Evelyn Reynolds

The best thing I saw in Italy was a bus driver shaking his fist at a flock of sheep blocking his way down a narrow road set against a hillside covered in wild lavender. He had a glorious mustache and an extensive vocabulary of what I assume were sheep-related curses. The second-best thing was the dashboard of Audi’s RS Q e-tron, which flashed my name across its digital display. I only saw it for a second, and then I drove through a stream and all I saw was water.

Audi brought me to Italy to get a taste of what its racing drivers experience piloting the RS Q e-tron in the two-week-long Dakar Rally in Saudi Arabia. Just replace nearly 6000 miles of skyscraper-high sand dunes, rocky desert terrain, and high-speed navigation with three laps around a small dirt track on a perfect spring day on a farm in Sardinia. Here, the biggest distractions were the cows, all of which were wearing cute little bells, like in the cartoons, and the farmers, who kept offering me homemade wine, even though it was 9 a.m. Emil Bergkvist, an actual Dakar co-driver, sat to the right of me in the RS Q e-tron’s passenger seat, so in some ways, it was sort of like driving in the real race. The RS Q e-tron is a monster. It’s wider than a GMC Hummer EV—a hulking space capsule of carbon fiber with air vents large enough to crawl through and 37-inch BFGoodrich tires as knobby as an arthritic knuckle. Audi’s race machines always have an intimidating presence, from the flattened R18 Le Mans racer to the wide-bodied RS5 of the DTM series to the brand’s prior Formula E car, with its insectile folds and wings. The body of the RS Q e-tron has all the scoops and fat fenders—and a general sense of violence—of Audi’s past racers, but sits high on a double-wishbone suspension replete with Reiger gas shocks as thick as my thigh. It looks less like a race car than a weapon, a stealth bomber on wheels. It’s also one of only three built (done in a very short time and at a cost in the millions), so Audi was really hoping I, and the rest of the media members it brought out to drive this machine, would avoid running it into a cow while drunk on morning wine.
The densely packed development timeline of the RS Q e-tron saw the vehicle go from an ambitious idea at the beginning of 2020 to a dune-jumping, stage-winning racer in January 2022. This tight schedule forced the RS Q e-tron’s development team to rethink everything they knew about building race cars. Audi’s racing history includes decades of developing all-wheel-drive vehicles for the purpose of driving in the dirt. The brand has also put in time competing in endurance racing. Less familiar to Audi, though, was off-road endurance racing, and in order to send teams to Dakar, it needed to build a completely new car. The difficulty of the task was amplified by the brand’s desire to enter an electric vehicle. Audi knew its electric motors were up to the task courtesy of its now-defunct Formula E team, but it needed to find a way to ensure there was enough electricity on board to power these motors for the many miles that separate each stage of an off-road endurance race such as the Dakar Rally. “If we’d wanted to make it to even the first fueling stop on battery power [alone], we would have required a trailer to haul it,” joked Benedikt Brunninger, technical project leader for the RS Q e-tron. When Audi started work on the RS Q e-tron project, the FIA still did not have rules in place that were applicable to the electric racer. By the time the car hit the starting line, its powertrain’s output was limited to 288 kilowatts (approximately 386 horsepower), and its onboard fuel capacity was capped at 300 liters (approximately 79 gallons). Wait, fuel? Audi worked around the electric RS Q e-tron’s potential range issues by equipping it with an onboard generator, making it sort of the reverse of the brand’s hybrid Prototype-class Le Mans racers. While those cars used electric motors to give a power boost to the internal-combustion engine, the RS Q e-tron uses its front- and rear-axle-mounted motors to power the drive wheels and its turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four (cribbed from the RS5 DTM racer), which mates to a third electric motor, rigged to serve as a generator, to recharge its 52.0-kWh battery pack.
That makes it a series hybrid, an electric car with a surprising muffler in the rear, and a decidedly non-electric sound while recharging. The software that connects the multiple systems and keeps everything running and charging is so complex that several miles of wiring reside in the car. From an environmental standpoint, running a gas engine for hours to charge an electric motor is arguably no better than simply relying solely on an internal-combustion powertrain. However, the problem-solving done to bring the RS Q e-tron to life may ultimately lead to more efficient hybrid powertrains in the future. Audi developed the RS Q e-tron’s DTM-sourced engine for endurance racing, which makes it well suited for the task of running at high revs for extended periods of time when the desert racer calls upon it for recharging purposes. With little need for the engine’s full powerband, the RS Q e-tron’s engineers tinkered with the engine by upping its compression ratio and lowering the turbo’s boost in order to improve fuel efficiency. Fabian Titus, one of the combustion-engine development engineers for the car, told me there were initially some concerns about modifying the four-cylinder for the Dakar race. “Normally, if an engine is at high rpm, the car is moving fast, so you don’t worry about overheating,” he said. “Here, if it is charging in the dunes, it might be barely moving.”
There were also worries about getting enough air to the engine while also keeping out grit and sand. To address those issues, the four-cylinder gets a protective box, replete with fans for cooling. Speaking of cooling, Saudi Arabia can drop to freezing at night, and there’s no time for engine-oil warmers or idling in the pits. To test what might happen if the engine fired up cold, the team took a retired DTM car, left it outside in the German winter, and started it up the next morning. “I was ready to run if it blew up,” said Titus, “but it was fine, it wasn’t a problem.”The system can automatically kick on the engine at a predetermined battery charge level, but the driver can also start the four-cylinder at will, which Bergkvist did on our second lap around the track. He warned me it was a strange cognitive experience, going from the hums and clicks of the motors to the engine’s steady 5000 rpm no matter the position of the accelerator. It was especially off-putting during braking to hear no change in the roar and feel no less vibration from the middle of the car. It was also shockingly loud, though not loud enough to drown out my suggestion to Bergkvist of taking the jump in the middle of the course. “Ah, yes. No,” he said, pointing firmly toward the straightaway to the right of the hill.
Even without a sweet jump, I could tell the RS Q e-tron must be extremely capable in rough terrain. I was the last member of my media group to drive the car around the small track, and its previously smooth dirt surface was thoroughly plowed and furrowed from my colleague’s behind-the-wheel antics. Truth is, though, I didn’t even realize the course’s deteriorating condition until much later, when I ran it in a lightly race-prepped Audi Q5 and nearly had my teeth knocked out. The RS Q e-tron bobbed over the ruts like a fishing float, the cabin suspended so far inside the big fenders that Bergkvist had to remind me a good one-third of the car was hanging out on either side of our viewpoint. It felt strange to aim for an apex so far from the edge of the track and realize your tires are still slightly up the berm. Other than the engine note, everything in the RS Q e-tron is soft. The steering is as light as a ’73 Chrysler’s, which makes sense when you imagine driver Mattias Ekström spending full days digging this thing through sand dunes. It’s sort of fun once you get used to it: a little tip of the wheel, wait for the body to dip and recenter, get back on the accelerator. It’s a delicate process for such a brutish machine. During races, the RS Q e-tron offers a set amount of energy recuperation through braking, but for my drive, it was off—full coast and traditional brake pedal feel. The nose dove like a fishing eagle every time I stepped on the brake and bounced back up when I got back on the accelerator.
I was just getting the hang of letting the Audi rear up on the straights and surf through the turns when Bergkvist announced the cool-down lap. I let the body settle down into a quiet loaf and turned it back toward the pits. Battery-electric vehicles are currently the darlings of automotive marketers, but the problems faced by the Audi team in preparing for Dakar are not so different from those today’s car shoppers must consider. What’s the range? Where can I charge? It’s possible the answer for consumers might be the same as that for racers. If gasoline-electric hybrids return to fashion, then Audi may just lead the charge.
This content is imported from {embed-name}. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

