DROPTOP DRIVES LIKE A DREAM

Even on bumpy roads, the Camaro is superior to the Mustang

thanks to its more modern independent rear suspension

rather than the Ford's refined but still archaic solid rear axle.

By David Booth, Driving.ca - There's no great mystery to evaluating a convertible, at least not a convertible with a sedan or coupe sibling. Other than niggling details such as how well the droptop roof seals and how well the outside world - rain, snow, noise, etc. is isolated by the removable top, you're basically searching for what performance compromises have been made in order to satiate the quest for al fresco motoring.

Said compromises used to - and still often do - come in the form of reduced body control. Lopping off the roof of a perfectly good automobile is much like cracking the top off a soft-boiled egg. What was once an incredibly rigid structure is now but - pardon the bad pun - a shell of its former self.

An automobile's chassis - now sans toit - becomes a far more flimsy framework, the loss of the roof allowing the body to twist and shake like Jerry Lee Lewis in full Great Balls of Fire form.

Manufacturers construct all manner of reinforcements to compensate. There are strengthening beams below the chassis, suspension tower struts atop and all manner of thicker steel throughout the body to try to compensate for Humpty Dumpty's more fragile state. Despite the extra metal, however, it's almost impossible for a convertible to match its coupe sibling's stiffness (usually referred to as torsional rigidity).

Rarer still are the convertibles that try to do so with the same stiff suspension as their more rigid siblings (stiff suspension, as you can imagine will upset a limper chassis more easily, hence the reason so many soft-tops have more compliant suspensions than their rigid-roofed cousins).

No wonder then that Chevrolet is making much of the fact that the suspension of its newly decapitated Camaro is exactly the same as the hard-top version.

"To compensate for the reduced structure of an open car, engineers often will make the suspension softer, making the convertible a boulevard cruiser," says Al Oppenheiser, the Camaro's chief engineer.

"Instead, we took the more difficult - but better - path of bolstering the structure rather than softening the suspension. We didn't change a strut, bushing or spring rate from the Camaro coupe."

The bolstering takes the form of a beefy tower-to-tower suspension brace under the hood, additional bracing for the transmission tunnel and further "V" bracing under the front and rear underbodies. It's nothing fancy.

Indeed, these are fairly straightforward changes, yet, according to Chevy's engineers, the Camaro's chassis is stiffer than the comparable Mustang and equal to that of the much-vaunted BMW 328 Cabriolet.

And, although it's less rigid than the hardrop version, the difference goes largely unnoticed. For better or for worse, the convertible's ride and handling is pretty much the same as the coupe's. In other words, on a smooth road, the handling is precise without the ride being overly stiff and the steering is well weighted if a little numb. Even on bumpy roads, the Camaro Convertible is superior to the Mustang thanks to its more modern independent rear suspension rather than the Ford's refined but still archaic solid rear axle.

The one disappointment is the brakes on the base V6 version. As this is the suppossedly less sporty model, the LS and LT are saddled with single piston brakes front and rear (the monster-motored SS gets four-pot Brembos up front) and smallish 321-millimetre ventilated discs. The result is a wooden feeling I thought GM had banished from its fleet - or at least its sports car fleet. Here, the extra metal - 112 kilograms of it - that GM added to boost that stiffness exacts a penalty.

General Motors' bean counters contend the V6-powered convertible is less about performance and more about style. But the V6 model deserves better, if for no other reason than the fact the V6 is plenty sporty. Its 312 horse-power would have been the equal of the V8-powered Mustang GT a few years ago and, more importantly than just the numbers (it also pumps out 278 pound-feet of torque and accelerates the 1,808-kilogram LS to 100 kilometres an hour in just 6.2 seconds, only 0.2 of a second behind the hardtop) is that it feels sporty.

The V8, of course, is sportier still. With 426 hp on tap (400 in the L99 automatic version), the LS3 V8-powered SS has enough moxie to warrant the Camaro nameplate. Traditionalists need not fret that GM has watered down the Camaro as even the heavier convertible version of the SS blasts to 100 kilometres an hour in five seconds.

I would, however, recommend sticking with the manual-equipped SS. Not only does it boast 26 more hp and a noticeably more evocative exhaust note, but the V8's six-speed autobox is not nearly as sophisticated as the V6's automatic.

The last part of the equation, for any convertible, is styling. Here, the Camaro impresses.

Unlike the interior, which is somewhat bland, the Camaro's exterior is always striking whether in hardtop or convertible format.

With its roof up, the Convertible looks every bit as menacing as the hardtop that wows in the Transformer movies.

Top down, it's a little more feminine, probably a good thing since females are a large part of the prospective audience.

Drop-top roof may be stylish, but it is not as convenient as it could be. Yes, it's electrically powered, but it still requires manual removal of the tonneau cover as well as manual connection to the windshield's header. And though it's quick to stow - less than 20 seconds - it takes longer to install.

These, I suspect, will be minor details.

The Camaro already outsells the Mustang in the United States (the Mustang still sells better here in the Great White Frozen North) - hard-top, convertible and even the Shelby variants - with just one model.

Chevrolet marketing mavens estimate the convertible will result in an additional 20 per cent sales increase. There's little reason to doubt them.

The Camaro ragtop will go on sale next month and will start at $33,995.

CRUZE FITS COMPACT SEGMENT NICELY

The Cruze has many safety options, highlighted by OnStar with

Automatic Crash Response with Injury Severity Prediction

By Harry Pegg, Autonet.ca - I just came back from a Cruze Cruise to discover the new Chevy has been named Canadian Car of the Year by the Automobile Journalists Association of Canada.

Chevy says this is a compact ride which has all the amenities of a midsize car with the economy of a smaller craft. No argument there, even in this entry-level model that comes in at under $22,000 before taxes.

Cruze is by no means a head-turner, although it has all the earmarks of a well-built automobile: nice proportions, tight and uniform body gaps and a solid feel.

Once I get beyond the bland, the test vehicle has everything I like to see in a car with the exception of power adjustable, heated seats. Try as I might, I can't get the three-lever manual system to adjust enough to keep me comfortable. I also make a mental note not to wear wide shoes or boots as the brake and gas pedals are very close together and wide footwear could hit both in an emergency situation.

All in all the interior is pleasant if not a homey place to spend time on the road. Materials are top notch -- even the plastic looks good.

Chevy says the four-door sedan will carry five. While it's possible, that centre position in the back is better left as a fold-down armrest for two. Access to the back is tight, and it's difficult to keep pant legs from contacting a dirty door sill in crappy weather.

