To be totally honest, I’m more interested in Hybrid fuel economy than football.  Maybe there was something weird in the water where I grew up, or maybe I just agree with Ernest Hemmingway: “There are three real sports: mountain climbing, bull fighting, and car racing.  Everything else is just games.”

Regardless, I hard it find to fake enthusiasm for the Super Bowl.  This year some overpaid athletes in spandex played against some other overpaid athletes in Spandex for the title of something.  Yay.  But I don’t need to fake my enthusiasm for the advertisements.  Manufacturers spend vast sums of money to get ads in the superbowl; it’s the highest-viewed event every year in the US, but at $3.5M USD per 30-second spot, they try especially hard to make ‘em stick.

These are the car ads from this year’s Super Bowl -- some good, some not.  Check ‘em out, and let us know which was your favorite in the poll at the bottom.

Volkswagen’s always had good superbowl ads.  Last year it was the Darth Vader kid with the new Passat; this year it’s a dog inspired by the Beetle to lose enough weight so he can fit out the doggie door.  Adorable, and the cameo by Vader at the end is pretty funny as well.  I’d give it an A-

Is the fact that you can chuck one out of a plane supposed to make us think the Sonic’s a cool car?  Because it would’ve been a lot cooler if they’d skipped the parachute; just saying.  I give it a C.

Much better, nothing like a sarcastic pot shot at your competition while making fun of the Mayan Apocalypse prediction.  Legitimately humorous.  A.

I just wish Suzuki’s US sales were as good as their advertisements are.  This one’s for the AWD Kizashi, which is a pretty damn nice car.  An Eskimo trades his sled in for a Kizashi, with 50 cent as the background music.  I like it.

I was a fan of Fiat’s “Seduction” ad for the 500 Abarth when I first saw it a few months back.  It’s still quite good, substituting a metaphorical Italian hottie (her name’s Catrinel Menghia, and she’s actually Romanian -- here’s her twitter if you’re interested) for a 500 Abarth.  I can’t wait to drive one of these things.

I love Acura’s spot for the 2015 NSX.  Jerry Seinfeld is trying to get his hands on the first NSX, but someone else’s got it -- so he tries everything he can to trade.  Almost got it, then Leno steps in…

I’m starting to think Chrysler’s less interested in actually advertising their cars (some of which are actually quite nice) than giving us all a preachy economics lesson, which is obnoxious.  It’s less obnoxious when Clint Eastwood is doing it -- but only just.  They went through slightly more than $7m of ad money before showing us a Chrysler product; must be made of money.  Also, isn’t Clint more of a Ford man?

Kia’s ads are funny, when they don’t include Blake Griffin.  Your mileage may vary, but their spot for the Optima -- “A Dream Car. For Real LIfe” is amusing, if formulaic.  I’ll take a piece of the giant hoagie!

Kinda disappointing; Ferris Bueller should be driving a Ferrari, not a mommy-mobile Honda CR-V.  Literally: My mom has one.  Thumbs down.

Love Audi’s spot for the A7.  LED headlights kill vampires!  Perhaps this is a shot at Volvo, who sponsored the latest Twilight movie?

BMW might not be the only manufacturer who’s cars will read your texts to you, but so far they’re the only ones who’ve done something funny with it in an ad.  I like the honk censoring the swear word as he backs out of the driveway.

Speaking of BMW, why is Cadillac so intent on comparing themselves to the 3-series?  It’s cool that the ATS is basically an Americanized carbon copy of the 3, but maybe they could’ve focused more on why it’s better.

Heh.  Hyundai’s ads.  The Genesis 3.8 R-Spec can act as a makeshift AED if your boss has a heart attack while you’re on the road in the middle of no-where.

The other Hyundai ad was for the new Veloster Turbo, which I can’t wait to take for a spin.  Kudos to Hyundai for including tire smoke in both of their superbowl ads this year.  The premise is that while the Turbo is faster than a Cheetah, make sure when you let the Cheetah out you’re at a safe distance?  Thanks for the PSA, Hyundai.

And the last one.  I’m not sure if Cars.com was going for funny or creepy here, but I think they landed closer to “creepy.”

Which was your favorite car ad?  Vote in the poll below!

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

We heard a while back that there’s a new Fiat Panda in town, but this…isn’t it. It may have a whiff of the old Panda about it, but it is in fact a new 500. Don’t worry, this isn’t a complete train wreck design update to the stylish and fun 500, but rather a bigger 500 for people who, well, are bigger. Or have a family.

Called the 500L, with the ‘L’ standing for (surprise surprise) ‘Large’, it will be unveiled in Geneva in March ahead of its sales launch towards the end of 2012. You can see it isn’t the best looking car in the world, but then again it isn’t a Rover Metro so it’s not all bad.

And when it arrives in the showrooms, it’ll have the really rather excellent TwinAir three-cylinder petrol, as well as a 1.4-litre petrol and 1.3 litre diesel.

How much will it cost? Well, we’re not sure yet, but hopefully the most basic mode will be less than £10k, otherwise the 500L will probably be a bit of a sales dumpling for Fiat.

Right off the bat with that title, I’m lying.  The Chrysler 300 is the product of a company that’s more than half-owned by an Italian company.  The point of final assembly is Brampton Ontario, Canada.  The engine’s from Mexico, and the transmission is from ZF in Germany.  The rear suspension is based on an old E-Class Mercedes design, and actually only 59% of the Chrysler 300 is made of “domestic” parts: and for some reason Chrysler counts Canada as being domestic.  Want an American car?  Buy a Honda Accord.

Still, this is an old and tired argument.  It’s easy to poke fun at diehard domestic fans who trash talk the (built in Texas) Toyota Tundra for being Japanese (despite being designed and engineered largely in America, by Americans) in favor of the Dodge Ram (built in Mexico) or the Chevy Silverado (some built in Canada.)  It’s a truly global market we live in, the world’s getting smaller every day, and these days it’s wise to judge a car on it’s merits rather than it’s origins.

So, what are the Chrysler 300′s merits?  Well, I’ll be honest: they used to be mostly surface-level.  That is, it’s a damn good looking car.  Even the original 300, which debuted in 2004, still pulls eyes.  It’s gangster with a license plate.  The aggressively blocky body, the huge doors with narrow gun-slit windows perched atop, those complex headlights and vertical tail lights, it still cuts a striking profile.  For a car they’ve made so blasted many of, the first 300 still stands out on the road by virtue of it’s ridiculous proportions alone.  It’s got “swag,” as the kids say.

