Volkswagen GTI

WHERE WE WENT: Most long-term updates begin with what we like, but we’re starting this one with a road trip from Ann Arbor, Michigan, to Los Angeles, California. The Ann Arbor office, in a display of largess, took the long-term Subaru WRX back to Michigan and sent us the long-term Volkswagen GTI for the fall and winter. Since the GTI arrived in September, the West Coast crew has kept the VW in constant motion. When it’s not sluicing through Los Angeles traffic it has traveled to San Francisco three times and to San Diego four times. It’s an incredibly comfortable highway star, and with the cruise set at 80 mph, the GTI’s fuel economy rises into the low 30s.
On these long hauls, seat comfort has been praised. But it’s not just the tartan-covered front chairs that garner compliments, as rear-seat riders have found the back seats to be spacious, supportive, and easy to get into thanks to the square roofline and large door openings.

Headquarters has started asking about when we might want to swap out the GTI. We’re reluctant to give it back, but their promise of the long-term Mazda Miatamay assuage the loss.

WHAT WE LIKE: In L.A. traffic we’ve come to appreciate the light clutch-pedal effort and the effortless throws of the GTI’s six-speed manual transmission. A good manual is a pleasure to use, even when the freeway comes to a grinding halt. While the traffic tries to convince us that autonomous cars are the future, the GTI keeps us comfortable until there’s a break in the gridlock and we can properly exercise the 2.0-liter turbo.

Southern California has more than just traffic, so we’ve taken the GTI out into the mountains both as a photo vehicle for comparison tests and for fun. Outside of the city, the GTI never fails to delight. The chassis, supple in normal use, tackles mountain roads with complete ease, and the turbocharged engine never runs out of breath at altitude. We’ve yet to encounter an environment that doesn’t suit the GTI, but we haven’t taken it off-road. Now, how far is the Rubicon from L.A.?

WHAT WENT WRONG: Hard runs through the canyons may explain why the front tires wore out after 24,181 miles. We replaced them with the same Bridgestone Potenza S001 tires. Ordered from the Tire Rack, they were $253.75 each. With installation and shipping, the new rubber set us back $579.30.

The GTI calls for service every 10,000 miles. The first service is free, but you’ll be reaching for the wallet when the 20K job rolls around. At 21,330 miles, we took the GTI to Volkswagen of Downtown L.A.; a glorified oil change, with a host of inspections and a new cabin air filter, totaled $269.95. The tires were supposed to be rotated, but the dealer didn’t do the work. Plus the service cost was padded with items like battery cleaner ($8.67), a charge for washer solvent ($1.87), and a $13.45 fuel additive. Volkswagen doesn’t require these extras, but dealer service recommendations and manufacturer recommendations rarely agree. We’ll have to be more vigilant in the future to make sure the dealer does only the work recommended by VW.

The GTI rang in the 2016 New Year with a broken driver’s-side front window. In addition to the loss of a pair of Ray-Ban sunglasses, the break-in cost us $235 for a new window and installation. The only other car broken into on the street happened to be one of the GTI’s platform-mates, an Audi A3. Clearly the thieves were drawn to Volkswagen’s MQB architecture.

WHAT WE DON’T LIKE: There’s not much in the logbook as far as complaints. One shorter driver complained about her knee hitting the steering column, but moving the steering wheel up and the seat cushion down alleviated the problem. After spending 2800 miles with the GTI, technical assistant Zeb Sadiq had only one complaint: that he didn’t own one. Everyone who has driven the GTI since it arrived in California feels exactly the same way.

Months in Fleet: 11 months Current Mileage: 27,625 miles
Average Fuel Economy: 29 mpg Fuel Tank Size: 13.2 gal Fuel Range: 385 miles 
Service: $269.95 Normal Wear: $579.30 Repair: $0 
Damage and Destruction: $235

Read More

Volkswagen Touareg

Overview: Freshened for 2015, the Touareg is Volkswagen’s mid-size—and largest—crossover SUV, a five-seater with luxury aspirations. With a price range that opens in the mid-$40,000 range and culminates close to $70,000, it lies beyond more mainstream two-row offerings such as the Ford Edge, Kia Sorento, Nissan Murano, and Hyundai Santa Fe Sport. But handsome appointments, a roomy interior, refined road manners, and all-around usefulness give it strong appeal nevertheless.