The 60/40 split rear seat-back folds down easily to increase an already impressive trunk space. The only downside is trunk hinges that intrude into the cargo space and you need to be careful not to crow them when you're loading.

To haul all this stuff down the road, this Cruze uses a tiny, but willing, engine that uses turbocharging to coax 138 horsepower out of just 1.4 litres of displacement. Not bad, but when the car is loaded up, those horses have to work pretty hard to get the mass moving to cruising speed. The six-speed automatic transmission goes seamlessly about its job and doesn't do any gear-hunting on long grades.

This is not a thirsty powertrain; in fact it's downright thrifty. The Eco model has been modified to enhance fuel economy, but it's difficult to detect body differences. An active grille louver system controls air flow, the AC compressor has been modified, wheels are unique and there's a rear deck spoiler and more underbody covering to direct air flow.

Chevrolet figures say the car will get 42 miles per US gallon (5.6 L/100km), but on a highway run between Los Angeles and San Diego we hit 4.7 L/100km (50 mpg) at one point and averaged 5.0 L/100km (47) over the distance.

The highway ride is smooth and the MacPherson strut suspension handles humps and hollows easily without disturbing the car's occupants. It's reasonable quiet, too.

When a car spins out in front of me on an icy highway patch, the rack-mounted electric power steering responds quickly to my demand to go somewhere else. This is one heck of a safe car when you consider all the standards: electronic stability control, traction control, ABS, rollover mitigation and, it seems, an airbag for every body part that might hit something.

The options include OnStar with Automatic Crash Response with Injury Severity Prediction that lets OnStar advisers alert first responders about possible serious injury.

Standard interior features include driver information centre, power windows and mirrors, and an audio system with MP3 playback ability, six speakers and auxiliary input jack. The tester carries extras like power moonroof, a connectivity package and remote start.

That's a lot of high-class stuff packed into a rather bland, albeit award-winning, package. I find it's not a car I can love, nor is it a car I can hate.

SHORT LEAF SUPPLY COULD COST NISSAN SALES

By The Wall Street Journal - If you thought getting a reservation at the hottest new restaurant was difficult, try reserving a Nissan Leaf electric car. Even if you are ready to spend the $32,780 or more it costs to buy one, the car maker isn't taking your money.

Reports have circulated recently that Nissan Motor Co. is suffering from a backlog or bottleneck in the supply of its Leaf electric cars. As a result, the car maker could lose potential customers to rivals like Chevrolet, which is selling the Volt electric and others like Ford and BMW who are planning to offer electrics later this year.

Chevrolet recently said it was speeding up its roll-out of the Volt because of higher-than-expected demand. Nissan, however, says it has 20,000 reservations from customers and wants to deliver more of those cars before taking any more orders.

Nissan says it expects to deliver the first 20,000 cars by spring or early summer and acknowledges the delay may wind up costing it some customers. "We may lose a few here and there between now and then," a Nissan spokesman says.

CHEVROLET CRUZE NAMED AJAC'S CAR OF THE YEAR

By Carmen Cheung, Postmedia News - The Chevrolet Cruze has been named the 2011 Canadian Car of the Year by the Automobile Journalists Association of Canada (AJAC) at the opening of the Canadian International Auto Show in Toronto, beating out the Ford Fiesta and Volkswagen Jetta TDI.

"The Cruze represents our line in the sand: We're playing to win - and delivering the goods - in the small car business," said Kevin Williams, GM of Canada's president and managing director.

The Ford Edge takes the prize for the 2011 Canadian Utility Vehicle of the Year, besting the Volkswagen Touareg TDI and Hyundai's Tucson.

David Mondragon, president and CEO of Ford Canada, says of the winning vehicle: "The Canadian-built 2011 Ford Edge features industry-leading technologies that create a whole new in-vehicle experience."

The Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG takes the Best New Design for 2011, beating out the Audi R8 and Jaguar XF Supercharged.

"With its stunning lines, trademark gull-wing doors and hallmark wide radiator grille that prominently features the Mercedes-Benz star, the SLS AMG is instantly recognizable as a Mercedes-Benz. A contemporary interpretation of a legendary classic, the SLS AMG is reminiscent of the widely celebrated 300 SL, while also providing a glimpse of the future direction of Mercedes-Benz design," said Marcus Breitschwerdt, president and CEO of Mercedes-Benz.

Ford's inflatable rear seat belts won for Best New Technology of 2011.

The awards, handed out annually at the Canadian International Auto Show by AJAC, mark the end of a rigorous evaluation process.

The winners are determined by a combination of different evaluations by journalists derived from an extensive four-day "TestFest" of 144 new vehicles in Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario that took place in October.

GM TO ROLL OUT RIVAL FORD'S SYNC INFOTAINMENT SYSTEM

By David Sedgwick, Automotive News - General Motors Co. will introduce a competitor to Ford's Sync infotainment system that will provide text messaging, e-mails, traffic advisories and other connected-car functions.

The system, called Chevrolet MyLink, will let motorists link their smart phone and its functions -- such as texting, calls, music or navigation -- to the vehicle's voice recognition software, sound system and navigation screen.

MyLink will be launched in the Chevrolet Volt and Equinox this fall. Later, GM will offer it in the rest of Chevy's models, as well as Buick, Cadillac and GMC. The automaker did not provide a timetable for the rollout.

Chevrolet MyLink lets motorists choose new applications online and continuously update software.

More important, it provides the applications safely, said Micky Bly, GM's executive director of global electrical systems, hybrids, EVs and batteries.

By using spoken commands, motorists can use MyLink without taking their hands off the wheel or their eyes off the road. Bly said in an interview. Most automakers "are trying to make sure that they display things in a safe, secure manner," he said. "We don't want to step across the line" and distract motorists.

MyLink could represent GM's first real competitor to Sync, a system that's available on all Ford and Lincoln vehicles sold at retail and has lifted Ford's reputation as a technology leader.

The basic Sync technology allows people to control cell phones and portable music players by voice. Since Sync's debut on the Focus in 2007, Ford has enhanced the system several times, adding services such as emergency 911 assistance and vehicle health reports.

Ford has installed more than 3 million Sync units. Sync comes standard on Lincoln vehicles, and the automaker says about 80 percent of people buying 2011 Ford models opt for the $395 system.

Sync and other similar devices are drawing more scrutiny from U.S. regulators who are studying the impact of driver distraction on highway fatalities and injuries. U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood recently held meetings with GM, Ford and Chrysler officials on the matter.

