[Autocar]

The biggest difference between this 2010 and the old model first introduced in 2007 isn't the power and torque bump (from 500 HP and 480 Lb-Ft to 540 HP and 510 Lb-Ft), but rather the fitment of better suspension and particularly a whiz-bang stability control system that doesn't just make driving the live rear axle muscle car safer, but also much faster.

How does it do that? Not just by controlling wheelspin on the rear axle due to an overly enthusiastic right foot, but also by reigning in understeer. That means you can hold a tighter line in corners which, in turn, means you can go faster.

The system's got three modes: everything on, traction off, and full traction and stability off. It's that middle mode that you'll want to drive the GT500 in most of the time. It allows seven to eight degrees of rear wheel slide before intervening to stop you slamming into a tree. Yes, your ability to posture masculinely on the internet is reduced by admitting you use stability control, but it's just way more fun to drive the car like this. Not only because the car doesn't understeer so much, but also because you're free to really beat on the engine without worrying too much about bodywork repair bills.

Exterior Design: ☆☆☆☆☆
I'm an unrepentant euro car snob, but I love the 2010 ‘Stang's looks and they're even better in aggressive Shelby form. That huge grill, the hood-mounted air outlet, the dark wheels, the functional rear wing with a Gurney lip; all that just exudes menacing purpose. I literally dream about driving the GT500 down desert roads at night, all car commercial style. Now if I could just grow a five o'clock shadow it'd be perfect.

Interior Design: ☆☆☆
Some decent shapes and the huge Sync screen is nice but the interior just doesn't belong in a $48,175 car. The cue ball shifter is cheesy, the polka dot dash inlays are tacky, the seats feel cheap, the flimsy black plastic belongs in a ‘90s economy car. Worst of all, the steering wheel doesn't telescope so, thanks to my 34-inch inseam dictating my seat position, I'm stuck extending my arms fully to reach the steering wheel. This is not only uncomfortable, but is detrimental to car control too. At least the steering column is high enough that my long right leg can clear it for heel and toeing. We'd gladly sacrifice gimmicks like lighted door sills and changeable color clocks for a telescoping wheel. This applies to all Mustangs. Ford, you really have to fix this.

Still, the Mustang has a usable back seat and a big trunk. Can you name another 500+ HP two-door that does the same? Not for this money you can't, it's actually a fairly practical car.

Performance: ☆☆☆☆☆
How's driving a 540 HP Mustang on summer tires in 38-degree rain on winding roads in the Adirondacks? You'd probably guess frightening, sphincter tightening or at least white knuckled but I'm going to go with "fun."

Driving in California in the summer we said the new GT500 could keep up with AWD cars in corners. In these conditions it wouldn't, but it's a hell of a lot more involving. There's just a lot to be said for the feeling you get when you slowly squeeze the accelerator towards the floor out of a wet corner, correct a slide safe in the knowledge computers will take over if things get too crazy, hear the supercharger whine scream louder and louder, grab third then stay flat into fourth and then the hood full of overnight ice flies up onto the windscreen completely blocking your vision as you get close to the 155 MPH speed limiter. You still have to drive the GT500, it just does what you tell it now.

Even on warm, dry, smooth roads the GT500 has a hard time putting its power down completely, hence the somewhat disappointing 4.3-second 0-60 time for a car that weighs 3,917 Lbs, yet has all that torque. In October in New York the Shelby will spin its wheels under power all the way through fourth gear if you're not smooth with the throttle.

Ride and Handling: ☆☆☆☆
For 2010 the GT500 gains firmer springs and stiffer dampers all round. Intended to reduce roll, squat and dive, they enable a thinner front swaybar, spec'd to dial out some more understeer. The steering shaft is also stiffened with stronger couplings. All this transforms the GT500's handling but it remains a relatively unsophisticated setup with front struts and a live axle rear, so it can't work miracles. Handling is improved, but the ride is stiffer. But do you really expect a 540 HP Mustang to ride like a Jaguar?

The previous cars understeer, then snap oversteer has been cured by this arrangement as has its tendency to float around imprecisely rather than behave like a sportscar. Even without the stability control system, this would be a drastically better car to drive, but the system elevates it to an entirely new level. As expected, you're going to have trouble putting your power down on wet, cold, bumpy roads, but now the slides those conditions produce are predictable and controllable.

Toys And Tech: ☆☆☆☆
It's got the latest version of Sync, our favorite sat/nav communication thing operated through a huge eight-inch touchscreen. Unlike OnStar you actually get a map to look at and you don't have to talk to Jimmy Joe Bob from Arkansas in order to get directions somewhere in New York. Even I can connect my phone to for hands free use, but don't tell Ray, "I'm Driving" is my favorite excuse to ignore his calls. Sync and the huge screen alone are worth five stars, but I'm subtracting one because Ford considers MyColor a legitimate Toy on a car designed for adults.

Value: ☆☆☆
Not only is the GT500 the cheapest car you can buy from a major manufacturer with 540 HP, but it's basically the $79,995 2009 Shelby GT500KR for $30,000 less. We like to think of the GT500 as the working man's supercar, but numbers aside, it's not much more fun to drive than the 2010 Mustang GT with the Track Pack, yet costs $18,000 more.

Overall: 80%
Fast, fun, challenging, rewarding, great looking but suffers from the regular Mustang's crappy interior and struggles to offer more than numbers over the cheaper GT. Despite all that, we'd love to own one of these. The Shelby GT500's combination of power, control, practicality and looks is completely unique.

Suitability Parameters: Who Should Buy This?
● Speed Merchants
● NASCAR Dads
● Penny Pinchers shopping for supercars
● Jalopnik Road Test Editors

Suitability Parameters: Who Shouldn't Buy This?
● Poseurs
● Treehuggers
● High Falutin' City Folk

Also Consider:
● Chevy Corvette: better handling, even worse interior, just as fast

● Dodge Challenger SRT/8: a competitor in looks only

● Camaro Z/28 (if/when it happens): All speculation at this point, but if it gets the LS9 it'll be faster

● Mustang GT with Track Pack: just as much fun if quite a bit slower

Vitals:
Model Year: 2010

Make: Ford

Model: Shelby GT500

Trim: N/A

Price, Base/As-Tested: $48,175/$48,175

Engine: 5.4-liter supercharged, 32-valve V8

Horsepower & Torque: 540 HP @ 6,200 RPM, 510 Lb-Ft @ 4,500 RPM

Transmission: 6-speed manual

Curb Weight: 3917 Lbs
0-to-60: 4.3 secs (manufacturer quoted)

Top Speed: 155 MPH (limited) 
Crash Testing, Front/Rear/Side: *****/*****/*****

Fuel Economy, EPA: 14/22 MPG

(We're taking a step back from 500 HP Week to bring you a timely first drive of a new vehicle. Sorry, these damn automakers are always messing with our timelines. — Ed.)

No, you're not seeing things –- that's a Mitsubishi Lancer's snout tacked onto the nose of a seven-passenger truck. This is the 2010 Mitsubishi Outlander. Do not adjust your screen.

We know what you're thinking: That is one big nose job.

In the industry, this sort of thing is known as a mid-cycle face-lift, a planned rejuvenation that occurs roughly halfway through a vehicle's production life. In these face-lifts, cosmetic updates are usually paired with a handful of mechanical and electronic refinements; the goal is to give sales a small boost and retain interest in the model until its replacement is ready for sale.

But enough with the background. We mention all of the above only so we can tell you this: Rarely is a face-lift this extreme. In one fell swoop, the Outlander has made the jump from relative nonexistence to something else entirely, something both polarizing and compelling. (Go ahead: Try and remember what the 2005-2009 Outlander's nose looks like. Five bucks says you can't.) It's like John Travolta's shift in Pulp Fiction –- at some point during that dance with Uma Thurman, Vinnie Barbarino began to matter again. And somehow, by borrowing a face, Japan's most anonymous SUV became interesting.

Also, Mitsubishi gave it an updated interior, the aforementioned differential, and ten more horsepower. We have thoughts on all of this.

Exterior Design ☆☆☆☆

This is one of those things that's entirely up to taste. The last Outlander suffered from anodyne looks and a wallflower vibe that encouraged parking valets to mistake it for a turkey sandwich. The truck you see here is as extroverted as its predecessor was sleepy; the gaping hole in its maw is either a killer shout-out to the Evo's rally heritage or a tribute to the everlasting glory of the Mississippi River catfish. We like it, but we also like bourbon milkshakes and playing the music of John Philips Sousa very loudly at three o'clock in the morning. We acknowledge that such things are not for everyone. Your call.

Interior Design ☆☆☆

Excellent use of space. A mix of above-average and below-average materials. (On a recent press launch, a certain journalist accidentally scratched the bejesus out of an Outlander's dash by simply skittering his fingernails across it. Diamond-like fingernails, or an interior in need of slightly more attention to detail? You be the judge.)

The Outlander's interior has the same refreshing sparseness and black-coffee simplicity found in all current Mitsubishis; things are occasionally boomy over rough pavement, but the thin pillars and good visibility prompt you to throw the truck around in ways that you probably shouldn't. The thickly bolstered front seats may not suit the girthier folk of middle America, but they hold you remarkably well when dropping into seemingly bottomless off-camber turns with one wheel in the air. (Not that we would know.)

Performance ☆☆☆

Make no mistake: There's no Evo firecracker under the Outlander's hood. Mitsubishi's 230-hp, 3.0-liter V-6 lives in the GT's scowling snout, and while it's competent and smooth, it's by no means overly potent. As with the old Outlander, the standard 6-speed automatic — intuitive and quick to respond to a prod of the shifter or the column-mounted paddles — is the best part of the package. (Interesting question: Would we take an Evo drivetrain if it were available? Sure, even though it would probably send the Outlander's sticker price through the roof. But we doubt that anyone else would want one.)

