tehcarblogz's Xanga

Website!

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 22:37:37 GMT

Hey all my two readers! My car blog has moved to it's own website. It can be found at www.tehcarblogz.com Web design by Mike Torbert at Semper Fi designs, hosted on the Penguin Militia network. Check it out!

www.tehcarblogz.com

-James

Power to Weight: the only number that really matters.

Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:43:16 GMT

the world is filled with fast cars. Fast, of course, is relative. If you're driving a 4-cylinder Camry, then a Mini Cooper S will feel like a rocket ship. If you're driving a Corvette, it's going to take more to put some fire up your ass.

A lot of car guys tend to get caught up in the numbers, in the on-paper promise. It is alluring: which car is better, the one with 3.0L and 12 valves and 200bhp, or the 2.0L with 20 valves? 6-speed manual, or 7-speed SMG? 100bhp/l or 75 bhp/l? Direct injection or port? High power peak or strong low-end torque?

As far as performance goes, though, there is really only one relevant number: the power to weight ratio. It's pretty simply: how much oomph for how much weight. The best way of explaining it is this example: A Lotus Elise has 190 bhp. An 05-06 Pontiac GTO (with the 6.0L LS2) has a whopping 400bhp. Both of them hit sixty miles an hour in about 4.8 seconds. Why? Well, the Pontiac weighs about double what the Elise does. (you can come to your own conclusion on which is better. I'd love to have one of each in my garage, thanks.)

So while your neighbor's Escalade might have 408 horsepower, you'll still be able to spank his ass from a stoplight in your 200bhp Sentra SE-R Spec V. And so on and so forth.

So let's get a little perspective. My preferred method of power/weight measurement is the classic horsepower per ton (standard, 2000lb ton.) Here's a short list of some cars with basic specs (engine, output, weight, bhp/ton, acceleration numbers.)

Honda Civic Type R: 2.0L 16v I4, 220bhp, 6M FWD, 2800lbs, 174.8bhp/ton. 0-60 6.2s
Mini Cooper S: 1.6L 16v I4 Turbo DI, 173bhp, 6M FWD, 2491lbs, 153.1bhp/ton. 0-60 7.1s
Subaru Impreza S-GT (WRX) 2.0L 16v H4 Turbo, 247bhp, 5M 4WD, 2998lbs, 181.62bhp/ton. 0-60 6.0s
Subaru WRX STi: 2.0l 16v H4 Turbo, 304 bhp, 6M 4WD, 3263lbs, 205.41bhp/ton. 0-60 5.2s

as you can see, the bhp/ton ratio makes more of a difference than the actualy power numbers. The Honda has a significant mechanical disadvantage to the Subaru S-GT (front wheel drive instead of 4WD, no turbo, no torque, 25 less horsepower stock...) but since it's quite a bit lighter, it's close enough in acceleration that a drag race would be more down to the driver than to the Subaru's advantage. Also notice that while the STI version of the WRX boasts more than 50 extra horsepower, it's bhp/ton ratio doesn't go up nearly as much -because the STI is a porker, weighing in at nearly 3300 lbs - about as much as a ZR1 Corvette. Let's move up a bit, though. Here is the case of the LS2.

2006 Chevrolet Corvette: 6.0L 16v V8, 400bhp, 6M RWD, 3241lbs. 272.11bhp/ton, 0-60 4.4s
2006 Cadillac CTS-V: 6.0L 16v V8, 400bhp, 6M RWD, 3849lbs. 229.1bhp/ton, 0-60 4.9s
2004 Chevrolet SSR: 6.0l 16v V8, 390bhp, 6M RWD, 4760lbs, 180.64bhp/ton, 0-60 5.6s
2005 Pontiac GTO: 6.0L 16v V8, 400bhp, 6M RWD, 3725lbs, 214.76bhp/ton, 0-60 4.9s
2006 Chevrolet Trailblazer SS, 6.0L 16v V8, 390bhp, 4A AWD, 4663lbs, 167.27bhp/ton, 0-60 6.3s

This list is relevant becuase it's 5 entirely different cars with the same engine - GM's renowned LS2 small-block V8. The Corvette weighs the least, and is far and away the fastest - in near-supercar territory with the same 400bhp that the Trailblazers lounges along to sixty in 6.2 seconds with. So you can see why power-to-weight matters.

But here's what I really came to talk about: the upper echelon of supercars.

Let's start with something batshit crazy fast: the original Ferrari F40. Twin-turbo 2.9L V8, 478 horsepower, yadda ya. And some other batshit crazy cars to go along.

1989 Ferrari F40: 2.9L 32v V8 Twin Turbo, 478bhp, 5M RWD, 2425lbs, 429.09bhp/ton. 0-60 3.9s
1991 Jaguar XJ220: 3.5L 24v V6 Twin Turbo, 500bhp, 5M RWD, 3439lbs, 320.51bhp/ton. 0-60 4.0s.
1994 McLaren F1 Road car: 6.1L 48v V12, 627bhp, 6M RWD, 2509lbs, 550.97bhp/ton. 0-60 3.4s
2003 Porsche Carrera GT: 5.7L 40v V10, 603bhp, 6M RWD, 3042lbs, 436.97bhp/ton. 0-60 3.7s
2007 Bugatti Veyron 16/4: 8.0L 64v W18 Quad-Turbo, 1001bhp, 7S 4WD, 4162lbs, 522bhp/ton. 0-60 2.9s

The Veyron, the accepted "standard of the world" for production cars, actually has a lower power/weight ratio than the 14-year old McLaren F1 street car, simply because it weighs about as much as a box of boat anchors. 1001bhp is great, but a 2+ ton kerb weight isn't. It's faster 0-60 because of the incredible launches provided by it's 4WD system but you have to imagine how fast it'd be without all the 4WD and twin-clutch gearbox and four turbos. Still, a neat car. But there are two cars coming out that blow everything ever made, literally, into the weeds.

2008 Ariel Atom 500: 2.4L 40v V8 Supercharged, 500bhp, 6S RWD, 11150lbs, 869.75bhp/ton. 0-60: who knows?

The other is the same RS Technology supercharged V8 stuffed into a Cateram 7 SV, which, let's face it, will also be ignorantly fast. No hard numbers on that one yet. But basically this Ariel Atom is a piece of scaffolding with a 500 horsepower V8 and some wheels. nearly 1000bhp/ton makes me frankly a bit uncomfortable. Almost double the power/weight ratio of a Bugatti? How would you drive it and not DIE?

Anyway, here are some pics, please refrain from touching yourself:

Hot Rods I've Had Floating Around My Head

Sat, 23 Feb 2008 06:28:39 GMT

    I've come to realize one thing that bonds "car guys" together, even if they don't know it. No matter who you are, what you're into, where you're from or how old you are, you have that "dream project" floating around your head. You might ponder on while sitting in a soul-crushing sales data meeting. You might imagine it as you fall asleep to bring ease to your mind. Hell, you might even be picking the right A/R ratio for that huge turbo while your girlfriend goes on about shoes. Whatever it is, you know you have one.