OnStar still offered

GM will continue to offer its OnStar service with Chevrolet MyLink. OnStar, which offers 24-hour roadside service, route guidance, emergency assistance and other features, will be positioned as a package of safety services.

Chevrolet owners will get a basic mix of telematics services when they buy their vehicles. Then they will go online to add apps and update their systems.

Chevrolet owners will get a basic mix of telematics services when they buy their vehicles. Then they will go online to add apps and update their systems.

The first wave of apps will include Pandora, an online music source, plus Stitcher, an app that lets users create customized radio stations to play their favorite podcasts.

Motorists without smart phones would be able to place calls, respond to text messages and use turn-by-turn navigation using OnStar. But a smart phone is needed for access to Pandora, Stitcher and other apps.

QNX, a division of BlackBerry producer Research in Motion Ltd., provides the software operating system for MyLink. Nuance, of Burlington, Mass., provides the voice recognition software.

QNX is a longtime GM partner in telematics. Its software customers include Audi, Acura, Ford, GM, Hyundai and Saab.

Nuance has developed a leading voice recognition technology dubbed Dragon Dictation. GM will use OnStar's hardware to integrate Dragon Dictation into the cockpit.

Bly said GM would review all software applications to make sure they meet the automaker's safety standards, and to ensure that the software is bug-free.

"We're going to keep all applications in a walled garden," Bly said. "We know our software will be virus-free."

CHEVROLET CRUZE NAMED "2011 CANADIAN CAR OF THE YEAR" BY THE AUTOMOBILE JOURNALISTS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA

By Marketwire.com - Chevrolet was honoured today at the Canadian International Auto Show when the Automobile Journalists Association of Canada (AJAC) named the Chevrolet Cruze as the "2011 Canadian Car of the Year". The award followed rigorous head-to-head evaluations performed by over 70 of Canada's leading automotive journalists on 144 new vehicles entered in this year's competition.

"We are very proud to receive AJAC's 2011 Canadian Car of the Year honours for the all-new Chevrolet Cruze, which reflects a major refocusing of investment on smaller vehicles and fuel efficient technologies," said Kevin Williams, GM of Canada's president and managing director. "The Cruze represents our line in the sand: We're playing to win - and delivering the goods - in the small car business."

The Cruze affirms Chevrolet's commitment to building refined, fuel-efficient vehicles using new, small-displacement, four-cylinder engines, with the 1.4L turbo engine and six-speed manual transmission combination on the Cruze ECO model and the 1.8L engine with six-speed manual transmission on the Cruze LS both delivering best in class highway fuel economy.

Featuring a segment-leading 10 standard airbags, surprising amenities and leading edge connectivity, including Chevrolet's My Link application by OnStar, the Cruze aims to change the way Canadians look at compact cars.

Since its launch, the Cruze has been winning the hearts of customers around the globe, with over a half a million already sold. In its first 3 months on the Canadian market, Cruze is off to a flying start, increasing GM's compact sales volume by over 32% versus the prior year period.

The Cruze logged more than 6 million kilometres in quality and durability testing worldwide, making it one of the most real world-tested GM products prior to launch.

CAMARO ZL1 USES DECK PLATE HONING ON HIGH-END ENGINE

By General Motors of Canada - Deck plate honing a cylinder block, a precision-maching process typically reserved for high-performance engines, will be used on the Camaro ZL1 6.2L supercharged V8, helping maximize engine life, reduce friction between engine parts and increase horsepower.

Deck plate honing refers to a machining process in which aluminum plates, sometimes called torque plates, are clamped to the block, simulating the cylinder heads, before the final bore and hone of the cylinders takes place. The clamp load of 10 bolts per head creates normal, minute distortions in the block and thus makes the bore slightly out-of-perfect shape or cylindricity.

While the simulated cylinder heads, or deck plates, are attached to the block, a boring maching does its work boring, and then honing each cylinder. Later, when the actual cylinder heads are assembled to the block under identical torque loads, the cylinder bores are near perfect for the engine's lifetime of piston travel up and down in the bore up to 6,200 times a minute.

"It amazes me what GM does with some of their production engines," said Andy Randolph, engine technical director at Earnhardt-Childress Racing. "Deck plating is a time-consuming process that fine tunes the bore to get every ounce of power, torque and durability possible. It's standard practice when building high-end race engines. It tells me the Camaro ZL1 will have some serious performance."

The deck plating process is used in applications where cylinder head pressures are greater than average, to ensure cylinder sealing and prevent scuffing of the piston against the bore wall. In the Camaro LSA engine, this means improved bore life and ring sealing. True bores and better sealing are keys to optimizing power. This is a common process also used with the Corvette ZR1 and Z06 blocks.

The deck plate bore and hone process uses billet aluminum plates with steel bolt sleeves for compression limitation. The plate's bolt attachment points have the same height and clamp loads as the actual cylinder heads. The LSA cylinder block is made of 319T7 aluminum and has cast-in-place cast iron cylinder bore liners. The final honing process brings the final 103.25 mm (4.06 inches) bores to within a tolerance of eight microns or .00031 of an inch. The deck plates remain installed for the final honing of the crankshaft bores.

UWINDSOR ENGINEER AND GM CANADA CELEBRATE AWARD WITH CANADA'S TOP SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING RESEARCHERS

By General Motors of Canada - Dr. Ahmet Alpas, a University of Windsor engineering professor, and General Motors (GM) of Canada were honoured by His Excellency the Right Honourable David Johnston, Governor General of Canada, at Rideau Hall in celebration of Canada's top science and engineering research awards. This past November, Dr. Alpas received the 2010 Synergy Award for Innovation from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) for his team's collaborative research with GM. Synergy Award recipients, along with other top NSERC award winners, were recognized Monday evening in a reception hosted by Governor General Johnston.

"We are proud of Dr. Ahmet Alpas and his team who have performed outstanding research with GM," said Dr. Alan Wildeman, president of the University of Windsor, who attended the celebration at Rideau Hall. "We value our partnership with GM and NSERC as we know this work will positively impact the automotive industry and the nation."

The University of Windsor and GM have been working together as partners since 2002. Beginning as a small contract, the relationship has grown and now includes GM laboratory access for UWindsor researchers.

"GM has been a leading supporter of collaborative research in Canada, and Dr. Alpas and his team have shown why these partnerships are important, delivering results that have benefitted the automotive industry and beyond," added Kevin Williams, president and managing director of GM of Canada. "This award-winning research has led to efficiency improvements in a number of areas, including powertrain manufacturing and vehicle operation."

