generation, and also to summon a couple of waves of automotive journalists to the Napa Valley area, 100 miles north of Sacramento, to examine and drive it – even while acknowledging that the outside underwent more of a mid-cycle refresh than a redesign.
It didn’t take more than one step on the gas to appreciate the tremendous power and the firmer handling of the new E550, but for style, the existing 2006 E-Class certainly won’t look out of date next to the 2007. The new car’s grille is slightly taller, leans back at a steeper angle, and wears a new small Mercedes emblem just ahead of the traditional Mercedes star hood ornament. Below the grille is a pointier front bumper – the easiest way to differentiate the two. If the bumper comes to a distinct point at its leading edge, it’s the new car. Taillight lenses have a smoother lens, which is interesting, because the current style’s grooves were designed to force airflow and rainwater to clean off the taillights. New side mirrors have an air-channeling design to help blow the side windows clear of rain.
The first E-Class sedan was built in 1953, and it evolved into the company’s “bread and butter†car over 53 years, particularly in the last dozen, when it usually outsold the more compact C-Class and the larger S-Class. The new E reflects Mercedes’ continued attempt to divide and conquer with the usual Luxury model to satisfy the discriminating taste of the car’s traditional minions, and adding a Sport, which will attempt to swipe some performance/luxury customers from the likes of the BMW 5-Series, Audi A6, Acura RL or TL, Infiniti M, Lexus GS450h, or Cadillac STS.
Bernhard Glaser, general manager of product management, said the two-pronged approach with Sport and Luxury models worked with the C-Class, and led to the same strategy with the E-Class. He noted that traditional buyers will find all they expect, plus some added dynamic function, with the Luxury model, while the Sport model seeks to lure performance buyers who donÂ’t mind a firmer suspension in exchange for more precise handling. In reality, both cars do their best to close even that gap. The Luxury model rides a bit softer but still handles very well on its new suspension, while the Sport model – available on either the E350 V6 models or the E550 V8 models — handles with a flatter attitude on its firmer air-suspension, without ever approaching harshness, despite riding 1.5 inches lower and on 18-inch alloys compared to the LuxuryÂ’s 17s.
Both models benefit from the new suspension, with asymmetric control arms enhancing lateral support, and a new steering system, which is 10-percent more direct in responding. Inside, the Sport gets white gauges, and two unique interior packages – black bird’s-eye maple trim instead of the Luxury model’s rich burled walnut. The Sport also has specific interior trim, either black with Sahara beige leather seats, or black with cognac brown leather. The Sport windows have a bluish tint, to differentiate from the neutral green of the Luxury.
Remarkably, the Sport model costs no more than the Luxury. In either form, the base price of the E350 is $50,550, while the E550 will start at $59,000 when it hits the showrooms in September.
The new V8 engine is the latest gem from Mercedes, which had gone to a smooth and efficient three-valve engine system for its V6 and V8 over the past decade, using two intake valves and one exhaust on each cylinder, operated by a cost-effective single overhead camshaft on each bank. Last year Mercedes changed to four-valve heads with dual overhead cams on the V6, and its increase in power and fuel-efficiency moved close enough to the V8Â’s performance to be a wise alternative.
This year, Mercedes has applied the four-valve, DOHC concept to the 5.5-liter V8 as well, and it makes a particularly notable difference in the E550. The new V8 has 382 horsepower – an increase of 80 horsepower (26 percent) — and 391 foot-pounds of torque – an increase of 52 (15 percent). No less than 100 percent of that torque is available from 2,800-4,800 RPMs, and 75 percent of the torque can be summoned at 1,000 RPMs, barely above idle. With the slick seven-speed Mercedes automatic transmission and its manual-selection capability, the E550 meets or exceeds every expectation for power.
That E350 V6 now has 268 horsepower and 258 foot-pounds of torque – more than adequate, and the E350’s 0-60 times of 6.5 seconds are not that far off the E550’s 5.4-second clocking.
