Evelyn Reynolds

From the October 1987 issue of Car and Driver.The Detroit manufacturers are beset by overcapacity, lagging sales, foreign com­petition, and iffy currency-exchange rates—but for limited-production perfor­mance specialists, prospects have never been brighter. Carroll Shelby has just re­leased his fourth series of Chrysler spe­cials. Reeves Callaway is selling every hy­peractive Twin-Turbo Corvette he can build. And Steve Saleen is in his fourth year of producing modified Mustangs.Readers familiar with Shelby’s various exploits over the past twenty years, and Callaway’s pressurized power packs of about half that time, may be excused for wondering who Steve Saleen is. The an­swer is that he is fast becoming a perfor­mance VIP in his own right. Saleen’s modified-Mustang production is current­ly running at about 1000 units a year. His success is particularly impressive in light of the difficulties Ford encountered in marketing its own Mustang-based special, the SVO. Saleen’s initial tie-up with Ford grew out of his background as an enthusiast. He met the people at Ford’s Special Vehicle Operations when he was racing in the Trans-Am series in the early eighties. In 1982, when the reincarnated Mustang GT appeared, he thought it would be an ideal foundation for a limited-production high­-performance special. Saleen approached the SVO people with his idea, and they helped him develop working relationships with Ford’s sales and manufacturing organizations. The first series of Saleen Mustangs appeared in June 1984, and produc­tion has increased steadily ever since. A close relationship with Ford is critical to keeping Saleen’s costs low and his pro­duction schedule regular. When a cus­tomer walks into a Ford dealership and or­ders a Saleen Mustang, instruction are transmitted to the Ford plant in Dear­born, Michigan, to produce a Mustang LX specially designed for the conversion. The factory equips the car with a 225-hp, 4.9-liter V-8, a five-speed manual transmis­sion, several heavy-duty chassis pieces, and a full complement of power assists and comfort options. In addition, some standard Mustang components and trim pieces are omitted from the normal assembly-line process. Upon arrival at Saleen Autosport in Brea, California, the raw Mustang is first equipped with new suspension bits. Springs that are shorter than stock Mus­tang GT pieces lower the car by 1.5 inch­es; they are also stiffer than stock, and the front spring rates are boosted more than the rears. The Saleen’s damping needs are handled by Koni adjustable gas shock absorbers; Konis also replace the two hor­izontally positioned shocks that help con­trol the rear axle’s motions. The stock front and rear anti-roll bars are retained, but the front bar’s rubber pivot bushings are replaced with stiffer urethane pieces. Another detail change is the substitution of ball-bearing upper strut mounts for the stock rubber bushings; this reduces steer­ing friction. To stiffen the front-end struc­ture, the tops of the strut towers are tied to each other and to the firewall with a trian­gular steel brace. In addition to these suspension changes, the Saleen shop installs the four­-wheel-disc braking system previously used in the SVO Mustang. This system not only replaces the rear drums with discs but also employs larger front cali­pers and five-bolt hubs all around. Cast­aluminum wheels made to Saleen’s speci­fications are mated to these hubs. The seven-inch front and eight-inch rear rims are fitted with 225/50VR-16 General XP2000V tires.Once the major mechanical work is complete, a few new body panels are bolted into place. The frontispiece is a deep spoiler with ducts that feed air to the brakes and the radiator. A matching apron is tucked under the rear bumper, and side skirts that flare out at the wheel wells tie the two ends together. All of these parts are molded in urethane, so they are flexible enough to absorb small impacts. Three fiberglass pieces are added as well: a pair of quarter-window louvers and a rear wing that is both larger and higher than the stock GT fixture. Finally, each Saleen Mustang gets tricolor racing stripes along its side sills and a sunscreen with giant “Saleen Mustang” lettering across the top of its windshield. The passenger compartment also bene­fits from a makeover. All Saleen Mus­tangs share a special gray interior treat­ment that requires replacing the side panels in the front doors and the rear-seat area. Flofit sport seats with color-coordi­nated fabric replace the stockers in the front, and the factory rear seat is reuphol­stered to match. Other interior changes include a 170-mph speedometer, a three­-spoke, leather-covered Momo steering wheel, a dead pedal, and a Hurst shifter. The Saleen’s standard electronic gear in­cludes an Escort radar detector and a Kenwood sound system complete with a graphic equalizer, six speakers, and an 80-watt amplifier. Finally, a Sateen serial-number plate is affixed to the console of each car. Saleen Autosport makes no changes to the Mustang’s drivetrain, so the high­-output V-8’s emissions certification and warranty are preserved. The stock tail­pipe, however, is replaced with a unit that provides a throatier sound. Saleen also of­fers, on a limited basis, an optional 3.55:1 rear-axle ratio. The finished product looks like a take-­no-prisoners street fighter. The lowered Mustang has a purposeful, aggressive stance on its wide wheels and tires. And the Saleen body panels are every bit as eye-catching as the factory GT’s, proving that you don’t need such boy-racer touch­es as do-nothing scoops and pretentious fog lights to turn heads. We do find the huge “Saleen” lettering on the windshield a bit gauche, but otherwise the Saleen is as good-looking a Mustang as we’ve ever seen. The Saleen’s interior changes are not only tasteful but, for the most part, benefi­cial. The seats are comfortable and sup­portive, the dead pedal is well located, and the Momo wheel reminded us of how sat­isfying a well-designed three-spoke wheel can be. Our test car’s Hurst shifter, however, was less successful. It afforded a tight and precise shift action, but its link­age buzzed annoyingly at certain engine speeds. We also found the six Saleen badges visible from the driver’s seat to be about five too many. When we discussed these issues with Steve Saleen, he insisted that the buzzing of the shifter was unusu­al. He did admit to getting a certain ego boost from the badges and sheepishly confessed that as many as thirteen name­plates had adorned the interiors of previ­ous Saleen Mustangs. This visual chest puffery is easy to for­give, because the Saleen Mustang’s func­tional modifications are as effective as its cosmetic ones. In fast, hard driving, the Saleen is much more comfortable than the stocker. On the skidpad, we measured a maximum adhesion of 0.84 g—a signifi­cant improvement over the 0.82 g gener­ated by a stock Mustang GT that we used for comparison. Moreover, the Saleen is more neutral and controllable at its limit, and it changes from understeer to over­steer much more smoothly as power is ap­plied, allowing delicious four-wheel drifts in third-gear corners and on freeway ramps. The smooth limit behavior is hard­ly surprising: Saleen campaigns his Mustangs extensively and successfully in Showroom Stock endurance racing. Despite this rigorous high-speed devel­opment, though, the Saleen displayed a strange, two-step steering response in sla­lom testing that made it difficult to thread precisely through the cones. The stock Mustang was much easier to drive and much quicker. We never noticed any of the Saleen’s aberrant steering behavior on the road, however. Indeed, in hard driving, the Saleen’s stiff suspension makes it much more se­cure than the stock car, which bounces constantly. Unfortunately, the Saleen’s chassis also feeds every tiny road imper­fection into its body. Because the Mus­tang’s structure is tight enough to with­stand such beating without generating a symphony of squeaks and rattles, we sus­pect that those who live where roads are smooth will find little fault with the Saleen’s ride. Any northerner thinking about buying one, however, should defi­nitely take a Saleen on a test drive over local roads. Although engine changes are not part of the Saleen package, the improved rear traction and the optional lower axle ratio might be expected to enhance accelera­tion. Our test car’s engine, however, was too tired to take advantage of any im­proved starting-line grip. And although the lower axle ratio improves top-gear ac­celeration, it requires revving the engine well past its power peak to reach 60 mph in second gear, thus hurting the time to that speed. The shorter gearing also limits top speed, at least in theory. In testing, though, our Saleen reached 136 mph—­only 1 mph shy of the Mustang GT we tested last June. Anyone considering buying a Saleen and pushing it to its limits will be comfort­ed to learn that his car will be backed by the same warranty that covers stock Mus­tangs. Ford guarantees the factory parts, and Saleen covers the rest. And in order to receive the official Ford blessing for his program, Saleen had to commit to stock­ing a supply of spare parts for seven years after each car is produced. You can buy a Saleen Mustang for $19,900 from any of the 4700 Ford deal­ers in the country (although most of the Saleen business is concentrated at the 150 outlets that specialize in performance sales). If that price seems steep compared with a comparably equipped Mustang GT’s sticker of $13,838, consider that you probably couldn’t duplicate the Saleen for any less, and you couldn’t buy its warranty or the development that went into it at any price. Consider also that the Saleen costs only a little more than a similarly loaded Camaro IROC-Z or Firebird GTA. You might think of the difference as the price of distinction. SpecificationsSpecifications
19897 Saleen MustangVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 3-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $19,900/$20,900Options: 3.55:1 final -drive ratio, $1000
ENGINEpushrod V-8, iron block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 302 in3, 4942 cm3Power: 225 hp @ 4000 rpmTorque: 300 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: strut/live axleBrakes, F/R: 10.9-in vented disc/11.3-in vented discTires: General XP20000VP225/50VR-16
