2022 Mercedes-benz Sl-class Amg on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ecclestone wonders if F1's upcoming turbo V6s should get augmented sound [w/videos]

While every team on the Formula One grid is worried about making a good showing in this year's championship at the same time as they develop a brand-new car for next year's championship, Bernie Ecclestone and F1 circuit promoters have a different concern: how next year's cars will sound. The current cars use 2.4-liter, naturally-aspirated V8s that can reach 18,000 revolutions per minute and employ dual exhaust, next year's engine formula calls for 1.4-liter turbocharged V6s that are capped at 15,000 rpm and are constrained to a single exhaust outlet. Ecclestone and promoters like Ron Walker believe the new engines sound like lawnmowers and that the less thrilling audio will keep people from coming to races. If Walker's Australian Grand Prix really is shelling out almost $57 million to hold the race, every ticket counts. As a fix, according to a report in Autoweek, Ecclestone "suggests that the only way to guarantee [a good sound] may be to artificially adjust the tone of the V6s."
However, neither the manufacturers nor the governing body of F1, the FIA, think there will be a problem. Ecclestone fears that if the manufacturers "don't get it right" they'll simply leave the sport, but the only three carmakers and engine builders left next year, Renault (its 2014 "power unit" is pictured), Mercedes-Benz and Ferrari are so embedded that it would stretch belief to think they'd leave the table over an audio hiccup - if said hiccup even occurs. And frankly, these issues always precede changes to engine formulas, as they did when the formula switched from V10 to V8; fans, though, are probably less focused on the engines and more on the mandated standardization of the sport and the spec-series overtones that have come with it.
No one knows yet what next year's engines will sound like, but we've assembled a few videos below to help us all start guessing. The first is an engine check on an Eighties-era John Player Special Renault with a 1.5-liter V6 turbo, after that is Ayrton Senna qualifying in 1986 in the Lotus 98T that also had a 1.5-liter V6 turbo, then you'll find a short with a manufactured range of potential V6 engine notes, and then the sound of turbocharged V6 Indycars testing last year at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Any, or none of them, could be Formula One's future.

Genesis G70 vs sport sedan rivals: How it compares on paper

We got our first look at the Genesis G70 sport sedan today. We think it looks good, with enough ties to its fellow Genesises (Geneses?) to further establish the brand and just enough distinction to help it stand out from the crowd. But ah yes, the crowd. Although Genesis didn't release the G70's full spec sheet, it revealed just enough for us to start sizing it up to its future competition. There are certainly others with which to compare (Lexus IS, Cadillac ATS, Alfa Romeo Giulia, Jaguar XE just to name a few), but we decided to take a look at the best sellers and most competitive luxury sport sedans. (And hey, if you like this, we can always do a follow up) So, here we have the Genesis G70 vs BMW 3 Series vs Audi A4 / S4 vs Mercedes-Benz C-Class vs Infiniti Q50. Nothing like a good chart to dig your teeth into on a Friday. Note that we only compared those models that line up with the G70. So, we left out the BMW 320i and Audi A4 Ultra entry level models as well as the Q50 3.0t mid-grade model that's considerably cheaper than the German performance upgrade models we listed. All 0-60 figures are rough estimates based on several sources, models/drivetrains and OEM figures. Related Video: Featured Gallery Genesis G70 vs other sport sedans View 15 Photos Audi BMW Genesis Infiniti Mercedes-Benz Luxury Sedan consumer infiniti q50 audi s4 genesis g70 mercedes-benz c-class bmw 330i bmw 340i

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.