Last year, I have started going to the Pennsylvania Auto Show in Harrisburg instead of the Philadelphia Auto Show. Philly has more of the concept cars and preproduction models, which are really cool to see sometimes, but Harrisburg is closer, it's only $6 to get in (with a coupon), although parking is $10. Also, there seem to be about 6 million people at the Philly show, many of whom are rude big-city types. The show in Harrisburg still has all of the major 2012 new cars to look at and sit in, it's not nearly as crowded, and it gives you more of an opportunity to really drive some new cars.
You are probably thinking "What do you mean, drive?" One of the newer trends at auto shows are ride and drive events, in which you take cars for a short spin accompanied by a product specialist. Like the rest of the auto show, this is a non-selling atmosphere, so there is no pressure to buy a car, but the reps are there to answer many questions you might have. Most auto shows, including Philly, are in crowded downtown areas, so the ride and drive events through city streets, and you are lucky to break 10 mph. In Harrisburg, you navigate the large parking lots around the massive Pennsylvania Farm Show complex, which hosts the largest agricultural exhibition in the country in January.
Last year, I had the pleasure of driving some fine GM products, and a Subaru. This year, Ford is hosting a ride and drive.
I am a third generation GM man, and, with the exception of a Honda I drove in college, I have driven nothing but GM products. I have driven a Pontiac, an Oldsmobile, a Saab, and I currently own a Saturn. See a pattern here? Maybe my next car will be a Cadillac so I can put that division under.
Anyway, I have nothing against Ford. I think their pickup trucks have always been unbeatable. Their cars seem to be attractive and appealing (except for the Flex and Fiesta sedan), and I think Alan Mullaly's "world car" strategy is good for us, but I always thought that little was done to differentiate Lincolns from Fords, rendering the Lincoln division virtually useless, especially because they are equipping Fords with more and more luxury gadgetry. Having seen the 2013 MKZ, this should be changing.
Also, a good friend of mine works as a thermal systems engineer in Dearborn. He is not only brilliant, but also a family man and an all-around nice guy, so I can assume that with people like him working there, they are building some well-engineered cars.
So here are my impressions of the Ford products I test drove. The test drive route went through the parking lots, and then back into the Pa. Dept. of Agriculture property, where you could get somewhat of a feel for the cars, and a chance to open them up.
Ford F-150 Ecoboost: This is the vehicle (or one of the vehicles) that my friend was working on as an engineer. He has my compliments, because this was an impressive vehicle. Like most of the Ford pickups I have driven, it is easy and predictable to drive, very comfortable to sit in, 
feels smaller than its massive size. This vehicle is considered by many to be a game changer, because it has a twin-turbocharged V6, which puts out 365 horsepower, and a whopping 420 lb-ft of torque, which matches or surpasses most V-8 pickup truck engines. Although not a hot rod, this was certainly fast enough and then some for most pickup truck drivers. The power came on smoothly and relentlessly, and had a surprising amount of low-end torque for a blown V-6. The exhaust note was the only obvious sign that this isn't a V8. The Eco in Ecoboost is not too obvious. The 16 mpg city-23 mpg highway fuel mileage is only marginally better than its V-8 colleagues, but then again, this ia a 5700 lb. vehicle. Ecoboost trucks start at about $25k for a regular cab, but pile on the options, and the price goes way up. The nicely equipped, but not loaded Super Crew I drove was about $43k. Overall, an impressive vehicle, and I think other manufacturers will follow suit with smaller engines in pickup trucks. Supposedly almost half of all F-150s are Ecoboosts, so this new approach seems to be popular.
feels smaller than its massive size. This vehicle is considered by many to be a game changer, because it has a twin-turbocharged V6, which puts out 365 horsepower, and a whopping 420 lb-ft of torque, which matches or surpasses most V-8 pickup truck engines. Although not a hot rod, this was certainly fast enough and then some for most pickup truck drivers. The power came on smoothly and relentlessly, and had a surprising amount of low-end torque for a blown V-6. The exhaust note was the only obvious sign that this isn't a V8. The Eco in Ecoboost is not too obvious. The 16 mpg city-23 mpg highway fuel mileage is only marginally better than its V-8 colleagues, but then again, this ia a 5700 lb. vehicle. Ecoboost trucks start at about $25k for a regular cab, but pile on the options, and the price goes way up. The nicely equipped, but not loaded Super Crew I drove was about $43k. Overall, an impressive vehicle, and I think other manufacturers will follow suit with smaller engines in pickup trucks. Supposedly almost half of all F-150s are Ecoboosts, so this new approach seems to be popular.
