Pros

• Awesome acceleration for a SUV that weighs like an elephant
• Intelligent cruise control basically drives the car itself
• High driving position provides commanding view of the road
• A sense of superiority comes standard

Cons

• Great power comes at a cost- paltry MPG makes operating expensive
• Steering is a bit too loose at highway speeds
• The styling is getting a bit dated

Click here to view the embedded video.

I have always wanted to drive a Ranger Rover, having grown up in the 80s where a Jag and a Ranger Rover in the garage means you’ve arrived. Now I know perfectly well that the Range Rover Sport does not sit on the same platform as the Range Rover, which was developed while Land Rover was still owned by the Germans. The Range Rover Sport is based on the newer LR4 platform, so the way I see it: it looks like a Range Rover, smells like a Range Rover, runs faster than a Range Rover, makes me feel superior than every other driver on the road like a Range Rover. Hence, it’s a Range Rover.

Driving Impressions

The LR-V8 5.0 liter supercharged petrol engine delivers 510 hp and 461 lb-ft torque. It can get to 60 MPH in 5.9 seconds. That’s right, you read correctly, 510 horses. Unfortunately, the gross vehicle weight is 6,889 pounds on the RRSS. Acceleration is simply marvelous, but you definitely feel the weight of the SUV and can hear the supercharger working hard. Off-the-line acceleration is great at stop lights. People simply don’t expect this hunk of metal to move that fast. Stopping power is also impressive, the Range Rover Sport comes with high performance brakes developed jointly with Brembo.

The RRSS also comes with a slew of advanced systems such as Adaptive Dynamics, Dynamic Response and the Terrain Response systems, making this one of the best handling SUV in production. Oh sorry I was just reading the press release. The truth is, the RRSS handled really well on surface streets, the steering felt fairly tight at local speeds and the SUV cornered well. Handling on the freeway was a different story. The steering felt too loose and there was too much give at highway speeds for my comfort.

An awesome feature on the highway is the adaptive cruise control (ACC). You just set it, and forget it! Well, you still have to steer, but the Range Rover Sport Supercharged basically drives itself, keeping a preset distance from the car in front of you. You can also select from three distance settings, depending on the prevailing speed at which traffic is moving on the freeway. It is really cool to experience the car brake on its own when using the ACC. It’s almost like that Lexus prototype in the creepy futuristic movie where Tom Cruise is trying not to overwhelm even himself with his great acting.

Styling

The Range Rover Sport Supercharged has a number of styling cues that set it apart from the lesser HSE and the base model, but overall the styling has not changed much at all since Land Rover first introduced the Sport. The headlamp units look more sophisticated and the new more sophisticated corporate grille give the RRSS a more stately presence. From far away, it’s hard for one to tell the RR Sport from the taller Range Rover. The raked rear window gives it a sportier look and feel, and the streamlined port holes also set the Sport apart from the top of the line badge wearer. I’m not a super big fan of the raked rear window, however. Land Rover should have made the front windscreen (is that what they call it in the UK?) more aerodynamic as well like the new Evoque. The thick bonnet on the Range Rover is also signature and works well on the Sport. The Supercharged version also has curvy skirts under the sides of the car that make the SUV look lower, even without you lowering the ride height using the air suspension control. It’s pretty cool to feel the vehicle height lower and rise, by the way.

Interior Comfort and Ergonomics

The 2010 Range Rover Sport has a revamped and upgraded interior to bring it closer to its more expensive sibling. The materials feel expensive for the most part but the actual controls, buttons and knobs feel plasticky for a $80k+ car. The steering wheel controls provide an extensive set of controls, from phone controls, voice commands, cruise control and adaptive cruise control, to stereo and info menu controls, it’s all right there at your fingertips. And then you find the paddle shifters behind the wheel. I must admit, these are kind of awkward on a SUV this size. Plus the 6-speed transmission with CommandShift responds to driving style and conditions and dynamically changing shift patterns, so you don’t really need to use the paddles.

