First Drive: 2012 Ferrari FF

The last time Ferrari blew absolutely everyone away with wall-to-wall surprises and equally sizzling performance all wrapped into one car was in 2002 with its Enzo. We’re not saying that all things between then and today have been shabby, mind you. And we’re also not saying that the 2012 Ferrari FF does it in marquee-and-fireworks Enzo-style, but the unexpected innovations aboard this gorgeous trailblazing all-weather shooting brake will keep conversation heated for an uncommonly long time. This is Ferrari thinking way outside its box of usual GT forms and, for no other reason than this, we must applaud them.

You’re probably expecting us to drop the “But…” right about now, yanking the carpet away in the damning-with-faint-praise tradition, however, there isn’t one to drop on the parade here. We’ve just reeled off some 150 miles of sheer V12 driving joy in the endlessly challenging Dolomite Mountains of northeastern Italy, and when finished with that, we only wanted more. Admittedly, we could do with a better onboard sat-nav and command center than the Harman Kardon unit, as well as a slightly weightier steering map for warm and dry days, but these are our only moments of quandary when assessing the FF.

FF means “Ferrari Four” and this unashamedly standout model will most likely cost around $300,000 when it hits North American ports in the end of October of this year. That’s cheap. Why keep a $173,200 Porsche Panamera Turbo S, a $39,680 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited 4×4, a $111,100 Corvette ZR1, and a $21,200 Ford Transit Connect cluttered in your drive, when you can save both money and garage space by snapping up the ingenious and rare all-wheel-drive 651-horsepower Ferrari FF and call it a day? For that matter, why buy a house when you can have all the comfort and room we took advantage of inside the FF? The leather is luscious and an optional Schedoni [pronounced ske-DOH-nee] luggage set outfitted in the same hides runs around $10k.

We are not ignorant of the fact that some of those who can afford an FF – together with legions of the less wealthy who aspire to simpler pleasures like a BMW xDrive model or some such thing – have been exuberantly vocal (usually in writing, huddled away in their computer lairs) about what an atrocity the FF is to the Ferrari brand and heritage. We have only one thing to say before we say more things: stick it in your ear. The FF is a genius move from a company that we frankly saw getting itself into a small rut and having an increasingly challenging time selling V12-engined dream cars, no matter how gorgeous they might draw them or how well they were engineered. Thinking of a world without a briskly selling V12 Ferrari makes us break out in a worrying sweat for humanity.

And seeing as there has been a real challenge for anyone selling 12-cylinder cars lately, any new V12 needs to be about a lot more than simply the engine and its power. That said, even the 6.3-liter “F140 EB” V12 sitting front/amidships in the FF possesses a raft of sophisticated improvements. Nuances to the FF’s engine almost make the outgoing 612 Scaglietti’s F133 F 5.7-liter V12 and its 536 horsepower seem historic. The 6.3-liter has more in common with the 611-to-661-hp 6.0-liter V12 in the 599 line. Just add 200-psi direct injection and new “reed” valves in the dry sump to keep oil from seeping back up with the pistons. Voila! 651 hp and 504 pound feet of torque and at least a 15-percent improvement in fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

Certainly we must talk design and packaging of this latest Ferrari that has succeeded in surprising everybody. First, just like Porsche and others before it, Ferrari found itself at a point where it needed to create something more “practical” – using the term very loosely, of course. Bringing new blood to the brand was necessary. One measure that reassures as we eye the FF before driving it is the 1.4 inches taller that it stands versus the 612 Scaglietti, while at the same time still remaining 1.5 inches squatter than a Panamera Turbo S. In all other key measures, the FF is almost exactly the same size as the Scaglietti, though the aluminum chassis and every aluminum body panel are all new. So, the FF still sits low down enough to be a sleek two-door supercar worthy of the Ferrari badge.

Marking Ferrari leader Luca Cordero di Montezemolo’s words, there will never be a four-door Ferrari and hence, nary an SUV or crossover. So, also along these lines, the four-honest-seat FF should be as close to such genres as the company ever gets.

How Ferrari designers have established the taller rear section of the greenhouse is a thing of beauty, with rear-seat head- and leg-room that is copious for anyone up to six-feet, two-inches tall. Luggage space in back ranges from 15.9 cubic feet up to 28.3 cubes with the rear seatbacks simply falling forward and laying flat. Bagged skis and golf bags can also be stored by loading through the center section of the rear seats very comfortably. For many car companies, these facts and figures would be far from miraculous, but the FF is a 208-mph Ferrari with a thoroughly heart-wrenching exhaust symphony that sets it miles apart.

Helping the exterior proportions are the surface treatment and detailing of all the lines of the FF’s sexy rear, as well as the standard 20-inch wheels bookending the long 117.7-inch wheelbase. Whereas we’re still not 100-percent convinced by the headlights of the sensational 458 Italia, the LED light design up front on the FF is just right. Does the FF have too large a mouth? That V12 does need to breathe a lot and stay cool, hence the constant Italian smile.

