Evelyn Reynolds

From the July 2004 issue of Car and Driver.
The 9-2X represents many firsts for Saab. It is the first Saab to feature all-wheel drive. The first to compete in the premium-compact segment. And the first to be built on the Swedish island known as Japan.
Ex-squeeze me? Was that JAPAN?

Obituary: Saab Automobile, 1947–2011

Best Station Wagons of 2020

Hai! The home of teriyaki, karate, and Nintendo is now home to a Scandinavian import. This blue-eyed, black-haired beauty is built by Fuji Heavy Industries, a.k.a. Subaru, in the Gunma Yajima plant and then exported to the U.S. and Canada for consumption by Saab’s North American faithful. The only things Swedish on the car are the badges, and we’re not so sure those aren’t made in Japan, too. Perhaps you’re curious as to why Saab took this circuitous route? Let us explain.
Saab felt it direly needed to get a foot in the door to the premium-compact market, which the brand predicts will triple in size by 2006. Not only has Acura been thriving in the segment for years with the Integra and RSX, but the Euros are currently organizing a full assault as well. Volvo is already out with an all-new S40 sedan and the V50 wagon. Audi is only a year or so away from bringing over the five-door A3. And heck, it’s rumored that within a couple of years BMW will ship to the U.S. a form of its new five-door 1-series—possibly a two-door coupe, à la 2002—that could carry a 2-series title. The guns are being positioned.
Well, Saab wasn’t thrilled at the thought of being left out in the cold once again, missing out on all the fun had by the other kids playing Battleship. Accordingly, Saab turned to the one entity that could quickly rally the troops—the General. As in General Motors.

Highs: Handsome styling, versatile package, faster than an Audi S6 Avant.

As you may know, GM has a 100-percent equity share in Saab and a 20-percent share in Subaru. So when Saab needed a small, quick leadoff hitter for its lineup, it was the General that nabbed the WRX wagon from Subaru’s squad and optioned it for Saab’s team. For Saab, the wagon made the most sense given the brand’s hatchback history. Plus, it’s a very functional design that can squeeze in five adults along with 28 cubic feet of gear. Had Saab attempted to build its own car from scratch, it would have taken up to five years to get it to market. Time equals money, not to mention competitive advantage, so Saab gladly accepted the General’s offer. Not a bad offer, mind you, given that the WRX made back-to-back appearances on our 10Best Cars list in 2002 and 2003.
That this Saab is really a Subaru begs the question, How different are they? To sum it up: a lot and a little. “A lot” with respect to the extensive aesthetic changes Saab made to the WRX, yet “a little” when it comes to the disparity in overall driving experience, which we’ll get to later. First, the laundry list of alterations.
The 9-2X is not a simple rebadge, evidenced by the myriad modifications inside and out. From the A-pillars forward, the 9-2X is completely unique, wearing new front fenders with distinctive cornering lamps, sleeker headlamps (with available xenon bulbs), a flusher hood scoop, and Saab’s signature three-hole grille. Only the doors, the roof, and the rear quarter-panels are shared with the Subaru. In profile, the Saab shows off more-aggressive rocker panels, an integrated rear roof spoiler, and a clean roofline unmarred by rails, which are standard on the WRX wagon. For the hind end, Saab nipped and tucked the Subie’s butt, fitting the 9-2X with fresh taillamps, a bumper with a black diffuser, and a new tailgate that houses the license plate.
Inside, Saab has given the Subie a full IKEA makeover. The carpeting is now a richer, fuller weave. The door trim is improved, now more pleasing to the eye and hand. Gone are the Subie’s cheap dash-mounted cup holder and manual HVAC controls, replaced in our Aero model by two drink holders in the center console and a metallic-look center stack with knurled knobs for the radio and automatic climate controls. Our Aero also came with a standard in-dash six-CD changer and options not even available on the WRX wagon: a $1950 power sunroof and $1695 black-and-parchment leather-wrapped seats with front active head restraints (part of the Premium package, which also has the xenon headlights).
Saab wanted—and needed—to enhance the WRX’s subpar NVH levels. Thus, it installed not only the upgraded carpet but also sealing for the rear quarter-trim and liftgate; a revised rear engine mount; acoustical treatment on the roof and rear floor; and new or improved insulation for the toe board, fenders, and shift boot. We told you it wasn’t a rebadge.
Mechanically, our test 9-2X Aero is nearly identical to a WRX. It features the same 227-hp, 2.0-liter turbocharged flat-four, five-speed manual, and all-wheel-drive system as the Subie, but it attacks the road with quicker steering and a retuned suspension. Saab stiffened the steering-gear mounting for better feedback and response, and on the Aero, pitched the WRX’s standard rack in favor of the rally-bred STi’s, which lowers the ratio from 16.5:1 to 15.0:1. The Subaru’s strut suspension was reworked with firmer springs, softer dampers, 10mm-shorter rear bump stops, and stiffer front control-arm bushings. In addition, 1.8mm of toe-in was dialed into the front wheels for better on-center feel and straight-line stability.

Lows: Turbo lag, as Swedish as sumo.

That’s the laundry list, but how does it all come out in the wash? Compared with the Subaru, the Saab is first and foremost a more refined machine. At idle, the rumbling from the engine that is so evident in the WRX has been hushed in the 9-2X, as if quelled with a down pillow. Our test car registered just 44 dBA on the sound meter, compared with 51 for the last WRX sedan we tested (“Two Against One,” October 2001). Since we never tested a WRX wagon, a direct comparison is a little tricky because a wagon has a cargo area that acts like a noise-enchancing echo chamber. As expected, then, the Saab wagon’s sound levels surpass the WRX sedan’s at both wide-open throttle (78 dBA versus 75) and 70-mph cruising (73 versus 71). In spite of that, the Saab somehow seems quieter, maybe in part because it has eliminated much of the Subaru’s tin-box effect, especially the cacophony of road pebbles ricocheting off the wheel wells and undercarriage. The leather-wrapped, three-spoke steering wheel relays minimal vibration, as does the gearshift–both weak spots in the WRX. Moreover, the interior, although still more economical than luxurious, is smart and inviting, with supple leather, higher-grade plastics, and metallic accents.
Over Ann Arbor’s diverse landscape, the 9-2X exhibited a ride as firm as the Subie’s yet more compliant, better at absorbing the harsher impacts. Saab’s diligence paid off here, resulting in a ride more befitting of a “premium” car. The steering is superb, offering crisp turn-in, a firm on-center feel, and quick response that isn’t too quick. The overall feel is light yet amply communicative, rarely requiring adjustments to the wheel after taking a set.
The precise steering only enhances the Aero’s impressive grip and scoot. Fitted with split-spoke 17-inch alloys wearing W-rated 215/45R-17 Bridgestone Potenza RE011s (included with the sunroof on Aero versions), our test 9-2X pulled 0.86 g on the skidpad, superior to the WRX’s 0.82 and on par with another premium, now discontinued all-wheel-drive wagon, the Audi S6 Avant Quattro (November 2001). Furthermore, the Saab not only shorted the S6 from 70 mph–171 feet versus 176–but also outgunned it in acceleration, posting a 0-to-60 time of 6.1 seconds (versus 6.3) and a quarter-mile sprint of 14.7 at 92 mph (versus 14.9 at 97). Wow. Plus, the 9-2X Aero beats the old 9-3 Viggen (February 2002) to 60 and the quarter. As with the Subie, our only real gripe is the Aero’s turbo lag, which stifles momentum below 3000 rpm. The WRX sedan is still quicker–we tested one that did 5.4 and 14.1, respectively–but it’s also carrying 164 fewer pounds than the 3256-pound 9-2X. Nonetheless, the Aero should prove to be plenty competitive in its class.
The real beauty of the 9-2X Aero is that it retains the WRX’s core fun-to-drive factors–turbo power and the sure-footedness of all-wheel drive combined with eagerness to perform four-wheel drifts–without really diluting the Subie’s raw driving experience. It has only softened the edges while at the same time raising the quality bar. For that, Saab is asking $27,645, or $2975 more than a WRX wagon. If you want less for less, Saab is also offering a $23,685 Linear version with 165 horsepower.

The Verdict: A swanky WRX that’s better in every way.

