2012 Lexus LFA

There’s something slightly weird about this scene. We are about to drive the daunting 12.9-mile Nürburgring Nordschleife track in Germany. In a Lexus. Okay, it’s the exotic LFA, a Ferrari-fighting supercar that will cost about $350,000. But the company built its reputation on smooth, refined, and perfectly nerve-calming cars, so why does the LFA exist? In what parallel universe is this thing remotely Lexus-like?

Lexus claims multiple justifications for the LFA program. The car, it says, casts a halo over the Lexus F line of performance machines. It’s also a way for Toyota to explore new technologies, particularly carbon-fiber construction. And since Lexus says it will be selective about whom it will sell to—car collectors and high-profile individuals who use the car rather than park it—the LFA should raise the cachet of the brand as a whole.

For all that marketing happy-talk, the 2012 LFA is a serious outlier in the Lexus lineup and has had a convoluted gestation. The program started in 2000, and Lexus showed the first concept car at the Detroit auto show in 2005. Next, a convertible version appeared at Detroit in 2008, though it has since been canceled. In the interim, LFA prototypes were spotted testing at the Nordschleife, and further, two race-prepared cars entered the 24-hour race at the Nürburgring in 2008 and 2009. But until now, the company hasn’t said anything about production intent. Lexus is finally ready to admit that a mere 500 will be made, with production starting in December 2010.
Specifications

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe

ESTIMATED BASE PRICE: $350,000

ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 40-valve V-10, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection

Displacement: 293 cu in, 4805cc
Power (SAE net): 553 bhp @ 8700 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 354 lb-ft @ 6800 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 6-speed automated manual

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 102.6 in Length: 177.4 in
Width: 74.6 in Height: 48.0 in
Curb weight (C/D est): 3500 lb

PERFORMANCE (C/D EST):
Zero to 60 mph: 3.5 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 11.8 sec
Top speed (drag limited, mfr’s claim): 202 mph

FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST):
EPA city/highway driving:14/20 mpg
Although the car is extravagantly expensive, Lexus says it will lose money on every one. We believe it. The last car that incorporated a similar level of technology, performance, and exclusivity was the $650,000 Ferrari Enzo. At $350,000, the LFA begins to look like something of a bargain. The LFA is an exotic, two-place, front-engine, rear-wheel-drive coupe. The chassis and body are made largely of carbon-fiber composite, just like those of an Enzo or a Mercedes SLR McLaren. Per Lexus’s scales, the car weighs 3263 pounds—less than a Corvette ZR1.

The engine is a 4.8-liter V-10 codeveloped with Yamaha. It’s a compact unit that makes 553 horsepower at 8700 rpm and revs to a giddy 9000 rpm. Maximum torque of 354 pound-feet peaks at 6800 rpm, with 90 percent available between 3700 and 9000 revs.

The rear-mounted, six-speed automated manual transaxle incorporates a Torsen limited-slip differential. Control arms comprise the front suspension, with a multilink arrangement at the back. To keep weight down, the suspension pieces and the remote-reservoir monotube KYB dampers are aluminum.

The Brembo carbon-ceramic brake setup consists of discs 15.4 inches in diameter and six-piston monoblock calipers up front, with 14.2-inch discs and four-piston calipers at the back. Forged aluminum 20-inch BBS wheels sit inside bespoke 265/35 front and 305/30 rear Bridgestone Potenza tires. There are four driving modes: automatic, normal, wet, and sport; the driver can also select manual shift speeds. In sport mode, the stability-control system allows for greater amounts of yaw, but the system can be switched off completely.

When it comes to the styling, there’s a definite Japanese aesthetic, what with all the sharp edges and matte-black vents. But it’s not a head turner like the Enzo or even a Lamborghini Gallardo. We definitely wouldn’t order one in matte black—one of 30 available colors—because it looks like someone forgot to paint it properly.