The Touareg’s three engine options carry over from 2014. VW’s unique 3.6-liter narrow-angle VR6 is standard, its 280 horsepower providing adequate propulsion in this 4700-pound rig. Options are a 3.0-liter turbo-diesel V-6, serving up 406 lb-ft of torque, and a hybrid that combines a 333-hp supercharged 3.0-liter gasoline V-6 with a 47-hp electric motor. Total output for the hybrid is 380 horsepower and 428 lb-ft, making it the quickest of the trio. But the diesel is the fuel-economy champ, according to the EPA, at 20 mpg city and 29 highway (we averaged 27 mpg in the TDI driven for this review). The hybrid is rated at 20/24 mpg. In all cases, an eight-speed automatic transmission does the shifting, four-wheel drive is standard, and the vehicle can tow up to 7700 pounds.

What’s New: It takes a keen eye to distinguish the 2015 Touareg from its 2014 predecessor. The major clue is a new four-bar grille. Less obvious: more bright trim, revised lighting (standard bixenon headlamps and LED taillamps), an updated rear fascia with triangular exhaust tips, new wheel designs (18-, 19-, and 20-inch), and some new colors. Inside, there are upgrades to materials and lighting as well as to the available (and tasteful) wood trim. VW has added several driver aids, including blind-spot detection, lane-departure warning, adaptive cruise control, and precollision automatic braking.

What We Like: The Touareg TDI prevailed in a 2013 comparo against a distinguished field of diesel-powered rivals (BMW X5, Jeep Grand Cherokee, Mercedes-Benz ML350, Porsche Cayenne), emerging as being good at everything without excelling in any particular area. This is among the very quietest of VW’s diesel-powered offerings, and it gets off the line with respectable zeal (although if speed is your objective diesels are not the answer). The eight-speed automatic is smooth, the hydraulic power steering is quick and tactile, the unibody is solid, and the dynamics are a blend of Teutonic agility tempered by real-world compliance.

What We Don’t Like: We give the Touareg’s eight-speed automatic credit for having a manual mode, but this is achieved by waggling the shifter—paddles are conspicuous by their absence. The eight-speed is essentially seamless in fully automatic operation, but one or two trials with the manual mode are likely to be enough for most owners. Responses are languid and not very satisfying. Also, while brake-pedal feel is good, stopping distances with the standard all-season rubber are lengthy. A bigger issue is the pricing—from $45,615 for the VR6, $53,155 for the TDI, and $67,905 for the hybrid—which seems pretty ambitious.

Verdict: The Touareg is among the best vehicles in VW’s entire lineup, although the pricing is high enough to make you understand why it isn’t the bestselling.

Read More

Toyota Camry XSE V-6

Toyota has pledged to make its vehicles more engaging, with the bestselling Camry the latest to be called in for an overhaul. While the result is indeed a better Camry for 2015, the car proves that altering the essence of this refrigerator on radials is no simple task.

The Camry’s latest freshening is substantial. All the bodywork is new save the roof, and the curves flow more organically than before. Most models carry a simple five-bar chrome grille, but a gaping, black-mesh snout distinguishes the sportier SE and new-for-2015 XSE trims. It’s a cyborg catfish, but one you can take home to meet the parents.

Additional spot welds add rigidity to the structure, while thicker carpet padding and door inserts help tamp down road noise in the cabin. All variants get minor chassis changes, while the XSE—like our V-6 test car—gets extra starch, with firmer shocks and springs, harder bushings, and a sharper tune for the ­electric power steering. It remains family-car compliant, but the foundation feels more solid and isolated, with better body control and ride quality.

The Camry’s helm, however, is still DOA, offering little on-center feel or increased effort in corners. XSE models wear standard 18-inch wheels shod with Michelin Primacy all-seasons, which numb the experience by prioritizing low-rolling resistance over outright adhesion. Both their lateral grip on the skidpad (0.81 g) and their stopping perform­ance from 70 mph (178 feet) are unexceptional.

