Evelyn Reynolds

It’s been more than 20 years since Audi introduced the S3, a high-performance version of the A3. Back then, its 20-valve 1.8-liter four-banger made 207 horsepower, a number that seems quaint today. While that original S3 never made it to the United States, we did get the 292-hp S3 in 2015, a punchy and attractive sports sedan capable of hitting 60 in 4.4 seconds. We were so smitten, we wondered why anyone would spend more for the slower S4 sedan.
A new S3 has arrived in Europe, and we took the first-to-market four-door Sportback hatchback for a drive. Audi won’t be bringing the Sportback stateside, like the last generation. We’ll only get the S3 sedan, and it’ll come sometime in 2021.

View Photos

Audi

2022 Audi S3 Has Over 300 Horsepower, Looks Sharp

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

The S3 has truly grown up. It weighs a bit more than before at about 3300 pounds, and power is up from the last-gen’s 292 horsepower to 306 from Audi and Volkswagen’s turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four. As smooth here as it was in the previous S3, the engine makes 295 pound-feet of torque from 2000 to 4750 rpm and maximum power from 5450 to 6500 rpm. Power is seemingly right there whenever you hit the accelerator, and there’s a lovely snarl that comes into the cabin. The S3 builds speed with ease and confidence.
Audi claims that the sprint from zero to 62 mph takes a mere 4.8 seconds. We’re guessing that estimate will prove to be a few tenths conservative than what we’ll extract from the sedan when we test it next year. Should you want more power, a new RS3 is in the works, and its turbocharged 2.5-liter five-cylinder will produce more than 400 horsepower.

View Photos

Audi

All-wheel drive and a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission are standard. The six-speed manual offered in the past is gone, even in Europe. The S3’s all-wheel-drive system uses a multi-plate clutch to manage the torque distribution between the front and rear axles.
On tight, curvy roads, the S3 shines. It is easy to go fast in this car. The electrically assisted power steering is crisp and on the slightly lighter side, turn-in is aggressive, and the limits of adhesion are extraordinarily high. An 18-inch wheel with 225/40R-18 tires is standard, and 235/35R-19 tires are optional. Our S3 wore the 19-inch wheel option, which offers a remarkably harmonious compromise between agility and comfort. The softness of the A3 is gone, although the Comfort setting turns even the S3 into a very comfortable long-distance cruiser.

View Photos

Audi

The interior of the new S3 is spacious, with ample room both up front and in the rear. We have praised the materials and workmanship in the A3, but the S3, which will start at about $45,000 when it hits the U.S., isn’t sufficiently differentiated from the less-expensive A3. While we like details such as the frameless mirrors and the stitching on the instrument panel, the hard plastic around the air vents looks out of place. And the shifter paddles on the steering wheel feel flimsy, with too little travel and a lack of feedback.
The exterior design is sporty and attractive, but the S3 is fitted with a number of faux air vents. The Audi S3’s segment is expanding. Mercedes-AMG offers two sedans, the A35 and the CLA35. BMW rolled out the M235i Gran Coupe this year. Cadillac’s excellent CT4-V’s longitudinal engine and rear-drive layout is a standout against this class of transversely mounted all-wheel-drive machines. If the lack of an S3 hatch is holding you back, a new VW Golf R should arrive stateside in late 2021 and is expected to share the new S3’s mechanicals. We’ll have to wait a bit longer to test out the S3 sedan, but our time with the Sportback leaves few doubts that another great S3 is on its way.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Audi S3 Sportback
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door hatchback
BASE PRICE (GERMANY) $47,500
ENGINE TYPE turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement 121 in3, 1984 cm3Power 306 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque 295 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
TRANSMISSION 7-speed dual-clutch automatic
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 103.5 inLength: 171.3 inWidth: 71.5 inHeight: 56.6 inCargo volume: 12 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 355 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST) 60 mph: 4.5 sec100 mph: 11.9 sec1/4 mile: 13.2 secTop speed: 155 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST) Combined/city/highway: 24/22/28 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

The biggest problem with the Aston Martin DB5 Goldfinger Continuation is always going to be one of discipline. The stoplight that stays red too long, the pedestrian who steps out without looking, the bully in the SUV that cuts you off—how long could you resist the temptation to deploy the twin .303-caliber machine-guns? Similarly, could you stave off the urge to deploy a smoke screen, or even an oil slick, in the face of a determined tailgater? What about the ability to instantly switch license plates before (or after) committing a moving traffic violation? “Me, officer? No, it must have been that other Silver Birch DB5.”
Unlikely as it seems, we are suffering from a confusing surfeit of James Bond-inspired DB5 replicas. Back in February, we told you about the carbon-fiber-bodied stunt version that was created for the latest outing in the long-running franchise, the delayed No Time To Die. Despite looking almost identical and also being produced by Aston Martin, the DB5 Goldfinger is very different. It’s also way cooler—because of gadgets.

View Photos

Aston Martin

Aston Martin Reopens, Building Goldfinger DB5 Cars

Aston DB5 Continuation Has Working Bond Gadgets

Car and Driver Tests James Bond’s Rides

Speaking of gadgets, it has pretty much a full set. The heritage Aston Martin Works division has followed up its official limited-run recreations of the DB4 GT and DB4 GT Zagato with a similarly perfect replica of the iconic DB5 that was created for the third official James Bond film, 1964’s Goldfinger. This was the first time that Britain’s least-secret secret agent, then played by Sean Connery, got to drive an Aston Martin. Thanks to the vivid imagination of production designer Ken Adam, it was also the first time 007 drove a car packed with a variety of lethal weaponry and defenses, something that immediately became a hallmark for the long-running franchise.
The DB5 in Bond’s arsenal for Goldfinger included twin Browning machine-guns that deployed from behind the front turn signals, rotating license plates, front and rear bumper rams, a bulletproof metal screen that rose up behind the rear window, dispensers for smokescreens and oil slicks, radar, and what seemed at the time like an impossible futuristic idea: an in-car telephone headset. The secret agent’s ride also had rotary tire slashers that seemed to somehow deploy from within its wire wheels and even, most famously, a passenger-side ejector seat that Connery uses to rid himself of a gun-wielding thug with exceptionally poor reactions.
Recreating most of these features for regular use proved a serious technical challenge, as the gadgets used on the cars used for filming were theatrical props. Chris Corbould, the Oscar-winning special-effects designer who has now worked on 15 Bond films, led a team to create replicas of the original alterations. Aston then worked out how to package them within what is, beneath the modifications and gizmos, an exact copy of an early DB5.

