Karl's Daily Log Book

imidazol97

LUV my HUD. Don't some other car companies use them? Just GM?

stever

Also, I've noticed there is a forum called " The Camry vs Accord Vs Sonata Vs Fusion" why not include the Milan in there as well

Ask or email the host over there (Pat) and maybe it can be included.

Steve, Host

editor_karl

So, what vehicle is going to get your vote? Or is that a secret?

Just curious - how many people get to vote on this?

I don't think we're supposed to let people know what we're voting for, but our contributer (and fellow jury member), Stephen Cole Smith, just wrote a great article on the subject, and I think you can glean plenty of information from it. Plus he's a great writer.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Columns/articleId=107524

The are 50 members on the jury. It used to be very Detroit/old school based, but now the jury members are pretty evenly spread across the country and the type of media they represent. I wrote a story that talks about the award last year:
http://www.edmunds.com/news/column/carmudgeon/103466/article.html

editor_karl

Did edmunds ever get a chance or are you ever going to drive the 2006 Mercury Milan?

I'm sure I'll drive it eventually, but you're correct -- as a pure re-badge of the Ford Fusion it's difficult to give the Milan a lot of focus, especially at this time of year when there are so many truly all-new cars I need to drive.

I finally got in the new Passat last night, and I still need to drive a Civic.

editor_karl

My GXP (2005) has no seam anywhere that I can feel on this control - or any other steering column mounted stalk.

I don't know what to tell you. It's definitely there on ours.

I thought of one other troubling trait that I'd forgotten when I posted my first note.

What's with the "hot" interior displays/controls? I remember our 1999 Olds Intrigue long-term car had a real problem with this. http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/LongTerm/articleId=44030

I would describe the GXP's as "better" than the Intrigue in this regard, but it still gets very hot around all the major control areas -- including the steering wheel buttons. As my other editor noted, "GM is very into this whole 'perceived value' thing, and how they are being misrepresented. But hot controls in a car aren't a perceived value issue, that's just plain poor engineering. I've never felt the controls get 'hot' in any other modern car. What's the deal, they haven't mastered basic electrical current management?" Of course she got little argument from me on this point.

Who knows, like the front-wheel drive element, maybe someone out there will respond with, "I love that aspect of my GXP. Keeps my fingers warm in the winter." :confuse:

editor_karl

For the average family, the GXP represents a tremendous performance bargain. Where else can you get this much performance/features for about $27k loaded? And you don't have to put it up on blocks in the garage in the winter.

Our Web site lists the Pontiac GXP for $29,395. That includes the destination charge, but doesn't include a single option. Certainly it's not "loaded" for that price.

The Dodge Charger R/T is listed at $29,995, also including destination, so that's a $600 difference.

For that $600 the Charger offers 37 more horsepower, 67 more lbs-ft of torque, wider wheels, all-season tires, a five-speed automatic (four-speed on GXP) and standard leather seating (standard cloth on GXP).

Also, the GXP has 1/10th of an inch more front headroom, and 4//10ths of an inch more front legroom. In every other interior measurement (rear headroom, front/rear shoulder room, front/rear hiproom, rear legroom, maximum cargo capacity) the Charger is larger (substantially, like 1-4 inches, in most of those areas).

One other point I'd make: Chrysler felt confident in bringing rear-wheel drive back to this segment because of the many advances in traction control (it works on rear-wheel drive cars, too) and tire technology (that's probably why Charger comes with all-season tires standard). I don't know how the Charger does on snowy roads, but I have trouble believing they can only "crawl around." Or, to use your words regarding the GXP's torque steer, I bet "it's not all that bad."

In terms of performance the numbers we got are below:
0-60------1/4-mile------60-0----Slalom Speed
GXP----------6.7-------14.57--------124ft-------56.0 mph
Charger-----6.2-------14.32--------121ft-------61.8 mph

bigdaddycoats

Thanks for the response.

So here is another question - do the voters get a chance to have seat time in all contenders?

editor_karl

So here is another question - do the voters get a chance to have seat time in all contenders?

Yes. The jury holds an event where all candidates are gathered for back-to-back drives. Plus, many jury members (like myself) have ready access to the cars in time for voting (that's why I've driven a Passat and GXP in the last 48 hours, and I've got several more candidates that I need to drive coming in the next few weeks).

