Car Reviews

From the January 1996 issue of Car and Driver.After years of denial, the manage­ment at Cadillac has finally real­ized that baby boomers will not automatically mutate into Sedan De Ville buyers should they live long enough to become prosperous and middle-aged. Many of us born after WWII reached maturity at a time when size and ostenta­tion were replaced as automotive virtues by performance, technology, and refine­ment. In other words, we became import buyers. That’s why the average age of today’s Cadillac customers is 62. To help bring that average down, Cadillac will begin selling a new model this fall called the Catera—a genuine import based on Opel’s Omega, the largest and most expensive sedan produced by the German car company that General Motors purchased back in 1929. The Omega was introduced in Europe in 1994, and its size and specification put it in league with 5-series BMWs and E-class Mercedes—precisely the market segment where Cadillac is weakest.In proper Germanic fashion, the Catera employs a front-mounted engine driving its rear wheels, a configuration shunned by domestic sedans in this size and price class. It’s also rather compact by Amer­ican luxury-car standards, measuring 193.8 inches long and 70.3 inches wide. That splits the difference between the Infiniti J30 and the Lexus GS300. Under the Catera’s hood is the same double-overhead-cam, 24-valve 3.0-liter V-6 that has been propelling Saab 9000s since last year. It has an unconventional 54-degree cylinder-bank angle rather than the usual 60 degrees, so the engine fits in Opel’s smaller Vectra sedan. For use in the Catera, Opel and Cadillac engineers recal­ibrated this engine to produce more low-­end torque and to satisfy the latest emission and OBD II requirements. Output, however, is only slightly reduced from the European version, to 200 hp at 6000 rpm and 192 pound-feet of torque at 3600 rpm.The engine works in partnership with a GM THM Rl-AR35 electronically con­trolled four-speed automatic transmission. Dubbed the Strasbourg transmission in honor of the city in which it’s built, it is used not only by GM but also by BMW, which buys 90,000 of them every year. In the Catera, this gearbox comes with a choice of economy, performance, and winter shift schedules, and it coordinates with the engine-management system to modulate power as needed to provide smooth shifts. The Catera carries over the Omega’s four-wheel independent suspension, using struts in the front and semi-trailing arms upgraded with toe-control links in the rear. Rubber-isolated subframes, coil springs, and anti-roll bars are fitted at both ends, with automatic leveling in the rear to keep the Catera on an even keel regardless of load. Naturally enough for a car developed on Germany’s autobahns, the Catera has four-wheel disc brakes with anti-lock con­trol. It is also equipped with traction con­trol, though it can only reduce engine power to limit wheelspin. A more sophis­ticated system that can also apply the brakes is in the works. This collection of up-to-date hardware is clothed in the subdued bodywork indige­nous to European executive sedans. In Catera form, these lines are accented with a Cadillac-pattern grille (finished in black chrome and fitted with the classic wreath­-and-crest emblem), a new tail section with full-width taillights and a nicely integrated center brake light, revised rocker and body-side moldings, and new wheels mounted with 16-inch all-season tires. The overall visual effect is clean and tasteful, if not captivating. Inside, the Catera feels sumptuous and roomy. Front-seat occupants find a hand­some, well-organized dashboard with a sound system that looks to be custom-tai­lored to match the center console, just as the systems are in various Lexus models. Leather upholstery covers the door panels as well as the seats, and soft pockets cushion your elbows at the points at which they contact the doors. The supportive seats have dual-segment lumbar adjustment. And, of course, twin cupholders have been added for the U.S. market. The back seat is equally impressive. There’s plenty of head and leg room, including space to wiggle your feet under­neath the front seats. Passengers sit chair­-high with supportive cushions and can be separated by a nice fold-down central arm­rest. Climate-control vents open out of the back of the central console. This rear com­partment is very much in the mid-line BMW and Mercedes class. In keeping with the more active lifestyles of today’s boomers, the