Cars Review

Test Drive: 2010 Acura TL SH-AWD 6MT

2010-08-03T03:33:00.000-07:00

A World-Class Sedan With a Tech-Laden, Executive-Grade Interior

Vehicle Tested:	2010 Acura TL SH-AWD 4dr Sedan AWD w/Technology Package, HPT (3.7L 6cyl 6M)

Pros:	Refined and powerful V6, manual transmission works well and adds quickness, impressive handling, superb front seats, roomy backseat, strong brakes.
Cons:	Controversial styling, numb steering, marginal ride quality.

The 2010 Acura TL SH-AWD with the Technology Package and the new six-speed manual transmission brings some familiar adages to mind. "Don't judge a book by its cover." "Beauty is more than skin deep." You get the idea. From behind the wheel, this TL is a revelation, a world-class performance sedan that Acura somehow derived from the plebeian Honda Accord. It also boasts plenty of technology and room for four full-size adults. But the question is: Will those heartwarming adages still be convincing when $44,000 of your hard-earned money is on the line?
We'll hold open the possibility, because we've certainly met people who like the way the TL looks. Some find the pointy grille refreshingly different; others favor the unusual metallic V-shaped insert below the trunk. If you're a fan of the styling, the TL SH-AWD 6MT definitely belongs at the top of your shopping list. After all, its performance is competitive with that of the BMW 535i xDrive, which runs $10,000-$15,000 more when comparably equipped. And the TL SH-AWD is bigger and more comfortable than the marginally better-performing but pricier Audi S4.

Though more conservatively styled, the above-mentioned BMW and Audi are the only truly comparable luxury performance sedans with manual transmissions and the year-round versatility of all-wheel drive. Even if you're not high on the TL's brave design language, you might still want to give this car a chance. As one of the best-driving luxury performance sedans under $60,000, the 2010 Acura TL SH-AWD 6MT is proof that beauty is more than skin deep.

Enlarge Photo
The 2010 Acura TL SH-AWD is one of the best-handling luxury performance sedans under $60,000. Yes, it's that good.
(photo by: Kurt Niebuhr)
Enlarge Photo
The interior layout is pleasing to the eye but not particularly memorable. Then again, the same goes for BMW's interiors.
(photo by: Kurt Niebuhr)
Enlarge Photo
We'll say this for the TL SH-AWD — it sure looks distinctive. And it sure doesn't resemble the tidily styled previous TL.
(photo by: Kurt Niebuhr)

Performance

The 2010 Acura TL SH-AWD is powered by a 3.7-liter SOHC V6 rated at 305 horsepower and 273 pound-feet of torque. Our test car had the new six-speed manual transmission, with EPA fuel economy estimates of 17 mpg city/25 mpg highway and 20 mpg combined.
At the test track, our TL SH-AWD sped to 60 mph in just 5.6 seconds, a remarkable 1.1 seconds quicker than the identically powered automatic-transmission version we tested last year. The quarter-mile flew by in 13.9 seconds at 100.1 mph — pretty serious speed for a six-cylinder luxury sedan, particularly one with an engine as refined as this smooth 3.7-liter mill. Brake testing returned repeated fade-free stops from 60 mph in a commendably short 110 feet.
In our handling tests, the TL was aided greatly by its Super-Handling All-Wheel Drive (hence "SH-AWD"), a sophisticated system that mitigates understeer in hard cornering by apportioning power to the outside wheels. Our track driver did complain about a lack of feel from the electric power steering, an impression seconded by those of us who drove the car in the canyons. Still, the Acura averaged 68.5 mph in the slalom, an impressive speed for a large sedan, and it circled the skid pad at a sports-carlike 0.92g.
Real-world driving backs these gaudy numbers up convincingly. Unlike the tepid automatic version, the TL SH-AWD 6MT feels genuinely fast in a straight line, with the endearing manual shifter and light, short-throw clutch serving as willing companions. On twisty roads, the SH-AWD system does a stellar job of keeping the TL's handling neutral — if you notice understeer, you probably did something wrong.
The only real demerit here concerns the car's sheer bulk, an inevitable encumbrance given those Accord roots. Whereas the S4 and 535i xDrive shrink around you in tight corners, the TL SH-AWD never feels smaller than the sizable car it is. The Acura's brakes are always strong, though, and the steering is quite responsive despite its numbness. This is a genuine sport sedan — no doubt about it.

Comfort

Unlike its German rivals, the 2010 Acura TL SH-AWD lets some impact harshness filter through over bumps and ruts, and it generally has a less substantial feel at speed. Still, it rides notably better than the Accord on which it's based, and road noise is appropriately hushed. The front seats are among the best chairs in the business — brilliantly comfortable and supportive. The thick-rimmed, ergonomically contoured steering wheel fits hands perfectly, and the armrests are nicely padded.
The backseat is another high point. This is where the TL's imposing dimensions pay their most obvious dividends. Two 6-footers fit easily behind similarly lanky front-seat occupants, and they'll also appreciate the comfortable shape of the rear outboard seats. The S4 has less backseat space, and even the 535i xDrive would be hard-pressed to match the Acura in this regard.

