2012 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG Coupe Black Series Driven: The Terrible Teuton Triumphant

AMG’s Tobias Moers is one wicked mother, and his cars aren’t far behind. Moers is head of vehicle development for AMG. A classic German performance engineer—stern, compact build—he likes his machinery loud and sideways. Shortly after driving the new C63 AMG Black Series at its Laguna Seca press launch—nine hot laps only, and street driving verboten—your author walked up to Moers and asked him his official title. He stared back blankly, as if I had just told him my name was Big Bird. “I’ve had different titles,” Moers said, arms crossed. “Frankenstein was one of them.” No smile.

Witness the monster the doctor has birthed: Like all Black Series cars, the C63 Black is effectively a standard Mercedes—in this case a C63 coupe—sent to hell and back. The latter’s basic profile remains, but virtually all of the mechanical bits have been tweaked or replaced in the name of track velocity. Forged 19-inch, nine-inch-wide alloys sit inside fattened front fenders; the rear rollers live beneath gargantuan flares and are another half-inch wider. Front track is 1.6 inches greater than on a standard C63 and rear track blossoms by 3.1 inches. Stiffened springs, fatter anti-roll bars, and adjustable spring perches are mated to two-way adjustable dampers. Thanks in part to the lightweight wheels and the lack of a back seat—it’s available if you want it—curb weight drops by a claimed 235 pounds, to around 3700.

I’ll Show You Crazy . . .

Still, the truly insane bit lives under the hood. Like the ordinary C63, the Black Series uses a version of AMG’s mad M156 V-8, the same naturally aspirated, 6.2-liter piece that powers the SLS. It’s even closer to the SLS engine here than in its other applications, borrowing—as does the standard C63 with its optional Development Package—the Gullwing’s lighter crankshaft and forged pistons and connecting rods. With a new engine-control unit, it produces 510 hp at 6800 rpm, 59 more than the standard C63, 29 more than Development pack cars, and just 53 horses down on the SLS. The engine now redlines at 7200 rpm, a 400-rpm jump from the regular C63. Torque rises slightly, from 443 to 457 lb-ft, although peak grunt still arrives at 5000 rpm.

The whole mess sounds like a DTM racer that ate a few hundred Chevrolet small-blocks for breakfast. Mercedes says the 0-to-60-mph sprint is accomplished in 4.2 seconds, a claim we weren’t able to verify but are inclined to believe applies only to cars in which two cylinders are breathing all-natural Vermont maple syrup. The car leaves the line like a methed-up ape (Wait, no—3700 pounds? Make that a methed-up studio apartment), and we clocked a basic C63 coupe to 60 in just 3.7 seconds. Top speed is a claimed 186 mph, likely less when equipped with the optional rear wing.

The rest is predictable. In time-honored Mercedes-Benz fashion, there is no clutch pedal on offer, just Stuttgart’s seven-speed MCT automatic. (Twin-clutch ’boxes reportedly cannot handle the M156’s torque.) A slightly larger transmission cooler was installed because the regular C63 tends to go into gearbox limp mode when abused in hot weather. Brake rotors grow just over an inch front and rear. Thin-backed sport seats and red seat belts—the better, presumably, to hide the bloodstains from your vanquished enemies—are standard. The rear half shafts and limited-slip differential were swiped from the heavier E63, the diff given an external, fan-aided cooler.

. . . And You’ll Love It

Mercedes says the package can lap the Nürburgring in 7:43. It looks like undiluted mayhem, or maybe the result of a bad accident involving a race shop and Satan’s school bus. If you do not love it, have the nurse wake you up from your coma. In our short lapping session, the C63 did absolutely nothing wrong. Steering feel is better than any Mercedes in recent memory, hefty and with just the right amount of meaty, big-car feedback. The engine pulls like blazes, with torque everywhere and a righteous, gut-punching thunder-bark gushing from the pipes. The brake pedal is rock-solid, gaining only a hair of travel when the discs get hot.

The chassis is balanced but takes patience to stay ahead of—the Mercedes’ pork is always obvious, and you can induce understeer or oversteer by piling on steering or gobs of throttle at the wrong moment. Moers’s madman handiwork is evident even in the differential, which boasts a whopping 50 percent lock-up on deceleration. Stability during braking and turn-in is thus eye-opening; you can cram the C63 into corners with reckless abandon, DTM fantasies twitching through your toenails, your mistakes all but consequence-free. (Contrast this with the C63’s predecessor, the 2007–08 CLK63 Black Series, a raw behemoth that was both glorious and moderately homicidal at the limit. Fun stuff, right up until it kills you.)

All told, the refinement is the impressive bit—big cars aren’t supposed to be total pussycats when you honk on them. The only real complaint is the seven-speed automatic, which offers a seemingly telepathic Sport mode but reacts so slowly to paddle-shifter commands that you simply stop bothering and let the gearbox shift itself. A car this good should beg your involvement, even if it’s just with buttons.