The powertrains carry over, including a standard 178-hp 2.5-liter four and an optional 3.5-liter V-6 with 268 horsepower. Both mills are backed by six-speed automatics and stir your soul about as much as the backyard air conditioner. Yet the grunty V-6 con­tinues as the one entertaining aspect of the Camry’s drive; zero to 60 mph happens in 5.8 seconds and the quarter-mile passes in 14.3 at 100 mph. That’s properly quick. Our observed fuel economy of 24 mpg was reasonable and similar to previous tests.

Other tweaks for 2015 bring higher-quality interior materials, including the XSE’s faux-suede bits and tangy-red stitching on the dash and seats. There’s also a new 4.2-inch TFT display in the gauge cluster of most trims and a revised center stack that features a wireless charging pad for compatible smartphones.

Base prices increase slightly across the model range, beginning at $23,795 for a Camry LE with the 2.5. Our XSE V-6 test car started at $32,195, including new LED headlights, leather seating, and Toyota’s Entune audio and navigation system. That figure swelled to a substantial $35,768 with an upgraded JBL stereo ($805), the $750 Technology package (radar cruise control, auto high beams, pre-collision and lane-departure alerts), and other extras.

As a transportation commodity, the latest Camry is more refined and enjoyable than before, which should be enough for countless buyers. But unlike the equally capable and 10Best-winning Honda Accord and Mazda 6, sportiness is still AWOL.

Read More

Dodge Charger R/T Scat Pack

One of the few good things to come out of the German Occupation of Chrysler (when the entity was known as DaimlerChrysler) during the first few years of this century was the full-size Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger duo. Built on the bones of the second-gen W210 Mercedes-Benz E-class (Daimler had already moved on to the third-gen E-class by then), the pair marked a return to rear-wheel-drive performance and attitude—and set the stage for Mopar muscle-car glory.

A decade later, the Dodge Charger remains the brand’s bestselling passenger car and a key component of its image. For 2015, fresh styling breathes new life into the old platform. Even better, the roster of Charger performance variants—the R/T, R/T Road & Track, SRT 392, and SRT Hellcat—swells with the addition of the new R/T Scat Pack model.

In a sense, the new R/T Scat Pack reprises the role of the 2012 Dodge Charger SRT8 Super Bee, offering the same basic big-Hemi (6.4-liter) scoot at a $40K price. If that value proposition wasn’t convincing enough back in 2012, the new Scat Pack now shares most of the exterior bad-boy look of the $25K-more-expensive Charger Hellcat: NACA hood scoop, LED running lamps, menacing steroidal lower front fascia, et al.

In our tests, the Scat Pack’s 485-hp 6.4-liter Hemi backed up by a new ZF eight-speed automatic shot the car (which features launch control) to 60 mph in a scant 4.1 seconds and down the quarter-mile in 12.4. While that’s 0.7-second tardier to 60 and a full click less speedy through the quarter-mile than the supercharged 707-hp Hellcat, it’s a second quicker from zero to 60 and 1.2 seconds faster to the quarter-mile mark than a garden-variety, 370-hp 5.7-liter Hemi-powered Charger R/T. The Scat Pack’s lateral grip and braking numbers are even more Hellcatish. Rolling on smaller-size summer tires (245/45R-20 Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercars versus the Hellcat’s 275/40R-20 Pirelli P Zeros), the Scat Pack’s 0.91 g of skidpad grip was just 0.03 g shy of the Hellcat’s and its 153-foot 70-to-zero braking performance matched that of the 200-plus-pound heavier feline from you-know-where. You could say the Brembo binders have your Scat Pack back.

Hello, (Sorta) Kitty!

But what the numbers don’t show is how civilized the Charger R/T Scat Pack is to drive. Okay, so is the Hellcat, but more of the Scat Pack’s performance envelope is usable more of the time. It’s a 4300-pound muscle sedan with the moves of a 3500-pound pony-car coupe, kind of what we’d envision a four-door Mustang GT would be like were Ford to build one. Well-bolstered buckets keep front-seat occupants in place during enthusiastic driving but are capable of cradling 50-year-old butts (the Charger’s target demographic) in comfort. Sure, there’s some low-speed axle whine and ever-present sizzle from the grippy Eagle F1 Supercar tires, but overall the Scat Pack is a fast car you can drive all day and not get tired of.

