Turbo Toyboxes

We must be stupid, or at least masochistic. Aside from the fact that last year's version of this test inspired six pages of madness in our discussion forums, the cars you see in these photos have been involved in some of the most drawn-out and rage-filled threads in Car Lounge history. Yet here we are, checking tire pressures in pit row at Autobahn Country Club. We've brought along last year's winner, the Mazdaspeed3, plus four newcomers. Two of them, like the Mazda, are front-drivers: the Chevrolet Cobalt SS and the Mini Cooper S John Cooper Works. In addition, the Subaru WRX returns with more power, more brakes, and more stiffness, while the new Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart rounds out our all-wheel-drive set. And, of course, all of them have turbos.

A quick disclaimer, because some of you are surely already complaining: This isn't a mega-comparo of every turbocharged monster under $30,000. Our mission is to compare this year's additions to the segment, using our old favorite (the Mazda) as a reference point. This isn't to say the Volkswagen GTI, Dodge Caliber SRT4, or any other car isn't worthy of our time, but only that they aren't new or improved since last year's test. On that same note, all five of the cars we're testing here deliver a rewarding experience. While Motive has its idea of the best one, no car in this group is a real stinker. Here they are, in ascending order.

Best Lap: 1:49.2
Top Speed: 100.2 mph

When the Lancer Evolution arrived in the U.S. for 2003, we Americans finally had access to our first four-door Mitsubishi enthusiast car since the Galant VR-4. But unfortunately, the only way to enjoy one for under $30,000 was to forgo niceties like power windows and a radio. With the current Evo, the buy-in is even higher, opening the door for a 'tweener car to split the difference between that rally star and the pedestrian Lancer. That car, the Lancer Ralliart, nabs parts from each. The all-wheel-drive components come from the last-generation Evo, while the engine is a less powerful version of the Evo X's. Using a single-scroll turbocharger, the boost comes on earlier but doesn't produce the same eye-watering surge of power. The Ralliart's seats can come from either car, with the Lancer GTS seats as standard and the Evo's Recaros offered as an option. The GTS also donates wheels to the Ralliart, though the Yokohama Advan tires are specific to the new model. Other than bumpers, taillights, and an aluminum hood, the Ralliart is the base Lancer's body double, losing the Evo's box flares and big spoiler.

Mitsubishi's PR department readily admits that even with the Evo's all-wheel drive, the Ralliart is better described as a faster Lancer, not a baby Evo, and out on the track we see why. Of the five cars, the Ralliart is both the most prone to understeer and the one car that won't rotate no matter how rude the driver's inputs. A better set of tires might help the situation, but we think the problem could be more complicated than that. In any event, this certainly isn't a cheap Evo, but it is a pretty nice Lancer.

The one remaining bit of Evo hardware in the Ralliart not yet mentioned is the transmission, a dual-clutch automated manual borrowed from the top-level Evo MR. The Ralliart doesn't get the quickest of the MR's three shift settings, and it also doesn't get the hidden launch control capability. This is all part of the Ralliart's mission not to steal the Evo's thunder. However, this engine's better low-rev performance is a nicer match for the transmission — due to the Evo's lack of power under 3000 rpm, the tranny tends to struggle through engagement in the lower part of the rev range. Still, the automated clutch doesn't grab first gear very smoothly, which can get a bit tiring in stop-and-go situations. On the track, shifts snap by unnoticed and the transmission works flawlessly, though the gearing seems too short — the Ralliart needs fifth gear pretty often on a track where the other cars only see fourth once or twice. At least the 237-hp 2.0-liter makes impressive power, making the car feel nearly as quick as, and more linear than, the test's other all-wheel-drive car, the WRX. Its steering feels sharper than that car's, too.

Unfortunately, the Ralliart exhibits more flaws than the rest of the pack, and with the $2750 Recaro package (Recaro seats, HID headlights, Rockford Fosgate stereo, a six-disc changer, and satellite radio) it is also the second most expensive car here. At least those Recaros are the best seats of the group. In addition to the understeer, the Ralliart's brakes are a letdown — after half a day on the track, its fresh front pads are already spent and the pedal is near the floor before the brakes finds friction. The rotors, 11.6-inch vented up front and 11.9-inch solid at the rear, are borrowed from the Outlander crossover. They have more stopping power than a base Lancer's for sure, but these SUV brakes weren't engineered for extensive torture.

The way we see it, a few minor adjustments would make this newcomer a major player: tires and some suspension balance to dial down the understeer; a manual-transmission option to drive down the price; and a brake upgrade for anyone planning to give the Ralliart track time. As it stands, the Ralliart is a good, comfortable, all-weather street performer, but it needs more of the Evo's demon spirit out on the track.

Best Lap: 1:48.6
Top Speed: 101.9 mph

Subaru's WRX has had the affordable-but-fun all-wheel-drive-sedan segment all to itself since it arrived here, so it goes without saying that Mitsubishi saw the 2008 WRX as the car to beat. And the Ralliart does beat that car in most quantifiable ways — power, comfort, speed, and technology. But unfortunately, it'll compete against the 2009 WRX.

Instead of 224 hp and 226 lb-ft of torque, the 2009 engine, thanks to a larger turbo and more free-flowing exhaust, makes 265 hp and 244 lb-ft. Instead of last year's 205/50R17 all-season tires, the 2009 WRX wears 225/45R17 Dunlop SP Sport 01s. In addition, the '09 gets larger diameter anti-roll bars, higher spring rates, and firmer dampers. Mitsubishi probably wasn't expecting all that.

Those changes were good enough to give our 2008 WRX's track figures a kick in the pants, boosting the car's top speed by three mph to 101.9 mph and our cutting our best lap time to 1:48.6, down from 1:50.6 last year. (While we tested a sedan last year and a hatch this year, Subaru claims a meager one-pound difference between the two models — 3174 pounds for the sedan, 3175 for the hatch.) We praised the WRX last year for its neutral chassis, and the '09 model remains impressive, only without the feeling that the car's willingness to rotate might put it on its roof. The engine's newfound power is equally welcomed, though it still lacks fire at the low end.

