By Roger Boylan

05.28.2008

I have a fantasy shared, I know, by all autosavants: to follow the example of Jay Leno and have a collection of my favorite cars, with the wherewithal to keep them looking showroom-new and in perfect condition. This is the only place it will ever happen for me, so I’m going about it methodically and turning it into a miniseries: Part One, The Standards; Part Two, The Sportives; Part Three, The Utilities. For purposes of space and sanity, I’m restricting myself to a maximum of ten vehicles per segment. Some of them have already been featured in these pages under my byline.

We are, in this fantasy, under Mediterranean skies, either on the Cote d’Azur near Menton or somewhere south of Salerno, with a view of Vesuvius.

Part One: The Standards
These are the sedans that once set the standard for their class and time and that, for reasons known only to me and God, I would like to own.

1955 Citroen Traction Avant

Among the first front-drive cars (hence its name, meaning, literally, “Forward Traction”), produced between 1938 and 1955, this beauty, long associated with Resistance movies and the era of Gabin and Piaf, came in 4- and 6-cylinder variants, the latter, with a 2.8 liter engine, known as the “Big Six.” In its upscale iteration, which of course we see before us in my garage, it was equipped with leather seats, a wood dashboard, a very modern 12-volt electrical system, and, typical for a Citroen, an ultra-sophisticated suspension. Some models also had a sliding sunroof. The 2.8 engine propelled the car to speeds up to 85 mph and the state-of-the-art suspension ensured that the Traction was fast and held the road when cornering. Results can be admired in the films The Great Escape, Lacombe Lucien, and To Catch a Thief, among others.

1973 Rover P5 3.5 Litre

This is what the Queen drives, or drove. To my mind, a near-perfect combination of the classic and the sporting a l’anglaise, excelled only by the Jaguars of the period (see below). Powered by the venerable 3.5 litre Rover V8 that started life over here as a Buick 251, these beasts bustled down the road with speed and authority; their 200 hp was a lot of punch, back in the day. Inside, of course, there was the leather-bound, wood-panelled luxury of Athenaeum Club style. Prime Ministers Harold Wilson, Ted Heath, Jim Callaghan, and Margaret Thatcher drove, or rode in, Rover P5s, but Tony and Gordon have made do with Jags. Speaking of which….

1967 Jaguar Mk. II 3.8

One of the purest iterations of the “grace, pace, and space” dictum of Sir William Lyons, Jaguar’s founder and chairman. This is the Jag that got me hooked on the marque, back in boyhood at one of the Geneva Motor Shows in the ’60s, and got me hooked all over again in adulthood, when a red variant showed up driven by Inspector Morse in the eponymous TV series, to which I was long addicted. Morse’s Jag (later sold for £100K) was a relatively modest 2.4 litre version, not the 3.8 you see before you in my garage. This is really the archetype of Jaguar sedans, and bears a strong resemblance to its direct descendant, the S-Type that I drive daily in real life. The 3.8 version of the Mark II was one of the fastest production cars available in its day; the engine was the same one used in the E-Type, capable of producing up to 230 hp and generating easy cruising speeds of 120+ mph. Oh yes, I can see myself rushing to nowhere down the Corniche some summer morning in this car (British racing green, ideally, but pearl white would do.)

1980 Mercedes-Benz 450SEL 6.9

Beneath the common-or-garden body of your average Manhattan dentist’s S-Series 280 was a ferocious performance sedan that went like the blazes. An easily attained maximum of 140 m.p.h., and prolonged, illegal cruises at 130, were reported by such smitten fans of the day as Car and Driver’s correspondent, who wrote “The 6.9 feels more nimble, more agile than any other Mercedes we can remember. The enormous and very thirsty (12-14 mpg) 6.8 litre V8 powerplant, shared with the M-B 600 Pullman, gave out 286 hp and propelled the heavy car to 60mph in around 7 secs. John Frankenheimer, in Ronin, and Claude Lelouch, in C’etait un rendezvous, were among the movie directors who featured the 6.9 on celluloid; each also owned one. This Benz is durable, solid, and desirable, especially in gunmetal gray. Good for a sprint up the coast on weekends.

1957 Mercedes-Benz 300 “Konrad Adenauer”


Konrad Adenauer was the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of (West) Germany, from 1949 until 1963, the years of Germany’s postwar economic recovery, the Wirtschaftswunder, when the recently prostrate nation got to its feet, brushed off its knees, and set to work. Emblematic of this newfound confidence, and of the renewed luster of the once-great Stuttgart firm that had pandered to Hitler (not a real car buff, by the way: he never learned to drive)–was this magnificent, stately car, named in honor of the distinguished Chancellor, who owned, or was driven in, six over his long life (he died at 91). It was a thoroughly modern car for its day, with an advanced independent suspension system, “Arctic-Kar” air conditioning, Borg-Warner 3-speed automatic, and a 3-liter, 175-h.p. engine. Adenauer’s versions had writing desks, sirens, curtains, fender flagpoles, and division windows. Frank Lloyd Wright, the architect and notorious car buff, owned one; so did Yul Brynner. To me, this car exudes the dignity and self-possession of a much older, aristocratic Germany. It couldn’t care less whether or not you can outrun it to 60; it will take its own sweet time, danke sehr, perhaps reaching a respectable 105 m.p.h. on the Autobahn if so inclined.