Our tester, equipped with the Premium package, sunroof, and $600 heated seats, rang the register up to $31,890. Add another $1250 for an automatic. Premium cars equal premium pricing. But considering the Saab is the best all-around WRX to date, not to mention it includes no-charge maintenance for two years or 24,000 miles and a longer four-year/ 50,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty, it may garner another first for Saab in the new millennium–winning one of our comparos.
Counterpoint
Recommending a WRX to a friend is like setting him or her up with a potential mate who’s a bit on the homely side but a lot of fun, too. Needless to say, this matchmaking rarely works out. When people are investing their money or hearts, a physical attraction is necessary. The Saab version of the WRX addresses this issue with a makeover worthy of its own network show. It doesn’t go so far as to create a Swedish supermodel, but the improvements might sway status-conscious customers. Under the skin, subtle modifications make the 9-2X feel like a WRX with the volume turned down. If you tried to love a WRX but failed, you might find a match with the 9-2X. —Tony Quiroga
I love the Subaru WRX, so of course I’m also enamored of Saab’s nearly identical version. But by adding a few luxury features and more sound deadening, Saab took the car in the wrong direction in weight, price, and performance. It’s slower and more expensive. In my opinion, Saab should have added the WRX STi’s 300-hp engine but kept the standard WRX’s softer suspension. Then we’d have something different enough to justify a loftier price. The only reason I could see popping for the Saab instead of the Subaru is that a Saab dealer typically throws in more perks, such as free loaner cars. I’d stick with the Subaru, however. —Larry Webster
We’re on record as Subaru WRX love slaves, which makes questioning the bona fides of this badge job just a little awkward. Particularly since this car adds something to the Saab lineup–all-wheel drive–that’s overdue. Not to mention a high fun-to-drive quotient, augmented by small-wagon usefulness. Nevertheless, as a descendant of Vikings, it seems to me there’s a credibility question that’s gonna nag Saab faithful. Do a few suspension tweaks, a new grille, and leather morph this Japanese warrior into something the trolls of Trollhättan would bless? If it looks like a Subaru and drives like a Subaru, will it really make you say, “Yah, shoor”? —Tony Swan

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2005 Saab 9-2X Aero
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, 4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 5-door wagon
PRICE AS TESTED: $31,890
ENGINE TYPE: turbocharged and intercooled flat-4, aluminum block and heads
Displacement: 197 cu in, 3222ccPower (SAE net): 227 bhp @ 6000 rpmTorque (SAE net): 217 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 5-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:Wheelbase: 99.4 in Length: 175.6 inWidth: 66.7 in Height: 57.7 inCurb weight: 3256 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:Zero to 60 mph: 6.1 secZero to 100 mph: 18.3 secZero to 120 mph: 30.5 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 7.6 secStanding ¼-mile: 14.7 sec @ 92 mphTop speed (governor limited): 140 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 171 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
FUEL ECONOMY:EPA fuel economy highway/city driving: 20/26 mpgC/D-observed: 21 mpg

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

View Photos
Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

From the August 2004 issue of Car and Driver.
The blended DNA of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler Corporation produced its first offspring in 2003, and hairdressers rejoiced. The Crossfire is just the kind of florid prêt-à-porter that appeals to people in the look-good business. To be sure, the Crossfire does look good.

Best Coupes of 2020

$60K Sports Car Showdown

The car’s name is also an unintentional pun about DaimlerChrysler; in the days since the 1998 merger, executives have been regularly mowed down by crossfire between Stuttgart and Detroit. The latest forced exit was Chrysler Group COO Wolfgang Bernhard, crossfired in May for being too vocal about problems at Mercedes and resisting a plan to spend $7 billion bailing out Mitsubishi.

View Photos

Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

Maybe he thought the money should be used to induce more people to buy Crossfires. As of May 1, according to trade magazine Automotive News, enough of the torpedo-tailed coupes were sitting in stock that the Karmann factory in Osnabrück, Germany, could go on a five-month lunch break before Chrysler dealers would run short. The company believes the magic laxative may be pulling the base price below $30,000 for 2005 by yanking out some standard features such as heated seats.
Meanwhile, the dandy-dressed Crossfire, which shares both skeleton and muscle with the first-generation Mercedes-Benz SLK roadster, is the first Chrysler product to attain the performance-enhancing SRT label, heretofore bestowed only on Dodges.

Highs: Looks sweet on the street, supercharger dispels past power complaints, new legs love track work.

The “street and racing technology” shtick—adding more horsepower, bigger tires, and big attitude—has already been done to a few Dodges, notably, the Ram SRT-10 and Neon-based SRT-4 (all Vipers carry an SRT-10 badge). Buyers who prefer a quick quarter-mile served with essence of tire smoke have approved of the 500-hp pickup and 230-hp subcompact (in fact, various Mopar bolt-on kits will bump the SRT-4’s horsepower all the way to 300). These first vehicles have given the SRT moniker a reputation for delivering the real deal. Anticipation runs high for the SRT versions of the Chrysler 300C sedan and Dodge Magnum wagon, now only months away, we are advised.
While we wait, the Crossfire SRT-6 will blaze into dealerships this June as both the $45,695 automatic coupe pictured here and a $49,995 automatic convertible. Criminally, no manual is offered in the SRT-6.
We have written that the base Crossfire has eye-snaring looks and pleasing handling but an engine at least 50 horsepower short of the boiling point. The SRT mods are substantial, as is the price increase. From base Crossfire coupe to SRT-6 coupe, the extra $11,200 buys first and foremost an intercooled supercharger that wrenches another 115 horses from the 3.2-liter, 18-valve V-6. Blown, the V-6 makes 330 horsepower and 310 pound-feet of torque, a twistability increase of 81 pound-feet. And there are only 109 more pounds of curb weight (3220 in all) for the coupe to haul.

View Photos

Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

Shorn of its decorative plastic sombrero, this Mercedes engine would look more familiar. It rolls out of the AMG handicraft shop in Affalterbach, Germany, and previously found work in the SLK32 AMG and C32 AMG. Both of those models have since gone to V-8s, and Mercedes has developed a new 268-hp, twin-cam, four-valve naturally aspirated V-6 for its 2005 SLK350 ( C/D, June 2004). So the Crossfire SRT-6 is the last customer of a very nice hand-me-down.
There’s been considerable pumping up of the Crossfire’s suspension as well. The spring rates have been stiffened almost 50 percent in the front and 42 percent in the rear, and jounce and rebound rates in the shocks have been firmed up to match. The front brake rotors grow 1.2 inches to 13.0, and the rear discs go vented and get another 0.9 inch of diameter.

View Photos

Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

There’s more zoot in the Crossfire’s ’40s-streamline styling with special-to-SRT wheels, 18 inches in front, 19 in the rear. The spoke count in the wheels has been upped from seven to 15. Peeking over the rims is the thin trace of the new low-profile Michelin Pilot Sport PS2 multicompound summer rubber (Continental all-season tires are an option). You’ll find a jack and a can of tire sealer, but no spare.
The square jaw gets a bit squarer with a revised front-bumper fascia. Replacing the base car’s motorized rear spoiler is a fixed wing that wraps around the fastback and is etched with the same boat-deck dimples as the hood. It clutters the tail and raises a question: If the base Crossfire’s deploying spoiler provides enough stability for its 151-mph top speed, why does the SRT need a gaudy whale fluke to go 154?

View Photos

Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

The cockpit gets by with minimal changes, including a 200-mph speedo and Alcantara pseudo-suede trim on the buckets that is embroidered with an SRT-6 logo. Hence, a few complaints about the Crossfire cabin remain, including over-the-shoulder blind spots, a tight cabin for six-footers, no steering-wheel rake adjustment, and a dinky eight-cubic-foot trunk with nothing to tie down the goods.

Lows: Vision-blurring ride, no manual available, blind spots will hide a Scenicruiser.

The Japanese-made IHI supercharger does whack time off the Crossfire’s track numbers in big chunks. A 60-mph run now swiffs by in 5.1 seconds, a 1.4-second improvement over a six-speed manual Crossfire we tested in 2003. That car ran the quarter in 14.8 seconds at 96 mph. The SRT-6 posts a 13.5-second quarter, steaming through the trap at 107 mph. Whether it’s the next green light down the avenue or the gap between two rigs guarding the freeway merge lane, “up there” is “right here” much sooner in an SRT-6.
Even so, polite manners govern the powertrain. The throttle response and the automatic gear selections are smoothly keyed to your pedal inputs. If you like, pilot the SRT-6 all day without ever getting into the fat end of the power–let the Starbucks get cold in the one cup holder, and it won’t slosh if you’re careful.
More thrust doesn’t equate to more noise, either. The decibel measurements at idle and wide-open-throttle, 46 and 78, respectively, are not low by luxury-car standards, but they are virtually identical to those of the base Crossfire. A supercharger that is felt but not heard runs on sophisticated engineering.

View Photos

Bill Delaney

Fancy multilink arrangements in the wheel wells strike a contrast to a medieval recirculating-ball steering box that deadens wheel feedback from the driver. The base Crossfire is no lubberly pig, but the SRT deckhands have pulled in any slack and reprogrammed the stability-control software to tolerate more friskiness. Some fast lapping at Southern California’s Willow Springs track proved that the SRT-6 is screwed down tight. Speedy steering reflexes, stable footing through the corners, and dependable reserves of grip from the monster tires (0.90 at the skidpad, about the same as the base car fitted with an older model of Pilot Sports) caused corner speeds to climb well past our expectations. Braking distances likewise shrank.
Clamped into full ABS, the four discs supply a stop from 70 mph in 157 feet, a few feet shorter than the base Crossfire. Better yet, the brake-pedal swing is packed with adjustability, and it fades little, even with torturous use.

View Photos

Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

We love cars that handle, but so much suspension resistance on such a short wheelbase means trouble. The SRT-6 hops its way up sectioned concrete freeways like a malfunctioning lowrider. It crashes heavily on railroad grades and fraying pavement. It shivers over the minutest cuts and crevices, the stout tire sidewalls transmitting all their energy through the stiff springs and into the rigid body. What works on track day makes life miserable every other day.
And there the SRT-6 creates a conundrum. No doubt Chrysler’s hot-rod group has extracted a serious performance car from a fashion accessory. But with no manual transmission available and a reputation as a too-cute coupe, the Crossfire may never appeal to hard-cores who live for the next apex, especially when it’s priced in Corvette and BMW M3 territory. And the Crossfire’s current constituency may never put up with having their pompadours viciously rattled with every trip down the driveway.