Function

The TL SH-AWD's primary gauges are clear and feature Acura's trademark "floating" needles. The center stack has too many similar-looking buttons, though owners will, of course, acclimate to this with time. A multifunction control knob comes in handy for programming the Technology package's navigation system or checking real-time weather forecasts, and deftly manages the iPod interface, which our music fans lauded for its ease of use. The premium Panasonic/ELS stereo, also part of the Technology package, delivers crisp and clean sound.
In our real-world usability tests, we found that while the TL's 12.5-cubic-foot trunk can accommodate two sets of golf clubs plus a standard suitcase, it's disappointingly small given that this is hardly a small car. A rear-facing child seat fits just fine in the commodious backseat, however.

Design/Fit and Finish

We've said enough about the TL SH-AWD's exterior styling; beauty is in the eye of the buyer, as always. Inside, the TL's dual-cowl dashboard design is sleek but not particularly memorable, awash as it is in dark colors and odd silver plastic trim with a black dot matrix overlay.
Materials quality is average for this segment, including the expected soft-touch dash covering. Build quality on our test car was exemplary — there were no squeaks or rattles, and everything in the cabin seemed to be put together exceptionally well.

Who Should Consider This Vehicle

The 2010 Acura TL SH-AWD 6MT is an excellent option for driving enthusiasts who want an all-weather luxury performance sedan. The manual shifter naturally limits its appeal, but buyers who opt for this configuration will be rewarded with a spacious four-door with refined world-class performance.

Others To Consider Audi S4, BMW 535i xDrive, Cadillac CTS Performance, Subaru Legacy 2.5GT Limited.

The manufacturer provided Edmunds this vehicle for the purpose of evaluation.

Model Year

2010

Make

Acura

Model

Style

SH-AWD 4dr Sedan With Technology Package, HPT (3.7L 6cyl 6M)

Base Price

$44,195

Price as Tested

$44,195

Options on Test Vehicle

None.

Drive Type

Front-engine, all-wheel drive

Transmission Type

Six-speed manual

Transmission and Axle Ratio (x:1)

1st = 3.625, 2nd = 2.115, 3rd = 1.529, 4th = 1.125, 5th = 0.847, 6th = 0.686, FD = 3.842, R = 3.656

Engine Type

Transverse-mounted V6

Displacement (cc / cu-in)

3,664/223

Block/Head Material

Aluminum/aluminum

Valvetrain

SOHC, 4 valves per cylinder with variable intake-/exhaust-valve timing and lift

Compression Ratio

11.2

Redline (rpm)

6,700

Horsepower (hp @ rpm)

305 @ 6,300

Torque (lb-ft @ rpm)

273 @ 5,000

Brake Type (front)

12.8-inch ventilated disc with two-piston fixed calipers

Brake Type (rear)

13.1-inch solid disc with single-piston fixed calipers

Steering System

Speed-proportional electric-assist rack-and-pinion power steering

Steering Ratio

13.96:1

Suspension Type (front)

Independent, double wishbones, coil springs and stabilizer bar

Suspension Type (rear)

Independent, multilink, coil springs and stabilizer bar

Tire Size (front)

245/40ZR19 94Y

Tire Size (rear)

245/40ZR19 94Y

Tire Brand

Michelin

Tire Model

Pilot Sport PS2

Tire Type

Summer performance (asymmetrical + directional)

Wheel Size

19-by-8 inches

Wheel Material (front/rear)

Cast aluminum alloy

Manufacturer Curb Weight (lb)

3,889

Curb Weight As Tested (lb)

3,849

Weight Distribution, F/R (%)

58/42

Recommended Fuel

Premium unleaded (required)

Fuel Tank Capacity (gal)

18.5

EPA Fuel Economy (mpg)

17 city/25 highway/20 combined

Edmunds Observed (mpg)

17 worst/22 best/19 average

Temperature (Fahrenheit)

58.8

Humidity

42%

Elevation (ft)

1,121

Wind

1.5 mph crosswind

0 - 30 (sec)

2.2

0 - 45 (sec)

3.7

0 - 60 (sec)

5.6

0 - 75 (sec)

8.1

1/4 Mile (sec @ mph)

13.9 @ 100.1

0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec)

5.3

30 - 0 (ft)

60 - 0 (ft)

110

Braking Rating

Very good

Slalom (mph)

68.5

Skid Pad Leteral acceleration (g)

0.92

Handling Rating

Very good

Db @ Idle

39.2

Db @ Full Throttle

70.8

Db @ 70 mph Cruise

57.5

Acceleration Comments

With so little tangible feel from the pedals, it's almost a robotic experience to launch the TL SH-AWD 6MT. The best launch was from an indicated 3,750 rpm with a wisp of wheelspin. The shifter is light and makes upchanges easy but not confident. Power is linear and tapers off very little near redline. Engine sounds better (less thrashy and smoother) than the Nissan/Infiniti VQ.

Braking Comments

Firm pedal, little idle stroke, flat and straight stops. Some brake-pad odor, but no observed fade from six total stops (or after four quarter-mile runs). Very quick ABS motor so zero buzz or vibration during panic stops.

