Evelyn Reynolds

From the July 2009 issue of Car and Driver.When getting there is assumed and what counts is your arrival, you need a ride with Coach cachet, Ferragamo flair, Saks snobbery, Vuitton verve. In the travertine halls of the Somerset Collection, a ritzy shopping enclave in the Detroit suburb of  Troy, Michigan, our quintet of all-weather Arrival Vehicles—let’s call them AVs—basked in admiring glances. Burberry and Ralph Lauren behind showroom glass, Lexus and Mercedes out front, the coveting begins at 10 a.m. [editoriallinks id=’236f4ff4-3352-4455-9709-c97a4d75c3bc’ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]Of course, an AV will get you to most any terrestrial destination; all-wheel drive, traction control, stability control, and onboard navigation see to that. But it’s the designer details and gilt-edge labels that mark an arrival. Arrival—as opposed to just plain ol’ arrival—naturally costs a little more, the price of moving up the status pyramid far enough to be where everybody isn’t. Unrolling 45 or 50 thou won’t put you up in the thin oxygen, but the manners are more polite and the leather is softer.This comparison test is prompted by four new entries in this so-called “compact-luxury sport-utility” class. We’re facing them off against the veteran BMW X3, first introduced in 2004, the winner of our last roundup [July 2007]. For the record, these crossover vehicles are all based on passenger-car platforms.The Audi Q5, newborn for 2009 and Audi’s first entry in the segment, is based on the similarly new A4 sedan. A 3.2-liter V-6 and Quattro all-wheel drive are standard equipment.The new-for-2010 Lexus RX350 follows the formula that made its predecessor the bestseller in the segment, a sumptuous leather cabin riding on a creamy suspension. Choose front- or all-wheel drive.Mercedes-Benz, long a lofty presence in heavyweight SUVs, for the first time lowers its sights to the compact segment with the 2010 GLK350, which is based on C-class architecture. A 3.5-liter V-6 is standard equipment, backed by a seven-speed automatic, with your choice of rear- or all-wheel drive.Volvo’s swoopy XC60 debuts as a 2010 model, a shortened and much resculpted take on a platform shared by the V70/XC70/S80 models. The 3.0-liter, turbocharged inline-six spools up to 281 peak horsepower, making it the top performer of this group, on paper at least. Golf clap, please, for these five AVs.[vehicle type=’adtag’ vehicle-body-style=” vehicle-make=’mercedes-benz’ vehicle-model=’mercedes-benz_glk-class’ vehicle-model-category=” vehicle-submodel=’mercedes-benz_glk-class_mercedes-benz-glk-class_2010′ vehicle-year=’2010′][/vehicle]Fifth Place: Mercedes-Benz GLK350[image id=’5c2f2852-17ae-4892-9498-f2efe003e46f’ mediaId=’482a16e3-623d-4cdf-b201-7faae8ec8818′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]If comparison tests were decided on the basis of styling, this spunky little Benz rolling on Pirelli 20-inchers might have won here. But low-profile tires are noisy, and they often make the steering vague on-center; both complaints echoed and reechoed throughout our drive. All the other vehicles wore 55 and 60 profiles and elicited no squawks. Surprisingly, given the tires, the Benz’s ride was relatively smooth, better than the BMW’s. HIGHS: Looks like fun on wheels, spirited growls from the V-6, smart screen-control strategy, excellent support from the driver’s seat.LOWS: HVAC controls below driver’s knees, noisy on the road, dead travel in brake pedal, flaring sills put mud on pant legs.The GLK350 looks sharp inside and out, with chunky expanses of neatly bent and brushed metal punctuating the black interior. The dash, and particularly the instrument cluster with its crisp markings, seems clean and contemporary. We like the firmly stuffed driver’s seat, pronouncing it just right for all-day journeys.[image id=’e48db2c3-186a-4662-938a-5d8fd3cef9f1′ mediaId=’40f5a5fc-5313-432f-abcc-40c5bdc8333b’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]The V-6 growls as the Benz romps to the lead in the 0-to-30 sprint—only 2.2 seconds required—then falls back a nose by 60 mph before returning to the front of the pack to tie the Volvo for a 15.0-second ET in the quarter-mile. The snarl never goes away, though, making this a relatively noisy ride at interstate speeds.[editoriallinks id=’f3ce52fe-c21d-4b84-b747-c49fe34e7906′ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]This is the shortest and narrowest of our AVs, and if you’re planning to transport three adults in back, don’t—unless one of them agrees to leave a shoulder behind. The high doorsills try to trip you on exit, too. Cargo capacity, measured in cubic feet, is smallest of the quintet. With the second row folded, however, the Benz tied the Volvo at the top of the chart, as both swallowed 37 longneck-beer cases. Those who opt for the power liftgate will learn to use it every time; manual operation takes a strong pull. [image id=’797f2884-3e17-4746-af8a-784c2191ca19′ mediaId=’f9106f3b-bbee-41cc-a180-15b173858c94′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]When the final votes were counted, the disconnected steering and wooden brake feel were too much to overlook, so we’ll appreciate GLK style from the cockpit of something else.THE VERDICT: A baby G-wagen, if you go for that sort of thing.2010 Mercedes-Benz GLK350 4MATIC268-hp V-6, 7-speed automatic, 4234 lbBase/as-tested price: $36,775/$45,935Interior volume f/r: 53/45 ft3Cargo behind f/r: 55/23 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.6 sec100 mph: 17.3 sec1/4 mile: 15.0 sec @ 93 mphBraking, 70­-0 mph: 180 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.78 g C/D observed fuel economy: 20 mpg [vehicle type=’adtag’ vehicle-body-style=” vehicle-make=’lexus’ vehicle-model=’lexus_rx’ vehicle-model-category=” vehicle-submodel=’lexus_rx_lexus-rx350_2010′ vehicle-year=’2010′][/vehicle]Fourth Place: Lexus RX350[image id=’146a66d6-95f4-4e6e-ac32-55313c4280a4′ mediaId=’d231d074-64f1-42fb-8e5b-6e95bccee52b’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]This triple-creme Lexus may define the class in consumers’ minds—it is, after all, the top seller—but it takes more than comfort, silence, and top-level materials to push our car-enthusiast buttons. We insist on driver involvement; Lexus specializes in isolation. We end up feeling respect rather than love.HIGHS: The zenith of plushness, buttery leather everywhere, creamy ride, thoughtful and convenient control layout.LOWS: Power outlets too far down in the console bin, seat cushion and lumbar adjusters never quite get the seat right.[image id=’e3b73797-7a3b-4989-a30e-f4ea4613f646′ mediaId=’24624776-3add-4d15-b06a-fbf8b2c3e7ec’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]That said, the RX350 offers much to respect. The bright, white instrument markings stand out against black backgrounds like stars on a desert night. The interior leather is surely from cows that enjoyed Oil of Olay rubdowns every day of their lives. The 275-hp V-6 purrs happily all the way to its 6500-rpm redline, allowing this Lexus to beat the BMW to 60 mph. Automatic shifts manage to feel silky and sound incredibly precise as well.[editoriallinks id=’3c4f8d2f-dba7-467a-9985-3767d0049dd7′ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]In most measures of performance, the RX turns in numbers that are average for the class, although road grip, at 0.76 g, is weakest of all by a narrow margin. Fuel economy, at 21 mpg on our 450-mile test trip, is exactly average for the group.Surprisingly, given Lexus’s emphasis on luxury, the RX also tops the rankings in practicality. Perhaps in this class, usability is a prerequisite for lavishness. The liftgate is widest of all, opening to the largest floor area behind the second row. Only Lexus and Audi provide release mechanisms allowing you to fold the second-row seat as you load from behind. The hauling space available above the rear wheel arches is by far the widest of the group, resulting in the largest maximum cargo capacity measured by cubic feet, 13 percent larger than that of the second-place BMW. That said, the shape of your stuff determines how much can fit. A full-size bicycle fit most easily into the Lexus, though we managed to get it into every test vehicle. Yet in our beer-case test, both the Volvo and the Benz held more—37, versus 35 for the Lexus. [image id=’ec4087a9-29b3-455f-8406-65adfbb5cedf’ mediaId=’10294263-47c8-414e-8efa-e687f6e522b8′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Our list of admirable Lexus features goes on and on, but we didn’t find the one quality that we seek more than any other—passion.THE VERDICT: The definitive luxury utility absent of any real sport.2010 Lexus RX350275-hp V-6, 6-speed automatic, 4471 lbBase/as-tested price: $39,025/$52,965Interior volume f/r: 57/46 ft3Cargo behind f/r: 80/40 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.8 sec100 mph: 18.6 sec1/4 mile: 15.3 sec @ 92 mphBraking, 70­-0 mph: 175 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.76 gC/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg[vehicle type=’adtag’ vehicle-body-style=’suv’ vehicle-make=’volvo’ vehicle-model=’volvo_xc60′ vehicle-model-category=’compact-luxury-crossovers-and-suvs’ vehicle-submodel=’volvo_xc60_volvo-xc60_2010′ vehicle-year=’2010′][/vehicle]Third Place: Volvo XC60[image id=’eaea8bf2-5a5f-4945-a675-fac50573a29c’ mediaId=’44cc350c-761b-465c-9340-552b8a37648e’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]This turbo Volvo won the sprinting contest, faltering only in the 0-to-30-mph jump, where the Mercedes and the Audi nipped briefly to the front. From there on, it was all Volvo all the way, blowing through the quarter-mile at 96 mph, three up on the Mercedes, which scored the same time. Big power is usually accompanied by small mpg numbers, and this Volvo is no exception—19 mpg puts it last on our trip, compared with 22 for the BMW at the top.HIGHS: Fascinating styling, excellent front seats, lots of turbo thrust, low-mass liftgate swings easily.LOWS: Pancake syrup in the steering, sharp ride motions and crashing noises on broken pavement, look-ahead safety system lights up laser detectors.