Special Car, auto, cars, vehicles

In the white-hot crucible of the European mainstream market, products like the Ford Ka, Fiesta, Focus and Mondeo, and the Opel Agila, Corsa, Astra and Insignia hold their own against rivals from Germany, France, Italy, and -- yes -- Japan and Korea. More importantly, these Fords and GMs compete against VWs, Renaults, Fiats, Toyotas and Hyundais on style, performance, handling, efficiency, innovation, not price.

Both Ford and GM have been quick to move into emerging markets. GM has a 10 per cent share of the Chinese market -- second only to Volkswagen, the first western automaker to move into manufacturing in China -- and last year sold twice as many Buicks there as it did in the U.S. GM also has 20 percent of the Russian market, 22 percent of the Brazilian market, and last year its sales growth in India outstripped that of Hyundai. Before the global economic collapse emerging markets accounted for 35 percent of total GM sales, and helped boost total GM sales outside of North America to 65 percent of the company's total volume earlier this year.

Ford lags behind GM in China and India, but it was one of the first western automakers to invest in Russia, establishing an assembly plant near St. Petersburg in 1999. It now has 10 percent of the Russian market, selling more cars in a week than it did in a year when it started. Emerging markets now account for about 25 percent of Ford's global sales.

Before the bozos on Wall St. drove the world's economy off a cliff, both Ford and GM planned further significant investments in emerging markets. Here's why: In the U.S. there are more than 900 cars and personal use trucks already on the road for every 1000 people of driving age. In Europe, where cities are more densely packed, and there is a more effective public transport network, there are still more than 600 vehicles per 1000 people of driving age. But in Russia, that number is under 200, Brazil it's about 130, China 30, and India under ten.

With those four countries alone accounting for about 42 percent of the world's population, the growth potential is huge. Assuming the global economy gets back on track, China will soon surpass the U.S. as the world's largest auto market, and Russia will surpass Germany as Europe's largest within a few years. In Brazil, sales have been growing at the rate of 30 percent a year for the past two years.

Apart from the fact the Ford and GM experiences overseas suggests the senior management do know something about running an auto business, and the companies do know how to build competitive products, all this raises some interesting questions.

First, if Ford and GM can be competitive in other markets around the world, why not here in the U.S.? What special factors are preventing Ford and GM performing here more like they do in the rest of the world? Is it solely a problem with management? Unions? Product? Or is it a wider structural problem with the U.S. economy?

And then there's this: If they can survive the impact of the economic meltdown on their North American operations, Ford and GM currently look well positioned to profit from the explosive growth in demand for cars and trucks in emerging markets over the coming decade or so. So does it make sense to just let them die?

2007-2008 Acura TL Type-S -- The new for '09 TL is a technical advancement over the outgoing model. It offers a smidge more power, outstanding infotainment offerings, optional all-wheel drive, and more room in back. But it's so hideous-looking, I could never bring myself to buy one. The previous gen TL is just the opposite; one of the most attractive sedans on the market, and the Type-S is the performance version. At launch, we called it "A Japanese Alfa Romeo." Great V-6, good electronics (first car I ever tested with Bluetooth), and high quality. Shop now and you may still find a fresh one.

C5 Corvette Z06 -- Many Corvette guys I know have to have the latest and greatest. Now that the C6-series Z06 (and ZR-1) are in the marketplace, people are offing their previous gen Z06s. Sure, they have about the same horsepower as a base C6 -- but the price should be half or less. You have to be careful here; they are made to be run hard, and often are. And the first of them had some piston problems as I recall. But a lot of hardcore Vette types really care for their cars, and don't beat them to death. The newest of them is five years old now; find one that's lived a good life, and you'll have something special.

Volkswagen Phaeton -- The right car wearing the wrong badge. VW wanted to see how far upmarket it could take the brand in this country, and went one step too far. That takes nothing away from the greatness of the machine. They are fabulously engineered, looks the business, shared a lot of stuff with the Audi A8, and are fine driving cars. A bit of an odd duck as it came and went so fast, but its not an orphan as VW is still around, and will continue to be. If you want a top drawer luxury sedan for near econobox money, find a clean Phaeton, and enjoy flying first class for a coach fare.