This fall we can look forward to the same car becoming available as an E320, with a 3.0-liter Bluetec turbo-diesel, generating 208 horsepower and a startling 388 foot-pounds of torque, with 0-60 times at 6.6 seconds. That patented Bluetec diesel will thrive on our newly cleaned low-sulfur diesel fuel being put in place between now and October, and could be a third prong for Mercedes. While we’re at it, we must also point out a fourth as well, because for the first time, the in-house AMG performance branch of Mercedes got a chance to build an engine from a blank sheet, rather than merely modifying a production engine. The result is the limited-production E63, extracting 507 horsepower and 465 foot-pounds of torque from 6.3 liters, and Porsche/Ferrari/Corvette Z-06–like acceleration of 4.3 seconds.
It only took us one stop to marvel at how quiet the muscular 5.5 V8 runs. I had driven just over an hour through the scenic, curving roadways in the Northern California mountain range when we arrived at a restaurant parking lot for a prescribed rest stop and driver change. The car has the keyless operation system, whereby if you have the key in your pocket, the car unlocks itself as you approach, and you can start it by push-button, on top of the gearshift lever, which makes me nervous. As I pushed down on the gearshiftÂ’s handgrip button to shut off the engine, I mentioned to my codriver that it was neat, but it bothered me. On many cars, a very similar button must be pressed to shift out of park; in this car, that move kills the engine.
To demonstrate, I pushed the button down three or four times in a row, at five-second intervals, alternately starting and shutting down the 5.5-liter V8. As we climbed out, my codriver asked if the car was still running. “No,†I said, “that’s just the fan, cooling down the engine.†He nodded and said “OK, I just wasn’t sure.†Thermostatic fans run on sometimes, after hard driving, and we could hear the soft hum as we walked around to the rear of the car, nodding to three Mercedes officials positioned there.
Inside, we had some coffee and munched on snacks, and in 15 minutes we were ready to resume our drive westward, through the redwood-lined mountains to the coast. We stopped casually to talk to the same three Mercedes folks still standing a few feet behind our car. Then we climbed inside the E550. Only then did I notice the, uh, fan seemed to be still purring along, so I pushed down on the gearshift knob button. Sure enough, it stopped. The engine had been running the whole time. It was so quiet-running that both of us drivers, as well as several Mercedes officials standing just starboard of our tailpipes, didnÂ’t notice that the engine was running.
Those keyless operation deals, where if you have the key, you don’t need to use it, either to unlock the doors or to start the car, concern me for other reasons. I always envision driving to the airport, jumping out to catch a plane, while turning the idling car over to my wife or son. While they’re driving home, I notice the key is still in my pocket – at 40,000 feet above Denver. I like the feature of the door automatically unlocking as you approach, but if you need to have the key to start the car, I think not needing to put it into the ignition switch is like designing a neat cure for which there is no known disease. Embarrassing or not, inadvertently leaving the car running during lunch verifies my concern.
{IMG2}
When we were certain the E550 was running intentionally, we fairly flew up the mountain roads, around the tightest switchbacks, through the giant redwoods, and along the fabulous Pacific Coast vista of California 1, which winds up the Pacific coastline all the way past Mendocino. We switched out of the E550 Sport to the E350 Sport for the afternoon driving assignments, and we were in for another surprise.
The power of the E550 V8 was awe-inspiring, but in spirited driving, if you go hard into a tight curve and hit the gas, the beast wants to show off its power by jumping ahead with startling suddenness. Impressive as that power is, you have to be focused on doing some steering correcting as you fly around tight curves.
For real-world consumers, doing real-world driving, the E350 in some ways was more precise, felt more agile, and seemed to harmonize even better with the quick-steering and handling balance. You could hammer it hard through the same tight curves and it tracks smoothly and predictably. After a few such curves, I could throw the E350 Sport into a turn knowing it would track precisely without steering correction, without concern that a heavy foot might cause the car to zoom ahead harder than you wanted.
From the driverÂ’s seat, the trip computer registered another key difference. Driving to excess in the E550 showed an impressive 19.8 miles per gallon, highway and curves, although it certainly would get better on a normal commute. The E350 indicated 26 mpg, also when driven hard, and also with an anticipated improvement in moderate, everyday driving. That closes the inter-model gap further, and the Bluetec diesel will narrow it more, even if the AMG model stretches it a bit.