[image id=’987c88f9-3eb4-4caa-891f-727d4e66da3b’ mediaId=’e8e2dff5-0cf9-48ca-a741-25592ef851ae’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Turbo boost comes up quickly. The steering is highly damped, as if the parts were moving in a goopy fluid. The ride is firm over rough roads, accompanied by crashing sounds. [editoriallinks id=’87750d87-aa12-49c0-ade4-797aafa16ed8′ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]As Arrival Vehicles go, this one gives the fashionistas something to look at: a high-waisted shape that flares dramatically as it sweeps back to huge sculptural taillights. Better yet, this visual entertainment takes place without encroaching on the capacity within. The XC60 ties the Audi in length at 182.2, exactly mid-size in this collection. We rated rear-seat comfort equal to that of the Audi and the Lexus at the top of the group, cargo space topped them all in our beer-case test, and the lightweight liftgate swung so easily that power assist would have been superfluous. Our bicyclist says the Volvo and the Lexus are easiest to load.[image id=’ffe191c1-18ac-4873-8682-405f4ebd0536′ mediaId=’f700b57e-8778-44d7-8a95-91e54e3f9016′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Inside we found a design that mixes caution and daring, starting with relentless black, wall to wall. And yet the black seats are carefully accented with an orange stitching faint enough that it doesn’t immediately grab the eye. Looking around, there’s a potpourri of textures, with the one on the door inserts being so bold the mind considers, just briefly: Could this have been a mistake? Oddly, the radio/entertainment information appears in a display that humps up out of the dash top like it was an afterthought. The front buckets are form fitting, yet they seem to fit all shapes. We rated them highest for comfort, in a tie with the Audi’s.Speed and comfort, a lasting recipe.THE VERDICT: Volvo breaks the shackles of stodgy but can’t quite make the leap to fun.2010 Volvo XC60 T6 AWD281-hp turbo inline-6, 6-speed automatic, 4258 lbBase/as-tested price: $38,025/$42,250Interior volume f/r: 51/44 ft3Cargo behind f/r: 67/31 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.5 sec100 mph: 16.5 sec1/4 mile: 15.0 sec @ 96 mphBraking, 70­-0 mph: 177 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 gC/D observed fuel economy: 19 mpg[vehicle type=’adtag’ vehicle-body-style=’suv’ vehicle-make=’bmw’ vehicle-model=’bmw_x3′ vehicle-model-category=’compact-luxury-crossovers-and-suvs’ vehicle-submodel=’bmw_x3_bmw-x3_2009′ vehicle-year=’2009′][/vehicle]Second Place: BMW X3[image id=’4500f093-4227-4072-9458-c1816ac6c4be’ mediaId=’77c4c0ed-4dd3-4b59-961c-86eda21ca7c9′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]We like this high-riding X3 for the same reason we hoist superlatives in honor of most other BMWs: It drives like it loves what it’s doing.HIGHS: Surprisingly agile, smooth six-cylinder, big glass area opens the view.LOWS: Shockingly expensive even in stripper form, inhospitable rear seat, thinly padded interior feels a class below the others.[image id=’064611d5-a3f4-4ffd-8362-561b0f3e6745′ mediaId=’852b58a2-20d6-4e53-89b8-a231cbbc60f6′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]At the same time, this X3 is the extremist of the group, the anti-Lexus, devoid of plush, abstinent of lush, so thinly padded inside that it feels bony, with road noises typical of a model that’s already five years into its run. [editoriallinks id=’f83f5d61-d44b-471b-9f2b-bcca5375bc9b’ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]But that athletic BMW feel is there. Does it make up for the hideous value proposition? At $46,525 as tested—about $600 more than the nicely equipped Benz and $4275 pricier than the appealing Volvo—the X3 may not represent a sensible investment. The list of equipment we expect at that price that is absent from the X3 raises eyebrows: no navigation, no individual temperature controls for front occupants, no extend feature on the visors, no height adjuster for the front shoulder belts. This is an austere car. And despite the athletic feel, the performance numbers mostly don’t impress. An exception is fuel economy, which tops all others at 22 mpg over 450 miles, compared with 19 mpg for the turbo Volvo at the thirsty end. This lightest-of-the-group X3 stops shortest, too, needing just 169 feet to halt from 70 mph. But it was consistently last in measures of acceleration. [image id=’58b953c0-ebed-4bd7-8baa-994598721935′ mediaId=’2ddfbb45-2641-4a64-b60d-f2cf6293c5de’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]The X3, and the Mercedes even more so, stands at the compact end of the class, almost eight inches shorter than the Lexus. We rated the rear seat lowest in comfort for two, a significant disadvantage for those with social lives. Out back, though the floor area is second smallest, the lean padding and upright sides allow a credible showing in the cargo-space department: 71 cubic feet with the second row folded, compared with 80 for the Lexus and 55 for the least-roomy Benz. Bottom line, this is a driver’s AV, thoroughly and unconditionally satisfying on that count, at a price that promises more pampering than it delivers.THE VERDICT: Imagine a five-year-old BMW on stilts, and you’ll get the idea.2009 BMW X3 xDrive30i260-hp inline-6, 6-speed automatic, 4141 lbBase/as-tested price: $40,525/$46,525Interior volume f/r: 51/45 ft3Cargo behind f/r: 71/30 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.1 sec100 mph: 19.1 sec1/4 mile: 15.5 sec @ 91 mphBraking, 70­-0 mph: 169 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 gC/D observed fuel economy: 22 mpg[vehicle type=’adtag’ vehicle-body-style=” vehicle-make=’audi’ vehicle-model=’audi_q5′ vehicle-model-category=” vehicle-submodel=’audi_q5_audi-q5_2009′ vehicle-year=’2009′][/vehicle]First Place: Audi Q5[image id=’2135fe80-52dc-4ad0-a59e-fc5c135a978a’ mediaId=’65e85003-0386-4cda-9570-a73f410f6e99′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]From the driver’s seat, you just have to love the surroundings, the smooth contouring of the almost seamless leather wheel, the deft designer touch with the metal trim around the burled-wood accents, the neat detailing of the door panels right down to the slickly integrated stiffener molded into the top edge of the storage pockets. Oh, sure, we can nitpick. The bin under the center armrest isn’t big enough to be dinky, and what’s with the speedo markings up to 180 mph?HIGHS: Sculptural perfection inside, inspired use of bright trim, fun screen graphics, composed handling.LOWS: Oddly heavy steering at low speeds, freakishly oversized side mirrors, screen-menu buttons too low in cockpit.[image id=’3a19f621-1ba8-40bf-b643-66bd334e5426′ mediaId=’b4a857c8-b723-45ac-a3c8-5aec9e19e2a0′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Audi has delivered where it counts, though: quick acceleration, top-level comfort in the back seat, class-leading grip as measured on the skidpad, better-than-average fuel-economy ratings, respectable cargo space, and, of course, an interior so classy you might delay your arrival for just one more trip around the block. [editoriallinks id=’ba58bfbd-427c-4f3a-b78b-23584cc20a8e’ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]This test car was equipped with Audi drive select, a $2950 electronic controller that tailors throttle response, steering effort, automatic shift points, and ride damping according to your selection of buttons labeled comfort, auto, dynamic, and individual. But don’t expect comfort to be the Lexus mode. The Q5 always feels muscular, more inclined toward the BMW-Mercedes end of things. As with most of these “u-tailor-it” systems, there’s something to like and something to dislike in each position, and after a few days of evaluating, we just decided to default to auto and forget about it. Knocking three grand off the sticker is a better idea.The driver’s seat earned top marks for both comfort and support, in a tie with the Volvo. The side mirrors are freakishly large; some test drivers complained they blocked the view toward the front corners. Out on the two-laners, we appreciated the passing power, confirmed by top marks in the 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70 acceleration tests. The steering, so heavy in town, seems just right at speed.[image id=’5d9c7a06-d9fd-4d8c-838b-ffe0686473a4′ mediaId=’2a2fbef5-cfdc-4986-8f83-795448781bc1′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Comfortable, composed, and capable, that’s our consensus on this new entry, and the interior design is most inviting of all. In fact, we find it irresistible.THE VERDICT: Great over-the-road dynamics in a high-class package.2009 Audi Q5 3.2 Quattro270-hp V-6, 6-speed automatic, 4346 lbBase/as-tested price: $38,275/$48,275Interior volume f/r: 52/46 ft3Cargo behind f/r: 57/29 ft3C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.5 sec100 mph: 17.5 sec1/4 mile: 15.1 sec @ 94 mphBraking, 70­-0 mph: 170 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.83 gC/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

