Car Reviews

Until now, the Venn diagram circles representing ultra-luxurious four-door grand-touring machines and sports cars with sub-10-second acceleration through the quarter-mile have never touched. Add a third circle representing EVs with over 400 miles of range and you’re in deeply unfathomable territory. Want to make it even more difficult? Let’s up the ante and lower the quarter-mile acceleration bogey to nine seconds flat. That’s ridiculous, right? Nope. Meet the Lucid Air Sapphire.Best Acceleration Ever?Lucid’s claimed performance would make the Sapphire quicker than any car we’ve tested. To see for myself, I ease one through the water box at California’s Sonoma Raceway and line up with the slightly uphill drag strip. With the traction control off and the powertrain set to Track mode’s Dragstrip setting, which unlocks the full 1234 horsepower, I briefly mash the accelerator to spin all four tires to build heat, then back up and do it again. Back in Drive, I creep up to the staging lights that trigger the Christmas tree. With the brake fully depressed, I then floor the accelerator, wait for the lights to approach green, then sidestep the brake.Incredibly, the tires vaguely spin for a few dozen yards, then fully hook up as the car lunges up the track. The sensation of uninterrupted acceleration is ungodly, and when I rip past the finish and climb onto the binders, the in-car GPS readout displays some staggering numbers: 2.2 seconds to 60 mph and a quarter-mile of 9.28 seconds at 153 mph. It’s hard to be disappointed by such epic performance, especially since the shockingly quick Ferrari 296GTB plug-in hybrid we recently tested needed 2.4 seconds to reach 60 mph and finished the quarter in 9.7 seconds at 150 mph. But then I realized the wheelspin signaled a mistake. I had been advised to reengage traction control after the water-box burnouts, but I hadn’t. Back in line for a second run, I repeat the burnout procedure but make sure to reengage traction control before creeping up to the tree. Bam! No hint of wheelspin this time, and the feeling of being shot out of a cannon is even more acute. The timer backs this up with even more outrageous numbers: 60 mph in 1.9 seconds, then 9.05 seconds and 154 mph at the stripe. Later on, as conditions improve, someone else manages 8.95 seconds. We’ll stop short of giving the Sapphire a Major Award just yet because these unofficial numbers were not generated using our usual procedure. We don’t test on a slightly uphill drag strip from a tacky start box on preheated tires fresh from water-box burnouts, and we do publish a two-way average to account for wind.Still. There’s no denying the Sapphire is badass.Setting Sapphire to the Road CourseOn the Sonoma Raceway road-race circuit, a Lucid Air Grand Touring ahead of me slews sideways out of the tighter corners as it puts the power down in clouds of smoke. At the helm is David Lickfold, the chassis and vehicle dynamics director I met when I drove an Air Sapphire prototype some months ago. He’s pushing hard to make sure he’s not holding me up in the more track-worthy Sapphire. It’s not working, as I’m barely fogging the inside of my visor while he’s all arms and elbows dealing with tires beginning to shed slender strips of rubber. He soon waves me past, putting the lead-follow pretext to an end.I’m unsurprised to learn that the Sapphire has a lot more to give, even though the 1234-hp Dragstrip power setting has been dialed back to 767 horsepower in the Endurance track mode that enables consecutive lapping. In between, there’s a 1003-hp Hot Lap setting for a single-lap time attack. The fortified Air devours this technical circuit, which is reminiscent of Virginia International Raceway—where I sampled the prototype—in that it has numerous elevation changes, blind corners, and uncertain crests that can upset a car at the apex. Here, on the very eve of the first customer deliveries, the Sapphire’s three-motor powertrain feels fully dialed in, with none of the traction-management teething issues we experienced on the prototype.In fact, Sonoma’s plunging Carousel is eerily similar to VIR’s Hog Pen final turn, and I’m able to confidently plant my right foot without hesitation as the long corner opens onto a blisteringly fast straight. A few seconds later it’s time to stand on the brakes—massive 10-piston front calipers and carbon-ceramic rotors—to haul the approximately 5400-pound Sapphire down to turn-in speed, then smoothly feed on the power through the hairpin and storm through the esses, tickling the curbing on the way past. Meanwhile, Back in the Real WorldNone of the above would seem remotely possible if you first drove a Sapphire on the street, as it feels utterly at home on the nearby wine country byways, cruising in quiet comfort with the same grace as other Air sedans. There’s nothing hard-edged about how it rides, and the only thing notable about the steering is the ultrasuede covering that connects the driver’s hands to a very appropriate level of feel and effort. The Sapphire’s performance seats that held fast on the circuit are suitably comfortable, and their more aggressive bolstering isn’t anything like a nuisance in more relaxed driving. The 1234-hp Dragstrip and 767-hp Endurance settings used on the track seem like they belong to another world, as the Sapphire also purrs serenely and can deliver a fantastic 427 miles of EPA combined range on the same staggered 20-inch front and 21-inch rear Michelin Pilot Sport 4S performance rubber (custom-tailored with the Cup 2 shoulder compound) that glued it to strip and track alike. Should you need to get past a gawking tourist, however, the Sapphire will oblige with more authority than you can imagine.How It Came to BeThe existence of the tri-motor Sapphire was planned from the start. The Air’s basic chassis stiffness and five-link front, integral-link multilink rear suspension geometry were designed accordingly. The space for three motors was allocated from the get-go, so the Sapphire’s rear trunk volume doesn’t shrink by a single cubic foot. Also, the dual rear-motor upgrade is a ridiculously modular one, with a second unit merely flipped around and mounted nose to nose with the first, with the mechanical differential removed because it’s no longer necessary.Lucid also made the decision to forgo a blended brake pedal, going instead for a divide-and-conquer strategy that uses accelerator lift alone to trigger regeneration. That left the brake engineers free to optimize the hydraulic brakes of all Airs for feel and response, which in turn made implementing the Sapphire’s massively powerful and communicative carbon-ceramic brake system a much more straightforward engineering task. Furthermore, the adaptive Bilstein dampers were initially specified to have the tuning bandwidth to accommodate Sapphire performance, and so the necessary internal shock valving tuning tweaks and adaptive-control software adjustments didn’t force a move to different hardware.Related StoriesBut the same is not true of the stability- and traction-control systems, it seems. The supplier-provided software wasn’t up to the Jekyll-and-Hyde challenge that the Sapphire presented. I wasn’t aware of it at the time, but Lucid was toying with the idea of scrapping the supplier option for the Sapphire in favor of in-house stability- and traction-control software while I was with them at VIR. They had the brainpower to write code for other vehicle systems, so why not this?After this drive, it’s easy to see that that move has paid off mightily. But there’s more to it than that. This illustrates how Lucid’s willingness and confidence to go its own way and leverage its in-house expertise can do great things. We first got this impression when we understood the brilliance of their compact electric motors, batteries, and charge-management systems. Those first Airs offered Chevy Bolt levels of efficiency in a long-wheelbase BMW 7-series-sized luxury EV that delivered unheard-of range and comfort. With the Lucid Air Sapphire, Lucid has brought in that third Venn diagram circle, the one that has Ferrari 296GTB levels of performance (and then some). Damn.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Lucid Air SapphireVehicle Type: front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE

Base: $250,500
POWERTRAIN

Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous ACRear Motors: 2 permanent-magnet synchronous ACCombined Power: 1234 hpCombined Torque: 1430 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 118.0 kWhOnboard Charger: 19.2 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 300 kWTransmissions, F/R: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS

Wheelbase: 116.5 inLength: 197.5 inWidth: 78.5 inHeight: 55.4 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 61/44 ft3Trunk Volume, F/R: 10/22 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 5400 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)

60 mph: 2.0 sec100 mph: 4.0 sec1/4-Mile: 9.1 secTop Speed: 205 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY

Combined/City/Highway: 105/108/101 MPGeRange: 427 miTechnical 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

The forced move to electrification has shaken up the decades-old hierarchy of brands in the automotive business. Many leaders were caught out by the trend and faced internal resistance that made them slow to adapt. It was and is, however, a golden opportunity for new brands and for established players looking to get ahead. In the latter camp is the Hyundai Motor Group, which has turned out a plethora of stellar EVs, including the first-generation Kona Electric. Now Hyundai has comprehensively redesigned its entry-level EV. Although the new Kona Electric is not yet on sale in the U.S., we had a chance to spend a day with it near the Nošovice plant in the Czech Republic, where models destined for European markets will be built.Hyundai makes much ado about the fact that the new Kona was designed as an “electric first.” That may well be, but we find it surprising that you can so easily stuff a conventional powertrain into a vehicle designed to be an EV. In fact, a glance at the new Kona—and the Kona Electric—reveals that the car has not deviated far from its predecessor. Like the previous model, it’s stylish in a playful way. The convoluted lines of the new Kona won’t please Bauhaus-worshipping purists, but the horizontal light bars and the “parametric pixels” that adorn the car set it apart pleasantly from many a dull competitor. Beyond that, the Kona Electric remains a compact, easy-to-park, yet surprisingly spacious crossover.It has become slightly bigger in its second generation—5.7 inches longer and with a 2.3-inch greater wheelbase—which can be a negative in European traffic. But it doesn’t really matter in the U.S., where the new Kona is still on the smaller end of the spectrum. The growth was a specific request of Asian markets, where the Kona often serves as a family’s only vehicle.This time there are two battery options, a standard battery (in the SE) with a capacity of 48.6 kWh and an extended-range battery of 64.8 kWh (in the SEL and Limited). With the larger battery, the Kona Electric is estimated to achieve 260 miles of range (EPA figures aren’t out yet), while the smaller battery is said to be good for just under 200 miles. Whereas the Ioniq 5 and Ioniq 6 models feature an 800-volt architecture, the Kona uses a 400-volt system. Hyundai says that a 100-kW connection can take either battery from 10 to 80 percent in 43 minutes. The onboard charger has been upgraded from a 7.2-kW unit previously to a 10.8-kW one, cutting by a third the time it takes to go from 10 to 100 percent charge on an appropriately powerful 240-volt (Level 2) source.The smaller battery limits output of the same electric motor to 133 hp but delivers an identical 188 pound-feet of torque to the front wheels. Europe gets slightly higher power ratings for both setups. We drove the top-of-the-line model that’s rated at 215 horsepower—for the U.S., SEL and Limited models get 201 horses. The power comes on with a satisfying rush, but as you’d expect, there is no head-snapping acceleration as in the high-powered Ioniq models. We appreciate the fact that brake regen can be adjusted, both manually or automatically, and the Kona Electric comes with a one-pedal driving option that Hyundai calls “i-Pedal.” Whether or not one-pedal driving is your preference, it’s great that the Kona offers it for those who prefer to forget about the brake pedal.As before, the Kona Electric is only available with front-wheel drive. While the previous model struggled with wheelspin during acceleration, traction and stability control now intervene much more effectively. The electric motor operates so quietly that the Kona Electric moves in remarkable silence, aided by a well-isolated body. The suspension—struts up front, a multilink setup in the rear—clearly veers toward the comfortable; there is some body roll and some predictable understeer at the limits. Brake feel is a bit detached but better than a lot of its segment competitors.The interior will make Hyundai drivers feel at ease: The controls are logical and straightforward, even though the navigation system would probably benefit from an update of the graphics. There is plenty of storage, four occupants sit in comfort, and visibility is decent if not great. There is a token “frunk” as well, although at barely 1 cubic foot, it’s a good place to stash charging cables if not much else. The rear luggage compartment is far more generous, at 26 cubic feet (more than six cubic feet larger than before), expandable to 64 cubic feet with the rear seats folded down (an increase of nearly 18 cubic feet).More On the Kona ElectricThe Kona’s bidirectional charging lets you operate your gadgets while on the go. Hyundai can provide over-the-air updates, and the Kona Electric comes with a full suite of assistance systems that now includes a surround-view monitor and Hyundai’s blind-spot view monitor. Even remote parking can be specified, as well as smartphone-as-key functionality.In Europe, all that fun doesn’t come cheap; there, the Kona Electric commands a hefty markup over the very reasonably priced gasoline versions, and it is priced uncomfortably close to the Ioniq 5 and Ioniq 6. (U.S. prices have not yet been released, but we estimate they’ll start around $35,000.) That said, the Kona Electric holds its own among compact EVs. It’s poised to please previous owners—and win over a lot of new ones.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Hyundai Kona ElectricVehicle Type: front-motor, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE (C/D EST)
Base: $35,000
POWERTRAIN
Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 133 or 201 hp, 188 lb-ft Battery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 48.6 or 64.8 kWhOnboard Charger: 10.8 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 100 kWTransmission: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 104.7 inLength: 171.5 inWidth: 71.9 inHeight: 62.0 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 52–55/45 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 64/26 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3500–3700 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 6.7–8.6 sec100 mph: 17.6–19.5 sec1/4-Mile: 15.2–17.1 secTop Speed: 101–107 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 113–122/126–136/101–108 MPGeRange: 197–260 miContributing EditorJens Meiners has covered the auto industry since 1996 and written for Car and Driver for much of that time. He is a juror on the World Car of the Year and International Engine of the Year and founder of German Car of the Year. Jens splits his time between New York and Nuremberg, where he keeps a growing collection of historic cars. More

