Hyundai Tech: Sonatas of Two Different Flavors

Hyundai is expanding its Sonata lineup seemingly with something for everyone. In honoring this South Korean company’s press embargo, I cannot share driving impressions just yet, but I can spill the technical beans. And there are lots of them.

The 2.0T Sonata, as its name suggests, is powered by a turbocharged 2.0-liter engine. Hyundai avoided the GDI moniker that could have legitimately been attached, as this inline-4 also features direct injection of its gasoline. Now I admit there’s nothing particular novel about having a turbo-enhanced direct-injected engine of small displacement do the job of a traditional—and more fuel-consumptive—V-6. But Hyundai engineers have been busy in perfecting this concept in several distinctly innovative ways.

For one, the turbo’s compressor housing is actually part of the engine’s exhaust manifold. What’s more, the casting that integrates these two elements is of austenite stainless steel. It’s quite a technical achievement to use this material, but it’s ideal for this application because of its thermal properties of getting exhaust heat efficiently to the turbo’s compressor. And, of course, having the two components integrated into one only enhances this.

Factoid: It’s both the kinetic energy of exhaust flow as well as the thermal energy of its expanding gases that drive the turbo’s compressor and its attached forced-induction-producing impeller. Hyundai’s integrated design enhances both aspects.

The Sonata’s turbo is a twin-scroll type as well. That is, its porting and vanes are designed to exploit two separate paths of exhaust flow, from cylinders 1 and 4 and from cylinders 2 and 3. This way, pulses during inherent four-stroke operation don’t trip over each other. This twin-scroll idea isn’t unique to Hyundai (the 2.0-liter Buick Regal uses it as well). But the Sonata’s 274 bhp versus the Regal’s 220 suggests the other wizardry involved.

Hyundai engineers figure that optimized forced induction plus direct injection are worth around a 22-percent kick in torque, from 220 to 269 lb.-ft. over a broad rpm range, with the twin scrolls accounting for perhaps half this. There’s lots of synergy involved here as well: Direct injection provides a cooler charge of fuel; optimized intercooling does its magic as well with the forced induction of air. They combine to produce the 2.0T’s 137 bhp/liter, a figure that’s quite amazing in a car in the $24K-$29K range. More details on this and my driving impressions once the embargo has lifted.

The Sonata Hybrid also carries some very neat tech, specifically in its parallel-hybrid drivetrain, lithium-polymer battery pack and optimized thermal management. Hyundai engineers also pointedly used the term “fun to drive” in describing their hybrid design and development.

Its 2.4-liter gasoline engine operates on an Atkinson Cycle; more correctly, like other hybrids, on a innovatively valve-timed simulation of this short-compression/long-expansion concept. A clutch separates this powerplant from a 41-hp electric motor which resides directly ahead of a 6-speed automatic transmission eventually sending twist to the car’s front wheels.

Note the difference between Hyundai’s hybrid layout and those of Toyota Camry, Ford Fusion or Nissan Altima (these three, certainly technical siblings in more ways than one). The Hyundai’s 6-speed automatic is in marked contrast to the other’s CVTs, one claimed benefit being enhanced highway performance. What’s more, as its operation is integrated with the electric motor’s, this automatic has no need for an energy-sapping torque converter.

Unlike these other cars’ nickel/metal hydride battery technology, the Sonata Hybrid’s is lithium-polymer. Newer technology, it offers improvements in everything from power and energy density to weight to volume to cycle life to characteristics of state of charge.

This last one, SOC, for short, is particularly interesting in Hyundai’s optimization of hybrid operation. For reasons of durability, any battery profits from gentle chemical action—not being discharged too deeply, not being charged to its full capacity, with SOC being a measure of this. Typical nickel/metal hydride batteries owe their life-of-the-car longevity to an SOC window as narrow as 15 percent; e.g., operating no less than 50 percent SOC, no more than 65 percent SOC. Hyundai engineers say lithium technology can accept a wider range, say 50 to 75 SOC, with no degradation of battery durability.

What’s more, innovative thermal management stretches this further: In cold weather, for example, the Sonata Hybrid’s SOC window can expand to as wide as 45 percent, from 45 to 90 SOC. One benefit of this is balancing the inherent loss of battery performance concomitant with lower ambient temperatures. Despite these exemplary SOC characteristics, Hyundai engineers expect to confirm battery longevity on the order of 250,000 miles or more.

A last example of Hyundai’s thermal management and efficiency. Compared with other Sonatas, the Hybrid has a larger air intake; this, to handle hybrid powertrain cooling in extremes such as Death Valley at summer’s peak. On the other hand, such a gaping snout is detrimental to aerodynamics. To optimize matters, the Sonata Hybrid has what engineers term an Active Air Flap. As its name suggests, this gizmo automatically adjusts the airflow. It’s wide open at low vehicle speed and high coolant temperature; it closes as speeds increase or coolant temperature drops. Engineers figure there’s a 10-percent reduction in CD with this, all the more impressive when you hear that the car’s inherent drag is an already low 0.25.

My driving impressions of the Sonata Hybrid can appear on October 18 (one day before my birthday—please, no presents).