But it was mostly a veneer.  Although the 300 had noble roots – front suspension from the W220 S-class, rear suspension from the W201 E-class, as well as the 5-speed transmission, wiring harness, seat frames, etc – it always felt a little shallow.  Thin plastic covered with tortoise shell wood patterns is still thin, rattly plastic.  While the Hemi-powered 300C (and the rare, 6.1L Hemi-powered SRT-8) were fun steers, the more basic trims left a lot to be desired.  Chrysler’s notoriously terrible 2.7L V6 did base-model duty in some markets, a 190bhp weakling trying to push a really large car.  The 3.5L SOHC 6 was a little better, not underpowered but with all the refinement of the Intrepid they took it out of.

So I was really pleased when I started seeing the new, second generation (2011+) 300′s.  Here’s a sign Chrysler is finally understanding the car business.  They took their old, popular model.  They kept all the things people loved about it, and they fixed all the stuff that sucked.  The proof?  Most of the changes aren’t on the outside.  It’s not a drastically different looking car, there’s no reinvention here: it’s got more modern headlights, fancy LED tails, some minor trim things, but it’s still clearly a 300.

It’s a great looking car, especially in the context of it’s competition.  Toyota Avalon?  Jack ‘o Lantern.  Hyundai Genesis?  Nice, but derivative.  Ford Taurus?  Clean, modern, but not as much character.  Buick LaCrosse?  Nice, but even more anodyne.  The 300 is eye-catching, especially in my tester’s Brown Pearl Coat, with the chromed 20″ wheels.  Like a shiny chocolate bar.

The big changes for the 300 are inside, and under the skin.  First and foremost, both the 2.7L and 3.5L SOHC motors have been deposited in the garbage where they belong, replaced by Chrysler’s new 3.6L “Pentastar” twin-cammer.  This 24v V6 is all-aluminum and has variable valve timing, and it makes a healthy 292bhp and 260lb-ft of torque in the 300.  That’s up 42bhp and 10lb-ft from the old motor.  More significantly, the old Mercedes-derived 5-speed auto is phased out in V6′s for 2012, replaced by a new ZF-designed 8-speed automatic, that’s shared with Audi, BMW, and Rolls Royce.  It’s a lot of gears, but the result is noticeable: the 2011 300, with the 5-speed and 3.6L did 27mpg on the highway; the new 8-speed does 31mpg.  Future Pentastars will be available in different displacements, and the rumormill suggests all sorts of possibilities: direct injection, Fiat’s MultiAir, and even twin turbocharging.

My concern with that many gears is the constant “shuffling” effect – switching up and down as a result of low torque, underdeveloped programming, etc.  None of that: on the road, the 8-speed auto is unobtrusive, and you only realize there’s something weird going on when you settle into an 80mph cruise on the highway and the tach shuffles down to 1,700rpm.  The large spread of gears allows them to run a super-deep 2.65:1 final drive, which is the likely result of the big highway increase.  Other benefit: set the cruise, and it’s whisper quiet.  If your passenger farts, you can hear what they ate.

In fact, driving the 300 is surprising in a lot of ways.  It’s a big car, and doesn’t try to disguise it’s mass at all.  But at the same time, it’s nothing of the fat wallowing mess that many people unfairly characterize American full sized sedans as.  The hood seems to stretch out forever, so the steering is a shock: it’s geared really quite short, giving much more dramatic reactions to small inputs than you’d expect. It’s one-finger light and not a single iota of steering feel is present – but it doesn’t rock back and forth a half-inch in dead center before the wheels move.  Light, numb, and accurate: perfect for highway cruising.

The brakes made me feel at home: that is, they reminded me of my Accord.  The first ¼” of travel feels like it produces about 50% of the braking force, which leads to a few akward head-jerking moments during the test drive.  After you acclimate, it’s no sweat – they’re more than up to the task of hauling down this big sedan.  Taking one look at the wheels (shod with 245/45/20 tires) would have you assuming back pain was in your near future, but again no: while the big rubbers do slap a bit on expansion joints, the ride is very well composed and harshness is absorbed well before it reaches your backside or hands.

Still, even with the 20″ performance all seasons and the “Touring” suspension, the 300 Limited is not a car you are going to want to hustle down a back road.  I won’t lie, I didn’t even try.  Horses for courses: we don’t complain about the lack of luggage space in a Gallardo, and we don’t complain about turn-in response or brake feel on a big luxury sedan.  Who cares?

What the 300 is really good at: road trips.  This would be an awesome road trip car.  The V6 runs happily on 87 octane, 31mpg is reasonable enough, and there’s room for four people quite comfortably (the middle seat in the rear is a big hump; these are the sacrifices RWD cars must make) inside, and room for four more in the trunk.  The 19-gallon tank gives a theoretical range of around 600 miles, so it’s a bladder-buster for sure.  There’s room everywhere: elbows, knees, feet, everything except your head.  The 300′s low roofline makes stop lights a squat-and-peek deal, although I managed to avoid head-on-roof contact with the seat all the way down.

Which brings us to the interior: perhaps the most improved thing about the 300.  It’s a total redesign, and it’s a mixture of nice materials and some brand-new technology.  The shifter is one oddity: while it has a “PRNDL” marked on it, it only moves backwards and forwards, like the shifter in newer BMW’s.  So to go from Park to Drive, you hold the shift button down, and bump the lever backwards three times.  It’s unintuitive; what’s wrong with actual slots so you can just pull it down into park in one motion?  Much better is the Chrysler U-Connect system, controlled through an 8.4″ high-res touch screen in the center of the dash.

This touchscreen interface is one of the 300′s killer apps.  You control all sorts of things from the screen – the stereo, HVAC, heated seats, BlueTooth phone pairing, Satellite Navigation, etc.  Got a bluetooth phone?  Bring it, pair it, and you’ll never have to touch it in the car.  Want to play music?  You’re spoiled for choice – it can do iPod, USB, SD card, Bluetooth, traditional radio, CD’s, and Sirius Satellite.  The 300 with UConnect can also act as a mobile hot spot for up to four devices on a built-in 3G network, too.  UConnect uses Garmin navigation – a great move, considering (in my humble opinion) Garmin does it best – and it’s paired up with Sirius Traffic Data so it’ll automatically adjust to avoid crowded roads.  UConnect hits all the point for in car electronics – it’s easy to use, it’s pretty, it’s highly compatible, and it’s useful.  Ford’s MyFordTouch can learn some lessons here.

The backlit blue gauges are a big step up from the old 300′s generic green ones, both in legibility and overall attractiveness.  There’s a small TFT display between the speedometer and tach, giving you space-age looking instructions on how to operate the transmission, as well as other information which you can switch through.  It’s a nice touch.

