Car Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

From the December 2023 issue of Car and Driver.CORRECTION 11/1/23: This story has been updated to state that the EV9 isn’t the fastest-charging EV we’ve ever tested; the Genesis Electrified GV70 has charged quicker. We’d imagine that most car designers don’t get too excited when they’re assigned to a new three-row SUV. There’s only so much you can do with a two-box shape, and the segment is so competitive that it pays to play it safe rather than do something entirely novel. But a few years ago, Kia proved all of that wrong with the Telluride, and now the Korean automaker is doing it again with the new electric EV9.Whether you view it from 100 yards away or up close, the EV9 makes a big impression. You can tell that the people who worked on this vehicle—designers and engineers alike—were up to the challenge of executing a battery-powered take on the family crossovers that have become so popular in driveways across the nation.HIGHS: Strong performance, quick charging, compelling design inside and out.Built on Hyundai Motor Group’s top-notch Electric Global Modular Platform (E-GMP), the EV9 has proportions that are radically different from the Telluride’s, even though it gives off a somewhat similar boxy vibe. The wheelbase is 122.0 inches long, nearly eight inches longer than the Telluride’s, and the wheels are pushed to the corners, giving the EV9 a far more dramatic stance. The headlights, which combine a row of dot-style LEDs with swooshes of LED accent lights, are almost cyborgian, and the vertically oriented, intricately detailed taillights look like they belong on some sort of science-fiction spacecraft.The attention to detail inside is even more impressive. Although the EV9 is not a luxury utility vehicle, no one seems to have told the people who selected the materials in our fully loaded GT-Line test car. The faux leather is soft, the dashboard incorporates a variety of attractive finishes, and there are innovative touches, such as trampoline-style mesh front-seat headrests that are far more plush than you’d expect from looking at them. Yes, there are screens galore, including a 12.3-inch infotainment screen and digital instrument cluster. They are easy to navigate, and there are enough physical buttons and knobs to make the interface accessible. Our only real UX annoyance was the placement of the climate-control screen, which the steering wheel obscures.More on the EV9This being a family-oriented vehicle, the environs aft of the driver and passenger are especially important, and they don’t disappoint. The second-row captain’s chairs are not only heated and ventilated but also available with power adjustability and extendable footrests. The rear doors are wide, easing entry, and Kia even sweated the little stuff such as the roof-mounted air vents, which are surrounded by attractive bezels. While the third row of seats isn’t quite as generously sized as some of the largest gasoline-powered three-row models, the bottom cushion is placed at an appropriate height and angle for adults to sit comfortably, making this a reasonable place to sit for short periods.This level of design and packaging aptitude isn’t surprising, given the success of the Telluride, and neither is the EV9’s strong performance, considering that the 10Best-winning Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Kia EV6 share the EV9’s E-GMP platform. There’s a relatively wide range of powertrain configurations available, starting with a single-motor, rear-wheel-drive setup and a 76.1-kWh battery pack. We tested the top-of-the-line dual-motor, all-wheel-drive model, in which front and rear motors combine for 379 horsepower and 516 pound-feet of torque. The juice comes from a 99.8-kWh battery pack, a greater capacity than what we’ve seen in any of the other E-GMP vehicles thus far.LOWS: Ambitious pricing, some head toss, awkwardly placed HVAC controls.This big lithium-ion pack weighs a claimed 1249 pounds, and the EV9 tips the scales at a prodigious 5839 pounds—1349 more than the last Telluride we tested. But the electric motors have more power and torque than the Telluride’s 291-hp 3.8-liter V-6, and in terms of acceleration, they more than make up for the extra weight. The dual-motor EV9 lunges to 60 mph in just 4.5 seconds and passes through the quarter-mile in 13.3 seconds at 101 mph. Those are quick numbers regardless of segment, and the EV9’s instantaneous responses to jabs of the accelerator make the Telluride—which gets to 60 mph more than two seconds slower—feel positively sluggish in comparison.Kia has also done a good job of ensuring that the extra weight doesn’t dull the EV9’s dynamic qualities. It’s fitted with 285-mm-wide Hankook Ion Evo AS SUV all-season tires, which are considerably wider than the Telluride’s 245s, and larger brake rotors. The results speak for themselves: The EV9 gripped around our skidpad to the tune of 0.87 g and stopped from 70 mph in 184 feet, numbers that would have been more than competitive in our recent comparison test of gasoline three-row SUVs. Even better, the EV9 is satisfying to steer, with good weighting from the helm and nicely controlled body motions. We did notice a bit of head toss on the roughest roads, but overall the ride quality is good, and responses to changes in direction are