The manufacturers are very cool about working with jury members to get them into cars in time to vote.

bigdaddycoats

Sounds like you will have a difficult decision in deciding who gave you the best gift;)

Joking of course. Have a great weekend.

editor_karl

I've already told them that gifts won't work on me.

It has to be CASH!! :P

splatsterhound

You said: I don't know how the Charger does on snowy roads, but I have trouble believing they can only "crawl around." Or, to use your words regarding the GXP's torque steer, I bet "it's not all that bad."

Karl: I suggest you try leaving L.A. sometime. Rear wheel drive in the snow sucks. Doesn't matter what car, or even what tires. Snow tires are obviously better, but they don't change physics. I've driven fwd, rwd, 4wd, awd for a quarter century in the snow. The worst is RWD. And yes, with a rwd in the snow, traction control or not, you do truly 'crawl around.' Even with new Blizzaks on the car....

Yours truly from Minnesota.

imidazol97

>It has to be CASH!!

Are you sure you should be telling us this information--putting it in writing???

imidazol97

Can't top Minnesota for snow and driving. In Easter Indiana and Western Ohio (flyover country some call it), I sure like the front wheel drive starting in 1981 better than RWD on my previous cars. I always had ordered cars with limited slip differentials and that helped with digging through especially with snow tires but brought the problem that any acceleration or deceleration causes longitudinal and lateral slip to occur on both rears at the same time, putting you easily into a rear end going first mode.

michaellno

But he hasn't always lived in LA .. he grew up in Colorado, so I suspect he's well aware of the issues combining RWD and snowy weather.

docnukem

putting you easily into a rear end going first mode

Or for the word-challenged like me, fishtailing. I agree that FWD are better than RWD in snow, but I never crawled around in the snow (in western MI with plenty of lake-effect snow from Lake MI) with my RWD 328. The traction control worked really well (and no, I did not swap out the all-seasons for snow-tires).

splatsterhound

Well, that's nice about Karl's background....He still doesn't seem to be very well informed about real-world driving in snow.

For the record, I just put in several years living in Los Angeles. I've trudged maaannnnny hours along the 405 and the 10 and the 101 and the (on and on and on). If you ever want to pull the perfect bank heist, do it in LA during the first rainy day of the fall. Nobody knows how to drive there -- and I mean nobody -- when the roads are a tiny bit slick. They either crash going 85 or they inch at 3 mph (mostly crash going 85). Nobody knows how to do a nice slick road rally-style drift (something I perfected at age 17 where there is snow on the roads five months a year).

That being said: The cat who said you can buy a loaded GXP for 27$ is right. I've priced 'em. With rebates and a few bucks over invoice, they're about 27 grand, with leather and various toys. Karl should know that MSRP is a shell-game. Does he ever buy a car?

xmf314

If you ever want to pull the perfect bank heist, do it in LA during the first rainy day of the fall. Nobody knows how to drive there -- and I mean nobody -- when the roads are a tiny bit slick. They either crash going 85 or they inch at 3 mph (mostly crash going 85). Nobody knows how to do a nice slick road rally-style drift (something I perfected at age 17 where there is snow on the roads five months a year).

I am a resident of Los Angeles, and I couldn't agree with you more. During the first rainy days most people zip along on the freeways as if the sun was shining. It's scary. I have discussed this with LA natives who were not aware of the traction issues of wet pavement. They thought you have as much traction in the wet as in the dry.

Fortunately, most years there is not much rain. Although last winter was an exception.

splatsterhound

xmf314: Okay. I take it back. With you there in LA there is at least ONE fella who knows how to drive on slippery roads...

I was actually back in LA for an extended stay last fall when the first hard rains started falling. Other than being nearly submerged in Pasadena, my real fun was driving my wife (who was visiting) back to LAX at 5 a.m. on the very first day of the rain. I lost count how many accidents I saw. It was surreal. I cannot express how crazy it was. I saw cars upside down, in the ditch, facing the wrong way.... Coming back from LAX on the 10, the cops had closed down all lanes to clean up some massive wreck. I was in the first wave of cars stopped. I thought, 'damn, I'm going to be here all morning.' But a few minutes later they opened it up, and the guy behind me, driving a dropped Civic, rides my back bumper before taking off. I caught up to him a few minutes later. He had crashed -- t-boned the barrels of an offramp. He was just getting out of his wrecked car, a bit dazed but okay, and as I drove past him I honked, rolled down my window and gave him a nice thumbs up and a few words of, uh, 'encouragement.' And this was before 7 a.m. on a Sunday. Gotta love LA.... :sick:

editor_karl

But he hasn't always lived in LA .. he grew up in Colorado, so I suspect he's well aware of the issues combining RWD and snowy weather.