Ride and Handling ☆☆☆☆

Handling is the Outlander's main party trick — it's blessed with decent steering feel and a suspension just sharp enough to be handy in the hills. The Super All-Wheel Control business is Japanese embroidery for the electronically controlled front differential; it shuffles torque between the front wheels when it senses wheelspin, but most people won't notice it in action. (The "Tarmac/Snow" setting on the console knob simply modifies how aggressively the system does its job.)

All told, the end result is something that sneaks up on you. The Outlander will hustle down a country road or blaze down a freeway with surprising speed, but it doesn't have any interest in throwing its talents in your face.

Toys and Tech ☆☆

Items of note: a 710-watt Rockford Fosgate stereo with a ten-inch subwoofer in the trunk; a sunroof; an optional navigation system. The stereo can store songs on its internal hard drive, and there are iPod and video jacks in the center console. Given the price point, this is a respectable, but not remarkable, amount of icing.

Value ☆☆☆

At $29,990, the Outlander GT is almost three grand more than the base Outlander ($27,130). Neither is a bargain, and both feel a bit too expensive for what they are. It's kind of like eating out in California if you're from the Midwest –- the food is generally pretty good, but you can't shake the feeling that there's a better deal just down the street.

Overall: 76%

A good SUV, but not a great one. That said, the GT is a more well-rounded truck than the base Outlander, and it's definitely worth paying a premium for. On top of that, the competition — specifically, the offerings from Nissan, Hyundai, and Ford – isn't anywhere near as much fun to drive. This is what you buy if you have to have a mid-size crossover and don't want to spend a lot or drive an appliance. It'd be nice if both this and the regular Outlander were a bit cheaper, but you can't have everything.

Suitability Parameters: Who Should Buy This?

● Tuner Crowd
● Soccer Moms
● Rally Freaks who breed

Suitability Parameters: Who Shouldn't Buy This?

● Penny Pinchers
● Speed Merchants
● Treehuggers
● People who think the Mercury Mariner handles just fine

Also Consider:

● Ford Escape
● Honda CR-V
● Mazda CX-7
● Nissan Rogue

Vitals:

Model Year: 2010
Make: Mitsubishi
Model: Outlander
Trim: GT
Price, Base/As Tested: $29,990/$29,990
Engine: 3.0-liter SOHC V-6
Horsepower & Torque: 230 hp @ 6250 rpm/215 lb-ft @ 3750 rpm
Transmission: 6-speed automatic
Curb Weight: 3860 pounds
0-to-60: 7.5 sec (est.)
Top Speed: n/a
Crash Testing, Front/Rear/Side: n/a
Fuel Economy (EPA): 18/24 mpg

Despite its horrendous brake overheating issues, Jaguar is a brand that we desperately want to love. It's got the history, it's got the personality and it's getting better and better products. Sadly, those products still lack the completeness of those from better funded rivals like BMW and Mercedes. Maybe it's our fault for going into each new Jaguar hoping to find a car that's genuinely competitive, but whatever the reason, we walk away from each successive product underwhelmed. That's exactly the word we used to describe the 2008 Jaguar XKR after finding that it didn't handle with even an ounce of precision, had an automatic gearbox that refused to do what it was told and an interior that was partially amazing hand-stitched leather and partially parts sourced from a 1990s Ford Fiesta. It was fast though, the 420 HP supercharged 4.2-liter V8 was enough to spin the rear wheels up virtually everywhere.

So what's new for 2010? A sharper looking front bumper, LED taillights, different lower valance on the rear, body-color side vents, nicer leather door trim, a new steering wheel with a leather bottom spoke, the rotary drive selector from the XF operating a six-speed ZF automatic gearbox, an active limited-slip differential and continuously variable electronic shocks. So not a huge change except for the last and most important thing, the 510 HP, 461 Lb-Ft, 5.0-liter supercharged V8.

Did Jaguar just put a bigger engine in a car that didn't need more power to make up for all its other flaws? Yes. Yes it did.

Exterior Design: ☆☆☆

It's not like the 2010 XKR isn't a handsome car, it is, but the changes amount to very little and don't alter the boring headlights, the awkward front bumper (thank you pedestrian crash test regulations) with its distinct horizontal hood shut line or the impractical proportions. The XKR is a huge car outside, yet tiny on the inside.

The low roof-line means the top of my head sticks out over the top of the windscreen, making me look like a circus clown and forcing me to hunch down to see forwards. Dropping the top cures the horrendous rear 3/4 blindspots, but its inevitably going to rain sometime and when it does, if you don't want to get wet, that means you're not going to be able to change lanes confident in the knowledge that a car is 100% not next to you.

Interior Design: ☆☆

Despite the lack of vision while up, the XKR Convertible has convinced us that fabric convertible roofs are far superior to folding hard tops. It takes up only a tiny space in the trunk and is dead quiet while shut. It's even lined in nice material, creating the illusion that it's a real roof over your head.
Other than the rotary gear selector, which we're learning to like if only for its novelty (it brings no functional benefit over a standard selector, but does clean up the center console), the interior appears virtually unaltered over the old car. I guess there is the single leather-wrapped steering wheel spoke, but that leaves two nasty painted plastic spokes which just happen to be the ones you'll actually be touching.

Forgive me for going on a little bit of a rant here. Silver-painted plastic is possibly the worst material a luxury car maker could be using in a material right now, it's evocative of cheap, shitty phones and happy snap digicams from 1998. Consumer electronics have moved on to glass, metal and piano black, why can't cars? You'll find that horrible material not only on the steering wheel, but also on the door-mounted seat controls and on the controls for the sat/nav stereo and HVAC. Those are all parts you'll be looking at and touching regularly.

Elsewhere in the interior, things are much, much, much better with classy piano black taking a cue from iPhones and looking super nice. The contrast stitched leather used on the dash and seats is dreamy. It's also used on the rear seats, which appear to be there for no reason other than to hold shopping bags. There's probably better shopping bag storage solutions than pretend seats complete with seatbelts, but Jaguar must be hoping to really cash in on that doll collectors market.

Performance: ☆☆☆☆

Giving the XKR four stars is hard for me. It has probably the ultimate fast luxury car engine, but makes using it frustrating with an awkward gearbox. Developing its maximum torque of 461 Lb-Ft at just 2,500 RPM, you can safely apply every cliched auto journalist hyperbolic metaphor to its performance. It accelerates to 60 in a stump pulling 4.0 seconds. It rockets towards the horizon like a Saturn V. It does all that while delivering smoothness, refinement and a uniquely crisp exhaust note all Jaguar's own. We haven't driven this motor alongside the stronger LSA in the CTS-V, but we think we'd take the Jaguar's simply for its smoothness. The transition from cruising to light speed takes only a wiggle of your big toe, while plaid is delivered any time you plant your foot. It's a Druish miracle that I'm not writing this from a jail cell after playing with the car all over Brooklyn.

BMW take note, this Jaguar V8 makes all your torque-free M-car engines look limp wristed in comparison.

Thanks to that active differential, the XKR's ability to put its power down without wheelspin is now drastically improved, but unfortunately for your tire budget, Jaguar upped the power so much that it overcomes that newfound traction. That's part of the reason it can be so frustrating to try and tap into the performance, but the other is the gearbox.

Try to take off from a stoplight quickly in manual mode and you'll hook up pretty well in first, but when you grab second with the cheap plastic paddle, there's a good two-second delay between selection and engagement, spoiling what little fun you can have at low speeds. Much less powerful cars will easily beat you when the road slims down to one lane on the other side of an intersection. That shouldn't happen in a 510 HP 2+2. Things are much more predictable in automatic mode. The previous car's tendency to shift down two gears at unpredictable points in the throttle travel has been cured, probably by the plethora of torque making downshifts unnecessary, but when it does shift it's intrusively clunky. In Sport or Manual, it's difficult to come to a smooth halt with the shift into first coming with a pronounced jerk.

Combining a powerful engine with an auto transmission isn't necessarily a recipe for performance disaster, as proved by another small, troubled car manufacturer with the 2009 Maserati Quattroporte Sport GT S.

The brakes are powerful, easily modulated and, surprisingly, I couldn't convince them to fade.

Ride: ☆☆☆☆

The constantly variable dampers can be firmed up by selecting Competitive Mode, but they're always on the firm side of comfortable when you're cruising and on the soft side of taught when you're hauling ass. Luckily, they're bolted to a very strong aluminum frame so there's no scuttle shake even while tackling the East Coast's most challenging off-road course, the BQE.

Toys and Tech: ☆☆

Other than the rotary gear knob, there's nothing new to play with in the Jaguar's interior. We should probably count the 525-watt Bowers & Wilkins stereo as a toy, but you'll have to use it through Jag's horribly obtuse touch-screen interface and won't be able to hear it with the top down and the engine working and your head sticking out over the top of the windscreen anyways.

Value: ☆☆☆

The $102,000 XKR is cheaper than a $107,900 BMW M6 or a $135,000 Mercedes SL63, but cheaper cars do a better job of both performance and luxury, most notably the $88,800 Porsche 911 Convertible.

Overall: 60%

Does the new engine transform the XKR into an entirely different car? Surprisingly yes it does. But, it's an entirely different car with the same old problems. Very fast, pretty nice looking, fundamentally flawed. Thanks to the amazing new engine we're no longer underwhelmed with Jag's flagship, we're just frustrated that its still not able to live up to its now greater potential.