But there is function underpinning the somewhat sedate form. According to chief engineer Haruhiko Tanahashi, an advantage of using carbon fiber for the bodywork is that it’s possible to make very sharp edges and cutoffs that improve aerodynamic performance. The LFA has a reasonably low coefficient of drag (0.31), and Tanahashi says that the car produces more downforce than any of its competitors. Even the inside edges of the door mirrors are shaped to guide air into scoops over the rear fenders that feed the rear-mounted radiators. A large rear wing incorporating a Gurney flap pops up at speeds above 50 mph.

The interior is restrained but tasteful. The car we drove had a mixture of supple leather, carbon fiber, Alcantara, and “satin metal” adorning the cockpit. Lexus will offer seat coverings in 12 shades of leather or 10 alternate hues of Alcantara, with three color choices for the Alcantara headliner. “Roomy” describes the cabin, although luggage space is minimal. The supportive bucket seats have eight-way power adjustments, and the driving position is superb. The minor controls are as easy to find and use as in a standard Lexus sedan, and the LFA even has the same mouse-style operation for its multifunction center-console screen as in an RX350 sport-ute.

___________________________________________________________________________________




Nerd Alert

Trick tach puts on a show. Its face turns white for sport mode, glows red near redline. A button on the steering wheel activates lap-timer and shift-point options.

___________________________________________________________________________________

The squared-off steering wheel houses a start button and a switch that controls the instrument-panel display. We like that the alloy paddle shifters are fixed to the steering column; the right-hand lever governs upshifts, and the left one is for downshifts.

The most remarkable interior features are seatbelt airbags—which inflate in a crash to spread the impact’s forces over a broader section of the body than a traditional belt—and the instrument display, which is as cool as liquid nitrogen. Alter the vehicle settings, and the large central tachometer, which also incorporates a digital speedometer and a gear indicator, changes appearance. In sport mode, the background color goes from black to white and the increments between the tach’s numbers get bigger. Pressing the display switch on the steering wheel causes the tach to appear to scoot sideways in the instrument panel. This opens a submenu that allows the driver to access features such as a lap timer and even to change the point at which warning lights appear on the tach. Continued...

2010 Jaguar XF 5.0 Premium

When the Jaguar XF first went on sale in the U.S. in 2008, it did so with two engines: a naturally aspirated, 300-hp, 4.2-liter V-8 and a 420-hp, supercharged version of the same unit. Just over a year after the car was launched, however, Jaguar has completely revamped the powertrain lineup and the range. The base XF retains its 4.2-liter engine, but the XF Premium model features a naturally aspirated, direct-injected, 5.0-liter V-8 making 385 hp and 380 lb-ft of torque. The XF Supercharged model adds a supercharger to the Premium’s direct-injected 5.0-liter, good for 470 hp, while the range-topping XFR gets a 510-hp version of the same engine.

The Premium model offers the best combination of performance and value in the XF range and carries a base price of $57,000, roughly $11,000 less than the XF Supercharged. The car comes well equipped, with standard 19-inch wheels, navigation, heated and cooled leather seats, blind-spot monitoring, front parking assist, a rear-view camera, bi-xenon headlights, a sunroof, and a power tilt/telescoping steering column.

The only available options are a premium sound system, a heated leather steering wheel—which was fitted to our tester and bumped the price up by $300—adaptive cruise control, and a power rear sunshade. Sybarites can also opt for the Portfolio package—which adds 20-inch wheels, a suede headliner, deep-pile carpeting, and contrasting stitching—for an extra $4000.

Less Power, Equal Performance
Specifications

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan

PRICE AS TESTED: $57,300 (base price: $57,000)

ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injection

Displacement: 305 cu in, 5000cc
Power (SAE net): 385 bhp @ 6500 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 380 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 6-speed automatic with manumatic shifting

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 114.5 in Length: 195.3 in
Width: 73.9 in Height: 57.5 in
Curb weight: 4189 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 12.0 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 17.6 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 5.3 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.6 sec @ 106 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 123 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 157 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.85 g

FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 16/23 mpg
C/D observed: 20 mpg

Like all XFs, the Premium model moves sweetly down the road, with a supple ride that’s married to good body control, accurate steering, and nicely balanced handling. The new engine is a sweetheart, with excellent mid-range response and a muted growl under hard acceleration. The six-speed automatic transmission shifts smoothly and has an excellent manual override, orchestrated via paddles on the steering wheel.

