Evelyn Reynolds

View Photos
Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

After patiently waiting more than two decades for the Toyota Supra’s return, maybe you were so excited about the new one that you put money down to secure an early example. Possibly you even paid more than sticker price to be first. If this describes you, if you’re among the 4100 people in the United States who bought a 2020 Supra, then Toyota’s changes for the 2021 model year are going to hurt.

We Dyno Tested 2021 Toyota Supra, Found More Power

2021 Toyota Supra Gets Turbo 4, More Powerful I-6

First, a small bit of good news for you first-year buyers: There aren’t a lot of visible differences between the 2020 and 2021 cars, so you’re not missing out there. But the new one does get aluminum braces that tie together the strut towers and core support, borrowed from the BMW Z4 M40i version of this car. It also sees a healthy boost of 47 more horses for the six-cylinder model, to 382 horsepower, and Toyota added a 255-hp four-cylinder to the menu.

View Photos

Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

HIGHS: More powerful six, hits 60 mph in 3.8 seconds, Toyota’s version of a BMW is better than BMW’s.

For the six, that jump in power over last year’s 335-hp rating consists of more than just software changes to the BMW-sourced turbocharged 3.0-liter. It uses a new cylinder head with a fully separate exhaust manifold—the 2020’s is partially integrated—and has revised pistons to reduce the compression ratio from 11.0:1 to 10.2:1. The drop in cylinder pressure is offset by increased boost from a larger turbocharger. And if BMW’s recent revisions to similar engines in its lineup are anything to go by, then this inline-six likely has a stronger crankshaft, too.
The result is an impressive 382 horsepower and 368 pound-feet of torque. If those numbers sound familiar, that’s because those outputs are identical to the Z4 M40i’s. It appears the Germans may have wanted to hold back their best stuff, at least initially, because Toyota tells us it couldn’t get this engine for the 2020 Supra.

LOWS: Had to wait a year to get the best stuff, still looks odd from some angles.

View Photos

Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

From the first poke of the accelerator, the difference is not obvious. There’s still no manual transmission, but the eight-speed automatic’s 2000-rpm launch-control limiter makes getting to 60 mph in 3.8 seconds easy. That time, however, is 0.1 second slower than before. The 3.0-liter pulls hard across the entire sweep of the tach to the 7000-rpm redline. The extra power is more clearly seen at higher speeds. The quarter-mile passes in 12.1 seconds at 117 mph, a tenth of a second quicker and 4 mph faster than the 2020 car. We also noted that the engine’s exhaust note is more mature, Toyota having toned down the crackle-and-pop theatrics a bit.
Steering responses feel a hair crisper, as Toyota revised the steering calibration to make the effort buildup more linear as cornering loads increase. The electronically controlled dampers receive some massaging, and on our favorite roads, the updated Supra doesn’t bottom out its suspension as often when flung into high-speed heaves. Its tail end also remains glued to the ground under hard cornering, which is new. There’s more understeer on the skidpad, which resulted in a reduction in grip, from 1.07 g’s down to 1.02.

View Photos

Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

For a car this powerful and quick, the Supra is remarkably efficient. The EPA estimates the revised 3.0-liter will achieve 22 mpg in the city and 30 mpg on the highway, down 2 and 1 mpg, respectively, from the 2020’s numbers. Our test car averaged 22 mpg over 350 miles of driving that included plenty of full-throttle hits, and on our 75-mph highway fuel-economy test, it managed an excellent 34 mpg. Last year’s Supra achieved 36 mpg in the same test.
The more powerful 2021 model might not sit well with last year’s Supra buyers, but new owners might someday come to feel a tinge of regret, too, as Toyota says it’s far from done with the Supra. But don’t let that stop you from enjoying the fun now. The new Supra goes on sale in August and will start at $51,945, $1000 more than last year’s model—a minor price bump for a more powerful engine.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Toyota Supra 3.0
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door hatchback
PRICE AS TESTED $52,440 (base price: $51,945)
ENGINE TYPE turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement 183 in3, 2998 cm3Power 382 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque 368 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm
TRANSMISSION 8-speed automatic
CHASSIS Suspension (F/R): struts/multilinkBrakes (F/R): 13.7-in vented disc/13.0-in vented discTires: Michelin Pilot Super Sport, F: 255/35ZR-19 (96Y) ★ R: 275/35ZR-19 (100Y) ★
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 97.2 inLength: 172.5 inWidth: 73.0 inHeight: 50.9 inPassenger volume: 51 ft3Cargo volume: 10 ft3Curb weight: 3347 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 3.8 sec100 mph: 8.8 sec130 mph: 15.2 sec150 mph: 21.9 secRolling start, 5–60 mph: 4.4 secTop gear, 30–50 mph: 2.7 secTop gear, 50–70 mph: 2.7 sec1/4 mile: 12.1 sec @ 117 mphTop speed (governor limited): 160 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 152 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 304 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 1.02 gStanding-start accel times omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.
C/D FUEL ECONOMY Observed: 22 mpg75-mph highway driving: 34 mpgHighway range: 460 miles
EPA FUEL ECONOMY Combined/city/highway: 25/22/30 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 November 1976 issue of Car and Driver.
Those of you who have been sitting forward in your chairs waiting for the word on the Chevette, wondering if it has a chance against the Rabbit and all of those other big-selling foreigners, can relax a little. The Chevette is going to make it, at least in the short term. More than anything else, the basic car offers good value for its price, and that should be enough to keep the majority of small ­car buyers from defecting to the imports.

Best Hatchbacks of 2020

The Greatest Cars of All Time: The Seventies

We’ve been closely following this car since its introduction to the long-lead press last July. Late in the summer we accompanied a number of high-ranking Chevrolet engineers on a one-day road evaluation of three pre-production models, and now we’ve just finished a thorough examination of a production 1.6 Rally model (unfortunately loaded with options) under our own testing conditions.
By now everybody knows that the Chevrolet Chevette is the American version of the General Motors T-car first built by Opel in Germany and then picked up by GM subsidiaries in England, Japan, and Brazil. It’s an utterly conventional design with a front-mounted four-cylinder engine driving a solid rear axle. A two-door hatchback coupe is the only body style available. The American version is 3.4 inches longer, 1.6 inches narrower, and 3.2 inches lower than a VW Rabbit on a nearly an identical wheelbase. The base Chevette is about 120 pounds heavier than the Rabbit; the available options add even more. Our test car with air conditioning (an extra 71 pounds) rolled across the scales at 2220 pounds.

