This week's Review: 2011 Mustang V6

What’s crazier than the next Mel Gibson phone message released? How about a Mustang V-6 with 305bhp? What’s more surprising than Dale Earnhardt Jr. winning a Sprint Cup race? How about the all-new 2010 Mustang V-6 having a faster ¼ mile time (13.5 seconds) than a 1968 Boss Mustang (14.8 seconds).
Seriously, let that bounce around in the brain pan for a minute. But, while you’re thinking remember the V-6 may well be the old V-8.

Read more...
Ortigo Performance

2011 Mustang V6

Posted on August 23, 2010 – 8:10 am by Lonnie Johnson

2011 Mustang V6

2011 Mustang V6


Listen to Review
What’s crazier than the next Mel Gibson phone message released? How about a Mustang V-6 with 305bhp? What’s more surprising than Dale Earnhardt Jr. winning a Sprint Cup race? How about the all-new 2010 Mustang V-6 having a faster ¼ mile time (13.5 seconds) than a 1968 Boss Mustang (14.8 seconds).

Seriously, let that bounce around in the brain pan for a minute. But, while you’re thinking remember the V-6 may well be the old V-8.

Before the new V-6 mustang was delivered, I had the privilege of driving Ford’s big beast, the Mustang GT500 Cobra. Let’s just say it’s a nasty car that you will hear more about, just not in this review. The cool thing about getting the V-6 after the Cobra was the contrast offered by the cars. Compared to the Cobra the V-6 is much easier to drive and almost as much fun. You have to understand that you could never see the top-end of the Cobra on public roadways. I was lucky enough a few years ago to go to Dearborne and meet Carol Shelby to test drive, at the time, the all-new Mustang GT500 on an auto cross course. That car had about 90 less horsepower than the current GT500 model. It was an absolute blast on the course. Carroll just advised me to “stay in it”. But, that was on a closed course. On the “street” you could never push the car that far. That’s what makes the 2010 Mustang V-6 so fun to drive. With 305HP you can have more fun than Lindsey Lohan at an Adderall convention.

When I was growing up my father, who’s not a car guy always encouraged me to get the V-6 and make it look fast. Well, Ford took it one step further. Not only does the Mustang V-6 look fast, it is fast. There is almost no way to tell the difference between a V-6 and the GT at this time. If the decals were removed and both cars had a wheel and tire package, I would argue it would be damn near impossible to tell the difference. Just last week someone brought a V-6 up to the station that had been “slicked”, that means all of the tags had been removed. Only paint remained. The car had a different hood and wheels and tires. It may be one of the best looking mustangs I’ve ever seen.

The funny thing to me though is before too long Ford is going to shove the 3.5 liter eco-boost motor in one. Then it’s over. There will be tuners getting 500-plus horsepower out of the new generation of six-cylinder power makers.
The gear box in the standard Mustang is silky smooth. Think Steve-O’s brain. Each gear falls into place effortlessly. The one gripe I have with the new mustang is no telescoping steering wheel. This is one addition to any creature comfort list that should be on all cars, at this time. I just couldn’t get my arms to feel comfortable if my legs did.

But, far and away the second most impressive thing about the Mustang V-6 is the mileage. This car sucks up fuel at a slower pace than two turtles in line at Wal-Mart. How does 30MPG sound with 305HP? Unreal, right?
Look, for price, starting at just over $22,000.00, the new mustang can’t be beat. As a matter of fact it’s very hard to beat period.

2010 Dodge Dakota

Posted on July 23, 2010 – 11:17 am by Lonnie Johnson
2010 Dodge Dakota

2010 Dodge Dakota

Listen to Review
Ten years. Ten years I’ve owned what I consider the best truck ever built. The Dodge Dakota Quad Cab. The Quad cab Dakota was released in 2000 as the only quad-cab truck with a new, more powerful V-8. Dodge was advertising everywhere. I lived in Dallas at the time and I needed a truck that I could move clients in and out of easily and still have the power to tow more than 6,800 pounds. I know, today, those towing numbers seem low, but ten years ago they were the unbelievable.

The years passed. Dents came and were mended. Tires were bought, a radiator was replaced , and oil (synthetic of course) was changed. As a matter of fact, all the fluids were changed before their scheduled intervals. The truck cost me nothing in ten years but a radiator, maintenance, and wear items; brakes, tires, etc. Not too shabby. As a matter of fact, I think most of you reading this would be impressed, if not by my excessive maintenance, then, by the shear durability of the Dodge truck brand.

