The 24 Hours of Lemons is the fastest growing racing series in America, and for good reason: It’s cheap, at least by normal racing standards. Cars must not be worth more than $500, and poor driving is punished with hilarious penalties, dished out by Matt and the Lemons Supreme Court, comprised of Motor Trend’s Jonny Lieberman and The Truth About Cars’s Phil Greden (aka Murilee Martin). As a bonus, Matt is invited to pilot the safety car before the race, so we built our own replica of Formula One’s Safety Cars out of a brand-new C63 AMG coupe. Hit the jump for the video.

Of course this video was really fun to make, but it does lack the full in-depth review of the C63 that some of you were probably hoping for. Good news! Matt wrote one of those too, and it’s available in the free online magazine Road Lanes. 

Click here to read it.

"This sticker is dangerous and inconvenient but I do love fig newtons."- Ricky Bobby

by Zack K

Doctors have recently decided “distracted driving” includes many things beyond using a cell phone. Bluetooth and hands-free are useless in the fight against people’s lack of attention behind the wheel. The DMV in California even lists “Viewing objects outside the vehicle” as a contributor to accidents. Basically, we all suck at driving. Then, a few months ago, MINI announced it’s social-connection feeding tube app, “MINI Connected“, a program that reads you Twitter and Facebook updates while you drive. It fueled a small- yet informative- rant from yours truly. Now, Mercedes has decided to not just throw caution to the wind, but light caution on fire and throw it into a spinning windmill, with their conceptual driver media interface D.I.C.E., which stands for “Dynamic & Intuitive Control Experience.”

The goal is to make your car as smart as your phone, connecting to you to everything as quickly and seamlessly as possible. Instead of checking Yelp on your phone for nearby eateries, they pop up on the dash, with the option of projecting them onto the windshield. If you saw Mission Impossible 4 you’ll know the idea. Watch their video and you’ll see the “driver” getting all sorts of fascinating info, like how many cars drive over a bridge he’s near. Amazing! Just what I always need to know while driving down the street! I get why they’re doing it, but I have concerns.

Make the jump for a short explanation and their video.

I could rant for pages on it, but they summed it up in their own video (shown in the picture above). While typical-successful-looking-white-guy is checking out when a theater will reopen, two cyclists-one adult and one child-ride by in the background. Those very soft, breakable humans are hidden from view while he ponders if he fancies a show or not. What could possibly go wrong with this kind of media interaction available? I love Mercedes cars and few people get a muscle car right like them. I also understand you have to begin developing technology long before the world may be ready for it. I just hope this isn’t released until drivers are really ready for it. Like when cars drive themselves. If that’s the case, then magician-wave on.

“No, Zack Jr., you can’t have a new bike. Because you’re going to fucking die, that’s why.”

Click here to jump to Car and Driver for the video.

We know it’s been a little quiet around here the past few days, and that’s because Matt and the crew are on a 3,000 mile road trip to film 4 episodes for our new show Tuned on the DRIVE Network. We’ll be back to regular posting on Monday, but for now, check out the January issue of the free online magazine Road Lanes, where Matt reviews the new Mercedes C63 Coupe, Lexus’s new “sporty” hybrid, the CT200H, and the BMW R1200R motorcycle!

Check it out at www.roadlanes.com

 Last week we sat down and looked at all the cars we had driven in 2011. It was a great year at The Smoking Tire. Though we hadn’t driven hundreds of cars with a team of only 1.5 journalists (Matt and Zack) we did pretty well, driving at least 60 cars. Some were used in episodes, some for written reviews and some were from Matt’s work on “The Car Show.” We decided to break them into 3 categories: Sedan of the Year, Truck/SUV of the Year, and Sports Car of the Year.

After coming to an agreement on the Sedan and Truck/SUV of the Year Matt chose the Sports Car of the Year. He drove everything, so he would be the best judge. LIES! We locked in our votes and then posted a contest for all of you: Whoever picked the same 3 cars we did before midnight on New Year’s Eve would win a t-shirt. It’s now January 1, 2012 which means it’s time to reveal our choices for Cars of the Year, as well as the contest winners.

Sedan of the Year: Mercedes Benz E350 Bluetec

Some of you were expecting the CLS63 AMG. Others lost their free shirt betting on the CTS-V wagon. We considered those, but a super-sedan is really a sports car wearing a fanny pack. You want a sports car, get a sports car. But if you want the best sedan on the market today, get a Mercedes E350 Bluetec.

We all fell for this car on a 1,600-mile drive to the California/Oregon border and back. The challenge was to drive from the Mexico border to Oregon in one day, the entire state of California, on one tank of diesel fuel. Clean diesel cars are fairly new to America and their fuel economy usually exceeds what’s advertised, so why not? The car had to fight stop-and-go traffic, 94-degree heat, mountains, several stops (for the camera truck to re-fuel), the weight of 3 full-grown man-boys, their camera gear and a slow-cooker plugged into an inverter that spent 6 hours roasting a brisket. Despite all that, we went 784 miles on a single, 21 gallon tank of dino juice, averaging 38.5 miles per gallon, better than the dismal Lexus CT200H Hybrid, a car so bland we completely forgot to put it on the list, even though we drove it just 3 weeks ago. A big part of its efficiency is the incredible 0.27 cD, which for the non-technical among us, means it’s just as aerodynamic as a Prius, and doesn’t look awful.

But it wasn’t just the fuel economy that hooked us; this car is the total package.

If it takes 100 miles to get to know a car, consider this a former spouse. You want to test an interior, spend 14 hours straight in one, then 10 hours the next day. It is one of the most comfortable we have sat in. The massage seats are better than those in the $400,000 Bentley Mulsanne. The engine is almost silent on the road yet has 402 torques that make accelerating or passing a breeze. It handles well for its size, the 7-speed transmission is repsonsive, the interior is nice looking and easy to use and it has a night-vision system which is as helpful as it is frigging awesome. I’m 5’11″ and after 10 hours in the back seat, I wasn’t the cranky, short-fused jackass I was expecting to be. Mercedes simply got many many things very right.

This car also brought us to the agreement that unless you’re getting an AMG (or similar performance car) and driving it, hard, all luxury cars should be diesel. People equate off-the-line torque with speed and it has that in spades. Few E550 owners ever use all the power and RPMs their cars can provide, so why not get something a little more frugal (something rich people secretly love). Stylish, aerodynamic, comfortable, silent, and efficient, the 2011 Mercedes E350 Bluetec is what a modern sedan should strive to be.

SUV/Truck of the Year: Ford F-150 EcoBoost

I’m betting a lot of you were expecting the Raptor to be here simply because we drive one all the time and love it very much, while writing in the review of the 2011 Raptor that it’s the best truck ever made. While the Raptor is our choice of transportation when the apocalypse comes in 2012,not to mention the one Matt wrote a check for, we’re objective enough to give credit where it’s due: The Ford F-150 EcoBoost is an incredible leap forward in the truck game. The 3.5L twin-turbo V-6 makes 365HP and 420 torques at only 2,500 RPM. Compare that to the Raptor’s 6.2L V-8; 411 HP and 435 torques, but not until 4,500RPM, which are on Premium fuel compared to the Ecoboost’s regular octane. Point: EcoBoost.