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 100.5 inLength: 179.6 inWidth: 69.1 inHeight: 50.0 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 49/34 ft3Curb Weight: 3289 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.5 sec100 mph: 19.5 sec1/4-Mile: 15.2 sec @ 90 mphTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 8.5 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 8.7 secTop Speed: 136 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 197 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.84 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 12 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 16/24 mpg  
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDCsaba Csere joined Car and Driver in 1980 and never really left. After serving as Technical Editor and Director, he was Editor-in-Chief from 1993 until his retirement from active duty in 2008. He continues to dabble in automotive journalism and WRL racing, as well as ministering to his 1965 Jaguar E-type, 2017 Porsche 911, 2009 Mercedes SL550, 2013 Porsche Cayenne S, and four motorcycles—when not skiing or hiking near his home in Colorado.  More

From the April 1982 issue of Car and Driver.Your eyes do not deceive you. You are looking at a Cadillac Eldorado with no stand-up hood ornament. Its lower body moldings are made of a gray plas­tic. It has no chrome side moldings. It has no chrome headlight moldings. Its wheels are not shod with ersatz wire covers. Its tires are fat and black. No, this is not a Car and Driver project car. This is the new 1982 Cadillac Eldorado Touring Coupe.Having sent the radical-for-Cadillac Cimarron out to woo a market it never had, Cadillac is now entering phase two of its recovery plan: bring back the tra­ditional big spenders who’ve been lost over the past several years to the quali­ty- and performance-oriented European luxury cars. Cadillac thinks it has a chance with this new breed of Eldorado. Its secret weapon? A high-performance handling package that made us doubt we were driving a Cadillac. The heart of the package is the tour­ing suspension, added to Cadillac’s op­tions list in February 1980. Almost im­mediately after the specially tuned suspension was developed, forward thinkers in Cadillac engineering saw that it had the potential to transform the Eldo into a European-style luxury driv­er’s car. Thus inspired, the engineers developed two project cars around the suspension—both with fat tires, both with no chrome—and tried to sell the Touring Coupe package to manage­ment. Meanwhile, perennial racer Rog­er Penske was putting together his own special-edition Eldorado for his dealer­ship in Downey, California, calling it the Penske/RS. Penske started with a fully optioned, megabuck Eldo with the tour­ing suspension, removed or blacked out most of the outside brightwork, and lowered it over the biggest set of meats he could squeeze into the fender wells. Fitted with Goodyear 60-series CTs four sizes larger than the tires supplied by the factory, the low-slung Penske/RS had a clear purpose. Jerry Kerran|Car and DriverRoger Penske got there first: The Penske/RS combines Cadillac’s touring suspension with an original grille design, custom pinstriping, and 60-series Goodyear NCTs on Appliance wire wheels.It remains a mystery why Cadillac’s taken so long to showcase the excellent touring suspension, but one can imag­ine that it took a while for the design staff to choke out the words, “Take off the chrome.” It doesn’t really matter who did it first, or which looks more sin­cere (Penske’s does; it also costs anoth­er $950). What does matter is that both Penske and, finally, Cadillac management recognized the Eldorado as a logi­cal base upon which to fashion a car with the potential to compete techno­logically with BMWs, Audis, and Mercedes. At the top of the Eldorado’s list of technological highlights is its front­-wheel drive. General Motors opposed the conventional wisdom of the day by switching its big E-bodies (Eldorado, Oldsmobile Toronado, Buick Riviera) to front drive way back in 1965. After sixteen years of refinement, the El­dorado’s front-drive system is so unob­trusive that it’s hard to tell which wheels are driving the car. In addition to a flat floor and a spacious trunk, front drive provides the Eldo with excellent footing over bad roads. Our test Eldorado had no problems schussing around the ski slopes that Ann Arbor roads turn into after a blizzard, while conventional rear­-drive Bimmers and Mercedes fishtailed nervously even down our beginner hills. Along with the advantages of front­-wheel drive, the Eldorado also has a fully independent suspension system. The front suspension consists of un­equal-length control arms, torsion bars, and an anti-sway bar; the rear uses a combination of semi-trailing arms, coil springs, and an anti-sway bar, with a pair of self-adjusting air shocks to keep the ride level. What’s more, there’s a disc brake at every corner. With these pieces the Eldorado has long had the potential to be a world­-class driver’s car. In the past, however, the critical components have been tuned more toward preserving the deli­cate equilibrium of the driver’s toy poo­dle than toward offering any hint of driving fun. Not so in the Touring Coupe. The suspension has been tuned toward max­imum aggression (our favorite setting). The diameter of the front stabilizer bar has been increased from 30 mm in the stock Eldo to 32 mm, the front suspen­sion bushings are 16 percent stiffer, the front torsion-bar rate is higher by 18 percent, the rear stabilizer bar is larger by 18 percent, and rear spring rates are higher by 14 percent. The steering ratio is still a quick 2.9 turns lock-to-lock, but the Touring Coupe benefits from a 20 percent increase in steering effort. More aggressive Goodyear P225/70R-15 tires replace the 75-series stock rubber. More Cadillac Reviews From the ArchiveThe result is startling and wonderful. The first noticeable feeling is just that: feeling. The Eldorado Touring Coupe provides that reassuring feeling that there is a road down there, the physical sensation that something is happening be­tween that road and the steering wheel. At the same time, the Eldo doesn’t give up over tar strips and expansion joints like the less forgiving BMW and Mercedes sedans. The Touring Coupe’s fine-tuned suspension strikes an admirable balance between road feel and no feel. Speaking of no feel, Cadillac could have increased the effort of its wimpy power steering by another 20 percent with no complaints from us. Not even the improved steering of the Touring Coupe can be trusted to sound a warn­ing when the limits of adhesion are about to be breached—a situation char­acterized by massive understeer. Having taken turns trying to unsettle this Caddy’s newfound composure, we’re most impressed with its behavior under duress. Sherman’s specialty is high-speed lane changes that will de­posit an unbelted front passenger into the rear seat. Ceppos has a favorite stretch of road that Chrysler should plaster-cast for reproduction as a tank-­testing track. Csere simply drives home in typical Hungarian fashion. (We would like to take this moment to thank Cadillac’s interior-design staff for its small but significant contribution to the cause: the inclusion of the Cimarron’s supportive driver’s seat and leather­-wrapped wheel. We would also like to reassure closet fake-wood freaks that nothing else in the heavily forested inte­rior has been touched. Some things are sacred.) What we found is that the only remaining trace of the rollicking, fat-cat Cadillac ride is a brief whoopsy-daisy in the nose over good-sized dips. A touch more shock damping in the front would take care of the problem. Yes, the touring package is very good—the body sticks close to the chas­sis, the chassis sticks close to the road, the driver sticks close to the seat, and the jeweler can still cut a diamond in the back seat, or whatever it is Cadillac peo­ple do back there—but there’s more to a great car than tight springs and stiff anti-sway bars. We were thoroughly dis­appointed in the performance of the new throttle-body-fuel-injected 4.1-liter aluminum V-8 (the base engine for all Caddys but the Cimarron and the lim­ousine, and the only engine available in the Touring Coupe). The new engine worked well enough; there just wasn’t enough of it. Or else there was just too much car. Whatever, it’s clear the en­gine engineers had one goal in mind: to produce the lightest, most fuel-efficient engine they could. They succeeded in saving 200 pounds over the weight of the 1980 6.0-liter V-8, which significant­ly improved curb weight and the front­-to-rear weight bias. And fuel economy is 3 miles per gallon better on the EPA city cycle than the 6.0-liter’s 14-mpg rating. But the price in performance is dear. Comparing acceleration statistics with last year’s 6.0-liter-powered Sedan de Ville (heavier by 400 pounds), the 1982 Eldorado is almost 4 seconds slower from 0 to 60 miles an hour, slower by al­most 2 seconds in the quarter-mile run, and will barely break 90 miles an hour after 65 seconds of trying. The new alu­minum V-8 produces 15 less horsepow­er at a higher rpm level, and 70 less pounds-feet of torque than the 6.0-liter engine. It produces so little power that almost any driving condition other than steady cruising will cause the new four­speed automatic overdrive transmission to downshift from fourth. You quickly come to expect a downshift with each and every throttle motion. Both engine and car are tentatively scheduled to be downsized in 1984, and the inside word is that no further work will be done on either until then. We can only hope that two more years will be enough time for Cadillac’s power­train and design staffs to come up with a truly innovative showcase for the talents of Cadillac’s suspension engineers. Now that we’ve been titillated by a second provocative demonstration of Cadillac’s ability to build a real driver’s car, we will not be satisfied until it delivers one. Technical HighlightsThe Eldorado’s new HT4100 aluminum engine is unusual in its modular construc­tion and in its use of cast iron in critical areas. The latter