Handling Comments

Skid pad: With ESP off and in 2nd gear, I found maintaining a line a little difficult as the AWD system was busy shifting power all over. Switched to 3rd and it was better behaved and more consistent, but then using throttle to adjust yaw angle to skid pad arc required more patience and felt a little delayed. With ESP on, the car was even more difficult to place precisely on the line as it merely added another (electronic) layer between the driver and the mechanicals. Steering effort/build-up feels a little springy. Slalom: There's little doubt this is a tremendously capable sport sedan, but I just wish for equally tremendous feedback, and that's lacking. Steering is quick and direct, but lacks vocabulary. With the ESP off, the car was mostly neutral -- neither under- nor oversteering -- right up to the last cone where a "lift-stab" on the throttle worked to coax some useful rotation. The ESP system is remarkable in that it merely "trims" your heading slightly with brake applications, but kills the enthusiastic WOT exit.

Length (in)

195.5

Width (in)

74.0

Height (in)

57.2

Wheelbase (in)

109.3

Front Track (in)

63.2

Rear Track (in)

63.8

Turning Circle (ft)

38.4

Legroom, front (in)

42.5

Legroom, rear (in)

36.2

Headroom, front (in)

38.4

Headroom, rear (in)

36.7

Shoulder Room, front (in)

58.2

Shoulder Room, rear (in)

56.2

Maximum Seating Capacity

Cargo Volume (cu-ft)

12.5

Bumper-to-Bumper

4 years/50,000 miles

Power Train

6 years/70,000 miles

Corrosion

5 years/Unlimited miles

Roadside Assistance

4 years/50,000 miles

Scheduled Maintenance

Not available

Front Airbags

Standard

Side Airbags

Standard dual front

Head Airbags

Standard front and rear

Knee Airbags

Not available

Antilock Brakes

Four-wheel ABS

Electronic Brake Enhancements

Braking assist, electronic brakeforce distribution

Traction Control

Standard

Stability Control

Standard

Rollover Protection

Not available

Tire Pressure Monitoring System

Standard tire-pressure monitoring

Emergency Assistance System

Not available

NHTSA Crash Test Driver

5 stars

NHTSA Crash Test Passenger

5 stars

NHTSA Crash Test Side Front

5 stars

NHTSA Crash Test Side Rear

5 stars

NHTSA Rollover

5 stars

IIHS Offset

Good

edmunds.com

First Impressions: 2010 Hyundai Santa Fe

2010-08-03T03:29:00.000-07:00

Pros:

Radio controls integrated into steering wheel (and integrated very well!)
Bluetooth® phone controls
iPod support
XM® Satellite Radio
Lots of storage compartments
Elegant trim touches
Good mileage for gas SUV at 22 mpg

Cons:

Dated styling
Uninspired driving
Acceptable freeway on-ramp power

First Impressions
Over the last decade, Hyundai has made huge strides in improving their reputation for safety and quality. In 2006, they passed Toyota in the JD Powers and Associates quality ranking – a major change for a brand that had once been the poster child for low quality. Note that this was way before Toyota started recalling everything – they used to be the standard for quality! With the better reputation, long warranties and their low prices, Hyundai has grown sales in North America from about 250,000 cars in 2000 to 435,000 in 2009, grabbing share from their established rivals. The biggest part of that success has been the Santa Fe, a crossover SUV that has become commonplace here in import-friendly California. The gist of all of this background is that I was interested to check out the most popular SUV that the up-and-coming Hyundai has to offer.

The 2010 is part of the second generation of this workhorse SUV. However, since the last major overhaul was in 2007, it’s getting time to update this one again. The styling of the Santa Fe is acceptable, but clearly a step behind the recently overhauled 2010 Tucson, which is a smaller and less expensive crossover. The Tucson is far edgier and exciting, making the Santa Fe come off looking behind the times. Walking up to it, I felt the age of the design and expected my time with the Santa Fe would reveal it to have some tweaks on an established platform, but nothing too exciting.
However, opening the door and sliding behind the wheel, I was surprised to find an array of controls integrated into the steering wheel. I’m a big fan of putting stereo controls into the steering wheel, but have usually only found them on much higher end cars. It makes no sense to me why car companies have put so much effort on putting cruise controls on the steering wheel and completely ignore the fact that people adjust their stereo a thousand times more often. Seeing both phone and stereo controls in the Santa Fe brightened my opinion immediately. In addition to the integrated stereo controls, the Santa Fe also comes standard with satellite radio and iPod integration, a surprising touch that I didn’t expect in a base model GLS that I drove.

Hyundai has certainly learned about the American love affair with cup holders and has extended that to all kinds of storage space throughout the SUV. My son loved finding all the “secret compartments” as he called them, including a sizable one below the deck of the rear area. This would make a great place to stow a laptop out of sight. The extra storage was one benefit of not having the third row of seats, which is not available on this model year.
The drive experience of the Santa Fe was as expected for a mainstream SUV – a bit bouncy, but not overly much. For a crossover, it sure felt a lot like a truck. I guess there are some physics you can’t get around and having a heavy vehicle with a high center of gravity will lean and sway like a truck. Hyundai touts the power of the Santa Fe, but I was unimpressed. I was able to merge safely onto several freeway on-ramps, but the Santa Fe lacks the power to really put you back in your seat. The 2.4L 4-cylinder engine cranks out 175 horsepower, but I would think hard about towing a boat in the mountains with this. The 276 hp 3.5L V6, the standard engine in the SE and Limited trims, might be better suited to heavier duty.

