2007 FERRARI 599 GTB

Maurizio Manfredi, director of Ferrari V12 model development, says Montezemolo’s edict for the 599 was even tougher: enhanced daily-drive capability with track performance superior to the F40.

Yes, that F40. The last Ferrari developed under Enzo’s active management. The mid-engine, twin-turbo track special that was the Enzo (the car) of the late 1980s.

“We wanted emotional impact in an all-around car that satisfies almost everyone,” says Manfredi, apparently unaware of how strange that sounds coming from someone responsible for creating V12 Ferraris.

Emotional impact starts with design, and the 599 GTB is 100 percent Pininfarina, crafted under the supervision of former Ferrari design chief Frank Stephenson. It is wider and longer than the 575M, with 11 functional ports or air-management devices, compared to five. This new berlinetta is subtle, supple, sophisticated—pretty, really—but also quietly aggressive. Its subtlety is both a strength and problem. Every angle releases something new and interesting, but it lacks the immediate, faraway impact one experiences spotting an F40 or an Enzo for the first time.

Appearance aside, the 599 GTB is more aerodynamically efficient than any Ferrari built without separate wings, says Manfredi. Downforce front and rear is equal and increases with speed (good thing, with a top speed over 205 mph).

The 599 GTB’s wheelbase (108.3 inches) is nearly 10 inches shorter than Ferrari’s 612 Scaglietti. While this is technically a front-engine car, weight distribution is mid-engine. Both engine and cabin are moved rearward compared to the 575M, leaving 85 percent of the mass between the wheels. Weight is optimally distributed 47 percent front, 53 percent rear, according to Manfredi.

Aluminum bodywork covers an aluminum space frame comprised of 176 separate castings, extrusions and sheets that are MIG-welded, riveted and glued into a whole. The 599 weighs 100 pounds less than the 575M; curb weight is 3722 pounds.
The 5999-cc, 65-degree V12 shares its architecture and compression ratio (11.2:1) with the Enzo’s engine and generates almost as much power: 620 hp at 7600 rpm, compared to 660. It is more compact than the previous-generation V12 in the 575M, with a lower deck height that brings the center of mass down roughly an inch in the chassis. Redline is 8400 rpm, with 448 lb-ft of torque at 5600 rpm.

Engineers went to great lengths tuning the V12’s sound, suppressing mechanical noise in favor of an appropriately Ferrari exhaust tone. Still, they seem proudest of their work on the Formula One-style electrohydraulic transmission controls. The 599 GTB will be offered with a conventional six-speed manual, but Ferrari expects to build 80 percent with the F1 Superfast gearbox.

This box uses the same control software as Ferrari’s F1 transmission, according to Manfredi. Twin clutch discs allow overlapping of the clutching and gear-change operations. The entire shift process—signal, clutch, gear change—occurs in 100 milliseconds, compared to 250 in the 575M. The “acceleration gap,” the period the engine is decoupled from the driveshaft, is 40 milliseconds, compared to 100 in the 612 and 15 in Ferrari’s F1 car.

2007 Mercedes-Benz R63 AMG

Who needs this car, really? Premium unleaded is still hovering around $3 a gallon, so a hulking, six-seat luxury MPV running a 6.2-liter, 510-hp V8 engine, capable of accelerating from 0 to 60 mph in less than five seconds, and returning fuel consumption of around 14 mpg doesn’t seem to stack up. Not at a cool $88,000, in any case.

Yet clearly Mercedes-Benz thinks there is demand, however small, for such a beast. And despite recent overblown pump prices that may not let up over the long term, Mercedes will offer the R63 AMG in North America starting in October.

Up until now, performance MPVs have not exactly been hot property on these shores. Such a vehicle by its very nature is compromised by its tall stature and, from experience, is no match dynamically for a well-sorted SUV. But with go-fast all-wheel-drive sales outstripping expectations of late, it appears this could be the next niche to go mainstream.
That may well be, but at the end of the day the R63 doesn’t cut it as a performance car worthy of the AMG badge.

No doubt it’s quick. The R63 will stay with a Porsche 911 Carrera up to 60 mph with no trouble at all, and it is almost two seconds quicker to the standing-start benchmark than the previous range-topping R500, which continues to run Mercedes’ 5.0-liter 306-hp V8 instead of the company’s more refined and economical 5.5-liter 382-hp V8, as fitted to models such as the new S-Class.

The R63 is also superbly refined, with the sort of mechanical isolation and ride quality not normally associated with AMG offerings. High-speed stability is another R63 attribute, thanks to its long wheelbase and wide-track stance. In this respect, the vehicle is just about perfect for long freeway slogs.

But the R63’s tall stature conspires to work against it on more challenging roads. With all-wheel drive doling out the power in a 40:60 split, there is excellent traction, and the huge 21-inch rubber serves up surprising grip. But just when the R63 threatens to deliver, it is defeated by unruly body roll and its substantial weight, the front end pushing on at speeds at which any other AMG model would be clinging tightly to its line.

And that’s with just the driver aboard. Load the R63 with another five adults and their luggage and any pretense of sportiness is gone.

The upside of course is the R’s impressive versatility. With generous spacing between the second- and third-row seats, passengers in the back are well catered to over extended journeys. And even with the rearmost seats in place, there is plenty of luggage space.Interestingly, Mercedes has rethought its decision to provide the R-Class with just six seats. Beginning early next year the R-Class will be available with a seven-seat option, with the two individual seats in the center row replaced by a three-across bench. With the Audi Q7, BMW X5 and Volvo XC90 all providing seating for seven, it was really only a matter of time before the R-Class fell into line.