The rear seat’s enormous as well.  I can see why Police departments like these LX cars more than the outgoing Crown Victorias – they’re large, but there’s actually room inside them.  Legroom in the back is fine for even giants, but headroom is still a compromise – not as much so as the Charger, though.  Interior quality in the 300 is vastly improved, but it’s still not perfect.  Still, they’ve focused on making sure everything you touch frequently is nice – the leather wrapped wheel, the comfy leather heated seats, the shifter, most of the minor controls, they’re all very nice.  Panel gaps are not as tight as in some foreign cars, but that’s largely academic.  Secondary surfaces can be hard and brittle (like the dash), but overall it’s a very convincing luxury atmosphere.

In fact, it’s a convincing luxury car.  That’s impressive, considering this isn’t even the Hemi V8-powered 300C, or the riotous SRT-8.  The old base 300′s used to be a pretty wrapper with some nasty chocolate inside; in Limited trim the V6 300 is a fully satisfying car with an attractive price.  How attractive?  Well, this test car stickered out at $36,680.  If you’re looking at direct competitors, that’s very cheap – a Ford Taurus with the same goodies rings up at $39,715.  A Hyundai Genesis sedan with the Premium Package (which has most of the Limited’s features) is $39k, a Genesis with the Tech package (even more stuff) is $43k.  Want a Mercedes E-Class with the same features?  You’ll have to option an E350 (gas) out to $62,545 to match the 300 Limited feature for feature.  In fact, even if you wanted to spend $62k on a 300, you couldn’t – a 300C SRT-8 (all 470 horsepower of it) comes out to $58k if you carefully pick the most expensive options.

It wasn’t too long ago that Chrysler’s products were obvious also-rans.  They’ve used the budget they had wisely, and the result is a truly great large sedan, with no false pretenses about being large – it’s comfortable in it’s skin, like Adele.  (Sorry.)  It will never win a trophy at SCCA Autocross, or cash at drag-strip bracket racing, but it’s high quality, has lots of character, and is nigh on perfect as a highway companion.  If you want a big sedan for reasonable money, the choice is pretty damn simple.

2012 Chrysler 300 Limited RWD

Base price: $32,470
Price as tested: $36,680
Options: Dual-pane panoramic sunroof ($1,495), UConnect Upgrade (Garmin Navigation, Sirius XM Travel Link, $795), 20″ Polished Aluminum Wheels ($995), Destination Fee ($925)

Body: 4-door unit construction sedan
Drivetrain: Longitudinal front-engine, rear wheel drive, 8-speed automatic transmission
Accomodations: 5 passengers

Engine: V6, Aluminum Block & Cylinder Heads
Displacement: 3605cc (3.6L)
Aspiration: N/A
Fuel delivery: Port fuel injection
Valvetrain: Dual overhead chain-driven cams, dual variable cam timing
Compression ratio: 10.2:1
Horsepower: 292bhp@6,350rpm
Torque: 260lb-ft@4,800rpm
Rev limit: 6,500rpm

Suspension (F): MacPherson Strut, Coil Spring, Anti Roll Bar
Suspension (R): 5-link Independent, Coil Spring, Anti-Roll Bar
Steering: Electric-Hydraulic (electric pump, hydraulic rack) power-assisted
Wheels/Tires: 20″x8″ Aluminum-Alloy, 245/45/R20 HPAS tires
Brakes (F/R): 12.5″ Ventilated discs, single-piston sliding caliper (front and rear)

0-60mph: 6.6 seconds (via Allpar)
Top speed: 114mph (governor limited)
1/4 Mile@ET: 15.2s@96mph (via C&D)

EPA fuel mileage estimate: 19mpg city/ 31mpg highway/ 25 combined
Recommended fuel: 87 octane or E85 Ethanol
Fuel Tank Capacity: 19.1 gallons
Theoretical Range: 592.1 miles

Wheelbase: 120.2″
Length: 198.6″
Track (F/R):  63.4″/63.8″
Width: 74.9″
Height: 58.7″
Cargo Capacity: 16ft³
Curb weight: 3962lbs

Main Competitors: Ford Taurus, Hyundai Genesis Sedan, Buick LaCrosse, Chevrolet Impala, Cadillac CTS, Nissan Maxima
Pros: Bold looks, refined and feature-laden interior, Pentastar V6 has punch and refinement, ZF 8-speed auto gives more MPG and faster acceleration, great value for money, creepy quiet highway cruiser
Cons: You’ll probably still want the Hemi, shifter is obnoxious, visibility and headroom a casualty of gangster styling
Conclusion: The easy choice of big mainstream sedans – they’ve fixed the stuff that sucked, and refined the things that were already great.  You won’t regret it.

It’s either bizarre or sad, depending on how you look at it.  I’m talking about Lancia, of course.  Amidst the hubbub of the Fiat/Chrysler merger (or takeover, depending on your views), we’ve been hearing a lot about Chrysler, Dodge, Alfa Romeo, Fiat, Ferrari, and the tech sharing that will occur between them.

The 2013 Dodge Dart is an Alfa Romeo Guilietta underneath.  The Dodge Journey is making it’s way over to Europe with Fiat engines (including diesels), new nose, and a slightly refined interior as the Fiat Freemont.  The Fiat brand has returned to the US after an almost 30-year absence, selling the 500. Supposedly the next-generation Viper will include some Ferrari technology mixed in with it’s traditional big-block badassery.  The Ram brand will be getting the Fiat Ducato as a commercial van to compete with the Ford Transit Connect as well.

It may look like a Dodge Journey, but it’s a Fiat.

With the consumption of the Chrysler Group, Fiat has become nearly Volkswagen-like in it’s proliferation of brands and associations.  Fiat, Alfa Romeo, Ferrari (and Maserati), Lancia, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Ram, Magnetti-Marelli, and a lot more if you go further into shared interests, etc.  The brand covers everything from the tiny 500 and Panda subcompacts up through 8,000lb Ram Heavy Duty trucks, which could probably tow 10 Fiat 500′s.  But what’s Lancia getting?

If that looks like a Chrysler 300C to you, you’re forgiven.  It’s actually a Lancia Thema.  Such uncreative, insubstantive rebadging hasn’t been seen since Chrysler sold the Neon as a Dodge and a Plymouth, with the only difference being the badges.  And frankly, such inappropriate rebadging hasn’t been seen since Pontiac sold a Daewoo hatchback made out of old Opel parts as the LeMans from ’88-’93.  But it’s okay.  The 300C might not resonate with Lancia’s engineering reputation, but it’s a nice car in it’s own right.  Surely that’s it?

Oh!  The Lancia Voyager!  No points for guessing what this was, they didn’t even change the name.  But that has to be it, right?

Ahh, jeez.  You have got to be kidding me.  This is not a Flavia.  No.  This is the automotive equivalent of grabbing your grandma by the lapel and punching her in the face until it’s flat.  That, unless I’ve lost my eyesite, is a Chrysler 200.  One of the most lacklustre cars out there, a relic of old Mopar, a Sebring with a half-assed facelift.  A Sebring Convertible, the dream car of boring real estate agents and octogenarian Floridian retirees.  The Metamucil of automobiles.  That’s a crap.  This is a Lancia Flavia.  This is a real Lancia.

