1980 Mercedes Benz 450 Sl on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Audi RS6 Avant and Mercedes-AMG E63 S drag race for Top Gear

Sometimes the kids are late for school, and you need a wagon to get them there in a hurry. In its latest drag race, Top Gear finds out which is the quicker high-performance family hauler: the Audi RS6 Avant or the Mercedes-AMG E63 S. The specs suggest this race should be quite close at the finish line. The RS6 has a 4.0-liter twin-turbo V8 with 552 horsepower, but the E63 S is a little more powerful with 577 hp from a 5.5-liter twin-turbo V8. However, the Audi has a traction advantage from the all-wheel drive system, whereas the Mercedes only spins its rear wheels. Pick your favorite, and then watch the video to see if the similar numbers translate to a photo finish in the real world. Related Video:

2015 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG Coupe

Conventional wisdom would dictate that adding more power and several key performance enhancements to an already very good car, like the 2015 Mercedes-Benz S550 Coupe, will end up equaling an even better car. In the case of the 2015 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG Coupe, conventional wisdom sort of applies, but perhaps not as much as we'd have initially guessed. We'll get into the nitty gritty details in just a moment, but here's the most immediate takeaway we had in our minds as we walked away from this super coupe: The S63 AMG is excellent, but so is the slightly more mundane S550 Coupe on which it is based, and which is priced some $41,000 less expensive than its more powerful sibling. Chew on those figures while we examine what differentiates the two S-Class Coupes. Drive Notes As expected, the single greatest highlight of the 2015 S63 Coupe is its engine. As a powerplant, it's a gem. As a hand-built engineering exercise, its 577 horsepower and 664 pound-feet of torque are just as impressive in real life as they sound when recited from stat sheets. Not that the old CL63 AMG was lacking in power, but the new S63 AMG Coupe boasts 41 more horses and 74 more lb-ft than the outgoing engine. The run to 60 miles per hour takes a scant 3.9 seconds, according to M-B, aided in no small part by the car's 4Matic all-wheel-drive system and other assorted electronic brains deciding where, exactly, all those ponies should be sent. The rear-biased system is tuned to send two-thirds of the engine's power to the rear wheels in a bid to make the car feel more like what performance-minded drivers expect. Top speed is electronically limited to 186 miles per hour, which is plenty fast enough, even in the days of 200-plus-mph sedans from M-B's former corporate cousin Dodge. We didn't get anywhere near the car's maximum velocity, but our brief trips into triple-digit territory were quiet, comfortable and completely free of drama. The seven-speed automatic gearbox responds quickly to requests of your right foot, but the steering wheel-mounted paddles don't change gears as quickly as we'd like when in Manual mode. Controlled Efficiency (which we'd call Comfort) maximizes efficiency, keeping the transmission in higher gears and shifting earlier than when in Sport mode, and we didn't find much fault with the computer's shifting algorithms in either setting.

Automakers want to stop the EPA's fuel economy rules change, and why that's a shortsighted move

With a Trump Administration looming, the EPA moved quickly after the election to propose finalizing future fuel economy rules last week. The auto industry doesn't like that (surprise), and has started making moves to stop the EPA. Ford CEO Mark Fields said he wanted to lobby Trump to lower the standards, and now the Auto Alliance, a manufacturer group, is saying it will join the fight against cleaner cars. The Alliance represents 12 automakers: BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. Gloria Bergquist, a spokesperson for the Alliance, told Automotive News that the "EPA's sudden and controversial move to propose auto regulations eight months early - even after Congress warned agencies about taking such steps while political appointees were packing their bags - calls out for congressional action to pause this rulemaking until a thoughtful policy review can occur." The EPA was going to consider public comments through April 2017, but then said it would move the deadline to the end of December. That means that it can finalize the rules before President Obama leaves office. The director of public affairs for the Consumer Federation of America, Jack Gillis, said on a conference call with reporters last week when the EPA originally announced its decision that it is unlikely that President Trump will be able to roll back these changes. Gillis also said on the same call that any attempt by the automakers to prevent these changes would be history repeating itself. "These are the same companies that fought airbags, and now promoting the fact that every car has multiple airbags," he said. "These are the same companies that fought the crash-test program, and now are promoting the crash-test ratings published by the government. So, it's clear that they're misperceiving the needs of the American consumer." There are more reasons the Allliance's pushback is flawed. Carol Lee Rawn, the transportation program director for Ceres, said on that call that the automotive industry is a global one, and many automakers are moving to global platforms to help them meet strict fuel economy rules around the world.