It also has the same towing capacity as the V-8 trucks, up to 11,300 pounds, so you can pull logs in slow motion through a muddy work site all day long. I don’t know why you would, that’s just what the commercials tell me you people are up to. And of course, the cream on top is the fuel economy: 21MPG highway. That’s only 1MPG less than the non-turbo V-6, and only in the 2WD trucks (the engines get the same MPG in the 4×4 trucks). With a 34 gallon tank, the range is 756 miles. That same trip means 2, more expensive, stops in the Raptor. Point: EcoBoost.

The EcoBoost outsold V-6 trucks from all of it’s competitors combined; more than 100,000 units. The last time Ford sold that many V-6 trucks was 1985. And lets not forget the comfortable, well-equipped interior. The seats in the top trim levels are nearly the same as our Raptor, and they are some of the best seats I’ve ever sat in, period. The media systems are great; Sync (at least the version the F150s and Mustangs get) is still best in the business, and there’s room and storage everywhere. Ford clearly thought things out, paying attention to every piece a person could use, touch or sit on. You put that interior onto a smart, powerful-yet-efficient platform and you cannot lose.

Bottom line: A tuned version of this engine in a Raptor would earn another check from Matt in 80,000 more miles. Raptors rock, 10 mpg doesn’t.

Sports Car of the Year: Porsche 997.5 GT3 RS

Of all the cars we’ve driven in the three categories, this one was the hardest to choose. I mean, just go back and look at that list of sports cars: Supercharged Lamborghini, 640 HP Corvette’s, a Mustang that handles like a German car, and the BMW 1M, the best car to come out of Munich in over a decade. All of them are incredible, and we’ve been very fortunate to get behind the wheel of these amazing machines. But I thought long and hard about this (read: the length of 1 massive Spider Wreck bong hit followed by 1 Camel Light cigarette), and one car stands out as being so completely over the top with driving excitement, it had to be recognized. We understand that this isn’t the newest, fastest version of the GT3 RS, as that honor goes to the new 4.0 version with 50 extra horsepower, but we’ve never even seen one of those in person, let alone drive one. Trust me, the 3.8 works just fine.

When you see a GT3 RS parked on the street, it looks like a full-on race car. And for good reason: it only weighs 220 pounds or so more than the actual 911 Cup cars, and most of that is mandatory street equipment and basic interior panels. There are no buttons on the steering wheel. The seats don’t recline, because if they did, you wouldn’t be driving properly. You’d think the radio would sound terrible, but it doesn’t. I know because I used it exactly one time. You may as well throw it out the window, because the 3.8L, 450 horsepower flat six sounds as close to its racing version as I’ve ever heard on a road car; add a basic cat-back exhaust and it sounds identical. It revs up like a literbike, and when it comes on cam, I just about came; on cam. I found the above picture by looking up “Direct Steering” on Google. Even on public roads, I found myself braking later into corners than I ever had in my life. The handling was so good, cameraman Tom Morningstar made a girl puke twice on a Sunday drive (thankfully she exited the car first). People use the term “bolt action rifle” to describe the perfect shifter. I’m convinced the gun was designed to mimic the car’s feel, not the other way around.

I was fortunate enough to spend a week with the GT3 RS while filming The Car Show back in May. We procured it for the purposes of running the Mojave Mile, where I went 166.3 mph. Just a few months beforehand, Richard Hammond of Top Gear used the exact same car for their American supercar road trip film, and nearly wrecked it at VIR, but he loved it.  We originally tried to get a Turbo S, which would have been the right decision for the film, as a Turbo S in attendance ran 182.7, but it wasn’t available, and I don’t care. Standing mile numbers notwithstanding, (the giant wing couldn’t have helped), this car was fast. 450 horsepower pushing around just 3020 pounds is ridiculous. Sure, the 4.2 second sprint to sixty may make you roll your eyes compared to Supercharged Lamborghinis or magical AWD computer-aided launches, but passing at highway speeds? Forget it. Every highway is the Mulsanne Straight when you’re in a GT3 RS.

That week was one of the best driving weeks of my life. I went 15 mph faster on the way to the runway than I did on it, and have never felt a car so planted at those speeds. Thank you, downforce. I spent 12 hours and 2 tanks of gas in the canyons one day. And I used the GT3 RS for daily driver errands, too. You’d think that the most hardcore, barely street legal race car available from Stuttgart would be rough, noisy, and generally unpleasant on the street, but the opposite was true. Even on rough pavement, the GT3 RS was totally bearable. The trunk and empty space normally filled with a hilariously un-usable back seat holds a surprising amount of stuff, provided it fits in between the (again, non-folding) seats to get there. The air conditioning, aforementioned radio, and ounce-shaving cloth door pulls do their jobs just fine. And it’s easy as pie to parallel park. Sure, the clutch and shifter are a bit heavy for the daily Los Angeles commute, but odds are, if you own, or are even considering owning a GT3 RS, you’ve got that situation handled.

Some of you may be disappointed that we didn’t choose everyone’s favorite, the BMW 1M Coupe. We loved that car, and I mean really had an amazing time driving it. It’s fantastic. But the GT3 RS is cut from the same cloth; a limited-edition, wider, faster, racier, yet somehow still practical version of an already high performance car. The difference is, the RS starts at a much higher level. These two cars are both incredibly brilliant. But at the end of the day, there has to be a winner. And the smile on my face while driving the Porsche at, frankly ludicrous speeds simply can’t be matched by a BMW 1-Series, even if it is the fastest, best handling, most fun 1-series ever made.

The Winners: Unfortunately, no one was able to guess the exact same cars as us. I know the list was long, but I thought someone might have. However, shoutout to user The Nik, who got two out of three, the Porsche and F-150 Ecoboost. For being the most right person in a sea of wrong people, The Nik, email Matt your address and we’ll send you a TST shirt.

This goes in the “Golden Reddit Finds” chapter of TST. The title was, “How is it determined if a custom-built car is road legal?”(I’m guessing the only way this is road-legal is if you still register it as the original Harley bike it was bolted to). Unfortunately, that was all the information on it. A search on Google found it is a 1936 Harley Davidson Sidecar, numerous people ogling and saying “I need to build this!” but nothing more.  So we don’t know anything about it, other than that it’s fucking rad. I mean rad in the 1980s Ninja Turtles, bright neon Hammer pants rad. It’s flat-out cool, with a nice dollop of crazy on top.

Judging by the beard this was taken in the late 60s, a time of, shall we say, inspired creativity? So this guy took a 1936 Harley sidecar and fabbed up a frame and drive-train. It looks like it uses a Harley V-twin motor, located where the motorcycle would be. I can’t tell if it’s chain-driven, but I would assume it’s a simple design due to the technology on hand at the time.  The wheels and tires are as big as the engine, hopefully giving this swollen go-kart a silly amount of grip. I imagine it has drum brakes off a car, at best. If it has motorcycle brakes (or only on one side like a go-kart) then this is a death machine. But because I live by the rule “Everything will be fine.” I don’t care.

I don’t know what a sidecar weighs, but it can’t be much. Engines back then didn’t make much power. In my dream, this thing has 200HP and was the grandpa of the Ariel Atom, but according to bikez.com a 1996 Harley Sportster made 50hp, so this is probably under 40. Don’t care. Want it anyway. It’s like a hot-rod motorcycle stew without being as serious as a rat rod. If anyone knows more about this thing, let us know.

