Drew Dowdell

SoCal - it will likely be over 200hp for the ATS. Turning the engine 90 degrees allows for better breathing. Additionally, this is an all new engine, I believe there was some power left on the table when they announced the spec for the Malibu. Even the old 2.4 liter Ecotec could do 180hp with direct injection. They can get more than that from a brand new engine with DI.

There is nothing stressed about the 2.0T, even the current one has more torque than a Northstar at a lower RPM.

I think most of you are off with your assessments.

Changing the LFX from transverse to longitudinal takes the power from 305 to 317. So I would expect the 2.5 to be over 200 in the ATS.

I think the 2.5 might see a hp bump for the ATS.

Finally some sanity!

The biggest single mistake that Acura ever made was canceling the Integra.

Look for the turbo to be between 260 and 280

190 hp is the non-turbo SoCal

I am departing the Hudson Valley today for the small town of Forty Fort, PA. Lets see what the fuel economy of an unladen Beetle Turbo is.

I don't see it as a risk at all. GM can always turn up the boost a bit if they think that more horsepower will drive sales. I no longer think that is the case. 300hp is pretty much the extreme upper limit of what a typical family sedan shopper will ever insist on anyway. Most Camry and Accord drivers are happily cruising along with their 160 - 180hp 4-bangers. The key for the Malibu will be having great torque down low in the RPM range. If they can do that, the horsepower number won't matter so much.

It looks like it has about as much front overhang as a 1996 W-Body!

I thought the Olds' were all about the torque.

is it going to be a RAM?

Sidevalves of course.

Integra

Honda concepts tend to be pretty bang on as to what the production version will look like

I just want to point out that this is the PERFECT time to be an independent journalist. You can self publish in many ways and make good money doing so.

That is a sweet looking dash cluster!

I am not in any way a journalist... nor am I in print media, I work for a large energy firm during the day... yet here I am with press credentials.

wish granted

true.....

I'm in the highest trim Beetle you can currently buy and it does not have all of the features the GLI has.

I think I'd go with the Beetle, but I'd get it in a manual instead of DSG. However, the GLI is a full $3k cheaper than this Beetle, so if money were an object, the Beetle isn't worth $3k more than the better equipped GLI. I was close. it's a $2,500 difference, so my point stands. GLI Manual - $26,445 GLI DSG - $27,545 Beetle Turbo Manual - $28,995 Beetle Turbo DSG - $30,095 The GLI has automatic climate control, bluetooth, and iPod controls for less money. Handling wise, the GLI only seems marginally better... and I think that has more to do with the Beetle's relatively tall stature on a 5 inch shorter wheel base. I really really am enjoying this car. It is fun to drive, easy to park, easy to get in and out of, more commodious than one would think, and relatively fuel efficient for a car that has a lot of scoot. So my problem? For $30,000, one has to *really* want a Beetle equipped like this... because at that price, one's mind can quickly wander to things like a Regal Turbo, which handles better (or at least more reassuringly) and is still pretty quick, and I keep thinking how much Verano $30k will get you keeping in mind the turbo version of that car will have 50 more horsepower and 50 more ft-lb of torque along with the other niceties. Edit: I just realized I screwed up on the price comparison because I compared a 6-speed manual GLI to a 6-speed DSG Beetle. Let me look up the price differential and fix it.