The Range Rover Sport has a lot of interior room. Not as much as the exterior dimensions would suggest, however, but ample room for all five passengers. The center armrest opens up to reveal a refrigerated cooler. Luxury! The rear passengers are treated to dual LCD displays with wireless headsets to enjoy DVDs and music. Splendid! Did I mention that the tester RRSS comes with the optional extended leather package that wraps the entire dashboard, the armrests and the top of door panels in premium Windsor leather. It’s all very bourgeois. Or is that too pedestrian a word to describe the feeling you get from driving a Range Rover?

Value

At over $80k, the Range Rover Sport Supercharged is no bargain. You can get a base Range Rover for that much money. Compared to a BMW X6 M, however, the RRSS is a bargain. Not only do you get more luxury for your money, you also get an extra dose of class that comes only with the venerable British SUV marquee. You can’t get a luxury SUV that’s more unabashedly square, with in-your-face traditional styling that says I come from a more noble birth than you than the Range Rover. Getting the Sport Supercharged just means you’re not old enough to drive the range-topping Range Rover yet.

Conclusion

So if you’ve got $80 grand sitting around and you’re looking for a luxury SUV that says you’re better than everyone else, and you’re not sure whether there’s an off chance that you might one day buy your own plantation with dirt roads, the Range Rover Sport Supercharged is for you. I recommend you buy a pair of black riding boots and a tall hat to go with the ride. A smoking jacket and a fake British accent would also go well with the new ride. God save the Queen!

2010 Range Rover Sport Photo Gallery	2010 Range Rover Sport Supercharged Specs
The official website of Land Rover – www.landrover.com

By Danny Chang

2012 Fiat 500 Abarth
BASE PRICE $21,500 (est)
PRICE AS TESTED $23,000 (est)
VEHICLE LAYOUT Front engine, FWD, 4-pass, 2-door hatchback
ENGINE 1.4L/160-hp/170-lb-ft turbo SOHC 16-valve I-4
TRANSMISSION 5-speed manual
CURB WEIGHT (F/R DIST) 2564 lb (64/36%)
WHEELBASE 90.6 in
LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 144.4 x 64.1 x 58.7 in
0-60 MPH 6.8 sec
QUARTER MILE 15.3 sec @ 89.8 mph
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 117 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.86 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT 26.9 sec @ 0.65 g (avg)
EPA CITY/HWY FUEL ECON 27/32 mpg (est)
ENERGY CONS, city/hwy 125/105 kW-hrs/100 mi (est)
CO2 EMISSIONS 0.67 lb/mi (est)

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/1202_2012_fiat_500_abarth_first_test/#ixzz29VDfKZ13
Pros

• Endearing styling
• Rev-happy engine with good MPG (30/38)
• Fun 5-speed gearbox

Cons

• Lackluster interior doesn’t match great exterior styling
• Tight rear seat
• No trunk space

Although Fiat introduced the Nuova 500 back in 2007, 2011 is the first time the cleverly styled mini-compact is coming to the US. With its arrival, Fiat makes its return to the American market. The new 500 is styled after the original rear-engine Nuova 500 introduced in 1957. Although the new one is front-engine and front wheel drive, it looks like a giant next to the original city car. But that doesn’t mean it’s big in any way. The 2012 Fiat 500 slots in nicely between the Smart ForTwo and the MINI Cooper.

Driving Impressions

I was super glad to see the manual gear shift when I first hopped in our test car. It’s so rare these days to see a car outfitted with a good old-fashioned 5-speed and clutch. More good news: there is a sport button on the dash. Must be the sport-tuned suspension on this Sport trim. Fire up the engine and it sounds a little underwhelming, but what do you expect from a 1.4-liter four banger? Put the 500 in first gear, step on the gas, and you quickly discover how rev-happy this little engine is. Drop it into second gear and you begin to smile. All of its 98 lb-ft. of torque comes on at 4,000 RPM and the 101 hp at 6,500. It’s really easy to redline this little machine without feeling like you’re stretching this engine.