We drive Mazda’s Norwegian hydrogen-powered RX-8

Yes. You read that correctly. Mazda has been experimenting with hydrogen as an energy carrier for a long time. In fact, I wrote about it way back in Tech Tidbits, July 1992. Not long afterward, Mazda offered me a drive of a special hydrogen-fueled rotary-powered Miata MX-5. More than a decade later, March 2004, Sam Mitani drove and was able to report on an RX-8; this one, dual-fueled, either gasoline or H2.
And, indeed, the latest version of this RX-8 HRE (as in “Hydrogen Rotary Engine”) is what I drove recently. The HRE has had lease-only availability in Mazda’s home market since early 2006. The car is also taking part in Norway’s Hynor Hydrogen Highway Project, in which seven stations support a 360-mile route from Stavanger, in the southwest of the country, across to Oslo.
Why a hydrogen rotary?
It turns out there are two excellent technical reasons for fueling a rotary with hydrogen, both based on combustion dynamics. "With a rotary's hmmmm, as opposed to a conventional reciprocating engine's boing boing, note that a rotary's engine's intake port is nowhere near its combustion chamber." Thus, unlike in a recip engine, the intake charge isn’t subjected to hellacious heat of the previous combustion.
This is of particular importance with hydrogen, because the stuff is 10 times more flammable than gasoline. A major challenge in hydrogen recip engines is “flashback,” essentially preignition of the H2 encountering hot surfaces. A rotary engine sidesteps this completely.
Another beneficial aspect of rotary combustion is its inherently greater swept volume. Intake and compression of a recip engine involve 360 degrees of crankshaft rotation. By contrast, the rotary’s eccentric shaft travels through 540 degrees to accomplish these same two cycles, thus giving a more consistent mixture of fuel and air.
In summary, rotary combustion and hydrogen are made for each other—more or less.
The “less” part has to do hydrogen’s volumetric shortfall as an energy carrier, combined with a rotary’s inherent paucity of low-end torque. As a general rule, if an engine has dual-fuel capability, it gives up almost half its gasoline output when running on hydrogen. In the RX-8’s case, a gasoline-fueled 206 bhp drops to 108 on H2; torque diminishes from 164 lb.-ft. to 103. What’s worse, the RHE is tuned to deliver this reduced output in either of its dual-fuel modes.
Alas, the RX-8 HRE’s performance is decidedly sluglike. This feels all the more disconcerting because the car’s driveability on either fuel is exemplary. What’s more, the rotary’s phenomenal smoothness in revving is retained—only the kick is halved.
What’s Mazda to do?
If it were me, I’d dedicate the engine utterly to hydrogen. Its high octane—effectively 130+—would permit really abundant forced induction, gaining back a lot of the lost output. Also, in forgoing the dual-fuel jazz, I’d replace the RX-8 HRE’s currently minuscule 6 lb. of H2 at 5000 psi with perhaps double the tank volume and also take advantage of state-of-the-art 10,000-psi storage.
The car would still be an excellent “bridge,” a much-needed transitional vehicle in helping solve the chicken/egg challenge of hydrogen mobility. With proper rotary smoothness and power, it would be all the more entertaining as well.
(Purely as an aside—and because people have asked—the rotary concept isn’t amenable to diesel. This has nothing to do with anything we’ve discussed here. Rather, the problem is the infeasibility of arranging a rotary’s compression ratio high enough for diesel compression ignition.)

The Mercedes-Benz Shooting Brake Wagon is a Go

When Mercedes-Benz unveiled the CLS Concept Shooting Break at the 2010 Beijing Auto Show back in April, the company erroneously named it a “Shooting Break.” It’s understandable, as the French call this type of car a “break de chasse,” and break is listed as an alternate spelling in some glossaries. However, anyone who grew up in the U.K. knows that a shooting brake is a luxury 2-door coupé (or less commonly a 4-door sedan) with a station wagon rear end. Of course in the U.K. the generic term for an ordinary station wagon is “estate car.”
Before the Second World War Shooting Brakes were popular with the landed gentry in the U.K. Because of this, “shooting brake” is the accepted name reserved, if you will, for luxury station wagons such as the handful of Aston Martin Shooting Brakes custom-made in the 1960s.
Fast forward to today and Mercedes-Benz has confirmed that it will produce the CLS Shooting Brake as a new model in 2012. The press release clearly calls it the CLS Shooting Brake. It’s an appropriate name that could easily have been attached to other recently launched luxury station wagons.
The second-generation 2012 CLS 4-door coupé, which was unveiled at the recent Paris Auto Show, has already garnered several rave reviews for its sleek lines. The new Shooting Brake barely alters the overall sweeping look despite the longer roof and tailgate.
While European buyers will have a wide choice of engines it looks as if the new 4.7-liter twin-turbo V-8 that is powering the 2012 CLS 550 will be the only choice, at least initially, in the U.S. when the CLS Shooting Brake goes on sale later in 2011. It produces 402 bhp at 5250 rpm and 443 lb.-ft. of torque from 1600-4750 rpm.
Like the CLS, the Shooting Brake will offer a barrage of safety items including 12 airbags and optional features such as a dozen driver-assistance systems to help prevent accidents and reduce the severity if one should occur. The Active Blind Spot Assist and the Active Lane Keeping Assist are new. The Shooting Brake will also have the same all-new electromechanical Direct-Steer system that is appearing first in the CLS.
One of the most interesting new options is the LED High Performance Active headlamps that Mercedes-Benz says are a world first. They are closer to daylight than Bi-Xenon lights, which Mercedes-Benz claims is less tiring, yet they produce as much light. Each headlamp contains 71 LEDs that can be adjusted in a variety of ways, including spreading light around corners. In addition, the left headlamp can be dipped independently of the right to improve the view for the driver while avoiding dazzling oncoming vehicles.
The Shooting Brake will be built on the same production line as the CLS, along with the E-Class upon which the CLS models are based, at the facility in Sindelfingen—Mercedes-Benz’s largest plant.

