Car Reviews

From the Archive: Their previous offerings seemed like four-wheel motorcycles, but Honda is now definitely in the car business. More

Somewhere south of 20 grand, there’s a sweet spot of cheap miles and wide smiles. We compare seven of the contenders—Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic, Hyundai Elantra, Mazda 3, VW Rabbit, Nissan Sentra. More

Hyundai’s performance strategy can be confusing, but it basically plays out like this: N Line is to Hyundai as Si is to Honda. If you see just the letter N, that denotes a track-ready car, like the Civic Type R. You need to know this because the whole thing is about to snowball. What began with the impressive Veloster N in 2019 will explode into seven N Line and N performance models by the end of 2022.
At the heart of it will be the 2022 Hyundai Elantra N, which marries the all-new 2021 Elantra sedan with the seriously good high-performance hardware of the Veloster N hatchback, including its 276-hp 2.0-liter turbo four, electronic limited-slip differential, and adaptive dampers. When it arrives in late 2021, it will sit one considerable notch up in power and performance from the 201-hp Elantra N Line and will take on the Type R version of the 11th-generation of the Civic, whatever that may be.

With the exception of their camouflage, both Elantra N prototypes we drove seemed production ready. There’s no duct tape holding the door panels together, no chicken wire hidden beneath the wrap, which is hiding a sizable rear spoiler, a tweaked front fascia, a new rear bumper with a diffuser, and pronounced rocker moldings. The front air dam is deep enough to make you pause before entering driveways. It wears the production wheels, which feature an elaborate triangular pattern, and the two big exhaust pipes are exclusive to the N model.

View Photos

David Dewhurst

Hyundai Elantra N Confirmed, Likely with 275 HP

Hyundai Elantra N Line Has 201 HP, Manual Gearbox

2021 Hyundai Elantra Sedan Looks Good, Adds Hybrid

Inside the sedan gets the same firm, properly bolstered sport seats and the three-spoke steering wheel as the Veloster N. Also shared with the Veloster N are the five distinct driving modes, including an N Custom mode, which allows you to tune the throttle response, steering heft, suspension damping, rev matching, stability control, and exhaust note as you see fit. The Elantra’s new digital gauge cluster is clean and simple with two traditional-looking instruments—a 180-mph speedometer on the left and an 8000-rpm tachometer on the right. In the center, you can choose to display more instruments, including gauges for boost and oil temp, a g-meter, or a lap timer.
Hyundai brought two prototypes to give us a taste of each transmission. A six-speed manual with rev-matching capability will be standard, and a dual-clutch eight-speed automatic shared with the Sonata N Line and Veloster N will be optional. Both wear Pirelli P Zero PZ4 235/35R-19 summer tires with a 280 treadwear rating, which will be on the production car and match the Veloster N.
The six-speed is up first and draws a thumbs-up from a guy in a new Mercedes-AMG E63 Sas we pull onto Sunset Boulevard in Los Angeles’s hip West Hollywood. We head for the Pacific and the twisty two-lanes that carve up the Santa Monica Mountains. The clutch is light with a well-defined pickup point. The shifter is also light but precise and satisfyingly mechanical. The ride is firm. It rounds off the large impacts well, but there’s some chop over the city’s rippled concrete freeways. At 75 mph, top gear puts the sedan’s turbo-four at 2700 rpm, high enough for a quick response from the turbocharger. There’s plenty of passing power without dropping down to fifth.

View Photos

David Dewhurst

Get off the line with any aggression, and the N’s low-end power—all 289 pound-feet of torque, which is 29 pound-feet more than the Veloster N, are available from about 1500 rpm—sends both front Pirellis up in smoke. Hyundai lets you deactivate the traction and stability-control systems if tire destruction is your thing. Horsepower peaks at 6000 rpm, but the 2.0-liter happily revs past that point with a strong pull until it touches a soft rev limiter at 6750 rpm. Get the power down, and it might match the acceleration of the Veloster N, which hit 60 mph in 5.2 seconds at our test track.
It sounds good, too, and there are three settings for its active exhaust system that could be named: Pleasant; They Can Hear You Coming From A Mile Away; and Okay, That’s Obnoxious. In the louder settings it braps, pops, cracks, and crackles when you lift off the throttle or change gears, which is cool, but it also drones on the highway.
Second gear is good for 63 mph, which is perfect for the tight corners of Latigo Canyon Drive, where the Elantra N shows impressive grip, a firm brake pedal with good modulation, steering clarity, and serious pace. Hard sustained runs fail to cook the brakes, which are also borrowed from the Veloster N with 13.6-inch front and 12.4-inch rear rotors.
Despite the Elantra’s new platform and longer wheelbase, its engine is still mounted ahead of its front axle line, but like the smaller Veloster, it turns in quickly and is well-balanced. In its firmer settings, the suspension is choppy over rough patches, but grip and the sedan’s stability aren’t adversely affected. The stiffest of the three settings is really tuned for a track day. Unlike the standard Elantra, the N Line and N have an independent rear suspension.