View Photos

Aston Martin

Some changes had to be made. The original replica machine-guns fired pyrotechnic blanks, which would have required reloading and which also sound exactly like real automatic gunfire—a characteristic that may have caused owners some legal difficulties. The Continuation’s barrels simulate fire with a mechanized recoil action and ultra-bright LEDs, but their loudspeaker soundtrack (taken straight from Goldfinger) is much more subdued than an actual Browning .303 would be. The oil slick is actually water, and the tire slashers come in a presentation case and can’t be fitted to the car, due to a corporate desire not to abet actual murder. And although the red button within the flip-open gear shifter is present, there isn’t an ejector seat on the passenger side, not even an under-seat cattle prod. (The asymmetric sunroof aperture is still present, though.) The gadgets can be operated by a control panel between the seats or, to better appreciate them when the car is stationary, through a remote control pack.
Another small issue is the one indicated by the proviso that has been scrupulously added to every official release about the Goldfinger Continuation: “Please note, this car is not road legal.” The fact that we drove the prototype on a route made up of some of England’s more picturesque public highways indicates there is some wriggle room in that restriction. Two companies in Britain are already offering to officially register Aston’s earlier Continuation models for street use in Europe. But unless you can find and exploit some serious motor-vehicle-department loopholes, it seems unlikely you will be able to enjoy this particular DB5 in the United States on anything other than your expansive private estate.

View Photos

Aston Martin

And that would seem to largely miss the point. Because while the gadgets are fun to play with, the core appeal of the Goldfinger is definitely the box-fresh DB5 that gets to haul them all around. This isn’t a restomod; beyond changes to accommodate the toys, nothing has been changed. So, the 4.0-liter straight-six engine breathes noisily through triple carburetors, the feeble ventilation system bringing the enticing smell of gasoline under gentle use. The steering is both unassisted and low geared, heavy around a parking lot but becoming almost too light at speed. And the chassis manages to be too hard and too soft, crashing over some apparently minor imperfections but delivering lurid body roll under even modest cornering loads. Which, you soon realize, are all the period-sized Avon Turbospeed tires are capable of handling. Small wonder Sean Connery had so much difficulty outrunning Goldfinger’s goons in their wimpy W120 Mercedes 180s.
None of this matters in the slightest. This is an entirely authentic DB5 driving experience. The flaws both add character and prove originality. They also serve to emphasize some of the DB5’s other strengths. The seating position is high and requires the driver to squeeze around the vast wooden-rimmed steering wheel, but there can be few better automotive views than the panorama through the wraparound windscreen and over the voluptuous curves of the hood, a full set of chrome-bezeled Smiths instruments in the foreground. Performance is plenty brisk thanks to 290 horsepower and 288 pound-feet of torque, the big six feeling impressively strong in its broad midrange and generating more than enough acceleration to easily outpace modern traffic. The five-speed manual gearbox is another highlight. Aston got ZF to dust off the original drawings to produce a new batch. But the gearchanges are now crisper and better-feeling than the vague shift actions common at the time.

View Photos

Aston Martin

Despite its devotion to speed, the DB5 is also a thoroughly nice way to travel not very quickly. Bond’s Aston comes from an era when cruising comfort and speed were prioritized over outright dynamic performance. At 60 mph with the electric windows lowered to dispel the heat being produced by the big engine, the cabin is remarkably calm, much more so than it would be in a modern alternative. This is one of those cars that delivers fun without breaking a single speed limit.
The accusation of having more money than sense is normally applied as an insult, yet the implied equation merely states that cash needs to outplay caution. You would have to be obscenely rich to even consider spending more than the $3.5 million Aston will charge for a DB5 Goldfinger Continuation. But for those who are sufficiently loaded and have scratched every other automotive whim, buying James Bond’s Aston Martin seems to us like an entirely justified thing to do.

Specifications

Specifications
2020 Aston Martin DB5 Goldfinger Continuation
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, 2-door coupe
BASE PRICE $3,523,677
ENGINE TYPE DOHC 12-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, 3×2 carburetorsDisplacement 244 in3, 3996 cm3Power 290 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque 288 lb-ft @ 3850 rpm
TRANSMISSION 5-speed manual
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 98.0 inLength: 180.2 inWidth: 66.6 inHeight: 53.1 inTrunk volume: 11 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 3850 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST) 60 mph: 7.3 sec1/4 mile: 15.1 secTop speed: 145 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST) Combined/city/highway: 14/12/18 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 February 1989 issue of Car and Driver.
There’s a sequence in Out of Africa in which Robert Redford buzzes a clearing in a biplane, thumps down, and taxis up to his startled paramour, Meryl Streep. Delighted, she marvels at his unexpected arrival at the controls of an airplane:
“Where did you get it?”
“Mombasa.”
“When did you learn to fly?”
“Yesterday.”

DICK KELLEY

Well, hedgehoppers, that’s Nissan. It, too, just learned to fly. Or relearned. From the Maxima (C/D September 1988) to the 300ZX (check here next month) to this 240SX, all of Nissan’s new fliers tower with talent—as its legendary 240Z did under the Datsun banner two decades ago.
In 1969 the original Z-car, quick and light and looking right, captured the imaginations of the world’s sports-car fanatics. In a creative coup, Nissan perfectly conceived its two-seater coupe for its perfectly perceived market. The 240Z took flight with a near-ballistic rush that left its foes rocking in their wheel chocks.
Yet from the mid-seventies to the mid-eighties, Nissan squandered its well-deserved dynamic reputation. Its sporty models grew glitzy, and its lesser models became mundane. Meanwhile, Honda blitzed new trails in excellence, Mazda licked the edges of the performance envelope, and Toyota hung on as Japan’s biggest car company. By 1988, Nissan had fallen from second place among imports in U.S. car sales. Luckily, new Nissan management had already begun to trim its lineup of flabby underpinnings and blasé bodywork.

