Latest Car Extreme

On the subject of the Mk.8 KTT Velocette over the counter production racing motorcycle, I often wondered how much one costs if purchased as spare parts…..having the elusive spares numbers list, pre and post-war Veloce price lists and feeling like wasting some time, I set out to find out…..

Introduced at the November 1938 Earles Court ( UK) Motorcycle show, the newly introduced Velocette Mk.8 KTT production racing motorcycle was eagerly awaited by motorcycle racers and enthusiasts.

First available in May 1939 just prior to the IOM TT races, the price of a complete Mk.8 KTT racer was UK£120.
In Dec.1946 the listed price for 1947 was UK£240 (+UK£64.16.0 purchase tax in UK)
For 1950 UK£260 (+UK£70.3.0 PT in UK)
The price of various items was also of considerable interest…
A WM1x21” or WM2x19” Dunlop alloy rim were UK£5.5.0 each ( interestingly a bare steel rim was UK£0.18.0 and an enamelled rim UK£1.10.0 each), bad news if you crashed and buckled the rim.. several weeks wages at the time.
A complete frame with a pair of Dowty Oleomatic suspension units was UK£67

During 1979 The Australian “Aviation Safety Digest” ran a series of articles on vision and safety, obviously much of it applies to motorcycling and driving and can explain, but in no way condone, the familiar “I didn’t see him” comment following a road accident…..I’ve edited the articles and collated them to be relevant to us and the several diagrams, whilst aviation oriented can be looked at from our viewpoint…read on….
In motoring today we have many distractions whilst driving…inside the vehicle-radios, CD players, cell phones. Externally a multitude of signs, traffic calming devices, traffic signals and an often confusing series of road rules to obey. However the see and be seen concept is still a most important element in collision avoidance. To make the most of this concept, we should know our sight limitations. This article sets out some of the physiological, psychological and environmental factors that affect visual efficiency.
One little known limitation of the human eyeball is the blind spot where light strikes the optic nerve. In most eyeballs this blind spot is about 30º right of centre, looking straight ahead. With both eyes open and vision unobstructed by objects, the blind spots of each eye are cancelled by the peripheral vision of the opposite eye. The brain combines the image and the blind spot disappears.
But what happens when peripheral vision from the opposite eye is obstructed by an object such as the side windscreen pillar? Now the brain cannot fill in the image.
How large is the void?
It’s about a 1½º cone diverging from the optic nerve. Under some conditions it could block instruments from view and in the case of an aircraft will blank out a 747 three kilometres away.
You can find you blind spot on the picture above. Hold the picture at arms length with both eyes open, focusing on the cross on the left windshield. Then bring the picture in until it is almost touching your face. With both eyes open you should not lose sight of the 747 in the right windshield. Now close your left eye and try again. Keep your right eye focused on the cross as you bring the picture in towards your face. The 747 will disappear, then reappear as you draw the picture closer.
Obviously I published this in the Australian Velocette Owner’s Club magazine some years back, so I’m unsure how it will work looking at the picture on a computer VDU.
When your blind spot limitation is combined with empty field myopia ( the tendency of the eye to focus at about 6 metres when there is nothing to focus on), you can appreciate your visual limitations.
The solution to this problem, a natural phenomenon common to everyone, is to learn how to use your eyes in an efficient scan and overcome vision blockages caused by vehicle structure.
How to scan .........
The best way to start is by getting rid of bad habits. Naturally, not looking at all is the poorest scan technique, but glancing to the side at 5 minute intervals or so is also poor when you consider that it only takes seconds for a disaster to happen.
Glancing around and giving it the old once around without stopping to focus on anything is practically useless; so is staring into one spot for long periods of time.
So much for the bad habits. Learn how to scan properly by knowing where to concentrate your search.
In normal driving conditions you can generally avoid the threat of collision by scanning an area 60º to the left and to the right of your central vision area. This doesn’t mean you should forget the rest of the area you can see from the side areas every few scans.Ever wondered why, as you approach an intersection where a vehicle is also approaching along a side street to say your left ( or right ) you often arrive at the intersection together and if somebody doesn’t take some quick evasive action such as sharp braking, swerving to miss, a collision occurs? Well there is an easy way to avoid this situation….

Look at the left diagram…..when you look across at the approaching car it appears at an angle Θº to you, as you advance forward, look across again to the other vehicle…does it appear to be in the same relative position/angle to you as your previous look?
Well the bad news is you will have a collision! You need to speed up or slow down a little so the angle between you changes each time you look…simple.
Ever wonder why in the situation where a vehicle coming directly towards you suddenly turns across your path and the driver exclaims “I didn’t see you”!

