From the July 1991 issue of Car and Driver.
The late Andy Warhol predicted that everyone in the future would be famous for fifteen minutes, but time is running out and you still haven’t made the cover of People or even been a finalist on “America’s Most Stultifying Home Videos.”
Say, would you pay 44 cents a minute to announce to the world who and what you are? The phone company charges half that, but sadly your message would only reach one listener at a time—not very cost-effective.
You could try the television networks, like Mr. Iacocca does, but for 60 seconds of air time they want the equivalent of what Roger Clemens gets for pitching an entire, exhausting nine innings of baseball against such formidables as the Seattle Mariners: $200,000 or so.
Maybe you ought to consider an automobile, one that mirrors your style and image, not to mention your haircut, your cool élan. So our assembled players cost about $35,000 each. So what? If you drive one 15,000 miles a year for the next four years, averaging 45 miles an hour, it’ll cost you a measly 44 cents per minute to broadcast your tastes and means to everyone on the road, at the car wash, and in front of the most overpriced restaurant in town.
Of course, this self-mirroring business, like fashionable dressing, can be risky—the message received is not always exactly the one the sender intended. Is the owner of that smart little Kyongsang Pudhopper EX a brilliant consumer, or just an expedient skinflint? Does that grand Wellington-Ross HMS 6.5 carry a person of refined tastes, or of unchecked vanity?
Consider the seven sedans we’ve collected here. They’re all relatively rare head-turners. Fleet of foot (they zip to 60 mph in less than ten seconds), all are capable of more than 120 mph, which of course would be wrong, but who wants to broadcast the message, “Hey, I may not be fast, but I sure am low!”
The names of our fast-lane foreigners fairly lilt off the tongue: Acura Legend LS, Alfa Romeo 164L, Audi 90 Quattro, BMW 525i, Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.6, Saab 9000CD Turbo, and Volvo 940 Turbo. Already it sounds like you’ve mastered a foreign language.
We tested the cars in the form most commonly chosen by their buyers. That means automatic transmissions, which Americans overwhelmingly prefer to manual gearboxes, even in cars like these. Among our contestants, only the Audi was fitted with a five-speed because, in fact, all 90 Quattros are. (An automatic is not available on any all-wheel-drive Audi except the flagship V-8.)
We gathered our field in sunny Southern California and spent a work week on the road—testing, measuring, pondering . . . and hunting for routes not closed by snow or mudslides. The Monsoons of March ended the drought (for a month anyway), but they didn’t dampen our enthusiasm to find out how these expressive automobiles stack up. Even cars intended to make a statement have to work as cars, and for the money these charge, they should work well indeed.
After some hard driving and harder judging, we had our answers. And rankings that reflect our opinions. We discovered that all these cars are special, and that all are acceptable. But some are more acceptably special than others.
7th Place: Volvo 940 Turbo
From the logbook, a diary of driver impressions: “Doesn’t feel very spirited.” “It’s not a chore to drive, but it offers no real pleasure.”
Few cars have the cult appeal that Volvos do. A loyal clientele has responded for decades to this Swedish image of safety, reliability, durability, and sensibility. Yet even the newest Volvo felt dated and overmatched in toe-to-toe comparison with our half-dozen alternatives.
The 940 series is the company’s new family of sedans and wagons, and the Turbo is its lustiest example. But our 940 failed to win many hearts, even though it had the lowest sticker price of the group, $29,813.
HIGHS: Great seating comfort and visibility, quality appointments.
LOWS: Thrashy engine, road manners of a much heavier car, dated feel.
VERDICT: Loyalists won’t need to test-drive anything else.
Oh, there was plenty to like about this Swede, starting with fine brakes and sheetmetal contours that are softer and rounder than its 740 parent’s. And the big, long-cushioned seats drew raves: supportive, comfy, upright, and mounted high in the car. (One driver tagged this “the king of Sweden driving position.”) The interior design retains the rectangles and straight lines of the 740, but everything is well executed in quality materials, creating a businesslike cockpit.
The windows are tall, like looking out of a control tower. The new Volvo is a comfortable, secure place to sit, for hours on end.
