Mercedes museum honors history of superb, swift cars
STUTTGART, GERMANY — Breezing along on the German autobahn, my codriver in the passenger seat said he thought the new Mercedes-Benz E-Class station wagon I was driving had a diesel engine. I didnÂ’t think so. This vehicle was an E-320, so I thought it might be the new Mercede direct-injection gasoline V6.
I’m a strong advocate for diesel technology advancing into the United States as soon as we can get our fuel cleaned up in October, and I know the best European diesel-powered cars betray none of the obnoxious traits – smelly, smoky, loud clattering sound, and an oily lack of power – of diesels as American drivers recall them. My codriver, Tony, is a good friend from Vancouver. No language problem, because we share a love of great cars and the game of hockey. As we continued our friendly discussion, neither too sure, I tried a few smooth passing moves to see if I could detect any hesitations, or any telltale puffs of smoke from the exhaust. There were none.
At one point, where the autobahn had no posted speed limit, I pulled into the left lane of the three lanes, passed a slower vehicle, and kept on a-going. The speedometer rose, reaching 180, 190, and 200. Of course, we were in Germany, so the carÂ’s speedometer was in kilometers, not miles. But still, 200 of them are quite a few. I kept easing onward, with nothing but clear roadway ahead. At 220 kilometers per hour, I asked Tony to take a picture of the speedometer, because I was too occupied to look at it.
At the equivalent of 142 miles per hour, the E-320 was smooth as silk, and had a lot more in reserve. We stopped at the small town of Wolnzach, north of Munich, to change vehicles. As we walked around behind the station wagon, Tony pointed out that the emblem on the rear end said “CDI.†Sure enough, it was a turbocharged V6 diesel.
Furthermore, it is the new “BLUETEC†diesel that will become prominent in the U.S. within the next year, as our diesel fuel gets cleaned up to reasonable standards. It has only 165 horsepower, but a whopping 388 foot-pounds of torque, occurring from 1,600-2,800 RPMs.
I was reluctant to get out of the “Estate†– Germany’s term for station wagon – but U.S. buyers are strangely reluctant to buy station wagons, so duty pressed me to drive some of the gathered sedans. That comes under the heading of “tough job, but somebody has to do it,†because the gathered sedans were all world-class standouts – the new E-Class sedan, plus the high-powered AMG version of the E, and, several super-sleek CLS sedans, including its incredible AMG high-performance model.
While external design changes are only subtle in the four-year mid-term refreshening of the seven-year E-Class cycle – confined mostly to the adaptive headlights, side mirrors and taillights – there are also a number of technical revisions in the 2007 E-550. One of the major upgrades is in design of the standard 5-liter V8, which goes from three valves with single overhead camshafts to four valves with dual overhead cams on the E-550. The new engine delivers 382 horsepower and 391 foot-pounds of torque, and is evidence why other drivers stay out of the left lane on the autobahns.
ItÂ’s hard to imagine anyone wanting or needing more power than that, but turn to the AMG model of the E-Class. The E63 AMG is the same sedan after thorough reworking by the in-house hot-rodders of AMG. The E63 number signifies a nearly 6.3-liter V8 that replaces the 5-liter, and boosts power to 507 horsepower and 465 foot-pounds of torque. It will run from 0-100 kilometers (about 62 miles per hour) in a mere 4.5 seconds, through a specially reinforced seven-speed automatic, which is manually shiftable.
Mercedes has put simpler tabs above the steering wheel arms on both sides to facilitate upshifts and downshifts, having thankfully done away with the toggle switch controls on the backside of the steering wheel. They always made me uneasy because you could upshift or downshift with either hand, and I always imagined that as you upshifted with your right hand while squeezing your left hand just a bit you could inadvertently downshift, simultaneously. With the new larger and more obvious paddles, you upshift with the right hand and downshift with the left. Easy. And fun.
The entire trip was special, because I had never driven the CLS before, so it was introduction time for that car, too. It is the sleekest sedan ever built by any company, and is referred to as the “four-door coupe†in Germany.
It seems to me, the ideal thing in the world of automotive journalists would be to mandate that all road tests be conducted on the German autobahns. Other than a race track – a long, long racetrack – or maybe a private, open expanse of highway in Montana or Nevada, there is no place to let such a prized vehicle as these Mercedes stallions run at full gallop. As far as I could judge from the brief driving experiences, both the E-Class and the CLS could drive right on back to Stuttgart and park themselves in the sparkling new Mercedes-Benz Museum.