feature is undoubtedly intended to preclude any repetition of the problems of General Motors’ last alumi­num engine, the infamous Vega four­-cylinder.The block is an aluminum die-casting with an open deck, wet iron liners, cast­-iron main-bearing caps, and a separate valve-lifter carrier. The wet iron liners of­fer a conventional cylinder-wall surface, good heat transfer, and manufacturing simplicity, while the separate lifter carrier and the open-deck design reduce casting complexity. The iron main-bearing caps, coupled with the block’s deep skirts, en­sure sufficient crankcase rigidity.Topping off this composite block are very compact cast-iron cylinder heads. Like most iron heads, they have integral valve guides and seats, but Cadillac engi­neers minimized the use of heavy cast iron by designing much of the intake port into the runners of the aluminum intake manifold and using a separate, die-cast-­aluminum rocker-arm support. Long bolts, extending into the crankcase web area, attach the heads to the block and provide firm clamping at both ends of the free-standing cylinder liners. In most other respects, the HT4100 is contemporary but not innovative. Throt­tle-body fuel injection (a two-barrel unit unique to Cadillac engines) meters fuel to compact, fast-burn combustion chambers. The valvetrain is of conventional Ameri­can design, with pushrods and hydraulic lifters. In the interests of fuel efficiency, friction has been minimized with low-ten­sion piston rings, a low-drag water pump, and special bearing clearances. The resulting engine is approximately 200 pounds lighter than its controversial V-8-6-4 six-liter predecessor (which in earlier incarnations had been as large as 8.2 liters). Unfortunately, its power has also been downsized to 125 net horse­power, which leaves the HT4100 too limp to motivate Cadillac’s current 3800-to-4000-pound offerings with any degree of alacrity. However, this engine is destined to turn into a V-6 in 1984 (the tooling is already in place at Cadillac’s Livonia, Michigan, engine plant), when it will find a new home in smaller Cadillacs. With any luck, that combination will correct the power-to-weight imbalance of today. —Csaba CsereCounterpointA few years ago I would have laughed at the notion of a Cadillac masquerading as a BMW, but I now understand the power that artistic engineers have to change a car’s personality. And since Cadillac Divi­sion seems to be making an attempt to lure buyers back from the showrooms of the high-priced German competition these days, I dared hope for something special here.Unfortunately, the Eldo Touro suffers from the same malaise as the Cimarron—a lack of management commitment. You can almost see the budget committee shaking their heads “no” when some hopeful engineer lobbied for the bigger Caddy 6.6-liter V-8 or for Trans Am-level steering effort—two things that would really bring off the transformation. In­stead, they okayed body-color moldings and surprisingly effective suspension calibrations.It’s too bad they didn’t go further, but understandable. It reminds me of the Six­ties, when parents just couldn’t compre­hend what their pinko-Commie-hippie kids were saying. This Eldorado certainly shows there’s hope, but until the old guard understands the new guard, Cadil­lac seems destined to keep on making cars for another era—the one just past. —Rich CepposMy initial exposure to this Cadillac con­sisted of a couple of routine runs back and forth between home and office. These consisted of about three miles each way, two-thirds winding two-lane with plenty of potholes and frost heaves, and one-third parkway with a 45-mph speed limit. I was absolutely knocked out by the car. I came back to the office singing its praises as the first Cadillac in years that I could actually take pleasure in owning. I applauded its firm ride. I was comfortable with its interior appointments. I liked the sleek, unadorned look of its exterior. It seemed to have a pretty decent engine. Then I made a 50-mile trip on the Inter­state. Uh-oh. . . There is some craziness at work in the relationship of torque and horsepower curves to transmission set­tings and converter lockup. Try to cruise at any speed between 50 and 75 and the converter locks and unlocks—always with a thunk—and the transmission just can­not seem to make up its mind. Even at 75, when I thought I’d finally gotten past the critical point, I started up a very moderate grade and damned if it didn’t unlock again. I dunno. This is the nicest Cadillac I’ve driven in years, but it cries out for a 1969 driveline. —David E. Davis, Jr.It seems to me that any car as big and heavy as the Eldorado should give back something in return for its size. Some­thing like a whole lot of space inside. I love the Mercedes-Benz 380SEL and the BMW 733i and the Jaguar XJ6. They’ve got so much usable room inside. The 380SEL has room for a small convention. The 733i has room for a board meeting. The XJ6 has room for entire governments in exile. The expense of these cars has nothing to do with their roominess. The philosophy behind them is solely responsible. This brings us to the philosophy be­hind the Eldorado. Clever people at Cad­illac are delving into electronics and con­venience features and trick suspensions, but I’m a little puzzled as to why less clev­er people at Cadillac would choose space­-efficient front-wheel drive only to saddle it with a uselessly long nose and so little room behind the wheel that my just-un­der-six-foot-long body can’t find enough space to work in. This unpleasant squeezing makes it dif­ficult for me to work up any enthusiasm for the trick suspension. And I’d say it’s no better than okay, anyway. —Larry GriffinSpecificationsSpecifications
1982 Cadillac Eldorado Touring CoupeVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $18,716/$23,099Options: Touring Coupe package, $1950; AM/ FM/CB radio, $560; digital instrument panel, $229; rear-window defogger, $198; six-way power passenger seat, $197; theft-deterrent system, $1 79; cruise control, $175; tilt-telescope steering wheel, $169; automatic door locks, $145; illuminated vanity mirrors, $136; other opt ions, $445
ENGINEpushrod V-8, aluminum block and iron heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 249 in3, 4087 cm3Power: 125 hp @ 4200 rpmTorque: 190 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/semi-trailing armsBrakes, F/R: 10.4-in vented disc/10.4-in vented discTires: Goodyear Custom Polysteel RadialP225/70R-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 114.0 inLength: 204.5 inWidth: 70.6 inHeight: 55.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/46 ft3Trunk Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight: 3830 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 15.2 sec90 mph: 65.6 sec1/4-Mile: 20.2 sec @ 68 mphTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 7.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 11.4 secTop Speed: 92 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 220 ft
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 13 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 20/17/27 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDThe legendary Jean (Lindamood) Jennings, who died in December 2024, was part of what made the ’80s unforgettable at Car and Driver, and she leaves behind legions of fans. More

Lexus has offered hybrid SUVs going back to 2006, so the arrival of a hybrid powertrain into the LX had an air of inevitability about it. This is a first for the big-boy SUV, however, which was redesigned for the 2022 model year. Whereas previous Lexus hybrids have been mostly about fuel economy, that’s not really the case this time. With a combined fuel-economy estimate of 20 mpg, the hybrid LX is just 1 mpg better than its nonhybrid sibling. Instead, the LX700h’s numerically higher model designation (versus the rest of the lineup’s LX600 nameplate) is indicative both of its loftier horsepower output and its higher position in the lineup.The powertrain combines the LX600’s twin-turbocharged 3.4-liter V-6 with an electric motor located within the 10-speed automatic transmission’s housing and a nickel-metal-hydride battery. The electrification pushes output to 457 horsepower and 583 pound-feet of torque versus 409 horses and 479 pound-feet for the lesser nonhybrids. Top-of-the-Pyramid PricingAs suggested by its nomenclature, the LX700h is also the most expensive variant. It starts at $115,350, almost exactly the point where the LX600 ($115,850) tops out. That’s for the new Overtrail trim level, which is available solely on the hybrid. From there, prices climb to $117,850 for the F Sport and $119,850 for the Luxury, both of which are $4000 more than their LX600 trim analogues. At the top is the $141,350 Ultra Luxury, which migrates over from the LX600 to become another LX700h exclusive. The current LX is effectively the U.S. version of the 300-series Toyota Land Cruiser. (The latest U.S. Land Cruiser, known as the 250-series internationally, is slightly smaller and sports completely different bodywork than the LX—the GX is now its closest Lexus doppleganger.) As such, the LX already comes with a goodly amount of off-road equipment: four-wheel drive with low range, an electronically locking center differential, low-range crawl control, hill-descent control, an adaptive suspension with Active Height Control (AHC), and a camera system that can show an underbody view. The Overtrail AdditionThe new Overtrail trim adds front and rear electronically locking diffs, a metal skid plate, and beefy 33-inch tires on 18-inch wheels. It does not add any additional ground clearance, as the lowest point is still the differential housing of the solid rear axle, just shy of 8.1 inches above the ground; the AHC, however, can raise the body as much as 4.5 inches above the standard ride height (and lower it by just over an inch). We tried it out on a slick and muddy, but short, off-road course Lexus set up. There, the Overtrail demonstrated impressive wheel articulation, smooth throttle tip-in, and the ability to walk itself down steep slopes. The underbody-view camera system, which also shows graphic representations of wheel position, is a neat tech helper.This hybrid powertrain hardware is much the same as that in the