Dr. Alpas is one of only four winners in Canada to receive this year's prestigious Synergy award. The prize, which includes a $200,000 research grant, allows Dr. Alpas and his team to further invest in their innovative work with GM, examining ways to increase energy-efficiency in vehicles by developing lightweight materials for automotive products and manufacturing systems.

The Synergy Awards for Innovation were launched in 1995 by NSERC to recognize partnerships in natural sciences and engineering research and development between universities and industry.

NSERC is a federal agency that helps make Canada a country of discoverers and innovators for all Canadians. The agency supports some 30,000 university students and postdoctoral fellows in their advanced studies. NSERC promotes discovery by funding more than 12,000 professors every year and fosters innovation by encouraging more than 1,500 Canadian companies to participate and invest in postsecondary research projects.

CHEVY VS FORD IN HEAVY-DUTY RUMBLE IN THE ROCKIES

By Mike Levine, pickuptrucks.com - Over the summer, we published the results of our nine-truck Heavy-Duty Shootout, where we selected the Chevy Silverado 2500 HD and GMC Sierra Denali 3500 HD as our two top picks in the three-quarter-ton and one-ton diesel categories. But our readers raised two important points.

The first point was that we didn't test Ford's "Job 2" engine calibrations for the all-new 6.7-liter Power Stroke V-8. The free powertrain software update for 2011 diesel Super Dutys boosts the ratings from 390 horsepower and 735 pounds-feet of torque to an astonishing 400 hp and 800 pounds-feet, eclipsing GM's 6.6-liter Duramax V-8 rating of 397 hp and 765 pounds-feet. We didn't test the re-rated Ford trucks because they weren't available at test time.

The second concern was about the quarter-mile and hill-climb acceleration tests, where we measured performance over relatively short distances pulling 10,000-pound and 12,000-pound trailers. The tests were enough to provide consistent evidence of the strength of GM's powertrain, but some thought Ford's diesel and new six-speed would have beaten the Chevy and GMC if the distances were greater.

We didn't disagree with these two points and wondered about both ourselves, even though we know our Shootout comparison tests are the most rigorous exams you'll find to judge pickup truck capability.

The challenge

Then, in late September, Chevrolet challenged Ford to a real-world showdown in the Colorado Rockies, similar to the Mike Rowe head-to-head towing competitions that Ford has used to promote the capabilities of its F-Series pickups. Ford declined, but the bowtie boys decided to press forward and invited PickupTrucks.com and Diesel Power magazine to witness the test.

We agreed with a few conditions: Chevrolet had to use test trucks purchased off the lot from Chevy and Ford dealers and the Super Duty had to have the 400/800 power ratings. They couldn't come from GM's captive test fleet and the trucks had to be as "apples-to-apples" as possible when it came to features and equipment. While Chevrolet originally wanted to test three-quarter-ton HD pickups -- the heart of the HD market -- we had to use one-ton trucks because that was the only way to match equivalent rear axle ratios of 3.73. We also had to drive and instrument the trucks to measure the results ourselves. Chevy reps would be along for the ride.

Chevrolet met those conditions, and we picked up two brand-new dealer-bought HD pickups in Detroit. The 2011 Chevrolet Silverado 3500 LT four-wheel-drive crew cab came from Mike Savoie Chevrolet in Troy, Michigan, with 8 miles on the odometer and 0.9 hours on the engine meter. The "Job 2" 2011 Ford F-350 Super Duty XLT four-wheel-drive crew cab was sold at Harold Zeigler Ford Lincoln in Elkhart, Indiana, and driven to detroit by a third-party fleet service. Two Diesel Power staffers drove the trucks 1,250 miles to Denver.

How equivalent were the trucks? They were probably the most evenly matched HD pickups we've tested. Besides the same rear axle ratios, the $54,805 8,440-pound Ford was just $65 and 220 pounds more than the $54,740 8,220-pound Silverado. Both lacked fancy equipment such as leather seats, navigation systems and sunroofs.

The location and the load

We knew we needed a real-world place to test both trucks, so we chose the eastbound ascent from Dillon, Colorado to the top of Eisenhower Pass on Interstate 70. It's perhaps the toughest stretch of road a loaded truck will encounter on a major cross-country highway -- call it the Nurburgring of pickup trucks because nearly every bit of towing and braking hardware is stressed to its max for multiple miles at a very high altitude.

The grade starts at about 5 percent for two miles and increases to about 7 percent for the remaining six miles, to the entrance to the Eisenhower Tunnel, the highest vehicular tunnel in the U.S. Despite that lofty elevation, an average of more than 30,000 vehicles crossed in both directions each day last year, according to the Colorado Department of Transportation.

We also needed a heavy trailer that the trucks could share. Chevy lined up a 6,500-pound gooseneck with three 4,140-pound pallets of flagstone lashed to the flat bed for a grand total of 18,920 pounds. That brought the gross combined weight rating for the Chevy to 27,140 pounds before four adult males jumped in and added another 800 pounds, for a grand total of 27,940 pounds, or 96 percent of the Silverado's maximum GCWR. The total for the Ford F-350 was 28,160 pounds, or 94 percent of the Super Duty's maximum GCWR.

For our test, we used a stretch of I-70 that started in Dillon at 8,776 feet and ended at exactly 11,000 feet, rising 2,224 feet over 7.6-miles (approximately 40,000 feet).

But we didn't just time the trucks up the grade. We also evaluated their exhaust-brake performance while heading the opposite direction back to Dillon with the nearly 19,000-pound trailer pushing these monster HDs downhill. An exhaust brake saves on brake and transmission wear by clamping down the engine's turbo vanes, creating back pressure to engine brake the truck. It also reduces the potential for brake fade during long descents, increasing downhill safety while towing and overall wheel brake life.

Where's Ram?

If you were wondering where the Ram 3500 is in all of this, it wasn't included because these weights exceeded its 24,500 maximum GCWR by more than 2,500 pounds. It wouldn't have been safe or responsible to test the truck in these conditions.

To help manage these astonishing weights, which we couldn't have imagined a decade ago, we used a professional driver with a commercial driver's license paid for by Diesel Power Magazine.

Hill-climb test

Each truck was run up the grade in Tow/Haul mode starting in four-wheel drive for max traction in the cold conditions and switching to two-wheel drive at approximately 30 mph. The fastest time was used for the comparison.

