What Edmunds Says:

A slew of innovative high-tech features make the 2011 Ford Escape a tempting choice in the compact crossover category. But most competitors are more appealing due to superior refinement and functionality.

Pros:

Innovative high-tech features; impressive crash scores; peppy performance.

Cons:

Feels old compared to rivals; poor braking performance; non-reclining rear seat is difficult to fold.

 

Standard equipment loaded in the XLS consists of 16-inch alloy wheels, an outside mirror with an integrated blind-spot viewing surface, keyless entry, MyKey parental controls, full power accessories, cruise control, air-conditioning and a four-speaker stereo with a CD player as well as auxiliary audio jack.

2011 Ford Escape Basic Specs

2011 Ford Escape Measurements:

Width: 71.1 in.

Height: 67.9 in.

Length: 174.7 in.

Engine & Performance: Base engine size: 2.5 L

Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)

Cylinders: inline 4

Valves: 16

Valve timing: Variable

Torque: 171 ft-lbs. @ 4500 rpm

Horsepower: 171 hp @ 6000 rpm

2011 Ford Escape DriveTrain:

Drive type: front wheel drive

Transmission: 5-speed manual

2011 Ford Escape Video from Youtube:

Below are some user reviews of the 2011 Ford Escape:

By ml500owner

Owns: 2011 Ford Escape XLS 4dr SUV (2.5L 4cyl 5M)

I have the base model 2WD, 5 spd. manual. So far no problems. It has been excellent for going back and forth to work and some highway driving. It is comfortable to drive and has good power. I get 24.5 MPG in town according to the car computer and 23.5 when I calculate myself. Either way better than a lot of SUV’s.

By jeff_56

Owns: 2011 Ford Escape Limited 4dr SUV AWD (2.5L 4cyl 6A)

I would not reccomend this vehicle to anyone. I have less than 10,000 miles on it and it has been in the shop three times, once to replace the rack and pinon, twice for a dead spot in the gas peddal. This car is dangerous to drive. Oh, and the dealer and Ford motor co say this is normal. This car is dangerous to drive. Do not put yourself in the same situation I am in.

So this is the end of our review, we hope that it is quite helpful for you. Feel free to let us know what you think of the 2011 Ford Escape.

2011 Ford Escape Review is a post from: First Car Reviews

Occupy Horsepower seems to be the sentiment at Ford these days as the Blue Oval seeks elite output for everyman. Earlier this year, we told you the next GT500 was going to produce north of 600 hp, but even we weren’t prepared for the 650 hp and 600 lb-ft of torque announced as the car debuts at the Los Angeles auto show. Is that “God Bless America” we hear?

As for the price, the 2012 Mustang Shelby GT500 coupe starts at $49,605, which means the 2012 convertible is $54,605. All prices will include a $795 shipping charge. Below are some of the specs of this ride.

2013 Ford Mustang GT500 Specs

2013 Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 Features:

Year: 2013

Engine: V8

Engine Displacement: 5.8 liter

Horse Power @ RPM: 650

Top Speed: 190 mph

Here is the Youtube video from Motor Trend:

Below are some people’s opinions about 2013 Ford Mustang GT500:

By jeremy_c

Ford needs to put a dual clutch 7 speed tranny in the GT500. The good ol’ muscle cars were all available with Hurst shifters. It will really help make launching the 600bhp+ car easier.

By blueguydotcom

Yes, the performance on this car will be insane.  The normal GT could hang with an M3.  The Laguna Seca could take an M3 coupe at the track for sure.  This thing would pound it down.

By ParisTNDude

I love fast powerful cars, but I wouldn’t own a Mustang GT500 for any amount of money…the front reminds me of a catfish out of water taking it’s last gasps! I would take a Mustang 5.0 and put some mods on it and give the GT500 a run for the money!

Well, that’s all what we’ve got so far. Feel free to let us know your opinion of the upcoming 2013 Ford Mustang Shelby GT500.

2013 Ford Mustang GT500 is a post from: First Car Reviews

On the other side, a 2010 Volkswagen GTI has also been redesigned for 2010 model of year. This front-wheel-drive vehicle is powered by a 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine that creates 200 hp and 207 pound-feet of torque. A six-speed manual transmission comes standard, while a six-speed dual-clutch automated manual called DSG is optional.