That is a gorgeous car, one that was designed by people who loved automobiles, not number crunchers.  This was pre-Fiat Lancia, when they would send a design back to the drawing board if it was too conventional.  This was before Fiat bought them, and forced them to sell cookie-cutter Fiat Strada’s as the Prisma.  This was the company that gave us narrow-angle V4′s canted to the side, because they could.  For instance, the Flavia had an all-aluminum pushrod flat four.  Why?  Because!

I’ll be honest, this sham of a Flavia irks me.  Not just because the 200 isn’t a great car, or that it’s not a Lancia in anything except badging, but because Lancia has such a rich history to draw from, so much potential.  The brand has existed since 1906.  It was a pioneer in a lot of ways.  Why is it getting saddled with cast-off Chrysler products?

So, why didn’t Lancia ever produce the 2003 Fulvia concept?  It was originally green-lit after introduction in 2003 for production, then cancelled, then the same in 2008.  Still, while the brand-sharing of technology runs rampant with every other brand, Lancia gets the proverbial dirty end of the stick.  The Fulvia would’ve been a fantastic car.  Of course, there was the spot-on styling.  This design is a decade old, but still looks fresh.  It was a modern interpretation of the classic Fulvia Coupe, a car which showed that small and simple could be absolutely beautiful.  The Fulvia rocked the face off of all competition on rally circuits before the arrival of the even wilder Stratos rally car, and it’s still a high mark of design today.  Just look at it.

The 2003 Fulvia concept probably would’ve been great to drive, like a modern CRX Si, except sexy and Italian.  It’s underpinnings were taken from the Fiat Barchetta roadster.  Just like the original, it was a strict two-seater with front drive, light weight, and a short wheelbase.  The 1.8L 16v motor made 140 horsepower, drove through a regular 5-speed manual, and the whole concept weighed in at 990kg (2,186lbs.)

Obviously, those underpinnings are outdated today.  But Lancia needs something besides rebadged Chryslers and the amusingly unattractive Delta, Ypsilon and Musa.  Why not build the Fulvia concept on the underpinnings of a hot Alfa?  Basing it on the Giulietta would be a good start.  The 103″ wheelbase is a bit on the compact side for a hatchback, but it’s great for a coupe – and the modern chassis underpinnings could make it an entertaining steer.  How about a choice between the 1.4TB MultiAir (170bhp) and the 2.0 JTDM-2 diesel with 170bhp for a base model?  Then use the 1750cc TBi motor for an Integrale version – direct injection, twin-scroll turbo, 235 horsepower, that thing would scream!

My point is this: Fiat/Chrysler have a lot of different, valuable brands at their disposal.  There’s a lot they can do with Lancia.  After all, do you think the brand that made this rolling piece of sex architecture/rally domination…

…should be stuck hocking rebadged Chrysler Sebrings in Europe?  Should the same Lancia that gave us the Stratos, a bespoke rally car based on a pie-in-the-sky concept with a friggin’ Dino engine be selling 300s?  Should the brand that stuffed a Ferrari 328 engine sideways into the front of their family sedan be selling Town & Countrys?  No.  Sergio, get on it – the neglect of Lancia needs to end.

The Detroit Auto Show actually starts Monday.  But in this business, all the news arrives before its due date.  That’s the case with the Dodge Dart, which they’ve been teasing for a little while now.  We’ve had some preview posts on the Dart before, which you can find here and a snarky editorial on the Dart’s EPA-pleasing 9-speed gearbox here.

The full press release on the Dart will likely drop Monday (or before), but they’ve released a batch of images showing the R/T (Red) and Limited (White.)  Finally seeing the whole car for the first time, I’m pleasantly surprised.  Mainly because they’ve ditched the goofy pseudo-SUV look of the Caliber, which never really worked, but it’s a decent looking little car on it’s own.  The Dart is based on the Alfa Romeo Guilietta (as mentioned in the preview post), and with the whole thing in view you can see a decent amount of the euro hatch in the car’s lines.  If you don’t remember what the Guilietta looks like, here’s a high res gallery for reference.

The Dart has a surprisingly low belt line for a modern car, especially the side windows that dip down towards the front to create maximum glass surface area.  The front end drops dramatically towards the nose, something we couldn’t really see in the preview pictures.  To me, it looks good from some angles (like the one below) and awkward from others -- like directly side-on.  The “race track” LED tail lights are adapted from the new Charger surprisingly well; I was thinking they would look out of proportion on the much smaller Dart, but they work -- giving the rear end a bit of Fisker/Aston Martin if you squint.

The interior is a pleasant surprise.  Chrysler have been known for distinctly low-rent interiors in their compact cars since the beginning of time, but in these press photos it looks… really rather nice.  Also, I’m pleased to see a manual transmission in the press photos- even if it’s got 3 less gears than that new one. The red accents all over the place (R/T model) seem a bit brash, but it brings some light into an otherwise totally black/grey interior.

The large center-mounted touch screen takes up a lot of dash real estate, but with the focus on compact cars shifting ever more towards technology and creature comforts these days, I doubt that will be a bad thing to any potential buyers.

Update:  Most of the hard specs on the Dart have rolled in with it’s official debut today, if you’re curious.  This is a fairly large car, despite it’s Alfa underpinnings -- The 106.4″ wheelbase is surprisingly roomy, with an OAL of 189.3″.  It’s 72″ wide, and 57.7″ tall.  To put it into perspective, compared to the current 3rd-generation Focus Hatchback, the Dart has a 2″ longer wheelbase, 12″ longer overall length, with about the same width and height.

There will be three four cylinder engines, and three tranmissions. The base engine is a 2.0L “Tigershark” I4, the only one of the three that doesn’t employ Fiat’s MultiAir technology.  It makes 160 bhp@6,400rpm, and 145lb-ft@4,800rpm.  This one will be available with a 6-speed manual or conventional automatic.  Upper level models (probably standard on the R/T, optional in the Limited, although no info on the engine to trim level relationship is out yet) will get a revised version of Mopar’s 2.4L I4, now with Fiat’s MultiAir.  This is the most powerful, making 184bhp@6,250rpm and 171lb-ft@4,800rpm -- again, available with the 6-speed manual or automatic.  The most interesting is the 1.4L MultiAir Turbo, presumably “borrowed” from the Fiat 500 Abarth.  This tiny motor is turbocharged and intercooled, matching the 2.0L for power (160bhp@5,500rpm) and beating both engines for torque (184lb-ft from 2,550-4,000rpm), with a wider torque spread than either.  This too can be had with a six-speed manual transmission, or interestingly a 6-speed DDCT (Dual Dry Clutch Transmission) like VW’s DSG.  I would expect the 1.4L Turbo to be the most efficient, and near the 2.4L for overall performance.  The crazy ZF 9-speed auto will come along at a later date.