Looking at the diagram left, imagine the plane is a vehicle approaching you, as you can see the angle it subtends when in the distance is small.
When it closes to you and is half the original distance, the angle is now twice as great, but it’s still very small and so on until when almost on you the object appears huge, because the angle is doubling quickly and if you are unlucky, it hits you.
The small frontal area of a motorcycle exacerbates this and makes it difficult for the vehicle coming towards you to workout just how fast the vehicle is approaching and can be disastrous if it starts to turn across you. A collision is often inevitable, but not condonable.
There isn’t much you can do in this situation, but you must be aware this can and often does happen.

Left click on pictures to enlarge

Every year I make the trip to the US to stay with my good friend, arch motorcycle and car enthusiast, Mick Felder. This time it was to travel with Mick up to the Napa area of middle California for the US Velo OC “Spring Opener” ride at Sue and John Ray’s “Rancho Veloce”…and while a Velocette aficionado, Mick likes British and early American cars… So come stroll with me through the photographs I recently took inside his business…Felder’s Body Shop, 210 Pacific Coast Hwy., Hermosa Beach, Ca. 90254……
Mick Felder will tell you he is on the wrong side of 70, but a fitter person of this age would be difficult to spot. A bachelor, he has had a life-long love affair with mechanical things.
As a restorer of older cars his body shop… panel beating shop would be the term in Australia or the UK, is a constant source of supply of these gems.
A 1917 Studebaker sits in the centre of the showroom, more often used yearly for local Rotary club fund-raisers ( Mick is a great supporter of such community organisations and regularly does Meals-on-Wheels deliveries to the less mobile members of the local community and has served on the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce for over 40 years).
MG B, Porsche 356, MG Midget, 1952 Moto Guzzi Falcone 500, Triton ( Triumph engine in a Norton “Featherbed” frame), Velocette Venom and numerous engines on display greet you when you walk through the door.
Back in the spacious work area a Triumph TR3, several 1980s BMW motorcycles, a mid 50s Triumph, and many examples of good American “iron” nestle in corners.
All the while Mick in his usual laid back style answers queries on the telephone, rebuffs disappointed callers with more modern cars suffering from the inevitable “fender bender” from LA traffic and discusses restoration work with friends and fellow enthusiasts.
So if you’re in this area of Los Angeles, it’s a shop that beckons to be stopped at….

Left click on photos to enlarge them.

Yamaha's success saling automatic bike in Indonesia influenced other manufacturer to sale the same bike type. After Yamaha Nouvo, Yamaha launch Yamaha Mio which has won Indonesian market and forced Honda and Suzuki to take a role in this class. Honda launched Honda Vario and Suzuki lauched Suzuki Spin and Skywave to compete Yamaha Mio. Then, Yamaha launch Mio Soul and we hear some rumors in recent days that Yamaha will bring their retro bike to Indonesia, Yamaha Vino. People call it Yamaha Mio Vino, yups .. it could be a retro style of Yamaha Mio, not like it's original Vino which has only 50CC capacity, but 125CC.

After being secret for about two monts, finally Honda launch their new motorcycle in Indonesia. This motorcycle has been advertised for about one month, but didn't mentinoned it's name. And finally, 6 April last week, Honda launch it for public in Surabaya. It's name is Honda CS1 (City Sport).

Mercedes-Benz performance brand AMG shows its environmental side.

Mercedes’s AMG performance division wants to offer guiltless pleasure for those who love performance cars but are tired of being criticized for a lack of commitment to save the planet.

On the eve of the 2008 Geneva auto show, AMG boss Volker Mornhinweg boldly announced that the fleet of performance cars will achieve a 30 percent reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2012. Smaller engines, hybrid systems, and diesels are all on the table for Mercedes’ thriving performance sub-brand.

Mornhinweg leveled a shot at BMW’s claim to “efficient dynamics” which is spawning products such as the X5 Vision diesel hybrid concept, also unveiled in Geneva. AMG’s roots are in racing, he said, and “racing was always about ‘efficient dynamics,’ we just called it differently.” He then went on to announce fuel-saving technologies to be offered in AMG cars across the globe.

