2015 Mercedes-benz Glk-class Glk350 Rwd on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2018 Lincoln Navigator vs luxury SUV rivals: How it compares on paper

The all-new 2018 Lincoln Navigator is an impressive, luxury-lined beast. However, while its Black Label interior stood out most during our first drive of the new Navigator, it also seemed pretty clear that much of this full-size SUV was superior to the competition in a number of fundamental ways. Its Raptor-sourced 3.5-liter V6 had class-leading power for one, and its third-row seat seemed as spacious and comfortable as its rivals' are cramped and barely usable. To search for your next new vehicle, try Autoblog' s Car Finder. Yet, I wanted to take a closer look at how the Navigator fully compares on paper to its competitors - especially the Cadillac Escalade with which it most directly competes. The below spreadsheet should tell the whole story, but as you can see, there's an awful lot of class-leading green highlighter in the Navigator's column. The cargo volume and third-row legroom numbers are particularly telling, with the latter actually going up to 42.3 inches when you slide the second-row fully forward. Now, a few things to note about the above spreadsheet. The GLS-Class is also available as the GLS 550, which boasts a 4.7-liter V8 that just comes up short to the Navigator with 449 horsepower but has to deal with only 5,578 pounds. Its $94,950 price tag is comparable to the Navigator Black Label. Much of the LX 570's information is also applicable to the Toyota Land Cruiser, which, badge aside, could certainly be considered a member of this segment given its feature content and still-hefty price tag. It has better ground clearance and approach/departure angles than its Lexus sibling, along with an as-indicated lower price. Much of the Escalade's information also applies to the GMC Yukon Denali, while the Infiniti QX80 is applicable to the Nissan Armada. Related Video: Cadillac Infiniti Lexus Lincoln Mercedes-Benz SUV Luxury Off-Road Vehicles consumer lincoln navigator

McLaren, Red Bull and Ferrari call for unfreezing F1 engines

Formula One is a hugely expensive sport. Not only do you have enormous salaries and logistical expenses, as you would in any other sport, but each team also spends huge sums developing their own chassis from the ground up – and so too do the participating automakers in developing the engines. One of the ways the series organizers mitigate those costs is by freezing development. So once the new crop of V6 turbo hybrid powertrains were developed, that was it. But now three of the of the sport's leading teams are calling on the FIA to unfreeze engine development. Their reason? Unfair advantage. There's little question that Mercedes did the best job of developing its "power unit" to meet the new regulations that took effect at the beginning of this past season. That's how the Mercedes team won all but three of the grands prix this season and finished with at least one car on the podium at every single race. It's also a big part of how the teams that bought their engines from Mercedes this season managed to consistently outperform the other non-works-supported teams. That clear advantage is why Red Bull, Ferrari and now McLaren are calling for engine development to be unfrozen. Their argument is that, under the current locked-down status quo, their engine suppliers (Renault, Ferrari and Honda, respectively) cannot possibly catch up. So unless the FIA and Formula One Management want the next few seasons to be the kind of absolute blow-outs that this past season was, these leading teams argue, the powers that be are going to have to make some changes. For its part, Mercedes naturally counters that unfreezing engine development would send costs spiraling out of control. But then of course it stands to lose the most by re-opening engine development. If those three teams, however, closely intertwined as they are with the three other engine suppliers participating in next year's championship, manage to solicit enough support from the other customer teams and bring the matter to a vote, Mercedes may very well find itself out-numbered. News Source: ESPNImage Credit: Patrick Baz/AFP/Getty Motorsports Ferrari McLaren Mercedes-Benz F1 engine

Trump calls Germans 'very bad,' vows to stop their car sales in US

TAORMINA, Italy -Talks between President Trump and other leaders of the world's rich nations at the G7 summit on Friday were expected to be "robust" and "challenging" after he had lambasted NATO allies and condemned Germans as "very bad" for their trade policies. Trump's confrontational remarks in Brussels, on the eve of the two-day summit in the Mediterranean resort town of Taormina, cast a pall over a meeting at which America's partners had hoped to coax him into softening his stances on trade and climate change. According to German media reports, Trump condemned Germany as "very bad" for its trade policies in a meeting with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, signaling he might take steps to limit sales of German cars in the United States. "The Germans are bad, very bad," he reportedly told Juncker. "Look at the millions of cars that they're selling in the USA. Horrible. We're gonna stop that." White House economic adviser Gary Cohn on Friday confirmed the reports. "He said they're very bad on trade, but he doesn't have a problem with Germany." Cohn said Trump had pointed out during the meeting that his father had German roots in order to underscore the message that he had nothing against the German people. Trump's spokesman Sean Spicer said Trump had "tremendous respect" for Germany and had only complained about unfair trade practices in the meeting. Juncker called the reports in Spiegel Online and Sueddeutsche Zeitung exaggerated. The reports translated "bad" with the German word "boese," which can also mean "evil," leading to confusion when English-language media translated the German reports back into English. "The record has to be set straight," Juncker said, noting that the translation issue had exaggerated the seriousness of what Trump had said. "It's not true that the president took an aggressive approach when it came to the German trade surplus." "He said, like others have, that (the United States) has a problem with the German surplus. So he was not aggressive at all," Juncker added. In January, Trump threatened to slap a 35 percent tax on German auto imports. "If you want to build cars in the world, then I wish you all the best. You can build cars for the United States, but for every car that comes to the USA, you will pay 35 percent tax," he said. "I would tell BMW that if you are building a factory in Mexico and plan to sell cars to the USA, without a 35 percent tax, then you can forget that." Last year, the U.S.