For tech, the Dart does not disappoint.  In fact, of all the makers to challenge the Focus for sheer toys, who would expect Dodge?  But hell, it’s all there.  There’s an optional 7″ TFT gauge cluster that can be configured any number of ways: digital and analogue gauges, turn-by-turn display for the navigation, fuel economy data, and audio/phone/compass/temp readouts.  Then there’s the optional 8.4″ color screen in the center dash, ringed by the lit red groovy tube (I’m trademarking that name.)  That does Radio, Navigation, iPod control, climate controls, voice-activated blue tooth, SiriusXM Travel Link, weather updates and points of interest.  More toys?  Sure!  You can also get a heated steering wheel(!), a 506w stereo, a storage compartment in the passenger seat, keyless entry/ignition, HID headlights, Dual-Zone Climate, a rear view camera, heated seats, etc etc.

The Dart will be available in 5 trim levels, from poverty (relative these days) to posh.  From base to top: SE, SXT, Rallye, Limited and R/T.  There will be 12 color choices and 14 different interior combinations, plus a bunch of accessories from Mopar.  Production of the Dart will begin Q2 of this year at Chrysler’s Belvidere Ill. plant, with a base price of $15,995.

An attractive, high tech, feature-laden and desirable Chrysler Compact?  Be still, my beating heart.

In order to keep you, our reader, more abreast with current news without taking up an inordinate amount of your time, I’m introducing this column – “News Bites.”  One paragraph and picture per topic of today’s automotive news.  One article.  If we were a paper publication, we’d say we were going green.  Let us know what you think!

Fiat has dropped a load of new photos of the 3rd-generation Panda supermini today.  This pint-sized product (which I still believe Fiat should be selling in the US pitched against the Fit, etc) debuted at the Frankfurt show in September, and is going on sale next year.  Engines are all tiny, ranging from an 800cc TwinAir 2cyl up to a 1.3L diesel.  Full high-res gallery here.

Dodge’s replacement for the Caliber, the Dart, is less than a month away from it’s official reveal.  Dodge has been playing the teaser game the best they can with a fuel-sipping compact car, and now we’ve got a full CGI teaser shot of… the dashboard.  You can’t see the shifter, which will surely display “P-R-N-D-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1″  – right?  Anyway, we can see a push-button start, a small display between the speedo/tach, the touch-screen HVAC/stereo display, and that odd glowing ring around the instrument panel.  It actually looks pretty nice – but I’ll wait for pictures of the real thing to judge it first.

Infiniti, Nissan’s luxury brand, apparently wants to add a smaller hatchback to their lineup.  This is likely in response to cars like the Lexus CT200h, Audi A3, and BMW 1-series hatch – and perhaps the upcoming Acura ILX (see below.)  Styling will likely be based on the Etherea hatchback from the Geneva show this year (above), but the underpinnings will be from… the front-drive Mercedes Benz A-class.  The world is indeed getting smaller.  Although, the A-class’s clever DI/Turbo four cylinder and 7-speed DCT with an Infiniti (read: attractive) body and interior doesn’t sound like a bad combo.  Apparently a design should be signed off on by January, and a fall debut is the target.

Acura is apparently planning a big booth at the Detroit show this year, and there’s a lot of news.  Sadly, being Acura, none of it’s interesting.  First of all, there will be blood: something with four doors in the Acura lineup is getting an axe to the neck.  One of the models Acura will be introducing at Detroit is called the ILX (about which I could launch an hour-long rant on the stupidity of acronyms.)  It will be an Acura-ized version of the 9th-generation Civic (much like the CSX, pictured above, strangely only sold in Canada) and will likely take the place of the TSX.  The ILX will widen the size/economy gap between the small (TSX) and medium (TL) Acura sedans – the TSX being a European Accord, the TL being an American Accord – and should come with 1.5L Hybrid, 2.0L 16v DI, and 2.4L engine options.  More Acura news?  A redesigned RL sedan, a facelift (likely a move to the new CR-V chassis) for the RDX mini-ute, and the debut of a 2nd-generation NSX Concept car.  Which will be a 4WD electric-hybrid with a twin clutch automatic.  Acura… sigh.

Mini has apparently realized that everything can benefit from more power.  When I reviewed the Countryman S a while back, I was impressed by it’s interior flexibility and capable chassis.  I was nonplussed by the odd styling, and disappointed by it’s lack of power – even in it’s fastest form, the FWD turbo Countryman S with a manual.  177bhp is enough for a regular Cooper hardtop, but it struggles a bit to move the Countryman’s additional 400lbs of mass.  Praise be to JCW!  No, not JC Whitney, the people that will almost always send you the wrong parts in the mail.  John Cooper Works.  Mini is rumored to be bringing a Cooper Works version of the Countryman to Detroit, likely with the same 208bhp turbo engine that graces the rest of the JCW range.  With AWD and a manual, the Countryman JCW should blast to sixty in less than seven seconds.  A proper AWD hot hatch, then?  We shall see.  You know how I love test driving Minis.

Ford Focus related news of two varieties today!  First up is the Focus ST-R pictured above, which Ford announced today will be priced at… wait for it… $98,995.  What?  The ST-R is a stripped-out, track-ready version of the Focus ST that is soon to arrive on our shores.  The ST-R is a turnkey, ready-to-go racecar that can run in Grand Am ST, SCCA World Challenge TC, and a number of other touring-car series.  It’s got a full roll cage, track suspension and brakes, a track-ready 2.0L turbo engine, and a bunch of other race goodies.  Less exciting Focus news?  The Focus Electric has been rated at 100 MPGe, which is a confusing electric mileage rating you can read more about here.  That makes it the highest MPGe-rated five-seater, which must be exciting to some people.  Apparently the main benefit of the Focus Electric is that it will take a full charge on 240v in about half the time needed for a Nissan Leaf.  I still don’t want an electric car, though.

And finally, via the Daily Mail UK, here’s a picture of actor Richard Dean Anderson peering under the hood of his (C5) Audi Allroad Quattro while he waits for roadside assistance.  Now, I’m not one for celebrity news – I don’t care what magazine Lindsay Lohan is posing as a Marilyn Monroe wannabe for.  And a broken-down Allroad is not surprising – what with the twin-turbo 5-valve V6, 5-speed automatic, torsen AWD, variable ride-height air suspension, and all the other various mechanical malarky Audi shoved into that car, it’s not reliable.  At all.  But Anderson is best known for his role as MacGyver.  The TV hero who was known for fixing things with a paper clip and a stick of gum?  Hell, MacGyver has become a verb these days – meaning “fix a complex problem with a simple solution.”  If any car needs MacGyver-ing, it’s an Allroad Quattro.  I am so disappointed.  To make this more relevant: Audi is going to be selling the current A4 Allroad Quattro here next year, with the 2.0T/8-speed auto/Quattro drivetrain.