Driving through the redwoods of Northern California, we paused to marvel at the majestic and enormous old trees. It reminded me that a week earlier, my son, Jeff, and I had marveled at the size of some huge old Douglas Fir trees in Northern Washington State. I also was reminded of Jeff’s comment: “These things are so huge that I have the feeling if one of them fell over, there would be some noise – even if nobody was around.†Similarly, we must concede that the E-Class will thrive in a seventh-generation mode, even without much generation gap.
Danica Patrick, without the hype, tries second Indy 500
The Month of May at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway would indicate that pole-sitter Sam Hornish should be the favorite to win SundayÂ’s 90th Indianapolis 500. If not Hornish, his Team Penske teammate of Helio Castroneves, and Target-Chip GanassiÂ’s Dan Wheldon are his top challengers.
After those three, who will start on the front row, GanassiÂ’s Scott Dixon, starting fourth, or Andretti-Green ace Tony Kanaan, starting fifth, are the next best bets. After that, the colorful return to the Indy 500 by Michael Andretti, Al Unser Jr., and Eddie Cheever have drawn a lot of attention.
They can call it smart money, or unimaginative guesswork, but it doesnÂ’t take a lot of courage to pick one of the top five qualifiers to win the race. Once in a while, the 500 goes according to form. More often, it varies greatly.
Me? IÂ’m pulling for Danica Patrick. Without the pile of publicity, and without what appears to be a highly competitive car, Patrick, the only woman in the race for the second year in a row, qualified 10th, so will start on the inside of Row 4.
The media frenzy that followed Danica Patrick through her first attempt to race in the Indianapolis 500 a year ago was overdone and over-hyped. After the race, when she finished fourth, the hype turned some different directions, one of which was scorn.
A number of “mainstream†media guys – so-called because they are so focused on stick and ball sports like baseball, football and basketball that they are actually annoyed at having to be distracted from that focus – started to rip on Patrick. They criticized her because she was beautiful, and wasn’t afraid to put on a little makeup and some fetching clothes for photo opportunities, and they criticized her for being over-hyped.
It was an interesting tendency to witness, because some of the same fellows who clamored to out-hype their rivals in over-hyping Danica Patrick, then ripped into her for being over-hyped.
I had an interesting session last year, because having missed only three Indy 500s since 1969, I was attending it for the third straight year as part of the Midwest Auto Media Association (MAMA), a collection of automotive journalists who went by coach bus from a predawn race-day Chicago venue to the race, with an immediate return to Chicago afterward. On the way to the track, somebody came up with the idea of all of us tossing $5 into a pool, and drawing for names. I drew – Danica Patrick.
Now, I was interested to follow her through practice and qualifying, and the race, although I didnÂ’t expect her to be able to break into the all-menÂ’s club of winning, or even contending, in the race. A group of us sat in Turn 1 for the race, and it proved a great vantage point.
In watching the race unfold, where every little nuance early in the race could contribute to final contention, I was impressed when Patrick kept running among the leaders. She actually passed Dan Wheldon, the eventual winner, in race trim during the race. One pit stop got fouled up, which was unfortunate, and the luck of the timing of pit stops during caution slowdowns dropped her to 10th place, and apparently out of contention.
However, as the race boiled down to the homestretch, the leaders all were calculating one final pit stop and how theyÂ’d need at least a splash of extra fuel to make it to the finish. In a bit of brilliant strategy, PatrickÂ’s Rahal-Letterman crew gambled and let Danica Patrick stay on the track. When all the rest of the leaders pitted, Patrick wound up in first place.
She led the Indianapolis 500, running hard and at full speed. It used to be that the Indy 500 drew the biggest names in motorsports in the world, every year. Under the current split of U.S. open-wheel racing, we could only say she led the biggest names in motorsports this side of Formula 1 and NASCAR. Still, it was a marvelous performance.
In the closing laps, Wheldon and the rest of the hottest runners cut into her lead. Her crew realized she would have to back off on her pace or not finish, which was an all-or-nothing choice. She backed off a little, and it turned out Wheldon and three others passed her to finish 1-2-3 ahead of the most impressive female sports performance in racing – except in drag-racing, where several women have done very well.