Black Series models don’t sell in big numbers, but that’s kind of the point—the line, remember, was named after the American Express Centurion card, offered only to those who buy Gulfstreams by the dozen. The CLK63 moved just 399 units in America. The C63 Black is said to be mostly sold out, and Mercedes claims less than 100 will be available stateside, at an estimated price of around $125,000. Pity—this kind of insanity needs to be spread.

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2- or 4-passenger, 2-door coupe

ESTIMATED BASE PRICE: $125,000

ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection

Displacement: 379 cu in, 6208 cc
Power: 510 hp @ 6800 rpm
Torque: 457 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm

TRANSMISSIONS: 7-speed automatic with manual shifting mode

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 108.9 in
Length: 185.3 in
Width: 71.9 in Height: 54.6 in
Curb weight (C/D est): 3800 lb

PERFORMANCE (C/D EST):
Zero to 60 mph: 3.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.0 sec
Top speed: 186 mph

FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST):
EPA city/highway driving: 13/19 mpg

View Photo Gallery PHOTOS (16)

Read more »

2012 BMW 528i Driven: Small DI Turbo Four Makes 5er More Efficient, but Not Better

We’ve been skeptical of claims that direct injection and turbochargers could replace displacement while returning sky-high fuel economy since the beginning. Our observed mileage with many such engines has suggested that potential fuel savings are being overstated, but in fairness, making maximum horsepower takes fuel regardless of the displacement. Our leadfoot, hit-the-redline driving style prioritizes quickness far above efficiency, and we manage to wring less-than-optimal mpg figures out of pretty much anything we drive.

But few small direct-injection engines will have to overcome as much skepticism as BMW’s new turbo four, which replaces one of our favorite engines. Like IHOP with pancakes, BMW does inline-sixes right, and we’re going to miss the naturally aspirated 3.0-liter that this turbo 2.0 supersedes.

The four’s specs are promising. At 240, its horsepower rating matches that of last year’s six, but out-torques it 260 lb-ft to 230. The six was peaky, too, and the four’s torque maximum occurs at lower rpm (1250 versus 2600). We first encountered the quad-pot in the Z4 sDrive28i, where we loved it, finding it an appropriate match for a small roadster. We also came away with much love following a turn in the all-new 2012 328i sedan.

Now Comes the Real Test

This, however, is our first experience with this engine in something large. Few things reveal an engine’s flaws as reliably as increasing its burden, and the 528i is about 700 pounds heavier than the four-cylinder Z4. (Speaking of weight, BMW says the four-cylinder 528 is 22 pounds heavier than the previous model with the inline-six.) Sure enough, we observed some unsavory behavior that we hadn’t noticed before.

When we drove the Z4 with this engine, we noted no letup in the power delivery. In the 5, however, the engine starts to nod off above 5200 rpm or so—although, in fairness, it’s hardly noticeable at speeds lower than 70 mph. We found the car felt much quicker above 100 if we manually shifted the eight-speed auto—the only transmission available in the 528i—well before redline, keeping the engine comfortably on its torque plateau. While the old, six-cylinder 528i might have required a longer wait for the power, it at least delivered it in a smooth, consistent stream.

Given that the outputs of the engines are so similar, we expect that the four-cylinder 528i will match the six’s 0-to-60 sprint of 6.4 seconds, but the wane in power at the top end should cost it a couple of tenths in higher-speed contests. Around town and in traffic, the four-cylinder never left us wanting more grunt. And with eight ratios to choose from, the car easily finds a suitable gear for moderate acceleration at any speed.

What Did You Say to Me? No, Really—I Could Barely Hear You

To our ear, most four-cylinders speak with one of two voices: wimpy or pissed off (the latter frequently in part because they’re still a little wimpy). In the Z4, BMW’s new 2.0-liter falls in the pissed-off camp. For the engine’s installation in the 5-series, BMW apparently made no audio breakthroughs, and went with the more fitting weaker soundtrack. (We can’t imagine too many 5-series buyers desiring a car that sounds like a Honda Civic Si—or the rorty, rude Z4.) There’s a slightly inappropriate-for-a-luxury-car drone at startup and idle. The 5er keeps engine noise muted regardless of cylinder count, though, and the four-cylinder becomes a distant hum under throttle in the same way that any other 5’s engine does. We imagine buyers will hardly notice the startup noise after their first few days with the car.

As 528i intenders are highly unlikely to be BMW’s most enthusiastic customers, they’ll probably love what we hate about the car: the steering. It’s smooth and comfortably weighty, and won’t disturb serene drives with any pesky feedback. With such an elegant interior and a supple, quiet ride, the 5 is a stupendous mileage accumulator, and the turbo four does well with the other sort of mileage, too, at least according to the EPA. Fuel economy increases from 22 mpg city/32 highway with last year’s naturally aspirated six to 23/34. Opt for the newly available all-wheel-drive 528i xDrive, and you drop back to 22/32. We’ll bring our observations once we get an example to test.