linear if not especially eager.At 70 mph, the EV9 registers a hushed 67 decibels. It’s a pleasant highway cruiser, although cruising range is just about the only objective metric where the EV9 doesn’t beat the Telluride. In our 75-mph highway range test, the EV9 posted a reasonable 240-mile result, a bit short of the EPA’s estimate of 270 miles. Realistically, the EV9 will deliver less than that on road trips if it’s loaded with family members and stuff—we could fit five carry-on bags behind the third row and 17 with the third row folded, by the way—which means you’ll be stopping to recharge every few hours.Fortunately, the EV9’s electrical architecture is set up to replenish the battery quickly. At a 350-kW DC fast-charger, we watched it gain 100 miles of range on the display in just 13 minutes and measured an average charging speed of 139 kilowatts between a 10 and 90 percent state of charge—among the highest average of any EV we’ve ever tested. And if you desire more outright range, there is a single-motor configuration that has the big battery and a 304-mile EPA range. However, its paltry 201 horsepower will likely result in slow acceleration times.More Hyundai-Kia EVsAs the EV9 is in the first wave of three-row electric SUVs to enter the mainstream market, its price will be a crucial factor for convincing families to switch to running electrons. The EV9 starts off right about where the Telluride tops out, at $56,395 for the rear-drive, small-battery model. Unsurprisingly, our significantly more powerful and significantly better-equipped GT-Line is a whole lot more than that, with an opening price of $75,395. That’s a lot to ask when so many compelling gas-powered alternatives exist for less coin, but the EV9 looks great inside and out and offers enough of a performance advantage to feel worth that. Those who do take the leap won’t be disappointed.VERDICT: Kia shows that three-row SUVs, too, can benefit greatly from the switch to electricity.CounterpointsTalk about playing to your strengths. Kia takes the two things it does best—three-row SUVs and electric vehicles—and joins them together in the EV9. Quiet and quick power delivery make sense for a family vehicle, and the EV9 has both. Its third row is grown-up friendly, its hatch is cargo friendly, and its front rows are full of features that make driving and charging more comfortable. Like Kia did with the Telluride, the brand’s three-row EV will have everyone else playing catch-up. —Elana ScherrIs it time to update my go-to Kia Telluride recommendation for three-row-SUV buyers? Passenger space in the EV9 is virtually identical; the biggest differences are third-row headroom (the EV9 has more) and hip room (the EV9 has less). Sure, the EV9 has a plush interior and luxe features, such as optional power second-row seats with leg rests, but it can also drive ponderously with an occasional wallow induced by its more than 1300 extra pounds. But it’s the EV9’s higher price and today’s imperfect charging network that keep me recommending Tellurides. —Dave VanderWerpSpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Kia EV9Vehicle Type: front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 6-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested (C/D est.): $75,395/$77,500 
POWERTRAINFront Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 189 hp, 258 lb-ft Rear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 189 hp, 258 lb-ft Combined Power: 379 hpCombined Torque: 516 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 99.8 kWhOnboard Charger: 10.9 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 215 kWTransmissions: direct-drive
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 14.2-in vented disc/13.6-in vented discTires: Hankook Ion Evo AS SUV285/45R-21 113V M+S K
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 122.0 inLength: 197.4 inWidth: 77.9 inHeight: 70.1 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 58/58/35 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/M/R: 82/44/20 ft3Curb Weight: 5839 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.5 sec100 mph: 13.0 sec1/4-Mile: 13.3 sec @ 101 mph120 mph: 21.3 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 4.7 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 1.9 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 2.9 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 126 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 184 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 365 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.87 g  
C/D FUEL ECONOMY AND CHARGING
Observed: 79 MPGe75-mph Highway Driving: 76 MPGe75-mph Highway Range: 240 miAverage DC Fast-Charge Rate, 10–90%: 139 kWDC Fast-Charge Time, 10–90%: 37 min 
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined: 80 MPGeRange: 270 mi
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDSenior EditorDespite being raised on a steady diet of base-model Hondas and Toyotas—or perhaps because of it—Joey Capparella nonetheless cultivated an obsession for the automotive industry throughout his childhood in Nashville, Tennessee. He found a way to write about cars for the school newspaper during his college years at Rice University, which eventually led him to move to Ann Arbor, Michigan, for his first professional auto-writing gig at Automobile Magazine. He has been part of the Car and Driver team since 2016 and now lives in New York City.   More