1961-1967 Ford Anglia 105E

I’ve never quite figured out why I like this car so much, but I always did, and still do, so there it is, in my dream garage. As mentioned in a previous piece (“I Dream of Anglias”), my adoration reached its height during a family trip through northern Italy and Yugoslavia in the early ‘60s, when I noticed in my weird childish way that spanking-new Ford Anglias were almost as popular in Italy as were Fiats, and that the prevalent hue was a luscious pistachio green. And there you have justification enough, for the Italians are the world’s premier nation of car lovers. If they like a car–basta cosi. Anyway, I always admired the Anglia’s styling, inspired by American cars of the day (Studebakers and Lincolns in particular), so much more attractive and inspired, with its reverse-rake rear window and flashy add-ons, than the previous, plebeian Anglia. As of the inception of Series 105E, you could get your Anglia with chrome side strips, two-tone side flashes, two-tone vinyl seats, chromed rear lights, and a handsome toothy chrome radiator grille. This was at a time when small cars were only just emerging from the humdrum era of postwar deprivation; the chromed-up and sassy Anglia was the harbinger of a new age. The Mods and the Rockers were upon us (well, upon the Brits), and around the corner were the Fab Four and the Stones. All that seems as quaint and remote now as the Crimean War, but at the time the Anglia 105E represented the fever pitch of modernity. And the little car has held up well. It featured prominently in two of the Harry Potter films, and it’s still a hot property on amateur rally circuits.

1937 Cord 812


Finally, an American car, and one of the finest ever–and one of the biggest commercial flops. A lesson learned by writers and auto designers alike is that originality has its price, and it’s usually too high for the public. Mind you, early Cords had dodgy transmissions, a problem that didn’t get fixed in time to reassure the understandably wary Depression-era public. Upshot: The Auburn Automobile Co., manufacturer of Cords, expired in 1937, just as it was beginning to manufacture an automobile of the first rank, the model 812, the last, and the best, of its line. Sleek and aerodynamic, it rode lower than any of its contemporaries, and moved faster than most: The speed endurance record set on a Cord 812 at the Bonneville Salt Flats in 1937—24 hours at 101.74 m.p.h.—was unbroken until 1954. Unlike most of the other cars of the time (the Citroen Traction Avant excepted), Cords had front-wheel drive, and they dispensed with such impedimenta as running boards and bulbous headlamps and other leftovers of the age of the hackney-cab. The headlights were retractable popups hidden in the flowing front fenders. And, like one of the mighty Pacific Limited locomotives of the day, the 812 boasted unadorned louvers around the hood, a vivid statement of futurismo. The Cord had no chrome, unlike its little Anglia stablemate. But its beauty is hard to deny. It could be the very embodiment of the Goddess of Speed. And while we’re on the subject of goddesses….

1975 Citroën DS 23 Pallas

Citroën sold nearly 1.5 million of the DS (“déesse,” or “goddess”) and near-twin ID (“idée,” or “idea”) models over 20 years of production. A unique car indeed, the DS is what the world thinks of when it thinks “French car.” Like its ancestor the Traction Avant, and so many early French cars, it was a pioneer. Its famous self-leveling suspension, which caused it, when coming to a halt, to sink sighing to its knees like a tired camel, gave it a ride equal to that of a Rolls-Royce. The extraordinary roadholding was credited for saving the life of President Charles de Gaulle during an assassination attempt in 1962 (as described in my article, “The Goddess and the Idea”). And of course there’s the unmistakable, futuristic, aerodynamic body, one of the most influential automotive designs of all time. Yes, you love the DS or you hate it. I fall into the former camp, perhaps needless to say, which is why there’s a place in my garage for a silver-gray 1975 DS Pallas, the summum bonum of the species, with the biggest engine and the most goodies.

1975 Tatra T603

And now for something completely different: Communism’s finest automobile, from one of the oldest and most distinguished Czech manufacturers. Not to laugh: remember that pre-Communist Czehoslovakia produced some of Europe’s finest machinery, from sewing machines to heavy guns, and not even Communism could extinguish the spark of Czech craftsmanship. Tatra was founded as a wagon and carriage manufacturer in 1850 as Nesselsdorfer Wagenbau-Fabriksgesellschaft, and became Czechized after the First World War as Tatra. This beauty (if you’ll excuse the expression) dates from ’75, the last year of its 20-year run. It was the crème de la crème of Politburo limos; Fidel Castro had a white one, and Nicolae Ceaucescu and Leonid Brezhnev each owned a couple. Actually, the T603 was quite a good car. Its burly air-cooled V8 moved it briskly along, its disc brakes lowered the anchor convincingly, and an all-independent suspension system gave it a ride nearly as smooth as that of a Citroen. The early T603s, with three headlights, looked like goggle-eyed extraterrestrials, but later versions had a more normal four-headlight arrangement, and in the end acquired a kind of quirky elegance that appeals to me.

1956 Lincoln Continental Mk II

The only 2-door sedan in my collection and, in my eyes, one of the iconic American cars of the 1950s. Elvis owned one; so did Sinatra and the Shah. With a magnificent V8 capable of 285 h.p.,it would give the Benz 6.9 in my collection a run for its money in the traffic-light derby. In the marketplace, however, it was soundly thrashed by Bentleys, Rolls-Royces, and Benzes, because–apart from the afroementioned celebrities–people were reluctant to fork out the equivalent of about $75,000 in today’s money for a car manufactured by Ford. But what a Ford it was! There’s never been another like it. Each one was handbuilt to a high standard; interiors were richly appointed, with Turbo-Drive 3-speed automatic, air conditioning, power windows, power seats, and leather upholstery. Ford claims to have lost a thousand bucks on every Continental Mark II it sold. But it is the epitome of an age, and an attitude. It speaks to me of balmy evenings at the Tropicana and the sweet-scented air of the desert dawn after a night’s debauch at Caesar’s Palace. We all need a touch of that kind of jaunty swagger in our lives.

