Evelyn Reynolds

Carrol Shelby’s Mustangs have come a long way since bib overalls. More

From the July 1984 issue of Car and Driver.

James Bond would feel right at home in a BMW M635CSi. Emergencies in the Balkans would be in easy reach of the motorway-gobbling big coupe. Those Alpine-switchback games of tag with the sinister forces of SPECTRE would be easy sport for the BMW’s acceleration and handling, even with a full complement of Q’s death-dealing devices in the ample trunk. More critical yet to 007 than mere life and death, the Bavarian coupe has the proper blend of racy lines and understated elegance for whisking luscious double agents away from the baccarat tables of Monte Carlo.

Best Coupes of 2020

Best Road Cars Ever Developed by BMW’s M Division

Tested: 1992 BMW 850i versus Porsche 928 GTS

Such images seem incongruent with the BMW coupes we know in America. Our 6-series cars never got their full share of the sporting legacy left by their 2800 and 3.0CS forebears. They had the misfortune to arrive in our market just when most European manufacturers were inclined to neglect performance in the wake of American safety and regulations. Recent examples are much improved, but the early image has been hard to shed. In Europe, however, with such versions as the bespoilered, 218-bhp, 140-mph 635CSi on the scene, the situation is quite different. BMW works hard to maintain a sporting image in the home market, its latest move being the introduction of the M635CSi at last fall’s Frankfurt show.
The “M” stands for “Motorsport,” the branch of BMW that spawned the legendary M1. This new M-coupe perpetuates the bloodline with an updated version of the mighty six-cylinder M1 engine, complete with a twin-cam, four-valve, pent-roof combustion-chambered head; a big-bore, short-stroke version of the 3.5-liter block; a tuned intake system with six individual throttles; and a sensuous bundle of six intertwined exhaust headers. The mechanical fuel injection of the M1’s big six has been replaced by a Bosch Motronic system, which controls the spark timing and the electronic injectors with far greater precision. This has allowed the compression ratio to be bumped from 9.0 to 10.5:1. As a result, the new engine develops 286 bhp at 6500 rpm, up by 9 bhp from the original and 251 pounds-feet of torque at 4000 rpm, a peak 12 pounds-feet higher and 1000 rpm earlier than the original. Fuel economy is about 15 percent poorer than the two-valve 635CSi’s, but most of the difference is due to much shorter gearing (3.73 versus 3.07 final-drive ratio).

View Photos

In addition to the new powertrain, the M-coupe gets low-profile 220/55VR-390 Michelin TRX tires on new modular aluminum wheels, a firmer suspension, and beefier front disk brakes. The only interior alterations are a pair of firm and supportive sport seats and a Motorsport steering wheel. Outside, the M-coupe is distinguished by leading and trailing M-badges and a slightly deeper front spoiler.
BMW claims a top speed of 158 mph and a six-second zero-to-sixty time for the M-coupe—figures we weren’t able to verify with proper testing, since we drove the car only in Europe. We can say, though, that the big coupe easily kept up with a 231-bhp Porsche 911 Carrera on the straights at Hockenheim raceway. Another convincing demonstration took place on the Côte d’Azur, where we blew off a Honda 750 motorcycle in the serious local stoplight grand prix.
BMW hasn’t quite forgotten low-speed manners in its quest for performance. The race-derived engine can claw for its 7000-rpm redline one moment, then murmur along contentedly at 1000 rpm in top gear the next. In either case, the engine is refined in sound and feel. One can sense the motor’s efforts, but never any strain.