View Photos

David Dewhurst

Opt for the dual-clutch automatic and you also get launch control, however, the system wasn’t active during our drive. “We’re still tuning it,” a Hyundai engineer said. When it’s done, he says the car will probably rev to more than 3000 rpm before engaging the clutch. Launch control might make the Elantra get off the blocks quicker, although the automatic’s shorter gearing adds a gear change to the run to 60 mph, which will add time.
Fingertip-ready paddle shifters on the back of the steering wheel feel solid, and there’s no slop in their action. Gear changes up and down are sharp but smooth and properly quick. It feels just as good around town as it does in the hills, and its response is adjustable. Turn it all the way up, and it gets smart like Porsche’s PDK automatic, finding the right gear under braking before each turn-in point all on its own. DCT-equipped cars will also get a sunroof and an electronic parking brake.
Two years ago, we put the Veloster N in the ring with the almighty Civic Type R, and it impressed but finished a solid second. It just couldn’t match the overall speed or sophistication of the Honda, but it also cost thousands less. Hyundai is inching closer, though, and the 2022 Elantra N looks like it’s going to be seriously good. We’ll know more when we test the full production version sometime in 2021.
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 Archive: Let’s leave it at this: stupefying. More

Pony-car fans have more to be excited about today than they’ve had in 40 years—not only are both the Mustang GT and Camaro SS above the 400-hp threshold, but there’s even a horsepower war raging between the V-6 editions. Next week, we’ll post comparison tests between both the current eights and the sixes, but for now, enjoy this series of past encounters between two of Detroit’s most storied cars.

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

Camaro vs. Mustang: Complete History of Comparison

Tested: 1993 Pony Car Comparison

The Camaro and Mustang first met on these pages in March of 1968, but the clash was part of a six-car showdown—and they finished fifth and sixth, respectively. We knew the two cars had more potential than the relatively wimpy cars Detroit had given us for that test, so for the July issue that same year we invited both to send us the hottest they had to offer. We had the cars delivered to Lime Rock Park in Connecticut, where we met up with Trans-Am wizard-driver Sam Posey.
______________________________________
From the July 1968 issue of Car and Driver.
The Lime Rock pit straight is a wavy, gray blur. Up front two roaring Holleys are trying to suck a hole in the at­mosphere. “A 7000 rpm redline? Christ Almighty, it’s gonna burst.” But it doesn’t, and Sam Posey snaps the shift lev­er into fourth at seven grand as the speedometer climbs past 110 in one of the absolute wildest street machines ever to come out of Detroit. No question about it: we’re in the middle of one of the most beautiful goddam road tests in the annals of mankind.
Trans-Am sedans set up for the road. All right, the six sporty cars we tested (March) were exciting examples of the car builders’ art—but they weren’t mind blowers. They performed well, almost automatically, never making demands on the driver. But that was their shortcoming. A kind of polished lack of character.

View Photos

An unsatisfied craving for total driver involvement prompted us to continue our search for that mystical machine. Not a near total fantasy of the Lamborghini Miura or Ferrari 275/GTB-4 sort, but something totally without pretense that might even outperform them. That’s asking a lot. Ideally, it should be American. Should we—in the largest automobile producing country in the world—necessarily turn our lust-filled eyes to Europe?
What would it be then? There is always the Corvette, a truly sophisticated GT car, but the Corvette tends to be a glittering boulevard machine with little significant professional competition heritage. The more we thought about it the more we con­cluded the pure American GT concept is typified by the sporty cars and they are racers. Ask anyone who’s seen Trans-Am sedans at 170 mph on the banks of Day­tona. Now the plot: according to FIA those scrappy Trans-Am machines are Group 2 sedans and that means the manufacturer has to provide at least 1000 copies. We should be able to get one for a road test. Right? While we’re at it why just one? Why not get one of each kind and compare them? The Mustang and Camaro are obvi­ously on even terms so it didn’t seem quite fair to test a Javelin which has had less than a year of development time. We’ve gone pretty far in saying we’re encouraged by the AMC effort, and the plain fact is that they deserve a little time to sort out their car.