    A lot of people have pretty standard car dreams - "Oh, I'd love a Corvette. Red. Yeah, a convertible... uhh, black top. Lowered a bit, black mesh cross-spoke 19's with a chrome lip. Uhh, and a supercharger." Others might yearn for a gleaming, like-new classic. Who doesn't want a lipstick red Porsche 356 Speedster with 4 miles on it, stored in a bubble since new?

    For the true car nerds like me, though, things aren't that simple. I see cars not so much as objects or devices, but as a canvas. Sure, some cars are appliances just like a refrigerator - Camry, take a bow. And they have their place. But a true gearhead sees a car as a starting point- what's the potential? And of course, bonus points for uniqueness. These are just a few of the projects I've had floating around my head.

1) Hot-rod Volvo V70 Cross Country
this one has been floating around and solidifying in my head for a little while. I thought it would be a great basis to make a really classy, unique, well built and powerful "do anything" car. I mean think about it- the V70XC is pretty great. Four wheel drive, 5 seats and a wagon bay for stuff, tons of cargo capacity, a bit of ground clearance for minor off-roading, comfortable interior, lots of character. What it's missing is some power! The first generation came only with a 2.4L low-pressure turbo straight five with 190 horsepower. Hardly sufficient.

Being a bit of a nerd, i would cover every aspect. The car would be lowered somewhere between and inch and an inch and a half, giving it better roadholding but still riding higher than a normal V70. Stiffer Bilstein shocks, IPD springs and sway bars, stock 16" wheels with 215/55/16 G-Force T/A KDW's for grip. Porsche Cayenne front brake conversion, S60R front rotors and calipers in the rear for the whoa.

As for the go, big plans. MKI V70R engine (2.3L DOHC 20v I5, td04-18g, lower compression ratio than the 2.4L and 2.5L five-bangers.) S60R manifold, TD05 turbo, 3" downpipe to high flow cat, running back to a 3" IPD stainless dual exhaust with single mufflers on each side. Stock internals but water/meth injection, larger intercooler, samco hoses to avoid boost leaks, TiaL blow-off valve, IPD trans cooler, RICA ECU reflash, and of course IPD poly motor mounts. With the larger S60R turbo and better-flowing manifold with the free-flowing exhaust, bigger injectors, advanced timing with the water meth, software, and much more boost than stock, this sucker would book. It would be like the Volvo equivalent of a Subaru Forester STI. Imagine the bricks people would shit when you passed their ass at 120 in a Cross Country. Priceless.

2) Subaru Legacy 2.5GT Wagon

Don't need to do a whole lot here... You already start with the bigger EJ25 turbo flat four. STi short block (lower compression, oil squirters, etc) with IHI VF39 twin-scroll ball-bearing turbo (stock STI is a VF34) or a Garrett GT30R, larger APS top-mount intercooler (for sleeper status), ported heads, bigger Denso 550cc injectors, Walbro 255lph, Cobb Open ECU tuning, APS 3" downpipe to dual 2.75" stainless exhaust. Lowered on 18" grey OZ Superleggaras with Leda coils and SPT rear swaybar. Add a few goodies on - Kart Boy shift kit, APS Stage 2 clutch, Aquamist injection, STI brake conversion, and you have one seriously quick, seriously innocuous-looking Hot Rod. And you can fit your labradors in the back! And it'll sound seriously fantastic.

3) Audi allroad Quattro 2.7T

The allroad has all-time sleeper status for having both the 2.7T biturbo V6 and an available six-speed, stuffed in the body of a jacked-up A6 Avant with rubber cladding and adjustable air suspension. No one would ever suspect it. For real.

start with the cosworth-designed RS4 block, forged internals, redone valvetrain with 9.0:1 compression pistons and a block spacer plate to allow for more boost, twin Garrett GT30's, Forge DV's, Samco hoses, Southbend Stage III clutch and lightened flywheel, etc etc. 600whp would not be unimaginable with this configuration. Leave it on stock wheels and watch it burn all four tires on launch! Why the hell not?

Hmm, looking back, this first set seems to be pretty heavy on the highly-modified turbocharged, all-wheel drive wagons. Perhaps because they're awesome. Anyways, the next list will be: "cars that i would just say fuck it, i'm stick a small block Chevy motor in there." Stay tuned!

designing the perfect car (or: designing a car like a bike)

Mon, 03 Dec 2007 01:58:28 GMT

My interest of things with wheels is pretty broad. I've been a road-biker for years, I love cars, motorcycles, trucks, Jeeps... pretty much anything with wheels. I haven't developed a love for the unicycle yet, but I'm sure it's time is coming.

One of things about the whole bicycle industry is that very few components are proprietary. That is to say, if you are building a mountain bike, a Shimano XTR rear derailleur will work on a Santa Cruz frame, or a Trek frame, or a Cannondale frame. A rear derailleur is a rear derailleur. Same thing with seats. Love your Selle Italia carbon saddle? Put it on your new bike. Shifters, handbars, stems, brakes, cranks, crank arms, pedals. grips, shorties, forks, head units, computers - most everything will fit on anything. You can theoretically build a bike exactly the way you want it. Wouldn't that be amazing if you could do that with a car?

Some people will say "well you can custom-fabricate anything to fit in anything." It's true. I've seen an EK9 Honda Civic hatchback with an entire C5 Corvette drivetrain under it - LS1, Tremec T56, even suspension and wheels/tires and brakes. But that is nigh on impossible unless you have an engineering degree, thousands and thousands of dollars, and unlimited creativity.

so I've thought about what I would build if cars worked the same way bikes did. The ideal car. The possibilities are endless! Every car has a best feature, you could combine them in any way you wanted to build the ideal car to your specifications. Here's my idea.

The overall goal for the car would be a car that is fuel efficient, extremely fun to drive, cheap to own and maintain, useful (able to carry a lot of stuff), comfortable, and electronically integrated. Here's how I'd do it.

Body: 5 door hatchback/sedan - something like the Saab NG900 or Mazda 6s 5-door: sleek looking but with a lift rear hatch, 40/60 split folding rear seats, and lots of useable cargo space.

Engine: BMW's 3.0L twin-sequential turbocharged diesel from the 535d, remapped for more power. It already has 282bhp and 428 lb-ft of torque; in a 3000 lb car that would be good for a low five-second 0-60 time and 40+mpg on diesel. Bonus points for running it on B100 biodiesel.

drivetrain: Gen IV Haldex all wheel drive. haldex's latest development of their AWD system just debuted in the restyled Saab 9-3 and it's a brilliant piece of kit. Up to 100 percent of available torque can be shifted to the front or the rear wheels (as opposed to only a 50 percent variable for the old system.) In addition, the electronic coupling can reduce power sent to the rear wheels down to 5-10% during normal driving to prevent wear and to increase fuel economy. the electronic limited slip diff in the rear sends power where it is needed among the two rear wheels, and the system can even detect emergency situations (like a sharp lane change or a hard start, etc) and distribute power where it needs to go to keep the car under control - like limited understeer or oversteer. It will be safe, efficient, and very rewarding to drive. Sign me up.