View Photos

Such broad sophistication is not offered by the M-car’s suspension. It’s definitely locked into the high-speed mode, becoming smooth and supple only when kilometers are being devoured. Low speeds don’t really generate any serious harshness, but neither is the suspension particularly absorbent. On the other hand, there’s never any bobbing, weaving, or instability at any speed. The limit handling is unusually forgiving for a BMW, with slight understeer controllably giving way to oversteer as the throttle is lifted.
Sad to say, but BMW will probably never bring this M-coupe to America. Its combination of impeccable breeding, faultless manners, and upper-crust demeanor, concealing a core of sinewy strength and barely controlled energy, has a more narrow appeal in America than in Europe. Americans tend to be more single-purpose in their automotive desires, preferring to leave James Bond cars in movies.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
1984 BMW 635CSi
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED (Germany) $31,459 (estimated)
ENGINE TYPE 6-in-line, iron block and aluminum head, Bosch Motronic fuel injectedDisplacement 211 cu in, 3453 ccPower (DIN) 286 hp @ 6500 rpm
TRANSMISSION 5-speed
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 103.3 inLength: 187.2 inCurb weight: 3300 lbs
MANUFACTURER’S PERFORMANCE RATINGSZero to 62 mph: 6.4 secTop speed: 158 mph
FUEL ECONOMY (European cycle)European city cycle: 14 mpgSteady 56 mph: 29 mpgSteady 75 mph: 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 September 2006 issue of Car and Driver.
Disappointment is invariably related to expectations. The higher they are, the greater the likelihood the object of those expectations won’t quite measure up. Do you hear Shelby GT500 convertible disappointment impending? You do. But let us hasten to add that these aren’t major disappointments. In fact, for the most part, we simply want to, shall we say, square GT500 expectations with reality.

2006 Corvette vs. 2007 Mustang Shelby GT500

2007 Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 Super Snake

2007 Ford Mustang Shelby Cobra GT500: Ultra Retro

Based on our July comparison test, pitting a Shelby GT500 coupe against a Corvette, we’d already relaxed our performance expectations for the convertible, even before it rolled into our parking lot. For example, since our GT500 test coupe wasn’t any quicker than the old SVT Mustang Cobra, there was no reason to believe the convertible, weighing in 112 pounds heavier at 4008, would do any better. And it did not, thus fulfilling our slightly diminished expectations, although we found that in this area our expectations hadn’t been diminished quite enough. At 4.8 seconds to 60 mph, the convertible was 0.3 second slower than the coupe, which ain’t really slow, but the disparity was progressive. The convertible was 0.8 second slower to 100 mph — 11.1 versus 10.3 — and also slower through the quarter-mile: 13.4 seconds at 108 mph versus 12.9 at 112. This is more than we expected for a 112-pound difference, and we think our test car’s supercharged 5.4-liter V-8 was a tad soft, a suspicion enhanced by a nasty ticking noise coming from the engine. Exhaust leak? Or…?
In addition to softer acceleration, we were also prepared for higher ambient noise levels — a normal consequence of traditional softtops. But in this scoring category we were pleasantly surprised. There’s wind noise, yes, but this is a high-quality top that does a better-than-average job of damping buffeting and roar. The biggest source of interior racket came from the Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar tires and the suspension — all of it related to what was going on underfoot. On pavement cross-hatched with expansion joints and/or patching, every seam was tangible to the occupants, as both noise and thumping. The suspension bushings seem to be made of granite.

View Photos

Similarly, the tires are pavement sensitive, quiet on smooth asphalt, singing at unpleasant frequencies on various concrete compounds. But for all that, the convertible’s decibel readings were quieter than the coupe’s at idle, quieter at wide-open throttle, and identical at a 70-mph cruise.
We have mixed reactions here to the absence of the Shelby stripes on this convertible — they’re a dealer option. We judged the stripes as a “low” in our July test, but we are not unanimous on that score, and it’s fair to say the Shelby doesn’t really have much curbside charisma without them. Along these lines, we also think the SVT people could have taken more pains with this car’s interior. Aside from a couple of badges, there’s not much that sets the Shelby apart from its Mustang GT counterparts, and it’s pretty plain considering the car’s price. And speaking of price, we’re already hearing tales of dealers asking $15,000 to $20,000 over the MSRP. Ford has no real control over this, and the sad part is these gougers will probably get their markups.
In all the foregoing, we don’t perceive really serious disappointments. But there is one element that’s impossible to rationalize: a rubbery chassis. It doesn’t take much of a bump to provoke shudders in this GT500’s structure, regrettable in an ordinary convertible, unacceptable in one with performance aspirations. This trait was a big surprise, since we gave the Mustang GT convertible high marks for chassis rigidity. Could the extra power, higher (by 335 pounds) curb weight, and heftier forward weight bias account for this? Could be.