Next installment: The Sportives

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

Will other tiremakers follow in their tracks?

by David Surace

05.27.2008

This Monday, while we Americans were remembering our fallen vets, and experimenting with various pairings of grilled meat and domestic beer, Pirelli CEO Francesco Gori told Reuters at a press conference inside their factory in Germany that the tire company foresees a raise in product prices to compensate for the rising cost of tire-making raw materials, and the cost of getting them there.

It’s of note that these are the same raw materials other tire manufacturers have to use to make tires as well: petroleum-based plastics are used alongside natural rubber in most tire compounds, and most radial tires use several layers of polyester weave to act as the “ply” which steel belts serve to reinforce. Could Pirelli be the bellwether for increased tire prices across the board?

Said Mr. Gori, “We cannot exclude further price increases in the third or fourth quarter, especially in the dollar region,” the latter part rather ominously referring to the market in the States.

Any price increase would be a proactive attempt on the part of Pirelli to keep its tire business in the black and meeting its goals: the place where Mr. Gori spoke from, Pirelli Tire Germany, has set its annual revenue bogey at 1 billion euros, or $1.58 billion USD, by 2010. They’re almost there, too–last year they raked in 850 million euros (about USD$1.4 billion.)

But the precise timing of that statement is impeccable; despite Memorial Day being one of the busiest driving holidays of the year thanks to its almost nationwide acceptance as a three-day weekend, many folks here in the US simply changed their plans and drove less to avoid that other stinging cost-of-ownership issue–fuel consumption.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net — All Rights Reserved

2009 SEAT Ibiza

Virtually unknown in the United States, SEAT makes a move

By Brendan Moore

05.27.2008

SEAT, Volkswagen’s subsidiary in Spain, has a business goal of getting to 800,000 sales a year by 2018. It’s all part of Volkswagen AG getting to its goal of being the largest vehicle manufacturer in the world by 2018, and SEAT, Volkswagen’s often-overlooked Spanish arm, getting to its goal of being somebody on the world automotive stage.

If SEAT is able to reach 800,000 sales a year by 2018, that would signify a doubling of their current sales volume, all within ten years.

How does SEAT plan to get there from here?

SEAT plans to unveil 2-3 new vehicles per year from now until 2018, starting with the new Ibiza. The new model was shown for the first time at the Madrid Auto Show this year, and is a big step forward for the company. It is SEAT’s first model off the Volkswagen Group AO platform, and it is a splashy debut for the corporate platform within the SEAT family.

Erich Schmidt, president of SEAT as of 18 months ago, stated that the Ibiza represents massive increases in quality, precision and reliability.

“We’ve improved in all those three areas. Our faults per 1,000 have dropped from 37 in 2002 to 4.3 last year”. It’s one of the biggest improvements in the industry over that time”, commented Schmidt.

Since only two models in the SEAT lineup, Leon and Ibiza, currently account for over 70% of SEAT sales, the company is intent on diversifying their product range as well.

To that end, SEAT is also planning a D segment car to do battle with the Renault Laguna and Peugeot 407 in its current geographic market region. This yet-unseen car will show up at the end of 2008 and go on sale in Europe in early 2009 as both a sedan and estate/combi/wagon. It is based on the current (but soon-to-depart) Audi A4 platform and will be built at SEAT’s production facility in Martorell, Spain.

SEAT is also rumored to have reached a “yes” decision on whether to put the Tribu concept, unveiled at the Frankfurt show in 2007, into production. The Tribu will be SEAT’s entry into the sizzling-hot small crossover segment in Europe and will contest market share with Peugeot 4007, Ford Kuga, Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V. It is a given that the production version of the Tribu will be a platform derivative of Volkswagen’s recently-launched and much-lauded Tiguan.

VW up! concept

2009 Kia Soul

Here’s some free advice to Kia: take a couple of those small cars and put the turbo four-cylinder engine from Hyundai’s Genesis coupe in them, and watch your sales figures (and your brand image) get a lot better in a hurry.

Kia Koup concept

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Kevin Miller

05.26.2008

PSA Peugeot Citroën and Mitsubishi announced a joint venture to open a vehicle production plant in Russia. The cornerstone of the plant will be placed June 10th, with production scheduled to commence in 2011. The agreement was signed last week by Christian Streiff, Chairman of the Board of PSA Peugeot Citroën and Osamu Masuko, President of Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (MMC).

The Russian assembly plant will be located in Kaluga, 180 km southwest of Moscow. It will produce vehicles for 3 brands, Peugeot, Citroën and Mitsubishi, including mid-range SUVs for Mitsubishi, Peugeot and Citroën brands as well as medium size Peugeot and Citroën vehicles. Capacity will be around 160,000 vehicles.

As Russia is a growing market in a world of slower automotive markets, the announcement of this assembly plant is timely. The product diversity of this future joint-venture is a good combination of the demands of the Rissian market: mid-range vehicles represent 50% of sales in Russia and SUVs correspond to one of the most buoyant segments in the market.