From the February 1995 issue of Car and Driver.Question: What do a practical hatch­back and a discotheque have in common? Answer: Most Ameri­cans won’t go near them. Now, this riddle would not apply in Europe, where neither disco nor hatch­back became dirty words. Nor does it apply to stateside hipsters, who were never afraid to be seen pulsating to Patrick Hernandez or KC and the Sunshine Band, or driving a CRX, Golf, or GTV6. For those on the A-list, in fact, the hatchback seems to be enjoying a bit of a resurgence, with the recent success of the trendy Saab 900 and Acura Integra. Soon, even swanky heavyweight BMW will be joining the hatchback huddle with one of its own: the 318ti. HIGHS: Bug-in-a-rug cuteness, 3-series stoutness, handling, and quality, gaping cargo hold.If you’re falling off your Recaro over the news of a BMW hatchback, perhaps you suffer from long-term memory loss or you haven’t been to Europe, where more than 50,000 BMW 316i Compacts—Europe’s version of this car—are already on the roads. The Compact was introduced only last spring. Its success is due in large part to its price—which is about $2500 less than the next-cheapest Euro BMW, the 316i sedan. When the 318ti arrives here next spring, its base price should be $20,370, undercutting our previous bot­tom-feeder BMW, the 318i sedan, by a whopping $5070. This will be the first time a BMW has been available for 20 big ones since 1985. Its price is low, but there’s flesh on these bones. BMW’s 1.8-liter DOHC four­-cylinder and a five-speed are standard, as are dual airbags, anti-lock-equipped disc brakes, air conditioning, and power steering, mirrors, windows, and locks. For another $2400, BMW will offer either of two upgrade packages—the semi­-loaded “Active” (BMW says that it couldn’t come up with a better name), or the athletically inclined “Sports.” The Active package includes cruise control, larger alloy wheels and tires, remote key­less entry, leather seats and door inserts, a trip computer, and a power sunroof. The Sports package includes firmer shocks and springs (which lower ride height by 0.4 inch), the Active’s wheels and tires, fog lights, and leather that covers more aggres­sively bolstered sports seats. Other options can be added individually, such as an auto­matic transmission and a CD player. The initial investment in this car wasn’t cheap either. The new rear sheetmetal, which lops 8.8 inches off the length of the coupe, necessitated a new, more compact rear suspension based on previous 3-series’ semi-trailing arms. Instead of shar­ing the notchback coupe’s doors, with their frameless window design, BMW designed yet another set of doors for the hatch­back, with framed win­dows, mated to the four­-door’s front fenders. Inside, there’s a new dashboard that will appeal to a younger crowd, says BMW. The rear seat that cor­dons off the 11-cubic-foot trunk is split 50-50 and folds forward (but not flat) to increase cargo space.Changes like these don’t come cheaply. Vic Doolan, president of BMW North America, figured this version of the car cost the company in the neighborhood of $500 million.Car companies don’t employ magi­cians. To keep the sticker down, BMW pruned costs in other areas. The simpler rear suspension saves BMW a few deutsche marks, as does the glovebox, which is no longer lined with mouse fur. Its little self-charging flashlight has disappeared, too. The air conditioning now has manual controls, without separate settings for driver and passenger. The headlight and wiper switches on the dash­board are pull-type units, instead of the rotary and steering-column-mounted switches from the rest of the line. And, for the first time in a BMW, there’s a compact spare instead of a full-sized spare tire, which is removed from under the trunk. LOWS: Merely adequate underhood motivation.Doolan insists that, despite this scrimp­ing, a 318ti is still true to the “driving machine” profile that BMW ads often boast. Based on a drive through the Bavar­ian countryside in a 318ti Active, it’s clear that BMW met most of those goals.From the moment you size up its mirror-smooth paint, you can see that BMW hasn’t lowered its quality standards for its little base car. Open the door and there’s the familiar BMW business-like interior. The other 3-series cars would be lucky to share the new dash, which looks lighter and seems to reduce the console “wall” that separates the driver and passenger in the other 3-series cars. (It will remain exclusive to the hatchback.) Aside from two new cupholders in the console, nearly everything else—from the seats and their controls to the carpeting, from the door panels to the shifter and pedals—is car­ried over from the 3-series. The 3-series car with three doors drives just like the other 3-series cars, too. The engine-speed-sensitive power steering maintains the sensitivity and progres­sion of the more expensive models. At the rear, the 318ti’s new lightweight suspension (it saves about 18 pounds) is eager to oversteer, although with a bit more nervousness than the sedan and coupe. The hatchback is about 130 pounds lighter than the sedan and coupe, and it offers the same excellent ride/handling compromise of its pricier relatives. Those sloughed-off pounds mean the 318ti responds more eagerly to the brakes and throttle than the coupe and sedan. Despite having slightly smaller rear discs than the 318is coupe we tested in August 1992, the hatchback can stop three feet shorter from 70 mph, at 175 feet. (We were unable to test for cornering grip, but it should be at least as good as the 0.84 g of the coupe.) Sprints to 60 miles per hour take 7.8 seconds, nearly a second quicker than the 318is. That sounds faster than it feels. BMW’s 1.8-liter four as installed in the 318ti is even-tempered from idle to its 6300-rpm redline, and it looks substantial in the neatly tailored engine bay. But it must be flogged before the torque (129 pound-feet at 4500 rpm) becomes noticeable, and it offers far less excitement than the simi­larly sized four-cylinder in the similarly priced Acura Integra GS-R. That engine, with its wild lunges to its 8200-rpm redline, makes the 318ti’s four-cylinder seem merely adequate by sporty-car standards. If that’s a problem, a fix is not on the way. Doolan says the company has no plans to fit either of the two muscular inline sixes that it offers in the 3-series. More BMW 3-series Reviews From the ArchiveIn many ways, though, the 318ti makes sense just the way it is. Its price allows BMW a foot in the door of a market chock­full of nameplates like Integra, Golf, Probe, and Celica—a market good for at least two million sales a year, by BMW’s estimate. Furthermore, BMW already offers no fewer than seven iterations of the 3-series. If your motive is speed, and you can’t find satisfaction in the 3-series, you’d best switch brands, or clear the fog from your forehead. VERDICT: BMW cooks up a morsel for the masses.The 318ti has another purpose: increasing the company’s bottom line. BMW’s assembly plant in Munich can easily turn out an additional 6000 or 7000 cars for American buyers. For those who question the notion of a high-volume BMW, Doolan has a quick reply. He says the income from this little BMW makes possible less-profitable performance cars like the recently introduced 540i six­-speed. We’ve driven that sweetheart. Enough said. SpecificationsSpecifications
1995 BMW 318tiVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 3-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $20,370/$22,770Options: Active package (power sunroof, leather seats, cruise control, alloy wheels with 205/60HR-15 tires, keyless entry with alarm, and trip computer), $2400
ENGINEDOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 110 in3, 1796 cm3Power: 138 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque: 129 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 11.3-in vented disc/10.7-in discTires: Michelin Pilot HX205/60VR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 106.3 inLength: 165.7 inWidth: 66.9 inHeight: 54.8 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 48/36 ft3Cargo Volume: 11 ft3Curb Weight: 2778 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.8 sec1/4-Mile: 16.1 sec @ 84 mph100 mph: 24.9 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.8 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 11.5 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 11.4 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 116 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 175 ft  
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 22/32 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