We ran the Ford four times. The first two runs were with only three adult males to offset the Chevy's 220-pound curb weight advantage, and the last two runs had all four of us in the trucks. The fourth run was Ford's fastest time. Two-hundred-twenty pounds doesn't matter much when you're pushing almost 15 tons against gravity.

Temperatures ranged from 5 degrees to 18 degrees, according to the trucks' outdoor temperature readouts. It was so cold that neither truck's fan turned on, though the next day, at just 35 degrees, both trucks' fans turned on frequently to cool the engines.

The trucks were at a dead stop before each run. The driver ran wide-open throttle from start to finish. We didn't encounter any traffic on the road during the late-night climbs.

We used our own GPS-based Racelogic VBOX test kit to record performance and geographic data.

The Ford F-350's best time up the grade was 10 minutes, 46.8 seconds at an average speed of 42.41 mph. The top speed at 58.5 mph, and it happened just before the point where the grade increased from 5 percent to 7 percent.

The Chevy Silverado was significantly faster. It finished more than two minutes ahead of the F-350, in 8 minutes, 38.2 seconds. Average speed cruising up to 11,000 feet was 53.63 mph, 11.22 mph faster on average than the Ford. The Chevy's top speed was 67.38 mph for a few seconds before the grade changed from 5 percent to 7 percent.

The Chevy and Ford had similar performances at the start of their runs. The Ford clicked off the quarter-mile in 31.25 seconds at 45.13 mph, and the Chevy ran the same distance in 28.93 seconds at 50.3 mph. But the Chevy was already coming on like a freight train at that point. It took the Silverado 28.56 seconds to go from zero to 50 mph, while it took the Ford 42.02 seconds.

Both trucks ran the first part of the grade in 4th gear and dropped down to 3rd gear for the rest of the climb.

Exhaust brake test

For the exhaust brake test, we exited Eisenhower Tunnel westbound and set both trucks' speed to 55 mph in 4th gear. The Silverado has a push-button-activated exhaust brake that can work in or out of Tow/Haul mode, while the Ford's exhaust brake is automatically enabled when the truck is in Tow/Haul. Unlike the Duramax, the Ford's exhaust brake can't be turned off by the driver.

We wanted to see which truck required the least amount of wheel brake application, so when speeds reached 60 mph, the driver applied his left foot to the brake to slow down the truck to 52 mph to start the cycle again.

The difference in exhaust brake performance (echoing the much shorter test performed in HD Shootout) was starker than the difference towing up the hill.

After four runs in the Ford, we had to manually slow the truck between 11 to 14 times during each descent to keep it from exceeding 60 mph. Ford's exhaust brake seemed to have minimal effet slowing the rig and keeping our driver from getting that "white knuckle" feeling you don't want to have when your 15-ton rig is rolling down a hill. Ford's six-speed transmission did a nice job downshifting from 4th to 3rd gear after the foot brake was applied to help slow things down.

The Chevy was a superhero on the descent. It was like Superman digging his feet into the pavement to stop a runaway locomotive. In three downhill runs, we averaged one to two manual brake applies. That's it. It consistently hung in at a steady 58 to 59 mph and stayed at that speed for miles. When we aplied the foot brake after the first time, the Chevy downshifted from 4th to 2nd gear near redline at 52 mph and kept shedding speed until we tipped into the throttle to get back into 3rd and started picking up speed again. We never shifted down to 2nd gear in the Super Duty, slowing the truck to 52 mph.

At the turnaround point in Dillon to start each test cycle, the most telling aspect of our exhaust brake test was the strong smell of hard-worked brakes in the Ford and the absence of that smell in the Chevy. That doesn't just save on brake wear. It saves on frayed nerves as well.

Summary

In short, they Chevy Silverado's performance surprised everyone, given Ford's higher stated power figures for the 6.7-liter Power Stroke. Finishing two minutes ahead of the Super Duty over a 7.6-mile grade at more than 90 percent GCWR is nothing short of a dominant showing for Chevy. The exhaust brake performance is perhaps even more telling and welcome news for frequent heavy towers.

What accounts for the significant performance differences between the Chevy and the Ford in this comparison? We originally thought it might be a gap in the Power Stroke's high altitude engine calibrations, which optimize combustion performance based on driving conditions, but now we think its part of the nature of the 6.7's unique single sequential turbo.

Ford's turbo features a single turbine and two compressors placed back-to-back. It's possible that Ford's siamese compressor design is losing some efficiency the higher it climbs.

For braking, both trucks depend on variable geometry fins that surround the turbine. They clamp down to restrict exhaust flow and create back pressure in the engine to slow the truck down. The Duramax appears to be able to clamp down more strongly than the Power Stroke.

Interestingly, Honeywell subsidiary Garrett is the same turbo supplier for both diesel engines.

Regardless of the cause of the performance gap between these two incredibly capable HD pickups, we reaffirm the results of our 2010 HD Shootout in the real world. There's no question that GM's latest diesel pickups are the performance leaders in the class. Chevy doesn't just run deep. It runs high as well.

ROBOT GUY'S VIEW ON DRIVING THE CHEVY VOLT FOR MAX EFFICIENCY

By Brad Berman, PluginCars.com - Patrick Wang's enthusiasm for his Chevy Volt is unrestrained, and not surprising. The 25-year-old online marketing manager, who now lives in Berkeley, California, grew up the son of an engineer in Silicon Valley. As a lover of technology and an experienced builder of 100-pound competitive robots, Patrick sees the Chevy Volt as the ultimate geeked-out dream machine.

"I like that you can think about all this technology and enjoy it, experience it and work through it," Patrick said. And the fact that Patrick has had his Volt for more than a month -- the odometer reads 720 miles -- and he has not yet been to the gas station makes the technology that much more fun. (Ironically, a couple of months ago, Patrick won a $750 gas card, which could take years to redeem.)

Perhaps, most importantly, Patrick loves the way the Volt drives. "The ride has been just fantastic," Patrick said, heaping praise for the car's quietness and smooth linear acceleration.

Patrick has been following the Volt since 2007, and started calling local dealers a full year before production began. He didn't consider a pure electric car, like the Nissan LEAF, because he still makes frequent trips to Cupertino -- about 55 miles from Berkeley -- to visit his family. "A LEAF can cover that distance on a one-way drive, but I usually do those on a single-day trip," Patrick said. "I can't count on having a 240 charger down there."