But driving the 940 Turbo for those same hours isn’t a particularly rewarding experience. Though steering response is excellent and the suspension keeps the tires in good contact with the road, the body moves around quite a bit, creating a feeling of ponderousness. From the driver’s seat, you’d never guess the 940 tied for second-lightest curb weight.
Also disappointing was the racket from the Volvo’s four-cylinder engine. The 162-hp turbocharged 2.3 turned in acceleration times that put it in mid-pack, but it also raised a decidedly agricultural din. It finished last in both the top-speed and fuel-economy derbies.
So the Volvo pigeonholes itself in the cultist people-hauler slot: it works okay in its way, but that’s not a way that stands up to hard-nosed comparison shopping, in our view. Long may the Volvo faithful disagree with us.
From the logbook: “It seems tall, old, sedate, stodgy.” And: “Stiff and jiggly on uneven blacktop; the wheels stay planted, but the driver is stirred in quite the wrong way.”
1991 Volvo 940 Turbo
162-hp turbocharged inline-4, 4-speed automatic, 3180 lb
Base/as-tested price: $29,675/$29,813
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.4 sec
1/4 mile: 16.6 sec @ 82 mph
100 mph: 30.6 sec
Braking, 70–0 mph: 165 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.76 g
C/D observed fuel economy: 18 mpg
5th Place (tie): Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.6
From the logbook: “A lazy-feeling car. It’s reluctant to get up and go, and when it finally does, it still doesn’t deliver much.” “Quality is excellent.”
The little 190 Mercedes may have been in over its head here. We might have asked a 300 to carry the Benz banner against a 5-series BMW and the big Saab, but the window sticker doesn’t lie: look for a Mercedes around $35,000 and this is what you find. In fact, the 190E, at $37,392, was the most expensive car in this group. Also the lightest, the most cramped, and the least powerful. Does that mean it’s simply overpriced? You might make a case.
Still, the 190E 2.6 is beautifully put together and feels solid as concrete. From the high-gloss wood trim to the firm seats and slightly scattered minor switches, it provides a true Mercedes-Benz experience.
HIGHS: Top-quality construction and materials, great bad-road ride.
LOWS: Lazy engine, outmoded transmission, high price.
VERDICT: A real Benz, but not a great Benz.
Would that it worked better in the bargain. We have no complaint with the ride, and the car’s handling poise seems to improve as the road surface deteriorates. But in most other measures of dynamic ability, the six-cylinder 190 just sort of lies there. Though smooth-running, the 158-hp engine generates only modest thrust. Exceptionally long throttle-pedal travel doesn’t help. Nor does an automatic transmission that lacks the smooth shifting, ready kickdown, and general refinement of today’s typical GM Hydra-matic. An over-exuberant traction-control system cuts engine power in middling-hard cornering: it made tight mountain roads less fun and our skidpad test impossible to conduct properly.
We expected the 190 to trail the field in rear-seat spaciousness but were surprised to find even the driver’s feet and knees competing with pads and trim panels for a place to be. Especially annoying was the under-dash cover that snagged the toe of the right shoe as the driver pivoted between throttle and brake.
Somebody called this the Cadillac Cimarron of Mercedes’s line. That’s perhaps too harsh, but the 190 does risk coming off as an imitation of a prestige car. Or at least as a very old prestige car (the body dates from ’84, the engine from ’87). It’s a real Mercedes, though, no question. It just happens to be priced like bigger and better cars.
From the logbook: “Too physical in all the wrong ways.” “Lovely ride, but seems to lumber along.” “This car feels virtually unchanged from the old 2.3.”
1991 Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.6
158-hp inline-6, 4-speed automatic, 3100 lb
Base/as-tested price: $34,070/$37,392
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 9.4 sec
1/4 mile: 17.4 sec @ 82 mph
100 mph: 31.0 sec
Braking, 70–0 mph: 177 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.69 g
C/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg
5th Place (tie): Alfa Romeo 164L
From the logbook: “I find myself thinking its failings are okay because this is, after all, an Alfa.”
Though profoundly different in heritage, execution, and character from the Mercedes 190 (and more than $3200 cheaper), the Alfa 164 toted up and boiled down to a dead-heat finish with the baby Benz in our overall judgment. It also, despite some endearing traits, couldn’t rise above the competition arrayed against it.