Recalibrating the Toyota Prius

I’ve recently driven the Chevrolet Volt and Nissan Leaf. Indeed, I’ve written items here and also did our print R&T’s Leaf First Drive and coming Road Test. These are important new cars, each likely to modify people’s views on personal mobility. A decade ago, another car did a similar thing, and now the Toyota Prius is in its third generation.
How does the Prius compare with these two new contenders in our Brave New Technology?
To recalibrate the car—and, in a sense, to recalibrate myself—I borrowed a Prius for the 10-day period including the Thanksgiving holiday as well as a trip to San Francisco. Here’s what I’ve found so far.
An assessment of interior roominess concurs with my memory. In terms of ingress/egress, driver comfort and even the ability “to sit behind one’s self,” my particular ordering is Prius, Leaf and Volt. A Full Disclosure here: As many readers know, I’m bigger than the average bear, have a disproportionately long torso and a less than agile back as well. Also, curiously, the driver seat has a height adjustment missing in the passenger seat of a Prius. As a front seat passenger, I have equal head room in Prius and Leaf. No contest, though, in the rear seat. I find the Volt’s head room interference back there to be well nigh claustrophobic.
All three are 5-door hatchbacks, a layout that I find very useful. Indeed, if I owned any of them, I’d likely fold the rear seats except when needed.
The contrast of performance among the three is strong. In its initial “charge depletion” mode, the Volt behaves like a pure electric. As such, it’s the quickest of the trio. Once in “charge sustaining” mode, its engine is relatively unobtrusive. This plug-in series hybrid is good, sound, innovative technology.
The Leaf’s performance isn’t far behind, and indeed I find it the sportiest of the trio. Alas, its inherent pure EV range makes it unsuitable for some missions, namely the San Francisco portion of my adventure.
At around 9.7 seconds 0 to 60, the Prius is the slowest of the three in acceleration. It’s also the least sporty to drive. In fact, though, its enthusiast involvement is of a different nature.
Around town, I encourage the Prius into electric propulsion whenever possible—subject to a simple rule: Never drive like a dork. I use the car’s gasoline engine, often almost at full throttle, to accelerate to ambient traffic pace, then lift off momentarily to finesse it into electric mode. This works fine in typical 45- to 50-mph suburban traffic, and it’s good fun to see the resulting high mpg.
The Prius’s EV mode is button-activated and keeps the car utterly electric. However, it limits speed to around 25 mph and acceleration as well. I found this mode useful only in parking lots, school zones and my immediate neighborhood. Indeed, I’d play a little game coming home from work: Entering the neighborhood (zoned at 25 mph anyway), I’d use EV mode to coax a couple extra tenths out of the mpg monitor before reaching my driveway.
There’s also a PWR mode button that evokes somewhat sharper throttle response. I tended not to use it. Indeed, I did most of my driving in ECO mode and found its somewhat heavier throttle more to my liking.
In town the Prius got low 50s mpg, depending on how the traffic around me was behaving. Remember my “no dork driving” rule; and, curiously, I was aware of other drivers expecting me to drive like one and maybe being surprised otherwise.
On my trip to San Francisco, I averaged 41.0 mpg through the Los Angeles freeway sprawl. Once into mixed motoring up Rte. 101, for a while there I set the radar-sensed smart cruise to just a tick less than the fastest cars (let them get the ticket). From Paso Robles to San Francisco, including the city stint to my downtown hotel, the Prius averaged 69 mph and returned 49.1 mpg.
Had I driven a Chevy Volt, it would have depleted its charge, likely within 25 miles at that highway speed. For the remaining 175 miles to San Francisco, its gasoline mpg would have been in the mid-30s at best. And, of course, the Nissan Leaf wouldn’t have worked at all for this particular mission.
Also, because I know some will ask, what about a diesel for this same adventure? It’s not in this trio’s clean-air league: A typical “clean diesel” is a Tier 2 Bin 5 vehicle by Environment Protection Agency rating, equal to only an average gasoline car. By contrast, the Prius is an AT-PZEV (Advanced Technology Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle). But for certification of its evaporative emissions, so likely is the Volt. And a Leaf is a ZEV (with its electric utility generating the only emissions).

Thus far, my recalibration of the Toyota Prius speaks favorably for this car and its technology.

Porsche 918 Spyder and 911 Turbo S Edition 918 Spyder Pricing Announced

With so much anticipation built up around the 918 concept cars—wantonly brandishing the Spyder and RSR race trim in the show circuit—Porsche would have been borderline unscrupulous not to bring the sexy hybrid into production. As it turns out, Porsche will build the supercar in its Spyder trim, carbon fiber-reinforced plastic monocoque and all. Except for the presence of a new roof (manually operated with removable panels that can be stowed in the front luggage compartment.
But before you rush to put down a deposit, the 918 Spyder is a bit more expensive than a 911. Listed at $845,000, it’s the equivalent of four and an eighth 911 Speedsters. But don’t let the numbers deter you, there’s so much more than fuzzy math to the 918. Take, for instance, its output. With a maximum estimated at 718 hp, it comes courtesy of a midship 500-bhp V-8 and two electric motors both good for 218 hp. Mounted on the front and rear axles, the electric motors act independently and endow the 918 with variable all-wheel drive.