That said the most impressive feature of the Santa Fe was the price. I didn’t look at the sticker until after I had checked out the car. For $22,995, the GLS that I drove delivers a lot of value, reliability and features. The faux wood styling in the cabin makes it feel like a much more expensive SUV. With its value, generous list of standard equipment, and impressive safety ratings, I can see why more and more people are selecting a Hyundai as their car or SUV.

	BUILD	INTERIOR	PERFORMANCE	HANDLING	STYLING	VALUE	OVERALL
RATING	4.0	4.5	3.75	4.0	4.0	4.5	4.25/B+

Carreview.com

Gymkhana Grid Competition, 2011 Ford Fiesta Review

2010-08-03T03:28:00.000-07:00

Driving Sports TV Episode #26: – Ken Block is well-known for his Gymkhana videos where he took his Subaru Impreza WRX STI rally car and effectively went all out, drifting, power sliding and doing all sorts of crazy things in specially designed locations. Now, Block wants to turn Gymkhana into an actual motorsport, and has announced the Gymkhana Grid and the Ken Block Invitational competitions. Plus, Ryan flies to San Francisco to test the all-new Ford Fiesta on an autocross course.

Driving Sports is an online publication and video series that strives to entertain, inform and engage. Click in every Wednesday at 10pm PST at drivingsports.com to watch a live streaming broadcast. If you can’t watch live, view the archives posted at drivingsports.com as well as their various syndication partners (YouTube, Streetfire, etc.)
Driving Sports is a registered trademark of MediaSpigot LCC.
Content is copyright 2003-2009 Driving Sports. All rights reserved.

First Impressions: 2011 BMW Z4 sDrive35is

2010-08-01T06:34:00.000-07:00

Things That Make You Smile:

Sling-shot performance and slot-car handling without the go-kart suspension
Beautifully balanced proportions and elegant design silhouette
Retractable hardtop insulates you from the elements and road noise better than a ragtop
Intelligent dual-clutch automatic is fast and silky smooth
The new interior is more visually pleasing, and includes a slew of comfort and usability improvements

Things That Turn Your Smile Up-side Down:

Melbourne Red paint job attracts more attention than Boss Hogg and Sheriff Rosco spotting the General Lee
I know it’s a roadster, but where do I put my golf clubs?

Bada bing, bada boom! Last year we drove the 2010 Z4 sDrive35i powered by BMW’s silky-smooth turbocharged, inline-6 engine and a double-clutch transmission that can change gears faster than Quick-Draw McGraw on speed. Performance was impressive, handling was sharp as a razor, and driving dynamics were more engaging than Betty Davis’ eyes. This year BMW has added a new range-topping Z4, one with a massaged engine that produces 335 hp and a load of M Sport touches. Not that the Z4 needed any more power, but we were surprised the company didn’t call it a Z4 M.
The 2011 BMW Z4 sDrive35is wants to play with the big boys and take its place next to the Audi TT-RS, Mercedes-Benz SLK and Porsche Boxster S/Cayman S. BMW has given the 3.0L engine better intake breathing and higher boost pressure for a new output of 335 hp at 5900 rpm and 332 lb-ft from 1500 rpm, with overboost providing quick bursts of 369 lb-ft. A specifically tuned exhaust system provides a deep rumble with a focus on the low-frequency sound range.

The sDrive35is is available only with BMW’s seven-speed double-clutch transmission. The same Getrag-engineered unit offered as optional equipment for the M3. Here, it features a dual-mass flywheel to handle the increased power. It is spectacularly good, providing rapid and seamless shifts that fully justify BMW’s decision not to offer the Z4 sDrive35is with a traditional six-speed manual gearbox as on the Z4 sDrive30i and Z4 sDrive35i. The programming is also unique to the model. Gear changes can be effected either via the console selector or wheel-mounted paddles. Launch control is part of the package, as well.
Launching the Z4 from a standing start, redline approaches faster than you can hiccup and the dual-clutch transmission snaps through gears 1, 2, and 3 before you can exhale. Officially the Z4 sDrive35is will reach 0-60 mph from a standstill in 4.7 seconds, some 0.5 second faster than Porsche claims for the Boxster S. We did detect a tiny bit of turbo-lag response, but the real beauty of this engine is its willingness to go faster, no matter what the revs or the gear, all the way to its electronically limited 155 mph.

Yet there’s much more to the 2011 BMW Z4 sDrive35is than just a tuned engine. The 35is also gets a reworked suspension with stiffer springs and dampers, a ride height that’s lower by 0.4 inch and a set of 18-inch cast-aluminum wheels. Steering, body control, grip and overall responses are in an altogether different league from those of the Z4 sDrive35i — so much so that you’re left wondering if the two really share the same origins.This car might not wear an M car’s badge, but it certainly feels like one.
The Z4’s standard electric-assist steering has been calibrated to endow the sDrive35is with a beefier feel and added levels of feedback compared to lesser versions of the two-seat roadster. It weights up nicely through corners and delivers sharp response both at lower speeds around town and as the pace increases out on the open road.