View Photos

What we wanted for this test were cars that any enthusiast could duplicate with factory parts and yet have performance and handling far beyond the sporty cars. Way, way beyond them. We wanted to wander into the office after the test dazed—surfeited. A night with Jane Fonda, a $1 million stake to blow at Monte Carlo, Sa­ville Row to turn out an endless stream of four-button brocaded double-breasted waist­coats. Velvet collars, Moet & Chandon, 320-foot steel-hulled diesel yachts. That’s what we wanted. Trans-Am racers for the street.
FIA homologation papers were convincing evidence that each manufacturer had an abundance of high performance parts that would result, if everything was done just right, in a blindingly fast, exquisitely responsive street car. But the only way to be assured of the best combination of these delectations was to have the manufacturers supply the cars. That’s where the footwork started.

View Photos

CAR AND DRIVER

C/D has been doing comparison tests for a while and in every test, when we find cars we like and cars we don’t, we lay it on the line. In a 2-car test, the second place car is also the last-placed car and it didn’t take Ford and Chevrolet awfully long to come to just that conclusion. Neither one wanted to play unless they could win. There would have to be rules or we’d end up with Mark Donahue’s Camaro and Jerry Titus’ Mustang—which would be a complete gas—but would miss the point entirely. It would all be pretty simple: any factory in­stalled or dealer available part would be acceptable if it was homologated. We sug­gested that the engines have the racing two 4-barrel intake system and tuned headers but mufflers would be used at all times. We wanted only factory-available street tires and we wanted the cars supplied with axle ratios as close to 4.10 as possible since both Ford and Chevrolet had homologated this ratio. Of course any homologated suspen­sion parts would be acceptable and 4-wheel disc brakes would be a welcome addition. We warned that we would be on the look­out for cheaters so the engines had better not be bigger than the FIA 305 cubic inch limit and the cars had better not weigh less than the AMA registered curb weights, not the 2800-lb. Trans-Am minimum. Every­body agreed, shook hands and went back to neutral—and not so neutral—corners.

View Photos

We had the beginning of a splendidly volatile mix, but we needed one thing more, and that would be Sam Posey. Nothing alive can withstand the magic, probing, X-ray eyes of Sam Posey. A fierce, brave rac­er who has startled his competitors by his absolute fearlessness—and his almost total understanding of how a car behaves under conditions of maximum stress, not to men­tion his endless pointed stream of talk about it. Yes, Sam Posey was perfect. In awe of nothing, living everything that sep­arates cars from transportation modules, a driver with brio—and not aligned with any factory team. Everything was set. The very walls of the office quivered in anticipation.
In the succeeding days each manufactur­er grew more and more up tight about second-place-being-last. Nervous telephone calls between Detroit and New York were unending. Each was afraid the other was going to build a trick car and put the hurt on his innocent, honest-as-it-can-be street car. They would supply an engineer with their car for adjustments, for keeping ev­eryone honest, and—to our howling dis­appointment—to return each car to its incubating shop in Detroit the very mo­ment the tests were over.

