NOS2006

Now that Chrysler has been joined by Fiat and released from the grip of its previous owners, or "partners," it has been given a nearly all-new line up of fresh vehicles. Almost every single vehicle on any Chrysler or Dodge showroom floor is new in one way or another. However, there is one vehicle that is missing: a compact sedan.

Dodge tried fooling us into buying a compact crossover-type vehicle when they replaced the Neon with the Caliber in 2006. This car was nothing like the Neon and has gone unchanged for far too long. Seeing as though it is aged and was never able to sell like the Neon, it is time for a replacement that goes back to its roots.

Your mission is to create a new compact sedan for Dodge that has best in class styling. This car must sell to the masses and show that Dodge means business, so don't be afraid to be unique and creative in its design. Other designs in this class very widely, from the very sleek Civic to the edgier Cruze, so show us what Dodge should do to replace the bulky Caliber with something new!

You may base your creation on any compact Fiat vehicle or branch out in a new direction. But each entry must comply with the following:

• Four doors (though you may add an extra coupe or wagon sketch to accompany your sedan)
• Compact proportions
• Dodge family resemblance

To me, Cadillac should still offer better engines than Chevys.

Just because it's a V8 doesn't necessarily mean it's better.

You want the opinion of someone younger? Here it is...

I was raised to love the Camaro and hate the Mustang (and all things Ford). I grew up looking at pictures of Camaros that my dad owned and eventually had to give up to raise my sister and I. I absolutely loved everything to do with the Camaro and felt disgusted when someone even thought to say that the Mustang was better. My first car was a Camaro and, before that even, I joined C&G searching for 5th Gen Camaro pictures. I joined after seeing Walt's chop of a black 4th Gen into what he expected to see out of a 5th Gen.

With the minor exception of '82 (and a few years of I6s), Camaros have always been V6 and V8 only. However, the world is changing. If you can think of one modern car that is pure muscle with no refinement, what do you think of? That, my friends, is the Viper. How have Viper sales been? Poor. So what is Chrysler now doing? Giving it some refinement and coming out with something much more polished than ever before. If even the Viper has to change to accomodate refinement and more efficient packaging, why should the Corvette or Camaro have the privilege to stay the same and not evolve whatsoever? They don't have the privilege and they never will because the only thing that is constant is change, which is ultimately very true for the auto industry.

That being said, the Mustang's latest MCE is exactly what GM is missing. We were told by GM that we were getting an amazing car that would be nearly perfect in every aspect with the 5th Gen Camaro and, on paper, it mostly was. We received a very good exterior design, much better suspension, sufficient engine choices, and more technology than a Camaro has ever seen. With that we also received nearly two tons, a hard plastic dash, and a rather large feeling car. When I sit inside a car, I want something that Cadillac is striving for: "When you turn your car on, does it return the favor?" With the Camaro, it does not. Sure, it was fun to slide a 2SS around some corners and bring it up to 120 on a back country road, but there was something lacking. To me, that something was that it felt large and acted as if it needed all of its 426 ponies to get it going the way it did to push that weight around.

I admit, the car felt large partially because my last two cars have been forced induction four-bangers making around 300 HP with a curbweight of about 1000 lbs less. These two cars feel like they can go all out with little effort whereas the Camaro really needed to be pushed, and my SRT-swapped Neon actually felt quicker than the Camaro (though I can't confirm or deny whether or not it is). I didn't get that special feeling out of the Camaro, though I know GM has the ability to do so. I drove a Corvette Grand Sport about a month later (yes, I know, it's a much more expensive car with a way better suspension, but it is the Camaro's big brother so to speak), and it gave me that feeling from the start. As soon as I sat in the Corvette and felt it just wrap around me, I knew I was in something much more special than the Camaro I had driven. Then I started it and mashed the petal, and that same motor gave me a thrill that I hadn't seen whatsoever in driving the Camaro.

I then test drove a 2011 Mustang a month or so later. I didn't even intend to drive one, but once I sat down in one at the dealership, I knew that I had to. It gave me a much better feel than the Camaro, and I felt more welcome and invited to drive the Mustang. I started it, and drove this V6 Premium model around for a few minutes. There is one word that best describes the Mustang's feel to me over the Camaro's, and that word is tidy. The Mustang just felt tidy. It felt much smaller, lighter, and more nimble than the Camaro. Heck, even the much smaller amount of power in the 3.7L V6 even made me feel better than that of the 6.2L V8 in the Camaro, not because it was more powerful, but because everything about the car felt much more sporty. And this is what these cars are trying to be, deep down they are sports cars, so they must act and feel the part. They are no longer what they used to be, rough racers that are straight-line contenders only. However, they still should embody that spirit and live on as contenders in every aspect that defines a sports car.

