CARS REVIEW

2004-2011 Mercedes Benz SLK Class

The Good: Great exterior styling with the matching performance

The Bad: Rare in the market

The Say: Balances the hardcore moments and the smooth ones.

Go For: SLK350
Avoid: SLK55 AMG

Price Range: P1,800,000-P2,600,000
Our Rating: *****

Related Reviews:
Used Car Review - Mercedes Benz SLK Class (2004-2011)

Car Choices:
There are numerous engine options from the light to the strong, depending on the performance level. For those new to the convertible experience, may we recommend the SLK 200. Although the 1.8 engine is low in displacement, it is fast enough and less intimidating for newbies. Experienced buyers can either choose between the SLK 280 (3.0) or 350 (3.5) which are both blistering fast and to fully utilize the Benz ownership experience.

The strong engine in the line-up is the SLK55 AMG which brings out 355hp and those who want more must take up to the challenge of hunting one.

All variants come fully equipped but the Harman Kardon stereo system is available in the 350 model.

2008-Current Mitsubishi Montero Sport

The Good: Not matagtag, plenty of models in the market, numerous features available

The Bad: Limited space in the third row, not great off-road, does not like low revs

The Say: Definitely lives up to its sporty name.

Go For: 2.5 GLS/GLX (non VGT)
Avoid: 3.0 V6

Price Range: P990,000-P1,400,000
Our Rating: ****

Related Reviews:
None as of the Moment

Car Choices:
For the Montero, its a diesel to go. You get a number of variants fitted with that engine. First launched in 2008 and dropped in 2011, the 163hp 3.2 would activate its potential in the higher rpms. Made available in 2009 and was brought back in 2012, the 134hp 2.5 with CRDi technology would motivate the Montero with an anemic start but let the turbo kick in, it will come alive. A turbo upgrade (those models are marked with a V in the end) done in 2011 gave the Montero more top end torque but at the expense of fuel economy and acceleration (it is not smooth). For practical reasons, we would go for the CRDi powered 2.5 (available with the GLS from 2009 to February 2011 and GLX during June 2012 onward) but the VGT powered (fitted in the GLS-V and GTV) ones are also good, too.

Introduced in 2012, the 3.0 V6 gasoline is a smooth operator but fuel consumption is lower than both the 3.2 and the VGT powered ones and maintenance costs are high.

Numerous standard equipment treats Montero buyers, which is definitely a good thing that in fact, yearly changes usually occurs. Leather seating is available only on the top models (GLS SE and GTV), and prior to 2011 with all variants gain a touch screen monitor that is GPS ready, an aftermarket stereo system is the standard fare. Importantly, all models get airbags, ABS brakes, power windows, power door locks, power mirrors, roof rails, and side step boards.

1991-2000 Nissan Patrol Safari

The Good: Easy to steer, ample occupant space, soft clutch

The Bad: Hard to maneuver, slow at 4WD mode

The Say: Tough as nails, but there are other appealing but modern choices.

Go For: 4.2 Patrol Safari
Avoid: Converted units

Price Range: P330,000-P700,000
Our Rating: ***

Related Reviews:
Used Car Review - Nissan Patrol Safari (1991-2000)

1995-2000 Daewoo Espero

The Good: More space for both people and cargo for less

The Bad: Reliability, handling

The Say: You get a lot for less, but other established brands are worth looking first.

Go For: 1.5
Avoid: 2.0

Price Range: P50,000-P125,000
Our Rating: **

Related Reviews:
None as of the Moment

Car Choices:
Unless you want an Espero (which we doubt so), we vouch for the 1.5 since this is the common engine. The 2.0 is worth avoided especially of the higher maintenance costs and its rarity in the market.

Launched in June 1995, the 1.5 is more than enough since it packs the following amenities: airbags, ABS brakes, CD player, power windows, central locking, fog lamps, rear defogger, rear reading light, and alloy wheels. The 2.0, added in September 1996, gains 15 inch wheels (as opposed to the 1.5s 14 inch) and sun roof.

2010-Current Suzuki SX4 Hatchback

The Good: Roomy cabin, easy to drive

The Bad: Noisy at speeds, limited trunk space

The Say: Better in hatchback form than the sedan derivative.