Transmission: 6-speed transaxle from the Honda Accord fitted with double overdrives (5th and 6th) and a deep final drive ratio for relaxed and efficient highway cruising as well as good acceleration. Include a short shifter as standard, too. This is IMO the best shifter out there. Light, precise, great reactions. Perfect.

Suspension: easy: double wishbones front and rear limits positive camber during cornering. Magnetorheologic shocks instantly vary stiffness based on road conditions. It would be expensive but who cares? it would be perfect.

Interior: seats from the Volvo S60R AWD are IMO the best out there for a mixture of support and comfort. Heated and cooled, with manual controls please. Gauges from the current-generation Audi A4 - beautiful and perfectly legible 100% of the time. Saab-style dashboard (main controls are high on the dash and tilted towards the driver) but with Audi build quality and materials. Pop-up satellite navigation that stays hidden when not in use. Build in hard-drive to store nav data as well as music. 600w Harmon-Kardon stereo with 12 speakers, built in amp and subs below the seats. VW Golf R32 steering wheel (duh.) bluetooth connectivity that works. That's about it.

I think it'd be ideal - at least for me! Fast, efficient, spacious, great to drive, comfortable, unique. I wish that's how it really worked

till next time,

-James

Saab story

Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:57:07 GMT

one of the most fervently discussed topics in the automotive arena these days is what will become of Saab. The brand that was (actually) "born from jets" started out as fiercly independent, open-minded, individualistic, and Swedish. Financial troubles led to the Saab car brand being split off of parent company and producer of heavy equipment, Scania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scania_AB) and being bought up by the evil whoremonger GM in 1990. Things pretty much went downhill (slowly at first) from there. The classic, longitudinal-engine 900 was replaced by the "NG"900 in 1994, a Saabified version of the Vauxhall Vectra. Although it had some classic Saab traits - hatchback, key in the console, turbo torque steer, awful shift linkage - the 900 wasn't a real Saab, and most Saab people noticed. That was the problem - Saab was pretty much define by their iconoclastic owner base. Well, that and the NG900 was poorly built and not very well equipped for the money it required.

Still, the real problems didn't start until after the turn of the new millenium. The Saab brand hadn't been doing well for GM - it had been bleeding red ink for years, as opposed to Ford's counterpart purchase, Volvo, which had been turning a profit fairly reliably since purchase. The General wasn't doing all that well, either - loss of focus on cars and overinvestment in the deflating light truck/ SUV market meant GM had put all it's eggs in the wrong basket. So they inacted "drastic measures" and shot some badge-engineering fun into the Saab fold. It wasn't pretty.

The first automotive abortion was the 9-2x. Not to say the 9-2x was a bad car, but it was about as Swedish as a bottle of Sake or a Subaru Impreza. Which, coincidentally, it was - well, an Impreza with a different front and rear bumper, Saab badges, a bit more sound deadening, and the steering rack from the STI. And a whole bunch of money tacked onto the sticker. Not that it mattered; rebates on the 9-2x for it's entire lifespan ranged from "gigantic" to "we'll pay you to buy this Saabaru." Case in point: the 9-2x Aero, Saab's version of the WRX, listed at an MSRP of around $27,000 USD, considerably more than an identically equipped Subaru WRX. I almost bought one for less than $19,000 USD, brand new.

At least the 9-2x was based on a car with Saab-like traits: after all, Subaru has a history of taking the bizarre route to accomplishing ordinary tasks, and a habit of being very good at rally racing. But the 9-7x, on the other hand... well, no.

Ok, sure, the 9-7x had it's ignition switch on the console. And a Saab front end. But it was a GMC Envoy. A Chevy Trailblazer. Model names, hilariously enough, were either "4.2i" or "5.3i" depending on which underpowered, gas-sucking truck motor was under the hood. Someone forgot that Saab split off of Scania a while back, and no longer made trucks as well as cars. The 9-7x was just complete garbage, and was also largely ignored by the market, as it deserved. There was nothing remotely "Saab" about it. The point is, the 9-7x would've destroyed a weaker brand than Saab.

Now I'm neither alarmist nor idealist, but I think there is light at the end of the tunnel for this "saab" story. The new '08 9-3 has been introduced, and holy trollhatten, Saab has an appealing product. Sure, the 04+ 9-3's were attractice, but there was nothing to really put them in a good position in the market. Now, the 9-3 might actually find some buyers. And the best news is, it's actually a Saab. Sort of.

First off, check out that nose - rawr. If you're ripping down the left lane on the highway and that slow Camry doesn't move over, it's because the driver can't see. The styling updates were inspired by the popular Saab Aero-X concept car from a few years back, and I think they're adapted to great effect here.

The big news, though, is some mechanical improvements Saab has made to the 9-3 lineup.

They are the first to market to adapt Haldex Gen. IV All-Wheel-Drive, which in Saab nomenclature is called "XWD," as well as the first in the segment to adopt an electronically controlled limited slip rear differential. There are some significant differences between this setup and other ones on the market that gives Saab (for once) a foot up on the competition.

XWD uses the electronic rear differential to be "pre-emptive": that is, unlike most Haldex system currently on the market, XWD activates the rear wheels BEFORE the driven wheels spin, offering greater traction. In addition, the eLSD on the rear can distribute power at the rear axle more towards the outside wheel, like Honda's SH-AWD, to increase cornering speed. As well, the system can send up to 100% of the engine's power to either the front OR rear axle, rather than a maximum 50/50 split as is normal. All this means that the XWD will have better traction, better agility, and offer a more involving and safe drive than other AWD equipped cars.

The first car to get this nifty system will be the new Turbo X, which I must say is hotter than a room full of cloned Hayden Panettieres. Built to celebrate 30 years of turbocharging technology at Saab, beginning with the first 99 Turbo, the Turbo X is cloaked in black, dropped on lowered sport suspension over some sexy 18" wheels that only Saab would have the balls to produce, has the new XWD system and a 280bhp 2.8L turbocharged V6. Inside, sport seats, a fully black interior, and 99 Turbo- inspired guages make it that much more special. This car is gorgeous. You want one. Don't even lie.

and check out that sweet gauge cluster

I guess I'm just happy that Saab finally has a product out that is both attractive just because it is, and attractive from a mechanical standpoint. Here's to hoping Saab doesn't go down under the waves!

Till next time,

James

So what exactly is a sports car?

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:40:31 GMT

When someone says sports car, what do you think of first?

