2017 Chrysler Pacifica

Meet the New Town & Country

 

Here it is: the all-new 2017 Chrysler Town & Country! Except it isn’t called the Town & Country—it’s now the Pacifica. Chrysler says it wants this vehicle to dramatically shift how people think about minivans, and the company no doubt felt that Town & Country was synonymous with mom jeans and regurgitated Cheerios. 

 

So the Pacifica badge was exhumed after a long dirt nap. You might recall that the name was attached to a three-row crossover a decade or so ago, one that could reasonably be considered as being ahead of its time—no snickering, now—as it was softer and more carlike when America was still obsessed with more-truckish SUVs. But that Pacifica suffered from disappointing sales, and we’d question the wisdom of using its name if anyone outside of Chrysler even cared it existed. As for the T&C badge, we don’t believe this means it’s dead for good; prior to being applied to a minivan in the 1990s, it appeared on all manner of vehicle types over a 75-year run. So we wouldn’t bet against Town & Country reappearing down the line as a trim level, special package, or perhaps a large crossover similar in philosophy to, uh, the original Pacifica.  

 

The Pacifica’s piles of technology can be split into two categories: safety and convenience. To keep occupants safe and sheetmetal unbent, the Pacifica now offers a 360-degree camera view, automatic parallel and perpendicular parking, forward-collision warning and mitigation, lane-departure warning and mitigation, rear backup sensing with automatic braking, adaptive cruise control that will bring the van to a complete stop and hold it there, and several other active and passive systems.  

 

2017 Ford Fusion

Mid-cycle tweaks to stem the crossover tide.

With 300,000-plus U.S. sales to its credit last year, the Ford Fusion plays a key role in its maker’s plan to rule the auto world. And now, three years into its current generation, Ford has tweaked its mid-size offering to fortify its position against a host of competitors. The key addition is the revived Fusion Sport, which promises to raise a ruckus in suburbs overrun with Camrys thanks to its 325-hp twin-turbo V-6, all-wheel drive, and fortified chassis systems. Meanwhile, all five members of this sedan family receive fresh front fascias, revised interior trim, and significant infotainment upgrades for 2017.
 

With 10 or so competitors scrambling to stem buyer flight to crossovers, the traditional family sedan has become a hotbed of design and engineering. The bestselling Toyota Camry was refurbished a year ago, the Honda Accord was revamped this year, Nissan treated the 2016 Altima to a heavy facelift, and Chevy’s Malibu is new from tire treads to roof antenna. Ford’s dream is that this Fusion will rise up from its current fourth-place status to wound the mid-size masters. 


Three distinct grille designs distinguish Fusion family members. A fashionable shiny-black mesh pattern adorns the $34,350 Sport model. That same motif with a bright chrome finish decorates the new Platinum trim level, which starts at $37,495. S (the entry model costing $22,995), SE, and Titanium Fusions have a five-bar grille that’s essentially a wider version of the 2016 front-end design. While the hood and front-fender sheetmetal is unchanged, LED head- and fog lamps now are standard or optional on Fusions. Except for a new decklid wing, the rear design is carryover.

The Fusion hybrid ($26,060) and Energi plug-in hybrid ($33,995) powertrains are unchanged save for new regenerative-braking calibrations. The engine lineup for other Fusions is also largely the same, too. A naturally aspirated 2.5-liter inline-four rated at 175 horsepower is the base engine. EcoBoost 1.5-liter and 2.0-liter four-cylinders have new dual-scroll turbochargers. (Expect nearly 200 horsepower for the 1.5 and about 250 for the 2.0-liter when final output ratings are released.) An eight-speed automatic is standard in all nonhybrid Fusions.
The only notable chassis news concerns the firmer damper, anti-roll bar, and spring-rate calibrations engineered for the Fusion Sport. Continuously controlled damping technology shared with the Lincoln MKZ reads an array of sensors every three milliseconds to adjust the shock absorbers within 30 to 50 milliseconds. Fusion chief engineer Bill Strickland calls this a “pothole detection” strategy. While that may be a stretch, these electronic dampers should be capable of nicely balancing comfort and body control. The front brake rotors are significantly larger, and 19-inch wheels wrapped with Goodyear Eagle performance radials are standard Sport fare.
Inside, to clear the way for more accessible cupholders and storage bins, the Fusion’s shift lever has been replaced by a rotating knob. (Thankfully, it does not rise out of hiding for use, à la Jaguar and Land Rover.) An S position in the Sport model calls up a more aggressive shift schedule, which also can be commanded by new wheel-mounted shift paddles. Those handy paddles are available as optional equipment in other trim levels. The Fusion Sport is fitted with firmly bolstered front buckets trimmed with leather and perforated microsuede. Diamond quilting covers the softer Platinum and Titanium seats.

2017 Ford F-150 Raptor SuperCrew

A second Raptor officially hatches.

In the modern automotive idiom, few names stir up as much enthusiasm—and testosterone—as “Raptor.” Indeed, the moniker of Ford’s brawny, F-150–based off-road sensation ranks right up there with Hellcat, GT350, GT3, and GT-R for many enthusiasts, and it tops all of those among folks with a taste for suspension travel and heading off the beaten path.
 
And so the introduction of the all-new, second-generation 2017 F-150 Raptor at last year’s Detroit auto show was a much-anticipated event, even though the new truck doesn’t go on sale until this fall. Now, Ford is using the 2016 Detroit auto show as an opportunity to roll out its new Raptor in SuperCrew form. 

Based on the aluminum-bodied F-150 SuperCrew, the Raptor SuperCrew rides on a 145.0-inch wheelbase—a foot longer than the standard SuperCab-based model—and has four front-hinged doors and the SuperCrew’s 5.5-foot bed. Aside from that, and the inevitably more capacious rear seat, not much changes compared with the standard Raptor, which we detail in this story.

Frustratingly, Ford still hasn’t disclosed output figures for the Raptor’s engine, which is a version of Ford’s prolific, 3.5-liter Ecoboost V-6. Earlier reports suggested that the engine could produce some 450 horsepower, but all Ford has said officially is that it will outmuscle the previous Raptor’s 6.2-liter V-8, which churned out 411 horsepower and 434 lb-ft of torque. With up to 500 fewer pounds to lug around—thank you, aluminum!—and 10 gear ratios allowing the engine to stay in the sweet spot of the powerband, the 2017 Raptor is expected to be much quicker off the line. It also should be a force to be reckoned with off-road thanks to torque-on-demand four-wheel drive plus a new terrain-response system with six available modes. It’ll be more fuel-efficient, too, if anyone cares.

2016 Toyota Tacoma V6 4x4 Manual

Man up with a stick-shift, 4x4 pickup.

Chevrolet’s recent advertising for its Colorado mid-size pickup, which courts buyers with the tagline “You know you want a truck,” and features staged focus groups wherein truck-driving men are viewed as more datable, has zeroed in on the key purchase driver for trucks: their implied machismo. The ads are spot-on, but we think they work much better for the square-jawed, ready-for-anything Toyota Tacoma. Granted, the updated-for-2016 Toyota lost its first comparison test to the Colorado, but it has an ace up its sleeve: an available manual transmission. Put in marketing terms, everyone knows that rowing a stick, especially with a bed behind you and four-wheel drive under the chassis, is just plain manly.

