How to save money on car repairs: 4 tips

The wise mechanic says: Avoiding the need for repairs is the best way to save money on repairs. Here are a few tips and tidbits along those lines:
* Parking brake on first -
It’s a small thing – but could save you a great deal of money. By putting the parking brake on before you put the gear shift lever into Park (or a manual transmission into Reverse – or whatever) you avoid using the transmission to hold the car’s weight in place. You use the car’s brakes instead – as the Motor Gods intended. Many people make the mistake of putting the transmission into Park first – then engaging the parking brake. This may assure the car stays put – but it also assures tremendous loading of the transmission – which isn’t good for it. Which ultimately means, not good for you.
* Idle it with the clutch out –  
Want to do your manual transmission a favor? When you first start the car in the morning, ease the clutch out right after you start the engine – and put the trans in neutral (keeping your foot on the brake pedal, obviously). Why do this? With the engine running and the clutch out, the transmission is engaged (connected to the engine) and the gears inside are turning – which will coat them with fresh lube and also speed their warm-up. This will reduce wear and tear and improve driveability on cold days. Also, it will take pressure of the clutch/pressure plate/pilot bearing – which should increase the life expectancy of those parts. Even when the car is fully warmed-up, try to avoid prolonged periods of clutch disengagement. When you roll up to a red light, put the trans in neutral and let the clutch out until the light goes green – and it’s time to get going again. Don’t sit at the light for five minutes with your left foot pressing the clutch to the floor.
Your car will thank you for your consideration.
* Battery disconnect switch -
If you have a vehicle that sits for weeks at a time without being driven, you might want to look into a disconnect switch for the battery. This lets you “turn off” the battery, without having to do more than pop the hood and turn a knob/handle (the one you installed on the battery’s cable terminal). If you don’t do this – and there’s even a slight current draw from the car’s systems – the battery will likely be be either dead or low next time you use the car. Dead will be obvious, but low will not be – for awhile. However, over time, your battery’s life will likely be cut short. Excessive discharge-recharge cycles are the reason why. Maintaining a battery at or close to peak charge is one of the keys to long battery life. And could save you a tidy sum in premature $100-plus replacement batteries.
 * Vacuum caps on grease fittings -
You’re supposed to make sure a grease fitting is clean before attempting to shoot fresh grease in – otherwise you’ll also shoot some fresh dirt in, too. A simple – and cheap – way to keep grease nipples clean (and free of rust) is to slip a rubber vacuum cap onto the nipple after each servicing. You can buy vacuum caps for next to nothing at most any auto parts store. Find the size you need – and buy a handful. Next time you’re greasing the ball joints, slip a cap onto the nipple after you’ve finished. It’ll keep crud off the nipple – and make the next time that much easier. This also works well on threaded shock absorber studs, too. By covering up the threads, you’ll have a much easier time turning out the bolt next time you need to replace the shocks – because the threads won’t have rusted up as badly. Maybe not even at all.
* Use a syringe to suck out brake/clutch reservoir fluid - 
Most modern cars with manual transmissions have hydraulic-assist clutches, with a small reservoir of fluid (brake fluid) that should be periodically changed out. And of course, all cars have hydraulic-assist brakes, with another reservoir of fluid (also brake fluid)  that should be periodically changed out. If you don’t do this, the fluid gets contaminated/degrades – and that will eventually lead to expensive problems. You can change all the fluid at once, by bleeding the system – but this may require tools/skills you haven’t got – in particular, if the car has anti-lock brakes (ABS).  
But if you have a syringe and a catch can, you can remove a third to half or more of the fluid without removing a single bolt or using a single tool. Just open the top of the reservoir and draw out fluid – being careful not to expose the little holes at the bottom of the reservoir (or you’ll let air into the system and then you will have to bleed the entire system). Then top off with fresh fluid to the proper level. If you do this a couple of times (takes about five minutes per time) you’ll have effectively replaced most of the fluid within the system.
It’s an almost no-cost, no-tool and no-skill way to keep brake/clutch fluid reasonably fresh without having to actually bleed the system – or pay someone else to do it.


Please bookmark us

4 Ways To Keep Your Car Warm In Winter

You think it’s hard on you when it’s 10 degrees outside?
Think about your car.
You may feel cold. Your car is cold. If it’s 10 degrees outside, that’s the temperature of your car. Its engine. The oil in the engine. Everything else, too. Now imagine being subjected to sudden extremes of pressure, friction and rapid heating. Hammered by explosions, bathed in frigid oil. From stationary to more than a thousand up and down cycles every 60 seconds – and that’s just at idle. To even approximate this in human terms, you’d need to do something like jump into Lake Michigan buck naked in January – and breaststroke like Michael Phelps without showing any signs of strain.
I am grateful I’m not a piston… .
And your car will be grateful if you’re kind to it when it’s cold. Gratefulness that will be expressed in longer life – and fewer problems during that life. Here’s what you can do:
* Park inside, if you can -
My father-in-law has a two car garage… full of  garage sale junk. His cars were parked outside. I finally nagged him into clearing out the junk, so his cars could stay indoors – where it’s 15-20 degrees warmer on a 20 degree day outside by dint of being inside – and enclosed. Subjecting a car to cold start conditions – among the most abusive conditions a car typically experiences – is much less abusive when it’s not quite so cold. The car’s parts will warm up faster, too – which is better for them – and for you (the heater/defroster gets going more quickly). Plus, you won’t have to chisel your way into the car with an ice-pick and scraper.
* Get a block (or radiator) heater if you have to park outside -
In meat locker areas – the places where it gets really cold (the negative numbers) – the locals know that without a block heater, their car might not turn over tomorrow morning – much less actually start. In extreme cold, battery power may be half what it would be at room temperature – and that cold-gimped battery is trying to turn over a reciprocating assembly that’s bathed in cold-congealed oil. During WWII, the Germans resorted to building fires underneath their tanks to try to keep them start-viable in -30 conditions. The more technologically sophisticated (and safer) approach is to use a block heater – typically, an electrically heated magnetic pad that you slap onto the oil pan – and plug into a standard household outlet. There are variations on the concept – such as a heating element that you insert into the dipstick – or the radiator. But the idea is always the same: Keep the temperature of the engine from descending to absolute zero – well, whatever the outside temperature happens to be.
* Use a battery tender -
As already mentioned, winter is very hard on car batteries. It takes more juice to start up when it’s really cold – and in really cold weather, the battery has less juice to work with. One easy way to make life easier for your car’s battery – and make your car easier to start – is to maintain the battery’s charge by hooking it up to a tender when the vehicle is not in use. These cost about $30 and work automatically. All you have to do is install the plug-in connecter pigtail (which connects to your battery’s positive and negative terminals) then plug the other end into a wall outlet (or extension cord) when the car’s not in use. The tender will gently recharge the battery, if it’s low – and maintain the charge – so that when you get up tomorrow morning, there’ll be plenty of juice on tap to get you rolling – instead of calling AAA.
* Use the lowest recommended/allowable viscosity (thinner) oil during the winter -
Many new cars already use very “thin” oil – 0W-20, for instance vs. 10W-30 in years past. This is done for two related reasons: Modern engines are put together with very tight tolerances – and car companies want to extract as much fuel efficiency as they can from their engines. Lighter/thinner oils flow more readily (especially when it’s very cold) and less friction equals better gas mileage. Check your owner’s manual and see what’s allowed. If it’s ok to use a 0W-20 vs. a 5W-20 (meaning, it won’t affect your warranty coverage) go with the lower (thinner) oil during the cold season. Older cars (pre-’90s stuff, generally)  can really benefit from going lower because they often started out much higher (10W-40, etc.). Many – most – of the “0″ weight oils on the market are also either semi or full synthetic – which adds another layer of benefit. Synthetics have better flow characteristics at extremes of temperature (cold as well as hot) and you can also extend change intervals significantly (5,000 miles or more vs. the old once every 3k).
Throw it in the Woods?