Go For: 1.6 Crossover
Avoid: There is none

Price Range: P320,000-P680,000
Our Rating: ***

Related Reviews:
None as of the Moment

Car Choices:
A 110hp 1.6 4-cylinder is the sole engine option which has the capability to move the 1,235kg vehicle with ease. It tends to get noisy when driven hard, though.

All models get power windows, power mirrors, power door locks, alloy wheels, ABS brakes, airbags, fabric seats, alarm, keyless entry, and CD player. It looks more sporty with fender flares, roof rails, honeycomb grille, rear spoiler, and body kits. If you want an SX4, proceed to the hatchback.

Today is the Fourth of July, and Myk Belmonte celebrates it by featuring an American SUV.

2008-2012 Dodge Nitro

History
It has been a long time since Dodge had a compact SUV in their line-up since the discontinuation of the Dodge Raider (basically a renamed Mitsubishi Pajero) at the turn of the 90s. Rather than developing their own compact from scratch, they just asked their sister brand Jeep to provide them with a second generation Liberty, and change everything (including some body extensions) sans the engine (the Nitro has its own 4.0 V6 which the Jeep does not offer).

Available at your nearest Dodge dealer in the US from September 2006, the Dodge Nitro went first before the second (and last) generation Jeep Liberty, whose platform is shared with. Sure it may have some butch looks and a convenient sliding cargo floor, but driving satisfaction is not great and the engine drinks more gas than the fastest texter in the world. The last Nitro went out the assembly line in Toledo, Ohio commenced in December 2011, while its Jeep counterpart in August 2012.

CATS Motors brought in this SUV as a part of expanding the Dodge line-up in 2008, which was a year when gas prices went up like crazy. Unlike in the US, only one engine and transmission combo was made available. 2012 was the last year one can purchase this brute SUV.

Value and Costs
Similar to its same priced contemporaries when new, Nitro prices range from P880,000-P1,100,000. Definitely the best place to start is the pre-owned selection of CATS since they have been inspected and certified, but private owners are also worth a look.

Reliability of the 3.7 V6 is decent enough based on several US forums, but other than that interior quality isnt stellar. Parts are mostly limited to the casa but online and specialist shops are present but this requires some research. Buying this vehicle means more fuel expenses as this has a V6 engine under the hood.

Exterior and Interior
The main attraction of the Nitro are the macho looks that come as standard equipment. Each four wheels is complemented with fender flares that are, wait a minute, huge. Ending the aggressive exterior are chrome bits from the alloys to the grilles.

Getting inside is a different story, as clambering in and out the front area is difficult since no handle bars assist them. Controls are big and placed together in the center stack, but quality of materials used isnt to the level of the Japanese. Before driving, you have to set your comfortable position and this fails in a way since you either be far with the tiller or near with the foot pedals, both inhumane and in a way dangerous. Headroom is OK considering the tall height but legroom is a bit tight.

Engine
Worldwide, there are two V6 engines and a diesel exclusive for Europe but one V6 managed to reach the Philippines in the form of the EKG 3,701cc from Chryslers PowerTech engine family that belches 210hp at 5,200rpm and 319Nm at 4,000rpm. While it has a growling sound similar to V8 engines, acceleration is coarse and fuel economy wont give you any citations.

Driving Impressions
Despite having proportions that is a bit bigger than a third generation CR-V, it drives like an Expedition that is not a good thing. Maneuvering is a mixed bag, while parking sensors come standard, the uncomfortable position would give you a hard time parking at the mall. Steering is light which is an advantage in the expressways and while braking is decent, the weight penalty makes it not stop in a dime.

Verdict
Sure youd be getting the Nitro for its hotrod looks but as they say beauty is skin deep. You get the looks but have an uncomfortable driving position, poor fuel economy, and a limited space for your toes. Unless you are desperate for pogi points, there are other great choices that are superior when it comes to consumption, acceleration, room, practicality, and most importantly, your image. Better look elsewhere.



The Good: 

• Sliding cargo tray at the rear
• Bad ass looks
• Its American, so it must be muscular!

Another Chrysler product...I seriously have driven too many of these things.



Introduction: The Chrysler 300 and the Dodge Charger belong to the same LX platform as the Dodge Magnum does. The only difference is the Magnum was the only vehicle to stop being produced while the Charger and 300 continue to live on. Both 300 and Charger are practically the same the big difference being mostly down to badge and exterior styling. Both cars changed the full size car market in that they returned to using rear wheel drive which in turn spawned the short lived Pontiac G8 as competition. The use of rear wheel drive allowed Dodge to attempt to sell Chargers to police fleets many of which are very used to the out of production Ford Crown Victoria compared to General Motors using the front wheel drive Chevrolet Impala.

