Subterms
The 2021 Porsche Cayenne GTS coupe’s twin-turbo V-8 makes it feel powerful and fast. Its massive exhaust pipes make it sound cool. But it’s the integration of that stirring V-8 in the Cayenne lineup’s most aggressive chassis setup that makes it good. As what we’d consider the driver’s pick among big Porsche SUVs, the mid-range […] More
From the July 1994 issue of Car and Driver.
Talk about a case of delayed gratification. At first, BMW said we were not going to get the M3 version of its seductive 3-series coupe. Then it said we were, but with the less-than-tantalizing proviso that it would not have the European M3’s engine. Instead, we’d get a modified 325i’s engine. That meant no handmade throttle bodies, no continuously variable valve timing. We couldn’t help having reduced expectations.
Best Road Cars Ever Developed by BMW’s M Division
Which made our surprise even more pleasant. The U.S M3 is equipped with a bored-and-stroked version of the 325i inline six, but that engine wasn’t exactly bad from the get-go. In M3 trim, now known as the S50, it’s a 3.0-liter with 240 horsepower and 225 pound-feet of torque at its disposal, which it deploys in such a willing, refined, and generous fashion that to drive the car is to fall in love with this engine.
View Photos
DICK KELLEYCar and Driver
The S50 is also a performance bargain. “Our” M3 trades 42 horses for about a $14,000 slice off what the Euro car would have cost had it been brought over as is. In return, we get a fatter torque curve that climbs to 190 pound-feet at just 2400 rpm, and then flattens between 4000 and 5500 where more than 220 pound-feet is permanently on call.
Thus equipped, the U.S. M3 is better suited to the environment it will find itself in. We have no autobahns here. We have very low speed limits here. We have roads that look as if they’ve been on the receiving end of a Serbian mortar assault. And the M3 takes this stuff in stride. A touch of throttle at freeway speeds in the direct-drive fifth gear dials the speed up like a rheostat, jetting the car past slower vehicles in a manner that brings to mind an F-18 cruising through a formation of DC-3s.
HIGHS: Good looks, great torque, superb sound, the right place.
Those of us lucky enough to have driven a Euro M3 might notice that the stateside car does not have quite the same exultant rush to the redline that its European cousin has, nor exactly the same surge of acceleration at the top end that 282 horsepower provides. But the U.S. car has, along with the emphatic flow of torque from low down on the tach, a power delivery very much keeping with American driving priorities.
View Photos
DICK KELLEYCar and Driver
From as low as 2500 rpm, our vivid Dakar-yellow M3 pulled like a turbo car all the way to its engine limiter at 6800 rpm or 6500 rpm, depending on which gear it was in. The engine-management system gives you 6800 in the first two gears, then 6500 in the next two, with a 137 mph cutoff in top. Exactly why our car curtails its rush toward what is surely a 145-to-150-mph top speed is beyond our understanding, although the safety watchdogs are probably scandalized by the 137-mph figure anyway.
Wait until they hear about the way in which the car dashes off easily repeatable 0-to-60 sprints in 5.6 seconds. That’s half a second quicker than the company claims for the car. Better yet, it’s 0.4 second faster than BMW’s claim for the European car. In fact, this car feels so good that comparisons with the Euro car become odious after just a few hours behind the wheel. Not least because the U.S. car is an authentic M-division product, sharing the other M3’s unique accouterments.
View Photos
DICK KELLEYCar and Driver
The body kit is identical, with M-style rocker panels, deep front fascia, and rear under-bumper diffuser, plus unique ten-spoke alloy wheels with ultra-low-profile 40-series Michelins. Under the skin, you’ll find careful M-division tweaks too. The suspension is a fully redeveloped version of the standard 3-series kit, with reinforced control arms, bushings, and knuckles; gas pressurized shocks; revised spring and bar rates; and massive brake discs.
The suspension tuning is specific to the U.S. model, giving the car a superb compromise between body-motion control and comfort. Yet it pulls 0.86 g on the skidpad-only 0.03 g less than a Corvette. The M3 is necessarily firm, yes, but it handles pavement breaks with amazing poise. The tire thwop over lateral bumps and cracks, but very little impact makes it through to the driver, and what does lacks the sharp edge you might expect from such a dedicated sportster. On really bad surfaces, the impacts come through mainly to the seats, sort of like a kid kicking the back of your seat at the movies, only less annoying.
LOWS: Only 2000 coming this year.
For such a potent machine, the controls are particularly genteel. The higher-torque-capacity Euro M3 five-speed is employed, but like other 3-series manual gearboxes, it uses automatic-transmision fluid. So this car’s shifts are as light and silky first thing on a cold morning as they are in the mild-mannered 325i. And if the clutch and brake pedal effort is a trifle heavier in the M3 than in other 3-series, a strong clutch and ferocious braking performance are ample payback. Stops from 70 mph take only 158 feet. Even the steering, which offers a fair bit of self-centering tug in fast curves and has a firm feel to it at all speeds, will yield to the modest arm strength of your average couch potato.