The 500′s stylish 16-inch wheels and all season tires are grippy and the car corners fairly well. I didn’t break a sweat taking freeway interchange ramps at speeds of over 55+ MPH. OK, maybe a little bit, but the 500 held on every time. With the huge sunroof open and the 1.4 liter happily revving in third gear, life in the Fiat Cinquecento (CHIN-KWAY-CHEN-TO) is good and you can’t stop smiling.

Styling

As mentioned, the new 500 is reminiscent of the original Fiat 500 introduced in the late fifties and popular through the 70s. The original was truly a tiny city car, with a sub-500 cc engine that led to the iconic name. The new car does a really good job of featuring all the cute cues of the original, from the distinct hood to the cute headlights to the signature beltline and sloping rear window. It’s a great modern interpretation of the original, similar to the BMW-made New MINI of 2000, but the new 500 is definitely cuter than the new MINI. The 500 is also far more stylish than more mundane competitors such as the Mazda 2 and the Honda Fit. Driving this tester around Silicon Valley drew quite a few stares from passersby, and I felt pretty smug in it.

Interior Comfort and Ergonomics

The driver’s seat is comfortable and the levers are easy to reach. Same goes for the front passenger seat. There are armrests that come in handy, especially since the beltline is relatively high on this little car. The steering wheel controls are easy to learn and use, as are the dashboard-mounted controls for the radio and climate control. One complaint I do have is about the radio controls. Both the volume and tune controls should be turn knobs instead of the up and down buttons, which drove me crazy when trying to adjust volume or change stations.

The shifter is well placed and easy to control, and the gauges are nicely designed. The speedometer wraps around the tachometer, which itself warps around an LCD display in a circular layout that is both space-saving and cool to read. Controls for windows are mounted on the dash, adding a bit of Euro flair, but this will probably illicit a double take from most Americans.

(Continued on page 2)

Pros

• Spacious cabin
• Good on-demand V6 power and smooth Continuously Variable Transmission system
• One-touch power sliding doors and lift gate
• Distinct styling sets it apart from the competition

Cons

• Distinct styling is not for everyone
• Distance between rear captain’s chairs too wide to attend to baby
• Only one screen for the rear seat passengers

Click here to view the embedded video.

Let’s play word association- I say sexy, you say…soccer moms? If that was the first thought that entered your mind, then do I have a vehicle for you. Nissan has introduced the new 2011 Quest with bold styling that sets it apart from the rest of the box-on-wheels crowd. I can’t tell you how many looks I got in the local high school parking lot last weekend. When one speaks of minivans these days, the Honda Odyssey, the Chrysler Town & Country/Dodge Grand Caravan and the Toyota Sienna come to mind. Rarely does the Nissan Quest enter the fray. That’s probably due to the fact that the previous Quests were less than popular with American buyers.

The first- and second-generation Nissan Quest/Mercury Villager were actually distinctively styled and featured innovative features like sliding rear seats, but they were not in the same league as the competition of the time. The third generation (2004-2009) was actually a big improvement, growing in size and was styled in Nissan’s San Diego-based Nissan Design America (NDA) studio to go after an upscale female audience. That minivan gave the 1996 Ford Taurus a run for its money for having the most oval central stack console ever found in an automobile.

The 2011 Nissan Quest, however, represents a departure from the past. Instead of being designed just for the North American market, this Quest is based on the Japan Domestic Market (JDM) Nissan Elgrand. It’s been Americanized in a few areas, most noticeably in growing in width to suit American tastes. But it retains the tall beltline of JDM minivans.

Driving Impressions

So, I jumped into the Nissan Quest, well actually, slid into the cushy leather 8-way power driver’s seat. I engaged the Sport mode, and floored the gas pedal. Oh wait, who am I kidding here, there is no Sport mode on the Nissan Quest. It has a CVT for god’s sake.

