Evelyn Reynolds

From the May 1994 issue of Car and Driver.You won’t get this advice from “Donahue,” guys, so listen up: size matters.Face it, Pee-wee, Rosey Grier didn’t make the Pro Bowl because he learned how to cross-stitch. Wilford Brimley doesn’t work the commercial circuit because he’s a clotheshorse. And King Kong didn’t get lucky with Fay Wray because he had a hairy back.Granted, Dodge’s new Ram pickup can’t climb the Empire State Building, except maybe in the service elevator. But it is larger than life. And its size plays a big part in putting it at the top of the full-sized pickup class.The Ram’s immense measurements make their first impression when you open the door, because it requires a little leap to vault into the driver’s seat. Once you’re settled in, the echo of your low whistle will take a minute to quiet down. That’s because the Ram sports the biggest cab available on a full-size pickup. Headroom is about the same as in the Ford F150 and the Chevy C/K 1500, but the Ram boasts a 5.1-inch advantage in hiproom over the Chevy and a 3.6-inch edge over the Ford. (An early proposal, in fact, called for a fourth seatbelt on bench-seated models.) In overall length, the Ram also takes the crown. It’s 7.0 inches longer than the Ford and 10.2 inches longer than the Chevy. The short-bed Ram’s pickup box, how­ever, is marginally smaller than those of the competition.To fence in this real estate, the Chrysler styling team looked no further than the Unocal 76 rest stop for their inspiration. The designers at Freightliner must be impressed with the Dodge knockoff of their big rigs, maybe as and Rolex are with their imitators. In pro­file, the Ram’s fenders and the immense chrome grille look a little awkward—like a full-sizer trying to swallow a compact truck—but in the rear-view mirror the Ram looks as menacing as an 18-wheeler bear­ing down on your bumper.This kind of stage presence is guaran­teed to draw a crowd at Fingerle’s lum­beryard. But the Ram’s sheer mass does create some unique problems in situations where, say, a Nissan Altima would do the job. Addressing someone in the passenger seat over the somewhat hoarse powertrain might be better accomplished with a nine-digit zip code. You’ll need friends who know semaphore for parallel parking downtown, where they’ll flag you down into a space that could otherwise be occu­pied by two Ford Festivas.Otherwise, the Ram’s gargantuan girth doesn’t prevent it from performing like a pleasant mid-priced sedan. With the optional 5.2-liter V-8, the Ram we sam­pled would make any armchair trucker froth with envy. When coupled to a four-speed automatic with electric overdrive, the 220-horsepower V-8 sends the Ram scurrying to 60 mph in 8.7 seconds and forging on to a top speed of 113 mph. If you’re comparing apples to kiwi fruit, that’s the same top speed as a base Dodge Intrepid.The Ram also looks the family-sedan part, at least from the inside. Its simple dash contains all the gauges properly placed and clearly labeled. Two cupholders slide out from the dash above the radio. The rotary climate-control dials for temperature and fan speed are painlessly simple to use. And the largish steering wheel contains an airbag, a first in the class. Add the Laramie SLT trim pack­age, which gooses the sticker on the short-bed truck with the V-8 and an auto­matically shifted gearbox from $14,984 to $18,694, and the Ram gets the full-boat sedan treatment: a cloth interior, power windows and locks, and an AM/FM cas­sette radio. For construction foremen and anal-retentive urban cowboys, there’s a handy set of movable bins and netting behind the seats, plus storage space for a laptop computer in the fold-down center armrest.Anti-lock control is also included, but braking is nonetheless a sore point. Dodge claims best-in-class stopping distances and fade resistance, but we noted heavy fade during testing and recorded a mediocre stopping distance from 70 mph to stand­still of 214 feet. Still, the Ram does cor­ner in the car-like range at 0.73 g with min­imal understeer, and the rigid body shell and live-rear-axle suspension with longitudinal leaf springs handle all but the largest pavement pits without stepping sideways.So, don’t point and snicker at it because it buys from the big-and-tall rack. The Ram doesn’t carry its weight around its middle like its aging circle of full-sized friends. In size, look, and feel, the Ram is a barrel-chested gorilla of a truck, with enough muscle to elbow aside the chubby chimps at the top.Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS2004 Dodge Ram 1500Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 3-passenger, 2-door truckPRICEBase/As Tested: $14,984/$18,694ENGINE TYPE16-valve V-8, iron block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 318 cu in, 5210 ccPower: 220 hp @ 4400 rpmTRANSMISSION4-speed automaticDIMENSIONSWheelbase: 118.7 inLength: 204.1 inCurb weight: 4414 lbC/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 8.7 secZero to 100 mph: 30.9 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 9.0 secStanding ¼-mile: 16.8 sec @ 82 mphTop speed (governor limited): 113 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 214 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.73 gC/D FUEL ECONOMYObserved: 14 mpg

EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity: 13 mpgC/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the October 1995 issue of Car and Driver.Anything weighing more than two tons and casting an 18-foot shadow ought to be a national monument. Or, at the very least, federal law should prevent it from being named after an African antelope that is svelte, lithe, and agile. As if to rectify GM’s reckless stabs at nomenclature, hot-rodders have attempted for 34 years to make the Impala SS at least quick, if not agile. The latest attempt is the Callaway SuperNatural SS. “We hadn’t thought about modifying this car,” says Callaway Cars marketing director Rick Carey, “until a guy dropped off his own Impala and said to us, ‘Do what’s right.’ We already had the SuperNatural V-8 [C/D, June, 1995], so that was a good start.” “Doing what’s right” in Callaway-­speak involves depositing your Impala SS—new or used—in Old Lyme, Con­necticut, for about a week. The stock 260-horsepower engine is yanked pronto, of course, and its iron heads are replaced with aluminum versions whose ports have been polished to a Bulgari-quality luster. Larger-diameter valves are fitted. The cylinders are bored out 0.03 inch and a Callies forged-steel crankshaft with a 3.75-inch stroke is dropped into place, swelling displacement by 33 cubic inches. Next, the engine is enriched by Carillo rods, a Chevy MTG camshaft with greater lift and duration, and a 52 mm throttle-body.Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverSo that the own­er will experience as much of the new­found oomph as possible, Callaway recommends that the engine inhale via the company’s inelegantly named “Honker”—a 3.5-inch-diameter fresh-air duct and low-restriction air cleaner. And the V-8 exhales through dual 2.5-inch-diam­eter stainless-steel exhausts. Twin exhaust tips poke curbward just aft of both rear wheel wells, a layout that shortcuts some three feet of superfluous pipes and increases ramp clearance. This means your dramatic entrance into the A&W drive-in no longer generates a hail of angry sparks.According to Callaway, these minis­trations result in 404 horsepower at 5750 rpm and 412 pound-feet of torque at 4500 rpm, all of it 50-state legal and none of it inexpen­sive. At this point, you will already have shelled out $14,403. For which princely sum, frankly, the increase in perfor­mance—at least on the first SS we mea­sured—was slim. Compared with the stock Impala SS (C/D, June 1994), the Callaway SuperNatural romped to 60 mph just 0.3 second quicker and blinked through the quarter-mile 0.2 second sooner. Hey, you slam-dunk an extra 144 hp into any vehicle—even one the size of a high-school gym—and it ought to lean more toward Mr. Hyde than that, right?Part of the disap­pointing accelera­tion we traced to the stock engine-man­agement system and its attendant shift program. Upshifts under full throttle occurred at 5400 rpm—350 rpm shy of the burly new V-8’s power peak. Equally annoying were full-throttle second-to-third upshifts, in which the driver had to lift off the gas briefly to keep the engine from performing a Mel Tillis impersonation as it stuttered under the whip of a dominatrix rev limiter. Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverCallaway hauled our test car away and pondered all of this. When the car returned, the Connecticut yankees had replaced what they claimed was a faulty engine­ management box. The new one instructed the V-8 to shift at 5950 rpm—now in the meaty portion of the power curve—before imposing rev-limiting discipline at a heady 6000 rpm. (Well, heady for so many cubes.) Overnight, we had ourselves a real street rod. Sixty mph loomed large in 5.5 seconds (1.0 second better than stock) and the quarter-mile was history in 14.1 seconds at 100 mph (0.9 second quicker, 8 mph faster than stock). The moral: Don’t leave Old Lyme without that trick black box.As it happens, there are other Callaway virtues to consider. A mild $1014 suspension make­over, for example, that includes four adjustable Koni shocks and a set of Eibach springs—the latter a half-inch lower “but not much stiffer than stock,” says Carey. The droop in ride height is obvious, lending the SS a “let’s-stomp­-everything” silhouette that causes bystanders to gush with adoration. The springs and shocks also reduce roll, should you be so brave as to pitch this condominium into a hairpin. Also, they ensure that you will crush the two-inch chin spoiler the first time you nose this W.C. Fields baby over a California speed bump.Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverAdding to the festivities are four steamroller BFGoodrich Comp T/As—275/40s in the front, 315/35s at the tail­—which are mounted on raceworthy Forge-line wheels. The rears are 11.0 inches wide, 2.5 inches wider than stock. The result—apart from another $4000 assault on your wallet—is a contact patch the size of a small refrigerator and very little wheelspin under even the most radical of brake-torqued launches. Ride quality is slightly degraded, how­ever, and the front tires are now prone to tramline. Skidpad grip, compared with stock, goes from a not-bad 0.86 g to, ah, a not­-bad 0.86 g. To be fair, the Callaway SS is easier to hold in a steady tail-out pose, assuming you’ve located an 18-foot-wide lane to accommodate its porcine rump. A major runway or half of New Jersey will do.Working far better are the big-daddy Brembo brakes installed at the front. (Cough up another $4000.) This modification includes four-piston calipers and Pagid semi-metallic pads, hugging cross-drilled 13.1-inch rotors. Here, we measured improvement. From 70 mph, the Callaway SS stops in only 164 feet, which is a mere two feet shy of what a Porsche 911 Turbo can achieve. Holy cats. More Callaway Cars and the Man Behind ThemWhat a 911 cannot achieve is an exhaust that bellows, “I am one evil mother V-8!” right into the next county. This is appropriate for street rods. Unfortunately, there’s a part-throttle resonance that, at 2500 rpm, ricochets into one ear, stomps a steel-drum tattoo on your cerebellum, then performs a pounding pasodoble as it exits your other ear at about 2800 rpm. Full-throttle din is up 6 dBA—the differ­ence between Mozart and Megadeth.It’s like having an old Grand National stock car—”whOP-wah-wah-WHOOP!”—only with better paint and worse seats. (Even the Callaway guys are weary of the poorly contoured chairs and the steering wheel aimed at your left shoulder. They plan later to install Recaros canted per­manently toward the transmission-tunnel hump.) Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverWith the taxes and all options, the price of your new Impala SS has more than doubled. We’re talking about a $50,966 car based on a Chevrolet that GM has just axed from its lineup, very much like the 405-hp Corvette ZR-1, of which I just saw a zero-mileage example for sale in Columbus, Ohio, for just $966 more than Callaway’s Impala. This is somewhat difficult to explain to my 70-year-old neighbor Martin, whose own Caprice Classic, he says, “cost $18,910 on the nose, pardner, plus she don’t need a new muf­fler yet, like yours.”You know, you could also lay all of these rod mods on a Buick Roadmaster wagon.SpecificationsSpecifications
1995 Callaway SuperNatural SSVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $48,674/$50,966
ENGINEpushrod 16-valve V-8, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 383 in3, 6271 cm3Power: 404 hp @ 5750 rpmTorque: 412 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic 
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 115.9 inLength: 214.1 inCurb Weight: 4224 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 5.5 sec100 mph: 14.1 sec1/4-Mile: 14.1 sec @ 100 mphRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.1 secTop Speed (drag ltd): 154 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 164 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.86 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 16 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity: 16 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

The EV segment is a fickle and sometimes mysterious beast. It’s easy to get lost in a sea of contortionist tax-rebate rules, evolving manufacturer product strategies, and advertising bluster. Volvo’s new 2025 EX30 EV compact crossover is positioned to transcend the hype and exist on its own as a simple and satisfying vehicle first and foremost, regardless of powertrain or income bracket. Leading the effort is its $36,245 base price for the entry-level EX30 Core model. The stateside 2025 Volvo EX30 will be available in two strengths: the EX30 Single Motor Extended Range and the EX30 Twin Motor Performance. The EX30 Single Motor features a 268-hp electric motor mounted on the rear axle and a claimed range of 275 miles. It’s offered in three trims: Core ($36,245), Plus ($40,195), and Ultra ($41,895). The EX30 Twin Motor adds a motor on the front axle for a combined output of 422 horsepower and 265 miles of range, and it comes in two trims: Plus ($46,195) and Ultra ($47,895). Both models use a floor-mounted lithium-ion battery with 64.0 kWh of usable capacity. Style (Volvo’s Version)The design certainly adheres to the simplicity edict, as the exterior’s aero-mandated anonymity is saved only by an interpretation of the familial Thor’s Hammer headlamps and a prominent Volvo badge on the nose. The only “EX30” badging on our sample car resided discreetly on the upper section of the C-pillar. There are some Chevy Bolt EUV vibes in the rear doors, C-pillar, and hatch, but that’s a product of aerodynamics, structural integrity, and interior practicality. The EX30’s back glass is shorter and more upright than the Bolt’s, and the rear section is a bit bulkier and more squared off. The taillamp treatment is from the Volvo playbook, softened slightly to blend with the design. A paragon of purposefulness, the EX30’s interior takes the form-follows-function concept to its core. A single center-mounted vertically oriented screen handles the driver display, infotainment, and vehicle setting functions. Though it runs native software, it incorporates Google hands-free assistant, Google Maps navigation, and Google Play; remarkably, it’s the first Volvo to feature wireless Apple CarPlay. Despite our best efforts, the mapping software, as well as the native functions, worked flawlessly. We did have a hiccup or two with the wireless Apple CarPlay and finally resorted to using a cable, although we’ll note that the cars were pre-production examples. A pair of vents bookend the screen with another pair at the far ends, the space below covered by a smooth renewable woven flax textile in the twin-motor model and a flecked, composite substrate in the lower trims that contains recycled PVC. The carpet is manufactured from recycled plastic bottles, and the Twin Motor seats are a blend of recycled polyester and “responsibly produced” wool, which, although we previously didn’t know was a thing, sounds virtuous. Though the fabrics are as pleasing to the touch—some might say even more plush—as the petrochemical vinyl upholstery currently in use across the industry, it’ll be interesting to see how they weather 100,000 miles of hard use. The goal of all of this resourcefulness, according to Volvo, is to have the smallest carbon footprint of any Volvo car to date, based on over 124,000 miles of use with the current EU-27 electricity mix. Volvo claims 95 percent of the vehicle will be recyclable at the end of its life cycle. Altruistic aspirations aside, the exterior and interior designs create an undeniably minimalist but satisfying vibe of the best consumer designs, whether it be electronics, furniture, or cookware—everything you need and little you don’t. Versatility is important regardless of size, and the EX30 provides plenty of room for a variety of drivers; the author’s six-foot-plus and wider-than-most frame slipped behind the wheel easily with two or three more notches of seat travel to go in both the manual- and powered-seat iterations. Specifically, there are 41.9 inches of front legroom, one inch more than in the Volvo XC40. Rear seating offers decent head and shoulder room, but legroom is tight at 32.3 inches. Window controls are on the center console, and a single control stalk on the right of the steering wheel selects the vehicle direction and functions as the on/off switch for the Pilot Assist (semi-autonomous) drive mode; everything else is accessed through the center screen. That includes opening the center-mounted glovebox, though its close proximity to the button on the screen makes it kind of superfluous. Despite the lack of a sun shield for the panoramic glass roof panel, the EX30’s air conditioning kept the cabin frosty even when we were mired in traffic; Volvo is aware of the American public’s need to chill and says a retractable cloth sunshade is under consideration for U.S.