As a younger person who could actually afford a Mustang or Camaro, I would choose the current Mustang because it is mostly what these cars need to be as of right now, and that says a lot given my history with these two cars. I've even considering putting down money multiple times to get this car in my driveway.

That being said, the Camaro especially has to get smaller, as GM already realizes. It needs to be more efficiently packaged like I feel the Mustang is. It needs to bring you inside of it and tell you, "I dare you to start me." Whatever happened to having a "bitchin' Camaro" back in the day? That's what we need now, a bitchin' Camaro. If it were to lose the weight necessary and have a tough-sounding I4 turbo with 300 HP, then why not? 300 HP would result in a quick car and, if it is packaged correctly, this engine would give a very respectable fuel economy. I think everybody is offended by four cylinders in this car because it will eventually have a fart can put on it by some little fanboy teenager one day, but turbo-fours tend to sound much better than any N/A four-banger no matter what you do to them and their exhaust and, no matter what happened to the exhaust of such a motor, the sound of it would most likely not disrespect the Camaro name IMHO. Also, if we're already getting 300+ HP out of a mean-sounding I4, then why should we throw a V6 in there? The I4 will be more efficient, possibly lighter, and would be showing its true potential. You don't really need a 350 HP V6 base engine in the car, 300 HP is honestly more than enough, especially if the car is much lighter than the current car.

Will people accept this car though? Maybe not right out of the gate. There will obviously be people snarling about it, but they will still have a V8 option without a doubt, and I don't see that going away for awhile. If the Corvette has a V8 (and it has since the 50s), then the Camaro will as well in some form or fashion. If the base 6th Gen Camaro can almost perform with the 5th Gen SS (as the base 5th Gen nearly can with the 4th Gen SS), then what's the difference in what engine it has? Just build us a car that gives you that 45+ year heritage, sports car spirit, an interior that makes you feel absolutely crazy just sitting in it, the performance (in both power and fuel economy) to outperform anything else in its segment, and call it Camaro. If that doesn't make you happy, no matter the options you're given in the car, then nothing truly will.

Good choice, Camino, and great submission, Z! I really liked quite a few of these, and I'm glad to see the competition this time. Great job hyping it up, Camino!

Oldsmoboi.. what was your idea for the next contest?

haha Yes, I know. I didn't know I posted about it, damn it. lol Anyway, I'm far past that

Thanks again, everybody! And, yes, it's absolutely terribly frigid here today/tonight..

6th gen styling is a complete mystery right now. I'm working on it.

I hope to God it's a modern take on the '70 1/2....

Source: Left Lane News -- LINK (pictures after the jump)

Confirming earlier rumors, Ferrari took the wraps off of its latest design, a totally new grand touring-oriented 612 Scaglietti-replacing shooting brake called the Ferrari FF.

Set to formally debut in early March at the Geneva Motor Show, this latest Ferrari truly stretches the brand’s design language to a new limit. In many ways, it looks like one of the mega-buck one-off designs commissioned by extravagantly wealthy sheiks, but this new model is set to be a volume offering – at least by Ferrari standards.

The FF nomenclature derives from “Ferrari Four-seater,” meaning that this shooting brake has plenty of room for extra passengers and their cargo.

Its long roofline hides a nearly 16 cubic foot cargo area that can be extended to more than 28 cubic feet with the second row of seats tumbled away.

All-wheel-drive arrives

The FF debuts Ferrari’s new 4RM all-wheel-drive system, which reportedly weighs in at about half that of a conventional all-wheel-drive system used in rivals bearing the Lamborghini and Porsche badges. Ferrari says that the FF tips the scales at under 4,000 lbs., meaning that even though it puts power to all four wheels and features an elongated roofline, it weighs around 100 lbs. less than the 612.

The light weight system helps keep weight distribution at 47/53 between the front and rear axles.

Ferrari says that the FF is powered by a 6.3-liter V12 that cranks out 651 horsepower at 8,000 rpm and 504 lb-ft. of torque at 6,000 rpm. Top speed is 208 mph and the automaker says that the FF sprints to 62 mph in just 3.7 seconds, representing a roughly 0.3 second increase over the outgoing 612.

Helping to keep things green, the automaker’s HELE start/stop system makes an appearance. Fuel consumption is down to around 15.5 mpg combined and emissions are curbed at 360 g/km – impressive figures for a Ferrari.