It’s a testament to the success of the RX that Lexus was able to dominate the luxury-crossover space for so long without a legitimate three-row option. The cobbled-together previous-generation RX L didn’t really count, and neither did the body-on-frame GX and full-size LX, but the new 2024 Lexus TX finally aims straight for the heart of the three-row luxury crossover market—and largely hits its target.Built on the same platform as the Toyota Grand Highlander, the TX is significantly bigger than the latest RX, with a nearly four-inch longer wheelbase, almost three inches of extra width, and just over a 203-inch overall length. There’s no swoopy roofline to be found here, as the squared-off rear end makes it clear the TX is a people hauler that places function over form.Spacious InteriorSpace for passengers and cargo is important in this segment, and that’s what the TX delivers. No matter whether you choose the seven-passenger configuration with a second-row bench or the six-passenger setup with captain’s chairs, all three rows are habitable for adults. The only real flaw in the rearmost seat is the low bottom cushion, but that’s true of most of the TX’s rivals, and at least Lexus offers a recline function along with armrests and USB ports.The environs up front will be familiar to anyone who has driven the new RX, with a large 14.0-inch touchscreen dominating the dash and a muted design without many flashy touches. Many premium vehicles have interiors that look better than they feel, but the latest Lexus cabins are the opposite, with lots of plush touch points and high-quality materials but little visual flair or panache. We found the touchscreen to be relatively clear and easy to use, but certain functions—such as the drive mode selector—are buried deeper in settings menus than we’d like. The touch-sensitive control pads on the steering wheel that display their selections on the head-up display are also not the most intuitive.Wide Range of PowertrainsWhile many competitors offer merely a turbo four or a V-6 engine, Lexus is offering a wide range of powertrain choices in the TX, including two hybrids. The base TX350 has a 275-hp turbocharged 2.4-liter inline-four that provides merely adequate grunt for a big vehicle like this. We expect a 60-mph time in the 7.0-second neighborhood, slightly quicker with the optional all-wheel drive, but both of which are not standout times for this class. The turbo four is relatively well isolated from the cabin, but its occasionally grumbly tone makes us miss the smoothness of Lexus’s naturally aspirated 3.5-liter V-6—though it was also a bit sluggish and didn’t provide great fuel economy.Things get more interesting with the 366-hp TX500h, a hybrid that comes exclusively with the F Sport Performance treatment. Its combination of the turbo four with front and rear electric motors is nearly identical to the Hybrid Max system available in the Grand Highlander, and it’s similarly impressive here. We enjoyed hustling the TX500h through corners, as the powertrain is quick and responsive and the F Sport’s standard adaptive dampers tighten up the body motions, making the TX a surprisingly eager handler for its size. The tradeoff is ride quality, as the F Sport model is a bit too firm for this vehicle’s mission.The final setup, which isn’t likely to make up a big portion of TX sales, is the plug-in-hybrid TX550h+ model that uses a naturally aspirated 3.5-liter V-6 gasoline engine (just like the old days) and is the most powerful choice in the lineup. It makes 404 horsepower in total but is also significantly heavier than the TX350 and TX500h due to its battery pack that enables a claimed electric driving range of 33 miles. We were impressed with the smoothness of this powertrain, and the TX550h+ also rides well due to its softer suspension tune compared with the F Sport. It’s likely to be expensive (Lexus hasn’t yet released pricing for the plug-in; we’re estimating $77,500) but is a solid option for those who are able to charge at home and make full use of the electric range in daily commuting.Worth the Money?Price could be somewhat of a hangup for the standard models too. The TX, which starts at $55,050 and rises to over $76,000 for a loaded TX500h, is a few thousand dollars more expensive than luxury SUV rivals including the Acura MDX, Cadillac XT6, and Infiniti QX60. (It’s worth mentioning, too, that the Grand Highlander offers a similar package for thousands less, though admittedly without the prestigious badge.)Other Lexus SUVsBut the Lexus has plenty of tricks up its sleeve to increase its appeal. Compared with those familiar three-row models, the TX has a generous list of standard and optional equipment, lots of interior space, and myriad powertrain choices to sweeten the deal. We don’t think it will have any problem establishing itself as a major player in this important segment, just as the RX did decades ago.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Lexus TXVehicle Type: front-engine, front- and rear-motor, front- or all-wheel-drive, 6–7-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: TX350, $55,050; TX350 AWD, $56,650; TX500h, $69,350; TX550h+, $77,500 (C/D est)
POWERTRAINS
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.4-liter inline-4, 275 hp, 317 lb-ft; turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.4-liter inline-4, 271 hp, 339 lb-ft + 2 AC motors, 85 and 101 hp, 215 and 124 lb-ft (combined output: 366 hp, 406 lb-ft; 1.4-kWh nickel-metal hydride battery pack); DOHC 24-valve 3.5-liter V-6, 259 hp, 247 lb-ft + 3 AC motors, 179 and 101 hp, 199 and 124 lb-ft (combined output: 404 hp; 18.1-kWh lithium-ion battery pack; 7.0-kW onboard charger)Transmissions: 8-speed automatic, 6-speed automatic/direct drive, continuously variable automatic/direct-drive

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 116.1 inLength: 203.2–203.5 inWidth: 78.4 inHeight: 70.1 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 60/52–54/39 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/M/R: 97/57/20 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4450–5400 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.5–7.2 sec1/4-Mile: 14.3–15.5 secTop Speed: 112 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (MFR’s EST, TX350/TX500h)
Combined/City/Highway: 23–27/20–27/26–28 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST, TX550h+)
Combined/City/Highway: 29/28/29 mpgCombined Gasoline + Electricity: 60 MPGeEV Range: 33 miSenior 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 August 1989 issue of Car and Driver.Neither the United States nor the Unit­ed Kingdom has on its books a statute stipulating that only the wealthy are per­mitted to own Jaguars. Despite this omis­sion, Jaguars and the rich seek each other out as surely as the sun seeks high noon, and we must admit that the combination earns high marks for both proper appearance and the generation of envy. Like strawberries and cream or Moët and beluga, Jaguars and the well-to-do just seem to go together. The 1989 Vanden Plas continues this tradition. Jaguar, for that matter, takes enormous pride in its devotion to tradi­tion, and this latest offering suggests that the Coventry cavaliers have not lost their touch. The big sedan remains elegant, eccentric, evolutionary, and every inch a Jaguar motorcar. Being every inch a Jaguar is, in many ways, like being every inch a Rolls-Royce, but a Jaguar differs from a Roller in its availability to persons with incomes of somewhat less magnitude than Califor­nia’s sales-tax revenue. At just under $50,000 for the Vanden Plas version and just under $45,000 for the garden-vari­ety XJ6, this Jaguar confers more perceived status per penny than just about any car on the market. The Jaguar Vanden Plas also dis­tinguishes itself as a car that all enthusi­asts can appreciate—even if they can’t af­ford it. For a car with a 113-inch wheelbase and an interior that smacks more of a London club than of modern ergonomic design, the Vanden Plas is a marvelous combination of ride quality and handling competence. Jaguar, in fact, has enjoyed a close, mutually re­warding relationship with those who drive its cars for as long as any luxury-car maker you can name. Jaguar’s big news for 1989 can be summed up in two words: better perfor­mance. The inline six-cylinder engine has been spiffed up by an increase in the compression ratio from 8.2 to 9.6:1. This move raises the horsepower of the fine twin-cam, 24-valve engine from 181 to 195 and increases the torque from 221 pound-feet to 232. This, coupled with a rear-axle-ratio change (the economy-­minded 2.88:1 is replaced by the zoomy 3.58:1 Jaguar uses in Europe), results in a 0-to-60-mph time of 8.8 seconds, down a full two seconds from the XJ6 we tested two years ago (C/D, June 1987).Ever aware that the rich, however per­formance-minded they may be, are not loath to pinch the odd penny, Jaguar en­gineers saw to it that the sedan’s perfor­mance improvement came without an onerous mpg penalty, though the car now requires super unleaded instead of regular unleaded. The new sedan gets a 17/23-mpg EPA city/highway fuel-econ­omy rating, while the old version got 17/24. Your actual mileage may vary, of course, but our observed mileage during the time we spent as Jaguar drivers was a respectable 18 mpg. These figures are the same whether you select the superluxurious Vanden Plas model­—which brings such