Industry-wide, from sports cars to economy cars, the trend away from stick shifts continues. Nissan’s Frontier still can be had with a stick, but that truck is ancient. The Tacoma’s primary competitor, the Colorado, offers a stick only in the rear-drive, four-cylinder, base-model “Work Truck,” which is as unappealing for everyday use as it sounds. Toyota puts its manual option right where off-road enthusiasts want it, in select four-wheel-drive Tacoma variants like the TRD Off-Road model tested here—and it even lets you pair the stick with a V-6. There are actually two manuals in the Tacoma lineup, and either replaces the six-speed automatic that’s standard on nearly every Tacoma. On the base Tacoma SR extended-cab 4x4, which uses a 2.7-liter four-cylinder, the manual has five forward ratios. In the V-6–powered extended-cab or four-door Double Cab TRD Sport and Double Cab–only TRD Off-Road models, the stick has six speeds.

Given how satisfying the Tacoma’s six-speed shifter is to use—well-defined gates, solid engagement, and reasonably tight throws for a unit with a nearly foot-long shift lever—we’d like to see it more widely available within the Tacoma family. This holds doubly true when you consider that the six-speed automatic transmission suffers from finicky programming that can find it hunting for gears. Even so, the more involving transmission doesn’t mask the Tacoma’s inherent foibles: The cabin feels somewhat cramped thanks to its high floor and low-mounted seats, some structural flexing can be detected, and the TRD Off-Road model’s knobbier tires deliver subpar grip on-road. The flipside of these flaws are that the high floor affords 9.4 inches of ground clearance, the chassis flex helps keep tires in contact with terra firma over big obstacles and provides engineered-in resilience, and the big tires lend the already soft suspension an extra measure of compliance.

If you fit in the Tacoma—the cabin’s pinched vertical dimension, fixed seat height, and minimally adjustable steering column limit its adaptability—you’ll understand where we’re coming from when we say there’s just something inalienably right about a stick-shift Toyota truck. It sounds trite, but the experience is appealingly burly. The updated Tacoma’s lumberjack handsomeness blends oh-so naturally with the TRD Off-Road model’s locking rear differential, off-road shocks, Kevlar-lined tires, and plastic fender flares (automatic-transmission examples get electronic aids for off-roading). Compared with the Colorado, which feels as though it’s trying to emulate a crossover in both style and comfort, the Tacoma remains starkly truckish.
Surprisingly, the Tacoma is also fairly comfortable. Our loaded test truck came optioned with a $650 tri-fold hard tonneau cover for the bed, as well as the $2980 Premium and Technology package, which added dual-zone automatic climate control, heated front seats, rear parking sensors, blind-spot monitoring, LED running lights, a sunroof, and towing equipment. As equipped, our Tacoma stickered for a reasonable $36,630. The burly suspension swallowed up the worst of Michigan’s roads at the expense of moderate body roll in hard cornering, the cabin is quiet at highway speeds, and the dashboard controls are simple and easy to use.


The manual Tacoma V-6 continued to bolster its case at the test track, where it muscled its way to 60 mph in 7.3 seconds, 0.8-second quicker than the automatic version. Strangely, our stick-shift truck weighed in at 4598 pounds, an inexplicable 164 pounds heavier than the identically equipped automatic-transmission TRD Off-Road 4x4 we sent into battle with the Colorado. (Toyota’s quoted curb weight for the manual-transmission Double Cab is 35 pounds lighter than the same model with the automatic.) The secret to its speed, then, is in the gearing. Six-cylinder Tacomas optioned with the manual send their 278 horsepower to the wheels via a shorter first gear and a 4.30:1 final-drive ratio, while the automatic uses a taller 3.91:1 final-drive, as does the stick-shift four-cylinder Tacoma. The manual’s accelerative advantage fades off the line, as evidenced by the automatic Tacoma’s higher trap speed—but with a slightly slower time—through the quarter-mile.
 

Much like the Chevrolet Colorado’s optional V-6, the Tacoma’s six isn’t a torque monster. And neither does it produce its peak horsepower or torque low in the rev range; even so, we found ourselves sometimes shifting into higher gears at less than 1500 rpm without any untoward lugging or vibration, mostly to avoid the V-6’s graininess at higher rpm. Featuring both direct and port fuel injection, the V-6 never begs the driver for more, although its marginally improved EPA fuel-economy ratings over the old Tacoma’s 4.0-liter V-6 were backed up by the marginally better real-world fuel economy of 18 mpg that we recorded over 827 miles. A 2015 Tacoma TRD Pro we tested last year, which came with similar off-road-tuned shocks and beefy tires, returned 17 mpg, albeit with an automatic transmission; the 2016 Tacoma V-6 automatic gave us 19 mpg.
Want to go off-road in a reasonably sized pickup truck, or at least look the part? The Tacoma fits the bill. It is eminently usable, fitting in downtown parking spaces with relative ease, the built-in Deck Rail System tie-downs in the bed make locking down variably sized loads a snap, and its 6400-pound tow rating is enough to drag another car (or a trailer full of dirt bikes). Oh, and the inner bed is entirely composite (the exterior-facing painted panels are metal), meaning it won’t rust and can take a beating without denting. Is the Chevy Colorado still more refined and roomier? Absolutely, but you won’t sprout a few extra metaphorical hairs from your chest driving it. C’mon, you know you want a manual-transmission truck.

2016 Kia Optima 1.6T

The smallest engine makes for the most compelling Optima.

 

When it debuted at the New York auto show in 2010, the now-outgoing Kia Optima wowed spectators with its attenuated roofline and determined visage, penned under the direction of design boss Peter Schreyer. That Optima established Kia’s current design language, and the new, 2016 version doesn’t stray far from the script, with the tiger-nose grille, the arc of chrome along the roof edge, and the beltline that sweeps up at the rear. Details may have changed, and the car is 1.1 inches wider and a bit longer, but no one will confuse the new car with anything but an Optima. Two of the three available engines carry over. The mainstay 2.4-liter four-cylinder is a naturally aspirated unit making 185 horsepower and 178 lb-ft of torque; it’s found under the hood of the base LX and the mid-level EX. At the top end, the 2.0-liter turbo returns brandishing 245 horsepower and 260 lb-ft; it powers the SX and the SXL. Both get a six-speed automatic. New to the party is the engine in our test car: a 1.6-liter turbo four married to a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic. Its 178-hp output is the lowest of the group, but its 195 lb-ft of torque betters the 2.4-liter.  