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

Viewed as a total package, handling is the Chevette’s most attractive feature. This is followed by the delightful accuracy and responsiveness of its controls, its relatively quiet interior, and the potential of very comfortable seats if you are willing to pay extra for certain options. The biggest deficiency, on the other hand, is its lack of engine power. We were also disappointed by the stopping ability of the standard-equipment unassisted brakes (power assist is optional). Interior room for luggage and passengers falls into that vast middle rating of “acceptable.” The Chevette will carry four adults in reasonable comfort—which is a laudable performance for a car this small and certainly a first for Detroit—but its usable space falls short of the high standard set by the Rabbit.
If you were to drive a Chevette blind­folded, chances are great that you would assume it to be an import. Unlike Vegas and Pintos, which seem large and lethargic by comparison, the Chevette is nimble and direct. The sound it makes is that of a typical import with a small, high-­revving engine. But when you peel off the blindfold and take a look, particularly at a heavily optioned model, there is no longer any doubt that it is a Detroit car. The trim is more abundant and more consciously applied than that found in any foreign car. Some aspects of it are very well done. The wooly herringbone cloth (optional) on the seats is exquisitely soft and at the same time highly resistant to showing dirt. The rubber floor mats, also optional, are heavy, finely detailed, and well-fitted; Rubbermaid couldn’t have done better.

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

Beyond this, there are two convenience items that even Detroit’s big cars can’t match. The Chevette has inertia­-type locks on the front seat backs that allow them to be folded forward without fumbling for some hidden lever. And the retractor mechanisms for the front shoulder belts operate like window­ shade rollers—after you’ve fastened the buckle, a slight pull on the shoulder strap will reposition the retractor to give you a bit of slack, removing the belt tension from your chest.
Yet these few functional and tasteful items are overwhelmed by the garish. The Chevette’s Custom interior is heavily accented with wood-grained tape applied to flash-chromed plastic moldings. All too frequently the tape is cut short or mislocated so that its edges are visible, informing you graphically that your simulated luxury is only a few microns thick. This is the sort of flash and filigree that is shunned by Volkswagen and most other small-car builders.

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

We’ve asked certain Chevrolet officials about their preoccupation with imitation wood, particularly when the cost target of the car apparently doesn’t allow the job to be done in a quality fashion. They are uniformly reluctant to talk about it but generally concede that Chevy general manager Robert Lund feels that the American public associates wood grain with luxury. So, by executive decree, all optionally trimmed Chevrolets right down to the Chevette will be accented thus. Our argument is not with wood grain itself, which can be attractive if properly done, but with Detroit’s practice of providing those garish trims that somehow promise to lift the stigma of a cheap car. The Chevette’s equipment list contains a number of these “sucker options”: body side moldings, side window reveal moldings, door edge guard moldings, custom exteriors, woody decor packages, various combinations of wheel covers and trim rings, sport mirrors, deluxe seat belts and consoles. And they are frequently tied into inter­locking packages. For example, you can’t have the optional sound-deadening unless you opt for the Custom interior, which includes the bogus wood.

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

We are not opposed to options—they give a basic car great latitude. But it appears that too much of the Chevette’s development time was spent working out appearance gimmicks and not enough was spent on basic engineering. The engine is the most notable case in point. Compared to the garden-variety small imports, the Chevette’s power­plant is in a primitive state of tune—and performance suffers accordingly. Flat out, the test car was capable of only 81 mph. In acceleration, it required 19.8 seconds to complete the standing quarter-mile, with a finishing speed of only 66.3 mph. Certainly the extra weight of the air conditioning penalized our test car’s acceleration, but even without it the Chevette could not match the pace of the Honda CVCC and the Datsun B-210, generally considered to be the slowest of the imports. A good indication of the Chevette’s available power comes from comparing its top speed to those of the Honda (93 mph), Datsun B-210 (88 mph), and VW Rabbit (97 mph). Keep in mind too that we are speaking of the Chevette with the optional 1600cc engine. The standard 1400cc version should be even slower.

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

The basic design of the Chevette’s engine is widely credited to Opel, even though it was built only in Brazil before Chevrolet picked up the blueprints. It is a reasonable engine, compact in size and light in weight despite its cast-iron block and head. The head is a cross-flow design with all the valves in line, operated by rocker arms off a single belt-driven overhead camshaft. We have not examined the ports, but conversations with Chevrolet engineers indicate that they are not unhappy with them. These same engineers justify the use of the Brazilian engine rather than designing a new one because it saved time: At least one division of General Motors already knew how to manufacture it, and the engine had proved that it worked (new designs don’t always work on the first try). But it would appear that Chevrolet did not put all of the time it saved to good use. The Chevette engine went into production with a very unsophisticated four-into-one exhaust manifold. Common import practice is a four-into-two-into-one system that, when properly tuned, produces a substantial increase in torque and horsepower and in no way conflicts with the catalytic converter for emissions control. It is also common for imports to be equipped with a progressive two-barrel carburetor, but the Chevette has only a one-barrel. It’s little wonder the Chevette ends up a weakling.

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

We asked Robert Stempel, recently named director of engineering for Chevrolet, why the Chevette couldn’t match the Rabbit’s performance, and he admitted that Detroit small-engine technology lags behind that of the foreigners. Chevrolet examined the VW engine and was impressed by the careful design of its combustion chambers and the efforts directed toward the reduction of parasitic losses—for example, not only does the Rabbit have a highly efficient water pump, it also uses an electric cooling fan instead of a belt-driven fan to save power at high engine speeds. Since small engines are expected to turn higher revs than typical American sixes and V-8s, these detail improvements have a substantial effect on both output and fuel economy. Chevrolet is well aware of the potential but just hasn’t engineered it into the Chevette yet.

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

The rest of the car is a good deal more successful. Chevrolet picked up the suspension design originated by Opel with only subtle revisions. So the Chevette rides and handles very much like a smaller, lightweight version of the Opel Manta, a car that has always found favor with this magazine. Rather than the simple small-car expedient of MacPherson struts in front, the Chevette has a pair of control arms on each side. The rear uses a solid axle with a short torque tube for excellent wind-up control plus a single trailing link on each side and a Panhard rod to positively locate the axle in all directions. The front and rear anti-­roll bars on our test car are optional. All of this in conjunction with the standard­equipment 5.0-inch-wide wheels provide a basis for good handling. Even with the limp, 80-series GM-specification radials, our example pulled 0.70 g of cornering force on the skid pad. A set of tires with more handling potential, such as the Continentals now used for Showroom Stock racing, would certainly bring that up to a sporting level. As expected, the Chevette understeers considerably at its limit, and there isn’t near enough power available to bring the tail out. There is adequate wheel travel to keep the suspension from bottoming out, so the car remains manageable at the limit. The high caster angle in the front suspension, however, requires a fair amount of muscle on the steering wheel. For normal motoring, the caster produces a strong centering action that feels great. But when you’re flogging it, the aligning torque trying to straighten the front wheels is more than you need or want.
Ride quality depends on the road surface. On relatively smooth pavement—the type traveled by Detroit executives to and from the office—the Chevette’s soft radials do an excellent job of absorbing the shock of expansion strips and various other small bumps, and we would judge the ride equal to the best of the compact imports. When the going gets rough, the Chevette turns choppy and is distinctly less comfortable than the Rabbit, Renault 5, and Fiat 128.
Out on the freeway, it’s easy to believe that the Chevette was developed for the era of the 55-mph limit. Below that speed, it’s a quiet and relaxed cruiser. Sensitive drivers will notice a few vibration periods at various operating speeds, but this is not uncommon for four-cylinder cars. Once you go over 55 mph, however, the engine assumes a busy, almost frantic tone. The faster you go, the more you feel as if you’re abusing the machinery. Much of this has to do with the selection of axle ratios. Chevrolet has decided on a 4.10 as standard equipment with the 1600 engine. This helps acceleration, but a more powerful engine with the optional 3.70 axle would be a calmer choice. On the other hand, the Chevette’s lack of power is not as bothersome as it might have been. At wide-open throttle, our test car was substantially quieter than any other small import we’ve tested. So it doesn’t strain audibly when accelerating.