niceties to the rear­-seat occupants as veneered picnic tables and reading lamps—at $48,000 or the “standard” XJ6, at $44,000.The engine retains the smoothness and silence of Jacques Cousteau film footage and moves the big cat at a grace­ful, sure-footed lope. The four-speed automatic transmission, complete with lockup torque converter, contributes rather than detracts from the comforting atmosphere of smoothness and precision created by the engine. After the passage of a mere nineteen years, Jaguar totally redesigned the XJ6 for the 1987 model year. The new car’s skin didn’t generate raves from automo­tive critics, and it is unchanged for 1989. We remain less than awed by the car’s profile, but it’s undeniably a Jaguar. At rest, the Vanden Plas manages to look both refined and important—a pleasing blend of personality traits. The exterior has benefited from a pair of minor but useful tweaks. The outside mirrors have undergone aerodynamic surgery, and a new “finisher plate” spans the space between the hood and the windshield. These two fine-tunings are designed to reduce the level of wind noise discernible to the car’s occupants, making the car even more hospitable when it’s moving at freeway speeds. Entering a Jaguar is much like walking into some of the better-preserved public rooms at the Royal Geographic Society. You have the feeling that any number of important personages have been there before you and that none of them raised his voice or otherwise behaved badly. With the exception of a Rolls-Royce or a Bentley, a Jaguar is the only car that might get away with selling memberships to well-heeled harrumphers. There are some problems with the 1989 interior, however. Pushing past the shade of Joseph Lucas and into the elec­tronic age, Jaguar has fabricated an in­strument layout that is truly peculiar. Gone are the wonderful clock-sized in­struments, replaced by two dials about the diameter of a crumpet staring blankly back at you. A full complement of elec­tronic displays flanks the dials. Grafted onto the steering column are some more controls, looking every inch the add-ons they are. These are not terminally off­-putting, mind you, but they are anything but harmonious with the Jaguar’s overall aura of tasteful luxury. Our other objection to the interior is one we found ourselves sitting on. The seats, never overbolstered to begin with, were at least snugly comfortable before. The new editions are as flat as a park bench and just about as yielding—both beneath you and behind you. The seats are not uncomfortable, not at all, but they are discomfiting in that one never feels quite one with the car when sitting on them. That, in fact, sums up the situa­tion: one tends to sit on the seats rather than in them. Probably an owner would quickly get used to the seats, and if such an owner were not prone to unseemly hard cornering they would present no problems. But we were, to coin a phrase, more comfortable with the old ones. Otherwise, the quality of the materials inside remains as top­-notch as ever. The generous use of wood, fine hides, and cut-pile wool car­peting results in an environment that’s as rewarding to occupy as a $1500 custom­-built Harris Tweed jacket. Driving the Vanden Plas, with its new­found low-range punch, no longer sub­jects you to traffic-light embarrassment. And the Jaguar blend of luxurious ride and surprisingly competent handling continues to be among the better driving experiences the luxury-car world offers to the fiscally fortunate. The fully independent suspension maintains its composure under duress, while under nor­mal driving conditions it provides a ride that’s smooth without being overly soft. As noted, the Vanden Plas now gets out of its own way with considerable aplomb, and it will cruise effortlessly at speeds that have “ticket” written all over them. The brakes, four discs, are confidence-­inspiring to use. They will bring the Vanden Plas to a stop from 70 mph in a smart 182 feet and, in our experience, are fade-free. The Teves anti-lock brak­ing system also serves to make emergen­cy braking less stressful. More Jaguar Reviews From the ArchiveFor a luxury car—or any car, for that matter—the Vanden Plas communicates the same spirit of driver involvement that we suspect William Lyons had in mind when he introduced the Jaguar SS 2.7 sa­loon in 1935. Though the Jaguar Vanden Plas may not be at the cutting edge of sedan tech­nology—being light-years behind the BMW 750iL, to cite one bit of evidence—it nonetheless delivers traditional Jaguar luxury, more than adequate perfor­mance, and an indefinable aura of respectability. And it does so at what those for whom it is intended would consider a fair-enough price. SpecificationsSpecifications
1989 Jaguar Vanden PlasVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $48,500/$48,500
ENGINEDOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 219 in3, 3590 cm3Power: 195 hp @ 5000 rpmTorque: 232 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 11.6-in vented disc/10.9-in discTires: Pirelli P5 Cinturato205/70VR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.0 inLength: 196.4 inWidth: 78.9 inHeight: 54.3 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 51/40 ft3Trunk Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight: 3965 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.8 sec1/4-Mile: 16.6 sec @ 85 mph100 mph: 26.1 sec120 mph: 55.3 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.9 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.5 secTop Speed: 130 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.76 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 18 mpg 
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 17/23 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDContributing EditorWilliam Jeanes is a former editor-in-chief and publisher of Car and Driver. He and his wife, Susan, a former art director at Car and Driver, are now living in Madison, Mississippi. More

With an overabundance of power and near-silent operation, electric propulsion seems perfectly suited to ultraluxury vehicles. We’ve just had the opportunity to drive the latest demonstration: the 2024 Mercedes-Maybach EQS SUV. It joins the 2024 Rolls-Royce Spectre coupe as we await the debut of Bentley’s first EV in a year or two.As the name implies, the Mercedes-Maybach EQS SUV is based on the existing Mercedes-Benz EQS SUV and embellished heavily with every luxury touch the engineers and designers could muster. As with previous Maybach vehicles dating to the 2002 revival, one can see the Mercedes-Benz on which it is based, but there are also plenty of distinctive Maybach styling touches to set it apart.The closed-off grille features thin vertical chrome strakes that cascade down to the actual air inlet below. A Mercedes three-pointed star stands proudly on the fixed hood, with a subtle Maybach badge just underneath. Other Maybach logos are scattered about the exterior. A two-tone paint scheme adds some old-school presence, and there are also monotone choices for the less extroverted. Wheels play a major role in the visual impact. The substantial monoblock-type wheels will certainly be popular with some traditionalists, while a lacelike option made up of small Maybach logos could be a hit with new-money clients.The Maybach EQS SUV’s appearance is heavily dependent on how the client specs it. With more conservative colors and wheels, the Maybach easily plays the part of a chauffeur-driven conveyance for a wealthy industrialist. Get wilder with the choices, and it would be right at home in the latest hip-hop video. Inside, the Maybach continues its theme of embellished familiarity. The massive glass Hyperscreen dashboard is standard, with some Maybach-specific elements in the display. Elsewhere, the enhancements come by way of features and materials. Nearly every surface is covered in premium leather that is “sustainably processed,” with coffee-bean shells used as tanning agents. We actually had to hunt for exposed plastic and found it underneath the door armrest. Rich open-pore wood trim elements are a joy to the eyes, and even the pedals are finished in knurled metal.The rear compartment shows the greatest differentiation from the Mercedes version. The third rows of seats is jettisoned, and the luggage compartment walled off. Order the individual rear seats (a bench-seat configuration is also available), and they’re separated by sweeping center console that extends forward. The