2010 Mazdaspeed 3 vs 2010 Volkswagen GTI Specs

2010 Mazdaspeed 3:
Base engine size: 2.3 L
Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Cylinders: inline 4
Valves: 16
Valve timing: Variable
Direct injection
Torque: 280 ft-lbs. @ 3000 rpm
Horsepower: 263 hp @ 5500 rpm
Drive type: front wheel drive
Transmission: 6-speed manual

2010 Volkswagen GTI:
Base engine size: 2.0 L
Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Cylinders: inline 4
Valves: 16
Direct injection
Torque: 207 ft-lbs. @ 1800 rpm
Horsepower: 200 hp @ 5100 rpm
Drive type: front wheel drive
Transmission: 6-speed manual

Below are some people’s comments on 2010 Mazdaspeed 3 vs 2010 Volkswagen GTI:

By Nes
I like both of them…if people want a refined hatch that has power to boot…go with the GT-I…if people want a raw yet refined hatch with power to spare and don’t mind torque steer…go with the MS3.

By MickSFO
If cost is a concern, go for the Mazda; NOTHING better in this price range. I played middleman when a friend bought their Mazda 3 5-door a couple months ago. The sales manager gave me the keys to a speed to take it for a spin, and I really loved it. Shocked that a car (a japanese car) would be this much fun to drive. Otherwise, the GTI is a no-brainer.

By Vinnie Gelinas
I like them both, but with that gaping maw on the MS3 and my love of the taught, no-nonsense style of German cars, the mk6 GTI takes the cake. Now if only we can get a GTD here!!

So here we are at the end of our discussion. Feel free to let us know what you think of between 2010 Mazdaspeed 3 vs 2010 Volkswagen GTI.

2010 Mazdaspeed 3 vs 2010 Volkswagen GTI is a post from: First Car Reviews

As for the 2010 Jaguar XFR, this XFR trim is equipped with a supercharged 5.0-liter V8 engine with even more power than other trims which produce 510 hp and 461 lb-ft of torque. This engine underneath the hood of the Jaguar XFR is coupled with 6-speed automatic transmission. Last of the competitor here is called 2010 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG which came with 6.2L V8 engine under the hood that creates 518 hp and 465 lb-ft of torque. This engine is then coupled to a sport-tuned seven-speed automatic with a paddle-shift manual mode.

2009 Cadillac CTS-V vs 2010 Jaguar XFR, 2010 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG Specs

2009 Cadillac CTS-V:
Base engine size: 6.2 L
Cam type: Overhead valves (OHV)
Cylinders: V8
Valves: 16
Valve timing: Variable
Torque: 551 ft-lbs. @ 3800 rpm
Horsepower: 556 hp @ 6100 rpm
Drive type: rear wheel drive
Transmission: 6-speed manual

2010 Jaguar XFR:
Base engine size: 5.0 L
Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Cylinders: V8
Valves: 32
Valve timing: Variable
Direct injection
Torque: 461 ft-lbs. @ 2500 rpm
Horsepower: 510 hp @ 6000 rpm
Drive type: rear wheel drive
Transmission: 6-speed shiftable automatic

2010 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG:
Base engine size: 6.2 L
Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Cylinders: V8
Valves: 32
Valve timing: Variable
Torque: 465 ft-lbs. @ 5200 rpm
Horsepower: 518 hp @ 6800 rpm
Drive type: rear wheel drive
Transmission: 7-speed shiftable automatic

Below are some of people’s thoughts about 2009 Cadillac CTS-V vs 2010 Jaguar XFR, 2010 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG:

By JB4444
The Jaguar is much better looking than the other two, and it would be my pick of the three. No dought the coolest too! The Cadillac is just a stupid cheap American car, while the Mercedes is good, but looks a bit boring!

By MH424
I don’t think people driving these cars are too worried about fuel economy so a cylinder de-activation would be pretty pointless

By Snowwhite
I wonder if the E63 will receive some kind of cylinder de-activation system to make it more appealing.

So what do you think? Let us know your opinion about 2009 Cadillac CTS-V vs 2010 Jaguar XFR, 2010 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG too, guys.

2009 Cadillac CTS-V vs 2010 Jaguar XFR, 2010 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG is a post from: First Car Reviews

As for the Jeep, it is the most expensive of Jeeps but in this crowd its price tag seems reasonable and worth the price. The all-new 6.4L HEMI V8 engine complete with Fuel Saver Technology generates about 470 horsepower and 465 pound-feet of torque in this SRT8. On the other hand, an HSE trim of Range Rover Sport Supercharged is powered by a 5.0 litre LR-V8 510hp engine and it is the most powerful yet high-performance Range Rover Sport ever built.