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

Although the Volkswagen Jetta’s hatchback counterpart, the VW Golf, has graduated to the Mk 8 generation, VW’s compact sedan continues to ride on the Mk 7 platform. That doesn’t mean it’s been neglected, however. For 2022, the mainstream versions of the Volkswagen Jetta—that is, those other than the enthusiasts’ special (and 10Best-winning) Jetta GLI—get a heart transplant plus a few lesser updates. The standard Jetta comes in four trim levels: S, Sport (replacing last year’s R-Line), SE, and SEL. All have a new turbocharged 1.5-liter inline-four borrowed from the Taos crossover, replacing the previous 1.4-liter turbo-four. The swap brings a horsepower increase from 147 to 158, while torque remains at 184 pound-feet. The base S and Sport trim can still be had with a six-speed manual transmission. Grander models, including our SEL test car, get an eight-speed automatic.[image id=’304bc590-40e3-4748-94f3-0b408983eaab’ mediaId=’22f29781-ee83-49c9-8f23-02be0f57551b’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image][pullquote align=’center’]HIGHS: Cushy ride, roomy cabin, quicker than before.[/pullquote]Despite its growth in engine displacement, the Jetta’s fuel economy improves in most measures. With the automatic transmission, the base S version adds 2 mpg in both the EPA city and highway estimates, which are now 31/41 mpg. With the six-speed stick, the Jetta loses 1 mpg in the city but gains 2 mpg on the highway, with estimates now at 29/43 mpg, respectively. Upper trims post the same 29-mpg city rating as before but now hit the 40-mpg bogey on the highway. We did slightly better in our 75-mph highway test, averaging 42 mpg.[editoriallinks id=’6c2693cc-ca1e-4b98-8f96-f64fcc1207a8′ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]In low-speed driving, this new still-small engine feels heavily dependent on its turbocharger, with a fair bit of lag in initial response. Brush the accelerator when cruising, though, and the Jetta easily surges ahead, giving the impression of ready power. And judging by our acceleration testing, the 1.5-liter’s 11 extra horses are all descended from Seabiscuit. Stomp on the accelerator and 60 mph appears in 7.1 seconds—0.6 second quicker than last year’s car. The quarter-mile passes in 15.5 seconds at 91 mph versus the previous model’s 16.0 seconds at 86 mph.[image id=’086e36ad-6302-4982-a050-9deb8d6beed3′ mediaId=’900967bd-7790-49fb-8c64-b30d6b6bf073′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’6×4′][/image]With its larger turbocharged 2.0-liter packing 228 horsepower, the GLI is still quicker, of course. In our most recent test of a 2022 GLI with the six-speed manual, it hit 60 mph in 6.1 seconds and ran the quarter-mile in 14.6 at 100 mph. Compare the automatic Jetta and GLI, however, and the gulf widens: A 2019 GLI with the dual-clutch (and no-longer-available Hankook Ventus S1 Evo3 summer tires) scampered to 60 in 5.5 seconds.What’s more, the SEL’s braking performance was well off that of its sportier sibling. Stops from 70 mph in our test car took a long 189 feet, and the brake pedal has more travel than we’d like. With its larger front brakes, the GLI chops 15 feet off that distance, even without summer tires. That model also boasts adaptive dampers, a multilink independent rear suspension, plus an electronically controlled limited-slip differential (the latter shared with the base-engine Sport model). The base, non-GLI Jetta has a similar strut-type front suspension yet makes do with a torsion beam at the rear, and its chassis is softly sprung. [image id=’ec20699e-9875-434c-a329-9baa8111cd74′ mediaId=’edd1da15-3357-4be0-9d8f-119e7fb190e6′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image][pullquote align=’center’]LOWS: Wallowy body control when hustled, overboosted steering, dour interior.[/pullquote]Crank through a series of quick curves and the Jetta rolls easily, its body bobbing around on its suspension as you hustle over lumpy pavement. Add overly boosted steering to the mix, and you have a car that’s built more for comfort than for speed. Comfort, though, it does deliver, as there’s plenty of compliance to sop up potholes with minimal disturbance to passengers. Jetta SEL occupants are also minimally disturbed by noise. We measured just 67 decibels cruising at 70 mph. Ask the wee engine to give its all under full throttle, though, and a substantial 78 decibels makes its way into the cabin—that’s 5 decibels more than in the VW Taos with the same engine.[image id=’c277d2b3-66d0-4942-bebc-dbe7d5506bb7′ mediaId=’a178cde5-d2d5-4335-b0ee-7fd8ffc98be1′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]The Jetta’s cabin remains plenty spacious for adults in both the front and rear, and the roomy trunk measures 14 cubic feet. Digital instrumentation is now standard with an 8.0-inch unit in most trims but the SEL and GLI get a 10.3-inch display. Even so, the interior design is stark and hard plastics predominate. The good news is that the Jetta hasn’t yet been afflicted with the all-touch infotainment setup that GTI and ID.4 drivers suffer with. The Jetta’s infotainment system still has a volume knob as well as a tuning knob—the latter requires the radio display to first be in the right mode, however, and switching among the many display options is a needless annoyance. The climate controls, though, are simple and straightforward.With the Golf lineup now consisting exclusively of the GTI and Golf R, the Jetta serves as the entry to the VW brand. That threshold now stands at $21,360 for the S, which is more than $1000 higher than last year, but that’s offset by new standard equipment including forward collision warning, blind-spot monitoring, and rear cross-traffic alert. At the top of the range, a SEL like our test car costs $29,090. Yet while the SEL is a comfy cruiser, we’d be sorely tempted to stretch another 10 percent or so for the GLI, which at $32,290 to start is far more rewarding to drive. With the Jetta, those three letters after its name make a big difference. [vehicle type=’specpanel’ vehicle-body-style=” vehicle-make=” vehicle-model=” vehicle-model-category=” vehicle-submodel=” vehicle-year=”][/vehicle][image id=’bf222a99-967e-406f-a4d3-886f2d33b440′ mediaId=’14086df1-27f1-4f1c-a5d8-46cf51332c3e’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=’A car-lover’s community for ultimate access & unrivaled experiences. JOIN NOW’ expand=” crop=’original’][/image]