View Photos

However, we suspect that none of our reservations is going to matter to prospective owners. And in fact, there’s much to rejoice in here. The six-speed gearbox is a wonderful device to manipulate, the steering is quick and communicative, braking performance is strong, the seats are supportive and long-haul comfortable, and supercharger whine adds an enjoyable audible element to full-throttle acceleration.
Beyond that, there’s no question that these cars will be instant collectibles. That alone makes this Shelby another winner, whatever expectations we may entertain.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2007 Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 Convertible
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door convertible
PRICE AS TESTED $51,000 (base price: $47,800)
ENGINE TYPE supercharged and intercooled DOHC 32-valve V-8, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement 330 in3, 5411 cm3Power 500 bhp @ 6000 rpmTorque 480 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm
TRANSMISSION6-speed manual
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 107.1 inLength: 188.0 inWidth: 73.9 inHeight: 55.7 inCurb weight: 4008 lb
C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 4.8 secZero to 100 mph: 11.1 secZero to 130 mph: 20.6 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 5.4 secStanding ¼-mile: 13.4 sec @ 108 mphTop speed (governor limited): 155 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 170 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
FUEL ECONOMYEPA city (C/D est): 15 mpgC/D observed: 17 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

They say those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it, but Ford’s Special Vehicle Team has very carefully studied the Mustang’s history—specifically, the chapter on the 1967–70 Mustang Shelby GT500—and is gleefully set to repeat it, in spades, with no less an authority than Carroll Shelby himself adding his blessing and the use of his name. And when it comes to Mustangs, who in today’s car biz has more historical cachet? It was Shelby who raised the image of the original Mustang from an engaging all-American sporty car to a turnkey factory racer with the 1965 GT350 fastback. Then he followed up with the GT500, propelled by a big-block (7.0 liter) Ford 428 V-8 generating enough torque (420 pound-feet at 3200 rpm) to pull the skin of the earth measurably tighter when the driver tramped on the gas.

Tested: 2007 Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 Convertible

2006 Corvette vs. 2007 Shelby GT500

Mustang GT PPL2 vs. Mustang Shelby GT350

Fast forward to now, and at a glance Ford is reviving that same formula: a stronger engine in a Mustang fastback, delivering more power, more torque, better handling, and more visual intimidation. A little bit of history repeating, right? Well, yes. But that’s at a glance. Technology hasn’t exactly stood still since the last GT500 rolled out of a showroom in 1970, and even though this revival preserves a good old live-axle rear suspension—a mechanical tradition that has all but disappeared in current passenger cars—its mechanical credentials are fully contemporary. Not to mention seriously potent.
We brought you a preview of this new super-‘Stang in May, a quick thumbnail of the red prototype that was one of the stars of this year’s New York auto show. And having sat in and lusted after that show car, we immediately began pestering the Special Vehicle Team development crew, led by Hau Thai-Tang and chief vehicle engineer Jay O’Connell, for an early drive in one of the development cars.

View Photos

AARON KILEY

That led to a rendezvous at Ford’s proving ground in Romeo, Michigan, on a day in late April that ranged from damp to deluge. Not the right setting for getting acquainted with a muscle car on summer tires, but when you’re signed up for an exclusive first drive in the hottest production Mustang ever, you don’t quibble.
So what should you expect when this car rolls into showrooms next June?
Certainly, some traits are predictable. Tops on that list is hustle. With output of its supercharged engine forecast by the development team to be “over 450 horsepower and 450 pound-feet of torque,” the GT500 will be one quick pony. O’Connell predicts 0-to-60-mph times in the low-four-second range. Similarly, it’s not too surprising that this car responds to steering inputs a wink quicker than the Mustang GT and delivers considerably more grip and major-league stopping power.
What is surprising is the level of civility that goes with all of this. The GT500 is by definition a muscle car, but it’s not one of those remorseless brass bushing brutes that make their owners pay for visceral gratification with a relentless assault on their hearing and skeletal integrity. The 2001 SVT Mustang Cobra R comes to mind. In contrast, the GT500 should deliver enough compliance to make everyday driving a pleasure rather than a punishment, and we anticipate that interior noise levels may actually be lower than they are in a stock Mustang GT coupe.