2012 Land Rover Range Rover Sport Specs

Drivetrain: All Wheel Drive
Curb Weight (lbs): 5487
City (MPG): 14.3
Hwy (MPG): 26.8
Horsepower: 375@6500
Torque (lb-ft): 510@3500
Wheelbase: 108.0
Length (in.): 188.3
Width (in.): 85.0
Height (in.): 70.2

Below are some of people’s opinions on X5 M vs Grand Cherokee SRT8, Range Rover Sport Supercharged, Cayenne Turbo S:

By JB4444
If you want a fast car, get a fast car! Not a fast SUV! The Range Rover Sport is the most luxurious and the best off-road, and that is what really matters with an expensive SUV.

By Gavin A.
Had a Audi S5 for a while which was fun…have a Jeep now, not an SRT8…it does make me laugh that all of these vehicles can out accelerate the 5.1 second audi by so much!

By Thug On A Rug
The Range Rover Sport is so unreliable, I’m surprised it finished the comparo.

By James Peter
As always, good one from BMW. I’m quite surprised that the SRT8 is better than the Range Rover to be honest. We should include ML63 AMG to complete it and let them explain to the world, which is the best, but still it’s peoples opinion though.

So what do you say? Let us know what you think of the X5 M vs Grand Cherokee SRT8, Range Rover Sport Supercharged, Cayenne Turbo S as well.

X5 M vs Grand Cherokee SRT8, Range Rover Sport Supercharged, Cayenne Turbo S is a post from: First Car Reviews

The optional V-6 packed in the Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner is currently rated at 240 horsepower which is an increase by 40-horse, and the deservedly maligned four-speed automatic has been binned in favor of a modern six-speed. As the Grand Vitara comes with a standard nav system which is also removable. Then the Terrain is the longest SUV in this group we are talking about, it rides on a wheelbase that extends 7.4 inches beyond any competitor’s.

2010 GMC Terrain and 2010 Suzuki Grand Vitara Specs

2010 GMC Terrain:
Base engine size: 2.4 L
Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Cylinders: inline 4
Valves: 16
Valve timing: Variable
Direct injection
Torque: 172 ft-lbs. @ 4900 rpm
Horsepower: 182 hp @ 6700 rpm
Drive type: front wheel drive
Transmission: 6-speed shiftable automatic

2010 Suzuki Grand Vitara:
Base engine size: 2.4 L
Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Cylinders: inline 4
Valves: 16
Torque: 162 ft-lbs. @ 4000 rpm
Horsepower: 166 hp @ 6000 rpm
Drive type: rear wheel drive
Transmission: 5-speed manual

Below are some of people’s comments on Terrain vs CR-V, RAV4, Tiguan, Mariner, Outlander, Forester, Grand Vitara:

By Bliss Records
I Just purchased a 2012 Tiguan SE..I have to say the car is fun to drive..I love that thing, It will move too!!

By Phanatic n’ Philly
i disagree the RAV-4 is too small ( i’m 6′ 3 ” ) so i like the suzuki much better

By Westernfan
Now, if the Rav 4 had an overhead rear hatch like the CRV, rather than that swinging door on the back, it would be perfect!

So here we are at the end of our discussion. Feel free to let us know what you think of the Terrain vs CR-V, RAV4, Tiguan, Mariner, Outlander, Forester, Grand Vitara.

Terrain vs CR-V, RAV4, Tiguan, Mariner, Outlander, Forester, Grand Vitara is a post from: First Car Reviews

As for the 2012 model year of BMW 750i, it is powered by a 4.4-liter twin-turbo V8 engine which produce 400 hp as well as 450 lb-ft of torque and it is coupled with a standard six-speed automatic. Well, last but not least is the Maserati Quattroporte Sport GT S which is packed with an engine with a displacement of 4,691cc. This engine is able to pump up 450 HP at 7,000 rpm along with a maximum torque of 510 Nm at 4,750 rpm.

Porsche Panamera S vs BMW 750i, Maserati Quattroporte Sport GT S Specs

Porsche Panamera S:
Engine layout: front engine/rear-wheel drive
Cylinder layout/number of cylinders: V engine/8
Displacement: 4.8 Liters
Horsepower @ rpm: 400 hp @ 6500 rpm
Torque: 369 lb.-ft.