2008 Mitsubishi Outlander

In 2005, MMC and PSA Peugeot Citroën began working together on an SUV for the European market. Launched in 2007 in Europe, these SUVs, the Peugeot 4007, Citroën C-Crosser, and Mitsubishi Outlander SUVs are highly successful. The joint venture agreement marks the deepening of relations between the two carmakers, both of whom consider Russia a priority region for growth.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net- All Rights Reserved

By Mike Mello

05.23.2008

How much fun can you have in second gear? You can have plenty – when there’s 280 hp and 295 ft.-lb at the ready while trying your best line through the cones. In this special edition, all-wheel-drive Saab that’s only available in black, good times and a memorable driving experience is easy to find.

The 2008 Saab Turbo X is a rocket. It’s the kind of car that you’ll want to keep driving – on vacation, commuting, running around town, or just for the sake of driving – the Turbo X has that kind of allure. The moment you leave the driver’s seat, you’re thinking of the last shift you completed, while at the same time, anticipating the next launch.

During a recent media event where drivers got the chance to get aggressive with the Turbo X SportSedan and SportCombi wagon, I got a taste of what Saab’s XWD system (pronounced: cross-wheel-drive) is capable of delivering. The Turbo Xs on hand were fitted with either the six-speed manual or six-speed automatic transmissions which were ready to deliver the 295 ft-lbs of torque on this dry, sunny day. The course, set up in a large parking lot with a sandy corner at one end offered ample room to get to know the Turbo X, in addition to driving the surrounding back-roads and highways.

Admittedly, I’m no seasoned pro when it comes to pushing the limits of the Turbo X in the slalom, but I know traction when I feel it – and traction combined with turbo power had me feeling in control, which lead to more driving joy. The seats felt comfortably firm with the right amount of plush bolstering and the gearshift knob was a favorite touch of mine. Finished in a rounded triangle form – which fit my fingers well during rearward throws and let my palm grip firmly in forward throws – I looked forward to shifting. I’m naturally drawn to standard-shift cars, but it deserves mentioning that the automatic featured up and down shifting capability both on the console and through steering wheel-mounted tabs.

In the quick passes around the parking lot track, the Haldex Gen 4 XWD system really showed its poise though an S-curve that greeted the driver with a large patch of loose, dry sand. After picking up some tips from Saab Turbo X Engineering Project Manager, Tommy Sundin, I chose my line, aimed the car into the turn then hit the gas. Grip is a beautiful thing! The Turbo X went where I directed it and had power to spare coming out of the turn. There are other cars with all wheel drive systems, but I can only speak to how properly engineered this drivetrain felt as I’ve not had the chance to drive other the other brands on a course such as this.

Looking at a cutaway display unit of the Turbo X’s Rear Drive Module, Sundin explained that the electronically controlled limited slip differential (eLSD) controls the torque being applied to the right and left rear wheels. Up to 40 percent of the available torque can be applied to whichever wheel has the most traction. Also housed in the Rear Drive Module is the Torque Transfer Device (TTD) which controls the amount of torque distributed to the front and rear differentials. As expected, the Turbo X’s anti-lock braking and Electronic Stability Program (ESP) communicate with the XWD system to yield optimum handling and braking, but the driver retains the option of switching off the ESP. If the system detects and emergency situation, the ESP will reactivate itself automatically. A unique Turbo X specification is that the suspension has been lowered 10 mm. The 18″ alloy wheels are unmistakably inspired by those found on the much-loved 900 Turbo, looking strong and stable with a wide, triple-spoke design.

Driving the Turbo X on the interstate let me know that with a turbo, you always feel like there’s more power available. I’ve never owned a turbo car, but the power reserve just didn’t seem to have an end when cruising at 65+ mph, negotiating your average interstate traffic. Top speed on the Turbo X is unrestricted and the brakes measure 13.6″/345 mm at the front and 11.5″/292 mm at the rear. Don’t loan this car out to your kids – ever. It’s unrelentingly quick, absolutely comfortable, and stops under control, but cannot be trusted to an unseasoned driver.

In the cockpit, you notice another nod to the cult-car that is the 900 Turbo – the return of the analog turbo gauge with the white, orange and red graduations. Near the OnStar and stereo interface, one cup holder pops out at the touch of a button and unfolds with a jack-knife kind of motion. Classic Saab A/C and heating vents let you direct the airflow by rotating the joystick-like knob on each vent and a subtle, brushed silver-colored molding encompasses the main controls on the dash. The “black panel” button is, of course, there when you need it, and the ignition is on the console, between the bucket seats. Depending on how you grip the emergency brake lever, your knuckle may contact the carbon fiber trim when releasing the e-brake. A nice touch is the cruise control stalk which is operated by easily rotating a rounded, rubber selector wheel.

Production of the Turbo X will be limited to 2000 units worldwide. Within these 2000 cars, 600 will be available in the U.S., consisting of 475 SportSedans and 125 SportCombis. Pricing starts at $42,510 and $43,310, respectively. Obviously, a car produced in such limited quantities should be considered by anyone who’s loved a Saab, but should also be considered by those beginning their shopping for an all-wheel-drive, fun-to-drive sport sedan or wagon. Saab has been producing high-torque, turbo-equipped engines for many years and the Turbo X is looking to convert you into a turbo-believer.