DICK KELLEY

This is now, and the 240SX is Nissan. The new 240, though not directly related to the original, is also a car to lust after—unlike the 200SX it replaces. The 240’s trappings, from its voluptuous lines to its worthy innards, showcase Nissan’s reborn enthusiasm. A trip in the SX proves that, just as with the original 240Z, a flight in a well-trimmed craft brings its pilot great joy.
The 240SX steps up to the needs of the 1990s with all the right stuff. It contains a new, naturally aspirated, twelve-valve, 2.4-liter four-cylinder instead of the 200SX’s naturally aspirated V-6 or four-cylinder turbo. The SX handsomely houses the new engine amid lighter weight and better handling; Nissan’s engineers may have relearned flying overnight, but they weren’t born yesterday.
Nissan’s new managers cleverly insisted on retaining the 200SX’s basic rear-drive layout. The 240 makes the most of it with a new rear suspension. Its multilink design offers welcome self-stabilizing characteristics and precise handling—areas where the 200’s higher weight, narrower tracks, and less accomplished tires showed a weaker grip on theory and road alike. The new suspension design—similar to that finalized for the next 300ZX—easily provides almost any mix of agility and stability that Nissan cares to dial in. It delivers increasingly benign toe-in as cornering loads grow. It minimizes squat, lift, camber change, and jacking for flatter handling without stiffer springs and bushings. The 240’s front suspension retains the 200’s strut layout but includes more anti-dive.

View Photos

DICK KELLEY

Anybody seeking joy in an automobile’s handling, meaning all of us with hands caressing the wheel and feet hot to trot for thrills underfoot, will find exceptional dynamics in the SX—perfect for a lively model that Nissan flatly proclaims a sports car.
Like the old 240Z, the SX gives a terrain-hugging ride but masterful control. Like such recent fighter-tough, society-slick fliers as the BMW 750iL, the Peugeot 405Mi16, and the Plymouth Laser and Mitsubishi Eclipse turbos, the 240SX feels lighter than the scales say it should. It weighs 2798 pounds, but its deft controls and cheery bent for changing direction belie its mass, subtracting about 400 pounds from its feel.
Until you take the controls, the only clues that times have changed at Nissan lie in the 240SX’s bodywork. It comes as either a fastback, the SE, or a blocky notchback, the XE. Nissan styling clinics show public preference split 50-50.

DICK KELLEY

Both cars wear four-wheel disc brakes, but the fastback will soon offer an ABS system. Our SX was equipped with a sport package, optional only on the fastback. It includes fore-and-aft spoilers, a firmer suspension, alloy wheels, and tires fattened from 195/60R-15 all-weather skins to 205/60HR-15 performance rubber with better dry grip. From the same option box: cruise control and a leather-wrapped shifter and wheel.
Every 240 turns up with linear rack-and-pinion power steering. Nissan keeps communications between car and driver open and direct. No variable-assist or variable-ratio monkey-motion muddies the messages. Wound tight, the 240’s steering produces a snug 30.8-foot turning circle, good for superb tuckability in gridlock wars and parking snarls. Yet the guileless steering and almost unflappable chassis allow exhibitions of gripping behavioral magic. Blend this natural gift of grab with 0.83-g skidpad cornering, thanks to Bridgestone Potenza RE88s, and the 240SX helps you look like the most masterful conducteur de l’auto this side of Alain Prost.
Nissan fits in the SX almost every control that a master driver, an advanced amateur, or a really rank beginner could want. The dash layout, simple and thor0ugh, surpasses most others in both its appearance and its function. Barely a stretch of the driver’s mind or muscle distracts from the driving. A digital speedometer with head-up display lurks on the options list, but bypass it for thefine standard analog array-whose largetach and speedometer dials dominate the central bulge of the instrument pod.Small coolant-temp and fuel-level gauges nest in the pod’s outer corners.They fill perfectly the viewing space framed by the sport wheel-whose horizontal spokes join the rim a bit too low for best hand placement. Embedded in the wheel are membrane buttons for de-cently coordinated cruise controls,though the spoke-mounted buttons prove less handy than, say, Honda’s hub-mounted buttons or the stalk-activated designs from BMW and Mercedes-Benz.

DICK KELLEY

The 240’s console houses climate controls capable of all but rainmaking. Stereo components fill most of the leftover space above the snickety-snick five-speed stick or the lever for the optional four-speed automatic (whose gear ratios drew mixed reviews). Our SX’s radio fronted a clean layout and large soft-touch but-tons, but it didn’t pick up signals cleanly.As for onboard music, an optional Sony compact-disc player stood in for an also-optional cassette deck, but after hearing the four speakers’ poor AM/FM sound we didn’t bother trying any CDs. Still, based on Nissan’s studious attention to finer details in our prototype SX, we suspect the sound system in production-line 240s will not fall on its woofers.
The 240SX’s two-plus-two seating provides legroom for four if the two in back tape in at 24 inches head-to-toe and say “goo-goo” a lot. Up front, adults sit in a fashion more appropriate to front-cabin status. Despite supportive appearances, though, the deep buckets—even in their most upright position lean back quite far and offer so-so padding.Nissan, unlike most purveyors of automatic seatbelts, positions the inboard latches close beside the hips of front occupants, so you regain some support sacrificed by the lackluster seats. The backseat flops forward to add cargo length to the shallow hidden trunk, which stretches wider and longer than expected.
Braking performance also stretches long for a sporting car. The pedal feels fine during hard road driving, but all-out stops from 70 mph–even with consider-able pedal modulation-chew up 195feet. We anticipate shorter stops from SEs fitted with the promised ABS system.
The 2.4-liter SOHC four, with port fuel injection plus one exhaust and two intake valves per cylinder, growls out 140 hp. The 240SX equals the old V-6-powered 200SX’s 0-to-60-mph run of 8.6 seconds and zips a quarter-mile in
16.4 seconds at 83 mph. But soon there-after it quits abruptly: Nissan fits a top-speed governor to keep down buyers’ car-insurance costs. The power stops Iu!r-thunk! at a claimed 112 mph-though our 240SX took a nose dive at a true 107mph. Otherwise, the SX’s willing engine and slick body felt capable of knocking off 120 mph, its chassis even more.(Word is out-heh-heh-that snipping one engine-parameter wire disconnects the annoying cutout.)
Aiming to deliver 60,000 240SXs this year, Nissan pegs the base prices at$12,999 for the notchback and $13,199for the fastback-low bucks, but subject to added option costs. Moreover, several faster machines skulk on both sides of today’s exchange rates. Take the PlymouthLaser and Mitsubishi Eclipse turbo two-seaters: two seconds quicker from 0 to 50, about 35 mph faster up top, but barely costlier. Such machines may not keep a lid on running costs, and they will not bend into corners as rewardingly as the240SX, but you pays yer money and you takes yer turns as you please.
A note of guidance: Nissan insiders hint that an unrepentantly quick 240SX is well on the road to final development. The 240’s layout already seems so good that we humbly suggest a 50-percent power boost. Once and for all, Nissan, are you men or mice, ninjas or nice?