Suitability Parameters: Who Should Buy This?

● Poseurs
● Very Serious Businessmen
● Girlfriends of Sheiklets
● Jews who won't buy German
● Men who want handjobs

Suitability Parameters: Who Shouldn't Buy This?

● Penny Pinchers
● Speed Merchants
● Men with bald spots

Also Consider

● BMW M6 Convertible: torque-free engine, better handling, real back seats
● Mercedes SL63 AMG: just as fast, more fun to drive, bad image
● Porsche 911 Convertible: slower, yet way more fun
● Audi R8 Convertible: gorgeous, fast, fun, capable

Vitals:

Model Year: 2010
Make: Jaguar
Model: XKR Convertible
Trim: base w/20" wheels
Price, Base/As-Tested: $102,000 / $108,000
Engine: Supercharged, 32-valve, 5,000cc V8
Horsepower & Torque: 510 HP @ 6,00 RPM, 461 Lb-Ft @ 2,500 RPM
Transmission: 6-speed slushbox
Curb Weight: 4,079 Lbs
0-to-60: 4.0 secs (estimated)
Top Speed: 155 MPH (limited)
Crash Testing, Front/Rear/Side: not tested
Fuel Economy, EPA: 15 MPG City / 22 MPG Hwy

Despite the price difference, the $85,750 E63 and the $200,000 (est) SLS actually have a fair bit in common. Most obvious is the 6.2-liter AMG V8, here developing only 518 HP to the SLS's 571, but they both also use AMG's new Speedshift seven-speed dual-clutch gearbox. Whereas that gearbox is tuned to be quicker shifting and is mounted in rear transaxle style on the SLS, we actually prefer the smoother tuning on the E63; it allows the sedan to pass as a refined luxury car when you're not in attack mode, a trick the SLS doesn't manage.

In fact, keep the rotary shift map selector in C (for "Controlled Efficiency"), the adjustable dampers on the softest of the three modes and the stability control all the way on and the E63 does as good a job at luxury as any other sedan in the the Mercedes range. We actually prefer the less ostentatious E to the look-how-much-money-I-have S-class not just because we don't look like Albanian sex traffickers when we drive it, but also because the uncluttered E-class interior brings with it a certain austerity that evokes a more classic sense of luxury.

Cruising along the highway, there's nothing to indicate that you're driving a 4,300 Lbs sedan that can hit 60 MPH in just 4.4 seconds. You can't feel the 2.2-inch wider front axle, the beefed up subframe bushings or the thicker sway bars. You can feel the wider, more low profile tires and their tendency to track over road imperfections but that's not as pronounced as the sense of power the car creates in its driver.

C mode allows the engine to make use of its low-RPM torque for seamless acceleration without frequent downshifts to access the high-RPM power, something that makes barging through traffic feel like second nature. Drive the E63 on the highway and you're the master of your domain, it's faster than any car around you even though you can't hear the engine or feel the road's bumps.

Pull off the highway onto a back road, push the damper button once and switch the transmission to Sport+ (we tend to skip sport as it's an unhappy medium between relaxed and responsive) and you're suddenly driving a car that feels smaller, lighter, tauter and higher revving. Acceleration goes from seamless to kicking you in the ass and you can suddenly feel everything the road is trying to tell you. With stability fully on, you're making fast, smooth, event-free progress.

Want more fun? Try manual shifting, two lights showing on the adjustable damper button and ESP in "Sport." Like all auto transmissions the E63's is too prone to unexpected kickdown while you're pushing the limits, so shifting yourself through the steering-wheel mounted paddles eliminates that tendency and also lets you exploit the full power band without some computer deciding what's optimal. On their firmest setting, the dampers make the car respond even better and feel even smaller, while the more liberal stability control allows a couple degrees of slip, allowing you to have some fun and actually drive the car yourself, but still keeps you from plummeting over that thousand-foot cliff.

So far, so impressive. Then you get to the race track. While the E63 is still a very fast car and more than capable of easily lapping a track, the ability of the adjustable suspension, fancy gearbox and big V8 to overcome the physics of a big, heavy sedan are somewhat diminished in this environment. Unlike some competitors like the CTS-V, the E63 lacks a track-focussed stability control mode, so you're stuck with something that's either too conservative to really get the power down out of slow corners or nothing at all standing between your $1,000 a month payments and a tire wall. There's an optional performance package that bumps the speed limiter from 155 to 186 MPH, adds ceramic brakes, stiffer suspension and, much more importantly, a limited-slip differential, but while it noticeably improves the E63's ability to put its power down, you're still left with a car that's happier on road than track.

Exterior Design: ☆☆☆☆

The 2010 Mercedes E-Class is already subtly handsome thanks to its new-found boxiness and the AMG addenda — flared wheel arches, deeper front splitter, new LED running lights, badges, four square tailpipes — adds a nice sense of aggression. Anyone smart enough to tick the "Badge Delete" box gets an extra star.

Interior Design: ☆☆☆☆☆

Our favorite Mercedes interior hits all the classic Mercedes austere, squared-off, notes while adding super supportive bucket seats, a transmission-tunnel mounted gear selector and a manlier steering wheel. Make sure you spec the glass roof, the standard interior can feel a bit dark, but the extra light eliminates that. Don't choose the carbon interior accents, this isn't a tuner Integra.

Performance: ☆☆☆☆☆

Not only is the E63 fast (0-60 in 4.4 seconds, an optional top speed of 186 MPH), but it feels fast thanks to loads of torque throughout the rev range, yet a still definite peak coming in the form of top end power. The four-mode gearbox does a good job of offering drivers a range of responses and even a manual mode that gives you full control. Brakes are pop-your-eyes-out strong and we couldn't make them fade. Six figure speeds are disturbingly easy to reach and will likely become a threat to your license.

Ride: ☆☆☆☆☆

The E63 is never going to be the outright handler that smaller cars like the C63 and M3 can be thanks to their smaller size and weight. But, rather than trying to play that game it creates its own, combining ability and luxury in a hitherto unprecedented combo that sacrifices neither. It's kind of silly to expect that such a big car could be great on the track, but its so capable and fun on tight mountain roads that after driving it there you simply come to take track ability as a given. All that and it's also supple, quiet and smooth. Other cars have adjustable dampers and whatnot, but no other system offers this breadth of adjustment. The suspension didn't bottom out while landing an 80 MPH jump, which gives us loads of confidence in its ability to soak up anything else.

Toys and Tech: ☆☆☆☆

All the toys of the standard E-Class, plus all the new AMG buttons that help you alter the driving experience. We've never liked COMMAND, Mercedes' flawed attempt to copy iDrive, which is the only thing keeping the E63 from a five star rating. Somehow we always manage to turn navigation off mid-journey, then struggle to figure out how to turn it back on. Literally everything is adjustable on this car, even the speed at which the seat's bolsters inflate to support you in corners.

Value: ☆☆☆☆

Sure, with a starting price of $85,750 and the ability to tick boxes to reach a price north of $100,000, the E63 isn't cheap, but it does both speed and luxury better than much more expensive cars in the Mercedes lineup. Rather than thinking of it as an expensive E-class we like to think of it as a cheap S-class that also drives like an SL63. That's a bargain in our book.

Overall: 90%

Our favorite vehicle in the entire Mercedes lineup, the E63 makes us feel like we could be either an elderly European plutocrat or Lewis Hamilton, all depending on our mood and which buttons we push. If we had lots of money, but only the ability to by one car to satisfy all our vehicular needs, and those needs didn't include driving on a race track, this would be the car we would buy. We just wish we could afford one.

Suitability Parameters: Who Should Buy This?
● Speed Merchants
● Technogeeks
● Very Serious Businessmen
● Albanian Sex Traffickers with a need to travel incognito

Suitability Parameters: Who Shouldn't Buy This?
● Penny Pinchers
● Treehuggers
● Anyone who can squeeze into the CTS-V's tiny interior

Also Consider:

● BMW M5
● Cadillac CTS-V
● Porsche Panamera
● Audi S6

Vitals:

Model Year: 2010
Make: Mercedes
Model: E63 AMG
Trim: N/A
Price, Base/As-Tested: $85,750/$85,750
Engine: 6.2-liter 32-valve V8
Horsepower & Torque: 518 HP @ 6,800 RPM, 465 Lb-Ft @ 5,200 RPM
Transmission: 7-speed dual-clutch manumatic
Curb Weight: 4,300 Lbs (est)
0-to-60: 4.4 secs (manufacturer quoted)
Top Speed: 155 MPH (limited) or optionally 186 MPH (limited)
Crash Testing, Front/Rear/Side: not tested/not tested/*****
Fuel Economy, EPA: 13/20 MPG

[via EVO]

From the first moment you get into the SLS there's no escaping the improbably long nose. The nearest equivalent car I can think of that sits the driver so far from the front axle is the 2009 BMW Z4, but where that car's been described as a clown shoe, Pulitzer Prize-winning auto hack Dan Neil says the SLS looks like "a hairbrush." Unlike that car, the SLS is also wide (76 inches) so guiding it out of a parking lot is a daunting task, requiring placing the front wheels with guestimation versus vision. Open the hood and there's a good foot of clear space between the radiator and the airboxes mounted just in front of the engine. Good packaging this is not, but this long nose lends the understated super car the only visual drama it really has; the abbreviated cabin and low roof help to emphasize just what the big Merc is packing up front. The cabin is also further midship than it feels, with the relatively large 22-gallon tank sitting between the seats and the rear axle.