seats are generously cushioned to cradle riders. Our loaded Maybach with the available Executive Rear Seat Package Plus enhanced the experience with massaging calf rests, folding tray tables, and heated and cooled cupholders. There’s also a refrigerated compartment and optional silver champagne flutes that have their own special holders in the console.Each rear passenger has their own 11.6-inch entertainment screen mounted on the front seatback. The screens can be operated by touch, which can be a bit of a reach during reclining. A detachable mini tablet controller in the console solves that issue. Reclining the right rear seat is a one-touch affair: Just tap a button to set in motion a complex series of power actuators. The front seat slides and tilts all the way forward while the headrest tucks down; meanwhile, the rear seat is gracefully easing back as the footrests move into place.In full recline, you can bask in a bubble of calm, watching through the expansive panoramic sunroof as trees or skyscrapers file past. The cabin remains peacefully quiet, with no boominess or road noise thanks to the sound isolation the sealed-off cargo area provides. Related StoriesThis allows the standard 15-speaker Burmester audio system to demonstrate its full potential. With Dolby Atmos processing, the audio quality is noticeably clear and powerful, lending a new dimension to familiar songs. Built into the seats are two exciters that produce a thump with the subwoofer, allowing you to feel the music with intensity adjustable from subtle to strong.All of this points to the Mercedes-Maybach EQS SUV being a truly great limousine, but how is it from the driver’s seat? With 649 horsepower and 700 lb-ft of torque, you certainly won’t be wanting for power. Mercedes says the SUV flashes to 60 mph in 4.1 seconds, but given that Benz’s 536-hp EQS580 SUV model can hit that mark in 4.0 seconds, we reckon the Maybach will prove to be several tenths of a second quicker when we get it to the test track.That’s impressive for a big SUV that weighs more than 6000 pounds, and you definitely feel that mass. On a hard launch, the rear end squats, and the front lifts as if to exclaim “Giddyap!” With moderate to heavy braking, the nose dips significantly, but the vehicle remains very planted and stable.There’s also plenty of body roll in the curves, and you’ll occasionally feel some residual rebounds from larger bumps. This softness doesn’t encourage sporty driving, and selecting a stiffer suspension setting has only a minor effect. Granted, the Maybach EQS SUV isn’t intended to be sporty, and this pillowy ride seems appropriate for comfort-minded clients. The vehicle is thoroughly enjoyable to drive, and performing silky-smooth limo stops is easy. And like the standard EQS, it’s also unusually maneuverable thanks to rear-wheel steering with up to 10 degrees of deflection.Of course, for an EV, charging and range are vitally important. With its 107.8-kWh battery pack, the Maybach EQS SUV has a range estimated at 372 miles using the optimistic European WLTP standard. But using EPA methodology, that estimate should fall closer to the 285 miles that lesser EQS SUV 4Matic models are rated for. When you need replenishment midtrip, the Maybach is capable of DC fast-charging at up to 200 kW, which should get the from 10 to 80 percent capacity in 31 minutes.Altogether, the Maybach EQS SUV is one of the most luxurious EVs available. Like the Rolls-Royce Spectre, it demonstrates that electricity greatly enhances the luxury experience with silence and smoothness, but the Maybach offers much more interior space. And we estimate that the Maybach will start at around $200,000, making it about half the cost of the Rolls. The Maybach EQS SUV demonstrates that electric propulsion meshes perfectly with this brand’s ethos. SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Mercedes-Maybach EQS SUVVehicle Type: front- and mid-motor, all-wheel-drive, 4- or 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE (C/D EST)
Base: $200,000
POWERTRAIN
Motors: permanent-magnet synchronous AC Combined Power: 649 hpCombined Torque: 700 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 107.8 kWhOnboard Charger: 9.6 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 200 kWTransmissions, F/R: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 126.4 inLength: 201.8 inWidth: 80.1 inHeight: 67.8 inCargo Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 6700 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.5 sec100 mph: 9.2 sec1/4-Mile: 12.0 secTop Speed: 130 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 74/77/72 MPGeRange: 270 miContributing EditorWith a background in design and open-wheel racing, Mark Takahashi got his foot in the door as an art director on car and motorcycle magazines. He parlayed that into a career as an automotive journalist and has reviewed thousands of vehicles over the past few decades. More

From the February 1995 issue of Car and Driver.Please continue reading while we observe a moment of silence for the Nissan Sentra SE-R. At the thin-wallet end of the spectrum, the SE-R was rare metal. Cheap, with X­-Acto handling and an unadorned shape plain to the trained cop eye. It virtually reinvented the inexpensive sports sedan­—on BMW terms, in Japanese quality, at an American price. We gushed, foamed, and put it on five Ten Best lists. And most of you ignored it. You called and wrote “What’s a good car for under $15,000?” We answered with three letters: SE-R. You said, “What else?” HIGHS: Spirit-awakening four­-cylinder, five-speed joystick, smart and functional cockpit. As Sam Kinison would scream, “Thanks a lot, guys!” It’s gone. You might still find one, but Nissan built the last of the Sentra SE-Rs on a buggy June day in Tennessee. Or you might hold your collective breath—as we did—and hope that the replacement would be as lively and endearing and cheap as the Sentra SE-R. Lucky for you, the second act on Nissan’s Sentra-based playbill is nearly as enter­taining as the first one. The 200SX SE-R is the most sporting of the fourth generation of Sentras, filling the hole left by the dearly departed. The new name recalls the low-buck, high­-performance Nissan coupes from the mid-­Eighties, married to the glossy image of the recent SE-R. This palimony agreement neatly divorces two distinct models, allow­ing the two-door 200SX to get on with its life and go after younger, sportier buyers with minimal assets.You can’t deny roots, though. Like it or not, the SE-R remains based on the frugal Sentra, now in its fourth iteration. And for the fourth time around, Nissan has given more thought to increasing the Sentra’s rear-seat room and to reducing the gush of cash it takes to pop out some 200,000 cars a year. Both of these goals have direct effects on the perfor­mance and handling of the related SE-R. The lovingly con­structed powertrain is nearly untouched. The SE-R is still propelled by an expensive-feeling, very-expensive-to-build 140-horsepower 2.0-liter four. (The base 200SX and the mid-line SE model host the likable 1.6-liter four from the last Sentra, pumped up to 115 horsepower.) We’re not sure that there has ever been another four-cylinder engine with as much verve and slickness as this one. It races ahead of you to reach the redline, waiting happily there until you realize it’s time to stop that mechanical childishness and shift.When you do, you engage a five-speed that might have been lifted intact from the best arcade games, so light and correct and intentional are its movement through its ratios. Swapping gears here is a fun job, much like being pool boy at the Playboy mansion cabana (minus the risk of finding Hef’s toupee in the skimmer, of course). If you choose not to shift, you will notice that the engine’s remarkable flexi­bility remains. If anything, the new appli­cation has quieted the last minor roar from the rhythmic beating of the four-cylinder. A stiffer body structure is responsible for the quietness—full throttle creates only 76 dBA of whining music, compared with the 82 dBA in the older car.LOWS: Off-the-rack styling, occasionally knotty ride. A whit of performance may have been lost somewhere between generations, kind of like William Shatner’s formerly virile physique. The 200SX SE-R we sampled­—one of eight in the country as we write—hit 60 mph in 8.0 seconds, four-tenths slower than the former SE-R. Odd, because the new car weighs 23 pounds less than last year’s model (even