Specifications

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2 + 2 passenger, 3-door coupe
PRICE AS TESTED: $16,108
ENGINE TYPE: SOHC inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injection
Displacement: 146 cu in, 2389 ccPower: 140 hp @ 5600 rpmTorque: 152 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 5-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:Wheelbase: 97.4 inLength: 178.0 inWidth: 66.5 in Height: 50.8 inCurb weight: 2798 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:Zero to 30 mph: 2.6 secZero to 60 mph: 8.6 secZero to 90 mph: 20.0 secTop gear, 30-50 mph: 11.1 secTop gear, 50-70 mph: 11.4 secStanding ¼-mile: 16.4 @ 83 mphTop speed: 107 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 195 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.83 g
FUEL ECONOMY:EPA city/highway: 20/26 mpgC/D observed: 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 October 2006 issue of Car and Driver.
There’s been a lot of talk on internet chatrooms lately about whether the new AMG 6.2-liter naturally aspirated V-8 engine is an improvement over the supercharged 5.4-liter V-8 that was an AMG staple—particularly, if the new car is quicker or slower off the mark. Well, the answer is yes and no, at least on the evidence of the CLS63 AMG that we have been stylin’ in of late. The 6.2-liter V-8 makes 507 horsepower in the CLS, up from 469 hp in the old CLS55 AMG. Torque is down, though, from 516 pound-feet to 465 lb-ft. More power usually results in better top-end performance, whereas more torque normally means quicker mid-range and off-the-line acceleration.

The Best Sedans of 2020

Best Luxury SUVs in 2020 Ranked

Luxury Cars for $25,000: Window Shop With C/D

To a certain extent, that’s what our numbers show. The CLS63 gets to 60 mph from rest in a blistering 4.1 seconds, a tenth quicker than the CLS55, but is identical otherwise up to 120 mph and shares a 12.6-second quarter-mile time. The 30-to-50 and 50-to-70-mph figures show the benefits of the supercharged motor’s fatter torque curve (2.2 and 2.5 seconds, respectively, compared with 2.5 and 3.1 for the CLS63), while the extra top-end grunt of the 63 comes into play above 120 mph. By 150 mph, the CLS63 is ahead by almost a second and a half.
So, apart from marginally better performance away from a stop light and in go-to-jail-fast territory, what are the benefits of the new engine? Well, it sounds absolutely fantastic, especially as it nears the 7200-rpm redline. (Yeah, that’s right: a 6.2 liter V-8 that spins past seven grand.) The loud, guttural growl is a bit too intoxicating, because the desire to hear a blaring soundtrack makes it all too easy to stray into triple-digit temptation. It really does pickup and go past 100 mph.
The seven-speed automatic transmission is as smooth as a luxury-car salesperson, not to say that the old five-speeder was bad. More important, manual shifting is now effected by a pair of paddles on the back of the steering wheel—right for upshifts, left for down—in place of the buttons in the CLS55.
Other important mechanical changes are fitment of AMG’s new sport suspension and revised brakes. The vented and cross-drilled front rotors are now 14.2 inches in diameter (up from 14.0 inches) and the front calipers have six instead of eight pistons. At the back, there are 13.0-inch-diameter discs and four-piston calipers. The AMG suspension is a recalibrated version of Mercedes’ Airmatic air-spring setup, which works in conjunction with the so-called Adaptive Damping System. Just like the system in the E-class, it has driver selectable settings, none of which are perfect. The sportiest setting beats you up over bad pavement and the comfiest one doesn’t offer enough body control.
Still, the CLS63 has lots of grip, decent steering, and is very entertaining once the traction control is turned off and the throttle is mashed. It isn’t quite as sweet a chassis as a BMW M5’s, but the CLS has the advantage of a fine automatic transmission in place of the M5’s clunky Sequential Manual Gearbox and a torquier, more compelling engine. Only serious AMG-heads are going to be able to spot the difference between this one and the CLS55. Discreet 6.3 AMG badges on the flanks and tail are the only real external clues, while there is a new instrument cluster and a fabulous, race-car-like steering wheel. Otherwise, the gorgeous CLS shape and lush interior remain. Why mess with success?
The only real drawback of this car is the sticker: $95,575 base, with an as-tested price of $100,805. It’s a lot of dough, sure, but the combination of the CLS shape and the rocking new AMG powertrain make this is a sweet ride for the whiz-kids of this world.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2007 Mercedes-Benz CLS63 AMG
VEHICLE TYPE Front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED $100,805 (base price: $95,575)
ENGINE TYPE DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 379 in3, 6208 cm3Power (SAE net): 507 bhp @ 6800 rpmTorque (SAE net): 465 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm
TRANSMISSION 7-speed automatic with manumatic shifting
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 112.4 inLength: 194.0 inWidth: 73.7 inHeight: 54.7 inCurb weight: 4366 lb
C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 4.1 secZero to 100 mph: 9.8 secZero to 150 mph: 23.5 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 4.4 secStanding ¼-mile: 12.6 sec @ 114 mphTop speed (governor limited): 158 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 163 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g
FUEL ECONOMYEPA fuel economy, city/highway: 13/20 mpgC/D-observed fuel economy: 13 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 October 2005 issue of Car and Driver.
The obvious part of the formula is obviously far from new: Cram a big ol’ V-8 in there, make the car go faster. Detroit has been doing this since the ’60s. But what may not be so obvious is that there’s a big asterisk to the formula when you start applying it to a front-wheel-drive car. The footnote reads something like this: “Put enough power through a front-drive system, and the driver will find himself turning right or left when he was planning on straight ahead.”

Fastest Sedans in Lightning Lap History

Which Ultimate Pony Car Is the 1/4-Mile King?

Quickest American Muscle Cars, Ever

It’s called torque steer, and it’s the major limiting factor in front-drive performance cars. Despite various engineering advances, the problem persists in cars such as Acura’s otherwise superb TL, which sends 270 horsepower through a six-speed manual transmission to the front wheels via a helical limited-slip differential. But in the Grand Prix GXP, with more horsepower (303 at 5600 rpm) and a lot more torque (323 pound-feet at 4400 rpm), torque steer is not a serious issue. There are hints-a little tugging when the driver cracks the throttle at low speed-but no real wrestling.
How’d they do that? By adopting a measure no one else has ever put into production. More in a minute. But first, another front-engine, front-drive problem, one that’s even more chronic than torque steer. With a design that puts all the heavy powertrain hardware up front, front-drive cars invariably have a pronounced forward weight bias, 64/36 percent in this case. As a consequence, the front wheels carry more than their fair share of the car’s mass, diluting the ability of the tires to transmit steering inputs. Worse, the front tires are also required to transmit power to the pavement, and all things being equal, the poor things just can’t handle their multiple assignments as well as the front tires of rear-drive cars. The result is understeer. The faster the driver herds the car into a turn, the more it wants to go straight.