The FF will go on sale later this year and it will be offered in six factory shades.

Source: Left Lane NewsLINK (pictures after the jump)

Confirming earlier rumors, Ferrari took the wraps off of its latest design, a totally new grand touring-oriented 612 Scaglietti-replacing shooting brake called the Ferrari FF.

Set to formally debut in early March at the Geneva Motor Show, this latest Ferrari truly stretches the brand’s design language to a new limit. In many ways, it looks like one of the mega-buck one-off designs commissioned by extravagantly wealthy sheiks, but this new model is set to be a volume offering – at least by Ferrari standards.

The FF nomenclature derives from “Ferrari Four-seater,” meaning that this shooting brake has plenty of room for extra passengers and their cargo.

Its long roofline hides a nearly 16 cubic foot cargo area that can be extended to more than 28 cubic feet with the second row of seats tumbled away.

All-wheel-drive arrives

The FF debuts Ferrari’s new 4RM all-wheel-drive system, which reportedly weighs in at about half that of a conventional all-wheel-drive system used in rivals bearing the Lamborghini and Porsche badges. Ferrari says that the FF tips the scales at under 4,000 lbs., meaning that even though it puts power to all four wheels and features an elongated roofline, it weighs around 100 lbs. less than the 612.

The light weight system helps keep weight distribution at 47/53 between the front and rear axles.

Ferrari says that the FF is powered by a 6.3-liter V12 that cranks out 651 horsepower at 8,000 rpm and 504 lb-ft. of torque at 6,000 rpm. Top speed is 208 mph and the automaker says that the FF sprints to 62 mph in just 3.7 seconds, representing a roughly 0.3 second increase over the outgoing 612.

Helping to keep things green, the automaker’s HELE start/stop system makes an appearance. Fuel consumption is down to around 15.5 mpg combined and emissions are curbed at 360 g/km – impressive figures for a Ferrari.

The FF will go on sale later this year and it will be offered in six factory shades.

Thanks for getting mine uploaded, Camino!

Thanks, all! I'm glad that "sNOSage" is still alive. haha

Live Like a Model?! haha I don't think I remember this...

And cake and an extra cold one is for sure going to happen!

Trial 2. If this doesn't work, PM me your email, Camino, and I'll send it to you and maybe you can post it?

After scanning it, it looks a lot more (besides grainy) like a GMT-800, but this is a half-hour effort for you Camino lol. Not gonna win, but it's something damn it!

haha Believe me. I've tried sketching some ideas out for this and I'm not at all creative when it comes to recreating an '80s-'90s truck/SUV haha.

I'm not going to be home tonight, and I'm at work right now, so I've got no chance at participating. Besides, I'm not at all a truck guy and there's no chance I'd have at beating quite a few of these entries. They're freakin' good.

Source: Left Lane News (LINK.. Pictures after the jump)

As post-bankruptcy General Motors reinvents itself, the automaker formerly known as the world’s largest is finding that it cannot ignore historically less-profitable segments like compact and subcompact cars.

Share1retweet00diggsdiggBut to compete with rivals like Toyota and Honda, GM knows the facsimile game won’t work. Luring buyers back into Detroit products requires something new. In this case, it is a trip into uncharted waters: A move upscale with the globally-developed Chevrolet Cruze.

To find out if GM’s Korean and German divisions are up to the task, we put nearly 3,000 miles on a nicely-equipped 2011 Cruze LT.

What is it?

Don’t call it a Cobalt or a Cavalier. Although its name might sound Gen X-inspired to us, the Cruze is a vastly more refined four-door than any of its compact predecessors. GM hopes that buyers will take home Cruzes because they want them, not because they were forced to settle on a Cobalt or a Cavalier that was cheaper than its rivals.

Cruze rides on the same Delta II architecture as the Opel Astra and the Chevrolet Volt, but most development was done in South Korea and Germany..

Although Cruzes just hit the market in the United States late in 2010, the sedan has actually been on sale in some places across the globe for about two years. That isn’t because GM wanted to keep it away from us, but rather because it was introduced in the markets where primary development took place.

Our tester featured the uplevel 2LT trim, which adds leather seats and a few other goodies, but falls just short of the range-topping LTZ. Base Cruzes check in at around $17,000 – a price that seems high but nonetheless still comes in below a similarly-optioned Honda Civic or Toyota Corolla. Cars are expensive to develop and build these days.

What’s it up against?

Chevrolet is gunning for the class-leading Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla. Of course, “class-leading” might be a misnomer if you look at anything other than the sales figures.