Image gallery: For more images of the 2008 Saab Turbo X, go here.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Igor Holas with Melissa J. Sanchez

05.23.2008

Is there a car you cannot stand looking at; a car that you consider terminally ugly? Well, the 2009 Nissan Murano is such a car for Melissa and I – we liked the original car OK, but the new one adopts a face that is painful to look at. However – as they say – you should not judge a book by its cover, and so Melissa and I were actually excited to see whether the Murano can make us forget about its looks and win us over with its personality. We can unequivocally say, it did.

The Murano incorporates a lot of attractive features at an attractive price. However, most importantly, it drives like a much smaller car and is truly fun to drive. With its combination of compelling features, and excellent dynamics the Murano is an excellent car worth consideration, and is the first car that we liked as much as the Taurus X, and yes, we did like it better than the Edge.

As we alluded to last week, the Murano is the original design that prompted the copycat that is the Ford Edge. As a mid-size five-passenger crossover, it became very successful, but then lost its shine when the new and well-marketed Edge arrived last year. Not to worry, the all-new 2009 Murano comes to the rescue, with new looks, updated powertrain, but most importantly, with a new upscale interior with a number of clever features.

Pricing
The car we drove was the 2009 Murano SL AWD. The SL trim is the mid-range trim between the stripper S and the loaded LE, and (as is common) represents the lion’s share of the sales. The SL AWD trim carries a base price of $29,480, but our tester added the panoramic moon roof ($1,170), leather ($1,600), navigation with Bose audio, and hard-drive entertainment system ($1,850), Premium Package ($1,000) and Technology Package ($1,900). The Premium Package adds XM satellite radio and BOSE upgraded audio and larger screen, auto dimming rear view mirror, roof rails, cargo organizer, cargo cover, and alarm. The Technology package adds power lift gate, automatic Xenon headlamps, Bluetooth phone system, and keyless ignition. Overall, including destination, the Murano’s as-tested price was $37,745, or $2,600 above the Edge we tested last week.

Using True Delta’s feature-adjusted price comparison, the Murano is on average about $2,000 more expensive than a comparable Edge, but about $800 less than similarly-sized three-row crossovers such as Honda Pilot, or Toyota Highlander.

Exterior
The all-new 2009 Murano uses the familiar shape and profile of the original with raked windshield rounded edges, and high cowl. The profile of the new car is especially familiar, as Nissan carried over the window shape and only re-sculpted the door skins.

With so many familiar features, Nissan had to bring the drama somewhere, and that place is the nose, and to a lesser degree, the tail. The new Murano eliminates many of the flowing lines of the old model and installs a new horizontal front mask with a unified grille-headlamps shape. The headlights have an odd extension running across most of the nose underneath the messy looking chrome grille and the overall shape is hard to make out, and confusing to the eye. As I said before, Melissa and I do not like it one bit, but as I have said many times before – design is highly subjective, so if you like it, who are we to tell you otherwise.

Front Cabin
One of the major advances for this generation of Murano is the interior. The old interior was called names from cheap to Spartan, and was one of the reasons why customers turned to the $6,000 cheaper Edge. The new Murano (along with lower price) brings an interior that uses much better materials, but most importantly uses a new attractive interior design reminiscent of Nissan’s luxury division, Infiniti. Design cues are not the only things Murano borrows from the luxury segment, and the new interior includes several Infiniti-inspired features, as well as switch gear from its more expensive brethren.

Our test car was equipped with two-tone beige/darker beige interior, and while we are not usually fans of light-colored interiors, this one was quite attractive. Nissan did a good job making you feel spoiled with little details such as leather (vinyl) covered door panels, accent lights, and push-button start. The seats were very comfortable and we were easily able to find a comfortable position using the tilt-telescoping wheel and full-power seats (hear that, Ford?). However, despite its high price tag, our Murano SL still did not have memory function for the seat adjustments – that option is limited to the top-line LE trim.

The most prominent design feature of the interior is the high-mounted navigation screen with elaborate controls underneath. As with the Land Rover LR2, the Murano retains separate audio and HVAC controls despite having the navigation screen. Indeed, the Murano even has hardware controls for the navigation giving you options of using either the knobs and buttons, or touching the screen. The multitude of options was welcome, and I usually do better with knob and buttons, but at times it seems superfluous. For example to scroll though a menu, you could touch the screen, turn the big shiny knob, or push the up-down buttons.

Overall, the interface on the screen, as well as the array of buttons underneath were easy to operate and easy to navigate. Within minutes we were able to find what we needed with pretty good precision. The stereo also produces some very well defined and rich sound, something we did not expect – so on a trip to the mall, when Edge of Seventeen came on, we turned juvenile and, dare I say it, rocked out (yes, yours truly are big Stevie Nicks fans).

The navigation sports an updated map with “bird’s-eye view” as well as 3D symbols for major landmarks, and traffic information, but its POI database had some notable omissions – on two occasions it could not find restaurants that have been present for years. Once we manually entered the addresses the guidance worked just fine. Once again, we were too smart to venture into the open in the middle of the rush hour, so we did not have a chance to test the traffic-based re-routing, sorry. The Murano also included a Bluetooth hands free phone interface, which worked just fine with easy pairing and problem-free call quality. However, when I wanted to play music from my new Walkman phone, I confirmed that Ford’s SYNC is still the only system on the market that can accept Bluetooth signal as a source of audio.

