Month 3 running an Aston Martin DB9: the early factory visit and Welsh mountain thrash in our DB9

This is the Volvo V40 Cross Country, its suffix denoting SUV pretensions for the V40 hatchback. You get a raised ride height, and some rugged body trim for £1000 over a normal V40 – we drove the entry-level D2 diesel version to see if the Cross Country is the pick of the V40 range.

This is the cavernous new Citroen C4 Grand Picasso, a bigger version of the C4 Picasso MPV we recently tested.

The Grand Picasso stands 4590mm long – the same as its predecessor – but sees its wheelbase stretched to the longest in its class for maximum cabin space and enormous door openings. What it does share with the regular Picasso is a lightweight body structure and frugal downsized engines.

The new Citroen C4 Picasso is an MPV laden with all sorts of new technology. But is it still able to perform its fundamental role of carrying lots of people and their stuff?

Nissan’s performance car skunkworks arm Nismo (short for Nissan Motorsports) has agreed a deal with Williams Advanced Engineering to co-develop faster versions of Nissan’s road cars from 2014.

It doesn’t mean the Williams F1 team will be developing the forthcoming Nismo version of the GT-R, but the Formula One team and Williams Advanced Engineering are part of the same group founded by Sir Frank Williams. Sir Frank said: ‘Williams Advanced Engineering has a history of developing world class, high-performance products and this agreement is particularly exciting because of the ambition and potential of the Nismo brand.

What can we expect from the Nismo-Williams tie-up?

Nissan plans to launch at least one new Nismo model each year, encompassing most of its road car range. In 2013 we’ve driven the Nismo Juke and European markets have finally been offered the Nismo 370Z that’s been on sale in the US for a few years. A Nismo GT-R will go on sale in 2014 too, and a Nismo Leaf concept has been shown as well.

‘Williams have a proven history of making racing technology benefit road cars,’ said Nismo president Shoichi Miyatani. ‘We look forward to starting this relationship during such a period of intensive product development for Nismo.’

What’s Williams’s history in developing road-legal, sporty cars?

Ironically the most famous Williams-branded road car, the 1993-1997 Renault Clio Williams hot hatch, had no design or engineering input from the F1 team – it simply played on the fact Renault powerplants powered the contemporary Williams F1 cars. In fact, it was go-faster division Renaultsport that developed the hot Clio’s dynamics.

More recently, Williams helped to develop the 900bhp Jaguar C-X75– click here to read CAR’s full review of the sadly canned hybrid supercar. Williams also supplied the battery-hybrid propulsion system for the Le Mans-winning Audi R18 E-tron Quattro, and the Porsche 911 GT3 R Hybrid racing car.

Could we be set for a new wave of high-powered Nismo hybrids? If Williams’ CV is anything to go by, part-electric performance could be the future of fast Nissans.

Porsche has confirmed it’s poached Formula One driver Mark Webber from Red Bull Racing to race for it at the 2014 Le Mans 24hrs. The 36 year-old Australian has signed a multiple-year contract to drive Porsche’s new LMP1 challenger, which is aiming to give Audi a bloody nose in the world’s most famous endurance event next year.

What does Mark Webber know about driving a Porsche endurance prototype at Le Mans?

Quite a bit – Webber previously raced at Le Mans in 1998, and was infamously involved in two high-speed flips in his aerodynamically challenged Mercedes CLR during the 1999 event, before heading into an F1 career in 2002.

Wolfgang Hatz, Porsche’s R&D chief, said: ‘I’m very pleased to have secured Mark Webber for our LMP1 project as one of the best and most successful Formula 1 pilots of our time. Mark is without doubt one of the world’s best race drivers, he has experience at the Le Mans 24hr race, and on top of that he’s been a Porsche enthusiast for many years.’ Incidentally, Webber bought a 611bhp Porsche 911 GT2 RS in 2011, so Hatz isn’t wrong about the Aussie’s penchant for quick Porkers…

Porsche will enter two new LMP1 racers at the 2014 Le Mans 24hrs, and alongside Webber, Porsche has already confirmed two long-time works drivers Timo Bernhard and Romain Dumas will have seats, as well as the ex-Formula 1 test driver Neel Jani.

What sort of legacy does Webber leave behind in F1?

His record of nine race victories, 36 podiums and two third-place finishes in the drivers’ championship, as well as contributing to Red Bull Racing’s three consecutive constructors’ titles from 2010 to 2012 is none too shabby.

However, Webber’s often been overshadowed by RBR teammate Sebastian Vettel, and criticised his team for seemingly favouring his younger German rival. Plus, he’s notoriously struggled to convert strong qualifying performances into points with inconsistent starts.

The Mazda 3 is back: lighter, more eco-friendly and supposedly better to drive than ever, promises Mazda. Brought up-to-date with Mazda’s new ‘Kodo’ design style from the 6 saloon and CX-5 crossover, the new Mazda 3 is a handsome hatchback, and boasts a far superior cabin to its predecessor.

Is that enough to shoehorn buyers out of the VW Golf and Ford Focus? Get the full CAR story here.

Some people will undoubtedly argue that living to an advanced age means signing up for a slow agony if you must become a vegan or endure routine yogurt enemas to do it. Dr. John Harvey Kellogg famously disagreed. The co-inventor of Corn Flakes and a health nut a hundred years before Whole Foods sold its first kumquat, Kellogg made it to 91 preaching a steadfast diet of nuts and twigs and a watery lifestyle of sitz baths and regular colon cleansing. Victorian-era visitors to the good doctor’s enormous sanitarium in Battle Creek, Michigan, were presented with his lengthy list of items to avoid, including meat, seafood, eggs, milk, coffee, tea, mustard, vin­egar, pepper, chocolate, tobacco, alcohol, iced drinks, “complicated meals,” stress, worry, and heavy clothing.

We might be inclined to add any near-$40,000 sedan that brings the heart rate down to a virtual standstill. That simply can’t be healthy. And yet such vehicles as the Toyota Avalon have been doing it for years. They persist for a generally older segment of buyers wanting big-car coddling in a plain brown wrapper, without all the pretension and assumed upcharging associated with a luxury nameplate.