Catera has been designed to swallow a wide range of cargo. Extending the usefulness of its 17-cubic-foot trunk, the Catera is the first Cadillac with a fold-down rear seat; the left, right, and center sections deploy sep­arately to best match your people/cargo needs. The backrest of the right-front seat also folds forward until it is flat, leaving room for two-by-fours or windsurfer masts to stretch from the dashboard to the back of the trunk.Along with its talents as a beast of burden, the Catera has the European driving feel that we expect from a car engineered in the heart of Germany. The body seems tight and solid. The ride is well controlled and very firm. The steering has the precise and accurate action that makes carving up narrow European country roads so satisfying. At top speed on the autobahn, this Cadillac feels sub­limely secure and un­stressed.That top speed is only 125 mph, however—electroni­cally limited for the sake of the Catera’s all-season tires. Euro­pean Omegas can reach 140 mph. At the other end of the per­formance spectrum, Cadillac promises that the Catera will accel­erate from 0 to 60 mph in about 8.5 seconds, and that feels about right. Despite the 154 pounds added by its various modifications, the 3800-pound Catera feels reasonably peppy from rest, thanks to the V-6’s enhanced low-end torque and the shorter ratios in first and second gears. Even so, an aggressive driver will tend to work this smallish engine rather hard—­and when flogged, the V-6 doesn’t sing with quite the happy tones of a BMW six. But the transmission is quick to supply downshifts when needed, and it changes gears unobtrusively during mild driving. Customers not seeking a dedicated sports sedan will find little to fault in the Catera’s powertrain. The Catera will come well equipped, with all of the usual power options, including express down and up power windows, automatic climate control with separate temperature control for driver and passenger, and a remote keyless-­entry system—virtually mandatory because neither the passenger door nor the trunklid is fitted with a keyhole. Customers buying luxury cars tend to place a high value on their personal safety, so the Catera has dual airbags, devices to grab firmly and actually tighten the front belts in a collision, ratch­eting belts to secure child-safety seats, and a passing grade on federal side­impact standards. The Catera’s anticipated base price of $33,000 tells us Cadillac has learned from its Allanté experience that newcomers in a market should price aggressively. At this price, the Catera undercuts almost all comparably sized competitors.More Cadillac Reviews From the ArchiveThose attracted by the Catera’s value will likely find satisfaction in the driving experience it provides. And when the Catera replaces the Fleetwood in Cadillac’s lineup next fall, it will shift the division’s center of gravity a long way from traditional to contemporary. It’s about time.SpecificationsSpecifications
1996 Cadillac CateraVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base (est.): $33,000
ENGINEDOHC 24-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 181 in3, 2962 cm3Power: 200 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque: 192 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.4 inLength: 193.8 inWidth: 70.3 inHeight: 57.4 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 52/45 ft3Trunk Volume: 17 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3800 lb
MANUFACTURER’S PERFORMANCE RATINGS
60 mph: 8.5 secTop Speed (governor limited): 125 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)City/Highway: 17/24 mpg Contributing EditorCsaba Csere joined Car and Driver in 1980 and never really left. After serving as Technical Editor and Director, he was Editor-in-Chief from 1993 until his retirement from active duty in 2008. He continues to dabble in automotive journalism and LeMons racing, as well as ministering to his 1965 Jaguar E-type, 2017 Porsche 911, and trio of motorcycles—when not skiing or hiking near his home in Colorado.  More

