2009 Audi R8 Coupe 4.2l 420hp V8 R-tronic Trans,phantom Black/black Int,only 6k! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

These are your top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2012

Despite 2012 being the best year of auto sales this country has seen since 2007, not every vehicle got an equally large share of the sales pie. Some barely got a sliver, as evidenced by this year's list of the top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2012. We've dug through sales data from every automaker to come up with this year's list and, like last year, we've set some parameters to ensure it includes legitimately bad-selling vehicles. The first parameter is a starting MSRP under $100,000, which automatically excludes what's parked in most one-percenters' garages. We're also excluding vehicles cancelled in 2012, even if they garnered sales through the end of the year while dealerships sold off remaining inventory. This includes models like the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Mercedes-Benz R-Class and last year's worst-seller, the Acura RL. Next, vehicles are considered as they are reported by the automaker, which means that, while sales of the Murano CrossCabriolet were probably low enough to make the list, because Nissan reports only one number for all Murano sales, it was excluded. Cadillac, however, reports sales of the Escalade EXT separately from the Escalade, hence its repeat appearance. Finally, there was the question of whether or not eligibility should be given to Suzuki vehicles, as the brand announced in November that it would end sales in the US as soon as its current inventory ran out. We decided Suzuki vehicles should be included as the brand was offering 2013 models at the time of the announcement, and as far as we can tell, inventory levels remained high enough to satisfy demand through the end of the year. Without further ado, below are the top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2012. Top 10 Worst-Selling Vehicles of 2012 10. Volvo C30 MSRP: $25,500 Units Sold: 2,827 Last Year: – 9. BMW Z4 MSRP: $47,350 Units Sold: 2,751 Last Year: – 8. Audi TT MSRP: $39,545 Units Sold: 2,226 Last Year: – 7. Subaru Tribeca MSRP: $32,595 Units Sold: 2,075 Last Year: 10 6. Suzuki Equator MSRP: $19,449 Units Sold: 1,966 Last Year: 7 5. Cadillac Escalade EXT MSRP: $63,060 Units Sold: 1,934 Last Year: 6 4. Nissan GT-R MSRP: $96,820 Units Sold: 1,188 Last Year: – 3. Acura ZDX MSRP: $50,920 Units Sold: 775 Last Year: 4 2. Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback MSRP: $18,495 Units Sold: 702 Last Year: 3 1. Mitsubishi i-MiEV MSRP: $29,125 Units Sold: 588 Last Year: – Want a little more "worst-selling" data? Check out our list of the top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2011.

For Audi, Quattro name means something for hydrogen cars, too

Forget Dueling Banjos. Audi is proposing "Dueling Motors" for its Audi A7 Sportback H-Tron Quattro concept vehicle. All in the name of appropriate pickup, of course. The German automaker, which showed off the concept sedan at the Los Angeles Auto Show last month, is pairing a plug-in electric motor with a hydrogen fuel cell powertrain. Each motor powers two wheels, maintaining the Quattro's all-wheel-drive pedigree. The car's 8.8-kWh lithium-ion battery can drive the car as far as 31 miles on battery-power alone. After that, the water-vapor-spewing fuel-cell engine kicks in. Audi executive Ulrich Hackenberg told Automotive News Europe that the unusual set-up is necessary because the hydrogen fuel cell powertrain alone would only power two wheels while providing an insufficient 136 horsepower. Not exactly sport-sedan material, especially for a car that weighs about 4,300 pounds, even if it is a zero-emission ride. Combined, the two engines give the sedan 231 horsepower as well as a combined single-charge/full-tank range of almost 350 miles. What it all means is that the A7 can go from 0 to 60 miles per hour in less than eight seconds and has a top speed of about 112 miles per hour, and can still dash through the snow.

2021 BMW M3 and M4 vs all the high-powered sport sedans and coupes

Should you have a found a way to get past that schnoz, you've probably digested some of the basic specs for the all-new 2021 BMW M3 sedan and M4 coupe specs. They're plenty impressive. There's also, basically, two sets of them thanks to the regular and Competition versions that differ in engine output and transmission type.  But how do they compare to other ultra sport sedans and coupes? Well, we were wondering that too, so we fired up the Autoblog Comparison Spreadsheet Generator 5000 (aka me chained to my computer in a dark basement).  Sadly, there are surprisingly few competitors for the 2021 BMW M3. Rival sedans include the Mercedes-AMG C 63 and the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio, along with the Audi RS 5 Sportback sedan/coupe/hatchback thing. There's no more Lexus IS F, the Cadillac CT4 Blackwing has yet to arrive and Jaguar doesn't offer a spicy XE R.  Happily, there are more coupe rivals for the 2021 BMW M4, including the two-door versions of the AMG and Audi as well as the Lexus RC F. I also included the Ford Shelby GT350 and Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE. On paper, they align incredibly well. On the street and on a track, I can personally attest that these Americans are fully capable of keeping up and/or bettering the fancy-pants luxury brands (and let's not forget there are even more powerful, hardcore versions available). If they don't align in terms of price or prestige, whatever. OK, let's get to the spreadsheet. Let's start with the coupes and note that I didn't bother listing the dimensions for the M4 Competition and C 63 S as they are identical to their "lesser" siblings.  I won't bother burning words explaining what you can see on the chart. Instead, I'll point out a few things that stood out to me. First, BMW M comes awfully close to matching the output of AMG's twin-turbo V8 despite having two fewer cylinders. Similarly, Audi manages to better the 0-60 time of the M4 Competition and tie the C 63 S despite being WAY down on power. It's not like it weighs less. Magic? Second, and speaking of 0-60 times, remember the importance that transmission and drivetrain make with them. It's not just horsepower and torque. An automatic will be quicker and easier to launch than a manual, while all-wheel drive provides more instantaneous and beneficial grip.