In spite of its autobahn deficiencies, the 528i works fine as a daily-use luxury cruiser for shoppers on a budget. At a starting price of $47,575, it saves buyers about $5500 over the cheapest 535i. All-wheel drive adds $2300. We didn’t get a chance to drive that version, but its additional 200 pounds or so will surely make the engine’s high-rpm weakness more apparent at lower speeds. If we needed all-wheel drive at this price, we’d be looking at a 3-series or X3 with the turbo six, or a Saab 9-4X. (Just kidding, we’d never buy a 9-4X.)

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan

BASE PRICE: $47,575

ENGINE TYPE: turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection

Displacement: 122 cu in, 1997 cc
Power: 240 hp @ 5000 rpm
Torque: 260 lb-ft @ 1250 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 8-speed automatic with manual shifting mode

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 116.9 in
Length: 193.1 in
Width: 73.2 in Height: 57.6 in
Curb weight (C/D est): 3950 lbPERFORMANCE (C/D EST):
Zero to 60 mph: 6.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.1
Top speed (mfr's claim): 130–155 mph

FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 23/34 mpg

View Photo Gallery PHOTOS (49)

Read more »

2012 Honda CR-V Driven: Less Ugly, But Also Slower

Compact crossovers are a little like toothbrushes. They perform a necessary function, but they’re rarely exciting. Everybody needs a toothbrush, though, and toothbrush manufacturers want to outsell their competitors, so we have wear-indicating bristles, flexible split heads, integrated tongue-and-cheek scrapers, and the like.

Accordingly, much of Honda’s technical presentation on the new CR-V focused on the next-gen mini-ute’s new features, including standard stuff like two info screens, a rearview camera, Bluetooth, and a function that reads incoming text messages from paired phones—assuming said phone is from a short list of BlackBerries or a Droid X, as those are the only devices with which the CR-V can currently communicate. Meanwhile, lesser points like the powertrain and the basic construction of the chassis were only mentioned in passing. Makes sense: Once Colgate nails down the perfect handle cross-section, head shape, and bristle feel, it’s probably going to keep making that same toothbrush. Honda was pretty happy with the outgoing CR-V—and its sales numbers indicated that buyers were, too—and the new CR-V is a lot like the old one.

Hello Again. You Should Have Brought a Friend. Maybe a Turbo

The spec-sheet familiarity begins with the only available engine. It’s the same dual-overhead-cam 2.4-liter inline-four, but now boasts a 5.4-percent reduction in internal friction and a more efficient alternator. These slight changes increase output to 185 hp and 163 lb-ft, bumps of 5 and 2. It’s worth noting that the power peak occurs at 7000 rpm, while the automatic transmission shifts about 300 or so rpm before that. Unless you’re going to lock your CR-V in first around town, don’t expect to feel those extra fillies. You won’t hear them quite as much as before, either, although Honda still has the most pleasing soundtrack in the tiny-truck business. It’s louder than we would expect most crossover buyers to want, but obviously isn’t deterring many—the CR-V is the perennial bestseller in its segment.

Behind that only slightly updated engine is an only slightly updated transmission. Against a market that is swelling with six-speed automatics—not to mention the nine-speed ZF unit on its way for front-drive applications—Honda is sticking with the CR-V’s fiver. Lower-friction internals and lower-viscosity transmission fluid boost efficiency, while a wider ratio spread nudges the CR-V’s fuel-economy ratings higher. Front drivers see their mileage increase from 21/28 city/highway to 23/31, while all-wheel-drive models go from 21/27 to 22/30.

The Snow Falls and Molasses Wins

The downside is that the CR-V, already among the slowest in its class, now needs noticeably more time to get up to cruising speed. A previous-gen car we tested needed 8.7 seconds to get to 60 mph; the new model should log a time right around nine seconds. In first gear, redline resides north of 40 mph; in second, it’s hiding in the 80-mph range. We’ve recently logged about half a dozen complaints about the ratio spread in Chrysler’s rear-drive five-speed—which, we would like Honda to note, is imminently being replaced with an eight-cogger—because of its ludicrous gearing.

While very few people floor it off the line during their morning commute—more people should try it; they’ll be amazed how much more time they have in a day if they don’t drive like they’re dead or waiting to be—there are real-world drawbacks to dog-slow crossovers. Run up on a surprisingly slow truck on the freeway, and you’d better have a long opening behind you in the left lane. When you pop out to pass and give the CR-V the boot, it’s going to need a lot of time to get up to speed. Should you floor it at much more than 60 mph, the trans only drops into third, stranding you around 3500 rpm. At that speed, it feels like you only need two digits to quantify the 2.4-liter’s torque output. Drivers behind you are likely to display two digits of their own. For even greater sluggishness, Honda fits all 2012 CR-Vs with an “Econ” button that dulls throttle response and widens the acceptable window of variation for the cruise and climate control.