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

It seems strange that a company in such obvious need to grow sales volume as Alfa Romeo has taken so long to enter one of the most popular parts of the premium market. The Italian brand’s first compact crossover, the Tonale, is nearly here—set to reach U.S. buyers early next year. Not wanting to wait until then to tell you what it’s like, we’ve driven the European version, which hits the streets in its home market later this year.The Tonale sits on the same Stellantis Small Wide LWB platform that underpins the Jeep Compass. Getting our early preview meant experiencing it with a powertrain that almost certainly won’t come to America. While U.S.-bound versions of the Tonale will feature a 256-hp turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder, a nine-speed automatic, and standard all-wheel drive, Europeans get a weedier 130- or 160-hp turbocharged 1.5-liter inline-four paired with a 20-hp electric motor that, even in its most potent form, takes a claimed 8.8 seconds to reach 62 mph. It also sends torque exclusively through the front wheels via a seven-speed dual-clutch gearbox. Both markets will also ultimately get a 272-hp plug-in hybrid that combines a 180-hp turbocharged 1.3-liter engine with a 121-hp electric motor powering the rear axle.

Alfa Romeo

But it was the 1.5-liter front-driver that we experienced in Italy, and we can confirm that U.S. buyers need not feel upset about being denied it. The engine operates on the Miller cycle and has a variable-geometry turbocharger to boost economy, but it still feels like a utility-grade powerplant with a harsh voice when pushed and limited enthusiasm for the upper reaches of its rev range. The cars we drove also had inconsistent throttle response and frequently hesitated when switching from electrical to combustion power. The dual-clutch gearbox lacked smarts in Drive and tended to thump when shifting under bigger accelerator inputs.The good news from the U.S. perspective is that the rest of the car proved much better, giving plentiful hope for the quality of the ones that will cross the Atlantic.

Design is a definite highlight even by Alfa’s elevated standards of sartorial evidence. While many automakers have struggled to deliver elegant lines from the dinky dimensions of a compact crossover, the Tonale looks elegant and well proportioned. Overall length at 178.3 inches is just a tad longer than the Audi Q3 and BMW X1, and the basic form is closer to that of a hatchback than a boxy SUV. The triple-element headlights, wraparound rear glass, and Alfa’s traditional “phone-dial” wheels all look great.

Alfa Romeo

The Tonale’s cabin is a step beyond the plasticky interiors of the Stelvio and Giulia too. The trim feels of higher quality, with soft materials in the most high-touch areas and far more evidence of ergonomic thought. The Tonale gets digital instruments as standard, as well as a crisply rendered 10.3-inch infotainment touchscreen that runs Alfa’s new user interface, which works cleanly and intuitively. The system also supports wireless Android Auto and Apple CarPlay and Alexa-driven voice commands that can be as broad as “play Seventies disco” or “navigate me to a good pizzeria.” Having both USB-A and USB-C ports front and rear is welcome.Conventional switchgear includes physical buttons for the climate control, a definite plus, as well as a rotary controller for the driving modes. We also loved the large metal shift paddles that come with the plush Veloce trim. Subjective build quality was impressively high too, with squeaks and rattles conspicuously absent.

Alfa Romeo

Cabin space is good up front, with plenty of driving position adjustment, but is predictably tighter in the rear. The Tonale’s fashionable falling roofline limits back-seat headroom, and the equally trendy rising beltline makes it feel a little gloomy back there. Yet it’s adequate by the standards of this not especially spacious segment. Refinement also impressed, with the Tonale’s cabin staying hushed even at a rapid autostrada cruising pace. Alfa has chosen a quick steering ratio to deliver sharp responses, with the electrically assisted rack’s 13.6:1 gearing giving the front end a keenness that feels more like that of a hot hatch than a compact SUV. The Tonale resists understeer impressively well, too, with the Pirelli P Zero tires finding plentiful adhesion and biting hard in tighter turns. Yet the electrically assisted steering seems to filter out almost all low-level feedback, and although the tires had lots of grip, there was little ability to adjust the Tonale’s cornering line by varying throttle input. The brake-by-wire system feels natural under harder use, less so in gentle applications, where there’s a slight response delay.

Alfa Romeo

The European Tonale’s suspension settings were also on the firm side of comfortable, even on generally smooth Italian roads. We drove cars fitted with passive dampers and the optional active dampers. The latter delivered crisper front-end responses, as well as a more compliant ride in their softer setting—the non-adjustable dampers were always stiff. In both cases, the cars we drove were riding on 20-inch wheels (the largest available)—smaller wheels likely would improve ride quality.While the Tonale that comes to the U.S. will have a different engine and suspension tune, the basics seem positive—and the new car already feels like a higher-quality offering than either the Giulia or the Stelvio. Whether the U.S.-bound versions will be able to match the charisma of Alfa’s existing lineup is still a question; the European hybrid powertrain certainly felt some way short of special.