The Verdict: Everything we wished for and some things we wish we hadn’t.

Car magazines may howl, but Chrysler—having fixed the power deficit and added better brakes and styling—should rethink the SRT-6’s suspension and relax it for easier boulevard work. True, the company expects to build only a couple thousand SRT-6s a year. But the corporate crossfire may be a little less deadly if this model actually sells.
COUNTERPOINT
The local Mercedes salesmen must be doing a slow burn now that the SRT-6 version of the Crossfire is going to hit the streets. The Crossfire has always been rakishly good-looking, with taut, sporty handling, but it needed more power under the hood to make it truly exciting. That’s all been fixed by the supercharger and its extra 115 horsepower. The sales guys at the Chrysler store now have a great-looking coupe, or convertible, that runs like a sprinter and costs two to six grand less than the Benz products. One word of advice to Chrysler: Lose the big wing on the back. It’s tacky-looking, and it only muddles the Crossfire’s sleek and elegant profile. —André Idzikowski
Cult-car alert! Twenty years from now, the SRT-6 will be one of those scarce machines that will command a prominent location at concours across the country. Just consider its exotic concept-car-derived styling, its Mercedes-based mechanical bones, and its outstanding acceleration, handling, and braking. Unfortunately, although the SRT-6’s performance neatly splits the difference between a 350Z and a Corvette C5, its sticker price is near the Vette’s. Furthermore, this performance comes only with an automatic gearbox. Customers attracted to this feature will not likely appreciate the SRT’s firm ride. In other words, the SRT-6 is destined to be a rare bird. —Csaba Csere
I want to know what happened to the 19 horsepower that didn’t make the jump over to Chrysler’s SRT-6. Just because the engine isn’t in a Mercedes, it automatically has to lose power? I remember fondly the closely related full-powered, 349-hp SLK32 AMG, primarily because it was scary fast. The SRT-6’s 330 horsepower is nothing to sneeze at, but stomp on the accelerator through the kickdown switch, and it just doesn’t fly at other cars’ rear ends the way the SLK32 did. Perhaps it was the larger wheels, or the green engine in our test car, but with the rest of the vehicle so uncompromised, you don’t expect to make any concessions. —Tony Quiroga

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2004 Chrysler Crossfire SRT-6
VEHICLE TYPE Front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 3-door coupe
PRICE AS TESTED$45,695
ENGINE TYPESupercharged and intercooled V-6,aluminum block and headsDisplacement: 195 cu in, 3199ccPower (SAE net): 330 bhp @ 6100 rpmTorque (SAE net): 310 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
TRANSMISSION 5-speed automatic with manumatic shifting
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 94.5 inLength: 159.8 inWidth: 69.5 inHeight: 51.5 inCurb weight: 3220 lb
C/D-TEST RESULTS Zero to 60 mph: 5.1 secZero to 100 mph: 12.4 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 5.5 secStanding ¼-mile: 13.5 sec @ 107 mphTop speed (governor limited): 154 mphBraking, 70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 157 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.90 g
FUEL ECONOMYEPA fuel economy city/highway driving : 17/25 mpgC/D-observed: 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 July 2004 issue of Car and Driver.
Lake Tahoe, for those of you who’ve never been there, is solid Subaru country. You see the star-badged four-wheel-drive Subies everywhere you go. At a lunch stop during the company’s 2005 Outback introductory drive, most of the staff admitted to owning one Subaru or another.

Six-Way Compact Crossover Battle

Best SUVs and Crossovers of 2020

Every 2020 Small SUV Ranked from Worst to Best

Obviously, the snowy winter climate in the Sierra Nevada predisposes Tahoans to durable, four-wheel-drive vehicles, and interest in the fleet of new Outbacks was wholehearted. And when the faithful learn that the midrange 2.5XT tested here has a 250-hp turbocharged engine-based on the unit in the WRX STi-that shrugs off most of the effects of power-robbing altitude, these folks will be standing in line at the dealerships.
There are three basic levels of the 2005 Outback, starting with the 2.5i and 2.5i Limited. A 168-hp naturally aspirated flat-four engine powers both of these, with the Limited offering a higher level of equipment.
The 2.5XT and 2.5XT Limited are intercooled turbo versions of the flat-four engine, with 250 horsepower on tap.
Most expensive are the top-dog Outback 3.0R and 3.0R sedan, powered by a 3.0-liter flat-six featuring variable intake-valve timing and lift. The 3.0R is also available in L.L.Bean livery and as the VDC Limited (for “vehicle dynamics control,” a system that integrates an all-speed, all-wheel traction-control system with variable-torque all-wheel drive). At about $33,000, it is Subaru’s most expensive Outback.

Highs: Turbo performance, refinement, all-weather versatility.

For 2005, the Outback has a slightly longer wheelbase and is 1.3 inches longer overall. It has a wider track, a lower center of gravity, and weighs less than the previous-generation car, despite being stiffer and stronger. Subaru used aluminum panels for the hood, front bumper assembly, and liftgate to reduce weight as well as decrease mass at the car’s extremities for better handling. In the drive toward centralized mass, even the battery was shifted rearward.
At 3640 pounds, the 2.5XT Limited we tested isn’t exactly svelte, but it isn’t too bad for a fully equipped all-wheel-drive wagon, and it certainly performs and feels like a lighter car. A quarter-mile time of 15.6 seconds at 92 mph isn’t too shabby for a nearly two-ton wagon with an automatic transmission.
The low center of gravity helps quell roll motions and reduce that tippy sensation you often get in heavy SUVs. And thanks to a steering rack bolted securely to the front suspension subframe, what Subaru calls a “cannon mount,” the Outback has very direct responses to the helm. To reduce kickback shock, the rack has an integral shock-damping valve that produces a decent compromise between wheel tremor and feel.

Subaru engineers explained at length that horizontally opposed four-cylinder engines have perfect primary and second-order balance, and the new 2.5-liter engine is indeed amazingly smooth and quiet.

Subaru engineers explained at length that horizontally opposed four-cylinder engines have perfect primary and second-order balance, and the new 2.5-liter engine is indeed amazingly smooth and quiet. The layout boasts other advantages, too, such as a crankshaft that is short and stiff and-since no heavy counterweights are needed -comparatively light.
The engine is short, and its longitudinal location provides a straight shot for the transmission and driveshaft. The new five-speed automatic gearbox looks way long in comparison, but that’s because it also houses the front and center differentials, along with the computer-directed multi-disc clutch mechanism that apportions torque in Subaru’s so-called variable torque-distribution system. (Models with other engine-and-transmission configurations come with different center-differential systems.)
The “symmetrical all-wheel-drive” mechanism—as Subaru calls it—is mostly utterly transparent, but you can sense its variable operation in certain conditions. Because the torque is directed to the axle with the most grip, you can alter the car’s handling characteristics in a corner on a gravel road by adding throttle and having the car transition from understeer to neutral or even mild oversteer simply by staying on the gas. For drivers accustomed to correcting slides, the process can be a little counterintuitive, but you soon become reliant on this useful handling tool.

Lows: Slow transmission kickdown, all-season tires.

We could feel the center diff manipulating torque during skidpad testing, too. In third gear, too low on the tach for serious boost, the Outback would squeal around with the front end pushing fairly resolutely. When we tried it again in second, the rapidly inflating boost levels would have the car up on its toes, ready to rotate.
The fact that the 2.5XT only pulled a fairly unexceptional 0.74 g has more to do with its all-season Bridgestones. The Potenza RE92s are engineered to keep those Lake Tahoe residents slogging through the slush, not for cornering at high speeds. Despite that, the Outback handles well, feeling stable and secure in all circumstances, and summer tires would really optimize its act.
In many ways the Subaru approach is paradoxical. The Outbacks (and Legacy siblings) have the necessary hardware, suspension geometry, and balance to be credible performance cars, but they’re tuned for the middle of the road. Although body-motion control is well restrained, the ride is supple and comfortable. A four-into-one-into-two exhaust system is pleasant-sounding but muted to the point of inaudibility in normal motoring.
Control feedback in the cabin is clear but subtle, and you always get the impression that the cars are trying to please the largest possible audience. Yet lovers of high-performance machinery won’t be disappointed with the 2.5XT’s cockpit, which has the requisite instrumentation tidily presented by electroluminescent white-on-black gauges ringed by dimly glowing red circles. The seats in the 2.5XT are as firm and supportive as the furniture you’d find in reputable German sports sedans.

Another thoughtful feature typical of the Subaru approach is that the rear wiper will automatically switch from intermediate to constant speed when the driver selects reverse gear.