In 2010, direct-injection gasoline engines and start-stop systems will mark the beginning of the push to lower consumption and emissions. AMG is developing a crankshaft starter-generator system that it claims is far more advanced that BMW’s current system, which operates with a conventional starter.

Two-Mode Performance

But that kind of technology is just the beginning. AMG is working on full hybrid cars that can drive short distances with just the electric motor. Mercedes is part of a consortium with General Motors, Chrysler, and BMW in developing this “two-mode” or full hybrid system for use by each automaker.

Mercedes did not want to launch its version of the two-mode system in the M-class, as there already are hybrid SUVs on the market, and “we don’t want to be a follower,” says Mornhinweg. For AMG, look for the technology to bow on a low, sporty car like the CL, the SL, or the CLS.

Turbocharged V-6s on Tap?

In a reversal of its strategy of the past few years, AMG could also offer six-cylinder gasoline engines again. This time around, they would be turbocharged. Mornhinweg says that a decision will be made soon. Turbocharged V-8 engines are already high on the agenda.

Despite all that fuel-saving technology, AMG continues to focus on fun and performance. The new MCT multi-clutch transmission—essentially Mercedes’ seven-speed automatic with a multiclutch system replacing the torque converter—will migrate to more models after its debut in the SL63 AMG. The next-generation CLK and SLK are sure bets to receive the gearbox, while the C-class is an open question. It won’t replace the automatic throughout the lineup as it is not well-suited to towing and does not fit the character of the S- or CL-class luxury cars.

AMG will also up its performance credibility with ceramic brakes. By now, they are reliable but cooling is still a challenge, and there needs to be a significant performance advantage over the regular brakes to warrant the additional cost.

AMG is hoping its fuel-saving announcements present a challenge to competitors. Porsche has announced a CO2 reduction of 30 percent for its V-6 hybrid powertrain over the regular V-6. But such savings across the entire fleet are “unrealistic,” Porsche board member Wolfgang Dürheimer tells us here in Geneva.

Last year, AMG sold 20,107 units, its best results ever. For 2008 and beyond, Mornhinweg is aiming for “further, profitable growth.” If he reaches his ambitious CO2 targets, Mother Earth won’t really care.

GM checks off milestones in the development of its gasoline-electric plug-in vehicle.

General Motors is developing the Chevrolet Volt electric vehicle and its lithium-ion battery pack on parallel paths—and both have passed significant milestones en route to a targeted November 2010 launch.

Larry Burns, GM vice president of research and development and strategic planning, tells Car and Driver in an interview that the design of the car has been frozen. While the production model is not a twin of the Volt concept, the more conventional sedan bears a family resemblance to the Chevy Malibu. And, in the interests of speed, it dips into parts bins of existing GM products wherever possible. That likely includes an existing four-cylinder gasoline engine as the on-board means of recharging the battery that, alone, gives the vehicle a range of only 40 miles.

The car was designed around the need to package a battery pack with a 150,000-mile life, with enough performance for a 0-to-60 mph time of 8.5 seconds. The Volt concept also underwent changes to improve aerodynamics after extensive wind-tunnel testing.

Time to Hit the Road

And at an event in Detroit, GM execs discussed preparations for road-testing the lithium-ion batteries that will go into the production car—past tests were with nickel-metal hydride batteries. The next stage of testing begins this month, with battery packs in a 2001 Chevy Malibu mule to gather much-needed durability data as the team scrambles to simulate 10 years of usage over the next two.

Burns says initially GM canvassed numerous battery suppliers around the world as part of its e-flex program. After a “bake-off” between suppliers, GM is working with two deemed to “have the chemistries to get there.” Burns says there are eight criteria that GM determined its lithium-ion batteries must meet for automotive application, including such things as energy density, extreme temperature viability, the material set, and cost.

Second-Gen Work Underway

Meanwhile, Burns says work is already underway on the second generation. He declines to give a timeframe.

Plug-ins may be exciting, but with a range of only 40 miles, they fall short in comparison to a family-size fuel-cell vehicle with a 300-mile range and zero emissions. Burns sees work on plug-ins as a complimentary play to FCVs that convert hydrogen to electricity onboard, with batteries for power assist and to store energy regenerated in braking.

And he doesn’t anticipate the Chevy Tahoe or other full-size vehicles—or even minivans, wagons or mid-size SUVs—will be offered as plug-ins. “It’s okay for a Cobalt-sized vehicle, but not something with twice the mass.” For larger vehicles, GM’s two-mode hybrid system makes more sense. And efficient gasoline engines will continue to play a significant role in the future, Burns says.