A car-lover’s community for ultimate access & unrivaled experiences. JOIN NOW

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

From the March 1980 issue of Car and Driver.These days, every gallon of gas saved is a gallon earned. Unless you’ve been lost in a Peruvian rain forest for the last eighteen months, you know how tenu­ous our energy situation is. And that means every car has got to do its part.[editoriallinks id=’38e6eedb-fa95-435f-86ab-8a36dc86e058′ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]Of course, for those of us who care about good cars, fuel-efficient rays of hope are already streaming through this cloudy scenario—and one of the bright­er lights, we’re happy to report, is the new BMW 320i. Not only does this quintessential sports sedan provide all of the driving enjoyment of its fore­bears, but for 1980 it’s also become an energy-conscious solid citizen: this year it delivers 30 percent better fuel econo­my than ever before.While more than a few reworked 1980 cars boast such an economy improvement, the BMW’s is truly notewor­thy. Last year’s version, at 19 mpg, wasn’t exactly a gas hog, but the 1980 320i will travel an average of 25 miles for every gallon you pump into it. And in case you haven’t checked lately, that’s the mileage number you’ll find on the window sticker of a Volkswagen Rabbit. But there’s more to this success story than miserly mileage figures. More of­ten than not, a change like this would be cause for a performance loss, the engi­neers having traded off horsepower or favorable gearing for better economy. But the most encouraging thing about the 320i is that its hearty performance wasn’t compromised by its new respon­sibility for saving fuel. In fact, in some areas it will even outrun last year’s car.[image id=’4495fbf6-a3b6-4594-b60b-fd5680de7e07′ mediaId=’ff170f7d-f462-4aff-85c5-3ab34f4fcdf2′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Its 60-mph time of 9.8 seconds is 0.2 second slower than before, but the new 320i pulls out an advantage of 0.6 second and almost 2 mph by the end of a quarter-mile. It will also reach 90 mph 4 seconds quicker than before—though its 105-mph top speed is off by 4 mph.Those figures are all the more im­pressive when you realize that they were turned in by a car tuned to the freshly tightened 1980 exhaust-emissions stan­dards—requirements that have squeezed the life out of more than a few engines this year.Even BMW’s crack team of enthusi­ast-engineers had to work overtime to make all of this happen. In fact, things mechanical are actually so changed that the littlest BMW technically isn’t a 320i anymore. In Bimmerese the numbers on the rear deck lid have traditionally signified the body style and engine dis-placement—in this case meaning a 3-series coupe with a 2.0-liter engine. But no longer. For marketing reasons the model badge is unchanged, though the 320i is now powered by a downsized version of the famous fuel-injected, overhead-cam, hemi-head four-cylinder engine that displaces 1767cc. (In Eu­rope this model is called a 318.) A mere 223cc reduction doesn’t sound like all that much, but when you’ve only got 1990 to start with, every little cubic cen­timeter counts.[image id=’37f38954-7db3-4abf-8c1c-d7f28004d27f’ mediaId=’b70076b9-f915-4185-8802-574a8d043cc7′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]BMW kept the horsepower loss down to 8 percent (9 hp) with the aid of a new emissions system built around a three-way catalytic converter and an oxygen sensor. Thanks to the way such ad­vanced devices work, BMW was able to optimize fuel distribution, compression ratio, and timing for greater engine effi­ciency. The new emissions system is so thorough, it even meets the tighter 1980 California standards. So for the first time in years, West Coast Bimmer buyers suffer no performance penalty.BMW’s trick for making fewer ponies pull harder was to multiply the available power with lower gearing. The final-drive ratio was dropped from 3.64:1 to 3.91, a change that would normally have turned the 320i into a buzzbox on the Interstate while hurting highway fuel economy. But BMW specified a Getrag five-speed transmission with a 0.81:1 overdrive top gear to drop the revs back into quieter, more economical territory for overland cruising.Not only do these revisions do im­pressive things when pitted against the clocks, they work every bit as well as be­fore in the real world. The new engine acts as if there were no such thing as emissions controls. It drives off after a cold start without so much as a hiccup, and, whether it’s warm or cold, its throttle response is among the most linear you’ll find anywhere. And in the first three gears it pulls cleanly to the 6800-rpm redline—which happens to be 400 revs more than were on tap last year.[image id=’605bdeef-07be-43e8-8cc8-a3ad0eb8167d’ mediaId=’ff7eeac6-a0f7-4a34-bda4-015ce390f15b’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]The new five-speed gearbox is the perfect complement to the willing engine. The shift pattern puts fifth in the preferred spot, up and off to the right of the H, while reverse is nestled to the left of first and protected from errant down­shifts by a strong lockout spring. The gear lever is connected to a Swiss move­ment of a linkage that responds to fin­gertip flicks. Its jeweled action and sur­gical accuracy invite you to play stick-shift concertos. The low final-drive ratio makes fifth a really usable gear, suitable for 45-mph trolling as well as highway work. And on the Interstate the engine’s characteristic droning doesn’t set in un­til about 75 mph, nearly 10 mph higher than before. So in every way, the driveline rejuvenation has been a rousing success. Aside from those under-the-skin revi­sions, only a BMW salesman will be able to tell the new model from the old with­out a program. That’s just fine by us, because it means the 320i still beckons with kick-me-hurt-me-but-just-don’t­-ignore-me vitality. It packs something for everybody: enough panache to make novices look good and handling that will keep even you experts in the audi­ence entertained.[image id=’adf2eb80-1d16-4fea-802a-467b1b1bcafb’ mediaId=’dfdba594-8edf-4f3c-baba-221a7ffb49b9′ align=’left’ size=’large’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]The 320i is al its best on semi-desert­ed country two-lane, hammering along just short of its limits. All the control are direct, linear, and full of feedback. The steering is light and accurate. The brakes are sure. And not only does the fully independent suspension flatten mountainous bumps, it’s also blessed with that rare ability to filter out extra­neous information from the road sur­face without isolating you from what you need to know. It’s one of those cars that will gobble serpentine asphalt all day without breathing hard—so long as you leave it a margin in the corners. Like many cars with semi-trailing-arm rear suspensions, the 320i will bare teeth when pushed to the edge. Charge too hard and it snaps out of its stable understeering attitude with a lurch of the tail that also starts the inside rear wheel spinning. It takes a quick hand on the wheel, a cool throttle foot, and more than a little expertise to make sure every journey to the limit of adhesion is a hap­py one. But once you’ve mastered the quirks, playing with the 320i is even more fun. Of course, tearing around is only part of a sports sedan’s mission in life. And the 320i addresses its utilitari­an obligations with a pretty fair amount of success too.The interior is a hospitable place, de­signed and furnished in typically re­strained—or austere, depending upon your viewpoint—Teutonic style. The door panels are simply styled in high­-quality vinyl. The firm, supportive seals are covered in a grippy, wide-wale cloth, and they serve up a comfortable rapport with the wheel and pedals. The carpet­ing is close-cropped. The handsome dash and well-executed control layout put everything within easy reach. There’s enough space for two adults in back, though the accommodations are snug. And the 320i offers enough lug­gage space for a family vacation. The generously sized trunk is deep, square, and flat-of-floor, so every one of its six­teen cubic feet of room is usable.[image id=’34804117-2b85-4ee6-9c2a-2a85bcd03cf6′ mediaId=’4283ce03-f893-48e7-bdf3-abda4c57dcac’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]This year the cabin is a bit more com­fortable, thanks to a revised heating­-ventilation system. Four new chest-high, fan-boosted vents blow solid gusts of air at you. And for 1980, an electrically op­erated outside mirror is standard. But lest you think that BMW’s businesslike sports sedan is getting soft, that’s the only power-operated convenience fea­ture you can buy on a 320i. If you must have power assists at your fingertips, deep-pile carpeting underfoot, or squishy-soft seats under your backside, you’ll still have to take your money somewhere else.[image id=’eceb2afc-fff6-4fe4-acc5-cd018177b9fb’ mediaId=’83bd8530-3202-4b5c-ac6b-37cade58830d’ align=’left’ size=’large’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]And a considerable sum of cash it will be. In fact, the BMW’s sticker price is the one thing about it that gives us pause—actually, something closer to shock is more like it. Unless you marry the dealer’s daughter, you can’t have a 320i for less than $11,465 as of this writing. This brings up a sore point that’s been festering for some time. BMW’s sports sedan has historically cost a comparative ton, but it’s deliv­ered a brand of driving enjoyment that put it head and shoulders above the competition. That’s not quite the case anymore. In the last few years, the rest of the sports-sedan world has begun to catch up. In terms of performance, han­dling, and refinement, some far less ex­pensive cars—like the Mazda 626, the Honda Prelude, and the Volkswagen Scirocco—are now snapping at the 320i’s heels. And that situation makes its virtues seem awfully dear. Certainly, for that kind of money the 320i ought to blaze down the highway with the kind of authority it exhibits in curves. But alas, its straight-ahead sense and resistance to buffeting are far from exemplary. We’d also like to see BMW tone down the busy whirring of the engine above 3500 rpm, as well as muffle the inces­sant hum from the fuel pump. And fi­nally, we think your eleven grand should at least buy you a radio rather than a hole in the dash.On the other hand, that lofty sum does deliver a car of the highest quality. The 320i’s basic structure is rock-solid. Every piece of trim and swatch of cloth is finished to exacting standards. Each part is battened down so tightly that there’s not a rattle in the house. But most important, the 320i is more than just a driver’s car par excellence. It’s now also ecologically responsible and ener­gy-efficient, a delightful car in which you can bat around secure in the knowl­edge that you’re having a good time and being civic-minded as well.[image id=’92ebd2d3-fd8c-4020-8e23-c6ae2f78ec7b’ mediaId=’cf9b2d41-e6be-4bb7-8f92-daf52086d031′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]Whether that’s ample incentive to sign on the dotted line is something only you and your banker will be able to decide. But we’ll certainly understand if the 320i leaves you in a bit of a cost­-benefit dilemma. After all, gas-saving rays of hope don’t come much more ex­pensive than the 320i. But they don’t shine any brighter, either. CounterpointI cleverly assigned myself the last IMSA race of the season. It’s in Florida, you see, which is about 5000 degrees warmer around Thanksgiving than Ann Arbor. The Bimmer arrived during my absence. First thing I heard about when I got back was how much it costs. Not how it han­dles, or rides, or goes, or stops, or does/doesn’t use gas. Just that it costs ‘leven­teen thousand dollars and just look at a 626 you can get for much less and what about a Scirocco for crying out loud not to mention a Saab even a turbocharged one even. Enough I say. That little BMW, to use an automotive journalist’s term, is real neat. Terrific, even. Eighty-five mph in third and you think it’s maybe 45. Slickest gearbox I’ve felt in ages. Visibili­ty, legroom, headroom, great driving po­sition, and pedals so wonderfully right for heel-and-toeing. It’s a car that makes you want to bump the redline at every shift and late-brake every stop sign. Yes, the fuel pump is unforgivably noisy, you pay extra for a radio, and the steering feels a bit isolated. I still think it’s real neat. —Mike Knepper[image id=’637557e6-7d47-4bf3-9c3d-f0a0d5a66c6b’ mediaId=’83a41805-d6f6-4033-9bb6-cbdf1f6fbcc7′ align=’left’ size=’large’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]What am I to do, BMW? You have creat­ed a dilemma. I am a longtime fan, but your new 318i (well, it is) draws a few too many blanks for my taste. I continue to hold your smallest car in high regard, and I would have one in a twinkling if it could first pass through the doors of a specialty builder such as Miller & Norburn Alpina, Dietel Enterprises Alpina, or Hardy & Beck Performance. It would come out the other side lean, mean, and born to run.Right now, it’s just born to run. The engine is lovely, the gearbox and heel-­and-toe are the stuff of dreams, and the ventilation and the interior are second to none. But the right front brake wants to lock at a touch, the suspension has ad­vanced heebie-jeebies under duress, and the car sits so high on its springs it feels as if it will execute a tipsy onto its topsy at the drop of something unexpected in a hard right-left-right. Disturbing.This is most un-BMW-like. The 320i should make its way down the road as well as a Scirocco. The BMW is roomier, more solid, and better put together, but it withers in the confidence-building de­partment. This is me being glum. —Larry Griffin[image id=’a749bf6f-f14a-412f-8b97-aa9c2ce2fc5f’ mediaId=’35953ddb-6b3f-457b-9acf-f25ad813f565′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]In the past year, we’ve tested a bunch of small sedans, most of which have been surprisingly good cars regardless of their national origins. As their quality and per­formance have improved, we may have become a little blasé, taking it for granted that there was a pervasive aura of small-­car goodness abroad in the world and all the little dears were falling into the same general level of acceptability. Not so. The new 320i arrived to remind us that there are still plenty of unclimbed automotive mountains out there ahead of the com­mon herd. It should be called 318i, since that’s what it is, but whatever you call it, it’s a wonder—maybe the best-balanced small sedan around—a lively, agile four­-seater for the demanding driver. I object­ed to the lack of headroom, and I found myself consistently beating the second­-gear synchro in normal driving—leading me to wonder what in God’s name it might cost to replace a Getrag five­-speed—but in every other sense the new 320i is the sort of car that enthusiasts turn into legend. —David E. Davis.Jr.[vehicle type=’specpanel’ vehicle-body-style=” vehicle-make=” vehicle-model=” vehicle-model-category=” vehicle-submodel=” vehicle-year=”][/vehicle]