The gauge cluster is electro-luminescent so it is lit up all the time, and with its attractive orange-white design, we were happy it was. The gauges also include a well-designed driver information center with a wealth of information (again, hear that, Ford?), including a semi-useful instant mileage readout. Nissan also installed an array of hidden LED lights that almost imperceptibly light up the interior with a warm orange glow. While you do not notice the lights, they do help break up the darkness of the interior at night. On the left side of the steering wheel is a small control panel for such functions as opening the power lift gate, folding the rear seats, or opening the gas door – but while the buttons were well marked, the panel was angled down and extremely hard to negotiate. A similar ergonomic misstep was done with the HVAC controls when someone decided to print instructions under large knobs on a downwardly-sloped piece of trim.

Overall, the front cabin left a great, luxurious first impression and managed not to ruin it during our week together. “Standard” panoramic sunroof overhead (comparable to the LR2 sunroof, not as nice as Edge’s Vista roof), plenty of storage places including a glove box the size of Connecticut, and nicely finished center console. The keyless ignition also worked better than the Land Rover’s. While there is a slot to hold the transmitter, you can unlock and start the car without taking your keys out of your bag; the transmitter was also nicely small and lightweight.

There were a few missteps we noticed, however. The heated seat controls were all the way under the center stack and hard to reach, and on cobblestones, the interior let out more creaking and rattling that we would have liked. The front headrests also had a lot of fore-aft play to them and their anchors were unfinished; and there was a slightly annoying unfinished edge on the bottom of the shifter. Finally, the foot wells for both the driver and the passenger were extremely unfinished with loose carpet edges, and plainly visible sound insulation – with such a level of un-refinement I would worry about the carpet coming loose after a couple years of use. However, besides the carpet issues, our quibbles with the front cabin were just that – minor quibbles, and we remain impressed with the Murano’s cabin.

Rear Cabin and Cargo Area
The rear seats do not spoil the good impression with the cabin. They were nicely shaped, and comfortable to sit in. I felt I had a little less legroom than in the Edge, and a quick glance through specifications confirms that the Murano has about three inches less rear legroom than the Edge. Less legroom notwithstanding, the rear seats were a comfortable place to be. The folding armrest included two cup holders, and the seats reclined. The back side of the center console has a nicely-sized drawer that could hold a small bag, a couple of DVDs or a smaller DVD player. There was no entertainment system for the rear occupants (as with other cars it fell victim to the dual-panel sunroof), but there are audio and video hookups that can play music through the stereo, or play movies on the navigation screen (when the car is stopped)

The cargo bay is nice and flat, and unfortunately, like the Edge, devoid of anchors or bag hooks. However, Murano redeems itself with a cargo organizer that flips up from the floor and creates three little cubbies to hold grocery bags. There are also nicely-sized under-floor storage compartments on the sides of the floor, and can hold the all important (but always in the way) emergency equipment such as a triangle or a first aid kit. As much as we liked the cargo organizer, it made accessing the spare a little annoying, but since that is almost never done, it is not a big deal.

Unlike the Edge, the Murano included a retractable cargo cover, but the rounded shape of the lift gate, and the reclining rear seats, made it an awkward system. The shade itself extended only by about two inches, and included a large rounded section that sat flat against the lift gate. In front of the retractable part were two “curtains” – flimsy pieces that hooked to the rear headrests covering the cargo, while allowing enough play for the seats to recline.

The rear seats folded with a pull on a strap, or a pull on a lever in the cargo bay. Unlike the Edge, the Murano also included a remote operated seat “unfold” – by holding a button in the cargo bay, or by the steering wheel, the seats came back up – a nice addition. Finally, unlike many recent SUVs and even some sedans, the front passenger seat does not fold flat, significantly limiting the cargo flexibility and maximum utility of the Murano.

Driving the Murano
Until now in our assessment, we have liked the Murano quite a bit, but while that is all nice and dandy, there was nothing that would make us fall in love with the car. That all changed when we drove the car.

The Murano is 200 pounds lighter than the Edge, and despite the extra weight of the AWD system (our tester Edge was FWD) the Murano felt agile and light on its feel wherever we went. The Edge handles well, but the Murano put it to shame with surefooted handling that never showed the car’s high center of gravity and still hefty curb weight. The suspension did an excellent job of controlling the body roll, and in our driving, we never worried about taking a turn. Moreover, the way the Murano’s chassis was tuned, it literally begged be driven sharply.

While the handling department would get a glowing A+ from us, it forced a compromise on the side of ride comfort. The Edge is tuned very well to deliver solid handling, but still transform all roads into ribbons of silk – absorbing virtually all road imperfections and making the whole driving experience an exercise in smoothness. The much more agile Murano was not quite as refined. More imperfections made it into the cabin, and while the car rarely felt jarred, the imperfections did make it in.

The best suspension in the world would be useless, however, without a good engine and transmission, and luckily, Murano had just that under its hood. Nissan’s VQ V6 engine has been celebrated, coveted, and fawned over for the better part of the past decade, and Nissan keeps refining it with consistency. We doubted it could be so much better than the competition, but in all honesty, it just is. Sure, Ford’s Duratec has no flaws to speak of, and returns stellar fuel economy, but the way the VQ is tuned and the way it is paired with the continuously variable transmission made it feel special. The first thing you notice about the engine is its V8-like growl. We have mentioned that the Duratec sounds pretty aggressive when opened up, but the VQ sounded angry no matter what you did. Better yet, the aggressive audio was not accompanied by any sort of vibration or harshness from the engine compartment.

The CVT did an excellent job keeping the engine happy as it adjusted the gearing. We were curious to see whether we would notice any strange behavior given its lack of (or infinite number of) gears, but as with the Escape Hybrid, there was simply nothing that would make us not like the CVT. Partially responsible are modern six-speed transmissions that already shift so smoothly that a shift-less CVT is a minor step. From a stop, we did notice a little lack of snap, but once underway, the transmission did a fine job of responding to our right-foot commands.