View Photos

CAR AND DRIVER

The first day of testing would be at New York National Speedway where we would do the technical inspection to make sure that nobody had stuffed a 427 or half-thickness steel fenders or any other deceit­ful devices into our cars.
When we arrived the Camaro and Mus­tang were already parked, nose to tail, on the strip and much to our surprise, Ford Man and Chevy Man were talking to each other in civil tones.
What was going on here? The Camaro was dazzling. All squeaky clean, wearing its black Z/28 hood and deck stripes and front and rear spoilers. Not even any or­ange peel in its paint. Hell, it was beautiful, but we asked for a street racer, not a con­tours entry. Up front was the Mustang, looking dusty from the trip, sporting a set of 7-inch-wide American Mag wheels and fat Goodyear donuts the likes of which we’d never seen before. A little rule inge­nuity, and we hadn’t even started examin­ing the cars yet. Those mysterious tires put over 7.5-inches of rubber on the road and they said “Goodyear” on the sidewalls in great big white letters—just like a race tire. The size marking was F60-15 and the mys­tery deepened—nobody had ever heard of F60-15 but there they were, big as life. One thing for sure; they made the Camaro’s standard E70-15s look like Suzuki tires and we weren’t the only ones to notice it. “Uh, I don’t know about those tires,” said Chevy Man. He’d never heard of their like before. “No problem,” said Ford Man leading with the old the-best-defense-is-still-a-good-offense trick. “You can get those real easy. How many do you want?” Along with “how many do you want” he made it clear that, of course, there would be a bill, which slowed us down a bit. What would we do with a bunch of tires that were really too small to be real race tires and yet so big that they would probably rub on the fenders of every street car we could get our hands on? We had no quarrel with their choice of American Mags since the Shelby Mustangs come with 7-inch-wide wheels as standard equipment and the difference between magnesium and steel would never show up in the test. In fact, the Camaro could have used the 7-inch-wide Corvette wheel if they wanted to since it’s available through their dealers, but they chose to stay with the standard wheels to emphasize what a good car the regular Z/28 is. “It’s a difference in the basic philosophy of the people who built the cars,” said Chevy Man later. “They’re racers.”
The simplest part of the tech inspection was determining weight—so that came first. Our worry about the Camaro being a con­cours entry was reinforced when the scale said 3480 lbs., 260 lbs. over the minimum.
“I was afraid of that,” said Chevy Man. “With the power steering and power brakes and the custom interior it got a little heavy. We wanted to make a nice car but now I’m afraid we’ll get drubbed.”

View Photos

On to the scale came the Mustang, watched by a half dozen very suspicious eyes. No reason for suspicion here, though, because the scale balanced out at 3282 lbs., 111 lbs. over its minimum.
O.K., both cars heavy; but with full street trim what do you expect? The Ca­maro even had a console, for Christ’s sake. Underneath, both cars had a very ordinary looking suspension, neither with any sort of radius rods on the rear axle. In fact, the Camaro had the standard Z/28 front and rear springs and anti-sway bar, with the only change being the optional Koni ad­justable shock absorbers. The Mustang used the heavy duty 390 GT front springs and anti-sway bar with export Mustang rear springs. Adjustable shock absorbers were used on the Mustang too, Konis in front and Gabriels in the rear.
To cheat in the engine department you’d have to go big; bigger than the allowable 305 cubic inches. Not that there’d be any particular problem in doing that, especially with the Camaro, since the 327 and the 350 look the same on the outside as the 302. To catch cheaters, every drag strip worth its name has a device to measure cylinder dis­placement without removing the heads and New York National is no exception. We were pleased to find that both the Mustang and Camaro checked out at 302 cubes.
“It’s really a pretty standard Z/28 en­gine,” volunteered Chevy Man with some relief and no small pride. “It’s got the standard camshaft and pistons so the com­pression ratio is 11.0 to one. About the only thing we’ve changed is the intake manifold and carbs, as you can see, and, of course, the dealer available headers.”
He was being modest about the intake manifold; it was an arresting sight. It’s a huge, single plenum chamber ram-tuned setup, very similar to the one used on Chrysler’s NASCAR Hemis except that the Camaro had two 600 cubic-feet-per­-minute Holleys mounted on top. “We don’t recommend the two-by-four intake system for the street because the carburet­ors don’t have chokes and there’s no man­ifold heat. Really, it’s just for racing. Works best in the 4800–7200 rpm range which you don’t get to use much on the street. For normal driving the single 4-bbl. works better.” The air cleaner for the Ca­maro was a masterpiece too. All black and chrome, it covered both carburetors and was ducted into the cowl just at the base of the windshield where car speed packs high pressure air. The only other non-standard parts in the Camaro were the optional valve springs, transistor ignition with breakerless distributor, and the heavy duty L-88 clutch and flywheel.