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

In fact, there seems to be more strain associated with braking. Without the optional power assist, pedal pressure is higher than would be expected in a small car, and you really have to lean into it to lock the front wheel. Unfortunately, one of our test car’s rear wheels locked readily, which compromised the overall performance. The Chevette required 232 feet to stop from 70 mph, an unacceptably long distance.
The Chevette’s modest performance is offset to a great degree by its particularly well-laid-out driver’s compartment. The Rally option includes special instrumentation (tachometer and temperature), which is grouped directly in front of the driver, clear of the steering-wheel rim. Also a part of the Rally equipment is a “sport shifter” option. This moves the base of the lever farther back along the tunnel so that the knob travels in a horizontal path. While the relocation is a small contribution to “sport,” the action of the shifter itself is crisp and direct, one of the best in the business. Its only flaw was a tendency to rattle in sympathy with engine vibration at certain speeds.
Detroit usually builds its cars with lower rooflines than those from other parts of the world, and the Chevette is no exception. Yet it has very good headroom without the unpleasant feeling of sitting flat on the floor. Apparently the rather deep “pans” in the footwell area (both front and rear) create the impression of seats being higher than they really are. Even the rear passengers have reasonable headroom without finding their knees poking into their chins. And if the front seats are pushed forward a few notches, there is adequate knee clearance behind. The Chevette is far more comfortable in back than larger cars such as the Vega hatchback, Monza, and Camaro but inferior to the Rabbit (the VW’s three-inch-higher roofline allows a more chair-like seating position that is as comfortable as that of many American intermediates).

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

The Chevette’s trunk space is some­what smaller than the Rabbit’s, and it lacks the hinged cover bridging the gap between the hatch door and the rear seat back that keeps potential burglars from scouting the contents of the Rabbit’s trunk. Additionally, the Chevette’s spare tire and fuel tank have not been integrated into as small an area as they should have been, so the trunk floor is a bit high. This point becomes moot, however, when there are no rear passengers. The seat back folds down, creating a small station wagon that will carry more luggage than most families own.
Passengers in our test car were invariably impressed by the front bucket seats. The Custom interior ($152) and the cloth covering ($18) combine to provide a softness and degree of comfort beyond what you’d expect in a small car. They offer no lateral support in cornering, but for normal driving they are comfortable indeed.

View Photos

Eberhard LuethkeCar and Driver

Overall, we find the Chevette to be a car well suited to American conditions. It’s happy at the 55-mph limit, nimble in metropolitan traffic, and offers its driver a fair amount of pleasure. The only category in which it really falls down is performance. The poor acceleration is accompanied by less-than-stunning fuel economy—our test car achieved 27.5 mpg in the urban section of the Car and Driver mileage cycle, 29 mpg on the highway. A similar 1600cc, four-speed Chevette without air conditioning bettered these figures by 1 mpg, which puts it ahead of a Toyota Corolla but behind the Honda Civic, Datsun B-210, and Rabbit. Even though the Chevette handles well and is expected to be accepted by the SCCA for competition in the Showroom Stock Sedan class, we see little hope for it being competitive. It just doesn’t have the necessary power.
For competition in the sales charts, however, the Chevette has one ace in the hole beyond its appeal as the only American-built small car: price. For those on a low-calorie budget, the no­-back-seat Scooter at $2899 matches the cheapest stripper imports head on. And the regular Chevette coupe at $3098 is a solid $400 under the base Rabbit. If price is the sales incentive that Detroit has always claimed it is, Chevrolet will hold the line against the imports.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS 
1977 Chevrolet Chevette 1.6 
VEHICLE TYPEfront-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door hatchback 
PRICE AS TESTED (1977)$4647 (base price: $3098)
ENGINE TYPESOHC 8-valve inline-4, iron block and head, 1×1-bbl carburetorDisplacement: 98 in3, 1600 cm3Power: 60 hp @ 4800 rpmTorque: 82 lb-ft @ 3400 rpm
TRANSMISSION4-speed manual
CHASSISSuspension (F/R): control arms/live axleBrakes (F/R): 9.7-in disc/7.9-in drumTires: General Steel Radial, P155/80R-13 
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 94.3 inLength: 158.7 inWidth: 61.8 inHeight: 52.3 inCurb weight: 2200 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 15.0 sec70 mph: 24.6 sec1/4 mile: 19.8 sec @ 66 mphTop speed (drag limited): 81 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 232 ft

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

View Photos
Michael SimariCar and Driver

It only seems as if Cadillac has been struggling in the luxury compact segment since Antoine de la Mothe, sieur de Cadillac, founded Detroit in 1701. It hasn’t been quite that long, of course, but it has been nearly 40 years since the brand introduced the wrongheaded Chevy Cavalier–based Cimarron.
It took a few decades after that debacle for Cadillac to field a legitimate small luxury sedan—no, not the Catera. We’re talking about the rear-wheel-drive ATS of 2013. That’s really where the CT4’s story begins. Cadillac says its latest, smallest, and least expensive sedan is all-new, but that’s a bit of a stretch. It’s more a redo and refocusing of the ATS.

HIGHS: Strong acceleration, smart interior, rear-drive in a front-drive segment.

View Photos

Michael SimariCar and Driver

While the ATS attempted to go head to head with the BMW 3-series and Mercedes-Benz C-class, Cadillac has now ceded that territory to the larger CT5. The rear-drive (or all-wheel-drive) CT4 has been assigned to take on the front-drive subcompacts from Audi, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz, and it’s the only car among them that can do a John Force–style burnout through its first three gears.

2020 Cadillac CT4-V Down on Power, But Not Out

2020 Cadillac CT4 Sedan Lineup Comes into Focus

Squint and the CT4 looks a lot like an ATS. The sheetmetal is new, and there are 4.4 more inches of overall length, but the 109.3-inch wheelbase is unchanged. The base engine is a 237-hp turbocharged 2.0-liter, but the upgrade isn’t a V-6. It’s a 310-hp turbocharged 2.7-liter inline-four and a $2500 option on Premium Luxury models like our test car. The CT4 hits 60 mph in 4.7 seconds and crosses the quarter-mile marker in 13.4 seconds at 103 mph, which puts it near the front of its class.

LOWS: Unrefined engine, soggy handling, pricey add-ons.