Sitting in the multi-adjustable driver’s seat within the first class cabin, before us is an impressive steering wheel that’s clearly inspired by the one gripped on occasional Sundays by Felipe Massa and Fernando Alonso. By forgoing all traditional stalks, the now larger column-fixed carbon-fiber shift paddles for the new seven-speed F1 DCT automated manual gearbox sit closer to the backside of the wheel, and thus right at our fingertips like never before. Besides the five-mode GT manettino switch and red Engine Start button, a windshield wiper toggle and the “Schumacher” button for softer suspension while in Sport or ESC Off on the manettino, Ferrari has incorporated the turn-signal controls into the 3-o’clock and 9-o’clock positions for thumbs to activate or deactivate. This seems small as far as features go, but it’s a revelation of functionality. There are also the “Look, Mom, I’m racing!” red LEDs that light up left to right at the top of the wheel as the revs build to the 8,000-rpm redline.

Luckily, we were directed to many a tunnel with perfect acoustics during our drive day, and this obligated us to downshift even when not really necessary, and there were a few occasions when we couldn’t help but pull both paddles to find neutral so that we could then just blip the throttle like rabble rousers. And what a sound from the FF’s four burnished tips! The throttle is so responsive that we could blip out entire songs as we coasted briskly through the heart of many a mountain. There’s nothing anywhere more emotionally evocative as a carefully tuned Ferrari V12 singing in a tunnel.

And it’s not just all sound and fury with no substance. The 651 horses and 504 lb-ft of torque work together with all that sweet tech on board to move this 4,147-pound Ferrari as though it weighs about half a ton less than it does. Despite all of the changes, the FF weighs just 13 pounds more than the 612 Scaglietti. Given its added power and torque, acceleration to 62 mph is quoted officially at 3.7 seconds versus the Scaglietti’s 4.0 seconds. We’ll take odds right now on a digitally timed 3.3 seconds to 60 mph as soon as Ferrari lets us do that. Four adults and their bags – moving very quickly.

The Dolomites are a perfect testing area for dynamics and engine characteristics. The A-Number-1 innovation on the FF is the two-ratio gearbox mounted in front of the V12 linked directly to the crankshaft, looking a bit like the motor hung on the front of a Morgan 3-Wheeler when it’s naked. These two ratios in front are what give the FF its lightweight all-wheel drive only when needed. Think about it: Do 99 percent of all-wheel-drive vehicles need to be all-wheel-drive at all times? No, they do not. How often do you need four-wheel drive in gears 5 through 7? Just about never.

This system is labeled “4RM” – “4 Ruote Motrici” meaning “four driven wheels” – and it is a Maranello in-house patented approach that we know others will be using in the future. First off, it is mechanically much simpler than a traditional all-wheel-drive setup, it weighs half as much and the reactions are silk smooth. There is no center differential needed and no additional shaft is required to pass from the rear axle back up to the front axle. You do not talk of a torque split here. Rather, the seven-speed F1 DCT and E-Diff torque vectoring on the rear axle still run most of the show and they are built to manage up to five times the torque of the front axle. The mechanism on the front of the crankshaft is referred to as a PTU, for power take-off unit or power transfer unit. Take your pick.

Wet clutch packs on the rear transaxle and the front PTU are synchronized by the FF’s sophisticated ECU to make sure all four wheels are doing everything they can at all times to give you the dynamic advantage under all driving conditions. The PTU has one gear that acts on the front wheels while the F1 gearbox is engaged in either first or second gear in back. The PTU’s second gear is used with the F1’s third and fourth gears. There is more slip programmed into the PTU in first or third gear, while less slippage happens when in second or fourth. This variation is to simply maintain proper wheel speeds between front and back at all times while in these more sensitive first four gears. The PTU’s first taller gear is good up to around 60 mph, while the longer-legged second gear can engage up to 125 mph or so before rendering the car a traditional full-time rear-wheel-drive Ferrari fast-lane funfest from fifth through seventh gears.

We drove plenty of sundrenched dry mountain roads with a plethora of hairpins that would suck the wind out of and overtax the weight-shift characteristics of almost all other cars we know that can compete. We flew over graveled sections of road, hammered the third-generation Brembo CCM ceramic brakes ad infinitum and played a lot with the third-generation Delphi magnetorheological dampers via the manettino switch and Schumacher button. The throttle to the new direct-injected V12 motor knew no rest and the responses were precise. Overtaking a constant flow of delivery trucks and people driving slowly into the mountains for the weekend became an afterthought as the FF’s mid-range enthusiasm imposed itself.