The performance-tuned suspension doesn’t have the adjustable factor of the Hellcat’s or the SRT 392 Charger’s but is never jouncy in the middle of travel and delivers good body control without beating up its occupants. There’s almost no side-to-side head toss, even on undulating, high-crown roads. The Scat Pack’s electrically boosted steering doesn’t give up much to the Hellcat’s hydraulically boosted setup; turn-in is quick yet nicely weighted with good on-center feel, and the car goes where it’s pointed with precision. Ditto for the Scat Pack’s powerful, four-piston Brembo brakes, which are not the six-piston, two-piece rotor design of the heavier Hellcat, but they’re equally adept at hauling down the brawny Dodge from speed without drama.

Hello, Hemi

Never at a loss for torque, the 6.4-liter Hemi nevertheless makes good use of the eight speeds in the new ZF automatic transmission. While not dual-clutch-quick, the eight-speed’s shifts (which can be manually actuated via the paddles or the shift lever) shave milliseconds off gearchange times compared with the previous five-speed unit’s. Throttle tip-in is a tad on the enthusiastic side; drivers can train their right foot to ease onto the gas or just work the Sport mode settings in the car’s Dodge Performance Pages application. A muscle-car-appropriate level of exhaust rumble is ever present but never intrusive. For the 6.4-liter Scat Pack, Dodge kept the Fuel Saver feature that cuts out four cylinders to help fuel economy under low-load conditions. But when entering fuel-saver mode, say under light throttle at 30 to 40 mph and between 1300 and 1500 rpm, the exhaust note gets momentarily sour as the Scat Pack’s active exhaust system quickly switches from low-restriction to normal mode. Crank up the 276-watt, six-speaker audio system and you’ll never hear it. Or just punch the throttle and cue all of the horns in the Scat Pack’s ample brass section.

Our $41,880 2015 Dodge Charger R/T Scat Pack test car arrived with just a couple of options: $195 summer tires and the $695 Customer Preferred pack 21W with HD radio, navigation, the Uconnect 8.4-inch touch screen, and SiriusXM Traffic and Travel Link. In the face of ever-tightening emissions and carbon-dioxide regulations, it’s unclear how much longer carmakers will be able to offer big, ground-pounding V-8 sedans and coupes at middle-class prices. So if you don’t quite have the scratch for a Hellcat but don’t want to pussyfoot around with lesser muscle sedans, do not hesitate to check out the Charger R/T Scat Pack.

Read More

BMW M5 / M6 Gran Coupe with Competition Package

Call our response to the latest BMW M6 Gran Coupe and M5 sedan lukewarm. Our tests prove they’re plenty fast, but they lack the visceral communication and engaging soul that made the E39 M5 legendary. We ranked the M5 third in acomparison test against its Audi and Mercedes rivals.

Now comes the Competition package, named not with the S6 and E63 AMG in mind but rather to denote track-day intentions. Realistically, few large, luxurious four-doors with six-digit sticker prices are going to flirt with racetrack guardrails, so think of the Competition package as a $7300 blue pill ($6000 on the Gran Coupe) that promises to revive the rorty, racing-derived spirit of the M subbrand’s heritage. The package is also available for the M6 coupe and convertible.

Brief drives in the M5 and M6 GC show that the Competition pack never lets the driver forget he’s sacrificed comfort on the altar of trackworthy performance. Stiffer springs, dampers, and anti-roll bars, ride heights lowered by 0.4 inch, the unique 20-inch wheels, and less compliant front suspension bushings see to that. Our first stint in an M6 with the package was on freeways and during afternoon rush-hour traffic entering Vancouver, British Columbia. Even with all the electronics dialed back to their Comfort and Efficiency modes, the firm ride and sharp responses made the exercise akin to walking a grizzly on a leash.

With no track handy, we settled for storming about on two-lanes through the hill country outside Bellingham, Washington, where we drove both models equipped with the seven-speed dual-clutch transmission. They feel so similar from behind the wheel that we had to double-check which was which after climbing out.

