1982 Mercedes 300cd Diesel Coupe 85k Miles: Restoration Project on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Aston Martin Vantage vs. Mercedes-AMG GT C Review | Translating German into English

GROssBRITANNIEN — No car matches the new Aston Martin Vantage as closely as the Mercedes-AMG GT, the two sharing both their 4.0-liter twin-turbocharged V8 and electrical architecture while competing for the same market niche. So, of the many challenges Aston Martin faced when developing it, ensuring that the Vantage had a unique identity must have weighed more heavily than any other. The added spice to this confrontation is the GT's status as halo model for AMG. Meanwhile, Aston Martin's brand identity, built on the sharp-suited machismo embodied by a certain big-screen spy, is a make-or-break issue for the company. The identity problem has fascinated me since the AMG deal was first announce in 2013. So exploring the Vantage on British roads with the GT literally filling the mirrors is a big deal. Now, finally, we have directly competing products with which to explore the theory. And there's much to like in both, not least of which is that common powerhouse of an engine. While they don't share a platform, both use the classic front-engine, rear-drive, transaxle layout, with traditional driving manners to match. Some quick number-crunching as an appetizer: The AMG GT C you see here has the dry-sumped M178 derivative of the V8, with 550 horsepower and 501 pound-feet of torque, driving the rear wheels through a transaxle-mounted, seven-speed dual-clutch transmission and fully active electronic locking differential. It's 179 inches long, weighs 3,748 pounds and will clear 0-60 mph in 3.6 seconds en route to 197 mph. The Vantage has the wet-sumped M177 version of the same engine, as featured in countless AMGs and shared with the DB11 V8. It makes 503 hp, 505 lb-ft and drives the rear wheels through a transaxle-mounted, eight-speed automatic gearbox and fully active electronic locking differential. Sounding familiar? It's comparable in overall length but a couple of inches longer in wheelbase, and weighs pretty much the same as the GT C, give or take a few pounds. It hits 60 in 3.5 seconds and tops out at 195 mph. Both have adaptive dampers and a variety of driver modes, both are built from aluminum and both are at the sportier end of the GT spectrum. The two U.K.-market cars you see here cost just more than $180,000 with options. Pretty darned close, then. Numbers are one thing.

Why it's difficult to accurately test the efficiency of a plug-in car

When it comes to electric vehicles and plug-ins in general, the Environmental Protection Agency-certified range is a hugely important number. While actual range anxiety is largely psychological, the magic number does provide a point of comparison of buyers considering one EV over another. The driving distance is also often touted by automakers when marketing their models. Unfortunately, as Green Car Reports finds in a recent deep dive, the way the EPA calculates the figure is a convoluted mess, and discovering the reasons why is definitely worth the read. The issue isn't about bad science but instead comes down to vague wording. The EPA's accepted range test is sourced from an evaluation called J-1634 from the Society of Automotive Engineers, and it seems to provide balanced results for vehicles that automatically reach a single state of charge when plugged in. However for models with multiple charge settings, the situation gets complicated very quickly. Of course, these modes are often created in the software, meaning that a car's certified driving distance can change with just a few taps of the keyboard without the real world results owners might experience actually changing. By showing the test's effects on the certified range for the Tesla Model S, Nissan Leaf and Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric Drive over the last few years, Green Car Reports makes a compelling argument that it's the evaluation that needs to change. Thankfully, it appears that the solution is a very simple one. Get the details here.

Genesis cars win accolades, offer value — so why are sales so bad?

My high-school buddy Brent Cormier was so smitten with the Genesis G80 when he saw it at an event I hosted at SXSW in 2016 he bought a used 2013 Hyundai Genesis a short time later and fell in love with the car. "It surpasses my every expectation," said Cormier, a self-described "renaissance man" who owns and runs a real estate agency with his wife Laura, is a food service executive chef and part owner of Austin-based Thin the Herd Guitars. "I was locked into Mercedes and Audi for 10 years," he added. "And felt trapped in an endless pit of maintenance costs." After owning the Genesis over the past two years — including using it as an Uber and Lyft driver to earn extra cash — Cormier learned what some frugal luxury sedan buyers and a handful of car reviewers have discovered: Genesis offers great bang for the buck compared to other premium brands and can compete with the best in terms of performance, features and comfort. Hyundai's luxury brand also earned a prominent third-party endorsement last week when for the first time Genesis topped J.D. Power's 2018 APEAL study, surpassing German luxury-performance icon Porsche. The APEAL study (which stands for Automotive Performance, Execution and Layout) "measures owners' emotional attachment and level of excitement across 77 attributes," ranging from performance to comfort, and asks nearly 68,000 owners of new 2018 models to score vehicles on a 1,000-point scale. In its second year ranked as a stand-alone brand, Genesis earned an APEAL score that bumped it up 15 points to 884 and helped push it past Porsche — and past BMW, Lincoln, Mercedes-Benz, Audi, Volvo, Cadillac, Land Rover and Lexus, in order of ranking. Last month, Genesis also topped J.D. Power's Initial Quality Survey (IQS) for the first time this year. And both its models were awarded Top Safety Pick Plus ratings by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, among 11 Plus ratings in all for Korean vehicles. Despite high J.D. Power rankings and great reviews, Genesis U.S. sales were off 50 percent for the first six months of 2018 compared to 2017, and in June Genesis sold only 796 vehicles — the first time U.S. numbers dropped below 1,000 in a month. Part of Genesis's APEAL and IQS success can be attributed to its small product lineup: just two models, the G80 and G90 sedans, with a third, the 2019 G70, launching later this year. And while those numbers may help in J.D.