At speed, those awkward proportions cease to negatively impact the driving experience and the SLS actually manifests some steering feel, mostly felt over bumps and cat's eyes rather than in corners, but that's OK, because the car is heavily biased toward oversteer so it's only really the rear you need to feel. Actually, let's take a quick step back. The 9.5" wide front wheels wearing 265/35 low profiles and 11" rears with 295/30s don't really have an issue with grip. The problem is the 6.2-plus-change-liter (ignore the badges) V8 and its 571 HP just makes pushing the limits of what's possible way too easy.

Heavily modified over the standard AMG V8 that's in everything from the C63 to the S63, this M159 6.2-and-change (same capacity as all the other M156 engines) breathes much freer thanks to an all-new intake system, more aggressive valve timing, tubular steel headers and a de-throttled exhaust. It also switches to dry sump lubrication so the engine can be mounted lower in the chassis. In addition to that 571 HP at 6,800 RPM, it now develops 479 Lb-Ft of torque at 4,750 RPM, delivering the unique mix of high-revving power with low-RPM torque. That's also a healthy increase over the 525 HP the M156 normally develops and all it has to motivate is a 3,571 Lbs curb weight gull-winged bird of prey (703 Lbs lighter than the SL63 and 326 Lbs lighter than the SLR thanks to an aluminum chassis and body). Weight distribution is 47% front, 53% rear (unintuitive by look, but makes sense when you consider the aforementioned extra crumple zone space), aiding traction but still failing to overcome the fast-revving engine's ability to easily overcome the rear.

Driving an oversteer-biased car at a corner-biased track like Laguna Seca, like we did yesterday, is actually kind of refreshing. Where most cars would understeer into turn 2 and push the front around turn 11 and onto the back straight, the SLS is aggressively trying to step out the rear, even on a constant throttle. Credit for recovering the slides goes to the almost unbeatable stability control system. While you can push enough buttons to make it say "ESP-OFF", that doesn't fully shut down the system, with it still moderating acceleration-related wheelspin and re-engaging automatically the second you tap the brakes. While the SLS is a fast and engaging car even with all the nanny systems fully on, we of course mourn the loss of full driver control. My planned photo for the top of this review was a doors-up burnout, but sadly the car just wouldn't spin up the rear tires from a standstill.

That same system acts to control wheelspin on a hard launch, contributing to a manufacturer-reported 3.8-second 0-to-60 MPH time, eventually reaching a limited top speed of 197 MPH.

That engine also feels far more alive than in any other AMG application. It pops and burbles on the overrun and, mated to the seven speed dual clutch gearbox, is fast to rev and shift. It's also somewhat awkward in any of the three automatic modes, somehow always managing to be in the wrong gear, no matter the setting. The manual paddle shifter improves that, but compared to competitors, are a little slow to shift. Mercedes claims the transmission takes as little as 100 milliseconds to shift, but in practice it feels far slower, with a pronounced delay between a pull of the paddle and the transmission actually doing what you told it to.

The seven-speed rear-mounted transaxle is connected to the engine, as is the fashion these days, by a rigid torque tube containing a carbon fiber drive shaft. This arrangement maximizes the connection between the rear wheels and the engine, while minimizing the torque's impact on the handling and reciprocation mass.

I came into this drive expecting a luxury grand tourer that was also fast, but instead found a track-oriented super car that is also luxurious. On the road, the limitations of this incredibly fast car are relatively easy to reach, yet hard to live up to. It's also firmly sprung, always loud (both from road and engine noise) and fairly cramped. The SL63 would probably make an equally fast, yet more refined, spacious and comfortable road car, but the SLS would literally drive circles round that car on the track. Still, this combination of outright performance with extreme luxury is relatively rare. The 911 GT2 is harsh and edgy on the road, a 599 is way more expensive, as is the even-faster Lexus LFA. On the opposite end of the spectrum the Audi R8 does luxury a little better but track performance is a little less involving. At an estimate $200,000, the SLS carves a performance-oriented, luxury-capable niche all its own, something that's aided by the classy, restrained looks and the visual drama of the doors.

Is the Mercedes SLS AMG the fastest, most exciting super car on the market? No. Is it the most luxurious GT? Not by a long shot. Does it have significant flaws, most glaringly from the gearbox? Totally. But, fercrissakes, have you seen how sexy those Gullwing doors are when they pop open?

Let's get the lingering question out of the way: Is there any difference mechanically? In a word, no. The only difference as far as the vehicle is concerned is the suspension tuning required for the 19 inch wheels not available on the Equinox. Other than that the Equinox and Terrain are identical. Same engine packages: 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine with 182 HP mated to a six speed auto with an electric power steering rack and shockingly achievable 32 MPG; same 3.0 liter DI V6 good for 264 HP and mated to a six speed transmission, etc. The same all-wheel-drive system as the Equinox can be had with both engines.
The options list includes leather, navigation, dual pop-up rear-seat DVD players, power programmable lift-gate, sunroof, a 40 gig hard drive, iPod integration, and 17, 18, or 19 inch wheels, based on trim level.

Those big wheels are at the root of one of the only dynamic differences in the vehicle as well. Like the Equinox, the Terrain is competent over all road surfaces and handles well on corners of all shapes and sizes. Understeer is moderate when you overcook a corner, but if you're so inclined you can induce oversteer by lightening up the rear end with the brakes. Of course there won't be a lot of soccer moms hitting the track with this car, but in daily use it's just a little stiffer over bumps with the big wheels than the Equinox. Acceleration is the same; the 2.4 liter can squeal the tires off the line but loses pep through the mid range, though it's adequate for the vast majority of appliance drivers. The V6 does offer some decent grunt, but we'd be lying if we didn't want to see the 2.0 liter turbo Ecotec dropped in that engine bay. Since this is a GMC, we'd be remiss in leaving out the tow ratings of 1500 lbs and 3500 lbs for the I4 and V6, respectively fine for most weekend jobs, but bigger loads will require bigger trucks.

Feeling the deja vu? You should. There's no equipment you can get on the Terrain that you can't get on the Equinox. What the Terrain offers has more to do with its personality. First and foremost is that exterior-that massive grille is the first full implementation of the new GMC face, first seen on the GMC Denali XT concept at last year's Chicago Auto Show. It's certainly polarizing, drawing equal parts love and hate, but it's definitely distinctive. The controversial styling extends down the sides as well, with extremely squared off wheel-well arches and pronounced, almost cartoonish fender flares. However, the side glass is something we think everyone can get behind, with sharp chrome surrounds giving the glass a clean, defined look. We have to admit to liking it when done up in the black with the 18 inch polished wheels, but the chrome wheels are a little much.

Inside there's not much in the way of unique styling. The dash gets considerably higher-quality soft-touch material that's stitched together with nice contrasting red thread, complimented by the red accent and interior lighting, all differentiated from the blue of the Equinox. Seats are shared between both models, with the excellent mid-level cloth seats again taking the cake for comfort, grip, and styling. Rear seat passengers enjoy limo-like leg room with the sliding rear seat in he back position, and the bench is plenty comfortable for even the longest trips. There is a bit of news, as GM representatives let us know there was a Denali version coming along, so expect a garish front grille, a significantly upgraded interior with wood and aluminum trim, and unique wheels and exterior trim pieces.

And that's kind of the modus operandi of the Terrain: appealing to a different buyer than the Equinox. Where the Chevy is sort of soft-looking and inoffensive, the Terrain is a louder, more look-at-me vehicle. It can be had with more chrome than any GM vehicle in recent memory, and decked out in a suit of black, it looks pretty dang sharp. Just because it might not be our flavor doesn't mean it won't find a strong audience of buyers. Add that it's base price is only $1800 higher than that of the Equinox primarily due to standard backup camera, floor mats, tint, fog lights, and USB integration, it's not that bad of a deal either. If this product came out first, we'd be shouting its merits as we did with the Equinox, but while it has everything which makes that product so good, it's only claim to fame is styling and a softer dash. The value proposition is still there, but the necessity is hard to argue. It's a great compact SUV, no question there. It's just not any greater than the Equinox.

The 2010 MDX retains the 2008 model's torque-vectoring SH-AWD, adding re-tuned Active Dampers a new 6-speed, paddle-equipped automatic transmission, larger 13-inch front, 13.2-inch rear brake discs, optional 19-inch wheels and retunes the 300 HP, 270 Lb-Ft 3.7-liter V6 with a more flexible power band.

Put together, it makes the MDX both more capable and more refined. Engaging "Comfort" mode on the adaptive dampers now better isolates passengers from bumps, further differentiating it from "Sport" mode, which is still taut and controlled, delivering a near absence of body roll.

You can now click the paddles twice in rapid succession to shift down two gears at once, useful for overtaking and cornering as that sixth gear is now a very tall overdrive, spec'd to boost highway fuel economy and refinement. However, one needn't worry — the more flexible engine means sixth doesn't lack the ability to accelerate.

Engage "Sport" mode, knock it down from fourth to second, get on the accelerator and throw the MDX into a corner fast and the result is something akin to a dialed-back BMW X6. Like BMW's strangely-shaped crossover-car-coupe, there's virtually no roll or steering feel, but there's not really any understeer either. The MDX just takes corners at any speed you require of it. Thank the torque vectoring rear differential for that, although, unlike the X6, the front wheels can't push power side-to-side to really capitalize on available traction. Still, the ability to send power to the outside rear wheel in a corner greatly boosts confidence, speed and outright cornering ability. I was disappointed I couldn't convince the MDX to hang its rear out like the X6, but I suppose the desire to do that in a 7-passenger SUV is strongly indicative of its ability to push the boundaries of physics.