View Photos
DICK KELLEYCar and Driver
It’s this sense of refinement, of everyday versatility, that makes the M3 exceptional. It’s as nice to drive on a leisurely Sunday morning lakeside dawdle as it is to rip through a series of mountain zigzags. But when you’re alone in the M3 and the fun police are all on doughnut patrol, something in your brain clicks over. You leave the last stoplight with a 4500-rpm clutch drop. The tires light up, spinning in unison under management of the 25-percent limited-slip diff. In two seconds you need second gear, and the tach calls for third barely three seconds later. All the while you hear a beautiful angry yowl from somewhere beneath the suave veneer of the BMW. You swing into the first bend and the nose swivels like the turret on an MI. The wheel could be on a precision lathe; nothing is lost to compliance. The corner tightens, you dial in more lock, and the nose responds in direct proportion. Now you’re going too fast, so you ease off the throttle. The car loses speed and kind of hunkers down, but there’s no change in heading unless the front end was already pushing, in which case the line tighten . If you are going way too fast, the car will rotate as the back eases out.
View Photos
DICK KELLEYCar and Driver
Exploring the M3’s limits takes dedication; they’re disconcertingly high. So high that you’ll be pushing your luck on public roads. But as we know from riding with Joachim Winkelhock, the British Touring Car Champion, as well as from less adventurous exploits of our own, there is a whole handling spectrum available to M3 owners in which oversteer balanced with the wheel and throttle promises great entertainment.
If you’re not likely to take long trips with adults stuffed in back, then this car could be the one to buy if you want only one. Its all-around versatility goes a long way to meet the frequently conflicting need of the modern driver. Somehow it manages to blend a sense of upscale privilege and refinement with flashing good looks, spellbinding performance, and refreshing integrity.
THE VERDICT: Buy one before the news gets around.
The M3, it has to be said, is a car very near the top of our wish list.
Counterpoint
One of my most vivid behind-the-wheel memories is of the Euro M3 I sampled last winter in Germany. The route I chose ticked off more than 200 kilometers, but the 282-hp Bimmer and I made it in a little over an hour, clipping along the autobahn at triple-digit speeds. My tape-recorded notes sounded like bulletins from the front: “Thrilling acceleration. Telegraphic steering. A near-total absence of brake dive. Delicate, but urgent.” Last night I sampled the American-spec M3. Only the saving bleeps of my radar detector hinted at any difference. —Martin Padgett Jr.
I live in Detroit, and this is a lousy car for the city. That’s the city’s fault, not the car’s. The M3’s terrific six-cylinder begs to be wound to the redline in every gear, and the suspension seems happiest when all four wheels are drifting. Try to use such potential on crowded streets and your license will be gone before your third drive to work. So if you’re an urban dweller and you fall for an M3, prepare to buy a racetrack, or five miles of curving country road, or at least a local judge. Otherwise, you’re in for unremitting, frustrating self-restraint. —Don Schroeder
BMW drivers run the danger of being perceived as status exhibitionists. The reason? The pricey 325is is a nice coupe, but a $14,000-cheaper Eagle Talon TSi AWD can outrun it. Not so with the M3. The only car faster and less expensive (and only by a few hundred dollars) is the Mazda RX-7. The M3 approaches it in acceleration and handling, and you would probably want to call a twisty road duel between these two cars a draw. The M3’s the quickest real four-seater you can get for its $36,620 price. No status hazard in that.
Specifications
SPECIFICATIONS
1995 BMW M3
VEHICLE TYPEFront-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE AS TESTED$38,760 (base price: $36,620)
ENGINE TYPEDOHC 24-valve inline-6, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 182 in3, 2990 cm3Power: 240 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque: 225 lb-ft @ 4250 rpm
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSISSuspension (F/R): struts/multilinkBrakes (F/R): 12.4-in vented disc/12.3 -in vented discTires: Michelin MXX3, 235/40ZR-17
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 106.3 inLength: 174.9 inWidth: 67.3 inHeight: 52.6 inPassenger volume: 82 ft3Trunk volume: 9 ft3Curb weight: 3180 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 5.6 sec100 mph: 14.9 sec130 mph: 29.8 secRolling start, 5–60 mph: 6.1 secTop gear, 30–50 mph: 7.4 secTop gear, 50–70 mph: 7.6 sec1/4 mile: 14.3 sec @ 98 mphTop speed (governor limited): 137 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 158 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMYObserved: 22 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCombined/city/highway: 22/19/27 mpg
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More
From the September 1999 issue of Car and Driver.
Is it us, or are European luxury-car manufacturers marching boldly into car markets other makers have been shrinking from? They already offer a batch of premium wagons here, and more are on the way. Ditto for sports cars and convertibles, two more market segments where other manufacturers haven’t exactly been clamoring to get in.