But in the end, you have to question the relevance of the R63. Aside from its engine, the vehicle fails to deliver the excitement an AMG model should, a clear case of the Mercedes marketing department seizing on an opportunity to ratchet up the image of the R-Class without properly considering the harm it may cause to the AMG name in the long run.

2007 Honda CR-V

Spend an hour driving the Honda CR-V and you’ll be reminded of that joke about mopeds being a good ride until your friend sees you on it. This little sport/utility vehicle-crossover thing won’t do much for your enthusiast creds, but as agreeable, practical all-purpose transportation, it’s hard to beat.

CR-V is pleasant in all circumstances. It can haul lots of stuff and provides a modicum of all-terrain capability, but it won’t beat you up.

The new third-generation 2007 CR-V just does everything a bit better than the 2006, without messing with a proven formula. The basic size/power/performance equation is just fine with customers, according to Honda, so refinement was the guiding principle. The new CR-V is slightly larger in most dimensions, and interior space is reapportioned. There is less volume overall, yet more hip room in front and two cubic feet more cargo space.

Honda has ditched the side-hinged rear door it once swore by in favor of a more conventional swing-up hatch. The company claims the CR-V tailgate requires less force to operate than any in the class. High-tensile steel is applied more lavishly throughout the CR-V’s unibody, and Honda predicts the best crash ratings of any small SUV. There is more sound insulation and double seals on all doors.

Honda concluded that shoppers who seriously considered a second-gen CR-V and ultimately chose another vehicle did so based on styling. Thus, the ’07 swaps puppy-cute looks for what project leader Mitsuru Horikoshi calls “advanced emotional styling.” This CR-V is supposed to be more dynamic, with a more rugged lower body.
An optional V6—offered on nearly all competitors—would compromise CR-V’s basic frugal character, according to Horikoshi. The engine remains a 2.4-liter VTEC four, with an increase of 10 hp (to 166, with 161 lb-ft of torque), thanks largely to a slight increase in compression. There is no choice of transmissions, either. With the take rate at 3 percent, there was simply no case for continuing with a manual. The CR-V’s automatic has five speeds, while a four-speed is the class standard.

The CR-V features a new multilink rear suspension that helps lower its center of gravity 5 percent. Its steering ratio is slightly quicker, and 17-inch wheels come standard.

Step-in height is reduced 1.3 inches, and the cabin is decidedly upscale. What’s lost in charm (no more handbrake that looks like a grab handle) gets reimbursed in refinement. There are plenty of Honda-convenient features, including a retractable center tray with a 12-volt outlet and a new 40/20/40 rear seatback that allows the center chunk to fold for pass-through from the cargo area. There is also a new cargo shelf that supports 20 pounds and doubles the cargo-floor space. The blue-backlit gauges read sharp. Finish and materials are impressive, though the upper glovebox door (there are two gloveboxes) on our pilot production test car was uncharacteristically floppy.

Even with Honda’s hydraulic RealTime awd system, CR-V’s default drive mode is 100 percent front wheels. It understeers, much like a conservatively tuned front-drive sedan. Yet as SUVs go, it’s quite crisp and impressively refined. Ride quality is excellent, never tippy, and overall noise control surpasses some luxury SUVs.

2009 Volkswagen Iroc

VW is vague on exact specifications, but the new coupe likely will be powered by three engines: a supercharged and turbocharged 1.4-liter, 210-hp four-cylinder Twincharger gasoline engine; a turbocharged 2.0-liter 240-hp four-cylinder; and a 3.6-liter 280-hp V6, the latter likely offered with 4Motion all-wheel drive. Transmission choices should include a standard six-speed manual and optional seven-speed Direct Sequential Gearbox.

Sports Car Briefs

The American Le Mans Series has given Porsche and Acura, among other LMP2-class teams, a performance break that should allow them to compete favorably with the more potent Audi R10s in at least some races this season.

The ALMS will not impose a 5 percent cut in engine air-restrictor size mandated by the Le Mans rulebook for LMP2 cars this year. That should ensure that Porsche’s RS Spyders and the Acura-engined Lolas and Courages will be competitive against the turbo-diesel Audis.

Le Mans reduced the power of the LMP2 cars to try to maintain a gap between LMP1 and its secondary prototype class. ALMS bosses determined that this was not appropriate for their series when four top-class prototypes are likely to contest the full season.

“We understand what Le Mans is trying to do, and we have no issue with that,” said Doug Robinson, executive director of IMSA, the ALMS sanctioning body, “but we saw that the competition we had between LMP1 and LMP2, especially at certain tracks in 2006, created extra excitement for the fans.

“Changing the rules would have meant we would have ended up with less competition. We again hope to be seeing the top LMP2s pressuring the LMP1s.”
Former ALMS LMP2-class champion Intersport Racing will compete in the LMP1 prototype division this year.

The team will campaign a Creation CA06H-Judd. At first glance, the move might seem odd, as Intersport will race head-to-head against the dominant factory Audi effort. But with a proliferation of factory-backed LMP2 programs from Acura, Porsche and Mazda, Intersport may find more overall success in LMP1.