1988 Cadillac Coupe Deville For Parts Or Restoration Nr on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Lincoln Corsair vs 2020 Cadillac XT4 | How they compare on paper

The 2020 Lincoln Corsair compact crossover was introduced this year to replace the aging MKC. Our first impressions are that it's a thoroughly competent luxury machine, but where it fits in the market is interesting. Given its size and price tag, the Corsair basically slots in-between compact segments, with vehicles like the Audi Q3 below and Audi Q5 above. It's a distinctive position to be in, but not a unique one, as there's another comparably sized and priced SUV -- and an American rival, no less. The Cadillac XT4 was launched just last year to be its company's smallest crossover, boasting compelling design and ample technology features.  So which is better? To give you some idea, let's take a look at each vehicle's horsepower, torque, fuel economy, space, pricing and some slightly more subjective aspects about their luxuriousness and feature sets. You'll find all the nitty gritty numbers below, followed by more detailed analysis. And if you'd like to compare other luxury crossovers, be sure to check out our comparison tool. Engines, drivetrains and driving impressions Both the Corsair and XT4 come standard with turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder engines, but the Corsair's is more potent with 250 horsepower and 275 pound-feet compared with the 237 horsepower and 258 pound-feet of the Cadillac. And to seal the deal, the Corsair has an optional turbo 2.3-liter engine with 280 horsepower and 310 pound-feet of torque. That's not only vastly better than the Cadillac, but one of the most powerful outputs in the compact luxury SUV segment. Both vehicles have standard front-wheel drive with optional all-wheel drive on the base engines. The 2.3-liter Corsair has all-wheel drive standard. The Cadillac does boast an extra cog in its transmission over the Corsair's eight-speed automatic, but there's not necessarily an advantage or disadvantage to be gleaned from that. When it coes to fuel economy, the Cadillac is victorious with a 26 mpg combined rating for the front-drive model, with the front-drive 2.0-liter Corsair coming just behind with 25 mpg combined. It's a three-way tie for third with the all-wheel-drive XT4, all-wheel-drive 2.0-liter Corsair and 2.3-liter Corsair all returning 24 mpg combined. Of course, the all-wheel-drive Corsairs have a small advantage here in that it delivers more power and torque than the Cadillac with the same fuel economy.

2014 Cadillac CTS Vsport [w/video]

Bridging The Gap With Power And Poise
As you read these words, West Coast Editor Michael Harley is preparing to drive the brand-new 2014 Cadillac CTS along the gorgeous, sun-drenched roads of Southern California. And while I'll wait for Harley's full report before I put words in his mouth, I'm willing to bet he enjoys the hell out of Cadillac's new CTS. In fact, I'm sure of it.
I say this with confidence because, about a month ago, I spent the better part of a day flogging the new CTS Vsport around the 2.9-mile Milford Road Course - a challenging circuit laid out in the infield of an oval test track at GM's proving grounds in southeast Michigan. The MRC was built about a decade ago after Bob Lutz was lured out of retirement to work closely with GM's product development team, and thus, this circuit is known informally as the "Lutz Ring." The main objective of the MRC was to have an in-house facility for engineers to fine-tune vehicle dynamics, without having to constantly schlep cars over to Germany's infamous Nürburgring. (Of course, they still do.)

Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski  Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.