Luxury Sports Sedans Face Off
The Best Sedans of 2020
Yet another example is limited-production sports sedans, four of which we’ve assembled here for a comparison test. They are the Audi S4 Quattro, the BMW M3, the Mercedes C43 AMG, and the Saab 9-3 Viggen. They’re the fastest, most exclusive smaller sedans you can buy. (Remember, we define a “sedan” or a “coupe” not by the number of doors it may have, but by how much room is in the back seat.) Each represents its maker’s best crack at high performance on an existing car platform.
Costly, low-volume performance models built off more mainstream platforms aren’t new. The concept got its start in the late 1950s and early 1960s with domestic muscle cars like the Chrysler 300 and the Pontiac GTO. Those early hot cars were cheap to produce, often amounting to little more than a big engine, a stiff suspension, and a few badges. Automakers liked the showroom traffic these “halo” cars generated for their less-exiting offerings. Within a few years, Detroit offered performance packages on nearly every car it made.
By the 1980s, overseas manufacturers were in on the game, and you could buy souped-up entries ranging from a Suzuki Swift GT to a Renault Alliance GTA.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
Those days are gone. The number of factory performance packages has declined precipitously this decade for all kinds of cars. Performance no longer commands the respect of young car buyers that it used to. The cost of insurance surcharges, always a problem for more powerful cars, certainly didn’t help. Even car critics like us, who in the past have mocked the half-baked performance efforts of many carmakers, must take some of the blame.
Ironically, pleasing the customers who still want these cars is probably more difficult than ever because they’re more likely now than in previous times to be committed enthusiasts. Drivers who once bought performance as a fashion statement are now driving pickups and sport-utes. No wonder so many carmakers have walked away from the high-performance factory hot rod.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
Increasingly demanding customers may explain why European carmakers remain in this game. If you can’t make a silk purse from a sow’s ear, you certainly can’t design a decent factory performance car from a cheap-car platform. These four cars were all developed from advanced designs with sophisticated independent suspensions. The Audi S4 is a version of the slick A4, and the Bimmer M3 is derived from the highly coveted previous-generation 3-series. The C43 is built off Mercedes’ sturdy C-class, and the Viggen was spawned from Saab’s successful 9-3.
So these models comprise a rare breed. On average, each will account for about one in eight sales of its respective platform in the U.S. They’re the most expensive versions of each car model you can buy, too. Base prices run from a low $38,465 for the Saab 9-3 Viggen to a high of $54,651 for the Mercedes-Benz C43 AMG.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
For cars that vie for the same customers, they’re a diverse bunch. The Saab has front-wheel drive, the Mercedes-Benz and the BMW are rear-drivers, and the Audi is driven by all four wheels. The Audi has a V-6 and the Saab a four, both turbocharged. The BMW comes with an in-line six, and the Mercedes boasts a big V-8, without forced induction. The Mercedes and the Audi are four-doors, the Saab is a three-door, and the BMW is a two-door. The Audi comes with a six-speed manual. The others are five-speeds—manuals in the BMW and Saab, an automatic in the Mercedes. The last time the drivelines varied this much, it was in a comparison of exotic sports cars.
We wrung out these eager runners over 1000 miles of test driving, including interstate jogs in Ohio, brisk runs through the sweepers of Pennsylvania’s Allegheny National Forest, and howling track laps at Nelson Ledges Road Course just outside Cleveland. Here’s how these rare sedans stacked up.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
Fourth Place: Mercedes-Benz C43 AMG
AMG is the famous German Mercedes-Benz tuner that DaimlerChrysler acquired a controlling interest in last year. Although Mercedes intends to expand the AMG line to include more models here, the C43 and the larger E55 are the only AMG cars currently offered. Given the stiff-lipped nature of the C-class, the C43 is an impressive transformation. We found room for improvement, though, particularly for the price.
Highs: Sexy-sounding, powerful V-8; beautifully crafted interior; ample road grip.
Above all, AMG means speed, and the C43’s engine is a jalapeño-overloaded tamale. It’s a version of Mercedes’ aluminum SOHC 4.3-liter 24-valve V-8, muscled up to the tune of 302 horsepower, at least 50 more ponies than in any other car here. The soundtrack it plays is classic Detroit V-8 muscle car, with some expensive-sounding harmonic whines mixed in.
It’s an aural delight, one that pleases the inner ear as well as the outer ear. Stomp on the throttle, and the V-8 blasts the C43 to 60 mph in 6.1 seconds. That’s slightly behind the BMW and Audi, and then this car’s just hitting its stride. By 100, the other three are eating the C43’s exhaust fumes. The C43 is governed at 155 mph, fastest of the group.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
We would have preferred a manual transmission, but at least the standard automatic is willing to play. At full throttle, it gallantly winds the steamy V-8 to its 6400-rpm redline, and it always seemed to find the right gear quickly in the Allegheny hills, requiring little driver intervention. “Makes passing on two-lanes an easy job—just floor it and go, no fiddlesome sticks to work,” wrote Frank Markus.
Lows: Twitchy steering response, stratospheric price, stiff suspension that rides over bumps instead of absorbing them.