View Photos

CAR AND DRIVER

Camaro: a manifold for serious street racers only.
Compared to the Camaro, the Mustang engine was all business. No chrome air cleaner or valve covers. Just plain old blue paint. Even the headers were kind of pale blue. Right on top was a super tall alu­minum, two 4-bbl. inline intake manifold with a pair of 540 cfm Holleys and a paper element air cleaner. There it was, tunnel port fans, right in front of our very eyes. The real thing. “Well, yes, this is your regular 12.5 to one compression ratio, dry deck, tunnel port 302,” allowed Ford Man still a bit defensive from the tire discussion. “How many do ya want?” Man, just the name tunnel port makes us stand at atten­tion. It’s really a simple idea but only Ford had the initiative to do it. Instead of trying to crowd the intake ports between the push-rods like everybody else, Ford just made the intake port as big as they pleased and then ran a little tube down through it for the pushrod to move inside of. A great idea. This particular 302 had a fairly tame (by race standards) camshaft and a dual-point distributor without the benefit of transistor ignition. An 8-quart road racing oil sump finished off the package.
Unfortunately, the Mustang had only a 3.91 axle ratio instead of the 4.10 we had asked for. It was the lesser of two evils. We’ve never considered Ford’s locker rear suitable for the street, and they weren’t overjoyed about it themselves, so they equipped the Mustang with their new limited-slip unit which is very similar in principle to what GM and Chrysler use. However, the highest numerical ratio avail­able for that differential is 3.91. The differ­ence between 3.91 and 4.10 is less than 5% and the Mustang’s lower profile tires compensated for that difference.

View Photos

The real testing was scheduled for Tues­day at Lime Rock. Posey had flown back from California on Monday, after finishing third in the Riverside USRRC in his Group 7 Caldwell, and we all arrived at the track almost simultaneously; Sam in his Gullwing Mercedes and us in the lumpy idling test cars. It was a little off-putting. There was Posey having traveled like 3000 miles and we were showing him a pair of what looked like showroom stock sporty cars. “Listen Sam, these are a pair of screaming muthas . . .” “Sam,” “Sam?” It took some convincing but we got him out on the track. From then on he never stopped talking—and smiling.
The Camaro had been the quicker of the two the day before at the drag strip, turn­ing standing start quarter miles in 13.77 seconds at 107.39 mph. The Mustang wasn’t exactly a stone either, covering the same distance in 13.96 seconds at 106.13 mph. Just for comparison, the Ferrari 275/ GTB-4 we tested (October, ’67) was ca­pable of 14.5 second quarters at 100 mph and the 400 hp, 427 Corvette (May, ’68) was good for 14.1 seconds at 102 mph.

View Photos

CAR AND DRIVER

If there is such a thing as a home track for a race driver, Lime Rock would be that for Posey. Having grown up only five miles away, in Sharon, Connecticut, he spent a good deal of his spare time practicing there. He knows the way around. Since a road test was a whole new deal to Sam he was eager to get on with it, and was just as we suspected—he was ideal, all courage, will­ingness and technique—and no matter what he was doing, he talked about it. Flat out up the front chute, Sam was talking; through the right hander, wheels to the wall, Sam was talking; tail hung out and wailing, Sam was talking—and all in that same, even, cultivated tone. And all with that almost-uninvolved analytical approach. Posey the scientist at work. It was wild.
“You see, Lime Rock is a track that puts any big car with a fairly mushy sus­pension to the test right off. The first time you go through The Hook you suddenly re­alize you’re going to have to do a lot of work to go really fast. It’s actually a bumpy, hook-shaped turn that you drive with two apexes and it is, without a doubt, the toughest part of the course. There’s just no way you can turn the steering wheel one time and expect it to go through.”
We’d covered about half a lap in the Camaro when Posey came to the same con­clusion about the steering that we had reached when driving up from New York.
“I like the power steering. I’ve never seen any reason why you should have to make a big effort to steer a racing car. In fact, it’s a good case for as little effort as possible, particularly in a Trans-Am car. Some of these races you have to go 350 or 400 miles by yourself which is pretty for­midable. I don’t feel any less control be­cause it’s easy and it’s got all the road feel I’d ever need. The thing is … all right, for one lap you might get fractionally more road feel from standard steering, but, 10 laps later you’re beginning to fight the wheel. You’re getting tired and you’re not getting so much road feel anymore. You’re struggling with the car. This would defi­nitely be the way to go in any prolonged, high speed situation. I like it a lot.”
Posey’s biggest surprise was the han­dling.
“It doesn’t understeer near as much as I thought it would. You can hang the tail out quite nicely with a little throttle. Of course, it wallows in The Hook but other than that it’s really delightful—terrific. Gawd, you could really get away from the cops in this thing.”