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

For years while German luxury-car makers were heavily committed to diesel engines, Lexus instead relied on hybrids to improve efficiency. After the Volkswagen emissions scandal put all diesels—even the majority that were not gaming the tailpipe tests—under a dark cloud, the German automakers jumped onto the EV bandwagon in an attempt to atone for their real and imagined sins. The resulting regulatory and competitive pressures have created an inexorable push for EVs, and Lexus could no longer hold out. So, at a time when most German luxury brands have already introduced three or four EV models, Lexus is releasing its first, the RZ450e.The new entry is a crossover that’s sized between the familiar Lexus NX and RX models, the brand’s two top sellers in America. The RZ is built on a new platform called e-TNGA, which is also shared with its Toyota bZ4X sister ship and the closely related Subaru Solterra, both of which are just going on sale. Though the RZ is about three inches shorter in length than the RX, its 112.2-inch wheelbase is two and half inches longer, designed to enhance interior space. The RZ is also about three inches lower than its larger Lexus sibling.
The powertrain, similar to the one in the bZ4X, uses separate electric motors for the front and rear axles. However, in place of the twin 107-hp motors in the all-wheel-drive Toyota, the AWD-only Lexus drives its front wheels with the 201-hp motor from the front-drive bZ4X, making for a total of 308 horsepower, 94-hp advantage over the dual-motor bZ4X.A 65.6-kWh liquid-cooled battery pack shared with the all-wheel-drive bZ4X, which uses lithium-ion prismatic cells produced by a joint venture between Panasonic and Toyota, resides in a roughly six-inch-thick pack under the RZ’s passenger compartment. This is not a huge battery capacity in the current market, and Lexus is estimating a range of only 200 to 225 miles, depending on wheel size.