The suspension is the not-so-good news. AMG seems to have applied a moldy Detroit formula to the C43’s under-pinnings—stiffer shocks and springs, and wider tires—and then called it a day. Most of the time, the C43 pounds over bumps instead of absorbing them. “Ride is harsh, brittle, hot roddish,” noted Pat Bedard. The steering is nervously quick just off-center and lacks feel. The big Michelin Pilots SXs, on the other hand, provide a reliable 0.86 g of grip, and the brakes kill speed adroitly, stopping the Benz from 70 mph in a short 159 feet. Both save the C43’s handling from being a major loss, and the car has no problem keeping up with the others here. But we think this kind of car should ride and handle with more sophistication.
The C43 lapped Nelson Ledges in 1 minute and 22.7 seconds. That’s a third-place finish, despite this car’s first-place power-to-weight ratio of 11.4 pounds per horsepower. On the track, the automatic was less adept, sometimes shifting at inopportune moments.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
Outside, the C43 is styled with racy but tastefully done front and rear ground effects and side skirts. Most drivers found the C43’s stiffly padded sport seat comfortable and supportive, but only after a few minutes of trial-and-error fussing with its inscrutable thigh-, lumbar-, and lateral-support adjustment switches. The steering wheel’s upper spokes are, unfortunately, right where your hands want to grip the rim. The rear seats were the most comfortable and accessible in this group.
The C43’s price goes down the hardest. It begins at $54,651, and our car’s metallic paint, rain-sensing wipers, and xenon headlamps pushed it to $56,548. That includes Mercedes’ fine stability-control and brake-assist systems, but it doesn’t include a CD player.
The Verdict: AMG rediscovers the 1960s Detroit muscle car.
In spite of its muscle-bound suspension, this C43 remains one of the most enjoyable Mercedes sedans to drive. Were it $10,000 cheaper, it would have been more in the running in this group.
1999 Mercedes-Benz C43 AMG302-hp V-8, 5-speed automatic, 3454 lbBase/as-tested price: $54,651/$56,548C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.1 sec1/4 mile: 14.6 @ 99 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 159 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 gC/D observed fuel economy: 19 mpg
View Photos
Jim CaiozzoCar and Driver
Third Place: Saab 9-3 Viggen
After our testers had their first experience with the Saab 9-3 Viggen’s balky shifter, driveline lash, and unnerving torque steer, they each responded with the same, “Uh-oh.” But 9-3s grow on you, as we discovered in our 25K-sedan comparison test last spring. The Viggen is the fastest 9-3 yet, and its increased power brings into sharper focus the 9-3’s quirky and even contradictory appeal.
Highs: Hatchback versatility; nimble, throw-it-around handling; low base price.
The Saab has the humblest genes in this group. It descends from the Saab 900, circa 1994-98, which was developed from the Opel Vectra, a moderately priced European sedan. Coincidentally perhaps, our Viggen, at $39,048, was the least-expensive car here. The modest origins help explain the Viggen’s unseemly chassis flex over rougher roads that the other cars can take in stride. It also explains this car’s front-wheel drive, a layout that’s less than ideal for a performance car. You’re reminded of this every time you accelerate with any authority because the car strays from its intended path. It’s what we call torque steer, and the Viggen may have the worst case of it we can remember.
Its wheel-wagging torque steer isn’t surprising, given the Viggen’s powerful engine: a turbocharged and intercooled 2.3-liter four-cylinder that makes 225 horsepower and 252 pound-feet of torque. Those figures are achieved with lots of boost-20 psi, to be exact—that surges on and off, lending to the throttle a curiously elastic response. Imprecision is sprinkled throughout the driveline. The shifter balks when rushed, feeling as if it were connected to the transmission via long rubber rods. Driveline lash is noticeable, made worse by a stiff clutch that engages within the last inch or so of travel.
View Photos
Jim CaiozzoCar and Driver
These factors make it harder to extract speed from the Viggen. It was last to 60 mph at 6.5 seconds, despite a power-to-weight ratio that’s between the BMW’s and Audi’s. Its 1:24.1 lap time at Nelson Ledges was the slowest of the four. The Saab also brought up the rear in braking and skidpad grip, although not by much, stopping from 70 mph in 172 feet and generating 0.82g. So on paper, this is the runt of the litter.
Lows: Sloppy clutch and shifter, chassis flex, torque steer that verges on the ridiculous.
But not on the road. The Saab is the lightest car of the group, and it drives like it. This is a nimble car—note its comparo-leading 66.3-mph speed through the emergency lane change. The steering maintains good path accuracy, allowing you to lob the Saab hard into corners. Its revised suspension is stiff-riding, yet the body rolls and bounces too much. It never loses its composure, however, and the brakes are forgiving. You can overcome the driveline’s foibles with practice, a challenge that some drivers found stimulating. “One of the more exciting cars in the bunch, but not always for the right reasons,” wrote a test driver.