Exactly correct. I lived in Denver (actually Golden, which is right at the base of the Rocky Mountains and gets more snow than Denver proper) for the first 25 years of my life. I drove in this area from 15 to 25 (hmmm, at 36 my drive time in LA has only just surpassed my drive time in Colorado...). And yes, I was driving at 15. I drove all the time before I had my license, and also when I only had my permit. What can I say, I was an enthusiast long before I was legally allowed to be one.

Anyway, the cars I drove primarily during those first 10 years were a 1969 Plymouth GTX, 1976 Plymouth Arrow and 1987 Dodge Shadow CSX. I also had a 1973 Dodge Challenger Rallye. Both Plymouths were rear-wheel drive, as was the Challenger, and the Shadow was front-wheel drive. None ever had dedicated snow tires. The GTX and Challenger had BFGoodrich all-season radials, and the Shadow had 50-series Pirellis (can't remember what the Arrow had).

I remember after several years in the GTX (that was my first car and what I drove almost solely from age 15-18) that I started wondering what the big deal was with everyone wanting SUVs. For me, in Golden, I'd say the typical year was like this:

355 days a year I didn't even notice I had rear-wheel drive.
8 days a year I had to drive extra careful because of the extra heavy snow on the road
2 days a year it was either not possible for me to drive, or I could but it was very tricky

That's not to say it only only snowed or rained 10 days a year. On the contrary, it snowed often from October to April, and it rains in Denver every afternoon from June to August (ask anyone who lives there). And on many of those snow/rain days the roads are quite slick.

BUT, even on most days when there was snow or rain all I had to do was use my brain and it was no big deal. This was in a rear-wheel drive, 400-horsepower 1960s muscle car (so I obviously didn't have traction control or any other aids to help me). What I noticed with my Shadow was that I could be lazy/sloppy with my driving because the FWD allowed for a greater margin of error, but those people who talk like, "all rear-wheel drive cars are absolutely useless in winter, and all front-wheel drive cars are 100-percent go anywhere, anytime vehicles that never, ever slip an inch" are being a bit foolish. That's just not how it is. Remember, front-wheel drive didn't even become the dominant drivetrain layout until the 1980s. I wonder how people got around in "winter" the first 90 years of the automobile. Hmmmmm... :confuse:

Let me put it another way. For me, if I got transferred to Detroit tomorrow, and the company said, "You can have either of these company cars -- GXP or a Charger. Oh and don't foget, it snows in Detroit." :surprise: (cue ominous music)

I wouldn't even have to think twice about the vehicle I'd choose...

carlisimo

I was in LA too for that rainy spell (I'm from the San Fran area).

I was studying civil engineering, so of course the first thing I noticed was how poorly the roads were designed for drainage. The drivers were as bad as you said, but the city didn't help them one bit. There shouldn't be huge puddles in the center of the freeway, nor huge plumes coming up from cars driving through. And those are just the basics, which aren't really hard build or expensive.

They're unprepared for bad weather in every way.

(On the other hand, I find many of my LA friends to be better at high-density urban traffic than most people.)

tonygxp

before you say things like "cloth is standard on the GXP"???? No Leather was.(2005, leather as in the same as the GTP was standard 2006 it is changed to base cloth)..And as for the "not loaded"?? HUD (GM only), Cross drilled brake rotors (W/ ABS),18" chrome wheels (forged, not cast by the way), stability control, traction control, cruise, A/C, power everything & lumbar driver's side, not to mention; On star (try to get that in anything other than another GM product for that price range), it has everything...everything that is optional on the base "GT" model, standard, outside of High end stereo & DVD Navigation..So please, complain about the front wheel drive, complain about the headroom, complain about the bland interior (which I love mine so what) but don't try to pretend that this isn't the biggest performance bargain of all time for a family of 4 that lives in the snowbelt and isn't 60yrs old, because that is what it was designed to be!!!

