Hardtop Convertible Immaculate 2 Sets Of Wheels Just Serviced Like Sl500 500sl on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Mercedes G 500 4x4 is mighty mean and bright lime green

The Mercedes-Benz G500 4x42, finally ready to meet the crowds at the Geneva Motor Show, might just be the best factory-prepped expedition off-roader on the market, should Mercedes choose to build it. The short story is that some well-heeled admirers of the G63 AMG 6x6 said, "It's nice, but can you take it down a notch?" And by "notch" they meant "an axle." So the G500 4x42 gets just two portal axles instead of three, and a slew of other features. The 4x4 squared offers up a standard G-wagen body, but instead of the 5.5-liter twin-turbo V8 from the G63, there's a new 4.0-liter twin-turbo V8 with 422 horsepower and 450 pound-feet of torque. Compared to the standard G500, the track is 11.8 inches wider, the street-cred rims being 22-inchers on 325/55 R-series tires. When it's time to get dirty, they can be swapped for an optional set of 18-inch wheels with 37-inch beadlock tires. With that setup and the same wheelbase as the G500 LWB, ground clearance and fording depth are more than doubled to 17.7 inches and 39 inches respectively, the angle of approach goes from 36 degrees to 52 degrees and the angle of departure leaps from 27 degrees to 54 degrees. Breakover angle is bumped from 21 degrees to 47 degrees, a two-piece stainless steel undertray protecting the sensitive bits when you push it. The only parts that get a raised eyebrow are the carbon fiber wheel arches and bumpers, which might behave badly when they meet an immovable granite object. To escape the sensation of driving the Taj Mahal in urban environments, there's a twin spring-and-damper setup at each wheel. One of the spring-damper combos is electronically controlled and adjustable, and when called into action via the Comfort or Sport mode, takes control of wheel action; even when passive, it will kick in to automatically to stiffen the body if it detects evasive maneuvers. On top of all that, to remind you that you're in a Mercedes the interior is fitted out with Designo leather trim and diamond-quilted microfiber. Mercedes is going to gauge its Geneva reception before deciding to build it, a hurdle we're sure will be overcome. Car and Driver drove it and verified it's the real deal, with pricing - if it's built - speculated to land between the G63 AMG and G65 AMG. The press release below has all the details. Related Video: Near-series show car G 500 4x42: The G-Class Squared Stuttgart, Feb 21, 2015 -- Only a G-Class can be better than a G-Class.

The biggest gas-guzzlers of 2024: 'The Meanest List' is the opposite of greenest cars

In some circles — especially some automotive circles — bigger is better. This explains the Hummer, for example. In its so-called “Meanest List” of a dozen models, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) makes no apologies for berating “the worst-performing mass market automobiles” sold in 2024 in the U.S. The most diminutive car on the list is a Chevy Corvette Z06. At the top of this particular heap is the Mercedes-Benz AMG G63, a gas-powered SUV that the environmental agency says was “the worst-performing vehicle of the more than 1,200 models assessed by Greener Cars and has an annual fuel cost over $4,000.” Not to mention its MSRP of around $184,000. Rank Make & Model Powertrain Green Score MSRP Estimated Annual Fuel Cost* 1 Mercedes-Benz AMG G63 Gas 20 $184,000 $4,242 2 Ram 1500 TRX 4x4 Gas 22 $98,335 $3,819 3 Ford F150 Raptor R Gas 24 $79,975 $3,777 4 Cadillac Escalade V Gas 26 $152,295 $3,388 5 Dodge Durango SRT Gas 26 $74,995 $3,332 6 Jeep Wrangler 4dr 4X4 Gas 27 $35,895 $3,260 7 Jeep Grand Wagoneer 4x4 Gas 28 $91,945 $3,058 8 Mercedes-Benz G550 Gas 28 $143,000 $3,186 9 GMC Hummer EV SUV EV 29 $98,845 $1,746 10 GMC Sierra Gas 29 $37,700 $3,069 11 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Gas 30 $114,395 $3,169 12 Mercedes-Benz Maybach S680 Gas 30 $234,300 $3,031 *ACEEE analysis using EIA data of the annual cost of driving 15,000 miles In terms of numbers, the dirty dozen of the meanest includes seven SUVs and three trucks. Lonely at the middle of the list is the sole electric, the GMC Hummer EV, which weighs in at 9,000 pounds. The council notes that “though EVs have lower emissions than similarly sized gasoline models, the Hummer demonstrates that size and efficiency, not just fuel source, are important factors in a carÂ’s environmental impact.” ItÂ’s also worth reminding prospective buyers that the average fuel cost of a vehicle on the “Greenest List” eats up only a fifth of the fuel cost of a vehicle on the Meanest List, “showing that greener options can also be more affordable.” The ACEEE also put out a "Greener List" of efficient gasoline and hybrid cars that don't require plugging in.  By the Numbers Green Cadillac Chevrolet Dodge Ford GMC Hummer Jeep Maybach Mercedes-Benz RAM Emissions Fuel Efficiency Green Automakers Truck SUV Electric Hybrid

Comparison test: 2019 Acura RDX vs. compact luxury SUV competitors

Truth be told, if we were to compare the all-new 2019 Acura RDX with those compact luxury crossover SUVs it would most likely be cross-shopped against, you'd be looking at a different list. Even Acura admits that Lexus and Infiniti are the most likely bogies, but with the 2019 RDX, Honda's luxury brand is attempting to attract those customers who think as much with their hearts as with their heads. And for the most part, those folks have been buying from German brands: the Audi Q5, BMW X3 and Mercedes-Benz GLC-Class. So, to show how the new RDX compares to them, Acura actually provided examples of each during the recent press drive along with a Volvo XC60. All were determined to have greater emotional appeal than the last RDX, and we would certainly agree. For, as much as the previous-generation RDX made sense on paper, it was really hard to get excited about it. And when you're paying extra for a luxury vehicle, shouldn't you get a little excited? Well, as luck would have it, Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski and I were on hand in Whistler, British Columbia, for the press launch. We didn't have an abundance of time in each RDX competitor, but in conjunction with our usual comparison chart, our impressions should provide a good first taste of how the new RDX compares. Performance and fuel economy Contributing Editor James Riswick: On paper at least, the RDX is gutsier than its comparably powered European rivals. It also weighs the same or less, which logically should mean it'll be the quickest in a straight line. During my brief drives, though, I'm not sure it really stood taller than the three Germans. It at least matches them for smoothness, which is something that can't be said about the Volvo. Fuel economy is lower than them all when you consider all but the Mercedes come standard with all-wheel drive. It's also worth noting that all the competitors are available with engine upgrades, and unless Acura's forthcoming resurrection of Type S models includes the RDX, it should stay that way. Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski: Line 'em all up in a drag race, and I have a feeling the Acura would squirt away to victory. A good bit of that, though, would be due to its 10-speed automatic transmission, which offers a huge spread of ratios and fires off extremely quick shifts. In the real world, I'd guess fuel economy will be similar across the board, so I'm willing to call that category a draw.