Hybrid Powertrain, Supercar Performance
Fitted with a 7-speed twin-clutch gearbox, the 918 Spyder has some lofty performance targets: 0–60 mph in 3.1 seconds, a 199-mph top speed and the Nürburgring in under 7 minutes, 30 seconds—that’s 2 sec. quicker than the Carrera GT. And don’t forget, these numbers are for a plug-in hybrid. Porsche is throwing out efficiency figures of 94 mpg and 16 miles of range solely on its lithium-ion batteries.

Limited to 918 units, production for the 918 Spyder doesn’t start until September 18, 2013. Think 2013 holidays, if you’re well behaved. For the impatient types, there’s the 918 Spyder-edition 911 to hold you over.
911 Turbo S Edition 918 Spyder

If you can’t wait until late 2013, Porsche is placating buyers of the 918 Spyder by offering them an exclusive opportunity to purchase an “Edition 918 Spyder” 911. Based on the 530-bhp 911 Turbo S, the special-edition Porsche has carbon-fiber trim inside and out, plus upgraded leather, badging and the exterior colors of the 918, including the use of Acid Green on the brake calipers, illuminated sill plates, interior stitching and instrument cluster needles. Also limited to 918 units, the 911 Turbo S Edition 918 Spyder will be available in Coupe ($160,700) and Cabriolet ($172,100) forms, making this one very expensive dealer option.

Mercedes-Benz B-Class F-Cell Comes to California

The Mercedes-Benz B-Class F-Cell was one of the stars of this company’s Los Angeles Auto Show presentation, along with no less than the super-potent CLS63 AMG. In a sense, the latter celebrates a supercar past, whereas the B-Class F-Cell more than hints at a super-efficient future.
As such, this new Benz fuel-cell electric vehicle was a great way for me to travel to Los Angeles from the company’s Carlsbad, California, Design Studios (where, by the way, I got up close with its Biome and other advanced concepts). The distance to the Los Angeles Convention Center, around 80 miles, was nothing to write home about, as I’ve already driven FCEVs from Fairbanks to Vancouver, from Las Vegas to San Diego—this one, on a single tank of hydrogen—all around the Los Angeles Basin, and from Nice to Monaco and back.
According to the company, this iteration of its FCEV program is “produced under series production conditions.” That is, the B-Class F-Cell is no lab-built one-off. It’s essentially what Mercedes will have on sale in 2015. For the time being, a limited number is being offered here in California on a 3-year lease program at $849/month. This, I must admit, is hardly chump change, though the lease does include insurance and the cost of hydrogen from your friendly local 10,000-psi station.
Don’t laugh. We already have two such stations within 8 miles of our office and another scheduled to open by the end of the year just down the street from here. That is, Orange County, California, is seen as a core community for an evolving hydrogen highway.
The B-Class, as its Euro nomenclature suggests, is what we’d call a compact. Its proportions, though, are decided different from most of this genre: An extended wheelbase of 109.4 in. packs maximal utility within a tidy overall length of 168.2 in. All of the propulsion hardware resides in a platform beneath the cabin, thus leaving excellent room up front and adequate, if not sumptuous, accommodation in the rear. The layout is also amenable to different propulsion choices, everything from those traditional choices, gasoline and diesel, out through hybrid and FCEV to pure BEV.
The FCEV’s front-drive electric motor produces 136 hp and a quick-zipping 214 lb.-ft. of torque. A top speed of 106 mph is cited, though I didn’t tempt fate on Los Angeles freeways by probing this claim. Its reported range of 270 miles could serve a lot of commuter applications in the Los Angeles Basin, though I’m not about to drive one from Fairbanks to Vancouver.

Mitsubishi i Pricing Announced

Mitsubishi has set the Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price of its i electric vehicle at $27,990 for the ES model and $29,990 for its SE version. From each of these, many buyers can eventually subtract $7500 by way of a federal tax credit. These prices place the tidy i at some $5000 less than the (admittedly larger) Nissan Leaf EV.
The ES includes air conditioning, a driver seat heater, remote keyless entry and a 4-speaker 100-watt AM/FM/CD with MP3/WMA capability. The SE adds alloy wheels, two-tone interior touches, leather-wrapped steering wheel and shift knob, fog lamps—and another 260 watts to the sound system. Another $2790 SE Premium package adds HDD navigation with rearview camera, FUSE Hands-free Link with USB port, steering wheel mounted audio controls and a Level 3 Chademo quick-charge port.
Customers encountering freezing climes should also opt for a $150 Cold Zone package that includes outside heated mirrors and a Warming System for the car’s 16-kWh lithium-ion battery pack.
With the battery at its lowest state of charge, a Level 3 quick charge can return the pack to 80 percent in 30 minutes, provided, of course, that you locate an appropriate Level 3 charger. At this point, be aware that Level 3 is in a formative stage. The Chademo hookup, also an option with Nissan’s Leaf, isn’t compatible with the one being developed by SAE.