View Photos

Michael SimariCar and Driver

Unfortunately, this large four-cylinder idles with the clatter of a diesel and is boomy through the top half of the tachometer. It sounds like John Deere, not John Force, tuned the exhaust system. Cadillac “enhances” the engine’s sounds through the audio speakers, but it’s more noise than note.
Our test car rode comfortably, with just a bit of float. Pushing it hard on a fun road, however, amplifies that float. Mid-corner bumps upset the chassis, and there’s more body roll than we would like. It’s good enough at an easy pace, but it’s never much fun. The all-season tires—only the CT4-V offers summers—limit grip to a meager 0.81 g.

View Photos

Michael SimariCar and Driver

The interior is a huge improvement over the ATS’s cabin. It’s a pleasant place to be, and the rethought controls and infotainment system work well. The Premium Luxury trim level starts at $38,490, but the big engine, all-wheel drive, and a long list of add-ons pushed our car’s sticker to $46,515. And you don’t get a sunroof or a power-opening trunklid for that price.
Yes, Cadillac is still struggling to build a great small sedan. The CT4 offers superb acceleration, but refinement deficiencies and tepid dynamics hold it back. It is a good car, but in Premium Luxury guise, it falls short of its more polished and fun-to-drive German rivals.

Specifications

Specifications
2020 Cadillac CT4 450T AWD
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED $46,515 (base price: $44,190)
ENGINE TYPE turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement 166 in3, 2727 cm3Power 310 hp @ 5600 rpmTorque 350 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm
TRANSMISSION 10-speed automatic
CHASSIS Suspension (F/R): struts/multilinkBrakes (F/R): 11.8-in vented disc/12.4-in vented discTires: Continental ProContact RX, 235/40R-18 91V M+S TPC 
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 109.3 inLength: 187.2 inWidth: 71.5 inHeight: 56.0 inPassenger volume: 90 ft3Cargo volume: 11 ft3Curb weight: 3725 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 4.7 sec100 mph: 12.6 sec130 mph: 24.7 secRolling start, 5–60 mph: 5.5 secTop gear, 30–50 mph: 3.0 secTop gear, 50–70 mph: 3.9 sec1/4 mile: 13.4 sec @ 103 mphTop speed (governor limited): 140 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 172 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 gStanding-start accel times omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.
C/D FUEL ECONOMY 75-mph highway driving: 35 mpgHighway range: 600 miles
EPA FUEL ECONOMY Combined/city/highway: 23/20/28 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 November 1979 issue of Car and Driver.

2022 Audi A3 Prepares for Battle in the U.S.

The Best Sedans of 2020

Live with any car long enough and—unless it stops dead in its tracks—it begins to grow on you. If it gets you there and back, you learn to love it. We only put a thousand miles or so on the Audi 4000, but it never missed a beat. True, it coughed once—sneezed, really—on the way up to the historic-car races at Laguna Seca, but all the other beats of its stout Teutonic heart inspired nothing but confidence. It ran like Supertrain, mostly at speeds upward of 80 mph. How many cars have you driven lately that can peg the speedometer for hours at a stretch? The numbers on the Audi’s speedo run out at 85 mph, but we pressed on with the needle buried in no man’s land until we hit the notorious Grapevine southbound on California’s I-5. Shutting off the air conditioner bought back enough power to hold a steady 80 mph up the long grade. And when we finally ran the 15.8-gallon tank dry at 300-plus miles, a fuel-economy check showed the 4000 getting better than 21 mpg at those speeds. Best of all—probably thanks to having pitched seven pennies into the ocean for good luck on the run north up Route 1—we managed to slip through the CHiPs’ speed nets like VC sappers. How could you not love a car like this?
If only the Audi 5000 didn’t exist, we might have been totally captivated by the 4000. But in comparison, the 4000 doesn’t fare quite so well. The two cars look remarkably alike—nice, clean, modern wedges. German (though Giugiaro designs), pointy, purposeful. Some of their hardware, like the door handles and the seatbelt harnesses, are identical. At first glance, about the only differences appear to be the 4000’s rectangular headlights versus the 5000’s round eyes … and the price—a couple of grand less for the smaller (100.1-inch wheelbase), lighter (2260 pounds) Audi. Is the 4000 the baby brother to the runaway best-seller 5000? Not really, more’s the pity; the 4000 feels more like a Volvo, any Volvo since the dear old 122S.

View Photos

Aaron KileyCar and Driver

A Volvo? Yeah, well, at least the steering and handling. Which may not be quite fair, because the 5000 started as a clean sheet of paper, with the former Porsche design team poised with Dietzgen drafting pens in hand, while the 4000 is an evolutionary refinement of the discontinued Fox, wrapped in snazzy new sheetmetal. The 5000 has one of the most lissome combinations of ride and handling of any car on the road; the 4000, however, is less smooth and less graceful. It harks back to an earlier generation of engineering—to cars like the Volvo.

View Photos

Aaron KileyCar and Driver

There are some odd attitudinal differ­ences between the 4000 and the 5000, too. If the 5000 is “deluxe,” the 4000 is definitely “junior.” The 5000, for exam­ple, has a proper pneumatic strut to prop the engine lid open; the 4000 has a manual hood stay, like a Morris Minor, ferchrissake. Some of the 4000’s con­trols are smaller than their counterparts on the 5000, as if Audi expected the buyers of the 4000 to be physically scaled down as well. And while the 5000 has a full-sized spare tire, the 4000 has one of those “space-saver” spares, about the size of a dirt-bike tire. Nonetheless, the 4000 has some pretty posh touches; standard equipment includes items like steel-belted radials, a trunk light (the trunk is huge for a small car), power front disc brakes (although not power steering; alas, not even as an option), honest-to-goodness vent windows that open, an electric rear-window defogger, and a center console with a voltmeter and an oil-temp gauge. The console, however, is badly placed. Tall drivers complain that its trailing edge leaves a lasting (and numbing) impression on their legs.
Driving the car is pretty nice. The seats are like the 5000’s: fully reclining buckets and comfortable for hours on any kind of road. The fuel-injected 1.6-liter, 78-hp (76 in California) four-cylinder engine starts easily and runs without any of the drivability problems associated with most engines built since “ecology” became a dirty word. It’s redlined at 6500 rpm, but most of its considerable poke comes between four and five grand. The clutch is a bit notchy, but the shift is as smooth as Teflon and cocked slightly toward the driver (wonder if they change that for a right-hand-drive version?). The instruments are intelligently laid out, with big, bold, E-Z Read graphics, and the operating controls are placed where you expect to find them.

View Photos

Aaron KileyCar and Driver

The 4000’s steering may be slow, heavy, and not as precise as the 5000’s, but it’s better than most of its competition from across the Pacific. With 60 percent of its weight over the front wheels, the 4000 has unflappable straight-line stability (unaffected by anything but gale-force side gusts), and excellent traction on loose stuff, but she sure do understeer and the rear wheels tend to lock if you stand too smartly on the brakes.
The front-drive powertrain is inherited from the Fox, and the engine still buzzes enough at speed, especially at 70 mph, to rattle the keys off your key ring. A five-speed manual transmission would help, and is rumored to be in the pipeline, as are a five-cylinder engine, a three-speed automatic, a three-door coupe, a five-door wagon, and—gasp!—a turbo. But for now the 4000 is simply buzzier and noisier than it should be.