The Competition package brings black-chrome exhaust pipes and a retuned active rear differential but also adds 15 horsepower at the top end of the twin-turbocharged 4.4-liter V-8’s rev band (redline stands at 7200 rpm). Equipped cars also see an extension of the torque peak of 500 lb-ft, which is a longer mesa that now runs from 1500 to 6000 rpm instead of falling off at 5750. That gives bragging rights over the 560-horse versions that the neighbor in your gated community abides for being an M5 or M6 Gran Coupe early adopter. BMW says the tweaks are good for 0.1 second in the 0-to-60-mph dash in the sedans, which the standard cars accomplished in 3.7 seconds in our tests.

The biggest gain in driver involvement is that the hydraulically assisted rack-and-pinion steering has what BMW calls “more-direct programming.” It’s evident in quicker responses to steering inputs and is so immediate that you’d call it twitchy in the Sport or Sport Plus settings if the steering weren’t so absurdly overweighted. (The additional modes are chosen via a button beside the shifter or programmed into one of the two M buttons on the steering wheel.)

The best steering feel for road use came in Comfort mode, delivering better feedback than in any 5er of this generation at the cost of a small dead zone at center. The recalibrated suspension no doubt has something to do with this, and your results may vary depending on your own temperament and conditions. With the shocks in Sport (Plus is too hard for the road), the throttle at Sport Plus, and the shifter at its sharpest setting, this car feels more like a real M. To approach E39 playful-puppy mode, you’d have to find a way to cut more than 500 pounds from the curb weight, but that’s not in the cards for today’s cars saturated with safety tech and must-have luxury features. Owners of these modern Ms will just have to settle for their cars being way, way faster.

Read More

2016 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray Z51 vs. 2016 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350

Chairman Mao Zedong, a fan of the red but not so much of the white or the blue, once said, “I got more hoes than the ozone.” Oh wait, it might have been Abraham Lincoln who said that.

The quote we were Google-searching for from Chairman Mao was something about asymmetric warfare, about how a fighter must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea, which is way more poetic and stuff. And what we have here is a classic asymmetric fight; a battle in which one side is conventionally powerful and established and the other is a fish.

All of this brings us inextricably to the showdown that neither Chevrolet nor Ford probably had in mind: the one between the Corvette and the new Shelby GT350. We set out to find the best American sports car that a successful, but not necessarily rich, person could attain. We would want road-course competence from our winner, but not at the expense of real-world drivability, since it is sadly the real world in which we spend most of our time. Our winner should look fast, sound fast, and be fast. But most important, it should be thrilling to drive.

Playing the role of the established power­house is the seventh-generation ­Corvette. We chose an example with the Z51 performance package to bring the track prowess we were looking for. And because driver engagement and enjoyment are ­paramount in this test, we chose the seven-speed manual transmission. Chevy provided just such a car, loaded up with the 2LT package of niceties ($4455), Magnetic Ride Control shocks ($1795), the data-and-video system for recording laps ($1795), the vibrant but extra-cost Laguna Blue paint ($995), and “sueded microfiber” seat inserts ($395). This ballooned the Z51’s suggested price from $61,395 to a whopping $70,830. But if you were to spec out a more basic performance Z51, you could easily cut $7000 from what this car cost.

Our insurgent, the Shelby GT350, is a car that would easily swim through the sea of EcoBoost and GT Mustangs undetected, were it not for its ripping exhaust note. Mustangs were never really intended to battle Corvettes. Hell, they have at various times shared platforms with Falcons, ­Pintos, and Fairmonts. But this one—this frankly shockingly special version—can put up a legitimate fight even though it’s more than 300 pounds heavier and is more than five inches taller than the Corvette. We specified a regular GT350 with the optional Track package instead of the R version because we wanted as much on-road sophistication as possible, and also because we wanted tires that roughly match the stickiness and longevity of the Corvette’s. The Track package—which brings magnetic shocks, a front strut-tower brace, firmer springs, and oil coolers for the engine, transmission, and differential—rings in at a not-insubstantial $6500. The only other option on our test car was the $475 “Over-the-Top Racing Stripes.” Unfortunately, once you opt for the Track package, Ford locks out the navigation system, upgraded stereo, and a few other goodies available to stand­ard GT350 buyers.