210delray

355 days a year I didn't even notice I had rear-wheel drive.
8 days a year I had to drive extra careful because of the extra heavy snow on the road
2 days a year it was either not possible for me to drive, or I could but it was very tricky

Sorta sums it up for me, too. We had a 1980 Volvo 240 for 21 years: 1982-2003. It was my daily driver pretty much from 1990 on. While we don't get as much snow in central VA as Denver, we do get some, occasionally a lot.

The only time I couldn't get to work was for a couple of days after the Blizzard of Jan. 1996 (just under 2 feet of snow) when my subdivision hadn't yet been plowed and I simply lacked the ground clearance.

Oh yeah, I really need OnStar in my next car. NOT!

brightness04

I wonder how people got around in "winter" the first 90 years of the automobile.

In the first 90 years, wheels and tires tend to be much narrower. I remember my first BMW (an early 80's model) having 195/70-14 tires; you can't even get snow wheel/tire combo that narrow and small for BMW's nowadays.

In the first 90 years, most people lived within the first beltway, where snow plowing was prompt. Those living outside the 2nd beltway (I-295, I-395 etc.) were farmers driving trucks if not tractors. Massive development of the 2nd and 3rd beltways did not take place till the 80's. Also, for the first 60 years of those first 90 years, before the belt ways were built, cars were SUV's. If a Model T were introduced today, it would be easily classified as an SUV. Still RWD, but great ground clearance and extremely skinny tires to dig through the snow and mud, for off-roading ('cuz there weren't much road outside the cities).

splatsterhound

Well, Karl, nice to know you actually know how to drive when the traction is less than ideal. I, too, learned to drive only rear-drivers, but unlike relatively mild Golden, Co, (where the snow often melts within a few days) it was in sub-Arctic Duluth, Minnesota, where it not only is really really cold and really snowy, it's also hilly as hell. The "San Fran of the North" the local boosters like to say. Only without the cable cars. And the Castro District....Anyway, I get off point...

I also learned to drive with rear-drivers -- a Volkswagen van and a big Olds. And with rear-drivers I never got stuck and had a whale of a good time going sideways after every corner. The good thing about living in a pretty quiet town with big snowbanks is that you can drive like crazy and not worry about hitting anything but 3-foot-high banks of ice and snow. That being said, there is absolutely no comparison between a rear-driver and a front-driver. A rear-driver simply cannot make it up snowy hills. Period. A front-driver with the right tires can. I know. I now live back in N. Minnesota and have a front-driver and a rear-driver/4wd truck. The fwd whips the rwd hands down on snowy hills and in handling contests. I've gone out and timed figure eights on the ice with both vehicles...There is no comparison.

I know what kind of a car I'd have my wife or kids drive. Would it be a "gee, this is fun, I'm going sideways again" rwd? Or would it be a "gee, I'm spinning out and I keep going straight instead of into the ditch" fwd?

One last point. Back in the day, the city of Duluth had ice races on the bay of Lake Superior. Very cool. And front drive Saabs would kick everyone's rear (this was the pre-Audi era). I took my own rear-drivers on the course (okay, don't laugh..it was just for some giggles) and tried to run the course quickly. No way. I'd be looking out of my side window more than my front as I sloooooowly went around the course.. So if you said, 'which car would handle better in the snow, a Charger or a GXP Grand Prix?" I'd say it's a no-brainer.

Listen, I trust that you or me or any decent driver is going to keep a '72 New Yorker a new Charger from going into the ditch, but is it as quick and as safe as a good front driver? No. Would I buy a rwd? No. Beemers are nice in So Cal, but pretty worthless in MN.

I'm tired now.

rlsedition

Sorry if I misrepresented Editor Karl. My earlier post had [editor Karl} in the title because I thought that was the proper way to respond to his message on GXP. It appears I was wrong and I'm sorry.

zeuscgp

I dont't know about the Chager 1/4mile but the GXP is waaay to high. Last month my buddy ran a 14.058 @ 97.2mph with a 2.114 60' stock (14.1xx for the rest of the day).
Video!:):
http://www.nymcgp.com/members/silver2kgtp/Etown%209-3-05/DaveGXP.mpg

phillyone

I have been reading the recent posts here about the GXP vs. Charger. My thoughts are that the acceleration differences between the cars is negligible. If you look at the C&D test of the GXP you will see it was only .1 sec slower to 60mph in spite of having one fewer gear and 47 less hp. Not too bad for a FWD car. The Charger may have the power going to the right set of wheels but it weighs about 400 lbs more and most reviews I have read of the RWD chrysler cars says they cannot hide their mass. The GXP is no worse than the Charger on the inside and can more or less match it's performance. I think it really comes down to price and styling preference. I dont like the Charger's styling, nor do I like heavy cars. The GP is more exclusive, lighter, gets better fuel economy and has more user friendly features than the Charger.