Most found the standard power driver’s seat supportive without being confining. The rear seat is comfortable for two adults. This is the only competitor here that has a hatchback, and the seats split-fold forward, making the Saab tops in versatility. Aside from its Lightning Blue paint, the Viggen package includes a drag-reducing rear spoiler and sharp-looking thin-spoked alloy wheels.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
This car is a good value, with a base price that includes standard headlamp washers, keyless remote entry with alarm, and a power sunroof. It’s quite rare—just 400 will be built this year—but convertible and five-door models are on the way. It’s economical, too, turning in an impressive 22 mpg—best in the group by 1 to 3 mpg—with us.
The Verdict: An exciting drive, but not for all the right reasons.
The 9-3 Viggen is truly an acquired taste. Work past its peculiarities, and it can be quite a ride. Having said that, we also don’t think you should have to work past anything in a modern performance sedan.
1999 Saab 9-3 Viggen225-hp inline-4, 5-speed manual, 3090 lbBase/as-tested price: $38,465/$39,048C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.5 sec1/4 mile: 15.0 @ 95 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 172 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 gC/D observed fuel economy: 19 mpg
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
Second Place: BMW M3
This car may be the most decorated soldier in the history of Car and Driver. The current BMW M3 has been a 10Best car every year since it was introduced in ’95. It won our “Best-Handling Car for More Than $30,000” shootout in 1997 among some superstars, and it’s won every C/D comparison test it’s ever entered. That unparalleled string of victories ends here, but the M3 went down swinging.
Highs: Punchy, sweet in-line six; peerless handling dynamics with right-now reflexes; stout structure.
This car remains a benchmark of performance-car handling. Its steering is sensitive, linear, and intuitive right up to the tires’ traction limits. The suspension refuses to transmit breaks in the pavement and takes on depressions and bumps without upsetting the driver’s cornering line. The ride is firm enough to let your keister monitor what’s going on underneath, but not to the point of harshness. Unlike the other cars, the M3 dutifully telegraphs the moves of the rear tires as well as the fronts.
The driveline is more perfection. BMW’s DOHC 240-hp, 3.2-liter six loves being wound to its 6500-rpm redline. Its song is sweet all the way there. It offers right-now torque, regardless of rpm level. The transmission, with its tightly defined shifter throws and silky clutch takeup, is the most cooperative of the group.
Precision is the M3’s hole card. “Everything feels so tight, so buttoned down, and so immediate in this car,” wrote one tester. “There’s no slack in the controls or the responses, from the give of the leather seat to how quickly revs die when you stab the clutch.” There is, however, some rubber-banding in the driveline at traffic-jam speeds that requires attention to avoid. And this car could use a sixth gear. At 80 mph, the engine revs urgently at 3600 rpm as if straining at its leash, waiting to be cut loose with a wide-open throttle.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
Somehow, the power and the grip seemed slightly diminished on this particular M3 relative to others we’ve tested. The 0-to-60-mph sprint took 6.0 seconds—a half-second slower than the last M3 we clocked. Roadholding was down by 0.03 g to 0.84, and the braking distance from 70 mph was poorer by 15 feet, at 167. Our test car’s tires were Michelin Pilot Sports, which felt softer than the Pilot SXs on previous M3s. And then the M3 went out and turned the fastest lap at Nelson Ledges: 1:21.0!
Everything ages, and so has the M3. This is the only car in this pricey pack whose steering wheel neither tilts nor telescopes. The hard plastic on the dash, doors, and center console seems conspicuously cheap now. We’re starting to notice that the high cowl in fact truncates the outward view. The ergonomics need improvement—the cruise-control lever is hidden low behind the steering wheel.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
Other features need to be added. The M3 is the only one of our racehorses without keyless entry, power seats, heated seats, headlamp washers, rear fog lamps, and floor mats. Nonetheless, its $43,070 as-tested price is the second most expensive of the four cars here.
When viewed against the other cars’ interiors, the M3’s feels cramped. Legroom is the most exiguous, front and rear, and the trunk holds just nine cubic feet, making it the minimalist of the four. The rear seat is the most difficult to get in to, and it’s the least roomy, at least two cubic feet shy of the others in volume. The M3’s sport seat, standard on two-door models, offered ample support for hard driving. But drivers of more substantial girth found it confining.
The Verdict: BMW’s superb sports sedan is finally toppled in a C/D comparison test, but a new version is just around the corner.
Things may change when a new M3, based on the new E46 3-series, arrives next year. The BMW before you here may have lost its perpetual place on our hot-sedan podium, but its score of 93 is testimony to its greatness. If driving fast is your foremost priority, however, the M3 will remain at the top of your list.
1999 BMW M3240-hp inline-6, 5-speed manual, 3230 lbBase/as-tested price: $40,526/$43,070C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.0 sec1/4 mile: 14.6 @ 95 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 167 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.84 gC/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
First Place: Audi S4 Quattro
Our ideal exclusive sports sedan would be more than just quick. It would be polished and accomplished on all kinds of roads—a roads scholar, if you will—yet would be willing to play, and play hard, when asked. It would be versatile—able to haul adults as well as charge hard—and secure in all kinds of weather. It would be as easy on the wallet as on the eyes. Okay, forget that—at least it would be loaded with features.