What it does have going for it, though, is that workhorse 3.5-liter V6 found in many other Nissan and Infiniti models. In the Quest the V6 is tuned to produce 260 HP at 6,000 RPM and 240 lb.-ft. of torque at 4,400 RPM. So I floored the accelerator and…to my delight, the Quest actually moved! The CVT is actually really smooth and was good at matching engine rpms to the way I stepped on the accelerator. 0 to 60 was…well, let’s just say that there was no problem getting to 60 MPH.

The Quest felt really smooth and solid on the road, with minimal road noise and acceptable wind noise on the freeway. The suspensions is soft, to say the least, and is very capable of glossing over bumps in the road. That being said, I don’t recommend driving the Quest over speed bumps at over 35 MPH. Just trust me on this one. Overall the Quest drove like a…van.

Just like sedans, minivans have grown in size in America. The new Quest drove like the Chevy Astro van that I used to drive for a job in college, and that Astro was no minivan. Parking the Quest was a bit of a challenge in my garage and I had a hard time with tight parking spots at work. The rear view camera is a must (standard on the SV trim and above), since there’s no way you can see behind you in this machine.

Styling

If you’ve decided to shop for a minivan, styling is obviously an important factor for you. Therefore read this section very, very carefully. The new Quest will definitely set you apart from the crowd of minivans in the Safeway parking lot. Not in the same way the lightning bolt beltline on the new Honda Odyssey sets you apart, but the Quest sure looks distinctive next to the other minivans on the market.

As previously mentioned, the 2011 Nissan Quest is based on a JDM minivan, which as a genre manages to look narrow, tall and from the third moon of Saturn. While that design philosophy may be perfect for those tight alleyways in Tokyo, in the US it may backfire on you. Although Nissan increased the JDM Elgrand’s width when making the Quest, the beltline on the Quest is still extremely high compared to competition like the Toyota Sienna and Honda Odyssey. This means the Quest has a shorter greenhouse and a lot of metal real estate underneath the windows, which makes the Quest look tall.

The rear door and glass of the Quest is almost vertical, another departure from the rest of the minivan crowd. The Quest’s front end also manages to look different from all other minivans out there. I’m not sure how I feel about it, actually. I hope lots of moms and dads will love it, for Nissan’s sake.

Pros:

• Awesome handling
• Great power once turbo kicks in
• Extremely rev-happy engine with a close-ratio 6-speed

Cons:

• Cheap interior materials
• Wish the 6-speed shifter could be quicker shifting
• Can’t miss it styling

Having recently test driven a Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart (I know, not quite the Evo), I have been looking forward to driving the WRX STI for a long time. And I was not disappointed when my editor showed up with the STI Limited sedan with the giant functioning air scoop on the hood and the even more gigantic rear wing on the trunk. Unfortunately it’s in bright red.

Driving Impressions

The bright red color of the tester definitely scared me at first when driving the STI; maybe that’s why Subaru decided to put a red one in the press fleet. But once inside and after taking this baby on the road, you begin to forget that this is a cop magnet with a gigantic wing on the rear, and you start doing stupid things. Like rounding cloverleaf freeway off ramps/on ramps/exchange ramps at 60+ MPH. In California these circles have decreasing radius as you go around the curve, and what are you supposed to do on a curve? Accelerate, of course. The WRX STI was the perfect car for this.

The STI improves upon the sport-tuned four wheel independent suspension system with inverted struts and aluminum-alloy lower L-arms. There was very little body roll. The STI’s AWD system also lets the driver control how it distributes power with the Driver Controlled Center Differential. You can set it on auto or manually move it forward and back. Pretty cool stuff, but unfortunately I didn’t get to play with the settings much.

On the STI the SI-Drive system lets the driver control how smooth and efficient the engine “behaves”, I kept it on Sport Sharp (S#) the whole time, which meant the acceleration was anything but smooth, but a lot of fun.