But to read some of the post-race columnists, her performance was no big deal. After she ran the next few races, and ran competitively without winning, one syndicated columnist tore into her. SheÂ’s hasnÂ’t won, he wrote; Anika Sorenstam, the fantastic womenÂ’s golfer, was a dominant force and won consistently, which made this fellow claim that she should be the female athlete reaping the rewards of all the media hype, and not Patrick.
A year later, letÂ’s let a tiny bit of logic venture into the debate. Sorenstam, truly an amazing golfer, has entered a couple of menÂ’s tournaments. In golf, women tee off from shorter distances, because they canÂ’t hit the ball as far. Simple as that. In several impressive attempts, Sorenstam came close to qualifying, and played very competitively with the bottom qualifiers for a couple of rounds. Very impressive. Then she would return to the LPGA, and again dominate.
But Danica Patrick wasn’t running in a powder-puff derby, or a celebrity race-against-the-media type preliminary. She was racing against the best open-wheel race drivers in the world, and she not only competed – she LED the Indianapolis 500 with 10 laps to go! Not only that, but the earlier pit foul-up hadn’t occurred, the seconds she lost there clearly would have made up for the deficit she had at the finish.
{IMG2}
To compare, Sorenstam would have to qualify for the Masters – not for some remote PGA event – and she would have to have risen from contending for the lead to actually take the lead after three rounds. At the Masters. If she did that, and then faded to fourth behind Tiger Wood only because her caddy dropped her putter in a pond by mistake, believe me, she would have gotten all the hype she could have wanted from the “mainstream†media.
None other than former NASCAR “King” Richard Petty added his two cents worth, saying that women don’t belong in serious racing, and virtually adding that Patrick should be home, in the kitchen. Patrick dryly suggested that ol’ Richard might be suffering from a generation gap. Let the record show that Petty used to be my favorite NASCAR driver, and he must have been speaking from behind the secure rollcage of a full-metal stock car jacket, because he never had the wherewithal (courage?) to drive one of those missile-like Indy race cars at lap averages of 225 mph.
Of the 33 cars, maybe a dozen– by a combination of preparation, adjustments, and good luck — will end up making it to the final 25 laps with the proper driver, engine, suspension, tires and pit work to be in hot contention to win the race. The Rahal-Letterman team was the 500 darling the last few years, with Buddy Rice winning, and then with Danica Patrick last year, and with the gap-toothed support of night-show star David Letterman urging them on.
The hype has scaled back this year, and the team has not been a top threat in the early IRL races. But they know the short way around that 2.5-mile oval, and if all goes well, Danica Patrick could be right up there at the finish.
Saab 9-3 models thrive on GM technology, personalities
The Saab 9-3 is one of the more pleasant surprises in the automotive industry for 2006, if youÂ’re a family-car person, a stylish show-off, or a high-performance driver. And, if you happen to be all-of-the-above, itÂ’s even more impressive.
Recently, I had the chance to drive a Saab 9-3 Aero “5-door†station wagon, and it blew me away. More recently, More recently, I spent a week with a 9-3 Aero convertible that was equally enjoyable – maybe more.
In the process, I also want to offer sincere congratulations to General Motors, which has subtly upgraded the Saab 9-3 and turning it from what seemed to be an orphan to arguably the most surprising and enjoyable brands in GMÂ’s vast array. Two men made the subtlety is less-subtle, GM public relations man Tom Beaman, and GM engineer Bob Jacques. Both of them play integral parts in this Saab story.
In recent years, IÂ’ve challenged several maneuvers by General Motors. Building superior high-tech engines but still installing less-costly, outmoded engines in mainstream cars is one item IÂ’ve addressed. Another is a recent ploy in which GM declares its vehicles better than the competition, then criticizes journalists who dare to say otherwise. Some autowriters who should know better now produce reviews that read a lot like GM press releases.