Before we drOve any of the cars, we spent two fascinating days with the priceless and historic vehicles stored at the old museum at the Mercedes plant, and the cream of the crop, strategically placed throughout the magnificent new museum, scheduled to open May 19. From a sensory perspective, it was too much to digest in a mere four days. The museum is a priceless work of art as a facility alone, to say nothing of the 160 or 170 vehicles on display – the fruit of a prolific company that can claim to have built the world’s first automobiles, dating back to 1883.
The history is riveting. The old museum was in the middle of the Mercedes-Benz plant, not suitable for properly displaying the pride of 125 years of building some of the world’s greatest motorcars. So in 2000, Mercedes executives went forward with plans to build the new facility. In January of 2002, they hired an architectural firm from Holland to design it, and without question, there is no other building like it in the world. Construction started in March of 2003, with May 19, 2006 as a target for completion – just before Stuttgart plays host to World Cup soccer quarterfinals in a stunning new domed stadium, which is located adjacent to the museum.
Ben van Berkel, chief architect of the Dutch firm, designed a double helix – essentially an unending line that traces three continuous double circles that ultimately meet – with the three circles to mimic the three-pointed star of the Mercedes logo. The three-pointed star, incidentally, was conceived out of the company’s ambition to develop internal combustion engines to revolutionize travel on land, sea and air.
{IMG2}
The exterior of the building is a wonderfully blended structure of huge glass panes, with steel exterior and concrete interior pillars. The steel represents the structure of the vehicles, and the concrete pays tribute to the highways and bridges those vehicles have traveled. There is not a single wall in the structure that is straight – everything curves for a purpose, either horizontally or vertically, from the seven levels that start from the top. The museum consumes 16,500 square meters, rising adjacent to the autobahn that leads down around the circular path into the city of Stuttgart, located in the valley below. As you drive into the city, it appears you might drive right into the Museum itself.
The Guggenheim Museum has similar spiral design, but nothing else has the double helix layout that always offers visitors the opportunity to look outside at the city, the soccer stadium, and mostly the autobahn, passing below, or inside, down to the atrium.
Elevators take visitors to the top, then the two separate tours travel downward through seven separate legend rooms, and five different collection rooms, each defining different eras of advancement. Four mechanized hooks in the center ceiling can lift vehicles to the various levels, placed through openings that are then closed to the artfully sloped inner walls. Passenger vehicles, commercial vehicles, motorsports vehicles, aircraft engines, safety developments – everything is there, with a complete library where each of the eras can be more thoroughly researched.
The attention to detail includes sounds. As visitors rise on the interior elevators, they hear different sounds of automotives, until, at the very top, they hear the clip-clop sound of horses hooves. Visitors can take one of two separate tours, starting with the earliest vehicles at the top, and leading down along displays and vehicles in a breathtaking trip through time. The structure is so stiff, there are no interior pillars. As you continue downward, you can look to the inside and see each upcoming display from a different perspective, and you can step off the walkway for close-up examination of any of those displays.
The plan was to create the feeling that the entire facility is one long and continuing room, with no doors. Van Berkel described the constant view of displays from the walkways as merging into an “almost kaleidoscopic†sensation. Explanations are offered via headphones in eight languages at every level, with videos, memorabilia, and attention to detail, with the two pathways ultimately meeting at the motorsports display, which covers 120 years of racing.
Even the name Mercedes-Benz is fascinating. The three key players were Karl Benz, Gottlieb Daimler and Wilhelm Maybach. Daimler and Maybach collaborated out of a facility in Cannstatt, and built their first car as a motorized horse carriage, with three wheels. Benz started out in Mannheim, and went a different direction, patenting his first car in 1886. Daimler-Maybach became one company, while Benz competed with them from 60 miles away, and never got to know his rivals.
In 1893, Benz built the “Vis-a-vis†car, and in 1894, Daimler added a fourth wheel to his vehicle in 1889, solving a steering problem with the three-wheeler, and created the “Velo,†which sold through 1901. When Daimler motorized a boat, he claimed it was electrically powered, because he feared people would be apprehensive of the dangers of the explosions of internal combustion power.
In 1899, Daimler built the Phoenix race car, and Emil Jellinek dominated auto races. It was Jellinek who asked to have the name of his daughter, Mercedes, added to the company. It wasnÂ’t until after both companies converted to World War I production for German vehicles, when they faced the economic crisis of the depression, that they decided to merge in order to survive.