The tech fest continues inside with new VGA screens front (8") and rear (9"), the latter featuring a detachable remote that mimics the main HMI on the dash. Neat. There's also LED ambient lighting in high-tech blue, a backup camera with three selectable views (180 degree wide-angle, normal and one that points 90 degrees down for precise negotiation of obstacles), blind sport warnings, radar cruise control with last-second collision mitigating brakes, heated and cooled leather seats, a power tailgate, Sat/Nav with real-time Doppler radar weather maps and live traffic info, a 15 GB hard drive for storing music, full voice-controlled iPod integration with Bluetooth audio, lane guidance and a wallpaper function for the Nav screen capable of displaying your favorite cute kitten picture. Hang in there!

Bizarrely, Acura has slathered the dash and console in an ugly wood trim that isn't in keeping with the otherwise tech-focused nature of the interior.

All these interior features, 6-speed tranny and SH-AWD will also be used on the 2010 Acura ZDX.

At 7.0-seconds to 60 MPH, the new MDX is faster than V6-equipped rivals like the Porsche Cayenne, Audi Q7 3.2, Lexus RX350, Infiniti FX35 and BMW X5 3.0. At 16 MPG city/21 MPG highway, it's also more fuel efficient than all but the Lexus. It's expected the new MDX will start around $43,100 when it goes on sale late this year and top out around $55,000 with the "Advance" (the dynamic stuff), "Technology" and "Entertainment" packages.

The restyled MDX is also the best interpretation of Acura's otherwise awkward new design language. In fact, if we were in the market for a 7-seat luxury SUV with tiny rear seats, this would definitely be the one we'd buy. But we're not in the market for a 7-seat luxury SUV, we're in the market for cars that aren't inherently compromised by the desire to conform to the questionable fashion for tall, aggressively-styled wagons. The MDX is arguably the most fun-to-drive, most comfortable and nicest looking car in Acura's range; the problem is there's also cars in Acura's range and they should drive better and look nicer than a big honkin' SUV.

Based on the four-cylinder 2009 Acura TSX, the new year brings a more powerful engine, stronger springs and firmer dampers to the independent double-wishbone front suspension and adds more feel to the electric power steering. Both are present to accommodate the 210 Lbs of extra weight the new engine brings as well as the additional performance made possible by its 280 HP, 254 Lb-Ft 3.5-liter V6. That engine changes the weight distribution from 60/40 percent front/rear to 62/38.

Also added are a larger brake master cylinder, 18-inch wheels and all-season performance tires, larger front fascia openings for improved cooling and a V6 badge on the trunk.

Where the four-cylinder TSX is a still frugal, albeit slow (0-60 take 8.6 seconds) near-luxury car with a starting price of just $29,310, the V6 is more capable but much more expensive, starting at $34,850 and only available with a 5-speed, paddle-equipped automatic transmission. Figure on 0-to-60 MPH time in the low six-second range and the same limited top speed of 131 MPH.

Adding the "Technology Package" and its Nav system, real-time weather radar and traffic rerouting, 10-speaker stereo and GPS-linked climate control system brings the price up to $37,950. These prices are nearly exactly equal to those of the admittedly less powerful BMW 328i.

Despite its limited performance or maybe because of it, the four-cylinder TSX is a competent car to drive even if it's a bit boring. Its narrow tires and soft suspension mean the limits are relatively low, but it's naturally-balanced and light on its feet. In the quest for greater ability, the V6 sacrifices much of those qualities. The ride is much harsher, but like several recent Hondas and Acuras (the Insight and TL come to mind), that's not balanced by good body control. Drive the TSX V6 over pot holes, ruts and ridges and the steering wheel will jerk in your hands and the suspension will intrusively fail to soak up the bumps, in short it feels like a firm setup. But, drive the TSX quickly around a corner and it will roll, change direction quickly and the roll is more noticeable. Hit ridges or bumps mid corner and the body will wallow, in short, it feels like a soft setup. The end result of the revised suspension is a car that's firm when you want it to be soft and soft when you want it to be firm. Despite that flaw, the revised steering does deliver plenty of feel, which, combined with the lack of torque steer, is impressive for a front driver. Of course, the rear-wheel drive 328i has none of those problems.

The rest of the TSX is as before. It's a right-sized sedan with a little more interior room than the competition and, with the optional Technology Package, is extremely well equipped with the kind of whizz-bang gadgetry everyone but me seems to get excited about. The ELS sound system with the technology package is one of the best sound systems around and the real-time weather — with Doppler radar maps just like you get on your iPhone — is particularly neat. The seats are supportive and comfortable, the interior well constructed and the rear accommodation slightly better than competitors like that 3-series or an A4.

The thing about the V6 TSX is that it asks more questions of the platform than it answers. Sure, it's faster than the four-cylinder, but does that performance justify a price that's on par with more thoroughbred competition? Are the handling and ride sacrifices necessary to install a powerful engine in a front-wheel drive chassis justified by the increased straight line performance? If the 2009 Honda Accord Coupe V6 is faster and comes with a manual transmission, does the Acura brand really justify the premium? Would you buy a FWD Acura over a RWD BMW for the same price?

That engine is the centerpiece in a thoroughly upgraded car. Shared with the Audi S3, the 2.0-liter TFSI delivers 265 HP at 6,000 RPM and 258 Lb-Ft of torque between 2,500 and 5,000 RPM. If you think that sounds seriously flexible, you'd be right, but it's also full of character, with noticeable turbo lag at low revs and distinct turbo whistles, whine and bumps coming from under the hood. 0-60 now takes just 5.1 seconds in this Roadster, while the top speed is limited to 155 MPH.

Unlike the 2.0-liter turbo diesel in the 2009 VW Jetta TDI SportWagen we criticized a few weeks ago, the TFSI's character matches perfectly with the DSG gearbox. Here equipped with sportier programming than in that TDI, shifts are well timed and rapid in automatic mode, even more so in "Sport." In manual mode DSG is objectively more able to exploit this engine than a traditional manual (not available) would be, with upshifts occurring immediately and downshifts taking place smoothly. DSG is a true automated manual, so you have complete control over the gearbox in manual mode.

That gearbox and engine combination is actually very reminiscent of the 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution MR in its immediacy and turbocharged character, just with a little less power.

The suspension also gets upgraded in the TTS. The whole thing is lowered 10mm, the magnetic ride dampers receive firmer tuning, all the suspension components go aluminum and the steering is made more direct and feel-full. That magnetic ride is supposed to continually adjust the dampers to better keep the tires in contact with the road and it gets a sport mode to firm things up even further. Even with the traction and stability control switched off, we struggled to get the optional summer performance tires to break traction on the road, but the sport suspension mode doesn't appear to do much aside from make the ride annoyingly harsh.

Gelled hair marketing types needn't worry, as all this extra performance and handling doesn't come at the expense of posing. The TTS is equipped with a silver grille, a lower front splitter, side skirts, silver mirrors, LED running lights, four chromed exhaust pipes, "TTS" badges front and rear, "TTS" logos on the brake calipers and is here fitted with optional 19" wheels. The power soft top on the Roadster drops quickly, better enabling you to show off your fake tan. I got more "you're a smug bastard" looks in this TT than in any car I've driven since the R8, possibly because, from the front and to laypeople, the TT is virtually indistinguishable from that car.

The TTS Roadster starts at $47,500, but equipped with the Premium Plus package, fancy leather, 19-inch wheels and Sat/Nav system seen here, the total comes to $55,075. Unusually for a performance car, the fuel economy is reasonably high: 21 MPG city, 29 highway, 24 combined. With the soft top up, the Roadster offers coupe-like isolation from noise; with it down and the rear windscreen raised, it's still a reasonably isolated place to pass time.

On the mountain roads around my secret Pennsylvanian retreat the TT demonstrated a similar ability to put the world in drama-free fast rewind as cars like that Evo. The all-wheel drive, fast steering and revised suspension conspire to seriously increase the TTs dynamic ability, if not its level of involvement. While it's drastically improved over the old model, the TTS now suffers from the same video game-like nature of other fast AWD cars like the Nissan GT-R, requiring very little of its driver even close to its respectably high limits. The 2009 BMW Z4, the TT's closest competitor on purpose and price, delivers similar pace but asks far more of its driver and for the enthusiast, is a lot more fun to drive fast as a result.

Ultimately, the TTS's neatest trick is that it combines Evo-like character with a more grownup-friendly package thanks to a credible design, luxurious interior and plenty of on-road refinement. You can still pose in a TT, now you're just going to have a lot more fun doing it.

In addition to the corporate grin, the face-lifted MX-5 receives new taillights and side skirts, intended to give the roadster a more mature, appealing look. The 2.0-liter, four-cylinder engine also gets upgraded, with a forged steel crank and connecting rods, stronger wrist pins and firmer valve springs combine with a new oil-cooler to make possible a 500 RPM higher redline; now 7,200 RPM. That doesn't deliver anything in the way of improved top-end power — still 167 HP — but it does allow you to hang on to a lower gear in corners for longer, something that will return a real, on-the-road, performance increase. Fuel economy also is nudged up slightly — now 21 city, 28 highway — but enthusiasts will care more about the intake noise, which, thanks to revised ducting, now sounds more like the roar of the 1990 original's than the stifled meow of the 2006 model's.

There's also a new, optional $500 sports suspension with firmer springs, Bilstein dampers and a limited-slip differential. This Grand Touring package, Power Retractable Hard Top version was equipped with that and every other option aside from the slushbox, bringing the price up to $31,010, but you can still get a soft top with a stick for just $22,420.

So, while face-lifts and tummy tucks are now well within the acceptable bounds of manhood, why did I get scared shitless in a cute little roadster that takes 6.9 seconds to reach 60 MPH? Two reasons. One; the MX-5 offers an unrivaled sense of occasion at legal speeds and two; I'm a terrible passenger.