Sure, there were the red-neck jokes like; what’s the matter, couldn’t afford the whole truck? After all, the Dakota is not a full-size truck. It’s a truck you can actually park in congested parking lots. It’s a truck a five-foot-ten mountain of a man can get in and out of perfectly. It’s a truck that begs to you to use the “Bubba Rule”. Ask David Irwin about the “Bubba Rules. He’ll tell you it applies to enterprising folks who are sure tow limits are estimated not actual…Tyler’s full of them.
The point is, Dodge built an amazing truck in 2000. Maybe that’s why so little has changed structurally with the Dakota in the past ten years. Yeah, the skin is different. There are more gadgets to keep your attention. The satellite radio, nav-system, and heated seats make life more enjoyable. But, the heart of the Dakota has stayed the same. Check the V-8 option and you’ll receive a 4.7 liter motor that gets 14 mpg city and 19 mpg highway. The same as it was in 2000. Sure, there’s more power and torque, but little else has changed. Why mess with perfection?

2000 Dodge Dakota

2000 Dodge Dakota

When the new 2010 Dakota arrived, it was wearing the same tires as my truck currently is shod with. BFG’s, raised white letters, letter side facing out. It’s a great look on this body style. Maybe Dodge should call me for future styling ques.
The Dakota drives great. Not too stiff. With a revised 4.7 liter, the new Dakota makes 302HP and 342LBFT of torque, almost 60Hp more than mine. Also, the new Dakota can tow up to 7,200 pounds and has a payload of almost three quarters of a ton. Think about that. The beauty of the Dakota to me has always been the power of a full-size truck with the ease of driving like a smaller truck.

So, here is my suggestion. If you want an uber-reliable truck and don’t have “size envy” then, you should consider the Dodge Dakota. Take it from someone who has ten trouble free years of service with an older model. Treat your Dakota right and maybe you can keep yours for ten years.

2010 Volkswagen Golf TDI

Posted on July 6, 2010 – 1:29 pm by Lonnie Johnson

2010 Volkswagen Golf TDI

2010 Volkswagon Golf TDI

Listen to Review

Ah, the Jetta and the Rabbit. Both cars played a large part in my youth. My best friend in high school…still today, it’s not easy finding additional people to like me. If you know me you understand. My friend Paul had a 1984 Jetta. It was black and at the time I considered it very quick. I had other friends who drove the Rabbit’s or “Golf’s”. They were great jumpers. We could get one to two feet of air on just about any dip on the streets of north Dallas. A street named Merrill was the best. It was the street I tested the Ford Raptor on. The Raptor was more impressive than the Golf…but, only slightly.

But, that was when I was young and immature. Now I’m older. And more…ok, just older. Now that I’m in my forties I can appreciate more about the Golf. It gives me a glimpse of what is possible if you suspend the reality that larger is better. There is a time coming soon, sooner than you think when we (Americans) will be forced to drive fuel efficient cars and trucks. Let’s hope that when that time comes there are a lot of offerings similar to the Golf TDI.

First I’ll cover the fun part, driving the Golf. There is substantial turbo lag until you reach over 1500 RPM’s but, after that the Golf feels peppy at the least and sometimes it actually feels strong. You can give the credit to the 2.0 liter diesel. This particular power-plant has been in the Jetta for a while. It puts out only 140HP but manages 236lbft of torque. 236lbft of torque! In a thirty-two hundred pound car that’s enough torque to make it extremely fun to drive. Assisting the mini torque monster in driving enjoyment is the handling. I forgot how much fun small cars are to drive. Especially, small cars from Germany. I had more fun driving the Golf this week than I had reading about Tiger’s divorce settlement. Man, what must Elin know? $750,000,000.00!!!!

The Golf handles like a go-cart. I know this example gets used more than Lebron James’ cell phone but, it’s true. I can’t compare it to anything else. It’s that exhilarating. The steering is accurate, the gauges are user friendly, and the seats are comfortable. About the only gripe I have is something I’m embarrassed to admit. But, for your enjoyment I will. I stalled this car at least once a day while I had it. The Golf TDI makes like zero torque until you pass 1200RPM’s and for this reason I believe it’s very easy to stall. I mean it couldn’t be the driver, right? The trouble with stalling the Golf is this, you need to remove the key completely before the car will re-fire. This can be more nerve racking than a Monday morning sales meeting with no sales by your name. It also seems a little dangerous to me.

Here’s the big news however; the fuel mileage! I averaged 45MPG. There were some stretches where I could hyper-mile the Golf to around 60MPG. Now I understand that you can come close to these numbers with hybrids, the Fusion hybrid for instance. The truth is the Fusion can’t touch the Golf in the ”fun to drive” category. Compared to the Golf the Fusion hybrid feels like a nineteen sixty-two caddy. With all due respect to the Fusion, I own one, great car, just not a ton of fun to drive. The Golf is small and, if you don’t mind the small size ( big by European standards) the Golf is a very good choice.