Available only in the LX 1.6T, the 1.6-liter is designed to be the most economical offering of the bunch (apart from the Optima hybrid, still based on the previous-gen car), and its EPA ratings of 28/39 mpg city/highway are at the top of the class. Its seven-speed dual-clutch automatic, however, is a welcome break from the rising tide of CVTs in this category. It credibly mimics the smoothness of a torque-converter automatic at low speeds and delivers well-timed shifts under acceleration. That acceleration is pretty spry for a green guy, aided by the fact that the Optima LX 1.6T danced across our scales at 3241 pounds—more than 300 pounds less than the 2.0-liter SX. That figure is about on par with a four-cylinder Honda Accord.

 
It’s also more than 200 pounds lighter than the Ford Fusion 1.5-liter EcoBoost, which is perhaps the Optima LX 1.6T’s most direct competitor. In a battle between those two eco-misers, the Kia shines. Engine output is pretty much a draw—the Kia’s 1.6-liter makes 3 fewer horsepower but 10 lb-ft more torque than the Ford’s 1.5-liter EcoBoost—but the Optima’s fuel economy is better by 3 mpg in the city and 2 mpg on the highway (and that’s spotting the Fusion its optional auto stop-start system). And when it’s time to put your foot down, the Kia’s 7.3-second zero-to-60 time trounces the Ford’s 8.2-second result.
In fact, the case could easily be made that the 1.6 is the best of the three Optima powerplants. The 2.0-liter turbo got to 60 mph only half a second faster in our test, at a cost of 6 mpg in the city and 7 mpg on the highway. The 2.4-liter four (which we tested in the Optima’s close kin, the Hyundai Sonata) is both slower, at 7.9 seconds to 60, and thirstier. Speaking of the Sonata, when we tested the 1.6 turbo in that car—where it’s offered in the Sonata Eco—it was even quicker, hitting 60 in 6.7 seconds; that suggests our Optima, which had less than 500 miles on the clock, might have done even better with a more broken-in engine.
 

The LX 1.6T rides on the Optima’s standard suspension, not the “sport-tuned” version found in the SX and the SXL; even so, it need not make any apologies for its ride. Pleasantly tied down without excessive body motions, it’s also compliant enough to take the edge off harsh pavement, aided by this version’s 65-series rubber on 16-inch wheels. The low-rolling-resistance tires, however, led to a long stopping distance of 185 feet from 70 mph, although roadholding was a respectable 0.83 g.
That the 1.6-liter engine comes in only one trim level may be its main drawback. One step up from the base LX, the LX 1.6T is reasonably well equipped (Bluetooth, a backup camera, keyless entry), but if you want leather, seat heaters, or navigation, you need to climb up the ladder. The options list does, however, include navigation, a blind-spot warning system, and rear cross-traffic alert.
At this level, interior materials are pretty basic, with lots of grained black plastic, but at least the steering wheel is wrapped in smooth leather, the armrests are decently padded, and the console has plentiful storage. The previous Optima’s more driver-oriented dash has been replaced by a new design that emphasizes the cabin’s width. It’s a straightforward interior design with a gimmick-free layout of the controls that recalls the Honda Accord. The comfortable seating position is enhanced by a prominent dead pedal for the driver, and relatively thin pillars and a low cowl afford good visibility. The back seat boasts abundant legroom and adequate headroom under the sloping roofline as well as a short-trip-appropriate middle position.
The 2011 model brought the Optima in from the subprime fringe of the mid-size-sedan market, and the redesigned model ought to keep it there. While not the most powerful or luxurious variant, the LX 1.6T may be its most interesting, offering painless frugality that should speak to price-conscious sedan buyers.

2016 BMW X5 xDrive40e

A painless, if pricey, way to boost your SUV's green cred.

 The first thing you need to know about the new plug-in-hybrid version of the BMW X5 is that the EPA rates its electric-only range at just 14 miles—and, of course, your results may vary. Which is another way of us saying that you’ll need good luck to go even that far between charges.  

So you shouldn’t expect the X5 xDrive40e to be a Chevy Volt writ large. Commuting on electricity is possible only for those who have a very short drive. A 14-mile range would be just enough to allow you to traverse Manhattan from north to south (or vice versa), assuming mild traffic. Plus, the top speed in EV mode is 75 mph, so if your commute includes any expressway driving, you’re better off selecting the Save Battery mode and reserving the EV driving for city streets. Also, in EV mode the X5 xDrive40e needs 22.6 seconds to reach 60 mph. That is just 0.8 second quicker than a 2011 Smart Fortwo ED. And it should be noted that using the inline-four to charge the battery (as also occurs in Save Battery mode) is hardly an efficient practice. 

If saving dollars at the pump is your goal, leave the X5 in Auto eDrive (hybrid) mode and plug it in as often as you can. We averaged just 21 MPGe, which is lower than expected. To be fair, our result may have been slightly dragged down due to a few drivers using the engine to charge the battery in order to experience the EV mode. By comparison, an X5 xDrive35d returned 25 mpg in our hands. The diesel also boasts a 6-mpg advantage in the EPA highway ratings, at 31 mpg versus the 40e’s gasoline-only 25-mpg score (the diesel also has a 1-mpg-higher EPA city rating of 24 mpg). The diesel also is $4400 less expensive. But diesels don’t have the eco-friendly cachet of a plug-in hybrid, especially now.

 

The X5 40e is a very conventional hybrid setup. It pairs a 2.0-liter turbocharged inline-four with a 111-hp electric motor and an eight-speed automatic. The engine on its own makes 240 horsepower and when combined with the motor can deliver up to 308 horses, which is very close to the turbocharged inline-six that powers the X5 35i. But whereas the 35i’s engine must motivate 4934 pounds, the 40e’s batteries mean it’s saddled with 5283 pounds—thus, the 40e trails the 35i to 60 mph by two-tenths, at 6.2 seconds.
That difference, however, is largely irrelevant in everyday driving. There’s never a feeling that a measly 2.0 liters isn’t enough; the X5 40e has more than adequate power. Plus, the hefty five-seater is dynamically sound. It carries its weight well, pitching and rolling like any big SUV, but without the extra commotion associated with poorly tuned dampers. This is no back-road carver, but it’s not supposed to be.

 
Its only dynamic failing is a spongy brake pedal that requires some concentration for smooth stops. When are makers of hybrids going to figure out that a blended brake system isn’t the way to go? There are settings in modern cars for everything; why not have a regenerative setting (as in the all-electric Tesla Model S) and have the brake pedal solely operate the mechanical stoppers? It makes sense to us.
One of the best things the X5 has going for it is the seating position. The current generation may have lost a little of that truly commanding feeling—you know, when the car’s beltline is nearly on the same plane as your own—but visibility is great for a big ute. And this large SUV also has a full measure of utility. Fold the rear seats and 73 cubic feet await your Costco needs. The battery pack located under the cargo floor, however, means you can’t get a third-row seat as in other X5s.
The 40e may not be the most efficient X5, but at least it doesn’t drive like a moving penalty box. Its premium pricing shows that, in the automotive realm, making an environmentally conscious statement often isn’t cheap. Add “SUV” to that equation and it gets even pricier.

2016 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350 / GT350R

Ford moves the muscle car to a higher order.