A complete Level 1 110-volt replenishment takes 22.5 hours. A Level 2 220-volt hookup accomplishes this in 6.5 hours and is the sort recommended by Mitsubishi, for both practicality as well as battery life. The i comes with a 8-year/100,000-mile warranty on its battery pack. Given that the car’s range is rated at a modest 85 miles (on EPA’s LA4 city cycle), I predict that most i EVs will reach 8 years before they travel that 100K.
From our experience with the earlier (and somewhat smaller) i-MiEV, I’d find this wide-body i the perfect city transport delight; EV-spirited, tidy, easy to park, yet with a surprising amount of interior space within its 144.8-in. overall length. Fold down the rear seats and it’s even an urban hauler.
Mitsubishi has devised innovative marketing for early adopters. Visit i.mitsubishicars.com beginning Earth Day, April 22, 2011, and create an account which includes your own “My Mitsubishi i” page. Be among the first 2000 to place a pre-order (alas, it may already be too late), and the company will waive the $99.99 home electrical inspection fee (this inspection required to assess your home’s EV readiness). There’s also a refundable deposit of $299 via PayPal.

2013 Mercedes-Benz G63 AMG

What to make of the fact that the Mercedes-Benz Galendewagen has seen a nearly fifty percent increase in sales from 2009 to 2011? The fact that this vehicle, which was originally designed for military, not civilian, use, is now more than thirty years old (it dates from 1979) apparently does little to deter its well-heeled buyers. Nor does the ancient SUV's appalling gas mileage (13 mpg combined city/highway, in the case of the G550). The fact that a GL, or an ML, is far roomier inside also appears to be irrelevant.

One assumes that most of those buyers rarely if ever use the G-wagen's three (!) locking differentials, or seriously tap into this vehicle's incredible off-road skill set -- which includes the ability to climb, or descend, a 45-degree slope. That off-road ability is the only rational reason to choose a G-class over one of Mercedes' far more modern SUVs. But rationality probably has little to do with a G-class purchase.
After three decades with only minimal changes, the G-wagen has emerged as an icon. The boxy design is now seen as a throwback style statement. This utilitarian vehicle has morphed into a wild-child image machine.
That idea that outrageous is a core component of the G-wagen's appeal is supported by this statistic: The AMG version has traditionally accounted for a majority of G-wagen sales. In no other Mercedes model line is the AMG version so popular.

Model year 2013, then, will be an important one for G-wagen clientele. After the G55 AMG disappeared for 2012 (only the G550 is currently sold in the United States), the AMG G-class returns, in the form of the new, 2013 G63 AMG.
Mercedes may be loath to mess with the G-wagen's design, but there's always room for a little more bling. Thus the 2013 model welcomes a strip of LEDs under the round headlights, red brake calipers, twenty-inch wheels, and a more aggressive lower fascia punctuated by three huge air intakes.
Mercedes also continues to build on the amusing dichotomy between the G's militaristic exterior and its Sybaratic interior. New interior features include a console-mounted knob controller for the standard Comand multi-media interface; a new iPad-style TFT-screen that sprouts out of the dash; and available Designo interior that decks out the upright cabin in quilted leather. A new electrical architecture allows such up-to-the-minute conveniences as internet access, adaptive cruise control, and blind-spot assist.
Having bowed out with the old, supercharged, 5.5-liter V-8 under the hood, the AMG G-class returns with the new, 5.5-liter twin-turbo V-8 (having skipped over the normally aspirated 6.2-liter engine seen in most other AMG models). Now cranking out 544 hp (up from 507) and 560 pound-feet of torque, the burly new V-8 still emits a deep rumble from its side-exiting exhausts but also -- amusingly -- comes with auto stop/start. From rest, the AMG V-8 can have this tall, heavy beast hurtling along at 62 mph in only 5.4 seconds. Hauling it back down again are new brakes that feature six-piston calipers up front. Mercedes claims that the suspension has been revised for more dynamic handling -- too bad the steering, which is unbelievably slow and full of friction, discourages any exploration of the G's enhanced cornering abilities.
The greater disappointment for G-wagen buyers, however, probably would be that the G63 is not, in fact, the zenith of G-wagen outrageousness. Two other variants are even more absurd: the two-door convertible (complete with power top); and the G65 AMG, powered by a biturbo V-12 with 612 hp. Unfortunately, the two wildest G-wagens are not available in the United States.

2013 Mercedes-Benz G63 AMG

On sale: July
Base price: $129,000 (estimated)
Engine: 5.5-liter, twin-turbo V-8
Power: 544 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque: 560 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
Transmission: 7-speed automatic
Drive: Four-wheel
Curb weight: 5625 lb
Wheels: 9.5 x 20 in
Tires: 275/50R20 tires

The 2013 Dodge Dart aces IIHS testing as Top Safety Pick

Based on a close-up look at the Dart during recent automotive events, it truly appeared Dodge had hit the sweet spot on the new small car. After a quick look at the engine and interior, we noted the refined fit and finish while listening to some of the car's virtues, pointed out by the brand reps in attendance. It is good to hear the IIHS has confirmed its safety.
"We had high expectations for the Dart and our engineers delivered," says Reid Bigland, Dodge-brand President and CEO and Head of U.S. Sales. "Since its launch, the 2013 Dodge Dart has consistently outperformed in the area of fuel efficiency, technology, value for the money and now safety. It is truly a groundbreaking new car."