We might as well be describing Audi’s new S4.
Highs: Mannerly but powerful twin-turbo six, four-wheel-drive traction, smooth ride, long list of features.
It’s certainly fast. Under the hood is a version of Audi’s 30-valve V-6, debored to 2.7 liters and fed by twin turbochargers and intercoolers to whip up 250 hp at 5800 rpm. Behind it is a six-speed manual transmission (a Tiptronic “manumatic” is optional) driving all four wheels. Rev the six-cylinder engine to 5000 rpm in first gear, dump the clutch, and the Audi surges forward with real authority, zipping to 60 mph in 5.6 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 14.2 seconds, quickest of the bunch. Only the Mercedes accelerates harder—after the quarter-mile, and not by much. Our S4 continued to a steamy 157 mph (although Audi insists production models will be limited to 143 mph. Bummer.)
On the minus side, however, the S4’s roadholding at 0.83 g and stopping ability from 70 mph at 169 feet are in the middle of this tight pack. And its 62.2-mph emergency-lane-change speed is worst of the group, but only by 0.8 mph.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
As a result, this car isn’t as sporting as the M3. The six-speed doesn’t shift as precisely, and the engine revs more quietly. Its handling isn’t as intuitive. The steering is a tad numb on-center, working through the S4’s four-link front suspension. But the Audi is as dependable and tenacious at the limit as the M3, and its body control is arguably superior. The S4 has the best ride of our entrants, made crystal clear on Pennsylvania’s rutted Route 666.
What the S4 Quattro seemed to lack in cornering grip at Nelson Ledges it made up for with its standard four-wheel drive, which allowed us to get back on the throttle earlier when exiting corners. It weighs 3618 pounds—the heaviest car here—and despite a last-place 14.5 horsepower-to-weight ratio, it managed to lap the track in 1:22.6, second to the BMW.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
At the track, we would have preferred more lateral support from the S4’s seats. Otherwise, we found them as accommodating as those in the Mercedes and easier to adjust. Choose the optional sunroof, and headroom gets tight up front. The rear seats can’t match those of the Mercedes or Saab for roominess, but they’re comfortable for two on long trips.
The ergonomics are respectable. The three-spoke steering wheel falls to hand perfectly, an adjustable front armrest is included, and heel-and-toeing is a cinch. The Audi/Bose stereo is above the climate controls, where it belongs, and it’s been redesigned with a larger faceplate.
View Photos
JIM CAIOZZOCar and Driver
Prices haven’t been set yet, but Audi hints the S4 Quattro will nose in under the M3’s $40,526 base price. With the options on our car—including a sunroof, heated seats, auto-dimming mirrors, and a CD changer (as well as an in-dash player)—it would likely come in at about $42,000. That’s not easy on the wallet, but this is a very well-equipped car. Safety features such as a curtain-style head airbag for both front and rear passengers and four-wheel-drive security can’t be ignored, either.
It takes a sharp eye to distinguish the S4 from the A4. Aside from badges and larger 17-inch alloy wheels, the S4 gets a revised front bumper with six gaping air intakes. The look is subtle. In optional black or silver, the S4 would be a stealth lover’s dream.
The Verdict: A technological tour de force that’s fast and practical, with a price that’s easy to justify.
Limited-edition cars often have limited appeal, but not this Audi. It’s fast, fun-to-drive, practical, and an excellent value. It’s also good enough to topple BMW’s M3 in a comparison test, which is saying something. If that finishing order changes when the new M3 arrives next year, you’ll be the first to know.
2000 Audi S4 Quatttro250-hp V-6, 6-speed manual, 3618 lbBase/as-tested price (est.): $39,000/$42,000C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 5.6 sec1/4 mile: 14.2 @ 98 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 169 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.83 gC/D observed fuel economy: 19 mpg
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More
From the May 1994 issue of Car and Driver.
Have you wondered: What sports car would the road testers keep poised behind their own garage doors, on 10-second alert, gassed and gleaming, ready to light the burner and blur the pavement on those occasional sorties of the utmost therapeutic importance?
Hey, road testers have fantasy lives, too.
HIGHS: The jet-fighter view, the engine’s grizzly growl, the way the controls turn small motions of your feet and hands into large g-forces.
And if the automatic teller were ever to go Robin Hood on us, the great sucking sound you’d hear would be a heartwarming number of Acura NSXs being drawn toward Editorial Headquarters. The testers of this magazine are of one mind about the NSX, so much so that we can finish each other’s sentences.
Revisit the 1991 Acura NSX
1991-2005 Acura NSX Buyer’s Guide
“The low, forward, cockpit is exhilarating . . . like riding in the head of an arrow.”
“It’s so precise in its responses . . . as if it were hard-wired into my cerebellum.”
“It’s exotic and rare . . . but it doesn’t have to prove it by beating me up.”