I've spent years trying to become a good driver and the result of on-track training, learning from lots of mistakes and racking up hundreds of thousands of miles in fast cars is that I drive by-the-book and very smoothly. Ride with me, even when I'm going fast, and you could fall asleep. The problem is, if I'm riding with you, I can't. I'll be busy spotting every little mistake, silently critiquing each and every one of your turn-in points and cringing every time you step outside the bounds of what I consider appropriate. In short, I'm anal.

Riding along a mountain road with another journalist, my lack of confidence combined with his lack of discipline — in-corner downshifts, unintentional trail braking, changing lines in corners — had even my consistently high fear level hitting unprecedented heights. Even with the newly recalibrated stability control on, the tail was moving around on entry and exit. Well, I was scared until I looked at the speedometer, which was sitting squarely within legal limits.

You see, weighing just 2,511 LBS with a folding hard top and equipped with skinny 205/45-17 tires the MX-5 offers an experience wholly absent from other modern cars — even the more capable Lotus Elise — it's involving and exciting at relatively low speeds, just like a British sports car from the ‘50s or ‘60s. The relatively low power and rev-happy nature of the engine also helps, you never find yourself with more power than you can use, meaning you can use it all.

Of course, all the things that make the MX-5 bad for a nervous passenger also make it great for the enthusiast driver. Start out down a mountain road with every intention of behaving and by the time you've reached the third corner you'll be pushing the communicative front on the way in and, depending on how tight the corner is, either lifting or flooring the throttle to play with the rear on the way out. It's really only first or second gear hairpins in which you can do the former, but even the latter is extremely safe and easy; lower limits equal a broader range of slide with little chance of a spin.

The MX-5 is now fitted with a newly recalibrated stability control system that allows a couple of degrees of slide before kicking in, but the chassis is so friendly and so willing to tell you what it's doing that there's really no need. Don't be afraid to switch it all the way off.

If you're tough enough to live with the bouncy ride and buzzy engine in everyday driving and comfortable enough to deal with the questionable looks and aggressive behavior from overcompensating SUV drivers, the MX-5 can still deliver the thrill of real driving. For the enthusiastic driver that's a hugely welcome change from overly-competent and underly-involved modern performance cars. Just tell nervous passengers to man up.

Photography credit: Grant Ray

Full Disclosure: Ford wanted me to drive the new Taurus SHO so badly they flew me all the way to Knoxville and put me up in a fancy hotel, but only after all the buff books had all chosen to go ahead and break the review embargo, which must mean they didn't want me to drive the SHO all that badly after all.

Ford is reviving the SHO name for the 2010 model year after an 11-year hiatus. Dropped in 1999 after a decade of increasingly diluted performance, the original 1989 car was a raw, sports-focused quasi-exotic with a manual-only Yamaha 3.0-liter, 220 HP V6. At the time, it was the third fastest sedan in the country. Over the next decade, all that made the SHO unique devolved into a top trim level for the seriously lackluster Taurus range.

And that's exactly what this new SHO is; a flagship trim for the all-new Taurus rather than a quasi-bespoke performance model. Luckily, the car it's based on is now seriously good. Unfortunately, due to the bizarre world of embargoes and manufacturers kissing the asses of the sleazy "D-Bag" buff books (see, when we use "quotes" it means we didn't actually say that and we're quoting someone else so the target of the epithet can't get mad at us), we can't tell you anything about how the 2010 Ford Taurus drives. So from this point on any time where we might accidentally break an embargo by talking about our drive of the regular model, we'll just talk about how it's different from a tasty piece of Mandel Bread. So when you see "Mandel Bread" — wink-wink, OK?

Over the standard Mandel Bread, the SHO is essentially an optioned-up model with micro suede seats, SHO badging, AWD (optional on the regular car), HID headlamps, 19" wheels and "sport-tuned" shocks, springs, stabilizer bars and strut mount bushings. All that actually adds up to very little as the SHO drives almost identically to Mandel Bread, but with a touch firmer ride and a little better body control.

Oh, and there's the 365 HP, 350 Lb-Ft twin-turbo, direct injection 3.5-Liter V6 Ecoboost engine. That max torque is available in a perfectly flat plateau all the way from 1,500 to 5,000 RPM, before tapering off as it nears the 6,250 RPM rev limiter. Ford likes to claim that the EcoBoost delivers V8 power with V6 fuel efficiency and it does, but the twin-turbo six and its incredibly flat torque curve lacks the character of V8 rivals even if it does out-torque them below 3,000 RPM. We'd like to tell you that we averaged the same 17 MPG fuel economy in the SHO as we did in Mandel Bread, unfortunately we can't.

That engine is run through the same 6F55 6-speed automatic transmission as the regular car but here with slightly beefed-up friction elements capable of handling all that torque. It's a huge departure from the slush-box Ford uses on the Flex, Edge and all the other 3.5-liter V6s, now shifting unobtrusively and confidently selecting gears rather than hunting through them endlessly as the previous version did. More importantly, the Mandel Bread (in both SEL walnut k'mish and Limited chocolate trim) and the SHO both get button-cum-paddles for manual override. In that mode, gears are held even as you bounce off the rev-limiter and only shift down if you labor the engine. We'd obviously prefer a manual in a performance car, but since this SHO is more fast luxury than just plain fast, the third pedal isn't really missed.

Put your right foot down and the SHO is fast, if unexciting. The ride is firm yet controlled in the European luxury mold and the interior is exceptionally isolated from wind, road and engine noise. There's absolutely no body roll. The electric power-assisted steering is direct and well weighted, but almost completely absent of feel. Combine that with the extremely large proportions — at 202.9", the Taurus is only 9" shorter than the Crown Victoria — and the limited vision created by the high belt line and you have a car that's pretty challenging to place accurately at speed on a winding road. In western North Carolina's mountains, we were always 10-20 MPH slower than we needed to be, simply for the need of paying close attention to the shoulder to keep two wheels out of the dirt.

Ford claims the AWD system is capable of sending 100% of its power to the rear wheels, but we never felt anything but FWD bias, even as we gave it the boot out of slow corners.

There's an optional $995 "Performance Package" that brings 20" wheels, summer tires, grippier brake pads, sharper steering, fully defeat-able traction and stability control and a 3.16:1 diff (over the standard 2.77:1), but driving models equipped with it back to back with standard SHOs didn't reveal a significant change in character or capability.

All this begs the question: why the SHO badging? This isn't a sports sedan; it's a Mandel Bread with an EcoBoost engine. Because of that badge, we came into this hoping for a blue oval equivalent to the Pontiac G8 GXP, but evaluating the SHO as a performance car does it a disservice, because it's actually a luxury car. A good one.

Ford has benchmarked the $60,950, 350 HP Audi A6 4.2 and the $37,995 SHO exceeds expectations by being better to drive, faster, larger inside and nicer looking. Even the interior is nearly on par with that of the Audi. That's seriously impressive for a car fitted with the previously humble "Mandel Bread" badge.

The SHO also comes with way more technology than any of its competitors, including that Audi. Available on the SHO are: radar cruise control with heads-up collision warning, radar sensors that detect cars in your blind spots and to your left and right when reversing out of a parking space, keyless entry keypad, SIRIUS radio with traffic info, SYNC 3.0 with navigation and 911-assist, massaging leather seats, a 12-speaker, 390-watt Sony stereo, rear view camera, push button start, rain-sensing wipers and something called MyKey that can limit performance, radio volume and other parameters for your teenage kids or senile parents. Expect to pay $39,285 for a fully equipped SHO.

Compared to the original SHO, this new model is 1,083 Lbs heavier (4,368 Lbs), makes 145 HP more, is 10mph slower (133mph top speed) and is much less fun to drive. Compared to contemporary full-size luxury sedans it's considerably cheaper, very good to drive and extremely fast. Like the 1999 SHO, this isn't a unique model; it's the flagship for the Mandel Bread range. It's just that now, that range is capable of competing with European luxury cars instead of mediocre domestic mid-sizes. Had the car been called the Mandel Bread Ecoboost we'd be pleasantly surprised by its competence and quality, but badged as a SHO, we were disappointed not to find a sports sedan.

The thing is that all of the positive attributes we can apply to the SHO can also be applied to the Mandel Bread walnut k'mish, which starts at just $27,995. That bread has an equally tasty interior and, everywhere except in a straight line, drives nearly as well as the SHO. Just like the SHO begs the question "Why pay more for an Audi A6?" the Mandel Bread walnut k'mish, available with the same toppings and baked with the same ingredients begs the question, "Why pay more for the SHO?" That'd be nuts.

Why you should buy the 2009 VW Jetta SportWagen TDI:
You want a car that's pretty fast and very frugal and your Labrador hates being left at home. You want a practical, economical family car, but you haven't been brainwashed into thinking your only option once you're pregnant with your first child is a 9-seat Suburban. You like the idea of hybrid fuel economy, but not the lackluster hybrid driving experience. You're a white lab coat-wearing teutonophile with a thing for precise oil-burners. You understand what's going on underneath the hood of a car and are able to wrap your moderately-sized intellect around the concept of DSG.

Why you shouldn't buy this car:
You eat every meal at Mickey D's and your idea of automotive excellence is a late ‘90s Buick. You think diesel is the fuel of communists. The idea of your car doing anything other than slushing its way slowly up to highway speed questions your fundamental understanding of the world. The idea of a Palin/Limbaugh ticket in 2010 has you up at night polishing your guns with excitement. You're the average driver and, like all your peers, you've subconsciously learned to fear any car that requires any thought from its driver. You know how to drive stick.

