carcounsel.com |HID|

marketing claim:
the Michelin Energy™ MXV4® S8 tire offers an array of improvements over its predecessors including a quieter, smoother ride, improved snow performance, lower rolling resistance and improved handling on dry surfaces.

owner experience:
Was very happy with the tires these replaced (OEM MXV4 Plus) with 52k. NOT HAPPY with the MXV4 S8. Dont believe Michelins hype – they are not better in every way. Handling diminished, ride now jittery (not balance – just harsher), braking distances longer. They are quieter, and I expect they will last, but if youre happy with the MXV4 Plus, stick with them!

our take:
The Michelin Energy MXV4 has long been one of our favorite tires of all time – grippy, quiet, confidence inspiring, surprisingly capable in the winter. The next generation – the Plus version – had better impact absorbtion and uncanny tracking but was slippery when cornering in the wet or snow and loud on some surfaces. Still a number of cars that drive well do so largely because they come from the factory on the MXV4 Plus – take them off and your refinement and fuel ecomomy are often lost. Unfortunately the S8 version is as vague as its predecessor was precise. It exchanges grip 99% of the time for better winter traction and lower noise levels on those rare occasions. Whereas the Plus made the car it was placed on, the S8 detracts from it – witness the feel of the old Accord or Jetta vs. the new ones: in both cases the S8 lends a slippery, vague feel regardless of any improvements made elsewhere in the chassis.

We’ve been voicing our concern with recent trends at BMW rather vocally since the late 90s, one of them being the emphasis on power output rather than cohesiveness and balance between the vehicle’s subsystems. (BMWs used to insist the chassis have twice and the brakes three times the capability the engine required – one reason they were associated with unerring controllability).

We’re happy to see that BMW hasn’t stooped to relying on forced induction to compete in the horsepower wars, but at the same time the engines and the cars that house them are getting bigger with each generation and the power output has seemingly exceeded the limits of the FR layout. The last M5 was accomplished and demanded respect in a sraight line but the weight of that V8 on the nose was ever-present and traction was hard to come by at lower speeds. The new M5’s V10 is no lighter than the outgoing V8 of course, and despite the aluminum front structure the new 5’s extra bulk, girth and remoteness is a step in the wrong direction.

When we addressed our concerns with weight gains in the E46 M3 to the former M brand manager, his response was “So??? The car has more power too!” (His successor is far more car savvy).

The consequence of BMW’s recent focus on power output above all is evinced in these excerpts from a brilliant comparison between the M5 and the Lamborghini Gallardo in this month’s evo

the speed and ferocity of the monster M Power saloon is a double-edged sword… as our speed increases and the road begins to duck and dive, you get an increasingly insistent feeling that while the V10’s up for anything, there’s massive momentum at work, and it takes far more out of the M5 than you’d think simply to stop it running away with itself. While there’s an impressive sense of grip and traction… how much restraint you have to practise in normal driving, and how little of the V10’s 501bhp and 383lb ft you’re able to use before cracks start showing in the M5’s impressive dynamic facade. At what feels like 7/10ths the M5 has a reassuringly composed feel… just that little bit harder and deeper into a corner on the brakes… and the M5’s limits suddenly don’t feel so lofty… Does this make the M5 a bad car? Hardly. If you’ve never experienced what a real supercar is capable of, and you don’t have the funds to purchase one, the M5’s demented pace and animalistic cry are your passport to new and exotic territory. Ultimately, though, it’s physics that defeats the M5. That wailing M Power V10 comes close to challenging a few of old Sir Isaac’s Laws, but hurling an 1800kg saloon down the road at supercar-rivalling speed generates such gargantuan quantities of inertia that unleashing the V10’s full potential is tantamount to declaring war on the rest of the car. The outcome is inevitable, brakes and tyres succumbing to the onslaught, with deftness and delicacy the early collateral casualties in the battle to contain the M5’s rampant performance… even M Power’s spectacular fireworks can’t disguise the fact that… the M5 has had greatness thrust upon it.

The magnesium block in the new inline 6s, the carbon fiber body panels in the M6 and the ceramic brakes planned for the next M3 indicate BMW is aware of the problem, and the number of M3’s that are traded in for Coopers shows that consumers are catching on too…

A shame that the current M cars are saddled with such a massive burden.

UPDATE:
it seems evo is not convinced by the M5 either…

Munich’s ultimate 5-series may have upped the ante in spectacular fashion with its seven-speed sequential manual transmission, 5-litre V10 engine and 205mph potential, but though unarguably great, it’s still not everyone’s pint of Warsteiner. It needs working hard to fully unleash the monster V10’s headline-grabbing outputs, and this rev-hungry delivery and the 8250rpm red line mean it burns through a fiver’s worth of super-unleaded every ten miles or so when fully stoked-up. While extraordinarily quick, it does sometimes feel like you’re sledgehammering walnuts… While the M5’s wailing V10 is never less than impressive, it always feels like it deserves a lighter, sharper car in which to truly shine.

Click here for a clone of the GLI we won’t be getting in the U.S. market…

(Is it just us or does it look like a more natural progression from the last Jetta and Passat?)

A business traveller snapped pictures of what we believe is the next C-class and the E90 M3 sedan undergoing testing at the now requisite Nurburgring Nordschleiffe.

(You can see the original post here).

As much as the press likes the Acura RSX Type S, we can’t bring ourselves to feel the same way. Sure, it loves to be taken by the scruff of the neck and thrashed, but even if we look past the tire noise or the engine’s lack of torque the fundementally flawed Civic based suspension and steering makes us wish Honda hadn’t decided the double wishbones were too costly and space inefficient.