with standard dual airbags and side-impact protection). We have a hunch that the light dip in the numbers is due to both the prototype status of our tester and to the new model’s 7100-rpm redline, which is 400 rpm lower than before (for emissions reasons). Quite intentionally, top speed has plunged, despite the similar weight and the more favorable aerodynamics of the 200SX. Nissan and the insurance companies appar­ently agree that keeping things down to 109 mph (from 124 mph) is politically correct. It may be the only case of a Democratic gov­ernor picking up work this year.More noticeable is the evolution of the SE-R’s underpinnings, away from mechan­ical exactitude to a simpler, cost-effective solution. The front wheels are still con­trolled by MacPherson struts and an anti­-roll bar, but the pairs of links that guided the old SE-R’s rear wheels have been replaced. Borrowing from the new Maxima, Nissan engineers worked up a beam axle with trailing arms, a Panhard rod, and a unique sliding link that connects to the axle at its midpoint. This arrangement cancels the jacking effect common to Panhard-rod setups. Nissan calls the arrangement a “multilink beam” and claims that it’s a better compromise than a completely inde­pendent rear suspension because (a) it’s more compact, freeing up rear-seat and trunk room; (b) it’s lighter; and (c) it has fewer moving parts and mounting points, making it cheaper to build and quieter on the road. Is Camelot lost? The handling differ­ences between the former SE-R and the 200SX are evident but not too bother­some. The hybrid beam-axle rear suspen­sion doesn’t absorb one-wheel bumps as easily as the previous SE-R, but it does offer more grip. It rides softer because the uniform motion of the rear axle allowed engineers to put some slack back in the springs and bushings. But it seems more reluctant to turn in, which might be blamed on the four-inch increase in wheelbase.Except for the infrequent harsh motions induced by tar strips, the 200SX SE-R rides smoothly for a car of its size. And a magnitude jump to 15-inch, 55-series tires (with a little help from the flat cornering motions of the rear axle) boosts lateral grip to 0.85 g, versus the 0.80 g we measured for the previous SE-R. Some cornering transitions are less settled than in its rail-riding predecessor, but mostly the new SE-R is eager to attack favorite stretches of two-lane road. Along those same lines go the brakes­—although they feel softer, they deliver slightly more stopping power. The 200SX SE-R brought itself down from 70 mph in 182 feet, four feet shorter than before. Anti-lock control is optional on the SE-R and 200SX SE models but is unavailable on the base 200SX. You’ll recognize the new duds before you can catalog the dynamics, and it’s on that basis that Nissan thinks it can sell 40,000 200SXs a year. Agreed, the former Sentra two-doors were plainer than North Dakota, but they had a certain elemental, ascetic appeal. The 200SX is less plain but not necessarily more attractive. We see a lot of different cars in its me-too two-door form—Thunderbirds, Accords, even Infiniti’s G20 (no surprise, really, since the Nissan was styled in the same Japanese studio as the G20). From its corporate face to its sloping trunkline snatched from the Altima, the 200SX is in need of some styling inspiration. A little ’95 Fiat Coupe, perhaps. The interior is very little changed, with the same functional switches and gauges now nestled in finer-grain plastic surrounds. Somehow, the inside works better than the outside. It’s black and stark—not unlike how BMW might outfit a $16,500 sedan—with smooth but straight-edged forms, clearly arranged controls, and a well-placed four-spoke steering wheel. The front seats are comfortable and sup­portive, and the new passenger airbag hasn’t displaced the glovebox. More Nissan Reviews From the ArchiveThe more flowing look liberates a lit­tle more rear-seat room, but not as much as we expected. Headroom has actually dropped, by more than an inch, to give the stylists some freedom to drape the C-pil­lar artfully. The car has gained 4.1 inches of wheelbase, but only 0.5 inch goes to gapping out vital knee room in the back. In all, the rear seats don’t seem usefully larger than the old ones, although they split and fold to swallow large packages. But by the numbers for shoulder, leg, and hip room, the 200SX SE-R is roomier in back than two-door Civics, Saturns, and Integras. You might have assumed by now, what with all the constant comparison, that we adored the Sentra SE-R. You would be correct. Buckling into its sport seat was like tightening the laces on a runner’s shoe. VERDICT: A lively successor to the dearly departed. What Nissan has wrought with a rethunk suspension and (supposedly) sex­ier styling is more mainstream than that paragon. The 200SX’s appeal may be broader than the old SE-R’s, but it’s also less intense. Does a Nissan still reign atop the mid­-priced pack of sporting two-doors? We’ll let you know in next month’s compari­son test. SpecificationsSpecifications
1995 Nissan 200SX SE-RVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE (ESTIMATED)
Base/As Tested: $15,800/$17,400
ENGINEDOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1998 cm3Power: 140 hp @ 6400 rpmTorque: 132 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 9.9-in vented disc/9.3-in discTires: Goodyear Eagle RS-A M+S195/55VR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 99.8 inLength: 170.1 inWidth: 66.6 inHeight: 54.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 50/34 ft3Trunk Volume: 10 ft3Curb Weight: 2588 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.0 sec1/4-Mile: 16.1 sec @ 83 mph100 mph: 27.2 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.7 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 10.5 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 11.3 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 109 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.85 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 26 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 24/31 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

All roads may lead to Rome, but that doesn’t mean each route is the same. Take, for example, the 2023 Jeep Compass and the 2024 Chevrolet Trax. These two subcompact SUVs are sized within a few of inches of one another, yet nearly every other aspect for comparison—from powertrain to price—highlights how wildly divergent the utes are.The Jeep Compass is hot off a mid-cycle refresh that extended into a second year, at which point its tired old 2.4-liter inline-four was rightfully jettisoned in favor of a perkier 2.0-liter turbo four. The Chevy Trax isn’t just refreshed, it’s brand spanking new, retooled from soup to nuts in pursuit of not being the rolling box of sadness it was in iterations prior. Is it still a stinker? Read on to find out.2nd Place: 2023 Jeep CompassWhen we first tested a well-equipped Compass Latitude model earlier this year, we walked away impressed with its newfound power and improved aesthetics. The base Sport variant you see here isn’t as well equipped, but the fundamentals are the same, and they’re still worthy of commendation.HIGHS: Standard AWD across the lineup, zippier than the Trax.LOWS: Piles on the poundage, big price penalty.VERDICT: Just because the Compass is better than before doesn’t mean it’s the best.Under the hood is a new turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four, making a solid 200 horsepower and 221 pound-feet of torque, urge that is sent to all four wheels through an eight-speed automatic no matter the trim. Against the stopwatch, the Latitude (we weren’t able to test the Sport) molly-whopped the three-cylinder Trax. The Compass needed 7.5 seconds to reach 60 mph, while the Trax required 8.8. At 15.8 seconds to the quarter-mile mark, the Jeep got to rest on its laurels for a whole second while the Chevy played catch-up. And the Compass’s responsive engine means that the leap from 5 to 60 mph takes only 0.4 second longer than a standing start.As for how the Compass drives, most editors opined, simply, “It’s fine.” Around our 10Best loop, the logbook entries remarked on the Jeep’s quiet practicality and decent, if uninspiring, handling. The base Sport model, perhaps ironically, lacked a Sport mode to firm up throttle response, leaving it in a perpetual commuter-oriented mood. Nearly everyone agreed it’d be happier in the dirt, where