Overall, our fuel economy was about 12.5 miles per gallon in the city, but only about 25 on the highway. Compared to Edge’s 12/30 mileage we achieved last week, the Murano does better in city driving, but did not match the exceptional frugality Edge showed on an open road.

The Murano’s driving dynamics are the key reason we like it so much. The Edge was just fine, but the Murano begged to be driven hard, pushed in the turns, and returned the favor with excellent poise no matter what we threw at it. In the Taurus X review, we said that for a car this size the biggest compliment can be “gets out of its way nicely,” but the Murano showed us that is not necessarily the truth. With its agile handling it was actually fun to drive. Just please keep in mind – if smooth ride is higher on your list that curve-carving, the Edge will likely deliver a better balance of comfort and fun for your preferences.

Conclusion
Yes, we liked the Murano – we liked it a lot. It was the first car since the Taurus X that has actually impressed us, and left us with no sour notes overall to speak of. It is not a perfect car – like anything else it is an exercise in compromises. However, at the end of the day, we were sad to part ways after a week together. The Murano does everything well and some things it does exceptionally. It has one of the best crossover interiors , one of the better V6 engines in terms of fuel economy, an extremely refined powertrain, and simply astonishing handling. Sure, you could get a RAV4 for a little less and get better economy and occasionally seat seven, but at the end of the day, if you do not need the third row, the Murano is simply a better car. The Edge is still an excellent choice, and it is quite a bit cheaper than the Murano, but with not as nice of an interior, and with not quite as a refined powertrain; it feels those $2,000 cheaper. If you are like Melissa and me, always buying a car (almost) fully loaded, the Murano simply delivers more toys than the Edge, and feels perfectly worthy of its near forty-grand price tag.

IMAGE GALLERY: For more images of the Nissan Murano go HERE

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

Bitter strike comes to an end

By Chris Haak

05.23.2008

Late last night, the UAW announced that the striking rank-and-file workers at American Axle voted to approve their concessionary contract by a 78% to 22% margin.

The American Axle strike was an ugly situation for all parties involved. GM lost $800 million as a direct result of the strike during March alone, due to the closure or partial closure of as many as 30 different assembly plants. GM also had to chip in another $218 million to help bridge the gap between the UAW and American Axle. The 3,650 UAW workers who were on strike at five American Axle facilities had to survive on very low strike pay for three months, and now are going back to work in the same jobs they had before, but in some cases at two-thirds of their previous hourly wage. The UAW, although managing to improve the final deal by several dollars per hour over American Axle’s initial offer, appears to have overall “lost” this battle with management, showing that the union’s power has been eroded further.

Related to the strike’s settlement was the dramatic drop in pickup and SUV demand – which we outlined in our previous two articles about trends that Ford’s management also noticed. GM announced a few weeks ago that it would significantly curtail production of trucks this year. The drop in large truck demand meant a drop in the demand for axles underpinning these trucks, which meant that American Axle needed its workers to come back to work even less in May than it did when the strike began in February.

For its part, the UAW’s leadership was well aware that they were putting a contract offer that wasn’t as good as they had hoped in front of the membership for a vote. “Our members have had to make some tough decisions for themselves and their families and have done so with careful deliberation,” said UAW President Ron Gettelfinger.

The company will pay workers up to $105,000 over the next three years to make the transition to a lower hourly wage lower. Workers will also be offered between $55,000 and $140,000 incentives to either retire early or leave the company without retiring in an effort to reduce headcount and transition more of the company’s manufacturing capacity to facilities outside the US, including Mexico and Asia. American Axle actually turned a modest profit last year, but saw that their competitors who were more financially distressed had been able to wring lower wages out of their union membership, so were in an uncompetitive position. At least the new deal should help the company remain competitive with other US suppliers going forward.

If it sounds like US-based suppliers and automobile manufacturers can’t seem to catch a break, that’s probably right. Even before the economy turned south in recent months, decades of poor management in the industry led to huge losses even during a rosy economy. Hopefully in a poor economy, the management decisions made in this industry will be better ones. More likely, however, we’ll see further struggles and labor battles before things turn around again.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

Will other manufacturers quickly follow?

By Brendan Moore

05.23.2008

As we’ve noted in the previous article, Ford held an important press conference yesterday and told reporters that the company now cannot say when it might return to profitability in its core North American operations. Ford just recently predicted a return to profitability in North America in 2009.

The CEO of Ford, Alan Mulally, said the market has dramatically shifted towards smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles, and in a first for any U.S. automaker head, said that Ford believes this shift is “structural” (read: permanent) as opposed to temporary. Mulally stated that Ford believes “the tipping point” for this market shift was gasoline reaching an average of $3.50 a gallon nationwide. “It seemed to us that we reached a tipping point where customers began shifting away from these vehicles at an accelerated rate,” Mulally said Thursday morning. “Based on everything we can see on the outlook for fuel prices, we do not anticipate a rapid turnaround in business conditions.”

The short translation is that the high price of gasoline has just crushed sales of pickup trucks and SUVs, which Ford has a lot of and makes a lot of profit from, generally. Cars, which are selling, but are not anywhere near as profitable, are what consumers are buying, and what Ford believes consumers will want to buy more of in the future.