The 2009 updates turn a decent car into a very good one, but the WRX still has some personality quirks we can't get used to. The engine's power delivery resembles that of a rubber band — pull it back, and watch out. The suspension has been firmed up, but the damping could be firmer still, and the loose steering — good for rally cross drifts but not for track attacks — could be tighter as well. The shifter is the most vague of the bunch and occasionally rejects an overly hasty attempt to find second gear. The brakes aren't quite as weak as the Lancer's, but they aren't much better, either.

Halfway through our testing, discussion of a winner is premature, but we've unanimously decided on a split through the middle of the bunch, with the three front-drivers fighting for an overall win and the two pseudo-rally cars duking it out amongst themselves. Certainly, if this test took place in December the story would be different. But on a snowless October day, the two cars driving all four wheels just aren't as rewarding on the track or the street. That's not to say that the drive configuration is to blame — all-wheel drive can certainly pay dividends toward solid lap times — but suspension issues are (the Mitsubishi's understeer, the Subaru's softness). Among these two, the WRX slightly edges out the Ralliart. The Mitsubishi is far more attractive, plus its power band, transmission, (optional) seats, and mellow everyday dynamics have the edge on the Subaru, while braking is a wash. The Subaru is more visceral, more mechanical and communicative, and the peak engine performance reaches higher. The tiebreaker? The Subaru is offered in a more useful five-door shape, has a $1500 lower base price, and comes standard with sport seats, while the Recaro package drives the Ralliart's price close to $30,000.

Best Lap: 1:48.1
Top Speed: 102.9 mph

Mazda's segment-owning turbo king has fallen. And what good timing, considering the next generation Mazda3 is set to debut in just a few weeks. While we managed to shave some time off last year's hottest lap, the Mazda's new best of 1:48.1 falls back to third place behind the Mini and the Chevrolet. Driving the Mazdaspeed hard is a comfortable, easy experience that could make a first-timer feel like it is his daily driver. The Cobalt and the Cooper take more getting used to, and even at the end of a full day at Autobahn we feel as if we could have still shaved tenths off our times in those two. The Mazda finds its limits slightly faster and is overcome by understeer before the situation gets messy.

Because it is so predictable, the Mazdaspeed3 can be driven the most consistently. Its steering feels numb and over-assisted next to the Mini and Chevy, but the car is simple to place right on an apex with a hint of trailbrake-induced rotation to set up the exit. Getting back on the throttle, the Mazda has the shortest downtime while the turbo re-spools, and all 263 horses seem to be available any time the clutch pedal isn't depressed.

Among these five, the Mazdaspeed3 is the best example of a car that's been engineered as an entire package — it really does present a unified personality. The smooth, quick power delivery is complemented by quick (if soft) steering, shifter and clutch action that matches both, and brakes that stop the car as consistently as the engine pulls it forward. The cabin feel, too, can be described as having a softened sportiness. The seats are supportive under heavy lateral G loads, but comfortable over the long haul.

The Mazda's interior and exterior styling don't hint at the fact that this car is rather elderly. The look is still modern and refined. We still applaud Mazda for offering it only in five-door form and only with a manual transmission, forcing buyers to chose a car that offers both the maximum involvement and maximum space efficiency. But in the end, the Mazda has been made to seem dull by two newer, sharper machines. The most notable chink in its armor is its limited-slip differential — and perhaps the Bridgestones it wears — which doesn't seem to put the power down as forcefully as the Cobalt's. Its inside tire spins a bit on exits, while the Cobalt's limited-slip delivers more mechanical feedback into the cabin and less smoking rubber. No worries, though — a next-generation Mazdaspeed was just spied at the 'Ring last week. We can't wait for its debut in Turbo Toyboxes, Part Three.

Best Lap: 1:45.3
Top Speed: 104.5 mph

To paraphrase a lyric from the band Spoon, if you have no fear of the underdog, then you will not survive. The Cobalt SS is one of the most dangerous underdogs around, wearing an exterior design that is the legacy of countless Cavaliers sold through the nineties and into the current decade. But this version of every GM employee's favorite soft-spoken compact doesn't just carry a big stick, it carries a Looney Tunes–sized baseball bat. Using a 260-hp, 2.0-liter, direct-injection Ecotec and a suspension that you've no doubt heard is Nürburgring-proven, the Cobalt serves up both the highest top speed and the fastest lap time of the day. Amid rumors of a Chrysler/GM merger, we can't help but think the Cobalt SS is a far better successor to the Neon SRT4 than the crossover-like Caliber SRT4. Yes, its cheapness shows through in some of the cabin materials, but it more than makes up for that with a feeling of lightness and brute power. Want some stats to back up our declaration of the Cobalt's greatness? The Chevrolet turns its Autobahn lap just under a second faster than the Mini, its closest competitor. The rest of the pack, including last year's winner, eats 2.8 to 3.9 seconds of Cobalt dust.

The Cobalt doesn't dance like a featherweight (as the Mini does), but consider how much each car weighs: The Mini comes in at 2701 pounds, the Chevy at 3012 (2975 for a coupe), and the Mazda at 3153, or nearly as much as the all-wheel-drive Subaru. Take the Cobalt hot into a corner and the rear lightens but never hints that it might come around, something that can't be said for the lighter, shorter-wheelbase Mini. On exit, the Cobalt's $495 limited-slip proves its worth, sending the power to the ground almost as well as the two all-wheel-drive cars.

Those aren't the only things that deliver the Cobalt's best-in-test speed, though. The SS benefits from the most contact with the ground, courtesy of four 225/40R18 Continental ContiSportContact2 tires. It also has the most torque (260 lb-ft at 2000 rpm) and ties the Mini for the most impressive braking force. Thank Brembo for both — the Cobalt uses 12.4-inch front rotors and 11.5-inchers at the rear, while the smaller Mini manages with 12.4- and 11.0-inch units, respectively. Using all those parts, the Cobalt muscles its way around the track like it was raised by a wild pack of Corvette ZR1s. That lap time you see here is just two seconds shy of the Lexus IS-F we tested at this same track in July. It's the perfect way to shame your rich friend into un-popping the collar on his pink polo.

The Cobalt's Ecotec engine is thoroughly enjoyable on streets as well, and we find ourselves using the throttle to spool and de-spool the turbo just for fun. Noticeable torque steer can be induced by plunging into the throttle mid-turn, but it's no worse than in the Mini or the Mazda. All three cars ride the same thin line of discomfort over bad roads, but the Chevrolet's GM Performance–designed seats take the brunt better than all but the Lancer's Recaros. The same praise can't be lavished on the shifter, which feels cheap and clunky but is better than the Subaru's. As a whole, the cabin reflects the Cobalt's lowest as-tested price. For $2500 more, our fully loaded Mazda has navigation and HID headlights, plus more space and a better design.