It’d be a mistake to write off the 2024 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 Bison as a regular ZR2 dressed up with special AEV wheels, fortified front and rear AEV bumpers, a plethora of boron-steel skidplates, and some AEV badges. But we wouldn’t fault you if you did. That was, after all, the formula for the first-generation Colorado ZR2, and that template was similarly applied to the Silverado 1500 ZR2 and 2500HD ZR2. There’s a shared reason for this: The ZR2 treatment was not part of the design brief when those trucks were initially conceived. The second generation of the Colorado ZR2 is different. It was developed with the full knowledge that a ZR2 was already wildly popular. That opened the door for the more foundational changes we saw when we first sampled the truck in a three-day blast across the Nevada desert: a front axle shifted forward relative to the cab to accommodate larger tires and the signature Multimatic DSSV shocks moved outboard of the leaf springs, where they rightfully belonged. But these tweaks didn’t just improve the Colorado ZR2’s performance, they also opened the door for a more extreme ZR2 Bison.A More Extreme BisonMassive 35-inch tires replace the ZR2’s already-embiggened 33-inch rubber, which proves that moving the front axle forward was done with the Bison in mind. But it took more to accommodate those big fellas, so Chevy resculpted the fender liners and jacked up the suspension a half-inch. That lift and the extra inch of tire radius increase ground clearance from 10.7 inches to 12.2 inches. The Bison’s LT315 tires are also 1.2 inches fatter, so the offset of its 17-by-8.5-inch wheels was shifted outward almost a half-inch to keep the insides from rubbing. Combine those facts and you get a 0.9 inch wider track and an outer sidewall-to-sidewall width increase of some 2.1 inches. Consequently, the ZR2 Bison is fitted with more protuberant fender flares that give it an 80.1-inch width that exceeds the ZR2 by 2.0 inches and imbues it with a meaner stance.Hidden behind those tires is a Colorado Bison exclusive: hydraulic jounce bumpers—or, as we might call them, “bump stops supreme”—at all four corners. They come from Multimatic, the same outfit that makes the ZR2’s spool-valve dampers. In normal circumstances, a shock retune would be recommended when larger and heavier tires are fitted, but the hydraulic jounce bumpers open new doors that make that a necessity. You essentially get an extra stage of dedicated compression damping, and both elements must be tuned to complement one another. The Bison’s Multimatics don’t offer any more overall suspension travel, but they also don’t have any less, and their midpoint was adjusted so the compression/rebound split was preserved.Driving the Colorado ZR2 BisonPounding across the wavy whoop-de-doos in the open California desert, the ZR2 Bison absolutely proves that it’s worth it. We could carry more speed into gnarlier whoop sections, and it gobbled them ravenously. Sure, the lack of extra travel ultimately limited how hard we could push, but the hydraulic jounce bumpers absolutely stuck the landings and soaked up bigger hits with much more progressive fluidity. The only downside—and it barely was one—was the slight click we could hear when the plungers of the front pair contacted the lower control arms, as they are meant to do in normal operation on abnormally harsh terrain.Out among the rocks, the Bison was equally beastly. The extra ground clearance was a boon on daunting trails that featured jagged cooler-sized rocks spanning every product in the Yeti catalog. Yes, the rock rails scraped a few times, but that’s what they’re there for. Ditto the five boron-steel skidplates protecting the underbelly and differential. The front and rear AEV bumpers are tightly sculpted, but the rear corners could stand to offer more lower bedside protection, as on the Jeep Gladiator.As big tires typically do, the 35s tended to roll over holes that smaller tires might’ve gotten hung up on. The standard front and rear lockers stood at the ready, but the point at which we considered them was ratcheted way up. Should we have needed to air down to an extreme level, the Bison’s standard 17-inch AEV beadlock-capable wheels would have let us deflate even more than we did—provided we had the accessory beadlock rings fitted. The spare is a full-size matching unit, and because it won’t fit underneath, it’s mounted vertically in the bed. That compromises bed volume, but it improves the departure angle over the ZR2.With more time spent in the rocks, our initial enthusiasm about Terrain mode’s one-pedal crawling experience has cooled. It still has its place, but that place is not boulder-strewn trails on which the truck might teeter or the boulders might shift beneath you and make your throttle foot move inadvertently. It made for a jerky ride at times because we couldn’t keep our foot steady, which turns out to be more crucial