The new Civic fixes many of the flaws of the strut front and ‘reactive link’ rear suspension, and the new Si comes with a limited slip differential that made cars like the Integra Type R and original Nissan SE-R legends* so we can’t help but agree when mph magazine founder Eddie Alterman asks

When Honda’s offering a car that’s newer, cheaper, just as fast, and dare we say it, more fun than the RSX, why would anyone buy the Acura?

*Think instant autocross winner. The key is a helical limited-slip differential… that eliminates wheelspin in hard corners when the weight’s off the inside front wheel. The RSX lacks this useful device. C&D, 10.05

Ever been in traffic behind a truck with their tailgate down or even replaced with a net like material marketed as an ‘Aerogate’? Their owners risk damage to your car and theirs under the assumption that their fuel economy will improve because the car looks more aerodynamic…

We regret to inform them that they’re wrong… A recent paper presented at the Society of Automotive Engineers conference shared that trucks are actually more aerodynamic with the tailgates in their upright and locked positions.

(We were surprised too).

Saab has just introduced a ‘new’ 9-5.

Unfortunately, now that Saab is a division of GM, new doesn’t mean what you’d expect.

In this case, “new” means new headlights, a new hood, new taillights and – if they’re feeling generous – perhaps even a new steering wheel (There are detail changes to suspension components but nothing more than a tweaking, really. The next complete redesign isn’t expected for another few years despite the fact that the car was outdated by the late 90s…)

This is actually quite a lot of newness for a GM product – the ‘all-new’ Monte Carlo coupe was only given a new nose…

We’ve never expected Mercedes Benzes to light a fire in our hearts when it comes to driving dynamics, but each time we get into an SLK 350 were reminded that there are some at MB that understand performance is about more than a lofty horsepower number or straightline acceleration.

Now the next S class is upon us, and 4Car’s John Simister has driven it. He finds that:

the S-class steers quickly and tidily, it grips hard and flicks from direction to direction as if it weighs half of its true mass (1910kg in the case of the long-wheelbase S500 we drove). The steering’s weighting is convincing enough to make you feel in touch with what’s happening under the tyres, and the damping – ours was a regular Airmatic DC car – is impeccable. The Comfort settting gives a pillowy ride without sogginess in corners, which is an impressive achievement, while Sport firms things up a bit without ever letting the S-class jar over bumps.

Given that both the A8 and the 7 have knobby ride quality on their oversized wheels, we’re looking forward to seeing if MB has managed a better balance between refinement and control.

(A shame that the S-class owner is forced to use a iDrive-esque MMI and that the styling is more Maybach than CLS).

UPDATE: here’s an excerpt from another review:

Our S-class rode on optional 19-inch alloys, shod with 255/40 tyres up front and 275/40s at the rear… Although it has grown in every dimension and put on weight, the S500 doesn’t feel bloated. On smooth, sweeping roads it is hugely competent, almost sporting. The way it masks its speed is one of this car’s major achievements. The traditional warning signals such as tyre squeal and lurching body roll are deceptively absent. Arrive at a corner too quickly and eventually the front runs wide as myriad electronic driver aids work to put you back on your intended line. Open the throttle mid-corner and the handling is incredibly neutral. Our test car was fitted with the ABC (active body control) system, which keeps the body flat by using electro-hydraulic actuators in each of the air suspension towers. It’s been improved, with a more progressive action during turn-in, meaning the car settles more quickly on entry and cornering speeds are now even higher. The rack and pinion steering is predictably light yet impressively direct at 2.8 turns lock to lock… while there’s a touch of vagueness around the straight-ahead to aid high-speed stability, it feels precise off-centre.

2ND UPDATE: evo’s test adds more evidence to the pile:

this rather large car, 43mm longer in long-wheelbase form, 29mm taller and 16mm wider than the old one, is wieldy, easy to manoeuvre, able to perform miracles of mass-disguise. pointing… into a sequence of fast, open bends… The steering is not exactly hyper-focused, but it’s quick, consistent and devoid of rubbery delay. The ample tyres are gripping convincingly, a bend tightens and the nose follows suit. There’s no sense of a behemoth’s laziness, of vast bulk reluctant to stir itself from the straight and narrow. The S-class goes where you point it, when you point it. No lurch, no float, no queasiness, even in Comfort mode. Airmatic DC suspension is part of the reason, with its active dampers. We know this system from other Mercs. But it’s the combination of bulk, refinement and agility that’s so spectacular. It’s like a Jaguar XJ, only quieter and cleverer… The new V8 is a lusty thing, hauling the S-class along with a distant but well-formed rumble when goaded. The seven-speed auto is best left to its own super-smooth devices, with sharper reflexes in the Sport setting, which also firms the suspension and lowers it by 20mm… It’s hard to escape the conclusion that Mercedes-Benz once again makes the world’s best luxury saloon. Its list of attributes and superlatives is frightening. Pity beauty isn’t among them.

Until the 16th of October, Volvo will donate $20 to Pediatric Cancer research for every Volvo you test drive.

Click here for more information…

Along with large wheels, front wheel drive, small windows, vague steering, seating placed in crumple zones and unidirectional tires we’ve always hoped the SUV was a trend that would someday go the way of the dodo.

While we don’t agree with their choice of contenders, we think this list of rankings from a recent Motor Trend comparison points to a trend in comparison tests performed over the years between wagons and SUVs: wagons are more pleasurable to drive. That this test ranks a wagon based on the dynamically mediocre Volvo S60 ahead of SUVs based on the nimble and connected Legacy and CTS says a lot, as does the fact that the test didn’t include any of the more trucky body on frame designs that litter our roads.

And until the laws of physics come crashing down or Ferrari or Maclaren make an SUV, we’d bet that will continue to be the case…