 

We’ve been here before. We’ve stared down the barrel of a twin-striped Mustang with more than 500 horsepower and the name of a Texas chicken farmer across its fanny. The last one, the 2013 Shelby GT500, had 662 horsepower, in fact, and was said to go over 200 mph. It didn’t, not for us, anyway. Even so, it was what a Shelby Mustang should be, what it has been for decades: a hot quarter-mile with a side of smoky burnout. It was a muscle car with more. Mustang lovers got sweaty, but as usual, the rest of the auto world just shrugged and moved on with evolution.  

Ford says it’s different this time. It says the new Shelby GT350, a name positively gestational with history, is a light-year leap in sophistication and handling. It says the flat-plane-crank V-8 delivers 8000 revelations per minute, that the magnetic suspension and custom, cross-drilled brake system and Michelin superstick tires prove that the company is serious about achieving world-class handling.

Well, Ford says a lot of things.

Our natural skepticism, honed to a katana’s twinkle by years of Shelbys with skull-rattling rides and plodding dynamics, marched proudly into the cockpit of the new GT350—whereupon it died instantly on the car’s red start button. Vaa-ROOOOOMpapapapapapa!!!!
Oh. Maybe they’re serious this time.

With the six-speed slotted into gear and the surprisingly light clutch lifted, the GT350 leapt onto the asphalt of Monterey’s Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca. First corner and first impressions: tight, tied-down, stable, maybe a little bit of push but, hey, the car’s cold and a bit heavy. Wind it out—wait, where’s the redline? Nowhere. It doesn’t exist! The sucker just keeps straining, keeps revving, keeps swelling with a glorious brassy, unmuffled, rhapsodic roar.
The anticipated upshift was forgotten as another corner approached.
The brakes—oof, such brakes!—chomp down, but the nose doesn’t dive. The car isn’t crossed up or squirming, it’s flat and stable and ready to turn right now! Less understeer this time, a perfect arc scribed from the white line to apex to white line. And it’s on the gas again, the sound flooding back—that addictive, dazzling, erotic exhale of lyric fire.
Yes. Yes, indeed. Ford is serious.
With the $49,995 GT350 and the even more track-ratty $63,495 GT350R, Ford wants to quit the pony-car sphere that the Mustang has inhabited since 1964. Supposedly using Carroll Shelby’s original race-ready Shelby GT350 as its guiding Polaris, the engineers set out to build a no-excuses track machine, more multitalented than the GT500 blunderbuss it replaces. That car was all about muscle power and 200 mph. This one is a little lighter, a lot more lithe, and perhaps able to finally get the attention of non-muscle-car types. You say you have a BMW but want something different, possibly American-made, but a Corvette isn’t your thing and a Camaro Z/28 is too brutish? Ford wants to talk to you.

Not that the new Shelby isn’t quick, but it’s not a dedicated quarter-mile eater, either. The base GT350 reaches 60 mph in 4.3 seconds after a somewhat difficult launch and does the quarter-mile in 12.5 seconds at 117 mph. Perhaps not stunning numbers these days, but the test car did weigh 3796 pounds. With its 18-pound carbon-fiber wheels and stickier Pilot Sport Cup 2 tires, the R (at 3710 pounds) makes it to 60 in 3.9 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 12.2 seconds at 119 mph. Guess what? Porsche 911 GT3 drivers don’t jump up and down about drag-strip times. Stats that matter to them more are skidpad grip and braking distances. There, the 350 and 350R pull 0.98 g and a startling 1.10 g, while stopping from 70 mph in 152 feet and 146 feet. Ford’s priorities become clear when you check the track-sheet data.
In the grander scheme, this is part of the internationalization of Ford’s U.S. product line in general, from Fiestas to Transits. Today’s auto-industry economics demand that you play on a world stage, which in a sporty car means world-class dynamics. The Mustang can no longer be just an island of romantic longing for drag-strip Christmas trees and fluorescent-lit drive-ins.
Okay, yes, the GT350 is North America–only for the time being, but its mien and manners are more BMW M4 than typical monster Mustang, even if the tire-shredding line-lock feature carries over into the Shelby. Really, the Cadillac ATS-V coupe, so enriched and able, is a better comparison to the GT350 than what seems to be its natural domestic competitor, the outgoing Chevrolet Camaro Z/28.

Well, the Cad is a good comparison except for the Shelby’s oddly unique V-8. We’ve complained about turbo engines and their lack of character. You want an engine with character? The GT350’s “Voodoo” V-8 is Brad Pitt, the Terminator, and James Bond coming at you with matching wry grins.
Everybody wants to know first what this 5.2-liter, 526-hp engine sounds like. Even when making its full 92-decibel war cry, it’s not a loping boom-boom like we’re used to from a muscle car, but rather a faster, more syncopated thrum that is more like what you hear from a Ferrari. Still, it doesn’t sound like a Ferrari, mainly because it doesn’t breathe like a Ferrari.
In case you’ve missed our many prior memos on the subject, here is a highly condensed update: This is a slightly bored and stroked version of the Mustang GT’s 5.0-liter V-8 but with a flat-plane crankshaft, meaning the connecting-rod journals are 180-degrees out, like in a Ferrari 458 or a Ferrari California, rather than at 90-degree intervals as on almost every other V-8 in production.
The Mustang does not wail like a Ferrari, however, because Ford’s engine is quite different. For one thing, it has a single intake and dual exhausts, as opposed to a dual intake and a single large muffler, as on a Ferrari. Also, rather than the Ferrari’s setup of, effectively, two four-cylinder engines joined at the crankshaft, where the center two pistons of each bank are 180 degrees out from the outer two, the Ford has a different arrangement. It puts each piston 180 out from the next one in line. This is mainly because Ford wanted a single large throttle body for better packaging and a power spread more befitting a Mustang.

2016 Audi S6

A highly stylish, speedy, and slightly sterile machine.

When the current generation of the swift, sexy Audi S6 was first launched for 2013, it and the A6 sedan on which it’s based secured a spot on our 10 Best Cars list. Then they did it again the next year. While other, newer vehicles have supplanted the mid-size Audis on our 10Best list, the S6 nevertheless has improved for 2016, with a styling update shared by all A6 derivatives and the addition of another 30 horsepower under the hood. 

 

That brings the pony count of its twin-turbocharged, direct-injected 4.0-liter V-8 to 450, available from 5800 to 6400 rpm. (This means the S6 now officially outmuscles the previous-generation S6, which was motivated by a Lamborghini-derived 5.2-liter V-10 with 435 horsepower on tap.) Torque, however, remains pat at 406 lb-ft from 1400 rpm. The extra muscle didn’t seem to make a difference when we took the 2016 S6 to the track, though. In fact, this car was a touch slower than the last S6 to which we strapped our measuring devices, with the zero-to-60-mph run taking 3.9 seconds, versus the previous car’s 3.7. Blame the additional weight that has piled on since 2013—this particular test car carried 134 more pounds than the last one. Still, these are damned impressive numbers for a car that weighs nearly 4400 pounds.  