The rest, as they say, is history. The company also made vehicles for World War II, which is still a subject of massive guilt under Adolph HitlerÂ’s Nazi control. But the significance of technical improvement continued, as the company realized aircraft lost power at higher altitudes, and invented supercharging their engines, using compressed air intake to overcome the problem.
After the war, the company struggled to continue, but after the May 8, 1945, capitulation to the Allied forces, it stayed in business doing maintenance work on occupying force vehicles. It wasnÂ’t until the 1950s that Mercedes-Benz could afford to build motorcars again.
Officials say that the facility will not be used for selling cars, although a magnificent nearby structure houses the most modern of dealership displays, and anyone buying a car will get invited to visit the museum.
To qualify for entry, a vehicle must be out of production for 25 years. So as we cruised the autobahn in the new E-Class, and in the CLS 63 AMG monsters, we realized they wouldnÂ’t yet qualify for inclusion. But their time will come. They are simply the latest example of a company that installs its pride in technology, quality, luxury, and safety into every vehicle. That pride also makes the museum come alive, as todayÂ’s vehicles zip past, outside on the autobahn.
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.
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.
Audi Q7 on target for sports-luxury on or off road
Sport utility vehicles didnÂ’t make a lot of sense to Audi a few years ago, as the German company rolled out a progression of high-tech and well-crafted sedans and sports-performance models. That was then, as they say, and this is now. Audi is unveiling the Q7, mother ship to the entire line, and a large SUV built to command a profitable alternative to keep Audi customers away from those Escalades and Denalis.
Wolfgang Hoffmann put it all in simple terms when he first introduced the Q7 to the North American media in New Jersey a few weeks ago. “SUVs make up 60 percent of the market in the U.S.,†he said. “And we didnÂ’t have one.Ââ€
Pretty simple. Large premium SUVs are often large trucks with a great variance in amenities and performance, and if Audi is looking for a proverbial home run, the Q7 touches all the bases of performance, safety, style, and versatility.
“A lot of loyal Audi customers have one or two cars, and a luxury SUV,†said Hoffmann. “Twelve to 15 percent of customers who left the Audi brand for their last purchase did it because we didnÂ’t have an SUV.Ââ€
The General Motors command of the large-SUV segment is legendary, with the Tahoe/Yukon leading to the Cadillac Escalade, which led back to the Denali, a luxury version of the Yukon for the GMC division. All are newly redone for 2006.
“There are three generations of SUVs,†said Hoffmann. “First was the two-box design, which was a truck, with a ladder-frame structure, designed to be rugged for heavy work and off-road use. Next came the crossover SUVs in the Â’90s, built on car platforms with the safety of car-like control, comfort, quality and status. Now we are about to start the third generation – performance SUVs.Ââ€
Combining size, strength, luxury, safety and off- and on-road performance takes some doing, but the Q7 calls those bets – and raises the ante with its high-technology engine. The Q7 has the latest generation of Audi’s potent 4.2-liter V8, which – along with Audi’s superb 2.0-liter four-cylinder – made the list of Ward’s top 10 engines in the world for 2006. The latest version goes to four valves per cylinder with chain-driven dual overhead camshafts, and direct injection.
Direct injection has the effect of making engines feel more powerful than their size indicates, with fuel economy expected only from much smaller displacement. The direct-injection Audi V8 makes 350 horsepower and 325 foot-pounds of torque, with 85 percent of its torque unleashed from 2,000 RPMs and on up. Despite a curb weight of 5,467 pounds, the Q7 will sprint from 0-60 in just under 7 seconds, with an electronically governed top speed of 130 mph.
A narrow-angle 3.6-liter V6 will be available later this year, with 280 horsepower and 265 foot-pounds of torque. The V6 model takes 8 seconds to reach 60, but the bigger difference is the price of the two.
The large performance/luxury class vehicles, such as the Escalade or Denali, cost $60,000 and more. The Q7 with the V8 starts at $59,900, while the same vehicle with the V6 starts at a comparative bargain $49,900. Over a thousand V8 model Q7s were presold before any advertising even started, and projections are for the Q7 to be one of AudiÂ’s best-selling models, even in its first year.
Because the V8 model was the only one available at introduction time, all of our preliminary findings are on that vehicle. Towing capacity is 5,500, or 6,000 with the towing package. The Q7Â’s handling is superb, with double-wishbone suspension on all four wheels, and settings for comfort, normal or sport, and a steering system with lower boost at higher speeds, the Q7 has the road manners of a top sporty sedan.