Shifts from the Getrag-Ferrari F1 DCT gearbox are emotional moments, and happen exactly as we hoped they would while staying in Sport mode practically all day long. In full Auto mode with the manettino set at Comfort, this DCT is far more livable than the former Graziano single-clutch race-oriented boxes. Do not let yourself be fooled, though, it’s still manically satisfying to slap the carbon-fiber paddles up and down the scale. The FF’s downshift throttle blips are the stuff of legend.

In those myriad curves – ascending, descending, flat, and all in abundance – the all-season 20-inch Pirelli P Zero tires – 245/35 ZR20 (95Y) front, 295/35 ZR20 (105Y) rear – were made to look infallible thanks to the 4RM system conducting all negotiations between the PTU in front, E-Diff with F1 DCT in back, and the agile F1 Trac rear axle torque control. Launch Control comes on all FFs and it can be used in all five settings of the manettino this time around. On the dry, just stand on the brake with the left foot, press the Launch button and insert first gear, floor the throttle, which holds at 3500 rpm, and let go of the brake. The F1 tranny then takes over and automates all the shifts at the 8,000-rpm power peak. Sadly, all our testers this day wouldn’t let us try out the LC party – something about cars possibly flying off the narrow mountain roads in unskilled hands and whatnot. We’ll just need to hit the closed track later, we suppose.

The FF also proves itself a capable snow-goer on optional 20-inch Pirelli Sottozero tires. We really see the entire 4RM suite of features at work here and the controlled oversteer drifts are just weird since we’ve never been encouraged to behave this way in a Ferrari. On our testers, there was a Traction Index interface to the left side of the driver’s display that was as addictive to watch as the green graphics in any slow-moving Japanese tree-hugger car. This digital display showed the traction values jogging between the four wheels in real time as we scooted over ice and snow, or over wet or dry pavement. It was fascinating stuff that a Ferrari spokesperson confided will not be offered on production models. Pity, because it was amazing to play with – especially when kicking out tail in empty hairpin sections.

It’s in exactly those tail-swishing dynamic sections of road where the FF equation all comes together. In our preferred Sport manettino position, feeling the forward PTU help pull us through and out of all hard curves while still letting the rear end swing around was akin to ballet. The FF profits from a typical 47/53 percent fore/aft Ferrari weight distribution and there was no perceivable understeer through whatever curves we were barreling into and screaming out of. It was also here, on dry pavement, that we wanted the feedback of a slightly heavier wheel, just as we’ve come to love on all other Ferrari models – especially the 458 Italia. In the slick stuff on winter tires, this lightness is ideal, but we were looking for it to tighten up a touch on warm, dry asphalt.

Funnily enough, a Ferrari guardian angel/spokesperson (who came to aide us after our left front Michelin Super Sport summer tire found a nail) handed us his backup FF and said in passing, “Try the steering feel on this car.” Later, after having driven this other FF all the way back to base camp, someone informed us that the steering map had been increased by ten percent for this pre-production car as an experiment. It was just the ticket and we hope that this calibration at least gets offered as an option somehow.

Other than all that, what can we say? Those out there who are so caught out by the non-traditional nature of this amazing Ferrari GT variation are only going to cheat themselves. Maranello has absolutely done it to a tee with the FF. In a sense, the FF is one of those beautiful moments where a company has answered a question that nobody was asking, only for us to drive it and smack our foreheads for not having thought of something like it sooner. It takes all of the racing lore Ferrari puts into each car it builds and adds every single bit of correct versatility that we’d add were we in charge.

The FF’s first year of production is already sold out and annual volume is planned at around 800 units, though Ferrari intends to stay open to making more if and when more are needed. European left-hand-drive FF deliveries start the end of May, worldwide right-hand-drive units ship in July, and North America gets federalized FFs into buyers’ hands in late October.

Just in time for the early snows.

[Source: autoblog]

Review: 2011 Chevrolet Volt

There’s something to be said for being at the right place at the right time. Had our primordial ancestors evolved legs and lungs while the entire globe was still awash in warm sea water, they would have gone belly up and we might have never made it to the top of the food chain. At this point in history, our entire species can thank generations of ancestors for not being squished, drowned, beaten, eaten or stabbed before cranking out offspring that would further the human race. One misstep to the left could have been all it took to eradicate entire lines of Homo sapiens progress.

Those same laws of luck and fortune dictate which automotive traits will survive into the future and which will be left to be bookmarks of curiosity in the mechanical fossil record. General Motors knows this all too well. The company infamously birthed the EV1 in the mid-’90s only to find that its high costs of development meant the short-range electric couldn’t keep its head above water in a sea of relatively cheap fuel prices. At the time, there just wasn’t any land in sight for the electric movement.

What a difference 15 years make. Thanks to the trailblazing efforts of the hybrid fleet, more and more Americans now associate efficiency with electric power, and General Motors has given rise to what could possibly be the perfect evolutionary species to bridge the gap between hybrid and full-electric motivation – the 2011 Chevrolet Volt.