We’re all guilty of occasionally judging a book by its cover; it’s simply human nature. And it’s also true that no matter how fair we ultimately try to be, some covers can be awfully tough to look past. But we’re certainly glad we cracked the proverbial book that is the redesigned 2010 Mazda 3. It wears a face that only a Pixar animator could love, but it’s one good car. More Displacement, More PowerIn addition to its updated smiling—er, styling—the 2010 Mazda 3 s receives a bump in the displacement of its four-cylinder engine, which moves from 2.3 liters to 2.5. That increase comes with a gain of 11 hp and 18 lb-ft of torque for totals of 167 hp at 6000 rpm and 168 lb-ft at 4000 rpm. The new car weighs 90 more pounds than the old one, so it’s no surprise that we saw a 7.4-second 0-to-60-mph sprint—identical to that of a first-gen 3 s five-door we tested—but a substantial 4.5 seconds were chopped from the 0-to-110-mph time. The quarter-mile time also improved by 0.3 second and 2 mph, to 15.7 seconds at 89 mph. Power delivery is buttery smooth, and the six-speed manual transmission—up one gear from the previous model’s—shifts with ease, although the clutch is rather numb. The 2.5-liter can sound thrashy at times, but the improved top-end power makes slicing through traffic a breeze. The EPA estimates 21 mpg city and 29 highway; we managed a respectable 25 mpg combined.The 3 boasts an excellent combo of ride and handling. The steering is the same precise and communicative type of setup we’ve come to expect from all Mazdas. The well-controlled ride means the 3 is comfortable without sacrificing any athleticism. Our tester wore 17-inch wheels with 205/50 Yokohama Avid all-season tires, which helped it achieve 0.86 g on the skidpad, a rather impressive number for the class. Braking is another strong suit, with 70 to 0 mph taking 176 feet, better than average in this class. Fresh InsidesThe new interior is as pleasing as the 3’s driving dynamics. Soft-touch materials are found everywhere you’ll rest your limbs, and there’s no stretching required to reach a control. The seats are extremely comfortable, too, offering great lateral support. Rear-seat room is ample, although those over six feet tall might feel a bit cramped. The shortcomings are few. We did find that the audio controls required some time to master and felt that the steering wheel could use a couple more inches of telescoping travel. Also, the horizontal dash brightwork looks great, but it caused reflections in the side windows that washed out the side mirrors. Our test car rang in at a reasonable $21,275, which consisted of the s five-door Sport base price of $19,900 plus a couple of options. One of the two add-ons was a 10-speaker, 242-watt Bose stereo, which came bundled with a six-CD changer and power sunroof for $1395. Opt for this pack and skip the navigation, and you get a nifty text-only display in place of the nav screen that allows the driver to toggle through various readings such as current and average fuel economy, fuel range, average speed, and vehicle settings. The screen will also display genre, station name, song name, and artist information for the Sirius satellite radio (the other option, at $430) in a Windows-folder-type format. If it sounds like we liked this Mazda, it’s because we did. With its superb road manners, comfortable interior, and flexible hatchback layout, you can’t help looking at the 3 as the top of its segment—although we’d close the book on that goofy front end.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS2010 Mazda 3 s 5-door SportVEHICLE TYPE front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 5-door hatchback PRICE AS TESTED $21,725 (base price: $19,900)ENGINE TYPE DOHC inline-4, aluminum block and head, port fuel injection

Displacement 152 in3, 2489 cm3Power 167 bhp @ 6000 rpmTorque 168 lb-ft @ 4000 rpmTRANSMISSION 6-speed manual DIMENSIONS:Wheelbase: 103.9 in Length: 177.4 in Width: 69.1 in Height: 57.9 in Curb weight: 3047 lb C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 7.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 20.5 sec
Zero to 110 mph: 25.6 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 7.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 15.7 sec @ 89 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 118 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 176 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g   FUEL ECONOMYEPA city/highway driving: 21/29 mpg
C/D observed: 25 mpg
c/d testing explained

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

When Polaris redesigned its three-wheeled Slingshot for the 2020 model year, it added an optional automated sequential-manual transmission in a bid to broaden the vehicle’s appeal beyond the stick-shift savvy. The gambit worked: AutoDrive, as the automatic gearbox is called, now accounts for 80 percent of Slingshot sales. But this Magneti Marelli five-speed is a single-clutch unit, and the 2020 models lacked manual-shifting capability, which is not what you want in a transmission that shifts on its own with a ponderous deliberation more appropriate to bomb defusing than spirited driving. So, after just one year on the market, Polaris has retuned AutoDrive and added a feature it should have had in the first place: steering wheel-mounted paddle shifters. Now when you’re on the brakes and dive-bombing a corner in your Bat Trike, you can manually select a lower gear rather than just hoping for AutoDrive to guess your intentions. Which is good, since it seldom does.

AutoDrive—a $1700 option on Slingshot S and SL models and a $2000 upcharge on the R variant—still works best at a part-throttle pace. Polaris doesn’t quote shift times, but this automatic’s one-Mississippi shift action is more early Smart ForTwo than Ferrari F430 Scuderia. AutoDrive’s shift cadence is aligned with temperate driving, like a human rowing a manual gearbox in no particular hurry. And unlike some automotive single-clutch transmissions—say, BMW’s from 20 years ago or the current Lamborghini Aventador’s—the Magneti Marelli unit doesn’t thrive on abuse. Crank the Slingshot’s 2.0-liter inline-four to its lofty 8500-rpm redline (which is the same for both the 178- and 203-hp versions) and there’s still an intermission between gears. But it’s nonetheless more fun and involving to time that upshift yourself.
Downshifts are rev matched and seem somewhat quicker, though that’s probably an illusion wrought by the ferocious throttle blip that often accompanies a pull on the left paddle. Try to grab a lower gear that would overrev the engine and you’ll get a “shift not allowed” message in the instrument cluster. The Slingshot generally obeys your shift commands, however, even if you’re downshifting right into the red zone.The other time you get the “shift not allowed” message is when you’re in fifth gear and try to upshift to sixth, which doesn’t exist. If you’re cruising at highway speeds, you might wish that it did, because fifth doesn’t let the engine relax much, despite being a 0.75:1 overdrive ratio. On the interstate, the Slingshot’s stubby exhaust constantly emits an unpleasant drone. Then again, when you’re skimming the pavement in a vehicle with no doors and the barest suggestion of a windshield, some highway noise is to be expected. But it is nice that you can now upshift at lower speeds if you’re feeling zen. The Slingshot’s four-banger is perfectly happy to burble along at 2000 rpm, and it’s not like it has a whole lot of machine to drag around.
Indeed, the Slingshot makes a Lotus Elise seem porcine. Polaris lists the curb weight of the SL AutoDrive model we drove at 1663 pounds, just 14 pounds more than with the standard five-speed manual. The company worried about the gearbox’s weight not because of performance reasons but to keep the Slingshot at a poundage where it can be classified as an autocycle, the rules for which in America vary widely from state to state. A more advanced dual-clutch automatic would have been heavier and more expensive, Polaris says, so here we are.And modern dual-clutch transmissions are so good that you often just leave them in automatic mode. Even on a racetrack, a good dual-clutch ‘box can give you the sense that working the shift paddles with your clumsy paws is, if anything, a liability. Regardless of its transmission, the Polaris Slingshot is a throwback to the days when the driver mattered. AutoDrive can now comport itself reasonably well in automatic mode, but it’s always an improvement to hit the big M button on the console and call the shots yourself. Hey, it’s nice to feel important. It’s also nice to know that there’s at least one vehicle out there today with a manual transmission that represents more than mere mechanical nostalgia. If you want to get the most out of a Slingshot—both in terms of fun and performance—you still need a clutch pedal. Polaris: saving the manuals, three wheels at a time.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Polaris Slingshot AutoDrive
VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 0-door roadster
BASE PRICE
S, $21,699; SL, $26,699; R, $33,299; R Limited Edition, $34,799
ENGINES
DOHC 16-valve 2.0-liter inline-4, 178 or 203 hp, 120 or 144 lb-ft
TRANSMISSION
5-speed automated manual
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 105.0 inLength: 149.6 inWidth: 77.9 inHeight: 51.9 inCurb weight (C/D est): 1650 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.9 sec1/4 mile: 14.9 secTop speed: 125 mph