In our first test of a 164 (a top-of-the-line S model in June 1990), we found the traditional Alfa quirkiness fairly well under control and the car’s performance brilliant. For this test, pricing and the lack of an automatic-transmission option on the S forced us into an L-model, and along the way the fire went out. The three-liter V-6 loses 17 hp between S and L trim, and that combined with the softer power delivery of an autobox dragged 0-to-60 times from 6.9 seconds to 9.8—a whole personality of difference.
HIGHS: Unique styling treatment, lusty engine sounds.
LOWS: The engine only sounds lusty, and steering weight feels odd.
VERDICT: Nice, but nowhere near the faster, sportier S-model.
Everyone liked the unconventional styling of the 164’s body. The combination of a growly engine and high-feedback suspension gives the car a gritty, mechanical feel that holds promise for the fan of the driving art. Turn up the intensity on the road, however, and that promise fades. The steering’s self-centering forces are curiously strong and artificial-feeling, giving little clue to how hard the front tires are working. And our slalom test turned up a darty instability in the rear suspension.
The boldly designed interior of the Alfa, especially all the slatted panels and square buttons of the dashboard, look original. And it works well enough, after a suitable orientation period. The driving position is arms-out but not arms-stretched-out, and the seats are decently comfortable.
So the 164 is an undeniably interesting car, one that is unusual but not so weird as to make it unlivable—as some Alfas have been. We wanted very much to like our 164 L. But in too many small ways, it let us down—something that didn’t happen with other cars that its $34,142 price forced it to compete against.
From the logbook: “Its sparkling-good looks are not aided and abetted by sparkling-good performance.”
1991 Alfa Romeo 164L
183-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 3440 lb
Base/as-tested price: $29,015/$34,142
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 9.8 sec
1/4 mile: 17.5 sec @ 83 mph
100 mph: 27.1 sec
Braking, 70–0 mph: 176 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.76 g
C/D observed fuel economy: 20 mpg
4th Place: BMW 525i
From the logbook: “Good driver! Lacks power.” “Everything works so very well and with great confidence. Perhaps the best balanced car in the test.”
This was our first time behind BMW’s new multivalve “small” six, and the results tell all: the 525i finished in fourth place, but it nearly tied with the third-place Audi and slotted in respectably close to the winner.
This newly powered price-leader 5-series gives an enthusiast driver plenty to love, including balance and poise on twisty roads, superb seats and driving environment, probably the best styling of this group, and faultless build quality. Some testers noted the numb spot in the steering around dead-ahead, but in every other way, the 525i actively approaches driving as a sport, a pastime, and a passion. Your thighs, seat, torso, and shoulders are positively located by the deep buckets, your thumbs find perfectly formed rests on the wheel’s upper spokes, your eyes and right hand have the dash-center instruments and controls canted toward them.
HIGHS: Beautifully made, beautifully shaped, beautiful to drive.
LOWS: Engine needs revs—and a manual gearbox—to really work.
VERDICT: A true driver’s car: solid, balanced, and integrated.
Under way, the BMW feels willing and spirited, with velvety control response, ready maneuverability, and good cornering grip. But it isn’t particularly fast. This 189-hp 24-valve 2.5 represents a welcome improvement over the 168-hp twelve-valver (C/D, July 1989), but it needs revs to make power. And that means the driver has to keep it spinning. More than any other autoshifter here, the BMW cried out for a manual box. And in one respect—top speed—what capability the engine does have is hobbled. The 525i is electronically limited to 128 mph, ostensibly because of tire ratings but also probably for marketing reasons: it mustn’t crowd the performance of the more expensive 535i.
Cloth upholstery that looked a little downmarket was the only visible suggestion that we were in an “economy” BMW. That concept is relative. At $36,683, our 525i surpassed all as-tested prices here save the 190E’s. Yet no enthusiast will question the BMW’s value.
From the logbook: “Very sweet. No rocket but not bad, and the chassis offers wonderful give and take.” “Very solid, very secure, delightfully responsive.”