I think car enthusiasts these days are divided into two basic camps - on one side are the purists, who say that a sports car is about tactile feel, needs to have two doors and preferably two seats and a roof that folds down at the push of a button (or for the hardcore, a few flips of the wrist and a swing of the arm.) They say it's not about the destination, it's about the journey - a sports car is one you don't feel strange putting on some stringback driving gloves and flinging it up a mountain pass with a favorite CD on the radio. Sports cars are defined by the experience.

To others, a sports car means a car that possesses performance abilities above and beyond mere commuter fodder. Forward acceleration and deceleration, lateral acceleration, powerbands and torque curves, brake horsepower per ton and total swept brake area per ton. How many gears? Where does the turbo kick in? Where does the engine run out of steam? Are you still in the fat part of the powerband when you drop it into the next gear from redline? How about some 0-60's, 1/4 mile times, top speeds, g's of lateral acceleration, braking distances? How about in-gear passing power? In a word, this group is about the numbers.

By this logic, the first group winds up in a mid-ninties Miata - british racing green, tan roof, optional limited slip differential. The second party winds up in a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution.

But it seems to me these days that the lines are being blurred more than ever before. And, (of course), it's all the fault of ze Germans. Well, and the Japanese.

To explain, let's think of a legendary sports car from, say, 15 years ago. In 1992, just about the most badass car you could purchase from your domestic dealerships was the C4 Corvette with the optional ZR-1 option package. Lotus-designed, Mercury Marine built 32-valve, quad cam 350 cubic inch V8. 405 horsepower. ZF 6 speed manual. 305mm rear tires. Widened fenders. 186 miles an hour. Power everywhere. It could burn rubber up to 70 miles an hour. And it hit sixty miles an hour in 4.9 seconds. But it wasn't cheap. Nearly $70,000 dollars (in 1992!) was the entry price for the General's road rocket. Back at this time, the Lexus brand was still getting on it's cute little feet - it had only been around for 3 years, and the Germans were only beginning to take it seriously. The most potent car they offered was the fat, boring, 250 horsepower LS400 sedan - a Mercedes S420 for people with no imagination, or taste.

Now let's come back to the present. Late 2007. Walk into your Lexus dealer early next year, and ask your salesperson to show you their shiney, new IS-F.

It's a compact executive sedan, but with a twist: check out those blistered fenders, giant wheels, huge Brembo brakes, quad exhaust tips. Scope out that bulging hood and giant air intakes on the front fascia. What's this business?

To speak in a language that camp #2 would understand: 5.0L 32v V8. 416 horsepower. 371 lb-ft. 8 speed automatic. Limited slip diff. 0-60 in 4.6 seconds. Top speed electronically limited to 170. (Rumor has it it's good for 186 when you clip that wire.) Mid 12-second quarter mile. All this with Lexus refinement, Toyota reliability, and for around $60,000 dollars (and mind you, that's 2007 dollars.)

To speak in the language of the first camp: It's a fun to drive Lexus sedan. Sharp steering, great throttle response, sounds amazing, it's a hoot to hoon about in. It's a Lexus that can let it's hair down, turn it's VDC off, and lay down two thick stripes.

And the IS-F isn't just a random bright star in Lexus' lineup. The standard IS with the optional engine has 306 horses and hits sixty in 5.3 seconds; it runs a sub 14-second quarter mile as well. The GS is available with a 380 horsepower V8. Even the LS hauls some serious ass these days.

And they're not alone. Every "upper-level" brand has a compact sedan with performance that rivals or even eclipses that of the celebrated sports cars of the 1990's. Infiniti's G35 sedan is about as quick as an LT1 Corvette. BMW's 335i can hit sixty in 5 seconds flat - significantly faster than the mid-ninties E36-generation M3. Volvo's 300bhp S60R AWD is faster in the 0-60 sprint than the original Acura NSX, a car labeled as a "Ferrari Slayer" in it's day. Volvo!

It almost seems like the sports car in a traditional sense is dying. For instance, park a Pontiac Solstice GXP next to a Cadillac CTS, and guess which one had it's suspension fine-tuning done at the Nurburgring Nordschliefe. I'll give you a hint: there aren't kidney grilles on the front. The Solstice is a cheap (but certainly gorgeous) parts-bin special. Pontiac's own G8 GT sedan is a well developed, powerful RWD sports sedan.

Honda killed off the Prelude to make space for a more sporting version of the Accord Coupe. The Acura CL and NSX disappeared, and the TL Type-S is holding down the fort as far as excitement goes with Honda's luxury brand.

Mazda's fastest car in the '90's was a sexy two-seat, twin turbo rotary powered flyweight called the RX-7. Nowaday's it's a turbocharged 4-cylinder hatchback called the Mazdaspeed3.

Don't get me wrong; I love all these new sports cars conveniently disguised as family haulers. They're total sleepers. But I wish the market would actually make some good sports cars again.

Three new cars I'd actually consider buying

Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:59:16 GMT

I'll be honest. most new cars that are on sale today are crap. They are boring, uninspired, and clearly derived from whatever the current trendsetting fashion of the moment is. Hondas look like Hyundais look like Nissans look like Mitsubishis look like Fords look like everything else in the entire freaking world. And mechanically, they haven't really gotten better. Sure, they have more power. But they have more weight and they're not really considerably faster than they were 10 years ago, and for the most part they're worse on gas. I'm a fan of old cars. I miss when Volvo made square cars with longitudinal engines and rear wheel drive. I miss when Hondas were light and had, oh I dunno, original features and were fun to drive. I miss the old WRX and it's hardly been gone a month. I miss when BMW's were classy looking.

However there are SOME new cars out or coming out soon that I'm genuinely interested in. Here are a few.

1) BMW 1-series (128i, 135i)
I have to say, as someone who studies the automotive market, I think the 1-series is a pretty foolish car to sell here in the US. It fits somewhere inbetween the classic 3-series and the cheeky Mini Cooper in size and price. Actually, it's closer to the Mini in size. But here's the kicker: it's rear-wheel drive, lighter than the chunky 3-series, and is available with two smooth 3.0L Inline Sixes. the base 1-series, the 128i, will come with a 3.0L 230 horsepower naturally aspirated six, probably good for sixty from a standstill in under 6 seconds - WRX territory. The upper level model, the 135i, will utilize BMW's new twin-turbocharged 3.0L 6 to the tune of 300 horsepower and 300 lb-ft. BMW conservatively estimates this car will hit sixty in 5.2s. I call shens; the 335i can do it in under 5 seconds and it's almost 400 pounds heavier. I would guess in the four-and-a-half second range. So this car will annihilate in a straight line. STI performance in a BMW with an STI price tag. Expect the 135i to ring in around $35,000 with the 128i tipping in around $29,000. That'll be a lot of RWD hoonage for not a lot of cash outlay.

2) 2009 Subaru Impreza WRX STI

Ok, i said the new Impreza is ugly. I'll say the new WRX is ugly too. But man, just look at the new STI version, only available in wide-body 5-door form. Holy crap:

The bodywork is significantly wider (well, at the fenders where it matters) than the standard WRX. The ugly 4-door sedan is thankfully not available in STI form now.