As for torque steer, everything I've read in regards to the Impala SS and GXP has said it wasnt a major problem. let's not forget that many cars with far less power have torque steer issues, namely the Altima, Maxima and TL. I'm not sure about the Avalon.

phillyone

I have experienced hot controls on the Intrigue and I dont know what causes that problem and I agree that it should be fixed. I don't know however that this flaw in the GP somehow proves that GM engineering is flawed in general. I often find that "car people" who don't know much about engineering or design are quick to state that companies like Toyota/Honda "lead" in engineering. I suppose that is due to the fact that Toyota and Honda can get good mileage out of small 4 bangers or get more hp per liter than the average Big 3 engine. That is all good and it represents some engineering grunt work. However, I think it's important to think about innovations that actually enhance the experience of the owner. When I think about the Grand Prix I think about the fact that it has been derided since it came out in 2003 in spite of some of it's attributes. The Grand Prix had fold down front seat, 90 degree opening rear doors, Tap shift, Stabilitrak (Accord just got it for 2006) and 260hp when it came out 2.5 years ago. Contrary to what I've read, I dont think TapShift was "years late" when it came out in 2003 and I dont think there were many cars in this price range that had this. In fact, in 2005 there arent many non luxury cars that have this feature. The seating and door innovations are simple, but significant in terms of expanding the usability of the car. People may say "that's easy stuff", but that begs the question "why didnt someone else do it first"? I have a car with fold down rear seats and I cant imagine not having a car without that feature now. Yet to my amazement many luxury cars (Acuras for example) don't have this simple, yet ingenuous feature. Just as hot controls make no sense in 2005, lack of fold down seats on a family sedan makes no sense.

On things like Sto and Go seats, fold down rear seats, fold down front seats, remote start, rear seat DVD players, Onstar, cylinder deactivation, satellite radio, etc. the american car companies have shown some innovation. The import companies purchase 5 and 6 speed autos from suppliers and they are lauded for great "engineering", but the innovations spawned by the Big 3 are largely dismissed. In fact, any car that debuts with a 4 speed auto is going to be called dated but a car with a 6 speed auto and no innovation is going to be called modern, well engineered and high tech. Cars like the Accord/Camry/Altima are considered benchmarks due to their sales, and that makes sense, but when you get down to engineering there is little innovation in any of those models unless you are talking about the recent hybrids. Reliability is about quality control of components and assembly quality, but not engineering design so the two things have to be viewed separately. The Japanese have been better at reliability for some time, but they haven't always been leaders in innovation. You will be hard pressed to name one exclusive or "industry first" feature on any of those cars other than HIDs on the Altima. When the 2003 Accord and 2002 Altima came out with 240hp the press was in a frenzy about these two family sedans offering so much power, but everyone seemed to forget the GP/Regal GS had 240hp in 1997 when the Altima had 150hp and the Accord had 200. I find incidents like that to be fairly typical and pretty annoying.

210delray

I think remote start is a bad idea in these times of higher fuel prices. How many more people are going to waste gas by starting their cars from the comfort of their homes so they don't have to sit in a cold (or hot) car? I realize a lot of people without garages do this in the wintertime to clear off frost, but isn't remote start going to make it so much easier? At least with the old method, you had to go out to the car, and maybe a lot of people would stick around to scrape off the frost and get going sooner.

Seems to me a better solution to frost is the new Hot Shot system (which I believe GM is offering) that instantly heats a small amount of windshield washer fluid so the glass can be cleared of frost immediately. Now all that is needed is a something for the side glass .

And as for a fold-down front passenger seat, it seems like a good idea. But then the owner's manual warns you not to put anything heavy and unsecured on the front passenger seat. If the car is in a frontal crash, the unsecured object flies forward, only to meet the inflating passenger airbag. The result is the object becomes a high-speed missle.

phillyone

So your point is that Toyota/Honda thought these things out and didn't bother to offer them? You have got to be joking. Remote start isnt just for use during snowy days, it's for use on any hot or cold day. The car must run to heat up regardless of who is or isn't in the car at that time so I dont see how starting up the car from the house is wasting gas. I don't know if you live in a state with cold weather, but trust me that the idea of warming up the car prior to getting in sounds appealing to me. I would expect other manufacturers to offer this feature in the future.

