2006 Cadillac Xlr Base Convertible 2-door 4.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The future's electric — but the present is peak gasoline. Burn some rubber! Do donuts!

I vividly remember the year 1993 as a teenager looking forward to getting my driver’s license, longingly staring into Pontiac dealerships at every opportunity for a chance to see the brand-new fourth-generation Firebird and Trans Am. Back then, 275 horsepower, courtesy of GMÂ’s LT1 5.7-liter V8 engine, was breathtaking. A few years later, when Ram Air induction systems freed up enough fresh air to boost power over 300 ponies, I figured we were right back where my fatherÂ’s generation left off when the seminal muscle car era ended around the year 1974. It couldn't get any better than that. I was wrong. Horsepower continued climbing, prices remained within reach of the average new-car buyer looking for cheap performance, and a whole new level of muscular magnitude continued widening eyes of automotive enthusiasts all across the United States. It was all ushered in by cheap gasoline prices. And as much as petrolheads bemoan the coming wave of electric vehicles, perhaps instead now would be a good time for critics to sit back and enjoy the current and likely final wave of internal combustion. Today, itÂ’s easier than ever to park an overpowered rear-wheel-drive super coupe or sedan in your driveway. Your nearest Chevy dealership will happily sell you a Camaro with as much as 650 horsepower. Not enough? Take a gander at the Ford showroom and youÂ’ll find a herd of Mustangs up to 760 ponies. Or if nothing but the most powerful will do, waltz on over to the truly combustion-obsessed sales team of a Dodge dealer and relish in the glory of a 797-hp Charger or 807-hp Challenger. Want some more luxury to go with your overgrown stable of horses? Try Cadillac, where you'll find a 668-horsepower CT5-V Blackwing. You could instead choose to wrap that huffin' and chuggin' V8 in an SUV. Or go really off the rails and buy a Ram TRX or Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 392 and hit the dunes after a quick stop at the drag strip. Go pump some gas. Burn a little rubber. Do donuts! There is nothing but your pocketbook keeping you from buying the V8-powered car of your dreams. Yes, just about every major automaker in the world has halted development of future internal combustion engines in favor of gaining expertise in batteries and electric motors. No, that doesnÂ’t mean that gasoline is going extinct. There are going to be gas stations dotting American cities and highways for the rest of our lifetimes.

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).

Cadillac CT4 Luggage Test | How much fits in the trunk?

If you go by exterior specs, the Cadillac CT4 is more similar to a BMW 3 Series or Mercedes C-Class. However, if you go by interior space (or price), it's more like a Mercedes A-Class or BMW 2 Series Gran Coupe. That's definitely true of the trunk, which measures a rinky-dink 10.9 cubic feet, according to GM's specs. That number is what you'd expect in a small luxury coupe rather than a sedan. Indeed, the old ATS Coupe had 10.4 cubic feet.  Nevertheless, the CT4 is somehow not the smallest in the segment. That would be the A-Class and its 8.9-cubic-foot trunk. Good grief. Now, Mercedes has been known to shortchange its cargo capacity numbers so we'll have to luggage test that at some point to know for sure. Today, let's see if the CT4 is in keeping with that 10.9 number. Also, how much worse is it than the also rinky-dink CT5 trunk or the overly optimistic 2 Series Gran Coupe? Yep, that looks pretty small. Also, note the weird rail-like things that hampered the CT5 (below right) are also present here in the CT4 (below left). There's also a similar lip to clear for the folding back seat, but the CT4's opening seems bigger.  As in every luggage test I do, I use two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D). All but the biggest bag fit, which is exactly the same number that could fit in the CT5. As the below photo shows, the bigger car has just a bit more space left over. Maybe for a pair of grocery bags. That would be consistent with the difference in cubic feet: 11.9 cubic feet versus 10.9. What about the BMW 2 Series Gran Coupe? BMW says it has 15.1 cubic feet of space, but it doesn't. At least not using the same measurement criteria that the vast majority of other manufacturers use. It can carry the biggest bag, but it would still need to leave the fancy bag behind. That's also while utilizing the 2 GC's ample under-floor storage compartment.  As such, the CT4 does indeed have a small trunk, but it's at least in keeping with its competitors. The CT5 cannot say that, regardless of which segment you compare it to.  Unfortunately for the CT4, though, the story does not stop here.