-bound models.Simple Doesn’t Always Mean BoringAcceleration is impressive, with our Cloud Blue single-motor EX30 stepping off abruptly enough for our passenger to discover there is no customary passenger grab handle. Guiding the EX30 through the crowded streets of Barcelona is a joy, as its 104.3-inch wheelbase and 166.7-inch overall length are tailor-made for dicing it up with the city cars and scooters that populate most of the Comital City’s traffic. (The EX30’s wheelbase and length are respectively 1.0 and 2.8 inches shorter than the Bolt EUV’s, and 2.1 and 8.1 inches shorter than the Volvo XC40’s.) Volvo claims a 5.1-second 60-mph time, but that’s largely irrelevant in urban traffic, where immediate access to the 253 lb-ft of torque is the key to victory. Top speed is limited to 112 mph. The ride on the Ultra trim’s 19-inch wheels (the Core gets 18-inch ones) is firm, but the car is solid and devoid of rattles or unnerving suspension noises, which encourages you to push it harder. Though the core chassis is provided by Volvo parent Geely, Volvo engineers tell us they spent a large amount of time tuning and tweaking all the moving parts for EX30 duty. Once free of city traffic, the EX30 gets a chance to display its agility on the tight, twisty roads that populate the mountainous regions adjacent to Barcelona. There, it displayed balanced dynamics, remaining neutral through all but the most hurried directional changes, where it starts to push wide. An approximately 30-mile highway slog reveals mild wind- and road-noise levels. It’s in the calmer downhill stretches where two additional concessions to simplicity reveal themselves. Unlike competitors that offer stepped levels of regeneration, the EX30 offers one-pedal driving as a single on/off option. Activated via the infotainment screen (Settings > Driving > Driving dynamics > One pedal drive), it’s calibrated nicely for urban settings, but we found leaving it off more efficient and fluid in mountainous and highway travel. You also won’t find any of the typical gee-whiz animations illustrating energy moving from the battery to the motors and wheels or the regeneration thereof. When asked about the absence, a Volvo rep said, “Why would we distract you from driving? That’s not us.” A creatively spun cost-cutting measure, perhaps, but it also jibes with EX30’s “This is not a novelty EV” character. One bit of innocuous tech is the black box behind the steering wheel. While you drive, it’s judging you, scanning your face and eyes and comparing data with the steering-wheel sensors to determine if you are drowsy, distracted, or just an epically bad driver. If using Pilot Assist (Volvo’s adaptive cruise control with steering function), it’ll let you know when it’s time for a coffee break or possibly a driver’s ed refresher course. The Twin Motor Performance version amps up the proceedings significantly, motivating the EX30 to 60 mph in a claimed 3.4 seconds. Activate its Performance All-Wheel Drive mode (via the same drive settings screen as the one-pedal driving), and it prioritizes acceleration by putting all 422 horsepower and 400 lb-ft of torque to work through all four wheels. In normal driving, it sends torque only to the front axle when it detects slip at the rear. The Twin Motor has an estimated range of 265 miles, only 10 less than the Single Motor version, which is curious as they share an identical battery. Given the Single Motor EX30’s rear-wheel-drive layout, however, the Twin Motor version’s all-wheel drive doesn’t radically alter the feel or dynamics during typical driving. There is more power on tap, obviously, but it’s a nice bonus, and it’s not like the dual-motor EX30 has an appetite for melting tires and cutting apexes with a precision that’ll have Porsche owners regretting their life choices. Buyers will have to determine whether the $6000 premium for the otherwise equivalent Twin Motor is worth the extra thrills. More on the Volvo EX30Both EX30 variants have a peak DC fast-charge rate of 153 kW. Volvo says a 50-kW DC fast-charger will take the battery from 10 to 80 percent in 56 minutes, while a 175-kW DC charger will do the same in as little as 27 minutes. AC charging to go from zero to 100 percent is optimistically quoted as “as low as eight hours,” which would require a dedicated 240-volt home charger. Plug into a standard 110-volt outlet and you’ll be waiting for over 24 hours for a full charge. Of note, the first EX30s will ship with an adapter to use Tesla Superchargers, while later cars will incorporate the Tesla NACS port directly into the vehicle. Hook ‘Em When They’re NewVolvo says that 80 percent of its EV customers are new to the brand. Volvo isn’t the first manufacturer to attract new buyers by walking the everyman’s-EV path. The Chevrolet Bolt, the Hyundai Ioniq 5, and the Volkswagen ID.4, among others, have fashioned themselves as affordable, practical cars that just happen to be EVs. Given the similarities in battery capacity, charging estimates, and identical range of the EX30 Single and Twin Motor versions, the primary decision facing buyers is, “How much am I willing to pay to go fast?” The EX30 is the second Volvo model to wear the “EX” nomenclature behind the flagship EX90 SUV EV; together they will bookend the automaker’s EV lineup. The EX30 is currently manufactured at parent company Geely’s facility in Zhangjiakou, China, and production will expand to Volvo’s Ghent plant in Belgium.Often, notions like “minimalist” or “pared back” tend to cover both a vehicle’s aesthetics and its on-road qualities. But that’s not the case with the Volvo EX30. While its design may err on the side of simplicity, the EX30 is not akin to driving a manila envelope. Its green cred, whether that means the sustainable materials in the cabin or the electrons powering its drivetrain, is bolstered only by its pleasant pavement demeanor.SpecificationsSpecifications
2025 Volvo EX30Vehicle Type: rear- or front- and rear-motor, rear- or all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: Single Motor Extended Range, $36,245; Twin Motor Performance, $46,195
POWERTRAINS
Rear-Drive Single Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 268 hp, 253 lb-ftAll-Wheel-Drive Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 154 hpAll-Wheel-Drive Rear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 268 hpCombined Power: 422 hpCombined Torque: 400 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 64.0 kWhOnboard Charger: 11.0 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 153 kWTransmissions: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 104.3 inLength: 166.7 inWidth: 72.3 inHeight: 61.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54/37 ft3Cargo Volume, behind F/R: 32/14 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3900–4150 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.3–5.0 sec1/4-Mile: 12.0–13.0 secTop Speed: 112 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 130–139/140–145/120–125 MPGeRange: 265–275 miContributing EditorAndrew Wendler brings decades of wrenching, writing, and editorial experience with numerous outlets to Car and Driver. A rust-belt native and tireless promoter of the region, he once won a $5 bet by walking the entire length of the elevated People Mover track that encircles downtown Detroit. More

From the September 1991 issue of Car and Driver.The scene was right out of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Ten Car and Driver editors spritzing and lolling atop Brock Yates’s 38-foot-long charter boat, the Bluewater Challenger, which Yates—in true Hemingway style—calls “one big, tough fishing machine.” Yates was at the helm, somehow persuaded that we could hook fish at 40 mph and look­ing for all the world like Jack Nicholson shepherding a boatload of inmates across icy Lake Ontario. And the inmates were jabbering about cars, not lake trout, except for our managing editor, who felt compelled to troll with his face, which is why there is now 85 feet of Lake Ontario water between him and his eyeglasses. We had driven to upper New York state, to Yates’s sprawling real-estate empire in the village of Wyoming, to wring out a six­-pack of imported sports sedans that each cost $25,000 or less. The driving itinerary was a brute: street circuits through the Ann Arbor and Detroit minefields, ten hours of freeway droning to and from the Village That Yates Owns, a seven-hour thrash through the glacially gouged hills surround­ing the Finger Lakes, and even a few laps—in formation, no less—around Watkins Glen (the latter maneuver performed flaw­lessly in front of a bevy of understandably mystified students attending one of Bobby Rahal’s Track Time sessions). Twenty-five thousand bucks may sound like a bundle, but this is a wildly competi­tive and popular niche, and none of these cars even qualifies as a luxury sedan by today’s standards.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverOur six-pack challengers, in order of price (most expensive to least expensive) were: the Acura Vigor LS, the Audi 80, the Mitsubishi Galant VR4, the Nissan Maxima SE, the Subaru Legacy Sport Sedan, and the Infiniti G20. Each was already a winner, because before we got started, we studied and drove other contenders: cars such as the BMW 318i, the Mazda 929, the VW Passat GL, the Peugeot 405Mi 16, the Saab 900S, and the Volvo 740 Turbo. But those machines—for reasons of age, sloth, or other character quirks judged unsuitable in a stab-and-squirt sports-sedan outing—were culled early. Finally, the idea was to pit the winning import against America’s own star-span­gled banger, the $22,071 Ford Taurus SHO, which had been a decisive victor in our “Yankee Clippers” shoot-out in March. As our seven-car caravan got under way—CB radio squawking, map being sucked out of open windows, and the inex­plicable appearance of two sets of keys for which there existed no cars—Yates mut­tered, “My most fervent hope is that I’ll simply be thrown clear.” A cruel sentiment, really, because at that point in the proceed­ings, we had yet to touch his boat. View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver6th Place: Audi 80 Absolutely true: Audi builds no automo­bile that we don’t enjoy driving. Also abso­lutely true: In this group, the Audi 80, now even blessed with a much-needed five-­cylinder engine, took a beating that would have kept George Foreman off the David Letterman show for seven months.Although a manual is theoretically avail­able, Audi doesn’t want to sell this car with any transmission except a four-speed auto­matic, making it the only non-manual in our sextet. But even a five-speed stickshift wouldn’t have upended many votes. HIGHS: Modern styling, typically Teutonic fit and finish.LOWS: Thrashy engine and an unwilling transmission.VERDICT: Expertly built, but low on fun, short on utility.The Audi required the most time to attain 60 mph and to trip the lights through the quarter-mile. Requiring 203 feet to stop from 70 mph, it offered the least impressive braking. Shod with 175/70R-14 tires that looked like space-saver spares, it screeched its way around the skidpad with the most meager grip. Its narrow cabin and high cowl made for cramped seating and passengers muttering about impending panics of claustrophobia. And its ten-cubic-foot trunk is more accurately described as a storage slot for attaché cases. All of which makes it tricky to justify the Audi’s sticker, which is the second steepest in this test.