Please bookmark us

2014 Chevrolet Corvette Revealed

Please bookmark us

2013 Nissan Sentra Review

The redesigned 2013 Sentra is a bigger car, objectively a much nicer car  – and without question a much more fuel efficient car – than the previous Sentra.
But is it a more appealing car than the smaller and less fuel efficient – but more powerful and sportier driving – car it replaces?
That is the question.
And the answer depends on what you’re looking for.
WHAT IT IS
The Sentra has traditionally been a sporty compact sedan – and thus, a distinct alternative to economy-minded  compact sedans like the Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic.
But rising fuel prices – and rising government fuel-efficiency mandates – have put pressure on all automakers to put gas mileage uber alles.
Thus, the bigger-for-’13 Sentra comes with a smaller engine – and less horsepower – but also with a 40 MPG (highway) rating. That’s something the previous Sentra never came close to delivering – unless its engine wasn’t running.
But there’s no performance minded SE-R package – at the time of this review, at least – while there is an FE+ fuel economy package that includes low rolling resistance tires and aerodynamic aids to squeeze as many MPGs (rather than HPs) as possible out of a gallon of ethanol-adulterated “gas.”
Prices start at $15,990 for the base S model with six-speed manual transmission.
A range-topping SL with continuously variable (CVT) automatic transmission starts at $19,820.
The max-effort 40 MPG Sentra FE+ (also with CVT)  starts at $17,770.
All Sentras are FWD.
WHAT’S GOOD
Big enough on the inside to be a family car – if your family isn’t the Duggar family.
Nice enough to not be just another economy car.
A-plus fuel economy – with the CVT transmission.
2013 model starts out $440 lower than 2012 model.
WHAT’S NOT SO GOOD
No longer a sporty car.
C- acceleration with the CVT transmission.
B+ gas mileage with the limited-availability manual transmission.
UNDER THE HOOD
The ’13 Sentra is upsized – but there’s a downsized engine under the hood: 1.8 liters (and 130 hp) vs. 2.0 liters (and 140 hp) previously. This is the same basic engine that’s used in the smaller – and lighter – Versa.
A six-speed manual transmission is standard – but only in base S trim Sentras. All other trims come only with a continuously variable (CVT) automatic, which can be ordered as an a la carte extra for $1,330 with the base S trim.
Even though the new larger model weighs slightly less than the previous model (2,822 lbs. vs. 2,906 last year) the loss of engine displacement – and hp – is evident when the accelerator pedal is depressed: Zero to 60 now takes 9.7 seconds. That’s about half-a-second slower than the old Sentra.
In the car’s defense, several other cars in this segment – among them, the new Dodge Dart and also the Mazda3 – are equally lethargic. However, these two offer engine upgrades that cut the zero to 60 time down into the mid-low 8s – and in the case of the Mazda3, while still delivering exceptionally high gas mileage. The Sentra – so far – comes only with the overtasked 1.8 liter engine – too little engine for too much car.
You’re also virtually forced to buy the CVT automatic, too – at least, if you want something more than a base S trim Sentra – or some of the options that aren’t available in base S trim Sentras, such as the Driver’s package, which adds rear disc brakes (base S trims have drum rear brakes) or the upgrade 17 inch wheel package. These are available only in step-up SV and SR Sentras – and the top-of-the-line SL – which come only with the CVT.
For sport-minded buyers, that’s bad news.
For economy-minded buyers, the good news is the Sentra’s 30 city, 39 highway MPG rating (40 MPG, if you order the FE+ enhancements). This is a dramatic improvement over the 2012 Sentra, which topped out at 27 city, 34 highway. It’s also better by about 4-5 MPG than  other economy-minded compact sedans such as the Honda Civic (28 city, 36 highway) as well as the current Toyota Corolla (27 city, 34 highway), Ford Focus  (26 city, 36 highway) and Hyundai Elantra (28 city, 38 highway).
The Chevy Cruze, Dodge Dart and Mazda3 can do better – as much as 42 MPG highway, in the case of the Cruze and 41 MPG in the case of the Dodge Dart. But not with their standard engines – and not at a Sentra-equivalent price. To get the 42 MPG Cruze, for example, you’ve got to buy the optional  1.4 liter turbo engine. So equipped, the Cruze’s MSRP is $19,680 – or $2,360 more than the 39 MPG-capable (CVT equipped) $17,320 Sentra S and $1,910 more than the 40 MPG-capable $17,720 Sentra FE+ with CVT.
Same story with the Mazda3. The standard model only manages 33 highway. To get to 40 MPG, you’ve got to buy the optional SkyActive-G engine, which bumps the Mazda’s MSRP to $18,700 – $1,380 higher than the CVT-equipped (and 39 MPG) Sentra S.
And the base ($15,990) Sentra S with six-speed manual still manages 27 city, 36 highway. That’s right there with the figures posted by the Civic, Corolla, Focus and Elantra, slightly better than the base model Dodge Dart (25 city, 36 highway) and a lot better than the base model Mazda3.
Can’t knock that.
ON THE ROAD
Well, here’s something you can.
I tested an early production Sentra SL with the CVT automatic transmission – which as mentioned earlier is now the only way you can get an SL or any other 2013 Sentra trim except the base S trim.  The CVT is there – and a manual transmission isn’t – in four out of the five available Sentra trims because of the CVT’s efficiency advantage. It’s worth 3-4 MPG at highway speeds, relative to the manual six-speed Sentra – and that’s a big deal not just to potential buyers but also to Uncle, who insists that all new cars average 35.5 MPG by 2016. This pressure accounts for the increasing use of CVTs in numerous cars – and not just Nissans.
The problem is the down-powered, de-engined Sentra is slow – and the CVT transmission only makes it feel slower.
You can’t raise the RPMs and sidestep the clutch – because there is no clutch. And because there’s no torque converter – as in a conventional automatic – the same thing.
It takes longer for an engine mated to a CVT to get into its powerband.
And if the engine is a small engine, the powerband is probably fairly high up in the RPM range – as is the case here. The 1.8 liter’s peak power (130 hp) isn’t produced until 6,000 RPM – vs. 5,100 RPM (and 140 hp) last year. It doesn’t help matters that torque output is also down by 19 lbs.-ft (128 lbs.-ft now vs. 147 lbs.-ft. with the old 2.0 liter engine). The torque peak is more accessible now  – 3,600 RPM now vs. 4,800 RPM before. But the bottom line is there’s less power available – and it shows.
Especially with the CVT.
Even though Nissan has done an admirable job in terms of rendering the bigger (longer, more wheelbase, etc.) 2013 Sentra lighter at the curb than the smaller 2012 Sentra, it still weighs a pretty startling (for a compact) 2,822 lbs. – and that’s before the driver gets in. One 180 pound driver and the car is already over 3,000 lbs. Put two passengers in there on top of that and the Sentra’s curb weight will be 3,200 lbs.-plus.
It’s asking a lot of a 1.8 liter engine to get that much mass moving without obvious signs of struggling – and the CVT only serves to call attention to the power deficit by holding the poor little engine at its 6,000 RPM power peak – close to redline – as long as you keep your foot down.
Yes, it’ll get you from A to B – if you’re not in much of a hurry. But forget about passing C. You’ll just have to be patient and wait behind him. Just as others will need to be patient when they’re behind you while you’re trying to get up to speed … or while you’re waiting for room (and time) to risk pulling into traffic.
The Sentra’s CVT does have a Sport (as well as an Eco) setting – but I’d rather have a clutch and the ability to launch a little quicker and cull the drivetrain racket once rolling -  even if it cost me three or four MPGs.
I understand why Nissan is hard-selling the CVT. But it wouldn’t be necessary if the Sentra didn’t weigh so much. A 2,500 lb. Sentra could probably hit 40 MPG without the CVT. And with the old 2.0 liter, 140 engine and six-speed manual transmission.
Then it would be fuel-efficient – and still fun.
This one’s not. Acceleration-wise as well as handling-wise.
The new Sentra is a Transportation Unit – like the Corolla and Civic. That’s apparently the target competition now – not sporty new comers like the Dodge Dart and Mazda3 – which appear to be taking over the slot the Sentra used to occupy. And from a business point-of-view, that probably makes sense – because Transportation Units are the volume sellers.
It’s where the money is.
AT THE CURB
The ’13 Sentra edges ever-closer to being a mid-sized car – especially as regards backseat legroom (more on this in a minute).
Nissan probably decided to build a bigger Sentra for two important reasons: To make up for the Sentra’s loss of performance – and to put more distance between the Sentra and its value-priced sibling, the Versa.
The ’12 model Sentra’s interior specifications were virtually the same as the Versa’s (in one area at least – backseat legroom – the Versa had more room than the Sentra). Buyers were probably more willing to overlook the previous Sentra’s slightly cramped interior when the Sentra had more engine and more personality. But now that the Sentra has the same downsized 1.8 liter engine as the Versa?
Time to upsize something else!
Thus, the new car is about two and a half inches longer than the old model and rides on a longer 106.3 inch wheelbase vs. 105.7 inches previously. This makes it look more substantial – and allows for a substantially roomier backseat area: three inches more legroom than before (37.4 inches ) as well as a mid-sized car’s trunk: 15.1 cubic feet vs. 13.1 cubic feet last year.
Also bigger are the front doors.
Actually, they’re huge relative to the rest of the car – and relative  to other cars. I got out my tape measure – 44 inches from edge to edge. For a “compact” car, that’s a big door. Some perspective: I happened to have a 2013 Buick Verano sedan the same week I had the Sentra. The Verano – Buick’s entry-luxury sedan – is a bigger car than Sentra – 183.9 inches end to end vs. 182.1 inches for the Nissan. But the  Buick’s front doors were three full inches shorter than the new Sentra’s.
Of course, a big door can be used to create the illusion of space. One that’s sometimes dispelled when you actually sit inside the car. That’s not the case here, though. The new Sentra’s got slightly more front seat legroom than the bigger-on-the-outside Buick (42.5 inches vs. 42 inches) and more backseat legroom than its big (and mid-sized) brother, the Altima (36.1 inches). But what’s really important is that the ’13 Sentra’s got three inches more backseat legroom than the old Sentra (34.5 inches) and about a half-inch more rearseat legroom than you’d get in the value-priced Versa sedan (37 inches).
The ’13 Sentra’s interior, like the rest of the car, is also more lux – and less sport.
The old car’s high-mounted shifter console is gone. In its place, a conventional center console and floor-mounted shifter – available with wood trim covers rather than carbon fiber or brushed metal. Also gone are the previous Sentra’s optional accessory gauges – which had been mounted, 370Z-like, on top of the dash and canted toward the driver.
The 5.8 inch LCD screen for the GPS is bigger, too.
An amusing touch is the new car’s 160 MPH speedometer – vs. 140 MPH in the old model.
JATO rockets not included.
THE REST
It’s pretty obvious the trend toward smaller, less powerful – and more economical – engines is upon us. Nissan’s just bowing to the inevitable – and trying to make the best of it. In most respects, the new Sentra is a better car than the model it replaces. But it’s also a blander car – and it remains to be seen whether Nissan buyers will be happy about the changeover.
THE BOTTOM LINE
All that’s missing, really, is an underhood upgrade – which may or may not be forthcoming. Probably, not. The market’s just not there anymore.
Meanwhile, the government is.