1991 BMW 525i
189-hp inline-6, 4-speed automatic, 3600 lb
Base/as-tested price: $35,555/$36,683
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 9.6 sec
1/4 mile: 17.5 sec @ 83 mph
100 mph: 26.3 sec
Braking, 70–0 mph: 178 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.77 g
C/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg
3rd Place: Audi 90 Quattro
From the logbook: “A marvelous machine. Light, supple, responsive, forgiving, and comfortable.”
The Audi was a bit of a ringer due to its five-speed manual gearbox, but we didn’t want to leave the all-wheel-driver out of the test, especially because we had been impressed with the difference its 20-valve engine made when we first sampled it. As it turns out, the Audi would have taken the crown as sportiest sedan of this bunch no matter what transmission it carried.
HIGHS: Taut, direct feel; unmatched grip and foul-weather traction.
LOWS: A small, noisy cabin, relatively speaking.
VERDICT: The only clear sports sedan here, and a jewel anywhere.
It’s a startlingly firm car, almost hard. From the seats to the steering-wheel rim to the ride quality, little in the way of padding isolates the driver from the car or the road. Generally, that’s great. It gives the 90 a very positive feel. On rough pavement, though, the road rumble can assault your ears, and the five-cylinder engine can do the same at the elevated speeds it needs to deliver punch. But overall we enjoyed the Audi’s taut, direct manner and its firm feel.
The 90 did come up short—and small—when called upon to do sedan-type passenger duty. Its interior measures tighter than all but the Mercedes 190’s—and it felt maybe snugger than that—and its trunk capacity was the smallest of all. None of which bothered the person fortunate enough to be at the wheel. The Audi drew praise from all quarters, even before the weather turned rotten.
When the rain and snow fell, whoever had the 90 Quattro grew downright belligerent about stopping for a driver change. The CB radios crackled with challenges: “That’s it, I’m locking the doors, I’m here for the duration,” and “You can have my Audi when you pry my cold, dead fingers from its wheel.”
Anyone needing more convincing that the $32,735 Audi 90 Quattro deserves the tag “sports sedan” can just look at two categories of testing where it racked up the big numbers: skidpad grip and interior noise. That may not constitute the definition of a sporting car, but it’s a fair guide.
From the logbook: “An extremely silky car on smooth pavement. The ride is tight and controlled, the directional stability excellent.” “I’m in love. How much a month?”
1991 Audi 90 Quattro
164-hp inline-5, 5-speed manual, 3180 lb
Base/as-tested price: $28,935/$32,735
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.2 sec
1/4 mile: 16.3 sec @ 84 mph
100 mph: 25.4 sec
Braking, 70–0 mph: 182 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g
C/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg
2nd Place: Saab 9000CD Turbo
From the logbook: “Maybe the best all around.” “This engine is a delight.” “Feels like a four-liter V-8.”
Saab’s luxurious 9000CD, with the new balance-shaft 2.3-liter turbo four, set the pace for sheer speed and came within just two points of taking all the chips. Based on previous experience with a hatchback, five-speed 9000 Turbo, we had expected the notchback automatic to be big, comfy, and swift. But we had not anticipated its wide margin of victory in the speed contests. The 200-hp engine (with 222 pound-feet of torque at a low 2000 rpm) belted the car to 60 mph in 6.8 seconds and hurled it down our test straight at 141 mph. No other car here approached those feats. And the Saab four ran with an eerie, silky smoothness that rivaled the Acura’s V-6 and embarrassed the Alfa’s. This is a remarkable engine.
HIGHS: Unique combination of size, balance, and blistering speed.
LOWS: A niggle here and there, but nothing seriously noteworthy.
VERDICT: Nearly impossible to beat as an enthusiast’s sedan.
The car it propels so energetically also leaves precious little to complain about. From the viewpoint of an enthusiast or a responsible head-of-household (realizing those can be one and the same person), the $34,853 CD Turbo is pleasing and effective. Tall, upright seats give good support, the controls work with precision (some testers would have liked an adjustable steering wheel), and the cavernous cabin keeps everyone comfortable. The CD’s new walnut instrument panel adds an element of elegance. On almost any kind of road, the big Saab shows great composure. It understeers when pushed, and the inside front wheel can easily spin exiting slow corners. But the car tracks perfectly down straights and dances into and through turns with poise unexpected in such a large car. Big humps and dips create no excess body flop or suspension slop, just a nicely damped, hydraulic sensation. And any time mood and conditions dictate, a push on the right pedal can serve up a headlong rush into the distant scenery. It’s hard to imagine the driver who would not be impressed with this car.