In terms of content, the Cruze squares off against the value-laden Hyundai Elantra and the similarly upmarket Mazda3 and 2012 Ford Focus.

Any breakthroughs?

A look at the spec sheet might leave you confused. Base Cruzes have a 1.8-liter, 138-horsepower four-cylinder, while all of the higher trim levels feature a 1.4-liter turbo four with… 138 horsepower. But the story here is torque, where the 1.8 offers a paltry 123 lb-ft. at 3,800 rpm, while the turbo delivers 148 lb-ft. in a broad band that begins at just 1,850 rpm.

For green-minded drivers, the Cruze Eco comes with a unique aerodynamic body kit with an innovative air shutter that makes things even more wind-cheating at speed, as well as its own gearing. The Cruze Eco is the only turbo with a stick, making it sort of an odd default “sporty” choice. We’ll be behind the wheel of a Cruze Eco soon.

How does it look?

The Cruze doesn’t look all that fresh if you’ve been following the auto industry for the last few years – or if you’ve been to Eastern Europe, where it is proving to be a genuine sales success.

But if it’s new to you, you’ll probably like its conservatively creased and toned body, which starts with a bold tall two-section and culminates in a short and high rear deck lid. The look isn’t as daring and trendy as the upcoming Ford Focus, but it strikes us as the kind of style that will wear extremely well.

Most models don’t brag outwardly about being positioned upmarket of a competitive Corolla, but there are enough small touches that all add up to an upscale appearance. Chrome detailing around the front grille, on the belt line and on the rear deck lid help out, as do particularly classy tail lamps. Our tester featured optional 17-inch alloy wheels but not the availble RS appearance package that adds a body kit and fog lamps. LTZs add 18-inchers for more bling.

And on the inside?

The Cruze’s interior elicited strong emotions the first time we plunked ourselves down into its seats, but its pluses quickly outweighed its negatives. Cruze’s basic design is well executed, with a simple, easy-to-use center stack flanked by the dual-cowl dashboard design GM’s design studios favor.

For the most part, the interior picks from GM’s best parts bin features, including a blue-on-black high-mounted display for audio and temperature information, a button-heavy but easily mastered audio system and a simple climate control setup. The center console features a pair of cupholders and a small center box with a sliding armrest. Interior storage is limited to door pockets, a small map pocket in the front passenger footwell, a glovebox and the center console box. A tiny compartment lies just ahead of the gear lever, but it’s too shallow to hold a cell phone.

Ahead of the driver lies a three-spoke steering wheel wrapped in nice leather and equipped with convenient audio, cruise and Bluetooth controls. Inset gauges flank a large display for the trip computer and handy (standard on all trim levels) turn-by-turn OnStar.

Our 2LT’s leather-covered seats proved extremely comfortable over long distances, even though they didn’t offer lumbar adjustment. But they countered with excellent support and “just right” side bolsters, not to mention a nicely-grained leather that would make several luxury brands jealous. The front passenger compartment could use a little more stretch out legroom, but the rear bench is plenty roomy for a compact sedan and it even features a fold-down armrest with integrated cupholders.

Kvetches centered around the odd gym shorts mesh trim covering the dashboard and door panels. LTZs get nicely-padded vinyl, but other trim levels make due with this weird choice. Our all-black 2LT’s inner trappings masked the mesh better than the light tan and brick red/black interior options do, at least.

But we have little reason for concern with the rest of the Cruze’s plastics, which were meticulously screwed together and composed of either the soft touch or the none-too-hollow variety. In terms of fit and finish, design, execution and usability, Cruze sets the high bar extremely high not only for its class, but for far pricier cars.

But does it go?

General Motors has never mastered four-cylinder engines in the way that its Japanese rivals have, so we approached the Cruze’s new 1.4-liter turbo unit with trepidation. Compared to most modern turbos, its power output of slightly under 100 ponies per liter seems a little weak, as does its modest torque.

But once under way, we found that the Cruze manifests its power in a solid and strong way that had us sufficiently satisfied. Only during certain mid-range passing acceleration exercises, like freeway on-ramp merging, did the Cruze feel like it had a mountain of torque available. A fast machine it is not, but the torque piles on with a comforting rush and it generally plods along without little fuss or complaint. Unlike most engines in GM’s Ecotec family, this 1.4-liter is a paragon of smoothness at idle and throughout the rev band.

