Prince Valiant
07-08-2009, 11:21 AM
Comparing comparable cars!
Full text Here (http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4322127.html)
Text:
After a 10-year hiatus, the high performance Taurus returns with a mouth-watering 365-hp twin-turbocharged V6 engine and a slick new suit to match. The SHO joins the redesigned base model for what could be a renaissance of the once best-selling car.
While Frank Davis, Ford’s Executive Director of Product Development, calls the SHO, “A sleeper sports sedan,” he’s also quick to point out the efficiency gains of the SHO’s downsized turbo engine. Ford’s Advanced Engine Manager, Brett Hinds, says the SHO’s EcoBoost engine offers up to 25 percent better fuel economy than a competitor’s V8 engine.
We wanted to find out for ourselves how the new EcoBoost performs against the competition—the Chrysler 300C. So we embarked on a marathon, 1000-mile two-day drive from Detroit to Pittsburgh to identify the strengths of these two powerful sedans, run them through our battery of performance tests and evaluate the real world fuel economy of these sedans over the long haul. As we documented previously: modern turbos may finally be able to deliver improved fuel economy and performance. So let’s see how Chrysler’s Hemi-powered 300C stacks up against Ford’s new EcoBoost SHO
The Specs
The SHO a big car that stretches nearly 17 feet long and hugs the pavement with 4368 pounds of metal. That size, however, has endowed the car with a roomy, full-size rear bench seat and a massive trunk that measures 20 cubic feet. And underneath the SHO is a derivative of the front-drive Volvo S80 platform used in the previous Taurus and Ford 500 as well as the new Lincoln MKS. But you would never know this was the same old chassis. Ford has done a remarkable job reinventing the Taurus into a much sportier, quieter and better riding car. Part of that comes from the new isolated rear subframe and a suspension revision that allows the shocks and springs to move in a 1:1 ratio.
For SHO duty, the springs, shocks and swaybars are all firmer. And the SHO uses a new electronic power steering versus the hydraulic unit in the base Taurus. A “Performance Package” is also available with performance brake pads, an even sportier steering system, 3.16:1 final drive and 20-inch summer tires. Routing 365 hp through the front wheels is a recipe for frightening torque steer, so the SHO comes standard with all-wheel drive.
The 3.5-liter aluminum Ecoboost engine uses several tricks to increase efficiency. It employs double-overhead cams, four-valves per cylinder, and variable intake-valve timing. There’s also a direct fuel-injection system, which squirts the fuel into the combustion chamber, instead of the usual intake ports. This is not a new feature, (GM, Audi, Mazda and others use it) and its benefits are well known: The injected fuel cools the combustion chamber, reducing the risk of harmful detonation. So that means the Ford engineers could use a relatively high 10.0:1 compression ratio.
Two small turbos are used instead of one large one to increase throttle response and the compressed air is cooled with an intercooler before it enters the cylinder. To increase durability, the turbos are water-cooled and oil jets squirt the underside of the pistons.
Chrysler’s Hemi V8 and its two-valve per cylinder, pushrod layout may seem like a dinosaur by comparison. But the Hemi is a modern engine with its own fuel-saving features. The multi-displacement system shuts off four cylinders when they’re not required and adjustable cam timing varies the valve timing.
One advantage larger engines usually enjoy over smaller ones, is greater low-end torque. These engines tend to pull very hard from lower rpms. The Hemi’s stout 398 lb-ft torque peak occurs at 4000 rpm and we know from experience that there’s plenty of grunt down low in the rev range too. The SHO’s engine, however, is no high-rpm screamer. Its 350 lb-ft torque arrives at 3500 rpm and there’s over 300 lb-ft of torque available at 1500 rpm. The trick for this Ford, is delivering that power and torque without turbo lag.
The six-speed automatic equipped SHO has an advantage in terms of gearing over the 300C and its five-speed automatic. The Ford’s taller top gear and final-drive ratio means that at 70 mph, the V6 lopes along at 1750 rpm; 450 rpm lower than the 300C.
On paper, the Ford seems to have the edge in efficiency. But the Chrysler appears to be a more able handler. Unlike the front-drive based SHO, the 300C, which is about the same size and weight, uses a rear-drive platform. Like the SHO, an all-wheel drive system has been added to the Chrysler.