Highs: Mellow V-8 rumble, plentiful V-8 torque, excellent road manners.

Pontiac’s solution to these two inherent front-drive directional control problems-understeer and torque steer-is unique. Instead of four tires of equal size, the GXP has a lot more rubber up front than at the rear: Bridgestone Potenza RE050As, 255/45-18 front, 225/50-18 rear.
“We wanted a car to run with BMWs,” says program engineering manager Phil Minch. “But we were limited by the W-car architecture, in other words, by front-wheel drive.
“The rear end never lets go when you have the same size tires all around. So we put our computer guys on it, and they came back with a recommendation for a smaller rear tire, to give the car better balance.”
This is a radical departure from conventional wisdom, and the idea proved out in initial testing. But there was a nasty side effect: Increasing the contact patch at the front amplified torque steer. However, after experimenting with a number of different tires from a variety of manufacturers, Minch and company decided the problem lay in the tire’s construction-the way the plies were wrapped-and not the footprint. With sufficient application of power, the tire sidewalls distort, thus affecting directional stability.

AARON KILEY

Bridgestone, the supplier of choice, was initially reluctant to accept this theory, but when the GXP team achieved improved results using an off-the-shelf tire from another maker, the Bridgestone people got to work and developed a tire that delivered the desired performance.
Other elements of the GXP package include Bilstein monotube front struts–a first for a front-drive GM car, according to Minch–and forged aluminum 18-inch wheels (8.0-inch-wide front, 7.0 rear), a stouter rear anti-roll bar, and a 0.4-inch reduction in static ride height versus the old GTP Competition Group.
Still another challenge was fitting the 5.3-liter V-8 into an engine bay originally conceived for a transverse V-6. Although GM has flirted with this idea in the past–our man Csere drove a Chevy Lumina mule with V-8 power more than 10 years ago–it wasn’t as easy as simply greasing the thing up and cramming it in there. The powertrain troops had to develop a tidier version of the 5.3, achieved by creating a unique edition of the block with a shorter crank, a single-belt accessory drive, and a starter mounted on the transmission rather than on the engine block.
The net of the redesign was a reduction in overall length of “about an inch,” according to Minch, which was enough.
The transplant also required mods to the 4T65-E four-speed automatic to handle the extra torque and a three-point engine-mount system designed to damp the V-8’s torque rotation at full throttle.
Pared down, the 5.3 V-8 met the assembly parameters–it installs from beneath–and provided an extra payoff at the scales. The all-aluminum V-8 is actually lighter than the supercharged iron-block 3.8-liter from the old GTP.

Lows: Hints of torque steer, hefty curb weight, high steering effort at low speed.

But how does it stack up in terms of Pontiac’s BMW objective? Let’s be clear. This ain’t a BMW. It’s not as agile as the sports-sedan pacesetters from Bavaria, and even though the unique tire stagger puts the GXP’s responses much closer to neutral, the Pontiac’s defining trait is still mild understeer. The four-speed TAPshift manumatic is better than some we’ve experienced, leaving upshift decisions totally in the hands of the driver, but the transmission offers only four speeds to play with. The engine’s torque band is so broad, and the transmission’s up- and downshifting so prompt in full automatic mode, that the driver can achieve pretty much the same levels of haste by simply putting the lever in D and leaving it there.
That said, the GXP is not without some appealing traits. If it’s not quite BMW eager in transient response, it’s not too far off the curve, and if the GM Magnasteer II system is artificially heavy at low speeds, it’s quick (2.4 turns lock to lock) and accurate, with effort that lightens as velocities climb. The GXP turned in a ho-hum 0.82 g on the skidpad, but real-world grip feels better than that, and as Minch and his cohorts hoped, a driver can induce a little oversteer. And braking performance–174 feet from 70 mph, and zero fade–is on par for this class. The net is a forgiving and capable four-door, arguably the most entertaining sedan Pontiac has ever offered.
There are some interior elements that enhance the entertainment. The front buckets, for example, are close to BMW territory in comfort and support, and the grippy steering wheel and nicely sized shift buttons enhance the sense of driver involvement. The head-up display is effective for keeping track of speed without glancing down, and the center-dash info display even includes a g-meter. Unfortunately, the latter will only deliver its readings–accel, decel, and lateral–when the car is stopped. Thus, the driver can only see the peak numbers achieved during his most recent stretch of road, rather than what’s going on in real time. Minch admits the GXP team made the mistake of checking with the liability lawyers before programming the g-meter display.

The Verdict: A cool idea that would have been even cooler a decade earlier.

An intriguing footnote to this front-drive breakthrough is that it won’t be immediately applied to other GM offerings. The 2006 Chevy Impala SS, for example, gets the 5.3-liter V-8, but the package will use equal-size tires all around and won’t have the Bilsteins.
With an as-tested price of $31,135 (base, $29,995), the GXP is on a more or less equal price footing with some compelling competitors-the Acura TL, the BMW 325i, the Infiniti G35. And that adds up to a tough sell. But this is GM, remember, the discount leader. We checked the company’s latest sales ploy-everybody gets the GM employee discount-and came up with a GXP base of $24,696. At that price, this good-looking all-American is tough to resist.
Counterpoint
Here is a car that depicts the difference between soccer and football, between Peter Pan and Terry Bradshaw. The GXP has brute force that can be summoned instantly, a pugnacious snarl, and a chassis that didn’t go to Harvard. Very American, and very likable in a roughhouse, bawdy sort of way. If you wear your baseball cap backward, this Bud’s for you. Look for owners to drive by in the hip-hop position, heads behind the B-pillar. And yet the GXP corners and handles well, isn’t overly teched up like the Euros, looks bad-ass in black, and the price is right. It’s one of the most memorable sporting American sedans I’ve driven in a gawdawful long time. —Steve Spence
Skeptical is not a strong enough word to describe the brain waves circulating after taking in the GXP’s spec sheet: 303 horsepower driving which wheels, you say? And a four-speed automatic? A taller final drive actually makes the GXP civilized and not the supreme burnout machine I expected. This V-8 makes nothing but good noises and lots of torque, but how does gearing a car to go over 100 mph in second gear make sense? Come on, a closely spaced six-speed could have smoked the porky Hemi Charger. Five years ago, I think Pontiac would have been on to something. Nowadays, the similarly priced Charger R/T seems like a no-brainer. —Dave VanderWerp
In the early ’90s, I drove an experimental Chevy Lumina whose front wheels were powered by a Chevy V-8. I found it to be splendid. At long last GM has put that concept on sale with this GXP, and it still works. As it has for decades, the V-8 delivers effortless performance to this front-driver, and the GXP copes gracefully with the power. One reason is front tires that are larger than the rears. This makes sense, given that the front tires must steer and propel the car while carrying 76-percent more weight than the rears do. There’s still a whiff of clumsiness in this large, old platform, but if you crave V-8 power at a reasonable price, the GXP is worth a look. —Csaba Csere