GM Determined to be Fuel-Cell Vehicle Leader

And while the Volt program has been designated a number-one priority at GM, fuel-cell-vehicle development is running full steam as well, Burns says, because GM is determined not to repeat with FCVs what happened with hybrids, with Toyota getting so far out in front of the market. “Toyota creamed us on the Prius,” Burns says. “It won’t happen again.”

Pole-dancing? Audi’s next lightweight supermodel might be a bit more of a stripper.

The Audi R8 is great. But as evidenced by the R8 V-12 TDI (nee R8 TDI Le Mans) concept car on display at this year’s Detroit and Geneva auto shows, Audi is clearly thinking about proliferating the R8 lineup.

The next R8 to roll down the spotless Neckarsulm, Germany, assembly line may be a lightweight stripper version rather than a more powerful oil-burner. So hints Stafan Reil, the head of development for Quattro, GmbH, which assembles the R8 and almost every Audi that starts with “S” and “RS.”

Lighter, more intensified cars make sense for Audi’s sport cars, Reil tells Car and Driver, much like Lamborghini’s success with the lightened Gallardo Superleggera.

“This is a direction you can go and make business,” Reil says, stressing that Audi won’t build anything that won’t make the company money. “It makes sense for the TT, and maybe in the future in an R8.”

Audi maintains performance while increasing efficiency by 20%.

Those who assumed the 2010 Audi S4 would share its powertrain with the S5 were incorrect. Instead, look for an all-new forced-induction 3.0-liter V-6 that will generate something close to the 340 horsepower found in the outgoing S4’s 4.2-liter V-8.

Why is the Audi S4 moving from a V-8 to a V-6, just as the BMW M3 moved from an inline-six to a V-8? In two words: Fuel economy. Audi’s strategy is to deliver comparable or improved overall performance by toeing the line on weight and maintaining power output by using forced induction on a smaller displacement engine. Doing so will boost a manual transmission S4’s fuel economy on the European cycle to 23.3 mpg compared with only 19.4 mpg for the V-8 S5. That’s an efficiency gain of 20%.

A less powerful, 290-hp, 310 lb-ft version of the engine will be the base offering in the A6 Quattro, replacing the 3.2-liter V-6. Known as TFSI, which in the past has been Audi’s internal moniker for four-cylinder turbos, the new engine may be referred to as the 3.0T in the model name, possibly indicating a twin-charged system using both a supercharger and a turbocharger. While Volkswagen has a “twincharger,” Audi has not yet offered such a system. At the very least, we expect the new V-6 to be supercharged, although what will allow the S4’s version to generate 50 or so more horsepower is still a mystery.

The supercharger will make the V-6 weigh about the same as the V-8 overall. Add in the requisite safety and luxury features that every new model gets, and it’s a wash. Expect Audi to claim a nominal weight reduction of only 20–100 pounds for the new model, putting it at about 3900 pounds.

Audi will debut the 2010 S4 this fall sometime after the 2008 Paris show in October—making the L.A. show in November a possibility. Expect the new S4 to compete with the BMW 335i for efficiency but the Audi probably won’t have the edge in performance and will cost significantly more. Watch for more details on the new S4’s engine in the coming days.

Two used-to-be roadsters aim for the hearts of purist drivers.

The tradition of sports-car automaking in recent history has been to turn out a roadster, wait until sales slip, then produce a hardtop to pick up the slack. To the nonenthusiast driver, the idea of turning a perfectly good convertible sports car into a hardtop coupe must seem as pointless as the plot of the film Snakes on a Plane. Why give up the joys of driving alfresco to permanently insert yourself into a rolling phone booth, especially if it costs about the same as the ragtop? But adding a roof to a convertible makes sense to car enthusiasts, because the roof increases structural rigidity that in turn allows for a sportier chassis.

In general, a stiff structure leads to a car that is more precise all around, as everything that is intended to move on a car (wheels, suspension, steering) works best when it is attached to a structure that moves about as little as a line at the DMV. Bolt a terrific chassis to a less-than-rigid platform, and movement in the structure will introduce unpredictable motion and inexact wheel control that will muddy handling. Stiff springs, often found on sporting cars, only exacerbate the motion in a flexing structure. Similarly, a floppy structure will introduce imprecision to the steering system, potentially degrading feel and accuracy.