- Zack K

124 MPG.

That’s the projected MPG of the new Volvo V60 Diesel/Hybrid wagon, due out in 2013. That’s using the UK gallon (bigger), so converted for U.S. it’s 102.3MPG. Still ridiculous. Still astronomical, unbelievable, incredible and unavailable, at least if you live in the U.S. Same thing with Mercedes’ upcoming E300 Bluetech Hybrid. Confused? Curious? Mad? Me too. I don’t know why we can’t get it, but I intend to complain until we can. Read on

3 weeks ago I wondered aloud, “Why can’t we have a diesel hybrid? That would be the perfect drive train for a daily driver. It’s the best combination of torque and efficiency.” Coming on the heels of long drives in diesel cars from BMW and Mercedes I think unless you get a performance model like an AMG or an M car (for the right reasons, not because you liked the stitching on the seats or need to advertise you bank account’s contents) every luxury car should have a diesel motor. They’re quiet, they’re smooth and the torque makes them feel powerful, i.e. expensive. People like torque, because that’s what they feel from a stand still than makes them grab the door handle and get wide-eyed. Very few AMG owners wring their cars out to 6500 RPM at 90MPH. They just want thrust.

A week later the news came down Volvo is making one. “Really? With torque, and efficiency, and quiet, all that jazz?”

Yes. For extra icing on this free-range, Eco-friendly cake you can even plug it in. Based on their V60 wagon platform the car will have a 2.4L 5-cylinder diesel powering the front wheels and an electric motor that powers the back ones. The diesel motor makes 215HP and 324 torque, the electric motor is rated at 70HP (torque figure unavailable from Volvo). It can be driven in an EV for 35 miles, or you can turn on “power” mode and hit 60MPH in 6.2 seconds.

The efficiency (based on the European cycle) is insanely impressive. 124MPG? Even if it was half that, it simultaneously kicks those Prii asses at the pump and the track (no one tracks a Prius, I know). It’s also a wagon, so it has space for stuff. And it has selectable AWD, so you can drive it anywhere a normal person needs to go. In my mind it is the greatest daily driver in the universe.

Mercedes is doing it too; look at the E300 Bluetec diesel hybrid. It uses a hybrid system similar to the E400H hybrid, but with a diesel motor. The 2.1L 4-cylinder makes 200HP and 370 torques. Mercedes says it will get 56MPG, offered as either a wagon or a sedan. I drove the E350 Bluetec a few months ago and it was Frosted Flakes-level grrrreat. Seats, transmission, noise level, looks, feel; all phenomenal in town or on the highway. If I had the money I would buy one. Mercedes says the E350 diesel gets 21/33 MPG but even with 3 people, gear and a slow-cooker plugged in we averaged over 38 MPG.

Remember that number, because the E-class hybrid we are so grateful we can buy here gets 24 MPG city, 31MPG highway, a whopping increase of 4 and 1 (respectively) over the regular gas-powered E350. All that work for 1MPG. What a joke. But people will buy it because hybrids are the iPod of cars. More hybrids are offered every month. Plus, diesel cars don’t come with a cool green leaf badge on them to announce to everyone how much you care about aminals (misspelled for cuteness). Some hybrids get better mileage, but some don’t (Hi X6 Hybrid).  I like everyone’s enthusiasm about saving money the planet but our love of glowing, green balls has blinded us to a better (for now) solution. I know diesel fuel is more expensive, but so is that hybrid option. If you only get 1MPG better with that electric motor how long do you have to drive that car before you save money over the regular car? A while I’m guessing.

The Volvo seems like a huge step for the industry, and it’s not bad to look at either. But…the introductory price is (cover your screen) $75,000. You spit on it, didn’t you? I know it’s insane or at least, insane for a Volvo. But don’t think of it as a Volvo, think of it as a Swiss Army knife that’s also been stuffed with a working socket wrench, a chainsaw and a light saber yet it still fits in your pocket. And Volvo is charging that price for the first 1,000 cars, but if demand was higher the price would surely come down. The BMW X5 diesel we had was about $60k. That car’s 28 MPG is funny car efficiency compared to this thing.

Let’s do some math. The average American male in my age group drives 17,000 miles per year. If you drove the Mercedes E400 hybrid 17,000 miles, getting an advertised 31MPG you would need 548 gallons of gas. Using the current price of $3.23/gal that costs $1,770.

Now we’ll drive the V60 the same distance, but I’m going to cut it’s MPG down to 100MPG (we know Swedish fish is a shitty candy, so I won’t trust their MPG either). You would need 170 gallons of diesel to cover the distance. At the price of $3.82/gallon, that costs $649. $1,100 a year is quite a difference. If you have a 10-gallon tank, you can drive over 1000 miles before re-fueling. 1000! That’s not considering its EV range. (And it may or may not be able to tow a boat.)

Of course it takes 20 years to balance out the price of your V60 with the $50,000-ish E400 but the E300 Bluetec won’t be $75,000, yet that’s not coming to the US either. The fact these are forbidden fruit bugs me, and we’re partly to blame. We aren’t offered these great, fuel-efficient cars because there’s so little demand. Diesel cars accounted for only 7% of Mercedes sales. That means 10% of us bought AMGs because we’re hooligans (guilty) and 83% of us are fucking morons.* Even Ford won’t give us their 65MPG Fiesta diesel, because it would be priced right by the Prius, the teet we all love to suckle at, despite a bigger, nicer one sitting just next to it.

V60 interior

Maybe morons is too strong, but we’re just stuck. We grab at trends with eagerness of Italy’s prime minister at a high school dance and then we hang onto them no matter what information or alternatives are presented. We’re like Dustin Hoffman in Rainman, stuck in our routine and if someone offers something else we bang on our heads and scream. Well I think we should read the facts more (something many people in the USA hate doing), because right now we’re telling the world, “Oh, that’s a flying carpet? Hm, I dunno, all my friends have hard-wood floors, so I think I’ll stick to that. Plus, don’t carpets smell?” Well you know what? I want to be able to buy these cars, I want them here, I want a flying carpet. So you people better start buying some ****ing rugs.

- Zack K

*This math is purely arbitrary, other than the 7% of sales part. That’s true.

I love the aftermarket. They are the fringe chefs of the auto world. No content with the way something is made, they will take a classic dish-say, risotto – and then add crazy stuff to it like maple syrup and essence of deadly sea urchin. You might think, “What are you doing?? It was delicious the way it is!” But then chef RENNtech presents his 2012 Mercedes CLS63 AMG risotto and after a taste, you stop complaining. Because RENNtech has found that with a simple tune you can extract another 100 wheel horsepower. Yum. Jump for dyno sheets and a video of a race against a Nissan GTR.

I’m not that surprised the CLS has big power potential, because it has a big V-8 with two turbos feeding it air like it’s making foie gras. But I didn’t think you could get 100WHP out of a simple chip. AMG cars always respond well to mods, but this is ridiculous. The other day we were discussing which is a better idea, buying a CLS 550 and chipping it, or dropping significantly more money for the AMG. Well RENNtech dyno’d all of them, including a CLS63 AMG with the performance package, and one without. Check out the dyno below.