A few years ago, I got to know Bob Jacques, a clever, articulate and engaging fellow who builds engines at GM. His most recent project was the 3.6-liter V6 for Cadillac, used in the then-new CTS, and SRX, and in the recently restyled STS. GM continued to install the ancient 3800 and 3.4-liter pushrod V6 engines in many vehicles, while the 3.6 has more power, more flexibility, better fuel-efficiency and, with dual-overhead-camshafts and variable valve-timing, all the high-tech goodies that make most import engines superior. Jacques has an old Firebird with a huge pushrod V8, so I can heckle him about living in the future at work, and living in the pasture at home.
Ah, well.
One of my recent concerns about GM is that in buying out Saab, it was turning the Swedish auto-maker into a place to send all sorts of GM-affiliated vehicles. I owned and loved a 1980 Saab 900S for a decade, so I felt personally offended when the recent 9-3 – successor of the 900 – appeared to evolve into a Malibu/Saturn clone with the key on the floor. Meanwhile, GM forced everything from its own TrailBlazer to a Subaru model into Saab disguises. I grudgingly accepted the fact that at least GM allowed Saab to continue operating.
Late last summer, I got the chance to attend GMÂ’s 2006 vehicle introduction at the GM proving grounds just outside Detroit. My friend Tom Beaman had been transferred within the corporate public relations staff to Saab. I was afraid to say it, but with all the turmoil in the auto PR world, plus SaabÂ’s uncertain future, I wondered if that was figuratively like being moved to a desk near the exit.
I was among all the journalists that stood in line to drive the new Corvette Z-06, the hot Impala, Cobalt, HHR, and several other enticing things. I enjoyed the Z-06, but it was so smooth that it didnÂ’t give me the kind of feedback to make me feel comfortable with so much more power, so I didnÂ’t go over 135 miles per hour on my one lap that included circling the long, high-banked oval track.
After lunch, I noticed my friend Tom standing over at the far end of the gathered cars, with a Saab 9-3 wagon. He looked a little forlorn, alone with his car, while the media folks clustered around the others. So I walked over to Tom and asked if I could drive his Saab wagon. He said sure, and off I went. IÂ’d only gone 50 yards when I realized that the 9-3 wagon felt too good to believe.The bucket seats were firm, the instruments ergonomically perfect, and it had a six-speed manual shifter. Stepping on the gas and running the revs up in second gear, the 9-3 wagon took off like a scalded cat.
Moments later, I pulled out on the oval test track, and I swept through the first turn high up on the banking at 135 mph. Fantastic! The thing had a turbocharged engine, and it was the most surprisingly impressive vehicle I drove all day. Others, including the Z-06, were impressive, but no more than IÂ’d expected. The 9-3 was over the top, beyond expectations. So I put in a request to get a Saab 9-3 for a weekÂ’s road-test when one got into the fleet.
It appeared, a couple of months ago. At first I thought the 9-3 Aero might be the same wagon I had driven, but it was no, because this one had an automatic transmission. More fun, because the six-speed automatic has a manual slot, and can be worked by large thumb buttons inboard of the steering wheel grips. The shifting was smooth, responsive, and every bit as much fun as the stick. Performance was excellent from the same turbocharged V6.
A little tracing of the engine’s lineage showed it is a 2.8-liter V6, with dual overhead camshafts, four valves per cylinder, electronic fuel-injection, and a turbocharger. I knew this was no Saab engine, so I immediately called Bob Jacques in Detroit. Good move. Jacques explained that his baby, the 3.6 “High Feature†V6 built for Cadillac and is now an option in the Buick LaCrosse, has spawned a family off offspring.
GM sends the engine to Holden, its Australian affiliate that built the Pontiac GTO, and Holden turns out a direct-injection 3.2 version of the 3.6 for Alfa Romeo, and a still smaller 2.8 – with both a smaller bore and shorter stroke than the 3.6. That 2.8 is upgraded from CTS form with a turbocharger, and is dropped into the Saab 9-3. With 250 horsepower and six gears, whether manual or automatic, the 9-3 whooshes up to freeway speed with sudden and easy swiftness. Careful, because it wants to go right on past reasonable freeway speed.