latest-generation Tundra and Sequoia. The most interesting difference is the redundancy added here. As with other Toyota hybrids, the electric motor-generator also acts as the starter. But if there’s a hybrid system failure, the gas engine can’t be started. Although hybrid system failures are rare, the fear was that an owner could be stranded out in the wild. So, the LX adds a starter, an alternator, and an auxiliary 12-volt battery. If the hybrid system fails, the aux battery fires up the starter, and the vehicle can be powered solely by the engine, with the alternator powering the accessories. The Tundra and Sequoia do not have these extra components. A second bit of extra engineering for the LX is that Lexus built a waterproof case for the hybrid battery, with a water-detection system and cooling facilitated by the rear air conditioning.Driving the LX700hMostly, though, the tuning of the LX700h’s powertrain is what sets it apart from its siblings. The hybrid adds 104 pound-feet of torque to the standard LX’s 479 pound-feet, which comes atop the additional 20 horsepower that the Lexus’s twin-turbo 3.4-liter V-6 makes (409 horses) over comparable Toyota versions. And despite carrying nearly 400 pounds of additional mass compared to the LX600, the LX700h is half a second quicker to 60 mph, according to Lexus. Looking back at Car and Driver’s testing of the LX600, we found it’s right around the 6.0-second mark (5.9 seconds for an F Sport and 6.1 for an Ultra Luxury), so figure the LX700h should be good for a 5.5-second time. Towing capacity is the same 8000 pounds as in the LX600, and an integrated hitch receiver is standard.Drive the LX700h, and the most impressive aspect is how seamlessly the hybrid system operates compared to similar Toyotas. The 10-speed automatic means there’s a pleasantly direct response to throttle inputs, and the effective sound deadening masks the EV whine when you lift off the gas and the system shifts into EV mode. The V-6 is muted, and the electric motor’s grunt helps compensate for any turbo lag. It drives like a smooth, responsive gas engine.For 2025, the previously optional Adaptive Variable Suspension in combination with coil springs is now standard across the entire LX lineup. It allows some jiggly ride motions over rough pavement—more pronounced in the Overtrail—but makes for a mostly composed ride. The various drive modes can add some heft to the steering, as well as alter the throttle mapping and shift strategy, but when we took the LX700h for a run down a twisting two-lane with an extensive series of switchbacks, this tall and heavy beast mostly left us wishing we were piloting an IS500 instead.LX700h InteriorThe LX700h interior lives up to the brand ethos with padded surfaces everywhere, and everything you touch feels substantial. The comfy front chairs now feature standard massage in all LX models (rectifying an omission at the LX600’s launch). A refrigerated front center console box and rear-window sunshades are LX700h exclusives.As in the LX600, the third row has decent head and knee clearance but a severe lack of space for legs or feet. Your butt is nearly at ankle level due to the raised floor necessary to clear the live rear axle and the hybrid battery. Overtrail buyers can skip the third row in favor of a five-seat layout, which makes for significantly more luggage space. The Ultra Luxury trim also does away with the third row to create additional second-row space for regal reclining chairs with a fixed console between them.For models that do have a third row, the packaging of the hybrid-system battery compromises the LX’s already miserly cargo space aft of the third seat, reducing it from 11 to 7 cubic feet, significantly smaller than other full-size luxury SUVs. And the third-row seat no longer folds into the floor as it does in the LX600—instead, the seatback flops down onto the seat bottom. A small shelf a few inches above the cargo floor meets that folded-seatback height but raises the already-high liftover height farther. It’s not a great solution. On the upside, the hybrid does come with a 2400-watt AC inverter, as well as a three-prong power outlet in the cargo area.”The biggest reason [for the hybrid] is that at Lexus we’re trying to move toward carbon neutrality,” says chief engineer Takami Yokoo, who points out that the LX was the only vehicle in the lineup that wasn’t electrified. He adds: “We were able to increase power and torque, and we were also able to reduce CO2 emissions.” Buyers with the same values should know that electrification makes the LX700h only marginally quicker and slightly more economical than the LX600, but it is every bit as refined. And then there’s that model designation, numerically the highest ever on a Lexus. That’s got to count for something.SpecificationsSpecifications
2025 Lexus LX700hVehicle Type: front-engine, front-motor, four-wheel-drive, 4-, 5-, or 7-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: Overtrail, $115,350; F Sport, $117,850; Luxury, $119,850; Ultra Luxury, $141,350
POWERTRAIN
twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.4-liter V-6, 409 hp, 479 lb-ft + AC motor, 48 hp, 184 lb-ft (combined output: 457 hp, 583 lb-ft; 1.0-kWh [C/D est] nickel-metal hydride battery pack)Transmission: 10-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 112.2 inLength: 200.2–200.6 inWidth: 78.4 inHeight: 74.2–74.6 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 55/45–49/34 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/M/R: 62–63/31/7 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 6200–6300 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.5–5.6 sec1/4-Mile: 14.2–14.3 secTop Speed: 110 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 20/19/22 mpgJoe Lorio has been obsessed with cars since his Matchbox days, and he got his first subscription to Car and Driver at age 11. Joe started his career at Automobile Magazine under David E. Davis Jr., and his work has also appeared on websites including Amazon Autos, Autoblog, AutoTrader, Hagerty, Hemmings, KBB, and TrueCar. More

My friends and I don’t talk anymore. “How’s it going?” has been replaced by a rapid exchange of 20-second viral clips of race-car drivers flippin’ the bird at 180 mph or meal-prep recipes. Often, before I can finish the first, the queue has grown by two or three. The same could be said for Porsche; there’s always another one to watch. The refreshed Taycan sedan lineup is now seven models wide. It spans more than $130,000 in starting price, and over 600 lb-ft of torque separates the base Taycan from the frenetic Turbo GT at the top.The year marks the first that Taycan buyers can get all-wheel drive without getting pushed into a $120,495 4S or a Cross Turismo wagon. Porsche says this trim will likely be the Taycan’s volume model, and that’s probably right. For $105,295 ($3900 above the base rear-wheel-drive Taycan), the Taycan 4 has more torque, narrowly better acceleration, and the added security of all-wheel drive.4 ShoLike the rear-drive Taycan, the 4 has 402 horsepower with the standard 82.3-kWh battery pack and 429 ponies with the optional 97.0-kWh Performance Battery Plus ($5780). The addition of the front motor, which the 4 borrows from the more powerful 4S, means that in the base model, torque is 431 lb-ft, and with the larger battery, it’s 449 lb-ft, an increase of 140 lb-ft over the rear-drive Taycan. That’s almost a Mazda MX-5 Miata’s worth of added torque. Porsche claims the 4 is quicker to 60 mph by a tenth, but we suspect that’s a modest estimate. The 2025 Taycan RWD we recently tested reached 60 mph in 4.1 seconds. Shaving a couple of tenths off that would mean that one of the most affordable Taycans is a sub-four-second car, but it’s unlikely to match the 3.4-second time of the 562-hp 2020 Taycan 4S we tested. Ninety percent of our drive time behind the wheel of the Taycan 4 was atop ice at the Porsche Ice Experience center in Levi, Finland. It’s as great a place to give Porsche cars the ol’ Scandinavian flick as it is a terrible place to be a reindeer. Our cars were equipped with a $6495 package that adds Taycan Turbo Aero 20-inch wheels and Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 winter tires, giving the 4 incredible traction in the snowy Arctic Circle.We did low-speed sliding through Porsche’s icy slaloms, across a figure-eight track (a large snowbank prevented us from crossing through the middle), and around a drift circle in below-freezing temperatures. While that’s not the most comprehensive driving experience, it did highlight the characteristics that make the Taycan one of best electric cars we’ve driven.Lifting off throttle, giving the wheel a crank, and then tipping back into the throttle at the beginning of the slalom puts the Taycan into a slide. There’s a lot of weight to transfer as you swing the Taycan from left to right around cones, but the steering’s linear buildup makes it easy to control. Even in a low-traction scenario such as ice and snow, the ability to balance the throttle with countersteering to hold on to an epic slide takes far less brain power than it should. The result? You look cool and sweat less. But at What Cost?The Porsche spec sheet indicates that the Taycan 4 is nearly 200 pounds heavier than the rear-drive car, so we estimate the weight of the all-wheel drive model to be about 4900 to 5100 pounds, depending on the battery-pack size. Brake caliper and rotor specifications remain the same, with 14.2-inch rotors up front and 14.1 inches in the rear. Despite that the Taycan 4 is on sale now and live on Porsche’s configurator, EPA ratings for driving range have yet to be published. Based on calculations from Europe’s WLTP figures, we estimate EPA driving range will be about 260 miles for the standard battery and up to 310 miles for the optional pack. The 2025 rear-drive Taycan earned a 318-mile EPA estimate in Performance Battery Plus guise. Taycan It EasyA big part of the refreshed Taycans’ updates for 2025 involves charging speed and management of battery temperatures. While the maximum DC fast-charging rate has increased to 320 kW (for Performance Battery Plus only; the standard Performance Battery’s max is 270 kW), that’s only part of the story.An updated climate compressor has increased battery cooling power from 9 to 12 kW, and energy allowed for heating the battery has more than doubled from 7 to 17 kW. That makes for quicker preconditioning. And Porsche claims its new charging capabilities—feats we sampled from a prototype model—have halved its charging times in 60-degree temps. Stealth WealthShort of a tiny “4” badge on the liftgate, it’s impossible to tell the 4 apart from the base Taycan. Both come with 19-inch Taycan S Aero wheels, LED headlights, and that same Taycan maw that looks a lot like Toothless from DreamWorks’ How to Train Your Dragon. The 4 could’ve been a checkbox on the order sheet, as it’s purely the option of all-wheel drive. The $3900 upcharge for all-wheel drive is about the same as you’d pay in far more affordable electric vehicles. Take the Hyundai Ioniq 5, for example. Upgrading an Ioniq 5 SE with all-wheel drive will run you $3500. In a Volkswagen ID.Buzz, the difference between a Pro S Plus RWD van and the all-wheel-drive Pro S Plus 4Motion is $4500. There are more EVs to buy than ever, and the cadence of new models and updates can feel like a barrage. But like another video of a dash cam capturing instant karma or dogs demanding payment of the cheese tax, more Taycans are a good thing. We look forward to testing the all-wheel-drive Taycan 4 ahead of deliveries, which Porsche says will start in June. Feel free to send us one. Or like six at a time. Just don’t say anything. Don’t make it weird. SpecificationsSpecifications