The blue line is a stock CLS63 AMG without the added Performance Package. Red line has the $7,500 Performance Package option ticked, raising power from 518HP/516tq to 550HP/590 tq. The Performance Package isn’t anything intense, it just raises boost from 14.5psi to 18.8. On the dyno, they put down 483WHP/478tq and 516WHP/544tq, respectively. So that means A, they’re both really fast and powerful and B, both are a little under-rated from the factory. Despite what your forum or 13 year old cousin has said, these cars are fast as hell. I know its 0-60 time (4.4) isn’t as fast as the Nissan R38 that had twin-supra motors and really strong guy pushing behind it, but in the real world the CLS63 AMG is fast as fuck. I spent a week with one. The only place this car is slow is on the internet.

Then RENNtech starts throwing things in the pot, to satisfy crazy people like  your cousin or wealthy Russians. Or wealthy anyone, really. Their chip gives the CLS a little more of the boost it craves so much, and just like that, it is putting down 583WHP and 643 torques. These aren’t gains at the crank (those numbers are 669hp/734tq. Yes, that is a “7″), this is at the wheels. You know, the part that pushes on the ground? This brings the 0-60 time down to 3.4 seconds, and the 1/4 mile is gone in 11.3s (or 11.2 with DRs). For proof, watch the video below.

So this brings us back to the CLS 550. We knew this motor had potential, and RENNtech’s 550 chip is essentially the same as Mercedes’ Performance Package. It raises power at the wheels from 392whp/441wtq (again, underrated from the factory) up to 447HP/516tq. At the crank, that’s 530HP and 606 torques. In a “regular” CLS. Price for this is only $2,700.

So we were sitting here trying to decide if the AMG part of the CLS is really worth it. That depends on the soundness of your mind. Is 530HP really not enough? Do you really need 669HP, and 734 ft-lbs of torque to be happy in life? The 550 would be an excellent cruiser-probably more comfortable than the AMG- and it will save you $20,000. I guess it depends on your income, how psychotic you are and how much time you spent watching single-turbo Supra videos(I think of them as the gateway drug to delusional power figures). I believe the internet has artificially raised people’s performance expectations and needs. Almost zero percent of CLS owners will drag race them, and only a few more will ever find out how fast it goes from 120 to 180. But there’s something AMG gives you that RENNtech doesn’t: brakes, suspension and stability control. Those are things you might want if you have 600 ft-lbs of torque. Remember, the proper way to upgrade a car is brakes first, power last.

But that’s no fun.

-Zack K

Like this post? Help us out and share with a friend. Or TWO friends if you want to get crazy.

There is rarely enough time in one of our 7-minute films to say everything that needs to be said about a car. You get in the moment, you forget things here and there, and you go home at the end of the day wishing you had said this or that. Well, in between filming and writing for The Smoking Tire, I review cars for other publications as well, which gives me an opportunity to write a completely different take on the same cars we film with. Introducing Road Lanes Magazine, a new online automotive magazine that you can download for free and view offline as well as online. In last month’s issue, I reviewed the Dodge Durango and Corvette ZR1. This month, check out the new issue of Road Lanes for my reviews of the Mercedes CLS63 AMG and BMW X6M.

So as not to disappoint our loyal fans here at The Smoking Tire, we have also made films with the Corvette ZR1 and BMW X6M, which you will see on the site and our various video outlets soon. Until then, click here to see the latest issue of Road Lanes!

In Fast 5, the latest installment in the Fast and the Furious movie franchise, Brian and Dom are trying to pull off the ultimate heist, which requires the ultimate heist vehicle. In the film, they choose Dodge Charger cop car look-alike’s, not a bad choice if you ask me. But is there something better? Matt and Fireball Tim Lawrence host a contest at Willow Springs Raceway inviting all comers to bring their metal and see how their car stacks up as the ultimate heist vehicle. Featured cars include: Gintani X5M, M5, C63 AMG, CLK 63 AMG Black Series, Nissan GTR, Supercharged Mustang GT, and more, plus the actual Nissan 370z from the movie Fast 5 and several professional racing drivers. Hit the jump for the video to see how it all went down and who came out on top.

Part 1:

Part 2:

The Smoking Tire’s Tom Morningstar was fortunate enough to attend the coolest race ever that no one’s heard of: The 24 Hours of Dubai. Held at the Dubai Autodrome, surrounded by unfinished buildings and general nothingness, the endurance race features privateer racing teams fielding such cool race cars as the Audi R8 LMS, SLS AMG GT3, Porsche 911 Cup, Aston Martin Vantage GT3, and more. Check out the video to see Tom doing what he does best: getting great shots of cars.

(Sorry about the link before, we had to take the video down to fix the music credits and it disappeared)

While out road testing a couple of cars yesterday, I found myself stuck behind some slow drivers in the canyons. This happens from time to time, and while we occasionally make moves around them, we didn’t this time because of what cars we were following. There was a Mercedes-Benz F-Cell, a Kia Borrego FCEV (Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle) and a Honda FCX Clarity all in a row, winding their way down the canyons. Strangely enough, the Kia and Benz had manufacturer “M” plates, while the Clarity seemed to just be another Californian on his way home from work.

Having a Mercedes-Benz sedan in the Dream Garage seems pretty feasible when you consider the recent batch of hot Benzes to reach our shores: the C63 AMG Black Series, E63 AMG, and the luxo-rocket S65 AMG all pack enough horsepower and torque to alter your perception of reality. But a 90′s-era sedan in this most coveted of garages? Impossible, or at least highly improbable, until you take a look at this Bavarian gem.

The 190E 2.5-16 Evolution II is to the regular 190E, what the WRX STi is to the standard WRX: It has more power, it’s more flamboyant, and wears the absolute daddy of all rear wings. The Evolution II’s rear wing makes even the last generation STi’s look sedate and civilized. This outrageous Merc was born from Mercedes’ Group A racing which required that the aerodynamic components of the race car match the production versions. More of that racing pedigree can be found in the car’s flared wheel arches, deep front splitter, upgraded brakes, and firmer suspension. The retuned 2.5 liter four-cylinder received upgraded components as well and made a potent 232 bhp.

Inside, it’s classic Mercedes with leather, wood trimming, and no-nonsense style. The pictured car, a 1990 model, has only 147 miles on the odometer, and honestly, have you ever seen 20-year old leather look so good? On modern Benzes, we expect buckets full of tech, and the Evolution II sports some of its own gadgets including a switch near the steering wheel that allows the driver to adjust the ride height to three different levels. It’s a rare car too, with only 500 or so ever being produced, so it’ll make a similar vintage E36 BMW M3 seem pretty commonplace and tame. All these go-fast parts did count for something on the racetrack, with the Evolution II claiming the 1992 DTM driver’s title. Thank goodness the nineties brought us more than Vanilla Ice and Trapper Keepers.

Welcome, Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.5-16 Evolution II, to The Smoking Tire Dream Garage.

[Source: BringATrailer]

The Smoking Tire would like to extend a formal welcome to the author of this post, our new writer Doran Del Pra. Welcome to the team, Doran!