And now comes the Saab 9-3 Aero convertible. Same 2.8 V6 with all the valves, cams and 250 horsepower, and with a six-speed stick shift. Like the more sedate-looking wagon, which was “Fusion Blue Metallic,†the “Parchment Silver Metallic†convertible also has the same electronic stability program, all-season tires on 17-inch alloy wheels, four-link rear suspension that helps the front-wheel-drive vehicle track around tight corners, and sport-tuned suspension settings all around. Antilock brakes, mechanical brake assist, cornering brake control, front and side airbags, and the traditional Saab safety crumple-zone architecture.
Leather power seats, a 300-watt sound system with six-CD changer, Xenon headlights, and all the other creature features are installed on both the wagon and the convertible. The wagon had a navigation system, the convertible had rain-sensing wipers.
The wagon went from a base $32,900 to a sticker of $38,065; the convertible went from a base of $41,900 to a sticker of $44,915. On the sticker, it reads: U.S./Canadian parts content – 1%, Germany 33%, Sweden 19%; assembly plant in Graz, Austria, for the convertible and Trollhattan, Sweden, for the wagon; transmission built in Japan (for the automatic) and Sweden (for the stick); and the engine – built in Australia.
Right. But in Australia after being designed, refined, and planned by my friend Bob Jacques and his playmates in the white smocks at the GM tech center in Detroit.
{IMG2}
While tracking well over residential streets, freeways, and when pushed hard around a cloverleaf, both the wagon and the convertible were predictable and smooth.
The convertible is a wonder of mechanical design. Unlike the Solstice/Saturn tops that must be manually put down and stuffed under a manually opened rear hatch, the Saab convertible requires that you stop. Hit the switch on the dash, and you can hear soft whirring as the rear hatch rises, clamshell-like, and the fabric top lifts itself off the top of the windshield, folds back, and disappears, with the hatch snapping shut over it. Smooth and sleek, with no fabric showing. It goes up just as easily, when you stop and flip the switch the other way.
EPA fuel-economy city-highway estimates are 18-28 for the convertible, 17-28 for the wagon. I attained somewhere between those figures overall, and the convertibleÂ’s computer shows 22.3 miles per gallon over the last 1,800 miles, combined city and highway, by various drivers. And those are media drivers, who, presumably, had as difficult a time as I did driving either car moderately.
In the meantime, I also drove a Saab 9-5, the larger and more luxurious Saab model, and it had the 2.3-liter turbocharged four-cylinder. Now, I was pretty sure that was the familiar Saab engine of recent years, but to be absolutely sure, I put in a call for my friend Tom Beaman, at GM’s corporate PR station in Detroit. He was out, and his message said he’d be out for a while. The next morning, by complete coincidence, I got an email from Tom. Turned out he’s going to be “out†for longer than I thought – he has accepted a generous GM early-retirement offer, and is leaving the company.
IÂ’m not sure what the cosmic influence of all this timing means, but I called Tom at home, to congratulate him on deciding to go a different direction with his life, and also to say how much IÂ’ll miss our respectful exchanges of questions and information, free of hyperbole or sarcasm. By either of us.
Sure, Saab gets straightened out as a GM affiliate that can live up to the companyÂ’s heritage for high-tech jet aircraft and enjoyable automobiles, and he bails. I told him he could leave SaabÂ’s PR post assured that all is well, and the product is alive and dazzling. Nevertheless, my memory bank stores it as another life lesson: Be cautious about desks that are close to the exit.
Acura RDX adds sporty leadership to SUV future
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF. — When the next major trend in United States car-buying arises, the Acura RDX might lead the way while other automakers can only follow. At least Honda hopes so, and a preliminary drive of the new 2007 RDX reinforces the companyÂ’s optimism, having cleverly combined the attributes of a sports sedan and a compact sport-utility vehicle into a stylish design bristling with cutting-edge technology.
Honda started its upscale Acura branch 20 years ago. The midsize MDX has been AcuraÂ’s only SUV, complementing the entry level RSX sports coupe, TSX compact sports sedan, superb TL, and luxurious RL. The RDX, which first enthralled onlookers as a concept vehicle at the 2002 North American International Auto Show in Detroit, hits showrooms in August.