Best Lap: 1:46.2
Top Speed: 104.7 mph

Talking price might not be the best transition into our top pick, because it isn't cheap. But we'll just come right out with it: We aren't that rational. The John Cooper Works is a touch slower than the Cobalt SS; has a base price hovering just under $30,000; and is only suitable as a family car if you happen to come from a bloodline of midgets or clowns. But it's the one car here that can inspire laughs, smiles, and arm flailing from even our most serious editors. It's a blast on the back straight between turns 10 and 11, it's a blast through the front 1-2-3 hairpin, and it's a blast sitting still in pit lane while the brakes spew smoke. It is even fun sitting in Chicago gridlock. The JCW is everything we've liked about Minis taken to the next level. If we were rational folk, we'd declare the Chevrolet the winner for the sake of its dollar/performance ratio, but none of us can admit that we wouldn't pawn a few possessions or hold up a convenience store to raise the extra cash for the John Cooper Works. It's so entertaining on both the road and track that it makes the other four cars seem almost Camry-like by comparison. There's a JCW Clubman, too, if you're willing to spend even more dough for the extra wheelbase.

The key to the Mini's lively personality is its ability to do more with less. The retuned Cooper S 1.6-liter under the hood makes an extra 36 hp and 15 lb-ft of torque, but at 208 and 192, respectively, those are easily the lowest figures among these cars. Yet look at the track results, and you'll see that the Mini hit the highest top speed and recorded the second-fastest lap of the day. Much of that is due to the JCW's huge weight advantage, but it's also the confident brakes that don't mind being squeezed hard and late. Credit also the ContiSportContact3 SSRs — tires similar to those on the Cobalt, only slightly smaller (205/45R17) — and the sharp chassis, both of which allow elevated speeds in corners. The steering is the most direct of the group and the throttle responds quickly when the "Sport" button is triggered. The Mini provides constant and direct feedback through all of its controls and the free-flowing JCW exhaust spits and burbles and guffaws to further heighten the sensory experience. Said one of our drivers, an active racer of his first-gen Cooper S, "This is everything I want my Mini to be."

The JCW's suspension tuning is spot-on, making it the industry's current front-drive chassis benchmark. But like a lot of very entertaining track cars, it also requires constant focus. Lift quickly going into a corner and the back of its short, 97.1-inch wheelbase will jump right over your shoulder. Similarly, standing on the brakes will make the rear end jiggle, though both situations are easily controllable with gentle modulation. And both help deter understeer, saving the front tires and asking less of the electronic differential lock control, which works fairly well but lacks the mechanical clawing of the Cobalt's true limited slip.

The Mini isn't without its flaws, of course. We're still not crazy about its Flava Flav speedometer or the fact that the volume knob is six inches from the rest of the radio controls. Additionally, the JCW's speed and handling overwhelm the pod-like seats, which carry over from the Cooper S. Being tossed sideways isn't quite as much fun when there's no lateral support there to catch you.

Conclusion

So there you have it. If you want the most thoroughly entertaining turbo compact out there, buy the Mini Cooper S John Cooper Works. Unlike the first-generation JCW, an expensive dealer-installed kit that only added minimal performance, Mini's first attempt to establish its own from-the-factory performance model is a hands-down success. It's a sensory explosion wrapped in an adorable little package. Unfortunately, it's also still an expensive little package, especially when you consider options. But hey, it uses the least fuel, so think of it as an investment. For the highest speed-per-dollar content, Chevrolet's Cobalt SS is impossible to beat. It's a perfect example of the type of performance GM is capable of when a dedicated team of engineers gets the resources it needs. The fit-and-finish isn't perfect — evidence that all the time and money went into speed, not prettiness. Both the Mini and the Chevy have caught up to and passed the Mazdaspeed3, but that's no reason to stick yours out on the front yard with a "Make Offer" sign in the window. The 'speed3 is still the most refined way to go fast on a budget if you don't mind getting beaten by a Cobalt. We wish the car a fond farewell as it leaves the market in the coming months. The Subaru and Mitsubishi both lack some of the assets of our top three picks (brakes, mostly) but either would be a good choice in northern climates or if your morning commute involves winding gravel roads. Of the two, the Mitsubishi is more subtle and relaxed in nature, but it's also pricier. The Subaru is the more entertaining choice, but it sacrifices looks and chassis composure. But rest assured — the battle between all theses cars has just begun. See you next year; same time, same place.

War of the Worlds Top Speed Videos

If you haven't seen our "War of the Worlds" comparison test featuring the Corvette ZR1, Porsche 911 GT2, Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano and Nissan GT-R yet, head over to the homepage and check it out. Once you do, get back here and check out today's Video Finds: All four cars hitting their top speeds.

While we were out puttering around Chrysler's Arizona Proving Grounds in over half a million dollars worth of four-wheeled machinery, we thought it would be good fun to let former IndyCar driver and 24 Hours of Daytona winner Didier Theys take them for a few laps each around the five-mile oval. Despite some minor tire trouble at top speed on both the GT-R and 599, Theys was able to wring incredible top speeds out of all four cars, and today, you can ride along with him at 200+ mph.

Follow these links to watch the Nissan GT-R, Porsche 911 GT2, Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano and Corvette ZR1 scream around the oval at full tilt. If you haven't had enough then, check out all the other videos on Motor Trend's very own YouTube channel.

GM Performance Parts to Offer LS9 Crate Motor Next Year

A few weeks ago, we pointed you do-it-yourselfers to the "Air Attack" LS7 SC crate engine from Katech. This week, we have news for the purists, in the form of a soon-to-be-offered LS9 crate engine from GM Performance Parts. GM hasn't announced pricing yet, so we don't know if it'll be a bargain or not compared to Katech's $37,000 engine, but if you're planning to build your own ZR1, this engine will look more authentic under the hood. Set to go on sale at the end of summer next year, the crate LS9 6.2L V-8 will come nearly complete. You'll get the engine block and heads, supercharger and cooling block set-up, ignition system, exhaust manifolds, dry-sump oil pan and more. You will, however, need to buy yourself an oil tank for that dry-sump system, a coolant tank for the air-to-water intercooler and an ECU and wiring harness. By the looks of the picture, you may need to pick up an alternator as well. The 638 hp and 604 lb-ft of torque come standard. Source: GM

2009 Aston Martin DB9 Volante

More power and a revised transmission make driving Aston Martin’s stunning ragtop almost as pleasurable as gazing at it.