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverWrote our editor, William Jeanes: “There may be adequate horsepower in there, but it obviously disagrees with the transmission.” He’s right. The automatic permits sloppy overrevs on many upshifts and a not-very-positive sense of manual control when you want it. Too much work, too much busyness to get at the power. The Audi averted outright ridicule because of its superb fit and finish, great freeway tracking, still-modern aero styling, and vault-like build quality—which made it another ingot from Ingolstadt. Alas, the little 80’s fate was sealed when, over the steamy Memorial Day weekend, its radiator fan “roared like a Channel hovercraft,” said Yates, and its AM radio was the only one in our group unable to lock onto the station broadcasting the Indy 500. Golly. 1991 Audi 80130-hp inline-5, 4-speed automatic, 2898 lbBase/as-tested price: $22,250/$24,395C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.7 sec1/4-mile: 17.5 sec @ 80 mph100 mph: 32.2 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 203 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.74 g C/D observed fuel economy: 24 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver5th Place: Infiniti G20 When you first clap eyes on the G20, with its Wonder Bread styling and compact dimensions, it is tempting to label it as some sort of Infiniti inventory tag-along. Big mistake. Go for a spin and here’s what you find: Maybe the best, most accurate five-speed shifter in the world, mated to a smooth and light clutch. Steering surpassed only by vehicles assembled in Zuff­enhausen. And a suspension that makes this car so inordinately pitchable and tossable that you’d swear the same guys designed the underbits on, say, the Nissan 300ZX. Which they did. HIGHS: Steering, shifter, and suspension of racing-car caliber.LOWS: Noisy engine, minimal low-rev power, Iowa styling.VERDICT: Can’t compete with its V-6-powered big brother.The G20 is the shortest and lightest car in this group, the fastest through the slalom, and the hands-down victor in fuel economy. What’s more, it is the least expensive car in our sextet. So how come it finished fifth? The all-alloy four-cylinder engine in the G20 is noisy. Extraordinarily smooth, mind you, with Tae Kwon Do–reflex throttle response. But noisy. And it is prone to drone, because to get at the power every­body keeps the tach twisted, as often as possible, somewhere north of 4000 rpm.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverOther repeated observations in our log­book: The motorized belts are annoying, as are the trio of hard-to-reach knurled knobs on the side of the driver’s seat for cushion height, rake, and backrest angle. In this group, the G20 is our sedan of choice for slicing through knots of urban traffic, but its conservative appointments and modest performance squeeze it out of the niche occupied by elegant long-distance tourers like the Maxima and the Vigor. Frankly, the G20 ought to compete with, say, the Accord, where it would do some serious damage to Honda.When we were first shown the littlest Infiniti (known elsewhere in the world as a mere Nissan), we asked the marketing guys, “Haven’t you already built a great $20,000 sedan called the Maxima, with a standard V-6?” The Nissan guys replied, “Nobody will ever compare the two.”We just did.1991 Infiniti G20140-hp inline-4, 5-speed manual, 2865 lbBase/as-tested price: $18,135/$19,835C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.7 sec1/4 mile: 16.8 sec @ 83 mph100 mph: 27.7 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.78 gC/D observed fuel economy: 28 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver4th Place: Subaru Legacy Sport Sedan We once described the Subaru Legacy as a car we respect more than we desire, and that inscription remains apt. Four-wheel drive and anti-lock brakes are standard on the Sport Sedan—this on the second-least­-expensive automobile in the group—and neither is mere marketing gimmickry. The Legacy was an outright winner in braking from 70 mph. With the most favorable weight distribution of the bunch, it circulat­ed our 300-foot skidpad with the greatest grip. And its turbocharged four-cylinder boxer absolutely does not feel force-fed, delivering a seamless, if somewhat gritty-­sounding, flow of power from 2000 to 6000 rpm and carrying this car to 60 mph sooner than the Maxima’s V-6. HIGHS: Compliant ride, sharp steering, four-wheel drive.LOWS: Poor detailing, hit-and-miss styling, rubbery shifter.VERDICT: Good value, short in fire and finesse.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverDetails are the Legacy’s downfall. Nothing wrong with the car’s overall sil­houette, but it is spoiled by fussy cutlines and gratuitous chrome accents: a trio of strips around the taillights, for example, along with chrome door handles and that shiny logo at the base of the C-pillars. Same deal inside. Basically a sensible layout, whose logic and legibility are eroded by buttons and switch­es that don’t match and vast expanses of tacky plastic—on the doorsills, the instru­ment panel, the A-pillars, the sun visors, the headliner, and the center console. By the time you discover the ridiculously flimsy passenger-side air vent (is this maybe a part from Mattel?) and row through the gears­—only to find the linkage a little rubbery and insubstantial—you begin to wonder if any­one at Subaru has heard that expression “sweating the details.” More Subaru Reviews From the ArchiveWhat they have heard, fortunately, is the word “utility.” In this group, only the Legacy and the Maxima deliver a rear seat capable of accommodating three adults. The Subaru’s trunk is cavernous. And if this test had been conducted in icy February, the Legacy’s utility rating might well have clawed its way to triple digits. 1991 Subaru Legacy Sport Sedan160-hp flat-4, 5-speed manual, 3150 lbBase/as-tested price: $19,748/$20,702C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.9 sec1/4 mile: 16.4 sec @ 85 mph100 mph: 23.9 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 173 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 gC/D observed fuel economy: 22 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver3rd Place: Acura Vigor LS We try to approach these comparison tests with no festering notions about proba­ble winners. But a bunch of us who had yet to sit in a Vigor reckoned we could expect near-perfection. In short, a probable winner.Ha! Just goes to show that our editors really do fret over dollars. Because the Vigor’s big weakness is its vigorous price. At $23,575, it is the most expensive sedan in the six-pack, yet it is the cheapest version of the Vigor extant, with no leather, sunroof, or power seats. Of course, for this kind of money, what you do get is the fruit of Honda’s engineers, doing what Honda engi­neers do best. The Vigor emerged a victor in our fit-and-finish category and tied for first in both ergonomics and comfort. The feel, location, and movements of the switchgear are faultless. The shift linkage is as silky as the Infiniti G20’s but with shorter throws. The tactile sensations—abetted by the wood inserts on the dash and doors—create an interior as inviting as Orson Welles’s den. HIGHS: Ball-bearing shifter, silky switchgear, flawless ergonomics.LOWS: Price, numb steering, price, slalom manners, price.VERDICT: High-zoot evolution of a Honda Accord EX, but at a major cost.