Both sedans offer a wealth of features for under 50 grand—our SHO stickered for $45,470, and the Chrysler for $46,860. Both had sophisticated entertainment systems with Bluetooth connectivity, voice activation, navigation systems, ipod hookups (Ford calls its system Sync, Chrysler Uconnect). Heated and power seats are of course part of the deal, although the SHO included cooled front seats. In both cars, adaptive cruise control took some of the drudgery out of traffic and power adjustable pedals helped us find the perfect driving position.
The Drive
The SHO and 300C are both excellent long-haul cruisers. On the highway, they’re exceeding quiet, smooth riding, and supremely comfortable. There are however, subtle differences. These are sleeper sports sedans, so South of Columbus, Ohio we exited the highways for some of the most challenging sinewy roads the Eastern U.S. has to offer. On the curves and hills, we marveled that these two-ton beasts could cut the corners with such alacrity.
The 300C feels surprisingly agile and quick on its feet. The chassis responds crisply to steering inputs and seems eager to turn in. The Hemi yanks the 300C out of corners with authority and the brakes performed with a consistently firm pedal. The suspension, however, felt a little too soft. Once in the corner, the car lost its confidence. It heeled over and demanded several mid-corner corrections.
The SHO however, had no such trouble. It feels bigger and heavier, but in the twisties, it’s more surefooted and has very precise steering. Once you bank the SHO into a turn, the body rolls just a little and it simply stays planted. Connect a few curves in the SHO and the size of this large sedan does seem to melt away. We also appreciated the steering wheel mounted shift paddles, which made it easier to manually operate the transmission than the 300C’s center shifter. Though, we’d like to see Ford offer an “Sport” mode in this transmission to keep the automatic from hunting between 5th and 6th gears on the gentle sweepers when not using those paddles. The biggest drawback we found on the Ford came from the brakes. In short order, the brakes overheated and the pedal went soft. Ford offers optional high-performance brake pads for the SHO bundled with the “Performance Package”. We’ve experienced them on a later test drive and they are a must have option for those that plan to drive SHOs hard.
Both cars kept a swift pace and from the driver’s seat, it’s nearly impossible to tell that they use such drastically different engines. Both accelerate from rest to 60 mph in nearly the same time (5.4 seconds for the Taurus, 5.5 seconds for the 300C). The quarter-mile times are nearly identical too. The one area where the 300C should have an edge, throttle response, didn’t materialize. And we did a test to simulate throttle response in both cars. We cruised along at 20 mph and then floored the throttle until we hit 60 mph. The 300C did this task in 4.4 seconds, the SHO in 4.2 seconds. This confirmed our impressions that Ford has indeed found a way to cure turbo lag.
Overall, we found the SHO to be the more refined sedan. It’s nearly luxury car quiet on the inside. Road impacts are barely audible. And when you do hit a large pothole it’s very well damped and muffled. The 300C lets a bit more of the jolt come through the chassis. And on the inside, the SHO is a class above the 300C’s too. The materials feel higher quality and the sloping center console surrounded in sleek black veneer offers a far more graceful design. The upright 300C design now seems a bit stodgy and dated.
The Bottom Line
After three tankfuls and 1003 miles of highways, city traffic, and backroads, the 300C returned 20.7 mpg while the SHO averaged 21.8 mpg, a 5.5 percent advantage. Considering that the SHO not only has an extra cog in the gearbox, but also fuel saving electrically assisted power steering, we expected a bigger spread. But we’ve learned that dramatically increasing fuel economy in a large car isn’t easy.
Fuel economy aside, the SHO was our clear favorite. Ford’s blend of refinement and speed, now match some of the best from Europe. And the lines of the car, hearkening back to the second generation SHO, are very taught and fresh. But the 300C is still relevant, and we were impressed that this car’s dramatic exterior still turns heads. In this current climate, you could probably slide into a 300C for considerably less than the SHO. And the Chrysler certainly wouldn’t be a bad choice. But at the last gas stop, the car we all wanted to take home was the sleek new Ford SHO.
test run down
cars- 300C AWD--SHO
price- 39,925--37,995
wt--4280--4368
0-60-5.5--5.4
1/4mi-13.9 @100.3--13.7 @ 101.7
60-0--126--117
observed fuel economy-21--22
Full text Here (http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4322127.html)
Text:
After a 10-year hiatus, the high performance Taurus returns with a mouth-watering 365-hp twin-turbocharged V6 engine and a slick new suit to match. The SHO joins the redesigned base model for what could be a renaissance of the once best-selling car.