Please bookmark us

Don't Get Stuck With a Lemon : 4 strategies for buying the best used car.

If you go new car shopping, your main worry is price. You don’t have to worry about the particular car. The red one sitting next to the silver one that’s parked next to the yellow one on the dealer’s lot . . . they’re all the same. It doesn’t really matter which one you pick – other than colors and options.
And, of course, the price.
With a used car, it’s exactly the opposite.
A given used car is an individual – distinct from the thousands of others of the same make/model that rolled off the line that year. It was driven differently – and maintained differently. It may have been babied – or it could have been abused. No two examples of  a given make/model/year used car will ever be the same as far as their mechanical and cosmetic condition, the miles on the clock, the stains on the seats or the intervals at which necessary service (such as oil and filter changes) was performed.
Condition – rather than price – is what matters most when used car shopping.
Unfortunately, condition involves variables and subtleties that make haggling over new car prices seem like a cakewalk. Most people know about dealer invoice vs. manufacturer’s suggested retail price – and how to research dealer incentives and all the rest of it. It’s not rocket science; the info is available and it’s all pretty straightforward – being just numbers.
But how do you determine whether the used vehicle you’re looking at was ill-treated by its previous owner? Whether high-quality service parts were used – or the cheapest no-name crap on discount at Wal-Mart? Dealers (and even private sellers) can cover up stuff better than Lady Gaga’s make-up people. And once you’ve signed the contract and handed over your dollars, any problems are now your problems – because in most states, there is no warranty implied unless it is specifically stated. Sales are generally considered “as is” – unless there’s something in writing asserting or promising otherwise. Telling the small claims court that the seller told you there were no problems with the car will usually cut no ice. And, to be fair to the seller, he may not have known about the problem that cropped up after the sale. It’s a used car. Wear and tear. Bad luck. Stuff can – and does – go wrong. That’s why the standard in court for pursuing a successful claim against a seller is usually pretty high. In most cases, you’d have to substantiate willful, knowing misrepresentation. Absent that, it’s your car now – warts and all.
Scared yet? That’s a good state of mind to be in when shopping used cars. I like to compare it with my personal policy when riding a motorcycle: Assume every driver is deliberately trying to kill you. A little precautionary paranoia in dicey situations can save you a lot of trouble. All right. So, how about some practical used car buying advice?
* Try to stick with popular models -
This may seem counterintuitive, because popular often means pricey. However, popular also tends to mean good. If lots of people are buying a given make/model/year vehicle – and prices are strong – it strongly suggests that make/model/year vehicle is a good vehicle. Personal case-in-point: I own two of the last-generation (1998-2004) Nissan Frontier pick-up truck, the generation before this model got up-sized to mid-sized  from compact-sized. I paid the same money in 2011 for my 2004 that I paid back in ’04 for my ’98. The value of these trucks has held strong – because they’re known to be sturdy little trucks that are very hard to hurt, even if you try to. Mid-late 1990s-era Toyota Corollas – and all Mazda Miatas – are two more examples of known-good cars that were made in the millions.
It’s still important to vet the particular example you find – but being able to fixate on a certain make/model/year helps a lot. And if it’s popular, it’s likely you’ll have lots of examples to choose from – another advantage of going for a well-liked car. And parts – especially trim parts – will likely be available for longer.
And for less.
* Avoid used luxury cars -
The reason being, luxury cars tend to be equipped with expensive to repair/replace features and equipment. I’ll give you another personal example. I once owned a late 1980′s vintage Lincoln Mark VII LSC. This car had an air-adjustable, self-leveling suspension that altered the car’s ride height up or down automatically. Neat feature – when new and under warranty. But really expensive when not.  The air shocks at each of the car’s four corners were prone to leaking as they aged – and each one cost (this was in the early ’90s) $1,200 to replace. If you didn’t replace them, the car’s body would collapse onto the tires like a California low-rider. It may be tempting to think about treating yourself to a used luxury car that only costs a third of its price when new. But there’s a reason why used luxury cars are often put up for sale at too-good-to-be-true prices.
The same extra caution – and due diligence – should be exercised when shopping a used performance car. For obvious reasons, they are more likely to have been run hard – and put up wet. Be even more cautious about turbo (and supercharged) performance cars.
* Educate yourself about high-dollar routine service -
For instance, timing belt changes. Many recent-era cars equipped with overhead cam (OHC) engines require this job – and it’s a big, expensive job – at regular intervals, just like oil and filter changes. Only $800-plus for the timing belt vs. $30 or so for the oil and filter. It is not at all uncommon for the original owner of such a vehicle -  well-aware of the impending bill – to trade the car in (or sell it) just before the mileage/time interval comes due for the big-ticket repair. Leaving you to deal with it.
Related: Be very wary about “lifetime” items such as spark plugs and engine coolant. It’s absolutely true an engine so equipped can run well for 100k-plus with its original, factory-installed spark plugs – and even its original coolant. But “lifetime” doesn’t mean forever. If you buy a high-miles used vehicle, try to determine whether “lifetime” items have ever been replaced. Because if they haven’t been at some point, it’s likely going to be up to you to take care of it.
On your nickle.
* Be absolutely certain everything works before money changes hands, or be prepared to pay to get it repaired yourself - 
Check that all turn signals, brake lights and so on operate properly. That every dashboard warning light comes on when the ignition key is inserted – and turns off once the engine’s running. Do all the gauges operate properly – and read normally? Pay particular attention to oil pressure, temperature and voltage gauges. Weird readings, too high readings – or too low readings – are reasons to say sayonara.
If it’s winter, do not forget to turn on the AC. Be sure it blows cold. Operate every control – windshield wipers, defroster, cruise – and make sure you know they’re working. Or not. If not, find out why – and before you proceed any farther down the road to buying the thing.
If the car is being sold by a private party (not a dealer *) do not buy it before it has passed both emissions and state safety inspection – in areas where either is required to register a car for the first time, or renew registration. If the yellow “check engine” light comes on – and stays on – it’s a red flag. At the very least, it means trouble codes stored in the computer’s memory must be cleared and the system re-set. And the light will just come back on again – and you’ll fail smog check – if the underlying problem isn’t found and corrected.
* In most areas where state emissions/safety checks are required by law, it is also a legal requirement that any used car sold by a dealer pass emissions/safety  inspection before it may be re-sold. Private sellers, however, are not required by law to get the car through emissions/safety prior to sale.
Throw it in the Woods?