From the November 2023 issue of Car and Driver.Mercedes’s EQS sedan seeks to be the S-class of electric vehicles, but it feels alien and lifeless compared with the brand’s beloved flagship. The new-for-2023 plug-in-hybrid Mercedes-Benz S580e, however, steps confidently into the future while preserving the Sonderklasse’s past and does so with few compromises.HIGHS: Palpable prestige, generous electric range, quick recharging. The PHEV S-class pairs a turbocharged 3.0-liter inline-six with an electric motor. Exceeding its 46-mile EPA range estimate, it traveled 58 miles on electricity alone in our 75-mph range test—that’s greater than any other PHEV we’ve tested (unless you count the BMW i3 with a range extender; you shouldn’t).Of course, the electric EQS goes farther, but range anxiety remains an issue on long trips. The S580e avoids those worries by offering gas fill-ups along with DC fast-charging capability, a rarity among plug-in hybrids. Mercedes claims the optional 60-kW charging hardware ($500) takes the 22.7-kWh battery from 10 to 80 percent in 20 minutes.The faster charging capability and numerous add-ons meant our S580e cost nearly $140,000 as tested. Still, its $123,700 base price undercuts the V-8-powered S580 by $1450 and the EQS580 by $3400. LOWS: Uneven brake-pedal response, irksome touch buttons, $16K upcharge for rear-seat climate controls.The S580e’s cabin is properly palatial, with headrest pillows that rival Ambien. The $3800 Warmth & Comfort package heats and ventilates the rear seats yet weirdly leaves riders back there without climate controls. Rear-seat rheostats require the $16,100 Executive Line package. We also scoffed at the second row’s two cupholders, which we struggled to release from the center armrest. The touch controls on the steering wheel are finicky, but mercifully, the EQS’s giant Hyperscreen isn’t here; its absence leaves space for upscale dash trim commensurate with the sedan’s price. The hybrid’s interior registered a hushed 64 decibels during 70-mph cruising, matching the EQS580.The S580e’s plug-in powertrain doesn’t make a peep as the car wafts down the interstate in Electric mode. Its e-motor provides an instantaneous 354 pound-feet of thrust, so it helps the Benz easily keep pace with traffic without waking the straight-six. The hybrid system’s combined 510 horsepower and 553 pound-feet push this 5606-pound all-wheel-drive limo to 60 mph in a tidy 4.2 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 12.6 ticks at 112 mph.Related StoryA cushy ride and fluid body motions make the luxury mission clear, and thanks to available rear-axle steering, the S580e is surprisingly nimble. Its lone dynamic flaw is a nonlinear brake pedal that is a plague in stop-and-go traffic, an issue in the EQS as well. Given that the plug-in S-class is considerably more prestigious and stylish, with enough real-world electric range to handle daily commutes, it essentially renders Mercedes’s equivalent EV irrelevant.VERDICT: The perfect blend of electromobility and S-class nobility.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Mercedes-Benz S580e PHEVVehicle Type: front-engine, front-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $123,700/$139,900
POWERTRAIN
Turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter inline-6, 362 hp, 369 lb-ft + AC motor, 148 hp, 354 lb-ft (combined output: 510 hp, 553 lb-ft; 22.7-kWh lithium-ion battery pack)Transmission: 9-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: multilink/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 14.5-in vented disc/14.1-in vented discTires: Hankook Ventus S1 Noble 2 HRSF: 255/40R-20 101H M+S Extra Load MOE-S RunflatR: 285/35R-20 104H M+S Extra Load MOE-S Runflat
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 126.6 inLength: 208.2 inWidth: 76.9 inHeight: 59.2 inTrunk Volume: 13 ft3Curb Weight: 5606 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.2 sec100 mph: 10.1 sec1/4-Mile: 12.6 sec @ 112 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 4.8 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.9 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.2 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 129 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 174 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 366 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.85 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 35 MPGe75-mph Highway Driving, EV/Hybrid mode: 75 MPGe/36 mpg75-mph Highway Range, EV/Hybrid mode: 58/630 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 23/20/29 mpgCombined Gasoline + Electricity: 51 MPGeEV Range: 46 mi
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDSenior EditorEric Stafford’s automobile addiction began before he could walk, and it has fueled his passion to write news, reviews, and more for Car and Driver since 2016. His aspiration growing up was to become a millionaire with a Jay Leno–like car collection. Apparently, getting rich is harder than social-media influencers make it seem, so he avoided financial success entirely to become an automotive journalist and drive new cars for a living. After earning a journalism degree at Central Michigan University and working at a daily newspaper, the years of basically burning money on failed project cars and lemon-flavored jalopies finally paid off when Car and Driver hired him. His garage currently includes a 2010 Acura RDX, a manual ’97 Chevy Camaro Z/28, and a ’90 Honda CRX Si. More