I forgot all about the heated windsheild wiper fluid. That is another example of innovation.

I dont see how your hypothetical "missile" situation makes fold down seats a bad idea. I'm pretty sure the primary purpose of the fold down seat is to allow long items like rugs and ladders to be carried in a car. With fuel prices going up people are going to be looking for more ways to carry a lot of stuff in cars instead of SUVs.

carlisimo

I like the idea of remote start. Sometimes it's like, less than 50 degrees in the morning here. That's COLD!

gee35coupe

Never felt the need for remote start though. Cars are pretty warm within the first couple miles if you start them and pull off gently like the manual suggests. Onstar=Cellphone. I have Verizon. Try to avoid automatic transmissions like the plague so any kind of sportshift is useless to me.

210delray

No I'm not joking. I live where it gets cold (Virginia) and I used to not have a garage. I started scraping the frost off the windows BEFORE I even started the car; couldn't see wasting fuel while the car idles. I also tried to cover the windshield with an old cloth the night before. Obviously, I wear a heavy coat or a jacket + sweatshirt, so it doesn't bother me in the slightest to get in a cold car. It warms up soon enough as gee35 pointed out.

Now that I have a garage, I just get in and go.

Hot car? Just turn on the a/c full blast when you get in and open the windows (and sunroof if you have one) initially. Also, I use a sunshade in the windshield.

Carry a ladder up front? My point precisely. Get into a crash and where does the ladder go (if unsecured)? Heavy, unsecured cargo should not be in the passenger compartment, period.

imidazol97

Cool mornings when I go out, I just turn on the seat heater for a while until the car warms up. Sometimes it gets chilly in the garage and I use the heaters. They're great if the car has been outside during the day in the winter.

dieselone

I've lived in the snow belt around Cleveland and northern Indiana. Here in Wichita, we don't get much snow, but lots of nasty ice. I've owned FWD, RWD, & 4WD. Sure FWD is generally easier to control, but RWD wouldn't phase me one bit. Particularly if it meant having a more desirable car. Why compromise when a good set of snow tires will make about any vehicle snow worthy.

One thing I've noticed is wheel base hase a huge impact on how a car handles in bad weather. I used to have a an 01 Nissan Pathfinder that was really squirely in snow and ice. Thankfully it was an LE and had automode 4wd, cause anytime it snowed awd was required to keep from getting squirely all the time.

I now drive a 4wd Suburban, with the extra wheel base I've never needed to use 4wd except at the occasional slick boat ramp. It just plows thru snow and ice and the back end never gets sideways and it tracks great (just wich it was built as well as my Pathfinder was) (granted, if it did, watch out, that's a lot of rear end to be trying to bring back in LOL).

editor_karl

Hey Guys,

I just spent the day driving a Corvette Z06 from Laguna Seca back to L.A. (Ventura, actually, but close enough). I attended a GM press event, where they hosted a few journalists to drive up to Laguna Seca from L.A., watch the Cadillac/Corvette races on Saturday and Sunday, and drive back. I drove a standard 2006 Vette with the new six-speed, paddle shift auto up yesterday, and a Z06 back today.

BTW, the new automatic is a nice execution. It readily downshifts when left in "auto" mode, and with all those extra gears it really launches the standard Vette forward when you just roll into the throttle at highway speeds. It quickly downshifts from 6th to 4th to get into the powerband. The paddles work well, too, when in "manual" mode. The base Vette is still quite fast, and it's funny to think it "only" has 400 horsepower (never thought I'd see the day where I could say "only 400 horsepower").

BTW, both Corvettes had the HUD, and they both worked fine with my polarized sunglasses. Not sure why they worked and the GXP's didn't...

I did 500 miles on the Z06 coming back, and ran some of the best roads in the state. Started out 101 south, then jumped off at 41 in Templeton and headed east and south until I hooked up with 58, then 58 all the way east to 33, then 33 south all the way to Ventura and the 101 again. Lot's of great twisties, plus lots of wide open straight stretches where you can...um...just go a little faster than legal...if you're into that sort of thing...which or course I'm not...

First, let's get something straight -- the Z06 has a better engine than the Ford GT.