Please bookmark us

The 2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray Unveiled

In a rational world, the 2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray wouldn’t exist. The very idea of launching a two-seat sports car named after a World War II ship powered by a truck-sized V-8 goes against every trend line on every chart in every automaker’s boardroom. Yet here it is, the seventh generation of America’s most venerated sports car, sharpened in all dimensions by racing experience toward out-hustling the best sports cars in the world. The question will be whether it can outrun history.
After 60 years of production, General Motors could have found ample reasons for waving the checkered flag at the Vette. Thanks to GM’s bankruptcy, the Vette has soldiered on longer than it should have without a major update; GM sold 14,132 last year, well off the 30,000 a year it sustained for much of the past decade. New U.S. fuel economy rules hit sports cars head-on, demanding the same measure of efficiency improvements in hot rods as in compact family sedans.
 
Slideshow: 60 Years of Corvette HistoryMore importantly, the Corvette has lost much of its cultural currency from the heyday of NASA astronauts drag-racing their free Corvettes on the beach, falling into the tar pit of an old man’s car competing for young people’s attention. From “Transformers” to the “Fast and Furious” movies, Hollywood prefers the new Chevy Camaro and those Vettes the astronauts drove. A survey from the popular Forza racing video game of the most-driven models found the modern Vette didn’t crack the top 40. And while you can still buy Barbie her classic pink Vette, it’s a far less popular choice than sending her off with Ken in a Mini Cooper.

On first view, the makeover wrought by Corvette chief engineer Tadge Juechter and team appears evolutionary. Yet every piece of the car has either been re-engineered or updated, from the new all-aluminum frame to the sharper, “shrink-wrapped” exterior to the 6.2-liter, 450-hp, 450 lb.-ft. V-8. That engine can now be paired to an optional Tremec 7-speed manual, a GM first, that will automatically match the engine’s RPMs to the anticipated gear in all shifts.

The biggest improvements come from applying modern electronic controls throughout the car for the first time. The Corvette will have five driving modes that alter 12 different systems, from the optional electronic limited-slip differential that’s part of the Z51 track package to launch control. In “eco” mode, the all-new V-8 will shut off four cylinders for maximum fuel economy, while in “track” mode, Chevy engineers say the new Vette will pull more than 1 g of cornering force and run to 60 mph in less than 4 seconds. (Chevy vows to release exact figures, including prices, closer to the car's launch this fall.)


The interior, long the weakest part of the car, has been renovated to modern sports car standards. In place of Barbie-quality plastic, the dash comes wrapped in leather and carbon fiber; the heated and cooled seats have bolstering built for track use. The Vette also finally gets the requisite HD LED screens for the center console, but Chevy wisely keeps separate radio and air control switches instead of touch screen controls.

Much of the Vette’s improvements began as lessons learned from the Le Mans-winning Vette C6.R endurance racing team, such as the new fender intakes by the rear window that cool the transmission and differential. Purists have already begun to exclaim over the loss of the Vette’s trademark round taillights; the new squarish units take that shape because their frames double as a cooling vents.
While Corvette enthusiasts often dream of more radical changes, the Corvette engineering team has six decades of experience arguing against such moves. Moving to a smaller V-8 or turbocharged V-6 as in the Nissan GT-R would have added more weight while doing little for fuel economy; Chevy expects the new model to easily surpass the previous generation’s 26 mpg highway rating. A mid-engine super Vette would lose the sizable hatchback space that makes it more livable as an everyday car or grand tourer than a Porsche 911. And the unique suspension, with its transverse leaf spring rear axle, sacrifices little on the track while weighing less than the alternatives.

Some compromises were inevitable. Even with a new carbon-fiber roof and hood, and a frame that’s 99 lbs. lighter, the new Vette will weigh about as much as the old one, due to added pounds from the engine, interior bits and crash safety — although it keeps its perfect 50/50 front-rear weight balance and sports a lower center of gravity. The new 7-speed manual will still have a skip shift that forces higher gears for better city mileage, and a revised six-speed automatic remains standard.

But the greatest challenge for the new Stingray won't come from rivals like the new SRT Viper, the GT-R or the 911. As Zora Arkus-Duntov, the famed "father of the Corvette" wrote in 1954: "If the value of a car consists of practical values and emotional appeal, the sports car has very little of the first and consequently has to have an exaggerated amount of the second." The engineers behind the new Vette hope the revival of the Stingray name for the first time in 37 years along with years of knowledge gained from racing will spark that emotional connection with a new generation. The most apt answer for why the 2014 Corvette exists may be an Internet meme: Because racecar.


Please bookmark us

Lamborghini Countach 1985, 60 Minutes, Italian Exotic Automobile

Lamborghini Countach 1985 60 Minutes Italian... by autoinfo

Please bookmark us

Why You Can't Buy a New Car Online

Americans can buy virtually anything over the Internet these days—sex, booze, houses—everything, that is, but a new car. If you want to buy a new Ford Fusion, you have to go down to your local dealership and haggle with the car salesmen, an unpleasant and daunting task. The process usually subjects consumers to hours in the dealership hotbox and can add hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars to the price of the car. Wouldn't it be nice if you could cut out the middleman and just order your Prius straight from Toyota?

But you can't. And there's one reason why: the car-dealer lobby, which has worked hard to ensure that this will never happen. Since the late 1990s, car dealers have used their considerable political clout to pass or better enforce state franchise laws that in many cases make it a criminal offense for an auto manufacturer to sell a new car to anyone but a state-licensed car dealer. The laws governing who can sell new cars are among the most anti-competitive of any domestic industry. By creating local monopolies for dealerships and prohibiting online sales for new cars, they constitute a major restraint on interstate commerce; in 2001, the Consumer Federation of America estimated [pdf] that the laws added at least $1,500 to the price of every new car.

These parochial state laws also make the distribution system for new cars incredibly inefficient and expensive, one factor in the financial problems facing the Big Three in Detroit. Online sales would help companies like GM and Chrysler align production to sales better by allowing more people to buy their cars built-to-order from the factory, rather than having Detroit send out truckloads of vehicles to sit around on dealer lots for months in the hopes that a rebate offer will finally entice someone to buy them.

Now that the federal government is bailing out GM and Chrysler to the tune of $13.4 billion, and Congress is demanding major changes in the way they're run, consumer advocates think the time is ripe for Congress to clear the way for online sales as part of its effort to move Detroit out of the Stone Age. You'd think they would find a sympathetic ear among deregulatory Republicans who take great umbrage over any state interference with the free market, but you'd be wrong. Most free-market Republicans have no interest in taking on the car dealers, who are among their strongest local supporters. Since 1990, American car dealers have given more than $66 million to federal candidates, with more than three-quarters going to Republicans.

For decades, Republican governors have been some of the dealers' biggest champions and have signed much of the legislation creating their bulwark against real competition. California legislator Mark Leno discovered just how entrenched these roadblocks are in 2005, when he introduced legislation to let consumers buy hybrid and other low-emission vehicles directly from manufacturers online. The bill came in response to evidence that local dealerships were price-gouging consumers seeking hybrids, which were then in short supply. Environmentalists believed the savings consumers were likely to get by purchasing online would spur more sales for the cleaner cars and encourage automakers to produce more of them.