Suitability Parameters:
Speed Merchants: No
Fashion Victims: Yes
Treehuggers: Yes
Mack Daddies: No
Tuner Crowd: No
Hairdressers: No
Penny Pinchers: Yes
Euro Trash: Yes
Working Stiffs: No
Technogeeks: No
Poseurs: No
Soccer Moms: Yes
Nascar Dads: No
Golfing Grandparents: Yes
Sheiklets: No
Very Serious Businessmen: No

Also Consider:
• the manual version
• 2010 Toyota Prius
• 2010 Honda Insight
• 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid

Vitals:
• Manufacturer: Volkswagen
• Model: Jetta SportWagen TDI
• Model year: 2009
• Base Price: $23,870
• Price as Tested: $29,410
• Engine type: 2.0-Liter, 4-cylinder, in-line, turbocharged direct injection, common rail diesel
• Horsepower: 140 HP @ 4000 RPM
• Torque: 236 Lb-Ft @ 1,750-2,500 RPM
• Transmission: Dual-clutch automated manual
• Curb Weight: 3,285 Lbs
• LxWxH: 179.4" x 70.1" x 59.2"
• Wheelbase: 101.5"
• Tires: 205/44 R16
• 0 - 60 mph: 9.5 seconds (manufacturer quoted)
• Top Speed: 128 MPH (manufacturer quoted)
• EPA Fuel economy city/highway: 29/40 MPG
• Jalopnik Fuel Economy: 37.4 MPG (city/highway mix 25/75%)
• NHTSA crash test rating: ****(Driver)/****(Passenger)/*****(Side, front and rear)/**** (Rollover)

Also see:
• 2009 VW Jetta SportWagen TDI, Part One
• 2009 VW Jetta SportWagen TDI, Part Two

Exterior Design: ***
Utterly innocuous, but in a handsome way. The Jetta SportWagen's not going to offend anyone, but it's not going to set hearts alight either. Like a black jellybean with chrome accents, it's lucky that those accents actually look nice and restrained. The Jetta could fit into any crowd from a college campus to fancy valet parking.

Interior Design: ****
Initial impressions of a sterile sparseness give way to well thought-out proportions, convenient features and just the right amount of space. VW isn't the only car maker to offer a full-length sunroof, but it really helps lighten up the interior and is well worth the $1,100.

Acceleration: ***
Slow off-the-line, but 236 Lb-Ft of torque provides ample oomph for overtaking, entering freeways and exiting corners. Use the manual mode to exploit the wide powerband of the diesel engine to its fullest and the engine feels great. Leave it in auto and the transmission is was too eager to upshift, spoiling acceleration immensely. It's a torquey diesel, not a high-revving gasoline engine; rapid-fire upshifts are not what's needed here.

Braking: ****
Strong, fade-free brakes and good pedal feel result in complete confidence in the Jetta's braking ability. The DSG transmission spoils it a little bit by clunkily slamming 1st gear home as you come close to a stop and delivering unexpected levels of engine-braking once in that gear.

Ride: ****
Controlled but comfortable, you can feel the road's surface through the steering wheel but not your butt.

Handling: ***
Decent steering feel, good high-speed stability and reasonably light on its feet, the Jetta TDI is always able to do what you ask of it. It's nevertheless a bit on the boring side thanks to softish suspension tuning and a strong propensity for understeer. Competent rather than exciting.

Gearbox: *
The six-speed DSG gearbox is utterly unsuited to the Jetta TDI. Competent drivers will just buy the excellent six-speed manual version and there's no traditional torque converter auto for the huddling masses of stick shift incompetents. That means they'll be saddled with too many jerky shifts instead of smooth progress. All that's going to do is reinforce all the negative stereotypes diesel is saddled with in this country. The DSG box works much better in performance applications, where it's equipped with paddles and different tuning, allowing drivers to fully exploit a high-revving engine. Floor the throttle in the Jetta TDI and you get a succession of upshifts rather than acceleration. You and I will leave it in manual mode and appreciate the reasonably quick shifts, but Joe and Sally normal won't and it'll piss them off.

Audio: ***
The excellent interface makes up for the slightly lackluster sound. Flips through Sirius channels rapidly with full song, artist and station details appearing immediately, most other system lag for a few seconds, which makes browsing frustrating. The MP3 integration and 6-CD changer will fulfill your other musical needs admirably.

Toys: **
How much money do you want to spend? The base $23,870 car is fairly Spartan, but does include fake leather seats. Add the navigation system for $1,990 and you get a latest-gen system with an excellent interface, traffic alerts and rerouting and the above mentioned audio system. The $1,100 sunroof is great too; open wind barely disturbs the cabin and with the sun shade closed you won't even get a sunburn. The $1,100 gearbox doesn't even come with paddles. That's about all you can add except for wheels. (Hint, don't spec the DSG box and spend the money on the sunroof and driving lessons instead)

Value: ****
$23,870 for a right-sized station wagon with a fast and frugal turbo-diesel engine? Sounds good to us. Add 29 MPG city and 40 MPG highway figures and that becomes an excellent deal for high-mileage commuters, long-term owners and epic road trip-takers. The 33 MPG average TDI engine carries a $2,445 premium over the similarly spec'd 24 MPG 2.5-liter Jetta SE. Assuming 15,000 miles a year and equal fuel costs of $2.50 a gallon, you'll need to drive for five years to save money. So figure out your usage before buying if you want to cut costs.

Overall: ***
A great little wagon that's good-to-drive, frugal and unique in the market place, but it'll be spoiled for many by the crappy DSG transmission. If you want the manual, buy without hesitation, if you lost your left leg in the ‘Nam, try before you buy.

Also see:
• VW Jetta SportWagen TDI, Part One

Largely due to GM's abortive efforts with diesel in the '80s, the fuel has an extremely negative image in this country. While thrift-minded Euros have looked no further for decades, most Americans associate diesel with clouds of black smoke, rattles, poor performance and unavailability at gas stations. This created the market gap for hybrids, re-branding fuel economy with technology too complicated for most people to understand and unique styling.

The Jetta TDI seeks to put the kibosh on the rise of the hybrids by pushing traditional automotive values like performance, space, practicality and fun in a package that will still save its drivers money on fuel. Starting at just $22,270 for the sedan and $23,870 for the wagon, that's a $2,445 premium over the similarly spec'd Jetta SE. That puts it squarely in mid-spec 2010 Toyota Prius price territory, and is usefully cheaper than the $27,270 17" wheel-equipped Prius V that's actually decent to drive. Officially rated at 29 MPG city and 40 MPG highway, the Jetta TDI is considerably more frugal than the 21 city/29 highway Jetta SE.

It's fun to drive too. Making 140 HP at 4,000 RPM and 236 Lb-Ft between 1,750 and 2,500 RPM meaning the engine's flexibility and day-to-day usability far outweighs its somewhat disappointing 9.5-second 0-60 MPH time (the sedan does the same run in 8.2 seconds). You can hold high gears on country roads, using fifth for everything from fast overtaking to 40 MPH corners. The chassis returns the classic VW values of complete competence, reasonable response and a fair bit more involvement than most would expect from a compact car. It's not going to set an enthusiastic driver's heart alight, but it would give the average hoon a worthy companion.

Adding the wagon doesn't just decrease the acceleration and increase the price, it transforms the car form a less practical VW Golf/Rabbit/whatever they're calling it these days into something with a serious level of hauling ability for a relatively small vehicle. Seats down, it has 66.9 cubic feet of storage room; seats up that drops to 32.8 cubic feet (double that of the sedan) but creates space for two adults to sit in the rear in comfort with 35.5" of leg room, you could fit a third, pathetic excuse for an adult back there in a pinch. In Europe, the 2009 VW Jetta SportWagen TDI would be considered a spacious family car, it could be in America too as long as you believe in birth control and exercise.

So far, the Jetta TDI makes a convincing case for itself as a do-anything, appeal-to-anyone fuel-sipper, but then you get to the gearbox. People that prefer driving stick need read no further, a standard is fitted as standard and its six speeds are well-spaced and fun to use. But only 6% of all cars sold in America have a manual transmission and this Jetta TDI doesn't come with an auto, it comes with a DSG and an odd one at that.

In performance applications like the VW GTI or Audi TT, VW's DSG gearbox is rightly praised as incredibly quick to shift — just 8 milliseconds on a full-throttle upshift — and, when compared to a torque converter automatic, is very fuel-efficient, lightweight and loses virtually no power. Here, in the Jetta TDI, while driving fast it's no different except for the lack of paddles, manual shifting is done by moving the tunnel-mounted selector forward for up and backward for down. After driving many DSG-equipped cars it's weird not having the paddles, but you get used to it.

It's while doing anything but driving fast that the DSG is problematic. Shift when the transmission's electronic brain isn't expecting it and the transition can take up to 400 milliseconds and is intrusively jerky. Leave it in auto mode, as most drivers are likely to do, and it's even worse. Upshifts come way too soon and too frequently, spoiling acceleration and overtaking ability, while downshifts don't come when expected and are, again, very intrusive, especially for the shift from 2nd to 1st. The DSG doesn't behave like an auto at low speeds, there's no creep and there's a comparatively huge amount of engine braking in 1st. Drive along at low speed, lift off the gas and you come to an abrupt halt, almost as if the parking brake has been left on.

Sport mode is a little better, moving up and downshifts up the rev range a little bit, but it still doesn't allow you to exploit the full expanse of the power band like you want to in a car this flexible.