If you like News Bites, let me know in the comments section below.  If you have ideas for how to improve it, I’d like to hear those too!  Till next time.

Pictured: ZF’s 8-speed Automatic for BMW’s, about to be “old hat.”

Luddite.  The term originated from England during the industrial revolution in the early 1800′s.  Luddites went out at night, destroying wide-frame fabric looms that were taking away the jobs of skilled textile workers.  It was a man-against-machine revolution that got to the point of military intervention.  Technology was minimizing their usefulness in society, so the solution was to destroy the technology.  A noble fight, but today the term Luddite has been boiled down to mean someone not fond of technological advances.

I am not a Luddite.  There’s plenty of technology I’m fond of.  I like fuel injection.  I even like direct injection in some forms, particularly Toyota’s D4S direct and port system.  Twin-clutch automated manuals are cool.  Of course turbocharging is.  I can even occasionally get along with traction control, flappy paddle gearboxes, heated seats, and satnav systems.  But sometimes it’s pretty clear that a line is being crossed, and that line is technology for the sake of the marketing department.

The 2013 Dodge Dart:  Grab Life By The 9-speed Auto.  More Gears Than You Can Handle!!11!!11oneeleventyone!!%$^^*

Two days ago, I showed you some CGI renderings and a few details about the upcoming 2013 Dodge Dart.  It turns out, there’s another detail that ol’ Sergio Marchionne left out.  While the Dart will likely ship with a Fiat 6-speed twin clutch when it launches, later on it will house a ZF 9-speed automatic transmission.  That will make it the first production car with 9 forward gears, and you have to wonder – what’s the point?

Well, the point is clear for Fiatsler:  as soon as the company can build a car that gets an unadjusted 40mpg combined, Fiat can buy the remaining 5% of Chrysler from the federal government, giving them a 58.5% share in the former-failing, now-selling company.  I don’t mind this at all.  Before Fiat came into the game, Chrysler’s vehicles were some of the least desirable, least efficient, most poorly-built automobiles in America.  (Well, except for the Chevy Aveo.  Thanks, GM-Daewoo!)  They’re quickly turning that around now, and I applaud them.

As long as they put the Caliber out of it’s friggin’ misery, I don’t care if it’s replacement has 14 gears.  Blech.

But really, how much of the decision to fit a 9-speed automatic to the Dart was driven by the engineering department, and how much of it was a result of the marketing department?  Dodge says the 9-speed automatic offers between 10-16% better efficiency than a conventional six-speed automatic, but I find that rather hard to believe.  Considering that the current Honda Civic HF has 138 horsepower, and gets 41mpg with an “old-school” 5-speed automatic, what are those other 4 gears doing?

“Honda is behind the times,” they say.  “Only 5 gears?  And port injection?”  Let’s look at the ends, not the means, guys.  Civic HF pictured.

I’ll tell you what they’ll be doing:  they’ll be swapping back and forth on a flat stretch of road.  They’ll be annoying.  9 gear is going to get on your nerves, in the same way that a bike with 3 chainrings and a 9-speed cassette has 27 gears, but you can never find the right one, because you’re always swapping between them.  Lexus apparently kept the 6-speed automatic in the brand-new GS350 because according to test drivers, prototypes fitted with the LS’s 8-speed auto spent too much time hunting for the right gear.  And the Lexus has a torquey, dual-injected 3.5L 306bhp V6.  The Dart is going to come with a variety of small displacement four-cylinder engines that will all be light on torque, with the possible exception of the 2.4L.  Less torque equals more sensitivity to gearing.  This is why a Bentley Turbo R can get away with a GM TH400 3-speed automatic: it’s got 500lb-ft of torque below 2,000 rpm, it doesn’t matter what gear you’re in.  This is also why they never made an S2000 with a 4-speed automatic: it would be terrible.  It’s why the 2.0L WRX with a 4-speed automatic is terrible, come to think of it.

“9 gears?  Old chap, I have 752lb-ft of torque at 1,800rpms.  I can get by with 2 gears.  Pfft.  Fish ‘n chips.”

The other issue is the law of diminishing returns for additional gears.  After all, you can keep adding on gears, but you can’t really keep making them deeper and deeper.  If Mopar is just stacking numerically lower and lower overdrive ratios on top of a 6-speed box, it won’t work.  A 1.4L engine is really going to struggle to keep a 3,200lb vehicle (just guessing) moving along comfortable at 1,300rpm’s.  This is why Honda’s Fit is geared so short – it has a small engine, if it had a long final drive ratio it wouldn’t be making enough power in top gear to comfortably stay at highway speed.  That’s why it buzzes along near 4,000 rpm while cruising.  So unless you have a 6.0L V8 under the hood, or something large and turbocharged, you can’t just get extra fuel economy from adding deeper gears, because the lack of power at that RPM will force the car to compensate with more throttle opening, more fuel, more timing: less economy.  So what they’re doing is stacking these ratios closer, keeping the top gear about the same as in transmissions with less gears, and making the gaps between the other gears smaller.  In theory, they should just bin the planetary automatic and make a CVT that doesn’t suck if that’s what they want to do.  CVT’s have infinite gears in a defined spread, but people rightfully (thanks Saturn!) don’t trust them.  With each additional gear you add, expense goes up but benefit decreases.  The difference in gearing peaks between a 4 and a 5-speed auto is noticeable.  The difference between 8 gears and 9?  Come on.  How many “average joe” consumers actually know how many gears are in their box anyway?  Ford doesn’t even bother to include choices on their automatics any more, giving you “P R N D L.”

What does the “L” stand for when you have 6 gears, by the way?

More likely, it was a small part “well, another gear will give us a few more MPG’s” and it was 90% “Hey, if we have a 9-speed automatic, that’s something we can brag about in our ads that none of our competitors can.  Yet.  Until Toyota comes up with a 5-speed auto with a 2-speed transfer case or something.  We’ll sell a bunch of these.  It’ll be great.”  After all, Marketing is the reason that most performance car ads focus on horsepower, instead of torque.  Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races.  And tows trailers.  And does burnouts.  But that’s Marketing, and I’m not a marketing guy, and if it helps Chrysler sell more cars then great.

I’ll be honest, this is how I prefer to be marketed to.