Most people who know me attempted to convince me that Chrysler hasnt totally screwed up their car lineup by using these two cars as an example. Given my first drive in the Magnum I set my expectations much lower than normal.



Performance: For this review due to the fact both cars use several engines Ill note the Charger as the 2.7L V6 and the 300 using the 3.5L V6. The scores will reflect the trim level given. Well the Charger SE uses the same 2.7L V6 Ive mentioned was a huge problem for the Magnum and the Sebring...its no different this time. This is such a pathetic engine that its pretty embarrassing. Its the same 190 hp and 190 lb.ft of torque engine. The Magnum is about 100 lbs heavier, so the Charger likely does 0-100 km/h in 11 seconds, there are no real tested times...its probably too embarrassing. Keep in mind the engine sounds terrible so revving this thing is no joy. The 300 Touring has the 3.5L and this engine is far more adequate for the job but is still not great doing 0-100 km/h in roughly 9 seconds. That engine produces 250 hp and 250 lb.ft of torque. This engine is much smoother and felt a bit faster than the 9 seconds suggest. However its no Honda or Toyota so it will consume fuel at a higher rate. In cars this big and this heavy...the 2.7L is a stupid idea. Another note, I thought the brakes on both cars were pretty weak.

My Score(Charger SE): 1/10 - A horrible engine, far too slow and far too weak and sounds awful.

My Score(300 Touring): 5/10 - A nicer smoother engine, but still slow and also not that efficient.

Handling: This is where I hope the RWD comes into play alas it was not what I was expecting. Taking most RWD cars into a corner is where the fun from the layout comes out, taking the Charger or the 300 into the corners show how poorly engineered they are. Both vehicles are just too soft and the suspension is too slow to react during faster cornering. The 300 has a decent ride, the Charger doesnt seem to provide that softness. Much of the misery of the Magnum returns to my mind, they do corner better than the Magnum but thats mainly because theyre both lighter. RWD seems to have prevented a poor handling car from being the worst handling car.

My Score(Charger SE): 2/10 - Very poor cornering ability, poor suspension setup

My Score(Chrysler 300): 3/10 - Same as the Charger but more comfortable



Interior: This area I was hoping for something better, as I believe it to be it seems the Ram stole all of Chryslers interior budget so both cars suffer as a result. The Charger SE is the base vehicle and the interior is nothing but disgusting, cheap, black plastic. The 300 Touring is given leather which is actually comfortable but the major additions over the charger is the stupid analog clock. As a car supposed to be their top of the line...it uses a lot of material you expect to be too cheap for even the bottom of the line vehicle. A huge problem in these cars is the poor visibility, not only are the windows small...the C-pillar is a gigantic blind spot. The interior of both vehicles appear to be an afterthought as a result they get a very poor score. The build quality on these cars are mediocre, better than some US assembled Chryslers but not near US assembled Japanese vehicles. Both cars are built in Brampton, Ontario.

My Score(both): 2/10 - Same cheap Chrysler material found in their cheapest vehicles

Styling: Finally something good to talk about these disappointing vehicles. Both vehicles have been styled extremely well as far as the exterior is concerned. The 300 is very much like the sort of car you expect the mafia to drive, its very big and menacing but appears to have some sort of a status along with that. The Charger is more aggressive looking and looks like the sort of vehicle that is a hunter...pity its too slow to match its looks. It appears Chrysler spent some money somewhere so as a result the scores are good.

My Score(both): 9/10 - Both vehicles look very good and have no need for a restyle.

Value for money: Both these cars do have something that most full size cars in this age dont have...rear wheel drive. This does give these cars a mild advantage over the competition with the only car offering RWD is the Pontiac G8. The problem is the rest of the car leaves a lot to be desired, the V6 engines Chrysler offers dont move these cars all that quickly meaning if you want this car to be faster than say...a Mazda 3 you have to buy the Hemi V8. The interior is extremely low rent regardless of which trim level, something none of its competition suffers. If you want a car with good looks...and has RWD regardless of its awful suspension...these cars are for you then.