By then, summer vacations may not have helped heal the large SUV market, which has been stunted by $3 gasoline prices, sending buyers to switch to smaller crossover car-based SUVs in such numbers that compact crossover SUVs are virtually certain to zoom right past large SUVs this calendar year. Honda’s market research predicts the premium crossover segment will expand five times – 500 percent – in the next five years, and tenfold beyond its current size in the next 10 years.
Manager of product planning William Walton said it’s part of a trend of “neo-urbanism,†which includes people migrating back from the suburbs to the cities for cultural and entertainment reasons, and with space at a premium in new condos and lofts, and also in parking openings. The ensuing dilemma is that traditional SUV buyers give up sportiness, while sports sedans lack utility and foul-weather capabilities of SUVs.
The RDX offers the solution of combining the best attributes of both, having borrowed and refined the best features from the rest of the Acura fleet.
For example: The platform and engine from the hot-performing RSX coupe and TSX sports sedan is jolted to 240 horsepower and 260 foot-pounds of torque by an ingenious variable-flow turbocharger. The RLÂ’s revolutionary SH-AWD system is adapted for the RDX. Inside, the RDX has utility roots of the larger MDX, and offers the latest version of the unique Panasonic ELS DVD-surround audio system from the TL, which has been my choice as the best audio system ever placed in a vehicle.
The RDX is better, with added speakers in the rear doors making a total of 10, dispersing the 410 watts through six channels, in professional sound-engineer Elliot Scheiner’s newest try. Crank up the power on the DVD-surround version of “Money for Nothing†by Dire Straits, and you feel as though Mark Knopfler might be sitting on the dashboard, playing his guitar.
Such a feature can make any trip fly by, and the RDX, which is being built entirely in Ohio, can do some flying on its own accord, if you can pardon the expression. The whole package is built under HondaÂ’s ultra-safety guidelines to attain best-in-class crash-test ratings. It will be priced at about $32,000 base, and up to $37,000 if you add the Technical Package goodies.
The RDX is more agile than most SUVs, whether zipping through traffic in downtown San Francisco, or carving precise arcs around the hilly switchbacks going north of the Golden Gate Bridge along the coast and then inland to wine country. It definitely lives up to the planned image of a sports-sedan in SUV form, and it is obviously not built as a three-row-seater, or a tow vehicle, although it will tow up to 1,500 pounds.
The assets of being light but still safe are mostly felt in agility and power, but decent fuel-efficiency, with EPA estimates of 19 city, 24 highway, and the ability to meet Level II ultra-low emission standards, are other advantages. The only disadvantage is if a tradition-minded buyer still clings to the idea that the number of cylinders is more important than the performance.
U.S. buyers traditionally insist on a V8 or V6 engine, but Honda solves that with a 4-cylinder that uses technology and sophistication to out-perform V6es. Vice president of corporate planning Dan Bonawitz noted a major shift currently going on, with V6 sales remaining fairly constant, but a large decrease in V8 sales accompanied by a large increase in 4s. Most likely, most V8 buyers downsized to V6es, and about as many V6 buyers downsized to 4s.
Still, if it seems like a magic trick to make a 4 that offers best-in-class acceleration and fuel economy, the magician is chief engineer Koichi Fujimori. The $50,000 Acura RL has plenty of torque with its 3.5-liter V6, but the RDX’s 260 foot-pounds tops the RL output with a 2.3-liter 4-cylinder. This engine is the latest version of Honda’s “K Series†of 4-cylinders. Koichi Fujimori laughed and denied that the “K†was for his first name.
Through an interpreter, Fujimori gave evidence of Honda’s “unfair†advantage. During an innovative and creative career, Fujimori has worked 20 years on Honda’s superb 4s, such as the over-achieving Civic, Prelude, Accord, S2000, RSX and TSX. And he’s far from finished.
