Slk230 Kompressor Salvage Rebuildable Repairable Damaged Project Wrecked Fixer on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Mercedes-Benz GLA250 4Matic Quick Spin [w/video]

Certain expectations come with the name "Mercedes-Benz." We picture cars with luxuriously appointed interiors, fashionable exteriors, Autobahn-worthy performance, and a ride that delivers an optimal balance between agility and outright comfort. Expectations, though, are no friend to the GLA250. This is a car that is deeply confused as to its purpose in life – can it be a proper Mercedes-Benz while still being a reasonably priced, subcompact crossover? After a week behind the wheel, we believe the two are mutually exclusive. Driving Notes The exterior styling is similar to the not-for-America A-Class hatchback, with the only major differences found on the rear end. That means that even with its flashy 19-inch AMG wheels and sport body styling – more aggressive front and rear fascias – the GLA is a stylish piece. We might even call it cute. Considering our 4Matic model's reasonable $34,225 starting price, the interior treatment is both attractive and uses mostly quality finishes. The matte Satin Light Brown Poplar wood ($325) covers a large portion of the dash, while the real metal found on the air conditioning vents is elegant and handsome. There is a lot of plastic in the cabin: It's soft on the dash, and switches to a piano-black finish in spots, but the center console and door finishers don't feel like they came from the Mercedes parts bin. In general, the GLA's cabin feels roughly equal to that of the Audi Q3 and BMW X1 – nice, but a step lower than what we've come to expect from Mercedes. The two-piece, leather-lined seats look great, but even with standard 14-way adjustability, they lack support. The bottom cushion is very flat, and doesn't support the legs. For this author, that's a recipe for near-constant back pain. That said, the chairs do look good, especially in the brown of this test car. The GLA250, like a few other models in the Mercedes range, uses a 2.0-liter, turbocharged four-cylinder, delivering a weak 208 horsepower. It makes up for that shortcoming with 258 pound-feet of torque from 1,250 rpm to 4,000 rpm. On paper, this sounds good, but in the real world, the 2.0T's power is tough to access. That's due more to the shortcomings of the seven-speed dual-clutch automatic than the engine itself. With three modes – Eco, Sport, and Manual – we thought we'd find at least one that could serve up precise downshifts.

Top horsepower-per-dollar cars in 2017

Bang for the buck. That quasi-scientific statistic is bandied about by motor heads everywhere from classrooms to barrooms, though the truth of the matter is that it's exceedingly complex to measure. A fair performance-per-dollar index would include something like cross-referencing MSRP (Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price) with point-to-point times on a track or driving route, which is obviously hard to do comprehensively. But, for the sheer joy of talking about cars and playing with a big spreadsheet, there's always the horsepower-per-dollar index, which is more straightforward, albeit hilariously flawed. There are vagaries even with this simple formula, of course: MSRP for vehicles can change at a moment's notice, to say nothing of the bottom-line shifting that happens with local deals or showroom negotiation. For this list we're running with the straight MSRP wherever possible, and as recently reported as we can get it. All the vehicles on this list are 2017 models, and all trims are reported where the lowest price and differing power levels intersect. Some choices were made for personal preference and some for sanity, avoiding things like all 48 trim levels of the Ford Transit, all with the same horsepower). If this list were a simple top ten, or even a top fifty, you'd be bored to tears with all the red, white and blue that is represented. Following perfectly with conventional wisdom, American cars really do lead the world where hp/$ is concerned. So, for the sake of variety (and the sheer joy of seeing a minivan 'win' one round of this thing) I've sorted out some top five and bottom five lists for broad power categories. Let's dive in. Less Than 100 Horsepower Okay, okay, this is hardly a category we'll grant you. But we've often tried to click off all the sub-100-hp cars on sale in the US, and making this list gave us an excuse. It also illustrates that none of these smallish vehicles bring cheap horsepower to the table - for that you'll need a motorcycle. The segment-leading Chevy Spark (above) asks just over $139 for each hp, and that Smart Fortwo Electric Drive has hp on sale for about the same price as its very distant family cousin, the Mercedes-Benz SL65 AMG (insert your favorite Smart joke here... we know you want to).

McLaren, Red Bull and Ferrari call for unfreezing F1 engines

Formula One is a hugely expensive sport. Not only do you have enormous salaries and logistical expenses, as you would in any other sport, but each team also spends huge sums developing their own chassis from the ground up – and so too do the participating automakers in developing the engines. One of the ways the series organizers mitigate those costs is by freezing development. So once the new crop of V6 turbo hybrid powertrains were developed, that was it. But now three of the of the sport's leading teams are calling on the FIA to unfreeze engine development. Their reason? Unfair advantage. There's little question that Mercedes did the best job of developing its "power unit" to meet the new regulations that took effect at the beginning of this past season. That's how the Mercedes team won all but three of the grands prix this season and finished with at least one car on the podium at every single race. It's also a big part of how the teams that bought their engines from Mercedes this season managed to consistently outperform the other non-works-supported teams. That clear advantage is why Red Bull, Ferrari and now McLaren are calling for engine development to be unfrozen. Their argument is that, under the current locked-down status quo, their engine suppliers (Renault, Ferrari and Honda, respectively) cannot possibly catch up. So unless the FIA and Formula One Management want the next few seasons to be the kind of absolute blow-outs that this past season was, these leading teams argue, the powers that be are going to have to make some changes. For its part, Mercedes naturally counters that unfreezing engine development would send costs spiraling out of control. But then of course it stands to lose the most by re-opening engine development. If those three teams, however, closely intertwined as they are with the three other engine suppliers participating in next year's championship, manage to solicit enough support from the other customer teams and bring the matter to a vote, Mercedes may very well find itself out-numbered. News Source: ESPNImage Credit: Patrick Baz/AFP/Getty Motorsports Ferrari McLaren Mercedes-Benz F1 engine