All in, our GT350 cost $56,970. That’s a substantial discount from our Corvette. The Chevy makes back all the points it loses for its inflated sticker in our features and amenities category—and then some. After all, this is supposed to be an asymmetrical fight.

We bombed around Willow Springs International Raceway in Southern California, gleefully roasting Michelins. We strapped on our instruments for our normal battery of proving-grounds tests. And we assaulted some of the country’s finest roads between our high-desert test facilities and the clogged thoroughfares of Los Angeles. In the final accounting, it was the insurgent that wound up with more hoes.

Read More

Audi RS Q3 Performance - sports crossover gets even faster

Like them or not, crossovers – and the performance versions they inevitably spawn – are here to stay. Thankfully, some even do reasonably good impressions of drivers’ cars, and the Audi RS Q3 is one such vehicle.

For those who baulk at the RS Q3’s 335bhp output and 4.8-second 0-62mph time, there’s now an even faster version.

The RS Q3 Performance uses a revised version of the regular car’s sonorous 2.5-litre, five-cylinder TFSI petrol powerplant, its output rising to 362bhp with peak torque of 343lb ft – improvements of 27bhp and 11lb ft respectively.

The latter figure is available in a spread between 1625 and 5500rpm – only a touch higher than the standard model’s 1600-5300rpm spread, but its effects slice four tenths from the 0-62mph time. Top speed remains limited to 155mph, which should suit most.

Mechanical changes extend to increased radiator cooling capacity and revisions to the fuel pump. A seven-speed S tronic twin-clutch transmission still delegates drive, via a Haldex V all-wheel drive system that can direct torque to wherever it’s most required.

The Performance pack retains the RS Q3’s RS sport suspension – 20mm lower than other Q3s – with RS sport suspension plus an option. This adds variable dampers, with Comfort, Auto and Dynamic settings.

Styling is also similar to the regular RS Q3, though Audi has applied extra titanium-look detailing to the singleframe grille, air inlet duct, side window trim strips, mirror housings, roof rails and the rear diffuser and spoiler. A unique paint shade, Ascari blue, is only available on the Performance, as are special 20-inch alloy wheels.

Standard equipment includes all-LED headlights, privacy glass, keyless entry and a 180-watt sound system. Pricing starts at £49,175, compared to the standard car’s £45,810. Order books are open now

Read More

Tesla Model S P90D

Tesla’s product architect, Elon Musk, must have been watching a Mel Brooks marathon on TNT when he picked “Ludicrous Speed,” straight out of Spaceballs, as the tag for the fastest acceleration mode in his Model S P90D. And indeed, one must have balls from outer space to fully exploit this car’s launch performance. To sort heroic acts from hype, we ran this electric missile through our test gantlet with, shall we say, shocking results.

Cutting to the chase, it’s the first production car with four doors to crack the 3.0-second zero-to-60-mph barrier, doing it in 2.8 seconds. In 30-to-50-mph passing acceleration, it trumps the Tesla Roadster Sport’s all-time record run of 1.5 seconds, also by two-tenths of a second. The P90D’s 11.1-second, 121-mph quarter-mile run, achieved with no hint of tire smoke or exhaust ruckus, merits VIP parking at NHRA headquarters. The Model S P85D in Insane mode, formerly the quickest Tesla, was a half-second slower to 60 and 0.7 second and 7 mph poki­er in the quarter-mile.

Due care is necessary to achieve these results. Options that add ballast, including the Model S’s huge sunroof, rear-facing seats, and second battery charger, must be avoided. It’s a $38,000 upgrade from a base Model S 70 rear-drive version to obtain the most-potent electric motors, the four-wheel drive, and the long-range 90-kWh battery pack. Then add the $10,000 ­Ludicrous Speed option to enable the on-demand disappearing services. A full ­cardiac work-up is recommended for ­anyone interested in experiencing Tesla’s ­latest abuse of common sense.