The bill would have allowed people to order their Priuses online and have the manufacturer deliver them to their doors—or, alternately, they could pick them up at Costco or the local dealership. The bill would have even allowed people to buy the cars on eBay or Amazon. Leno's office estimated that the bill would have little impact on the dealerships, because hybrids accounted for less than 1 percent of all new car sales. But he underestimated the power of the dealers, who were the reason legislation was needed in the first place.

Back in 1973, then-California governor Ronald Reagan signed a law that effectively prohibited any new car dealerships from opening within a 10-mile radius of another existing dealership selling the same make of car. The law was a gift to one of Reagan's "kitchen cabinet" members, Holmes P. Tuttle, and decades later would have made it difficult for hybrid manufacturers to create pickup facilities (which required dealer licenses) for cars ordered online.

Tuttle had famously sold a car to Reagan when he was an out-of-work actor. Tuttle went on to create one of the nation's largest car dealerships and helped fund Reagan's first run for governor. Reagan repaid him by signing the dealer franchise law. "A statutorily created monopoly was signed into law by Reagan to help his friend Mr. Tuttle," says Leno. He says Tuttle had been pushing for a law that prohibited the establishment of any new dealership without the majority support of the dealerships in that part of the state. Instead, he got the 10-mile exclusionary zone. Leno notes that the law was vigorously opposed by California state senator George Moscone, who was later assassinated, along with Harvey Milk, when he was mayor of San Francisco. Moscone labeled the bill "the turkey of the year," and issued a prescient statement observing that the bill would "freeze, for all time, the ability of new car dealers to make money without worrying about competition…How in the name of free enterprise could the governor even consider signing a bill that shuts off any future competition?"
Moscone's objections fell on deaf ears. Today, Tuttle's son Robert, who still owns the family auto chain, is the outgoiong US ambassador to the UK, an indication of just how strong the political clout of the car dealers—and the Tuttle clan—remains. Needless to say, Leno's bill to amend the franchise law never even made it out of a Democrat-controlled policy committee.

His experience isn't unusual. In the late 1990s and early 2000, the auto manufacturers themselves, sensing the potential of the Internet, attempted to challenge state franchise laws that restricted their ability to sell over the Internet. They got clobbered, and in no small part because of Republican governors, who, like Reagan, counted local car dealers as political supporters.

In 1999, as governor of Texas, George W. Bush signed what was then the nation's toughest law in the country banning new car sales online. Egged on by local car dealerships, state regulators invoked the law to help shut down Ford's fledgling attempt to sell used cars online. Ford had started letting people buy used cars on its website; local dealerships delivered them. But Texas regulators cracked down, threatening Ford with $10,000 daily fines for allegedly violating a state law banning manufacturers from selling their products directly to the public. Ford tried to fight back in court, arguing that the state franchise law was a restraint on interstate commerce, but the court was no more sympathetic than the governor. The federal judge hearing the case wrote that if Ford were allowed to sell cars online, "all state regulatory schemes would be nullified" as they "fall before the mighty altar of the Internet." Texas regulators, never known for regulating much of anything, also forced GM to abandon its foray into e-commerce. The automaker had bought a handful of dealerships in the state to use as distributors for cars bought online, but regulators refused to give GM a dealer license. GM gave up and sold off the dealerships.

Texas inspired car dealers in other states to seek similar protections from competition. Arizona, for instance, passed a law that not only blocked manufacturers from selling cars online but also restricted manufacturers from offering other services online, such as financing. Other states followed suit, as car dealers feared predictions that only half of them would survive the next seven years thanks to competition from the Internet. Since then, the manufacturers have largely given up the fight.
"We have a very good relationship with our dealerships," says Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents 11 manufacturers, including the Big Three. "The dealers are the faces of the manufacturer." Territo says that after their experience trying to change state laws in the 1990s, the manufacturers have no interest in picking a battle with the dealerships over online sales, which he considers unworkable anyway.

"What about sales tax?" he demands, suggesting that if people start buying cars over the Web, local governments would be deprived of revenue that supports their communities. He says that in California, fully 25 percent of state tax revenue comes from vehicle sales. Even if people could buy new cars online, he says, the nature of the sales means that the "dealer would still need to be part of the equation," either because they would need to service the cars or arrange delivery of them.
Territo says that the lack of Internet sales is the least of the problems for the automakers right now, when the credit markets have made it virtually impossible for many consumers to buy new cars. "It doesn't matter whether you buy it on the Internet or on a street corner—if you can't get credit, you're not going to be able to buy that car," he says.

Territo's argument mirrors that of the car dealers. Jack Fitzgerald, the owner of a chain of dealerships in Maryland who's known as an honest broker among consumer advocates, calls online new car sales "a pipe dream." From his perspective, the state franchise laws that prevent manufacturers from selling their own products "are what little protection dealers have against the abuses of the manufacturers," which have a long history of beating up on both their own employees and their dealerships, which the companies force to assume much of the risk of the sales business, he says.

Fitzgerald suspects that if the manufacturers could sell new cars directly over the Internet, consumers would actually pay more for them than they do now. Right now, he says, dealerships actually pay about $2,500 more for a car from the manufacturer than they sell it for. Dealerships make their money elsewhere—on repairs and servicing, financing, and other products. Fitzgerald says that the manufacturers haven't sold cars directly to the public in 75 years, since the days when you could buy a car at Sears. Those sales didn't work out, he insists, because someone still has to service the car, and that's usually the dealership.

Jack Gillis, the Consumer Federation's executive director, says allowing online new car sales wouldn't necessarily remove dealerships from the equation. It would just introduce more competition into the marketplace and reduce some of the inefficiencies in the distribution system. If Ford or GM could sell cars through Amazon or eBay, for instance, the dealerships could still handle the deliveries and warranty work. Indeed, Fitzgerald concedes that under such an arrangement, he might actually make more money than he does now.

"It's unfortunate that the car companies have capitulated to the desires of the dealers," says Gillis, noting that allowing online buying might actually stimulate sales. "The loser there, first and foremost, is the consumer, but ironically, so is the industry," he says. "People would flock to the Internet."