The wunderkinds from Stuttgart have also completely revised the active properties of the Z4’s aluminum-intensive suspension to provide the sDrive35is with the sort of sharpness that keen drivers will appreciate, together with impressive levels of compliance that everyone appreciates. The MacPherson struts up front and multilinks at the rear have been enhanced by stiffer stabilizer bars at each end, along with firmer springs and recalibrated dampers.
We tested the car under dry conditions and discovered that the great thing about the chassis changes is that once you get in the zone and start pushing up to the absolute limit, the car doesn’t prematurely back away from the action with early stability control intervention. The Z4 simply gets on with the job, digging deeper without displaying any worrying tendencies that might force you to back away from the throttle. Even at seriously high cornering speeds, it’s extraordinarily eager and imparts a feeling of utter competency.

The truly admirable achievement is that BMW’s suspension engineers have managed to endow the Z4 sDrive35is with such crisp and engaging handling without significantly ruining the ride. Yes, it is firmer than the Z4 sDrive35i, but the 35is retains reasonable levels of compliance even in the most extreme Sport+ setting for the electrically controlled dampers.
M Sport upgrades also adorn the exterior and interior. New front and rear fascias (the latter with an integrated diffuser) give the already attractive car a more aggressive look. Standard wheels are 18-inch five-spokes, with 19s available as an option. The sDrive35is also receives Audi-like silver mirror caps. Inside is a thick M leather steering wheel with the shift paddles, an M dead pedal, M door sills, floor mats with colored piping, and sport seats. Interior trim is done in what BMW calls Aluminum Carbon, which supposedly renders the look of a carbon-fiber weave in aluminum.

Carreview.com

2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS2 Review – Silver Bumblebee to the Rescue!

2010-08-01T00:22:00.000-07:00

Pros
• In-your-face styling
• Plenty of power to burn rubber
• Uncontrollable urge to drive recklessly
Cons
• Very poor visibility
• Jared-from-Subway weight problem
• Less-than-impressive MPG
Introduction
I’ve been pretty stressed out lately, been very busy at work, just moved into a new house and my wife and I are expecting our first baby. Yeah, a little stressed out. So when my editor called to tell me that a 2010 Camaro SS2 was on its way, I was ecstatic! Just as Bumblebee in Transformers coming to Earth to save Sam Witwicky from the Decepticons, this silver ice metallic Chevrolet Camaro SS2 arrived to rescue me from the tense situation in my life. And just like Bumblebee and Sam, I formed an immediate bond with the SS2, with its 6.2 L V8 with SFI pumping out 426 HP paired with a 6-speed manual, capable of hitting 60 MPH in 4.9 seconds. I loved the twin black striping down the middle of this silver tester, making it a Raiders themed kick-ass Camaro.

Driving Impressions
The SS2 had plenty of power, there was no doubt about it. What was surprising, however, was how conservative first gear was. It did not leap from a stop like the Challenger SRT8 that I drove a couple of months ago. But once I shifted into second and kept the right foot down, the Camaro took off and leaves everyone else in the dust. Third, fourth, came naturally and I was flying dangerously fast on the local expressway. Highway acceleration was good but you definitely feel the weight of this car. The Camaro SS2 weighs in at almost 3,900 pounds, a little less than the Challenger SRT8 but is still a lot of steel on wheels. The ride is tight, resulting in some pretty great cornering around my office building complex. The big 4-wheel disc Brembo brakes do a great job of stopping this beast. The V8 on the Camaro SS2 does not resonate with the bass that was so soothing on the Challenger SRT8.

The most distinctive impression the Camaro leaves you is the cockpit and the small greenhouse areas around you. Actually I meant the tiny greenhouse. The high belt line on this car makes you feel like you’re driving a military vehicle with small windows and windshield to minimize exposure to enemy fire. The gigantic C pillar makes it impossible to see out the right rear corner of the car, which makes backing out of parking spots at your local Safeway a hair-raising experience. You do feel like you’re in the cockpit of a futuristic military vehicle, like an Autobot.

Build
The Camaro felt extremely well built for a GM. I remember the last generation Camaros that I rented out when I worked at Enterprise Rent-A-Car after college. Those things were truly POS that had the structural integrity of a paper airplane. This Camaro is light years ahead and the body was very solid. The doors close with a strong thud like on a bimmer and the panel fit on the car was consistent and narrow. There were no rattles or creaks on the tester, and wind noise was minimal on the freeway. GM has come a long way and done a great job with the Camaro’s structural integrity. The interior, on the other hand, is a different story.
Interior Comfort and Ergonomics
The interior design is distinctive on the Camaro, and harks back to the Camaros of the 1970s. The retro dials in front of the stick shift are original (from the ‘70s) and do differentiate the Camaro from the Mustang and the Challenger. The doors feature huge expanses of body colored plastic panels with strips of LED lighting that emit a greenish blue haze at night. The instrument panel is retro as well and feature modern displays that provide the various data points available in all GM cars today. That’s about it for the good news on the interior.
The stereo unit would have benefited from a little more attention from the designers. It is of a strange shape that’s neither attractive nor easy to replace with after market units. It has neither a GPS unit nor does it offer high quality displays that you expect from a $30,000+ car. It does have one redeeming quality – it features a simulated analog dial not seen since the 1980s. For someone like me who used to have a radio like that, nostalgia heaven. The rest of the interior suffers from a basic problem of cheap-feeling materials.