Maximum acceleration is available only when the battery’s state of charge is above 95 percent and “max battery perform­ance mode” is set on the control screen. When we test, we average two acceleration runs in opposite directions to eliminate wind and grade effects. Normally that’s no issue, but because the Model S’s performance deteriorates with heat build-up in the battery pack, controllers, wiring, and electric motors, pausing at least three minutes between acceleration runs is necessary.

This Tesla’s exploitation of Newtonian physics tops anything you’re likely to encounter this side of an amusement park or the Navy’s flight school. Nailing the right pedal vents a massive torque gush, and weird, wonderful, and addictive bursts of dopamine flood your brain’s pleasure center when this tsunami sloshes the juice in your inner ear.

GOLLY G’s

Checking our data bank for outliers, we found this Tesla ranks fourth among five cars capable of averaging more than 1.0 g during the first second of acceleration:

Porsche 911 Turbo S ................................. 1.25
Lamborghini Huracán LP610-4 ................ 1.19
Porsche 918 Spyder .................................. 1.14
Tesla Model S P90D .................................. 1.12
Audi R8 V-10 Plus ...................................... 1.08

And we’d add an honorable mention for the Bugatti Veyron 16.4 at 0.95 g.

That’s the beauty of chambering 713 pound-feet of torque into a four-wheel-driver weighing 4842 pounds. Sir Isaac didn’t lie when he told you great things are possible without bending or bruising his second law of motion. You hope the rush lasts to orbital escape velocity but, alas, it soon peters out. Roll alongside a Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat at 40 mph, for example, and the Mopar beats the Tesla to 150 mph by more than six seconds.

An interesting consolation race would be to see whether the Hellcat or the P90D would be the first to deplete its fuel supply. For now, we are satisfied in the knowledge that this is the quickest production four-door ever conceived.

Read More

Volkswagen Polo GTI review - can it compete with the Fiesta ST?

Volkswagen’s new Polo GTi is a big step up from the car it replaces, and not just because it is no longer hampered by the 1.4-litre twincharged engine and DSG-only gearbox. However, the bar wasn’t exactly set that high to start with and ultimately the new Polo GTi is a good Polo rather than an exceptional hot hatch. 

It’s biggest failing is that it doesn’t feel genuinely quick, with a flat performance delivery and a chassis that is capable rather than captivating. If VW could hand the Polo GTi over to the same engineers responsible for the Golf R then the baby GTi may finally be in a position to challenge the class leaders.

There have been three generations of Polo GTI before and, before that, the borderline bonkers supercharged G40 - but none has guarded its Golf GTI-aping calibrations quite so preciously as this one.

Volkswagen must be hoping that attention to detail pays off because, up to now, its 'baby' GTI hasn't been a hit with British drivers, accounting for roughly two percent of Polo sales in the UK, whereast the full-size GTI currently ratchets up a much healthier 15 percent of Golf purchases. By aligning the pair more closely, this hotter Polo GTI's share of sales should improve.

By cloning the Golf GTI and resizing it with the subtlest of iPad finger swipes, Volkswagen has turned the Polo GTI into a very good car, but a Fiesta ST is still a more engaging hot hatch - David Vivian, contributing editor.

The Sport Performance Kit is worth the investment as it can add a bit of extra spark to the less than exciting engine. It's also worth upgrading to the Discover Pro sat nav on the options sheet, as it's very good indeed.

Performance and 0-62 time > On paper, the Polo GTI is amongst the fastest hot hatches. But on the road it lacks any sense of urgency. 

Ride and handling > The Polo is planted, offering ample grip with no sharp surprises. But this solid handling also restricts fun, as the Polo would rather hold its line than dance around underneath you. 

Engine and gearbox > The engine's lack of urgency translates into a fairly tame feeling powertrain. Though acceleration is strong, the way power delivery peaks through the mid-range ensures the Polo GTI feels like a standard hatch with poke rather than an out-and-out hot hatch. 

Prices, specs and rivals > Many rivals undercut the GTI for price, but the VW's build quality is second-to-none.  

Interior and tech > The car's touchscreen is also amongst the very best in class, though screen graphics look a little dated. 