2004-2008 Ford F-150 -- Even though fuel prices have halved in the last 90 days, the truck market is still chilly. Every time a new version of a high volume model, like the F-150, comes out, the latest-and-greatest crowd dumps their old ones. Between this phenom, and lots of lease turn-ins, means that a two, three, or four-year old F-150 can be a great deal if that's the vehicle you need. Bargain hard - there are many new choose from.

1990-2002 Mercedes-Benz SL-Class -- Even the newest of these falls well outside the three-year lease turn-in window, but they are superbly engineered machines. Although not a metal retractable hardtop, the SL's top is a one-touch unit. Engineered and built to high standards, these "Sacco era" SLs will run long miles without trouble. They don't have as many power goodies as the new ones, but they are great to drive, and still look good to many eyes, including mine. Get the latest, lowest mile example you can find, and it'll still be cheaper than a new four-banger Camry.

What's on your Great Deals list?

A few weeks ago, it was announced that several key players in the Corvette's existence will be "taking retirement" as of November 1. They are Vehicle Line Executive Tom Wallace (program director and chief engineer), Gary Claudio (Corvette marketing guy), Ron Meegan (Chief Engineer for the LS3, LS7 and LS9 engines), and John Heinricy, (serious car dude, sports car racer, former C4 Chief Engineer, etc.).

Previous VLE David Hill brought us the C5 and C6, and although the ZR1 came to market under Wallace's watch, we never really saw what he could or would do with America's Sportscar. But he sure asked a lot of questions, and the right ones: "Should we do a mid-engined car? Should we develop a dual-clutch gearbox? Should we make the car lighter? What sort of special editions should we do?" Claudio exhibited the typical, never ending exuberance you'd expect of a marketing guy, but he loved his car and his job. Meegan told me things about engines I never new, flew the flag overhead valves, and helped the latest versions of the Small-Block Chevy V-8 become as sophisticated as they have. Heinricy is a legit performance car and racing legend, surely with Bowtie logos tatoo'd on his heart.

Will the Corvette live on? Yes, but there's no question that its development will stutter, and likely be pushed back several years beyond the C7's projected 2012 launch date. Ongoing C6 technology development and such will slow, crawl, or may even stop altogether for the foreseeable future.

I remember when Zora Arkus Duntov handed the Corvette over to his replacement, Dave McLellan, everyone said the Vette was dead. But McLellan brought us the C4, impressive for its day, with a serious focus on handling that had never been achieved before.

The new VLE for Corvette is Gene Stefanyshyn, who was GM's Global Rear Wheel Drive Vehicle Line Executive, and a major player in the engineering of the 2010 Camaro. I know Gene; he's a darn decent guy and a smart engineer who knows how to bring home a development program. But does he have the heat for this assignment? Does he have the vision (and will he have the team and the budget) to take the car forward? This remains to be seen. It also disturbs me that, as I understand it, Stefanyshyn will retain responsibility for other performance nameplates, and not be focused solely on the Vette, as have been his predecessors most of the time.

While we're at it, I say the Corvette really needs to leap ahead from a design and technology standpoint. Stop copying Ferrari (360 Modena headlights, the ZR1's peek-a-boo engine window just like on the F430, except it looks down on a piece of plastic, not the actual engine or blower). Give the car a world class cabin. And don't make its butt any bigger than it already is. Celebrate the Vette's wonderful history without being beholden to it. Don't follow, Gene - lead.

I for one hope things right themselves, and the Vette can continue on the road is has blazed for 55 years. But there are bumps ahead, and the ride will be rough for a while.

By now most of you have undoubtedly read fellow MT’er Ron Kiino’s first test. At the track, the new Nissan blazed through our performance trials: 0 to 60 mph in 4.7 seconds, the quarter in 13.3 at 105.7 mph, maximum lateral grip a face-distorting 0.99 g. So, yes, the numbers are there.