On the road, the S6 is more than just fast in a straight line. Equipped as ours was with the optional S6 Sport package—which brings adjustable steering effort, a reprogrammed rear-axle torque-vectoring system, and a sport exhaust (which we’d love to be even louder)—nothing seemed to upset the S6. It is brisk, precise, and solid in sweepers, while the standard adaptive air suspension affords it a calm and supple freeway ride in its Comfort setting. Auto and Dynamic modes are notably firmer. Fortunately, the standard Drive Select system allows for the individual tailoring of powertrain, steering effort, and ride characteristics. Even in the chassis’s firmest settings, however, tighter corners serve as a reminder that the S6 is no dainty petunia—and that a fair chunk (57 percent) of its weight sits atop the front axle. We noted moderate understeer while pulling an impressive 0.92 g on the skidpad (with the optional summer rubber).

The S6’s styling updates are fairly minor, basically involving reconfiguring the head- and taillamp innards with nifty jet-age cues but nothing to make the car stand out any more than before. Our test example featured Audi’s optional 20-inch wheels—a $1000 upgrade—but even that doesn’t elevate the car to head-turner status. And we suspect that might be fine with a good many S6 drivers, once they realize how fast this car is. Some attention is fun, after all, but not all attention is desirable.
As with most Audis, the exquisitely assembled interior of the S6 is as antiseptic as an operating table, especially at night when cold white LED lighting blankets the cabin. Yet its premium feel is beyond reproach, and special S6-specific touches like the firm yet supremely comfortable diamond-quilted seats and racy carbon-look dash trim afford it a sense of occasion that helps to justify the price. The MMI system remains one of the best infotainment setups in the business, and for 2016 it is enhanced with 4G LTE data streaming, INRIX online traffic information, Apple Siri Eyes Free integration, and internet-radio streaming.

At $80,775 as tested­—hardly chump change, but still fairly reasonable compared to a BMW M5 or a Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG—the S6’s value in the segment is matched only by Cadillac’s similarly priced, 640-hp CTS-V. If there’s anything missing here, it’s character. This is the kind of performance sedan that wins more minds—and yes, comparison tests—than hearts. It will be interesting to see how the S6 fares over time, however, as it eventually faces off against the Caddy and upcoming stormers like the 505-hp 2017 Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio and the 2017 Mercedes-AMG E63, both of which we expect to be rich not only in power but in character, too.

  

 

2016 Ram 3500 Diesel Crew Cab 4x4

 The quintessential workaholic.

It’s pretty clear (or should be) that this is not the sort of truck that one would call a lifestyle vehicle—i.e., not a truck you’d expect someone to use as a car substitute. The Ram 3500 is the sort of truck that gives even a temporary owner a powerful urge to stop off at Tractor Supply Co. for a Carhartt jacket, steel-toed work boots, and rawhide gloves. And maybe 20 rolls of barbed wire, a couple dozen bags of cement, and one of every welder they sell. That’s what this big Ram is all about: work. You can outfit the interior with lots of fancy options—our test truck included $18,045 in extras, but most of that total went to work-related enhancements. Still, upscale features like leather, navigation, heated seats, premium audio, and Uconnect telematics spread only a thin veneer of civilization over a primordial brute with a work ethic that makes your average Calvinist look like a slacker.
 

To put the Ram 3500 into perspective, here are some noteworthy numbers: 385 horsepower, 900 lb-ft of torque, up to 7390 pounds of payload capacity, 31,210 pounds of maximum towing capacity. The turbo-diesel V-8s in the Ford and GM behemoths huff up more horsepower than does the Ram’s 6.7-liter straight-six, but the Cummins engineers keep mining more torque, with an increase of 35 lb-ft over the 2015 version. That increase is just enough to give this Ram a 40-lb-ft advantage over Ford’s Power Stroke V-8, although we should add that there are two tamer versions of the Cummins 6.7-liter six: 350 hp/660 lb-ft and 370 hp/800 lb-ft. The max Cummins gives this test truck a smallish edge in torque over Ford’s F-350, which helps yield a big edge in towing (3610 pounds, assuming both were set up for gooseneck trailers) but a sizable disadvantage in payload (990 pounds) to the F-350 we tested recently. 

Hook this baby up to certain riverbanks and you could change state boundaries. But again, this is no work-on-Monday, cruise-on-Sunday ride. A mile or two on almost any surface is enough to tell you that no pavement irregularity is too small for the suspension to ignore.

To be fair, suspension elements designed to support near-four-ton payloads are going to be stiff when there’s nothing in the cargo bed. Nevertheless, the Ram’s ride quality is something to be endured rather than enjoyed. And while the Cummins turbo-diesel is nothing if not manly, it will never be mistaken for a gasoline engine. It’s not as noisy as pre-common-rail diesels, but it leaves no doubt that what’s going on under the hood does not involve spark plugs. GM’s diesel heavy-duty pickups, the Chevy Silverado 3500 and GMC Sierra 3500, are both quieter and smoother on lumpy surfaces than their Ram and Ford rivals.
Diesels are also about efficiency, of course, and the Ram surprised us by logging 16 mpg over the course of our test, albeit almost always unladen. No surprise about acceleration, though: The zero-to-60-mph sprint consumed 8.6 seconds—about what you’d expect from a vehicle weighing well over four tons. Ford’s F-350 Super Duty, which weighed 100 pounds less, hit the mile-a-minute mark almost a second quicker. But the big Ford was substantially thirstier than the Ram, recording 12 mpg. (There are no EPA ratings for trucks in this class.)
 
As you’d expect of a four-door, long-bed behemoth dualie, the Ram’s responses are deliberate. Grip—0.70 g on the skidpad—is so-so, despite the substantial contact patches provided by six Nexen Roadian HTX tires (235/80R-17). And stopping distances are typical for this class—206 feet from 70 mph, or two-thirds the length of a football field. Although they suffered no fade, our Ram’s brakes shuddered with hard applications as the rear axle hopped to a stop.
The big work ethic that goes with an HD turbo-diesel carries a pretty big price tag. In any of the three big boys that make up this all-domestic class, the diesel engine alone costs well over $8000. In our Ram test truck the Cummins added $8995 to the bottom line, almost half of the $18,045 options total. The Aisin six-speed automatic was $2595, auto-leveling rear air suspension was $1595, and dual rear wheels added $1200. Our as-tested total crested $75,000.
All of the foregoing emphasizes the Ram’s big-job capabilities. Just be sure your jobs are as big as the truck—and that they pay well.

Volvo S90

First Car in the US To Be Fitted with Standard Semi-Autonomous Tech

Volvo’s handsome S90 sedan will enter into a packed and high-tech market when it goes on sale in the U.S. toward the end of 2016. But it’ll pack one feature nobody else offers in the U.S. market: self-driving technology as a standard feature.
The S90 will utilize the second generation of Pilot Assist, Volvo’s semi-autonomous driving tech that was first featured in the XC90 SUV. In the SUV, the feature tracks a vehicle driving in front of you to know when to accelerate, brake, and steer, at speeds up to 30 mph and when lane markings are clearly visible to the system’s cameras. The second-gen Pilot Assist, standard in the S90 sedan, will be able to accomplish those same tasks without needing to follow a car in front, according to Volvo. It also will perform these functions at speeds up to 80 mph.
 