While Frank Davis, Ford’s Executive Director of Product Development, calls the SHO, “A sleeper sports sedan,” he’s also quick to point out the efficiency gains of the SHO’s downsized turbo engine. Ford’s Advanced Engine Manager, Brett Hinds, says the SHO’s EcoBoost engine offers up to 25 percent better fuel economy than a competitor’s V8 engine.
We wanted to find out for ourselves how the new EcoBoost performs against the competition—the Chrysler 300C. So we embarked on a marathon, 1000-mile two-day drive from Detroit to Pittsburgh to identify the strengths of these two powerful sedans, run them through our battery of performance tests and evaluate the real world fuel economy of these sedans over the long haul. As we documented previously: modern turbos may finally be able to deliver improved fuel economy and performance. So let’s see how Chrysler’s Hemi-powered 300C stacks up against Ford’s new EcoBoost SHO
The Specs
The SHO a big car that stretches nearly 17 feet long and hugs the pavement with 4368 pounds of metal. That size, however, has endowed the car with a roomy, full-size rear bench seat and a massive trunk that measures 20 cubic feet. And underneath the SHO is a derivative of the front-drive Volvo S80 platform used in the previous Taurus and Ford 500 as well as the new Lincoln MKS. But you would never know this was the same old chassis. Ford has done a remarkable job reinventing the Taurus into a much sportier, quieter and better riding car. Part of that comes from the new isolated rear subframe and a suspension revision that allows the shocks and springs to move in a 1:1 ratio.
For SHO duty, the springs, shocks and swaybars are all firmer. And the SHO uses a new electronic power steering versus the hydraulic unit in the base Taurus. A “Performance Package” is also available with performance brake pads, an even sportier steering system, 3.16:1 final drive and 20-inch summer tires. Routing 365 hp through the front wheels is a recipe for frightening torque steer, so the SHO comes standard with all-wheel drive.
The 3.5-liter aluminum Ecoboost engine uses several tricks to increase efficiency. It employs double-overhead cams, four-valves per cylinder, and variable intake-valve timing. There’s also a direct fuel-injection system, which squirts the fuel into the combustion chamber, instead of the usual intake ports. This is not a new feature, (GM, Audi, Mazda and others use it) and its benefits are well known: The injected fuel cools the combustion chamber, reducing the risk of harmful detonation. So that means the Ford engineers could use a relatively high 10.0:1 compression ratio.
Two small turbos are used instead of one large one to increase throttle response and the compressed air is cooled with an intercooler before it enters the cylinder. To increase durability, the turbos are water-cooled and oil jets squirt the underside of the pistons.
Chrysler’s Hemi V8 and its two-valve per cylinder, pushrod layout may seem like a dinosaur by comparison. But the Hemi is a modern engine with its own fuel-saving features. The multi-displacement system shuts off four cylinders when they’re not required and adjustable cam timing varies the valve timing.
One advantage larger engines usually enjoy over smaller ones, is greater low-end torque. These engines tend to pull very hard from lower rpms. The Hemi’s stout 398 lb-ft torque peak occurs at 4000 rpm and we know from experience that there’s plenty of grunt down low in the rev range too. The SHO’s engine, however, is no high-rpm screamer. Its 350 lb-ft torque arrives at 3500 rpm and there’s over 300 lb-ft of torque available at 1500 rpm. The trick for this Ford, is delivering that power and torque without turbo lag.
The six-speed automatic equipped SHO has an advantage in terms of gearing over the 300C and its five-speed automatic. The Ford’s taller top gear and final-drive ratio means that at 70 mph, the V6 lopes along at 1750 rpm; 450 rpm lower than the 300C.
On paper, the Ford seems to have the edge in efficiency. But the Chrysler appears to be a more able handler. Unlike the front-drive based SHO, the 300C, which is about the same size and weight, uses a rear-drive platform. Like the SHO, an all-wheel drive system has been added to the Chrysler.