“A breakthrough sports car . . . now in its fourth year and still at the cutting edge.”
We C/D testers are unanimous: the NSX is our top choice for pure driving pleasure. Yet despite our enjoyment of its moves and our admiration for the all-aluminum construction that puts it on the good side of the F=ma equation, the NSX remains widely misunderstood, neither coveted nor respected in fair proportion to the joy it delivers.
View Photos
DAVID DEWHURST
Why is that?
For one thing, there’s no other high-performance car on the planet that’s so poorly described by its test-track numbers. It’s fast—zero to 60 in 5.2 seconds, quarter-mile in 13.7 seconds at 104 mph, top end of 162 mph. It stops—170 feet from 70 mph, with very good control from its four-channel anti-lock brakes. It turns—0.93 g, with a mild understeering balance.
Fast, but not a record setter. Several other exotics have more power and put more rubber on the road. But remember that these are test-track numbers, limits-of-the-envelope readings obtained with the driver at full alert and plenty of runoff room to catch the histrionics.
Track numbers say nothing about usable performance. Exotics are notoriously tricky to drive, and street-usable performance is typically well below the track numbers. Except for the NSX. This machine is so honest and predictable in its responses that most of its track performance is also useful performance. Out in the world, the NSX’s no-sweat capabilities top the charts.
LOWS: At night, the green traction control “on” idiot light reflects in the windshield.
Also against the NSX is the perception that it lacks intensity. There’s a half-truth here. “For a quick blast, the Ferrari F40 is more fun. But in a half hour I’m done with it,” says one of our crew. The NSX, on the other hand, is a splendid partner for a quickie and we’re never done with it. We would drive it every day. We’d happily commute in it. In the quest for perfection, Honda is used to playing in a tougher league. It holds itself to higher standards. One example: Despite the NSX’s speed, it’s not a gas guzzler, not even close. On one recent 713-mile trip, we logged 25.5 mpg. Another example: to reduce transmission noise, the 1994 NSX has re-contoured gear teeth.
Uh, what noise? We never heard it.
How much intensity can you stand? Recall that a little bit of Clyde Barrow was all most folks could stand. The usual exotic-car intensity comes from noise—shrieks and whines that are briefly amusing but quickly fray the nerves—or recidivist behavior that requires the driver’s full attention just to complete ordinary moves. You may have noticed that every test of the red Italian in the last 30 years complains about the shifter. And if it didn’t, it should have. True, such idiosyncrasies make vivid cars, but vivid is not the same as precise and attuned. It’s not as satisfying either.
View Photos
DAVID DEWHURST
The NSX is the most precise and attuned mid-engined machine we’ve ever driven. No big deal. Just the everyday story of the Honda Motor Company playing in the tough league. Remember, Honda satisfies millions of customers every year who expect the seats to fit them, no matter their shape, expect to see the instruments without dodging their gaze around the wheel rim, expect the lever to snick into the next gear while they pay zero attention to the process.
Imagine a mid-engined sportster with every ergonomic detail as correct as in an Accord. It’s simply never been done before. The NSX starts from that level. Then it excels. The seats have only two adjustments, fore-and-aft and seat-back angle. But they fit our long guys and our short guys, our wide guys and our lean guys, and they augment their lateral support with padding at the shoulders. So the side forces are broadly distributed.
VERDICT: The highest and best use of aluminum for civilian purposes.
The brakes are so unsquishy you’d think you stepped on a rock instead of a pedal. The clutch is Honda easy, thanks to its twin-disc design.
Like all wide-tired cars without power steering, turning effort is high. Until the tires begin to roll. Then the workout fades to amazing precision. You get feedback without kickback. Most staffers mention the steering in their first paragraph of NSX superlatives.
They exclaim over the view out the windshield too. Honda designers worked to a very specific motif when they drew up this car—the F-16 fighter jet. They imagined the panorama that opens to the pilot, out through the bubble canopy and over the drooping nose. They tried for that same sensation in the NSX. Oh, yes; oh, yes. An F-16 for the road.
David DewhurstCar and Driver
The black roof is part of the theme. All NSXs, except for some of the dark green ones starting this model year, have black roofs. Most mid-engined coupes have the roof integrated into the basic architecture: they look like coupes. But F-16s show you a fuselage trailing into an empennage. The canopy is transparent and not obvious at first glance. The NSX has a short roof far forward, with narrow, sloping pillars. And it’s painted black. It hides from your eyes. The canopy look. Inside, you get the canopy feeling too, with an unmatched view in all directions. It’s uplifting, exhilarating, liberating.
Liberating. Uh, not a term we’d use for other exotics, yet it applies perfectly to the NSX. Most exotics are blind toward the rear quarters, a source of unease in traffic. And most force the driver into an uneasy position, with awkward reaches and disadvantageous leverages on the controls. Not so the NSX. It simply fits, snugly, intimately, appropriately, from the hips on down, yet it seems to widen above the tunnel, above the armrests, to give plenty of elbowroom, a sense of spaciousness, room to work.