Volvo says the S90 will be the first car sold in the U.S. with semi-autonomous driving as a standard feature. It’s part of Volvo’s Vision 2020, a self-imposed goal by the automaker to eliminate deaths and serious injuries in its new cars by that year. 

2016 Jaguar F-Pace revealed

The F-Pace will reach the UK next spring, priced from £34,170. It is the first SUV in Jaguar’s 70-year history and will be crucial, along with the XE saloon, in underpinning the future prosperity of the firm.
The F-Pace and XE should help to lift Jaguar’s annual volumes past 200,000 units. Last year it sold 81,000 cars. The F-Pace is expected to outsell the XE globally, which further highlights its significance to Jaguar.
 
Based on the same modular aluminium platform as the XE and new XF saloon, the F-Pace is targeted at everything from the BMW X3 to the Porsche Macan in the premium mid-size SUV segment. Although it shares a common architecture with the XE and XF, Jaguar says 81% of the car's parts are new. Around 80% of the F-Pace's body is aluminium, and the car's body in white weighs just 298kg - about the same as a Fiat 500L.
Other materials include a composite tailgate, magnesium for the front end carrier and steel for the doors.
A varied model range at launch includes the most frugal diesel in the class and a full-blown sports variant with an engine and chassis technology from the F-Type sports car.
The F-Pace’s overall look and feel are broadly in line with the C-X17 concept car of 2013, the model that was the first visual proof of Jaguar’s intention to launch an SUV. Indeed, an SUV has been promised by the firm since 2012, when then boss Adrian Hallmark revealed one was in the works when speaking to Autocar at the Geneva show.

Jaguar F-Pace versus the Frankfurt motor show
The F-Pace sits between the XE and XF in length. It’s 4731mm long, 1936mm wide and 1652mm tall, with a 2874mm wheelbase and a ground clearance of 213mm. This makes the F-Pace marginally longer and wider than the X3. It also has a longer wheelbase than the X3 and practically matches the BMW on height.
From launch, Jaguar will offer one petrol and two diesel engines, rear and all-wheel drive and five trim levels. The F-Pace has a 50:50 weight distribution
The entry-level 178bhp, 318lb ft diesel is the 2.0-litre four-pot unit seen in the XE and XF. As standard, it is hooked up to a six-speed manual gearbox driving the rear wheels. In this form, the F-Pace is claimed to be the most frugal car in its class, with 57.7mpg combined fuel economy and CO2 emissions of 129g/km. It covers 0-60mph in 8.5sec and has a 130mph top speed. This engine can also be paired with all-wheel drive, at which point an eight-speed automatic gearbox becomes optional.
V6 diesel and petrol models are also offered. Both come with all-wheel drive and an eight-speed auto. With 296bhp and 516lb ft, the diesel verison is capable of 0-60mph in 5.8sec and a 150mph top speed. Economy is 47.1mpg and CO2 output is 159g/km.
The petrol V6 is a 375bhp, 332lb ft supercharged 3.0-litre unit taken from the F-Type. This can crack 0-60mph in 5.1sec and reach a top speed of 155mph. This model is aimed squarely at the Porsche Macan Turbo, a model with a 395bhp V6 and a 4.8sec 0-62mph time.
Jaguar F-Pace to spawn SUV family
Jaguar sources have indicated that a version of the F-Pace with even greater performance is planned, a model that could be powered by a supercharged 5.0-litre V8 and wear SVR badging.
The F-Pace shares its advanced double wishbone front and Integral Link rear aluminium suspension with the XE and XF, along with the saloons’ electric power steering. Jaguar suggests the F-Pace will be the best-driving model in its class, with benchmark ride and handling.
A whole host of chassis technologies has been fitted to the F-Pace, including torque vectoring, an optional electric adaptive damping system and tunable driving modes that adjust functions such as throttle mapping, transmission shift points and steering feel.

 

COPO Camaro Based on Sixth-Gen Car Debuts

 Based on Sixth-Gen Car Debuts

Chevrolet is producing a limited run of 69 COPO Camaro race cars for 2016, and, for the second year in a row, the first one will be auctioned for charity. Designed for the NHRA’s Stock and Super Stock Eliminator classes, the 2016 COPO Camaro makes its debut at the 2015 SEMA show in Las Vegas. Chevrolet first resurrected the COPO name back in 2012, when the bow-tie brand decided to pit its then fifth-generation Camaro against the Dodge Challenger Drag Pak and the Ford Mustang Cobra Jet on the drag strip. Now in its sixth generation, the latest COPO Camaro reaps the benefits of the new lighter and stronger design, the COPO’s body-in-white structure yielding a savings of 133 pounds. Structural rigidity is improved, too, up by a claimed 28 percent thanks to extensive computer-aided engineering. Chevy hasn’t published any data yet but says the aerodynamics of the new COPO car are superior to those of the fifth-gen COPO.
 

As with the previous COPO Camaros, the chassis and suspension are tuned for drag-strip duty. Up front is a lightweight, adjustable strut-type suspension and unassisted rack-and-pinion steering, while a four-link setup with adjustable coil-overs, a Panhard bar, and a stabilizer bar handle the duties in the rear; wheelie bars keep the nose from going airborne. To endure the hard-core abuse, the COPO ditches the production Camaro’s independent rear axle, replacing it with a solid unit with an aluminum center section featuring a spool-type diff and 40-spline, gun-drilled axle shafts. Weld lightweight racing wheels and Goodyear racing tires are utilized for rolling stock, and lightweight, racing-type, unassisted four-wheel disc brakes are supplemented by a parachute to slow the COPO after a quarter-mile blast.
Engine choices for the latest COPO Camaro are predicated on the buyer’s intended class of competition, so Chevy makes a variety of supercharged and naturally aspirated LS- and LT-family engines available: a supercharged 350 (5.7-liter), a naturally aspirated 427 (7.0-liter), and an all-new LT-based 376 (6.2-liter). All three come backed by a racing-prepped Turbo 400 three-speed automatic transmission; fueling is handled by a fuel cell with a built-in high-pressure pump.
 

As you might expect, each COPO Camaro race car is built by hand, and that includes the number-one car, which will be auctioned for charity at an upcoming Barrett-Jackson sale, with the proceeds going to the United Way. Designed by drag racer Courtney Force, the charity car features bright red livery and slash marks toward the back. In addition to the NHRA-certified chrome-moly roll cage and five-point safety harnesses, the charity car comes with Courtney Force’s signature and the COPO logo on the lightweight racing bucket seats.
As before, would-be buyers must register at chevrolet.com/performance/copo-camaro. An independent third party will randomly select purchasers from the pool of interested customers to determine which of the 69 individuals are worthy of purchasing a 2016 COPO Camaro race car.

2016 Mercedes-AMG C63 Coupe

  Pricing will start near $70K.