Economics and two market oddities make our six-car test a surprisingly large one. The concertmaster is the Avalon, a sort of super Camry created to bridge the gap between Toyota and Lexus. Back in 1995, it proved that a front-drive mainstream mid-sizer could be pulled out, frosted with some chrome, and priced higher to yield more lucre. The Avalon is the fourth generation, it’s all-new, and, for the first time, it’s somewhat athletically shaped.

Where Toyota goes, Hyundai chases. The front-drive Azera is basically a ballooned Sonata, except that the new Azera has a 3.3-liter V-6 while Sonatas offer only four-cylinder engines. And where Hyundai goes, its sibling rival Kia inexorably follows. Kia’s own version of the Azera is the 2014 Cadenza, bearing entirely separate sheetmetal and interior treatments but with the same basic equipment and métier.

The home team is represented in part by the Chevrolet Impala, which qualifies for big-car status now that it rides on GM’s stretched Epsilon platform along with the Buick LaCrosse and Cadillac XTS. The two oddities here are also from Detroit. The Chrysler 300S and Dodge Charger SXT are both rear-drive, and neither one is derived from a smaller model.

In fact, present-day Chrysler has no credible seat at the mid-size-sedan feast, having left a hole between the Dodge Avenger and the Dodge Charger (and between the Chrysler 200 and 300) big enough to drive a quarter-million Honda Accords through. While Chrysler is attending to that problem, it is trying to squeeze the last drops of market mileage from the Charger and 300 by adding a new eight-speed automatic to the 3.6-liter V-6 spec sheet that promises better fuel economy. Conspicuous by its absence is the face-lifted Ford Taurus, mainly because the folks in Dearborn couldn’t find us one with a V-6 to test.

Do any of these relaxed-fit and middlebrow cars put us on the road to Wellville? We hit the trail to Battle Creek in search of an answer and an unforgettable yogurt enema.

This is the 900bhp Jaguar C-X75 supercar, an £800k rival for the McLaren P1, Porsche 918 Spyder and LaFerrari – and we’ve driven it.

That’s the good news. The bad news is Jaguar actually cancelled the C-X75 project in December 2012, so the prototype we’ve driven doesn’t preview the production supercar, but instead tease us with what might have been…

How does the Jaguar C-X75 produce 900bhp?

The original C-X75 concept car (unveiled at the 2010 Paris motor show) used two diesel-driven micro-turbines to charge its batteries, which in turn powered four electric motors, one nestled in each wheel hub. Alas this potential powertrain proved a little too space-age, but Jaguar’s alternative solution isn’t exactly low-tech: there’s a supercharged /and/ turbocharged 1.6-litre engine using direct /and/ port-fed fuel injection, combined with two electric motors and a lithium-ion battery pack to create a four-wheel drive hybrid supercar with around 900bhp.

Should Jaguar have just slotted the 542bhp supercharged 5.0-litre V8 from the XFR-S into the C-X75, saved some weight, and saved itself a lot of technical headaches? That raucous V8 simply wouldn’t fit within the sleek silhouette, says C-X75 programme director Rob Atkin, and he and his team had four very specific objectives that precluded this Jag supercar from having a simple fossil fuel engine.

Those four objectives? For the C-X75 production car to have the same look and appeal of the original concept car; for it to achieve 0-100mph in same time as a Bugatti Veyron; for the CO2 emissions to match a Toyota Prius; and for the electric range to at least match that of the Chevrolet Volt. Quite a demanding list…

So for the Jaguar C-X75 to accelerate as hard as a Veyron it needed a 1.6-litre four-cylinder engine?

That, apparently, is right. The slender shape of the C-X75 means it can’t use some monstrous quad-turbo engine like the Veyron, and as even a V8 won’t fit Atkin and his team had to look for something smaller. Conversely, with the demands to be a clean and green as the Prius and Volt, the Jag needed a hefty set of batteries too.

Mix those two demands and you end up with a dry sumped, all-aluminium 1.6-litre four-cylinder nestled behind the driver, and flanked on either side by lithium-ion battery packs. The engine revs to 10,200rpm, is supercharged (for the low-rev response of a naturally aspirated engine) and turbocharged (for top-end power) and it has direct and indirect injection: at lower revs and under partial loads the two mix in and out to help the C-X75 be reasonably economical, but at high revs a second throttle body opens and both systems are used to throw as much fuel as possible into the engine.

Beyond that the engine is mated to a 295lb ft electric motor and a seven-speed automated manual transmission, and in the nose there’s another 295lb ft electric motor to drive the front wheels. The automated manual was developed because it’s small and light (much more so than a twin-cutch ‘box) but the transmission actually has two clutches, one to change gears with, and one to disengage the engine from the electric motor for EV running. Shifts take 200ms (the new 911 GT3 will shift in 100ms) but the nose-mounted electric motor sends some extra torque through the front wheels during the gearchange to compensate for the torque interruption to the rear wheels.

Anything else I need to know?

The C-X75 concept was aluminium, but the C-X75 production car is completely carbonfibre. Still, with all the batteries and motors aboard the kerbweight of the production car was predicted to only just sneak below 1700kg – that’s like-for-like better than the Porsche 918 Spyder, but a fair bit heftier than the P1 and LaFerrari. The five prototypes aren’t quite that lithe though, and the roll cage and testing and diagnostic equipment adds even more kilos.

But despite the switch from aluminium to carbon, the styling of the production C-X75 has changed very little. If anything, it’s actually improved, with the front grille now more akin to the F-type, fuller flanks, and a more aggressive rear diffuser. It’s gained door mirrors too, plus a pop-up rear spoiler-cum-airbrake, and the conventional doors of the concept have morphed into fancy flip-up dihedral items. The fifth prototype, painted dark blue, is particularly gorgeous.

How does the C-X75 drive?