My Score(both): 4/10 - Neither are good value especially in lower trim form...yet high trim vehicles are expensive but still retain the cheapness of the lower trim cars. Having RWD however is a plus.

Overall(Charger SE): 18/50 - For a base vehicle at this price its terrible, high marks only for good looks.

Overall(300 Touring): 23/50 - Better than a base Charger...but not that much better

Well its been a very long time since I took a long break in May, back with a new review of a car thats a bit more different than what I normally review.


Introduction: The Infiniti G cars began in 1991 starting with the original Infiniti G20, these were essentially rebadged Nissan Primeras. The Primera was a midsized car that was sold mostly to Europe but also sold within Japan. As an Infiniti the original G20 never did very well, it never sold very well and not a whole lot of G20s are still on the road these days. In 2003 Infiniti decided to use a different model for the G series, the much more famous Skyline which did well inside Japan. The Skyline is a rear wheel drive sedan unlike the front wheel drive Primera. It sold under the name the G35 as an Infiniti and its been Infinitis best seller since. In 2006 the Skyline was being replaced with a new model however retained its original 3.5L VQ engine thus it was still called the G35. In 2007 for the 2008 model year a new 3.7L was equipped changing the name to G37 to correspond to the new engine size.

I was surprised to see this car in our fleet. I never expected to see a car of this level actually being bought my company. I truly wanted to try this car out after driving the Maxima, I wanted to see was it worth paying more for this Infiniti badge.


Performance: Well the engine like I mentioned in the introduction is a 3.7L V6. Its differences to the original VQ engine are minor other than the increased displacement. While the Maxima is still under 300 hp, the G37 is allowed to produce 328 hp and 269 lb.ft of torque. The acceleration time from 0-100 km/h is about 5.1 seconds, this is easily the quickest car Ive ever experienced. Some people complain a bit about the noise from this engine, but I didnt really find it to be very intrusive, its only loud when your giving it full throttle.

My Score: 10/10 - Slightly noisy but near perfect delivery

Handling: I wanted to see how Nissan managed to make the G37 corner considering the Maxima was given the 4-door sports car(4DSC) designation. Unlike the Maxima the Infiniti is not as wide and doesnt appear to sport wider tires but it also doesnt have the burdens of being front wheel drive. Since I only drove the AWD X version it probably isnt as exciting in corners as a stand alone rear wheel drive one but its extremely flat cornering despite being a luxury sedan. The steering feel I believe is actually better than the Maximas and due to the electronics you can tweak these to your liking. I actually preferred the standard set up to provide the best balance of comfort and performance. I hate to admit it, this is the closest car Ive ever driven that has the spirit of my Cressida. It doesnt feel as light, but not nearly as front heavy as the Maxima.

My Score: 10/10 - No question, its a joy to drive


Interior: The layout of the G37 may seem familiar to your if youve been exposed to the Maximas interior. In all honestly the layout is pretty much identical, the differences come in the added buttons and the different gauges. I actually prefer the softer white/blue look of the Infiniti over the orange/white of the Maxima which is sharper. The material in the G37 is actually a few notches better than those used in the Maxima. A lot more metal and aluminum trim is used over what would have been plastic and faux wood. If there is anything to fault the G37 from the inside, its not the roomiest car as its not as wide as the Maxima nor is it as long as an Altima. Theres a lot of buttons to play with in a G37X unfortunately theres too many and not all are great positions. One of the things the G37X is equipped with is a rear view camera to compensate for the high trunk line, however it is wise to not rely on this over your driving skill. Its best to treat the camera as another mirror, its very useful but if you rely on it...get into a vehicle not equipped with it and youll feel blind. Build quality in the G37 is excellent, no gaps that Ive seen and everything is extremely solid. G37s are built in Tochigi, Japan.

My Score: 9/10 - Good materials, good build quality, very well equipped, but a bit too many buttons and not as roomy as one might want.

Styling: The Infiniti is a pretty handsome vehicle, I actually like this version a lot more than the older V35 design(the old G35). I actually prefer the sedan styling over the coupe version, the design flow much nicer. There isnt an angle I think the G37 looks bad in, but its not beautiful enough to totally grab your attention.

My Score: 9/10 - Great but just not quite enough to be the best.