The fuzz apparently sticks to Posey like it does to Brock Yates. Of course while he’s saying these things we’re zapping around Lime Rock in a roaring, tire squeal­ing blur and Sam is banging the inside tires on the edge of the track at every apex and kicking up a cloud of dust on the outside as we come out of every turn. The whole track seems to have changed shape since the first few laps. All the short straights seem shortened dramatically—in fact they look like they’re about the length of the hood of the car—and Posey isn’t turning in the corners anymore. No Sir, by now he’s setting up way before them. Into the main straight. Shifts to fourth at 7000 rpm. The speedometer is past 110 mph. On the brakes at the 200-yard marker for The Hook. Down to third. Power on. Sam is sawing away at the wheel and the Camaro is bellowing and squealing and going around The Hook like it was on a tether. Posey feels that he has the Camaro pretty well sorted out so we pull into the pits to change to the Mustang.

View Photos

Almost instantly the Mustang starts to an intense, deep-toned idle—the sound you’d expect from an engine that knew it could make over 400 hp from its modest 302 cubic inches and wanted to get on with it. Posey puts on one of his enigmatic grins and pulls out onto the track, immediately commenting on the vastly different feel.
“This steering is something else—very heavy. Heavier by far than a Trans-Am car. It’s even heavy in the straight. I think the chance of doing really well in this car may be fractionally jeopardized by the steering. The lap times will bear close scru­tiny.”
“Close scrutiny” for God’s sake. He talks like that all the time, whether he’s leaning on a fender or grooving through The Hook.
“This car has really excellent throttle response, better than the Camaro. The re­turn spring is very stiff but something hap­pens instantly whenever you push the ped­al. The brake feels mushy. The free play seems to be three or four inches and then it doesn’t want to stop the car.”
Posey worried about the apparent lack of brakes so the approaches to the next few corners were devoted to brake testing.

View Photos

“Christ Almighty, there’s nothing there at all. It’s just not braking, period. I’d be better off shifting down. That’s a real dis­appointment.”
The difference in the brakes was not coming as what you’d call a shocker of a surprise. The day before in tests the Ca­maro had performed brilliantly, stopping from 80 mph in only 209 feet at 1.02G, but try as we might, the best stop with the Mustang was 248 feet at 0.86G. Both cars had the racing 4-wheel disc system but Ford Man admitted that they were having trouble with caliper flex which gives a spongy pedal and that these brakes were the same as those on Trans-Am cars.
Posey’s reaction to the Mustang’s han­dling was more than just favorable.
“Except for the squealing of the tires, this car handles like a million bucks. The Hook just doesn’t present the same prob­lem in this car as it did in the Camaro. It understeers quite a bit but it’s very stable. Although the steering effort is greater, it’s compensated for by the race suspension, or at least it feels like race suspension, and the racing tires. In fact, I think the tires con­tribute a lot to my enjoyment of the car. I think we have a definite mismatch here. Ford has taken some considerable advan­tage with these tires and it would be quite intriguing to see what the Mustang could do with the Camaro’s tires. I think this is proving that race tires are, in fact, better for going fast than street tires—and we needn’t have come all the way to Lime Rock to see that.”
Back into the pits and a discourse on driver environment in the two cars.
“Somehow, I feel more connected to the Mustang than I do to the Camaro. I think the seat has more lateral support. Ei­ther that or because it’s covered with vinyl instead of cloth like the Camaro, the per­spiration is making me stick to the damn thing. It’s a shame the prime place in front of the driver in the Mustang instrument panel is reserved for the clock because the fuel and temperature gauges are hidden by the steering wheel rim. The Mustang has a nice big tach but it’s difficult to read. The numbers are so close together it looks more like a speedometer and the speedometer has a redline and the tach doesn’t—which is kind of a funny situation. I might have gone up to 70 mph in first gear if I hadn’t scoped it all out first. In neither car can I begin to see the instruments without taking my eyes off the road but it’s hardest in the Camaro.”