Power is pretty much the same as the old one: bonkers 2.5L pancake four-banger spooling a twin-scroll (dual entry) turbo, now pushing out 311bhp and 304 lb-ft of torque to all four wheels through a six speed manual. And of course various electronic trickery, such as a driver controlled center differential, Torsen front and rear diffs (nice!) and multi-mode functions of the DCCD as well as the VDC (Vehicle Dynamic Control). In other words, a whole lot of magic computers working to make this little hatchback stick to the road like it has no business to. Coupled with tons and tons of power and useable torque thanks to the quick-spooling twin-scroll turbo, the new STI should be ridiculous to drive. And man i want one.

3) Volvo C30 T5 6MT

Who would have guessed that of all manufacturers, Volvo would be the one to bring a car to market to challenge the VW GTI's position in the marketplace as the sports car for smart people?

Perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself with that statement - C30 sales haven't set the world on fire yet, but it's only been on sale about a month - give it time. I have every faith that the C30 will sell every one Volvo can make, just like the early months of XC90 production.

The C30 is, in reality, an S40 sedan underneath that sexy, sexy skin. Who cares? This car is sexy, low-slung, turbocharged, torquey, fast, tough, safe, useful, and affordable. It's a freakin' winner.

As per styling: the front end is pretty much the same as the cutesy S40 sedan; things get a bit more risque from the A-pillar on back. The sloping roofline, lack of a (visible) b-pillar, and abrupt rear profile leads around back to- surprise - an homage to the old 1800ES (P1800 Estate to some of you) with it's sharply raked rear end, inset glass hatch, and big booty bumper. That is the finest rear end around. Tell me you don't think this car is hot.

As far as power, Volvo's tried-and-true 20v 5-cylinder (in production since 1993... almost 15 years!) resides under the hood, in high-displace, low-boost T5 trim. This motor makes a stout 236 horses and is available with a standard 6-speed manual (stolen from the soon-to-be-dead S60R AWD) or an optional (don't do it!) 5 speed automatic. Sixty comes up around 6-and-a-half seconds, which is right on par with the 2.0T powered GTI.

Pricing is very Mini-esque... that is to say, it starts cheap but you don't even get cruise control. The only options I'd spring for would be the sports suspension, some 18" wheels (might go aftermarket on that), heated seats, cruise, upgraded stereo and trip computer - which puts the car around 26,000, or 4k over the base price. Pretty pricey. It can get up into the 30's if you're not careful. But for all the looks, questions and comments this car will get you in addition to the years of loyal service it'll give you, I'd say it's worth every penny.

Beyond the Sleeper

Wed, 19 Sep 2007 04:22:44 GMT

I came up with the idea for this post when driving my friend's Infiniti the other day. I figured it would make a good topic.

Everyone knows what a sleeper is; well, most everyone who knows cars, anyway. Basic recipe: looks slow, goes fast. Surprises other cars that look or are known to be fast. Favorite of gearheads everywhere. Classic sleepers include the B5 chassis Audi S4 with it's compact body, twin turbo V6, and all-wheel-drive, the Buick Regal T-Type from the 80's (a Grand National in landau roof and two-tone drag), and the 227bhp turbocharged Dodge Spirit R/T.

but there are some cars that even surprise car guys, a car you get in and don't even realize it's fast till you put the pedal down. My friend's Infiniti fits the bill perfectly. These cars are so sleeper even lovers of the sleeper don't know they're quick. Here's my quick and rough top ten.

10) Infiniti I35
The I35 is nothing more than a gussied-up Nissan Maxima. The Maxima has at least some mild sporting pretensions; the I35 has none. It was Infiniti's half-assed shot at the Acura TL, and it never really took of because - well, it was no different from a Maxima! Weren't you reading? The I35 takes the clean, basic lines of the Maxima and turns them into an anonymous hodge-podge of mid-ninties potato-esque styling and cheesy chrome. It's filled with useless gadgets - like a power retracting rear sun shade, and a heated steering wheel. It drives sort of like it looks - inoffensive but not very memorable. Overboosted, vague steering, four speed automatic, comfy heated leather seats, tall gearing - it's a great highway car.

But i nearly defecated while overtaking a slower car on a windy two-lane out in the boonies late at night. Put your foot in it hard enough for a double downshift, and WHOA! There is some SERIOUS firepower under this hood! Nissan's venerable - and venerated - VQ35 puts 255 mildly tamed horses down through the front wheels, with a thick wallop of torque to help move things along. Sneeze hard and you overtake cars. Fart and you overtake cars. The tach jumps clockwise towards 6500, the trans bangs off a smooth shift, and the speedometer flies up like no boring base model TL ever has. This thing torque steers at 45 miles an hour. Beast of an engine in a totally unassuming car. If you never put your foot down, you'd never know the potential this sucker has.

Photo from edmunds.com

9) Audi A6 2.7T Quattro

Audi's A6 2.7T makes the list in lieu of the B5 chassis S4 as fewer people know it exists and even fewer people know it's fast. The odd thing is that in the US, the 2.7T model was second from the bottom for engine choices in the A6 line - there was a 4.2L V8 with 300bhp (A6 4.2), one with 340bhp (S6), and a biturbo one with 450bhp (RS6, naturally.) The A6 2.7T was the pick of the litter excluding the rare, expensive, and extremely thirsty RS6 - it was easily on par performance-wise with the naturally aspirated V8 models, and the array of aftermarket parts is staggering.

Driving an A6 is a fairly serene experience - nice, heft steering, smoothly damped suspension, strong brakes, quiet interior with comfortable seats, very legible gauges and flawless ergonomics of the switchgear. The base 2.8L model is a bit pokey; the 2.7T uses the same 90 degree V6 with 5 valves per cylinder, but destroked and fitted with twin Garret K03 turbochargers, among other changes. In the 2.7T, this motor makes a stout 250 horsepower. This enables the 2.7T, which has standard Quattro AWD, to hit sixty in the mid-to-low 6 second range. This mundane looking Audi sedan has acceleration that is on par with a 4.6L Mustang GT. The power is linear, smooth, and very impressive. With the 5-speed tiptronic the quoted 0-60 time is 7.4 seconds; with the standard 6 speed manual, 6.8. Massive power increases are just a few simple modifications away - an ECU reflash, turbo inlet pipes, diverter valves, and downpipes can net more than 300 horsepower at the wheels - making this family sedan run to 60 in around 5 seconds flat. Quite a surprise!

Photo by Ken Rockwell

8) Hyundai Sonata V6

yeah, yeah. It's a Hyundai. It could be one of the most unassuming cars on the road today. Rental-friendly, wish-I-was-an-Accord styling, squishy suspension, great value, killer warranty. We all know Hyundai. It's got a well laid out interior, cheap leather seats, a nice stereo - it's the smart man's family sedan. The Sonata has a dark side, though. Underneath the hood lurks quite a surprise - a 3.3L twin cam all-aluminum V6 with 24 valves. Good for 235 horsepower, fed through a reasonably responsive 5 speed shiftable automatic.