Oddball cars are the spice of life, well, at least my life anyway. I’m so flooded with car information most of the time, that a great portion of it just goes in one ear and out the other, because, honestly, I’ve seen it all before. Not this time. While most drift drivers are busy cranking up the boost on their 240′s, or converting econoboxes to rear-wheel-drive with NASCAR engines, Finnish drifter Teemu Peltola has gone a different direction: He built a 1981 Mercedes 300D Wagon into a drifter.

My last memory of such a car, with the exception of the W123 240D we reviewed on the old show, was being dropped off to school in the late 1980′s by my mother, who had a 1983 example. In fact, every mother on the block had one of these. In the 1980′s, this was the mommy-mobile. So it’s not surprising that seeing one now, 20 years later, going sideways and spewing a mixture of tire and diesel smoke, has caught my eye.

The original 12V Diesel straight six wouldn’t do, so Peltola swapped out the engine for a 3.0L Diesel from a 1998 E-Class. He’s added a GT40 Turbo off a semi truck, a 6-speed transmission, the rear axles from a Lexus GS, and the rear suspension from a Mazda RX8. He says that, though it’s never been on a dyno, the engine probably makes about 450 hp and 550 lb/ft of torque. As you can see in the video below, that’s more than enough to put on a damn good show. I just wish he had left the rear-facing third row so I could re-live my youth from the best seat in the house.

[Source: Jalopnik]

The category of so-called “super sedan” is one of my favorites. The e55AMG, M5, XFR, CLS AMG, etc. I just plain like them. With 4 doors, big seats and often loaded with gadgets they provide comfortable, practical daily transportation. But underneath their often demure exterior is an athleticism usually reserved for cars with fewer doors and an appearance that’s usually not both wife and mom approved. If you come home with a loud car that has no back seat, suspension of granite and less trunk space than a  kangaroo, come with your debate points memorized and organized on PowerPoint, you will need them.

This is not the case with the super-sedan. It’s safe, comfortable, has plenty of room for company and because it looks like a car-not a Hot Wheels toy-your better half won’t be able to say, “What if I need to drive it? I’ll look ridiculous.” (This problem can be cured with the pill, Idontwantyou Drivinit, sold over the counter.)

If you can’t afford the $100k price tag that usually accompanies the great sedans of today, not to worry, for we have found a substitute that we would happily park alongside any of the modern cars in our Dream Garage; the 1992 Mercedes 500E/E 500. Matt found the one above on Ebay and despite having over 50k miles on it, it looks as fresh as if it had just leaped off the pages of a 1992 TIME Magazine ad.

The 500E was-and still is- a phenomenal car. It was built on Mercedes highly-praised W124 chassis. The W124 was  built when German engineering costs were extremely high, so it was very reliable. (Some cars with this chassis even reached 1,000,000 miles). So the chassis was good, but someone else had a hand in making it great; Porsche. While Mercedes handled the engine building, Porsche was given the job of perfecting and assembling the suspension and chassis, making this car more than just a sturdy box with a big motor, it was a functioning sports car.

Of course a key component (some may argue the most important) to any sports sedan is the engine. The 500E was fitted witht he 5.0 liter, 32-valve V8 from the SL500. The Euro-spec car (which this one is) had 326hp and 354ft lbs of torque. Those numbers are far from sluggish even by today’s standards. The 500E was good for 60mph in about 6 seconds, and would charge across the 1/4 mile line in just over 14 seconds.

The design of this car goes hand-in-hand with what super sedans are all about; formidable but not ostentatious. This 500E looks as clean as a newborn, and if it drove past you probably wouldn’t notice the 19″ wheels or the polished Remus exhaust. It has upgraded Koni shocks and drilled rotors too, but again, that’s all behind the scenes. It reminds me of the look you get when you walk by a sleeping Grizzly at the zoo. It opens one eye, and just that one say says, “Yeah, there’s a fence, but if I really wanted to I could get to you, but I’m trying to nap. So take your snow cone, and your camera, and your ugly kid, and go feed the fuckin meerkats.”

And while you may not be able to afford the newest 4 door power bomb from Mercedes, a used 500E goes for around 20 grand. Considering these cost $80,000 in 1992, that’s a bargain. With the new suspension, wheels, tires, LSD, brakes and exhaust this car will probably keep up with anything in that price range, along with cars costing far more. Mercedes calls it a classic, and so do we, making it a deserving member of our Dream Garage.

Check out the original ad here.

Many people ask us about our favorite cars, and so we’ve decided to put together a “Dream Garage.” It will be a recurring feature here on The Smoking Tire, as we continue to add our favorite cars to this never expanding list. Today, we start the list with a matching pair of vintage Mercedes racing cars, and if we’re talking about vintage Benzo’s, you only need to know two letters: SL.

The Mercedes SL’s of the 1950′s and early 1960′s are some of the most influential sports cars in history, and as good as they look on the road, they look even better in race trim. At the San Clemente, CA car show yesterday, there was plenty of the requisite 60′s muscle cars, so many so that I thought the whole show would be a wash of American boredom. Until I came upon a row of seven Mercedes SL’s, including 3 Gullwings. Now we’re getting somewhere. The matching pair in question includes a white 300SL Gullwing sporting the number 71 and several windshield tech stickers from the Monterey Historics and Rallye Monte Carlo. Good stuff indeed. Two cars down, I found a red 190SL roadster, similarly prepped and tech’ed for competition, except featuring my favorite red/black color combination and a menacing blacked grill. Bonus points for the “picnic basket” interior in both cars.

Welcome, matching Benzes, to The Smoking Tire Dream Garage.

Suggestions for more dream cars?

Despite the energy crisis and a recession, supercars seem to be getting better at an exponential rate. The future of the automobile is uncertain, making the future of the super-automobile even more shaky. Companies are fighting for a shrinking pie, one that got even smaller with the economic shit-storm of 2009.  But like the raging bull that graces the front of a Lamborghini, no one is going down easy. Each passing year is like another prick from the matador, only infuriating the bull and making it fight harder.

In 2010 the fight shows no signs of waning. There are handfuls of incredibly fast, beautiful and powerful cars coming our way. They are all so good, yet so different, the only answer I can think of to, “Which would you buy?” is “All of them!” And that got me thinking, what would I-or you-buy?

Today I’ve put together a list of 6 of the newest and best supercars of 2010. They all cost $200-250,000, are street legal, go like stink and are true supercars. I want you to read the list. Now close your eyes, and imagine someone just placed $250,000 on the table in front of you, and you have to use that money to buy one of these cars. (You can imagine they have a gun if it helps.)

You can only choose one, and it has to be from the list. I don’t want you to say “I’d buy 2 ZR1′s.” or “I’d buy a Hyundai Accent and invest the rest in moderate-return IRA’s and use that to purchase petroleum opt…” Yes you could build a GTR that’s faster, or a used 996 turbo and build it up to 1000hp. That’s not the point. What would you pick from this list of cars coming to us  in 2010, if you had the cash. Yeah, you better imagine I have a gun…

1. Audi R8 GT

First on the casting couch is Audi’s upcoming R8 GT. Think of this as an R8 “superleggera.” It makes 35 more horsepower than the R8 V10 but thanks to CFRP (carbon fiber reinforced plastic) body panels it also weighs 220lbs less the standard V10.  Thanks to the standard AWD it rockets to 60mph in only 3.5 seconds and tops out at 200mph.