View Photos

AARON KILEY

Let’s talk power. The heart of the GT500 is a supercharged 5.4-liter DOHC 32-valve V-8. If those specs sound familiar, it’s because they’re interchangeable with the description for the mid-engined Ford GT. But there are important distinctions. The GT V-8 is all aluminum with a dry-sump lubrication system, whereas the GT500 has an iron block and a wet sump. The GT engine is force-fed by a Lysholm screw-type supercharger; the GT500 will use an Eaton R122 Roots-type blower and an air-to-liquid intercooler, adding 10 psi to the intake system at peak boost.
O’Connell says the switch was dictated by availability, rather than price.
“The Lysholm unit is a little more expensive,” he says, “but the big problem was supply. They can’t make as many as we’re going to need. There are performance differences, too. The Lysholm type gives you a little more top end, and the Roots type is a little fatter in the midrange. We think owners will be satisfied with this setup.”
Judging by our weather-limited experience at Romeo and our test-track results with the 2003 SVT Mustang Cobra [C/D, June 2002], we concur. Power will be abundant, although O’Connell and his crew were still being cagey about specifics. Pressed on this issue, O’Connell said “between 450 and 500 horsepower—how’s that?” Our tech staff warmed up the calculators and figured a forecast of 475 horsepower at 6000 rpm. We may be low.

Big power isn’t much good unless it gets to the ground without excessive wheelspin, which is why the production GT500 will have a lot more rear tire than the New York show car, which hunkered over a set of 19-inch wheels wearing 255/45 tires. The initial production run of GT500s will roll on 9.5-by-18-inch wheels with sticky Goodyear Eagle Fl Supercar tires-255/45 front, 285/40 rear.
“We just couldn’t get the 255s to hook up,” says O’Connell. “Almost every run was going up in smoke.”
A pronounced forward weight bias—about 57/43, according to O’Connell didn’t help, either. Part of this is due to increased mass. The supercharged iron-block 5.4 weighs about 175 more pounds than the naturally aspirated 4.6 SOHC 24-valve aluminum V-8 in the Mustang GT. That factor, plus a bigger front-brake package, bigger wheels and tires, and other GT500 package elements, add up to a curb weight projected in the 3850-pound range versus 3575 pounds for the last Mustang GT we tested.

View Photos

AARON KILEY

But with the fatter Goodyears managing power delivered by a Tremec six-speed manual transmission and limited-slip rear end, O’Connell is confident the GT500 will sprint to 60 mph in “less than 4.5 seconds,” even with its tallish 3.31:1 rear-axle ratio. We expect that when we put the spurs to a test car early next year, a 0-to-60 number will come up in four seconds flat, and the quarter-mile will be 12.5 seconds at 116 mph. For perspective, those runs would be representative times for a C6 Corvette.
Other predictions: O’Connell forecasts a skidpad number of “0.91 or 0.92 g.” We think that’s a little conservative. Our last two C6 Corvette coupes [C/D, September and December 2004] produced identical 0.98 skidpad numbers. The GT500 will weigh in considerably higher, but it matches the Vette’s rear rubber and has even more contact patch up front. Accordingly, we expect to see at least 0.94 g.
Braking: The GT500’s 18-inch wheels will shelter huge 14.0-inch vented front rotors with four-piston calipers applying squeeze and 11.8-inch vented rear rotors. (The Mustang GT has 12.4-inch front rotors and 11.8-inch rears, all vented.) Given its Brembo braking system, bigger footprints, and stickier tires, we expect stops from 70 mph in less than 170 feet, which is, once again, Corvette territory. The front rotors on the GT500 show car were cross-drilled and vented. The production car’s brakes will lack cross drilling, which looks sexy but tends to produce cracks in hard use.
Handling: The GT500 has hefty front and rear anti-roll bars—a tubular 1.4-inch bar up front and a solid 0.9-inch rear bar and the spring rates and damping profiles have been adjusted to complement the massive power. There’s more roll stiffness, but it’s remarkable how supple the suspension manages to be, particularly with a live axle at the rear.

View Photos

AARON KILEY

The only negative dynamic comment in our notebook at the end of this brief time behind the wheel had to do with the power rack-and-pinion steering, which was quick (2.6 turns lock-to-lock) and accurate but felt a little light at high speeds. This was magnified by the absence of the production front air dam on our test mule. Unlike the early Mustangs, the GT500 is getting a lot of wind-tunnel time as part of its development, and O’Connell is intent on hitting the right balance between down-force and aerodynamic drag.
The test mule’s responses were colored by mild understeer—not too surprising, given the weight distribution and big disparity between the front and rear contact patches. And not unwelcome, since it makes the car’s responses predictable. Which is just what the SVT guys want.
“What we want is a little bit of steady-state understeer,” says Tom Chapman, SVT’s vehicle dynamics supervisor. “We don’t want to overdo it on agility, but we still want it to be fun to drive. Besides, we figure the driver can correct for understeer with his right foot any time he wants.”
Amen to that.
What else would you like to know? Price, perhaps? So would we. Like the matter of engine output, SVT will only offer a range of potential price points, from $36,000 to $40,000. The last SVT Mustang Cobra, with a mere 390 horsepower, cost $35,485. Our guess for this one is $39,000. Like the Mustang GT, that would be a tough-to-top performance buy, judging by our acceleration, braking, and skidpad forecasts. We’ll be waiting for your letters.