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

From the September 1990 issue of Car and Driver.Mr. Robert B. McCurryExecutive Vice President Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. 1900 I South Western Ave. Torrance, California 90509Mr. McCurry:We don’t know a lot about managing a big-time car company, and goodness knows we don’t presume to tell other people how to run their business. But may we offer a suggestion? Find out who told your Japanese colleagues that America doesn’t want a car like the Sera, and tack his hide up on a shed somewhere.[editoriallinks id=’4bffdad3-83bf-45ff-ab03-5f6c5a25af27′ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]You see, Mr. McCurry, it’s been a long time since we drove a car that attracts as much attention from the general public. And as many spontaneous expressions of approval. We get smiles, nods, waves, and thumbs up every time we take it out. It’s almost a hazard on the freeway, with rubberneckers changing lanes all around to get a better view. Crowds gather wherever we park it. The litany has become familiar: “It’s a Toyota. A prototype. It’s in production and on sale in Japan. And it’s cheap—the equivalent of about $11,000. But Toyota isn’t going to bring it here. Yeah, we think that’s a big mistake, too.”Sure, the eyecatchiness of the Sera (you really want it pronounced ser-AH, as in, “will be”?) stems partly from its pea-soup-metallic paint and its right-hand-drive cockpit. But most of the car’s appeal, we’re convinced, is rooted in its fundamental character. The Sera is tiny, fun, and modern. And it looks all those things. Who could resist?[image id=’6307dec6-6060-4929-9a0c-3a84a323c765′ mediaId=’95f81cd5-985c-48b5-b614-31795fa945c7′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]It would probably be enough that the car has a unique, all-glass, bubble-top roof. But then those delightfully trick semi-gullwing doors swing up…and the crowd goes wild. The designers at your parent company in Japan, Mr. McCurry, likely conceived those features for auto-show impact. But we found them to be likable and surprisingly practical in real­-life use. The doors feel sturdy, raise easily, and don’t mind high curbs or close-parked cars. And the wraparound glass provides an open, airy feeling and a truly panoramic view of the world. It’s like a convertible without the noise and mussed-up hair. Okay, a blazing sun can warm the cockpit. But between the air conditioning and the clip-on overhead sunshades, we never overheated.Even the mechanicals contribute, we think, to the Sera’s endearing nature: straightforward, absolutely conventional Starlet-based stuff throughout. That little sixteen-valve, 1.5-liter four runs as sweetly as most all your engines do now, sir, and its 108 horsepower pulls the one-ton car around with spirit and verve, if not exactly muscle. Rack-and-pinion steering, a strut front suspension, a well-located rigid axle in back—it’s all disarmingly simple. The car is light and compact enough to feel zippy and responsive without a lot of fancy chassis hardware. The four-wheel disc brakes and ABS add a welcome dash of upmarket technology.[image id=’2b87e0bf-70cc-4a2e-a7f0-33e77772d86d’ mediaId=’7490a697-4249-4a6f-82e7-cf7f8caaed77′ align=’left’ size=’large’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Considering its diminutive external dimensions, the Sera seems truly vast inside. It reminds us, if we may say so, of the clever CRX, which also sits on a 90.6-inch wheelbase. But your boys wedged real fold-down plus-two seats into that envelope. Even if they aren’t very comfortable, those seats expand the practicality of the car (and would do good things for its insurability). Where real usefulness as a car is concerned, the Sera embarrasses the popular but cramped Miata something awful. And wouldn’t you like to be stealing a little of that car’s thunder right now?We took the liberty, Mr. McCurry, of calling your product-planning department, and we spoke with a fellow there we know to be intelligent and professional. He patiently explained that bringing the Sera to the U.S. is not even an option anymore, because it was developed without regard for our government’s crash standards and doing the necessary structural engineering now would amount to starting over. And he had other completely sound reasons for leaving the Sera in Japan: its powertrain is no longer common to anything in your American lineup, lawsuits could result if the doors were to trap occupants in a rollover, and (the one we hear all the time) the volume wouldn’t justify the investment.[image id=’e22b1431-beb9-4aba-b129-ea3020e29596′ mediaId=’f206084f-2f6d-49f5-a4e3-2321294e3cc2′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Well sir, those may be the sorts of considerations someone in your position needs to weigh. But we’re just not convinced. Okay, maybe this particular car is out of the question for U.S. importation. But couldn’t it serve as a finished prototype for a fresh and practical little glass-roofed hatchback for America? The Corolla’s excellent 1.6-liter four would solve the engine-commonality issue. The structure around the doors and windshield is no more frail than that in a T-topped car, so surely it could meet roof-crush standards. And as for lawsuits, well, there have been gullwing cars before—and, anyway, what isn’t vulnerable to litigation today?No, we really don’t see any serious impediment to doing a Sera II for the States. Except perhaps one. Our friend in product planning admitted that when the Japanese designers showed the Sera to his American team a year and half ago, he didn’t pay much attention. Didn’t care for it. Didn’t take it seriously. Never drove it. Thought it was impractical, with a silly roof and silly doors. [image id=’9bb8ebac-a65d-46bb-8031-74703ced5bef’ mediaId=’e601bab0-c3db-4e96-9862-b4c0cfcf76ca’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]That, Mr. McCurry, sir, is a problem. We expect that sort of reaction from stodgy, overlarge car companies that have maybe forgotten what attracted them to this business in the first place—as opposed to the electric-razor business or the toaster-oven business. We worry when we se that response from the company that brought us the MR2, the Celica All-Trac, and the Previa.Well anyway, thanks for listening. And keep up the good work.Sincerely, Car and DriverP.S. If you don’t mind, we’re going to suggest to some friends that they too, drop you a note if they agree that the Sera should be sold here. But don’t worry. There shouldn’t be more than a million or so of them.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

Ask 100 track-driving enthusiasts what the perfect track car is, and you’re likely to get 100 different answers. Despite living in the shadow of the 760-hp Ford Mustang Shelby GT500, the 2021 Ford Mustang Mach 1 deserves consideration, especially if your track car needs to be a daily driver. Named for the Mach 1 special editions of the past, the new Mach arrives this spring and is best thought of as a track-focused replacement for three discontinued Mustangs: the Mustang GT with the Performance Package 2 (PP2), the Mustang Bullitt, and the GT350. With the Bullitt and the GT PP2 out of the lineup, Ford goes so far as to bill the Mach 1 as the most track-capable 5.0. We headed to Willow Springs International Raceway to test that claim, and we learned that although the Mach 1 isn’t perfect, it’s fast, it handles surprisingly well, it’s comfortable enough for a commute, and it looks pretty cool, too.Answering the call to speed is a 480-hp version—20 more than the standard GT—of the port- and direct-injected 5.0-liter V-8 from the Bullitt. Unlike the Bullitt, the Mach 1 utilizes Tremec’s TR-3160 six-speed manual transmission borrowed from the GT350 instead of the GT’s Getrag-built box and will also offer a 10-speed automatic ($1595) that wasn’t available in the Bullitt. For drivers still perfecting their craft, the Mach 1 features rev-matching downshifts—purists will be happy to know it can be shut off. Those looking to squeeze an extra tenth out of their times will like the six speed’s no-lift-shift feature that allows you to keep the accelerator pinned during upshifts.