Though the 2013 Dodge Dart claims a total of 60 different safety and security features, a lot of the IIHS designation was a likely result of two specific features. It comes with 10 airbags standard and has a passenger compartment surrounded by high-strength steel – a full 68 percent of the body structure making it the highest in the industry.
The Top Safety Pick is the highest safety rating bestowed by the IIHS.
"Winners afford buyers the best overall protection in four of the most common kinds of crashes, and help them avoid crashes altogether with electronic stability control," says IIHS President Adrian Lund.
At present, the IIHS requires certain modern technology systems to be present for any vehicle to receive Top Safety Pick status. These include electronic traction and stability control systems.
The 2013 Dart has those features along with electronic roll mitigation, four-channel anti-lock disc brakes, electronic brake-force distribution, blind spot monitoring and even rear cross-path traffic detection.
The Dart joins 11 Chrysler Group vehicles previously awarded an IIHS Top Safety Pick designation for 2012, including the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Patriot; Dodge Durango, Journey, Grand Caravan, Charger and Avenger; Chrysler Town & Country, 300 and 200; as well as the Fiat 500.
Among numerous other awards and accolades the 2013 Dodge Dart has been named the Compact Car of Texas by the Texas Auto Writers Assn, on of the 10 Coolest Cars Under $18,000 by Kbb.com and Consumer Guide Automotive and to the Most Important New Cars for 2013 List by the Washington Post.
We’ve already missed one opportunity to drive Dodge’s new compact marvel during the 2012 RMDE and will not let such a chance get away again. As a long time admirer of small cars with spirited performance, the 2013 Dodge Dart seems to promise not only reliable, economical transportation, but a whole lot of driving fun to boot.
Not only that, it looks darn good in red and black. How did Richard Thompson put it? “Red and Black leather, my favorite color scheme,” his original composition 1952 Vincent Black Lightning intoned.
In the song, our protagonist is dying and bequeathing his Vincent motorcycle to his redheaded girlfriend. We’d be delighted if someone, involving considerably less drama, would just loan us a Dart to drive for a while. That’s the only way to ever know if it’s as much fun to drive as it looks.

Tightening the Screws

• 
  

Recap: FR-S Problems

First, the car sounded terrible. A high-pitched chirping noise came from the engine bay, which was louder when I used fuel that had any ethanol content. Filling up meant that I’d have to go out of my way to find a gas station with non-Ethanol 91 Octane to avoid a tank full of loud crickets.
I went to my dealer about it for advice. They didn’t help. They said it was a normal sound of the car’s direct injection noise, and that if using ethanol-free gas helped, then I should keep using ethanol-free gas. I was not enthusiastic with that answer.
The other issue I had occurred less frequently. When idling at a red light, the engine RPM would drop to about 400, and then bounce back up to normal idling speed. Whenever this happened the car would shake roughly, and feel like it was on the verge of stalling. Headlights would even dim like the car was about to stall out. It’s only occurred four times, and when I brought it up with my dealer they tried to diagnose the issue, but couldn’t recreate the problem. They said without a check-engine light, there’s not much they can do.

TSB: Toyota Squashes Bugs?

I reached out to Toyota corporate for help on both of these subjects and was advised to contact my dealer, which (as discussed) has already been no help at all. I was just about to give up on finding some answers, when a TSB was issued for the car last week.
A technical service bulletin (TSB) is a recommended procedure for repairing a vehicle. These aren’t quite recalls, because they don’t affect the safety of the car.
The TSB (#S-SB-0023-12) referenced the chirping noise, and explains “Some vehicles may exhibit a high pitch chirp or squeak noise from the High Pressure Fuel Pump Assembly when the engine is fully warmed up and idling.”
However, there are some oddities here. The part numbers for the replacement high pressure fuel pump are the same as the parts that are already in the car. I asked a Toyota representative if the parts were the same, or whether or not the new parts received any update. The person I spoke to at Toyota said that “the part is the same” but that there is no information as to what the cause of the problem is.
I guess the real test is to get the part replaced, but the TSB is for the USA only, so far, and not issued in Canada yet. I’ve reached out to my dealer to contact me when it applies to Canadians.
Another story has surfaced regarding the idle issues. Apparently there’s a fix to the ECU that will cause the idle drop to stop happening.
The problem is associated only with early production models and my car falls into that category being number 3,417.
I’ve reached out to my dealer to see if I can get this fix as a precaution, even without a check-engine light, because right now I’m just waiting for a stall to happen.

Waiting For Fixes

I hope that other FR-S owners aren’t running into these issues like I am. I can’t help but think that if an auto journalist who writes a column on his car every week can’t get any solution from Toyota, then your average FR-S owner must be completely ignored.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m still really enjoying the car and these small nagging issues are bearable, and as long as they’re not damaging anything, I’m in good spirits. Still, the lack of concern from my dealer is disappointing. I’d expect that the latest, hottest vehicle would get a little more attention from the folks at Toyota but that’s not what I’m experiencing. I also wonder if BRZ owners are getting the same service, and if the price difference between the two vehicles could have reflected a difference in corporate mentality.

Tesla says it'll make advance repayment on U.S. loans

Tesla Motors, the maker of electric cars led by Elon Musk, said it's making the first advance payment of U.S. Energy Department loans the California start-up used to engineer and produce the Model S sedan.
Tesla, which qualified for $465 million in U.S. loans in June 2009, said last week in a filing that the Energy Department requested a faster repayment schedule as it expands sales of the $57,400 Model S and additional all-electric cars. The Palo Alto, Calif.-based company was "happy to oblige," Musk said.
"Far from being worried about our survival, the DOE is highly bullish about our future and doesn't want us to delay early repayment of the loan if we have the cash on hand to do so," Musk said in a blog post on the company's website. "I am happy to announce that we will be initiating an advance payment today to prefund the principal payment that is due in March 2013."
The initial payment comes after the carmaker works to become profitable from selling vehicles propelled by lithium-ion battery packs.
The loan program used by Tesla, as well as Fisker, Ford and Nissan, was created in 2008 by President George W. Bush's administration to spur a U.S. market for highly fuel-efficient cars and trucks, and disbursed by President Barack Obama.
Jen Stutsman, an Energy Department spokeswoman, didn't immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment.
Tesla last week lowered its 2012 production target to as many as 3,225 cars from about 5,000.
Through the end of September, the company has built 359 Model S vehicles at its Fremont, Calif., plant, and delivered more than 250, Musk said Wednesday.
Tesla fell 1.7% to $29.30 Wednesday. The shares have risen 2.6% this year.