“My goal is to make the K-Series 4 replace the V6,†Fujimori said. “The 2.0-liter 4 in the RSX [and TSX, and the new Civic Si] is very good, and conventional thinking is to increase displacement for more power. But we asked if that was the proper evolution path. We have a lot of cars with bigger V6 engines, but our goal is to replace them with smaller 4s that can maintain the same performance.Ââ€
That makes him my idol. My favorite engines always have been small-displacement over-achievers. Our family’s 1994 Honda Prelude has a 7,500-RPM redline, and I remember how impressed I was at the first S2000 with its redline RPM limit of 9,000. The new Civic Si has an 8,000 redline. Such capabilities got their start from Honda’s Formula 1 racing technology, but the main reason they work so well on production cars is Fujimori, who presides over “500 to 1,000†other engineers, he said.
“Among engine engineers, others say IÂ’m an oddball,†said Fujimori, which prompted a chuckle from the Japanese interpreter. “We have what we call our ‘MM Concept,Â’ which means ‘Man Maximum, Mechanism Minimum.Â’ Ââ€
Typically, an engineer seeking power would try to improve his engine, then bolt on a turbocharger. Fujimori knows that his engines are so fine, so extremely sophisticated, that it might be a better idea to refine the already excellent Mitsubishi turbocharger. Turbos capture exhaust flow, and channel it to spin a compressor, which spins faster and faster until it has the force to blow a more forceful air-fuel charge back into the engine intake. Step on the gas abruptly in a turbo engine, and there might be a lag, because at low speeds, less exhaust flow spins the turbo more slowly, so the arrival of engine power must wait for the turbo to “spool up†to adequate spin rate.
As the first production turbocharged engine Honda has made for the U.S., the RDX uses an ingenious variable airflow system to keep the turbo spinning faster, even at low engine speed. Airflow to the turbo is channelged through a smaller path at low RPMs, and being squeezed through a smaller opening causes the flow’s speed to increase, so the turbo spins faster, thus maintaining “spooled up†pressure even at lower engine RPMs, and virtually eliminating turbo lag.
Honda engines have used variable valve-timing technology for superior performance for about the same 20 years that Fujimori has worked for the company. But coordinating the innovative variable turbo with the latest i-VTEC 4 is a feat that should be credited to FujimoriÂ’s fine hand.
Oddball, indeed!
{IMG2}
A five-speed automatic works well, and can be manually shifted by steering wheel paddles. Those little thumb switches are showing up more and more, but the RDX has a unique feature. In “S†sport setting, you shift manually, but you can be in “D†for drive, and override the automatic with a left-thumb downshift, say to pass, or go down a grade, and the transmission responds instantly, then reverts back to drive.
Merge all those features with the SH-AWD system, which sends a portion of the engineÂ’s torque from the front to rear axle, apportioned for either slippery driving or the weight shift of hard acceleration. Up to 70 percent of the power can shift to the rear axle, and 100 percent of that torque can go to the outside wheel in hard cornering, which effectively pushes the RDX around the turn. ItÂ’s seamless, of course. All you know is you track around the curve as if you were on rails.
In the RL sedan, a variable extra gear can make the outside rear wheel spin faster than the inside, while in the RDX it is it fixed to spin 1.7 percent faster, eliminating the weight and complexity of the extra gear.
The active-lifestyle plan of the RDX may soon make large-SUV owners realize they donÂ’t need girth, heft, and poor fuel-economy to have an SUV. True enough, HondaÂ’s high-tech cars kept its market share growing, and if Honda missed the lucrative large-SUV glut of recent years, the market may now be coming back to Honda.
The RDX body is rigid, with high-strength steel used strategically for maximum stiffness, aiding handling and safety. The rear frame is built in a wave shape for optimum controlled crumple zones in impacts. Any such force is distributed up through the “A†pillar or down through the rocker panels, rather than to the interior.
The instrument panel and interior is well-planned and stylish. You can put two bikes into the rear if you fold the back seats down, or you can haul three friends with ease to a club across town, or a cruise to the north woods. Everything is creature-friendly. And then thereÂ’s that sound system.
I told Mr. Fujimori that his engine was silent – the quietest I had heard. He seemed disappointed. Then I admitted that it only seemed silent because my partner and I kept the ELS audio cranked up so high we couldn’t hear any engine sound.
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