Read More

2016 Honda Accord Coupe V-6 Manual

Think of the modern, affordable two-door coupe as being like applesauce made from one of those squeaky, hand-cranked mutilator contraptions. Only in our pomaceous metaphor, the mechanism is a quid pro quo equation in which, ideally, the impracticality of lowered door count is offset by performance pretense and rear-wheel drive. This arithmetic creates gooey, wholesome stuff such as the latest Camaro, the Ford Mustang, and the BRZ/FR-S twins. It also has boxed out nearly every front-drive two-door on the market except Honda’s Accord.

Even as the front-drive coupe has all but disappeared, Honda has dug in hard,refreshing the Accord for 2016. It should be applauded for its tenacity. Nissan stopped selling the two-door Altima, and Toyota long ago chucked the Camry-based Solara overboard. A few compact players stick to the format, but when was the last time you overheard anyone pining for a Kia Forte Koup or Honda’s own (non-Si) two-door Civic? And the Scion tC? Please. Beyond a modicum of style, there’s little to recommend those cars. The Accord, alternatively, serves up the sportiest two-door experience this side of a pony car.

As a performance machine, the deck is stacked against the Accord coupe. Its specifications include front-wheel drive, a large 107.3-inch wheelbase, and more than 61 percent of its mass riding over its front axle. But the Accord coupe has long transcended its pigeonhole, and its cosmetic tweaks haven’t changed that. The V-6, six-speed-manual version you see here is the family’s edge case, with 278 horsepower and a plethora of new, nonfunctional gashes in each bumper. Power is unchanged compared with the last Accord coupe we tested (a 2013 model), and the cars weigh within six pounds of one another. It’s also a negligible two-tenths of a second slower to 60 mph—a still-quick 5.8 ticks—and posted barely lower grip and a four-foot-longer stop from 70 mph.

Unlike a Ford Mustang or a Chevrolet Camaro, the Accord coupe isn’t a numbers car. No one will be impressed by the Honda’s performance stats, but anyone can jump into this car and take up a quick pace. In spite of the Accord’s extremely front-biased weight distribution, the nose never feels heavy, a sensation aided by the light steering. Everything from the steering wheel to the brake pedal, the clutch, and the suspension feels as though it moves through the same high-viscosity fluid, and the car simply flows down the road. Understeer keeps you from going completely wild, but it’s progressive and manageable.

The sweet-sounding V-6 yanks the Accord around with zeal, and torque steer really only crops up when coming out of particularly tight corners. You can buy a V-6 Accord coupe with a six-speed automatic—or a four-cylinder version with a CVT—but the manual transmission is phenomenal, with short throws and perfectly spaced pedals. (A stick is available on the four-cylinder model, too, but you give up 93 horsepower.) Our only complaint is easily solved with a twist: The 2016 Accord Sport sedan’s manual gained a satisfyingly hefty metal ball that we prefer over the coupe’s lighter, more plasticky piece.

You’ll often hear bleating over the Accord coupe’s high price, at least relative to stuff like the Mustang and the Camaro. But Ford has effectively relegated its V-6 Mustang to rental-car status in its earnestness to shout “EcoBoost!” from every rooftop, and the Accord’s premium over the Camaro V-6 has shrunk to $3255 as Chevy makes room for that coupe’s new turbocharged four-cylinder base model. This is as evenly matched on price as these cars have ever been, and at $31,745, the Accord EX-L comes loaded with 18-inch wheels, leather seats, dual-zone automatic climate control, a power driver’s seat, heated front seats, a sunroof, and LED taillights and fog lights. So it’s not a rear-drive pony car, but for a slice of buyers, it fits the bill perfectly as a quick thing filled with creature comforts.

Honda may be ignoring the industry’s two-door recipe by keeping the Accord coupe front-drive—or by keeping it around at all—but the car remains appealing. The restyled bumpers and wheels don’t ruin what’s easily the sauciest design in Honda’s lineup, the back seat can actually hold bipedal creatures of moderate stature, and the trunk is enormous. Consider the driving satisfaction to be the cinnamon sprinkled on this delicious applesauce, the manual transmission the crank you want to keep operating, and rear-drive a nonessential ingredient.

Read More