The 7.0-liter in the Z06 is certainly not as advanced as the GT's engine, and it doesn't have the sort of carefully honed, refined feel that the GT's modular engine possesses.

BUT, my GOD is it powerful and torquey! Remeber, this is the equivelant of 427 cubic inches, and there's no forced induction. The result is this massive wave of torque that catapaults the Vette forward with every millimeter of throttle travel. At the same time, it revs like a small block and zips up to that 7,000 rpm redline almost like an Acura or Infiniti V6. It's literally the best of both worlds.

And the SOUND!! Ah! Again, this could be the coolest sounding stock engine I've ever heard. It's got a Ferrari-like insistency in terms of always letting you know it's there whenever you get into the throttle. But where most Ferraris have a wail or screech, this thing is just a deep, throaty growl. It literally sounds like some sort of ancient dragon or monster that's had it's sleep disturbed after 10,000 years. Destoys the stock Viper in terms of cool (no UPS truck here). Think of the automotive exhaust tone equivelant of the Empire's theme from the Star Wars movies.

I have to give credit where credit is due. Chevrolet has one-upped the GT. Maybe not in peak horsepower figures, or even in pure acceleration (though that's basically a wash), but in the overall power-delivery experience, this thing ROCKS!

And this awesome engine is connected to...possibly the worst transmission I've driven in any vehicle from the last 25 years. Ugh! Just like the regular Vette, this one is too notchy, has vague gates, and puts an annoying vibration through the shifter that makes you want to only touch it when absolutely necessary (unlike my GT, where I like to let my hand rest on the shifter for long periods of time).

Also, and this is a first for me in Vettes, the transmission tunnel got REALLY HOT after about 150 miles. I don't know what caused it, but it started getting, like, Viper hot in the cabin because the damn transmission tunnel was throwing off so much heat. I couldn't even brace my right leg against it for more than a minute or so without it getting uncomfortable (through my jeans!!!). Happy to hear any thoughts on this one, but I truly have never experienced this before (not even in Vipers...the heat in those always seems to generally come from the engine compartment and/or exhaust system underneath, as opposed to this specific, localized heat issue on the center tunnel). It stayed like this for the last three hours/200 miles of my drive, and I even tried coasting down some long hills with the tranny in neutral to try and cool it off, but to no avail. Talk about heat soak...

Otherwise the car is pretty much your basic Vette. Steering gets the job done, but it ain't exactly inspiring. Brakes are quite good, as is the calibration of the "Competitive Driving" mode. It lets you absolutely smoke the tires from a dead stop (way easy to do, of course), and it also allows some rotation in the corners before intervening.

There was one other element that I wasn't too fond of. The suspension is tuned for a very comfortable ride, almost suprisingly so. But when I started hitting some of the bumpier sections of Route 58 I noticed a lot of kick-back through the steering wheel, and excessive bump-steer, at least in my opinion. I found myself trying to remember if the GT felt that way, but I'm sure if it did I would have noted it in that car, too. Now they are both in my garage but I haven't driven the GT for over a week. I need to take it out and confirm what I already know, which is that it has a far more settled/confident ride over bumpy roads. This was a bummer because it happened on both the twisties and the straights. I had to really concentrate when going fast across the barren parts of the 58, because it's only a two-lane road and relatively narrow. Not that I went that fast, of course. (this thing gets up to 150 mph so easily it's really frightening, but so does the GT, and the GT feels far more settled at those speeds -- at least that's what I hear )

So, my final verdict? I wish Ford would have had the time to put the V10 in the GT, because my drive in the Z06 today convinced me that, in the end, I'm still a torque guy (guess that's what happens when your first car, at age 15, is a 1969 Plymouth GTX with a 440). Beyond the engine, the new Vette remains a Vette, and that means the GT is still my preferred car, even if it doesn't have as remarkable of system for power delivery.

rayainsw

"drove a standard 2006 Vette with the new six-speed, paddle shift auto up yesterday"

Thanks for the initial impressions of the C6 I'd buy (if I win the lottery) - the new A6 w/paddles.
Any chance you'll road test this version?
- Ray
Also - in the end - a torque guy . .

nitromax

I have a car with fold down rear seats and I cant imagine not having a car without that feature now. Yet to my amazement many luxury cars (Acuras for example) don't have this simple, yet ingenuous feature.