Explorer: Not quite as impressed with this vehicle. I drove a loaded V-6 model. I have read that the Ecoboost turbo-4 is very slow. I wouldn't call this V-6 model fast, but it was certainly adequate. Handling and steering feel was a little bit pillowy and imprecise, but not to the point where I wouldn't recommend this car to others. However, the Chevy Traverse, which I drove as a rental car last year, has better handling and 
steering feel, as well as a better powertrain. The interior is class-leading, with soft touch surfaces, and high-tech stuff everywhere. The instrument cluster has an analog speedometer in the center, flanked by two hi-res digital customizable digital displays on either side that can show the tachometer, radio information, trip information, navigation directions, and other information. People who like tech and gadgetry like my younger brother would love this car. I wasn't able to really play with the MyFordTouch system, which Consumer Reports hates because it is too complex and distracts people from driving. I disagree, because people like technology, and like any piece of high-tech stuff, there is a learning curve on how to use it, and once people know how to use it properly, they have no problem with it. Maybe the folks at CR would like the Explorer more if they spent a couple of months with it. Then again, maybe not, because this isn't a Honda or Toyota.
steering feel, as well as a better powertrain. The interior is class-leading, with soft touch surfaces, and high-tech stuff everywhere. The instrument cluster has an analog speedometer in the center, flanked by two hi-res digital customizable digital displays on either side that can show the tachometer, radio information, trip information, navigation directions, and other information. People who like tech and gadgetry like my younger brother would love this car. I wasn't able to really play with the MyFordTouch system, which Consumer Reports hates because it is too complex and distracts people from driving. I disagree, because people like technology, and like any piece of high-tech stuff, there is a learning curve on how to use it, and once people know how to use it properly, they have no problem with it. Maybe the folks at CR would like the Explorer more if they spent a couple of months with it. Then again, maybe not, because this isn't a Honda or Toyota.
Focus: I felt a lot more comfortable driving this, because I like smaller cars much better than SUVs and other large vehicles, because I can feel the road, and actually feel like I am driving. The Focus is new for this year, and we finally get the same Focus as the Europeans do. This is a very good compact car with plenty of power and good, predictable handling. A lot of cjournalists complained about the dual-clutch automatic, but it felt fine to me, and seemed no different than any other slushbox on the road. They may have worked the bugs out of the tranny for the 2012 model. Still, this would be a blast with a manual. Again, Ford goes for the high-tech crowd with full color displays on the instrument panel and the center console. Very good marketing, because this is aimed at younger drivers who love technology at an affordable price. I was impressed when I drove this car's competitor, the Chevy Cruze, last year, and I am equally as impressed with this car. I give the slight edge to the Ford because of its sharp exterior and interior styling. Kudos to the Americans for two great cars in the competitive compact car market. Next year's Dodge Dart, which looks great, should be equally as competitive. The Corolla and Civic, which have as much personality as a toaster, are now playing catch-up.
Mustang V6: Thanks to some empty roads, and a product rep who was more than willing to let me play around a little, I was able to thrash the hell out of this Mustang. Gone is the boat anchor 4.0 V6, replaced in 2011 by a 3.7 liter V6 with an impressive 305 hp. Simply put, this car is fast. I had it up to 70 in a matter of seconds. It handles really well, and has that balanced feel that only a rear-wheel drive car can offer. I can only imagine what the V-8 is like. For comparison's sake, I drove a Camaro SS last year. That was one of the fastest cars I have ever driven. Although I think it is more attractive than the Mustang, it was hard to see out of, and the car was so low to the ground I felt like I was sitting in a bathtub. Although I drove the V-6 Mustang and the V-8 Camaro, I would give the edge to the Mustang because it's more comfortable to sit in, and has a better chassis with better handling and steering feel.
Other observations from the auto show:
The preproduction 2013 Escape was on display. It's about time, because the Escape was obsolete 5 years ago. However, the current Escape is very trucklike, while the new one is very carlike. (like the Focus, we get the same car as the rest of the world, except it's called the Kuga everywhere else). I am afraid this may turn off customers who are used to the quasi-macho styling of the Escape.
The 2013 Malibu is going for a more sporty look, complete with Camaro-inspired taillights. Unfortunately, I think it's a step backwards styling-wise, because I like the elegance and simplicity of the current Malibu. Still, it looks much better than the thousands upon thousands of the Camcords on the road.
Chevy Volt: There were lots of people crowded around this car to look at it, yet no one is buying them.
Buick Verano: Nice job taking what is basically a Cruze and making look like a Buick. It basically looks like a smaller version of the Regal, and that's a good thing. This is no Cimarron, but a car that is attractive inside and out and reasonably priced.
Buick Regal GS: Stick shift? On a Buick? Yes!
Volkswagen Passat: Good price for a very conservative looking vehicle. This will sell well, since so many people buy Camrys and Accords, it's clearly apparent that Americans like their midsize cars dull as dishwater.
Subaru Impreza: This is new for this year. For some reason, Subaru actually put a less powerful engine in the car. Power decreases from 170 to 148 hp, although the car is lighter and gets better fuel economy. It looks better, but, like most Subarus, the lines are weird and the proportions are a bit off. This will be an also-ran in the compact segment, but will appeal to Subaru's usual clientele of L.L. Bean wearing New England outdoorsy types, college professors and people of a certain sexual orientation.
Honda CR-V: Finally, after several years of boredom (the new Civic) and sheer homeliness (the Crosstour, Acura ZD-X), Honda finally puts out a decent looking car. The new CR-V looks a little bit more macho (I always thought the last CR-V looked like a chick car), And the interior is very nice. I sat in a leather-appointed vehicle with an attractive two-tone brown interior. However, the powertrain is carryover, which may put this car behind in the compact SUV segment.
No comments:
Post a Comment