The Porsche Cayman S and the recently introduced BMW Z4 M coupe are hardtop versions of the Porsche Boxster and BMW Z4 M roadster, although Porsche takes exception to that assessment and wants the Cayman considered as a completely separate model line. Delusion aside, the Cayman S and the M coupe are in the grand, olden-day tradition of the MGB GT coupe and Triumph GT6, trading open-air motoring for a distinctive look and the dynamic benefits that come from increased structural rigidity. Indeed, Porsche claims the hardtop Cayman S is 100 percent more rigid than a softtop Boxster S. Both deliver on the promise of the coupe née convertible by offering a driving experience that is different — more sporting and track-ready than that of their cloth-top brethren.

For the hardtop Cayman S, Porsche charges $4200 more than the price of the convertible Boxster S. BMW, though, charges $2000 less for the M coupe than the convertible M roadster. We can imagine that more than a few customers have walked into a Porsche dealership and balked at the idea that the fixed-roof car costs more than the ragtop. Porsche points out a significant fact: The Cayman S has a larger, 3.4-liter engine and 15 more horses than the Boxster S. But pricing the Cayman above the Boxster does separate the driving poseur from the purist.

At this point you’re probably wondering when we’re gonna insert the 400-hp Corvette into this comparison test. No, the Vette remains in the wings because Corvette coupes all have removable targa-style roofs, whereas our two Germans have fixed roofs. If you’re thinking a Z06, which has a fixed roof, would fit in with these coupes, we’d argue that its 505 horsepower puts it in a different league. Arbitrary, you say? Well, you and tech director/Corvette drooler Larry Webster should get a room. In any event, the Corvette isn’t here, so it’s Germany versus Germany, BMW versus Porsche. And after a week comparing the Cayman S and M coupe, we’ve discovered that although both are spawned from roadsters and offer nearly identical performance, it was easy to choose a winner.

We’ve been waiting to get behind the wheel of the M coupe since BMW pulled the wraps off of it at the Frankfurt auto show in 2005. We still remember with fondness the last-generation M coupe, even though in silhouette it looked like a low-top boot. When BMW stopped producing the original M coupe in 2002, it was 315 horsepower strong and arguably the most amusing car in BMW’s lineup. Would the new coupe, we wondered, be engaging enough to make us forget the fondness we had for its predecessor?

The ’06 M coupe is a striking and handsome design when you see it in person. Admittedly, there is a great deal of excited styling, flame surfacing, and what-not crammed into its diminutive 161.9 inches, but all the discordant lines somehow gel together to give off a pleasant vibe that suggests baby Aston Martin. That might be a stretch, but we can all agree that this M coupe’s exterior design will turn on a larger swath of the populace than the previous M coupe did. When parked next to the Porsche, the Z4 M consistently drew more attention and praise. Perhaps passersby didn’t realize the Cayman S was a new model and mistook it for a 911, a mistake that Cayman owners likely won’t mind.

Under the long hood of the M coupe is the familiar iron-block inline six-cylinder engine with an aluminum head that currently propels the M3 and the Z4 M roadster. As in the M roadster, the engine makes 330 horses high up at 7900 rpm, with 262 pound-feet of torque coming at 4900 rpm. The BMW’s logbook on this comparo was full of praise for the responsive flexibility and “angry metallic wail” of the powerful straight-six. It’s connected to the engine by a ZF six-speed manual that boasts short throws but has a slightly rubbery feel. We also found that it’s easy to beat the second-gear synchros during a high-rpm shift from first to second gear. You get a teeth-rattling grrauuch!

A quick run through the 3303-pound M-car’s gears produces a 0-to-60 time of 4.8 seconds, a quarter-mile time of 13.4 seconds at 105 mph, and a governed top speed of 160 mph. The Cayman S rang in at 4.8 seconds to 60 and posted a slightly quicker quarter-mile time of 13.3 seconds at 107 mph on its way to an ungoverned top speed of 166 mph. This M coupe proved to be a couple of ticks slower than the M roadster we tested in June, which was just 26 pounds lighter (the performance difference is likely attributable to production variation and a green engine). Nevertheless, the BMW is quick and has shorter gearing (through the first four gears) than the Cayman S, endowing it with an eagerness that makes it feel faster than the Porsche in day-to-day urban driving.