But beyond the annoyance of the car switching between gears 7, 8, and 9 on a flat road, and the pointlessness of 9 gears on a small engine, and the law of diminishing returns, and the argument of engineering versus marketing we get to the real issue.  Would you want to own a Chrysler that has 9 freaking gears?  I think a bus pass would be a better guarantee of reliability than a Chrysler 9-speed transaxle.  I’m not a Luddite, but I am a professional cynic, and let’s be cynical: Chrysler does not have the best reputation for building reliable automatic transmissions.  How often do you see ChryCo minivans for sale with busted or slipping automatics?  Dakota/Durangos or Rams with a failed 3rd gear valve body?  But hey, this 9-speed is being made by ZF, right?  Well, in South Carolina.  Even if we put aside my prejudice against Chrysler’s automatics (which is admittedly difficult), look at it this way:  except for the engine, the transmission is the single most complicated and expensive component in a car.  If you have a car with 100k miles and the transmission goes out, that is usually the point at which it goes to auction or the junk yard.  (Or on craiglist with a note “might need trans work.”)  A new or rebuilt transmission can sometimes match or exceed the cost of a less than ten-year-old car.  It’s one of those “planned obsolescence” features that help manufacturers keep their profits up.  And the more stuff they cram into a compact transaxle (such as nine gears, or two clutches) generally speaking, the less reliable it is.

VW’s 7-speed DSG.  Look at all those tiny parts waiting to break!

So while some autojournos will continue to make fun of the Civic for only having a 5-speed auto, I’ll continue to point out that it gets 41mpg highway with one battery and 5 gears, and they don’t break.  I think the Dart will be a good product (considering it’s based on an Alfa Romeo, it’ll probably be fun to drive), but you can put me on the wary side of this equation.  More is more, but can we start making sure that the engineering companies do has a point before they spend the money doing it?

Manuals aren’t immune either, apparently.  Porsche is introducing the world’s first seven-speed manual in the new 911, sure to confuse many an old banker.  And let’s not forget Mitsubishi’s “Twin Stick” 4×2 manual in the 80′s Colt, a 4-speed manual with an electronic 2-speed transfer case, giving you eight gears.  Before they introduced the 6-speed manual to the Corvette, the C4 had a 4-speed manual with an electronic overdrive on gears 2-4 as well, which was a major reliability issue.  But once you get past 6 gears, being able to make a comprehensible gear pattern becomes an issue.

As always, I’d love to hear your thoughts on this topic.  Drop a comment in the box below.  Is more gears better?  Or would you prefer everything came with a bellhousing compatible with a 2-speed powerglide?

We’ve known it was coming, but now we have all the details on the US-Spec Fiat 500 Abarth.  Following the regular 500 and the 500C quasi-convertible, the 500 Abarth packs more of everything:  power, grip, brakes, and attitude.  Here’s what to expect.

We’ve known the US Abarth would be getting the turbocharged 1.4L MultiAir I4, but we didn’t know whether it would arrive in regular (135bhp) or EsseEsse trim (160bhp.)  Thankfully Fiat realized that we love power, so the turbocharged Italian will arrive in full-strength form, packing 160bhp and 170lb-ft of torque under the hood.  The Abarth version gets goodies like forged connecting rods, piston cooling jets, and lower-compression 9.8:1 pistons, down from 10.8:1 in the normal 500.  The small turbocharger breathes through twin side-mounted intercoolers.

Power is sent through an upgraded 5-speed C-510 manual gearbox to the front wheels.  And intermediate shaft and equal-length halfshafts minimize torque steer, and the halfshafts themselves are 23% larger than the normal 500.  The CV joints are also stronger to deal with the additional torque.  A 3.35:1 final drive ratio means the Abarth is geared a lot taller than the regular 500, so it won’t be screaming along on the highway – and the extra 70+lb ft of torque should help at maintaining a good cruise, two weak spots in the normal powertrain.  There is also a “Torque Transfer Control” system built into the stability control.  While the description is somewhat vague, it sounds like a brake-lock differential – when it senses one wheel spinning (or about to spin) it applies that brake, to transfer power across to the wheel that has grip.

60% more power is about what I would’ve asked for, but they’ve also seen fit to upgrade the suspension and braking systems to suit.  The front suspension is 40% stiffer and 0.6″ lower with increased negative camber for better turn in, while the rear the beam axle is strengthened, the ride height is 0.6″ lower, the spring rates are 20% stiffer, and there’s a larger anti-roll bar.  Both ends ride on Koni FSD shock absorbers for increased control.  The steering ratio drops from 16.3 to 15.1:1, as well.

Standard rolling stock are 16×6.5″ alloys with 195/45 Pirelli Cinturato P7′s, while a set of 17×7″ alloys with 205/40 Pirelli PZero Nero’s are optional.  The brakes are larger, too: the front rotors grow from 10.1 to 11.1″ vented rotors, and the calipers are larger as well.

Stylistically, the 500 Abarth is more aggressive and functional than it’s normal counterparts.  The front bumper juts out further to make room for the intercoolers, with larger inlets to direct air through.  Side skirts and a top mounted rear spoiler spruce things up, and a new rear bumper has a diffuser and twin exhaust cutouts.  There are other little additions to differentiate the turbo 500, like the Abarth grille badge, markings on the rear quarter panels, and optional vinyl for the sides.

Changes on the interior all sound welcome.  Most interesting to me are the Abarth sports seats, which have larger torso and thigh bolsters, contrast stitching, and harness pass-throughs.  Hopefully they’re mounted lower to the floor, and don’t have those painful headrests.  A flat bottom leather-wrapped Abarth steering wheel sits in front of a revised instrument cluster with an analogue boost gauge with an LED shift light, and 160mph markings.  Abarth pedals, a leather handbrake, and black trim round out the interior upgrades.

What else is different?  Well, the “Sport” mode on regular 500′s now also affects engine mapping, making boost more aggressive as well as the steering heavier when activated.  Torque is limited in first and second gear in “normal” mode, so be sure to hit the button before you set off.

One doesn’t have to be a genius to realize what the 500 Abarth is aimed at in the US: the Mini Cooper S.  So how does it stack up?  Well, the Cooper S has more power (181bhp from a 1.6L) but it’s a little heavier (2,668 against 2,533 for the Abarth), so the power to weight ratios are similar – 14.74lbs/bhp for the Cooper S, 15.83 for the Abarth.  The Cooper has a six-speed ‘box so it will probably make better use of it’s powerband, but the Abarth has a shorter wheelbase, and with the improved suspension will be a ridiculously nimble-handling car.  Perhaps the big thing will be price:  although it’s likely the Abarth will start somewhere near or slightly below the Cooper S’s $23,800 MSRP, it’s already got most of the nice stuff standard, which costs an untold fortune to add to a Mini.  How will we be able to tell?  When I drive one.  The 500 Abarth should be arriving early 2012, so I’ll get behind the wheel of one as soon as I can to report back.

Let me know what you think in the comments section below!