Takashi Watanabe, the RZ’s chief engineer, says this battery size was a conscious choice, designed to limit weight and maximize electrical efficiency. According to him, tests indicate that the RZ gets 15 to 20 percent more mileage per kWh than its competitors—a worthwhile goal, though perhaps not at the expense of range. We’re eager to test that claim.Lexus provided no charging times for the RZ, but it can take only a maximum of 150 kW on a DC charger, so it won’t be high on the fast-charging leaderboard. And the onboard charger is rated at just 6.6 kW, less than the current norm of about 10 to 11 kW, so a Level 2 full charge will likely require roughly 11 hours.Watanabe seems unconcerned with such modest stats, insisting that the RZ will deliver a good compromise between range, efficiency, and performance. Speaking of which, Lexus offered no predictions about acceleration, but we would expect times to 60 mph in the mid-five-second area.
Instead of using of cutting-edge electrical infrastructure, the RZ seems more focused on new features, the key one being the available drive-by-wire steering, which uses a yoke-type steering wheel. A highly variable ratio is so quick at low speeds that only 300 degrees of rotation—less than one turn lock-to-lock—provides full travel. This is possible because there is no mechanical connection between the electrically powered steering rack and the steering yoke. (Originally dubbed One Motion Grip, this setup will be renamed, as the folks at U.S. headquarters concluded that OMG steering was not the best name in the States.)Another interesting choice, given the emphasis on overall efficiency, is the use of a nonblended, purely hydraulic brake. Regenerative braking is controlled exclusively by releasing the accelerator and is adjustable but limited to a maximum of 0.15-g deceleration. This makes for conventional pedal operation and feel, but at the sacrifice of some efficiency and potential range.
We had a brief opportunity to drive examples of the RZ, with both conventional and drive-by-wire steering, at an old racetrack near Barcelona. Both cars felt surprisingly good at brisk speeds. Body roll is limited, brake feel is excellent, and acceleration is healthy, though hardly breathtaking. And understeer was limited despite the front-biased power, which is unusual among all-wheel-drive EVs. One explanation is that the Direct4 control system varies the torque split from 75 percent in front to 80 percent in the rear, depending on conditions.The RZs were also quiet and felt tight, thanks to measures such as a front strut-tower brace, double-layer acoustic door glass, heavier gauge steel, and generally more sound insulation than Toyota applies to the bZ4X.The drive-by-wire steering model worked well on the track, where the speeds were high enough that its variable ratio was similar to that of the conventional steering. Neither steering system had great feel, but it seemed easier to bend the drive-by-wire RZ into a corner and precisely hit the apex.
The yoke-steering version also gets a different instrument cluster that is an inch and half higher and slightly farther from the driver. The idea is to take advantage of the missing upper portion of the wheel to slightly reduce both the angular and the focus adjustments needed when you shift your vision from the windshield to the instruments.There was also a very tight autocross course to test the steering systems, and while the drive-by-wire car eliminates the extensive hand-over-hand shuffling the conventional steering requires, it felt unnatural. The superfast ratio responded so quickly at low speeds that it was hard not to overcorrect, and the front end of the Lexus felt as if it were being jerked from side to side rather than being turned.
But the faster ratio did pay off in a short slalom test on a low-friction surface designed to induce oversteer. It was definitely easier to catch the RZ’s slide with the drive-by-wire system and avoid spinning. Living with this system in real-world driving, though, will be the best test to gauge its ultimate value and comfort.This will happen with closer-to-production RZs around November, shortly before the cars go on sale in America. Toyota expects to import only 4900 units for the 2023 model year, so expectations are modest. Prices haven’t yet been set, but with the all-wheel-drive bZ4X starting at $45,295, a base of perhaps $55K would seem reasonable for the RZ. We probably won’t get the yoke-steering version in the first year, and a front-drive model might eventually appear at a somewhat lower price. When considering costs, keep in mind that Toyota has built enough Prime plug-in models that it is expected to start losing its federal electric-vehicle tax rebates later this year. And since Lexus falls under the corporate umbrella for this benefit, you will likely be paying close to the sticker price for this model. Sometimes, arriving late to the EV party does not pay off.

Specifications

Specifications
2023 Lexus RZ450eVehicle Type: front- and mid-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE (C/D EST)
Base: $55,000
POWERTRAIN
Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 201 hp, 196 lb-ft Rear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 107 hp, 124 lb-ft Combined Power: 308 hpCombined Torque: 320 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 65.6 kWh Onboard Charger: 6.6 kWTransmissions, F/R: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 112.2 inLength: 189.2 inWidth: 74.6 inHeight: 64.4 inPassenger Volume (C/D est): 94 ft3Cargo Volume (C/D est): 26 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4650 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.5 sec1/4-Mile: 14.0 secTop Speed: 120 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 95–105/100–113/90–96 MPGeRange: 200–225 mi

A car-lover’s community for ultimate access & unrivaled experiences. JOIN NOW

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

Given the smashing success that is the Kia Telluride, it might have been smart for Kia’s designers to simply scale down that three-row SUV’s squared-off looks when it came time to redesign the brand’s smaller crossovers. But the latest generation of the mid-size Sorento doesn’t stick to that template, nor does the new 2023 Sportage, which brings a distinctive look to the compact segment.Whether or not you’ll be a fan of the Sportage’s design is another story. We won’t call it ugly, but its face is somewhat polarizing. With boomerang-shaped accent lights, low-mounted headlights, and a wide-mouth grille, the front end makes a strong statement. What exactly that statement is, we’ll leave up to you. The rear end is a bit more cohesive, with smooth surfaces and taillights that remind us of the handsome units on the Kia EV6. The Sportage surely won’t be mistaken for its corporate sibling, the Hyundai Tucson, which also looks striking for a mainstream crossover.