Even the Sportshift override system for the five-speed automatic caters to discerning drivers. Like other systems on the market, a sideways swipe of the console-mounted selector lever pops it over into the manual slot, where forward and backward movements provoke up- and downshifts. As in other cars, buttons on the steering wheel duplicate those selections. But in the Outback, you can thumb one of the buttons and get a response even when the center selector is in the normal drive position.
Thus, if you’re dozing along in drive and suddenly spot a stationary car in your lane and a break in traffic, you can thumb the button for a downshift and scoot into the gap. You could also mash the gas pedal and wait for a downshift, but here you’d find a fairly deliberate pause while the computer thinks about the smoothest way to do that.
The system reverts to normal automatic operation within a few seconds, but it’s nice to have the car standing by for further instruction, and we found ourselves taking advantage of the feature fairly often. Another thoughtful feature typical of the Subaru approach is that the rear wiper will automatically switch from intermediate to constant speed when the driver selects reverse gear. And here’s something for those Lake Tahoe drivers: The outside-temperature gauge flashes when the ambient conditions drop below 37 degrees.
Most of what makes the Outback a convenient and pleasurable vehicle to use is less visible than obvious gadgetry. When they found that the previous brake booster was expanding under pressure, Subaru’s engineers used tie rods (like those holding a kettledrum together) to stop it. The result is a more predictable brake-pedal feel.

The Verdict: High-end image and high performance in one package.

Subarus have always had sashless windows, and the new Outback is no exception. If you ask a Subaru engineer, such as Martyn Harding, why, he’ll answer that it’s better to add that metal to the door-aperture surround, where it forms part of the body’s impact-absorbing cage structure. Not coincidentally, Subaru foresees a five-star rating in all the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s crash tests.
We’re drawn strongly to the idea of a wagon that drives like a good car yet has nearly nine inches of ground clearance (along with pretty respectable approach and departure angles) and a four-wheel-drive system that will scramble up a rock-strewn grade like no leather-lined, quiet, smooth-riding luxury vehicle has a right to. We like that this Subaru is fast and stable on the road without ever suggesting its dual-purpose mechanicals. And we like very much that there is now a turbo Outback. Subarus were always cool. Now more of them are fast, too. That’s progress.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2005 Subaru Outback 2.5XT Limited
VEHICLE TYPE Front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 5-door wagon
PRICE AS TESTED $32,470
ENGINE TYPE Turbocharged and intercooled flat-4, aluminum block and headsDisplacement: 150 cu in, 2457ccPower (SAE net): 250 bhp @ 6000 rpmTorque (SAE net): 250 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
TRANSMISSION 5-speed automatic with manumatic shifting
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 105.1 inLength: 188.7 inWidth: 69.7 inHeight: 61.6 inCurb weight: 3640 lb
C/D-TEST RESULTS Zero to 60 mph: 7.1 secZero to 100 mph: 19.2 secZero to 120 mph: 32.0 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 7.8 secStanding ¼-mile: 15.6 sec @ 92 mphTop speed (governor limited): 130 mphBraking, 70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 204 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.74 g
FUEL ECONOMYEPA fuel economy city/highway driving: 19/24 mpgC/D-observed: 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

View Photos
Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

In just the second year of the latest generation, Porsche already offers the 911 in 14 varieties, which is about halfway to where it will probably end up once they’ve rolled out every possible iteration. The latest mutation of 911 DNA spawns the 2021 911 Targa, which features a power-retractable targa panel, but it isn’t a full-on convertible. It does, however, cost just as much as the cabriolet, thus raising sound questions about the point of this roof reengineering exercise. To which the answer is: Don’t overthink this. We’ve got a new 911 Targa 4, and seemingly the whole back end of the car pops off to hide a little piece of roof. And if you don’t think that’s cool, you’re welcome to peruse one of the many other 911s or just go down to the nearest pond and yell at the ducks.

2021 Porsche 911 Gets Targa 4 and 4S Models

2021 Porsche 911 Targa 4S Heritage Design Edition

The Targa’s top operates just as it did on the previous generation: The rear window cantilevers back as the top folds itself and tucks behind the rear seats, the glass then returning home on a 19-second round trip. On the previous Targa, it was possible to pop the top and smash that pricey piece of formed glassed into a brick wall or the Cayenne parked in the garage. In the newest generation, if the parking sensors detect any threats within 1.6 feet, the top will halt its disappearing act and alert the driver to the imminent danger. The Targa bar comes standard in silver and can be optioned in black. And be sure to keep this latest edition rubber side down or the two magnesium bars fitted to keep the targa panel taut would likely create a dazzling sparkler show.

View Photos

Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

The Targa is propelled by a familiar powertrain, a twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter flat-six mated to Porsche’s magnificent eight-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission. Starting at $120,650, the Targa 4 cranks out 379 horsepower and 331 pound-feet of torque. Upgrading to the 4S will run an additional $15,900 but bumps the power output to 443 horses and 390 pound-feet. Sadly, the Targa is only offered with all-wheel drive, but there’s a little morsel of redemption. As with the other S variants, a seven-speed manual transmission is offered as a no-cost option. The do-it-yourself gearbox replaces the electronically controlled limited-slip differential with a conventional limited-slip unit and includes the otherwise optional Sport Chrono package, which adds drive modes and dynamic engine mounts. Curious how the Targa will perform? Check out these tests of the Carrera S, Carrera S with the manual, Carrera 4, Carrera 4S and Carrera S Cabriolet.

View Photos

Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

Because it’s a Porsche, a plethora of performance goodies and dress-up items are available à la carte. The German-spec Targa 4S we drove had all the fixings, which, at $181,840, inflated the sticker price into capital-T 911 Turbo range. A 911 is beautiful to drive at any price point, but the Targa 4S’s extra performance gear certainly didn’t disappoint. The adaptive dampers (standard on both models) adeptly smooth the wrinkled pavement of old country roads, and the steering operates with impeccable precision and provides useful feedback. The brake pedal is perfect, and the optional carbon-ceramic rotors are unbothered by any abuse you can throw at them. The active anti-roll bars paired with rear-axle steering (both only available on the 4S) seemingly grant the Targa cornering superpowers and the driver instantaneous confidence. If launch-control starts don’t induce belly laughs, keep doing them until they do. The car won’t mind.
Of course, even a $180,000 Targa comes with a few caveats. The 911 coupes are stiffer than the convertibles, and the Targa feels a little more like the latter. The structure trembles a touch more over high-frequency washboard, and the tremors are amplified through the steering column. With the top peeled back and the wind deflector deployed from windscreen frame, there’s a bit of booming wind buffeting that occurs around 50 mph. And then there’s the additional mass. This loaded Targa 4S tipped the scales at hefty 3765 pounds, nearly 250 pounds more than the last Carrera 4S coupe we tested.

View Photos

Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

But all of those quibbles are rooted in logic, and the Targa is, at its core, an illogical machine. Sun worshippers are better off with a 911 Cabriolet; track rats will want a coupe. With so many models in the lineup, every 911 has a particular, focused mission—except this one. The Targa is the 911 that comes closest to whimsy. It’s here just for fun, to present an overly complex solution to a simple problem, and to deliver a throwback open-air experience without the hassle. If you don’t get it, don’t get it. The Targa and its audience will find each other, just as they always have.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Porsche 911 Targa 4/4S
VEHICLE TYPE rear-engine, all-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, 2-door targa
BASE PRICE 4, $120,650; 4S, $135,550
ENGINES twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter flat-6, 379 hp, 331 lb-ft; twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter flat-6, 443 hp, 390 lb-ft
TRANSMISSION 7-speed manual, 8-speed dual-clutch automatic
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 98.5 inLength: 177.9 inWidth: 72.9 inHeight: 51.1–51.2 inCargo volume: 5 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 3650–3750 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST) 60 mph: 3.0–3.8 sec100 mph: 7.3–8.6 sec1/4 mile: 11.3–12.0 secTop speed: 179–188 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST) Combined/city/highway: 19–20/17–18/23–24 mpg

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

JEFFREY G. RUSSELLCar and Driver

From the July 2003 issue of Car and Driver.
You might have noticed that periodically we find occasion to be unkind to a vehicle. The introduction of the Mercedes-Benz C230 Kompressor “sports coupe” for the 2002 model year was one such occasion (C/D, October 2001).

Best Sports Cars of 2020

$60K Sports Car Showdown

Forget for a moment our skepticism about the feasibility of any luxury automaker introducing a hatchback model to the small-car-phobic American public. BMW tried precisely the same thing with the 318ti between 1995 and 1999-with spectacularly poor results.
Forget, too, that this Mercedes looked, with its bulging bum and two-pane glass backlight, like a modern Renault (a company that was shamed out of America after foisting the Alliance on our fair country).

For the 2003 model of the C230, Mercedes has largely addressed our engine complaint with an all-new 1.8-liter, all-aluminum supercharged four-cylinder.

No, we were not rude to Mercedes for these reasons. Our real concerns had to do with the function of the automobile: (1) The engine, a 2.3-liter iron-block supercharged four-cylinder, was a far ruder thing than your humble author is on his worst days; (2) the standard-issue six-speed manual transmission was described by us as ropy, rubbery, and uncertain, not to mention just plain poor; (3) despite its “sports coupe” moniker, the C230 was not very sporty.

Even better, with this engine the C230 is, if not exactly transformed, at least a more pleasant thing to use.