BY STEVE SILER
October 2008

In Aston Martin’s lexicon, four-seat convertibles are known as Volantes, center stacks are called façades, and in the case of the DBS and the 2009 DB9, the key has become an Emotion Control Unit. That last term deserves a chuckle, because even for jaded automotive journalists, it takes more than a pocket-sized stainless-steel-and-glass transmitter to control the emotion elicited on rousing the 12 cylinders that live under the hood of a drop-dead gorgeous DB9 Volante.

Certainly, the DB9 could sell on looks alone, but when a car is this beautiful (and costs $200,000, give or take a shekel), performance expectations are high. And frankly, the DB9’s curb appeal hasn’t quite been matched by its performance up to this point. An automatic coupe we tested a few years ago took 4.8 seconds to reach 60 mph from a stop. That number is quick but not mind-blowingly so—just ask a Dodge Charger SRT8 or a Mercedes-Benz E550. It’s good, then, that Aston Martin blessed the ’09 DB9 with more horsepower, a quicker-shifting automatic, and minor chassis tweaks, all intended to help bring its thrill factor more into balance with its immutable beauty.

A Midcycle Refresh under the Skin, Not for the Skin

Any engine with nearly six liters of displacement spread across 12 cylinders should have plenty of power to motivate two tons of leather, wood, and aluminum with haste. But in previous tests, we’ve noted that the 449 horses produced by the 2005–08 DB9s somehow didn’t feel like 449 horsepower. This year’s update brings revised cylinder heads that increase the compression ratio from 10.3:1 to 10.9:1, putting 21 more ponies into the 5.9-liter V-12’s stable for a total of 470 at 6000 rpm, with torque remaining the same: 443 pound-feet at 5000 rpm. Of course, the aural soundtrack retains all the glorious notes we love in this particular V-12, which just roars once the needle crosses 4000 revs.

The six-speed ZF Touchtronic automatic transaxle features revisions for slightly quicker shifts, although a six-speed, three-pedal manual is still available. Our tester had the autobox, which we found to shift crisply and relatively quickly in sport mode, behaving in most respects like the excellent six-speed ZF transmission found in Jaguar’s XKR. We also like how the transmission paddles have been fixed to the column versus the wheel, but there were occasional moments when manual shifting led to some confusion on the part of the transmission, and when not in sport mode, we didn’t find shifts to be particularly fast. Still, Aston claims that 0-to-60 times for both manual- and auto-equipped DB9s are now down to a more estimable 4.6 seconds, and—even more to the point— it finally feels as if all horsepower were accounted for.

Specific Chassis Tuning for the Volante

The 4100-pound DB9 Volante is a proud GT, not a super-sports car. Built on Aston Martin’s lauded VH architecture, the Volante has always been pretty rigid, but some reinforcements were added this year to the front sheer panel, contributing another 10 percent of torsional stiffness. New Bilstein shocks, redesigned upper control arms, and retuned bushings were installed in all DB9s for 2009, and although tuning for the coupe focused on sportiness, the Volante’s setup prioritizes refinement.

So did the 2009 Volante go all soft on us? Not exactly. Steering remains pleasantly light and very precise. Ride quality is still GT-supple yet taut—a perfect balance for this car, and one that allows the Volante to traverse the pothole minefield known as the Sunset Strip while also keeping the body flat and stable during a couple of tail-wagging romps along the scenic switchbacks of Mulholland Drive. This is all managed with a double-wishbone front and rear suspension unaided by fancy Mercedes-Benz SL-like suspension electronics.

The only significant dynamic letdown was the brakes, which, as we’ve noted with earlier DB9s, require the driver to get deep into the pedal travel to find much response, and they don’t communicate a whole lot even once you’ve found it. Indeed, there were a few, uh, puckering moments on Mulholland before we got used to them (fortunately, none resulting in anything we had to pay for). Carbon-ceramics might be nice here.

Comfort: 10; Ergonomics: 2

The DB9’s interior is an intimate, elegant space that spoils occupants with myriad sybaritic delights, including terrific seats, a dazzling 700-watt sound system, lustrous metal-faced gauges, and thick, pillowy lining for the soft top. Every surface and material that one can see or touch is worthy of the DB9’s aristocratic mission. The center stack controls, for example, are set within an arcing slab of rich, glowing wood; our test car used mahogany. The speaker grilles are rendered in perforated metal, the column-mounted shift paddles in magnesium, and the lower console in zinc. And everything that’s not wood or metal—including both of the pointless rear seats—wears a coat of hand-stitched leather of such surreal softness and consistency, it’s as if the bovine donors had spent their precious time on this earth soaking in barrels of Oil of Olay.

Sadly, though, ergonomic shortcomings will sober a guy up faster than a swim across the English Channel in January. The artsy silver buttons on the “façade” look slick but are woefully unintuitive, with petite and indistinct buttons, tiny letters, and perplexing hieroglyphs that exact too much driver attention for even simple tasks.

We’re also not terribly universally fond of the dopey “P” “R” “N” and “D” gear buttons for the Touchtronic transmission spanning a center stack that, frankly, could really use more breathing room for larger controls and/or a decent navigation screen, the latter being a clunky, graceless aftermarket-esque unit that’s best left in its hiding place beneath its mahogany cover. More significant, a maddening joystick controller stands between you and any hope of speedy input for the navigation and advanced HVAC and stereo settings—it nearly made us nostalgic for BMW’s iDrive.