2012 BMW 750i:
Base engine size: 4.4 L
Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Cylinders: V8
Valves: 32
Valve timing: Variable
Direct injection
Torque: 450 ft-lbs. @ 1750 rpm
Horsepower: 400 hp @ 5500 rpm
Drive type: rear wheel drive
Transmission: 6-speed shiftable automatic

Maserati Quattroporte Sport GT S:
Engine Displacement: 4,691 cc
Maximum power: 331 kW (450 hp)
Engine speed at maximum power: 7,000 rpm
Maximum torque: 510 Nm (52 kgm)
Engine speed at maximum torque: 4,750 rpm
Top speed: 287 km/h

Below are some people’s opinions on Porsche Panamera S vs BMW 750i, Maserati Quattroporte Sport GT S:

By JB4444
Despite the fact that the Maserati isn’t as good as the other two, it would be my pick! Looks much better, and the sound!!

By Thug On A Rug
The Quattroporte is not even close to being on par with the others. The only reason they any at all is because of the Maserati badge.

By cheese
i currently i have m56, but the porsche is the one i really want, i always wanted a hatchback, but new STI’s are well… STI’s, this is ultimate performance hatchback, you guys need to test the panamera 4s , like inside line has, it will be the best all arounder you guys have ever had, you can’t beat porsche for performance, balance and most importantly reliability, no other german brand boasts even average reliability, meanwhile porsche is tops, so who cares if the XFR and E63 offer more performance, for less money, they will break, the porsche won’t, i’m just hoping it depreciates enough in a few years, when my infinit comes off lease.

So this is the end of our review. Feel free to let us know what you think of the battle between Porsche Panamera S vs BMW 750i, Maserati Quattroporte Sport GT S.

Porsche Panamera S vs BMW 750i, Maserati Quattroporte Sport GT S is a post from: First Car Reviews

On the other hand, 2010 BMW M3 is provided with a couple of minor changes which are a  standard HD radio as well as optional automatic headlights and it is available in sedan, coupe or retractable-hardtop convertible. A 4.0-liter V8 engine powers this car, it sends 414 horsepower and 295 pound-feet of torque to the rear wheels. A six-speed manual transmission comes standard, along with a seven-speed dual-clutch automated-manual gearbox as optional. Last of all is the 2011 Cadillac CTS-V which is the world’s fastest sedan that achieves 0-60 mph in 3.9 seconds. This ride is powered by a 6.2L Eaton-supercharged V8 engine that generates 556 horsepower as well as 551 lb.-ft. of torque.

2011 Audi RS5 vs 2010 BMW M3, 2011 Cadillac CTS-V Specs

2011 Audi RS5:
Engine: 4.2-liter V8
Max. Horsepower @ rpm: 450 horsepower @ 8250
Max. Torque @ rpm: 317.15 lb-ft. @ 4000-6000
Transmission: seven-speed S tronic

2010 BMW M3:
Engine: 4.0-liter V8
Power: 414 horsepower
Torque: 295 lb-ft.
Transmission: six-speed manual transmission

2011 Cadillac CTS-V:
Engine: 6.2L Eaton-supercharged V8
Power: 556 horsepower
Torque: 551 lb.-ft.
Transmission: 6-Speed Manual Transmission

Below are some people’s thoughts on the battle between 2011 Audi RS5 vs 2010 BMW M3, 2011 Cadillac CTS-V:

By JB4444
The M3 is no doubt the best car in it’s class! There is no competition for it!

By Harry Burdette
I love my 2012 CTS V. Took mother-in-law on trip; she talked about “pretty & comfort” in back seat @ 110mph down the interstate. Damn I love it so.

By SyJ
Not sure why the M3 won this won- aside from the fact that its a BMW of course. The V has more motor, a better interior, better steering feel, better acceleration figures and more distinctive styling. Too bad it lost points for the way its turn signals sounded. I mean that is a critical element when evaluation cars like these.

You have reached the end of our discussion here on the battle. If you have your own opinion to share, then we suggest you write it down here about the 2011 Audi RS5 vs 2010 BMW M3, 2011 Cadillac CTS-V.

2011 Audi RS5 vs 2010 BMW M3, 2011 Cadillac CTS-V is a post from: First Car Reviews

The 2011 Mazda 2 is actually a five-passenger, four-door subcompact hatchback which can be found in two trim levels which are Sport and Touring. Both models are powered by a 1.5-liter inline four-cylinder engine which produces 100 horsepower as well as 98 pound-feet of torque. A five-speed manual transmission comes standard, with a four-speed automatic offered at additional cost.