For the 2003 model of the C230, Mercedes has largely addressed our engine complaint with an all-new 1.8-liter, all-aluminum supercharged four-cylinder. On paper, this engine would seem to be a step backward for Mercedes. It’s down about a half-liter of displacement compared with the old engine, and it makes less peak horsepower and torque. And it makes those peaks at higher revs. The old 2.3-liter-still the base engine in the SLK hardtop roadster for 2003-makes 192 horsepower at 5500 rpm and 200 pound-feet of torque at 2500 rpm. The new 1.8-liter engine makes 189 horsepower at 5800 rpm and 192 pound-feet of torque at 3500 rpm. Indeed, the sprint to 60 mph for the 1.8-liter 2003 model is an unremarkable 8.1 seconds-more than a half-second slower than the 2002 model. We attribute this, in part, to an engine-management system that will not allow for abusive standing starts. Try as you might, the engine will not rev above 4000 rpm with the clutch pedal in. This is not something most owners-the majority of whom we don’t anticipate will go bracket drag racing-need worry about.
On the other hand, the new motor allows the hatch to go another four or five miles on each gallon of gas, depending on whether you get the six-speed manual or the $1325 optional five-speed automatic.
Even better, with this engine the C230 is, if not exactly transformed, at least a more pleasant thing to use. The previous engine felt weak at low revs, despite its power advantage and greater displacement. Higher in the rev range, the 2.3 was rough. Worse, it sounded as if it had an acute and chronic case of gastrointestinal distress.

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2003 Mercedes-Benz C230 Kompressor
VEHICLE TYPE Front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 3-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED$27,860 (base price: $25,670)
ENGINE TYPE Supercharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 4-in-line, aluminum block and heads, SIM 4 engine-control system with port fuel injectionDisplacement: 110 cu in, 1796ccPower (SAE net): 189 bhp @ 5800 rpmTorque (SAE net): 192 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 106.9 inLength: 171.0 inCurb weight: 3290 lb
C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 8.1 secZero to 100 mph: 21.0 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 8.9 secStanding ¼-mile: 16.0 sec @ 88 mphTop speed (governor limited): 131 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 161 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.84 g
FUEL ECONOMYEPA city driving: 21 mpgC/D observed: 22 mpg

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

From the May 2003 issue of Car and Driver.
Important question from C/D’s crack team of medical specialists: Are you getting your Recommended Daily Allowance (U.S. RDA) of adrenaline? Studies show that excessive yawning, droopy eyelids, pallid skin, loss of muscle tone, falling hair, and lack of consortium may be caused by adrenaline deficit.

Luxury Sports Sedans Face Off

Tested: Y2K Super Sedan Comparison

BMW M3 Will Get the Same Big Mouth as the 4-Series

May we suggest a compact adrenaline-delivery system (CADS)?
Don’t worry about installation. Due to relentless competition in the new-car market, a few automakers are now offering special models with CADS built in at the factory. For this comparison, we’ve been testing a trio of fast-acting units guaranteed to brighten your eyes before they have a chance to blink.
The gold standard of this group is surely the BMW M3, a 3-series coupe patiently transformed into a g-machine at the M spa deep in Bavaria. We chose the coupe version, although a convertible is also available. The M3 gets a lusty 3.2-liter in-line six amped up to 333 horsepower at 7900 rpm, in part thanks to six separate throttle valves, one in each intake stream, positioned down close to their respective intake valves. This arrangement, more common on racing engines, shortens throttle-response time. Throughout the M3, components from other BMW models are brought into play, either for strength or to tune for performance. For example, the M3 wears the heavier differential from the even more powerful M5.
All this tweaking costs money, of course. Our Imola Red test sample hit the pavement at $50,270, ready to run.
Another approach to adrenaline flow, fabled since the early days of automobiling, is the supercharger. It compresses intake air, forcing more flow into the cylinders. More air is more power, when done correctly. And it sure works in the C32 AMG from Mercedes-Benz. This is the small Benz, the C-class four-door, energized with 349 horsepower and all togged out for speed. The Kompressor, as the Germans spell it, is a positive-displacement type, which means no waiting for boost. Therefore, a small engine can be thoroughly convincing as it acts big.
Chassis muscles include 17-inch wheels, 7.5 inches wide in front and 8.5 inches in back, wearing low-profile Z- and Y-rated tires. The bad news is $54,370, including $655 for extra-snazzy metallic paint.
And now for the news: Minutes before we loaded up our test gear, Audi turned over a European-spec S4 for review. As before, the S4 is the sporting version of Audi’s A4 sedan line, with Quattro all-wheel drive, electronic differential locks front and rear, a six-speed manual, grippy rubber, and form-fitting driver’s quarters. But no more twin-turbo V-6. This new one inspires (compels?) adrenaline with an all-aluminum 4.2-liter V-8 that sings to 7000 rpm.
Think of this comparison as a cardiac stress test. Can you stand it?
Please fasten your seatbelt and let the adrenaline flow.

Third Place: Mercedes-Benz C32 AMG
If this adventure is a daring daylight probe into the upper reaches of a driver’s pulse rate, which it is, then it sets up the expectation that the most civilized entry will finish last. It did.
For the purest adrenaline jolt, you need a manual gearbox. The C32 AMG comes in five-speed auto only. Not a good start.

Highs: A Niagara of torque right now, on-rails handling in the daily commute, peaceful at interstate velocities, good-fitting driver’s quarters.

Still, not every enthusiast wants his juices stimulated to a full-bore gush all the time. This Benz has an appealing way of butting out of the conversation at just the right times. Planning an interstate jaunt? The C32 is easily the smoothest and quietest of the group when you need a transit capsule, with the least abusive ride. Straight-ahead stability is excellent. You can click off miles by the hundreds without pain.
And don’t forget those times when it’s your turn to drive the foursome off to dinner. Back-seaters never share the adrenaline, only the abuse. This Benz tops the others for space and comfort, and it won’t beat up on your friends (if the roads are decent).
Moreover, it’s really quite endearing in the way it goes about your daily rounds. The steering is quick and sharp, and the suspension, which resists cornering roll as if it had taken a solemn vow, resists brake dive, too. The seat is shaped exactly right to hold you in place. You find yourself grinning as you carve your path. Want to nail that Starbucks cup as it rolls toward the ditch? No problem. With the front tire or the rear? You really feel a gymnast’s confidence about maneuverability.
Just one little problem—this is a gathering of extremist cars. It’s about pushing limits, and doing so with cool aplomb. What’ll she do? And the civilized little C32 loses its poise under pressure.

Lows: Uncommunicative at the handling limits, clattering engine at idle, lengthy boot­up time on starting, dinky dashboard “PRND,” meager array of instruments.

Tire grip, as measured on the skidpad, is less than the others, 0.81 g versus the Audi’s 0.85 and the BMW’s 0.87. But that’s a minor concern compared with the way the Benz feels when pushed. First, the computer stability control won’t let you anywhere close to the edge. It kills the power in a big way when lateral g ramps up beyond “brisk.” Push the ESP button to cancel, and the previously polite C32 goes incommunicado. The brakes bring on huge understeer as you go deep into turns. And the fast-ratio steering gives very little sense of slip in the front tires. This is a car in which you cautiously edge up and up toward the limit and hope you never quite get there.
Maintaining control during our lane-change test was iffy, too, with many screaming-tire skids off the course. This car hates our test procedure, which requires ESP off. With ESP on, it’s stable and slow. With ESP off, the C32 was quicker than the Audi on a lucky run. But most runs were cone whackers. For road emergencies, we’d leave the ESP on.
When the path is straight, however, the C32 really lays its ears back. The engine is an AMG adaptation of M-B’s 3.2-liter V-6, supercharged to 349 horsepower. The crank-driven blower is a Lysholm-type using meshed screws to give positive displacement. In other words, big torque at low revs. Thrust tracks your right foot exactly.
Acceleration is as thrilling as it is easy to produce. The Benz was a fraction behind the others to 60 mph, fastest at the end of the quarter-mile, and tied with the others for time to that distance, clocking 106 mph through the eyes. You won’t confuse the C32 with a civilized car when the hammer is down. It screams a hard yowl toward the 6200-rpm indicated redline. Idle is remarkably clattery, too.

The Verdict: A sweetie when you’re running 8/10ths.

The automatic clicks off snappy shifts. It learns quickly of your moods (the computer is smart when it wants to be) and does well at anticipating when to change gears when you’re hustling. We very much like the manumatic shifter. Nudge the lever left for down, right for up, or hold right for a prompt default to D when you’re done playing.
Done? Are you ever done? The C32 ends up third because, as a playmate, it’s always a bit aloof.
2003 Mercedes-Benz C32 AMG349-hp V-8, 6-speed manual, 3864 lbBase/as-tested price: $52,120/$54,370C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 5.2 sec100 mph: 12.6 sec150 mph: 34.0 sec1/4 mile: 13.6 @ 106 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 174 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 gC/D observed fuel economy: 18 mpg

Second Place: BMW M3
The BMW M3 is one of those legends that every car guy salutes. Even Camaro pilots give it the eye on the street. Years of heroic numbers on test tracks and torrents of superlatives from magazine scribes add up to swaggering cred.
How could a legend finish second here, back from first place by a wide six-point gap? The short answer is, competition keeps everybody honest, even legends. Audi came up with a better answer.

Highs: expert shifting seem easy, no holes in the output curve, big power when you let it rev, blue-chip cred in any crowd.