The Acura RSX has fold-down seats.

redmaxx

has its purpose in the summer too. I live in Arizona and it regularly gets to be 105-110, sometimes as high as 115 or more. In those temperatures I have yet to meet a car that can cool the cabin in less then 30 mins. Most drives are shorter than that, so you are running around in a hot or warm car all day. Remote start the car for 10-20 mins and it is nice and cool for your drive.

editor_karl

Thanks for the initial impressions of the C6 I'd buy (if I win the lottery) - the new A6 w/paddles.
Any chance you'll road test this version?

We'll definitely want a road test on this version. Expect it in the next month or two (remember, we've still got our Ford GT -- Z06 -- Viper comparison coming up... ).

ateixeira

Wow, at those temps you need a car cover!

-juice

redmaxx

I've got tinted windows and a sunshade for the windshield and it still gets hot. Lets say that if you don't have them its its like a self clean oven and if you do, its only scorching. :sick:

bigdaddycoats

"Also, and this is a first for me in Vettes, the transmission tunnel got REALLY HOT after about 150 miles. I don't know what caused it, but it started "

Paul Eisenstein from the Car Connection reported the same problem is his review -

"We have a few minor complaints. The transmission tunnel gets surprisingly hot and downright unpleasant after some serious performance driving"

phillyone

I didnt mean to suggest these features were critical to car ownership. If you want to talk about things we don't need we can get into auto headlights, power seats, Nav, 6 disc changers etc. It's ridiculous to say an idea is bad because your car doesnt have it and you determined you dont need it. I don't feel I need Navigation but I'm not going to say it's stupid and everyone should go buy paper maps. I guess the point here is that anything Toyota/Honda develops is necessary and anything they don't pioneer is unneeded.

The whole point of remote start is to condition the cabin prior to entry, I'm not sure what part of that is confusing. We all know you can sit in a blazing hot car and crank the AC up and wait 6 minutes for cool down. That really isnt in dispute, my point was that remote start is a innovative convenience feature that eliminates the need to get into an uncomfortable car. If you think remote start is an unnecessary luxury than I suppose you feel the same way about heated seats.

if you have a problem with unsecured cargo than the solution would be to secure that cargo. My point was fold down front seats allow vehicles to transport long items that would otherwise have to be strapped on the roof. I'm pretty sure roof strapping isnt safe. The item isnt just sitting up front, it would be occupying space from the trunk all to the dashboard. Really it wouldnt have much room to move, and even if it did I fail to see how the operator of the vehicle would be in danger.

phillyone

I read the TCC review this morning and the tunnel thing was mentioned, but I didnt see it mentioned in the paper magazines. The reviewer didnt have any complaints about the shifter though. I am increasingly led to believe that shifter feel is largely subjective and thus there is no consensus. If you read C&D you will often see that editors have different opinions of the quality of a car's shifter. For whatever reason it appears that Corvette manuals arent compatible with Mr. Brauer's tastes. I don't know if that means the Z06 has the worst shifter in 25 years. Then again, I'm no expert on manuals.

gee35coupe

Alarm manufacturers have offered it for ages as an option on anything with an automatic.

I'm sure if there were a real market for that innovation, some luxury brand would have offered it before now. Especially Benz, the company that wants cars to drive themselves.

imidazol97

Remote start:
What would help for summer parking in hot sun would be a setting to put the windows down a certain fraction and leave the car with those down for 10-15 min
then start the car for 3 minutes and you'd have a cooler car. That would be better than running the motor for 10-15 minutes parked.
My friends have a Jetta with a button that puts all the windows down from the remote. Just add that to t he distance start.
Of course don't do this in a high crime area.

explorerx4

this won't work for every vehicle. i park my explorer(wagon) facing east during the summer. west during the winter. when i drive the focus, in the summer, i usually try to park with a big suv to the west of me.

carlisimo

hey that's basically how my navigation system works =]

210delray

All right already, enough is enough. Let's give it a rest. I never said nor give a hoot about whether or not Toyota or Honda introduced the remote start and the fold down frotn passenger seat. The former in my opinion is a fuel waster. The posters above have given other ways to cool down the passenger compartment.

As for the latter, check your owner's manual about unsecured cargo in the passenger compartment -- I didn't make this stuff up. VW and Audi are very specific about the need to tie down cargo, even in the trunk/cargo compartment.

I'm not going to carry this on any further; this is Karl's thread, not mine.