Carroll Shelby will always be remembered for his Cobra roadsters, but it was the GT350 and GT500 Mustangs that really filled 01’ Shel’s chili pot during the late ’60s—particularly the GT500. Although it was ponderous compared with the hard-edged GT350 of ’65 and ’66, the GT500 advanced an essential truth of the emerging U.S. sporty-car market: Americans liked speed, but not at the expense of comfort. This was the heyday of the big-inch V-8, when the U.S. industry was busily making torque junkies of us all, and that’s precisely what the GT500 delivered—lots of low-end grunt from a low-tech Ford 428 V-8, which was almost $1000 cheaper than the more potent 427 made famous by the Cobra.

View Photos

AARON KILEY

Most GT500s came with an automatic transmission, and if they weren’t pure sports cars, they were easy to live with. The GT500 made its debut for the 1967 model year with a price of $4195 and immediately outsold the $3995 GT350. Our road test in February 1967 characterized it as “an adult sports car,” noting that compared with the early GT350 “all the viciousness had gone out of the car, without any lessening of its animal vitality.” We quoted Shelby as calling it “the first car I’m really proud of.” In the next couple of years, both models acquired more and more comfort and convenience features, including convertible versions, moving steadily closer to the passenger-car mainstream. The last Shelby Mustangs were built in 1969, although some were sold as 1970 models. In all, just over 6500 GT500 and GT500KR (for “King of the Road”) cars were built. Recent GT500 auction prices, per Keith Martin’s authoritative Sports Car Market, were more than $90,000. This pristine 1968 model is owned by John Gribbel III, who lives in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, when the weather is too severe back home in Melvin Village, New Hampshire.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2007 Ford Mustang Shelby Cobra GT500
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
ESTIMATED BASE PRICE $39,000
ENGINE TYPEsupercharged and intercooled V-8, iron block and aluminum headsDisplacement 330 in3, 5409 cm3Power (C/D est)475 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque (C/D est) 450 lb-ft @ 3750 rpm
TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 107.1 in inLength: 188.0 inWidth: 73.9 inHeight: 55.7 inCurb weight: 3850 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)Zero to 60 mph: 4.0 secStanding ¼-mile: 12.5 sec @ 116 mphTop speed (governor limited): 160 mph
FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)EPA city/highway: 13/21 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

From the Archive: They blur fence posts—Acura TSX, Audi A4, Subaru Legacy, and Volvo S40—not the numbers on the gas pump. More

Ford’s 760-hp Mustang GT500 accelerates even harder on its standard summer tires than it does on the optional track rubber, and it’s no less exhilarating. More

Kia faces a formidable challenge with the launch of its redesigned fourth-generation 2021 Sorento SUV, which comes to market on the heels of the Korean brand’s immensely successful and 10Best-winning Telluride crossover. Yet, while both SUVs compete in the same mid-size, three-row segment, the slightly smaller Sorento makes a compelling case with its attractive design, more affordable pricing, and a diverse range of powertrains that includes two gas engines, a hybrid, and an upcoming plug-in hybrid model.
The new Sorento may not have the same bold style as the chunky Telluride. But its chiseled lines look handsomely modern and they set off its more prominent styling details, such as the hexagonal pattern in its grille and its eye-catching LED taillights. A $2800 X-Line appearance package is available on all-wheel-drive SX models, which adds a model-specific roof rack and front and rear bumpers. The X-Line is also available in a fetching Aruba Green color that pairs nicely with Sorento’s optional brown leather interior.