It’s been four years since General Motors first pulled back the sheets on the original Chevrolet Volt Concept. As you likely recall, that vehicle was a stylized dream that wore a vertical nose, high belt-line, chopped roof and massive wheels for a look that was, in a word, awesome. The concept was downright muscular and served as an excellent counterpoint to the econo-blob styling of the Toyota Prius at the time. Unfortunately, nearly all of the brawny build of the Volt Concept never quite made it to the production world.

Instead, the designers at GM were confined by the laws of aerodynamics, which means that the production Volt wears a shape that’s very similar to what Toyota came up with for its battery-assisted wonder child. At 177.1-inches long, the Volt is around four inches shorter than its platform mate, the compact Chevrolet Cruze, and 1.5 inches longer than the current generation Prius. The front fascia is appropriately swept into the hood and fenders with wrapped projector headlamps and a shield grille help to give the electrified four-door one of the lowest drag coefficients of any vehicle GM has ever produced. Only the low-slung Corvette rivals the 0.287 Cd of the Volt.

Even with all of its slippery concessions, the Volt is an attractive enough vehicle. Our tester came with 17-inch chrome-clad wheels that added a splash of style to the judicious use of chrome and piano-black plastic along the window line. The vehicle’s tall, abrupt Kamm tail rear takes some getting used to, especially with its slit brake lamps and somewhat awkward spoiler, but the design does have the effect of differentiating the Volt from the rest of North America’s roadgoing hardware.

Jump inside and it’s even clearer that you aren’t driving a run-of-the-mill internal-combustion mule. The center stack is awash in capacitive-touch controls that are simple to navigate if not difficult to read during daylight hours. At night, excellent back-lighting makes the small text labels somewhat easier to translate. A large LCD touchscreen handles everything from climate, navigation and audio information to data on the vehicle’s state of charge and efficiency, and the interface is perfectly intuitive.

Unfortunately, in what must have been a quest to skimp on weight and cost, GM built the cabin of the Volt with materials that would be more at home on a humble Cobalt. Hard, dark plastics abound as far as the eye can see, and while they’re nicely grained, they do little to make drivers feel any better about the vehicle’s lofty price tag.

We do have to give GM praise for the location of the vehicle’s start button, though. Mounted just north and to the left of the shifter, the button is at perfect thumb level. There’s no fumbling around or craning your neck in an attempt to find switchgear stashed behind the steering wheel. Here’s hoping that little trick begins finding its way to other products soon.

GM has also opted for a complete LCD gauge cluster in place of any standard dials. Those nostalgic for the old kit can give it up. The screen organizes and displays a wealth of information clearly and accurately, with vehicle speed represented in large, easy to read numerals above all else. We have to imagine that even if the Volt drivetrain doesn’t spread to the rest of the GM fleet, elements of its instrument cluster surely will.

We were treated to optional leather seating in our time with the Volt, and the light cream-colored thrones did much to brighten the otherwise dark interior. GM hasn’t skimped on details with the Volt, and the double-stitched seats include one line of electric blue thread that’s a particularly nice touch. Rear passengers will find somewhat cramped leg room and no comfortable place to put their inboard elbows, but there’s enough space up top to keep even the cast of Jersey Shore from scraping their hair on the headliner.

Interestingly enough, GM has opted to build the Volt as a hatchback. The rear cargo area offers around 10.6 cubic feet of room, which is plenty for stashing groceries and the like. Our only real issue with the design is that the hatch weighs a ton. Even with gas struts to assist in lifting and lowering the piece, it’s difficult to keep from slamming the door without using both hands. Additionally, with no partition to separate the cabin from the aft area, tire noise is especially prominent at highway speeds.

Under the hood, GM has stashed a tangle of technological wizardry. At its heart, the Volt uses a three powerplant system to get down the road. With a fully charged battery, the vehicle gets its gusto from an 111kw traction motor. Additionally, a 55kw electric generator is also onboard. Clutched to a 84-horsepower 1.4-liter four-cylinder gasoline engine, the generator can jump in to provide power to both the battery and the traction motor at the same time should conditions warrant an extra push of power. Should the batteries drop to a certain predetermined state of charge, the internal combustion mill will jump in to generate electricity to power the front wheels.

GM has graced the Volt with a lithium-ion battery system that the company claims has no memory. That means that it doesn’t have to be fully drained in order to receive the most efficient charge possible. The tech also allows for rapid energy release – something that’s essential for all-electric power at highway speeds. The Volt can be charged using either a 120v plug or a 240v outlet. We were only able to dabble with the first option, and as such, we saw complete-drain charge times of around 10 hours through a standard household outlet. That’s a long time, especially considering that you’re only rewarded about 36 miles of all-electric range for your patience. The good news is that the 240v option will top off the cells in right around four hours. If you’re going to be parking a Volt in your garage with any frequency, make sure there’s a 240v plug nearby.