As I mentioned previously, visibility out of the Camaro is next to nil. The high beltline and the low-slung roof make for a challenging task to judge where the corners and edges of the car are. The fat C pillars are worse than the Challenger and make it impossible to back out of parking spots. There is no grip bar on the passenger side and passengers were constantly reaching for it when I was driving, too bad. The door handles on the inside were also pretty poorly designed and made it hard to pull them close from the inside.

Performance
The Camaro SS2 definitely exceeds expectations on the performance front. First of all, it’s hard to tell that this is a SS2 for the untrained eye. There’s the small letters on the trunk lid and something on the grill that hint at the SS badass nature of this car, but otherwise it’s hard to tell it from a regular V6 Camaro with a styling package. It is really easy for others to underestimate this car at the stop light. The 420 lb-ft. of torque comes at a relatively low 4,600 RPM but as I said, you have to quickly shift to second in order to really take off.
I took the tester onto this fairly deserted stretch of a local unnamed expressway behind my office. After making sure there was no police presence nearby, I turned off traction control and let it rip! Burning rubber was surprisingly easy in the Camaro SS2 and I found good rubber going to second gear too. Luckily for me, police absence continued and I was able to do multiple burn-outs and scared off quite a few school children walking home. So this must have been what it was like to live in the ‘70s, burning rubber and wrestling the steering wheel to stay in control while smelling the smoke of wasted tires. Thank god for muscle cars!

Handling
The Camaro SS2 came with Stabilitrak with Traction Control, but I wouldn’t know since I had traction control turned off the entire time I had the car. Cornering is tight and the suspension is pretty hard on the passengers in the back. Swerving in and out of traffic on the freeways was an easy task for the SS2 and you really feel confident with the steering. The Camaro is a big coupe and it’s extremely hard to tell where the edges of the car are thanks to the tiny greenhouse area, but it handles pretty confidently despite its weight. Ultimately, you don’t buy the Camaro SS2 for the handling, otherwise you’d opt for a Lotus Elise.
Styling
The Camaro’s design is polarizing. You don’t have to love it, but you’d definitely have an opinion. It’s not as retro as the Dodge Challenger. It’s not as true to the original as the Mustang (although the latest design is a further deviation). What it is, however, is an original interpretation on the original. The new Camaro has all the hints of the original ‘66, but every panel and every part is a modern take on the original design.

Let’s start with the positives. I like the aggressive front end with the half-covered round headlights. The halos on the SS2 are a copy of bimmers but the bigger size works well on the Camaro. The pointed frontend is a nice touch and distinctive from the Ford and Dodge muscle cars. I love how the front wheels are pushed to the corners and are no longer sitting behind the engine and under the windshield. This is characteristic of the new GMs and good for them. I also like the subtle double bubble roof, the combination of a high beltline and a low slung roofline combine for an aggressive futuristic vehicle look. The 20 inch rims with low profile tires fill out the wheel arches and give the Camaro a very forceful stance. The designers also did a great job with the tail lights, which bear family resemblance to the four round ones on the Corvette but have their own distinctive shape that match the half covered head lights.
I actually found very few faults with the styling on the new Camaro. Yes, the fake air intakes behind the doors are a little tacky, like the ones on the Mustang, but they are reminiscent of the original. I do like the slits though, that remind people of the Stingray. The grill on the SS2 looks cheap and pales in comparison to the rest of the details on this car, but it’s ripe for aftermarket customizations.
Value
The Chevrolet Camaro SS2 has the performance, the looks, and the build quality that are comparable to the Dodge Challenger SRT8. It’s only natural to compare these two in terms of value as well. The SS2 tester I had an MSRP of $35,775, a bargain compared to the $45,525 price tag on the ‘09 Challenger SRT8. It didn’t have all the features found on the SRT8, but it’s still a huge delta in prices. On the Challenger SRT8, each of the 425 hp will set you back over $107. On the SS2, however, the 426 horses will cost you only $84 a pop! What a bargain! Don’t worry about the relatively low 16/24 city/highway MPG, you’ll drive yourself crazy.

Who should buy it?
Are you over the age of 40 and have a receding hairline? Do you find yourself commuting to work in a minivan or a Honda Accord or a Toyota Camry? Do you have two kids running around the house and a wife who’s nagging you while you’re trying to figure out trades in your fantasy football league? If you’ve answered yes to at least two of the questions above, do yourself a favor and go test drive a new Camaro SS2. You’ll be delighted to find out how you feel after a spin in this baby, how re-energized you feel, how full of hope life seems again.
Conclusion
The 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS2 is a polarizing car. You may love or you may hate it, but you’ll never miss it. It has presence in the parking lot. It’s a bargain compared to the Challenger SRT8 and also to a lot of other cars out there on a dollar per horsepower basis. But who’s talking dollars and “sense” here? That awesome feeling you get when you turn off traction control and peel out in first gear is simply priceless. The Camaro SS2 is a fix for the doldrums of everyday grown-up life. It’s like a shot of adrenalin when you’re on a sugar low. It’s Bumblebee to the teenager who’s supposed to be a grown-up, stuck under the weight of responsibilities that life has laid upon you. The Camaro SS2 will give your life meaning again.