No Styling Changes? No Problem

But none of that matters when pulling up to the fanciest restaurant in town and scoring the best spot any showoff can dream up—a simple task with any DB9, but especially a Volante. Seriously, everyone loves this car; in contrast to many other $200K automobiles, the DB9 is nearly universal in its public appeal, and the attention never gets old (unless it happens to be from the local constabularies). Even five years after launch, the DB9 still stands out like a Swedish supermodel at a Tokyo swap meet, with timeless proportions, perfectly rendered details, and unique design flourishes like flush-mounted LED-lit door handles, mesh-covered hood vents, and those oh-so-cool doors that rise 15 degrees as they open. This design hardly needs improvement, so we have no problem with Aston’s decision not to match the changes under the skin with any changes to the skin itself, save for new mirrors and two fewer anodized aluminum bars on the grille.

With more than 10,000 units sold thus far, the DB9 is already considered the most successful Aston Martin ever. And with this year’s extra helping of excitement, it finally has dynamics to match its looks. In the Car and Driver lexicon, we’d call it “pretty damn good.”

The Corvette Z's- which to choose

Killer Z's: The ZR1 is the fastest and most expensive production Corvette ever. So how does it stack up against its stablemates?

BY MARK GILLIES, PHOTOGRAPHY BY RICH CHENET
October 2008

The glory days of the Corvette have generally coincided with the availability of an alphanumeric soup of engine and equipment packages. Go back to the 1960s and early ’70s, and all sorts of near mythical combinations show up, with the LT1, L88, LS6, ZR-1, and Z06 being the most notable. Contrast that with the Vette’s Dark Ages between the OPEC oil crisis and the introduction of the fourth-generation Corvette, the C4, in 1984, when the options lists were limited to some slightly more powerful engines and sportier suspensions.

The C4 and the subsequent C5 marked a return to form—and evocative alphanumerics associated with performance again appeared on the options lists. The 375-hp ZR-1 model debuted in 1990, though it was pricey—nearly double the sticker of a base 245-hp coupe. A Z51 suspension package was also available through the C4’s (overly long) 13-year life. There was no ZR-1 for the 1997–2004 C5, but the Z06 performance model, latterly with 405 horsepower, commanded a premium of less than 20 percent over a base Corvette.

With the sixth-generation car, the C6, what’s old is new again. Introduced in 2005, the C6 has now spawned Z06 and ZR1 variants, while the Z51 suspension-option remains. The cynical might suggest that the $105,000 ZR1 merely represents a serious profit center for GM, but the other view is that this 638-hp supercar reflects confidence in the Corvette brand and in Chevrolet’s ability to engineer a car deserving such a price tag.

To see where the ZR1 (now hyphenless, kids!) stacks up, we decided to compare it with its stablemates. One could argue that we should be pitting the ZR1 against a Porsche 911 Turbo, but we reckon a 911 Turbo buyer is no more likely to cross-shop a ZR1 than a Yankees fan is to buy season tickets to the Red Sox. We think it’s better to know what the ZR1 offers—if anything—beyond the Z06 and the regular coupe.

Spot the Differences

With the cars lined up alongside each other, all our drivers made the same observation: The base yellow Corvette coupe, which ordinarily stands out on the road like a tiger in a room full of domestic cats, seems a little dowdy.

The Z06 and ZR1 look more taut and chiseled, thanks to wider front and rear fenders, more-aggressive front fascias, and a profusion of slats and scoops that channel cool air and exhaust heat. The ZR1 adds sills, an air-dam extension, and a roof made of carbon fiber; a more prominent tail spoiler; somewhat tacky ZR1 badges; and a transparent panel in its carbon-fiber hood.

All three Corvettes roll on big rims: 18 inches up front and 19s in back on both the base and Z06 models. On the ZR1, there are 19s at the front and 20-inch rears. Large red brake calipers play peekaboo behind the wheels of the Z06, with blue ones on the ZR1. Chromed wheels are optional, ranging from $1850 to $2000, but this treatment seems a touch passé.

Inside, all our test cars came fully loaded and featured an optional full-leather treatment that is way classier than the standard vision in plastic. The nicely stitched leather, however, jars with some cheap plastic moldings in the center stack and a lame faux-carbon-fiber finish that runs through the cabin. That leather costs $8055 in the base car, $6515 in the Z06, and $10,000 in the ZR1, bundled with a navigation system and upscale audio. (The touch-screen nav system is a $1750 stand-alone option on the two other models.) There’s a $55,410 difference in price between the ZR1 and the Z51, but interior changes are limited to a boost gauge in place of a battery-voltage meter, a 220-mph speedometer, and the ZR1 name emblazoned on the seatbacks and the gauge cluster.

ZR1 and Z06 buyers might not get a whole lot of extra interior equipment for their money, but they do get a lot more hardware. The base car comes with a 430-hp, 6.2-liter LS3 V-8 engine mated to a six-speed manual or automatic transmission. Our test car came with what we regard as the most significant option, the Z51 performance package, which incorporates stiffer springs and anti-roll bars, retuned shocks, shorter gear ratios, and larger-diameter brake rotors (13.4 inches in front and 13.0 inches in back, up from 12.8 and 12.0 inches). At $1695, the Z51 package looks like a value. We also like the $1195 dual-mode performance-exhaust system, which increases output from 430 horsepower and 424 pound-feet of torque to 436 and 428, respectively. A base Corvette coupe equipped with the Z51 package and exhaust system would run $50,785, but Chevy saddled our test car with another $13,155 of options.

For $23,655 above the cost of our Z51 test car, the Z06 adds plenty of performance-enhancing equipment. The LS7 engine uses a different block than the LS3 and displaces 7.0 liters. With the aid of lightweight titanium valves and connecting rods, it revs to 7000 rpm, 500 more than the LS3. It uses a race-type dry-sump oiling system compared with the LS3’s wet sump. This engine makes a stout 505 horsepower and 470 pound-feet of torque.

To handle the increased power and torque, the Z06’s clutch, transmission, and half-shafts have been beefed up. The frame is aluminum instead of steel, and there are cast suspension pieces in place of welded items. There’s even a magnesium front cradle instead of aluminum to save weight and add strength. The suspension design is carried over from the base car, with stiffer springs and anti-roll bars. The brakes are uprated, with 14.0-inch-diameter front and 13.4-inch rear rotors and six-piston front and four-piston rear calipers.

The ZR1 costs $31,745 more than the Z06. Like that car, the main news is under the hood. The supercharged 6.2-liter LS9 engine is based on the LS3 but with many changes. It has a forged steel crankshaft, titanium connecting rods, a dry-sump oil system, and hollow-stem exhaust valves. Titanium is also used for the intake valves. An Eaton R2300 supercharger and Behr intercooler force fuel and air into the engine, resulting in 638 horsepower and 604 pound-feet of torque.

