Rams Eye The Track Guy

This picture is a little misleading. Unfortunately, this isn't a post about a race on a frozen lake or a snow covered rally stage involving the three hottest AWD hot hatches (the WRX STI only a hatch in spirit). This is about the highly anticipated test recently posted by Car & Driver. First things first, I wish C&D would stop testing 30-50 mph and 50-70 mph in top gear for manual performance cars. They are hugely (almost exclusively) influenced by gearing and are completely irrelevant. I could see them being relevant in a more mainstream class (say, comparing a base Focus manual to a base Cruze manual) because an average buyer may not want to shift. But there is no way the buyer of any of these cars is going to wait over 7 seconds to go from 30-50 or approximately 6 seconds to go from 50-70? Worse yet, why would anyone floor a small 4 cyl turbo in an overdrive gear and lug the engine outside of boost? Now with the rant out of the way, let’s look at numbers.

Car and Driver recently tested a 2016 BMW 328i xDrive. It has good performance numbers (posted here earlier in the ATS4 2.0T post). It seems like a good little car.. until you get to the price. I'm more dumbfounded by the proximity of price to the +BMW  M3 than I am by the price alone. $59k?? One doesn't have to go far to find a much better deal. An +Audi  S4 starts almost $10k under it. I just can't wrap my head around choosing this over an S4. This isn't expensive compared to a mainstream car with comparable performance/options. Both this and the S4 are German, both are AWD, and both are well established luxury brands. I personally put a lot of weight on a RWD-based chassis but this automatic 328i xDrive isn’t exactly a purist’s choice and at 3,700 lbs, it isn’t a featherweight. I would imagine discounts on it would be huge to lure someone away from an S4. That, or you have to be an absolute die-hard BMW fan to buy one.  

The biggest news I found in this test is a huge improvement in power output. Looking back at one of the very early tests of the +Cadillac   ATS with this engine done by Car & Driver was a comparison test back in 2012, the ATS 2.0T was noticeably lacking in power compared to the 328i. Although the older tested cars were very different (i.e. lighter, manual equipped RWD versions) than this Cadillac, Car & Driver recently also tested a 2016 BMW 328i xDrive so we can have an apples-to-apples comparison of this AWD, 4-cyl turbo ATS and an AWD, 4-cyl turbo 328i. In the early test, the numbers were: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T 2012 BMW 328i 0-30 mph 2.0 s 2.0 s 0-60 mph 6.3 s 5.6 s 0-100 mph 16.7 s 14.5 s 0-130 mph 34.7 s 26.4 s 1/4 mile 14.8 s @ 94 mph 14.3 s @ 99 mph 5-60 mph (street start) 7.4 s 6.6 s At the time, the car made 272 hp @ 5

"It pounces on corners, tracks flat through the apexes, and devours the straights with a burly snarl from the V-8. It laps up freeway kilometers at triple-digit speeds, the suspension digesting ripples and dips so thoroughly that the body remains almost inert. All the driver has to do is aim the 645 and it goes there. Fast." Sounds great, right? Absolutely, except for the fact that it isn't about this 640i. Keen BMW fans would probably be fast to note that this 640i doesn't even come with a V8. The above is fro m a review of a 645Ci that was published back in January 2004, 12 years ago. This new review , though, was.. let's be kind and say less flattering. As seems to be a pattern now for all BMW's, except the 2-series and M models, there's lots of disappointment. "Our car, equipped with BMW’s M Sport package, offered what seemed to be a slathering of faux sportiness." It only managed 0.86 g on Car and Driver's 300-ft

Have you ever wondered if fuel additives really make a difference in how the car runs? Better yet, have you ever got in an argument with someone about whether or not it makes a difference? I have. This should settle it (assuming you trust the results of course).

This is a little overdue, but man, was I ever happy when I read this. A lot of people were disappointed after the first comparison of the new Corvette Z06 vs the Nissan GT-R Nismo and frankly I was a little disappointed myself ( read first post here ). Every one was expecting the Z06 with the Z07 package to beat every car short of hyper cars on a track but in the hands of Randy Pobst, it posted a best lap of 1:27.1 at Willow Springs vs a lap time of 1:25.7 by the GT-R Nismo, trailing it by 1.4 seconds. Every Corvette fan, myself included, tried to find reasons as to why it lost as it was hard to believe because the Corvette performed far better in individual handling tests (figure-8, braking and skidpad). Well, as it turns out, there was a reason. Chevy looked into the test car and found that the rear suspension was out of alignment. They sent it back to Motor Trend. To make things even better, GM developed a new setting for the magnetic shocks for rough tracks like Will

I agree with the video, there's something special about this car because it's one of the last very few naturally aspirated supercars. McLaren, Porsche, AMG, you name it. Even Ferrari is going turbo for the 458 Italia replacement. Porsche still has the naturally aspirated GT3 but the top dog is still the Turbo S. What makes this even more sweet is that this last fighter is a big V10. I'm a big fan of V10 noise. I don't know for sure which one sounds better, this or the high revving, wailingYamaha-developed 4.8 V10 in the Lexus LFA (which, in my opinion, is its only redeeming feature). I do know, though, that if both were on a track at the same time, the LFA would sound like it was wailing in fear of this Lambo, which would sound like a mad angry bull. I know which one I would take. Check out the video below to hear it and see its incredible performance.