Just tooling around town, the Hyundai feels like your typical modern Asian family sedan - actually, it feels better. It has a solidity to it that Toyota's mainstream products haven't had in years. Comfortable seats, hushed ride - nice car.

Bury your foot and the Sonata doesn't roll over and play dead, it perks up. The tach jumps up and sprints for the 6,250rpm redline and the little Korean startup that could (give the mainstream Japanese brand a MAJOR headache) scoots down the road like it has no right to. Sixty comes up around 7 flat, which is pretty healthy in my standards. Torque steer is at a minimum. The Sonata will top out around 137 mph- or will it? Recently a man named Lawrence Pargo received multiple speeding tickets from the city of Scottsdale, Arizona for infractions ranging from 102mph to 147mph. He was caught on the highway's speed cameras in his rented Sonata pounding asphalt like it was no-one's business, and ended up raising quite a stink about the camera's accuracy, as Hyundai claims the vehicle is drag-limited to only 137mph! Certainly a surprisingly fast car.

Photo from Edmunds.com

7) Subaru Outback 2.5XT

When you think of a Subaru Outback, you usually think of Hippies and soccer moms running their kids off to practice. You might think of outdoorsy types in colorado. But you usually don't think of Porsche-spanking performance, right?

The Outback, the jacked-up "SUV" version of Subaru's Legacy Wagon, is available with two top of the line powerplants - and the pick of the litter is the turbocharged 2.5XT. Using a detuned version of the EJ25T from the Impreza STI, the Outback 2.5XT packs a 250 horsepower punch into a very unassuming package. With the standard five-speed manual, the turbo mom-mobile scoots to sixty in the high five-second range - meaning it can easily keep pace with a standard-spec Porsche Boxster. And of course, with all-wheel-drive and plenty of ground clearance, it can go about anywhere. Quite quickly, too. An easy shoe-in for this list.

Photo by Edmunds.com

6) Honda Accord EX V6 6MT

Accords have always been the stalwart choice of... well, supremely boring people. They drive well, they're flawlessly reliable, they are completely unstylish, and generally dull A-to-B transportation.

Thus no one really noticed when Honda put out a manual-transmission version of it's EX V6 sedan. They should've; it's one quick (and surprisingly entertaining) car to drive. The V6 is an impressive unit - it manages to make 244 horsepower and 211 lb-ft out of only 3.0L with a single cam and 24 valves, while running on 87 octane and getting 34mpg on the highway. With a six-speed manual, the sedan can hit sixty around 6 seconds flat - which will lay a beat-down on a 5.0L Mustang any day of the week. The Vtec cam-profile change-over is smooth as butter, the 6-speed manual's shift action is perhaps the best in the business, and the little V6 pulls like a mother. Most Accord drivers would never even know they had a fast car! Go figure.

Photo by Edmunds.com

5) Toyota Avalon
Toyota's Avalon has rightly been called a Japanese Buick by some automotive publications. It certainly makes sense - squishy, floaty ride, huge flat seats, pudgy boring styling... an automotive appliance for old people. For the first, oh, decade or so of it's life span, it was saddled with a 3.0L V6 making somewhere between 188 and 200 horsepower - just enough to move, not enough to scare the old people.

Well when the new generation came out in 2005, Toyota pulled a real surprise on old people everywhere by fitting a 3.5L VVT V6 with 280 horsepower. Can you imagine how surprised grandpa was when he nailed it to pass a truck? Probably shat himself! The Avalon is a major sleeper these days, able to hit sixty in a sprightly 6.4 seconds. Grandma's never had it so good!

Photo by Edmunds.com

4) Lincoln LS V8

Lincoln's LS was supposed to appeal to a different crowd than the typical Lincoln - that is to say, they were shooting for the under-retirement-age crowd. It wasn't exactly a runaway hit, mainly thanks to it's faux-european lines, which turned out being sorta boring, and poor marketing. The upside is that Lincoln LS's are cheap as hell these days, and if you can keep a secret, I'll let you in on one: the LS with the optional V8 is a complete hot-rod.

The base 3.0 Duratec V6 powered model is a sleeper, too - as in, it'll make you sleep. Skip it and jump in an LS V8. It's got a 3.9L Jaguar-derived V8, that in later years with variable valve timing made 280 horses, and could hit sixty in 5.9 seconds - with a wonderful small V8 roar and smooth shifts from the five-speed auto, and smooth precise steering, the LS is a good driving car. It's very serene like most modern American luxury cars, but when you put your foot down, that V8 wakes up, spits fire at the rear wheels, and really pushes the pavement. Definitely a surprise the first time you nail it. This one's got quite some fire in it's belly! It's a shame they quit making it. When was the last time Lincoln made a good-driving car besides the LS? Can you even remember?

Photo by Edmunds.com

3) Chrysler PT Cruiser GT (2.4L Turbo HO)

Sort of an odd-ball choice here, but Chrysler managed to make a tire-skinning hot rod version of the PT Cruiser and didn't tell anyone! The PT, if you've forgotten, is the favorite of hip moms and groovy grandpa's who need to haul potted plants back from the Home Depot on a regular basis. In base trim, the PT is absolutely dog slow - a 2.4L 4-banger with 150 horses mated to a tragic 4 speed automatic barely allows the car to accelerate up an on-ramp.

The PT Cruiser GT (Or Limited Turbo HO or whatever they called it in later years) shoehorns in the 16v 2.4L Turbo motor from Dodge's snot-rocket Neon SRT-4 under the PT's pointy retro-tastic nose. With 230 horses under this hip hearse's bonnet, you better watch your foot carefully when it's raining - the traction control sucks, there's ton of torque, an open diff, and much hilarity will ensue. The PT is considerably heavier than the Neon so it's 6.9 second 0-60 time isn't quite as impressive as the SRT's 5.8 seconds, but come on - a Turbo GT will still scare the pants off of Grandma the first time she gets on an onramp.

and of course i would be remiss to not mention that all of the Mopar performance upgrades which are available for the SRT-4 are also available for the PT Cruiser - with warrantied kits going up to 355 horsepower. The Hoonage potential is just simply immense.

Photo from PTEnthusiasts.org

2) Volvo S80 T6

Volvo's S80 T6 is the poster child for "whoa! Where did all this power come from??" The S80 was Volvo's attempt at a 5-series, Lexus GS, and Mercedes E-class competitor. It was rather oddball - for instance, being front-wheel drive and transverse engined in a longitudinal RWD market. It was a pretty car, but absolutely utterly boring to drive in every way imaginable. A 4-speed automatic, traction control, simply adequate power, and numb steering made the S80 2.9 a car that only people who hate driving would consider.