In EV mode it feels about as brisk as a hot hatch – Jaguar reckons it’ll do 0-60mph in around six seconds – and there’s instantaneous urge from the electric motors. It’s not a silent experience either, as a ‘sound synthesiser’ produces a distant rumble of massive generators (like you’re on the bridge of the USS Enterprise and can hear the warp core deep with the bowels of the ship) and pulses a loud electric heartbeat when the C-X75 is plugged in and charging.

And the thorough road test? There are some caveats. The five prototypes were built to prove the technology, and the next stage was to develop the dynamic aspects of the C-X75. So although Atkin says 50% of the project was completed before it was cancelled, very little of that work was on any ride or handling set-up.

With just a few laps of Jaguar’s Gaydon test track allowed, what can we learn? That the electric power steering (the first application in a Jag, but the same system already on all the current range of Range Rovers) is light but not wholly devoid of feel, that the adaptive dampers (pinched from the F-type) give the C-X75 a reasonably compliant ride, and that the gearshifts aren’t as instantaneous as a double-clutch ‘box, but feel quicker than a Lamborghini Aventador yet also less brutal. Bar the lights and exhaust system, all the mechanical components are contained within the C-X75’s wheelbase, you do notice the weight through what corners and bends we can find. We suspect the Porsche 918 (with its rear-wheel steer system) and the McLaren P1 (with trick hydraulic suspension) will both feel more agile.

The engine is pretty special though. At idle there’s the rough chatter of the engine’s gear-driven cams, the shriek of the supercharger builds and builds until the point where it’s de-clutched at 5500rpm and it’s only the turbo forcing air through the engine, and then the deep snarl and growl of the exhausts really takes over and starts to deafen you. Despite the tiny engine, at 10,000rpm you’ll never think the C-X75 lacks any aural drama.

Is it as quick as a Veyron? Not quite. I’ve only driven the 1183bhp Vitesse, which is shockingly fast, but the Jaguar isn’t quite as brutally manic. But as we hit over 180mph on a relatively short straight there’s no doubting the power, and with the electrically assisted four-wheel drive the low-speed initial acceleration is particularly intense. Ditto those last few moments before you reach 10,000rpm in each gear.

Verdict

LaFerrari. P1. 918 Spyder. C-X75. Despite the four representing a new breed of supercars, all are very different, and the Jag had the potential to have the most technically advanced hybrid powertrain – but it’s only one that’s been cancelled. And conversely, LaFerrari – with a relatively conventional 6.3-litre V12, no zero-emissions mode and a hybrid system designed purely to boost acceleration – is the only one of the quarter reported to have sold out. Is the worldwide market really ready for hybrid supercars?

Where does that leave the C-X75? The five prototypes will continue to be developed for the remainder of 2013, as technology contained within them is promised to filter through onto forthcoming Jaguars. The future is bright for Jag, but it would have been even brighter with a real halo supercar.

first pictures

This amazing-looking creation is the Nissan ZEOD RC, and its Nissan's latest, bravest attamept to make the electric car cool. Combining Nissan DeltaWing looks with powertrain know-how from the Nismo Leaf RC electric racer, the ZEOD RC will compete in the 2014 24 Hours of Le Mans endurance race.

Let me guess: 'ZEOD RC' is an acronym for something techy...

Correct. Strictly, this is the Zero Emission On Demand Racing Car, but we'll called it ZEOD for now. Its electric powertrain is juiced by lithium-ion batteries developed from the Nismo Leaf RC. The car will hit 186mph flat out, but won't compete in anger until next year's event.

Then we have a year to get used to its crazy bodywork...

Looking like a cross between a 1970's land speed record car and Cruella deVille's company car, the ZEOD is ostensibly a 'coupe' version of the open-top DeltaWing racer which competed with conventionally-engined Nissan power at the 2012 24 Heures de Mans. As well as its low-drag canopy, the ZEOD gets a larger rear fin and wider rear wheel fairings: the fronts are still tiny space-saver like items made possible by the car's rear-biased weight distribution.

Why is Nissan bothering to develop an electric Le Mans racing car?

Aside from an opportunity to plug (sorry) the Leaf road car, the ZEOD RC is also a rolling test bed for future Nissan motorsport projects. Andy Palmer, Nissan's Executive Vice President confirmed lessons learned from the fully-electric ZEOD RC will be used in a future hybrid LMP1 class challenger from Nissan, which will fight the hybrid contenders from Audi, Porsche and Toyota.

The Ghibli is Maserati’s attempt to take on premium German cars like the Mercedes CLS, Audi A7 and BMW Gran Coupe. It’s also the first Maserati to feature a diesel engine. Sacrilege? Let’s find out.

That name. Ghibli – where have I heard it before?

It’s an old Maserati favourite, having been used twice before, first on beautiful front-engined GT in the 1960s, and then on a much less beautiful Bi-turbo spinoff three decades later.

But this one’s a sensible saloon.

Right. Loosely based on the new Quattroporte, but smaller and sportier, it comes with a choice of three 3.0 engines: 330bhp and 404bhp twin-turbo V6 petrols, and, crucially for Europe, a 272bhp turbodiesel V6.

275bhp? Sounds a bit limp for a Maserati.

You’re right, particularly when German rivals offer over 300bhp. The fact is this VM Motori-built V6 is merely a stopgap until a brand new twin turbo diesel arrives in a couple of years. That will come in two forms, one with around 275bhp, and a hotter version with 350bhp.

How does it drive?

Well, but with some room to improve. The 50:50 weight distribution means it changes direction far better than many rivals, and the diesel’s torque is just abut strong enough to ask questions of limited-slip equipped rear end out on twisty roads. But the hydraulic steering is overly heavy and not markedly more communicative than electric alternatives.

Passive dampers are standard, the damping force being equivalent to sport mode in the cars fitted with the optional Skyhook adaptive setup. Since the body control is so much better in Sport, and the ride occasionally unsettled in Comfort, it might be worth going basic.

The 443lb ft of torque from the single-turbo six makes for reasonably spirited performance (62mph in 6.3sec) but twin-turbo rivals are up to 1sec quicker and several mpg greener, too. And despite some augmented sound effects courtesy of special actuators in the rear silencers, it doesn’t sound as sexy as it could.

What’s the rest of the package like?