The 2.5 liter turbocharged Boxer (flat opposing four cylinder, lower center of gravity) engine produces 305 HP on the STI and is married to a close-ratio 6-speed transmission, it demands respect at the stop light. Subaru puts the tachometer front and center on the instrument cluster, a nice touch since this is such a high revving engine. The turbo doesn’t really kick in until past 3,000 RPM, but the good news is you get there in no time and you’re happily shifting.

The shifter is not as short-throw or quick as I expected, and it definitely doesn’t compare to the short-throw shifter on the original Mazda MX-5. The hill assist is super helpful as I navigated through the streets of San Francisco over the weekend. Steering felt a bit light to me, both at highway speeds and on local roads. I wish there was more feedback.

Vitals Statistics:

$22,765      Focus 5dr HB Titanium
4-Door Front Wheel Drive , 160 bhp, 146 lb-ft, 5-sp Manual, 26/36 mpg
5 passengers, 2900 lb, 2-liter, 4-cylinder engine, 18.1 lb/bhp

Pros

• Smooth ride and crisp handling
• Automated parking system
• Sporty Euro styling
• Eager engine that is happy to work hard
• Hatchback model has added utility over sedan and looks great
• Long list of upgrades and high-tech options

Cons

• Rear leg room is a bit tight
• Decent acceleration
• MyFord + Microsoft Sync works as well as a Windows PC

It’s been over ten years since Ford has brought its world-class compact sedan and hatchback to America. During this time, those of us in the U.S. completely missed out on the second generation of the Ford Focus that the rest of the world had access to, and instead we had the misfortune of an updated Mk 1 version with poor styling in being peddled as the second generation North American Focus. At least now we get the same world compact car as the Europeans do in the new Mk III Ford Focus. Having actually owned a 1996 Ford Escort way back when, I can actually say that this new Focus is like night and day when compared with the old Escort. One, I like the sporty styling. Secondly, I enjoyed the tight handling on this compact car. Thirdly, I was really wowed by the automated parking system. More on that later.

Driving Impressions

Our Focus tester has a 2.0L inline four cylinder engine that pumps out 160 hp and 146 ft-lbs of torque, which gives it decent acceleration from dead stop and acceptable passing power on the highway. It is mated to a 6-speed automatic transmission that gets the Focus a set of very respectable MPGs: 27/37 city/highway. I tried my darnest to burn up as much gas as possible while I had the Focus, but was only able to use up half the tank. The handling on the Focus was a vast improvement over the previous generations. The steering was one of the tightest I’ve felt in a front wheel drive car in this class, and road feel was good and response was quick to the driver’s commands. The ride was very smooth and I had no complaints.

Styling

The first-generation Focus represented a radical departure in Ford’s styling language back in 1998 and it was an even bigger deal Stateside, and the latest Focus is a mature reinterpretation of the original design. The third generation design is light years ahead of that of the North American second generation, and it has a good aggressive stance despite its front overhang and its FWD configuration. My personal preference is for the 5-door hatchback, but Ford’s designers even made the sedan version look good, which often looked like an afterthought in the previous generations. Attention to detail is also evident on this third-gen Focus, I like how the fuel door is well integrated under the taillight on the right rear quarter panel, cleaning up some usual unnecessary clutter. The tester came with optional 18-inch alloy wheels, which definitely help establish road presence.

Video Review by Motorweek:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Video Tech Review by CNET:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Pros:

• Surprisingly fast acceleration
• Revised styling is more sophisticated
• Refined interior & build quality

Cons:

• Proportions are a bit awkward with the top up
• Automatic hardtop takes patience
• Small trunk space