Pricey Allroad crossover looks like a winner for Audi

That's the difference between the base price for a new Allroad and the 2012 Audi A4 Avant station wagon, the car the Allroad replaces. Plus $150 a year for gasoline, of course. That's the EPA's estimate of how much more it will cost to fuel the Allroad than an A4 Avant wagon, despite the vehicles' identical performance and drivetrains.
The Allroad is an attractive, luxurious and sporty crossover SUV that's essentially a mildly restyled, more-expensive version of the attractive, luxurious and sporty A4 station wagon Audi sold until the beginning of the 2013 model year. (Hint to bargain shoppers: Your local Audi dealer may still have one.)
Prices for the 2013 Audi Allroad Quattro start at $39,600. The five-passenger crossover SUV comes with a fine 211-horsepower 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine, eight-speed automatic transmission and all-wheel drive. I tested an Allroad with a few options that stickered at $42,900.
The Allroad is no better than the A4 Avant, though it will almost certainly outsell it and earn Audi more money. It's a truism in the auto industry that Americans love crossover SUVs and abhor station wagons.
Gentlemen, start your platitudes: It's the free market in action. There's a sucker born every minute. Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line. Well, maybe not that last one, but the others apply.
The Allroad's wheelbase, passenger and luggage room are virtually identical to the Avant. It's 1.8 inches taller -- thanks to 1.5 inches more ground clearance -- 0.6 inch wider and 0.7 inch longer than the wagon. The Allroad has the same drivetrain and performance figures as the A4 Avant, though it's more expensive and uses more fuel.
The Allroad does much better when compared with other automakers' luxury wagons and crossovers.
Its direct competitors include the front-wheel drive Acura TSX wagon and AWD wagons like the BMW 328i xDrive, Cadillac CTS4, Subaru Outback and Volvo XC70.
Midsize upscale crossovers like the Infiniti EX, Land Rover Evoque, Lexus RX and Mercedes-Benz GLK will also compete with the Allroad.
The Allroad's combination of fuel economy, luxury and all-wheel drive is unmatched.
The EPA rated the Allroad 20 m.p.g. in the city, 27 on the highway and 23 in combined driving. That beats all the competitors I've named but the Acura, which can't match the AWD Audi's performance, and the less-powerful and luxurious Subaru.
The Allroad's interior is comfortable and refined. Leather seats are standard, and soft-touch materials cover most touch points.
The gauges are large and legible. A large sunroof lets in lots of light. Headroom is excellent for all occupants. The front seat offers plenty of room, but rear legroom could be better.
There's plenty of cargo space, with a low floor and wide opening that make it easy to load heavy objects.
Audi's MMI rotary control pads for climate, audio and other systems are falling behind the competition in ease of use. The Allroad's voice-recognition system is poor.
The Allroad I tested lacked some features you might expect in a $42,900 luxury wagon, including blind-spot alert, streaming Bluetooth audio capability, ventilated seats and a navigation system
The 211-horsepower engine is one of the least-powerful in the segment, but the combination of the turbo's readily available torque -- 258 pound-feet at just 1,500 r.p.m. -- and the smooth and quick eight-speed automatic transmission provide good throttle response and acceleration. Audi reports a 0-60 m.p.h. time of 6.5 seconds and top speed of 130 m.p.h.
The Allroad's suspension absorbs bumps and holds curves well. The electric power steering feels light in slow driving, but firms up nicely at speed.
The Audi Select system that adjusts steering, suspension, transmission and engine settings undoubtedly improves that, but it's part of a $3,250 option package.
The 2013 Audi Allroad provides an alternative for customers who like the functionality of a sport wagon and are willing to pay for plastic-clad wheel arches, a little extra ground clearance and vaguely SUV-ish looks.

More Details: 2013 Audi Allroad

All-wheel drive five-passenger crossover wagon
Price as tested: $42,900 (excluding destination charge)
Rating: * * * (out of four stars)
Reasons to buy: Looks, performance, practicality, fuel economy
Shortcomings: Price, rear legroom, voice-recognition system

More Details: 2013 Audi Allroad 2.0T Quattro at a glance

Vehicle type: All-wheel drive five-passenger crossover wagon
Power: 211-horsepower 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder
Transmission: Eight-speed automatic
Price range: $39,600 base price; $42,900 as tested (excluding options and destination charges)

More Details: Key features on vehicle tested

Antilock brakes; stability control; front-seat mounted side air bags; curtain air bags; space saver spare tire; power sunroof; aluminum roof rails; front and rear fog lights; rain and light sensor; heated power sideview mirrors; power locks and windows; leather seating surfaces; 12-way power driver seat; eight-way power front passenger seat; 60/40 split folding rear seat; AM/FM/CD premium audio with SD card and auxiliary input; three-months’ Sirius satellite radio service.
Options: iPod interface; auto-dimming rearview mirror with compass; auto-dimming sideview mirrors; Bluetooth phone compatible; heated front seats; driver memory; Xenon lights with LED daytime running lamps; three-zone climate control; power tailgate.