Specifications

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

From the May 2005 issue of Car and Driver.
Japanese love a good obento, which is a select assortment of traditional delicacies served in a bento box, a compartmentalized tray with high walls to prevent intermingling of foodstuffs. Perhaps that’s why you can’t buy the same feisty Mitsubishi Colt Turbo hatchback in both Europe and Japan, or the nifty six-passenger Mitsubishi Grandis wagon in the U.S. Intermingling has risky consequences. It’s bad obento.

Best Sports Cars of 2020

Quickest Cars You Can Buy for Less Than $30,000

Fastest Sedans in Lightning Lap History

At least there’s the Lancer Evolution, which Mitsubishi spreads like sinus-clearing wasabi across the world to spice up its lackluster image. For 2006, the Lancer Evolution’s generational odometer rolls over from the current Evo VIII, on sale since 2003, to the Evo IX. Accordingly, this rigid, noisy, spartan, all-wheel-drive son-of-a-rally-car gets new front and rear bumpers, aero tweaks, nattier seats, and lighter alloy wheels. And along with that it gets a 10-hp boost to 286, mostly from a new-to-Evo variable-valve-timing system.
Timing is everything, as we discovered with our own test gear strapped onto a six-speed Evo IX MR at Mitsubishi’s Okazaki track. It’s a postage stamp of grass and asphalt ribbons enveloped by the dense suburbs near Nagoya, Japan, and home to Evo development since the Evo II in 1992. With the Evo IX MR, we saw 60 mph in 4.6 seconds and the quarter-mile in 13.4 seconds at 104 mph, the fleetest sprinting we’ve garnered from any stock Evo.

View Photos

Oh, but you were expecting more than new bumpers and 10 added horses for the Evo IX? The name is “Evolution,” after all, and it is indeed evolving toward an all-new Evo X set to arrive late in 2007. That would be shortly after the debut of a redesigned Lancer sedan on a new platform dubbed GS.
Meanwhile, be content with the same three Evo flavors as before-the trim-stripped RS and the base Evo, both with five-speed manuals, plus the six-speed Evo MR with Bilstein shocks and forged BBS wheels. We’re told to expect a $500 bump of the current base prices (starting at $29,074 for the RS) when pricing is announced for the September on-sale date.
Inside are aluminum pedals (except in the RS) and redesigned seats. A faux-carbon-fiber panel adorns the dash. Cloth is gone; pseudo-suede center panels are now bordered by leather bolsters. All-leather seats are an option.

View Photos

Outside, a new front bumper fights aerodynamic lift with an available chin spoiler that increases the low-pressure zone under the nose. Two oval nostrils in the bumper help the intercooler by ramming fresh air around its input and output pipes. In back, the carbon-fiber airfoil can be had with a Gurney flap, a thin wing extension that increases downforce to the rear.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2006 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX
VEHICLE TYPEFront-engine, 4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED $35,700 (estimated base price: $35,700)
ENGINE TYPE Turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1997 cm3Power: 286 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque: 289 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 103.3 inLength: 178.5 inWidth: 69.7 inHeight: 57.1 inCurb weight: 3300 lb
C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 4.6 secZero to 100 mph: 11.9 secStanding ¼-mile: 13.4 sec @ 104 mphBraking 70-0 mph: 155 ft
FUEL ECONOMYEPA fuel economy, city driving: 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

From the November 1994 issue of Car and Driver.
Awright, we knew you’d write in. It was no shock here in the ice-cube quarry that is the magazine’s Michigan domain. You were sure to gripe that Acura’s uncanny Integra GS-R could never better other sports coupes because it was just a “glorified economy car.”

Listen to This Acura Integra Type R Scream

Tested: 1997 Acura Integra Type R Rewards at 8400

Civic Type R Limited Edition Starts at $44,950

That was after an Integra GS-R took first place in our June ’94 “Good Sports” comparison test of seven sports coupes, winning with its all-around worth rather than speed alone. (The group also included the Eagle Talon TSi AWD, Ford Probe GT, Honda Prelude VTEC, Mitsubishi Eclipse GS-T, Nissan 240SX SE, and Toyota Celica GT.)
The Integra had speed, but others in the test had more of it. What the GS-R offered was the purest talents at the lowest price (all cars comparably equipped). The Acura never gave us that cut-rate feeling of a bargain item. But some of you chose to read more into test-track results than did we.
Oh, our usual go/stop/turn tests put the Integra mid-pack, but in a group capable of running rings around most cars on the road. Especially on up-and-downy, in-and-outty, hook-and-loopy roads. The GS-R won by doing what a great road car does: it made us want to slip in, buckle it on, turn the key to its mesmerizing powertrain, and press its chassis to the task just for the joy of it.