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverSpeaking of which. The Vigor is clearly the one car in this group that makes you feel cretinous if you aren’t wearing a Ralph Lauren button-down shirt. Despite its 176-hp five-cylinder engine, the Vigor traveled through our 1000-foot slalom at the lowest speed, and its overassisted power steering rewards Wall Street deliberation, not high-­spiritedness. Said Jeanes, “It is almost, but not quite, as thrilling to drive as a riding lawn mower, though it is of course much quieter.” Moreover, the Vigor’s cockpit is cramped, this despite the car’s exterior bulk: It is the longest and widest car in this group, and it has the longest wheelbase. The vil­lain, of course, is the north/south engine installation, which requires a deep dash­board, insinuates a mammoth transmission between the front seats, and reduces the footwells to narrow, dark slots. We also wish the hood didn’t shake like a wet springer spaniel—an un-Honda-like touch.This is nonetheless an alluring car for the driver who wants to combine anonymity with quality. A class act all the way, posh and polished, but one that needs a lower sticker to earn our editorial thumbs-up.1991 Acura Vigor LS176-hp inline-5, 5-speed manual, 3104 lbBase/as-tested price: $23,575/$23,575C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.7 sec1/4 mile: 16.1 sec @ 88 mph100 mph: 21.7 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 198 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.76 gC/D observed fuel economy: 23 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver2nd Place: Mitsubishi Galant VR4Having just demonstrated editorial restraint—chiding Acura for the price of its Vigor—we now demonstrate irresponsibili­ty at its finest. The bribe we never fail to grab: horsepower.What we have here is the hot rod of the group (or, what Mitsubishi actually intend­ed, the rallyist of the group). This is the Hemi Cuda approach to sports-sedan motoring. Just look at the numbers: quickest 0-to-60-time (at 7.0 seconds, it’s as fast as a Ford Probe GT), best quarter-mile ET, and a 132-mph top speed, a velocity that even the V-6-powered Maxima cannot attain.HIGHS: Schwarzkopf-quality power and four-wheel steering.LOWS: Sloppy shifter, styling by, ah, Frigidaire?VERDICT: The sports sedan for PRO Rally Saturdays and NHRA Sundays.What’s more, in the Mitsubishi tradition, this car is loaded with, well, all of Mitsu­bishi’s stuff. Four-wheel independent sus­pension, four-wheel disc brakes, four-wheel steering, four-wheel ABS, four valves per cylinder. “It should say 4WGE on the rump,” opined editor-at-large Kevin Smith. “Four-Wheel Goddamn Everything.” View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverOf course, all that stuff makes the VR4 the heaviest sedan in the group, and all that stuff comes in a perversely angular wrap­per. “From the spectator’s seat,” said Jeanes, “the VR4 shows you the kind of exterior treatment that GM once thought represented zoominess incarnate. Now it just looks kind of silly.” Same deal inside, with a clunky shifter and a bizarre instru­ment panel buried under a jutting pod that could have been designed in the late 1970s. Saving the cockpit from brickbats are its front seats, which go a long way toward making the VR4’s racy demeanor tolerable. And racy it is, with the heaviest steering of our six sedans and a twitchy chassis that is sufficiently stiff (and loud) that you know everything about the road surfaces. Which, of course, made this our car of choice as we rocketed over hill and through Dale. (Dale, New York, that is, where Yates showed us this country’s smallest post office—the size of the Audi 80—complete with what Brock asserts is a zip code whose last digit is not a whole number.) The VR4 is not notably refined. We began calling it the Jack Klugman of the group. But you get a lot of stuff, you know? A hot rod, pure and simple. And, with only 2000 VR4s imported annually, a rare hot rod. We are such suckers for power. 1991 Mitsubishi Galant VR4195-hp inline-4, 5-speed manual, 3389 lbBase/as-tested price: $22,168/$23,652C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.0 sec1/4 mile: 15.6 sec @ 88 mph100 mph: 21.9 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 183 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.78 gC/D observed fuel economy: 23 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver1st Place: Nissan Maxima SE And the winner is . . . an old car. Well, old by today’s standards. We first climbed into the current-generation Maxima at Nissan’s Phoenix test track in the summer of ’88. That means this amazingly compe­tent and mature-feeling sedan is in the final year of its life. Spy photos of its replacement are already appearing. Which makes you wonder if Nissan is going to screw up a good thing, because there is a lot here to covet: a real sense of spaciousness in the cockpit, for example. Three adults fit in the back. And the trunk, in the words of James Thurber, “would be a wonderful place for a weekend or to learn to play the xylophone.” HIGHS: Perfect power delivery, great steering, room for five.LOWS: Excess body roll, cheap-and-noisy motorized belts.VERDICT: Sophistication and refinement beyond its price.What’s more, the Maxima offers the only V-6 in this six-pack, which is evident the moment you twist the ignition key. The idle is the smoothest here, and there is prodi­gious step-off torque. Power is on tap from as low as 1500 rpm—a real boon around town. And despite this engine’s post-4000-rpm growl, under normal conditions it is so unobtrusive—demonstrably the quietest at full throttle of the six cars tested—that on the Interstate we often found ourselves for­getting to upshift from fourth. Like the Vigor, the Maxima has uni­formly buttery controls. Shifter, throttle, steering, turn-signal indicator—all feel as though someone sat down and diligently struggled to obtain perfect weighting and an overtly expensive feel. Says a member of Nissan’s now-legendary “901” engineering team, “Yes, we did.” View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverIf you had to point a shame-on-you fin­ger at the Maxima, that digit would surely wag first at the noisy motorized shoulder belts, which ought to be replaced by air bags. And it would wag next at the car’s excess body roll and underdamped ride motions. In fairness, those motions upset the driver more than they upset the car—as proof we offer the Maxima’s 0.79 g of skid­pad grip, second only to the Subaru. Still, one of our editors said he would shell out an extra $500 for stiffer struts if they were offered, and nobody laughed out loud. The Maxima SE was a winner in our ride and value categories. And it tied for first place—with the $2780-more-costly Vigor—for best ergonomics and driver comfort. “Difficult to fault,” added Jeanes. “It does everything you could ask from a rea­sonably priced sports sedan.”And by the way, Brock, you know the car keys you couldn’t find after our fishing soiree? The managing editor says you’ll find them next to his eyeglasses. About 85 feet down. 1991 Nissan Maxima SE160-hp V-6, 5-speed manual, 3178 lbBase/as-tested price: $20,795/$22,790C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.0 sec1/4 mile: 16.3 sec @ 85 mph100 mph: 24.7 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 175 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.79 gC/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg More

From the November 2023 issue of Car and Driver.The burrito artist issued a succinct two-word review of the 2023 Porsche 911 Sport Classic as we sat nearby. “Nice spec,” he said, nodding toward the haunchy machine we’d backed into a front-and-center parking spot. He had no idea how right he was, even though the editor in our head thought that “awesome,” “wicked,” or even “bitchin'” was more apt for the car’s heritage vibe.HIGHS: Amazing grip and balance, goes like stink, looks like a million bucks.The vibe harks back to the 2010 911 Sport Classic and beyond. This new car combines that 997 special’s ghostly skunk stripes, double-bubble roof, and Carrera RS 2.7–style ducktail spoiler with similar gray paint, an indented hood from the air-cooled era, Fuchs-inspired wheels, and chunky Porsche Turbo tires and fenders, but without air intakes marring their flanks.Power comes from the twin-turbocharged 3.7-liter flat-six found in the current Turbo. Adaptive dampers, rear-axle steering, and active anti-roll bars come from the Turbo S. It has the classic Turbo configuration: rear-wheel drive and a manual gearbox, a coveted 911 Turbo combination that disappeared nearly three decades ago, when the 993 Turbo launched. This setup dictated a software remap, so maximum power shrinks from 572 to 543 horses. The Sport Classic’s pounds-to-power ratio is marginally better than the Turbo’s, however, because it’s 199 pounds lighter.That makes this the most powerful Porsche 911 currently available with a manual. Instead of the six-speed GT3 gearbox we cherish, the Sport Classic uses Porsche’s seven-speed unit, which inspires a hearty golf clap. Neither can handle as much torque as Porsche’s PDK dual-clutch automatic, and the fat rear tires must go it alone, so the torque remap is more draconian. The Sport Classic’s torque, 442 pound-feet, represents a 111-pound-foot deduction from the Turbo, but that’s still 22 more than the GTS.LOWS: Superfluous seventh gear, hard to nail the launch, costs over a quarter-million bucks.This explains much about the car’s track performance, where these realities and a 3500-rpm rev limit while stationary make it hard to score the perfect launch. Our 3.7-second dash to 60 mph bests Porsche’s own prediction by two-tenths, but with all-wheel drive and PDK, the Turbo needs just 2.4 seconds. Of course, this misses a huge point, because a rear-drive manual was never going to rule the drag strip. The Sport Classic is more about winding roads, driver involvement, and a rollicking good time. On this front, the Sport Classic absolutely delivers.Turning in, the Sport Classic is tenacious. Its front tires deliver a surprising surplus of grip that can tighten the arc even when you think you’ve overcooked it. There is a lightness in this Porsche, an absence of front mass that allows the front end to skip gleefully into turns. The tires, Pirelli P Zero PZ4s in the standard Turbo size, stuck at 1.07 g’s on the skidpad. Balance remains steadfast through a corner even if you trail the brakes in deep. As you roll onto the throttle at exit and revs build, a satisfying wiggle makes clear that this is a rear-drive machine, but the ass end never hints at walking you tail-first toward the guardrail. When the next corner rushes up, the massive carbon-ceramic brakes haul the car down smartly, and the cycle repeats.The feel and feedback of it are all but impeccable—through the well-bolstered seats, nicely placed pedals, and ergonomically contoured steering wheel. The seven-speed’s shift action is a bit rubbery and the only element needing more polish. Also, seventh gear feels superfluous, too tall for sub-autobahn speeds.More on the 911 Sport ClassicZooming out, we admire the interior’s heritage Pepita houndstooth pattern and saddle-brown leather. And Porsche should bookmark the tech balance of this cockpit, which combines the best elements of the Taycan’s curved instrument panel and central touchscreen with a big tach, normal air-conditioning vents, and logical switchgear.VERDICT: The rear-drive, stick-shift 911 Turbo returns, and it was worth the wait.The most worrying aspects of the 2023 911 Sport Classic are its $274,750 cost of entry and its limited supply of just 1250 worldwide. If you miss out, you can console yourself with a 911 GTS in a “nice spec.” The burrito artist would approve.