The Mach 1’s suspension is bolted to the former GT350’s front and rear subframes and features Ford’s latest spec of magnetorheological dampers, which offer three modes to match the powertrain settings of Normal, Sport, and Track. Even in Normal mode, the Mach 1 feels responsive and sporty, while still comfortable and composed. Drive the worst roads in your area and you’ll feel the Mach 1’s inherent track-readiness, even in base form, but even then, the ride quality is nothing to moan about. Sport is great when you want more responsiveness on the street, but the real fun with the Mach 1 happens in Track mode. To select Track mode, tap up on the driving-mode switch until the digital instrument panel displays a large, horizontal tachometer. A stability-control light illuminates to indicate that it is more permissive. Traction control can be turned off separately or left on; leaving it on doesn’t seem to get in the way of a good corner exit, so why not save yourself some money on tires? Ford limited our drive of the $3500 Handling Package-equipped Mach 1s to the road course at Willow Springs. The first thing you’ll notice is 5.0-liter’s surge of torque that transitions to strong, steady power as you rip through the gears. The manual’s no-lift-shift feature makes easy work of rapid-fire upshifts on a long straight, and the rev-match feature works perfectly as you ratchet back down into the braking zone. Turn in and you’ll notice the improved feel and precision of the Mach 1’s steering compared to the Mustang GT’s, courtesy of the stiffer intermediate shaft in the steering column and re-tuned electric power steering. You may even find you don’t need to turn the wheel all that much as the Mach 1 rotates gracefully as you lift off the gas or trail off the six-piston Brembo calipers gripping Handling Package’s the 15.0-inch front rotors.
So far so good. But now it’s time to get out of that corner and off to the next. As you begin to send power to the Handling Package’s sticky Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 rubber transplanted from the Shelby GT350R, the attitude initially tends toward understeer rather than oversteer, something that the GT350R didn’t do. According to the Mach 1’s chief engineer Carl Widmann, that trait is due to a combination of the integral link rear suspension design and bushing compliance within the suspension, which cause the Mach 1 to dynamically toe-in the rear wheels when acceleration compresses the rear suspension. This gives the Mach 1 a stable feel, but also means you’ll want to adjust your line slightly to plan for that initial understeer.With the Handling Package, the Mach 1 is a largely neutral, easy-to-drive, very fast track car. Even running nearly non-stop for more than two hours, issues with brake fade or engine and transmission overheating were non-existent. All Mach 1s come with additional underbody ducting to cool the brakes, engine- and transmission-cooling upgrades, and a rear-axle cooler borrowed from the GT500.For those who pride themselves on the multi-tasking macarena of three-pedal track driving, the 10-speed automatic isn’t as engaging, and it lacks the manual’s Torsen limited-slip differential, but it’s at least as fast, and it lets you focus more of your effort and attention on actually nailing the lap. The paddle-shifters are a handy feature, but not necessary, even for track use; the automatic’s algorithm is smart enough to call up the right gears for corners and hold them.
Ford offered the non-Handling Package cars for street use. On the road, the base car’s handling traits aren’t palpably different from the Handling Package car, aside from slightly lower overall grip levels offered by the narrower Michelin Pilot Sport 4S tires. Still, the limits are very high, it’s quick off the line, confident when cornering, and makes easy work of high-speed cruising.Details like the fighter-jet gray paint (a Mach 1 exclusive), retro-themed Mach 1 logos on the fenders, low-gloss stripes on the hood and sides, a 3D-mesh shark-nose grille, and a rear diffuser borrowed from the Shelby GT500 balance nods to Mach 1s of the past with modern style and aerodynamics. Base versions ride on 19-inch wheels, 9.5 inches wide at the front and 10.0 inches wide at the rear that are shared with the Mustang GT with the Performance Package 1. Those larger wheels hint at the more-than-a-Mustang-GT potential that lies beneath the surface, but Handling Package models are further distinguished by inch wider wheels, an extended front splitter, and Gurney-flapped rear spoiler. Opting for the Handling Package adds $3500 the Mach 1’s $53,915 base price, or $11,840 more than the cheapest way to spec last year’s PP2 . Not exactly inexpensive, but it may strike just the right choice for those who missed out on the Bullitt and GT350 and are looking for a car that will let them hone their track skills without building a new wing onto the garage or taking out a second mortgage. And it does look pretty cool, too.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Ford Mustang Mach 1
VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2- or 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
BASE PRICE
$53,915
ENGINE TYPE
DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port and direct fuel injectionDisplacement
307 in3, 5038 cm3Power
480 hp @ 7000 rpmTorque
420 lb-ft @ 4600 rpm
TRANSMISSIONS
6-speed manual, 10-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.1 inLength: 188.5 inWidth: 75.4 inHeight: 54.3 inPassenger volume: 85 ft3Trunk volume: 14 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 3900–3950 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.8–4.3 sec100 mph: 8.3–9.8 sec1/4 mile: 11.9–12.5 secTop speed: 155–168 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 17–18/14–15/22–23 mpg

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

From the May 1988 issue of Car and Driver.Hurrah for the buyer’s market: rock-bottom prices, unlimited choice, cutthroat competition, and salespersons who treat you like “Let’s Make a Deal” contestants. Short of free floor mats and a comprehen­sive lifetime warranty, what more can a new-car buyer ask for?

Well, how about a Cray supercomputer to whittle all this freedom of choice down to manageable proportions? If you’re in the market for basic transportation, your task is particularly daunting. We know, be­cause we’ve spent the past few weeks sur­veying the new-car landscape from the driver’s seat of an everyday Toyota Corol­la, and we found that it’s hell out there on bargain-basement row. To wit:• There are a half-dozen or more size categories below the $12,000-base-price threshold.• If you have somehow narrowed your fo­cus to the Corolla’s class, you have only begun: there are nearly twenty worthy competitors to consider.• Even in this class, the plain-Jane automobile is a thing of the past. The Nissan Sentra lineup, for example, comprises 22 different body-style, trim, and powertrain combinations.• With discount financing and manufac­turer rebates, it’s nearly impossible to de­termine the price of any new car until you’re ready to write the check.The decisions may be agonizing, but we can attest that the basic-transportation experience—at least in a Toyota Corolla—is less painful than you probably imagine. This is hardly the same Corolla that put Toyota on its feet in the American market twenty years ago. Under the hood, what used to be a 60-horse wheezer has evolved into a 90-hp, sixteen-valve four-cylinder engine fully capable of impress­ing the most blasé oil checker. Today’s Corolla offers a fifth speed in its gearbox, enough room for four American-spec pas­sengers, carpeting on the floor, padding in the seats, and three attractive body styles (plus the FX models). In other words, nearly every trace of entry-level stigma has vanished. The Corolla has en­tered the realm of real automobiles.

The same design ethic rules the interi­or, producing furnishings that are simple but not austere: an attractively sculptured instrument panel, tweed cloth on the seats and the door panels, tight-fitting trim, and absolutely no brightly painted bare metal.

Its price has followed suit. In the era of the falling dollar and rising competition, the new-for-1988 sixth iteration of the Co­rolla theme is fighting to stay below $10,000. Our base-model test car lost the battle: equipped with but four optional extras, it wore a sticker price of $10,593. If you can do without any of the trimmings, the cheapest Corolla you can buy will still cost you nearly nine grand.For that not-so-paltry sum you get a tidy four-door, three-box package that, if you squint, looks something like a four-fifths Audi 5000. The shape is clean and aerody­namically streamlined, at least visually (the drag coefficient is a mediocre 0.36). The grille, the bumpers, and the filler panel between the taillamps are modestly finished, and Toyota’s designers just said no to chrome plating: the door handles, the window trim, the mirror housings, and the wipers are all flat black. With a mini­mum of nameplates and exterior decoration, the Corolla permits the metal sculp­tors’ talent to shine through.The same design ethic rules the interi­or, producing furnishings that are simple but not austere: an attractively sculptured instrument panel, tweed cloth on the seats and the door panels, tight-fitting trim, and absolutely no brightly painted bare metal. The carpeting may not be ankle-deep, but it fits well and looks durable enough to survive several owners. The only evidence of interior penny-pinching is a few blank holes in the base model’s instrument clus­ter, which relies more on warning lamps than on proper gauges. Most unfortunate of all is the lack of a tachometer: some of the joy of having a spirited sixteen-valve engine underhood is irretrievably lost.