PHIL BERG, TOM COSGROVE

That feeling does not turn up in test data. If you’re into that, hey, more horsepower to you. As for us, our long-term test of the Integra GS-R brought 35,000 miles of unadulterated fun, the fun being always at hand and right underfoot. Our GS-R was the sum of some impressive parts: A howling 170-horsepower, DOHC, 16-valve 1.8-liter engine with port injection and Honda’s VTEC variable-valve-timing system for good performance and good fuel economy. All-independent suspension with front unequal-length control arms (instead of ubiquitous struts) and a rear multilink layout. Four-wheel disc brakes with ABS. Michelin 195/55 XGT-V4 all-season performance tires on 15-inch alloy wheels. Dual airbags. Side-impact protection. Air conditioning. Power moon-roof. Cruise control. An AM/FM/cassette stereo with six speakers. And all for just $19,894 (the same package would run you $20,215 today).
This Acura arrived in late 1993 as a pilot-production model with 1500 miles on it. Usually we avoid pilot cars. They rarely deliver the performance and reliability that come after the assembly line begins real production. But this GS-R was from Honda’s fancypants branch, so we chose to proceed based on experiences with earlier Acuras. By the end of the test, it seemed that about the only thing risked was the finish that peeled off the alloy wheels—apparently not a fault on customer cars. For an Acura that was used hard and wrung out by our Mr. Berg on the One Lap of America, that’s dandy.
We hustled so quickly that we finished the GS-R’s miles in just under ten months.
At 7578 miles, the GS-R toured Ann Arbor Acura for its first service, specified for 7500 miles. It required only an oil-and-filter swap: 30 cents for a washer, $5.75 for a filter, $8 for oil, $1 for “hazardous waste disposal,” $5.40 for “miscellaneous charges,” and a costly $54 for labor, which consisted of a front brake-pad inspection. The total came to $74.45, plus tax—a lot for a first service.

PHIL BERG, TOM COSGROVE

The 15,000-miler came at 15,270 miles, needing the same plus a valve-clearance adjustment and a muffler and tailpipe inspection, done by Acura City in Rochester, New York. The price jumped to $169.
We paid $151 at the 22,500-mile massage, but $76 of that went for repair of a “leaky valve-cover gasket installed improperly on the 15,000-mile service.” As with the first stop, the remaining $75 went to an oil-and-filter swap and a brake-pad inspection.
The 30,000-mile service called for an oil-and-filter change; a new air cleaner; a valve-clearance check; inspections of the alternator drive belt and the fuel, cooling, and exhaust systems; and a change of transmission oil. That service ran $334. And all those brake inspections finally paid off. The technician replaced the rear pads for $108, bringing the total bill to $442.
The service grand total of $653 is more than we expected, given the Integra’s economy-car genes. The need for rear-pad replacements was a surprise, too. Perhaps it had something to do with our tendency to test-drive the GS-R deep into corners.
The GS-R kept logbook notes coming. Wrote Schroeder: “I couldn’t get comfortable due to the seat’s lack of lumbar support [fortunately not a problem for all drivers]. And the droning engine at 80 to 85 mph gets tiresome—the short gearing and final-drive ratio would never fly on an autobahn. From the passenger seat, my housemate marvels at the wonderful engine, then asks, ‘How much is this thing, $14,000?’ Oops. Honda maybe needs to jazz up the conventional interior. But the Michelin XGT V4 tires (normally not so hot in winter) got me through horrendous snow in Buffalo on Christmas Eve. Barely made it through unplowed two-foot drifts, but I expected more trouble.”
“Buzzy at 85 mph,” noted Yates. “But not bad. And that motorcycle rev limit and taut steering are marvelous. I love this thing—it’s the Sugar Ray Robinson of automobiles, the original Sugar Ray having been considered, pound-for-pound, the greatest fighter in history.”
Another staff writer echoed Schroeder’s assessment of the interior, saying it reminded him of a dentist’s office—comfortable and functional but not likable, and definitely in need of a splash of color. Other drivers felt this serious atmosphere encouraged good driving. “The Integra GS-R is a pure pleasure. I drove it all day without a pain, ache, or complaint. At 70 to 85 mph with the A/C on, it got over 325 miles per tankful.”
As for oil additions, the lone log entry showed a half-quart at 27,256 miles (the day after the GS-R returned from the rigors of One Lap—ahem). A windshield chip was fixed at 28,406 miles for $30. The saddest incident came in a parking lot when the T-Bird of a driver new to America clipped the GS-R’s left-front corner. This left a besmirchment painful to see and brought an insurance estimate for $501.28 in repairs.
The Acura’s wild four-cylinder wore its 35,000 miles well. At the concluding test, the 0-to-60-mph time rose by 0.1 second to seven seconds flat, and top speed increased 1 mph, to 136. Despite all our revvings and our hustling far across the vast reaches of the West, the GS-R also averaged an excellent 30 mpg.
Wait now—that almost is good enough to make the Integra GS-R an economy car.
But to actually declare this splendid Acura a glorified economy car?
Nah . . .

PHIL BERG, TOM COSGROVE

Rants and Raves
The Integra has an odd odor inside. I looked under the seats for an old burger or pizza. Nothing. That aside, the GS-R is the most fun since our Sentra SE-R. The shifter is perfect, with something motorcycle-ish about power and shifting. If you shift at over 7000 rpm, the engine remains in its power band, the revs hardly drop, and the sound is wonderful. Part-throttle 2-3-4 shifts are terrific, too. —Dworin
The front of this car looks like a flounder: two beady eyes above each crooked turn-signal mouth. Inspired by a flounder—now that’s hip. But for those who aspire to a BMW 325i, this is the perfect starter car. Its moves are beyond reproach, its engine is superb. —Schroeder
If Porsche built this it would cost $65,000, smell like leather, have a sexier exterior, and R&T would treat it like the second corning of Dr. Ferdinand himself. This thing is a marvel. —Yates
Four people fit easily if you put the short ones in back. And small as the headlights are, they work well, with a sharp cutoff on low-beam and good brightness on high-beam with no hot spots. Also, the ABS-cycling sound of the brakes on wet leaves is refined—tick, tick, tick, not CLUNK, CLUNK. —Berg

Auxiliary lights and antennas traveled Forrest Gump’s Monument Valley road in Utah with our GS-R on the One Lap of America.
PHIL BERG, TOM COSGROVE

My Own Private One-Lapper
Six thousand of the 35,000 miles that accumulated on our Integra’s odometer were added during a single grueling drive: We followed the six-day automotive regatta known as the Bridgestone Car and Driver One Lap of America. This annual June enduro is organized by Brock “Cannonball” Yates to the delight of Visine, No-Doz, and Dramamine vendors in sixteen states. For 1994, a string of five all-night drives to nine of the better-known racetracks in the Midwest and Southwest was broken by just one night in a motel. So the One Lap is more than just a casual acquaintance with a car—it’s an intense, intimate fling.
Spending this much time in a car isn’t unbearable if you make preparations to keep yourself entertained. The Integra’s sedan-like center console is ideal for adding extra radios. We installed a Uniden BearTracker automatic police scanner and a trucker-quality K40 CB radio. Backing up these two highway essentials were an AOR 1500 wide-band scanner and a Sony shortwave receiver for entertainment.
This stuff alerted us to the news that New Mexican authorities were busy looking for a machete murderer (and so ignored One Lap competitors), that truckers in Texas knew where all the speed traps were, that the state police in eastern Colorado were distracted by a woman who launched a Volvo 50 feet into a ditch, and that Kansas was exposed to tornado warnings. And if all of this news made us weary, we could always switch to “Voice of the Andes” from Quito, Ecuador.
By the fifth night, our eyes were shot but our backs were healthy, thanks to the terrific seats. The engine revs busily on the highway, 4000 rpm in fifth gear, but makes such pleasant noises you never find yourself reaching for a sixth gear. The steering is so communicative that you have to be nearly unconscious to place a wheel wrong.
With 25,552 miles on the odometer between Arizona and New Mexico, we sustained 110 mph for 50 miles and still got 30 mpg. A lot of things about this little bomber make it ideal as your own private One-Lapper. —Phil Berg