View Photos

Aaron KileyCar and Driver

Still and all, for a company whose motto is “Success through Engineering,” there are some curious lapses. Consider: the rear frame of the front quarter-window partially obscures the outside rear-view mirror. (Rearward visibility is further hampered by a narrow field of vision in the inside rear-view mirror.) Consider: the little spoiler that pops up when the optional sunroof is opened creates more wind noise than there would be if there were no spoiler at all. (We finally taped the spoiler out of the airstream altogether.) Consider—the ultimate insult: park a 4000 alongside a 5000 and open a door on either car; the rub rails don’t even come close to mating, and the result is a ding in the other Audi’s door.

View Photos

Aaron KileyCar and Driver

If your style is elegance, ante up the extra bucks for the 5000. But the 5000 is an 85-mph car—any speed much above that and the disharmony of its uneven number of cylinders grates unmercifully on the human ear … which is what we’re equipped with. If, on the other hand, you want a little stormer, the 4000 is your Audi.
Counterpoint
I’ve had too much fun with the Audi Fox to applaud its demise and welcome this family-type 4000 to the fold. The 4000 just doesn’t stack up to the Fox’s performance standards: it’s slower, heavier by 200 pounds, noisier inside, and less fuel-efficient. And, of course, much more expensive. Some of this you can chalk up to tighter emissions standards, but really, the reason the 4000 isn’t Foxy is that Audi has given this car a character transplant to move it up and out of America’s apartment complexes and into a split-level life of country luxury. That’s fine, but the transformation is incomplete. The 4000 admittedly looks the part, even though it is the cheapest expression of the made-in-the-Black Forest styling idiom. And the ride, the ventilation system, and tire adhesion are all substantially improved over the Fox’s. Unfortunately, the 4000 has been sent to us with a 70-mph sonic boom built into its structure. I’m not sure whether this is some sort of subliminal over-speed alarm purposely installed at the factory, or just a bad job from the sound lab. In any case, I’ll be saving my enthusiasm for this new-generation Audi until I see the five-speed, five­-cylinder version. —Don Sherman
Audi did the right thing when it put a new name on its small car. The back-road duelist that lived behind the Fox badge is dead and gone, and I’ll miss it. But in its place is an equally competent, though very different, kind of car. It’s as if Audi sent the Fox through finishing school; it’s emerged from the halls of engineering far more suave, confident, and stylish than when it enrolled.

View Photos

Aaron KileyCar and Driver

If anything was lost during the maturing of the Fox, it was some youthful exuberance. The 4000 sedan doesn’t feel so much like a wily sports sedan as it does a sporting luxury sedan—which is nothing to irrigate your tear ducts about, because the 4000 is still one of the better all­-around sedans on the road. In fact, if Audi can fix the buzziness at highway speeds and righten up the high-speed stability a notch, the 4000 will be as exemplary a sporting luxury sedan as the Fox was a sporting sports sedan. —Rich Ceppos
Maybe I expected too much. In a fit of impracticality, I had even told my mother to consider this new Audi in her search through the Dashers, 626s, X-bodies, and Accords. But between me mum’s little Midwestern cottage and the nearest Audi dealer lies a hundred miles of pike. Anyhow, having at last driven the 4000, I’d now tell her to hold out till the arrival of a fifth gear and one more cylinder.
The four-banger drones in midrange like a B-29, and the four-speed just doesn’t reel out the long-legged cruising this otherwise sophisticated little sweetheart should be expected to give. Both inside and out, the 4000 looks as if it should provide effortless propulsion to go along with its league-leading styling and roomily luscious interior. It is much more comfortable than the GM X-bodies, having been given far more gracious seating and appointments, yet it weighs 500 pounds less. It is also fitted together infinitely better. For me, that will make it unquestionably worth the price when the all-­grown-up drivetrain is available. Besides that, we hear a prototype Turbo 5 is running loose in Europe, even as we speak. Heh, heh, heh. —Larry Griffin

Specifications

Specifications
1980 Audi 4000
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED $8850 (base price: $7685)
ENGINE TYPE SOHC 8-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement 97 in3, 1588 cm3Power 78 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque 84 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm
TRANSMISSION 4-speed manual
CHASSIS Suspension (F/R): struts/trailing armBrakes (F/R): 9.4-in disc/7.9-in drumTires: Firestone S-660, 185/60HR-14
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 100.1 inLength: 176.8 inWidth: 66.3 inHeight: 54.1 inTrunk volume: 12 ft3Curb weight: 2260 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 13.4 sec90 mph: 52.8 sec1/4 mile: 19.1 sec @ 71 mphTop speed: 91 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 209 ft
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST) Combined/city/highway: 28/24/35 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

In various areas of life, it’s sometimes said that the key to going quickly is to slow down. That’s certainly true for achieving the best acceleration times in a Tesla Model S. Even on our most recent 91-degree test day, it took almost 25 minutes after selecting Ludicrous+ mode to preheat the battery pack to its optimum, 120-degree temperature. Then, after a single blast to 150 mph, there’s a waiting period of nearly 15 minutes to dissipate the excess heat generated before it’s ready for another quick run.

Tesla Model X, S Now Have Cheetah Launch Mode

Porsche Taycan vs. Tesla Model S: The Test

Why are we here sweating under a Model S Performance’s glass roof on a hot summer day with the air conditioning off to measure its acceleration times again so soon? Because shortly after our comparison test where the Tesla successfully fought off the Porsche Taycan, Tesla issued a software update for the Model S and X that claimed more power, quicker acceleration times, and more consistency when making repeated passes. Part of the additional swiftness is due to what Tesla calls a “cheetah stance,” where the car’s front end crouches when launch control is activated. In that previous test we ran 15 consecutive acceleration runs on each car without any cool-down time, and after the Model S ran a couple of heaters in the high two-second range, it slowed dramatically to a near-Chevy Bolt pace, running zero-to-60-mph times that hovered around six seconds.

View Photos

Dave VanderWerpCar and Driver

So, we decided to repeat our same test regimen from before, with the exact same car running the updated software. This time, however, the venue was the test track near our home base in Michigan rather than our Southern California outpost.
The warp to 60 mph does indeed improve slightly to 2.4 seconds versus 2.5, tying the Porsche Taycan Turbo S as the quickest four-door we’ve ever tested in that metric. The Model S’s quarter-mile time also improves by a tenth (and 1 mph) to 10.6 seconds at 126 mph, but that’s still a tenth short and 4 mph slower than the Taycan’s best.