	Build	Interior	Performance	Handling	Styling	Value	Overall
Rating	4.0	3.75	4.5	4.5	5.0	5.0	4.5/A-

2010 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2010 Ford Mustang – Which one does retro better?

2010-07-31T23:54:00.000-07:00

Pony Car Retro Face-Off:
Who wouldn’t want a ‘68 Camaro or 64-1/2 Mustang in their garage – much less as their daily driver? I have lusted after a ‘68 Camaro ever since I skipped school one day of my sophomore year in high school with my older brother’s friend. He had a bright orange 1968 Camaro – rusted out and torn up, but with a pumped up V8 engine and manual transmission. We practiced burn-outs for a few hours in an abandoned parking lot and then when all the kids were out front waiting for the buses, he performed an amazing display of power by leaving 30 feet of skid marks and plenty of smoke. Those were the days!
But that was then. Now I’m a middle-aged engineering professional and parent, working 50-60 hours per week with responsibilities at home too. Who has the time and money for the classic muscle car obsession? And for those that do, can you daily drive it? Would you daily drive it?

It’s no secret that I love the modern retro cars that U.S. manufacturers have been churning out the last few years. But retro is only cool to a point. There are actually good reasons why certain design elements have been discarded over the years. I was fortunate enough to drive a couple examples of modern retro back-to-back. The classic rival pair – a 2010 Chevy Camaro and a 2010 Mustang – both very impressive cars, yet in very different ways. I have always been an import sports car driver and I have never driven a Mustang or Camaro – new or old. So comparing the two were a revelation to me. I’d always just arbitrarily chosen to prefer Camaros over Mustangs. Now I’m questioning that decision.

Driving Impressions:
The main thing I was looking for driving these cars was which one hits home and really stirs the soul. Which one takes you back to those magical days when no one worried about ‘the law’, or the price of gas, or how bald your rear tires were. Which one is the driver’s car? Which one would I choose?
They both managed to make the freeway miles disappear, but in different ways. The Mustang was fairly stable in a straight line, but I felt the suspension was not well damped. This gave it a kind of retro floaty feeling going down the highway – not my preference. The Camaro, on the other hand, was a rock solid freeway cruiser that was very well damped. The same held true for cornering performance where again, the Camaro felt rock solid and the mustang felt uninspiring. The Camaro was perfect for my tastes for highway and canyon carving traits.
From a driving dynamics, ergonomics and driver interface standpoint, the Mustang was the clear winner. The V8 helped of course, but I felt like I was driving the Mustang and just riding in the Camaro. The Camaro isolated the driver from the driving experience too much.
Styling:
The new Camaro is, hands-down and by a wide margin, the best looking of the two cars. Despite the enormous size of the Camaro, everyone who saw it loved it. The Imperial Blue Metallic color was just spectacular on our tester. My test vehicle was appointed with the ‘RS’ appearance package, which is a must-have, no-brainer option at $1,500.00. It comes with powerful HID headlamps trimmed out with striking Halo rings, 20-inch wheels with 245 front and 275 rear tires, rear trunk-lid spoiler, and RS-unique tail lamps that are smoked just a shade darker than the non-RS. It really has a presence on the road. I have never driven a car that turned so many heads. Older Camaros weave through traffic to get a look. Import-tuners cower and don’t make eye-contact. BMW drivers size up the car, not sure what to do – they try not to let you see them staring.

The 2010 Mustang isn’t so lucky in the looks department. The front-end is definitely an improvement over the 2009, but I preferred the 2009 rear end styling. In-between the front and rear? I dunno – it looks kind of pieces together and doesn’t seem to flow well as one cohesive unit. Part of it could have been that hideous Grabber Blue paint. It turned heads alright – but mostly away from the car. Repulsive blue is more like it. Maybe that’s too harsh. Out of all the hundred or so people that saw the Mustang over the course of a week, only two people said they liked the paint; Peter and some random older woman at the grocery store.

Build:
Build quality goes to Ford. Switches are solid without feeling clunky. Materials just look better and feel better and controls like shifters, blinkers, etc feel very solid. The Mustang delivers a decidedly upscale interior.
All the controls and surfaces in the Camaro just feel like cheap plastic.
Does anyone care about trunk space in a muscle car? The Mustang had decent usable space, but the Camaro’s trunk opening is so small once you open the large-ish metal deck lid, I had to laugh. So there’s space in there, but you won’t be getting much use out of it because getting things to fit through the opening is worse than an 80 pound Labrador trying to squeeze into a rabbit hole. Good thing the rear seats fold down.
Interior Comfort and Ergonomics:
Interior comfort is a draw. The seats in the Mustang felt well-bolstered and seemed to fit my small frame better, but the thick, black leather used on the seats does not breathe at all. My backside was literally sweating – even on a cool day with the A/C on. Yuck! The seats had heaters, but I was sweating already without the bun-warmers. The seats in the Camaro were made of buttery soft, perforated leather that breathes very well. Even with the seat warmer on, I was still comfortable, although they seemed a bit large for my frame. Very nice indeed.
Ergonomics and driving dynamics go to the Mustang, hands-down. Everything is in the right place and feels great – the retro-looking, yet very comfortable and modern-feeling steering wheel, the wonderful round billet shifter knob. The seating position was great. The transmission throws were rifle-bolt action smooth and positive, the clutch pedal pressure was perfect and the friction engagement point on the transmission was linear and predictable and made it very easy to launch – for both aggressive and easy driving. Rear visibility is great. From a driver input/ergonomics standpoint, it does not get much better. The pedals even facilitate heel-toe shifting! Who knew Mustangs were this good?

