Reviews

Jan 4 2012

Review 2013 Audi A4

Review 2013 Audi A4
The 2013 A4 Allroad Quattro will arrive in mid-2012 at the same time as this revamped A4, and having driven the thing, we can now say that all the mid-cycle touches have been nicely presented. While we were already big fans of the eighth-gen A4, the model’s reworked nose is handsome. Specifically, we note the more pronounced curvature to the hood, as well as a more planted stance. That’s a bit of visual trickery, not a wider track – Audi stylists have emphasized the design’s horizontal lines up front, and they’ve added new head- and fog-light fixtures, along with larger air intakes down low. It appears that Audi has deliberately “nastied up” the sensible A4 a little to better prepare it for the new RS4 range-topper we expect next year. (That is if the rumors of there being no RS4 this time around are just rumors.)

The only A4 2.0 TFSI sedan available for testing carried the standard six-speed manual and was gifted with Quattro all-wheel drive. The on-road behavior of this most popular North American A4 engine trim frankly hasn’t changed a whole lot, but that’s not a criticism. There is still 208 horsepower on tap and torque stands at an eminently usable 258 pound-feet between 1,500 and 4,200 rpm. Bear in mind that’s for a car that weighs in at 3,550 pounds as tested (we’re estimating it’ll ring up at 3,640 pounds with the U.S.’ optional eight-speed Tiptronic gearbox). That’s a net weight loss of over 50 pounds if we are to believe 2011 and 2012 spec sheets from both sides of the pond placed side-by-side.

Leading the tally of changes is a revamped thermal management system that heats everything more quickly at start-up in order to avoid wasting energy, a modification that Audi says aids in increasing fuel efficiency by around 10 percent. Helping this newfound fuel saving along is reduced friction between the moving parts through re-engineering of various tolerances. All the same, the smoothness and efficiency that comes with it, along with the turbocharging and high-pressure direct injection, is translated into a slightly slicker powertrain. Having said that, the factory’s 6.3-second acceleration number to 60 miles per hour remains, as does the A4′s 130-mph limited top speed. EPA fuel economy figures for the pre-facelift 2012 A4 Quattro automatic came in at 21 miles per gallon in the city and 29 on the freeway using premium fuel, but revised figures for the 2013 model haven’t been released yet.

The major change aboard for the entire A4 lineup is the adoption of electric power steering. Seeing as mid-range Audi Quattro models have never been singled out for having exceptionally precise steering response or feedback, we were only minimally concerned. The new electro-mechanical rack neither improves nor worsens this situation, as the onus with Quattro has more to do with the way torque is managed front to rear. In this case, the steering feel is fine relative to expectations, but it still trails both the 3 Series and C-Class for fidelity and communicativeness, though not as much as it did when Quattro was biased towards front-wheel drive. Tires for our drive were top-option 18-inch Bridgestone Potenzas from the Sport Package – base U.S. cars will receive 17-inch shoes. While the 18s fill the wheel wells nicely, the taller sidewalls of the base 17s will doubtlessly be the best bet for those whose day-to-day drudgery includes rougher road surfaces.

Source: Autblog

Dec 30 2011

2013 Lexus GS 450h

2013 Lexus GS 450h

From a sales perspective, the first-generation GS 450h was a disappointment. While we liked it quite a bit when we test-drove it a couple years ago, Lexus just hasn’t been able to move the metal. Introduced to much fanfare in 2006 as a 2007 model, the GS was Lexus’ second hybrid and the first rear-wheel-drive hybrid on the market. Lexus touted it as a performance sedan, even as Toyota was heavily marketing its hybrids as fuel sippers. Whether consumers were confused or not, they never took to the hybrid GS. Sales peaked at just below 1,800 in that first year and have gone down in each successive year. In 2010, Lexus sold barely 300 GS hybrids, roughly four percent of total GS sales, which were about 7,000.

The cognitive dissonance presented by Lexus hybrids has been an issue since the brand launched its first, the 2006 RX 400h SUV. Only marginally more powerful than the standard RX, its improvement in fuel economy was similarly slight at launch. The LS 600hL – the brand’s halo car before the LFA sports car came along – is a six-figure, 20-mile-per-gallon hybrid marketed as having V12 performance with V8 fuel economy, the rough equivalent of ordering a Diet Coke with your Super Size Big Mac Extra Value Meal. The “Lexus Prius” HS 250h, with neither particularly good fuel economy (35 mpg combined) nor any sporting aspirations, has been a critical and sales disaster and is rumored to be on the chopping block. While Toyota’s simple, “better mileage” definition of its hybrids is clear, Lexus has combined green machine and muscle car in varying doses, such that you never quite know what you’ll be getting with a gas-electric Lexus.