Gasoline is now around $4 a gallon in most parts of the country and soon will go higher in the near term with oil touching $135 a barrel yesterday. Ford has now changed their planning and forecast data. Ford is now basing their aggregate sales forecast based on U.S. gasoline prices to ranging from $3.75 to $4.25 a gallon throughout 2008 and in 2009.

I think they need to dial in some wiggle room in that forecast – on the high side.

Mulally commented that it just in the past week that the senior leadership at Ford realized that their previous forecast had just been eclipsed by rapidly moving market events.

Once the Ford senior executives realized how much the ground had shifted underneath them, they ordered immediate cuts in production in North America. The company has ordered a 15% reduction in second quarter production and a 15%-20% reduction in third quarter production. As might be expected, the cuts will be centered on the SUV and pickup production lines.

The cuts in production will be accompanied by worker cuts, both hourly and salaried.

Ford gets kudos for acting so quickly based on the changing market conditions, but it begs the question of what General Motors and Chrysler will do in the same market environment. Will they reach the same conclusions that Ford has; the conclusion that the market has now irrecoverably changed? Or, is there still sentiment that the SUV and full-size truck market will come back, not as strong as it was, but still robust? GM, of course, has a lot of SUV and pickup truck models, but Chrysler is easily the manufacturer with the greatest percentage of SUVs and large trucks in its model portfolio.

I wish to believe both GM and Chrysler have reached the same conclusion as Ford concerning the future of the new vehicle market here in the U.S. as I am personally certain it is the correct assessment, but since I am not privy to their internal deliberations, who can say?

And what about the other manufacturers? Does Toyota slash Tundra production even more? Will Honda be able to cut back production of the already slow-selling Ridgeline without compromising the profit margins of the vehicle? Does Nissan decide to pull the trigger on selling the Nissan Aprio, their private-label version of the Dacia/Renault Logan, and already on sale in Mexico, in North America? We’ve already seen Honda’s decision to bet very heavily on hybrids for the near future as a result of the fast-moving market environment; do other manufacturers follow suit?

Again, it’s (rampant) speculation on my part. But, if I could offer all the auto manufacturers (not just the three American manufacturers) some advice, I would tell them that not only has the ground shifted, it’s worse than you know. Because all you see is what is happening among the current car-buying public, and the next wave of car-buyers (they are currently 18 years old) is even more interested in buying the most fuel-efficient vehicle available, whatever that looks like in the future. I think these buyers will be looking for small conventional cars that get great fuel mileage, hybrids and electric vehicles, and not much else. I would tell them that time is running short if you want these prospective buyers.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Chris Haak

05.23.2008

Yesterday, Ford made the business news wires for the types of reasons that companies dread – they had to announce bad news. The news was that they expected to basically break even during 2009, while they had originally expected to begin turning a profit that year. The cause, of course, is twofold: the difficult auto market, combined with Ford’s currently truck- and large vehicle-heavy lineup.

Although this is clearly not good news for Ford, it also could be a lot worse. The news would be much worse if Ford had said that they expected to lose money in 2009, instead of basically breaking even. Or worse still, Ford could have said that they were announcing multiple expensive incentive programs to keep the factories humming, in spite of losing money on every vehicle they produce. Instead, the company, under the leadership of CEO Alan Mulally, appears to be under no delusions about its likelihood of sales success without a better selection of small, efficient cars, so is trimming production to appropriate levels.

Overall, Ford is cutting production by 15% for the second quarter 2008 compared to last year, plus a 15-20% reduction in the third quarter, and approximately an 8% reduction in the fourth quarter. The production cuts will also mean job cuts, although the company did not have immediate specifics of how many jobs would be cut, and from where.

According to Mr. Mulally, the “tipping point” (there is an excellent book by Malcolm Gladwell, by the way, with the same name) in the market – where consumers really started to abandon the SUV and pickup markets, came when gas prices reached $3.50 per gallon. According to Automotive News, the market share of SUVs fell from 5.2% in April to 4.4% through the first half of May, and down from 8.4% in 2007. Pickups saw their market share fall from 11% in April to 9% in May (and down from 14.1% in 2007). So basically, as a share of all new vehicles, SUVs have lost almost half of their sales since 2007 (from 8.4% to 4.4%) while pickups have lost almost a quarter of their market share.

There’s more decent news for Ford as well. Although truck and SUV production will be curtailed significantly during the remainder of 2008, many of the company’s car and crossover models, including the Focus, Fusion, Edge, Escape, Milan, Mariner, MKZ, and MKX, will see their production increase compared to 2007′s levels.

Many folks wondered where the tipping point would be that would finally make consumers throw up their hands and give up on gas guzzling V8s as personal use trucks. Ford believes the answer to that question is $3.50, but I believe that each person has a different breaking point, while some – who can afford the extra expense or can’t live without cubic inches – may not have any tipping point that changes their behavior, or at least a price so stratospherically high (as in $10+ per gallon) that they will continue to buy pickups and SUVs instead of cars and crossovers.

Although it’s definitely a shame to see Ford having to cut back production plans, I applaud the company for taking the appropriate steps to ensure its future survival and taking a pragmatic approach with regard to fuel prices and the economy. According to Automotive News, Ford’s projected range of gas prices during 2008 and 2009 range from $3.75 to $4.25 per gallon, and staying there for a while. Unfortunately, they’re probably right, unless gas goes past $4.25 per gallon.

The Fiesta can’t come to North America soon enough for Ford.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net- All Rights Reserved