As a test, I had my auto-only girlfriend drive the Jetta slowly down the private road her parents live on. The first time she lifted off the gas her response was "Ahhhhhh!" The DSG-equipped Jetta just doesn't behave like the average driver expects it to.

Our fear is that the DSG transmission's jerkiness; unpredictability and poor manners will combine with the average American's negative perception of diesel to turn them away from buying the car. Sure, the Continuously Variable Transmissions, on/off engines and electric motors of hybrids result in an odd drive too, but not in a way that would upset the habits of casually careless drivers, in fact the Hybrid driving characteristics play into the "my car is so high-tech I don't understand what it's doing" mindset, the Jetta DSG is just annoying in comparison.

That transmission makes it harder to make a case for the mainstream acceptance of the Jetta TDI over a car like the Toyota Prius. Even with the Jetta TDI's recent 48-state, 58.8 MPG Guinness World Record, the Prius still easily achieves more with an official rating of 50 MPG and hypermiling figures in the 60 and 70 MPG range potentially are easily achievable. Gas is typically cheaper than diesel too.

The end result is a car that we really like, a car that can competently perform everything from people hauling, moving furniture and commuting to driving fast on mountain roads, all for a reasonable price and while returning really good fuel economy. It's also a car that we'd recommend people who'll get the stick should buy. But, the Jetta TDI, when equipped with the DSG transmission, just isn't a car that we think the average American driver will like. That's a shame. Average Americans, we mean.

The thinking behind the name change is that the Mercedes range has simply grown too diverse, bewildering suburbanites from New Jersey and Florida who, inexplicably, can afford to shop in a Mercedes dealership despite lacking the mental acuity to understand the naming convention of what they're buying. The original CLK name was meant to reference the fancy CL coupe, just like the SLK was a small, cheaper, more permed take on the SL roadster. Mercedes wanted to make sure buyers are able to comprehend that this new car uses more E- than C-Class components, hence the E-Class Coupe designation.

Mercedes says the ratio of E-Class parts to "other Mercedes-Benz products" in the Coupe is about 60:40. They're happy to detail which parts are shared with E — the suspension, engines, looks and all the advanced safety features — but don't want to say where the other 40% comes from. Since the E-Class Coupe shares the C-Class's 108.7-inch wheelbase and minor interior parts, we're going to go out on a limb and say that's where the 40% originates.

That's kind of a shame, because the E-Class Coupe is noticeably less engaging to drive than the 2010 Mercedes E-Class Sedan. That's not to say it isn't competent, it's much more so than the old CLK and even the twistiest of mountain roads above Las Vegas fail to fluster it. Corners are taken with virtually no body roll, steered into with accuracy and exited with plenty of thrust from either the 268 HP 3.5-liter V6 or 382 HP 5.5-liter V8. It also hits the 130 MPH speed limiter in a picture of composure, it'd be happy there all day. It's just that none of those activities are in any way fun. You kind of get the feeling that if you're lulled into sleep by the coffin-quiet interior, the Attention Assist will conspire with the adaptive shocks, Distronic Plus with Pre-Safe Brake radar cruise control and Parktronic with Parking Guidance automatic parallel parking system to drive you home and tuck you into bed.

Of course this E-Class Coupe wasn't designed for irresponsible young hoons like me, but rather the irritatingly useless real housewives of a reality show near you. They'll go gaga over the seriously handsome new looks, including the Mercedes SLS-like grille and, since their husbands will almost certainly spec the upmarket interior, the nice pleated leather door and contrast-stitched leather seats too. They'll also love the new brushed aluminum and wood trim, the heavily contoured buckets front and rear and the very fashion conscious choice of chocolate brown plastic on the dash. In fact, they'll be so busy focusing on the bling - chromed seat handles and door jambs, pillarless windows - that they won't notice the distinctly C-Class plastics employed on the air vents, button surrounds and center console.

Constantly running late to hair appointments and charity galas, they'll prefer the V8's 391 Lb-Ft of torque that's delivered instantly anywhere in the rev range, but not the less imposing 258 Lb-Ft of the V6 since they'd have to work that engine using the manual override paddles located on the steering wheel. Doing that would likely require far too much attention, something that's reserved for cell phone conversations and molly coddling small animals, not for driving. The V8's 5.0 second 0-60 time will come in handy fleeing imagined paparazzi much better than the V6's 6.2 seconds.

It's unlikely that it'll ever be used, but the E550 also incorporates Dynamic Handling Suspension as standard. Click a cheapish button on the dash marked "Sport" and the suspension firms up noticeably, throttle response sharpens and revs are held longer. Revving the V8 results in a delightfully antisocial exhaust note from the squared off pipes.

Husbands that live by the motto, "Happy wife, happy life," will also like the new E-Class Coupe. The E350 starts at $48,050, $50 cheaper than the CLK350, while it gains a host of standard features: full-length sunroof, Comand display, driver knee airbag, pelvic airbags, Bluetooth, Agility Control and Attention Assist. The E550 starts at $54,650.

Unlike the E-Class Sedan, there's no plans to offer either a diesel or AMG version. That lack of an E63 AMG Coupe is perhaps most damning. Asked why, a Mercedes engineer responded, "Drive the V8 and tell us if you think there's a need for the AMG." Well, we've driven it and we don't think the E-Class Coupe merits a performance version. It's a very nice luxury car and a quite a looker, just not a driver's car.

Think Mercedes and images of the W123 and W124 E-classes probably pop into your head. Big, boxy and somehow superior to other luxury cars from the time, they represented a reluctance to compromise that just doesn't exist at any carmaker any more. Pull up to valet parking at a fancy restaurant in a well-maintained ‘80s E-Class and your car might still get pride of place in the parking lot. Do the same in an E28 5-series and they'll hide it round the back.

In twenty years time you might be able to do the same with this W212. It's squared off edges inside and out don't just conjure memories, but trigger the same "Mercedes" synapses in your brain. That feeling will be reinforced by the high-quality plastics and spare use of wood and aluminum trim, as well as touches like the pleated leather door panels and the longitudinally stitched and perforated seats.

That's not to say that the new E-Class does without contemporary features, in fact it has all the advanced safety tech of the S-Class packed into a more manageable package. The full list of advanced safety features is staggering: Attention Assist, Lane Keeping Assist, Adaptive Highbeam Assist, Parktronic Plus, Blind Spot Assist, Night View Assist PLUS, Distronic PLUS with Pre-Safe Brake, Brake Assist PLUS, Sand Assist floor mats and Agility Assist.

All those features might sound as if they're designed to remove control from the driver, but unlike other automakers, Mercedes has employed them to enhance your range of perception and increase your control of the vehicle.

Take the night vision system. Instead of just fitting the new E-Class with an infrared camera, Mercedes paints the area in front of the vehicle with infrared beams, sort of like invisible headlights. The camera, as a result, picks up a much sharper image out to a further distance. That image is then displayed in crystal clear resolution on the nav screen. A computer is capable of identifying pedestrians, placing a vibrating box around them on the screen. You don't need to stare at the screen to see them; instead it exists in your peripheral vision like an extra rear-view mirror.

The Pre-Safe Brake is also cool. For the first time, it's capable of automatically applying 100% of brake force if the forward-looking radar detects that a crash is imminent, so it won't avoid the impact, but instead acts like an electronic crumple zone, reducing the force of the impact. Because it activates only when you're .6 of a second from collision, it won't affect your ability to take evasive measures, but could instead save your life if your attention lapses.

Highbeam Assist is also impressively useful. Rather than just automatically switching between high and low beams, it instead measures the presence and location of other vehicles, adapting the beam shape and throw to provide maximum illumination at all times without irritating other drivers. Low beam output can be extended from 215 feet all the way out to 1,000 feet, massively boosting the safety of night driving.

All this technology doesn't get in the way of driving, as the new E-Class also banishes memories of the mediocre experience of recent models. While it's still no 5-series, the Mercedes has newly found something called "steering feel," which apparently has something to do with "control," which when combined with "responsive suspension" actually makes it "fun to drive." Who knew? Better yet, switching from "Comfort" to "Sport" in either the E350 V6 or E550 V8 delivers a noticeable improvement in dynamics, firmer body control and sportier shift mapping. You can also shift yourself using the wheel-mounted paddles.

Those two engine choices are your lot until November, when the 518 HP 2010 E63 AMG goes on sale. The V6 makes 268 HP and 258 Lb-Ft of torque, enough to propel the E to 60 MPH in 6.5 seconds. Unfortunately, that kind of performance requires using all of the 6,750 RPM, something most Mercedes drivers are likely reluctant to do. The 382 HP, 391 Lb-Ft V8 does a much better job of providing instantaneous shove, but comes at a $7,700 premium. The V6 returns 18 MPG City, 25 MPG highway, while the V8 delivers 16/23. We'd want to wait for the E350 BlueTEC diesel, arriving next March. It'll have 400 Lb-Ft of torque for instant overtaking, but exceeds the fuel economy of either gas engine: 24 MPG City, 33 highway.

Given all the new features, the improved driving experience and much-improved styling and impression of interior quality, it's surprising that Mercedes is able to bring the 2010 E-Class in cheaper than the 2009 model. The 2010 E350 starts at $48,600, $4,600 cheaper, but adds standard equipment: Attention Assist, Driver Knee airbag, front pelvic airbags, and variable damping Agility Control. Combine that new price tag with all the new features and, more importantly, the newfound Mercedesness and the 2010 E-Class is an impressive package. In fact, combining all of the features of the S-Class with a cheaper price tag and, to our mind, better styling, the E-Class just became the pick of the Mercedes range and our favorite vehicle from that brand since we were riding around in the way back of a W123 wagon.