when you’re using a comparatively sensitive throttle to control the brakes. Better to use Off-Road mode for rock crawling and save Terrain mode for smoother off-road creeping conditions like sandy two-tracks or Moab slickrock.Baja mode remains a favorite when the trails open up, and the relaxed stability control program that comes with it can also be fully shut off with a few stabs at the touchscreen. But its taller tires are not offset by shorter gearing, so the Bison doesn’t feel as punchy as a regular ZR2. The Bison package might feel a bit more eager if it had 3.73:1 gearing instead of the 3.42:1 final drive ratio that all ZR2s share. That wouldn’t likely raise its tow rating above 5500 pounds (versus 6000 for the regular ZR2), because the Bison shortfall is more about the extra weight of the truck itself, which Chevy says is some 300 pounds heavier than a regular ZR2.More ZR2 Family ValuesWill the Bison maintain the regular ZR2’s EPA fuel economy of 18 mpg combined (17 city/19 highway)? We doubt it on account of the Bison’s extra weight and the increased air and rolling resistance that come with a wider truck on fatter tires. We’re betting on a 1-mpg decrease across the board.Colorado ZR2 Bison Cost and ValueBut price is the bigger question, and we don’t have an answer for that because 2024 Colorado pricing has not yet been released. All we know is the 2023 Colorado ZR2 went for $48,295, and the last-generation ZR2 Bison option that didn’t have 35-inch rubber and trick jounce bumpers was priced at $5750. This more legit setup will surely cost more than that. If we guess $49,500 for the 2024 Colorado ZR2 and $7500 on top of that for the fortified Bison option, we’re staring at an estimated $57,000 for a new Colorado ZR2 Bison. That’s starting to feel like a lot of money for a mid-size pickup, but from where we just sat, the 2024 Chevy Colorado ZR2 Bison now delivers the extra performance and grittier appearance that makes the Bison badge absolutely worth it.Technical 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

Lifted heavy-duty pickups are nothing new, and in most parts of the country, so-called brodozers are a common sight. Ford’s Super Duty Tremor and the Ram 2500 Power Wagon represent factory entries into this arena, but the new 2024 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD ZR2 is arguably the best turnkey example of the breed due in large part to its independent front suspension. No, really.The Power Wagon, replete with a standard winch and disconnectable front anti-roll bar, is clearly optimized as a rough country rock crawler. The Tremor, on the other hand, has more general appeal with its mildly lifted suspension, somewhat burlier dampers, and oversized tires. Traditionalists will say that the solid front axles that underpin both models are preferable when tackling boulders, but such hardware comes with an abundance of unsprung mass that hurts them in conditions that are arguably more crucial more of the time.The Silverado 2500HD’s independent front suspension and the low unsprung mass that comes with it is a boon in daily driving, improving ride comfort and steering precision and minimizing chatter over washboard dirt roads. In the case of the ZR2, you can add swallowing up the whoops and rolling terrain of the wide-open desert to that list. We know this because we drove one to California’s Johnson Valley, site of the notorious King of the Hammers extreme off-road race, to see for ourselves.2500HD ZR2 equipmentIn Silverado HD form, the ZR2 formula consists of 35-inch-tall Goodyear Wrangler Territory MT mud-terrain tires on 18-inch wheels, a 1.5-inch suspension lift, and an electronically locking rear differential. But the ZR2’s killer app is undoubtedly its Multimatic DSSV dampers. They feature an aluminum body to better dissipate heat, durable and fade-resistant spool valves configured to provide position-sensitive damping, and piggyback external oil reservoirs that house more oil to reject even more heat—the latter fitted not just to the rear, but also the front. The HD competition has nothing like them.On the less-than-perfect paved roads heading out to Johnson Valley, the ZR2 exhibited precious little head toss, minimal impact shock, and a surprisingly low level of tire noise from its big Goodyear tires. The ride remained smooth even after we turned onto the washboard dirt entrance road, with none of the skittering we usually experience in plus-size pickups. But the biggest surprise was the control and stability