its all-wheel drive would be more of an advantage. If you don’t like the Trax’s wagon-ish silhouette, the Jeep’s more upright SUV form provides a nice counterbalance. The Compass roofline does lend an airier feeling for taller occupants, and we think the cabin is pleasant all around, with a clever use of warmer fabrics in place of the usual cheap-car piano-black plastic. The second row earned high marks for offering vents and outlets, which is not always a given at this price point. However, the all-wheel-drive hardware and lots of cabin features can pile on the pounds; despite having a shorter wheelbase and overall length than the Trax, at 3717 pounds the Compass is a whopping 648 pounds heavier than the Chevy. In spite of that porcine curb weight, the Compass proved surprisingly efficient. On our 200-mile, 75-mph highway fuel economy loop, the Compass returned 31 mpg—one mpg below its EPA estimate and one mpg above the lighter front-drive Trax.One arena where the Compass and Trax are far apart is price. A base Compass Sport demands no less than $29,995, $8500 more than a base Trax. That’s also $3310 more than our Activ-trim test car, which was nearly fully loaded.1st Place: 2024 Chevy TraxDespite being lower, longer, and wider than the old Trax, this new front-drive-only model aims to maximize thrift by downsizing its engine and—extremely uncommon for the industry—its price tag. That places this urban runabout atop a mountain of value that the Jeep simply cannot scale, even if the Compass leaves the Trax in its dust on the way up.Whether you want to ascribe it to the lack of available all-wheel drive, the missing cylinder underhood, or perhaps off-label Ozempic use, the Trax crossed our scales at a svelte 3069 pounds. That certainly helped its fleetness around our skidpad, where it achieved 0.84 g of stick, 0.03 g better than the Compass. It aided braking as well; the Chevy required 180 feet to clamp down from 70 mph, while the Jeep needed an additional 15 feet.HIGHS: Impressive bang for the buck, flat rear floor is a welcome addition, it’s giving tall-wagon vibes.LOWS: No hustle whatsoever, no back-seat climate vents.VERDICT: It may never win a race, but there’s no denying the Trax’s greatness on raw value alone.As you might expect, the Trax doesn’t have a whole lot of motivation underfoot. Its turbocharged 1.2-liter three-cylinder makes a paltry 137 horsepower and 162 pound-feet of torque, all of which is routed forward through a six-speed automatic transmission. Our testing revealed a 60-mph time of 8.8 seconds, with the quarter-mile requiring 16.8 seconds. Some drivers called the six-speed slushbox pokey, which tracks with the 9.5-second run from 5 to 60 mph. Passing maneuvers aren’t much better; going from 50 to 70 mph takes a chelonian 6.4 seconds.The Trax deserves some credit for its around-town quietness. At idle, we recorded just 37 decibels of clamor, well under the Compass’s 43-dBA result. Its logbook showed sufficiently high praise for its on-road demeanor. Technical editor Mike Sutton said the Trax is “[n]ever exciting but composed and competent all-around.”If you enjoy the Chevy’s carlike handling, you’ll probably also appreciate its wagon-ish aesthetic. The Trax’s top Activ trim doesn’t do much to the outside, other than adding black 18-inch wheels, but it throws some fun yellow accents into the cabin mix. We’re big fans of Chevy’s latest infotainment software, and the dashboard touchscreen looks good nestled against the gauge-display binnacle—it’s leagues prettier than the dashboard on its Buick Envista platform-mate. The Trax loses some points for lacking full rear-seat accouterments—namely, A/C vents—and some of its plastics are almost insultingly hard, but the lack of all-wheel drive means Chevy had no problem flattening the rear floor, which is a huge boon for running three-abreast.Most of the Trax’s issues are forgiven once price enters the conversation. The cheapest Trax will run you $21,495, but the $24,995 Activ trim throws a whole bunch of great equipment into the fray, including an 11.0-inch center touchscreen, keyless entry and start, and a heated steering wheel. Our test car added on a sunroof, inductive device charging, and a $795 Driver Confidence package that includes blind-spot monitoring and adaptive cruise control; yet, at $26,685, it’s still thousands cheaper than even the barest-boned Compass. That’s a tough deal to beat.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Chevrolet TraxVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $21,495/$26,685Options: Activ trim (keyless entry, push-button start, heated steering wheel, body-color grille insert, black mirror caps, 18-inch wheels, 11.0-inch infotainment touchscreen, six-speaker stereo, 8.0-inch digital instrument cluster, eight-way power driver’s seat), $3500; Sunroof package (power sliding sunroof and inductive phone charging), $895; Driver Confidence package (rear cross traffic, lane-change and blind-sport alert, adaptive cruise control), $795
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 12-valve inline-3, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 73 in3, 1193 cm3Power: 137 hp @ 5000 rpmTorque: 162 lb-ft @ 2500 rpm
TRANSMISSION
6-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/torsion beamBrakes, F/R: 11.8-in vented disc/10.6-in discTires: Goodyear Assurance Finesse225/55R-18 98H M+S TPC 3179MS
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 106.3 inLength: 178.6 inWidth: 71.8 inHeight: 61.4 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54/44 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 54/26 ft3Curb Weight: 3069 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.8 sec1/4-Mile: 16.8 sec @ 81 mph100 mph: 30.5 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.4 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 9.5 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.8 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 6.4 secTop Speed (C/D est): 115 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 180 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.84 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 25 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 30 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 390 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 30/28/32 mpg
—
2023 Jeep Compass 4X4Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $29,995/$41,270
Options: Latitude trim, $3995; Sun and Sound group (Alpine stereo, panoramic roof), $2695; Convenience group (remote start system, auto dimming rearview mirror, heated steering wheel and front seats, wiper de-icer, eight-way power driver seat, power liftgate), $2095; Driver Assistance group (adaptive cruise control, surround-view camera system, inductive charging pad, automatic wipers), $1895; Sting-Gray Clearcoat paint, $595
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection
Displacement: 122 in3, 1995 cm3
Power: 200 hp @ 5000 rpm
Torque: 221 lb-ft @ 1750 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilink
Brakes, F/R: 12.0-in vented disc/10.9-in disc
Tires: Firestone Destination LE2
225/60R-17 99T M+S
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 103.8 in
Length: 173.4 in
Width: 73.8 inHeight: 64.6 in
Passenger Volume, F/R: 52/47 ft3
Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 60/27 ft3
Curb Weight: 3717 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.5 sec
1/4-Mile: 15.8 sec @ 89 mph
100 mph: 20.8 sec
Results above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.9 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.4 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.4 sec
Top Speed (C/D est): 118 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 195 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.81 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 23 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 410 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 27/24/32 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDSenior EditorCars are Andrew Krok’s jam, along with boysenberry. After graduating with a degree in English from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 2009, Andrew cut his teeth writing freelance magazine features, and now he has a decade of full-time review experience under his belt. A Chicagoan by birth, he has been a Detroit resident since 2015. Maybe one day he’ll do something about that half-finished engineering degree. More