In response to criticism for sticking with the five-speed, Honda’s answer was along the lines of Our five is damn good. The customers wanted efficiency gains, we gave them efficiency gains. We appreciate the philosophy of extracting greater efficiencies from existing hardware before creating all-new systems, but we’d like to know how many of those customers also asked for a slower vehicle.

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, front or 4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 5-door wagon

BASE PRICE: $22,000

ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, port fuel injection

Displacement: 144 cu in, 2354 cc
Power: 185 hp @ 7000 rpm
Torque: 163 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm

TRANSMISSIONS: 5-speed automatic

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 103.1 in
Length: 178.3 in
Width: 71.6 in
Height: 64.7 in (FWD), 65.1 in (AWD)
Curb weight (C/D est): 3500 lbPERFORMANCE (C/D EST):
Zero to 60 mph: 9.0 sec
¼-mile: 17.0 sec
Top speed: 117 mph

FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 22–23/30–31 mpg

Continued... PHOTOS (80)

Read more »

Audi e-tron Spyder Concept Driven: It Might Be Love

The cop is clearly pushing his Crown Victoria police interceptor, but he can't lose us—his lights are flashing wildly; he pulls ahead on the straightaways, but we catch up in the corners. Several miles up Mulholland Highway northwest of Los Angeles, he's had enough. The officer yanks his cruiser around and blocks the road. Our drive is over. But as we get out of the car, he flashes a big smile. This time, the law is on our side.

The police are here at Audi’s behest to secure the road and make sure our ride, the tangible offspring of a project worth between $6.5 and $13 million, will remain unscathed by fellow motorists. The e-tron Spyder debuted at last year's Paris auto show alongside the Quattro concept—which we’ve also driven. The Quattro is based on a shortened RS5 platform and powered by a 2.5-liter turbo, but the e-tron Spyder rides on a bespoke chassis that borrows only its rear suspension and brakes from another Audi, the R8. Far from being art for art's sake, however, it showcases technical and stylistic approaches that could define future Audis.

Diesel and Electric (And Could Pull Like a Locomotive)

One of these ideas is demonstrated by the powertrain: The e-tron Spyder drives its rear wheels with a midship-mounted, twin-turbocharged diesel V-6 good for 300 hp and 480 lb-ft of torque. The front wheels are powered by a pair of electric motors that combine for 88 hp and 260 lb-ft. Audi is hopeful that, despite their extra weight, electric motors employed in this manner will make cars more agile, as they can apply torque with extreme precision and celerity.

On paper, the target weight of this prototype is 3197 pounds and its transmission is a seven-speed dual-clutch. In reality, the e-tron Spyder weighs 3638 pounds and has a CVT. In order to not fry the rubber-band box, Audi has reduced the diesel's torque to 280 lb-ft. Additionally, the car is limited to around 40 mph—the aluminum wheels with their carbon insets are, after all, one-off show pieces—which explains the Crown Vic was working so hard. Even with such dramatic handicaps, the e-tron Spyder is rewarding. This sleek concept launches like a brute, the thrust accompanied by the deep growl of the diesel and the hiss of the turbochargers.

We also tried out electric operation, which was by no means sluggish but not nearly as impressive as diesel mode. Combined diesel and electric propulsion wasn’t an option—it’s a concept car; that we were allowed to drive it at all is unusual. We loved it with the diesel alone, and can only guess how this car would scoot in theoretical production trim—more than 400 pounds lighter, with the diesel at full power and the extra assistance of the torquey electric motors. Audi says it could do 0 to 62 mph in 4.4 seconds and reach a governed top speed of 155 mph. Why not?

If Only We Could Go Faster

The chassis matches the powertrain's performance. It’s agile, neutral, and remains entirely composed even during aggressive cornering in Mulholland’s tightest bends, where 40 mph is actually pushing it. The electric power steering is a bit too effortless, but again, this is a prototype—that some Teamster isn’t kneeling alongside it jerking the wheels back and forth to affect directional changes on the showstand is something of a novelty. As we exit the ultra-tight corners on Mulholland and push the accelerator, the vicious pull forward repeatedly plasters a smile on our faces.

Beyond the diesel-electric powertrain, the e-tron Spyder points the way to a possible mid-engine sports car positioned between the TT and the R8. The elegant shape, penned by Wolfram Luchner (who is now at GM), is one of several ideas for an expansion of Audi’s lineup, but stands among our favorite. We do, however, doubt that cops will be all smiles if we ever encounter them in the real thing.

View Photo Gallery PHOTOS (59)

Read more »