What the stats don’t reveal, though, is how the Z has moved upscale. The new cockpit is gorgeous, with rich-looking soft-touch materials and mostly astute ergonomics. Nissan’s navigation system (optional) is one of the best on the market, both intuitive to set up and easy to interpret. The seats are terrific, proffering deep bolsters and trimmed in a grippy, good-looking cloth (leather is available). Big thumbs-up to Nissan’s designers for getting the seat controls right, too: fore-aft and seatback recline are power-controlled, while seat-cushion angles are manually configurable via two large, well-placed rotary knobs. As before, the primary gauges move up or down with the steering wheel (though the wheel doesn’t telescope), ensuring that the dials are always easily visible.

I noted only a couple of minor interior quibbles. The temp and fuel-quantity displays on the left of the dash are a row of orange LEDs that wash out in bright sunlight (you have to use the shadow of your hand to read them). And as far as I can tell, if you want to connect the available iPod interface cord in the center console, you can’t re-insert the plastic cupholder tray that normally fits there. Nor is there any convenient place to stow the tray when it’s removed. Apparently, you cannot enjoy your iPod and a chai soy latte, too (actually, is that ever possible?).

My dash across Mulholland confirmed the Z’s massive grip levels and revealed its excellent steering feel. I also got to play with the car’s innovative "SynchroRev Match" feature, which blips the throttle automatically whenever you move the gear lever for a downshift. If you’re accustomed to doing your own heel-and-toe downshifting, as I am, it takes a moment or two to break yourself of the habit of moving your right foot while braking for a manual throttle blip. Instead, just keep your foot firmly on the brakes and let SynchroRev Match make you look like Lewis Hamilton. The system works remarkably well, though if you insist on being a shifting purist you can simply turn it off.

The updated VQ six pulls really hard to its 7500-rpm redline, though there’s enough torque on tap (270 pound-feet) to keep the boil on even at lower revs. Yet Nissan still has some work to do on engine refinement; at higher revs, the exhaust gets coarse and you will feel some tingles through the pedals and wheel. Colleague Angus MacKenzie describes the Z’s NVH as “just awful,” but I wouldn’t go that far. True, this is no syrupy BMW six under the hood, but I didn’t mind the engine rasp when gunning hard. Adds a little raw flavor to the driving experience. And at cruise the Z is fine.

I’m impressed by the Z’s solidity. The structure hangs tough in hard corners and remains composed over rough roads. And while the rear tires were clearly fighting to stay planted in every corner -- I could see the traction/stability dash warning firing away -- the electronics didn’t intrude. And I was driving the Touring model. With Sport Package, the Z undoubtedly feels even edgier.

Actually, Trapster is a new, geopositioning-based anti-ticket technology all driving enthusiasts will want to know about. Invented by the Ferrari's owner, computer whiz Pete Tenereillo of San Diego, California (the 599 makes a nice billboard, eh?), Trapster is designed to work with or even replace your radar detector. And it's free.

Here's how Trapster works: First, download the free app to your iPhone 3G, Blackberry, or Garmin/TomTom nav unit (other devices also support Trapster; check the company’s Web site -- www.trapster.com -- for more info). With Trapster installed, simply drive. Spot a radar cop or red-light camera up ahead? Just tap your phone/nav device to report the location of the trap to the Trapster community. Everyone in the MySpace-like social network benefits -- including you. Because Trapster is two-way, traps reported by other Trapster users are automatically called out to you (using voice warnings) whenever you get near them. Trapster monitors your location via the Skyhook Wireless Wi-Fi and cell-tower-location positioning system; the Skyhook info is also enhanced with GPS positioning data.

Where Yogi's deja vu comes in is that, almost 20 years later, Hyundai is not only reenacting Lexus's yellowing battle plan, but using it to do to Lexus what Lexus did to those one-time fat and happy German luxocar builders.

No, Hyundai's Genesis isn't a separate brand as Lexus is. But it's a car so apart from anything the Korean firm is associated with that it might as well be. Like those early Lexi, the Genesis has that same many-luxury-cars-morphed- into-one appearance. The shape is more Andy Williams than Placido Domingo. And of all the Genesis's many impersonated Lexus qualities, the most notable is its steering feel, which replicates the LS's highly oiled, precision-bearing, sensation, spot on.