Please bookmark us

2013 Cadillac ATS Review

Cadillac is not known for its small cars. Er, that is, not known favorably.
The last one – the ’97-2001 Catera – rose to the mediocre. The ones before that – like the infamous Cimarron – must (like a “funny” Uncle) never be mentioned again.
But this latest small Cadillac – the 2013 ATS – is a comer. And, a goer. (Excepting the base model, which is afflicted with an engine unworthy of the rest of the car.)
For the first time – ever – there is an American alternative to a BMW 3 and all the rest of them.
A good alternative.
WHAT IT IS
The ATS is Cadillac’s new entry-luxury sport sedan, slotting under the CTS.
Like the CTS, it’s based on a RWD layout – and offers AWD as an option. Unlike the CTS, the ATS comes only in sedan form – for the present, at least. (The CTS is sold as a sedan, coupe and wagon).
Also, since Cadillac has dropped availability of a manual transmission from the CTS’ options roster for 2013, the ATS is the only new Cadillac available with a manual transmission.
Prices start at $33,095 for the base trim with 2.5 liter engine, six-speed automatic transmission and RWD. For $34,900, you can upgrade underhood to a turbocharged 2.0 liter four – and a six-speed manual transmission.
Adding AWD to the mix pushes the MSRP to $36,900.
Top-of-the-line is a Premium trim with 3.6 liter V-6, six-speed automatic and AWD. It stickers for $47,795.
WHAT’S NEW
The ATS is a new addition to Cadillac’s model lineup, targeting entry-level luxury-sport sedans from BMW, Mercedes, Lexus and Infiniti – among others.
Though it is Cadillac’s smallest car the ATS – like the current BMW 3 – is almost mid-sized. Both cars bridge the gap between  true compacts like the Benz C-Class sedan – and truly  mid-sized models like the Cadillac CTS (and BMW 5).
WHAT’S GOOD
No rebadged Chevy (or Opel) this time.
An American (the only American) alternative to a BMW, Benz , Lexus and  the rest of them.
Lots of engine – and transmission and drive – choices.
Very cutting edge technology, such as finger-swipe controls.
Mad Men attitude.
WHAT’S NOT SO GOOD
Only one body choice. Competitors offer coupe – and wagon – options.
Base 2.5 engine is a underpowered – and overly thirsty.
Cutting edge controls don’t always operate seamlessly.
Manual transmission only offered with one engine – and not the engine that needs it most.
UNDER THE HOOD
The base ATS engine is a 2.5 liter four rated 202 hp, teamed up with a six-speed manual. Next up is a performance-mined 2.0 liter turbo four boosted to 272 hp. This engine can be ordered with a six-speed manual transmission or a six-speed automatic. It is the only ATS engine that’s offered with a manual.
The third engine choice is a 3.6 liter, 321 hp V-6. It is automatically paired with the six-speed automatic.
All ATS engines, though, can be ordered with either RWD (standard) or (optionally) full-time AWD.
Including the 202 hp 2.5 liter engine.
In addition, there’s a Performance package that adds dual exhaust (but not with the 2.5 engine). Summer tires, a limited slip differential (RWD models), a Track package with oil cooler and upgraded brakes – as well as an adaptive, auto-adjusting suspension similar to Corvette’s may also be ordered.
The ATS offers the widest range of drivetrain choices (and combinations) of any car in its class. For example, the 2013 BMW 3 sedan ($36,500- $49,300) only offers two engine choices – a turbo (240 hp) 2.0 four or a twin-turbo six (in two states of tune, 300 and 320 hp). The Mercedes-Benz C-Class sedan ($35,350-$41,400) also has two engines – a 1.8 liter turbo four (201 hp) and a 3.5 liter V-6 (tuned to either 248 or 302 hp) and only one transmission with all of them (a seven speed automatic).
However, the ATS’ performance – even with its top two engines – is just par. Or even slightly below par. The top-of-the-line 3.6 liter model, for example, does 0-60 in about 5.7 seconds. This is quick, but not quite as quick as the Benz C350 (5.6 seconds) and much less quick than a BMW 335i (5.4 seconds) or 335is, which has a more powerful – 320 hp – version of the twin-turbo straight six. This version of the BMW 3 can get to 60 in a very speedy five seconds flat.
This disparity is noteworthy because the two cars’ engines put out virtually the same power (320 hp for the BMW is vs. 321 for the V-6 Caddy ATS). So why is the V-6 ATS about three quarters of a second less quick? The obvious guess would be – the BMW has to be lighter. In fact, it’s heavier than the ATS – and not just a little bit: 3,545 lbs. vs. 3,373 lbs. The Caddy is nearly 200 pounds lighter – and slightly more powerful – on paper – yet it’s noticeably less quick than the 335i.
What gives?
It’s got to be gearing (maybe the Caddy has a less aggressive final drive ratio) or – much more likely – BMW is soft-pedaling the true output of its twin-turbo six. Because the math does not otherwise add up.
Nonetheless, the Caddy isn’t slow – well, so long as you order either the 2.0 turbo or the 3.6 V-6. If you order the base 2.5 engine, however, you’ll be looking at 7.2 seconds to 60. With RWD. If you order AWD (heavier) it’ll be slower still. Too slow, arguably, for a premium car – much less a premium car so otherwise sporty as the ATS.
The 2.5 engine is fuel efficient, though: 22 city, 33 highway. However, the more appropriately powerful 2.0 liter turbo four matches that exactly when it’s teamed up with the automatic transmission – and beats it (22 city, 34 highway) when ordered with the manual.
Another ouch – for the Cadillac: The turbo 2.0 BMW 3 ($36,500 to start) can zip to 60 in a respectably quick 5.9 seconds – only a blink of an eye less quick than the V-6 (and $41,195 to start) ATS.
The V-6 ATS is also fairly fuel-inefficient: 18 city, 26 highway with AWD. The 335i delivers 23 city and 33 highway – exceptional numbers – and even more exceptional given the other numbers mentioned already.
Luckily for Cadillac, the ATS is not the thirstiest – or the least quick – car in this class. That dubious honor goes to the Benz C250 sedan, which needs 7.4 long seconds to manage 60 MPH – and still only gives you 22 city, 31 highway. Its performance – and economy – is on par with a new Toyota Corolla’s.
Double ouch – for Mercedes-Benz.
Another item in defense of the 2.5 liter ATS engine is that it’s a regular unleaded engine. Most – if not all – the engines in competitor models (base as well as optional) require premium.
Over time, the extra 20 cents or so per gallon – regular vs. premium – will definitely add up.
My only critique is that this Caddy is such a sporty-minded car that such considerations probably don’t matter – or rather, not in the way Cadillac might have thought. The typical ATS prospect probably doesn’t care about saving 20 cents per gallon at fill-up time. But likely does care what happens (or doesn’t happen) when he floors the accelerator pedal.
On the other hand, none of the Cadillac’s engines have the super-annoying (and probably super-expensive to repair when it craps out) Auto-stop function that is now standard equipment in the BMW.
ON THE ROAD
Cadillac’s return to RWD layouts beginning in the late ’90s (when the Opel Omega-based Catera was launched, followed  shortly thereafter by the much better CTS) marked a turning point away from placid – and let’s face it, elder-oriented – boxy boats it had been making since the mid-late 1970s … and back toward the kind of Cadillacs it had been making before that. In the ’60s, especially – when Don Draper-mobiles like the ’67 Eldorado were the chariots of successful young up-and-comers, not rheumy-eyed over-the-hillers.
This ATS is a car like that – or at least, it is trying hard to be. And, for the most part, succeeding.
Though not quite as athletic (or agile) as a BMW 3, it’s very close. It accelerates almost as snappily. It corners nearly as adroitly.
And much more so – in all those ways – than the ploddy, stuffy (and yes, old-mannish) Benz C-class.
Imagine saying that about a … Cadillac!
The 2.0 turbo engine/six-speed combo is – in my opinion – the one that fits the car’s nature best. It makes the ATS feel and drive most like a BMW 3 – and that is clearly Cadillac’s benchmark target. The big V-6, on the other hand, is a good companion and works well with the six-speed automatic. But – my opinion, freely admitted (and yours may differ) it also makes the ATS feel like a heavier, less on-its-toes car. It’s probably the go-to drivetrain for buyers who will be spending most of their driving time stuck in traffic – or doing long-hauls on the highway. But though it’s got thrust, it doesn’t sing like Caruso at (or near) redline like the magnificent BMW straight six turbo does. Especially the “is” version – which allows temporary overboost (and 370 lbs.-ft of torque vs. the Caddy 2.6 liter’s 274 lbs.-ft.) during those WOT moments we – like Don Draper – all crave and savor.
What’s really needed, 3.6-wise, is a manual transmission option. Or a better automatic transmission. There is nothing wrong with the Caddy’s six-speed automatic. However, the competition offers seven (and eight) speed automatics, as well as automated dual-clutch manuals – which confer an edge efficiency and performance-wise. Automatics need not be so… automatic. A sterling example is the Subaru BRZ I reviewed last week (see here). If the ATS had an automatic like that, there’d be less reason to lament the absence of a clutch.
It’s kind of odd when you think about it – given how aggressive Cadillac has become – that the CTS’ manual transmission has been dropped for 2013 – and that the ATS only offers a manual with one engine.
AT THE CURB
When it comes to their aesthetics, the new Cadillacs conjure the best of the Don Draper era. It’s a very different look, but there’s the same unapologetic arrogance expressed in the severe angles and facets, the skyscraper stacked taillights, the toothsome, leering grillwork. This is not a shy man’s car. Or a shy woman’s car. Cadillac is to be credited for that. It’s no easy thing to make a car look macho – and sexy.
Both Don Draper – and Charlize Theron – would look right in this thing.
Dimensionally, the ATS is almost exactly the same size as the BMW 3 sedan: 182.8 inches long vs. 182.5 for the BMW, but rides on a slightly shorter wheelbase: 109.3 vs. 110.6 inches. This may explain why the otherwise same-size Caddy has noticeably less backseat legroom: 33.5 inches vs. 35.1 for the BMW. That’s a definite downside – for Cadillac. Though a big/tall person ( I use myself as the guinea pig; I’m 6ft 3 and 210 lbs.) and will fit in the back of the ATS, it’s not a comfortable fit.
The Cadillac also suffers from not-much headspace – relative to others in this class. There is 38.6 inches of front seat headroom in the ATS – as opposed to 40.3 in the BMW 3. That’s before you factor in the optional sunroof. Taller drivers may find it’s already a close shave without it. With it – forget about it. The Caddy’s seats, however, are very adjustable – and you can drop them down enough to make up for the headroom clearance issue without dropping you too low.
It must also be mentioned (again) that the Benz C is even smaller inside – with only 33.4 inches of backseat legroom. This is a consequence of it being a smaller car than either the ATS or the BMW 3. It – the Caddy C sedan – is almost three inches shorter overall (180.8 inches) and rides on a 108.7 inch wheelbase. It is a compact sedan, while both the ATS and the BMW 3 edge closer to being mid-sized.
THE REST
The ATS has “touch” (or finger-sweep) controls for secondary functions such as increasing or lowering the stereo’s volume, raising or lowering the climate control settings – and so on. Kind of like the bridge of the Enterprise on Star Trek: Next Generation. It’s a neat idea – but the real-world function is sometimes less so in that it takes more time to do things like increase the temperature settings this way than it would using a more old-school button or knob. I found the system sometimes didn’t sense my finger’s touch – or required me to repeatedly tap the pad (for example, to go higher or lower for temperature). There is also an audible thump sound (and “Haptic” feeback) each time you increase or decrease a given setting. It takes some getting used to.
The main LCD display is set up to operate like an iPad – and its operation is less fussy.
You can use a radar detector with the ATS. Even though it has a bevvy of gadgetry – including a Driver Awareness package (gawd) that includes forward collision alert, rear cross-traffic alert and lane departure warning – for whatever reason, the radar/laser/sonar (or whatever) emanations used to make these things work don’t mess with the workings of radar detectors, as they do in other high-end, gadget-afflicted cars – including, most notoriously, Audis and BMWs and Lexuses, which drive my Valentine V1 nuts with false alerts.  The “leakage” from some of those cars is so bad you don;t even have to be in them to experience them. I’ve noticed that when I am in the vicinity of a new-ish BMW or Audi, my radar detector will go berserk – even though (as far as I know) cops are not driving BMW fives.
Small gripe: The center console cupholder has two cupholders but realistically only one is usable at any given time. Put a small-sized Starbucks coffee in one and there’s no room for your passenger’s cup.
Big thumbs up: The interior is sumptuous – and sexy. My test car had deep burgundy red and charcoal leather accented with piano black and carbon fiber trim plates. Thius entry-level Cadillac compared very favorably to high-end Cadillacs – and high-end cars, period. If only the back seats had a bit more legroom – and the base engine a bit more power.
Oh, and maybe a third pedal, too.
THE BOTTOM LINE
Cadillac made the transition from also-ran to contender several years back. Now it’s gunning for champ.
Eye of the tiger.