Value for money: The Infinti G37 competes directly against the Lexus ES350 and Cadillac CTS. It indirectly competes against the very top of the mainstream brands and the midsize offerings of the luxury brands. Against the CTS and ES350, the ES deep down is a Camry and against a high level car like this its definitely worse. The Cadillac, I believe the G37 offers more quality in several aspects for pretty much the same money, its not that the Caddie is bad...just the G37 is better. Its actually very competitive against the Lexus GS, in a value contest the GS is a poor value in my mind and far too expensive. None of the top mainstream cars offer nearly as many features for the money. In this class, Id say the Infiniti is one of the best bargains you get the medium size, for entry level luxury money, but all the toys and options of cars for 10K more without losing...anything.

My Score: 10/10 - Best bargain in its class.

Overall: 48/50 - Highest scoring car Ive reviewed, it truly is one of the best cars today.

Since Im off today Ill review...the worst car Ive ever driven. The current Chrysler Sebring and the current Dodge Avenger, this is not really a twofer because these cars are almost exactly the same.



Introduction: The Chrysler Sebring originally started as a convertible back in 1995, the sedan version would come out in 2001 on the JR platform. The current Sebring began in 2007 using the JS platform, the Dodge Avenger would be released in 2008. Since the sale of Chryslers assets to Fiat, the Sterling Heights Michigan plant was not part of the deal and thus the plant will close along with the production of the current Sebring and Avenger ending in 2010.

Yeah...this car is pretty uninspired...does nothing significant and has a pretty uninteresting history. I knew this car was going to be bad...I just didnt think it would blow my mind about how awful a car can really be.



Performance: The Dodge Avengers I drive have the weak 2.4L 4-cylinder GEMA engine shared with Hyundai and Mitsubishi. This engine produces 173 hp and 165 lb.ft of torque. The Sebring is a Touring version using the same 2.7L V6 mentioned in the Dodge Magnum review I did. It honestly didnt matter which engine you used in these cars, theyre both horrible. The GEMA engine was noisier and the V6 as mentioned before not all that quiet either. The Sebring gets from 0-100km/h in 8.9 seconds...thats pretty bad, the Avenger does it on 9.5 seconds. Whats most shocking is neither engine is particularly fuel efficient...so you get a weak, noisy and thirsty engine with no upsides. These cars have a 3.5L V6 option, a much better engine...but because the engine is old...its 0-100 time is 7.3 seconds...most cars in this segment are under 7 seconds.

My Score(both): 2/10 - Neither engine is good, neither engine is practical, flat out theyre terrible.

Handling: Once again the Sebring and Avenger are no different here. You got a hard suspension in both cars, the trouble with hard suspensions are theyre no fun driving on roads with potholes. Now generally the good things about hard suspensions are they offer great cornering ability...not the Sebring or the Avenger...you get massive body roll and rubbish cornering ability. Once again...you get two wrongs...there is no right here. The steering wheel on both cars is very dull and light and like the 2007 Hyundai Elantra review...the car had no feel whatsoever.

My Score(both): 1/10 - Poor cornering, no feel, uncomfortable suspension...this is terrible.



Interior: There are differences between the Sebring and the Avenger. The Chrysler is supposed to be more upscale with the Dodge is...er...well...cheap. As a result the Dodge has the more depressing interior full of the usual Chrysler stuff like depressing cheap black plastic, fake chrome, ugly tin-foil painted plastic, ugly dials, etc. The seats...while not very comfortable...I could sit in them without huge issues. The Sebring...its not as black as the Avenger but it still had all the horrid plastic, the fake chrome and so on but...the seats are absolutely unusable for a 54 guy. The ergonomics on these seats are so bad, I actually got back pain from these things. Every time I drive a Sebring...I have the adjust the seat so that its lying on the passenger floor, I might as well be sitting on a stone stool that would be more comfortable. The blind spots on both cars are pretty bad with the C-pillar being very large. As usual with bad interiors theyre not build very well, these cars coming from the United States. I guess theyre reasonably spacious considering the price of these cars...but other than that...absolutely horrible.

My Score(Avenger): 2/10 - Ugly, cheap and not built very well

My Score(Sebring): 0/10 - The same above except absolutely unusable seats

Styling: Once again there are differences...this time big differences. I actually like the way the Avenger looks, it actually does look handsome. The Sebring...just doesnt. The Sebring has the look of someone who always looks angry trying to smile...it looks wrong and unnatural. The Sebring borrowed the wrong bits from the Crossfire, keeping the profile of the Crossfire sedan but not having the serious but aggressive front styling. In the rear both cars are not that interesting but the Dodges actually fits the car...the Sebrings rear doesnt match the front at all.