There are a ton of track-oriented options available like a full roll cage, kill switch, cup tires and 6 piston ceramic brakes. Sadly no amount of money will get you a 6-speed manual, as this car is only offered with the R-Tronic transmission. Audi has taken the car that set a new standard for daily-driven supercars and simply turned the “super” knob up a little bit. It’s $256,000 of brilliant engineering that has only perfected it’s racing skill set.

2. Aston Martin V-12 Vantage

Originally Aston Martin had no intention of sending the V12 Vantage to the U.S. Odd, considering we are their biggest market. However enough customers sent enough gift baskets and now it’s headed here. It would have been a travesty to keep it from us. The V12 Vantage was described by Aston’s CEO as their “most agile car with their most powerful engine ever.” It won it’s class at the 24 Hours of Nurburgring while being piloted by the CEO and a team of engineers. People say Astons are filled with passion and soul, and I think that race is a clue as to why.

It has the classic long hood of a true sports car. The 510hp/420 tq. V-12 uses a 6-speed manual transmission to send power to the rear wheels only. Those 2 factors make this the “purist” car in the lineup. 0-60 happens in a brisk 4.1 seconds and the fun doesn’t stop until 190mph. The interior is beautiful without going soft.

The price is $250,000, or for another $13k in bragging rights  you can get the Carbon Black Limited Edition. It may not lap a track as fast as some of the others, and at 3700 lbs it’s also the heaviest, but it is stunning inside and out and you can’t argue with a V12 and a 6 speed.

3. Porsche GT2 RS

If people think the new Cayennes aren’t “Porsche enough” this car should balance that out. The standard GT2 is a 530hp, temperamental beast. It’s essentially the RWD purity of the GT3RS with the engine of a turbo, and the result was terrifying. If that car was scary, this one will simply cause drivers to go into catatonic shock. 620hp. 3,020lbs. 0-60 in 3.4 and the 747-like thrust doesn’t stop until 205mph. It’s simply the most powerful and fastest Porsche ever made, faster even than the Carrera GT.

Upgrades from the regular GT2 include a carbon fiber hood, wing, front splitter and intakes. It has a revised PSM (Porsche Stability Management) system, suspension and brakes. Special tires were made just for this car to handle the combination of grip and acceleration. This car calls back to the “glory” days of Porsche when they had lots of power, no amenities and could rip your head off if you looked at them wrong. It may not burble comfortably around town like a Turbo, but it’s time of 7:18 beat an Enzo around the ‘Ring. It’s like a Carrera GT without the sex appeal and-at $245,000-half the price. (Check out the video.)

4. Ferrari 458 Italia

Although I didn’t love the headlights when it first came out, I will now admit this is the best-looking car in this lineup. It’s angular yet supple, combing the sexy with the sinister. It’s 4.5 liter V8 makes 560hp at a sonorous 9,000RPM, yet somehow manages to make 80% of it’s 400 tq. at only 3,250RPM. Simply incredible. Of course it’s also the nerd of the group, with Ferrari’s E-Diff and F1 Traction Control. All this comes together in the form of 3.35 seconds to 60 and a 202mph top speed.

The interior is very modern-looking combination of creature comforts and racing tools. You can flip through the various settings with the manettino switch on the wheel, changing everything from how soft the shocks are to how hard the 7-speed DCT transmission shifts. You can also listen to music while directed by the SAT NAV.

The 458 is supercar technology at it’s highest, from the biggest name in the business. At $230,000 it seems like a bargain, but you’ll have to hire body guards to watch it 24/7 so you can sleep at night, and don’t forget about those maintenance costs.

5. Mercedes SLS AMG  Gullwing

The SLS was one of the most talked about and followed cars of recent years. Spy shots and speculation were blanketed on magazines and rumors about specs were more prevalent than HPV. Now it’s here, and what a car it is. The boys from Jalopnik put it bes; they expected a luxury car with some track ability, but got a track car that was also luxurious.

The outside, of course, is a call back to the original SL. The nose is longer than Mrs. Streisand’s but makes the overall shape downright gorgeous. I think it’s 2nd in the looks department only to the 458.  I was actually surprised it was priced at $200,000.

That money gets you 571hp and 480 tq. sent through a 7 speed trans-axle and shoved into a 3,571lb box. Its 0-60 time of 3.8s puts it in 5th place, but the top speed of 197 is on par with everyone else. It’s not as razor-sharp as the GT2, but is still fast on uneven roads, something the GT2 RS stumbles on. The soundtrack from the side pipes circles perfection. Gorgeous inside and out, and with doors that will elicit stares from any bystander, this car can turn heads and break necks.

6. Lamborghini LP560-4

Fittingly, the final contestant is a raging bull itself; the LP560-4. It won countless magazine showdowns when it hit the roads, combining beauty, brawn and brains into one incredible package. And because it’s a Lamborghini, it comes with a VIP card of mystique that goes back decades. Because it gets a lot of it’s parts from Audi (trades, rather) it also means the stuff all works. So you can go from 0 to 62 in 3.7 seconds all day long, instead of twice. Like the others, top speed is 200mph.

The body has the angular, aggressive face we’ve come to expect from Lamborghini, and it looks incredible. It’s low and short, and the AWD adds confidence to its agility, a deadly combo. It also comes with a 6 speed, so you can’t call it a video game. At $200,000 it may seem like the best choice; Italian looks and appeal, Audi reliability and serious performance. But it won’t be cheap for long. The options list is longer than the health care bill, and if you pick the wrong (or right?) paint color you’re looking at another $25,000. Just ordering the E-Gear tacks on $10,000. Still, an R8 V10 in an Italian body is difficult to walk past.

So there you have it, 6 of the best cars you can buy for about $250,000. Post below which one you would want, and tell us why. And don’t forget about the gun.

-Zack K

This week, The Smoking Tire has a Quartz Blue Mercedes-Benz E550 Coupe in the garage. Normally, we’d drive it and write a review, same as always, but this week, we’re going to try something different. I want to know what YOU want to know about this car. Real time car reviews. So if you have a question, post it up here in the comments section, and I’ll get you an answer over the course of driving the E550 around for a week.

This could totally go either way, but we’re going to find out now.

This is a Daewoo Leganza, but the taillights and badging would have you believe otherwise. This is where this person went horribly, terribly, wrong. Unless, of course, this really is the elusive E32 AMG prototype… You be the judge….

We were having some technical issues, so we’re a little late uploading these pics, but better late than never! This past Sunday’s Supercar Sunday was a big hit, just like the first one before it. Some of the highlights included a trifecta of turbocharged Vipers, an Ultima GTR, a Lamborghini Gallardo Valentino Balboni, a beautiful Mercedes 300SL Gullwing, and a Porsche 911 that would easily qualify in the top 5 for ugliest Porsche’s of all time. Mega-gallery after the jump!

SLS Barrel Roll in a Tunnel

I found this video today, and I will say right now, I believe it is 100% fake. The comments below it on youtube indicate there’s some controversy, so feel free to post your opinion below. I just think there’s a very noticeable difference between this tunnel barrel roll, and the one Jeremy Clarkson did. And if this had really been done, it would have gotten a little more press than a video posting on youtube, because this would be some sort of record. Either way, it looks cool and the car is sick. So put your brain back in “Avatar mode” and enjoy.