To cope with the power, a two-disc clutch is fitted, and the gearbox and rear axle have been further strengthened. The gear ratios are closer than those of the Z06. The ZR1’s suspension is shared, for the most part, with the two other models, although the fitment of magnetorheological variable-damping shocks allows for a softer ride than the Z06’s. For the first time, a Corvette is equipped with carbon-ceramic brakes—massive 15.5-inch-diameter front and 15.0-inch rear Brembo rotors. They’re a slightly smaller version of the brakes used on the Bugatti Veyron.

All three Corvettes are spectacularly fast. The base model goes from 0 to 60 mph in 4.1 seconds and hits 100 mph in 9.0 seconds. The Z06 needs just 3.6 and 8.3 seconds for the same tasks, while the ZR1 hits 60 mph in 3.4 seconds and 100 mph in a stellar 7.6 seconds. That 100-mph time betters the likes of the Nissan GT-R, Porsche 911 Turbo, and Ferrari F430.

The 30-to-50 and 50-to-70-mph top-gear acceleration times are impressive, as is skidpad grip: 0.99 g for the coupe, rising to 1.07 g for the ZR1, which also has the best braking of any production car we have ever tested—it needed just 142 feet to slow from 70 mph to a standstill. The base car managed 152 feet (better than the last 911 Turbo we tested), and the Z06 took 150 feet.

Road Warriors

The base coupe is the most livable of the three. The highway ride is surprisingly supple, tire noise is relatively muted—except for some intrusive slap over expansion joints—and the engine hums away at 2000 rpm at 80 mph. We even managed to average 25 mpg during our test in the coupe, close to the EPA-highway figure of 26 mpg. That’s astonishing when one considers that the car spent an afternoon being thrown roughly around Grattan Raceway Park in western Michigan.

On bumpy back roads, the Corvette was very composed, had tons of grip, and ate up the straightaways while being perfectly composed under braking. It sounds terrific, too, bellowing hard under full throttle. The only weaknesses are steering that isn’t particularly communicative, even if the weight and accuracy are first-class, and a notchy shifter.

The Z06 is almost too much car for regular roads. On the highway, the ride is quite compliant, but it gets choppy over high-frequency, small-amplitude ripples. Surprisingly, it’s quieter than the base car at 70 mph, though the engine is more raucous under hard acceleration, when the V-8 snarls in a harsher, less mellifluous manner. The shifter still has a manly action but was a lot smoother than the base car’s. An observed fuel economy of 20 mpg is impressive considering the Z06’s capabilities.

Although the Z06 is even faster and grippier than the base car, it’s not as easy to drive hard on bumpy back roads, darting here and there in the braking zones. It crashes hard over the most pockmarked surfaces, and the steering feels a little less linear and more aggressive on turn-in.

The ZR1 is a more civilized ride than the Z06, although one needs to make sure the adjustable shocks are set in “Tour.” “Sport” is as firm as it is in the Z06, whereas the softer setting is almost as supple as the base car’s. Highway cruising is more rowdy, however, thanks to the shorter gear ratios and the noise emitted by the giant tires. The ZR1 got a woeful 12-mpg average, although the car did spend an awful lot of its time lapping around Grattan. The attainable EPA highway number of 20 mpg is a lot more respectable.

The car tends to tramline, unlike the other models, which means the driver needs a firm hand on bumpy back roads. We rated the ZR1’s steering as the most linear and involving of the three cars. The brakes are stellar, despite some initial pedal softness. Like the two other cars, there’s a marked step in power at roughly 3000 rpm, except that there’s simply more thrust in this car. The engine noise is sublime, a sonorous exhaust growl that swells in volume with revs, accompanied by blower whine that creates a V-8 symphony.

Track Stars

Let’s get this straight: The seats in all three cars are unacceptable. They’re okay for street use, but they just don’t provide the lateral support needed on a track. We all found that our legs hurt after driving at Grattan because we had to use them to brace ourselves under hard cornering.

Otherwise, all three are weapons on the track. The base coupe is very good, with nicely predictable on-the-limit handling. It will run wide if the driver tries to dive-bomb into a corner on the brakes or with the throttle closed, but the attitude can be converted to neutrality and then to progressive oversteer with power.

The Z06 is 2.1 seconds faster per lap than the Z51 but is hairy at the limit. We’ve said it before, but the combination of light-switch oversteer, instant breakaway from the Goodyear tires, and a slight numbness in the steering makes for a ride that’s like one of those giant roller coasters: alternately so scary and exhilarating that you’re not sure whether you enjoyed the experience.

The ZR1 is a far more sanitary device, despite going 2.1 seconds faster per lap than the Z06. It feels softer than the Z06, which gives the driver more warning of incipient breakaway, and the Michelin tires are much more progressive when they relinquish grip. Plus, the steering has more feel, and the brakes could stop a run on Wall Street. At Grattan, it was about as good as a road car can get on a circuit.

Verdict: A Corvette Wins!

The loser among these three is the Z06. In the past, we’ve given the car something of a free pass simply because it provides such stupendous performance for about $70,000. It is still a great value, but the Z51 and the ZR1 highlight its major fault, namely that it’s really difficult to drive hard on a track, which is supposedly its raison d’être.

The base coupe is also a great value and mighty fine to drive, too. It is relatively comfortable on the highway, very practical, and really fast on road and track. Sure, the interior is Third World standard unless you order the $8000 optional leather package, but one can live with that for a base price of less than $50,000. As one test driver noted, “This is as much Corvette as I really need.”

The ZR1 is a spectacular car. Yes, it has an interior that wouldn’t pass muster in an $18,000 Hyundai let alone a $105,000 sports car, and it looks, well, like a Corvette (on steroids). But it is a great piece of work: faster, easier to drive at the limit, and more comfortable in daily use than the Z06. It is one of those rare cars, such as the Ferrari 430 Scuderia and the BMW M3, that make its driver look more heroic than reality suggests. To do that with a car that has such formidable performance is a rare feat.