Compared with the old supercharged model, which had 35 more horsepower and only about 25 more pounds to lug around, we recorded remarkably similar acceleration times for the new 5.0. Zero to 60 mph took 5.1 seconds versus 5.0 for the forced-induction car, while the quarter-mile was dispatched in 13.6 seconds at 106 mph, compared with 13.5 at 107. In passing maneuvers, however, the new XF 5.0 was a tenth faster from 30 to 50 mph and from 50 to 70 mph, at 2.6 and 3.5 seconds, respectively. Braking performance was excellent, with the 70–0-mph stop taking 157 feet, just two feet longer than both a Porsche 911 Carrera S and Cayman S. The EPA gives the 5.0 city/highway fuel-economy figures of 16/23 mpg, while our lead feet managed 20 mpg overall, which was the same as our long-term 2009 XF Supercharged achieved over 40,000 miles.

Flawed Beauty, Nice Package

However, there are still some areas in the XF that need addressing. The infotainment/climate-control system is only accessible through submenus that are Byzantine at best and perverse at worst. Jaguar is supposedly going to add hard buttons for the seat heaters instead of the touch screen interface that currently exists, a move that can’t come soon enough. And while the unique pop-up rotary shift selector looks cool, it still seems gimmicky. Rear-seat headroom for taller occupants isn’t the best in class, either.

Despite its quirks, the XF is a solid luxury package overall. It looks terrific and distinctive, has a clean and modern interior, and has one of the best ride/handling balances in its class. At the price of our tester, it undercuts the less-powerful Audi A6 4.2 and BMW 550i by about $4000 and is a hair cheaper than the 382-hp 2010 Mercedes-Benz E550, which isn’t as well equipped as the Jag. But as far as the XF goes, it’s hard to see a reason to move up to either of the supercharged versions, especially considering their added cost.

2010 Nissan Sentra

The mildly refreshed 2010 Nissan Sentra (new lights, front fascia, wheels) is a little car that can be a lot of things to a lot of people, including enthusiasts. At the base level, the Sentra 2.0 is pretty stark, although it does come with way more standard goodies than are available on the Versa, which has usurped the Sentra’s role as the cheapest of the cheap in the Nissan lineup. The 2.0 SL model adds upscale features, including newly available leather seats, as well as an in-dash navigation system (come January 2010) that’ll cost just $400. Finally, the SE-R continues to serve the enthusiast population with its 177-hp, 2.5-liter four-cylinder, a figure that climbs to an even 200 when joined by the “Spec V” suffix, which also brings a six-speed stick in place of the SE-R’s continuously variable transmission. All non-SE-R Sentras get restyled lights and noses, and all Sentras regardless of trim get standard electronic stability control.

HOW DOES IT DRIVE?

With its 140-hp four-banger and CVT, the Sentra 2.0 SL is quite quiet and subdued but, alas, it doesn’t like to boogie. If you want more scoot and a more responsive chassis, don’t stop until you see SE-R on the decklid. Bummer we didn’t get a chance to drive one during our brief drive program in San Diego.

HOW DOES IT STACK UP?

For the money, the Mazda 3 is far more charismatic behind the wheel. Indeed, the Sentra SE-R Spec V flopped in a 2007 comparison test of five pocket rockets when it was all-new, and not a lot has been done to liven it up since. The value story remains strong, but as a driver’s car, we’re afraid it’s slipping toward the back of the pack.

WHAT’S THE COST?

The Sentra starts at $16,140 for the base model and rises to just over $20K for the SE-Rs. A new model, the 2.0 SR, combines the look of the SE-R with the frugality of the base Sentra’s 2.0-liter/CVT powertrain, for $17,880. The focus of Nissan’s refresh effort was on the 2.0 SL, which effects a $1100 price reduction compared with a comparably equipped ’09 model. SE-Rs are also down more than a grand. All are on sale now.