On an episode of last season’s Top Gear, the trio went on a search for the biggest car bore: the sort of man who can tell the difference between the K-series and G-series Porsche 911E based on year of production and factory camber adjustments. At the classic car rally they dug up a few worthy of the title, but eventually concluded that it was none other than James May himself. (Watch the video on Top Gear’s site here.)

Well, now they may have found their match.

“It had to be a car from January 1993 to August 1993, because after that they changed the name from 600SL to SL600, and I preferred the script of the old lettering, which wasn’t italic, but underlined.”

Carsten Günther: airplane pilot, Mercedes aficionado, and the last person to be stuck in a zombie apocalypse with. Talking to Mercedes Enthusiast Magazine in January 2006 about the Mercedes SL73 AMG he fastidiously hunted down, and the SL600 (not 600SL, he’ll be quick to tell you) he owned before that.

Article scanned from German Car Zone, via Jalopnik.

- Blake Rong

When I was younger, I would spend my weekends hopping from dealership to dealership test-driving cars. I looked older, and dressed the part, which made my lies to salesmen more believable. As I have gotten older, I have gained increasingly more access to test vehicles, and my dealership experience has faded.

But in this series, I go back to my roots and begin to test-drive cars straight off dealership lots, because, well, I gotta get cars somehow. Besides, when you limit yourself to driving only very good sports cars, your perceptions of reality can get a little warped. That’s why, in this series, I’m going to try to stay away from sports cars.

This week, I drove three small, German SUV’s, the Mercedes GLK350, BMW X3 3.0 Xdrive, and Audi Q5 3.2. I hate this class of vehicle, especially since these vehicles offer less sport, and barely more utility than a station wagon, yet cost thousands more.

The Evidence (base price shown)

Audi Q5: $37,200

Audi A4 Avant: $34,500

Mercedes GLK350: $35,475

Mercedes C300 (sedan quoted, wagon available 2011): $33,600

BMW X3 3.0 XDrive: $39,575

BMW 328i Wagon: $35,400

Granted, the SUV’s offer more base power than their wagon counterparts, but with more mass to move, it’s easy to understand why the power is needed. Despite my hatred of the small SUV, we press on with the comparison:

Third Place: Mercedes GLK350

May as well come out and say it: the GLK is impossibly ugly. The exterior styling, while making an effort to be futuristic and edgy, comes off as neither. It looks like someone raised the roof, literally, on a C-class, then hacked off the trunk. Mercedes says that the GLK’s “design language” is based on the G-class, a 30-year old design that, for some reason, continues to sell to overindulgent morons in Hollywood like Megan Fox and Hilary Duff. I don’t see the styling connection, as it looks much more like the GL-class than the original G. Besides, even if it is any good off road, no one will ever know, because no one who knows they will be off-roading when thinking of buying a new car would ever consider the GLK, especially one fitted with the optional 20″ wheels.

My test car’s window sticker read $40,600, the cheapest as-tested price of this group. It included the Premium Package ($3,150), Sport Package ($900), and iPod integration ($375). The car did not have the COMMAND navigation system, which comes with a backup camera and costs another $3,000.

The interior is about what you’d expect: good fit and finish, great visibility out of the car, which makes sense given the upright seating position and generous amount of glass, and comfortable front seats, if lacking bolstering. I was pleasantly surprised to see real brushed aluminum used in the dash and trim, and then that surprise was offset by my shock at how much hard plastic is used in the interior. The dash, door panels, center console, and rear cargo area are all trimmed out in plastic. I was also disappointed in the lack of a better leather option, if you could even call it that. The salesman assured me that it’s real leather, I didn’t believe him for a second, and I have since learned that there will be a better “Upholstery Package” offered in 2010. It couldn’t come soon enough. The front, power operated driver’s seat has plenty of legroom and headroom for my large frame, and rear seat room was a close second in this test, slightly roomier than the Audi and tigher than the BMW. The front passenger seat had full, manual controls, and though it was just as roomy, a car at this price point really should have full power seats. I don’t understand why Mercedes would install a power steering wheel and not a power front seat, when its clear which would be more useful. The rear seats fold flat, a standard in this class, providing plenty of storage space.

Driving the GLK350 could best be described as “bland,” which is probably what the kind of aspirational appliance-seeker who would buy it wants. Its 268hp 3.5L V6 makes more than enough power to get the GLK from A to B, and not nearly enough power to have fun along the way. Its 258 lb/ft of torque are highest in this test, though, and it does scoot off the line with very little pedal effort. The salesman assured me that by putting the 7-speed SelectShift transmission in “sport” and shifting myself, that it would be more fun. It wasn’t. Upshifts took a full “one, Mississippi” count, and throttle-blips on downshifts would be way too much to ask. The GLK is one of those “throw it in D” kind of cars. The brakes work adequately for around-town commuting, though the pedal suffers from a serious case of the squishies. Expected fuel economy is about 18mpg overall, or 22/16 on the EPA scale. Unsurprisingly, Mercedes recommends 91 octane or higher.

Despite the $7,000 as-tested advantage over the other two vehicles in this test, the GLK was a clear dead last. It felt least attached to its luxury heritage, least equipped, and, in my opinion, the worst styling.

Good: You can tell your friends you drive a Mercedes, even if just barely.

Bad: An attempt at an aggressive, sporty SUV resulted in a tall wagon that’s anything but aggressive or sporty.

The Smoking Tire: A Mercury Mariner is more comfortable, just as functional, and better looking, for $10,000 less.

Second Place: BMW X3 3.0 XDrive

The aging X3 is the oldest design of this segment, first appearing on the market in 2004 with the anemic 2.5L engine and lack of performance to match. The good news is that, since then, BMW has decided to paint the trim body color and add the 3.0L 260hp engine to the X3, an improvement of 76hp from the original model. Unfortunately, not much else has changed. The X3 is still hideous, but now with front and rear fascias which attempt to mimic its big brother the X5. Sadly, the exterior proportions are still very awkward: it’s squat, yet upright, it looks more like a misshapen 3-series than a member of the X family.

Things get better inside, as the Bimmer’s leather is best-of-the group. The doors are sculpted and stitched with high quality, soft leather, and the door handles are works of metallic art. In typical BMW fashion, the steering wheel is thick and has just the right amount of padding, and is also fully adjustable, albeit manually. The dash, like the current-generation 3 and 5 series, doesn’t angle towards the driver, as it does in the Audi, it bulges in the center and gets narrower towards either door, a somewhat awkward proportion. Climate controls are standard BMW fare, except I still don’t understand why there’s a hot/cold selector knob in between the two center vents. Every BMW I have driven since I turned 16 has had this feature, and I don’t know any more about it now than I did then. If the climate system is indeed fully automatic, as it appears to be, then why the second control knob? The salesman, nice as he was, couldn’t explain its presence either, and once my questions about it fully confused him, I stopped asking. Immediately noticeable on my $48,000 test vehicle was the strange lack of iDrive. Instead, the X3 has a pop-up screen with the average-at-best Navigation system most commonly used in the E46 3-series and E39 5-series. Don’t get me wrong; it worked great, in 2002. Next year, the X3 is due in for a redesign, no doubt including iDrive. The X3 does get points, however, for the roomiest and best upholstered rear seat.