 The most powerful iteration of the next C-class coupe, the Mercedes-AMG C63. It will be strongly differentiated from the non-AMG versions—perhaps even more so than our renderings suggest. Powered by a twin-turbo V-8, the C63 will share less than half of its sheetmetal with the workaday coupes. Look for wide fenders, quadruple exhaust pipes, and vertical air outlets at the back. Stylistically, the closest thing to this new car is the AMG GT.
 

The latest Mercedes-Benz C-class has turned into a headache for the competition. Featuring a new, more upscale design language both inside and out and loaded with cutting-edge technology, it has vaulted to near the top of its segment, and it makes the analogous BMW and Audi models look positively dated. With the C63 coupe, the company remains in attack mode in the profitable high-performance corner of the segment. And this car could even steal a few sales from Porsche, grabbing customers who wouldn’t look at an AMG GT because it lacks rear seats—which would give the Daimler brass particular delight, given the two companies’ proximity in Stuttgart.
 

The AMG C63 coupe, like its four-door sibling, will be powered by the M177 version of the twin-turbocharged 4.0-liter V-8 that also sits under the hood of the AMG GT (where it’s designated M178). As in the C63 sedan, we expect two levels of output; a standard version will make 469 horsepower, while the C63 S will produce a whopping 503. Maximum torque should be rated at 479 or 516 lb-ft, and the grunt will be routed exclusively to the rear wheels by AMG's "Speedshift" seven-speed automatic. We’re still sad that the beloved, bellicose, naturally aspirated 6.2-liter V-8 that powered the last C63 is no more, but our drive of the four-door C63 proved that this engine is no wallflower in terms of responsiveness, fury, and righteous noise. Figure on zero-to-60-mph times of less than four seconds.

Mercedes c class coupe unveiled from Shrawan Raja

2016 Porsche Boxster Spyder

 Porsche Perfection

Ever since the Boxter launched 19 years ago, wags have derided Porsche for not fitting the mid-engined car with a 911-grade powerplant, suggesting that the company is afraid to one-up the centerpiece of its lineup. Even Zuffenhausen’s most starry-eyed apologists have lamented the decision time and again. And it’s worth noting that while the House of Ferry trots out the 550 Spyder to tout the Boxster/Cayman’s heritage, the James Dean Deathwagen and its successors—718 RSK, RS60, W-RS, et al—were high-performance racing machines, while the rear-engined 356 stood as the car for the sporting masses.

Yet the engine is still not as powerful as it is in the 911. Porsche blames the shorter intake manifold required to make the motor fit in a mid-engined application for cutting output from 400 to 375 horsepower. As an engineer said to us in a seeming attempt to absolve Weissach of any responsibility for the power cut, “It detunes itself!” Compared with the Cayman GT4, which shares its engine with the Spyder, the Boxster is not quite as track-oriented. Whereas the GT4 receives the 911 GT3’s front suspension minus the center-lock hubs, the Spyder, essentially, is a Boxster GTS with extra displacement, foofy bodywork, and nylon-strap interior door pulls. The GT4, as is Porsche’s way with its mid-engined hardtops, is rated 10 horsepower higher than the big-bore Boxster. The message? The GT4 is the racier one.
The last iteration of the Boxster Spyder featured a fussy, skeletal flibbertigibbet of a roof. The new car’s top is simpler, although it still retains a measure of fiddliness, mainly having to do with the maddening, hidden buttons that release the canvas buttresses from their moorings. It also features a power latch operated by a console-mounted button, which somehow serves to undermine the otherwise-manual unit’s purity. We can’t help thinking that Porsche would’ve done better to ape the honest, magical simplicity of the Mazda Miata’s roof.
When stowed, the top is hidden by a large, be-flared aluminum tonneau. The revised rear visually thickens the Spyder and makes the car’s appearance exceptionally color-dependent. In Racing Yellow, the effect works. In silver, the Spyder resembles a stuffy, slab-sided ingot. In Guards Red, the vibe gets a little regrettable as in, “Ach! Fancy Jürgen took his Boxster to ze Pep Jungen!” Because the Spyder trades the GT4’s sizable wing for a stunted ducktail, the front splitter has been shortened slightly to maintain an equitable distribution of downforce.

Mercedes-Benz - CLS550 Coupe

The CLS550 Coupe

Mercedes originated the “four-door coupe” with the CLS-class, which is basically an E-class wrapped in a sleeker, sexier body. Its intimate interior seats four, so practicality isn’t its strong suit. The CLS400 has a 329-hp twin-turbo V-6, while the CLS550 has a potent 402-hp twin-turbocharged V-8. Rear-wheel drive is standard and all-wheel drive is available on both. For more power, check out the CLS63 AMG. Prices for the CLS models start higher than the E-class—but style isn’t cheap. The CLS550 can be seen in the famous series Ray Donovan where Ray uses it as his daily car.

Driver’s Choice

We found the CLS most enjoyable to drive if we took the time, before leaving the driveway, to deactivate most of the assists, so we’d probably be better off not checking that option box at all. As with the E-class with which it shares a platform, the CLS’s “Intelligent Drive” technology takes a big step into the autonomous-car future. These technologies are allegedly among the options most desired by new-car shoppers. In rush-hour highway conditions, they can ease worries and people seem eager to have the backup just in case, you know, they get distracted by a text message or a cat video.
This comes at a price we’d just as soon avoid—and not just the monetary one. Technology that thinks on your behalf has to assume you’re not thinking for yourself. This car was sounding alarms, braking, and even steering us away from “imminent” collisions with large signs or piles of snow at the curb when, in fact, the road curved away from these obstacles. Presumably, the technology that works so well on major highways couldn’t read the road properly because the lines were obscured or nonexistent on our local streets. Once, seeking to avoid a badly patched, pothole-strewn stretch of pavement on a two-lane artery, we moved into the other lane. The asphalt was much smoother over there, we could see more than a mile ahead on this sunny day, and there were no oncoming cars, but simply crossing the double-yellow line freaked the CLS right out. It applied the brakes without our bidding, bringing us from 35 mph to 10 mph in short order, perhaps reading roadside objects (snow piles, trash cans, signs) as vehicles. All the warnings and alarms made us feel like Kimi “Just leave me alone, I know what I’m doing” Räikkönen. We liked the car well enough, but it didn’t always seem to like us. We won’t say consumers shouldn’t want this stuff—only that they should know what they’re buying . . . and how and when to disengage it.
A decade ago, when the CLS first brought the four-door coupe into being, it was a sleek and elegant alternative to the more stately E-class sedan and wagon. It was pricey, but distinct enough to justify the expense. Today, there’s an actual two-door E-class coupe and even the regular sedan wears fairly stylish lines. The premium price for the CLS’s mildly more appealing design, outside and in, might be harder to justify all on its own, then. Yet this new, less costly V-6 model amends the value proposition, bringing sufficient performance at a starting price that lets the customer add on “all the toys” or just select the ones that appeal most. It can even be fun to drive, if you take a moment to let the car know who’s the boss.

2016 Jaguar XJ

Rarely seen, but not forgotten.