2025 Porsche Taycan 4Vehicle Type: front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 4- or 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICEBase: Performance Battery, $105,295; Performance Battery Plus, $111,075
POWERTRAIN (Performance Battery)
Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous ACRear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous ACCombined Power: 402 hpCombined Torque: 431 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 82.3 kWhOnboard Charger: 11.0 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 270 kWTransmissions, F/R: direct-drive, 2-speed automatic
POWERTRAIN (Performance Battery Plus)
Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous ACRear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous ACCombined Power: 429 hpCombined Torque: 449 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 97.0 kWhOnboard Charger: 11.0 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 320 kWTransmissions, F/R: direct-drive, 2-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 114.2 inLength: 195.4 inWidth: 77.4 inHeight: 54.2 inTrunk Volume: 14 ft3Front Trunk Volume: 3 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4900–5100 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 4.0 sec100 mph: 9.6 sec1/4-Mile: 12.4 secTop Speed: 143 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 82–93/85–95/80–92 MPGeRange: 260–310 miAustin Irwin has worked for Car and Driver for over 10 years in various roles. He’s steadily worked his way from an entry-level data entry position into driving vehicles for photography and video, and is now reviewing and testing cars. What will he do next? Who knows, but he better be fast. More

From the February 1980 issue of Car and Driver.One door opens, another closes. One day I was reading Mr. Editor Davis’s val­ediction to the Mercedes-Benz 450SEL; on the day before, I was driving the car that proved the aluminum engine of its new successors, the 380 and 500SE, in the latest S-class range of luxury supersedans from Daimler-Benz. You know all about them; you know they have been derived and developed from the present class, looking sleeker and frac­tionally longer to give a 14 percent re­duction in wind resistance, and weigh­ing less (at vast energy expense in mak­ing aluminum, which is much more con­sumptive of electricity than iron, in or­der to save energy in fuel consumption on the road). You know how well the change has been justified, no doubt, with the performance of the superseded range approached with engines of smaller displacement: the new 3.8-liter V-8 offers virtually the same output as the iron-blocked 4.5 (218 bhp) and a slightly increased top speed of 133 mph, while the 5.0-liter V-8, with an output of 240 bhp, brings the 500SEL sedan within reach of the prodigious performance of the 6.9-liter SEL. What you may not know is that the five-liter V-8 has been in production and on the roads in and around Germany for nearly two years now, since it was introduced at the 1977 Frankfurt Motor Show un­der the bonnet of the 450SLC.Ever since it first appeared with 2.8-, 3.5-, and 4.5-liter engines, the SLC has been the most beautiful car in the Mer­cedes-Benz range, and surely one of the most beautiful in the world. Not that beauty is everything; but if it is not, I will stick my neck out and say that the SLC is also the best of all Mercedes. The 6.9 has more engine, more brakes, more suspension, and indeed more of most things; but they do not necessarily make it a better car than the 450SLC­—any more than having a shorter wheel­base, fewer seats, and slightly better acceleration makes the 450SL better. The “C” stands for “coupé,” which is ridiculous. “Coupé” means cut short, which is what this car is really not, being only a couple of inches shorter in the wheelbase than the corresponding sedan. On the other hand, it is fourteen inches longer in the wheelbase than the two-seater SL. In effect it is an SL that has been stretched to make room for four adults. It would make better sense if the C stood for “comfort.” The SLC is not a mollycoddling Merc, but it is the most comfortable of them all. The sedans may be roomier, but their expansive seats, dimensioned and contoured to pillow the posteriors of the tycoonly fat, offer less intimate sup­port to the torso than do the superbly shaped seats of this sumptuous car, which is itself superbly shaped. Gor­geous it looks from outside, but it is most specially delightful within: those seats are surely among the best any­where, for I once spent 24 hours out of 26 (the other two hours were spent on a ferry) literally on end in one, sitting be­hind the wheel and never detecting the faintest discomfort. Maybe the seat does not fold back all the way, but it goes back far enough to constitute an ade­quate bed; and the SLC may accordingly qualify as a sports car. After its success in the South Ameri­can Rally, maybe the SLC has other such qualifications, yet it was surely nev­er intended as a sports car. It is so ele­gant, so superbly balanced in form and in line, so exquisitely contoured to look beautiful from any angle, that to subject it to the gross indignities of competition would be sheer vandalism. Nevertheless the car begs to be driven in a sporting way—positively solicits the fast corner, the fine balancing of foot and hand, of centripetal and centrifugal accelera­tions. It is surely the best balanced and most impeccably behaved Mercedes-­Benz ever to have been built for com­mon sale. It is possibly a little less agile than the shorter and lighter SL, but in consistency and progressiveness of re­sponse to all control inputs, especially through the steering and brakes, it is the two-seater’s superior—which is just as well, because it looks it. More Mercedes SEL Content from the archiveTo rely on looks might be improvi­dent, unless you can look closely enough to read the small print. It is not very small, for modesty is not a failing commonly encountered either in Stuttgart or in its satellite showrooms; but the subscripts on the ravishing rump of this beauty deserve to be conned close­ly. What looks like a 450SLC may turn out to be only a 280SLC, which is less good; or indeed it may be a 350SLC, which is even less good than the 280. On the other hand, a full-span rump-reading might detect the figure “5.0” in addition to the 450SLC identification, in which case it is as good as almost any­thing. Even if you cannot read, there is a modest spoiler ridging the top of the trunk lid which is in itself an adequate declaration that what you see is the 450SLC that goes as well as the 450SLC always should have done. This is the car in which—in blissful legality on the pub­lic highway, and in perfect and tactful safety among all manner of other people going about their daily drives—I av­eraged 133 mph over 20 miles, 126 mph over 40 miles. This is a car that is every bit as fast as it looks, and which displays its incomparable pedigree by being very much faster than it feels.Take no great notice of the fact that the hood, deck lid, and bumpers are, like the engine, made of aluminum al­loys. They might account for a reduc­tion of 253 pounds in the curb weight of this car compared with the more com­monplace 4.5-liter version, but since that represents only 7.6 percent of the 3338 pounds standing on those four fat Michelins, it is not likely to have a great deal of effect on the performance. The aerodynamic bib and tucker probably make a slight difference, though their principal virtue is in increasing the car’s high-speed stability; and the higher gearing, raised by 12.5 percent in the rear axle, would by itself only make the car slower. No, the thing that made that gearing possible and makes everything else justifiable is the thing that gives 240 hp at 5000 rpm somewhere adja­cent to the driver’s right foot, the thing that is made of low-pressure, chill-cast, high-silicon aluminum alloy with elec­trolytically relieved cylinder bores that allow the plated pistons and rings to ride on the exposed silicon crystals without any nasty iron or steel liners in the way. It is the thing that has bigger bores to give it 10 percent more displacement than the 4.5-liter V-8, and bigger exhaust valves to give 11 percent more port area, along with 10.6 percent more power and 12.2 percent more torque. Intriguing exhaust valves, they are: Despite being 2 mm larger in head diameter, they are 2 mm more slender in the stem, and they are sodium-filled­—which is a rare feature today, after more than half a century since Sam Heron in­vented sodium-filled valves for the Wright Simoon aircraft engine. The Thing is just plain good, one of the most encouraging engines that a driver can find anywhere near his right foot; and it is just right for the SLC. Normally one barely hears it, for