Very Rare 1997 Bmw Z3 Roadster Garage Find Super Low Miles 23800 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Cadillac CT5 vs. BMW 3 Series | How they compare on paper

Cadillac just introduced the CT5 sedan at the 2019 New York Auto Show, and it's set to replace both the larger CTS and smaller ATS in the brand's lineup. We have all the details and features for you, in addition to a deep dive with the car's chief engineer, but now it's time to see how it stacks up to the long-time standard bearer in this class: the BMW 3 Series. Now, the car is a bit larger than the completely new 2019 3 Series, but Cadillac says the 3 and the rest of the compact luxury sedan class is its target for this car. We'll dive further into this little conundrum later. This comparison will look at how these vehicles measure up on paper, as we haven't driven the CT5 yet. That will come later, but we're expecting it to be a proper sport sedan competitor with the 3 Series, since Cadillac is building it off GM's dynamically superb Alpha platform. Now let's get on with the comparison. Powertrains and performance Both of these sedans come standard with 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engines. The BMW four-pot is a bit more potent, coming in with 18 more horsepower and 37 pound-feet of torque more than the Cadillac. Here's our driving review of the BMW. The only upgrade engine for both available initially are turbocharged six-cylinders. BMW offers up its revised inline-six, while Cadillac offers a V6. These six-cylinders are both 3.0 liters. Cadillac bests the BMW in brute torque by 31 pound-feet, but BMW takes the horsepower prize, making 47 more ponies. It's hard to say which car will actually be faster to 60 mph — they'll probably end up being about the same once official numbers are out. This segment used to be one guaranteed to offer a manual transmission, but that's not the case anymore. Neither Cadillac nor BMW will offer a manual to start, but expect to see the stick shift return to higher performance models of each car. For now, they both get torque-converter-style automatic transmissions. One dimension that isn't going away from either anytime soon is rear-wheel drive. Both cars offer rear-wheel and all-wheel drive in every spec available. Fuel economy for the 3 Series is impressive at 30 mpg combined with the four-cylinder. We'll have to wait and see if Cadillac can challenge that figure with its less powerful engine. Size and practicality Here's where a lot of the confusion about the Cadillac CT5 sets in. The CT5 is a tad larger than the 3 Series in its exterior dimensions, but the interior specs are nearly identical.

Ford, Toyota clean up in Best Car For The Money Awards

The U.S. News Best Cars for the Money Awards picks winners by looking at the average transaction price, five-year total cost of ownership, the regard a car has from the automotive press, reliability figures from J.D. Power and Associates and safety data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The result, according to the magazine, is "the best combination of critical acclaim and long-term value."
Ford nabbed six of the 21 categories that received awards this year, the Focus, Fusion, Fusion Hybrid, Taurus, Escape and Edge getting trophies. Toyota and its Lexus and Scion sub-brands took another five, the Tacoma and Tundra owning the two categories given to pickup trucks. The other ten awards were split between Honda with three, Buick with two, and one each for Subaru, BMW, Hyundai, Chevrolet and Mazda.
Follow the link to see all the winners and read about why they were chosen.

2015 BMW M3 Sedan

BMW's all-new M3 Sedan is dynamically nearly identical to its two-door M4 Coupe sibling: a stopwatch reveals that both are sub-four-second cars to 60 miles per hour, a racetrack proves that the mechanical twins are equally as adept on a road course and a full afternoon of driving on public roads demonstrates that each possesses talented everyday adaptability.
Yet after driving both BMW models back-to-back over two full days in Portugal, it's clear there are a few noticeable differences, both objective and subjective, that don't require instrument testing to reveal. All it takes is a few hours behind the wheel of both cars to conclude that one is slightly more agile, and the other a bit more twitchy. One has better outward visibility, while its counterpart is unquestionably more convenient.
It is the little things - subtleties attained through seat-of-the-pants observations - that eventually allow me to choose a favorite.