He gets 33 mpg in charge-sustaining mode. "I'm not excited about (that mileage), but that's not the car's primary operation mode." He has few other complaints -- one being the "tight" space for passengers in the back seat. When passengers are sitting right behind Patrick -- he's 6'2" -- they "better be less than five foot six," he said.

Of the 720 miles driven so far, 470 have been in pure EV mode. (The car was delivered having already clocked 80 gas miles.)

Driving the Volt All the Time in "L"

The young technologist believes he's figured out the best strategy for maximizing the Volt's efficiency, while still enjoying its brisk acceleration. His preferred settings are "Sport" (instead of "Normal") mode -- and he almost always keeps the car in "L" for low instead of "D" for drive.

Patrick likes Sport mode for one simple reason: A quicker response from the accelerator pedal. "I haven't used Normal. It's not fun. After all, it's just throttle mapping. It's not like Sport is actually using more juice -- only if you push the pedal harder," Patrick said. "In all the things I do, when I work on robots, when I work on my computer, I like high sensitivity inputs. In normal, you can get the same performance, you just have to push the pedal harder."

If he chooses Sport mode for greater sensitivity, then his choice of "L" is for more consistency. "I started in "D" mode when I drove off the lot. When I flipped to "L" mode, it's an unusual experience, because as soon as you let off, it has significant regenerative drag," Patrick said. "It's like you're driving with your parking brake on. There's a little bit of training, because it feels wrong at first." But then he learned that using "L" would allow him to control acceleration and deceleration with just the right pedal.

Experienced EV drivers have passionate views about how automakers should best calibrate regenerative braking -- many preferring more grab to maximize regen. By using "L", Patrick gets more regen, and he doesn't have to worry about how hard to hit the brakes. "When you're touching the pedal, the point between regen and disk brakes is hard to measure." Instead he's learned exactly how long it will take to slow down when he approaches a red light, and when to simply pull his foot off the accelerator pedal. That means maximum consistency, one of the keys to efficiency.

Patrick's simple strategy in "L" and Sport:

• If you hold your foot a little bit on, you'll keep your speed
• If you press it more, you'll increase your speed
• If you pull it off, you'll slow down

The use of these settings provides some level of personal configuration, but Patrick wants even more. "I want GM to give me more tools," he said. "Although I know they're building this car for the mainstream, and they provided just enough for the tech enthusiasts." For example, he would like to completely reskin the look and feel of the dashboard displays "just like a desktop background."

CHEVY VOLT SPARKS A SERIES OF PLUG-IN HYBRIDS

Expect many new plug-in cars to use

the gasoline engine only as an extra battery

By John Voelcker, Spectrum Technology - Iconic U.S. car company General Motors turned a page in its history on a cold day this winter in suburban New Jersey. It sold the first production version of its Chevrolet Volt to a retail buyer -- a retired pilot named Jeffrey Kaffee. With that sale comes the start of the first real test of consumer appetites for two concepts long in the making: hybrid cars whose battery you can recharge by plugging them in at home, and so-called series hybrid technology.

The Volt is the world's first production series hybrid-electric vehicle. Like a conventional hybrid, it has both an electric traction motor and a gasoline engine. Once its 16-kilowatt-hour battery pack is depleted, the 1.4-liter 4-cylinder engine switches on but does not drive the wheels mechanically. Instead, it turns a 55-kW generator that provides current to the 111-kW electric motor that powers the front wheels. It's not a new concept -- minus the battery pack, that's the same way diesel locomotives work. But until now, all hybrid cars have used their gasoline engines in parallel with their electric motors, combining their torque to turn the wheels.

The Volt's series-hybrid credentials came into question briefly last fall when GM power-train engineers revealed that in one mode, its engine directly contributes torque to the final drive. In other words, a Volt is sometimes a parallel hybrid, too. Crucially, in GM's view, it does not offer direct mechanical drive to the wheels. Instead, engine torque is transmitted through the generator -- locked by clutches on both ends -- into a set of gears that work only if they simultaneously receive torque from the electric motor.

For North America, where daily commuting distances are higher than in Europe or Asia, GM chose a series hybrid because it felt the design offered the best combination of electric use and limitless range. As the company points out, 78 percent of U.S. vehicles travel less than 64 kilometres (about 40 miles) per day -- the pure electric range that it attributes to the Volt. Beyond that, the gasoline tank and combustion engine act as a backup battery.

While the Volt may be the first series hybrid, more are coming. The next one will be the 2011 Fisker Karma, a luxury sports sedan from the venture-funded car company started by former BMW designer Henrik Fisker. The Karma uses a 2.0-L 4-cylinder engine to generate current that drives a pair of 150-kW motors to power the rear wheels. Other makers plan even more complex hybrid systems that can operate in series-hybrid mode at certain times, parallel at others. Most notable of these may be Audi's planned A1 e-Tron, a subcompact hatchback that uses a tiny Wankel engine as its range extender. Even more esoteric, Jaguar's C-X75 concept car uses a pair of microturbines as its range extender.

The fossil-fueled engines alleviate the "range anxiety" that may come with such battery-powered EVs as the 2011 Nissan Leaf, which has a stated 160-km range. (Four days after that first Volt delivery, Nissan delivered a 2011 Leaf to its first paying customer.) The phenomenon refers to a driver's fear of being stranded with a dead battery pack. As the saying goes, you can't pour a gallon of electrons into the tank.

But you can dribble electrons in. Early Leaf buyers will recharge their plug-ins largely via 240-volt home recharging stations, the installation of which their Nissan dealers must coordinate. Volt buyers, on the other hand, can recharge the smaller battery overnight using 110-V power, though Chevrolet also offers a home charging station. Toyota will launch a new Prius plug-in hybrid model during 2012, and Ford will offer an as yet unidentified model with a plug-in hybrid option. By the end of 2012, major carmakers plan to offer roughly a dozen plug-in models for sale or lease.

All three forms of plug-in vehicles -- battery electrics, series hybrids, and parallel hybrids -- will be offered over the next three years and marketed as meeting the varying needs of different consumers. While that happens, car dealers and electric utilities will gain more experience with the installation of home charging stations. And a network of public charging stations, many of them offered by retailers as incentives to lure customers for some shopping during a recharge, is expected to spread.

Initially, availability for the Volt will be low, so their impact on the spread of charging stations will probably be minimal. According to Volt marketing director Tony DiSalle, Chevrolet plans to build 10,000 by the end of 2011 and 45,000 the following year. But the big test for plug-ins comes in 2013, when Nissan will have the capacity to build 250,000 Leafs a year. Whether the global market is ready to buy hundreds of thousands of plug-ins remains to be seen.