the truck displayed on the countless crisscrossing dirt tracks that have been terraformed into standing waves by the passage of numerous dirt bikes and UTVs. Here, the HD’s ZR2 setup seemingly shrinks the truck by delivering an ability to absorb terrain that belies this behemoth’s size and weight. Farther into the off-road area, that feeling continues to come through when tackling the more boulder-strewn and remote trails of Johnson Valley, where the crew-cab standard-bed ZR2 can tiptoe through terrain you might personally tackle on foot with trekking poles. The purists are probably correct about the worthiness of solid front axles in this environment, as the apparent articulation of the Silverado’s independent front suspension isn’t as impressive as the last Power Wagon we sampled. Still, the ZR2 displayed eye-popping capability in this terrain. ZR2 Bison add-onsRockier tracks like these are best tackled with the ZR2 Bison package, which adds a winch-capable AEV steel front bumper with integrated fog lights and a pair of massive recovery points, an AEV steel rear bumper with similarly beefy recovery points, 18-inch AEV wheels (including the spare), and boron-steel bash plates under the engine, transfer case, and fuel tank. The usual differential shield isn’t present on the HD ZR2 because the rear-end housing is a massive lump of iron in its own right. GM’s Multi-Flex tailgate comes along for the ride, too, even though it’s not necessarily an off-road essential.The interesting thing about bringing a 2500HD ZR2 out to Johnson Valley is it’s not the least bit theoretical. People tow sizable toy haulers out here behind 2500-series trucks on a routine basis, and the Silverado 2500HD ZR2 remains utterly capable in this regard. The standard gasoline-burning, 401-hp 6.6-liter V-8 can tow 16,000 pounds with a conventional hitch, while the optional turbo-diesel 6.6-liter V-8 with 975 pound-feet of torque is good for 18,500 pounds. The diesel advantage shrinks where fifth-wheel towing is concerned, with both setups good for just over 18,000 pounds if you opt for the Gooseneck/Fifth Wheel Prep package (the Bison upgrade reduces fifth-wheel maximums for gas and diesel models to 16,900 and 15,570 pounds, respectively.) The thing is, after you unhook your trailer you can load the crew into your HD ZR2 tow vehicle and head off for some rocky perch to watch the nimbler UTVs and purpose-built Jeeps tackle the more insane trails of the King of the Hammers course.2500HD ZR2 interiorInside, both flavors of the ZR2 benefit from the Silverado HD lineup’s welcome 2024 interior refresh that features a vastly improved control layout, a configurable 12.3-inch instrument display, and a much-improved infotainment touchscreen that is 13.4 inches. The latter was of particular benefit when traversing rocky terrain and cresting uncertain brows, as the high-resolution forward-facing camera pairs nicely with the enlarged high-definition display to give the driver a clear picture of the potential perils that lie hidden in wait. The inevitable wide-angle distortion is no substitute for a spotter in truly precarious terrain, but this system works admirably well up to that point. The only potential improvement would be a camera-lens washer system to rinse off dust and grime.More on the Silverado ZR2Chevrolet is asking $72,595 for a gas-engine 2500HD ZR2, which is amazingly just $700 more than a 1500 ZR2. The entry price of a diesel-powered HD ZR2 rises to $82,085. That’s not as eye-watering as it seems at first glance—it’s comparable to both the Ram Power Wagon (gasoline only) and a similarly equipped Lariat-level F-250 Tremor, though the XLT version of the Ford is cheaper at $61,880 to start. But the ZR2 is a good deal on its own considering the unique worth of its suspension and its trick Multimatic DSSV shocks. Layering on the Bison package adds $9135 to the bottom line though. Whether that extra spend is worth it depends on how you value the AEV bumpers, skidplates, unique wheels, and GM’s Multi-Flex tailgate. None of that stuff will change the Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD ZR2’s performance, but it does make an excellent factory HD off-roader even burlier and more tricked out.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD ZR2Vehicle Type: front-engine, rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door pickup
PRICE
Base: ZR2, $72,595; ZR2 Bison, $81,830; ZR2 diesel, $82,085; ZR2 Bison diesel, $91,220