So, too, the car's silky yet quick acceleration. In V-8-guise (a 290-horse V-6 comes standard), 60 mph can be dialed up in as little as 5.0 sec. Yet, even in ordinary go-with-the-flow acceleration, the Genesis's all-new 4.6L, 368-hp V-8 (*using premium fuel raises output to 375 hp and 333 lb-ft) is such a refined sweetheart that Deutschland's and Japan's brightest engineers ought to be sensing the hot breath of their South Korean counterparts on their necks right about now.

Does the Genesis have what it takes to score the 2009 Motor Trend Car of the Year honors? Find out on Nov. 18

I was thinking about this over the weekend as I tiptoed a Land Rover LR3 through a forest ablaze with fall color on the 8000 acre Biltmore Estate in North Carolina. Tricky climbs, heart-stopping descents, deep waterholes, nasty ruts, chassis-twisting undulations: It was a walk in the park for the LR3, our 2005 Sport/Utility of the Year winner.

I learned to drive in an early 1960s Land Rover Series II with about a million miles on the clock and no synchro on first or second gears. It went damn near anywhere, that old Landie, but it was a visceral ride; all sweat and muscle when the going got tough. In the LR3, Land Rover's impressive Terrain Response System, which electronically links all the vehicle sub-systems -- suspension, differentials, throttle, transmission, braking -- and optimizes them to suit the surface you select from a menu on the center console, does most of the heavy lifting.

One thing hasn't changed, though: Although you might be travelling at little more than walking pace, serious off-roading is driving every bit as technical and challenging as hot-lapping a racetrack. You're constantly thinking about the physics at work in the interplay between vehicle and surface; always aiming to place each wheel with millimetric accuracy. The most notable difference is that, if you make a mistake off-roading, you usually have a lot more time to think about it as the consequences unfold before you in slow motion.

The Land Rover LR3 is a lot like a Porsche 911: Function has been transcended by fashion. Many owners buy the style or the badge rather than the ability; few have any real idea what their vehicle can do, and fewer still have gotten anywhere near the limits of its performance. Demonstrating to folks what the Land Rover badge really means is the idea behind the Land Rover Experience Driving School.

The Land Rover Experience Driving School at Biltmore Estate (it uses land around the stunning 250-room Biltmore House built by George W. Vanderbilt in the late 1800s) is one of four in North America. The others are in Manchester Village,Vermont, Carmel, California, and Montebello, Quebec. The schools offer everything from one-hour tasters for people who have never ventured off the blacktop, to full-day advanced winch-and-recovery techniques for those who understand that a four-wheel-drive vehicle, however accomplished, does not transcend the laws of physics.

As we noted during this year's Sport/Utility of the Year evaluation, the term SUV is now applied to everything from high-riding hot-rods (BMW X6, Infiniti FX) to 21st-century riffs on the traditional full-size station wagon (Ford Flex, Chevy Traverse). Form following marketing, I guess. Like a track day in a Porsche 911, my drive in the Land Rover LR3 at Biltmore Estate was a welcome reminder of a deeper truth, however: Form still follows function.

The Fit is a ball to drive. The 1.5L four-cylinder, breathing via VTEC, spins to its 6600-rpm power peak (117 hp) like a puppy on the loose, urging the Fit from 0 to 60 mph in 8.3 sec. Sports-car thrust it isn't, but the Fit is so happy at its work you almost don't care. The five-speed manual (a five-speed auto with paddles is optional) works better than units in cars costing far more; it flicks through its gates with a light touch. Clutch takeup is syrup-smooth.

You won't mistake the Fit for a Porsche, but on the twisty stuff you won't feel let down, either. The diminutive, 16-in. 185/55 tires hang on with 0.81 g of grip -- nipping on the new Mazda6 GT and the Audi A4 -- and steering forces build up nicely through the wheel. Stopping is the Fit's weakest performance parameter; the brakes need 138 ft for 60-to-0-mph stops.

Fuel economy is down a bit from the previous model but still checks in at 27/33 mpg city/highway. Not bad considering there's room for four adults (even five for short trips) plus "magic" rear seats that effortlessly fold down -- creating a huge flat cargo floor (and nearly 60 cu ft of room).

Does the Honda Fit have what it takes to be the 2009 Motor Trend Car of the Year? Find out on Nov. 18.

Photography by Brian Vance and Julia LaPalme