2010 GMC Terrain

Posted on June 8, 2010 – 3:29 pm by Lonnie Johnson

2010 GMC Terrain

2010 GMC Terrain

Listen to Review
Week after week, car after car, many things change. Muscle cars, trucks, sport car’s, and SUV’s come and go without a pause to reflect how much the domestic car industry has improved its products. Now like never before the big three are churning out better offerings than ever. Yeah, I know there seems to be more re-calls than ever too. But, even with the recalls the quality just gets better and better. Take this week’s review subject, the GMC Terrain. The Terrain has already had to deal with some small recalls, mostly for faulty defrosters. Now, I know you’re thinking Lonnie, how can you say products are better than ever if we are constantly bombarded by recalls. Easy, I drive these cars and can attest that quality throughout is better than it has been since I began reviewing cars three or four years ago.

The GMC Terrain gives you everything you need in a SUV/Crossover. The power-plant is impressive. That’s really hard to say about a four-banger but, it’s true. The 2.4 liter four boast 182HP and 172 pounds of torque. You can opt out of the four and order the six-cylinder if you need an additional 80HP and fifty pounds of torque but, you probably don’t. The four has more than enough chug to get the 3800 pound SUV up to speed quickly enough. It does so as quietly as BP handles the press for the Gulf fiasco. All the while, delivering 22 MPG city and 32 MPG highway. That’s the four banger. The six-cylinder is good for 17 city and 25 highway. Not too bad.

It’s the interior that won me over however. It’s sharp, comfortable and sensibly laid out. One gripe however is the audio control position. You have to stretch a bit too much to reach the audio controls. This can be as distracting as Sofia Vegara crossing the street. I think all manufacturers should place the secondary audio controls on the steering wheel. Distractions today are more frequent than ever. Why have one more?

The seats are comfortable and move fore and aft mechanically and electrically move the seat back and lumbar support. GMC must have done this to save a little weight. Sounds good to me. I’ll be happy to reach between my legs to move the seat up to save twenty pounds. Depending on the trim line you choose SLE-1, or, SLE-2 you’ll have more than enough amenities to choose from. The SLE-2 adds Bluetooth, 18 inch wheels, roof rails and a pioneer sound system.

Above all else the GMC Terrain was enjoyable to drive. Notice I didn’t say fun. It’s not. It’s easy. Sometimes easy is preferred to fun, like taking kids all over creation for summer activities. The Terrain seats five comfortably and has adequate room for gear in the rear. This space could be a little larger but, if it was, I guess you have more weight , worse mileage etc.

As I keep telling you, gas is going to get expensive again. Sooner than later. After all, we can’t ruin all of our coastal beauty to move from place to place. If higher gas prices are indeed in our future why not continue the trend of smaller, four cylinder powered SUV’s?

Congratulations GMC on building a product that blends into our hectic lives instead of complicating things with more frequent fuel stops and wasted space. Speaking of wasted space, that brings this week’s review to its conclusion. I Wouldn’t want to waste space on any more bad Gulf references. Get with it BP!

2010 Camaro SS

Posted on May 17, 2010 – 11:00 am by Lonnie Johnson

2010 Camaro SS

2010 Camaro SS

Listen to Review

America’s automotive waistline continues to expand. Turn on the boob-tube and you’ll likely see a story about the weight American’s gain each year. It’s not just the humans.

In 1974 a new Camaro weighed in around 35-3600lbs. Today that number has surpassed four thousand pounds. Think about it. With all of the new weight saving technology that is a travesty. Carbon fiber, aluminum, and plastics make it possible to build a much lighter car than decades ago. So, why the added weight? It’s for your comfort and ease of operation. Wiring weighs a ton. Bigger wheels and tires add to the issue. Sound deafening material and safety equipment round out the weighty problems.

Although I do love the styling of the new Camaro SS, I would feel less than truthful if I relayed anything to G.M. other than asking them to please call Jenny Craig asap. When I test drove the Camaro RS with the six cylinder (305HP) and six speed trans, I found it more fun to drive around town. Don’t misunderstand. I love power. I also like to feel sporty sometimes and I don’t feel terribly sporty in the Camaro SS. Sure, you can explode off the line and surge toward the finish line in the quarter mile faster than BP fills the Gulf with oil. But there really should be more to it. I don’t want to feel the same as the old man in the Cadillac CTS.

The weight is really one of only two gripes I have. The other is the interior. Scheduled to be updated soon, the fit and finish is rough. The knobs are oversized and confusing and the console needs to be re-visited. Also, please put the unlock buttons back on the door where they belong.

All of that aside it’s still a Camaro. The car everyone else tries to beat. And for now it’s finally out selling its closest competition, the Mustang. I love the lines around the car. The factory two inch cowl hood, big wide stance, and a truly classic front-end give this new Camaro undeniable muscle appeal.

There are ponies galore and with the ever greater involvement by GM performance you can upgrade the performance and customize your SS to look like no one else’s, unless you chose the BumbleBee.
The other good news out of GM is that a newer version is expected to be shorter and smaller. Now we’re talking. With the new CAFÉ standards coming down the mountain there may be no other way to meet these goals with the current rubenesque offering.