2011 Ford Fiesta vs 2010 Honda Fit, 2011 Mazda 2 Specs

2011 Ford Fiesta:
Base engine size: 1.6 L
Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Cylinders: inline 4
Valves: 16
Valve timing: Variable
Torque: 112 ft-lbs. @ 5000 rpm
Horsepower: 120 hp @ 6350 rpm
Drive type: front wheel drive
Transmission: 5-speed manual

2010 Honda Fit:
Base engine size: 1.5 L
Cam type: Single overhead cam (SOHC)
Cylinders: inline 4
Valves: 16
Valve timing: Variable
Torque: 106 ft-lbs. @ 4800 rpm
Horsepower: 117 hp @ 6600 rpm
Drive type: front wheel drive
Transmission: 5-speed manual

2011 Mazda 2:
Base engine size: 1.5 L
Cam type: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Cylinders: inline 4
Valves: 16
Valve timing: Variable
Torque: 98 ft-lbs. @ 4000 rpm
Horsepower: 100 hp @ 6000 rpm
Drive type: front wheel drive
Transmission: 5-speed manual

Below are some of people’s reviews about 2011 Ford Fiesta vs 2010 Honda Fit, 2011 Mazda 2:

By e30og
love the fiesta but the Fit has totally stolen this segment, and rightfully so. I cannot get over how much space is inside the rear; the seats fold completely flat or the bench folds up vertically for a very large, long space in the rear footwell

By Todd H
The automatic transmission version of the Ford Fiesta gets the best mileage. I am averaging 35 in mine and that is suburban driving. I got 41mpg on my last road trip.

By paul8632
Hmmm. The Fit is the winner with great ergonomics and driving feel but needs MUCH better brakes. The Mazda2 does a better job than the Fiesta despite weighing and costing less. The Fiesta desperately needs the Mazda’s manual transmission. The Fiesta is the best looking. Despite poorer EPA fuel numbers, the Fit gets the best mileage. The Fit is where I’d put my money. I just wish Ford had done as good a job with the rest of the car as it did with the styling. Thanks for testing the manual transmissions!!

Here we are at the end of our discussion. Feel free to let us know what you think of the battle between 2011 Ford Fiesta vs 2010 Honda Fit, 2011 Mazda 2.

2011 Ford Fiesta vs 2010 Honda Fit, 2011 Mazda 2 is a post from: First Car Reviews

The Lexus LFA features an all-new 4.8-liter V10 engine designed exclusively for use in the high-dollar supercar, plus comes with a screaming red line of 9,000 rpm. Power is rated at 552 horsepower as well as 354 lb-ft of torque. Even though maximum twist doesn’t occur until the needle sweeps over the 6,800rpm. The LFA also comes with Carbon Ceramic Material brakes, that happen to be both lighter than steel and more fade-resistant. Altogether, the LFA weighs about 3,263 lbs.

2011 Ferrari 599 HGTE vs 2012 Lexus LFA Specs

2011 Ferrari 599 HGTE:
Engine: 6.0-liter V-12
Power: 612 horsepower

2012 Lexus LFA:
Engine: 4.8-liter V10
Horsepower: 552@8700
Torque (lb-ft): 354@7000

Below are some of people’s opinions of 2011 Ferrari 599 HGTE vs 2012 Lexus LFA:

By Thug On A Rug
Why would you take the Lexus over any Ferrari?

By dbock1
Interesting that these two cars would be chosen. Though the parallels are obvious, I can’t help noticing the missions are different. The Lexus is a Japanese Italia, not a Fiorano. Front engined Ferraris are never as visceral as their mid engined counterparts, going all the way back to the Dino and Daytona. It’s a shame that the Ferrari lost points for designed-in comfort and refinement. Maybe the GTO would have been a better choice?
Lovely cars, both. Let’s see less electronics and more clutch pedals.

By Jesus Freak
I’s rather get a Ford GT and a new M6. I love the Ford GT ithink it is the greatest supercar of all time (hence my avatar). It outruns the Enzo, the 599 GTO, the Gallardo,the R8, the SLS AMG,the DBS and many others(even the mighty LFA). 0-60:3.2! sic! top speed:209! (look up Ford GT 209 on you tube to see it).

This is the end of our discussion regarding that competition. Feel free to let us know what you think of 2011 Ferrari 599 HGTE vs 2012 Lexus LFA.

2011 Ferrari 599 HGTE vs 2012 Lexus LFA is a post from: First Car Reviews