Cruzes like ours tip the scales at a portly 3,102 lbs., about 250 lbs. ahead of most rivals, which helps explain the relative lack of grunt. Further compounding things is a six-speed automatic transmission that offers balky shifts. We had to double-check the spec sheet to make sure that this GM-developed unit didn’t feature a clutch. At low speeds when the Cruze has just been awakened for its morning jaunt into the office, the transmission produces head-lunging upshifts for the first mile or so. We questioned the shift quality of our tester, but follow-up rides in two other Cruzes produced similar results. We hope the culprit is software tuning that will be rectified in future Cruzes.

Otherwise, the Cruze did little to have us doubting Chevrolet’s assertion that it is a premium machine. Nicely-boosted electric power steering offered predictable handling that bordered on genuinely sporty, while the ride quality with the Continental-wrapped 17s was nearly perfect. Over even the worst pavement we could find, the Cruze’s body felt as tight and solid as cars costing thousands more and its suspension smoothly swallowed up bumps and ruts with nary a clunk nor a misstep. In the twisties, the Cruze was neutral and predictable with good grip and enough communication through the wheel to bring a smile to our faces.

We were even more impressed with its highway characteristics, where GM’s extensive sound deadening paid off with one of the quietest interiors we have ever sampled – let alone in a compact sedan.

In nearly every way, the Cruze felt like a genuine “class up” vehicle – even its fuel economy. At highway speeds, we never managed to crest 30 mpg, despite the EPA’s ambitious 36 mpg rating. We generally bested the window sticker’s 24 mpg in town rating, but we were very dismayed with its highway economy. Our best guess is that 3,000 rpm needed to keep the little 1.4-liter at 75 mph eradicates the advantages of its small displacement design.

We talked with several Cruze owners after our evaluation ended and found they had reached a similar concolusion: 36 mpg is tough to attain.

Why you would buy it:

You want a four-door sedan that makes you feel like you paid more than you did.

Why you wouldn’t:

Fuel economy is your number one priority, or you liked the general crapiness of your old Cavalier.

Leftlane’s bottom line

Fuel economy aside, the Cruze is the most complete compact car we have ever tested. It may not offer quite the sporty feel of a Mazda3, but it counters with a wholly refined feel that belies any lingering negativity we had toward the bowtie badge’s last compact offerings. Cruze blows the Corolla and even the Civic out of the water and its style is more mature than the Focus.

But if you’re a high-speed cruiser, beware of the Cruze’s real-world fuel economy.

Words and photos by Andrew Ganz.

2011 Chevrolet Cruze 2LT base price, $20,675. As tested, $21,890.

17-inch wheels, $395; Compact spare tire, $100; Destination, $720.

I'm very surprised by their review. They love this car, and call it "better than its class" and "best compact we've tested" more than once. Very nice job, Chevrolet!

Last night I saw a commercial for the Mazda 6, and it seemed as though one of their biggest triumphs with the car was that they were able to package six (6!) airbags into it. I giggled a bit as I told my parents that the smaller Cruze has 10 standard.

Minor issues with the interior, eh? Please do elaborate.

Every 5 years, eh? I'm expecting something big from you on 11/11/11...

Z really wants that watch!

P.S. This is now posted in two separate stories on LeftLaneNews:

1. http://www.leftlanenews.com/cadillac-ats-sedan.html

2. http://www.leftlanenews.com/cadillac-ats-v.html

However, LLN does not cite us, which isn't right. DREW!

but if its not better at FE in this CAFE environment then there is no point to it.

i can't see a significant enough NVH benefit that some extra sound dampeners and more sophisticated engine isolation couldn't take care of in stead of making 6 cylinders (more weight and rotating mass) push 2 litres of air.

The rotating mass wouldn't be that much more. The pistons would each be smaller in the 2.0 V6 than a 2.0 I4. Overall, I think the mass of the 6 pistons (+ 2 extra connecting rods) would only be slightly heavier than the I4. Not necessarily negligible, but also not necessarily too much to argue over.

A new report, although we cannot absolutely confirm it, states a very convincingly feasible powertrain for the ATS-V: Jesus on a pogo stick. Cadillac's brilliant marketing group will be able to sell this while convincing all of America to burn calories by bouncing on a pogo stick because, "That's what Jesus would do!"

Sources also state that Europeans still won't buy it.

Glad you guys enjoyed.

Yay! The pictures decided to upload this time:

http://www.cheersandgears.com/gallery/page__module__user__user__177__do__view_album__album__88

Sorry for the delay, fellas!

So far this month (on the street) I've seen a Camaro convertible (tan on white), 200C convertible (tan on white), many Cruzes, and a few Volts (5-. I also saw a 3rd Gen Vette driving around (on slushy roads) on what looked to be its factory wheels.