Roomy, particularly when it comes to rear headroom compared with the more visually striking Mercedes CLS, and available with various interior colour combinations that deliver that traditonal Maserati feel. The quality of materials is good, if not class-busting, and some of the swicthgear, like the lever for the standard eight-speed ZF auto, and the dimly lit buttons on the console behind it, seems needlessly fiddly.

Verdict

The Ghibli has a few rough edges, but it’s a credible rival to established German models and the diesel option gives it far more relevance in Europe. The allure of that badge will count for much, and offset the fact that rivals are better to drive and more efficient – a BMW 5-series rides better, Jag’s XF steers more sweetly. This is a good first effort by Maserati, but you get the feeling that the Ghibli diesel won’t really come into its own until the new engines have come on line. For now, the petrol Ghiblis deliver a far more convincing Maserati experience.

The LS has been the premier sedan at Lexus ever since Toyota’s luxury division made its cheeky debut on German autobahns, a not-so-subtle challenge to the Audi-BMW-Mercedes establishment. That was almost a quarter-century ago, and the LS series has since evolved, expanding from the original LS400—a car that fortified its challenge with strong performance and beautiful craftsmanship—to a luxury sedan with multiple personalities.

For 2013, there are seven LS variations, depending on how you keep score, with the 600hL continuing to function as the flagship, sumptuously appointed and hybridized to salve the consciences of conspicuous consumers. It’s big, handsome, roomy, hedonistic, crackling with electronics and connectivity, and readily identifiable as a new Lexus offering, thanks to the so-called “spindle grille” that distinguishes the division’s new styling ethos.

Enhanced aesthetic appeal or not, potential buyers likely will be wrestling with bigger questions: Is this car worth its premium pricing? How much more are you willing to shell out for that hybrid badge? And what will you really get for your money?

What’s New?

Lexus claims that some 50 percent of the 2013 LS’s structure is new or revised, with upgrades to body shell rigidity, steering system, suspension, and drivetrains, as well as exterior enhancements. And as we’ve noted in two previews of the 2013 models, the flagship is awash in standard luxury features.

As before, the LS460 lineup, including the new Sport version, is propelled by a naturally aspirated 386-hp 4.6-liter V-8, and mated to an eight-speed automatic. The big 600 hybrid combines a long-stroke 5.0-liter version of the V-8—389 horsepower, 385 lb-ft—augmented by a 221-hp AC electric motor. (The combined system output is rated at 438 horsepower.) All-wheel drive, featuring a Torsen limited-slip differential, is optional with the various 460s, but standard with the hybrid, which transmits power via a continuously variable transmission.

All of this adds up at the scales. Our test car, which had a couple of big-ticket option packages, weighed in at a resounding 5470 pounds. For perspective, that’s Chevy Tahoe territory, and considerably heavier than BMW’s ActiveHybrid 7 as well as the 4835-pound AWD LS460 F Sport tested last month. It also pinches the hybrid’s capacity for people and/or cargo. The official GVWR (gross vehicle weight rating) is 6060 pounds. With nothing in the 16-cubic-foot trunk, and four people on board, the occupants would have to average 147.5 pounds to avoid exceeding the rating. (Memo to owners: Keep a bathroom scale handy when you’re planning to fill all four seats.)

Heavy Duty

Inevitably, mass makes its presence felt at the test track. Our test car managed to reach 60 mph in 6.3 seconds, and covered the quarter-mile in 14.7 seconds at 100 mph. For contrast, the LS460 we tested recently did 0–60 in six seconds flat, and the quarter-mile in 14.5. To be fair, our 600hL test car had only 248 miles on the odo when it went to the track. And its 30–50 and 50–70 passing times—3.0 and 3.7 seconds—were strong.

Not only does all that curb weight inhibit acceleration, it also lengthens braking distances. The big Lexus has a robust brake system, with regen capability, of course, but 185 feet from 70 mph isn’t anything to be proud of, especially when the test sheet also reflects moderate fade. Our test driver also noted that “this thing will drift if you ask it to,” although why anyone would want to do that with this car is a mystery.

When the word “Lamborghini” pops into one’s head, it’s difficult to not reach up into the ether and snatch down an image of a wild, doorstop-shaped road-burner. These spy photos—courtesy of notorious Italian spy Marchettino and London-based supercar photographer Shmee150—of what appears to be the Gallardo’s replacement prove that, with the exception of the upcoming Urus SUV, Lamborghini has no intention of messing with its image.

A few things point to these photos being the real deal, not the least of which being the Lamborghini sign on the building behind the prototype, and that building’s striking resemblance to Lamborghini’s test facility at the Nardò Ring in Italy. Otherwise, the car’s shape and wheels couldn’t be mistaken for anything built outside of Sant’Agata. Even though the test mules are covered in some pretty heavy camouflage, it’s clear that the next Gallardo will get pointier, more-Aventador-like styling—check out those headlights and the chamfered, angled exhaust tips.

The car will make use of a new platform cribbed from Volkswagen Group’s modular sports-car (MSS) architecture. That piece of kit is expected to underpin the next Audi R8 as well, and a future Porsche model, too. We don’t expect the Gallardo’s replacement to feature any radical powertrain changes, meaning it should get a version of its current 5.2-liter V-10 that’s been updated to make close to 600 horsepower. No manual transmission will be offered, although Lamborghini plans to again offer a rear-drive version in addition to the slightly tamer all-wheel-drive model.

Look for the Gallardo’s replacement to arrive for 2014; as for what it will be called, that’s still a mystery. Internet rumor has it that the new sports car will be called Cabrera; we assume this signifies a break from the Italian marque’s tradition of naming cars after famed Spanish fighting bulls, and will begin a new tradition of naming cars after Detroit Tigers third basemen.

GM recently unveiled the power figures and EPA estimates for the optional 5.3-liter EcoTec3 V-8 that will power its all-new Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra pickups. Now, it is taking the wrappers off of the info for the 4.3-liter EcoTec3 V-6s that will serve as the standard engines in both pickups.