I’m back in North Carolina now, where you can swing a dead cat without hitting a Bentley.  On one hand, it sucks.  I like seeing exotics constantly.  On the other, it’s nice that exotics remain exotic. I walked around LA the whole time with my camera around my neck for you guys – so I’ll continue now with day two and three of car spotting in LA.  Hope you enjoy it!

Classic cars, especially older Japanese cars, seem to have a much longer shelf life in California’s relatively mild, dry climate.  This 240Z would have a lot more rust bubbles over here in North Carolina.  I could do without the period window louvers, but YMMV.

You could do worse for your commute than driving an early Acura NSX up the 405 in LA.  These cars are still so pretty after all these years.

Here’s something that never actually existed: a Ford Edsel Ranchero.  The ’58-’60 Edsel was mechanically similar to the same era Fords, so grafting an Edsel front onto a Ranchero isn’t especially complicated – still unusual!

Heading up into the Hollywood hills (hey, gotta see the sign – tourist and all that), the cars parked alongside the mountain houses are far more eclectic.  Beverly Hills is all about the latest flashy so-and-so, big Bentleys and Maserati’s littering the asphalt.  Up here, you see more interesting stuff: like this original, and very brown 911 Targa.

I hear all the time how Porsche’s Panamera is one of their best-selling and most profitable cars.  Around Raleigh, I don’t see how – they’re thin on the ground, far outnumbered by Boxsters and Caymans.  In the Hills (of Beverly!) the Panabananarama is Taurus-like in it’s ubiquity.  They’re everywhere.  Here’s a mean black Panamera Turbo parked curbside.

Welcome to West Hollywood.  Here’s a Veyron and a Mercedes SLR McLaren in matching matte-white.  Cameo by an Audi R8 in the background.  They were both sporting Luxury4Play stickers, of course.

A Bentley Turbo R parked curbside in front of Charles Agapiou Bentley/Rolls Royce sales and service.  There will be a feature on this dealer (as well as another one nearby) coming up after this.

An Aston Martin DB7 Vantage in a valet lot in West Hollywood.  So gorgeous.

Merc’s SLS AMG Gullwing looks a million times lower, wider, and meaner in traffic than it does in press photos.  Oh my goodness, this car has the presence of a torch-wielding mob.

The popularity of AMG Benz’s in LA is pretty wild.  Far moreso than S-Audi’s and M BMW’s, they’re everywhere.  Here’s a W211 E55 AMG Supercharged rumbling through traffic.

A Jaguar XJ looks right at home in West Hollywood traffic.  check out that Austin Healey too!

Judging by how many Maseratis you see around LA, it’s safe to assume Maser/Ferrari salesmen have no trouble making their boat payments.  Jeez.

It’s not just about horsepower, though.  EV’s and Hybrids are huge.  The infrastructure in LA is a lot friendlier to the all-electric Nissan Leaf, with plenty of charging stations as well as dedicated EV lanes on highways.  I saw more Leafs in three days in LA than I have since they came out in NC.

I took some time to sit outside a coffee shop in Santa Monica and snap traffic that went by.  Not surprisingly, it’s pretty nice.  I heard this clean LT1 Camaro SS at least a block before I saw it.

Aston Martins may not be the fastest, or the most-high tech, or the most reliable, or the most anything technical in the supercar realm.  But they are the sexiest, and the best-sounding. I believe this was a Virage, but at speed I have trouble telling them apart.  Bad journalist.

The Evo X goes down the crowded street with the characteristic bark, crackle, whistle and pop of a highly-tuned turbo car – wonderfully out of the mould in Santa Monica.

A bright red GT-R waiting to turn, before unleashing first-second-third in rapid, growling succession.  I think he saw the camera and was either showing off or not wanting his picture taken.

A big Mercedes-Benz CL Coupe.

Not an X5M, but he had me fooled for a second.  BMW SUV’s are just as popular here as you’d imagine.

A Defender 90?  Where is he going off-road?  Still cool to spot in the states.

An ever-so-slightly blurry 997 GT3.  It’s so fast you can’t catch it on camera.

It wouldn’t be a Califonia spotting post without at least one old Microbus, right?

I feel like a rugged, extremely off-road-capable vehicle in Santa Monica is out of place in the same way a Nissan Leaf in the middle of the Alaskan wilderness would be.  Still, Gelandewägens are cool.

Ohh, Cinquencento.  How I love thee.  Looks totally in place here – Fiat 500′s are everywhere in LA.

Another blurry shot, but this is an M6 Cabriolet.

A Jaguar XK follows an E46 M3 Cabriolet.

The next day, I made the trip up to the Cars & Coffee in Irvine.  I’ve seen coverage from this event before, and normally it’s huge and amazing beyond words.  This particular saturday, there were 5 cars present.  This is apparently what happens when it threatens to rains in California – people leave their cool cars tucked away in the garage.

Still, an Alfa Romeo GTV6 2.5 is a cool sighting.

Alfa guys don’t care about rain.  Garages are for girls.

This Scirrocco 16v sees regular track time, and is in great condition to boot.

One final one, this time in Malibu.  A beautifully restored Toyota Land Cruiser FJ40 diesel.

In the last part of this series, I’ll be showing pictures from inside two private dealer/service centers for classics; stay tuned!

Abarth was relaunched in 2007 and since then the performance arm have covered some of the latest range of Fiats with their magic.

Sounds like a mad recipe doesn’t it? The very humble and practical Italian city car with crazy Abarth technology. Unlike the rest of the Abarth range the Panda Abarth will come with Fiat’s 0.9L two-cylinder Twin Air turbo petrol and then the performance division will tweak it so that it will produce 110hp meaning a 0-60 time of 8.5 seconds and a top speed of 110mph. The bonus of the twin air engine is a claimed 60mpg so this mad sounding recipe is now starting to sound quite sensible.

To make the driving experience much better, Abarth will fit better brakes on the Panda as well as fitting lowered and stiffened suspension.

The Panda will come with the usual Abarth trinkets; a white paint job with Abarth stripes down the side, large wings and spoilers and 16″ alloys. The interior will see sporty bucket seats, a short throw gear stick and a much sportier steering wheel. There are some optional choices too including a louder exhaust system and bigger 17″ alloys. They’re even considering making an even more crazy Essesse version of the Panda as well which will probably be released soon after the usual Abarth in 2013 if it makes it into production.

All this sounds good, the Panda with A.D.D is expected to cost around £15,000 which is around the same as the bigger but not so mad Skoda Fabia VRS but hold your horses though because just take a look at what the little Abarth is expected to look like.

Don’t know about you but I think this Arbath looks a bit ridiculous compared to the Punto Evo Abarth and the 500 Abarth which look much better in my opinion. This thing looks like a sporty cube.