On the highway, the coupe locks onto the horizon and rarely requires any correction to stay steadfastly in a lane, but the addition of a roof means it’s not so easy to see the traffic around you. The view out the back is only good for reading the license plate of the car directly behind, rear-quarter views are blocked by the large C-pillars and hatch, the windshield is so short you’ll have to crane your neck to see stoplights dangling overhead, and the roof creeps into one’s peripheral vision. Not surprisingly, six-foot-five tech editor Dave VanderWerp griped the loudest about the pillbox-view interior. It does feel smaller and more intimate than the one-cubic-foot difference between the two cars suggests. However, for humans of a more reasonable stature, the M coupe’s intimacy lends a special feel that is absent in the more spacious Cayman. Whenever we’re in the Cayman, we’re reminded of its brother, the Boxster. The M coupe somehow manages to make us completely forget the Z4 with which it shares much of its interior.

After a slog of 150 or so miles, we arrived at GingerMan Raceway in South Haven, Michigan. We would have been fresh and ready to start lapping the M coupe, but we needed a moment to walk off the miles owing to the stiff ride, unyielding seats, and seating position that arranges the driver almost between the rear wheels. Perhaps our glutes were just sore and sensitive from racing go-karts a few days before, but the Cayman S didn’t draw any such complaints. This would also be a good time to mention that the M coupe ran out of gas on the way to the track while continuing to show an eighth of a tank on hand and a range of 40 miles. Unnervingly, it repeated this failure a second time, the needle showing a quarter of a tank and 60 miles still in the bank. A fill-up revealed that the coupe had mysteriously run out of fuel with four gallons in its 14.5-gallon tank.

On the track, the M-car’s engine proved willing and eager to pull the coupe hard out of corners. Steering feel through the thick-rimmed, multifunctional steering wheel received praise from associate technical editor Robin Warner. “I love gripping the thick wheel in my hands,” he enthused, “and I always know what the car is doing.” However, what Warner giveth, Warner taketh away: “Unfortunately, what it’s always doing is understeering.”

Supporting the M coupe are struts up front and a multilink setup in back. Compared with the M roadster, the coupe has higher spring rates and more aggressive damping. Many chassis parts are shared with the M3, and although the tuning is different, the setup is conceptually the same. Common components include the rear subframe, limited-slip differential, rear anti-roll-bar mounting points, wheel bearings, front control arms, and vented and cross-drilled rotors clamped by single-piston calipers that are shared with the M3 Competition package. On the skidpad, the coupe clung to the tune of 0.89 g. On the track, it lacks the fluidity, sensitivity to weight transfer, and overall grip of the Cayman. We all agreed that the M coupe is willing and easy to drive on the track, but it takes only one corner in the Cayman S to realize the Porsche has one of the best sports-car chassis this side of a Lotus.

Even before we started lapping GingerMan’s 1.88-mile circuit, the brake feel of the M coupe drew some flack: “Longish pedal travel, strong and grabby, but lacking the firm pedal of the Porsche.” Nonetheless, the BMW equaled the Porsche’s 154-foot stop from 70 mph. After three hot laps, the brake pedal became familiar enough with the carpet that we’re surprised they didn’t get engaged. As the brakes began to fade, the Continental ContiSportContact tires began to lose grip and squirm underneath. Interestingly, BMW was stuck with tires that are a generation old. Continental couldn’t make sufficient quantities of its ContiSportContact 2 series in the necessary sizes in time for the M coupe’s launch. The old Contis have an M3 marking on the sidewall, which indicates that BMW had some say in their development, but they still pale next to the Cayman S’s rubber. Porsche equips most of its cars with Mich­elin Pilot Sport PS2s, and the extra grip the Cayman S enjoys over the M coupe is probably due to Porsche’s choice of rubber. With more time, we might have outfitted the M coupe with PS2s to see how the tires affect skidpad grip and lap times. We certainly could have purchased a lot of tires for the $12,380 difference in as-tested prices between the two cars [or bought a Kia Rio — Ed.]. Our $56,270 Z4 M (that price includes a $1000 gas-guzzler tax) came equipped with rain-sensing wipers, power seats, auto-dimming mirrors, and a navigation system and still managed to undercut the Cayman S’s $59,695 base price, not to mention the $68,650 as-tested price. There is some value here, and the M coupe feels sporting and alive in isolation, but life becomes unsettled for the BMW as long as a Porsche is around.

The Cayman S, fresh off a win against the barely legal Lotus Exige [“Coup de Coupes,” C/D, March 2006], faces a more sensible and civilized competitor in the Z4 M coupe. The Cayman S couldn’t quite match the track prowess of the Exige, but it clobbered it everywhere else. This time, the Porsche is up against a BMW that is similar in concept and is blessed with more than a modicum of practicality.