The new V-6 engine cranks out 285 horsepower and 305 lb-ft of torque, up a substantial 90 horsepower and 45 lb-ft from last year’s 4.3-liter V-6. Fuel economy improves by 3 mpg in the city and 4 mpg on the highway for both rear-wheel- and all-wheel-drive setups (to 18/24 and 17/22, respectively), and is the same regardless of cab configuration: regular, double, or crew. The increases in both output and fuel economy are a result of a host of new technologies for the engine, including direct injection, cylinder deactivation, and continuously variable valve timing, along with some aerodynamic tweaks and low-rolling-resistance tires.

That’s the feel-good news. Up against the competition, however, despite all of this technology, the Silverado and the Sierra are still in a close race with Ford and Ram. The Ford F-150’s base 3.7-liter V-6 makes 305 horsepower and 278 lb-ft of torque; rear-wheel-drive models are rated at 17/23 (down 1 mpg in both city and highway versus the GM twins) and four-wheel-drive versions get 16/21 (down by 1 mpg in both cycles). The Ram 1500 HFE (in regular cab) has a 3.6-liter V-6 that makes 305 horsepower and 269 lb-ft of torque. Rear-wheel-drive versions get 18/25 (matching the Silverado and Sierra in the city and bettering them by 1 mpg on the highway); all-wheel-drive models get 16/23 (down by 1 mpg in the city but up by 1 mpg on the highway).

While fuel economy may be too close of a race to call once in the real world, these are work trucks, after all, and that means hauling and towing, which is where the Silverado and Sierra have the F-150 and Ram 1500 beat. The GM trucks have a maximum payload rating of 2108 pounds, while both the V-6 models of F-150 and Ram 1500 max out at 1930 pounds. Maximum available towing for Silverado/Sierra is 7200 pounds; for the Ram 1500, it’s 6500 pounds and for the F-150, it’s 6100 pounds.

When it comes to trucks, most owners are probably more concerned with how hard their vehicles can work as opposed to how good their fuel economy is. When was the last time you heard a truck owner brag about his fuel economy?

Two weeks after balking at NHTSA’s request that it recall 2.7 million Jeeps because of fire risk in the event of a rear collision, Chrysler has announced that it will, after all, launch a “voluntary campaign” for 1.56 million of them. Just remember this is a “voluntary campaign” and not a recall—recalls are for defective products, and Chrysler maintains that these aren’t.

What will happen, though, does sound like a typical recall. Owners of 1993–2004 Grand Cherokees and 2002–2007 Liberties will be contacted by mail, asked to bring their cars to dealerships for inspections. At this point, according to a press release from the Chrysler:

“In addition to a visual inspection of the vehicle,” the company “will, if necessary, provide an upgrade to the rear structure of the vehicle to better manage crash forces in low-speed impacts.”

Whoa, slow down there, Maestro. Upgrade the rear structure? The government’s claim had been that these Jeeps were prone to fuel leaks and fires after rear crashes because the gas tank is located aft of the rear axle. Relocating it or building an impact-resistant cage around it would call for complicated reengineering and even-more-complicated installations.

The answer: tow hitches.

Apparently Jeeps with a tow hitch installed are better able to withstand rear collision, the hardware serving as an extra bumper and an extra way to distribute force to the frame (rather than the gas tank.) So when Chrysler talks about a “visual inspection,” what it means is that dealers will be checking for tow hitches. Vehicles that have a decent-quality hitch installed and in good condition will be free to go. Those without a hitch, or without one in good shape, will receive one on Chrysler’s dime.

Not that we wish ill on either Chrysler or NHTSA, but we would have enjoyed watching the formal dispute process go ahead. It’s been 15 years since an automaker fought a government recall request, and the process could use some more definition. At some point, we’ll probably see our wish granted. In the meantime, think about stocking up on tow hitches. We hear they’re about to become scarce.

ASSOCIATE EDITOR GRAHAM KOZAK: I honestly didn't expect to get much out of the Chevrolet Sonic, or the Sonic RS; I know it's aimed right at my demographic, but its entry-level, function-over-form attitude doesn't really do anything for me. The Sonic seems to be shooting for those who are buying with no small amount of reluctance. Why bother with a sport-trim version?

In light of all that, I don't see any reason to dwell on the Sonic's design. The exterior reflects Chevy's attempts to maximize interior volume; the interior itself is nothing to get worked up about. Details, like the motorcycle-inspired (according to GM) instrument cluster, RS-specific front-end treatment, etc., are cool, I guess, but these little highlights adorn a pretty bland form.

The infotainment console was frustrating. I like physical buttons and knobs. The Sonic's system didn't offer any of them. That's all I've got to say about that.

But whoa, that little turbo 1.4-liter I4 was a nice surprise. I had to double check the specifications after a night in the car -- it was tough to believe it only has a 138 hp, 148 lb-ft output. Sure, you need to rev pretty high to keep get the car moving, but the engine didn't seem to mind supplying the motivation. Even better, the turbo didn't lag horrifically; once I figured out the rhythm of the car, I barely noticed any hesitation. What remains to be seen is how badly such spirited driving bites into fuel economy.

One thing that bugged me -- something that almost succeeded at undermining the otherwise sporty feel of the Sonic RS -- was the crappy shifter mechanism. We've all griped about the imprecise long-throw feel of, say, our long-term Dodge Dart, but this one felt different, almost worn-out; either our press Sonic RS had been thrashed very hard during its brief life or Chevy needs to take a hard look at such high-performance machines as the mighty Mazda 2 to figure out how to improve here.

DIGITAL EDITOR ANDREW STOY: Whether it was sheer luck or because road test editor Jon Wong finally deposited the bribe I gave him, I'd been driving a variety of luxury vehicles for the entire week up to my evening in the Sonic RS. In fact, I came directly out of a new Range Rover, so one would be forgiven for taking my perceptions of the little Chevy scooter with a grain of salt.

Fact is, I really enjoyed the Sonic RS. Sure, it's all hard-grained black plastic inside, and the seats are devoid of support, but the fun of driving a slow car fast is on full display behind the wheel. The little turbo four is Italianate in its propensity for free-wheeling revolution, and GM was wise enough to include a fat leather-wrapped steering wheel to alternately point the Sonic and counter torque steer (which, to be fair, isn't terrible, thanks to just 148 lb-ft of twist).