For all of the bellyaching that we could work up over how long it takes to fully charge the Volt, GM has done an amazing job of building an EV that drives just like any other vehicle on the road. Acceleration isn’t exactly neck-snapping by any means, but if you get frisky with the accelerator, you will be rewarded with a few quick spins of the low-rolling resistance Goodyear Assurance tires. The jump to 60 miles per hour takes around 8.53 seconds in the optional Sport mode, but plan for a little more time in the Normal drive configuration.

We were pleasantly surprised to see that should you need an extra shot of power for a quick pass on the interstate, the Volt will happily oblige. Torque from the 111 kw motor is always at the ready, and while acceleration seems to level off quickly, there’s enough on hand to get you out of trouble. Likewise, the engineers at GM did an excellent job working up the brakes to feel just as linear and progressive as anything you’d find on a standard vehicle. Despite being regenerative, the stoppers never felt grabby or clunky in anyway. Pedal feel is always firm and confidence-inspiring, which is great considering that the Volt tips the scales at a portly 3,781 pounds.

That’s plenty of mass to carry around, and combined with the fling-averse tires, it’s clear that the Volt is never going to be mixing it up on the dance floor with any sports sedans. Get too froggy with the wheel and you’ll quickly be reminded of just how much this vehicle weighs.

But that’s clearly not what the Volt is all about. Under a full-head of electric steam, the Volt is beautifully quiet in city driving up to around 40 mph. Once the speedometer ticks past 50 mph, there’s a noticeable amount of tire and wind noise, though the vehicle never feels taxed or uncomfortable. Again, it’s a level of refinement typically associated with the compact segment, not vehicles with an MSRP north of $40,000 like the Volt, but with the drone of an internal combustion powertrain absent in EV mode, outside factors like air and road noise can’t help but become more prominent.

GM has aced the logic behind the range estimation for all-electric power. If the screen says you have 36 miles before the internal combustion engine kicks in, you can feel safe betting your first born that you won’t run of juice before then – a small detail that builds big confidence in the viability of getting where you’re going.

Once you do drain the battery cells, the 1.4-liter four-cylinder engine kicks in to generate more electricity. While the small four-cylinder isn’t crude by any means, there’s little insulating driver and occupants from its vibration once it gets going. We’ve never noticed just how harsh an internal combustion engine can be until we’d been romanced by the smoothness of 36 miles of EV driving. We almost felt embarrassed every time the engine came on, like someone had just pointed out a lengthy piece of toilet paper glued to the bottom of our shoes.

We drove the Volt over the course of four days and put around 165 miles on the clock in mixed driving. During that time, we purposefully drained the battery a few times in order to give the 1.4-liter engine a workout, but also kept the vehicle on the charger and in a climate-controlled garage when not in use. At the end of our stint, we burnt a whopping 2.064 gallons of premium fuel for a final average of 79.94 mpg. Of course, we’ll have to wait for our next power bill to know exactly how much that stellar fuel economy cost us.

When GM first showed off the Volt Concept, it lurked on stage with a sexy white cord coiled daintily beside the front wheel indicating just how easy it would be to charge your car instead of filling up its tank. While the Volt is about as easy to charge as your cell phone, there is some aggravation involved. For starters, the vehicle requires a clunky adapter that roughly resembles Officer URL – the glowing face of law and order from Futurama. Coiling and uncoiling the meaty orange cord from the converter requires some coordination, especially if you happen to be juggling a bag of groceries at the same time. What you’re left with is a long cord strewn in front of the driver’s door just waiting to ensnare the clumsy or calamitous.

Still, it’s easy to tell when the vehicle is charging thanks to a series of lights and honks from the vehicle itself. The good news is that we never had any issues charging the Volt during our time with the vehicle. Simply plug in the converter, click it into the car and go on your merry way.

We won’t completely dive into the EV debate here. That’s an argument best left to the well-educated pages of AutoblogGreen. While we have our reservations about digging up massive quantities of lithium and coal simply to serve our transportation needs, the Volt is nothing less than an amazing piece of engineering. Quite simply, GM has pulled off something worthy of all the accolades heaped on this vehicle’s hood. Nearly 80 mpg is nothing to scoff at, and we’re guessing that the figure would likely climb if we were simply using the Volt to dart back and forth from work instead of running weekend errands all over creation.

Ecological concerns aside, the only hitch in this giddyup is the price tag that the Volt carries. With optional equipment like leather, 17-inch wheels, rear-view camera and the sultry Crystal Red Metallic paint of our tester, final coin for this machine sits at $44,180 with destination. That’s a fat stack of cash, especially considering that the much larger Toyota Camry Hybrid starts at $27,435 with destination and promises 33.5 mpg combined. Likewise, Hyundai only asks $26,545 with destination for its 37.5 mpg-capable Sonata Hybrid. It doesn’t take any advanced mathematics to realize that the nearly $13,000 premium it takes to score a Volt over a Camry Hybrid would buy a lot of gasoline, even at Road Warrior prices.