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Porsche 911 Sport ClassicVehicle Type: rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $274,750/$282,810 Options: Burmeister High-End Surround Sound system, $3980; Surround View, $1430; Lane Keep Assist with traffic sign recognition, $1220; Lane Change Assist, $1060; power folding exterior mirrors, $370
ENGINE
twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve flat-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 229 in3, 3745 cm3Power: 543 hp @ 6750 rpmTorque: 442 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
7-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 16.5-in carbon-ceramic disc/15.4-in carbon-ceramic discTires: Pirelli P Zero PZ4F: 255/35ZR-20 (93Y) NA1R: 315/30ZR-21 (105Y) NA1 Extra Load
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 96.5 inLength: 178.5 inWidth: 74.8 inHeight: 51.1 inTrunk Volume: 5 ft3Curb Weight: 3438 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 3.7 sec100 mph: 7.5 sec1/4-Mile: 11.7 sec @ 127 mph130 mph: 12.1 sec150 mph: 16.9 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 4.7 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 11.8 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 9.6 secTop Speed (mfr’s claim): 195 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 139 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 279 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 1.07 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 16 mpg 
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 17/15/21 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDTechnical EditorDan Edmunds was born into the world of automobiles, but not how you might think. His father was a retired racing driver who opened Autoresearch, a race-car-building shop, where Dan cut his teeth as a metal fabricator. Engineering school followed, then SCCA Showroom Stock racing, and that combination landed him suspension development jobs at two different automakers. His writing career began when he was picked up by Edmunds.com (no relation) to build a testing department. More

IntroductionHow bullish is Honda on hybridization? Not only has a hybrid powertrain replaced the last-generation Accord’s wonderful turbo 2.0-liter at the top of the 2023 Honda Accord hierarchy, but it also powers four of the six available trim levels. When it was time to choose one for a yearlong, 40,000-mile test, we had little choice but to embrace it.Say hello to our 2023 Honda Accord Touring Hybrid. This top-of-the-lineup trim costs $38,985 and offers no options beyond exterior color and a few dealer-installed accessories. Our car’s Canyon River Blue paint is one of the no-cost colors.The Touring is the only Accord in the lineup that comes standard with all of these goodies: front and rear parking sensors, a head-up display, wireless charging, rain-sensing wipers, and Low-Speed Braking Control, which alerts the driver and assists in reducing the effects of low-speed collisions via sensors on the front and rear bumpers. We’ll appreciate the heated front and rear outboard seats come February, and ditto for the ventilated front seats during summer. But alas, there’s no heated steering wheel. Like ketchup-flavored Lays, that’s only for the Canadian market. Memo to Honda: We’ll trade the heated rear seats for a heated steering wheel quicker than our northern friends can say, “Sorry.” Getting to Know You The introductory phase required avoiding sudden or full-throttle acceleration for 600 miles and limiting hard braking for the first 200 miles. Dialing back on driving dynamics gave us time, let’s say, to appreciate the interior’s refreshingly simple layout. It feels strange to compliment Honda on ordinary stuff like buttons for the climate controls, a dial for the volume, and a traditional shift lever, but we have a mass of touch-sensitive switches across the industry to thank for moving the goal post. While digging through the menus to dial in keyless-entry behavior, gauge-cluster mode, and audio settings, we found an option to disable permissions from built-in third-party applications. We appreciate this ability as digital privacy becomes harder to obtain, even if taking advantage of it disables onboard Google features. Android Auto and Apple CarPlay remain accessible, and your privacy with them.So far, the driving experience mirrors the simplicity of the interior layout. Yes, the hybrid powertrain alternates between its 146-hp engine, a 181-hp electric motor, or a combination of the two (rated at a combined peak of 204 horsepower) to power the front wheels. It also recuperates energy from braking into a 1.1-kWh battery that allows all-electric driving until around 20 mph. And there really isn’t a transmission in the traditional sense, as the Accord hybrid is directly driven by its electric motor more often than not. But the only way you can tell if any of this is happening is by switching to a display that shows it. You can also just ignore it. The brake pedal reveals nothing about regenerative braking, and the engine revs to generate electricity under acceleration so it feels, believably, like there’s an automatic transmission somewhere in there smoothly changing nonexistent gears. At freeway speeds, you can’t even hear the engine switch off and on. At that point, our Accord Touring is simply a large, comfortable sedan with an EPA highway rating of 41 mpg and a theoretical highway road-trip range of 520 miles on account of its smaller 12.8-gallon fuel tank. In true hybrid fashion, the Accord is thirstiest on the open road, but its EPA city mileage is 46 mpg. The all-important combined rating we’ll compare to our observed fuel economy over the course of 40,000 miles is a stellar 44 mpg.The only real tells that more is going on than meets the eye are the exterior pedestrian alert sound that kicks on in EV mode at low speeds and the shift paddles that adjust the level of regenerative braking through a probably-too-high number of settings (six!). You have to hold the paddle for a few seconds for the setting to stick, and you have to do so every time you start the car or shift out of drive. Still, we appreciate being able to dial up the regen to just before the brake lights activate, doing our small part to alleviate traffic. Test Results and What’s Next After break-in, we took this 3525-pound Accord to the test track for its arrival physical. There, it reached 60 mph in 6.5 seconds and the quarter-mile in 15.2 seconds at 91 mph. Both measures lag over a second behind the last turbo 2.0-liter Accord we tested, but it’s not all bad: Consider that these acceleration results essentially match those of an Acura Integra Type R we tested in 1997. What’s more, our new Accord’s 0.90-g skidpad orbit bests the old Type R’s 0.88-g effort.It’s safe to say that our Accord Touring is settling in nicely for its year-long test. That shouldn’t be too surprising after we put it on our 10Best list—the 37th time we’ve done so, by the way. But winning 10Best as many times as the Accord has doesn’t guarantee anything. In fact, it demands more scrutiny. How seamless will it remain after 40,000 miles? How much jealousy will we have for Canadian-market Accords and their heated steering wheels? Time will tell. Months in Fleet: 1 month Current Mileage: 2649 milesAverage Fuel Economy: 38 mpg Fuel Tank Size: 12.8 gal Observed Fuel Range: 480 milesService: $0 Normal Wear: $0 Repair: $0 Damage and Destruction: $0SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Honda Accord Touring HybridVehicle Type: front-engine, front-motor, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $38,985/$38,985Options: None
POWERTRAIN
DOHC 16-valve 2.0-liter Atkinson-cycle inline-4, 146 hp, 134 lb-ft + AC motor, 181 hp, 247 lb-ft (combined output: 204 hp, 247 lb-ft; 1.1-kWh lithium-ion battery pack)Transmission: direct-drive
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 12.3-in vented disc/11.1-in discTires: Michelin Primacy MXM4235/40R-19 96V Extra Load M+S DT1