I'll echo Graham's comments on the Sonic's shifter, though, and put some of the blame on the feedback-free clutch. It's so light, there's no sense of where engagement is going to take place, making the 1-2 upshift particularly troublesome since first gear is so short. It's still difficult to understand how Honda/Acura can get a cable shifter so right and Chevy can still get that part so wrong.

Otherwise, potential buyers need to understand that the Sonic is a small car best suited for regular transportation of no more than two people. I had my kids in the back with booster seats and both complained about the legroom (“look Dad, one foot fits but the other doesn't”). But as a low-cost city runabout for a single person or young couple, the Sonic RS offers almost a bargain GTI appeal; add in the fact that it's an honest-to-goodness made-in-America hot hatch, and I think there's a lot to like in this little Chevy.

2013 Chevrolet Sonic RS

Base Price: $20,995

As-Tested Price: $20,995

Drivetrain: 1.4-liter turbocharged I4; FWD, six-speed manual

Output: 138 hp @ 4,900 rpm, 148 lb-ft @ 2,500 rpm

Curb Weight: 2,811 lb

Fuel Economy (EPA City/Highway/Combined): 27/34/30 mpg

AW Observed Fuel Economy: 26.9 mpg

Options: None

It's the novel Mercedes-Benz CLA compact sedan, all juiced up AMG style. If it's not exactly the AMG car for everyman, the CLA 45 will nonetheless move the brand within reach of more men and women than ever before. In the least flattering sense, you might call it the cheap AMG.

The CLA 45 represents several firsts for Mercedes and AMG. Most significantly it's the first AMG product created on a front-drive platform and the first with a four-cylinder engine.

It's no ordinary four-cylinder, to be sure. Mercedes calls the CLA 45's 2.0-liter, direct-injection turbo the most powerful four-cylinder ever manufactured in serial production, and we've found nothing to refute its claim.

The engine block is the same one used in the standard CLA250 with more sophisticated metallurgy, including AMG's Nanoslide plasma spray cylinder bores. The cylinder head starts with an entirely different casting, using more expansive coolant passages. Piezo injectors are crucial to the CLA 45's impressive output, as well as its emissions management and efficiency. These allow up to five separate fuel pulses per cycle -- usually in rapid succession during the compression stroke -- with multiple spark events to optimize horsepower or efficiency, depending on engine load and rpm.

No matter how much fuel AMG can force into the CLA 45's four cylinders, output still comes down to air in, air out. The flow starts at an intake channel with a cross-section larger than a softball. It continues through a single, twin-scroll turbocharger with a whopping 26 pounds of boost and an expansive air-to-liquid charge cooler, then spills out through 3-inch downpipes on the headers.

The net effect in the CLA 45 is 355 hp at 6000 rpm and 332 lb-feet of torque, starting at 2250 rpm and holding steady through 5,000. That divides to 178 hp and 166 lb-ft per liter of displacement. And still the CLA 45 engine meets the forthcoming Euro 6 emissions standard three years before mandate. It also delivers 34 mpg in the European fuel-economy cycle, though EPA ratings are pending.

The seven-speed Speedshift transaxle is similar in design and concept to the dual-clutch automatics in other AMG products, packaged in a case for transverse application. Gear ratios are higher across the board than those in the CLA250, with three overdrive gears on top, and the CLA 45's final drive ratio is nearly 50 percent lower.

In the CLA the 4Matic all-wheel-drive system is fairly simple, but effective. A power-takeoff on the transaxle constantly turns a drive shaft to the rear axle. When the management system detects front-wheel slip a multiplate clutch on the rear differential engages, without waiting for the drive shaft to spool up. Default torque delivery is 100 percent front. Depending on several variables, including vehicle speed; lateral and longitudinal acceleration; steering angle; friction differences between wheels and accelerator position, the rear differential will engage and power up the rear wheels -- typically dividing torque 50-50, but, for brief bursts on extreme low-friction surfaces, it can send all engine power to the rear.

Exactly how small is the CLA? Maybe not as small as you think. It's actually a couple inches longer and a fraction wider than the C-class sedan on a slightly shorter wheelbase. It's more than a foot longer than an Audi A3, 10 inches longer than a BMW 135is, and close in overall exterior dimensions to an Acura ILX. Yet it's lighter than the C250 and some of its smaller competitors, including the 135.

The CLA 45 won't offer the variable-damping suspension available on other AMG products. It uses the standard CLA's front strut/rear four-link layout with drastically altered tuning, with different bearings, bushings, shock and spring rates and thicker sway bars. It has larger brakes -- 13.8-inch x 1.2-inch rotors in front, 13.0 x 0.8 rear -- and AMG's three-stage stability control with all-off. It comes standard with 235/40 performance tires on 18-inch rims.

AMG finishes its CLA with larger, deep-gray intake ducts, a twin-blade grille, wider sills, a deeper rear bumper and twin chrome exhaust tips. Inside you'll find AMG instruments and data reporting, part leather sport seats with red belts, an AMG multifunction steering wheel with shift paddles and AMG door-sill trim.

The CLA 45 won't offer the vast array of options and customization choices typical of more expensive AMG products but it will offer more than the standard CLA. Upgrades include carbon-fiber trim packages inside and out, a performance seat upgrade with a broader range of adjustment, red brake calipers and 19-inch wheels. You can order one now for delivery this fall.

The idea with the AMG CLA is basically the same as with the standard CLA: Connect with younger buyers and cultivate loyalists who will purchase SL65s or SLSs when they grow older and richer. At a $48,375 base price including the $925 destination charge, the CLA 45 isn't exactly cheap. On the other hand its average transaction price is expected to be at least $20,000 less than the C63 AMG sedan, until now the bottom of the AMG pecking order in North America.