2009 Volkswagen CC 2.0T

When pondering the prices of the Volkswagen CC and the Toyota Camry or Honda Accord, mid-size-sedan buyers might ask themselves why the VW costs so much more. Well, we could draw you a picture of some dudes and a lady with a big butt hanging out in a park, but it wouldn’t be Georges Seurat’s Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte. To simplify, one is art and the other is not, and you can guess which commands a premium.

The CC qualifies as art not because of its mechanicals—they come courtesy of the fine Passat—but because of its sublime design. Take the front seats, for example. They’re beautiful. The unbroken, curved sections that frame the bottom cushions are particularly daring compared with regular car seats, and the seats as a whole serve as a great example of how interesting design doesn’t have to impinge on functionality or comfort; they strike just the right balance between sporty grippiness and long-haul cushiness. Styling permeates everything else, too. Even the trench that hides the windshield vents was clearly carefully considered, adding a bit of drama to the forward view. And the fit and finish of everything is impeccable. There are adequate interior bins and cubbies for storage, including two drawers above the nav screen good for thinner items. (We liked to race the drawers against each other to see which would open quickest. Right always won; left now has an inferiority complex.)

The two rear seats (this is a four-seater; for a similarly sized five-seat VW, you’ll still need to go to the Passat) are handsome to look at and are split by a console with two cup holders and a bin that can all be hidden under a tambour cover. Those rear chairs have really nice side bolstering, long bottom cushions, and good legroom for regular adults. The downsides: Headroom is nil for six-footers even though the seats are mounted low, and stretching your legs to take advantage of the thigh support results in your toes banging into stuff under the front seats. The low roofline makes ingress and egress tricky, too.

But, oh, that roofline. It might cramp scalps inside, but it’s sleek and sexy outside. The CC’s exterior aesthetic is clean and uncluttered, which lets the overall shape—and that roof—do the talking, rather than fussy details or overwrought brand cues. The CC’s face is both angry and playful, and we love the sinewy bulge that drops from under the headlamps to form the lower boundary of the grille.

It Isn’t Just Good to Look At
Specifications

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door sedan

PRICE AS TESTED (CC 2.0T Luxury): $36,090 (base price: $33,100)

ENGINE TYPE: turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, direct fuel injection

Displacement: 121 cu in, 1984cc
Power (SAE net): 200 bhp @ 5100 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 207 lb-ft @ 1700 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 6-speed automatic with manumatic shifting

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 106.7 in Length: 188.9 in
Width: 73.0 in Height: 55.8 in
Curb weight: 3387 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 7.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 18.0 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 29.7 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 7.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.3 sec @ 92 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 127 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 178 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad*: 0.83 g

FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 19/29 mpg
C/D observed: 25 mpg

*Stability-control-inhibited.

So, yes, the CC looks fantastic, but this looker drives well, too. The 200-hp, 2.0-liter turbo is one of our absolute favorite engines. The four-cylinder provides its full 207 lb-ft of torque from a broad 1700 to 5000 rpm, and we love the faint whoosh—you can’t hear it if the radio is at even low volume—it makes on acceleration and throttle lift. The one minor complaint concerns the 2.0-liter’s gruffness, which is playful in the GTI but is a bit out of place here; one of our passengers asked if the CC were a diesel. But the sound never becomes bothersome and is quickly ignored, especially once you tramp the gas pedal and get moving.

Sixty mph comes up in seven seconds flat, impressive when you consider we couldn’t ring quicker than 6.2 seconds out of a 280-horse, V-6–powered CC, and that car had the benefit of launch-enhancing all-wheel drive. This front-driver makes up some of the accelerative gap by the time a quarter-mile has passed, running 15.3 seconds at 92 mph versus the burlier model’s 14.8 at 97. In our hands, the CC returned a healthy 25 mpg in mixed driving.

In our 2009 test car, the 2.0T was hooked to a six-speed Tiptronic automatic. There’s a manual mode, but the gate is to the right, making it a difficult reach for the driver during spirited driving. We stuck with dropping the shift lever in S (sport) when we felt a little bit saucy. But a little bit saucy is all you’ll get, as throttle response is too languid for all-out runs and the Tiptronic is too eager to upshift even in sport mode. The 2010-model-year 2.0T has the rapid-fire dual-clutch DSG also found in the GTI, so responses are likely to be better.