Please bookmark us

Lamborghini Aventador Rome Italy

► Lamborghini Aventador Rome Italy by autoinfo

Please bookmark us

Pagani Huayra Super Car: $1.6 Million and Not Yet Legal

The Pagani Huayra holds many distinctions. It's arguably the most anticipated super-car in the United States this year, with a $1.2 million price tag and top speed of more than 230 m.p.h.

It's won multiple "super-car of the year" awards in Europe and car connoisseur Jay Leno has called it "unbelievable, like a dream come true." Richard Hammond, host of Britain's "Top Gear" said the car is so unreal "it may be a unicorn."

With its jet-like engine, radical curves and glittering cockpit, it's clear that the Pagani was inspired by the twin pursuits of aerospace and art. (Huayra means "God of the Winds" in ancient Inca dialect).

Pagani has sold 105 Huayra's globally, and 18 in the United States. Because the company is making only 40 a year, some cars may take more than a year and a half to be delivered. The first Huayra is scheduled to be delivered to the United States sometime in July.

But there's another small issue with the Pagani: it's not yet legal on these shores. While proud owners are driving them around Europe, there's only one in the United States being used as a showcar. (Read more: Lamborghini Miami Strikes Gold With Foreign Rich)

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says it has not yet granted approval for the Huayra to be street legal. Pagani fans might recall that the company's last car, the equally-acclaimed Zonda, was not approved for U.S. roads because of safety issues – including the lack of a passenger-side airbag.

So why would someone pay $1.6 million for a car that's not legal yet?

Pagani says approval is just a formality. A company spokesman said that Pagani has performed all the proper crash tests and safety requirements and that approval is expected sometime around March. It said the Zonda was not approved in the United State because the nascent car company couldn't afford to build a $500,000 Zonda just for crash-testing.


This time, after the financial success of the Zonda, the company had enough funding to build a Huayra for crash tests. (Which you can see in this video).

"This is not going to be an issue, we are quite sure," said the spokesman.
Let's hope so. Or else the super-rich Pagani owners may have to build their own backyard race-tracks to drive their new Huayra's.