That said, Uncle Sam really wants you to buy vehicles like the Volt, which is eligible for a $7,500 federal tax rebate, as well additional state and local rebates depending on where you live. Some residents of Lansing, Michigan, for instance, are eligible for up to $15,000 worth of rebates on the Volt. GM also plans to cut the Volt’s price when production ramps up and the technology spreads to other platforms.

So where does the Volt fit in the evolutionary spectrum of personal transportation? Though it’s priced for early adopters, the vehicle demands few concessions from owners coming directly from hybrid or internal combustion vehicles. We’ve heard word that GM is planning to up production of the vehicle to 12,000 units by 2012, which means that the automaker is anticipating steeper demand connected to ever loftier fuel prices. Though the Volt seems to be serving as the missing link between our transportation right now and full electrification, the price will have to drop before we see them wheeling around every corner.

[Source: autoblog]

Review: 2011 Honda Pilot 4WD Touring

The family Crossover Utility Vehicle segment is, to put it mildly, crowded. Every major automaker has at least one option from which to choose. Ford has four choices, while Toyota makes due with three options. Some models feature two rows of seating, while others boast room for up to eight. Then there are the more off-road capable options to contrast with the docile soft-roaders.

Though most automakers have gone crossover crazy, Honda has made due with a simple two-CUV lineup. The perennially top-selling CR-V takes care of those who desire a smaller footprint, smaller price tag and higher fuel economy, while the larger Pilot takes on the three-row crowd. The Pilot has been mostly successful during its nine-year production run, with high marks for safety (the 2011 model has an overall score of four stars from the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration) and reliability (Consumer Reports gave it the organization’s coveted Recommended rating). Dancing on the fringes of the CUV segment and selling in low numbers, Honda also offers the nearly gone Element and Accord Crosstour, but it’s still the boxier CR-V and Pilot doing the heavy lifting for the brand. Honda made enough changes to the Pilot to keep it competitive with stiff competition like the Toyota Highlander and Chevrolet Traverse? We spent a week with a well-appointed 4X4 Touring model to find out.

When the Pilot first hit the market in 2003, Honda’s CUV was competing mainly with quickly aging body-on-frame Sport Utility Vehicles like the previous Ford Explorer and Chevrolet Trailblazer. That first-generation Pilot’s 240-horsepower, 3.5-liter V6 and relatively nimble chassis made those SUVs look outdated in comparison, and buyers took notice. The Pilot later received a touch-up in 2006 and a fuller refresh in 2009, but other than a boxier, more macho design and an interior that some say actually regressed, the formula really hasn’t changed all that much. That’s not as damning a statement as one might think, considering how far ahead of the competition the Pilot once was, and it helps that repeat buyers know exactly what to expect from their big Honda: safety, reliability and unshakable resale value.

One appealing aspect of buying a Honda Pilot is the simplicity of its available options. For example, our $41,175 4WD Touring model came equipped with Bluetooth, a navigation system, leather seats, rear-seat DVD and a power liftgate. An impressive list of features for sure, except that this big Honda is without a single option box checked. The above is all standard on this highest trim level that starts at $40,395, and yet there are plenty of accessories to pick from, including some exorbitantly priced 18-inch wheels that retail for $3,093. Most utility vehicles in this price range start with 18-inch wheels standard and offer optional 20-inch or bigger wheels, which makes the extra three grand that Honda’s asking for one-inch larger diameter wheels than standard 17s even tougher to swallow.

If the goal of offering standard 17-inch wheels even on the top-of-the-line Touring model is to make the Pilot look even more massive than it actually is, then… mission accomplished. From the side the Pilot looks every bit as large as the GMC Acadia, even though GM’s crossover is about a foot longer. The big and bold theme is accentuated with a Lego block design theme throughout, as the Pilot reminds us of a super-sized Ford Escape. Up front, it features a squared, in-your-face double polygon chrome grille framed by a pair of headlamps that appear to have missed the trend towards more stylized peepers. The same storyline unfolds out back, with more boxiness and a similar absence of flair.

The Pilot’s exterior screams “utility vehicle,” and that theme carries over inside this crossover’s large cabin. We mentioned earlier that some feel the interior of the latest Pilot was actually downgraded when the vehicle was redesigned in 2009. You’ll get no arguments from us on that point, as the current model’s massive center stack and hard plastic materials are outdone by the first generation model’s more appropriately sized center console and more appealing materials. And although our tester didn’t feature this accessory, the Pilot’s dash can be made more attractive by dropping $393 for light wood accents that break up the expanses of dark plastics. Speaking of the center console, we have no idea why Honda designers chose such a massive canvas to place so many tiny and difficult-to-find buttons. We counted 62 buttons total, though don’t hold us to that figure, as our eyes began to fail sometime after reaching 40.