First Drive Review

The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about. Oscar Wilde’s line seems particularly apt when applied to another great eccentric, the Jaguar XJ. Because despite being both a fine luxury sedan and the conspicuously charismatic choice in a part of the market typically more conservative than Texas talk radio, the big Jag has never gained much traction against its obvious rivals.
 
Mechanical changes are minimal, with all U.S. powerplants continuing unchanged. The only substantive alteration is the switch to electric power steering in two-wheel-drive versions—apparently the system can’t work with the front axles of the all-wheel-drive variants.
We sampled the new setup in the sporty XJR, which remains the most powerful member of the clan and quite possibly the best way to experience Jaguar’s long-serving 5.0-liter supercharged V-8, here in 550-hp tune. The electric power steering is effectively invisible, with similar weighting and response to the old hydraulic system. Jaguar clearly doesn’t want anyone still buying a hydraulically assisted XJ to feel cheated.
As before, the XJR combines the sort of effortless low-down performance that luxury-sedan buyers expect with the ability to deliver truly startling pace at very little notice. The eight-speed automatic transmission shifts intelligently: it’s unobtrusive when asked to waft and acts with appropriate aggression when required. Test-track performance is impressive enough—we ran the 2014 version from zero to 60 in 3.9 seconds and from rest to 100 mph in 8.8 seconds—but real-world pace feels even stronger. The car found impressive traction even on the greasy surfaces of the English roads where we drove it. The XJR feels like a big car due to the simple fact that it is, but it also feels lighter and more responsive than all of its obvious rivals.
Little has changed, but that which has been altered has improved the XJ’s (and the XJR’s) case. This is a car that deserves to be talked about a little bit more.
 

2016 Ford Fusion

A sedan that won't be reFused.

Overview:
Ford’s Fusion mid-size sedan has led a busy existence since it was last redesigned just three years ago. Now entering the 2016 model year, the likable and stylish Fusion lost its mid-level 1.6-liter turbocharged EcoBoost engine for 2015; a 1.5-liter EcoBoost turbo engine option that came online for 2014 serves as its replacement. The two engines briefly were sold concurrently, with the 1.6L paired exclusively with a six-speed manual transmission and the 1.5L mated only to an automatic. The Fusion still has a 2.5-liter four-cylinder as its base engine, but a manual transmission is no longer available with any version of the car. Also, hybrid and plug-in-hybrid models are still available, although for this review we're focusing solely on the more-conventional powertrains.

 
What’s New: Aside from the powertrain shuffle, little has been altered in Fusionland since our two most recent reports. Among the news for 2016 is the addition of a cold-weather package for the SE (which includes heated seats, remote start, and all-weather floor mats), as well as an appearance package for base S models that brings 18-inch black-painted wheels, a rear spoiler, and fog lights. We applaud Ford for coming to its senses and dropping the touch-sensitive dashboard controls on models equipped with the Sync touch-screen entertainment display. The updated center stack now incorporates physical buttons. Our only complaint centers around the new buttons’ size—they aren’t very large, and there is plenty of leftover real estate to the point that the center stack almost looks austere. Unfortunately, the buttons still control Ford’s outdated and at-times frustrating MyFord Touch infotainment system on uplevel models like our test car; Sync 3, which is much better, hasn’t found its way into the Fusion yet.
It’s easy to like the Ford’s styling, which even three years on still looks handsome, if no longer wow-inducing. (In early 2016, Ford is expected to unveil the 2017 model, with restyled bumpers, updated lights, and new tech that should improve on the breed.) Either of the two EcoBoost engines are good choices, delivering strong power and, in the case of the 1.5-liter, impressive EPA-estimated fuel-economy ratings of 24 mpg in the city and 36 mpg on the highway—or 25/37 mpg city/highway with the optional stop/start technology. (The 1.5L managed 27 mpg in our testing, while the 2.0L posted a middling 20 mpg.) The 1.5-liter is the biggest surprise—it’s the smallest engine in the range by displacement but moves the Fusion respectably. Ford’s engineers tuned the suspension in such a way that the chassis absorbs bumps and jolts yet remains buttoned-down in corners. The overall sensation is European and upscale, and the availability of all-wheel drive sets the Ford apart from nearly all of its competitors save for Subaru’s Legacy and the Chrysler 200
As the saying goes, you can’t always get what you want, and what we’d like is for the Ford to show a little more athleticism. It feels plenty competent and the hardware is there, but the steering and suspension lack that final ounce of sharpness that sets apart sportier rivals such as the Mazda 6 and the Honda Accord. Legroom is decent in back, but the sloping roof saps some headroom. Other nits include the 1.5-liter EcoBoost’s tendency to groan at higher rpm (as distinct from sounding eager) and the 2.0-liter engine’s struggle to achieve anything close to its EPA-rated fuel-economy figures. This is a broader issue among Ford’s various EcoBoost engines, although the smallest of the lot, including the Fusion’s 1.5-liter, typically stray less from the EPA ratings. Finally, the automatic transmission’s thumb-operated, shifter-mounted rocker switch for manually selecting gears is so useless as to make us wonder why it was even engineered at all. Are paddles too much to ask for?

2016 Audi R8 V10

More Power, Lower Weight

The second generation Audi R8 debuts in Geneva with more style, added power and even greater capability. While its form may be familiar, the automaker's mid-engine supercar has been remade from the ground up and now incorporates new design, engineering and technology from Audi's successful racing programs. In its most potent R8 V10 Plus form, this exhilarating two-seater is simply "the most powerful and fastest series-production Audi of all time."


The R8's driver-focused cabin deftly interweaves competition character with luxury refinements, starting with two kinds model-specific sport seats and a Multifunction Plus Performance steering wheel that also adds additional capability on the R8 V10 Plus model. Like all new Audis, the R8 is fitted with the automaker's configurable Virtual Cockpit instrumentation. Other standard touches include the MMI controller, navigation and Audi Connect with a Wi-Fi hotspot. In addition to standard Alcantara/Nappa leather or pure Nappa interior appointments, the new R8 will offer numerous interior and exterior trim options, including a bespoke Matte Camouflage Green for the R8 V10 Plus. The 2016 Audi R8 V10 lineup will arrive in showrooms here next January. Pricing will be announced closer to the official on-sale date.




The 5.2-liter naturally aspirated FSI V10 in both of these new Audi R8 models has been significantly revised to include a new dual-mode (direct and indirect) fuel-injection, a racing-style dry-sump lubrication system as well as cylinder-deactivation and start/stop technology. The result boosts output and reduces fuel consumption by roughly 10 percent compared to the previous iteration. In the R8 V10, the engine is tuned to make 532 horsepower and 398 lb-ft of torque, giving it a 0-62 mph sprint time of 3.5 seconds and a top speed of 201 mph. The R8 V10 Plus version cranks out 601 ponies - identical to the engine in its corporate cousin, the Lamborghini Huracan - and 413 lb-ft of twist. The Plus accelerates to 62 mph in 3.2 ticks and tops out at 205 mph.