View Photos

Dave VanderWerpCar and Driver

Helpfully, Tesla has added a battery-temperature gauge that appears when the car is in max-acceleration Ludicrous+ mode, so you have an idea of how much wait time is remaining. When in that mode, there’s also now a power display that shows maximum-output figures for the battery and the front and rear motors. Ours maxed out at 593.5 kW (796 horsepower) for the battery, 182.0 kW (244 horses) for the front motor, and 396.5 kW (532 horses) for the rear motor.
As before, after the hero runs were finished, we made 15 additional passes, this time without the cool-down time necessary for the Model S to report that it’s at the optimum temperature. However, because our Michigan straightaway is 1.5 miles long, versus a 1.0-mile straight in California, the results aren’t laboratory comparable, as the Model S did get more cool-down time between runs this time around. During this test, we popped off a launch-control start roughly every 90 seconds—it was closer to a minute between runs last time—with about eight of those seconds spent waiting for the Model S to transition into its low-nose, high-fanny cheetah stance.

View Photos

Dave VanderWerpCar and Driver

Since the only thing that changed here is software, Tesla is simply allowing the battery, electric motors, and other components to get hotter than before, comfortable that it won’t cause long-lasting damage. But the significantly improved overall results speak for themselves: The 60-mph times ranged from 2.7 to 3.8 seconds, and the quarter-mile passes from 11.3 to 12.9 seconds. Across all 15 runs, the average time in both metrics dropped by a massive two seconds compared to our previous test.
That’s a staggering gain in performance from twiddling a few lines of code, and we continue to marvel at the breadth and depth of the changes Tesla is making with its continual software updates.

Specifications

Specifications
2020 Tesla Model S Performance
VEHICLE TYPE front- and mid-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door hatchback
PRICE AS TESTED $108,690 (base price: $96,190)
MOTORS front: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 275 hp, 310 lb-ft; rear: induction AC, 503 hp, 531 lb-ft; 98.0-kWh lithium-ion battery pack
TRANSMISSION single-speed direct drive
CHASSIS Suspension (F/R): multilink/multilinkBrakes (F/R): 14.0-in vented disc/14.4-in vented discTires: Michelin Pilot Sport 4S, F: 245/35R-21 96Y TO R: 265/35R-21 101Y TO
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 116.5 inLength: 195.7 inWidth: 77.3 inHeight: 56.9 inPassenger volume: 95 ft3Cargo volume: 26 ft3Curb weight: 4998 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 2.4 sec100 mph: 6.1 sec130 mph: 11.4 sec150 mph: 19.3 sec1/4 mile: 10.6 sec @ 126 mphTop speed (mfr’s claim): 163 mphStanding-start accel times omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.
EPA FUEL ECONOMY Combined/city/highway: 97/98/96 MPGeRange: 326 miles

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

The S-class is the brand flagship, but the E-class is the core model for Mercedes-Benz, a car that has to work equally well as a twee-engined Parisian taxi or a twin-turbo V-8 AMG battle wagon. That’s why Benz’s engineers and designers are always careful with a redesign. The E-class needs to cater to the preferences of a traditional owner base and simultaneously serve as a showcase for the brand’s abilities. That’s no easy task, and they have gone to great lengths to get it right with this mid-term facelift of the 2021 W213 E-class.
From the outside, the facelift is so extensive that you could almost call this car a new generation. While the doors, roof, and glass sections remain identical, the headlights and front grille have been thoroughly restyled, looking more swept back and stretched taut. The rear actually features an entirely new look, with the taillights now horizontal instead of vertical. Which, ironically, brings the E-class in line with famed designer Bruno Sacco’s “vertical model affinity,” which dictated that a similar design language should be followed across the lineup. All Mercedes sedans now have horizontal taillights, with the exception of the soon-to-be-replaced C-class.

View Photos

Mercedes-Benz

Up front, the E-class comes with a number of different grilles, only one of which still keeps the upright star on the hood. We are particularly fond of this traditional look, but we suspect a far greater number of customers will opt for the AMG Line grille with a central star. The actual AMG models, the E53 and E63, feature a front end that looks like it was grafted from the AMG GT, and the All-Terrain brings the Audi Allroad faux off-road treatment to the wagon. All trims except for the traditional “luxury” grill feature bulges on the hood that Benz refers to as “power domes.”

2021 Mercedes E-Class Is Refreshed, Adds Hybrid

2021 Mercedes E-Class Has Sensitive Steering Wheel

While the body modifications are impossible to miss, changes to the interior are more limited. The analog instrumentation disappears, replaced by two 12.3-inch screens. And the console rotary knob makes way for a more contemporary-looking touchpad. However, our test car was still fitted with the previous system, and we hear Daimler is considering giving customers a choice between the systems. We strongly encourage them to do so, since the old setup is far easier to use than the new one. That’s because the large rotary knob engages with precision and a delicate click, allowing you to move to the desired map size, screen icon, or radio station with precision. The haptic touchpad, on the other hand, needs to be operated like a cell phone, and the constant swiping, pinching, and spreading almost never leads to the desired result without corrections and distraction. Of course, you can always use the improved voice-recognition system or use the central screen as a touchscreen, but why mess with a system that works?
With the exception of the touchpad, the MBUX system does have some advantages over the previous system. It’s quicker, and it offers quite a few more functions, like the augmented reality navigation setting that indicates turns by displaying virtual arrows over a real-time camera feed of the road in front of you. That trick is good enough to make you forego Waze, sometimes.

View Photos

Mercedes-Benz

The interior remains altogether elegant and sumptuous, characterized by tasteful combinations of wood, metal, and leather. The frameless rearview mirror looks elegant, and the vents and switches operate with typical Mercedes precision. Fit and finish are impeccable, as they should be in this class. And we appreciate the fact that the E-class maintains its own somewhat opulent style, as opposed to the cold futurism that dominates the cockpit of an Audi A6.
Though you wouldn’t guess it from the horsepower number or displacement, a lot has changed under the hood, with the old twin-turbo 3.0-liter V-6 making way for a turbocharged 3.0-liter straight-six. Output remains identical at 362 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque, but the new powertrain is superior for two reasons. First, it includes an electric motor (basically, a beefy starter/generator called EQ Boost) that can produce up to 21 extra horsepower and 184 extra pound-feet of torque. Using a 48-volt electrical architecture, the electric motor helps swell the torque curve while the turbo spools up, improving response time. And second, a straight-six defined some of the classic E-classes for the same reason it makes sense now: Compared to the old V-6, the inline engine is noticeably more refined, with ultra-silky sound and vibration characteristics. Even when pushed to the redline, it emits little more than a purr.