Katech Corvette Z06 ClubSport

The Corvette from Katech

On paper, the formula for the ClubSport Z06 from Clinton, Michigan–based Katech Performance sounds inviting. Take a Z06, remove 201 pounds, fit a double-adjustable coil-over suspension, add a Brembo brake kit, and install super-grippy Michelin Pilot Sport Cup tires. On the test track, it delivers: The Katech car was as fast from 0 to 60 mph as the ZR1 (3.4 seconds), and it hit 100 mph in 7.8 seconds. It beat all the Corvettes on the skidpad with 1.12 g of grip, owing to the tires. It looks pretty wicked, thanks to a subtle Katech body kit, a carbon-fiber hood, and striking wheels, along with its lowered stance.

In the real world, there are a number of problems. It sounds amazing, although 99 decibels at wide-open throttle gets incredibly wearing after, oh, about five miles on the highway—as does the ride, which is race-car stiff.

One might think that its true métier would be the track, and up to a point, that’s the case because it took 1.5 seconds off the Z06’s lap time. But although the steering feel is more engaging than the Z06’s, it’s even twitchier at the limit, and the car gets knocked off line over the slightest bump.

Sure, it’s nearly as fast as the ZR1 around the track, but this driver needed to take plenty of bravery pills before attempting a quick lap, whereas the ZR1 was actually much friendlier. And while you might think that the Katech route would end up being cheaper than the ZR1, it isn’t. The base price for this one is an eyepopping $109,000.

Bugatti Veyron 16.4 - Road Test- When your Mission is to find out what is possible to do instead of what we know how to do

Molsheim Moonshine: It achieves 60 mph in 119 feet. It costs $1.7 million. What else do you need to know?

BY JOHN PHILLIPS, PHOTOGRAPHY BY JEFFREY DWORIN
December 2008

Driving a Bugatti Veyron is like carrying a 14.6-foot-long open wallet that is spewing 50-dollar bills. Drivers rush up from behind, tailgating before swerving into either of the Veyron’s rear-three-quarter blind spots, where they hang ape-like out of windows to snap photos with their cell phones. They won’t leave, either, because they know the Bugatti, averaging 11 mpg, can’t go far without refueling and that its driver will soon need to take a minute to compose himself. And when you open the Veyron’s door to exit—a gymnastic feat that requires grabbing one of your own ankles to drag it across that huge, hot sill—you will be greeted by 5 to 15 persons wielding cameras and asking questions. If you’re wearing shorts or a skirt, here’s a tip: Wear underwear.

Describing hyperbole with hyperbole is not a useful pursuit. In the Veyron’s case, the facts are sufficient. Let us look at a few:

It takes five weeks to build each car. Counting the heater core, the Veyron has 12 radiators. Sixty mph is yours in 2.5 seconds. The Bug will reach 150 mph 8.3 seconds sooner than a Nissan GT-R. At its top speed of 253 mph [as tested by C/D, November 2005], it is traveling 371 feet per second and will empty its 26.4-gallon tank in 19 minutes. If you can’t locate fuel of 93 octane or higher, your dealer must detune the engine. Service, in general, will be expensive because it takes two persons—one of whom won’t be you—to remove the rear bodywork just to get at the engine. Four of this car’s Michelin PAX Pilots will set you back $25,000. If they’re mounted on wheels—a process undertaken only in France—well, that’s $70,000. The hydraulic rams that raise the rear wing at 137 mph are identical to those that raise flaps on aircraft. During the Veyron’s prototype days, a bird crashed through its aluminum grille—the car was humming along at 205 mph—so now the grille is titanium. The windows automatically rise and lock in place at 93 mph so your dog doesn’t lose his tongue. You thought the engine made 1001 horsepower? Nope. “They all make more than 1010,” says Bugatti’s Jens Schulenburg, who works in the “Gesamtfahrzeugentwicklung” department.

Over Labor Day weekend, we drove the Veyron to the 5000-car Kruse Auction in Auburn, Indiana, where it could repose amongst other supercars and elicit reactions from enthusiasts whose wallets were as wide as the Bugatti’s doorsills. We parked next to a racing-blue 1948 Talbot-Lago. A French car next to a French car. But the Bugatti killed all interest in the magnificent Talbot, making us feel sorry for its owner. So we parked in a line of a dozen Lamborghinis. This lasted 15 minutes before the Lambo salesman began looking ill. “We’re trying to sell here,” he pleaded. “You’re killing us.”

All persons who stumble upon a Veyron are moved to speak:

“I’ll bet that car has more moves than a monkey on 18 feet of grapevine,” said one.

“If that’s your car,” said a blonde, “I’ll marry you.”

“That thing’ll rip your nuts off,” opined a teenager with numerous facial piercings.

“It’s like a good movie,” said another. “Contains violence, obscenity, possible nudity.” (We’re not sure what that meant.)

“I do believe this is the most beautiful car I have ever seen,” said a Southern belle who’d driven to Auburn in her Ford GT.

They ask questions, too. Mostly, “What happens when you flatten the accelerator pedal?” Here’s the best we can explain it. From rest, the car leaves civilly, gentlemanly, with almost no wheelspin or tire squeal. It accelerates briskly for roughly one second, until the turbos understand that you mean business. Then there is a deafening roar, the nose lifts, and the car feels as if it’s making a serious attempt to claw itself into the air. The first time you’re about three seconds into this experiment, you, too, will lift. For one thing, you’ll be close to rear-ending a family in a Ford Explorer. For another, you’ll need a moment to recalibrate what you’ve hitherto considered cheek-rippling forward thrust. Analogies, here, are often futile, but in the time it takes a thundering Audi S8 to attain 60 mph, the Veyron will be going 100.

The somewhat disappointing news is that despite accurate, nicely weighted steering and 1.00 g of skidpad grip, the car isn’t particularly nimble in the hills, where it is taxed by its 4486-pound heft. It feels more like a Benz SL63 AMG than, say, a BMW M3.

The Veyron’s weird shifter, which we named Klaatu, is as alien as the rest of the car. Push down for park. Push once to the right for drive. Twice to the right for sport mode. Left for neutral. Left and down for reverse. No matter where you shove it, it instantly returns to its original position, à la BMW turn signals. This is annoying, but resist the urge to abuse any gears. A new transmission costs $123,200. Speaking of abuse, within the 366-page hardcover owner’s manual, there are 190 boxed messages headlined “WARNING!”