My Score(Avenger): 8/10 - Pretty decent styling all things considered

My Score(Sebring): 1/10 - Ugly and yet boring

Value for Money: Honestly...theyre both terrible value. Theyre not quality products(they break all the time), they depreciate very badly and worst of all...theyre not even the cheapest cars available. The Hyundai Sonata is not expensive and far surpasses these awful cars at every category. The only person who would buy this over anything is someone who looks at the 82% parts sourced for America...and this person would be an idiot for using this reason to buy these two. If your an American and want to be patriotic here...wouldnt it make sense to buy a good American car rather than support a bad one? The Fusion and Malibu are far better, if the Mexican made Fusion discourages you then get the Malibu, that car also far surpasses these horrid cars.

My Score: 0/10 - You either have to use a stupid reason or failed to test drive anything in order to buy these cars.

Overall(Avenger): 13/50 - This car survived being slaughtered in the scoring by having good looks.

Overall(Sebring): 4/50 - An absolute failure of a car. I hope nothing in the future surpasses this car in terms of how truly awful a car can really be.

The engineers who okd this car should be ashamed of themselves, this car is woefully inadequate in everything they attempted to do. The executives who thought this was good enough should be fired for not understanding a good car is not just a 4 wheeled vehicle, if its not good theres plenty of other cars to choose from. If this same vehicle came from Daewoo I would criticize this car a little less harshly because it would come from a company that had no idea what it was doing. This is Chrysler, one of the oldest names and clearly nobody cared enough about these cars leaving it under engineered, poorly conceived and lags far behind from even its domestic competitors and thus deserve a harsh review.

The Mercedes-Benz 600 was a gigantic luxuriousness automobile. It was supposed to permute the direct pinnacle of automobile subject, and when introduced in 1963 had few competitors. Production began in 1965 after two period of ramp-up, with most styles shapely finished 1972. Modest creation continued to 1981, nevertheless. During this second, 2,677 vehicles were prefab.

The possibility featured some luxuries, including a labyrinthine hydraulic group which supercharged everything from the windows and way to the involuntary motility doors. The represent came in various variants:
+ A 4-door litter on a shortsighted wheelbase, corresponding to a stylish S600 litter in layout.
+ A 4-door litter on a truncate wheelbase but with a noesis pane separating the figurehead way from the back organization place.
+ A 4-door limousine on a somebody wheelbase featuring two rear-facing way and a nurture establishment center. Most, but not all, had powerfulness windows.
+ A 6-door limousine on a semipermanent wheelbase chassis. This had two headlong braving saltation seats stationed at the intervening two doors and a place establishment furniture.
+ A few of the limousines were made with a exchangeable top over the place passenger compartment and were titled landaulets. Production of this example ended a period earlier, in 1971.
+ Two coupés were made (one of them as a talent for Dr. Uhlenhaut, the man that designed the car, when he old.)
+ One funeral equipage (hearse) was prefab. This car, and the two coupés mentioned above, live to the state day in the Federated States.

The 600 was so strong that a monumental 6.3L V8 engine with return camshafts and Bosch automatonlike carbon shot was specially formed to change the vehicle. Adjustable air hiatus gave the car a unsubdivided travel and genuine manipulation over any traveling ascend, tho the cars lightness was necessarily compromised by its aggregation.

Produced until 1980 in extremely narrow lottery, this leader had no equivalent in the Mercedes-Benz roster until the intromission of the late Maybach 57 and 62 models.

The 600s "M-100" engine and air hanging were fitted to the 300SEL 6.3 theory in 1966, providing the ignitor (and more cheap) car with writer efficient debarment. Upon the informing of the "W116" chassis, a large writing of the M-100 was installed in the limited-production 6.9.