Although the new Corolla rides on the same 95.7-inch wheelbase as its predeces­sor, a four-inch increase in overall length has done wonders for its utility quotient. With 96 cubic feet of passenger and cargo volume, this car is stretching the bound­aries of the subcompact class.

There is a consolation prize, however. Buried at the bottom of the Corolla’s cen­ter-console stack—way down beneath the heater controls, an open storage bin, and the ashtray—is one of those little endear­ments that for some odd reason are found only in Japanese cars: the most ingenious cup holder we’ve ever seen. Draw it from its storage slot and the compact device, barely one cup wide, automatically unfurls two hinged fingers—one to each side—to form cup receptacles. After you’ve slaked your thirst, slide the panel back into the console and the fingers retract. The action is neat enough to be a NASA design.Other interior features are similarly well executed. The light and wiper switches are stalk-mounted and easy to operate. The radio knobs are high on the dash, so you can keep one eye on the road while you dial in Whitesnake. The heater controls are also close at hand, and high enough that they’re not hidden behind the shifter. The ignition switch is a push­and-twist design; no secret button frus­trates key removal.

Its powertrain, at least, is essentially faultless. The twin-cam engine loves to be lashed with the throttle and the gearbox, and it barely murmurs in protest when you ask it to cruise at what must be horren­dous rpm. (Without a tach, who knows?)

Although the new Corolla rides on the same 95.7-inch wheelbase as its predeces­sor, a four-inch increase in overall length has done wonders for its utility quotient. With 96 cubic feet of passenger and cargo volume, this car is stretching the bound­aries of the subcompact class. Its rear seat is particularly spacious, thanks to a low­-profile floor tunnel and plenty of head­room; in addition, the front seats’ tracks are set wide enough to allow feet to slide underneath, and the front seatbacks are hollowed out to enlarge rear kneeroom. The rear seat is molded to provide opti­mum support for two passengers, but a third can squeeze in and buckle up with­out permanent injury. The trunk is large in all three dimensions, flat of floor, and easy on the sacroiliac, thanks to a bumper­-level lift-over height.That’s most of the good news. The new Corolla also earns a few high marks while on the move, but if your heart is set on a bargain-basement sports sedan, maybe you should turn the page right now. This Corolla’s priorities are value, utility, com­fort, and reliability. The flings of driving joy permitted by its strait-laced personal­ity are few and far between.Its powertrain, at least, is essentially faultless. The twin-cam engine loves to be lashed with the throttle and the gearbox, and it barely murmurs in protest when you ask it to cruise at what must be horren­dous rpm. (Without a tach, who knows?) The ratios of the five-speed transmission are well spaced, and the shift linkage is one of the best we’ve encountered. You can select the gear of your choice—includ­ing reverse—with one pinkie’s friction atop the knob.The only remarkable aspect of the Co­rolla’s chassis design is that, thanks to a high front roll center, the engineers were able to tune the suspension without a front anti-roll bar. Each corner of the car has a strut and a coil spring. A control arm helps to locate each front wheel, and a combination of two lateral links, one trail­ing link, and an anti-roll bar braces each rear wheel. The engineers took special care to deaden mechanical noise and to stiffen the body structure: sturdy subframes are in place at both ends, five care­fully tuned mounts support the powertrain, and the firewall is an absor­bent sandwich of asphalt material between two sheets of steel.

Corollas of the four-door, base-trim persuasion are cruisers, not chargers. What they do, they do well. Their weighty structure, skinny tires, and mildly tuned suspensions deliver fine straight-line sta­bility and a pleasant ride under most con­ditions.

These efforts, together with nearly flush windows, create such a calm and qui­et interior mood that you can cruise the Corolla at 90 mph for hours without en­raging your mother-in-law. The downside is that subframes and steel sandwiches are heavy. Our modestly equipped test car weighed 2312 pounds, which put us at a disadvantage whenever some smart aleck pulled alongside in a new Honda Civic to test our mettle. With a zero-to-60 time of 11.3 seconds, the Corolla isn’t much of a street racer.Our cornering and braking reports are also discouraging. With narrow wheels wrapped in skinny all-season tires, the Co­rolla simply doesn’t have much dry-road traction. Bend it into a corner with verve and it rolls over like a motorhome in a gale. We measured a skidpad limit of 0.66 g and a 70-to-zero stopping distance of 240 feet—two of the poorest performances we’ve seen from any new car in several years. You can get 70-series tires and wid­er aluminum wheels on a four-door Co­rolla, but only if you step up to the LE model, which starts at $10,148.Corollas of the four-door, base-trim persuasion are cruisers, not chargers. What they do, they do well. Their weighty structure, skinny tires, and mildly tuned suspensions deliver fine straight-line sta­bility and a pleasant ride under most con­ditions. Of course, if you’re looking for a twin-cam-to-go at half the usual price, your ship is not yet at the pier. But if all you need is a transpo-box to relieve the family Bimmer of kid hauling and grocery get­ting, go ahead and reach for that check­book with confidence.CounterpointEvery now and again, I get into an automobile, drive it a few miles, and say to myself, “Here’s a solid piece of basic transportation.” I said that to myself about the new Toyota Corolla. Or thought it, anyway.Mind you, it’s not a car that I would buy, but that’s because I am not a person who needs a small four-door se­dan. That isn’t the Corolla’s fault. The car offers sane, sensible, well-ordered transportation that seems made to order for three groups: young folks on a limit­ed budget, middle-aged folks on a limit­ed budget, and old folks on a limited budget.For its $8898 base price, the Corolla delivers a simple, stylish exterior and an interior that’s pleasant to occupy. The seats sit right and the shifter shifts right. You can see out and you can reach things. On the extended freeway run the Corolla maintains 70 with a minimum of noise for a car its size.The Corolla is one more shining ex­ample that “econobox” need not be a synonym for “Nyquil.” —William JeanesThe previous-generation Toyota Corol­la was an econobox that serious drivers could appreciate. I rented one a few years ago during my honeymoon in Ha­waii, and its competence astonished me. Although modestly powered and softly suspended, the old Corolla performed so enthusiastically and responded so ac­curately to my commands that not even the tightly wound roads of Kauai’s Grand Canyon could trip it up.The new model is a lot less happy in its work. The sixteen-valve engine provides improved performance and smooth­ness, the restyled body looks sleek and contemporary, and the new suspension offers an admirably soft ride. But the new car is reluctant to explore the limits of its performance. At the first sign of a hard comer, it seems to fall over on its bump stops, its tires squealing for mer­cy. It executes even mild maneuvers with a sloppy sluggishness. The old Corolla was an enthusiastic driver’s eager part­ner, but the new one is little more than a hired hand. —Csaba CsereI subscribe to the view that inexpensive cars don’t have to look inexpensive. It doesn’t cost any more to make a good-­looking car than a lumpy one, so why punish entry-level buyers with scarlet letters that proclaim to the world that they don’t have the money for high­-ticket rides? Apparently Toyota feels the same way. The new Corolla isn’t breath­takingly handsome, in the Taurus or Audi idiom, but at least it looks as if it costs a couple of thousand more than its sticker price. It’s one of the few lowball cars you’re not embarrassed to park in your driveway.In addition to looks, respectable ma­chinery is in residence. The car has a zingy motor, an excellent shifter with a nice selection of gears, a decent interior, and a suspension that provides both ac­ceptable handling and a comfortable ride. I’d like to see a thicker steering wheel, bigger tires, and more instru­ments, but that’s a pretty short wish list. Almost any other manufacturer would kill for an entry-level car this good. —Tony Assenza

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
1988 Toyota Corolla
VEHICLE TYPEfront-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED$10,593 (base price: $8,898)
ENGINE TYPEDOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, 1×2-bbl Aisin carburetionDisplacement97 in3, 1587 cm3Power90 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque95 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSISSuspension (F/R): struts/multilinkBrakes (F/R): 9.6-in vented disc/7.9-in cast-iron drumTires: Toyo Z Radial 733 All Season, 155/SR-13
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 95.7 in Length: 170.3 in Width: 65.2 in Height: 52.2 in Passenger volume: 83 ft3Trunk volume: 13 ft3  Curb weight: 2312 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS30 mph: 3.4 sec60 mph: 11.3 sec90 mph: 34.9 secTop gear, 30–50 mph: 13.0 secTop gear, 50–70 mph: 15.5 sec1/4 mile: 18.2 sec @ 74 mphTop speed: 103 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 240 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.66 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMYObserved: 28 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCombined/city/highway: 28/26/32 mpg
c/d testing explained