View Photos
DAVID DEWHURSTCar and Driver
And it gives you the tools to work, to perform surgery on the road. The steering cuts so accurately. The torque comes in so broadly, accompanied by the sound of precision sewing machinery, turning to a growl in the midrange, revealing itself to be a grizzly as the VTEC switches to the high-speed cam profiles at full-throttle 5800 rpm. Talk about liberation. Allowed is 8000; enjoyed is 8000. Those titanium connecting rods aren’t back there for the weight distribution.
Still, power is not the centerpiece of this car. We’re back to liberation again. This car is about motion, about translating driver talent directly into g-forces. You guide the steering. You caress the pedals. You do the right things. And it does the right things. Yes, you can throw it around and end up throwing it away. But it’s more tolerant of uneducated inputs—of abrupt lifts off the power or stab of the brakes—than any other exotic we’ve met.
How, exactly, does it handle? Great. Braking into turns very late, and very deep, is a move for the postgraduate. It puts the nose down, loads the outside front, and makes the tail light. Do it wrong and you’ll spin bigger than the Supercollider. The NSX will go deeper than we will.
DAVID DEWHURSTCar and Driver
Early NSXs earned a reputation for rapid tire wear, particularly at the rear. Honda specified lots of rear-wheel toe-in to keep the tail from stepping out, 6mm total. That was reduced to 4mm starting with the 1993 models. Stability is still fine, we think. But tire wear is probably a trade-off in the design of this car. The Treadwear Grade number on the sidewall is 120, the lowest we’ve seen on an original-equipment tire, and suggests a tire life two-thirds that of a Corvette tire labeled 180.
The only significant visual change for 1994 is wheels one inch taller and a half-inch wider at all corners—7.0 by 16 inches in front, 8.5 by 17 in back, with 215/45 and 245/40 Z-rated tires. Red, black, and white exterior colors are continued, a new dark green replaces silver.
Price is up, to $77 ,265 for the base car, including destination charge and luxury tax. An awkward place—too expensive for most buyers, too cheap to be regarded as truly precious. On the usual exotic-car scale that equates preciousness with rarity, the NSX is a terrible misfit. Honda built a special factory for this car. It wants to push out 25 a day to recoup its investment. What the NSX offers, instead of rarity, is the detail refinement in both engineering and manufacturing that only a large, top-line carmaker can bring. Consider: In the Initial Quality Survey from J.D. Power & Associates, the NSX was found to have 71 defects per 100 cars in 1991 ,57 in 1992 (although the sample size was too small this year to be statistically certain). For the same years, Lexus scored 55 and 73, Mercedes scored 91 and 127. Industry average in 1992 was 125. Clearly the NSX is well built in a way that expensive sports cars usually aren’t.
The NSX will never be rare. But it works beautifully, which is more precious to us.
Specifications
Specifications
1994 Acura NSX
VEHICLE TYPE mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE AS TESTED $77,355
ENGINE TYPE DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement 182 in3, 2977 cm3Power 270 hp @ 7100 rpmTorque 210 lb-ft @ 5300 rpm
TRANSMISSION 5-speed
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 99.6 inLength: 174.2 inWidth: 71.3 inHeight: 46.1 inCurb weight: 3030 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 5.2 sec100 mph: 12.7 sec130 mph: 23.2 secRolling start, 5–60 mph: 5.6 secTop gear, 30–50 mph: 7.1 secTop gear, 50–70 mph: 7.2 sec¼-mile: 13.7 sec @ 104 mphTop speed (drag limited): 162 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 170 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.93 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY Observed: 25 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY City/highway: 19/24 mpg
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More
From the June 1987 Issue of Car and Driver. “What is this thang? A Toyota?”“No,” we said, “it’s a Range Rover. It’s sort of like an air-conditioned dune buggy for people who drink bottled water and get expensive haircuts.”“You sure? It looks like a Toyota.”“Positive. You could buy three Toyotas for the price of this […] More
From the February 1993 issue of Car and Driver. Mazda’s easy-to-live-with Miata might have redefined the small convertible sports-car market, but it didn’t kill off the eccentric little convertible with—to put it delicately—a bit more character. MGs, Triumphs, and AustinHealeys, for example, never linger long in the used-car classifieds. And sales remain steady for Alfa […] More
There’s a lot to like underneath the Lexus RC F’s rather, er, distinctive bodywork. As a luxury muscle coupe with a naturally aspirated V-8 for a heart, it is still impressively high tech, sumptuously appointed for everyday comfort, and nicely composed when pushed hard. Lexus dialed up the RC F’s excitement for 2020 with a […] More
From the October 1991 issue of Car and Driver. One of our road warriors said, “Lexus called—your bullet is ready.” More than ready, as any numbnoggin can see. On the Lexus LS400 four door, “LS” stands for “Luxury Sedan”; “SC” stands for the new “Sports Coupe.” But who needs the help? Your eyes wrap around […] More