Brake-torque launches with the stability control off bring no torque steer, which is all but nonexistent pulling hard out of a corner. Entering a corner, however, is where you’ll encounter a couple of the CC’s small handful of weaknesses. Turn-in is reluctant—to be expected with nearly 60 percent of the car’s 3387 pounds hanging over the front axle—and the steering has little feel, although it is accurate.

The other demerit concerns a choppy ride over broken pavement, which is sort of surprising given the relatively tall sidewalls of our car’s 235/45-17 Continental ContiProContact tires. But such surfaces never really disturb the car’s attitude, and in all other situations, the ride is very controlled. Stability is rock solid even nudging triple-digit territory.

You Get What You Pay For

With this car, price is always going to be the sticking point. A base CC is about 28 grand, which is where the price structures of mainstream family sedans generally end. But the thing is, although those cars do the job and some are even fun to drive, they go about their business humbly, and you see dozens of them come and go every day. The CC is like a microbrewed beer or an IWC timepiece or, well, a painting by Georges Seurat. Sure, you could have a Bud, buy a Timex, and hang that big-butt-lady drawing on the wall—and those are all fine in their own way—but those who pay a little extra are usually rewarded with something extra, too. In the case of this VW, it’s high style.

2010 Bentley Continental Supersports

Bentley describes the new Continental Supersports as “a fusion of extremes.” And that it is, starting with the name itself, which fuses the “Continental” badge, which dates to the brand’s 1950s models, and “Supersports,” a descriptor first given to a series of speed-record-setting Bentleys in the 1920s. The styling is a blend of the elegant body shape of the Continental GT coupe and sinister elements such as black wheels and gaping front intakes. The interior remains inarguably luxurious yet eschews stodgy wood and puffy seats in favor of intense carbon-fiber trim and lightweight racing shells.

If this sounds like high-brow automotive schizophrenia, know that each enhancement achieves the purpose stated by the Supersports name, contributing small but effective measures that elevate the Supersports out of the sphere where normal Continentals exist and into a world of faster, more exclusive, and even more prestigious nameplates. Think of it as a big-boned Aston Martin DBS, and you won’t be far off.

Specifications

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door sedan

PRICE AS TESTED (CC 2.0T Luxury): $36,090 (base price: $33,100)

ENGINE TYPE: turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, direct fuel injection

Displacement: 121 cu in, 1984cc
Power (SAE net): 200 bhp @ 5100 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 207 lb-ft @ 1700 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 6-speed automatic with manumatic shifting

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 106.7 in Length: 188.9 in
Width: 73.0 in Height: 55.8 in
Curb weight: 3387 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 7.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 18.0 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 29.7 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 7.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.3 sec @ 92 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 127 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 178 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad*: 0.83 g

FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 19/29 mpg
C/D observed: 25 mpg

*Stability-control-inhibited.
Bespoke, Be-Bad-Ass Styling

“We took the look of the [Continental] GT and tweaked it a little to give it a little more menace,” said Bentley board-member-in-chief Stuart McCullough during the press introduction of the Supersports in upstate New York. Specific changes include a front end dominated by a constellation of large black air apertures and four dark-trimmed headlamps. A set of gloss-black 20-inch wheels fill the wells, the rearmost framed by a subtle fairing to accommodate a full two-inch increase in rear track. Gloss black also finishes the lower-body spear trim and window surrounds, and the rear spoiler features an extra lip contour for aero purposes. Finishing the intensified package are smoked taillamps and a unique lower-bumper cap bracketing twin ovoid exhaust finishers. Two new colors—Ice (white) and Quartzite (gray)—are offered on the Supersports, as are two new matte finishes in dark and light gray.