The Sportage is not all about form, though. Significantly larger than its predecessor in length, wheelbase, and many other dimensions, the new model is on the big end of the compact-SUV spectrum. It doesn’t offer a third row of seats like the Volkswagen Tiguan and the Mitsubishi Outlander, but a 3.4-inch increase in wheelbase greatly expands its rear-seat and cargo space. We like how the rear seats slide and recline, and the Sportage’s 40 cubic feet of cargo volume behind the second row just edges out what the Honda CR-V offers.This Kia’s interior trappings also are nicer than that Honda’s. Upper-trim Sportage models have two integrated 12.3-inch display screens in front of the driver, one for the digital gauge cluster and the other for infotainment. Both screens have bright, crisp graphics, and the dashboard’s various materials are pleasant to the touch where it counts (and still nicely grained hard plastic where it doesn’t). Another screen down on the center stack is flanked by two physical knobs that can display either haptic climate-control buttons or a row of navigation and audio controls. The functions of those two knobs can also change depending on inputs, which is a neat feature but not necessarily a convenient one when you reach down to adjust the volume and realize the knob is currently set for temperature control.
More knobs and buttons reside on the center console to manage everything from the optional heated and ventilated seats—an EX model we drove had glaringly blank buttons for the ventilated seats it wasn’t equipped with—to the various drive modes and off-road settings, such as hill-descent control and the ability to lock in the all-wheel-drive system. Like basically every other crossover maker these days, Kia is touting its vehicle’s capability in the dirt, and it’s now offering the Sportage in X-Pro trim with all-terrain tires and some rugged-looking visual tweaks. While the X-Pro performed well on a fairly aggressive (Kia-prepped) off-road course, all Sportage models equipped with all-wheel drive have a decent 8.3 inches of ground clearance.On pavement, the Sportage exhibits a nicely sorted ride-and-handling balance, but, unsurprisingly for an everyday SUV, isn’t what we’d call engaging to drive. Much of the blame goes to steering that’s bereft of feedback, a brake pedal without much initial bite, and throttle response that is somewhat sluggish. There may not be much here for enthusiasts, but the Sportage is a perfectly pleasant vehicle to pilot day to day, even if it doesn’t turn in as sharply as, say, a Mazda CX-5. Sadly, Kia has abandoned the outgoing Sportage’s zippy optional turbo 2.0-liter engine in the new model. Instead, it’s focusing on hybrid variants to pad out the model range. The base naturally aspirated 2.5-liter inline-four, which pairs with an eight-speed automatic transmission, produces an unremarkable 187 horsepower and feels rather pokey on the road. It also can sound buzzy when you push it above 4000 rpm or so.
We think the better option is the quieter and more refined hybrid setup, with a turbocharged 1.6-liter four, two electric motors, a 1.5-kWh battery, and a six-speed dual-clutch automatic. This combination is both more powerful (a combined 227 horsepower) and responsive than the base engine. We’re willing to forgive the hybrid’s occasionally lumpy power delivery because of the fuel-economy boost it provides: Its EPA combined estimate of 43 mpg with front-wheel drive and 38 mpg with all-wheel drive is a huge jump over the nonhybrid’s 25 to 28 mpg combined. However, we will point out that the mechanically similar Tucson hybrid returned disappointing real-world fuel economy, so we’ll need to see whether that’s the case with the Sportage once we get one to test. A 261-hp plug-in hybrid is also coming later this year; we have yet to drive that model.Kia doesn’t price its vehicles as aggressively as it used to, but the starting points for the new Sportage—$27,245 for the base LX model up to $38,045 for a X-Pro Prestige—fall into a competitive range for compact crossovers. We’d be reluctant to pay close to $40,000 for a version with the base engine; the X-Pro, for example, can’t be had with the hybrid powertrain. But a nicely equipped EX hybrid in the mid-$30K range strikes us as an attractive proposition, distinctive styling and all.

Specifications

Specifications
2023 Kia SportageVehicle Type: front-engine or front-engine and front-motor, front- or all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: LX, $27,245; LX Hybrid, $28,545; EX, $29,245; X-Line, $32,045; EX Hybrid, $32,245; SX, $32,745; SX-Prestige, $34,745; X-Pro, $36,425; SX Prestige Hybrid, $37,445; X-Pro Prestige, $38,045
POWERTRAINS
DOHC 16-valve 2.5-liter inline-4, 187 hp, 178 lb-ft; turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 1.6-liter inline-4, 177 hp, 195 lb-ft + 2 AC motors, 17 and 59 hp, 32 and 195 lb-ft (combined output: 227 hp, 258 lb-ft; 1.5-kWh lithium-ion battery pack)Transmissions: 6-speed dual-clutch automatic, 8-speed automatic

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 108.5 inLength: 183.5 inWidth: 73.4 inHeight: 65.4–66.9 inPassenger Volume: 104–109 ft3Cargo Volume: 35–40 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3400–3900 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 8.0–8.8 sec1/4-Mile: 15.9–16.8 secTop Speed: 130 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 25–43/23–42/28–44 mpg

A car-lover’s community for ultimate access & unrivaled experiences. JOIN NOW

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

It doesn’t come as a surprise that Toyota expects to sell more GR86 coupes fitted with the optional six-speed automatic transmission than with the standard six-speed. Similar to how not all music lovers like to dance, not all driving enthusiasts prefer to shift their own gears, especially in today’s hyperautomated world. While we say it’s never too late to learn the three-pedal tango that a stick shift requires, buyers who do spend the $1500 for the GR86’s autobox will still get an excellent rear-wheel-drive coupe that recently won a 10Best award (alongside its mechanical twin, the Subaru BRZ). The catch is that they’ll be giving up both some driver involvement and some straight-line speed. Every GR86 features a naturally aspirated 2.4-liter flat-four that sends 228 horsepower and 184 pound-feet of torque to the rear wheels. That’s 28 horses and 33 pound-feet more than its predecessor’s 2.0-liter flat-four made when paired with the automatic. The GR86’s new engine is a revelation thanks to how that power is deployed. The first-generation car’s infamous midrange torque valley has been vanquished, with peak torque now arriving at 3700 rpm instead of 5400, which helps make right-foot inputs feel more responsive. Winding the new 2.4-liter up to its 7500-rpm redline is a joyful experience, and while the accompanying soundtrack isn’t exactly a serenade to internal combustion, its tone is richer than before. To handle the engine’s added power, the six-speed automatic receives an updated torque converter and additional clutch discs.[image id=’27b99665-fa47-40c3-8bb1-cd51577d2b36′ mediaId=’53b86e0a-cb65-4a34-b2c8-5ca01422233a’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image][pullquote align=’center’]HIGHS: Quicker than its automatic predecessor, joyous handling character, additional features not available with the stick.[/pullquote]If there’s a reason to dog the automatic GR86, it’s that it’s not as quick as the manual car. Our 2862-pound test car sprinted to 60 mph in 6.1 seconds and covered the quarter-mile in 14.7 seconds at 97 mph. Both times are 0.7 second behind the 24-pound-lighter manual version we recently tested, which means the gap between the manual and automatic in the sprint to 60 mph has been cut in half for this latest generation. The automatic’s times are also 1.5 and 1.2 seconds, respectively, quicker than what we got from a self-shifting 2017 model. We’ll argue that there’s no substitute for the rewarding choreography of clutching and shifting your own gears, but the automatic GR86’s steering-wheel-mounted paddles do prompt snappy ratio swaps, and the transmission won’t automatically upshift at the engine’s redline if you put it in manual mode. [image id=’9b43d377-32b1-4dfd-b173-aed461ac0201′ mediaId=’3af45964-229f-430b-b8ae-04a5788ead05′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’6×4′][/image][editoriallinks id=’da63effa-c836-4c0b-ac04-bd51c2146881′ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]Regardless of its gearbox, the GR86’s goodness is most evident when the pavement turns curvy. This coupe’s high-fidelity steering offers terrific feedback, which helps its driver confidently probe the limits of adhesion (0.95 g on our test car’s 18-inch Michelin Pilot Sport 4 summer tires). Likewise, a firm brake pedal makes for reassuring 153-foot stops from 70 mph. Stopping from 100 mph brought out the brake fade, however, just like we experienced on track in a GR86 at our most recent Lightning Lap. Reinforcements to the latest GR86’s front and rear subframes lend it a more refined, solid-feeling ride that is appropriately taut but not flinty or harsh. Most important, the GR86 remains effortlessly easy to exploit as both a willing cohort for seasoned drivers and a tool for teaching car control to novices. [pullquote align=’center’]LOWS: Slower than its manual counterpart, noisy on the highway, reduced driver involvement.[/pullquote][image id=’59fc9ab7-d74a-423e-8bbb-efb9e0c1a810′ mediaId=’a4656b89-feee-41d5-b702-79ed125cb5c6′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’6×4′][/image]Despite its excellent man/machine connection, the GR86 does have some minor flaws. The interior design and material quality are better than the outgoing 86’s, but this working environment is still more functional than fashionable. And the back seats remain pretty laughable, even for modestly sized humans. Interior noise at 70 mph is a tiring 76 decibels, too, which matches that of the manual. Our other gripes border on nitpicks, but we did wish for additional lumbar support in the driver’s seat, and the ease with which your elbow can accidentally open the center-console lid is annoying. Overall, the automatic GR86 proves that this is still a riot of a car to drive even with only two pedals. What’s more, opt for the slushbox and you’ll get an extra cubby in the center console for storing phones and the like, plus model-exclusive adaptive cruise control and lane-keeping assist. The EPA also prefers the automatic version, labeling it with a 25-mpg combined estimate versus the manual’s 22 mpg. Along with the $2600 Premium bundle (summer tires, blind-spot monitoring, heated front seats, and a larger rear spoiler) and a few other options, our test car amounted to a $33,507 ask—a solid value for a stellar driver’s car, even for those not keen on fancy footwork. [vehicle type=’specpanel’ vehicle-body-style=” vehicle-make=” vehicle-model=” vehicle-model-category=” vehicle-submodel=” vehicle-year=”][/vehicle][image id=’bf222a99-967e-406f-a4d3-886f2d33b440′ mediaId=’8620fd85-2d3b-4161-93b7-feaa101935d7′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=’A car-lover’s community for ultimate access & unrivaled experiences. JOIN NOW’ expand=” crop=’original’][/image]