Famous owners of the 600 include Hugh Hefner, Elizabeth President, Book Lennon, Jason Kay, Aristotle Onassis,Nicolae Ceaus,escu ,Josip Broz-Tito,Lead Mao Tse-Tung and Elvis Presley.

auto transmission

 Specification image modification exterior interior price review Auto Transmission Maruti Celerio
welcome to latestcarrelease.blogspot.com website that provides a variety of information about the latest cars in the world. and this time we will share information about the Maruti Suzuki Celerio  , the following information.

auto transmission

 in early 2014 a large company cars Suzuki released its newest product, maruti suzuki Celerio. This car is designed with a mini model and agile for urban car. the increasing number of vehicles in big cities, a lot of congestion. therefore the company suzuki maruti suzuki Celerio released to meet the needs of the market.

auto transmission

auto transmission

auto transmission

auto transmission

 ramha environmental and economical car is a dream for the mini car consumers. maruti suzuki Celerio answer all the questions. This car is very economical and best in class. with this car kemungilannya provide comfort for its users.

auto transmission

auto transmission

 in terms of the interior of this car has elegant design is equipped with leather seats are very soft and very complete multimedia features. including audio, 7-inch LCD screen as well senctuh GPS to provide directions when traveling.

auto transmission

auto transmission

in terms of the cars exterior has a very elegant with very inappropriate for young people, both men and women, maruti suzuki Celerio also pulled out some paint colors including red, yellow, green, blue, black and white.

such information from us about the Maruti Suzuki Celerio may be useful for you. and if you want to look for your new car

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

Specification image modification exterior interior price review 2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet
welcome to latestcarrelease.blogspot.com website that provides a variety of information about the latest cars in the world. and this time we will share information about the 2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet, the following information.

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

Dynamism in the open air - Audi presents the S3 Cabriolet. The open-top four-seater is unrivaled in its segment. Its 2.0 TFSI engine develops 221 kW (300 hp) and delivers 380 Nm (280.27 lb-ft) of torque but, with S tronic, consumes just 7.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (33.13 US mpg) on average (165 grams of CO2 per kilometer [265.54 g/mile]). Of course, the S3 Cabriolet also makes use of quattro permanent all-wheel drive - the perfect foundation for optimal traction and driving dynamics in all road conditions. Absolute lightweight construction and a high-performance chassis complete the profile of the Audi S3 Cabriolet, which is set to arrive in dealerships in Germany this summer.

From a visual standpoint alone, the Audi S3 Cabriolet cuts a sporty figure. It is 4.43 meters (14.53 ft) long, has a wheelbase of 2.60 meters (8.53 ft), and is 1.79 meters (5.87 ft) wide and 1.39 meters (4.56 ft) tall. The proportions are extended and balanced elegantly; precise lines and muscularly arched surfaces define the flanks.

The open-top four-seater has a soft top with an electrohydraulic drive. Magnesium, aluminum and high-strength steel keep its weight low. A highly insulating foam layer in the roof reduces the noise level in the interior. The top is available in three colors. It opens or closes in 18 seconds, even while driving at speeds up to 50 km/h (31.07 mph). An active rollover system protects passengers in the event of an accident.

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

Many design details hint at the dynamic driving potential of the open-top four-seater. The Singleframe grille, surrounded by a chrome frame, features a platinum-gray insert and double cross-struts with an aluminum look. The air intakes are framed by powerful edges and filled with double ribs and honeycomb inserts. S3 badges adorn the front and rear. The 12 paint colors include the exclusive Panther Black, crystal effect and Sepang Blue, pearl effect.

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

The A3 cabriolet will make use of the Volkswagen Groups MQB platform; it is a sister model of the VW Golf, the Seat Leon, the Škoda Octavia, as well as a number of upcoming larger vehicles, such as a crossover derived from the VW CrossBlue concept. The platform also will be shared with the next-generation Audi Q3, Audi TT, and VW Scirocco.

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet-Review Specs Photos

The A3 cabriolet will give Audi a market advantage over its premium competition. Theres nothing on the market quite like it: Mercedes-Benz has not formally decided yet on a CLA-based convertible, and the BMW 1-series and upcoming 2-series cabriolet are compact and on the verge of impracticality. There is no immediate competition from Cadillac, Infiniti, or Lexus, either. Considering its unique market position, this convertible will help Audi reach its ambitious sales targets in the U.S. Differentiation from the A5 cabriolet will be somewhat trickier; the pair’s styling appears to be largely differentiated by the voluptuous rear flanks of the larger A5.
source: netcarshow.com, caranddriver.com

such information from us about the 2015 Audi S3 Cabriolet may be useful for you. and if you want to look for your new car