A Kiss on the Cheek? Not this Continental

No matter the color, the styling of the Supersports will never be described as subtle. However, there remains a savory element of surprise that qualifies the Supersports as the ultimate street-fightin’ Bentley, especially in areas such as Los Angeles and Miami, which are veritably overrun with Continentals more benign, including the impressive Speed versions that now account for a majority of Continental sales. Even the most hopped-up Continentals will have a hard time keeping up with the Supersports, given how comprehensively this car has been enhanced under its skin.

That said, none of the Supersports’ enhancements is a big game changer by itself. According to lead engineer Brian Gush, the Supersports wasn’t originally part of the product plan but rather the result of the engine team coming up with an extra 20 horsepower and 50 lb-ft of torque from the twin-turbocharged W-12 (future Supersports will use an E85-capable version of the engine, a first for a Bentley). Drivetrain engineers simultaneously developed Quickshift programming for the six-speed automatic and a 40/60-percent front-to-rear torque split for the all-wheel-drive system. Gush explained that once they realized the car’s potential as a “whole different animal” from even the Continental GT Speed, they installed huge carbon-ceramic brake discs (with eight-piston front calipers), which reduced weight by 11 pounds at each wheel. More weight loss came about by yanking the rear seats and swapping out wood trim for satin-finished carbon fiber (together saving an additional 57 pounds) and switching the heavy front buckets to carbon-backed racing seats (losing another 100 pounds). Twenty or so more pounds were saved elsewhere on the chassis, including unsprung areas, resulting in an overall weight reduction of nearly 250 pounds. The body people did their part to make the Continental meaner-looking and to facilitate better engine breathing, and thus the Supersports was born.

Where does that leave the steel-bodied car’s curb weight? At a “mere” 4939 pounds, which is still spectacularly porky, especially for a two-seater. Still, with 590 lb-ft of torque at one’s disposal from 1700 rpm until nearly redline, the Supersports could be a full ton heavier and still outrun many cars half its weight. As it is, however, this Bentley is no slug, said to be able to hit 60 mph in 3.7 seconds, with 100 mph coming up in 8.9. Terminal velocity is said to be a lofty 204 mph. Passing power is mind-blowing, according to Bentley: 30 to 50 mph happens in 1.6 seconds, which is actually less time than it takes to say “1.6 seconds,” and the 50-to-77-mph pass takes 2.1 seconds. This is the sort of power that curls your neck muscles around your upper vertebrae and shoves your tongue down your throat. Lattes will spill, cell phones will fly, and whimpering Chihuahuas will be flattened against the quilted bulkhead that replaces the rear seats. Continued...

2010 Roush Ford Mustang 427R

Subtlety. Some strive for it, while others light their hair on fire and run into traffic screaming. Consider the Roush 427R. At first ogle, it’s nearly indiscernible from a standard-issue Ford Mustang GT, especially finished with black paint and flat-black decals, as was our test car. But turn the key, and this Mustang does its best impression of one of Jack Roush’s NASCAR sleds. The noise is intoxicating. We were addicted. The throaty, hairy-chested exhaust (a $710 option you can’t afford to skip) changes the entire character of this pony car when you get on the gas, counterbalancing subtle aesthetic mods to help the Roush strike a balance between hey-look-at-me and I’m-just-an-average-Mustang.

World’s Greatest Mustang GT

To be fair, the rest of Roush’s upgrades have a positive effect on the already improved-for-2010 Mustang GT, too, and they all work to improve the car’s characteristics in a balanced way. The 4.6-liter V-8 gets new breathing equipment, a supercharger, and a reprogrammed computer that yield 435 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque, increases of 120 and 75, respectively, compared with the stock GT. (The 427 in the name is for nostalgic purposes, as the car’s output is now undersold by the decals on its flanks, and the V-8 doesn’t displace 427 cubic inches.) A suspension package goes beyond that of Ford’s Track pack and includes new front struts, different rear shocks, and new springs and anti-roll bars at both ends.