That said, the M3 remains a machine to be reckoned with, as distinct from the S4 as cabernet is from zinfandel. This is a strongly flavored choice, muscular and deliberate, ferociously powerful, and not at all shy about its performance compromises. It always acts like the automotive jock it is, every mile of every day.
The M3 checks in at a trim 3394 pounds, less than the S4 by 470 pounds, and 257 pounds under the C32. The engine is an undeniably heroic in-line six; it’s powerful and flexible, willing to rev to 8000, yet strong all the way up, with no soft spots in the output curve. Variable valve timing really works here.
What about the M3’s adrenaline output? In its 4.8-second sprint to 60 mph, it showed taillights to the others, and it stayed ahead all the way to 150 mph, albeit with a tight margin; quarter-mile time is the same for all at 13.6 seconds. You must work the six-speed to stay ahead, however, as shown by the top-gear 30-to-50 and 50-to-70 bursts, where the larger-displacement Audi had a significant advantage.

DAVID DEWHURST

Unlike other BMWs, the M3 is never the silky, whirring machine. It’s raw in its engine noises, interior booms, gear whines, tire songs, and pipe-organ resonances. Raw and quite loud. Always the jock. And sometimes rude. We noticed an odd “death rattle” from the engine room each time the ignition was switched off. And the bixenon headlights sound a bad-mannered grunt as they rotate through their alignment ritual on startup.

Lows: Raw rather than refined in its noises, pounding ride, heavy clutch, 50 grand and cloth seats?

A hormone-injected 3-series BMW sounds as if it would be a frisky, flingable sportster. In fact, the M3 feels heavy and reserved. Steering effort increases very little as you bite into a turn. Some drivers read that as “effort too low.” All agree that communication is a bit aloof. The M3 also needs more turning of the wheel than the others, so direction changes seem less eager. The clutch is a workout. Some of us complained mildly about the driving position; for example, the left-foot rest seems too close to the driver relative to the pedals.
The cloth bucket seat, with numerous mechanical adjusters including one for height, seemed rather stingy at the $50-thou mark, but it’s very effective at holding the driver in place when the scenery starts to blur. On the skidpad, grip topped all the others at 0.87 g. This car is reliable for its understeer, and it’s not at all twitchy as you probe for its limits. It always feels trusty, but hardly spirited.
Don’t expect the famous BMW ride. Few road cars are as stiff-legged as this. And the seat is alive with vibrations at interstate speeds.
Even though the M3 thankfully lacks the extroverted wings, spoilers, and spats that other makers reach for to mark their sporting cars, it’s still easy to spot. The nose-down posture and the combination of wide 45-series tires in front and even wider 40s in back, on wheels that fill the wells, along with a bit of sculpting under the front bumper and chrome vents on each front fender, are enough to tip off even Mustang men.

The Verdict: Packing a magnum caliber is not about smiles.

Interior detailing is distinctive, too, while remaining nicely understated. The dials substitute gray backgrounds for the usual BMW black. There are M Sport logos on the speedo and shifter, and red-and-blue stitching sets off the leather-covered wheel.
Look, too, for the “sport” button down near the console. It quickens the response of the electronic throttle, making the M3 seem livelier to the touch, yet not jerky in the manner of some Detroiters.
Interesting. But regardless of switch positions, the M3 is never less than intensely sporty.
2003 BMW M3333-hp Inline-6, 6-speed manual, 3394 lbBase/as-tested price: $48,195/$50,270C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 4.8 sec100 mph: 12.3 sec150 mph: 32.7 sec1/4 mile: 13.6 @ 105 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 161 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 gC/D observed fuel economy: 19 mpg

First Place: Audi S4 Quattro
A big V-8 changes everything. This new S4 makes the deep-throated rumblings you just don’t expect from smaller cars–and that famous burble on decel. Who needs Bose?

Highs: Hooray for V-8 rumble, Nureyev moves when the going gets twisty, frictionless controls, curvaceous sheetmetal pulled as tight as spandex.

Turbos, as in Audi’s previous S4, can be plenty fast, but they never have the no-waiting torque, nor do they ramp up in a trusty way as you dip into the power. And they never have the magic burble, either.
This new S4 gets the company’s 4163cc, five-valves-per-cylinder, all-aluminum V-8 rated at 340 horsepower at 7000 rpm. It has a bottomless reservoir of torque–adrenaline delivery, no waiting–and great flexibility. Nothing loafs along like a substantial V-8. This one, Audi says, is no heavier than the twin-turbo 2.7 V-6 of the previous S4.
It mates to a six-speed manual gearbox (an automatic is available) and Quattro all-wheel drive with a Torsen center differential. Lots of machinery has been tucked under the A4’s pretty-much-unchanged skin, including 8.0-by-18-inch wheels with 235/40 tires and 13.6-inch vented front brake discs.
All these details work together in tightly orchestrated harmony. The controls are light to the touch, including the clutch. The shifter snicks through its pattern happily, and the steering feels lively and quick. Effort increases nicely with speed.

Lows: Rock-hard ride, blue headlights make blotchy pattern, lots of rolling and whirring sounds when in motion.

Out on the twisty roads, the S4 quickly became the favorite. The firm Recaro bucket keeps the driver in place without straining. The stability control is so subtle in its operation that you never feel it intrude (unless you’ve made a big mistake). Chassis dynamics are simply superb. As you brake deep into a turn, the S4 puts its belly to the ground and maintains amazing stability as you pick up the arc toward the exit and squeeze on the power. Roll angles are tightly controlled. The shocks keep body motions on a short leash. You can feel the tires scratching and straining for grip as the front and rear electronic differential locks respond to the V-8 torque. The Quattro’s stern discipline keeps redistributing the driving forces, allowing you to get the throttle open early yet cling confidently to your intended line. This is a car that’ll work with you! Few sporting cars are this open in their communication, and so disinclined to mischief. Of this trio, the S4 is in a class by itself, scoring the full 10 points in our handling rating, two above the M3 and three above the C32. It also earned a 10 in fun to drive, decisively above the others. Would the throaty motor music be worth a point all by itself? It might.

DAVID DEWHURST

There is a downside to the taut chassis muscles, however. The ride quality is darn stiff. The S4 would find jolts on glass roads. Ride impacts may be marginally sharper than the M3’s, although the tires are somewhat quieter over texture. Cockpit noises are less than in the M3, but both are similar in the vibes they put through the seat on the interstate.
Interior style follows Audi’s tasteful approach, black with thin chrome bezels and textured sweeps of metal in place of the wood trim of other models. The gas pedal is tight against the tunnel, meaning that the driver’s knee gets a good polishing. The brake pedal is high, adding to the challenge of heel-and-toe operation. The HVAC controls are low, and they mostly go invisible when you’re wearing sunglasses. The fat wheel rim and high-sided Recaros work together to make wide guys complain about entry and exit. Tilting the wheel helps, of course. But a confining driver space is inherent to sporting cars. It’s a part of the S4’s authenticity. And it pays off when you’re cooking.

The Verdict: An everyday car went to the gym and came back an Olympian.

Unfortunately, the rear-seat space is sporty, too. The cushion is deeply contoured for two occupants, which means passengers three across will all be sitting in the wrong places.
But who cares? This four-door is all about mainlining adrenaline to the left front seat, and it delivers three bags full. We predict the S4 will soon become famous for the trusty way it carves up the back roads. The V-8 rumble and its generosity of torque just add to the joy.
Here’s your chance to catch a rising star.
2003 Audi S4 Quattro340-hp V-8, 6-speed manual, 3864 lbBase/as-tested price (C/D EST): $45,000/$45,000C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 5.0 sec100 mph: 12.8 sec150 mph: 34.4 sec1/4 mile: 13.6 @ 103 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 168 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.85 gC/D observed fuel economy: 16 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 June 2005 issue of Car and Driver.
Chrysler’s 300C SRT8 is the car we thought the American auto industry would not build again. After the muscle-car era, U.S. automakers relinquished the high-performance family-sedan formula to the Germans (who added refinement but charged elitist prices) and Japanese (who charged a little less than the Germans but somehow sterilized the whole thing).

Every Full-Size Sedan Ranked from Worst to Best

The Best Sedans of 2020

On occasion, the home industry was good for the affordable yet unrefined eye-opener that temporarily salved our pain—to name a few, the Buick Grand National and GNX, the Chevrolet Impala SS, and the Ford Taurus SHO. Those vehicles offered performance and price but lacked the refinement of the import brands. For 2004, Cadillac gave us the 400-hp CTS-V that matched the performance and refinement of the über-sedans, but at $51,485, GM charges fully for it.
What makes the SRT8 version of Chrysler’s 300C exceptional is that it’s the first sedan from anyone, anywhere, to combine the refinement and performance of the pricey supersedans with a sticker of $42,095, no incentive necessary. It’s something the U.S. auto industry should have done long ago, but it was worth the wait.

Highs: Performance shames that of most sports cars, $42,095 base price, machine-gun exhaust note, Porsche-grade stopping distances, room for five.

