carcounsel.com |HID|

Here, in the twilight of the current MINI’s life, its engineers are putting the finishing touches on the Cooper S JCW GP edition. I was already excited to hear that the lower control arms and wheels are lighter (unsprung weight is a chronic MINI illness) but Motoringfile’s report that the clamshell front bodywork and the rear tailgate are to be done in aluminum really gets me worked up...

(By the way the 1.6L Tritec engine has been coaxed from an already impressive 100 horsepower per liter to 143 horsepower per liter...)

In today’s entry to GM’s FastLane Blog, Jack Keebler, GM Director of Advanced Concepts asks if GM should stick to FWD or consider RWD for their smaller performance models. He cites the success of past performance Saabs as proof that FWD can work in performance models but sagely observes many concepts are signalling a return to RWD in upcoming small car models.

Here is the response I submitted:

“There’s no question in my mind that FWD only offers one advantage to the consumer: packaging due to the transverse engine layout.

The dynamic prowess of the Solstice is due in large part to the RWD design and recent models that have flopped back to RWD have met with huge sucess in the market. In fact I’d venture that part of the appeal of trucks and SUVs is their rear drive bias in most conitions and the consequent lack of torque steer.

The X5 remains our favorite SUV to drive or ride in, but it’s old in car years and lacks the 3rd row buyers have come to expect when trading in their minivans.

BMW’s next X5 will have 3 rows and – we expect – a lighter, less brawny/trucky feel (i.e. more like an enlarged X3). (Hopefully it will have similar interior quality – most of the cars introduced since have a very plasticky – dare we say Japanese? – ambiance).

Click here to witness the test mule being driven as a BMW should be…

1) Mercedes Benz claims its research indicates drivers of the new S class have a heart rate 6 beats per minute lower than when driving competing cars. Given that it’s said every creature has 1,000,000 heartbeats on this earth…

2) The car can sense (and try to avoid) an impending accident for you – click here to find out more…

We think a well-judged retro remake is sexy but this is a bit much…

the xB takes us back decades to the days of simple, light, uncomplicated cars; Fiats and Minis and Datsun 510s that were eager and frisky and inspired us to be car guys forever… Yet it seems to give up nothing… the eager-sounding engine and slick, light-to-the-touch shifter and creamy clutch make more of an impression than acceleration numbers. As in those Fiats of old, rowing the lever is fun in this car, and faster would take away the reason to row. But it’s not just the lever. The engine’s revs drop smartly as your foot lifts and the clutch takes up so smoothly and promptly once you’ve changed up to the next gear. Although the lever usually gets all the credit, shifting actually involves harmony from a control trio; this one sings a happy tune. The skinny Goodyear Eagle LS tires, like everything else about the xB, exceeded our expectations. Road grip came in at a more than respectable 0.80 g. From the driver’s seat, the glass area seems oversized, opening a joyously large view of the surroundings… Back to the theme of less is more. Remarkably, the rear seat earned our top rating for space and comfort. The chair-height bench is relatively firm and seemingly straight across from one side to the other, like a bench. But lacking the superficial contours usually built in for appearance, the rear seat gave us nothing to disrupt our comfort, particularly in the dreaded center position… the car’s simple box outline does the rest, allowing 34 beer cases to travel inside, just two fewer than in the 21-inch-longer HHR. Less is more in fuel economy, too. The Scion averaged 27 mpg over our 300-mile test trip, 6 mpg better than the average of the group, 4 mpg up on the next-best… Few cars promise so little as the Scion xB and deliver so much.

(It’s no wonder Nissan is set to send over its xB competotor – the Cube).

source: Car and Driver

You know how sometimes you just can’t help liking something, even if, deep down, you know it’s actually a bit wobbly. Think most old James Bond films… The Chrysler 300C’s a bit like that. Dynamically it’s a division below the big BMWs and Jags; it’s not madly quick; it doesn’t ride particularly well, and it’ll probably lose money like a drunk on a cattle-grid. And yet everyone here who drove the new right-hand-drive version of the top-of-the-range 5.7 ‘Hemi’ just loved it… The ride feels initially good, though much of that’s down to the deep sidewalls of the 225/60 R18 {Euro-spec] Pirelli P7s; at speed over even moderately uneven surfaces it lacks the damping control and general poise of the best Europeans. Not great, then, but immensely likeable. source: evo

It’s exceedingly rare I see something on MSN autos that’s worth looking at and in fact they’ve printed at least one article that’s about as misinformed as journalism gets (e.g. an article claiming ‘bigger tires are better!’ citing sales numbers and interviews with tire company spokepeople as supporting evidence! In fact, there are more reasons to avoid larger wheels than desire them.)

This explanation of all wheel drive systems however has little to fault.

(The only things I’d like to add point out are 1) unless your 4WD/AWD vehicle has a limited slip rear differential or traction control, you essentially have 2 wheel drive and 2) I’ve found full time all wheel drive with a rear biased torque split the most satisfying to drive and that seems to be the way the whole industry is moving).

[Inside the Malibu] Ragged mold partlines are everywhere. Several plastic trim pieces feel as if they were secured by bubblegum and a prayer. There’s this sense that if you turned the car over and shook it vigorously the entire interior might fall out. There are no overhead hand grips for front-seat occupants, and the trim around the skylights appears to have been cut out with dull scissors. If GM didn’t build cars as if it expected to discount them, maybe it wouldn’t have to. source: Car and Driver, February 2006

(The good news is that GM’s aware of the problem and is just now doing something about it; the interiors of the new GM full-size trucks and SUVs are a marvel and those in the Cobalt and Lucerne are well beyond the General’s usual).

We’ve been watching the progress of the upcoming Acura RDX carefully, mostly because it will feature the brilliant SH-AWD system developed for the $50K RL.

Acura’s released details on the RDX prototype and we’re surprised to see it includes a turbocharged engine. (Honda – like BMW - has been reluctant to use turbos in the past and now both are doing so to compete for ever larger horsepower numbers without increasing engine weight. Interestingly both companies have resorted to variable vane turbo units for less compromise than usual between response and power output).

The new 2.3 liter engine’s 240 horsepower and 260 pound-feet of torque compare favorably with the 205 horsepower and 163 pound-feet of the 2.4 liter currently used in the TSX, an engine that Car and Driver points out is

down substantially in torque versus [VW’s 2.0T motor], 164 pound-feet compared with 207. Moreover, getting the i-VTEC cam lobes to assert themselves requires twirling the tachometer needle north of 6200 rpm. From there, it’s only 900 rpm to redline, a rather narrow power band that requires lots of rowing with the gearbox to exploit.

On short, we’re excited about the RDX because it signals two things: 1) an end to overpowered front wheel drive Acuras and 2) an end to torqueless Hondas. (Or so we hope).