From the September 1991 issue of Car and Driver.The world is watching this car. Let’s face it, when Magic Johnson steps out onto the hardwood, the fans expect to see a performance that no fresh­-faced rookie could hope to deliver. When Tom Clancy publishes a new thriller, folks plan on staying up late with the reading lamp on. When Mick Jagger grabs hold of the mike, you know in your heart that it’s going to be party time. And when the star in the limelight is an all-new BMW 3-series, the weight of expectations hangs heavily indeed. After all, this car has history behind it. We’re talk­ing about the descendant of the fabled 2002, the giant-killer sedan that inspired a cult of followers and put BMW on the map in the U.S. twenty years ago.HIGHS: The performance of a wing-footed god, an engine that can sing Mozart, German good looks.And don’t forget about how the upward­ly-mobiles made the previous 3-series a must-have trinket in the boom-boom 1980s. The world is watching and waiting for another reason too. Today, showrooms everywhere are bursting with wannabes—­terrific sports sedans eager for a bite of BMW’s glory. The newcomers are mostly Japanese—the Infiniti G20, the Lexus ES250, the Nissan Maxima, the Acura Vigor, to name four—and there are a few American upstarts too, like the Ford Taurus SHO and the Chevy Lumina Z34. And they’re all awfully good. The old 325i, despite constant improvements, was about to become somebody else’s lunch meat. Now for the good news: In an attempt to put some distance between itself and the wannabes, the Neiman-Marcus of sports sedans has gotten serious. No half measures this time around; BMW redesigned the 325i from bumper to bumper, in the process making it both more exciting and more practical. The all-new 325i, which went on sale here in June, has a new chassis with new rear suspension, a new and more pow­erful engine, and a sleek new four-door body (a two-door will arrive early next year) with more interior room and improved aerodynamics. About the only thing not changed is that it’s still rear-drive. Let’s start with the obvious, the parts you can see. The 325i looks good in photos, but not half as stylish as it does in person. Gone forever is the old model’s boxy shape (thank goodness), replaced by slicked-back sheetmetal that says “made in Germany” and delivers a Cd of 0.33. And we can tell you this: People look at this car—a lot.This 325i is still compact, ten inches shorter than a Honda Accord, but it is now reasonably roomy. Its wheelbase is up five inches, and the front wheels have been pushed to the far corners of the chassis, all of which opens up interior room consider­ably. The EPA’s interior-volume figures indicate about six percent more cabin space, but the improvement feels like three times that. The 325i finally qualifies as a passable four-passenger sedan; six-footers can ride in back for long distances. No 3-series has ever been as handsome inside, either. The dash and door panels are tastefully sculptured (the old model’s door trim looked like spruced-up economy-car upholstery). Still, the 325i’s cabin is typi­cally German in its approach to luxury, which is to say restrained. The plastic used on the interior panels and dash is expensive-­looking but unyielding, the seats are park-­bench firm, and there’s no carpeting on the bottom of the door panels. A Lexus ES250’s interior, hardly an example of wretched excess, looks like a New Orleans cathouse by comparison. Nor is there an abundance of labor-­saving devices at your fingertips. Power seats aren’t standard, and neither is a tilt steering wheel—though they will be avail­able later in the model run as part of a spe­cial luxury package. The driver’s window switch lacks the one-touch all-the-way-­down feature you can get in inexpensive cars like the Honda Civic. Any shortage in convenience gear will be quickly forgotten once you take the wheel. There is joy here. The first thing you notice is that the businesslike interior layout works. You can see the clearly marked gauges easily. The driving position is near perfect, and the reach to the steering wheel is just right. All of the stalks, controls, knobs, and buttons are within easy reach and are easy to see (except the electric win­dow switches, which are spread too far apart on the center console). Everything you touch in the cabin sends a single message back to your brain: “quali­ty.” Well, make that almost everything you touch. The lone exception to the cabin’s feelgood message is the glove box—which, unlike the huge storage compartments in previous Bimmers, is now a small crevice with a flimsy, ill-fitting plastic door. LOWS: The eye daggers aimed your way by those who still associate BMWs with yuppie excess.The 325i drives so well, any sort of glove-box remorse vanishes before you’ve gone a block. Once again, the overriding impression is quality—the savory hum of the machinery, the smooth-as-silk feel of the major controls, the sensory reward of sure-footed handling.The 325i is motivated by the same twin-cam 24-valve 2.5-liter in-line six