Then there are the details: A darkened pony logo nestled in the grille. A body kit that includes new front and rear fascias, a front splitter, side skirts, and a wing on the rear deck. Interior touches like aluminum pedals and our tester’s Jack Roush–besignatured seats. None of this is too much, but we could certainly do without the window louvers and a boost gauge that monopolizes space originally meant for the driver's air vent; thankfully, both items are optional. And did we mention the glorious sound the thing makes? Yep, we’re still addicted.
Specifications

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe

PRICE AS TESTED: 53,716 (base price: $47,296)

ENGINE TYPE: supercharged and intercooled SOHC 24-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection

Displacement: 281 cu in, 4606cc
Power (SAE net): 435 bhp @ 6250 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 400 lb-ft @ 4250 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 5-speed manual

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 107.1 in Length: 188.0 in
Width: 73.8 in Height: 54.4 in
Curb weight: 3700 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.8 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 18.8 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 5.3 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.0 sec @ 111 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 155 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.94 g

FUEL ECONOMY:
C/D observed: 14 mpg

Obvious-Comparison Time: What of the GT500?

For about the same price as this tricked-out GT, Ford will sell you its in-house-massaged Shelby GT500, which now boasts 540 hp and 510 lb-ft of torque from its supercharged 5.4-liter V-8. It’s an easy choice, right? Not so fast. In adding horses, the Shelby also adds more than 300 pounds over its front axle compared with the Track pack Mustang GT. The Roush adds 105.

Yes, the 427R is at a power deficit, but what’s there is ample. Blasts to 60 take 4.7 seconds, 0.2 second longer than the GT500, and the quarter is traveled in 13 flat at 111, 0.3 and 4 mph off the Shelby’s pace. Shifts in our 427R were accomplished by the regular GT’s five-speed manual, and the optional short-throw shifter makes the distances between ratios feel toggle-switch tight, minimizing the downtime between raucous exhaust honks. Skidpad grip of 0.94 g edges out both the Track-packed GT (0.92) and the Shelby GT500 (0.91). The handling is the best we’ve experienced in a 2010 Mustang, and the reworked suspension gives the Roush a planted feel where the GT500 is a bit too spongy. Seventy-to-zero-mph braking performance is also better with the Roush—155 feet versus the Shelby’s 165.

(All of that said, Roush will build you a Stage 3 Mustang with GT500 output for a package price of over $28,000, double that of the 427R. But we can’t see needing to spend more when the 427R feels, sounds, and looks as good as it does.)

The Sound of Unsilence

This Mustang got plenty of looks of admiration from spectators who first heard, then saw, the all-black stallion. At the same time, it drew some disapproving looks from fellow motorists and pedestrians who seemed to assume by its tone that the Roush must be up to no good—and quickly. (We weren’t always flooring it; it’s loud at times even when you’re trying to crawl through traffic.) This author would like to apologize to his neighbors—let’s say those within a one-mile radius—for any late-night arrivals or early-morning departures.

The basic 427R package includes the modified powertrain and most of the looks for $15,056 on top of a Mustang GT Premium with California emissions and a 3.55:1 rear axle ratio ($32,240). You can, of course, add things to the base Mustang—like the newly available nav system—and then pile on the options from Roush. Our tester’s Roush options amounted to an extra $6420 on the tab, but we’d happily knock that total down to $1120 for the short-throw shifter with black knob ($410) and God-sent exhaust ($710). Our car also had a $1450 brake kit that includes slotted rotors and some caliper paint, but we’d probably opt to move up to the $2877 big-brake kit (14-inch front rotors and four-piston calipers). So, after scrapping the unnecessaries and adding the bigger brakes, our personal 427R would ring in at $51,293. GT500 territory, yes, but this is a far more balanced package.

Building on what many of us believe to be the best Mustang ever, this Roush is the choice for those who want a well-rounded Stang that combines extra power with decent handling. It might not carry the flash of the Shelby or, for that matter, a Camaro, but people will certainly hear you coming, and you’ll even be able to have fun when the road goes curvy.

2010 Lincoln MKS With EcoBoost

The arrival of the MKS sedan last year spurred hopes that it might revitalize Ford’s historically uncompetitive luxury brand, helping Lincoln to better compete with Cadillac, Lexus, and other aspirational marques. Most of the hype stemmed from the stunning MKR concept that debuted at the 2007 Detroit auto show; it floated the idea that future Lincolns wouldn’t be dowdy, livery-service specials like the current Town Car.