there is plenty of sound deadening (some­thing has to account for all that weight), and the high gearing reduces the noise level inside the car even more at a given speed. Should you not fancy the speed given, however, the throttle pedal can be kicked or the transmission lever flicked and the most gorgeous growl is­sues from somewhere deep in the tiger bay. When it does, the car seems to leap—except that a leap is soon over, while this goes on and on, a great surge that seems to tip the road down the car’s gullet and turn the horizon bluer, as though a contracting universe were the essence of some new Daimler-Benz cos­mological theory. It is not a car for leaping away from standstill in drag races. There remain others, more intemperate and less en­during, that will explode off a starting line with greater vim and volume. Ac­cording to its makers, the five-liter SLC reaches 62 mph in 8.5 seconds, though mine was slower. Against that must be set their claim for a maximum speed of 140 mph, whereas mine went quicker. The plain facts according to my chronography are that, two-up, the car reached 62 mph in 8.6 seconds, 100 mph in a further 9.6 seconds, and when I wondered what speed it would reach in another 10-second increment I found the answer was 122 mph. These figures show just what a magnificent performer the SLC 5.0 is on real roads, as distin­guished from illusory drag strips. It is magnificently high-geared, able to reach 66 mph in bottom gear at its redlined 5800 engine rpm, 108 in second gear, and—how much in top? Not 158, that is certain, though that is what would correspond to 5800 rpm. The roads I was using in southern Germany never stayed level enough for long enough; but I can tell you that the car did 137 mph uphill and 149 downhill, and that, according to Heuer and the half-kilome­ter markers, the speedometer was re­markably accurate.You do not have to drive the car like that all the time in order to enjoy it, for it is impeccably mannered at any speed. If you do, you cannot expect to go for 320 miles before summoning the reserve three and a half of the 23.8 U.S. gallons of fuel in the tank, as you can if you content yourself with cruising at about half the car’s maximum speed. But if you have a long way to go, little time, and you want to arrive unstressed, this is the car in which to do it. If your route is not all unlimited autobahn, but is wet and wiggly, it is still the way to do it: I covered a good many miles saunter­ing through the stupefying sweeps of the Black Forest and, even when saun­tering, the SLC 5.0 seemed a good deal quicker than anything else around. When given the boot it was only once beaten—by a chap in expensively beautiful leathers riding a 900 cc Ducati Des­mo, looking gorgeous and sounding filthy, which eventually outaccelerated the Merc in a joint sprint off the end of a 40-kph speed limit and was never seen again until I spotted him refueling a few swervaceous miles down the road. An SLC is one of the sweetest things in swervery, beautifully balanced and most reliably shod with the XWX tires that were until a couple of years ago the finest high-speed tires you could buy and are still the best suited to this par­ticular car. Its power steering is among the best of its kind, feeling just a shade less light at very high speeds in the five-­liter car, perhaps because its aerodynamic appendages help to keep its weight firmly on the ground. When go­ing into tight comers, it is amazing how much grip is available to allow braking to be used right up to the apex; coming out of them, even wet ones, it is equally amazing how much traction is available, only the utmost extravagance producing a brief and eminently corrigible twitch of the tail. No wonder racing drivers like the car; being no kind of racing driver myself, I absolutely loved it. I admired the absence of wind noise; I adored the positivity of the automatic transmission (the sedans will be getting a four-speed­er, which should be even better); and I am still trying to analyze the reasons for a Mercedes-Benz (any model, but espe­cially this one) being so exceptionally reassuring to its passengers. It has about it an air of infallible competence. It contrives to do everything with such ease that its speed is simply not noticed, its acceleration simply taken for grant­ed, its cornering ability accepted as a right rather than as a necessity. If the passengers can be passively content, the driver can be actively hap­py. Beyond the trivial confines of 60 mph, the five-liter SLC is a lot livelier than the sedans. Yet for all its ability to go, the thing that most impressed me at the time and in retrospect was its ability to stop. Such brakes are seldom en­countered in anything on wheels; only in the Bristol and the Porsche 928 have I met their peers. The most sensitive ad­justment of speed to suit the pace of a pedestrian is as readily available at the pedal as the most almighty and sudden substitution of discretion for valor at speeds once the exclusive preserve of aircraft. Chasing time and rainbows along a damp autobahn, I occasionally came up behind some more modest lit­tle car committed to its own humble speedfeast, unable to get back into a slower lane until some daunting feat of bus-beating or beetle-crushing was tremulously accomplished—but a mea­sured squeeze of the pedal would pe­remptorily negate all the Merc’s superi­or speed, to leave it ambling untroubled in the obstacle’s wake with half the orig­inal sighting distance still unconsumed. Whatever the speed or the other circumstances, the SLC brakes were just right. And so was everything else. More

From the July 1985 issue of Car and Driver.Our almost unbounded affection for the Volkswagen GTI has been tempered only by our concern for its ultimate lack of poke. We looked forward to the day when the man who has turbocharged a thousand Volkswagen four-cylinders would pump more ponies into the company’s latest GTI. Callaway’s turbo conversions are not free of flaw (an impossibility), but among performance privateers, this Connecticut Yankee is known for putting some of today’s most as­tute turbo packages into the hands of peo­ple who feel, as he does, that the pedal on the right is for pouncing. Callaway leaped at today’s GTI the moment VW released a pre-production model into his care. The result is your basic bullet of the byways.The red-coated bullet we’ve been re­loading at the Mobil station and firing at will for the past week is clad in a BBS trim package. The smoothly finished air dam, fender flares, and side skirts propel the GTI from “barn” toward “bullet,” and BBS claims that the pieces lick down the GTI’s aero ballistics by ten percent in the wind tunnel, despite the increased frontal area and the fat 205/50VR-15 Goodyear Eagle VR50s (a.k.a. “gatorbacks”), which are mounted on BBS’s famous alloy wheels. Our coast-down testing shows that the Callaway GTI is indeed slightly better than the stock machine in aerodynamic drag but slightly poorer in rolling resistance. At higher speeds, the Callaway car’s advantage should increase somewhat. Speaking of high speeds, the turbo pushes the GTI’s terminal velocity from 114 mph to 122. At that point, VW’s rev limiter is itching to put a lid on fifth gear, though our test car’s tachometer still read short of the indicated redline. Whatever the effect of the body pieces, stability is first-rate. The Callaway’s headlong ballistics begin with muzzle velocity through a Nissan 300ZX Turbo hood scoop. Fresh air feeds an air box sandwiched between the hood and an air-to-air intercooler. In the past, Callaway’s intercooler was buried below the battery; now it perches above the “Callaway” cam cover, and the resulting short runs of plumbing do a better job of cooling and delivering the denser air to the cylinders. VW has increased the GTI’s fuel-delivery capacity by switching from Bosch K- to KE-Jetronic fuel injection, so Callaway eliminates its own proprietary Microfueler, relying on a one-time ma­nipulation of the new electronic control box to feed an increment of extra fuel. A copper cylinder-head spacer reduces com­pression from 10.0 to 7.8:1, taking away some low-speed response but allowing the 10-psi boost that pumps the delightful 1.8-liter four to an estimated 150 hp.Estimated or not, the power produces a 7.2-second 0-to-60 sprint amid a quarter­-mile burst of 15.5 seconds at 88 mph. And it’s easy, whooping up in a hurry with no sign of detonation (on unleaded premium pump fuel) and with only a brief hiccup if the throttle is quickly lifted. Fuel economy under a light foot is reasonable, but we managed only 18 mpg overall. Temptation is a spiteful thing. Although no official emissions testing has yet been done, Callaway claims that the retention of the stock emissions system al­lows the engine to remain at least 49-state legal. However, our test car’s reluctance to start caused extended cranking and necessitated pedal babying, which might foul a full, by-the-bag emissions test. Company rep Scot Keller places the blame on an un­common glitch in the brain of this proto­type GTI. Unlike many cars fitted with wide wheels and tires, the BBS-and-Goodyear­-equipped GTI tracks true. Only when cor­nering hard over seams that mimic your general direction of travel does the car dance nervously. Despite the availability of a BBS suspension package, Callaway feels that the stock components provide the best compromise between day-to-day driving and ultimate adhesion. The fat-tired, stock-suspended version we sampled matched the stock GTI’s 0.83-g skidpad perfor­mance but did not better it. Even on its original-equipment 185/60HR-14 Good­year Eagle GTs, the everyday GTI sends shock waves through the top ranks of high-­limit handling and world-class tracking. Two points: first, VW has done a fine job on the stock suspension; second, if the sweet limits of the stock car make you hap­py, you could save a bundle by leaving off the big booties and the extra body pieces. (If you really want to save money, a base VW Golf with Callaway’s less expensive Stage I turbo can roll out the door for un­der $10,000.) For about $9000, base price, the every­day GTI provides splendiferously heady behavior, and, except for its powertrain, it is dressed to kill. It’s got dandy sport seats, suitably boffo trim, and the right heads-up dapper attitude. For an additional $4000 (which includes a heavy-duty clutch), Reeves Callaway’s Stage II GTI shows nothing but its ringed tail to otherwise potent machines. Many and varied are the pompous asses who will be booted aside by the Callaway Turbo GTI, shot in the butt by the bullet of the byways. SpecificationsSpecifications