View Photos

Michael Simari

2021 Kia Sorento Pricing Announced

2021 Kia Sorento Has New X-Line, Hybrid Models

While we’ve only driven well-equipped SX models thus far, we’re impressed with the design and material quality of the Sorento’s cabin. Its fake wood trim is convincing, its quilted leather upholstery is soft, and its shapely door panels feature attractive stitching and plush armrests. The dashboard’s abundance of air vents can look busy, but the SX’s crisply rendered 10.3-inch touchscreen infotainment system sits within easy reach of the driver, and the climate controls are straightforward to operate. Lesser LX, S, and EX models have a smaller 8.0-inch touchscreen with wireless Android Auto and Apple CarPlay connectivity, but strangely the SX’s larger screen requires you to plug your phone in with an old-fashioned USB cable in order to access those features.
With a wheelbase that’s 3.4 inches shorter than the Telluride’s, the Sorento is closer in size to two-row mid-size crossovers such as the Honda Passport, yet the Kia comes standard with a questionably useful third row of seats. Accommodations in the way back simply aren’t comfortable for adults, with limited stretch-out space and a low bottom seat cushion that forces your knees up toward your chest. Plus, we only fit two carry-on suitcases in its cargo area with the third row raised versus the four we fit in the Telluride’s aft hold. If we owned a new Sorento, we’d probably leave the third row folded until we absolutely needed to ferry additional riders for short distances. Lower trim levels have a second-row bench seat and seven-passenger capacity, but higher trims are limited to six riders with their second-row captain’s chairs.

View Photos

Michael Simari

The Sorento will eventually offer four powertrain options, including a base 191-hp 2.5-liter inline-four, a turbocharged 2.5-liter four, a hybrid that pairs with a 1.6-liter turbo-four, and an upcoming plug-in hybrid with a larger battery pack that enables a claimed 30 miles of electric range. We’ve only driven the optional 281-hp turbo 2.5-liter so far, and we enjoyed its responsiveness and smooth power delivery.
Although the Sorento’s optional turbo-four (EX and SX models only) is somewhat unusual in a segment where naturally aspirated V-6s remain the norm, that the engine mates to an eight-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission is even more unconventional. Kia claims that this setup enables quicker shifts and better fuel economy. Indeed, the 2.5-liter turbo’s 24-mpg EPA combined estimate for an all-wheel-drive model is identical to the figure for an equivalent Sorento with the significantly less powerful naturally aspirated engine and conventional eight-speed torque-converter automatic. We did notice a slight lag in throttle response when starting from a stop with the dual clutch, but the transmission otherwise performed smoothly and unobtrusively. We expect a swift zero-to-60-mph time in the mid-six-second range for the quickest turbocharged models, with the naturally aspirated variants roughly 2.5 seconds off that pace.

View Photos

Michael Simari

Compared to the floaty ride and handling of the previous-gen Sorento, the new model feels considerably more solid and planted on the road. It rides confidently, with even large bumps producing little noise from the suspension and minimal vibrations through the steering wheel. The tuning of the primary controls also is much improved, with nicely weighted steering and a firm brake pedal.
Starting at $30,560 for a front-wheel-drive LX model and ranging up to roughly $45K for a loaded all-wheel-drive SX, the Sorento costs less than the larger Telluride, which starts at $33,160 and can top $50K with options. Given the Telluride’s presence and excellent packaging, it remains a highly tempting option among three-row utes. But the new Sorento is attractive in its own right. For sensible shoppers that don’t need its larger sibling’s extra size (and cost), Kia’s latest mid-size SUV has a lot to offer.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Kia Sorento
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, front- or all-wheel-drive, 6–7-passenger, 4-door wagon
BASE PRICE LX, $30,560; S, $33,060; EX, $36,160; SX, $39,160
ENGINES DOHC 16-valve 2.5-liter inline-4, 191 hp, 181 lb-ft; turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.5-liter inline-4, 281 hp, 311 lb-ft
TRANSMISSIONS 8-speed automatic, 8-speed dual-clutch automatic
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 110.8 inLength: 189.0 inWidth: 74.8 inHeight: 66.9–70.3 inPassenger volume: 144 ft3Cargo volume: 13 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 3750–4150 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST) 60 mph: 6.5–9.0 sec100 mph: 16.0–18.5 sec1/4 mile: 14.8–17.3 secTop speed: 124–131 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY Combined/city/highway: 24–26/21–24/25–29 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