From the logbook: “Quick acceleration to 130 with no engine thrash. Amazing for a four-cylinder engine. GM needs some of this for the Quad 4.”
1991 Saab 9000CD Turbo
200-hp turbocharged inline-4, 4-speed automatic, 3220 lb
Base/as-tested price: $34,853/$34,853
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 6.8 sec
1/4 mile: 15.2 sec @ 93 mph
100 mph: 17.9 sec
Braking, 70–0 mph: 179 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.75 g
C/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg
1st Place: Acura Legend LS
From the logbook: “Feels like the big car that it is. It responds pretty nicely, but I’m always aware that it’s a large, heavy piece.” “Great engine. All the torquiness of normal aspiration, but the power and smoothness of a turbo.”
Curiously, our testers had a wider divergence of opinion on the victorious Acura than on the second-place Saab. But despite the mix of bravos and but-then-agains in the logbook, when the points were totaled, the Legend eked out the win.
HIGHS: Engine power and refinement, build quality, control efforts.
LOWS: Its excellence is sometimes too subtle to register.
VERDICT: The winner, pure and simple. What else is there?
Much of the debate about the latest big Acura hovers around the quality of sportiness. One contingent within our merry cadre pointed out how hefty the car felt, and they considered its cornering poise a bit too waffly. Admitting it did nothing wrong, they also felt it didn’t seem completely glued to the road in the twisties. Both steering and brakes lacked crisp feedback.
The car’s supporters, meanwhile, seized upon the Legend’s light, delicate control efforts and its quick, predictable responses. That, they claimed, made for a sportier driving experience than, say, the BMW’s heavier helm. Everyone praised the 3.2-liter V-6, the biggest powerplant here and tied with the Saab for highest power rating at 200 hp. The Acura six is a gem: flexible at low speeds, lusty at high speeds, satin-smooth at all speeds.
So is the rest of the car, but often it shines in a subtle, understated way. Maybe too understated. Its styling, for instance, is unremarkable, yet clean and tasteful. If the car doesn’t scamper through bends like a jack rabbit, neither does it ever surprise you or put a wheel wrong. It is an excellent open-road cruiser, with unmatched refinement. And for quality of fit and finish, the Legend scores among the best in the automotive world.
The Acura Legend accomplishes its tasks smoothly and subtly, rather than with overt spirit and verve. Capable as it is, it can fail to make an impression. That may account for the boundless respect but qualified affection our drivers felt toward it.
From the logbook (the comparison cleaned up somewhat): “The Acura is the Meryl Streep of automobiles. She acts flawlessly, but I wouldn’t care to get involved.”
1991 Acura Legend LS
200-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 3500 lb
Base/as-tested price: $34,861/$34,861
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.8 sec
1/4 mile: 16.3 sec @ 83 mph
100 mph: 23.7 sec
Braking, 70–0 mph: 191 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.76 g
C/D observed fuel economy: 19 mpg
As the Overall Rating scores illustrate, we had four cars here that made sense to us. The BMW, the Audi, the Saab, and the Acura spoke to us with a combination of competence and style. We would not look askance at someone choosing to pay the price for any of them.
The 525i flattered us with its presumption that we were serious drivers. The Quattro entertained us with its racy demeanor. The 9000 freed us from compromising between utility and speed.
But in the end, the Legend would simply brook no challenge. Swift and silky, it happily took up any driving chore we threw at it. If the car left us little to remark on in the process, well, that may just be a measure of how unflappable it is. And who could deny, thinking ahead to matters of maintenance and reliability, that the Acura likely represented the lowest-risk purchase here?
When it comes to expressing personal style, plus saying a thing or two about good family transport, the Acura Legend just has all the good lines.
Source: Reviews - aranddriver.com