ENGINESPushrod 16-valve 6.6-liter V-8, 401 hp, 464 lb-ft; turbocharged and intercooled pushrod 32-valve 6.6-liter diesel V-8, 470 hp, 975 lb-ft
TRANSMISSION
10-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 159.1 inLength: 250.0–252.0 inWidth: 81.9 inHeight: 82.6 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 73/66 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 7450–8500 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 6.6–6.9 sec1/4-Mile: 15.0–15.4 secTop Speed: 98 mphTechnical 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 Lamborghini Revuelto is a supercar that’s also a declaration of war, on its segment rivals and Newtonian physics. When Lamborghini launched the Aventador in 2011, the car boasted an output of 691 horsepower, that representing a 30-hp bump over the outgoing Murciélago LP670-4 Superveloce. But even the most basic entry-level Revuelto’s hybridized V-12 will make a staggering 1001 horsepower, a massive 30 percent increase over the 770 horsepower of the last-of-line Aventador Ultimae. Having driven the Revuelto for the first time, we can report that it feels even more exciting than the numbers suggest.The Revuelto’s huge output is generated entirely without turbocharging. Lamborghini opted to use hybrid assistance to keep its naturally aspirated V-12 alive for another model cycle. The combustion engine still displaces 6.5 liters but now revs to a dizzying 9500 rpm, thanks to the use of finger followers in the valvetrain, just like the Corvette Z06. The most obvious change over the Aventador is the fact the engine has been turned 180 degrees, and it now drives an eight-speed dual-clutch gearbox, which is mounted behind it and powers the rear wheels.The V-12 makes 814 horsepower in its own right and is assisted by three electric motors. The one at the rear sits inside the gearbox housing and also acts as a starter-generator. Up front, an axial-flux motor drives each front wheel. There is no mechanical connection between the engine and the front wheels or across the front axle. Each of the trio of motors can deliver up to 148 horsepower, but the peak flow rate from the 3.8-kWh battery pack located in the central tunnel between the seats is equivalent to 187 horsepower, making that the peak electrical output. Our drive took place at Porsche’s Nardò proving ground in Italy, in production-spec cars. (The gawky little warning stickers are a requirement for any car at Nardò with high voltage onboard.) We also got the chance to drive the Revuelto back to back with an Aventador SVJ, the car that set an outright Nürburgring Nordschleife production-car record as recently as 2018.The Revuelto InteriorLamborghini admits that one of the few things Aventador owners regularly complained about was the cramped cockpit. The Revuelto’s cabin isn’t palatial, but it does feel appreciably bigger in terms of both headroom and shoulder space. A six-foot driver can wear a helmet without it regularly bumping against the roof. The new car gets a huge 3-D-printed air vent in the center of the dashboard, plus new technology, including three digital displays. A screen in front of the passenger can be configured to relay various shock-and-awe performance statistics. The Revuelto cabin also boasts stowage space, another Lamborghini sports-car first, plus a pair of Porsche-style pop-out cupholders that deploy from above the glovebox.Like other plug-in supercars, the Revuelto has an EV-only mode, here called Città. This is novel but unexciting—a silent, slow Lamborghini that feels about as quick as a first-generation Nissan Leaf. The EV range will be only around six miles, so Città is intended as a sneak-away stealth mode rather than a regularly used feature. Beyond that, a Hybrid mode starts and stops the V-12 as appropriate, but the vast majority of our time with the car was spent in the powertrain’s Performance mode, which keeps the engine running full time.Driving the RevueltoPerformance is huge. While we will have to wait to harvest acceleration numbers, the Revuelto proved its superiority over the Aventador SVJ when we chased one on the kilometer-long main straight. Even with Mario Fasanetto, Lamborghini’s chief test driver, at the wheel of the older car, the Revuelto chased it down like a GTP hypercar reeling in a GTD backmarker. Lamborghini claims that the Revuelto gets from 0 to 124 mph in 7.0 seconds—that’s just half a second slower than Bugatti’s figure for the Chiron on the same benchmark. The power-to-weight math puts the quarter-mile in the upper nines