While the new GS 450h continues to pay homage to two different masters, Lexus has, from the outset, done a better job at splitting the difference. With an entirely new V6 engine and revised hybrid system, the 2013 model has remarkably improved fuel economy, while sacrificing just a bit on the raw performance side. According to Lexus, the new model will be rated at 31 mpg combined (29/34 city/highway), an improvement of eight miles per gallon over the old 2011 model. Do the math and that’s a 35-percent improvement, which seems like a pretty good tradeoff for less than half a second in 0-60 time. By Lexus’ stopwatch, the 2013 GS 450h does 0-60 miles per hour in 5.6 seconds, compared to 5.2 seconds for the old GS hybrid.

Source: AutoBlog

Dec 29 2011

Review 2012 Ford Edge Limited EcoBoost

Review 2012 Ford Edge Limited EcoBoost
Ford thinks it has the answer to that problem in the form of its new EcoBoost 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine. Ford is using the compact, turbocharged mill in a variety of crossovers, including the 2012 Ford Edge, and we sampled a well-equipped Edge Limited to see how effective the Blue Oval’s engine downsizing strategy is going.

Our Dark Blue Pearl Metallic tester in Limited trim carried a base price tag of $34,915 that rises to $35,910 by ticking the EcoBoost option box. Ford doesn’t mess around when it comes to the Limited trim: Standard accoutrements include leather-trimmed and heated seats up front, a 10-way power driver’s seat, dual-zone climate control, SYNC infotainment, a 390-watt Sony sound system, back-up sensors and a rear view camera.

Our Edge was also packed with some of Ford’s top options, including the 2.0-liter EcoBoost upgrade, Ford’s excellent navigation system ($795), and BLIS blind-spot detection ($485). This Edge Limited also included the Drivers Entry Package ($895), which adds remote start, push-button start and a power rear lift gate. Also making the scene was Ford’s much-maligned MyFord Touch system – in this guise, it includes a pair of 4.2-inch LED screens in the gauge cluster and five-way steering wheel controls. With all options present and accounted for, our tester came in at $38,910.

The draw for this Edge Limited is the 2.0-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder engine, which is a $995 option compared to the capable and relatively efficient 3.5-liter V6. The extra coin will deliver 240 horsepower and 270 pound-feet of torque mated to a smooth-shifting six-speed automatic transmission. That isn’t as much punch as the 285 horsepower 3.5-liter V6, but the real story comes with a twist – the turbo 2.0 boasts 17 more lb-ft than its bigger, naturally aspirated brother, and it arrives in full force at 3,000 rpm (the V6′s torque doesn’t max out until 4,000 revs).

That extra pull is evident from behind the leather-wrapped steering wheel. The EcoBoost four provides good straight-line acceleration, with a 0-60 time that we estimate to be just over seven seconds. The EcoBoost also weighs a bit less, tipping the scales at 3,998 pounds – 58 fewer pounds than a front-drive V6 model. With torque that comes on early in the revband, the EcoBoost feels even quicker than any instrumented testing might suggest – at least until hitting the freeway. When we tested the V6-equipped Edge about a year ago, passing acceleration felt a bit stronger at highway speeds. The boosted four-cylinder also doesn’t sound quite as pleasant as the V6, but noise levels aren’t obtrusive.

Impressively, we were even more pleased with our real-world mileage. We averaged a surprising 25.1 miles per gallon during our week of driving. For comparison’s sake, we averaged 21.9 mpg in the 3.5-liter-equipped Edge, itself a reasonable number. Assuming our 3.2 mpg difference is representative of real-world fuel economy, is the EcoBoost’s efficiency increase worth $995? If we assume 12,000 miles per year and 87 octane gas sits at $3.50/gallon, the EcoBoost owner can expect to pay $1,673 for fuel each year. The equivalent 3.5-liter V6 owner faces a $1,917 tab – $245 more than the EcoBoost model. That means the $995 price tag of the EcoBoost model should pay for itself in about four years or about 50,000 miles. That’s far from an immediate return on investment, but it’s not bad and the equation could get more favorable if fuel prices spike.

Source: AutoBlog

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 »