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 111.4 inLength: 195.7 inWidth: 73.3 inHeight: 57.1 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/50 ft3Trunk Volume: 17 ft3Curb Weight: 3525 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS: NEW
60 mph: 6.5 sec1/4-Mile: 15.2 sec @ 91 mph100 mph: 19.2 sec120 mph: 41.1 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 4.9 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 125 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 173 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.90 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 38 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 39 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 490 miUnscheduled Oil Additions: 0 qt
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 44/46/41 mpg
WARRANTY
3 years/36,000 miles bumper to bumper5 years/60,000 miles powertrain8 years/100,000 miles hybrid/electric components5 years/unlimited miles corrosion protection3 years/36,000 miles roadside assistance2 years/24,000 miles scheduled maintenance
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDDeputy Editor, VideoFrom selling them to testing them, Carlos Lago has spent his entire adult life consumed by cars. He currently drives the creative behind Car and Driver video. More

From the April 1998 issue of Car and Driver.What’s most interesting about the new Trooper is not what’s changed, but what remains the same—namely, the suspension’s geometry and dimensions. After Consumer Reports described a near tip-over during a violent short-course lane-change maneuver in July 1996, we would not have been surprised to see the company increase the next Trooper’s track width or toss in some increased roll stiffness. HIGHS: Ride quality, build quality, powerful new engine, cavernous interior.In our lane-change tests of the Trooper and its twin, the Acura SLX, we have never noticed any rollover tendencies. Sure enough, Isuzu went on to prove that the Trooper was not defective. Last July, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced that tests it had conducted failed to reproduce the results claimed by Consumer Reports. The investigation was closed, and CR’s petition for a recall of the Trooper was denied. So the Trooper was vindicated, but sales have nonetheless suffered in the wake of the Consumer Reports hatchet job.To reinvigorate sales, Isuzu wisely chose to make useful product changes that address criticisms raised by Car and Driver, not Consumer Reports. The Trooper and the Acura SLX both finished fifth in comparison tests conducted in March 1994 and April 1996. In both tests, we dissed the Trooper/SLX’s primitive shift-from-a-stop part-time four-wheel-drive system, its lethargic acceleration, and to a lesser extent, its dull cubist styling. We also praised it loudly for its huge interior, its rigid chassis, its com­fortable and well-isolated ride, and its vaultlike build quality—virtues that did not fade in a 35,000-mile test. An automatic four-wheel-drive system has been installed in this new Trooper. It engages at the push of a button. The optional Borg-Warner Torque-on-Demand (TOD) system is computer-controlled. When the “4WD AUTO” button is pressed (below 60 mph, please), the front hubs are automatically locked and a light marked “Auto” appears on the dash. Wheel speeds, vehicle speed, accelerator inputs, and other factors are monitored by the system’s brain. When all-wheel traction is required, a multi-plate clutch like that in an automatic transmission apportions up to 50 percent of the available torque to the front axle. A series of LED lamps on a dash schematic illuminate to indicate the amount of torque being sent to the front axle. There is no center differential, but the clutch pack in the transfer case never engages fully when the vehicle is turning on dry pavement, so the axles don’t bind. When the road is smooth and dry, turning off TOD saves fuel by disengaging the front axle. For serious off-roading, a floor-mounted lever can be shifted (from a stop) to engage a planetary gearset for low range and also to fix the torque split at 50/50. TOD comes bundled with a lim­ited-slip rear differential, power folding mirrors, and a host of convenience features—all for $2180. LOWS: Lots of body roll, crummy radio, boxy styling.On slippery, snow-covered roads, imprudent stabs of the accelerator provoke the rear wheels to spin slightly before the front-axle torque comes online, but when driven normally, especially with the transmission in its winter-­driving mode, the system performs admirably. Ultimate off-road perfor­mance is limited by the Bridgestone Dueler tires, but the Trooper seems about as capable as a Mercedes ML320. More good news resides under the hood, where the previous 3165cc engine has been stroked to 3494cc and endowed with two more camshafts. The dual overhead cams, acting directly on the valves, are said to reduce complexity, noise, and cost and improve reliability compared with the old SOHC setup. To reduce intake-air temperatures, air is inhaled from inside the left fender, and the intake manifold, which now fea­tures variable-length runners, is better insulated from the cylinder heads.These refinements, plus reduced internal friction and a slightly higher compres­sion ratio, boost output to 215 horsepower at 5400 rpm and 230 pound-feet at 3000 rpm (up from 190 and 188, respectively). City fuel economy remains the same at 15 mpg, but highway fuel economy improves by 1 mpg to 19. A bonus: Less scheduled maintenance is required for the new engine, and that lowers the operating costs, which we found to be rather high in our long-term test report on the 1994 Trooper. The new engine feels much more ath­letic in all driving conditions. There’s better passing power and a more brisk step-off, and top speed increases from 105 to 108 mph. Our 4380-pound test car crossed the quarter-mile line in 17.3 sec­onds at 78 mph, well down from the 18.1-second, 75-mph time turned by our last 4485-pound Trooper. That level of per­formance would have put the Trooper mid­pack in our last comparison of sub­-$40,000 utes. Perhaps in response to our carps on the boxy styling, Isuzu has revised the Trooper’s snout slightly, which improves its looks about as much as a nose job would improve the visage of Jesse Helms. What really makes the Trooper more attractive is its price, which has dropped substantially. The base price of $27,285 is down $1010, and a fully loaded model tops out at $35,370—about four grand less than the previous Limited model, despite a superior drivetrain and similar equipment levels. Our test car’s $30,975 price tag places it squarely in the neighborhood of midrange Explorers and Grand Cherokees, neither of which provides the interior space or build quality the Trooper boasts. The Dodge Durango approaches the Trooper’s interior size and adds a third seat, which is not offered by Isuzu, but it trails the Trooper in either performance or fuel economy, depending on which engine is chosen. All the qualities we raved about in pre­vious Trooper tests remain praiseworthy. The build quality is excellent, with tight panel gaps and zero rattles or squeaks. The ride remains quite comfortable and well isolated. The Trooper still leans consider­ably in turns, but stiffening the anti-roll bars would likely result in head toss over one-wheel dips and bumps. Head toss can lead to cookie toss when you ride this high above the pavement. More on the Trooper From the ArchiveThere is still some room for improve­ment. The radio’s sound quality, ergo­nomics, and reception are subpar. We still don’t like the 70/30 split swing-out rear­-door arrangement because it is impractical for carrying long objects. A roll-down window in the wider door would help. We also dislike external spare tires that block rear visibility and make parallel parking difficult (will my bumper or my spare tire touch the car in back?). VERDICT: Isuzu muscles toward the front of the lux-ute pack.The new transfer case and the improved engine should earn the Trooper a podium finish in its next C/D comparo. And over the long haul, concentrating on improving the product will serve drivers better than reacting to alarmist rantings from the safety nannies. SpecificationsSpecifications
1998 Isuzu TrooperVehicle Type: front-engine, rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 5-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $28,245/$30,975Options: Performance package (Torque-on-Demand 4-wheel-drive system, limited-slip rear differential, power folding outside mirrors, privacy glass, and manual 4-way-adjustable front seats), $2180; CD player, $550
ENGINEDOHC/ 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 213 in3, 3494 cm3Power: 215 hp @ 5400 rpmTorque: 230 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/rigid axleBrakes, F/R: 11.0-in vented disc/12.3-in vented discTires: Bridgestone Dueler 684P245/70R-16
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 108.7 inLength: 185.8 inWidth: 69.5 inHeight: 72.2 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 54/52 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/M/R: 46/90 ft3Curb Weight: 4380 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 9.6 sec1/4-Mile: 17.3 sec @ 78 mph100 mph: 40.1 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 9.8 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 5.0 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 6.7 secTop Speed (drag ltd): 108 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 216 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.71 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 15 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 15/19 mpg  