Both sedans offer a wealth of features for under 50 grand—our SHO stickered for $45,470, and the Chrysler for $46,860. Both had sophisticated entertainment systems with Bluetooth connectivity, voice activation, navigation systems, ipod hookups (Ford calls its system Sync, Chrysler Uconnect). Heated and power seats are of course part of the deal, although the SHO included cooled front seats. In both cars, adaptive cruise control took some of the drudgery out of traffic and power adjustable pedals helped us find the perfect driving position.
The Drive
The SHO and 300C are both excellent long-haul cruisers. On the highway, they’re exceeding quiet, smooth riding, and supremely comfortable. There are however, subtle differences. These are sleeper sports sedans, so South of Columbus, Ohio we exited the highways for some of the most challenging sinewy roads the Eastern U.S. has to offer. On the curves and hills, we marveled that these two-ton beasts could cut the corners with such alacrity.
The 300C feels surprisingly agile and quick on its feet. The chassis responds crisply to steering inputs and seems eager to turn in. The Hemi yanks the 300C out of corners with authority and the brakes performed with a consistently firm pedal. The suspension, however, felt a little too soft. Once in the corner, the car lost its confidence. It heeled over and demanded several mid-corner corrections.
The SHO however, had no such trouble. It feels bigger and heavier, but in the twisties, it’s more surefooted and has very precise steering. Once you bank the SHO into a turn, the body rolls just a little and it simply stays planted. Connect a few curves in the SHO and the size of this large sedan does seem to melt away. We also appreciated the steering wheel mounted shift paddles, which made it easier to manually operate the transmission than the 300C’s center shifter. Though, we’d like to see Ford offer an “Sport” mode in this transmission to keep the automatic from hunting between 5th and 6th gears on the gentle sweepers when not using those paddles. The biggest drawback we found on the Ford came from the brakes. In short order, the brakes overheated and the pedal went soft. Ford offers optional high-performance brake pads for the SHO bundled with the “Performance Package”. We’ve experienced them on a later test drive and they are a must have option for those that plan to drive SHOs hard.
Both cars kept a swift pace and from the driver’s seat, it’s nearly impossible to tell that they use such drastically different engines. Both accelerate from rest to 60 mph in nearly the same time (5.4 seconds for the Taurus, 5.5 seconds for the 300C). The quarter-mile times are nearly identical too. The one area where the 300C should have an edge, throttle response, didn’t materialize. And we did a test to simulate throttle response in both cars. We cruised along at 20 mph and then floored the throttle until we hit 60 mph. The 300C did this task in 4.4 seconds, the SHO in 4.2 seconds. This confirmed our impressions that Ford has indeed found a way to cure turbo lag.
Overall, we found the SHO to be the more refined sedan. It’s nearly luxury car quiet on the inside. Road impacts are barely audible. And when you do hit a large pothole it’s very well damped and muffled. The 300C lets a bit more of the jolt come through the chassis. And on the inside, the SHO is a class above the 300C’s too. The materials feel higher quality and the sloping center console surrounded in sleek black veneer offers a far more graceful design. The upright 300C design now seems a bit stodgy and dated.
The Bottom Line
After three tankfuls and 1003 miles of highways, city traffic, and backroads, the 300C returned 20.7 mpg while the SHO averaged 21.8 mpg, a 5.5 percent advantage. Considering that the SHO not only has an extra cog in the gearbox, but also fuel saving electrically assisted power steering, we expected a bigger spread. But we’ve learned that dramatically increasing fuel economy in a large car isn’t easy.
Fuel economy aside, the SHO was our clear favorite. Ford’s blend of refinement and speed, now match some of the best from Europe. And the lines of the car, hearkening back to the second generation SHO, are very taught and fresh. But the 300C is still relevant, and we were impressed that this car’s dramatic exterior still turns heads. In this current climate, you could probably slide into a 300C for considerably less than the SHO. And the Chrysler certainly wouldn’t be a bad choice. But at the last gas stop, the car we all wanted to take home was the sleek new Ford SHO.
test run down
cars- 300C AWD--SHO
price- 39,925--37,995
wt--4280--4368
0-60-5.5--5.4
1/4mi-13.9 @100.3--13.7 @ 101.7
60-0--126--117
observed fuel economy-21--22