GOOD NEWS THAT SOME FOLKS WON'T LIKE

By Keith Crain, Automotive News - Last week General Motors announced that it will add a third shift and 750 jobs at an assembly plant in Flint, Michigan.

That has to be good news.

But many folks aren't going to be happy.

Those laid-off workers are going to be brought back because the demand for GM pickups is so strong.

Consumers want their trucks, and they don't care how much the price of fuel is rising. Customers can be told what's good for them, but when it comes to buying decisions, they make up their own minds.

It will be even more difficult for the automobile companies to meet the new corporate average fuel economy standards if consumers want the same product mix. It won't be impossible, but it will be tougher.

Many people think that as the price of gasoline rises, consumers automatically will shift to small, fuel-efficient vehicles. Well, it ain't necessarily so. I am not sure how high the price of fuel has to go before pickup and SUV buyers look elsewhere, but it hasn't happened yet. Whether it is $4 a gallon or $5 a gallon is unknown, and I hope we don't find out any time soon.

Washington should realize that it can't mandate that consumers buy what Washington thinks they should have rather than what they want.

Automobile dealers have known that for decades, and nothing has changed except the attitude in Washington that it can mandate consumer demand.

It is poetic justice that this year's National Automobile Dealers Association convention will be in San Francisco, home of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Last November's election told Washington that hometown interests were not the same as the interests of Congress. Now we have even more automobile retailers in Congress.

There will be many issues discussed at NADA this week, but none is more important than how to balance the desires of Washington with the wants and needs of the American consumer.

It is important that NADA gets the message to Congress: What Washington wants is not necessarily what will sell on Main Street.

AND THE WINNING TRUCK IS ...

The Truck King Challenge saw three HD trucks compete against each other

By Howard J. Elmer, Postmedia News - Each year, the Canadian Truck King Challenge tests and evaluates whatever is new in pickup trucks under real-world conditions.

This model year, each of the Detroit Big Three released new heavy-duty versions of their trucks. These HD pickups are a segment within a segment -- like sports cars are to overall vehicle sales.

However, in industry, on the farm and among recreational haulers, they probably make up a bigger chunk of overall truck sales, in part because nobody buys one to race out and get groceries. With that in mind, we loaded them down, towed with them and ran them off-road and on.

The Ford Super Duty, Chevy Silverado HD and Ram HD were delivered to us in crew cab diesel-powered form. The three similar in most respects and the tests were conducted back to back and on the same day. As always, we tested at our private IronWood test facility near Head Lake, Ont. And, for the fourth year in a row, it rained. (This is now called the Truck King curse among our panel of three judges.) Our results are as follows:

Third Place: Ram 2500

Our third-place pick debuted with all-new sheetmetal and a great new interior. Much of the improvements came from the latest half-ton Ram, itself an award-winning design inside and out. Our tester was equipped with the veteran combination of a six-cylinder 6.7-litre Cummins turbodiesel (providing a stout 350 horsepower and 650 pound feet of torque) and six-speed automatic. Unfortunately, "veteran" is also code for oldest.

Empty Test Loop: The engine and transmission combo is proven, although it now has the lowest power output among the three trucks. The interior is the best of the three with excellent soft-touch materials, accents and design. The drive was confident and comfortable -- in fact, maybe a little soft.

Towing/Loaded: The Ram has the best mirrors of the bunch, easily flipped-up to resemble the West Coast mirrors of old. No power means no failures. Dodge also provides four- and seven-pin connectors in the bumper -- a good protected location. A backup camera is also available. The Ram was first to offer a button-activated engine exhaust brake -- this is still there and works very well while towing. The brake holds the load on grades, saving the brakes. Its operation is tied in with the selectable gearing feature on the shifter handle.

Off-road: The truck has a two-speed transfer case (as do the others) for 4WD Hi and 4WD Lo that's an electronic shift-on-the-fly setup. Where the Ram falls short is its lack of a rear differential locker. Of the three it was the easiest to get stuck. The other noticeable omission is a traction control system. This truck spins its wheels off-road as well as on-road if over-torqued, not a good trait particularly when towing.

Conclusion: Design-wise, of the three trucks, I liked the Ram best inside and out. However, it appears that this was where the development dollars were spent. While the powertrain is decent, it is also the oldest of the three trucks and the capacities offered are the lowest.

Second Place: Ford F-350

An F-250 was not available. However, with the exception of the increased load limits on the F-350, the pickup is identical to the 3/4-ton version.

The 2011 Ford is by far the most extensively upgraded Super Duty ever -- new engine and transmission encased in the most powerful chassis the line has ever released. This is both great and scary. The potential for a great truck is there, however prudence suggests that with this many new components, a period of time is needed to make sure they all mesh in the real world.

Empty Test Loop: The new dashboard has clear large gauges and a larger centre information screen (4.2 inches) that clearly displays information, everything from radio settings to the trailer connections. It's easy to see, bright and can be accessed via steering wheel-mounted five-way buttons.

This Ford (granted, it was the one-ton) is the stiffest ever and I found it had a tendency to skitter on the washboard during test drives. On the other hand, the new steering is confident with good on-centre feel.

The new 6.7L Power Stroke is a torque monster, yet vibration is low and noise is well controlled. Ford claims there's as much as a 20% improvement in fuel economy over the outgoing 6.4L (which isn't hard considering how thirsty it was). The signal stalk has been changed; it no longer "sticks" when activated, which I found annoying. Several extra inches of floor space have been added to the new Super Duty Crew, most of which found its way into the rear-seat area. With the seats folded, the large flat floor lends itself to easy loading and unloading of equipment, tools or groceries.

Towing/Loaded: Ford has power mirrors that extend for trailer towing. The backup camera also doubles as a conenient way to hook up a trailer when alone. Four- and seven-pin connectors are also offered, but the connectors are still located below the bumper, where it gets the dirtiest. Why? Ford's tailgate step wit6h handle is a nice feature that has yet to be copied by the others. The new TorqShift six-speed transmission gave me pause. Under load, there were some rough upshifts. It didn't happen regularly, but it was noticeable. The pickup had a confident feel on-road and while towing.

Off-Road: The shift-on-the-fly controls for 4WD work well, and a button-operated electronic rear differential locker (as opposed to the automatic mechanical GM system) is also offered. The F-350 was the only pickup to have manually locking front hubs. Ground clearance was good, and the pickup offers very rugged off-road performance.