But the T6 took that 2.9L 24v straight six, and slapped a pair of blowers on it. The "TwinCharged" T6 pushed out 268 horses and 280 lb-ft of torque, enabling the big boring Volvo to scorch to sixty in the low six-second range, tires spinning and torque steering all the way thanks to it's unequal length half-shafts. Another car that perfectly illustrates that even boring cars can be tons of fun, when it comes time to get goin'!

Thanks to Edmunds for this picture, too!

1) Lexus IS350

Of course the Lexus IS350 wins this one. Simple reason: Can you name one person that thinks "Lexus = Fast"? No, me neither. The IS350 is a BMW 3-series sized sedan with mildly sporty, angular lines. And 306 horsepower under it's giant plastic engine cover from a direct injected V6. Under normal conditions, in fact, the car runs on port injection - it only switches to direct injection when you put the hammer down. Dual personality? You bet. Just tooling around town the Lexus IS is civilized, has great steering and strong brakes with a well damped ride. But put your foot down, watch the 6-speed auto pull a double-downshift, and suddenly you are headed for the horizon at a ridiculous rate of speed. Car and Driver clocked the IS350 as hitting 60 miles an hour in 5.3 seconds, which is not too far behind the V8-powered Audi S4. The IS350 brings the whole Japanese luxury car split-personality-syndrome to a new level, and it definitely belongs at the top of this list.

Photo courtesy of the blogspot

Tune in next time for more random crap!

I Miss when Mitsubishi made cars worth buying

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 02:43:05 GMT

really, seriously, I know it's hard to remember, but waaaay back in the day Mitsu made some seriously neat cars. This entry will be more of a compare and contrast with their past lineup versus their present "kill me now" dull lineup.

First, though, a bit of background: if you've ever been confused because you have a Mitsubishi Galant in the garage and a Mitsubishi DVD player, you're not on drugs: Mitsubishi Automobiles is just one branch of the gigantic Mitsubishi Keiretsu, a conglomerate which includes branches from electronics to a large bank system. Mitsubishis were first sold in the US in 1982, 12 years after it was incorporated as part of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. Before being sold as Mitsubishis in the United States, Chrysler sold Mitsubishis as Captive Imports in the US.

Early US Mitsubishis were mainly typical dull Japanese economy cars of the time, but towards the end of the 1980's, things got rather interesting.

in 1989, the captive import Dodge Colt managed to get on Car & Driver's "10 Best" list. The Colt, which until then had been nothing more than a low-budget competitor for cars like the Mazda 323 and Toyota Corolla, got a 147 horsepower twin-cam turbocharged 1.6L four stuffed under the hood. This flyweight hot-hatch could blast to 60 mph from a standstill in the mid 7-second range, which was up in muscle-car territory at the time, and had handling and braking capabilities to match. C&D loved the overall package, giving both the Dodge Colt Turbo and it's twin, the Mitsubishi Mirage Turbo, a place on the list, saying "ok, here it is: the Mitsubishi Mirage Turbo is one of the best performance values on the road." They were impressed both by it's performance and value as well as it's refinement and perceived quality (as many Mitsu owners of this era can attest, "perceived" was sadly a very apt description of the quality.)

The most captivating of 80's 'bishi's is, of course, the mighty Starion. Also known in this country as the Dodge or Chrysler Conquest (thus earning the name "Starquest"), the Conquest was a traditional 2-door, 2+2 seat, front engined and rear wheel drive coupe. It was available overseas with a single-came 4G63 (yeah, that 4G63 from the Evo... it's been around a while!) but in the US it came with the larger displacement G54B motor. At 2.6L it was pretty large for a four-cylinder, but had a few oddities like a 3-valve head and single port (throttle body) fuel injection, rather than individual injectors for each cylinder. In catalyst-equipped US trim, the StarQuest put out 153bhp to the rear wheels. The new ESi-R (in Dodge/Plymouth/Chrysler trim that's a TSi) models featured a small side-mounted intercooler to lower the intake temps, bringing output up to 177 horsepower. Outputs for stock Starions ranged all the way up to 197 bhp in the Japanese Domestic market with the non-catalyst 4G63 intercooled motor.

Although the Starion never experienced significant sales success, it was certainly the beginning of the Japanese turbo sports car era, which brought with it the Toyota Supra, MR2, and Celica turbocharged models, the Mazda RX7 Turbo and Turbo II models, the Nissan 300ZX Turbo and Twin Turbo models, and others. Starions have acheived a semi-cult following today, thanks to their cheap resale value, robust turbo motors, oversteer-happy rear wheel drive setup, and general quirkiness, as well as sites such as Jalopnik which can't seem to help featuring Starion content on a regular basis. In fact, one Starion in the US recently dynoed at 570 horsepower at the rear wheels - with a single overhead cam and single port fuel injection!

Chrysler's tie-in with Mitsubishi culminated in the creation of Diamond Star Motors, a US plant that produced both Chrysler and Mitsubishi Products. The first products to spit out of the plant in Normal, Illinois were the so-called DSM Triplets - the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, and Plymouth Laser. These little sports coupes ranged in performance from mild - a 1.8L 8v naturally aspirated motor with 90bhp to wild - a 2.0L 16v turbocharged powerplant with 195bhp and all wheel drive, and generated a true cult following that still persists to this day. The "1G" (first generation) Eclipses might not look like much, but in GS Turbo or rare GS-X trim, they are an automotive force to be reckoned with. the 16v 4G63 turbo pushed the FWD GS Turbo to sixty in the mid sixes, and the electronic all-wheel-drive GS-X there in the low sixes - a 5.0 Mustang of the time would have trouble keeping up with one stock. For quite a few years, the Eclipse was the best-selling Mitsubishi product in America, and it was no surprise - it was stylish, fast, and cheap.

1G DSM's, especially early build ones with the 5 bolt main crank, hold up to having a ton of boost (turbocharger air pressure) crammed down the chute - 800 horsepower 1G DSM's are nothing new, and there are plenty of streetable 1G's below 10 seconds in the standing quarter mile. To this day they remain a great performance value for the money, even if they are somewhat maintenance intensive in their old age.

One of Mitsu's less well-known performance cars in the US Market was the 1990 Galant VR-4, which is considered by many "in the know" to be one of the ultimate "sleepers". It packed the racy-looking Eclipse GS-X's all wheel drive, turbocharged powertrain into the much more sedate, but still light, Galant sedan body. It still packed 195 horses and could reach sixty in just a tick over 7 seconds. In addition to all-wheel-drive and turbocharging, it featured advanced technology such as electronic four-wheel steering and tons of power accessories. A grand total of 5000 were made, with 3000 coming to the United States over 2 years. a US-spec VR4 is pictured below. Today these cars are highly sought after by enthusiasts whose interests venture outside the mainstream, offering lots of performance and "Q-ship" potential for very little cash outlay.

Maserati's Gamble: The Biturbo.

Wed, 27 Jun 2007 02:44:30 GMT

People today generally see Maserati as a purveyor of beautiful, comfortable Italian grand tourers and sports cars. This was not always the public view of the trouble Italian brand, though.