"True, the Evo MR is an aged dog. Its equipment is antiquated." Who would have thought this would be how to describe an Evo? It has basically been unchanged since its introduction. In fact, the pictures posted here are from Mitsubishi's website. A link that takes you to a flickr Mitsubishi account where the pictures are titled 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution.  The Lancer Evolution has always been a performance bargain, offering performance that nothing in its budget did but, with a starting price that's as close as makes no difference $40,000 and no updates since its introduction, that's no longer the case. You can get Camaros, Mustangs and Challengers that are faster and quicker now. Many people now know that a Camaro SS 1LE or a Mustang GT Track Pack are hugely capable on a track and can easily beat an Evo but would struggle to believe that a Challenger would beat an Evo on the track but during Car and Driver Lightning Lap features, a 2011 Challenger S

This is the one every one has been waiting for, myself included. The two big giant killers - the Corvette and the Nissan GT-R. Let's cut to the chase, the Vette lost and people are surprised, disappointed or both. Around  Willow Springs , the GT-R Nismo posted a lap time of  1:25.7  and Corvette Z06 posted a lap time of  1:27.1 . That's  1.4  sec on a 1:25 lap which isn't insignificant. I am surprised and disappointed myself. I thought the Corvette would have easily edged out the GT-R based on the handling tests, not just expectations: Test Corvette Stingray Z06 (Z07) Nissan GT-R Nismo Braking, 60-0 MPH 91 ft 97 ft Lateral Acceleration 1.17 g (avg) 1.03 g (avg) MT Figure Eight 22.3 sec @ 1.06 g (avg) 23.1 sec @ 0.99 g (avg) The gap between the two is so large, you would be forgiven to think they are in two different classes. It's hard to believe it doesn't translate to benefit on the track. I think the fact that it didn't is

I love sleepers. A picture of this car could be put in a dictionary next to the word "sleeper". The styling isn't aggressive. The brand, if recognized, would be recognized as an electric car maker not a performance car maker (except for the avid car enthusiast). It's a four door. It even doesn't look any different from the pedestrian Model S 60. And to top it all off, the electric motors noise (or lack thereof) won't be convincing anyone they're V8s or anything with enough power to worry about. That couldn't be further from the truth, though. This is the fastest accelerating sedan that Motor Trend has ever tested. 0 to 60 mph arrives in just 3.1 seconds. The 1/4 mile passes in 11.6 seconds at 115.2 mph. For a full review and the rest of the stats, go to: 2015 Tesla Model S P85D First Test . There are a couple of things I don't like about the car, though. For one, the interior. I don't know why every one is going crazy over this c

Yes, Lightning Lap 2014! I thought they were going to skip 2014 all together but luckily they didn't. I know it has been available for a while in the paper magazine but I am not subscribed so I wait for it to be available online to read it. The full article is here: Car and Driver - Lightning Lap 2014 . This is easily one of my favourite magazine features of the year. As always, my car picks aren't necessarily very quick or slow. They simply did much better or much worse than I excepted them to. With that said, I would like to get one car out of the way. The Focus ST. The Highs: LL1 (Up to $35,000) - Ford Focus ST:  This car made it to last year's feature, Lightning Lap 2013, and it was on my "Lows" list ( Car and Driver's Lightning Lap 2013 - A Closer Look ). It posted a very mediocre-for-the-class 3:21.4. I said last year that "I wouldn't be surprised if, with more seat time on the track and a true limited slip differential, the Focus ST ma

Well, this comparison was bound to happen. A 2015 Mustang GT equipped with the Performance Package vs a 2015 Chevrolet Camaro SS equipped with the 1LE package. Before we get to the numbers, let's look at how these performance oriented packages improve on the regular spec models. The Mustang Performance Package ($2,495 USD/$3,700 CAD) adds the following: Chassis stiffening through a Strut-tower Brace and a K-Brace A Larger Radiator Unique Chassis Tuning Upsized Rear Sway Bar Heavy-Duty Front Springs K-Brace Brembo 6-Piston Front Brake Callipers with Larger Rotors (15") 19" x 9" front and 19" x 9.5" rear wheels (Gloss Black Aluminum) Unique Stability Control, EPAS (Electronic Power Assisted Steering) & ABS Tuning 3.73 TORSEN Rear Axle (differential) The rear wheel size is 0.5" wider than those on the outgoing Mustang with the Track Pack which used 19" x 9" wheels front and rear. It also gets 255/40/19 front and

This year's Best Driver's Car probably surprised many people because the winner was a lowly Camaro. A car that some people would argue is a muscle car, not even a sports car. With that said, let's start with the highs. As always, it's important to note that picking a car as an impressive or disappointing one doesn't mean it is quick or slow. It just means that, in my opinion, the car did much better or much worse than I excepted it to. The Highs: 2015 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 - 1:37.82 : This is obvious. It's a Camaro and it won. It's a blue collar's hero, a car with humble beginnings. Many will argue that it isn't a blue collar anymore with a price tag just north of $70,000 but the last time a car with the same task and equally humble beginnings tried to take on purpose built cars, the Mustang Boss 302 Laguna Seca, it finished in 5th place (Motor Trend Best Driver's Car 2011). The last time a Camaro tried to do the same feat, it fin