We usually require a day or so to adjust to our new surroundings when testing a vehicle, but we never got comfortable enough with the Pilot’s multitude of controls to come anywhere close to mastery. We even found ourselves repeatedly looking away from the road for three to five seconds at a time as we hunted for the proper radio or climate control settings. Despite being called “Pilot,” there’s no reason this crossover’s interior should mimic the cockpit of a 747. And then there is the oddly placed shifter, which blocks passage the driver’s reach to the mass of buttons and switches on the other side.

That’s a lot of hostility aimed at the Pilot’s cabin, but there are some areas where the boxy Honda shines. First and foremost is comfort. We love the Pilot’s front-row seats (the second row is a bit low to the ground). They’re big, comfy and upholstered with high-quality leather. The steering wheel, too, feels very posh. And then there is the Pilot’s cargo-hauling capability, which easily bests that of the Toyota Highlander. The Pilot is also the widest vehicle in its class, beating the Chevy Traverse by all of .1 inches. But hey, a win is a win, and the Pilot uses its span to swallow up more cargo than its middle-of-the-pack 87 cubic-feet of cargo carrying capacity would suggest. The Pilot also wins when it comes to handy storage space throughout the cabin, with our favorite cubby located under the load floor behind the third row. The six-inch deep storage space helps keep your cargo from pinballing around the cabin.

With great size comes great weight, and the Pilot tips the scales at over 4,600 pounds, or nearly 200 lbs. more than the Highlander. Yet in spite of the Pilot’s size, Honda has done little to increase power over the years. The crossover’s 3.5-liter V6 churns out 250 horsepower at 5,700 rpm and 253 pound-feet of torque at 4,800 revolutions. Those numbers would have been impressive about five years ago, but in 2011 the Pilot lags behind the Traverse by 38 horsepower. Even the much smaller Toyota RAV4 can out-grunt the Pilot by 19 horsepower with its optional V6.

And while the Pilot’s engine, which is mated to a tried-and-true five-speed automatic transmission, is smooth as glass, the power deficit is all too obvious. And less horsepower doesn’t translate to a decreased reliance on fossil fuels, as the Pilot lags behind both the Traverse and Highlander on the fuel economy front. When equipped with all-wheel drive, the Pilot earns 22 miles per gallon on the highway and 16 mpg in the city according to the Environmental Protection Agency. We managed a meager 18 mpg in mixed driving, which is still better than most eight-passenger crossovers, albeit nothing to brag about to your hybrid-driving neighbor. We were expecting better fuel economy what with the Pilot featuring Honda’s Variable Cylinder Management technology that shuts down two or three cylinders when conditions permit, but alas, we never found it.

The Pilot makes up for its lack of power and so-so fuel economy with a rock-solid chassis that tackles bumps and other imperfections with little fuss. Its rack and pinion steering is linear and nicely weighted as well, though there’s not much that can make this big ‘ute feel sprightly when turning into a curve. It snowed on the last day we had with the Pilot, which gave us the opportunity to test the Pilot’s all-wheel-drive setup. The system can transfer up to 70 percent of the engine’s power to the rear wheels when the need arises. We experienced next to zero slip with all-wheel drive engaged, which translated into a lot of confidence when we needed it most. We can’t say the same for the Pilot’s brakes, though. While the pedal felt firm, we noticed that the positive vibe didn’t translate into increased stopping power. On more than one occasion, we found ourselves tapping on the brake at first, then pressing more firmly when we realized the vehicle wasn’t stopping as quickly as we thought it would.

After a week with the Pilot, we can see why many customers love their big Honda. It’s roomy, smooth, reliable and safe, which hits many of the attributes near and dear to the American car buyer. And who cares if the Pilot is a bit south of stylish? The crossover segment isn’t this industry’s canvas of choice to display cutting-edge design, and neither has Honda ever been accused of being an artist. Buyers know this going in.

While we can see why the Honda faithful are perfectly happy with their Pilot, there are a lot more seven- and eight-passenger fish in this sea of crossovers. The aforementioned Highlander and Traverse consistently beat the Pilot in terms of power, fuel economy and style, and there are very few areas where the Pilot takes them both out. Sales, however, is the most concrete harbinger of a vehicle’s success or failure, and by that score, the Pilot continues to do well. Even so, we’re looking forward to the next iteration of Honda’s big family hauler.

[Source: autoblog]

Review: 2011 Lexus IS 250 AWD

Your available options in the entry-level luxury sedan segment rival the variety found at your local Baskin-Robbins. Interested in all-wheel drive, rear-wheel drive or front-wheel drive? Nearly every automaker has you covered. Want to row your own gears, or sit back and let the silicon chippery do the work? The car of your dreams awaits. There’s an option for all of us, and if you prefer a good vanilla to rocky road, then you’re going to love the 2011 Lexus IS250 AWD.