The Cayman S matches or beats all the BMW’s performance numbers (except the 5-to-60-mph time) and proved to be more usable and easier to live with on a daily basis. A lot of the livability can likely be traced to the Porsche Active Suspension Management (PASM) that drops the suspension by 0.4 inch and allows the dampers to be adjusted with the touch of a button. PASM costs $1990, but it gives the Cayman S a smooth and supple ride in the normal mode — even when equipped with 19-inch wheels with rubber-band-like sidewalls — and if you want a track-ready setup, push the PASM button or the sport button, and a firmly damped suspension is immediately at hand.

In the suspension’s normal mode, we settled into the flawless seating position and reveled in the Cayman’s superior outward visibility. After slipping into the supportive if simple-looking chairs, we happily spent hours at a time behind the wheel. A couple of hours in the harsher M coupe are all one needs to begin to feel a bit battered.

On the track, the Cayman S was nearly two seconds quicker than the BMW. That time can likely be traced to the glued-to-the-track Michelin tires, fade-resistant brakes, and easy-to-exploit and neutral handling. We’ve come to expect strong brakes from Porsche, so it’s no surprise that the four-piston calipers clamping large cross-drilled rotors offered fade-free performance and a firm, reassuring pedal feel. Perhaps due to its mid-engine layout and slightly rearward weight distribution, the Cayman S felt more stable and balanced during severe braking. Steering is similarly reassuring, direct, and communicative. Effort builds predictably through the relatively thin-rimmed, three-spoke wheel. With 295 horsepower and 251 pound-feet of torque, the throaty 3.4-liter flat-six makes short work of straightaways. In the Cayman S, shift efforts are lighter and throws from the six-speed manual transmission are longer, but if you demand shorter throws, Porsche offers a sport-shift option for $765.

Through the 11 corners of GingerMan Raceway, the Porsche felt alive. It’s seemingly unperturbed by cornering pressure. Brake late into a corner, and the rear end will begin to come around ever so gradually and predictably. Do all your braking in a straight line, and the Cayman S will take a neutral set that can only be upset by a quick lift or quick stab of the throttle. Add more steering, and experience understeer. Unlike so many things in life, the Cayman S’s handling is faithful and vice-free.

Orange-flavored Boxsters to go into production soon.

There’s really only one way to describe Porsche’s Limited Edition Boxster and Boxster S: Orange.

We first saw this retro-inspired paint job on the 911 GT3 RS a year ago, and now it has been bestowed on the Boxster line. In fact, the color covers everything in the Boxster: the roll bars, interior trim, and even the shift pattern markings are rendered in the less-than-subtle hue. Black side mirrors, intake vents, and script “Boxster” badges offer a slight visual reprieve.

It’s all due to a Splashlight Studios creation that was shown at the New York auto show and attracted so much interest that Porsche wants to endow 500 new Boxsters—250 base models and 250 S models—with the paint job. The modified cars will go into production soon, with an aggressive front lip, revised rear spoiler, and a diffuser in the rear bumper that Porsche says reduces aerodynamic lift.

To ensure this Boxster is special, the package adds a dual-tip sport exhaust to add a handful of extra ponies to the already powerful car.

Inside, Porsche nabs the three-spoke Alcantara-clad steering wheel from the GT3 RS, and they’ve added Alcantara to the seats and parking brake. The car rides on sleek black wheels with silver lips.

Even though the 2007 Boxster S is considerably faster than last year’s model, it’s hard to imagine anyone confusing these special edition cars for a real GT3 RS. Still, we don’t doubt there will be Boxster owners trying to do just that. Right after they don sunglasses so they can look at the car without retinal damage.

Porsche’s upcoming hybrid ute will deliver more than 400 pound-feet of torque.

Two years ago at the Frankfurt auto show, Porsche announced it had begun work on a hybrid Cayenne program, but the company has remained quiet since then, except to tell us it has remained partnered with VW on the SUV’s development. However, Porsche recently broke its silence and gave us a few more details about what we can expect from its new hybrid SUV, which is on track for a 2009 launch.