More Details: Competitive EPA fuel economy ratings

(Automatic transmissions; all-wheel drive where available)
2013 Audi Allroad Quattro: 20 m.p.g. city/27 m.p.g. highway/23 m.p.g. combined. Premium fuel.
2013 Acura TSX 2.4L wagon (front-wheel drive): 22 m.p.g. city/30 m.p.g. highway/25 m.p.g. combined. Premium fuel.
2012 Audi A4 Avant Quattro: 21 m.p.g. city/29 m.p.g. highway/24 m.p.g. combined. Premium fuel.
2012 BMW 328i xDrive wagon: 17 m.p.g. city/25 m.p.g. highway/20 m.p.g. combined. Premium fuel.
Cadillac CTS4 3.6L wagon: 18 m.p.g. city/26 m.p.g. highway/21 m.p.g. combined. Regular fuel.
2013 Subaru Outback 2.5i Limited: 24 m.p.g. city/26 m.p.g. highway/30 m.p.g. combined. Regular fuel.
2013 Volvo XC70 T6 AWD: 17 m.p.g. city/23 m.p.g. highway/20 m.p.g. combined. Regular fuel.

More Details: 2013 Audi Allroad Quattro

All-wheel drive five-passenger crossover wagon
Base price: $39,600
Price as tested: $42,900 (excluding destination charge)
Safety equipment: Antilock brakes; stability control; front-seat mounted side air bags; curtain air bags; space saver spare tire.
Specifications as tested
Engine: 2.0-liter turbocharged direct-injection DOHC variable-timing 16-valve four-cylinder.
Power: 211 horsepower at 4,300 r.p.m.; 258 pound-feet of torque at 1,500 r.p.m.
Transmission: Eight-speed automatic
EPA fuel economy rating: 20 m.p.g. city/27 highway/23 combined. Premium fuel.
Dimensions
Wheelbase: 110.4 inches
Length: 185.9 inches
Width: 72.5 inches
Height: 58.0 inches
Curb weight: 3,891 pounds
Where assembled: Ingolstadt, Germany
Comparative base prices
(Automatic transmissions; all-wheel drive models where available, not including destination charges)
2013 Acura TSX 2.4L wagon (front-wheel drive): $31,360
2012 Audi A4 Avant Quattro: $36,400
2012 BMW 328i xDrive wagon: $39,500
2013 Cadillac CTS4 wagon: $41,105
2013 Subaru Outback 2.5i Limited: $29,935
2013 Volvo XC70 T6 AWD 3.2: $33,450

Ford C-Max ad campaign aims for fans of Prius

Ford launched a 15-month advertising campaign Thursday for the vehicle meant to raise its alternative powertrain profile: the 2013 C-Max, a five-passenger hybrid that comes with or without a plug.
Ford is not looking for huge volumes from the C-Max, which went on sale mid-September. So far, dealers have sold about 1,000.
The C-Max Energi plug-in will follow in November. Both are built at Ford's Michigan assembly plant in Wayne.
The regular C-Max will carry a base price of $25,995. The Energi will start at $33,745, but buyers will be able to take a $3,750 federal tax credit.
"It is a new nameplate so we have to establish what the C-Max is and get it on people's shopping list," said Matt VanDyke, director of U.S. marketing communications.
Though the C-Max has been sold in Europe for several years with diesel or gas engines, Ford wants it to become synonymous with hybrids in the U.S. much like Toyota's Prius nameplate.
Indeed, the advertising campaign and a website promotion dubbed the "hybrid games" compares the C-Max and Prius.
It helps define the C-Max by likening it to the Prius, which is the "Kleenex of hybrids," said Amy Machesney, C-Max marketing manager.
"We don't anticipate selling the same volume as the Prius," Machesney said, noting Toyota has spent years building its loyal following and sales volume.
The three Prius variants -- the regular liftback sedan, the smaller c and slightly larger v wagon, accounted for 54% of the 322,516 non-plug-in hybrids Americans bought this year through September, according to Hybridcars.com.
Ford hybrids had about 9.5% of the market in 2011, but that figure has fallen to 4% with the loss of a hybrid version of the Escape. Ford hopes to fill that void with the C-Max.
Toby Barlow, chief creative officer for Team Detroit's global Ford team, said he enjoyed the challenge of going up against the "gold standard" Prius.
To avoid alienating customers who love Toyota, Barlow went with a lighthearted spot that features an animated line-drawn character created in 1969 by Italian artist Osvaldo Cavandoli and featured in the Italian "La Linea" children's TV series and on "Great Space Coaster" in the U.S.
The "hybrid games" pit a C-Max and Prius in feats such as passing a tractor-trailer uphill with spoof sports commentators reminiscent of scenes from the movie "Dodge Ball." See: www.ford.com/cars/cmax.
VanDyke said the C-Max campaign starts with two commercials that will run for 60 days, followed by a new series in a sustained campaign to run through next year.
Tom Rivers, senior vice president of global automotive for Nielsen, said automakers have raised awareness of more eco-friendly vehicles and Ford has led that charge.

More Details:

Ford C-Max
Base price: $25,995
Ford C-Max Energi
Base price: $33,745 before a $3,750 federal tax credit
Toyota Prius
Base price: $24,795
Toyota Prius v
Base price: $27,345