Without the 10Best-winning 340-hp 300C, which probably wouldn’t have gestated in its current form had it not been for the Mercedes merger, SRT (Street and Racing Technology) director Dan Knott would not have had such a superb starting point on which to perform the modifications necessary to make the car into something worthy of SRT badging. For those whose free time is completely taken up by reruns of VH1’s Strange Love, the SRT division of Chrysler and Dodge is akin to Mercedes-Benz’s AMG and BMW’s M division in that they take regular production cars and up the ante until they have about 50 more horsepower than you’d expect.
In the case of the 300C SRT8, the enhanced engine makes 425 horsepower and 420 pound-feet of torque from a bored-out, high-compression-ratio 6.1-liter version of the corporate 5.7-liter Hemi V-8. Tricks such as variable valve timing or a multistage intake manifold are not present. New stuff includes just a single hot camshaft sitting in the block, 16 lightened valves, and a forged crankshaft that allows the large V-8 to spin to a melodic 6400 rpm. The torque peak arrives at 4800 rpm. That may sound high for an engine this big, but the copious displacement means enough torque is available off idle to put the limited-slip differential to good use. Compared with the 5.7-liter it’s based on, the 6.1-liter feels sportier and, oddly, smaller because of its penchant for high revs.
An eager five-speed automatic modified by SRT provides immediate upshifts and downshifts and is a terrific partner to the 6.1-liter. Full-throttle shifts at the redline are accompanied by an explosive sonic boom from the exhaust. Back off the throttle, and the sound becomes mellow and unobtrusive. At 70 mph we measured 69 dBA of noise, but you don’t hear the engine as much as you hear the wind rushing around the brick-like body and the hum of the wide tires. Following the logic of AMG’s offerings, the German automaker’s American operations do not offer a clutch pedal. Manual transmissions in sedans this large and with this much power somehow feel out of place and too often suffer from high efforts that make them difficult to drive smoothly.

KEVIN WING

The SRT8 is a big sedan with 56 cubic feet of front passenger space and 51 in the rear. It isn’t light at 4212 pounds, but at just below 10 pounds per horsepower the SRT8 will bust through 60 mph in 4.7 seconds on its way to a 13.2-second quarter-mile at 109 mph. If the SRT8 had been included in the “Executive Adrenalators” comparison [ C/D, November 2004], it would have been less expensive and offered more sheetmetal and its acceleration would have been at the top of the heap. The SRT8’s ungoverned top speed of 173 mph also would have placed it on top and is especially startling when you consider the block-like drag coefficient of 0.36 and the garage-door-sized frontal area of 25.8 square feet. Better yet, the SRT8 outpaces the ungoverned CTS-V by 12 mph and all AMG products (which are governed at 155 mph) by 18 mph. Academic for sure, but if you paid more for those other cars, you’d definitely want the bragging rights.
The weight of the SRT8 is also effectively hidden by suspension changes that lower and stiffen the chassis. Striking 20-inch wheels that look nearly big enough to double as turbofan blades on a Boeing 777-200LR are wrapped by uncompromised Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar tires that adhere to the skidpad to the tune of 0.89 g. For those who don’t want to buy new wheels and snow tires (you’d have to buy new wheels if you wanted snows, since a 20-inch snow tire doesn’t exist at the moment), Chrysler will equip the SRT8 with all-season Goodyear RS-As that might have a better chance of getting you out of a snowy driveway. The tire sizes are staggered—smaller 245/45R-20 fronts and slightly larger 255/45R-20 rears—and on a dry, tight handling course there is some initial understeer, but it’s easily canceled by a quick crack of the throttle. Steering feel isn’t quite as award-worthy as the rest of the chassis. The power-assisted rack-and-pinion setup is predictable and never surprises, but it lacks the feedback you want in a car so willing to defy centripetal forces.

Lows: Acres of gray plastic inside, choppy bad-road ride, spongy brake-pedal feel.

Standard on the SRT8 is a specially tuned stability-control system that allows for more slipping and sliding than the regular 300C’s more intrusive system. As with Mercedes products, pushing the stability button on the dash doesn’t completely disable the control system, but you’ll be permitted even more freedom before the system finally intervenes. With the button pushed, hanging the tail out for those Dukes of Hazzard moments is as easy as cranking the steering wheel and matting the accelerator— Yee-haw!
The Duke boys might appreciate the stiff ride of the SRT8, but if you’re looking for a supple ride, the regular-strength 300C may be more your speed. In the SRT version you and your passengers will experience more bucking than Travolta did in Urban Cowboy. The dubs, the low-profile tires, and the firmer suspension increase the grip but degrade the ride over less than glassy pavement. Fortunately, even the harshest impacts don’t elicit quivers from the unyielding unibody. The strong structure imparts the SRT8 with a feeling of refinement and serenity that rivals that of sedans from das Vaterland.
The brakes are also up there with the finest from the autobahn nation. Stops from 70 mph take only 162 feet of real estate, and these brakes do so over and over again with no sign of fade. The front rotors measure 14.2 inches, and the rears are 13.8 inches tall, with four-piston calipers doing the clamping at every corner. Despite the SRT8’s remarkable braking performance at the track, after the car returned from testing, the brake-pedal feel became a bit spongy, requiring more travel than we like before biting down.

KEVIN WING

What doesn’t quite measure up to more expensive sedans is the interior of the SRT8. On the plus side there are new pseudo-suede and leather front seats that look like Viper seats let out between the bolsters. The chairs are supportive, and the wider size will fit big-and-tall shoppers with ease. An easy-to-use optional navigation system kept us from getting lost whenever we became disoriented by the SRT8’s acceleration. The nav system is part of a $1965 package that includes an upgraded and crisp-sounding stereo with Sirius satellite radio. Metallic trim adorns the center console and doors, but it doesn’t change the plastic-filled cabin to the extent that the rest of the modifications alter the character of the car. Some might call the interior understated, and it is certainly not an unpleasant place to spend time—it’s just a bit dull in light of the stellar performance.

The Verdict: AMG-like performance, Mercedes-like refinement—at a Chrysler price.

DaimlerChrysler must certainly recognize the greatness and appeal of the 300C SRT8 as it will soon be joined by SRT8 versions of the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Charger and Magnum. Right now, the only other car selling in the low 40s that approaches the joy we get from the Chrysler is the lightweight, uncompromised Lotus Elise. Obviously, the two cars couldn’t be more different. So why do we want both of them in our garage so badly? Because in both cases a Ferrari-like devotion to driver happiness is the reason they exist, and no one does it as well for the money.
Counterpoint
You can call the 300C SRT8 a poor man’s Mercedes E55 AMG or a four-door Dodge Viper, but I just call it impressive. With a base price of about 42 large, the SRT8 runs right with a Cadillac CTS- V (about 10 grand more) and not too far behind a Corvette. Chrysler has built a true four-door American muscle car here—for pity’s sake, it’s a 4212-pound brick that can hit 173 mph! Perhaps more impressive is that from 70 to 0, it halts those two-plus tons in a fade-free 162 feet. This thing can stop and go better than LeBron. And it’s got mad street cred, thanks to jet-fan dubs, Bentley-esque styling, and a lowered stance. As Chick Hearn used to say, “Slam dunk!” —Ron Kiino
The folks at Chrysler’s SRT had better be careful. I doubt their German bosses paid much attention when the econobox Neon was turbocharged to within an inch of its life or when a Dodge Ram pickup truck was endowed with 500 horses. But now SRT has struck on something a bit dearer to those bosses’ hearts—the Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG. At 4.7 seconds, the 300C SRT8 is just 0.4 second slower to 60 mph. However, the SRT8 outstops the E55 by 11 feet from 70 mph and outgrips it on the skidpad. The SRT8 is also more involving to drive and less like a tool for speed. One last detail: It costs $40,000 less than the Benz. Uh-oh. —Dave VanderWerp
What a brute. The steering is nothing if not manly. The ride quality is just this side of Fred Flintstone. The interior décor is distinctly austere for a $42,095 car. I mutter about these demerits as I rumble around Michigan’s battered byways. Then I tramp on the gas, and— vroom!—a half-mile disappears before a sense of license preservation sets in. I repeated this process regularly during my travels with the SRT8 and emerged with the same conclusion every time: Horsepower is good. More horsepower is better. Not to mention habit-forming. As a child of the muscle-car era, I suppose I subscribe to the foregoing more than most. But I also suppose no one is immune. —Tony Swan

Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS
2006 Chrysler 300C SRT8
VEHICLE TYPEFront-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED$45,450
ENGINE TYPEPushrod 16-valve V-8, iron block and aluminum heads, port/direct/port and direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 370 in3, 6059 cm3Power: 425 hp @ 6200 rpmTorque: 420 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
TRANSMISSION5-speed automatic
CHASSISSuspension (F/R): multilink/multilinkBrakes (F/R): 14.2-in vented disc/13.8-in vented discTires: Goodyer Eagle F1 Supercar, F: 245/45ZR-20 99Y R:255/45ZR-20 101Y
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 120.0 inLength: 196.8 inWidth: 74.1 inHeight: 57.9 inPassenger volume: 107 ft3Trunk volume: 16 ft3Curb weight: 4212 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 4.7 sec100 mph: 11.2 sec130 mph: 20.0 secRolling start, 5–60 mph: 4.9 secTop gear, 30–50 mph: 2.7 secTop gear, 50–70 mph: 3.0 sec1/4 mile: 13.2 sec @ 109 mphTop speed (redline limited): 173 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 162 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.89 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMYObserved: 14 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCombined/city/highway: 16/14/20 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 June 1970 issue of Car and Driver.
The difference between the Datsun 240Z and your everyday three-and-a-half thousand dollar sports car is that about twice as much thinking went into the Datsun. It shows. For the money the 240Z is an almost brilliant car.