The X3’s strong suit is the slickr’n greased owl shit 3-liter straight six. Though it’s the least powerful of the three, it’s only just, and it pulls the car without a single vibration felt through the chassis or steering wheel. This is an engine that is so refined at this point, I doubt it could get any better, except, maybe, by strapping on a couple turbos. Oh, wait, they already did that. In fact, why isn’t that engine offered? Nevertheless, the X3 is the lightest of the bunch, so it’s slight power deficiency isn’t too detrimental. BMW hasn’t gotten around to updating the X3 with their “Flight Simulator” shifter offered in the 5-series and X5/6 yet, but at least the shift lever has the right orientation for performance driving, with upshifts requiring a pull, and downshifts a push. The brakes are effective, yet almost too immediate with their response, and they require a gentle foot, unless you don’t mind your passengers’ beverages all over the windshield. Steering feel has always been BMW’s strong suit, and that’s one area where the X3 doesn’t disappoint. The weighted feel and perfect amount of road/driver communication really do remind you that you’re driving a BMW. And EPA figures of 16/23 put the X3 ahead of the Benz and just behind the Q5. Of course, that’s premium fuel.

The biggest problem the BMW faces is its price. The base price of $39,995 is over $2,700 more than the Audi, and over $5,000 more than the Benz, and both of those cars come with way more standard features. Fully optioned out, the Bimmer will cross the big five-oh. My test car stickered at $48,650, the highest in this test. Considering the BMW is an aging design with the least amount of tech goodies, value is out the window. Not surprisingly, it seems that even in the world of small SUV’s, the BMW-tax applies.

Good: Sportiest of the bunch, most rear seat room

Bad: The most desirable options make the X3 very expensive quickly.

The Smoking Tire: Just as ugly as ever, but hey, it steers like a BMW.

First Place: Audi Q5 3.2 Quattro

Like the GLK, the Audi Q5 is new for this year. Following in the footsteps of the ugly-but-successful Q7 SUV, the Q5 downsizes a bit, in keeping with the societal themes of the last couple of years. I was surprised that the Q5 actually looks better than the Q7; Ingolstadt’s finest smoothed and lowered the bulbous waistline of the Q7 into a flowing, more compact design with the Q5. The Q5 also loses the Q7’s monster air dam, a vast improvement. Where the X3 fails to “shrink” the X5, the Q5 succeeds in shrinking the Q7. Audi’s trademark big-mouth bass grille and LED running lights seem a bit much for the Q5; I’d preferred if Audi had reserved the LED’s for only its high-performance models.

By this point, everyone already knows Audi puts together stellar interiors, so I won’t beat a dead horse. The interior design language first seen on the A6 has tricled to the A/S5, the A/S4, and now the Q5, and in each of these models, it works flawlessly. The center console features the largest and brightest LCD screen of the three, and though it takes a few days to get used to Audi’s MMI system, navigating between menus using the large buttons is very easy. But, why does the scroll wheel go the wrong way? To scroll down, you turn counter-clockwise, which is the exact opposite of every scrolling wheel, ever. The steering wheel, while not as thick as the BMW’s, has multifunction controls as standard, and is wrapped in very soft leather. Front seats are full power standard, and the rear seat can remotely fold down using a button in the cargo area. They must be lifted back up manually with a lever on either side of the rear bench, a very simple process. Most disappointing about the Q5 is the lack of rear seat legroom; anyone with over a 32 inch inseam would get out of the car with bruised knees. Headroom is exceptional in both the front and back seats. Strangely, Edmunds.com’s car comparing website shows the Q5 with more rear legroom than both the GLK and X3, contrary to my experience.

The Q5’s 3.2 Liter, direct injection V6 makes 270hp, the most of the three, but by only 2hp over the GLK. There is only a 10 horsepower spread from least to most in this test, and the weight spread is only 150lbs, so acceleration, braking, and handling numbers are all going to be very similar. More importantly, the Q5’s transmission is noticeably quicker than both the X3 and GLK, especially in manual mode. On the other hand, the transmission in question actually hiccupped, hard, after flooring it and jumping off the gas quickly in “Sport Auto” mode. At least all three come with identical 4year/50k mile warranties. And if you keep your foot out of it, the Q5 will manage 18/23 MPG with the longest range of the group, 455 miles.

The good news is that the Q5 has a relatively low base price of $37,500. The bad news is that the premium package, which includes all the goodies you’d expect from a luxury car, is $4,000, meaning the odds of actually getting one for less than $40,000 are just about zero. Want navigation and a backup camera? That’ll be another $3,000 please. My test car stickered at $47,915, which is just about where I say the Q5, like the X3, isn’t worth the money. I’d say skip the navigation and get a TomTom. You still get the LCD screen and MMI interface, even without it. And if you really think you need a backup camera, save your money and get some driving lessons.

The best thing I can say about the Q5 though, is that it really is very similar to the A4 Avant both in interior feel and driving dynamics. And that’s the biggest compliment offered in this test.

Good: All the stuff you like about other Audis applies here

Bad: No 2.0T or TDI engine available, options get expensive quickly.

The Smoking Tire: Best of the three, but still a car you’d buy for your mom.

I wouldn’t buy any of these cars. Not because there is anything inherently wrong with them, or because they don’t perform as advertised, but because I see them all as pointless vehicles. I would never buy an SUV that doesn’t do anything that a station wagon wouldn’t. I spent a week with an A4 Avant, during which time it snowed nearly a foot, and I had to help a friend move a bunch of boxes. I even drove the Avant on a snow-covered Monticello Motor Club’s road course at very high speed, drifting the whole way. And none of it was even remotely a problem for the wagon. It looked better, went faster, cost less, and got better fuel economy than the Q5 as well. The A4 is just an example, BMW and Mercedes also make equally capable, and proportionately cheaper station wagons. And lets be honest with ourselves here: no one, and I mean less than 1% of owners, will ever drive any of these pseudo-SUV’s off road. Both the BMW and Audi come with hill-descent control standard, and if that button ever gets pressed it’s because the driveway is a bit icy, not because they need to get down safely from Everest Base Camp.

There was always a possibility that one of the three cars in this weeks Dealership Experience  would change my mind about small SUV’s, even though ultimately that wasn’t the case. These three cars all function in a very similar way and offer similar equipment at a similar price. It really makes me feel like car companies today are simply imagining holes in the market that really don’t need to be there. I know there’s nothing in between the E-class wagon and the ML or R class SUV’s, but do we really need a tiny little box running around pretending to be an SUV?  Not really. Does raising the roof and putting big tires on a 3-series make it do anything the 328xi Wagon won’t do? Not really. Are Audi customers really finding their Avants too mommy-like that they need a small SUV? Grow up, wagons drive exactly like sedans, they just hold more stuff.

Alternatively, I’d like to encourage everyone to try everything out for themselves, maybe you’ll see something I missed. If you’re looking at a small SUV, try a wagon, and if you’re looking at a wagon, try a small SUV. The sales don’t lie.