{IMG2}
“But,†said chief engineer Frank van Meel, “we didnÂ’t want to make a car that looked like it would do well off the road, then break your axle when you tried it.Ââ€
The optional air suspension can adjust ground clearance from 6.5 to 9.5 inches, and it is complemented by ESP, an electronic stability program that allows the driver to lock the wheels to spin all four when necessary, and adds hill descent assist, which lets you creep down steep embankments without riding the brakes. The same six-speed automatic transmission, with wide-spaced gears for on-road smoothness, can hunker down and perform when the going gets rugged, too.
One of the subtle but significant changes Audi is making is to the previous quattro standard of 50-50 torque feeding both axles. On the Q7, the standard mix is 60 percent of the torque to the rear, 40 percent to the front. That is more of what Mercedes and BMW have been advocating over the years than what Audi has steadfastly used to complement its front-wheel-drive base set-up. Interestingly, BMW and Mercedes have altered their all-wheel-drive mix to allow more power to the front at the same time Audi is moving more power to the rear in its quattro. But when the system detects any slippage, the torque split alters itself, moving up to 65 percent to the front, or up to 85 percent to the rear.
When it comes to deciding on a $60,000 vehicle, it is obvious that certain features might be pivotal. The Escalade, for example, is basically a Tahoe with all sorts of creature amenities that make it the premier prestige SUV. That well-earned title will be threatened by both the new Mercedes GL and the Audi Q7.
The Q7 has the tall, vertical grille that denotes all the new Audis, and on a large truck-like vehicle, IÂ’d say it looks better than on the cars, where itÂ’s still a bit controversial. A strong, high-strength steel frame and body are topped by a sleek roofline, which houses three rows of seats. You could house seven occupants, or two, plus enormous quantities of stuff. With seven aboard, and all seats upright, there is still 10.87 cubic feet of storage available behind the third seat. With just the third row folded flat, it jumps to 42 cubic feet, and if you fold down second and third rows, you can reach 72.5 cubic feet for storage.
Obvious features include a choice of burl walnut, olive ash, or Japanese tamo for real wood interior trim, plus a back-up camera system, four-zone climate control, and an optional panoramic sunroof that is a three-section picture window to the sky. Adaptive cruise control lets you maintain a set interval behind the vehicle ahead, and will slow you to a complete stop if need be. Braking Guard uses a radar warning system to send a signal if the vehicle ahead brakes harder than your braking attempt, and if need be, it adds brake force. Adaptive lights also shine around corners ahead, and a radar-guided parking system gives you a rear video readout on the navigation screen, with different color grid lines to help guide you to safe and accurate backing up and parallel parking.
Some other companies have some of those same features, but one that I think is unprecedented is the Q7 side-warning detector, which uses radar to note an overtaking vehicle, and if it moves into the vehicleÂ’s blind spot, a panel of LEDs on the side mirror light up as a warning to the driver.
Externally, Audi calls the Q7 styling “coupe-like,†and boasts of dynamics that adapt well to both on-road and off-road use, and “multifunctionality.†I think that means it can handle various functions, but Hoffmann stretched function to what I claim is an 18-letter journalistic record with “multifunctionality.†The ability of a vehicle to have functions has led to adding “functionality†to the automotive PR lexicon. Hoffmann also referred to Audi’s “DNA,†another of the auto PR-speak buzzwords.
Every journalist I know cringes when “DNA†is used to link models, whether or not a connection exists. Precious few, if any, auto PR types even know that Deoxyribonucleic acid is the structure of molecules forming two lines, whose paths intertwine in a double-helix to bond two complementary components, thus forming the chemical basis for linking heredity. Hoffmann used DNA to prove the same company that makes the A3, A4, A6, A8 and TT sports car is now making a do-everything SUV.
Director of marketing Stephen Berkov said: “We need some reasons why SUVs are still OK. We think the Q7 proves that performance can be efficient, safety can be exhilarating, design can be beautiful, and functionality can be elegant.Ââ€
For Audi, thatÂ’s not a badÂ…uhÂ…DNA. But the Germans made a major concession to build the Q7 primarily for the U.S. market by installing six cupholders and four more water bottle holders. “We put in six cupholders,†said Hoffmann. “That was always a battle with the engineers. They said, ‘What are these Americans DOING in their cars?Â’”
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.
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