My Fair Lady: A Visual History of the Nissan Z-Car

Datsun 240Z Designer Yoshihiko Matsuo Has Died

Tested: 1979 Datsun 280-ZX Gets Luxurious

The people at Datsun balk at calling the 240Z a sports car. To them it’s a “personal” GT car. Even so, they know perfectly well who the customers will be-sports car buyers-adventuresome young Americans who were collecting their dollars for an Opel GT or MGB-GT or Porsche 914 until something better came along and changed their minds. Still, the “personal” GT car description somehow fits. It separates the Datsun from whimsical, superficial sports cars like the Opel GT and moves it off into a mature class of automobiles that has more to offer than just amusement. The Z-car, as it has come to be called, is a very real transportation automobile, meant as much for coast-to-coast journeys as it is for playing around on idyllic summer days. Datsun is probably right. The Z-car really isn’t a sports car.

1-Owner Datsun 240Z Relives Nissan’s Glory Days

Lime-Yellow 1973 Datsun 240Z Is up for Auction

It is exactly the kind of car we have come to expect from Datsun, however. You can’t really consider Datsun to be an innovator-it didn’t invent the overhead cam engine or disc brakes or independent suspension-but it is one of the most ambitious car manufacturers alive these days and it has a habit of incorporating these sophisticated systems into easily affordable cars. The budget priced PL5I0 sedan is the envy of all its competitors, and the vitality in the engine and gearbox of the 2000 sports car makes a Triumph feel like a first-round loser in the soapbox derby. With that kind of siblings, the Z-car would naturally be a gifted performer.
And it is. Curiously, a double standard has grown up through the years concerning sports cars and equivalently priced- family sedans-the sedans are always more powerful. Not so with the Z-car. It will keep right up with your neighbor’s Bonneville and leave all of the sports cars in its class scuttling along in the slow lane. At Orange County Raceway the test car ran through the quarter in 16.1 seconds at 86.5 mph more than one second and 9 mph quicker than a Triumph TR6. It is also several mph faster than a 2-liter Porsche 91IT, although the elapsed time is not quite as good because the Z-car continues Datsun’s practice of using axle ratios suitable for the Bonneville salt flats.
Of course, it should also be obvious that the Z-car continues Datsun’s practice of using exceptionally powerful engines-in this case a 2.4-liter single-overhead-cam Six. It’s a new engine for Datsun-yet not really new because it is actually one-and-a-half of the Fours used in the PL51O sedan. With the help of two SUs and a 9.0-to-one compression ratio it generates 151 horsepower at 5600 rpm, and if you are so inclined you can turn it all the way to 7000 rpm before you hit the red line. We aren’t inclined, however. Like all Datsuns, the torque curve is as flat as Nebraska and the engine noise is so unpleasant above 6500 that there is just no reason to ever go up there.

Datsun tackles the exhaust emission problem with three separate external devices: an air pump to inject air into the exhaust manifold, a valve that admits air into the intake manifold immediately after the throttle is closed to aid combustion of fuel that is already in the manifold; and diaphragm which prevents the throttle from closing for several seconds after you lift your foot off the accelerator. Only one of these is noticeable to the driver-the last item. It keeps engine speed too high, making smooth upshifts impossible, and seriously detracts from the pleasure of driving. Throttle response, particularly at low speeds, also suffers, due to subtleties of the system.
In most other ways the Z-car is kind to its driver. The steering effort is moderate; the shifting motions are light and acceptably precise; and the driving position is excellent. The brakes-discs in front and leading/ trailing shoes in finned aluminum drums at the rear-stop the car well enough, 259 feet (0.83G) from 80 mph, but very high pedal effort is required for a panic stop. In addition, the system is spongy and offers very little feel to help the driver control lock-up. In the rain things get even worse-at least in the test car. Water somehow splashes up onto the braking surfaces and sharply reduces stopping ability. In this respect the Z-car is not satisfactory.
The Datsun’s suspension system-a fully independent MacPherson strut arrangement both front and rear-also has a few quirks. The test car would understeer more in right than in left turns. You would never notice it on the road but on the test track the car was very well balanced when cornering to the left but would plow heavily when turning right. There is no reason that this should be typical of all of the Z-cars. The test car had expanders between several coils in the left front spring to overcome a sag, and the asymmetric handling can probably be blamed on that spring. We don’t know what to blame for the poor directional stability, however. When you’d like to be going straight down the road the Z-car would rather weave back and forth. The wiggles are small-and they seem to correct themselves-but they are annoying, nonetheless.
Neither Datsun nor we are entirely satisfied with the choice of tires. Bridgestone 175 SR 14 radials were selected as standard equipment because of their good handling characteristics, but they are also responsible for an abnormally high level of road noise, particularly over tar strips and small bumps. The ride quality of the Z-car is actually quite comfortable for a sporting car of its class but the noise tends to make you think otherwise. Knowing this. Datsun engineers were deeply involved in tire testing at the time of our road test and hoped to have a more compatible tire before very many Z-cars were imported.
While there are problems in the chassis that still must be worked out, it’s an altogether different story in the cockpit. At times during the test we found ourselves being very critical of the Z-car-judging harshly where it fell short of perfection and completely forgetting that it sells for $3601. It seems far more expensive than any competitive similarly-priced sports car. We are back to the double standard for family cars and sports cars again. The Z-car has certain qualities that up to now were available only in sedans or very expensive GT cars. Silence is the best example. The engine noise level in the Datsun under normal operating conditions is roughly equal to that of an American intermediate sedan, which is to say that you hardly know it’s there. That doesn’t seem like a monumental achievement except that no one else in this price class has ever done it before.

And the 240Z is very comfortable which also makes it seem more expensive. The bucket seats are elaborately contoured and wrap around you slightly to keep you from sliding around. The backrest angle is adjustable in notches through a small range so you can find a position that suits. Head room, leg room and shoulder room are ample and the final little detail that makes it just right is the dead pedal.
The feeling of getting your money’s worth is reinforced by the complete instrumentation and rather complex looking controls. The speedometer (which for some reason starts at 20 mph) and the 8000-rpm tach are directly in front of the driver, and all of the normal small gauges and a clock are angled toward him from three pods centrally located on top of the instrument panel. A curious rod projects out of the right side of the steering column which has turntype switches for lights and windshield wipers and a button for the washers on its outer end. It works quite well when you get used to it but its biggest advantage is that it can be easily reached, even when you are strapped in with the shoulder belt On the console are two levers that look like they should be for lowering the landing gear or adjusting the flaps-it turns out that one is a hand throttle and the other is the choke (the 240Z always has to be choked to start).
The 240Z is obviously well conceived by standards universal to good automobiles but there has been an East-West struggle in the interior trim. When you consider the tremendous cultural differences between the Japanese and the Americans it’s surprising that any automotive styling could bridge the two. In some areas, like the 1953 Tijuana quilted vinyl on the console and on the sides of the luggage area and yellow wood rim on the steering wheel, the difference in taste is conspicuous. The instrument panel, too, has a characteristic flavor that is found in all Datsuns. It’s a one-piece affair, molded of soft energy absorbing plastic foam, and deeply contoured in a way that suggests nothing but a Datsun instrument panel: Not GT car in the fashion originated by the Italians, not 2-ton nickelodeon in the style championed by Detroit, but just plain Datsun. Elsewhere, the Z-car seems international in its appearance. The exterior styling is smooth and appropriately GT-like, drawing remarks like, “That’s not a Datsun, is it?” and “Man, how much did that thing cost ya?” It’s obviously attractive enough to generate a little envy in everyone who sees it and that is at least half the value of any automobile other than a 4-door sedan.
But while they are envying you for having a sports car the Z-car doesn’t shackle you with the normal sports car limitations. Not only is it comfortable and quiet but it also has a generous luggage area. From just behind the seats all the way back to the rear of the car is a flat area that will easily carry enough luggage for two people. Tie-down straps have been provided to secure small objects that like to roll around. And loading is easy because of the huge tailgate. It would be handier if the seat backs would fold forward so that small things could be unloaded from the front. As it is, the headrests are so high that there is little room left for passing bulky objects around them. Even so, the 240Z sets the new standard for utility in 2-passenger cars of this price.
And it is inevitable that we should come back to price because that ultimately decides the desirability of any car. At the time of the test the Z-car followed Datsun’s typical pricing policy for its sporting cars, everything is standard equipment. Every car, as it comes from the factory, has radial ply tires and an excellent push-button AM radio with a power antenna. It’s as simple as that. There will be options in the future, however. Tinted glass and a heated rear window will soon be available.
Price is the least of the Z-car’s problems -and it does have a few problems. Although it is splendidly conceived, we have the feeling that it’s not quite done yet. There is an annoying vibration somewhere in the drivetrain that you feel under full power, and as near as we can tell it is present in varying degrees in all cars. And as we mentioned before, the brakes are sensitive to splashed-up water which is a serious deficiency. Still, we are optimistic. After the test we sat down in a truth-telling session with the key men of Datsun USA, the importer, and they were intent on hearing any criticisms that we might put forth. It turned out that they were aware of every weakness that we had found and were working closely with the main engineering department in Japan to find solutions. We are confident that they will succeed. Since they were obviously bright enough technically to bring the Z-car this far along, the final rung on the ladder is within easy reach.
Even as it is, the 240Z is worth its price. Just between you and us, when Datsun gets it all straightened around, it might be worth a little more.
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