1985 Callaway Volkswagen GTI TurboVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $9560/$17,557Options: Callaway Stage II turbo kit, $4000; BBS body kit, $960; BBS wheels, $940; Goodyear Eagle VR50 tires, $782; air conditioning, $695; AM/FM-stereo radio/cassette, $495; leather-covered steering wheel, $125
ENGINEturbocharged and intercooled SOHC inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 109 in3, 1781 cm3Power: 150 hp @ 5500 rpm (est)Torque: 160 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm (est) 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/trailing armsBrakes, F/R: 9.4-in vented disc/9.4-in discTires: Goodyear Eagle VR50P205/50VR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 97.3 inLength: 158.0 inWidth: 66.1 inHeight: 54.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 46/41 ft3Cargo Volume: 18 ft3Curb Weight: 2323 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.2 sec1/4-Mile: 15.5 sec @ 88 mph100 mph: 24.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 11.5 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 7.7 secTop Speed: 122 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 193 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.83 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 18 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Last year, Subaru sold its three millionth Outback on U.S. soil. The fact that the sale occurred in Florida speaks to Subaru’s mainstream transformation from its original U.S. audience of professional snowshoers, granola farmers, and frostbitten loners. Subaru credits the Outback with saving the company’s stateside ambitions—in the mid-1990s, Subaru of America had a 300-day supply of cars languishing on dealer lots. Then, as the 1995 model year approached, someone said, “How about we add some plastic cladding to the Legacy wagon, name it after a remote region of Australia, and market it with Paul Hogan, star of the 1986 hit movie Crocodile Dundee?” In the words of one B. Dylan, when you ain’t got nothin’, you got nothin’ to lose. Thirty years later, the Outback is Subaru’s third-bestselling model, behind the Crosstrek and the Forester. In 2024, sales were up 4.1 percent even though the current-gen car was in its fifth year of production, largely unchanged since its 2020 redesign. But there have been some tweaks and revisions over the years, which is one reason why we’re training our critical eye on the 2025 Outback now. The other reason is that this is the last year of the Outback as we know it, so we figure we owe it a farewell. Yes, the 2026 Outback is going full SUV, abandoning the pretense of its wagon form factor. Whether this is a wise move remains to be seen, but online feedback from current owners seems to range from “I guess I’ll see how this turns out” to “I guess this is my last Outback.” Huffy social media proclamations aside, we’ll be bummed if Subaru goofs up the formula because the current Outback is really good at its core mission—hauling five passengers and their gear in comfort through the kind of wintry conditions that leave bro-dozers in ditches.Subaru has held the line on Outback prices over the years, and the 2025 model starts at $30,430, which is a swell deal for a capacious all-wheel-drive wagon. Turbocharged models open with the $40,895 Onyx Edition XT, with the top Touring XT example ($44,330) we drove still representing a good value for what you get, which amounts to every option on the roster. And options abound, as Subaru positions the flagship Outback as a credible alternative for disaffected Audi Allroad and Mercedes-Benz E-class All-Terrain shoppers. So you get heated and ventilated front seats, heated rear seats, a 260-hp engine, and nappa leather upholstery, among other finery. Headlights that track the steering wheel? Check. Heating that covers the full circumference of that steering wheel? Of course—that was one of the updates that came along with a light refresh in 2023.That minor overhaul also included a revised front end with changes to the headlights, grille, and bumper. The fanciest driver’s seat, included on the Limited and Touring models, went from 10-way adjustability to 12-way. The Outback got updates to its EyeSight driver-assist system and a new electronically controlled brake system that’s a better partner for EyeSight’s automated-braking capabilities. Speaking of Subaru’s stereoscopic forward-looking camera system, some of the uplevel trims now enjoy a third wide-angle mono camera to provide 180-degree coverage. Even in snow, the system somehow manages to parse lane markings that are barely visible, speakers chirping with reprimand if you dare stray. But mostly, EyeSight operates in the background and doesn’t intrude on your daily driving.Outbacks aren’t all about speed, but the XT’s turbocharged 2.4-liter horizontally opposed four-cylinder is a good match for the car, making 260 horsepower and 277 pound-feet of torque. When we tested an Outback Touring XT in 2020, it hit 60 mph in 6.3 seconds, 2.2 seconds ahead of its standard counterpart with a 182-hp 2.5-liter flat-four. The 2022 Wilderness model we tested was even quicker, dashing to 60 mph in 5.8 seconds. All Outbacks use a continuously variable transmission with eight fixed ratios that can be chosen via steering wheel paddles, and the XT’s extra torque is a helpful weapon against the CVT’s off-the-line turpitude. Going for the turbo also increases the Outback’s tow rating from 2700 to 3500 pounds. Given that the snail-fed mill is happy on 87 octane, and fuel economy is a push (both engines returned 28 mpg on our 75-mph highway fuel-economy test), we’d say treat yourself to forced induction if you can swing it.The Outback isn’t exactly a Raptor off-road, but its 8.7 inches of ground clearance (9.5 inches in the Wilderness) allows it to scramble along your average green-circle trail. And its limber suspension and generous tire sidewall make for a plush on-road ride. The driving experience errs on the side of luxury rather than sportiness, as the CVT strives to keep revs down unless overruled by the driver. When it comes to messages from the road, the steering adheres to a no-news-is-good-news philosophy, but then again, the Outback isn’t trying to be the Airslayer. The overall vibe is hushed refinement, with the exception of the stop-start system, which awakens the engine with such a jolt that it feels like the car got rear-ended. But you can disable that annoyance via the 11.6-inch touchscreen (dual 7.0-inch screens on the base model). Cabin-tech Luddites are likely to fawn over the existence of a real-deal CD player (standard on Touring/Touring XT); that throwback hides in the center console, where there’s plenty of room for your sleeve of bootleg Spacehog albums. The upgrade 576-watt Harman/Kardon sound system (Onyx Edition models and up) also includes a 3.5-mm input jack, affirming its commitment to old-school audio. If you don’t feel like plugging in your iPod Nano or tape deck, wireless CarPlay and Android Auto provide modern-day solutions.Even though the current-generation Outback debuted in the hazy antiquity of 2019, it doesn’t feel dated or obsolete, and its healthy sales affirm that impression. But time and product cycles march on, so soon we’ll find out whether the forthcoming Outback is more Crocodile Dundee or Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles. In the meantime, the 2025 Outback represents the distillation of 30 years of refinement, the last stop on the wagon train.SpecificationsSpecifications
2025 Subaru OutbackVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: $30,430; Premium, $32,730; Onyx Edition, $37,640; Limited, $39,390; Onyx Edition XT, $40,895; Wilderness, $41,380; Limited XT, $41,730; Touring, $41,880; Touring XT, $44,330
ENGINES
DOHC 16-valve 2.5-liter flat-4, 182 hp, 176 lb-ft; turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.4-liter flat-4, 260 hp, 277 lb-ft
TRANSMISSION
continuously variable automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 108.1 inLength: 191.1–191.9 inWidth: 74.2–74.6 inHeight: 66.1–66.9 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 56–58/51 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 76/33 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3700–4000 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.8–8.6 sec1/4-Mile: 14.6–16.8 secTop Speed: 115–120 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 23–28/21–26/26–32 mpgEzra Dyer is a Car and Driver senior editor and columnist. He’s now based in North Carolina but still remembers how to turn right. He owns a 2009 GEM e4 and once drove 206 mph. Those facts are mutually exclusive. More