View Photos

Mercedes-Benz

A nine-speed automatic transmission is standard, as is all-wheel drive. Thus powered, the E450 charges to 60 mph in a Mercedes-estimated 4.9 seconds, one-tenth of a second quicker than the outgoing model. Top speed will be governed at 130 mph, but we can attest that the identically powered European-market E450 reaches a governed 155 mph with ease and with a considerable margin above that, were it allowed to go faster. We regret to inform you that Daimler won’t offer any of the excellent four- and six-cylinder diesel engines on the United States market. They are clean and ultra-economical, and they could help restore diesel’s reputation here.
While the standard suspension imbues the E-class with a serene ride, there’s an optional three-chamber air suspension that’s even more cushy. In the non-AMG versions, the suspensions are on the slightly softer side, complemented by precise but pleasantly low-effort steering. When asked to, the E450 can dance through the corners with ease, but its real domain is effortless long-distance cruising.
The E450 4Matic will be priced starting just above $60,000 when it hits the market late this year. It will be joined by the entry level E350, powered by a 255-horsepower 2.0-liter four; the AMG E53 with its electrically boosted 429-horsepower 3.0-liter straight-six; and the 603-horsepower, 4.0-liter V-8-powered AMG E63 S. You won’t see that one working as a Parisian taxi.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Mercedes-Benz E450 4Matic Sedan
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
BASE PRICE (C/D EST) $63,000
ENGINE TYPEturbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement 183 in3, 3000 cm3Power 362 hp @ 6100 rpmTorque 369 lb-ft @ 1600 rpm
TRANSMISSION 9-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 115.7 inLength: 194.5 inWidth: 73.7 inHeight: 57.8 inCurb weight: 4300 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST) 60 mph: 4.5 sec100 mph: 11.3 sec1/4 mile: 13.1 secTop speed: 130 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST) Combined/city/highway: 23/20/28 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

There seems little doubt that luxury SUVs with big, thirsty engines are on borrowed time. Nobody needs the combination of a driving position with a six-foot-high eye line and a 542-hp V-8, but that doesn’t stop it from being compelling, particularly when you’re the one driving it.
Bentley Bentayga sales have grown steadily throughout its lifespan, and last year it made up 45 percent of Bentley’s global production. But this segment is not just Bentley’s anymore. The Rolls-Royce Cullinan and Lamborghini Urus are players, and the Aston Martin DBX is about to launch. To keep up, the Bentayga has been given a substantial visual makeover, although its core mechanical package remains virtually unchanged.

HIGHS: Easier on the eyes, improved infotainment system, V-8 is as impressive as before.

View Photos

Bentley

Bentley gave its designers more leeway. There’s a broader radiator grille and “cut crystal” LED headlights that look similar to the Continental and Flying Spur’s lights. The headlights are positioned an inch higher than before. but the overall effect is intended to—as Bentley’s design team put it—lower the front end’s visual mass. We can say that it looks much better. The changes haven’t transformed it into a classical beauty, but it is now less of a Doric temple and more of a Palladian mansion.

2021 Bentley Bentayga Gets a New Look

2021 Bentley Bentayga Gets More Than a Makeover

Changes to the rear end are more substantial. Immediately apparent are the new wraparound liftgate and a switch to oval-shaped lights. We had no substantial issue with the previous Range Rover-ish rear end, but the new look is certainly more in keeping with the company’s other models. Despite the larger liftgate, the size and shape of the cargo area itself—defined by the structure—remains unchanged. There are options for four seats, five seats, or even a folding third row, should you want your Bentley to double as a minivan.

View Photos

Bentley

The few alterations in the cabin have, for the most part, addressed the weaknesses of the old Bentayga. There are more charging ports—up to six USB-C outlets—as rich people’s kids don’t just throw away their gadgets when the battery dies. There is also an updated infotainment system that has a higher-resolution 10.9-inch central touchscreen, backed by quicker-acting hardware and an easier-to-use interface. Sadly, the screen doesn’t revolve around into the instrument panel like the one in the Continental and Flying Spur. The revised dashboard has also brought a new central air outlet that features plastic directional vanes. We preferred the metal and round-shaped vents of the old car. A new front-seat design slightly increases knee room in the second row, which remains a fine place to spend time in either four- or five-seat configurations.

LOWS: No substantive mechanical revisions, less agile than the Aston Martin DBX or Lamborghini Urus.

While there are plenty of software changes, there aren’t many mechanical changes. The most significant physical difference is that the rear track has been widened by 0.8 inches. Both the 542-hp V-8 and the 626-hp W-12 Speed will carry over unchanged in the United States market. We’re fortunate, as the 12 has been quietly dropped in most territories. A V-6 plug-in hybrid will be launched later as well.

View Photos

Bentley

We drove the V-8 version in England over a mix of highway, urban grind, and on some of the Welsh mountain roads used by many of the United Kingdom’s chassis development engineers. The Bentayga puts on a good show in all of those environments. It’ll cruise with unerring stability and in silence, even at a rapid pace. We measured a hushed 65 decibels at 70 mph, and it doesn’t seem much louder at triple digits. At slower speeds, it takes on the feel of an oversized luxury limousine, pliant and unfazed by Blighty’s oversized “traffic calming” bumps.
On twisting, cresty Welsh asphalt, the Bentley managed to keep its nearly 5500 pounds under tight control. The combination of pillowy air suspension and the optional 48-volt electric anti-roll system do a fine job of providing a Bentley-grade ride while keeping the car flat under hard cornering loads. It’s didn’t feel as good at defusing a switchback road as the Aston DBX we recently drove in similar conditions, but it is impressively athletic for something so grand and stately.

View Photos

Bentley

Although unchanged, the Bentayga’s twin-turbo V-8 is also worthy of praise for its combination of lag-free, low-rev muscle and a genuine enthusiasm to stretch all the way to its 6700-rpm limiter. We tested the new V-8 Bentayga in Michigan where it ran to 60 in 3.3 seconds and through the quarter in 11.9 seconds at 114 mph. That’s quicker than both the W-12 we tested four years ago and the last Bentayga V-8 we had at the test track. It sounds great while doing all of this, especially when being run hard. Again, it was better than the W-12 and with a more satisfying top-end rasp than the fine-sounding AMG-sourced V-8 in the Aston DBX. The Bentayga V-8 has the same 542 horsepower as the Aston, but Bentley’s 4.0-liter makes more torque at lower revs.
The V-8 has more than enough torque to effectively disguise the fact the Bentayga’s eight-speed autobox isn’t the snappiest shifter. This is especially true when operated in manual mode where it seemed to struggle with requests from the steering-wheel paddle for more than one downshift at a time, something the quicker twin-clutch ‘box in the Continental and Flying Spur has no issues with.
Both V-8 and W-12 Speed versions of the revised Bentayga will reach the U.S. by the end of the year, likely with a relatively modest spec-adjusted price increase over the outgoing SUV’s roughly $175,000 base price. For that near $200,000 sum, you’re going to get a much better-looking Bentayga.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Bentley Bentayga V-8
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE AS TESTED (C/D EST) $215,000 (base price: $177,500)
ENGINE TYPE twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement 244 in3, 3996 cm3Power 542 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque 568 lb-ft @ 1960 rpm
TRANSMISSION 8-speed automatic
CHASSIS Suspension (F/R): multilink/multilinkBrakes (F/R): 15.7-in vented disc/15.0-in vented discTires: Pirelli P Zero, 285/40R-22 (110Y) B
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 117.9 inLength: 201.8 inWidth: 78.7 inHeight: 68.6 inPassenger volume: 109 ft3Cargo volume: 17 ft3Curb weight: 5470 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 3.3 sec100 mph: 8.9 sec130 mph: 16.1 sec150 mph: 23.7 secRolling start, 5–60 mph: 4.6 secTop gear, 30–50 mph: 2.7 secTop gear, 50–70 mph: 3.2 sec1/4 mile: 11.9 sec @ 114 mphTop speed (mfr’s claim): 180 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 161 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 324 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 gStanding-start accel times omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.
C/D FUEL ECONOMY Observed: 24 mpgHighway range: 540 miles
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST) Combined/city/highway: 17/14/23 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

View Photos
Ron de RiemackerCar and Driver

From the May 1987 issue of Car and Driver.
If you’re looking for precision and sophistication in a car, don’t even consider the Buick GNX. In a world of sleek shapes and refined manners, the GNX is an axe­-wielding barbarian laying waste to everything in its path. For better or worse, though, the forces of civilization are winning: the GNX and its Regal Grand National stablemate won’t be pounding the streets to rubble much longer. The rear-wheel-drive Regal will be put to rest at the end of 1987, and its turbocharged and intercooled 3.8-liter V-6 will start pushing up daisies as well.