View Photos

CAR AND DRIVER

The instrumentation in the Camaro was almost nonexistent—a speedometer, fuel gauge, a few idiot lights and an accessory tach clamped to the steering column. In­adequate for a high performance car and only slightly worse than their optional in­strument package which mounts all the small gauges on the console.
The test session in the Camaro was cut short by preignition in one of the cylinders which, fortunately, only melted part of the spark plug and distorted an intake valve rather than burning a hole in a piston as is normally the case. Had the Camaro been equipped with racing spark plugs it would have been a failure that probably could have been avoided. Even so, the Camaro was very quick while it lasted and Posey was surprised by his best lap time.
“Really? A 1:09.2? That would have put us somewhere in the middle of the Trans-Am grid here last year which is pret­ty intriguing since it’s really a street car.
“There is a tendency for the rear wheels to lock up and the axle to tramp in braking and when I hit the bumps in The Hook it wants to plow straight off the road. The engine has all kinds of torque. I’ve been shifting at 6700 because there was no reason to go higher.
“The shift linkage is just absolutely ter­rible. I keep getting hung up in the reverse crossbar whenever I try to get into second. It’s far too sensitive.”
On the other hand, Posey was not at all surprised when we told him that he got the Mustang down to 1:08.8.
“I could have gone even faster if it wasn’t for the brakes. I have to start brak­ing about 100 yards earlier at the end of the straight than with the Camaro. It really sticks in the corners, though—goes through The Hook like a real racing car.”
That only made us more badger-like in our curiosity about the tires. They were ob­viously wider than what Mustangs are made for since the paint was blistered on each side in front where the tire had been rubbing on the inside of the fender. The first thing we did when we got back to the office was to call Goodyear in Akron. “An F60-15 does not exist,” was the of­ficial answer. We explained they might not exist, but that we had five of them. And that, in turn, loosened up the Goodyears some. After a lot of mumbling it came out that the tires on the Mustang were exper­imental, super-low profile Polyglas jobs that had not been—and maybe never would be—released for production. They did say in a positive tone that they were pretty sore at Ford for letting us see their secret tires.

View Photos

CAR AND DRIVER

Mustang: Goodyear tires nobody had ever heard of.
It’s a damn shame to have to put either the Mustang or the Camaro in second, which is to say last, place. Both are easily the most exciting machines we’ve ever driven with price tags less than $10,000 and by far the best performing street cars ever. But there is a certain inevitability about the results of a comparison test so the Camaro gets the nod. In acceleration, both cars were nearly equal with the Ca­maro slightly, but consistently, faster. It wasn’t much of a contest in the braking test with the Camaro stopping at a rate greater than one G. At Lime Rock the Mustang was a marginal winner but we suspect that with equal tires, the Camaro would have been pretty strong because of its better brakes. In defense of the Mus­tang, Posey says, “It would have a terrific advantage in a Le Mans start from the pizza parlor because you can’t get the igni­tion key in upside down.” And there’s this to say about the Mustang too. Unlike the Camaro, we were allowed to keep the Mus­tang for several days after the test. It went rumbling and grunting by a Little League baseball game—and broke the whole thing up in the top of the third. The kids had to see what that fire-breathing monster was about. And when we passed a house with a GT350 in the driveway along about 7 p.m. the dining room erupted and people poured out windows, doors and chimneys. That’s the effect it had. The Mustang even be­haved impeccably in one of New York’s patented traffic jams. Every kid on the block had to have a ride in it and wives stood around kind of hoping to fill their prom cards. Wild.
Trans-Amers, Mustang v. Camaro. Gawd!
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

Four of a Kind: 2007 Ford Mustang Shelby GT vs. 2007 Mazda RX-8, 2007 Nissan 350Z, 2008 Audi TT 2.0T More

View Photos
GENE BUTERA, THE MANUFACTURER

From the July 1968 Issue of Car and Driver
The original Boss Wagon—the 1966 Plymouth Fury III so much beloved of Car and Driver—has now seen its second birthday and is about to come face to face with its fifty-thousandth mile. Both the concept and the vehicle have worn extremely well, so well in fact that we decided to do another one.