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

From the November 2007 issue of Car and Driver. The basic recipe has been a Chrysler cookbook favorite through several management regimes, foreign and domestic. It goes like this: Take one small basic-transportation appliance. Add boost. Cook to taste. [editoriallinks id=’2b4a3c8c-ed5b-40ce-84ab-12f37c4bc29c’ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]Chrysler’s tradition of pressure-cooker pocket rockets began in 1985 with the Dodge Omni GLH Turbo (it stood for “Goes Like Hell”), created at a time when the corporation was still edging back from the lip of an economic abyss and had little in the way of engine resources. The solution was turbocharging, a cheap route to extracting big power from small displacements.Fast-forward to now, and the much-anticipated resurrection of the Dodge SRT4, known in this incarnation as the Caliber SRT4—just in case there might be some confusion with the previous Neon-based SRT4. [image id=’ab8cf107-f8fa-4c89-bca5-480ca7c1ddfe’ mediaId=’8d23a34d-6f24-4486-aea6-ff92d3473bd3′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Standards have changed since the GLH. For example, it is no longer acceptable for the car to try to snatch the steering wheel from the driver’s hands. Our GLH road test [May 1985] warned the world that if an unwary driver should “apply full throttle in first or second gear with the front wheels cocked a bit to port or starboard, the GLH Turbo is going to go where it’s pointed—into that ditch, up that snowbank, or around that tree.” It’s called torque steer, a phenomenon that is still not uncommon in small front-drive cars with lots of power. With 285 horsepower and 265 pound-feet of torque, the hot Caliber clearly fits that description. We’re happy to report that the SRT guys have largely tamed that particular demon, at least compared with a couple other cars in this class.HIGHS: Torque galore, never-fade brakes, autocross steering, crisp shifting, grippy bucket seats.However, we’re getting ahead of our narrative. What you really want to know is the hardware story, what the hardware adds up to in terms of performance, what it costs, and how all of this stacks up versus the other pocket-rocket players. So let’s address those power points in that order. [image id=’dd7b68e2-5c98-4b62-8fc5-43a7d5087143′ mediaId=’cb2fbe9e-5a70-4f42-abf2-2d45f27d46d6′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Mechanically and cosmetically, the not-so-blank canvas on which the SRT troops were invited to exercise their go-faster artistry represented a much bigger challenge than did the Neon. Tall (59.7 inches), brickish, and ungainly, the Caliber isn’t the kind of car that activates the salivary glands of street racers. But you play the cards you’re dealt, and considering the nature of the base car, the SRT achievement is impressive. The first order of business was the suspension. Although there were no concerns with chassis rigidity—the front-shock-tower connecting brace common to so many factory hot-rod packages is conspicuous by its absence here—the team had to figure out how to make a big reduction in ride height and still retain acceptable ride and handling. There were two reasons for the lowering job. One—minor—was cosmetic. Getting the car a little closer to the ground, and filling the wheel wells with 7.5-by-19-inch cast aluminum wheels, makes it easier to sell the idea that this Caliber has attitude. Second, reducing the ride height—1.1 inches front, 0.8 inch rear—helped to reduce torque steer by making the half-shaft angles essentially flat between the differential and the wheels.[image id=’05bf64e6-9e5b-466e-93e8-4f8a07f3532e’ mediaId=’76a849bf-481b-4722-a509-0a2a1c8903a6′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]As you’d expect, the suspension has undergone a general stiffening, with ZF Sachs twin-tube dampers all around, higher spring rates fore-and-aft, and a stiffer (by 0.71 inch) rear anti-roll bar. Given the car’s speed potential, the SRT team decided it was best to be conservative with rear roll stiffness. However, for hard-core autocrossers, Mopar plans to offer a track kit with much higher spring rates and firmer dampers.The brakes are formidable: 13.4-by-1.1-inch vented front rotors squeezed by twin-piston calipers and cooled by vents molded into the front fascia, 11.9-inch solid rear rotors, and standard anti-lock. Not only does this system provide fade-free braking, but the heavy-duty dimensions of the front rotors allowed the engineers to be aggressive with the so-called brake-lock differential. The brake-lock diff is an alternative to a conventional mechanical limited-slip differential and relies on the traction-control system. Operating on info from the ABS sensors, it limits wheelspin by squeezing the rotor of the wheel that has lost traction, which sends power to the opposite wheel. This is not a new strategy—Audi, BMW, and Mercedes use this technique—but the SRT4 system operates up to 85 mph, much higher than any other, according to Dodge. The system tends to chew the rotors pretty hard, but the SRT engineers figure their robust setup can handle it.[image id=’3e0d0a86-05ef-4e3a-a87b-ade72cc8ddaf’ mediaId=’fa616eb0-c696-4f41-8d81-52b801c1a873′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Braking power gets onto the pavement via 225/45R-19 tires (optional Goodyear Eagle F1s on our test car). Other elements of the chassis inventory include power rack-and-pinion steering, traction control, and stability control. The latter can’t be entirely shut down, although its threshold is high. But it does add to the challenge of achieving optimal drag-racing holeshots. More on that later. First, let’s take a look under the hood, which is distinguished by one real hood scoop and two fake breather vents. The starting point for the SRT4 engine was the same 2.4-liter Chrysler/Hyundai/Mitsubishi DOHC 16-valve aluminum four you can get with a Caliber, except the regular Caliber version generates 172 horsepower and 165 pound-feet of torque. This one, as you already know, generates a helluva lot more. Here’s how. The pistons are cast aluminum, running in iron liners, with forged con rods and trimetal bearings. SRT was confident the standard production forged-steel crank could take the extra heat and power. Oil squirters help keep the pistons cool, and an external cooler keeps temps of the Mobil 1 synthetic oil uniform.[image id=’27d245a6-c7cd-4e92-bdff-ca8b483239b7′ mediaId=’1fb5d8c0-d003-4565-be16-a1721099f17b’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]At the top end, there’s variable valve timing on both cam banks, with bucket tappets punching the valves, which are made of Inconel (a high-temp alloy) on the exhaust side. And, of course, there’s that most essential of ingredients—boost, 12-psi max at sea level, but it can rise to 15 psi at high altitudes, provided by a Mitsubishi TD04 turbocharger via a big (11-row) Valeo air-to-air intercooler. Like the previous SRT4 engine, this 2.4 is a long-stroke design and not a high-revver. The power peaks are more like lofty plateaus. Max torque is available from 2000 to 5600 rpm, max horsepower is on tap from 5700 to 6400, and the small-scroll turbo spools up quickly.LOWS: Body roll galore, wallows in hard cornering, disappointing stopping distances.The engine feeds its output into a six-speed Getrag manual gearbox via a dual-mass flywheel. Like the gearbox in the garden-variety Caliber, it’s a cable shifter, but the throws are shorter and the engagements are far more decisive.[image id=’9e62b82e-6a0a-4eed-bbcd-f5b160ded42d’ mediaId=’91cdb3c0-5e1c-4406-b4d2-121dfd86225b’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]There are cosmetic elements to the SRT package, too, but we think you’d rather hear about the dynamic payoff first. Okay. Let’s start with the what’ll-she-do department. Getting an effective launch is tricky, something that’s true of most front-drive turbo cars. The SRT people predict zero-to-60 mph in a little over six seconds. We clocked 5.9. The quarter-mile ate up 14.4 seconds, showing a 103-mph trap speed. Top speed is officially listed as 155 mph, although one of the SRT development guys says he ran a prototype to as high as 161.Regular readers will recall that the Neon-based SRT4 we tested in April 2004 posted better numbers: 5.3 seconds to 60, the quarter in 13.9 at 103. You’ll also recall that a Mazdaspeed 3 [Power Toys,” May 2007] ran to 60 mph in 5.4 and through the quarter in 14 flat at 101. We should note here that at 3233 pounds, the Caliber is 249 pounds heavier than that Neon-based SRT4 and 48 pounds heavier than the Mazdaspeed. Mass is never a plus for acceleration, nor does it help braking. The SRT4’s brakes don’t fade, but 175-foot stops from 70 mph can’t be called impressive. [image id=’67a0b3a6-d588-421b-958f-09f6d7d6a6fd’ mediaId=’11695821-9a09-4e0a-b4f5-5c63e10e44c9′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Handling: It didn’t take many circuits at Putnam Park near Greencastle, Indiana, to convince us that the SRT4 isn’t happy on a racetrack. Understeer in this environment ranges from mulish to absolute, the limited suspension travel provokes some unpleasant wallowing, and the actions of the traction control produce some strange sensations, although the engineers insist it’s more effective than a conventional limited-slip diff, which they tried initially. On public roads, the story improves. The car still doesn’t thrive on bumpy corners, but it inspires confidence nevertheless, with decent grip (0.84 g on the skidpad), sports-car steering, and surprisingly brisk responses in rapid transitions—surprisingly, because the SRT4 has a high center of gravity and hard cornering does entail a fair amount of body roll. But it hangs in there anyway. The rest of the car: SRT cosmetic and aero enhancements include a deeper front air dam, rocker-panel extensions, a king-size spoiler extending over the rear hatch, a row of vertical diffuser strakes at the bottom of the rear end, and a four-inch echo-can exhaust tip. [image id=’aa466cdd-f032-4737-8ba3-2c99a2779049′ mediaId=’5d3fda52-b9b5-4c27-903a-8bc4913f185b’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Inside, there’s a set of excellent bucket seats with leather outers, red stitching, and grippy cloth centers providing plenty of lateral support, particularly for the torso; a leather-clad steering wheel; the obligatory aluminum pedal pads; and white-face SRT gauges. A nifty instrument option is the “performance pages” reconfigurable display that can give the driver acceleration times, lateral g, braking distance, and more. THE VERDICT: Like a Camembert-and-sardine sandwich, it figures to be an acquired taste.As with previous SRT hot rods, the latest rates as a performance bargain, with prices starting from $22,995. Amazingly, that’s similar to the base price for a Mazdaspeed 3. Coincidence? And which is preferable? Maybe we should get the two cars side by side and head-to-head? Ya think? Counterpoint Theoretically, the SRT4 is my kind of machine—plenty of power, a good price, and a body style that can almost carry a couch. It’s got the goodies but, sadly, not the soul. There’s not enough friskiness in the chassis, too little joy to be had blipping the throttle, and a good amount of torque steer. I loved the Neon-based SRT4 and hoped the Caliber would be a hatchback version. It’s not, which goes to show that no amount of polishing can put a shine on the Caliber. —Larry Webster Some hot cars get faster when they graduate to the next generation. Others, such as this Caliber SRT4, develop a refined maturity. This ’08 model has a tightness of construction and dynamic stability that are light-years beyond its rorty predecessor. But these virtues come with greater size and weight and the loss of that on-the-edge-of-control tossability that made the previous SRT4 occasionally irritating but always engaging. —Csaba Csere[vehicle type=’specpanel’ vehicle-body-style=” vehicle-make=” vehicle-model=” vehicle-model-category=” vehicle-submodel=” vehicle-year=”][/vehicle]