The Story of Enzo Ferrari

Koenigsegg Supercars Megafactories FULL Episode

Bugatti Veyron Supercars Megafactories FULL Episode

2013 Nissan Sentra Review

The redesigned 2013 Sentra is a bigger car, objectively a much nicer car  – and without question a much more fuel efficient car – than the previous Sentra.
But is it a more appealing car than the smaller and less fuel efficient – but more powerful and sportier driving – car it replaces?
That is the question.
And the answer depends on what you’re looking for.
WHAT IT IS
The Sentra has traditionally been a sporty compact sedan – and thus, a distinct alternative to economy-minded  compact sedans like the Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic.
But rising fuel prices – and rising government fuel-efficiency mandates – have put pressure on all automakers to put gas mileage uber alles.
Thus, the bigger-for-’13 Sentra comes with a smaller engine – and less horsepower – but also with a 40 MPG (highway) rating. That’s something the previous Sentra never came close to delivering – unless its engine wasn’t running.
But there’s no performance minded SE-R package – at the time of this review, at least – while there is an FE+ fuel economy package that includes low rolling resistance tires and aerodynamic aids to squeeze as many MPGs (rather than HPs) as possible out of a gallon of ethanol-adulterated “gas.”
Prices start at $15,990 for the base S model with six-speed manual transmission.
A range-topping SL with continuously variable (CVT) automatic transmission starts at $19,820.
The max-effort 40 MPG Sentra FE+ (also with CVT)  starts at $17,770.
All Sentras are FWD.
WHAT’S GOOD
Big enough on the inside to be a family car – if your family isn’t the Duggar family.
Nice enough to not be just another economy car.
A-plus fuel economy – with the CVT transmission.
2013 model starts out $440 lower than 2012 model.
WHAT’S NOT SO GOOD
No longer a sporty car.
C- acceleration with the CVT transmission.
B+ gas mileage with the limited-availability manual transmission.
UNDER THE HOOD
The ’13 Sentra is upsized – but there’s a downsized engine under the hood: 1.8 liters (and 130 hp) vs. 2.0 liters (and 140 hp) previously. This is the same basic engine that’s used in the smaller – and lighter – Versa.
A six-speed manual transmission is standard – but only in base S trim Sentras. All other trims come only with a continuously variable (CVT) automatic, which can be ordered as an a la carte extra for $1,330 with the base S trim.
Even though the new larger model weighs slightly less than the previous model (2,822 lbs. vs. 2,906 last year) the loss of engine displacement – and hp – is evident when the accelerator pedal is depressed: Zero to 60 now takes 9.7 seconds. That’s about half-a-second slower than the old Sentra.
In the car’s defense, several other cars in this segment – among them, the new Dodge Dart and also the Mazda3 – are equally lethargic. However, these two offer engine upgrades that cut the zero to 60 time down into the mid-low 8s – and in the case of the Mazda3, while still delivering exceptionally high gas mileage. The Sentra – so far – comes only with the overtasked 1.8 liter engine – too little engine for too much car.
You’re also virtually forced to buy the CVT automatic, too – at least, if you want something more than a base S trim Sentra – or some of the options that aren’t available in base S trim Sentras, such as the Driver’s package, which adds rear disc brakes (base S trims have drum rear brakes) or the upgrade 17 inch wheel package. These are available only in step-up SV and SR Sentras – and the top-of-the-line SL – which come only with the CVT.
For sport-minded buyers, that’s bad news.
For economy-minded buyers, the good news is the Sentra’s 30 city, 39 highway MPG rating (40 MPG, if you order the FE+ enhancements). This is a dramatic improvement over the 2012 Sentra, which topped out at 27 city, 34 highway. It’s also better by about 4-5 MPG than  other economy-minded compact sedans such as the Honda Civic (28 city, 36 highway) as well as the current Toyota Corolla (27 city, 34 highway), Ford Focus  (26 city, 36 highway) and Hyundai Elantra (28 city, 38 highway).
The Chevy Cruze, Dodge Dart and Mazda3 can do better – as much as 42 MPG highway, in the case of the Cruze and 41 MPG in the case of the Dodge Dart. But not with their standard engines – and not at a Sentra-equivalent price. To get the 42 MPG Cruze, for example, you’ve got to buy the optional  1.4 liter turbo engine. So equipped, the Cruze’s MSRP is $19,680 – or $2,360 more than the 39 MPG-capable (CVT equipped) $17,320 Sentra S and $1,910 more than the 40 MPG-capable $17,720 Sentra FE+ with CVT.
Same story with the Mazda3. The standard model only manages 33 highway. To get to 40 MPG, you’ve got to buy the optional SkyActive-G engine, which bumps the Mazda’s MSRP to $18,700 – $1,380 higher than the CVT-equipped (and 39 MPG) Sentra S.
And the base ($15,990) Sentra S with six-speed manual still manages 27 city, 36 highway. That’s right there with the figures posted by the Civic, Corolla, Focus and Elantra, slightly better than the base model Dodge Dart (25 city, 36 highway) and a lot better than the base model Mazda3.
Can’t knock that.
ON THE ROAD
Well, here’s something you can.
I tested an early production Sentra SL with the CVT automatic transmission – which as mentioned earlier is now the only way you can get an SL or any other 2013 Sentra trim except the base S trim.  The CVT is there – and a manual transmission isn’t – in four out of the five available Sentra trims because of the CVT’s efficiency advantage. It’s worth 3-4 MPG at highway speeds, relative to the manual six-speed Sentra – and that’s a big deal not just to potential buyers but also to Uncle, who insists that all new cars average 35.5 MPG by 2016. This pressure accounts for the increasing use of CVTs in numerous cars – and not just Nissans.
The problem is the down-powered, de-engined Sentra is slow – and the CVT transmission only makes it feel slower.
You can’t raise the RPMs and sidestep the clutch – because there is no clutch. And because there’s no torque converter – as in a conventional automatic – the same thing.
It takes longer for an engine mated to a CVT to get into its powerband.
And if the engine is a small engine, the powerband is probably fairly high up in the RPM range – as is the case here. The 1.8 liter’s peak power (130 hp) isn’t produced until 6,000 RPM – vs. 5,100 RPM (and 140 hp) last year. It doesn’t help matters that torque output is also down by 19 lbs.-ft (128 lbs.-ft now vs. 147 lbs.-ft. with the old 2.0 liter engine). The torque peak is more accessible now  – 3,600 RPM now vs. 4,800 RPM before. But the bottom line is there’s less power available – and it shows.
Especially with the CVT.
Even though Nissan has done an admirable job in terms of rendering the bigger (longer, more wheelbase, etc.) 2013 Sentra lighter at the curb than the smaller 2012 Sentra, it still weighs a pretty startling (for a compact) 2,822 lbs. – and that’s before the driver gets in. One 180 pound driver and the car is already over 3,000 lbs. Put two passengers in there on top of that and the Sentra’s curb weight will be 3,200 lbs.-plus.
It’s asking a lot of a 1.8 liter engine to get that much mass moving without obvious signs of struggling – and the CVT only serves to call attention to the power deficit by holding the poor little engine at its 6,000 RPM power peak – close to redline – as long as you keep your foot down.
Yes, it’ll get you from A to B – if you’re not in much of a hurry. But forget about passing C. You’ll just have to be patient and wait behind him. Just as others will need to be patient when they’re behind you while you’re trying to get up to speed … or while you’re waiting for room (and time) to risk pulling into traffic.
The Sentra’s CVT does have a Sport (as well as an Eco) setting – but I’d rather have a clutch and the ability to launch a little quicker and cull the drivetrain racket once rolling -  even if it cost me three or four MPGs.
I understand why Nissan is hard-selling the CVT. But it wouldn’t be necessary if the Sentra didn’t weigh so much. A 2,500 lb. Sentra could probably hit 40 MPG without the CVT. And with the old 2.0 liter, 140 engine and six-speed manual transmission.
Then it would be fuel-efficient – and still fun.
This one’s not. Acceleration-wise as well as handling-wise.
The new Sentra is a Transportation Unit – like the Corolla and Civic. That’s apparently the target competition now – not sporty new comers like the Dodge Dart and Mazda3 – which appear to be taking over the slot the Sentra used to occupy. And from a business point-of-view, that probably makes sense – because Transportation Units are the volume sellers.
It’s where the money is.
AT THE CURB
The ’13 Sentra edges ever-closer to being a mid-sized car – especially as regards backseat legroom (more on this in a minute).
Nissan probably decided to build a bigger Sentra for two important reasons: To make up for the Sentra’s loss of performance – and to put more distance between the Sentra and its value-priced sibling, the Versa.
The ’12 model Sentra’s interior specifications were virtually the same as the Versa’s (in one area at least – backseat legroom – the Versa had more room than the Sentra). Buyers were probably more willing to overlook the previous Sentra’s slightly cramped interior when the Sentra had more engine and more personality. But now that the Sentra has the same downsized 1.8 liter engine as the Versa?
Time to upsize something else!
Thus, the new car is about two and a half inches longer than the old model and rides on a longer 106.3 inch wheelbase vs. 105.7 inches previously. This makes it look more substantial – and allows for a substantially roomier backseat area: three inches more legroom than before (37.4 inches ) as well as a mid-sized car’s trunk: 15.1 cubic feet vs. 13.1 cubic feet last year.
Also bigger are the front doors.
Actually, they’re huge relative to the rest of the car – and relative  to other cars. I got out my tape measure – 44 inches from edge to edge. For a “compact” car, that’s a big door. Some perspective: I happened to have a 2013 Buick Verano sedan the same week I had the Sentra. The Verano – Buick’s entry-luxury sedan – is a bigger car than Sentra – 183.9 inches end to end vs. 182.1 inches for the Nissan. But the  Buick’s front doors were three full inches shorter than the new Sentra’s.
Of course, a big door can be used to create the illusion of space. One that’s sometimes dispelled when you actually sit inside the car. That’s not the case here, though. The new Sentra’s got slightly more front seat legroom than the bigger-on-the-outside Buick (42.5 inches vs. 42 inches) and more backseat legroom than its big (and mid-sized) brother, the Altima (36.1 inches). But what’s really important is that the ’13 Sentra’s got three inches more backseat legroom than the old Sentra (34.5 inches) and about a half-inch more rearseat legroom than you’d get in the value-priced Versa sedan (37 inches).
The ’13 Sentra’s interior, like the rest of the car, is also more lux – and less sport.
The old car’s high-mounted shifter console is gone. In its place, a conventional center console and floor-mounted shifter – available with wood trim covers rather than carbon fiber or brushed metal. Also gone are the previous Sentra’s optional accessory gauges – which had been mounted, 370Z-like, on top of the dash and canted toward the driver.
The 5.8 inch LCD screen for the GPS is bigger, too.
An amusing touch is the new car’s 160 MPH speedometer – vs. 140 MPH in the old model.
JATO rockets not included.
THE REST
It’s pretty obvious the trend toward smaller, less powerful – and more economical – engines is upon us. Nissan’s just bowing to the inevitable – and trying to make the best of it. In most respects, the new Sentra is a better car than the model it replaces. But it’s also a blander car – and it remains to be seen whether Nissan buyers will be happy about the changeover.
THE BOTTOM LINE
All that’s missing, really, is an underhood upgrade – which may or may not be forthcoming. Probably, not. The market’s just not there anymore.
Meanwhile, the government is.
Throw it in the Woods?