2010 Ford Mustang Interior

The Camaro wasn’t so lucky in the ergonomics department. The temperature and pressure gauges were on the floor, partially blocked by the shifter and their shiny plastic covers reflected every bit of glare from the sunlight, making them useless for normal driving. Maybe they’d be okay at the drag strip when you are not looking at any gauges for 10-15 seconds and then maybe just between runs, but the serious ¼ mile junkies will probably throw them out in favor of some custom gauges.
The Achilles heel for the Camaro’s ergonomics is the steering wheel. It looks retro and all, but it’s an odd shape. Sure, its round, but the cross-sectional shape of the steering wheel grip surface gives a fairly sharp ridge where your palms are. There was never a comfortable way to grip the wheel for any driving. For twisty mountain road driving, I use the wheel to brace my weight under heavy braking or press my back into the seat under heavy cornering. I chose a 30-mile twisty road out to the coast and half-way through, I was sorry I did. I didn’t even know it was possible to become fatigued from a steering wheel that dug into your palms as you drove the car. That’s two retro failures right there. That steering wheel is just so bad.

2010 Chevrolet Camaro Interior

There were also ‘faux’ paddle shifters. The paddle-shifter-looking bumps that stick up from on the steering wheel spokes with the “+” and “-“ indicators are not actually paddle shifters. Instead they are indicators to let you know that there are button shifters there on the back-side of the spokes. Button shifters? Really? And no, shifting is not fast using the buttons; lethargic, maybe.

Performance:
From a performance standpoint, you’ve heard it all before. I had a 3560 pound Mustang with the V8 and 5-speed manual. The Camaro was 3800 pounds with a V6 and an automatic. Talk about apples to oranges!
So let’s talk about aural performance. The Camaro had a strong V6, but what happened to the sound? What sound? It had been castrated! It was almost completely silent. It didn’t sound any more aggressive than mom’s minivan. What a let-down! Maybe this was done on purpose. Maybe the demographic for a V6 Camaro driver also dictated they are not interested in muscle car sounds either. In the interest of fairness, I went to my local dealership and drove an SS/6-speed model and figured I’d get some throaty V8 sounds from that, but alas, I was disappointed in the SS too. It had a little more aggressive sound than the V6 Camaro, but it was still very muted and distant. And that SS clutch friction point is on/off and difficult to modulate.

Maybe my disappointment in the Camaro’s sound was because the Mustang’s induction system made such glorious, visceral, intoxicating sounds; unlike anything I have heard before. It puts everything else to shame. Seriously, I could not keep my foot from burying the gas pedal. The engine sounds could melt the mettle of any muscle-car fan and resulted in an ear-to-ear grin with a resounding “Hell yeah!”. It was just so rewarding to drive hard. And it’s all about the intake sound. The exhaust sound is alright, but Ford has realized that for the driver, the holy grail of satisfying engine sounds comes from the intake more so than the exhaust. BMW figured that out a while ago. GM doesn’t have a clue yet – at least their Camaro team.
Handling:
Handling comparisons between the test sample vehicles was also apples to oranges. The Camaro came with the RS package with 20-inch wheels and 245/45’s up front and 275/40’s in the rear. It proved to be a very confident handler even with its 3800 pound weight. The Mustang is lighter, but it’s measly 235/50/18 wheels and tires all around were no match for the lighter, yet still heavy 3560 lb curb weight. This smallish wheel/tire package made it a real handful around twisty, bumpy corners. It’s scary to drive fast on the back- roads and the V8 makes you want to drive fast everywhere.

Value:
The Camaro is worth the price of entry based on its gorgeous looks alone. From a visual standpoint, it definitely brings back the beauty and emotion of the originals. It’s a great freeway cruiser and it has the handling for the back-roads, but the steering wheel will keep me from buying one. That and I get a feeling of riding in the car, isolated from the engine and road – not so much driving it – even from the driver’s seat.
The Mustang isn’t as hot looking, but it’s definitely rewarding to drive – in a straight line. Just do something about the wheels/tires and suspension if you want to make it a canyon carver. But that will cost you considerably.
Decision:

Exterior design: Camaro
Interior design: Mustang
Ergonomics: Mustang
Engine sounds: Mustang
Attention getting: Camaro

If your knees go weak at the sight of a late 60’s Camaro or Mustang, but you don’t have the endless resources for care and feeding of such a car, you owe it to yourself to drive one of these. Or even better, drive both… you’ll find things to love about each. The tough part is narrowing it down to one.

I have always been a Camaro fan, at least until I drove a Mustang. If I could get the ergonomics and aural performance of the Mustang into the sexy Camaro body, I’d get the Camaro. If I could get the handling and perforated seat leather from the Camaro into the Mustang, I might buy that too. I’m no longer a fan of one car over the other. I’ll take one of each. Maybe I can get custom leather put into my mustang GT.

carreview.com