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Today, as in the 1980s, city traffic sucks. No one likes commuting in gridlock, but it’s often unavoidable even in places with robust public-transportation networks. After all, to get on a bus or a subway, you first have to get to the station. And because many do so via car . . . you get the gist. Various agencies and companies have tried addressing this “first mile/last mile” problem over the years with mixed results. Now, though, Honda is giving it a try—rather, giving it another try.More than 40 years ago, Honda tried addressing Tokyo’s traffic jams with the folding Motocompo scooter. The idea was you’d park in a lot several miles from where you worked, unfold the compact two-wheeler, and ride the rest of the way. Sounds brilliant, especially in Japan’s crowded urban areas. Honda even designed it to fit in a special trunk compartment in its contemporary City hatchback. But it sold the little Motocompo only in Japan and then pulled the plug in 1983 after a two-year run.However, like many JDM Radwood-era rides, the Motocompo is more popular now than it was in its own time. And with urban mobility still an issue, Honda’s design team decided it was time to revisit the concept.Enter the Honda Motocompacto. Like the OG, it’s a scooter with a seat. Also like the Motocompo, once folded, it can fit into the back of a conventional hatchback. But while project leader (and designer) Nick Ziraldo and his team looked to the original for inspiration, four decades’ worth of technological advancement means the Motocompacto is no mere design retread.First, the Motocompacto is, well, more compact-o than its ’80s inspiration. Its wheelbase is 3.5 inches shorter, it’s almost four inches narrower, and it’s a whopping 8.5 inches shorter overall. And that’s in folded-out, ready-to-ride mode. The new scooter also folds down far more neatly—and in a smaller volume—than the Motocompo. At 29.2 inches long, 21.1 inches tall, and 3.7 inches wide when folded up, the Motocompacto takes up roughly 18 percent less space than one of the carry-on-suitcase-sized boxes we use to measure cargo capacity. And at a claimed 41.3 pounds, it weighs less than half as much as its 92-pound ICE ancestor. That, combined with the carrying handle, makes it fairly easy to move around with one hand.The weight and size savings are linked to the other drastic change. Instead of the Motocompo’s smoky, 49-cc two-stroke carbureted single-cylinder engine, the Motocompacto has a DC electric motor. And it drives the front wheel, not the rear one. Thus, instead of a fuel tank, the new scooter’s body contains an integrated lithium-ion battery pack. And because there’s no need to accommodate an internal-combustion drivetrain, the Motocompacto actually has onboard storage, unlike the Motocompo. It’s not much, at 18.1 by 3.1 by 9.5 inches, but Honda says it’s big enough to hold a small laptop.Admittedly, with its 0.7-hp output, the Motocompacto isn’t as powerful as the 2.5-hp Motocompo. It also has a lower top speed—15 mph instead of 25 mph. But Honda spokespeople say that this was deliberate, ensuring that the Motocompacto isn’t legally a motor vehicle like a motorcycle or even a Vespa-sized scooter. That’s likely why, in contrast to the Motocompo, the Motocompacto doesn’t have a horn or turn signals, though it does have an LED headlight and taillight as well as a bell. Because of its modest speed and size, Honda says Motocompacto riders can freely scoot in bicycle lanes (where local ordinances allow).Sadly, there aren’t any bike lanes at Detroit’s M1 Concourse. But Honda did set up a neat little circular course for us to get a taste of what Motocompacto riders will experience. And if those riders are anything like us—or, allegedly, several Formula 1 drivers—they’ll be dismounting with smiles on their faces.Once you unfold and secure the foot pegs, handlebar, seat, and rear wheel, starting up the Honda Motocompacto is as easy as pressing the power button. Don’t worry; it won’t accidentally run away from you mid-unfold, thanks to safety sensors in the handlebar and rear-wheel assemblies. All the unfolding parts also have redundancies to ensure they won’t refold unexpectedly. The power button also changes the riding modes, which are shown on the LED display along with battery percentage, speed, and headlight status. Mode 1 limits you to 10 mph, while Mode 2 gives you the full 15 mph. With your preferred max pace set, just grab the synthetic leather handgrips and press the throttle with your thumb, and away you go.Ziraldo and Jane Nakagawa, American Honda’s R&D business vice president, said the Motocompacto team was obsessed with making the folding scooter fun to ride. Mission accomplished, team. Thanks to its skinny tires, tidy dimensions, and low weight, the Motocompacto is a cinch to lean into turns. While there’s not much road feedback coming through the handlebar, the steering itself is incredibly light. Honda claims a 0-to-15-mph time of 7.0 seconds for the Motocompacto. That doesn’t sound like much, until you’re atop a rolling briefcase. But the Motocompacto never feels unsteady or fragile at its top speed (fair warning, though, it does have a 265-pound weight limit). Combine all of this with the well-calibrated thumb throttle, and we were tearing up corners at top speed within seconds, grinning all the while. If you had a Razor scooter as a kid, riding the Motocompacto will be second-nature child’s play. Like a Razor scooter, the Motocompacto doesn’t have any suspension. However, Ziraldo says the tire compounds as well as the rubber dampers in the seat assembly were tuned to reduce vibrations and impacts. We’ll have to take the scooter on rougher surfaces to see how that works, but the sensations coming through the synthetic-leather seat at the M1 Concourse weren’t uncomfortable.Fortunately, unlike that Razor, the Motocompacto has an actual brake. Note the singular. But because the scooter’s so light, and because your weight is mostly on the rear, the cable-operated drum brake in the back is more than enough to bring you to a swift halt. And it’s easy to modulate with the lever mounted on the left.Don’t expect any stopping assistance courtesy of regenerative braking, though. Honda didn’t give the Motocompacto any, over concerns that the battery might overcharge and become damaged on long downhill sections. Range is modest for an e-bike but pretty good for a suitcase with handlebars. Honda claims the Motocompacto can do 12 miles on a charge, with a full recharge taking 3.5 hours using the provided charger and a 120-volt household outlet. In addition to the onboard LED display, you’ll be able to monitor charging status via a forthcoming dedicated app (which will also include features like GPS tracking and changing settings via Bluetooth).While 12 miles might seem underwhelming compared with something like the BMW CE 02’s roughly 56-mile range, remember that this is a first mile/last mile solution. It’s meant to supplement your car, not replace it. It’s a way to get to a train station or for college students to get around campus. And on that last front, a Motocompacto is easier to secure in a stairwell or your dorm room than a Ruckus.It’s also noticeably cheaper than a Ruckus. At $995 to start, the Motocompacto is also less expensive than the CE 02 and many e-bikes, particularly the folding ones. Everything feels solid and tightly screwed together. Unlike a Razor, this isn’t a toy. You’ll want to save up a bit more for a proper cycling helmet, though. Oh, and the optional decals, stickers, and skins that Honda also plans to offer. Yes, that means you can rep the football team while racing to Orgo 101. Honda hinted that other accessories are also in discussion.It’s too early to tell whether the Honda Motocompacto will have a bigger impact than its predecessor. But considering how popular Honda’s mini motorcycles, especially the Grom, have become, we can’t imagine the electric scooter will disappear after two years. Several C/D staffers have already said they want one. And starting this month, you’ll be able to buy it either at your local Honda/Acura dealer or online. At which point, city gridlock might become your playground.SpecificationsSpecifications
Honda MotocompactoVehicle Type: mid-motor, front-wheel-drive, 1-passenger, 0-door scooter
PRICE
Base: $995
POWERTRAIN
Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous DCPower: 0.7 hp Torque: 12 lb-ftBattery Pack: air-cooled lithium-ion, 0.24 kWhCharger: 84 WTransmission: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS (folded/unfolded)
Wheelbase: 29.2 inLength: 29.2/38.1 inWidth: 3.7/17.2 inHeight: 21.1/35.0 inCargo Volume: 0.3 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 42 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
15 mph: 7.0 sec1/4-Mile: 63.5 secTop Speed: 15 mphResearch EditorAfter discovering car magazines and Fast and Furious movies in high school, Matthew Skwarczek wanted to create cleaner fuels to keep automobiles around. But after a brief engineering career, the Chicagoland native realized he preferred researching and writing about the cars themselves. That’s how he found himself first at MotorBiscuit and then at C/D. Today, when he’s not reading, he’s daydreaming on Bring a Trailer, backpacking, or riding his motorcycle or bicycle. More