Conclusion: The Super Duty gets a power dome and a large Super Duty logo stamped into the upper grille. This looks is polarizing -- buyers either love it or hate it. As for what's under the hood, Ford has made a huge investment in the new engine and associated systems. The judges just worry a bit about the transmission. At first blush, though, Ford's effort looks very good.

First Place: Chevy Silverado 2500

Just out of bankruptcy when this truck was released last spring, GM has a lot riding on the Silverado (and GMC version). That has to be at least one strong reason for the massive improvement in the strength of the pickup's chassis and the leap forward in its electronics. The body got little attention, but that is the least of buyers' concerns.

Empty Test Loop: GM has put all its R&D dollars into a great leap forward in chassis and powertrain development for the Silverado. However, this means changes to the body and interior are negligible. The sheetmetal is OK style-wise, but the interior design is now the oldest of the three and it is tired-looking. On the road, the ride was very firm, but the road manners were steady. The interior soundproofing has been improved and the dash is functional. The rear seats flip up for storage, but the floor was not flat like Ford's F-350.

Towing/Loaded: The proven 6.6L Duramax has been upgraded and now easily pulls up to its limit. Along with the stiffer chassis, towing feels more confident. The veteran Allison transmission is smooth regardless of the amount of weight towed. Frankly, it's excellent, it also has a manual tap up/tap down shift feature along with a tow-haul setting. The smart engine brake works with the transmission to downshift and hold the load on grades no matter how severe. GM has deleted the four-pin electrical trailer connector from its standard hook-up, however, the seven-pin connector is well placed in the bumper. GM has an optional backup camera for the lone driver hooking up a trailer. The mirrors are alright, but not great.

Off-Road: GM offers a neat Eaton mechanical differential locker for off-road traction. This locker has an internal spring-loaded pendulum that reacts to centrifugal force, flying out when there is wheel slippage and locking the gear set. It's completely automatic and, when engaged, gives the 4WD system a goose as the back end slips. Excellent!

Conclusion: This Silverado HD is GM's best ever. But, this market is highly competitive, so the best I can say is that this effort has put GM back in the game with Ford. That was the consensus among the other two judges, too. The Silverado pulled just slightly ahead of the F-350 because of the proven reputation of its powertrain. This feature carried it to first place.

COMFY CRUZE A RARE FIND AT ITS PRICE

The 2011 Cruze is Chevy's newest compact,

a worthy replacement to the Cobalt. The

Cruze feels much roomier than its dimensions

suggest and it comes with all the right safety gear.

By Graeme Fletcher, Driving.ca - For years, Chevrolet flogged the Cobalt as its compact offering. The drawback with this car was simple -- it was very long in the tooth and desperately in need of replacement.

The Cruze effectively addresses these things. It has size, substance and an overall solidity to its drive that's a rare find at the affordable end of the price ladder. (Base price is $14,995, tester was $20,970.) In this regard, it is a family car that will find many fans.

The Cruze is surprisingly comfortable on a long drive. Credit goes to its wide body and 2,685-millimetre wheel-base. The combination makes the Cruze feel much roomier than its dimensions suggest. The additional width means there is plenty of shoulder and elbow room up front, while the wheelbase brings good legroom and generous fore/aft front-seat travel. The seats are comfortable and feature decent bolstering in both the base and backrest.

However, it's not so good for the rear occupants. Certainly, there is generous headroom, but the available legroom disappears quickly as the front seats are moved rearward. It is also out of step in that it features a large central tunnel. This effectively limits the rear seat to two passengers on all but the shortest trips.

For the driver, the height-adjustable seat and tilt and telescopic steering wheel adjustment make it a snap to find the right driving position. The sightlines are commendably clean. Yes, a shoulder check is still required before switching lanes, but the Cruze proves to be easy to wheel around in an urban setting.

The cabin is also refreshingly well conceived. The materials are better than many entry-level rides and the lay-out is logical. Brightening up the LT's interior is a cloth insert that rings the cabin. It is different and imparts a classier feel than the usual plastic trim. There's also a ton of content -- everything from air conditioning and cruise control to power door locks, windows and mirrors. In fact, there really are only two beefs -- Bluetooth and a USB audio input are conspicuous by their absence in the lesser LS and base LT models. Ditto the lack of heated seats. All should be standard across the range.

The 15.4-cubic-foot trunk is also right sized. It features a large opening that's nicely squared off and 60/40-split/folding seats. The bad news is the hockey-stick style hinges. Put anything beneath them and closing the trunk puts a dent in things.

Two very different engines provide the Cruze's motivation. The base 1.8-litre four-cylinder is more than adequate for most eventualities, but it lacks the driving crispness of the up-level 1.4L turbo engine. While the horse-power remains the same at 138, it is the turbo's torque and the manner in which it comes online that makes the difference. The base engine has to put 3,800 rpm on the tachometer before its 129 pound-feet show up for work, which creates a somewhat soft launch.

Conversely, the blown motor twists out a healthy 147 lb-ft at a very low 1,850 rpm. This brings much more punch off the line and a far more rewarding mid-range.

The LT Turbo scampers to 100 kilometres an hour in 9.8 seconds and turns the 80-to-120 km/h trick in 7.6 seconds.

The tester arrived with a six-speed manumatic transmission. It works well with the engine as the ratios bring good off-the-line performance and relaxed highway cruising. However, there's an annoying anomaly. The transmission tends to stumble its way up through the gears until things are fully warmed up.

Where the Cruze makes a statement is the manner in which it handles, as its European heritage shines through. In fact, the driving feel is one of substance and control. On one hand, the suspension takes the sting out of rough roads, which delivers the demanded comfort. Conversely, unwanted body motion is limited to a few degrees. There is very little body roll through fast corners and even less pitch and dive under hard acceleration or braking. Likewise, the steering feel is excellent. It is light at low speeds, yet communicative at higher speeds. In this regard, the Cruze sets a high standard for the class.

The Chevrolet Cruze is a decidedly decent compact car that delivers on nearly all fronts. It is competent in a corner, it has a comfortable cabin and it has all the right safety items. However, a week with the LT Turbo proved one thing conclusively -- this engine is the only way to go.

It not only puts appreciably more snap at the driver's disposal, it actually boasts better fuel economy than the base engine married to its optional automatic transmission.

At 8.5 litres per 100 km in the city and 5.5 L/100 km on the highway, the LT Turbo requires 0.7 and 0.1 L/100 km less fuel, respectively.

Of course, the fact it does not demand premium fuel is a huge bonus.