Maserati has changed hands multiple times; they were purchased by Citroen (France) in 1968, and the volume of Maserati production vehicles skyrocketed. They helped develop the gorgeous (and quite bizarre) Citroen SM, which in turn donated it's V6 motor to the Maserati Merak, a beautiful - if tempermental and underpowered - mid engined coupe. However, amid the gas crisis of the 1970's, Citroen went bankrupt and Maserati went into liquidation. They were purchased by Alessando DeTomaso, and new ambitious product development went underway. Pictured below is the beautiful, if unconventional, Citroen SM by Maserati.

Previous Maseratis had been large, extremely elegant cars. The Ghilbi, Khamsin, Sebring, Mexico, and others were all graced with smooth, flowing lines and refined performance. the DeTomaso era Maseratis were quite different.

The first fruit of the DeTomaso ownership was the BiTurbo, which was quite a departure for Maserati. DeTomaso decided Maserati needed to move more mainstream to stay afloat, and the BiTurbo was certainly a step in that direction.

The styling is best described as a hybrid of the BMW E30 3-series, and the Alfa Romeo 75 (Milano in the US Market.) Whereas previous Maseratis had been curvy, sensual deviced, the Biturbo was boxy, in a handsome way - like a suave version of a Volvo, if you will. The styling was the result of Marcello Gandini's talented pen. Although it was a simple shape, the elegant proportions and simplistic detailing made for a quietly handsome vehicle. a slightly forward slant to the tip of the hood, chrome trim surrounds on the windows, and short front and rear overhangs made for a very purposeful look.

Launch - 1982.

The Biturbo came in a very confusing array of specifications from it's inception in 1982. Naturally, it's named was derived from it's engine design - a single-overhead cam V6 (derived from the Citroen unit used in the Merak) with a carburettor for fuel delivery and twin turbochargers boosting power to luxury-sports car standards. The Italian market Biturbos used a 2.0L V6 with twin IHI turbochargers and a two-barrel Weber carb. As if twin turbos and carb-fed fuel delivery wasn't odd enough, the Biturbo utilized a 3v per cylinder valvetrain arrangement - one exhaust, two intake. In Italy, where a 38% additional tax rate is applied to vehicles with a motor larger than 2000cc's, the Biturbo was only sold as a 2.0L. Despite the displacement restriction, the engine still cranked out 180bhp and 208 lb-ft. Since the Biturbo weighed in at a svelte 2700 lbs, the 4 seat coupe could hit sixty in only 7 seconds - very rapid for 1982. The interior was richly appointed on all Biturbos - comfy leather seats, deep carpets, burled walnut everywhere - classically elegant.

1984

The US Market Biturbo arrived on our shores in 1984, with a slightly larger SOHC V6 - a 2.5L unit with 185 horses, identical torque output, at lower rpm levels. Performance levels were similar between the two motors. The Biturbo is only available as a hardtop with a 5-speed Getrag manual. Approximately 2,000 are sold in the US.

1985

many changes for the US-Market Biturbo. The big news is the introduction of the limited-production Biturbo E model. The primary advantage was the pair of intercoolers under the hood; either air-to-air units, or air-to-water units produced by Spearco. This boosted power on the (still carb-fed) Biturbo E to 205 horsepower and 260lb-ft. In addition to the boost in power, the E had a stiffer front anti-roll bar, wider wheels and tires, stiff shocks, and a few other differentiating touches.

In addition, power steering and a 3-speed automatic were offered for the first time on the Biturbo. the Sensitork limited slip rear differential appeared on the car during 1985 as well. Pictured below is a rare west-coast Biturbo E, with the desirable Spearco air-to-water twin intercoolers. All 1985's were coupes with 5 speed manuals. In all, 2200 were sold.

1986

During 1986, no hard top 2 door Biturbos were sent to the US market. The newly released Biturbo spyder, equipped with the 3 speed automatic and standard power steering. The wheelbase on the spyder is shorter, making the rear seats all but useless.

In addition, the Biturbo 425 was released, a 4 door sedan version of the Biturbo. It, too, used the 3 speed automatic and power steering. To meet more stringent emissions requirements in the US market, the size of the weber carb was downgraded, although power apparently remained the same. the IHI turbos went from being oil-cooled to water-cooled, which speeds up cool-down times after shut off and heat dissipation during operation, making the turbocharger system much more reliable. Only 946 of the spiders and 425's were sold in 1986.

below, the rare convertible and the 425 are pictured.

1987

Major change for the 1987 model year was the disappearance of the fickle Weber carburettor setup, replaced with a Marelli-Weber mechanical fuel injection system. This was for three reasons: reliability, performance, and meeting emissions. Previous year biturbos with the carburettors had earned a reputation for unreliability thanks to improper adjustment of the float valve from the factory, which caused them to stall frequently on sharp left turns. Fuel delivery was more accurate and more reliable with the fuel injection, which helped both performance and emissions, and it required less maintenance. On the 2.5L SOHC motor, power jumped to 187bhp and 240lb-ft. the 0-60 time dropped to around 6 and a half seconds. The naming scheme was altered: the coupe was the Biturbo Si, the sedan was the Biturbo 425i, and the convertible was still the Spyder. All 1987's were manual transmission.

No Biturbos were imported to the US for Model Year 1988. Big changes arrived with the 1989 models, though.

1989

1989 saw an enlargement of the Biturbo motor to 2.8L from 2.5L. Power jumped to 225 horsepower and 246 lb-ft of torque. The coupe was renamed 228, and the sedan was the 430. The convertible was still the Spyder.

Other mechanical upgrades included 5 lug hugs, larger brakes with ventilated rotors, a new limited slip differential, 15" wheels, and the availability of a 4-speed automatic in addition to the 5 speed manual.

1991 was the last year Maserati sold cars in the US market before the returned with the 4200 GT. The Car continued to be developed and sold overseas, including a 3.2L V8 twin turbo version called the Shamal, and the exciting Ghilbi and Ghilbi cup cars - with 24v 2.8L V6's putting out either 306bhp or 330bhp, as well as a new Quattroporte with V6 or V8 biturbo power. None of these variants saw US shores, however.

Despite the Biturbo's radical mechanical layout, classy lines, comfortable interior, and more-than-ample performance, it left a sour taste in the US market's mouth. The cars, especially the early build ones, were riddled with quality control issues, including the aforementioned left-turn stalling caused by poorly set float valves, as well as rampant overheating issues and numerous electronic gremlins. By the time the Biturbo left the US market, only a handful were being sold a year.

Today Biturbos are rarely, if ever seen - most have found their way to the junkyard with blown engines or completely shot electronics; par for the game for a 1980's Italian vehicle. Those that still work, however, are very rewarding cars - great power even by today's standards, entertaining handling, good looks, and a sumptous interior. It is up for debate if these audacious cars have more character than the Ferrari-derived fat luxo GT Maseratis of today; they were certainly more original.