The Honda CR-V and the Mazda CX-50 are the cream of the compact SUV crop. With its nonhybrid powertrain, the CX-50 beat seven rivals in a small-SUV battle royal last spring. And the Honda CR-V’s full line took home a 10Best Trucks award this year. With increased public interest in hybrids, we were curious how the gas-electric versions of each would stack up against each other. Meet the ContestantsAt Honda, the hybrid powertrain is the step-up choice over the base turbocharged 1.5-liter four in the CR-V, so it’s reserved for the top three trim levels: Sport, Sport L, and Sport Touring. Our sample vehicle was a Sport Touring, which includes all-wheel drive (it’s optional on lesser trims) and for 2025 starts at $42,495.For Mazda, the CX-50’s hybrid powertrain is effectively the middle offering, between the free-breathing base four-cylinder and the more powerful turbo four. Mazda offers the CX-50 Hybrid in three trim levels: Preferred, Premium, and Premium Plus. Here again, we had the top model, the Premium Plus. Base price for that trim is $41,470, and all CX-50s come standard with all-wheel drive.Interior and ExteriorThe latest CR-V has a more substantial, squared-off appearance than its predecessors. If you want a CR-V Hybrid, though, you’d better like black wheels and black trim, because that’s what you’re going to get. We like the CX-50’s somewhat more wagon-like proportions, with a longer hood and a set-back cabin. It comes across as a junior version of the CX-70/CX-90. Climb inside, and the CR-V earns top marks for its outward visibility. The layout of the controls and switchgear is traditional Honda: straightforward, easy to use, and no gimmicks. We love the three knobs for climate control and the physical shift lever. There’s also a good amount of stowage. The plump front seats are plenty comfortable, and space in back is generous. Outside of the hex-pattern trim on the dash, however, this is mostly a style-free zone, and the materials even in this range-topping trim are nothing special.Honda CR-V Hybrid Sport TouringHIGHS: Spacious interior, plush ride, transparent hybrid powertrain.LOWS: Ho-hum interior materials, highway fuel economy lags, black exterior trim is inescapable.VERDICT: An extremely well-rounded offering that covers all the bases.The top-spec CX-50 interior has a whiff of richness with soft leather accents on the dash and door panels. As in the CR-V, a real shift lever and physical climate-control buttons and knobs are present. Bravo. The Mazda’s rear seat also has plenty of legroom and knee clearance, but the cushion isn’t as substantial as the Honda’s. And the CX-50’s more hunkered-down roofline means the view out isn’t quite as expansive.InfotainmentThe Honda’s infotainment system is unremarkable, and that’s okay. At 9.0 inches, the touchscreen is far from the biggest out there, but it’s big enough (the base Sport hybrid gets a 7.0-incher). There’s a volume knob and two tiny buttons for tuning. Smartphone mirroring is wireless in the Sport Touring (and Sport L), and the top-spec model also has a wireless charging pad.The Mazda infotainment system is unusual in that you navigate via a knob and a quartet of buttons on the center console. That wouldn’t be so bad—we appreciate BMW’s similar (soon-to-be-deep-sixed) setup—but the operational logic makes the Mazda system kind of annoying. There is a workaround, however. Pair your smartphone (wireless smartphone mirroring is standard on all models) and use Android Auto or Apple CarPlay, and touchscreen functionality is unlocked, but the 10.3-inch screen is a long reach. Wireless charging is standard on all CX-50 Hybrid trims.Powertrain and PerformanceThe Honda’s hybrid system combines an Atkinson-cycle 2.0-liter four and two electric motors. One electric motor functions as a generator, and the other propels the car. The gas engine charges the battery and can also assist in powering the car. Total combined output is 204 horsepower.Mazda gets its hybrid powertrain from Toyota. The Atkinson-cycle 2.5-liter four and three electric motors are the same bits you’ll find in a RAV4 Hybrid. Like we said, all-wheel drive is standard, with one of the motors driving the rear wheels, with the gas-electric combo up front powering the front wheels via a planetary-gear transmission that operates like a CVT. The nickel-metal hydride battery is a Mazda exclusive, though (Toyota uses a lithium-ion unit). Total combined output is 219 horsepower. Mazda CX-50 Hybrid Premium PlusHIGHS: Standout looks, upscale cabin, engaging handling.LOWS: Engine noise, less-roomy interior, some ride harshness.VERDICT: Exceeds the class norm in several areas, but the hybrid CX-50 is not our favorite CX-50.Mash the right pedal, and neither of these hybrids has a distinct advantage over the other. Our 2025 CX-50 test car got to 60 mph in 7.6 seconds. That’s just ahead of the 7.9-second result for the CR-V Hybrid Sport Touring, the test results for which come from a 2023 model we previously evaluated that’s mechanically identical to the latest one. From a 5-to-60-mph rolling start, though, the CX-50’s 8.4 seconds trails the CR-V’s at 8.0 seconds flat. The Mazda ekes out a win in the quarter-mile sprint, its 15.8 seconds at 89 mph nosing ahead of the Honda’s 16.3 seconds at 85 mph. The Honda, though, was fractionally quicker in 50-to-70-mph passing at 5.2 seconds to the Mazda’s 5.6. Call it a wash, then, between the two. Both hybrid SUVs have modest tow ratings. The CX-50 Hybrid’s pulling capability is less than its nonhybrid siblings at 1500 pounds. Still, that beats the hybrid CR-V’s 1000 pounds, but few buyers will find this difference meaningful. Fuel EconomyWith all-wheel drive, the Honda CR-V Hybrid earns EPA ratings of 40 mpg city and 34 mpg highway. With all CX-50 hybrids touting all-wheel drive, the feds say to expect 39 mpg city and 37 mpg highway. So, the Honda has a paper-thin edge in the city, while the Mazda does better on the highway. Our real-world 75-mph highway fuel-economy test gave testament to the CX-50’s advantage, with the Mazda’s 34 mpg beating the Honda’s 31-mpg result. Michael Simari|Car and DriverHonda CR-V HybridDriving ExperienceThe CR-V hides its hybrid nature well. Programmed faux shifts mimic the action of a conventional transmission. In most driving, the engine is audible, but droning isn’t an issue. The hybrid system in the CX-50 is familiar, since it’s borrowed from the RAV4 (and other Toyotas). Because of its CVT-like action, the engine sometimes holds revs under acceleration. There’s more engine presence here, as the Mazda is noisier than the Honda: 74 decibels at wide-open throttle versus 72. In keeping with its Sport designation, the CR-V Hybrid has a firmer suspension tune and beefier anti-roll bars than nonhybrid models. And while its handling is poised and competent, you wouldn’t call it engaging. We were much more impressed by the suspension’s ability to take the edge off broken pavement and glide smoothly over bumps. The CX-50 is stiffer riding, allowing more road harshness to penetrate the cabin. But while the two SUVs’ skidpad grip is similar (0.85 g for the Honda, 0.83 g for the Mazda), the Mazda has subjectively superior steering and handling. When it comes to stopping, neither of these hybrids suffers nonlinear brake-pedal response, but the Honda’s 171-foot stop from 70 mph is 10 feet shorter.Picking a WinnerThe tit-for-tat results show how closely matched these two compact SUVs are. The Mazda’s low-slung shape and cab-rearward proportions strike us as more stylish, and the Mazda’s interior is more upscale. The Honda’s straight-edged styling is hardly homely, though, and its cabin is both easier to see out of and slightly roomier. Acceleration is a figurative and literal dead heat between the two, but we preferred the CR-V’s power delivery and greater refinement. The Mazda returns better highway fuel economy, but in city driving it’s a wash. Both are among the best-driving of their ilk, with the CR-V delivering a smooth ride but the CX-50 having the edge in steering and handling. The Honda carries more cargo, but the Mazda can tow a bit more. Pricing is virtually identical.The CR-V Hybrid’s combination of virtues likely will please more buyers, so it takes the win. Even so, plenty of folks may find the CX-50 Hybrid more compelling. Either way, there are no losers here.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Honda CR-V Hybrid Sport TouringVehicle Type: front-engine, front-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $40,450 /$40,450
POWERTRAIN
DOHC 16-valve Atkinson-cycle 2.0-liter inline-4, 145 hp, 138 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/12.2-in discTires: Continental CrossContact LSX Sport235/55R-19 101H M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 106.3 inLength: 184.8 inWidth: 73.5 inHeight: 66.5 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/51 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 77/39 ft3Curb Weight: 3914 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.9 sec1/4-Mile: 16.3 sec @ 85 mph100 mph: 24.7 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.4 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.0 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.6 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.2 secTop Speed gov ltd): 111 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 171 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.85 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 30 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 430 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 37/40/34 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED
2025 Mazda CX-50 Hybrid Premium PlusVehicle Type: front-engine, front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $41,470/$42,065Options: Soul Red Crystal Metallic paint, $595
POWERTRAIN
DOHC 16-valve Atkinson-cycle 2.5-liter inline-4, 176 hp, 163 lb-ft + 3 AC motors, 118 and 54 hp, 149 and 89 lb-ft (combined output: 219 hp, 163 lb-ft; 0.8-kWh [C/D est] nickel-metal hydride battery pack)Transmissions: continuously variable automatic/direct-drive
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/trailing armBrakes, F/R: 12.8-in vented disc/12.8-in discTires: Goodyear Eagle Touring225/55R-19 99V M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 110.8 inLength: 186.1 inWidth: 75.6 inHeight: 65.8 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 52/43 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 56/29 ft3Curb Weight: 4068 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.6 sec1/4-Mile: 15.8 sec @ 89 mph100 mph: 20.4 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.2 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.6 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 117 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 181 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.83 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 31 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 34 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 490 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 38/39/37 mpgReviewed byJoe LorioDeputy Editor, Reviews and FeaturesJoe Lorio has been obsessed with cars since his Matchbox days, and he got his first subscription to Car and Driver at age 11. Joe started his career at Automobile Magazine under David E. Davis Jr., and his work has also appeared on websites including Amazon Autos, Autoblog, AutoTrader, Hagerty, Hemmings, KBB, and TrueCar. More