Tested: 2006 Dodge Magnum SRT8

Ford Mustang Wagon Archived Road Test

Station Wagons That You Forgot Ever Existed

This time we selected an Olds F-85 Vista-Cruiser, largely because several engineers whose opinions we trust have called it the best-handling and most stable of all of the current crop of station wagons, and because Oldsmobile Division has been showing such extraordinary signs of life in the areas of enthusiasm and high performance. The Olds—albeit strictly a one-off custom job—is a worthy successor to our aging Plymouth, and if it is a bit more boss than wagon, we can only defend it on the grounds that we are car nuts, not teamsters.
In the Wagon Department the Olds loses to the Plymouth. It is just as long and just as heavy, but much narrower inside and out, making it considerably tighter and more limited for both people and cargo. In fact, its smaller interior dimensions are the only feature of the entire package that qualify it as the intermediate-sized car its F-85 nameplate implies. It is a great big car, friends, make no mistake.

View Photos

GENE BUTERA, THE MANUFACTURER

It is in the Boss Department, however, that the Olds excels our Plymouth and just about anything else we can think of. It is a veritable bear. It goes, stops, steers, and handles like hell. It is so fast you wouldn’t believe it. It does a big 94 in the quarter-mile, with an ET of 14.7 seconds, but unlike so many cars that deliver lots of sturm und drang in the quarter, it is perfectly happy to turn a corner or stop at the end.
New York National Speedway, where we conducted our performance tests, features a 0.5 mile shutdown area and a short return loop that can be negotiated at about 55 mph by test drivers with more brio than brains. The Olds was so good going through the quarter, then being hurled through the return loop that followed, that we’d like to see the whole procedure added to drag racing programs as a special event. The funny cars might end up a little less funny as a result.
To say that our Olds wagon was nonstandard would be an understatement of massive proportions. Basically a double-domed Vista-Cruiser, its standard-equipment 350 cu. in. V-8 was replaced with a mighty giant of a ram-air 455 developing tons of torque and herds of horsepower. And the enthusiasts in Lansing weren’t content to substitute just any old 455, they went a step farther and breathed all over the thing, bolting on a set of 4-4-2 heads, a special capacitor discharge system, and the camshaft from their hottest ’67 4-4-2 option. The result was the strongest, most responsive powerplant of any we’ve driven in the seven-liter-plus category.

View Photos

GENE BUTERA, THE MANUFACTURER

Big engines are usually thundering torquers, but shy on the zappy responsiveness of small-displacement screamers. The 455 combined the best of both worlds—bags of torque, but very sporty at the same time. It normally only wound to about 5400, but if it had turned any higher than that it would undoubtedly have detached our retinas. What’s a big engine for? Retina Detaching is a mere hazard of the trade. Besides which, it’s worth it when you come across something as close to Truth as Boss Wagon’s Cousin.
Bolted to this superstrong engine was a pumped-up 3-speed Turbo Hydra-Matic that shifted more crisply and authoritatively than most manual boxes. Only when it got hot from repeated acceleration tests and a lot of forced manual upshifts did it lose some of its sharp punch, and then only between second and third. The final-drive ratio (with limited-slip) was the optional 3.42 instead of the standard Vista-Cruiser’s 2.78, and it ran on Olds’ beautiful styled steel wheels (from Motor Wheel Corp.) with 6.0-in. rims and Goodyear H70-14 Polyglas tires.
The front suspension is part of Oldsmobile’s police “Apprehender” package, as is the rear, only the front is pretty straight while the rear bristles with evidence of the same special attention that the engine got. The front’s made up of stiffer springs and shocks and a stabilizer bar. The rear has stiffer shocks and springs, plus the control arms and rear stabilizer bar from the 4-4-2. Brakes are disc front/drum rear, again of the police “Apprehender” (not to be confused with “Apprehensive’) genre.

Specifications

SPECIFICATION
1968 Oldsmobile Vista-Cruiser
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-seat station wagon
PRICE AS TESTED N/A
ENGINE TYPE pushrod water-cooled V-8, cast iron block and headsDisplacement:455 in3, 7450 cm3Power:390 hp @ 5000 rpmTorque:500 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
TRANSMISSION 3-speed automatic
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 121.0 inLength: 217.5 inWidth: 76.7 inHeight: 56.8 inCurb weight: 4380 lb
C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 30 mph: 2.0 secZero to 60 mph: 6.2 secZero to 100 mph: 16.8 secStanding ¼-mile: 14.7 sec @ 93.6 mphTop speed (estimated): 127 mphBraking, 80-0 mph: 237 ft

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

Overfed pussycat gets its claws back. More