The last time I even thought about a VW convertible was in high school drooling over the hot blonde cheerleader with a white ’87 Rabbit-based Cabriolet with a matching canvas top. So when my editor called about the Eos I was conflicted. It brought back some fun high school memories but I also had to decide whether I was man enough to drive a chick car. I’m glad I said yes. The Eos represents the top end of the VW convertible line-up, capping the range that will start with the new Beetle soft top and the upcoming Euro-only(for now) 2012 Golf Cabrio soft top. The new VW Eos Lux was fun to drive with the top up or down. Usually the mid-cycle model refresh is focused mostly on the innards with just minor exterior updates, but the 2012 VW Eos received a fairly significant face-lift, and it is all the better for it. Gone are the roundish headlights with the vertically-stretched chrome grille with matching round taillights, and in are the new VW corporate looks both on the front and back. The new design is more sophisticated and less cutesy than the original Eos. The 2.0 turbo four carries over mated to a 6-speed automatic with Tiptronic and Sport mode.

Driving Impressions

Frankly I was not ecstatic about driving the Eos. Playing with the folding hardtop, yes, but driving the FWD 4-banger was not that enticing to me. But I was pleasantly surprised. Drop the gearshift into Sport mode and floor the accelerator, and you’ll be redlining in no time and peeling out. Yes, I was actually burning rubber off the line in this subcompact FWD four-cylinder Eos.

The turbo helps with the boost but the 207 lb.-ft. of torque @ 1,800-5,000 RPM makes driving this Eos quite fun. The 200 HP comes at 5,100 RPM and passing cars on the freeway was a breeze. For its size, the Eos is pretty heavy thanks to its 5-piece folding hard top, and 0-60 is pegged at 7.3 seconds. But it feels faster than that. Torque steer is a typical problem with high-power FWD cars, but it’s not too noticeable in the Eos. Guess it doesn’t exactly qualify as “high-power.” But hey, you don’t buy the Eos for the performance. There are plenty of other performance drop tops like the Nissan 370Z or the BMW Z4.

Driving the Eos with the hardtop folded down was fun. Yes, it messes up your hair and no, the rear passengers get a lot of wind in their faces but it’s not that common these days to be able to share a convertible driving experience with 3 other passengers. I was actually able to fit a child seat in the back (after half an hour and lots of curse words) and took my toddler for a ride. He didn’t enjoy it as much as I did (too much wind) but I can’t do that in a Z4. The Eos also has a unique sunroof option that is very wide and you can tilt it or open it just like in a hardtop car.

Pros

• Spacious interior for 7 passengers + luggage
• Sliding second row seats that recline
• Standard equipment list longer than Snoop Dog’s rap sheet

Cons

• Exterior is too similar to the less expensive CX-7
• Interior materials and designs are boring
• The nav screen is hard to read in sunlight
• Improved MPG, but not stellar

I always thought the pair of Mazda crossover SUVs, the CX-7 and CX-9, to be some of the most handsome ones on the market when they were introduced back in 2006 as 2007 models. Even in today’s crowded crossover SUV market, the Mazdas are still lookers although the styling is getting a little long in the tooth. While the larger CX-9 shares styling cues with the CX-7, it shares almost nothing else with its smaller sibling. The CX-9 is based on the same platform and shares the same 3.7 liter V6 engine as the Ford Edge/Lincoln MKX, an example of the long-term partnership between Ford and Mazda, which continues even after Ford reduced its stake in the Japanese car maker back in 2008.

Driving Impressions

On paper the CX-9 looks like an exciting ride. A 3.7 liter V6 engine with 273 HP and 270 lb.-ft. of torque, 6-speed sport automatic transmission, and an active torque split all-wheel drive system set some high expectations. Once behind the wheel though, those expectations fell flat. The CX-9 feels sluggish. It feels heavy. Don’t get me wrong, the 3.7 liter is producing significant torque and horsepower, but the CX-9 definitely doesn’t feel like it provides a lot of zoom-zoom, as Mazda likes to say. The power eventually comes on after some hesitation once you really sink your right foot into the floor, but the response is not something you should be happy with. On the freeway, this is even more pronounced, as I accelerated on the onramp to merge with moving traffic. The CX-9 handled rather well for a vehicle this size, however, and steering feel was decently heavy at highway speeds. At highway speeds, the CX-9 feels very stable. You still get the feeling that this is a big vehicle, however.