What we know is that a compact, 34-kW electric motor in the Cayenne hybrid will slot between its 3.6-liter V-6 and the six-speed automatic transmission, a series configuration that Porsche claims is more compatible with the Cayenne’s platform. The company also says the setup is more fuel efficient and flexible in terms of the hybrid system management, which Porsche claims will allow the vehicle’s performance to remain, well, Porsche-like. By adding electric power to the 290-hp, direct-injection V-6, maximum torque rises from 273 lb-ft to over 400 at 1800 rpm for the hybrid. That part sounds good, but all the hybrid components will add significant weight to the already bloated Cayenne, so we’ll have to wait to see what affect this has on not only acceleration but Porsche hallmarks such as handling and braking as well.

Porsche’s fuel-economy target for the Cayenne hybrid is 24 to 26 mpg—some 25 percent better than the current V-6 Cayenne’s mpg. Porsche did not make any mention of reduced emissions, but we expect at least commensurate improvements along those lines.

Other unique features of the Cayenne hybrid that have been designed to decrease fuel consumption include the vacuum pump for the brakes and the air conditioning, which will operate on electric power. Components such as the oil pump in the Cayenne’s automatic transmission, have also been replaced by electrically powered units. Further efficiencies were gained by the fitting of an electrohydraulic steering system—a move that may not be welcomed by purists.

Porsche also plans to introduce a hybrid version of its Panamera four-door sometime after its 2009 debut.

This is all great news, we suppose, but we’re still scratching our heads trying to figure out exactly what the point is of a hybrid Cayenne or Panamera. After all, few people buy luxury SUVs or four-door GTs because they’re “green.” Nor, for that matter, do they stay away from them because they’re not.

To the contrary, however, Porsche has claimed in the past that more and more rich people are interested in environmentally sound vehicles. But is the demand really that high? The only thing we can surmise is that Porsche is bending under major regulatory pressures, because considering what low volumes the Cayenne hybrid is expected to pull in, there can’t be much money in it, even at the prices we expect Porsche to charge for its mighty new green machines.

It’s official: the 911 lineup adds yet another sibling.

We almost didn’t write about this car since, well, there’s so little cutting-edge news here, but then we said, “What the heck?” since it’s such good eye candy. So here goes:

Hear ye! Hear ye! Behold the 2008 Porsche 911 Turbo cabriolet! A car that looks, well, like a 911 Turbo with the standard 911 cabriolet’s fabric top! Woo-woo!

Okay, however unsurprised we may be with the Turbo cab’s appearance, it’s not as if we’re not salivating. We find the 911 Turbo cabriolet as delicious as the current 911 Turbo coupe. The convertible will be powered by the same frighteningly powerful 480-hp 3.6-liter twin-turbocharged flat-six as the coupe and offered with the same choice of six-speed manual or Tiptronic S automatic transmission.

Slated to be released this September, the 911 Turbo will be Porsche’s fastest open-topped car since last year’s $440,000 Carrera GT, and the most expensive car in Porsche’s current lineup. Base price in Europe will be equivalent to roughly $172,000, a $30k smack above the previous generation car, while in the U.S. the 911 Turbo Cab is a relative deal starting at $137,360.

A V-8 and a manual: Has Porsche finally perfected the Cayenne?

Our relationship with the Porsche Cayenne has been love/hate from the beginning. First, the idea—let alone the execution—of a big, heavy Porsche ute was something not everyone loved. But Porsche gave all Cayenne models a serious power upgrade for ’08, which we all loved. Then it announced the Cayenne hybrid, which put some of us off again. But Porsche is roping us back in at the Frankfurt auto show with this tasty dish: the 2009 Cayenne GTS.

Powered by an enhanced version of the Cayenne S’s naturally aspirated 4.8-liter V-8 with a tidy 400 horsepower, the GTS is a distinctly sport-flavored model that slots in nicely between the mid-level 385-hp S and the top-dog 500-hp Cayenne Turbo. Even better, the GTS will be available with—get this—a true six-speed manual transmission as a no-cost option. We’re, um, sorta looking forward to trying out that combo.

Other changes include a tightened chassis, which gets all kinds of techie stuff like electronic dampers, an air suspension, and Porsche’s excellent stability-control system as standard. Gorgeous multispoke 21-inch wheels and 295/35 tires reside under slight fender flares. Much more aggressive lower-body addenda, new fascias, a more aggressive rear spoiler, and cool quad tailpipes are among the rest of the revisions. Sport seats and two new available colors—Nordic Gold and GTS Red—round out the GTS-specific features.

Now, if only Porsche could put the big girl on a weight-loss program, we might consider it perfected. In the meantime, the GTS looks darn close. We’ll see the 2009 Cayenne GTS here next March at an expected price of $69,300.