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

Three-row SUVs are far more likely to trade on their ability to haul families in comfort and style rather than for their sheer off-road capability. Bucking that trend, the Land Rover Discovery combines three rows and off-road credibility in a midsize package. Buying a Disco does mean you’re passing on larger and more practical three-row SUVs, many of which offer more value, but a number of upgrades for the 2021 model year enhance the Discovery’s everyday practicality without hampering its performance in the wilderness.The Discovery’s wild side came out during our drive of the updated model in England, which included both scenic country highways and some muddy trails at Land Rover’s Eastnor Castle testing site in Herefordshire. Both parts of the program were accomplished in the same vehicle and while riding on the same set of 22-inch wheels and low-profile Pirelli P Zero Scorpion All Season tires.

Land Rover

The Discovery’s mid-cycle facelift does little to enhance its rather sleepy design, despite it gaining new LED headlights, a revised front grille, and on the new R-Dynamic trim we drove, gloss-black exterior details. The overall effect still falls short of the upright ruggedness of the original Discovery and its LR3/LR4 successors—old-school SUVs that made every trip to the mall feel like a Camel Trophy competition. The latest version, on the other hand, still resembles a Ford Explorer from certain angle; the unique offset rear license-plate mount remains its the most visually interesting detail. More substantive changes lie under the Disco’s hood. Both of the previous gas and diesel V-6 engines have been dropped. The base powertrain is now Jaguar/Land Rover’s 295-hp turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four, which is standard on the entry-level P300 S and R-Dynamic S models. A 355-hp turbo 3.0-liter inline-six that also features a 48-volt hybrid system is optional on the P360 R-Dynamic S and standard with the top-spec HSE trim. Base prices range from $55,250 for the S to more than $70,250 for the HSE. The P360 R-Dynamic S that we sampled starts at $63,250.

Land Rover

The P360’s six-cylinder is a detuned version of the engine used in the Jaguar F-Pace P400e. At everyday speeds, the 3.0-liter six is subdued in character yet makes impressively light work of motivating the Discovery’s 5500-plus pounds, thanks in part to its 369 pound-feet of torque being available from 1750 to 5000 rpm. The standard eight-speed automatic transmission shifts intelligently to keep the engine pulling strong and in the heart of its powerband. While it takes a heavy right foot—or a prod of one of the shift paddles on the Disco’s steering wheel—for the eight-speed to commit to lower gears, we expect an all-out run to 60 mph will take a few ticks more than six seconds.Land Rover makes air springs standard on the Discovery, as they bring both a smooth, stately ride over every grade of asphalt and an adjustable ride height for off-road use. But this won’t be confused with a sporty performance SUV. The softly tuned chassis possesses little of the athleticism of Land Rover’s more driver-focused models. As before, the combination of minimal steering feel, noticeable body roll, and sizeable dimensions conspire to discourage spirited driving. The Discovery’s priorities are made clear by its Terrain Response system of drive modes, which features one setting for road use and five for different types of off-road terrain.

Land Rover

We didn’t get to experience the newest setting. The lack of a fordable river on our drive route prevented us from confirming Land Rover’s claim that the Discovery’s new Wade mode allows it to navigate water crossings up to 35.4 inches deep. But on Eastnor’s steep, slippery gradients and through deep, gelatinous mud, the Discovery excelled. A two-speed transfer case with low range is standard on the P360, as is a locking center differential (a locking rear diff costs $1100 extra). With the air springs in their highest setting, the Discovery has an approach angle of 34.0 degrees, a departure angle of 30.0 degrees, and a breakover angle of 27.5 degrees. This is a seven-seat vehicle that’s able to venture where very few big luxury SUVs could follow.

Land Rover

Inside, the Discovery’s cabin gains JLR’s slick new Pivi Pro infotainment system, which includes an 11.4-inch touchscreen, as well as an onboard Wi-Fi hotspot, over-the-air updates, and support for Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. The system is more intuitive and responsive than the previous InCommand Touch system. Additional changes include the fitment of a new shift lever in place of the old rotary selector knob, touch-sensitive buttons for climate control, a redesigned steering wheel, and a standard digital instrument cluster. Space remains generous in the Discovery’s front two rows, but the third row is still tight for adults, and there’s little cargo room in the way back when the rearmost row is occupied. Aesthetically, the Disco’s cabin serves as a middle ground between the simple utilitarianism of the new Defender and the luxury car look of the Range Rovers.Although the Land Rover Discovery’s latest updates struggle to enhance its curb appeal compared to its rivals, including the new Jeep Wagoneer, the changes should make it more compelling to a broader set of buyers. And for three-row shoppers that do value off-road prowess, the Discovery remains one of the most capable options—at least until Land Rover introduces its upcoming three-row Defender 130.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Land Rover Discovery P360
VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, four-wheel-drive, 7-passenger, 4-door wagon
BASE PRICE
S 1, $63,250; HSE, $70,250
POWERTRAIN
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection
ENGINE TYPE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement
183 in3, 2996 cm3Power
355 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque
369 lb-ft @ 1750 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 115.1 inLength: 195.1 inWidth: 78.7 inHeight: 74.3 inPassenger volume: 139 ft3Cargo volume: 9 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 5500 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 6.3 sec1/4 mile: 14.8 secTop speed: 130 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 21/18/24 mpg

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More