as the larg­er 525i sedan—and we do mean motivated. The engine makes an impressive 189 hp at 5900 rpm. It’s a peaky motor, the kind you associate more often with sports cars, with maximum torque occurring at 4700 rpm—higher in the rev range than many engines’ horsepower peaks. Which is to say, when you want to go, you have to have about 4000 rpm on the clock or the engine feels drowsy. Keep the revs up and the 325i is a rocket: It takes only 6.9 seconds to get to 60 mph and 15.3 sec­onds to cover the quarter-mile, at which point you are hauling buns to the tune of 91 mph. Not long ago we raved about muscle cars that could go that fast. You get the proper soundtrack as stan­dard equipment, too. The 325i’s engine is a symphony of expensive-sounding whirring and humming, all muted to a whisper for your listening enjoyment. The whirring turns cat-angry when you twist the engine to the 6500-rpm redline, but it never strains. You direct the symphony with a Getrag-­built five-speed manual gearbox and a pro­gressive clutch that make seamless gear-changing as easy as switching TV channels with your remote. A four-speed automatic is available, but if you want the full measure of joy that the engine has to offer, take the five-speed. Speaking of joy, the 325i’s chassis offers plenty in that regard. It cruises com­fortably, soaking up the big swells and thumping over the tar strips. Its steering is crisp and accurate, its standard ABS brakes powerful. The 325i enjoys hustling along twisty, tree-lined roads and feels as sure­footed as a Sherpa—even when you’re cor­nering so hard the passengers are wide-eyed and rigid in their seats. It sets no new stan­dards in handling, but the standards it holds to are plenty high. More 3-series reviews from the archiveThere are, however, a couple of things the 325i should do better. It wanders too much on long, straight stretches of high­way. And it tops out at only 128 mph. The identical car sold in Europe goes 143 mph, but BMW programs the computers of cars bound for America to limit top speed. BMW says only that it’s “worried that U.S. buyers might fit replacement tires with an insufficient speed rating.” Sounds flimsy to us. We think BMW of North America is feeling the cold wind of liability litigation blowing. Understandable, perhaps, in today’s litigious climate. Whatever BMW’s reason for lopping 15 mph off the 325i’s top speed, it has done the rest of the job right. The new small Bimmer feels like fine machinery whether you’re cruising through downtown or whipping along the open road at a full gallop. It’s roomy enough for family-car use and quick enough on its feet to plaster a grin on your face when you go up-tempo on two-lanes. Its twin-cam six emits a lusty cry. And the 325i looks almost as pricey as it is. In short, it has soul. VERDICT: A sports sedan with its priorities straight. BMW has moved the target again.We also think it’s got the legs on the wannabes again. Not by all that much, maybe not for long. But for now, at least, you pay more and you get more. Come to think of it, that’s another thing we’ve learned to expect of BMWs.Expectations confirmed.SpecificationsSpecifications
1992 BMW 325iVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $28,365/$29,900Options: leather upholstery, $1100; metallic paint, $435
ENGINEDOHC 24-valve inline-6, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 152 in3, 2494 cm3Power: 189 hp @ 5900 rpmTorque: 181 lb-ft @ 4700 rpm
TRANSMISSION
5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 11.3-in vented disc/11.0-in discTires: Pirelli P600205/60HR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 106.3 inLength: 174.5 inWidth: 66.9 inHeight: 54.8 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 47/38 ft3Trunk Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight: 3038 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 6.9 sec1/4-Mile: 15.3 sec @ 91 mph100 mph: 19.3 sec120 mph: 33.5 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.1 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 10.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 10.4 secTop Speed: 128 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 178 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.80 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 22 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 18/26 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDDirector, Buyer’s GuideRich Ceppos has evaluated automobiles and automotive technology during a career that has encompassed 10 years at General Motors, two stints at Car and Driver totaling 19 years, and thousands of miles logged in racing cars. He was in music school when he realized what he really wanted to do in life and, somehow, it’s worked out. In between his two C/D postings he served as executive editor of Automobile Magazine; was an executive vice president at Campbell Marketing & Communications; worked in GM’s product-development area; and became publisher of Autoweek. He has raced continuously since college, held SCCA and IMSA pro racing licenses, and has competed in the 24 Hours of Daytona. He currently ministers to a 1999 Miata and a 1965 Corvette convertible and appreciates that none of his younger colleagues have yet uttered “Okay, Boomer” when he tells one of his stories about the crazy old days at C/D. More