Nissan 370Z Coupe Revealed

LOS ANGELES — Nissan today pulled the covers back on its redesigned 2009 370Z Coupe, which formally debuts November 19 at the 2008 Los Angeles Auto Show.

Inside Line brought you details of the sixth-generation Z-car nearly two weeks ago, including our educated guess that the new, shorter Z will share its 3.7-liter VQ engine and seven-speed automatic transmission with the latest incarnations of the Infiniti G37 coupe and sedan.

Although we've been privy to several rounds of spy photos, this is the first official look at the 370Z's uncamouflaged sheet metal, plus production-ready cabin.

The architecture of the interior is familiar, as the steering wheel is mounted on a movable pod and there are three small instruments on top of the dash, but the cheap, hard plastic of the current Z-car has mercifully disappeared.

This is the first significant overhaul of the Z since the fifth-generation model was introduced in 2003. U.S. sales begin in early 2009, and a 370Z convertible is also expected for the 2010 model year.

Inside Line says: A full list of the 370Z's final production specs will be revealed at the L.A. show.

Amazing Water Transformation: Liquid To Solid Instantly.

How to Turn "water" into Balls


How to Turn "water" into Balls - Click here for another funny movie.

Carbon Ceramic Brakes for the everyday vehicle

STEZZANO, Italy — Brembo, the undisputed king of butt-kicking brakes, recently cut a deal to take over all of a joint venture it had with Mercedes-Benz parent Daimler AG which since 2004 had designed, developed and manufactured carbon-ceramic brake discs. Carbon-ceramic is the almost magic material that produces tremendously strong, virtually fade-free brakes.

These are all the rage for high-dollar sports cars and mega-sedans — and to now they've been as scary-expensive as the cars they bring to a halt: like 100 times the price of a standard $25 brake disc.

But that's the intrigue with the latest Brembo deal. In buying the 50 percent of Brembo Ceramic Brake Systems it didn't own, company chairman Alberto Bombassei insinuates that in addition to doubling capacity to make the things, it will perhaps help Brembo to start cutting the price of carbon-ceramic rotors.

"Carbon-ceramic discs technology is now ready to be applied on a wider scale, after the intense development performed with Daimler," said Bombassei. A press release stated, "R&D investments will continue with a view to launch a new product next year, with features suitable for wider scale applications."

In the auto biz, "wider-scale applications" usually is code for "less expensive." We're betting Brembo is working on ways to bring mass-production techniques to the manufacture of the carbon-ceramic rotors, which to now have been essentially hand-made in an extremely time-intensive process.

In some senses, access to the wonders of carbon-ceramic brakes already has become less expensive. Mercedes, which might or might not be able to claim being the first to introduce carbon-ceramic brakes for a production car with its CL55 AMG F1 Limited Edition in 2000, later that year charged $5,650 for the brakes as an option on the S55 AMG and CL55 AMG. But now, Brembo-made carbon-ceramic brake rotors are standard equipment on the $104,000 Corvette ZR1.

And although no Ferrari is cheap, the company said last year it would be the first automaker to make carbon-ceramic brakes standard on all its cars.

Apart from their otherworldly performance, carbon-ceramic brakes typically reduce weight at each wheel by 50 percent compared with a conventional, heavy iron brake disc. And maintenance cost will be gleefully reduced: for the optional carbon-ceramic brakes on the 2009 RS 6, for example, Audi guarantees a service life of 190,000 miles.

Inside Line says: Maybe you won't be seeing carbon-ceramic brakes on Malibus just yet, but Brembo's trying to make the technology more affordable — and more mainstream. We'll see what it's up to next year.

GM Chrysler Deal still on the Table

DETROIT — Emergency financial help from the U.S. government may be on the way to Detroit to support a merger between General Motors and Chrysler.

The New York Times reported on Tuesday that the Bush administration is looking into "a range of options for providing emergency financial help to spur a merger between General Motors and Chrysler." Reuters said the two automakers have asked the feds for "roughly $10 billion in an unprecedented rescue package" for such a merger. And the Associated Press said the financing arms of the automakers might be eligible for federal help under the bank stock-purchasing portion of the government's $700 billion financial rescue package.

If GM and Chrysler were to merge, such an entity would control about a third of the U.S. auto market by sales and include 11 automotive brands from Cadillac to Jeep.

The Detroit automakers are under growing pressure to come up with a plan to stave off bankruptcy filings. Late Monday, Moody's Investors Service sent its ratings on GM and Chrysler deeper into so-called "junk" status. Ford was put on review for a possible downgrade. All of the aforementioned moves add to the jitters about the domestic auto industry's financial health.

Among the options that the U.S. government is considering: tapping into a $25 billion loan program that Congress set up to help the auto companies modernize their plans and returning to Congress after the November 4 election for authority to spend funds aimed specifically at the auto industry, said the Times report.

However, the $25-billion loan program was originally designed to provide low-interest loans to the domestic auto industry for retooling to make fuel-efficient cars such as the Chevrolet Volt. The original intent was not to orchestrate a merger between Chrysler and GM. It is unclear what a diversion of funds from the loan program may mean for the development of more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Inside Line says: Nothing is cast in stone yet on federal aid for a Chrysler-GM merger — but it's clear some kind of help is imperative. — Anita Lienert, Correspondent

Aston One-77 Revealed

The 2 million dollar Aston Martin One-77. They will only make 77 of them. Why you ask?- because that is all the tooling will tolerate without degradation. That is how precise the tolerances are.

Oh yes and if you know anything about mathematics the car was designed around The Golden Ratio- some say it is evidence that God exists since it is found universally in nature and science has proven that which is deemed as beautiful fits that proportion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio

AMSTERDAM — Thanks to the Dutch Web site 925.nl, we now have our first detailed look at the Aston Martin One-77, the supercar that was kept — mostly — under wraps earlier this month at the 2008 Paris Auto Show.

Aston is still running silhouettes of the car on its media Web site. In Paris, it teasingly pulled the car cover up to expose a little flesh, but not much more.

We brought you details on the car from the show, but were not permitted to photograph the entire vehicle.

So take a good, long look at the $2.1-million supercar that expects to challenge the Bugatti Veyron. It appears we won't have to wait till next year's 2009 Geneva Auto Show after all to see the complete One-77.

Inside Line says: Serves those cagey Brits right for being so coy at Paris