Going into its fourth year in production, the second-generation Nissan Armada was beginning to feel a bit tired next to the newer full-size SUVs in in its segment, such as the Ford Expedition and the even-fresher 2021 Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon. Nissan understands this and has updated its big ute with some meaningful improvements for the 2021 model year. While the relatively modest changes don’t amount to game-changing enhancements, they do make the Armada more functional and attractive—and that’s okay because it already was pretty nice to begin with.
Nissan started by improving the Armada’s curbside appeal with a new front end that features a more aggressive nose and angular LED headlights, plus a revised tail with a more stylish hatch and taillights. Inside, the interior has been spiffed up with a simpler center stack and a 12.3-inch infotainment touchscreen with crisper graphics, while a new 7.0-inch full color display now sits between the analog speedometer and tach. Also standard is wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, although you still need to connect the latter setup with a cord. Map data and software can now be updated via an onboard Wi-Fi hotspot. And a neat feature of the Armada’s revised center console is that it can be opened from the front or the rear, making it easier for second-row riders to access.

View Photos

Nissan

2021 Nissan Armada Gets a New Look, Updated Tech

Tested: 2017 Nissan Armada

In the world of behemoth SUVs, the Armada is within a couple of inches of the Expedition, Tahoe, and Yukon in length. But while the Nissan is big and roomy—with three rows of seats and 156 cubic feet of passenger space when equipped with a sunroof—its competitors from Chevy, Ford, and GMC all have 178 cubic feet of people room. The Armada’s rear seat is tighter than its rivals’, too; average-size adults will feel cramped in the way back. The Armada also comes up short on cargo volume, offering 17 cubic feet behind its third row versus 21 cubes for the Ford and 25 from General Motors’s twins.
If the latest Armada is less cavernous than other full-sizers, it gives up nothing to them in the way of appointments. But that’s not a new development. It’s long been nearly indistinguishable from the mechanically similar Infiniti QX80, and our all-wheel-drive Armada Platinum test truck’s interior feels worthy of a premium brand. Its leather seats were stitched in a rich quilted pattern. Its cabin was stocked with amenities, including heated-and-ventilated power front seats, heated second-row seats, a rear-seat entertainment system with dual 8.0-inch monitors, a moonroof, power-reclining-and-folding third-row seats, and a 13-speaker Bose audio system.
The Armada’s midlife refresh adds several mechanical and safety-system improvements as well. Nissan’s engineers squeezed 10 more horses and 19 more pound-feet of torque out of Nissan’s venerable 5.6-liter V-8, bringing the totals to 400 horsepower and 413 pound-feet. A seven-speed automatic transmission still manages that grunt. There’s also more standard driver-assistance tech, ranging from automatic emergency braking with pedestrian protection to rear automatic braking. Adaptive cruise is standard across the three trim levels—SV, SL, and Platinum.

View Photos

Nissan

The posh ambiance of the Platinum model is a prelude to how the Armada conducts itself on the road. There’s effortless power underfoot; the last Armada we tested got to 60 mph in less than six seconds, and we expect the same of the new one. Its ride is pleasantly hushed, and it traverses bumps and ruts with admirable suppleness despite rolling on 22-inch wheels. This is a relaxed cruiser with not a whiff of playfulness to its steering, brakes, or handling. But the Armada does drive competently and comfortably—which for a lot of SUV buyers is more than enough. Towing capacity is a stout 8500 pounds.
Where we expect the 2021 Armada to excel, however, is on its window sticker. Nissan won’t announce pricing until it goes on sale in January. But based on the 2020 model’s $48,895 starting price, we predict that the base Armada SV will about a thousand dollars below the newer Chevy Tahoe. We think a Platinum model, equipped with the optional second-row captain’s chairs, will come in at well under $70K. Considering how easy it is to option a Tahoe or Expedition beyond $80,000, we’re inclined to overlook some of the Nissan’s shortcomings, of which there are now fewer than before.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Nissan Armada
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, rear- or four-wheel-drive, 7- or 8-passenger, 4-door wagon
BASE PRICE (C/D EST) Trim level 1, $49,000
ENGINE TYPE DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement 339 in3, 5552 cm3Power 400 hp @ 5800 rpmTorque 413 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm
TRANSMISSION 7-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 121.1 inLength: 208.9 inWidth: 79.9 inHeight: 75.8 inPassenger volume: 156–157 ft3Cargo volume: 17 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 5700–6000 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST) 60 mph: 5.8–5.9 sec1/4 mile: 14.6–14.7 secTop speed: 130 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST) Combined/city/highway: 15–16/13–14/18–19 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