AMG CEO Ola Källenius understands there are risks in lowering the entry point for the AMG Club. In that context he believes it's not how the CLA 45 stacks up against AMG's twin-turbo V12s. The important measure is how the CLA 45 stacks up against anything of its size or in its direct competitive set. He figures most CLA 45 buyers will be conquests, purchasing their first Mercedes.

As for brand dilution, Källenius notes the average sale price for AMG products is higher than it's ever been.

“The large [AMG] dealers in Orange County and China are ecstatic about this car,” he says. “They see it as the gateway to Gen Y.”

How's it drive?

If you understand the CLA's underpinnings and have been fortunate enough to sample a range of AMG products, the CLA 45 drives about as you'd expect. It's pretty freaking fast. We're close to calling it faster than anything in its size class.

As a road car the CLA 45 can be perfectly civil and nearly docile. Its engine is tuned to deliver torque in giant, relatively short bursts, rather than howling along for extended stretches at 6200 rpm. It's quiet inside--almost surprisingly so. There's some wind around the A-pillars at 120, but the engine noise consists of just a soft drone. Only when you open the side windows does the deep exhaust bellow present itself, almost mimicking an AMG V8, and it's sweet listening to the shifts. The ride is anything but stiff, though we're sure the smooth roads in rural Germany didn't challenge it nearly as much as a Chicago freeway will.

The dual-clutch transmission approaches a conventional torque converter 'box's smoothness, distinguished only by a barely perceptible lurch as it shifts down through a coast-down stop. The efficiency mode -- it also engages the start/stop function -- works to get the CLA into the highest gear possible as soon as possible and it takes a deep push on the accelerator to get kickdown. We preferred the sport mode for casual driving even at the expense of some smoothness. Acceleration from a stop or a roll is basically 911 Carrera-grade. A Race Start launch-control mode is standard, though it's cumbersome to engage, with a specified sequence of button presses and then a double click on the shift paddles.

The difference between the standard CLA and the AMG version comes clearest on a racetrack, and Mercedes gladly offered the opportunity. They could have gotten away with a less-challenging venue. Theirs was Bilster-Berg -- a brand new, Hermann Tilke-designed track at a former military installation south of Hanover, destined for service as an automotive country club. The well-heeled volk who join here had better be reasonably competent drivers, too, or at least willing to repair their expensive exotic machinery. This is one of the more challenging tracks we've sampled in a while.

In short, Bilster-Berg is a mini Green Hell: 2.6 miles with 19 corners, many blind and some off-camber, 200 meters of elevation change with grades as steep as 26 percent, and 44 hill crests that unload the car.

The key, in the context of the CLA 45, is the unloading.

As is probably expected, it's much more confidence-inspiring on track than the standard CLA. The first thing you'll note is it's much more stable under hard braking, and then that it's faster in all circumstances. The CLA 45 still feels mostly like a front-drive car, though not because it's inclined to understeer grossly. It isn't so inclined. It feels like a front-drive car because when it unloads suddenly, as it does often at Bilster-Berg, the rear end gets light first and feels like it might come around -- like lift-throttle oversteer -- though it never did. The difference is, if the unloading isn't too sudden or extreme the CLA 45's rear wheels will power up and grip and settle the car back down, and enhance stability.

In sport mode the automatic works better than manual shifting on a scary new track. It competently selects appropriate gears so the driver can focus on finding the proper way around. The CLA bears up admirably when the driver comes up short. Carry too much speed toward an apex and it will suffer a hard stab on the brakes without fuss, and it won't push madly and completely lose momentum if you gas it too hard again on the other side. Partly because of its weight and dimensions, the CLA 45 is one of the most fling-able and forgiving AMG cars to date.

Back on the road, the CLA's swoopy, CLS-inspired shape (Mercedes makes no excuses) has its drawbacks. The view through the center mirror is narrow and the standard backup camera is almost a necessity.

The front seats are large and have plenty roomy for large bodies, but only the upgrade model has bolster adjustment to keep smaller torsos from sliding around. The rear seat? You'll get reasonably comfortable if you are 5'7” or shorter. If you're taller you'll have to cock your neck sideways or put your chin on your chest, or your head will hit the roof. And that's probably OK, because there is only enough trunk space for luggage for two on a four-day trip.

Some things that look like cost-saving in the standard CLA are less obvious in the AMG version, thanks to a generally higher level of standard equipment (though the wing antenna on the roof still isn't painted to match the car). The red-stitched, partial-leather interior upgrade on the CLA250 comes standard on the CLA 45, and the options make the AMG richer still.

The nut: The CLA 45 meets the AMG standard on a slightly different scale. It's comfortable and easy to live with through lazy cruising or profiling, pulse quickening when you hammer it and visually distinctive in all circumstances.

Do I want it?

If you're an AMG owner you might want it for a family member. But unless you have a green conscience, or want the improved fuel efficiency a smaller, lighter four-cylinder provides, we'd guess you'll prefer what you have now. If you've always wanted a genuine AMG-crafted Benz, the CLA 45 moves you about $20,000 closer to your prize, and you won't be disappointed.

What about the AMG CEO's standard -- best in class, not best in brand? With the BMW 1 Series M gone and the still-pending arrival of Audi's promised S3, we're not sure how to define the class. If it includes the Subaru WRX STi Limited -- given Mercedes' target buyer, it could -- the STi saves about 10 large. If the class includes the Audi S4, the choice gets tough.

Best to leave it here: For now, the CLS 45 AMG 4Matic might be a class of one.

2014 Mercedes-Benz CLA 45 AMG 4MATIC

Price: $48,375

Available: November 2013

Layout: Five-passenger, front-engine, all-wheel-drive sedan

Drivetrain: transverse 2.0-liter turbocharged inline four, 355 hp @ 6,000 rpm, 332 lb-ft from 2,250 rpm; seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transaxle

Curb Weight: 3,494 lbs

Performance: 0-60 mph, 4.5. sec; 155 mph top speed (manufacturer), 34.5 mpg (converted from EU liters/100km cycle)

DIGITAL EDITOR ANDREW STOY: Beautiful to look at and sit in, the 2013 Audi S7 nevertheless left me with mixed feelings, much as it’s kissin’ cousin the S6 did. There’s nothing wrong with the handling feel or chassis dynamics; the engine is magnificent, capable of hurling one like a sixth grader’s spitball, but the dual-clutch automatic exhibits enough weird behaviors to spoil much of the fun.