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

Who put a Volkswagen engine in my Porsche? It’s a question as old as the brand itself, so it shouldn’t surprise anyone that Porsche equips its base Macan crossover with a VW/Audi-sourced turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four. Also, the brand has been doing it for years, it’s just that this is the first time we’ve been able to test one. Sure, it’d be a potentially more Porsche experience if the Macan borrowed the turbo 2.0-liter flat-four from a 718 Boxster or Cayman, but we know that playing these sorts of “what if” games always end with Bugatti’s quad-turbo 8.0-liter W-16.

We’ve long had some “what ifs” about the base Macan, as Porsche has never loaned us one. It’s the bestselling Macan model, accounting for around 60 percent of sales, and its engine is a ripper in things like the Volkswagen GTI and the Audi A4. In the Macan, the 261-hp turbo four finds itself pushing against 4199 pounds of Porsche. But equipping the Macan with the Sport Chrono option ($1220) adds a wart-like stopwatch to the top of the dashboard and some critical launch-control software. Engaging the system revs the Macan’s four to 5200 rpm before sending all 261 horses charging into the seven-speed dual-clutch automatic. Porsche doesn’t dumb down the launch control for its SUVs, and it works as well here as it does in its sports cars. Thanks to the aggressive take-off procedure, 60 mph falls in a respectable 5.0 seconds flat. Take out the hard launch and floor it from a 5-mph roll, and the 60-mph trip stretches to 5.9 seconds.

HIGHS: Smarty-pants automatic transmission with launch control, sufficient poise to loom large in sports cars’ mirrors.

If this is the only Macan you’ve driven, this engine will rate somewhere between lovely and more than adequate. But we’ve driven other Macans, and next to the rich timbre and backrest-imprinting thrust of the rest of the lineup’s turbocharged V-6s, the four has to work harder and will occasionally sound like it’s gathering a loogie. The sound does remain in the background, though, as the engine only musters 73 decibels of noise at full throttle. The dual-clutch automatic works well to give you a Porsche experience, quickly downshifting and holding lower gears to help make the most out of the engine. But even it seems to recognize the futility of sending this 2.0-liter mill to its 6800-rpm redline. Unlike the engines that Porsche builds, this one doesn’t get sweeter the closer you are to the redline. Fuel economy is slightly better than the turbocharged V-6s in the rest of the Macan lineup. The four-cylinder earns 21 mpg combined in EPA testing versus the 19 combined for the 375-hp Macan S and 434-hp Macan GTS models.
Aside from the sound of the engine, there aren’t many clues inside this Macan to indicate you’re in a basic version. At 70 mph the cabin only registers a luxury-car-quiet 66 decibels. Porsche’s touchscreen infotainment system does require some familiarization, as the menu structure will undoubtedly confuse new users, but phone mirroring through Apple CarPlay (Android Auto isn’t on the menu) ameliorated most of our complaints. Rear-seat space remains on the tight side of the segment, but headroom is excellent, and the rear-seat shape and cushioning provide long-distance support. On the base version’s 19-inch wheels the ride quality is free of jitters and whacks, provided you don’t set the optional adaptive dampers to Sport mode.

LOWS: Occasional moans from the engine room, relatively soft on power.

Thanks to the selection of chassis upgrades on our test car, this base Macan untangled twisty tarmac with an enthusiasm that reminds us of Porsche’s own sports cars. If that’s important to you be sure to specify the adaptive dampers ($1360), Torque Vectoring Plus ($1500), and summer tires for the standard 19-inch wheels—at least that one’s a freebie—and this lightest version of the Macan, with its 0.89 g of grip, will run with most traffic you’ll likely find on a canyon road. If you read our Macan GTS review, you’ll note that the GTS pulled 0.98 g on the skidpad. But credit its wider tires and track-focused Pirelli P Zero Corsas for that impressive achievement. Most of the suspension upgrades on our test car can now be had on the new Macan T, which will make finding the right mix of handling options easier. Driven aggressively and with a badge delete, no one will ever suspect that there’s anything but a Porsche engine under the hood.

Specifications

Specifications
2022 Porsche MacanVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $56,250/$63,270 Options: Porsche Torque Vectoring Plus, $1500; Porsche Active Suspension Management, $1360; Sport Chrono package, $1220; adaptive cruise control, $990; Bose stereo system, $990; Lane Change Assist, $700; Black and Mojave leather seat trim, $260
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 121 in3, 1984 cm3Power: 261 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque: 295 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm
TRANSMISSION
7-speed dual-clutch automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: multilink/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 13.8-in vented disc/13.0-in vented discTires: Michelin Pilot Sport 4F: 235/55R-19 101Y NEOR: 255/50R-19 103Y NEO
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 110.5 inLength: 186.1 inWidth: 75.6 inHeight: 63.8 inPassenger Volume: 96 ft3Cargo Volume: 17 ft3Curb Weight: 4199 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 5.0 sec1/4-Mile: 13.7 sec @ 98 mph100 mph: 14.4 sec130 mph: 32.5 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.2 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.0 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 4.0 secTop Speed (mfr’s claim): 144 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 163 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 342 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.89 g
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 21/19/25 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED

A car-lover’s community for ultimate access & unrivaled experiences. JOIN NOW

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