As it turns out, the MKS is indeed light-years beyond that ancient Panther-platformed barge in both styling and performance. But the production 2009 MKS came to market lacking the MKR’s exaggerated proportions, rear-wheel-drive chassis, and twin-turbocharged V-6—which then carried the aggressive TwinForce moniker. The reality of the MKS’s front-wheel-drive foundation (shared with the Ford Taurus) and naturally aspirated, 3.7-liter V-6 making 275 hp and 276 lb-ft of torque put it at a disadvantage with more powerful luxury sedans.

But Ford is now upping the big Lincoln’s game, as it will finally be available with a twin-turbo, 3.5-liter V-6 when the 2010 model arrives in showrooms in mid-summer. Although the engine carries the more marketing-friendly EcoBoost name, its 355 hp and 350 lb-ft of torque are for real and give the Lincoln the gusto to run with most V-8s. We recently had the chance to sample the new turbocharged model—as well as the 2010 MKT crossover—at Ford’s Michigan proving ground, where the company had a V-8 Cadillac STS and Infiniti M45x on hand for comparison.
Specifications

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, 4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan

BASE PRICE (with EcoBoost V-6): $48,585

ENGINE TYPE: twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injection

Displacement: 213 cu in, 3490cc
Power (SAE net): 355 bhp @ 5700 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 350 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 6-speed automatic with manumatic shifting

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 112.9 in Length: 204.1 in Width: 75.9 in Height: 61.6 in Curb weight (C/D est): 4400 lb

PERFORMANCE (C/D EST):
Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.9 sec
Top speed (governor limited): 135 mph


FUEL ECONOMY (MFR’S EST):
EPA city/highway driving: 17/24 mpg

Movin’ On Up

Supported by standard all-wheel drive and a beefier six-speed automatic transmission with paddle shifters and revised gear ratios, the EcoBoost MKS proved to be a far more compelling vehicle to pilot than the base car. However, it should be noted that, although the Lincoln handily outpaced the Cadillac and Infiniti in acceleration, technology, and refinement, Ford conveniently chose two of the oldest and least powerful vehicles in the segment for comparison.

With peak torque available as low as 1500 rpm, the direct-injected EcoBoost V-6 is flexible in its power delivery and motivates the 4400-pound MKS with uncanny ease. Acceleration is smooth and linear up to the indicated 135-mph top speed, with the 0-to-60 sprint likely coming in fewer than six seconds. Turbo lag is nonexistent. The exhaust note is hushed but noticeable, with a subdued growl that never gives the impression the engine is being worked too hard. To further promote the EcoBoost technology, Ford recently invited the media out to Michigan's Milan Dragway to run the new MKS down the quarter-mile. While the venue didn't allow for our regular testing regimen, our best run confirmed our 13.9-second estimate to be accurate. Stay tuned for full C/D test results from the next time we get behind the wheel.

Although the prodigious low-end grunt tops that of many V-8s, Ford says the EcoBoost engine’s direct injection, compact turbochargers, and smaller displacement allow it to sip fuel like a proper V-6. Our short stint behind the wheel, with the throttle frequently contacting the floorboard, didn’t give us much of an idea about real-world economy. Still, the EcoBoost MKS’s estimated city/highway mileage of 17/24 mpg beats the EPA figures for the STS and M45x—again, conveniently—which are rated at 15/22 and 14/20, respectively. The front-wheel-drive, 3.7-liter MKS is rated the same as the EcoBoost model; the all-wheel-drive base car gets 16/23 mpg. However, the Lexus GS460 with its 342-hp, 4.6-liter V-8 matches the economy of the boosted MKS, and the more powerful—and less expensive—Hyundai Genesis V-8 manages 1 mpg better on the highway. Although the Lincoln’s ratings are surely influenced by its porky curb weight and have yet to be verified by the EPA, we think it might have been better had Ford kept the cooler-sounding TwinForce name if the primary benefit of EcoBoost is performance.