The Lexus IS 250 is instantly familiar, yet ever-so-slightly different for 2011. The reason is that little has changed on the exterior, with a few minor exceptions. Some updates are hard to find, while others are immediately clear. The front bumper and grille have received slight tweaks, while subtle changes have been made to the foglight area and lower fascia opening, which benefit from sharper cutouts. In back, the IS 250 wears new taillamp lenses and redone exhaust tips.

By far, the most noticeable change has occurred out front, where a pair of bright LED eyelids have taken up residence under the swept-back headlamps. All of these changes give the 2011 Lexus IS 250 a smattering of sprinkles on an otherwise rather bland landscape of sheetmetal. The overall theme is conservative, but the new LED running lamps imbue Lexus’ most affordable sedan with a bright flash of modern style, displayed brilliantly against our tester’s Tungsten Pearl paintwork.

That subdued exterior style continues on the inside, as clean lines perform in concert with the surprisingly airy interior cabin. The pleasing to the eye Light Gray color scheme hangs in the background like a briefly foggy coastal morning. Against the sea of gray sits a set of bright white-faced gauges, which are easy-to-read and rather sharp, with a thin blue line underlining the ambitious 160-mile-per-hour display.

Ambitions aside, we had no desire to press that speedo into serious use. Why? Because the seats were just too darn comfortable for us to care. The perforated semi-aniline leather front thrones of our tester offered both heating and cooling features, thanks to the $2,195 Luxury Package Value Edition. It may be a bit crass to call this option grouping a “value” when it costs over $2,000, but the package does include wood trim, the aforementioned LED running lights, power everything (that wasn’t already), a rear sunshade and rain-sensing wipers.

Should you require the use of those intelligent water removers, fret not, because this particular IS 250 is equipped with all-wheel drive. Though the AWD gubbins add nearly 200 pounds to the curb weight (3,651 pounds), the IS 250’s small, 2.5-liter V6 remains surprisingly entertaining. We expected a droning bore of an engine coerced into working far harder than it wanted. What we found was a mill that pushed the whole works up to speed more quickly than we anticipated.

The engine produces 204 horsepower at 6,400 rpm and 185 pound-feet of torque at 4,800 rpm. Those numbers sound low in a world filled with 400-horsepower daily drivers (including the brand’s own high-performance IS F model) yet the IS 250 AWD simply rears back and moves at a pace capable of holding our interest. Push it above 3,500 rpm and it even begins to clear its throat something approaching a sense of authority.

The 2.5-liter is paired with a six-speed automatic transmission, which features steering-wheel mounted paddles for manual shifting. This may be Lexus’ entry-level car, but the shifts could be a few degrees smoother – even if the IS represents the brand’s sportier side. While we were hoping for less I-just-got-my-license and more of a Sade-like smooth operator, the setup didn’t oblige. The paddles only serve to nudge the drivetrain back into sporty, slightly roughneck territory, but unfortunately they don’t respond quickly enough to make the leap entirely.

This baby Lex comes across as confused in a few other areas as well. A bipolar effort, the IS 250 suffers from overboosted steering and mushy brakes. When driving, those factors make us think the IS 250 is pining to be a true luxury sedan, yet the ride, while smooth, is stiffer than we’d expected it to be. Vigorously bouncing over a rough section of Southern California tarmac makes one think the IS has changed its mind, suddenly wanting to be a sports car. It’s a little confused, and so are we.

At the end of the day, the slight redesign for 2011 doesn’t help a conflicted vanilla offering stand out in a display-case full of capable entry-level luxury sedans. The Lexus IS 250 AWD’s $35,775 base price is on par with its classmates, but fails to stack up as well in other areas. The Infiniti G25x is less costly ($34,900) and offers a more engaging driving experience, though its interior falls short. For $34,500, you might find yourself in a 2011 Audi A4 Quattro, with its top-shelf all-wheel-drive system, 7 more horsepower, 73 more pound-feet of torque available and better fuel economy ratings (21/31 miles per gallon versus the Lexus’ 20/27 mpg). The 2011 Mercedes-Benz C300 4Matic starts at $37,900 and makes more power, but is only rated at 17/24 (an updated 2012 model is just around the corner). We could add the Lincoln MKZ, BMW 328i xDrive, Cadillac CTS and Acura TL SH-AWD to the list of competitors to further muddy the waters.

The entry-level luxury sedan category is chock full of viable options and the 2011 Lexus IS 250 AWD is a perfectly acceptable (if run-of-the-mill) choice. The styling is conservative, the driving dynamics are a mixed bag of sport and luxury, but the engine is better than we anticipated. It’s priced exactly where it should be and, were you shopping in this segment, you wouldn’t be embarrassed to put one in your driveway. And yet… while we’ll happily concede that vanilla ice cream is enjoyable from time to time, we can’t help but think that Audi, BMW, Infiniti and Cadillac buyers are paying about the same to enjoy all 31 flavors every single day.

[Source: autoblog]