Best Muscle Cars for $10K: Window Shop with C/D

Camaro ZL1 1LE vs. Challenger SRT vs. Shelby GT500

Quickest American Muscle Cars, Ever

As a farewell to the rear-drive incarnation of the Regal, which has been around in its current form since 1978, some of the drag racers at Buick decided to give the Grand National one last tweak before relegating it to the boneyard of automotive history—a swan song, if you will, one last meteoric burst of power before the flame dies for good. The plan is to produce only 500 GNXs (in any color you want, as long as it’s black), so if your order is not yet in, forget about being the original owner of one of these brutes.
To expedite the procedure of pegging the needle completely off the Richter scale, Buick turned the GNX project over to the Automobile Specialty Company (a division of ASC) and McLaren Engines. Both companies are located in Michigan, and both have worked with Buick before. ASC was largely responsible for the 1982 to ’85 Riviera convertible, and McLaren has been associated with various Buick racing-engine projects.

View Photos

Ron de RiemackerCar and Driver

McLaren started with the Grand National’ s turbocharged and intercooled V-6, which already produced 245 horsepower (or more, but 245 is Buick’s modest claim), massaging it until 300 horses showed up on the dynamometer. The modifications are straightforward hot-rod stuff: ported and polished heads, a larger turbocharger with a ceramic turbine wheel, a dual exhaust system, a recalibrated PROM (programmable read-only memory) chip for the engine-control computer, and an insulated intercooler outlet tube, which keeps the temperature of the pressurized air from rising after it leaves the intercooler. Maximum boost has been increased to 16 psi, two more than the Grand National’s allotment, but a circuit in the engine-control computer still shuts off the fuel flow at 124 mph. The engine has enough grunt to push the GNX much faster, but Buick engineers feel the chassis wouldn’t tolerate much more speed without taking to the air like a Frisbee. The rest of the engine has been left untouched, a testament to Buick’s confidence in the soundness of the basic design.

View Photos

Ron de RiemackerCar and Driver

ASC’s modifications include a new valve body for the automatic transmission. It keeps the shift points at the redline and makes downshifts feel as if anvils were clanking together somewhere. In order to keep all the newfound power from torquing the live rear axle into new and exciting positions, ASC substituted a short torque arm and a Panhard rod for the Grand National’s pair of diagonal locating links. In our prototype test car, these components were attached to a massive machined-aluminum housing, which replaced the normal differential cover. (In production, a less expensive casting will do the job.) In addition, a new frame crossmember provides the forward attachment point for the torque arm. The front suspension is unchanged; considering that it will probably spend most of its life in the air, there was no point in spending much money on it.

View Photos

Ron de RiemackerCar and Driver

For those times when all four wheels are touching the ground, Buick took the precaution of upgrading the rubber to 16-inch Goodyear Eagle VR50s: 245/50VR-16s at the front, 255/50VR-16s at the rear. On our test car, the wheels were bolt-together modular alloy designs, but the production cars will get cast and welded alloy wheels from a Japanese manufacturer. New fiberglass fender flares keep the body from slicing the huge tires to ribbons.

View Photos

Ron de RiemackerCar and Driver

The last Grand National we tested generated some impressive numbers. It ran to 60 mph in 4.9 seconds and clicked through the quarter-mile in 13.9 seconds at 98 mph. The GNX, with 55 more horses and an additional 25 pounds of mass, rockets to 60 in 4.7 seconds and squirts through the quarter-mile in 13.5 seconds at 102 mph. In zero-to-60 performance, the only car available in the U.S. that matches the Buick is the Callaway Twin-Turbo Corvette, and the only one that beats it is the Porsche 911 Turbo, at 4.6 seconds.
Although the GNX’s performance in the drag-race mode is measurably improved, the new suspension pieces do little to help the old sled’s handling. At 0.80 g, it has respectable skidpad grip, but no more than the Grand National we tested last year. In the real world, when the road deviates from straight ahead or its surface becomes rougher than a pool table, the GNX rattles and bounces like bolts in a blender. Clearly, the engine and the chassis are in separate leagues. What we have here is a great powerhouse of a motor looking for a nice place to live.

View Photos

Ron de RiemackerCar and Driver

In dazzling contrast to the blacked-out exterior, the interior of the GNX is a festival of chrome and bright metal. At least the instrument cluster has been improved, with non-glitzy Stewart-Warner gauges for speed, rpm, boost, oil pressure, engine temperature, and fuel level. The seats are firm and supportive and are covered in a grippy gray fabric.
The GNX may be unsophisticated, but a lot of people with fond memories of “the good old days” will find its throaty voice and squalling rubber to be exactly the sort of aural gratification they’ve been missing lately. We have no doubt that at least 500 such people will be willing to pay $27,000 for this slice of automotive history. And probably a hundred times that number will mourn the passing of the Grand National and the GNX.

View Photos

Ron de RiemackerCar and Driver

We’ll do a little mourning ourselves—not so much for the car as for the engine that powers it. If we were Buick, we’d set the hyperactive V-6 on a stand and build a car of comparable talents around it. This is one orphan that cries out for adoption.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
1987 Buick GNX
VEHICLE TYPEfront-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE AS TESTED (C/D EST)$27,000
ENGINE TYPEturbocharged and intercooled pushrod 12-valve V-6, iron block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 231 in3, 3791 cm3Power: 300 hp @ 4400 rpmTorque: 380 lb-ft @ 2600 rpm
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSISSuspension (F/R): control arms/live axleBrakes (F/R): 10.5-in vented disc/9.5-in drumTires: Goodyear Eagle VR50, F: P245/50VR-16 R: P255/50VR-16
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 108.1 inLength: 200.6 in Width: 75.5 in  Height: 54.6 inPassenger volume: 98 ft3Trunk volume: 16 ft3Curb weight: 3545 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 4.7 sec100 mph: 12.9 sec120 mph: 24.7 secTop gear, 30–50 mph: 3.0 secTop gear, 50–70 mph: 3.8 sec1/4 mile: 13.5 sec @ 102 mphTop speed: 124 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 186 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.80 g
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCombined/city/highway: 20/17/25 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