Styling

As I mentioned, the CX-9 is still a pretty slick looker after all these years. It received the Mazda shield-shaped corporate grille in 2010 but overall appearance has not evolved much at all since the original version in 2007. The 20-inch wheels on the Grand Touring edition are massive and look great on the CX-9, but they also make the ride quality a bit rough.

Although this is a 7-passenger crossover SUV, it doesn’t have that elongated look the full-size SUVs like the Suburban do. Even the other 7-passenger crossovers like the Chevy Traverse look a bit awkward with a long body. Mazda designers managed to hide the size well on the CX-9 with a strategically-placed C pillar and the CX-9 doesn’t appear much longer than the CX-7, which only seats 5.

Its styling is too similar to that of the CX-7, however, and with the competition growing denser in the full-size crossover segment, Mazda would benefit from more aggressive and distinctive styling.

Pros:

• Conservative styling
• Good trunk space for a compact crossover
• Decent MPG

Cons:

• Nav/Entertainment unit with interface from 1985
• Tight rear seat
• Bo…yawn…ring styling
• Tailgate “lip” gets in the way

The Honda CR-V is one of the best selling compact crossovers in America, competing with the likes of Ford Escape, Toyota RAV4, Nissan Rogue, and the new Kia Sportage, just to name a few. This is a very crowded segment that includes some new unconventional entries like the Nissan JUKE and luxury entrants like the Audi Q5 and BMW X3. The third generation CR-V has been on sale in the US since the 2007 model year and is due to be replaced by a brand new 2012 CR-V in mid- 2011.

Driving Impressions

The CR-V is not exactly what one would call a blast to drive. Not that you expect anything more from the CR-V. Just look at the numbers: 2.4 liter in-line 4-cylinder engine, 180 horsepower @6800 RPM and 160 lb-ft or torque @4400 RPM. Not exactly anything to write home about. But the power is decent and merging onto the freeway is not an issue at all. Accelerating from 60 to pass cars in the fast lane is also not a challenge, to my delight. The steering feel is actually very solid, not light and fluffy like I expected in a Honda. I pushed the CR-V a bit through some curves on small suburban roads around Silicon Valley and it handled just fine. All in all, the CR-V handles decently and has sufficient power to get around town.

Styling

While the CR-V had a slight facelift in 2010 and is fairly stylish compared to the rest of the Honda line-up, the rest of the market has accelerated way past it in terms of styling. The third generation CR-V was first launched in the 2007 model year and its age is showing despite the 2010 tweak. It is extremely easy to lose your CR-V in the Safeway parking lot, especially if you bought the dark burgundy one like the tester I had.

The front end of the CR-V is not offensive, but it does feature a weird smiling lower grille, which is an awkward attempt to break up the bumper to make it look thinner. The profile of the third-generation CR-V is more aerodynamic compared to the previous two generations thanks to the sloping greenhouse, but the tail end is very nondescript and doesn’t exactly inspire passion. The spare tire is now under the trunk floorboard instead of on the back of the car like the previous generations. This is more practical but does remove a bit of the perceived ruggedness of the previous CR-V.

Pros:

• Tight & confident handling
• Decent acceleration
• Refined interior & build quality

Cons:

• Styling is a step back in time
• 8-speed automatic is too shift-happy
• Lacks personality

The second generation BMW X3 is almost the size of the first generation X5. BMW has added to the overall length, width and height, as well as a tiny bit to the wheelbase. The benefits are rear passenger legroom, headroom for all passengers and cargo room. Despite its bigger size, the second generation X3 still reminds you of the original, smaller X3, at least from the front. From the back, the new X3 resembles the new designs of the X5 and X6.

Although the new X3 offers a refreshing take on the original X3, the luxury compact SUV segment is filled with other entrants that offer lots of style and luxury these days. The second generation X3 definitely faces a lot more competition than the first one ever did.

