livingstone
brandegee
livingstone

It may also differ based on trim level. I have a 2008 Saab that is auto-down all four windows and auto-up the two front windows only. My 2011 Saab, same model, is a lower trim and only has auto-down on the two front windows (no auto up at all).

Or Volvo’s own S60 Cross Country sedan.

Yes, long tread wear equals worse grip and handling. But it’s certainly nicer for the environment and obviously lowers running costs. It also usually means the sidewalls are softer, which in turn means the speed rating is lower.

I could be mistaken, but this particular design is not based on an aircraft or airframe of any kind.

The North American Eagle lsr vehicle was literally a jet without wings, but the Bloodhound...hmm, no. If you attached wings it would not fly far or well.

LOL, $50K is not Porsche money. And I think you might be missing my point: a boxer-four is a LOT different than an inline-four when it comes to engineering. Of course we know that VW-Audi, Mazda, Mercedes, Ford, GM, Hyundai/Kia, etc., etc. have been building direct injected turbocharged engines with higher static

I wish people would stop getting hung up on the wagon thing and look at some figures. Or, failing that, just look at an Outback side-by-side with a regular crossover like an Escape or Edge. It has more ground clearance than most of them, yet sits at or below them in overall height. The seating height, or H-point) is

The Outback has 77 cu. ft with the seats down, IIRC. One of the small issues with most two-row crossovers is that the total cargo volume is taller than a typical wagon which offers the body length of a sedan with its long cargo floor. It’s only useful if you need the space, though. These days you can just get a

Porsche has shown the way with its 718 engines. The smaller one runs at 20.3 psi to get 300 hp. The larger engine runs a much higher compression ratio than the EJ25. Unfortunately for Subaru, the measures Porsche has taken to manage these feats are all fairly expensive. I fear that the next-gen STI will have to be

Well, the STI is ~$40K and it looks a lot better at that price. If VW built a track-focused Golf R it would cost well over $50K, too, but directly competing with its stablemates at Audi would be sort of insane. I think Subaru is being smart here and doing just enough to generate some enthusiast interest and keep the

The power is limited mainly by the older design and ever more stringent emissions rules. You can build a high-power boxer-4 but it’s pricey. Subaru is running a very modest 14.5 psi with a relatively low 8.2:1 compression ratio, IIRC. A quick look at the only other 2.5-liter boxer-4 on the market and it’s easy to see

Agreed the EA888 is superior, but I believe it has had its own issues with timing chain stretch and carbon accumulation, probably mostly confined to Gen 1 and 2 engines. No engine is perfect, especially when much of the design work goes into dialing in emissions. The layout—500cc/cyl inline-4—is much more robust and

More accurately I would say that Porsche nailed everything but the range. The battery technology is on point, and the 800-volt charging tech is the future. The disadvantage Porsche is tied to in this case is the need to provide a high-performance EV rather than one that emphasizes efficiency. 

This is true. Compared to the Sequoia, the Armada is a little bit larger, tows a little bit more, is priced a little cheaper, and gets a little worse fuel economy. They should really be shopped against each other.

After a little research it looks like R32 Jetta Wagon builds are totally a thing. I shouldn’t be surprised...but I have to say it looks best when the Golf front clip and R32 bumpers and lights are used in place of the Jetta’s stock pieces. 

True, in the “bitsa” sense it was sort of a throwback to the Group B homologation specials. Less extreme, but certainly wacky enough to guarantee it would never see a road as a new car in the U.S.

I think Ford had better luck with the Sierra platform in touring cars. In fact, the Escort RS Cosworth should probably be considered a touring car that Ford tried to dual-purpose as a rally car. As for a “real homologation special” I don’t know that it’s worth the special term. As you pointed out, platform is older,

That would be really cool, actually.

A Mangusta is a Mangusta, though. In excellent running condition even a single-headlight car (America got both headlamp styles) will fetch over $300K.

I believe the mirror issue is actually a state law. Some states are okay with no side mirrors at all, even today. Just look at what happens when you take the doors off a Wrangler. The caveat is usually that the rear-view mirror not be obstructed. So a panel van or box truck would need side mirrors. On the Mangusta I’m