At tip-in, there’s enough rubber-banding to make one think they're in a regular automatic with a loose torque converter. The effect is akin to what I’d imagine a plague corpse being catapulted over a city wall might experience…were it not a corpse (shame too; it’s kind of fun in its own way). Upshifts and downshifts are performed quickly enough, but in sport mode they’re oddly timed and surprisingly harsh, as if the gearbox suddenly began channeling the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution MR while the rest of the car remained an Audi.

In the end, what’s absent is the mechanical, visceral nature of the powertrain found on the S4. Much if it can be traced to the use of a dual-clutch sequential manual versus a traditional manual transmission, and I suppose it’s also related to the type of customer who purchases the larger Audi sports sedans versus the A4/S4 buyer. But as far as driver’s cars go, the S4 (and S5) simply deliver more of the direct lever-connected-to-gears connection I prefer.

Damn if it isn’t pretty, though.

EDITOR WES RAYNAL: I have mixed feelings about the Audi S7. Love the exterior shape; I think it’s just stunning. I mostly love the interior as well. It’s comfortable, classy and beautifully built. So why do I say “mostly” about the interior? Because I’d like it a whole lot better without the head-up display that sort of sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb on top of the dash.

And then there’s the transmission. Yes, that’s where I cool off -- sometimes. There’s the rubber-banding reported above making launches from lights uneven. But it’s not really that per se, it’s that the feeling is intermittent. Sometimes the car will cruise away smoothly from lights. Sometimes there’s a hesitation as if one is slipping the clutch on a manual transmission car. The whole experience is just weird. It seems the less you boot the better it is, but again, sometimes it just acts up. Trying the various setting didn’t seem to help. The transmission’s intermittent weirdness continued throughout the weekend.

Once underway the thing is fantastic. The engine is smooth and there’s definitely enough power here and more than enough grip -- it’s one of those rare birds that feels lighter to drive than it actually is. For gobbling up tons of highway miles I can think of few cars doing it better.

Overall, I like the S7 a lot. I just wish the transmission was more seamless and there was no head-up display to make the interior a bit tacky.

Other than that, this car is very nice.

ROAD TEST EDITOR JONATHAN WONG: We’ve warmed up to Audi’s A7 around the Autoweek office since it arrived on the market. The exterior sheetmetal is elegant, the rear hatch offers some added utility, it has a beautifully done interior and with the 3.0-liter supercharged V6, it’s a fairly entertaining car to drive.

In the S7 we have more power with the turbo V8, sharpened handling, sportier styling touches and an interior that has some of the most supportive and comfortable in the business.

Compared to the A7, the S7 packs 110 more horsepower (310 versus 420) and 81-lb-ft more torque (325 versus 406). Audi says the S7 gets to 60 mph in 4.5 seconds, while the A7 needs 5.4 seconds.

In place of the eight-speed torque-converted automatic in the A7 there’s a seven-speed dual-clutch sequential manual in the S7, which happens to be my only big sticking point to the car. I’ll get into that more later on.

On the outside, the S7 gets specific fascias, silver mirror caps, side sills and exhaust outlets.

The cost to upgrade from an A7 Prestige to an S7 (which is only available in Prestige trim) is $12,650, which isn’t too crazy if you consider how quick a sticker price can jump on European cars if you go a little bonkers with options. Is it worth it? I think it is, but the darn dual-clutch transmission is putting a damper on the party for me. Like the S6 I drove before this S7, the muted throttle response at tip-in drove me crazy over the weekend. Maybe with some programming alterations Audi could smooth things out. Or at least I hope they can.

Once you’re moving along, things are fine with quick up- and downshifts especially when the Audi Drive Select system is set to Dynamic. Dynamic also quickens steering response, increases weight and the S7 stays firmly planted around corners with little roll.

The engine is a good piece with the 406-lb-ft of delicious torque available at just 1,400 rpm, which is kind of soiled by the slow throttle tip-in response. Throughout the rev range power is strong, which is nice. Slowing matters is also easy with good brakes that easily scrub speed off with a firm pedal feel.

The really great thing about all these luxury sports sedans with adjustable chassis and throttle mapping settings is that at the push of a button you can turn the car from sharp and eager to a car that’s comfortable to docilely rolling around when you’re just puttering home from work. With Audi Drive Select in Comfort, the car can be relaxing with a cabin that’s well isolated from wind noise and only a little bit of tire noise from the 20-inch summer tires finding its way into the interior. The suspension damps out road imperfections well and steering feel is lighter.

In typical Audi form, the interior is nicely done with top-notch materials and the aforementioned front sport seats are comfortable and supportive. Audi’s MMI interface remains my favorite one among luxury makes with the controls within easy reach on the center console.

The S7 is a nice car with an attractive silhouette, a hammer of an engine, a chassis that can be both tight and fairly entertaining or calm and comfortable and an interior that’s just a nice place to spend time in. If Audi remedies the throttle tip-in, the S7 would be near perfect. Now, let’s get our hands on the RS7.

2013 Audi S7 Prestige

Base Price: $79,695

As-Tested Price: $94,570

Drivetrain: 4.0-liter turbocharged V8; AWD, seven-speed dual-clutch sequential manual

Output: 420 hp @ 5,500-6,400 rpm, 406 lb-ft @ 1,400-5,200 rpm

Curb Weight: 4,508 lb

Fuel Economy (EPA City/Highway/Combined): 17/27/20 mpg

AW Observed Fuel Economy: 15.7 mpg

Options: Bang & Olufsen sound system ($5,900); innovation package including cruise control with stop and go, pre-sense plus, active lane assist and side assist, head-up display, night vision assistant, cornerview camera system, power folding mirrors ($5,600); LED headlights with LED running lamps ($1,400); 20-inch alloy wheels with summer tires ($1,000); carbon atlas inlays ($500); Phantom black pearl effect exterior paint ($475)