Driving Impressions

Our tester X3 came dressed in Mineral Silver Metallic paint and xDrive35i trim, which means it has a Twin Turbo-charged 3.0 liter DOHC inline six producing 300 HP and 300 lb-ft of torque. It sprints from 0 to 60 in under 6 seconds. This sure sounds pretty fast, but unfortunately the X3 doesn’t “feel” as fast. When you sink the accelerator pedal to the floor, the X3 hesitates a bit before kicking in the power. I’m not sure why, but this delay is definitely noticeable.

After the power kicks in, however, the X3 has no problem accelerating. But then you start to notice that the 8-speed transmission gets right to work and starts upshifting like it’s going out of style. You definitely notice the gear shifts, too. Even when I used the paddle shifters the transmission would step in and upshift for me. I guess that’s the price of best-in-class fuel economy. Flipping the Electronic Damping Control to Sport+ and driving with a lead foot helped with this situation, but it does keep you wondering who’s really in control here.

Once you get up to speed on an expressway or the freeway, however, the X3 is smooth sailing. Try downshifting using the paddle shifters and the X3 sprints forward and you begin to smile. Steering feel is decent and courtesy of the Servotronic vehicle-speed-sensitive power steering, it’s both tight on the highway and effortless in the parking lot. Throwing the Electronic Damping Control into Sport+ also changes the suspension to be firmer than normal, making for a more enjoyable driving experience…for the driver. I don’t recommend this with passengers in the back.

Pros:

• Awesome list of luxury amenities like the massaging driver seat
• Silky smooth and powerful twin-turbo V8
• Advanced safety features that are perfect for long trips

Cons:

• Unique, busy styling
• Restricted head room and trunk space
• 7-speed transmission

Click here to view the embedded video.

I took the 2012 Mercedes-Benz CLS550 from the San Francisco Bay Area down to LA with the wife and toddler in tow a couple weekends ago, and found it to be one of the best four-door coupes I’ve ever driven. The myriad safety features made the 6-hour trip (with an occasional screaming toddler) all that more reassuring, and the luxury features like the massaging driver’s seat made the trip almost enjoyable.

The underlying mechanics are from the E-class sedan and the CLS550 sports the new MB 4.7-liter, direct-injection twin-turbo V8. It’s fantastic… but more on that later. The higher-end CLS63 features a 5.5L biturbo V8 that produces 518 horsepower but will set you back almost 20 Gs more.

Driving Impressions

The new Blue Efficiency 4.7-liter twin-turbo V8 produces 402 horsepower @5,000-5,750 RPM and 443 lb.-ft. of torque @1,800-4,750 RPM, and Mercedes-Benz claims 0-60 in 5.1 seconds. The CLS550 was quick off the line and had a smooth power delivery all the way up through 7 gears in freeway driving. Adaptive logic monitors adjust the shift points to match your driving style. Those who prefer a more direct approach can manually select higher shift points or use the paddle shifters for even more control.

For such a large and heavy car (4,200 pounds), it feels light on its feet in local driving and very confident at highway speeds. The ride is superb thanks to the air suspension and active damping, which adjusts each wheel’s suspension settings continuously in response to ride height and road conditions. The CLS550 was super comfortable on the 5 all the way down to LA and back, with the wife and baby lulling to sleep in the backseat at the same time.

In addition to the comfortable ride, the combination of safety features and luxury appointments in the CLS550 seemed destined for long road trips. The tester featured the Driver Assistance package which includes a radar-equipped cruise control that automatically detects cars in front of you and slows down, active blind spot assist and lane departure warning. All of these came in handy on the monotonous freeway drive through the half-parched fields of California’s San Joaquin Valley. The tester also came equipped with a driver drowsiness warning system, which sounded an alarm a few times during the drive, but I was not dozing off. The technology must be more advanced than I can figure out.