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
1993 Acura Integra GS-R Long-Term Test
VEHICLE TYPEFront-engine, front-wheel-drive, 2 + 2 passenger, 3-door coupe
PRICE AS TESTED $19,894 (base price: $19,894)
ENGINE TYPE DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 110 in3, 1797 cm3Power: 170 hp @ 7600 rpmTorque: 128 lb-ft @ 6200 rpm
TRANSMISSION 5-speed manual
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 101.2 inLength: 172.4 inCurb weight: 2661 lb
PERFORMANCE: NEWZero to 60 mph: 6.9 secZero to 100 mph: 19.2 secZero to 120 mph: 34.2 secStanding ¼-mile: 15.4 sec @ 92 mphTop speed: 135 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 186 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g
PERFORMANCE: 35,000 MILESZero to 60 mph: 7.0 secZero to 100 mph: 18.7 secZero to 120 mph: 32.1 secStanding ¼-mile: 15.5 sec @ 93 mphTop speed: 136 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.79 g
FUEL ECONOMYEPA city driving: 25 mpgC/D observed: 30 mpgUnscheduled oil additions: 1 qt

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 2000 issue of Car and Driver.
With its 7800-rpm redline, 180 horsepower that peaks just 200 rpm before that, and an aggressive VVTL-i electronically variable valve-timing-and-lift scheme, the 1.8-liter DOHC 16-valve engine in Toyota’s Celica GT-S is plenty edgy. Plus, it’s backed by a six-speed manual transmission, and the body wrapped around that engine looks as though it were designed with a knife. But the suspension, while generating impressive performance numbers, feels more civilized than aggressive.

Best Coupes of 2020

Tested: 1982 Celica GT-S Brings Rear-Drive Joy

Acura RSX Type-S vs. Four Front-Wheel-Drive Rivals

TRD’s aim for its Sportivo suspension kit is to sharpen the chassis of Toyota’s edgiest car. So the $1545 kit includes new, stiffer springs (38 percent firmer than stock up front, 30 percent stiffer in the rear), bigger anti-roll bars (24 millimeters in diameter up front, up from 22mm stock; and 21mm in diameter at the rear instead of the 17mm stock), rubber bushings 17 percent stiffer than stock, revalved shocks and struts, and upper-strut-mount reinforcements. In addition, a $136 rear strut brace has been added. On TRD’s demonstrator car, the T2 wheels fitted with P215/40ZR-17 Toyo Proxes T1-S tires replace the optional 16-inch wheels and P205/50VR-16 tires offered on the stock GT-S car.
Although that constitutes a pretty thorough reconstruction of the suspension, the rest of this TRD Celica is only modestly twisted. TRD added its own $634 sport-exhaust cat-back system, a high-flow air filter within the stock filter box, and $4267 worth of spoilers, wings, valance panels, and tinted head lamps. TRD claims the improved breathing of the exhaust and intake is worth an additional 14 hp over stock, but it makes no assertions for the body bits beyond claiming that high-schoolers dig them. Add up everything except the tires on the car, and that’s $6752 beyond the 2001 GT-S’s $21,800 purchase price.
On the tight Streets of Willow road course, the TRD-modified Celica’s turn-in is dramatically better than stock, and when the inevitable understeer arrives, it’s modest. Driven at less than 10/10ths, the car feels neutral and only reminds that it’s a front-driver when accelerating out of corners. Steering effort seems greater than stock, more so than might be expected for a car whose tire contact patch has expanded only 10mm at each corner.

That improvement in at-limit behavior doesn’t, however, mean that the limits themselves have expanded. Despite bigger tires and thicker bars, the TRD Celica only matched our last GT-S’s 0.86-g skidpad orbit. Getting the most of the chassis changes on the track probably means adopting beefier rubber than this car’s modest upgrade.
On the road, there’s notably more noise transmitted from the tires into the cabin than stock. That’s not surprising, given the harsher springs and harder bushings, and it’s just irritating enough that the sound could be maddening during daily commutes. The exhaust system adds to the cacophony, and the change in air filters is, we assume, responsible for the more pronounced octave shift as the VVTL-i variable valve timing kicks in at about 6000 rpm.
But although the exhaust and the intake change the sound of the Celica, there’s nothing to indicate that they make it quicker. The TRD car’s 7.5-second 0-to-60-mph clocking is 0.3 second slower than the last stock machine we tested, and the TRD’s quarter-mile time of 15.7 seconds at 92 mph is 2 mph slower. There’s no reason TRD’s changes should have made the car much faster, but they shouldn’t have slowed it down. We can only guess at the reasons for this small disparity.

TRD’s modifications nudge the Celica GT-S toward the raw-nerve reflexes of a car like the Acura Integra Type R. But the potential is there for Toyota and its TRD division to comprehensively optimize the car as a true, factory-built near racer along the lines of the Type R. There’s more power to be had from this engine, more grip to come from this chassis, and we want it all.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2000 TRD Toyota Celica GT-S
VEHICLE TYPE Front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE AS TESTED $28,552 (base price: $24,285*)
ENGINE TYPE DOHC 16-valve 4-in-line, aluminum block and head, Toyota engine-control system with port fuel injectionDisplacement: 110 cu in, 1796ccPower (SAE net): 194 bhp @ 7600 rpmTorque (SAE net): 133 lb-ft @ 6800 rpm
TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 102.3 inLength: 170.4 inCurb weight: 2600 lb
C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 7.5 secZero to 100 mph: 19.9 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 8.0 secStanding ¼-mile: 15.7 sec @ 92 mphTop speed (redline limited): 129 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 171 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
FUEL ECONOMYEPA city driving: 27 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