following a low-two-second leap to 60 mph.More important, electrification has removed none of the visceral experience of the V-12. The engine sounds savage when pushed, to the extent that it’s tempting to upshift well before the 9500-rpm rev limiter. Stick with it, though, and the engine pulls harder and harder all the way to its stratospheric redline. And while the Aventador lacked the low-down urge of its turbocharged rivals, the Revuelto’s electric motors give it instant punch even at lower engine speeds. In the Sport and Corsa modes, accelerator response felt as sharp as that of a quick EV. Lamborghini is also proud of having created two different launch-control functions, the more permissive of which (ordered by braking hard when stationary and then stomping on the gas) allows slight wheelspin from the rear. The different dynamic modes bring big changes to the Revuelto’s character. Although the softest, Strada, doesn’t turn it into a plush grand tourer, it does smooth the transmission and accelerator response and soften the adaptive dampers. Lamborghini says Strada also limits peak output to a mere 873 horsepower, although you’re unlikely to detect that difference in the real world. Choosing Sport increases output to 895 horsepower, stiffens the suspension, and also brings a much more permissive stability-control setting that allows significant low-speed yaw angles before intervening. It also quickens the shifts and adds a head-nodding torque bump to full-throttle upshifts. The max-attack Corsa mode unlocks the full 1001 horsepower and is designed to maximize track performance.Per Lamborghini’s figures, the Reveulto is 490 pounds heavier than the Aventador, which puts it just north of 4400 pounds, but on track it honestly doesn’t feel as porky as that sounds. Instead, it seems more agile and responsive than its predecessor when they’re driven back to back. The SVJ needs to be wrestled into slower corners and requires throttle discipline to prevent inelegant understeer. The Reveulto’s rear steering and ability to bias torque side to side means it turns in much more keenly, seems to find apexes more easily, and enjoys superior traction on the way out. It is much more stable under hard braking too. More LamborghinisThe Reveulto is a car that links Lamborghini’s past and future. Like all its predecessors back to the Miura, it uses a naturally aspirated V-12 engine, although one of unprecedented potency. But it also features a plug-in electric powertrain that, although it has added mass, has brought significant and obvious improvements to the way the car drives (as well as marginally cutting emissions). Buyers have responded—Lamborghini says the first two years of production are already spoken for. Now, after a drive of the first Revuelto, the big question is how Lamborghini will make something so fast and so exciting faster and more exciting in the spicier variants that inevitably will follow. Yet, somehow, it surely will. SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Lamborghini RevueltoVehicle Type: mid-engine, front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base: $608,358
POWERTRAIN
DOHC 48-valve 6.5-liter V-12, 814 hp, 535 lb-ft + 3 AC motors, 148 hp, 258 lb-ft (combined output: 1001 hp; 3.8-kWh lithium-ion battery pack; 7.0-kW onboard charger)Transmissions: 8-speed dual-clutch automatic/direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 109.4 inLength: 194.8 inWidth: 80.0 inHeight: 45.7 inCurb Weight (C/D est): 4450 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 2.3 sec100 mph: 5.1 sec1/4-Mile: 9.7 secTop Speed: 218 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 11/9/16 mpgCombined Gasoline + Electricity: 35 MPGeEV Range: 5 miSenior European CorrespondentOur man on the other side of the pond, Mike Duff lives in Britain but reports from across Europe, sometimes beyond. He has previously held staff roles on UK titles including CAR, Autocar and evo, but his own automotive tastes tend towards the Germanic, owning both a troublesome 987-generation Porsche Cayman S and a Mercedes 190E 2.5-16. More

From the February 1995 issue of Car and Driver.Generation Xers may be too young to recall Chrysler’s roller­coaster ride through the Eighties. Especially now that the No. 3 Amer­ican automaker seems to be going from success to success and leads the Big Three in profits per vehicle. But at both ends of the decade, the company sat per­ilously on the brink. First there was the brush with bank­ruptcy at the start of the Eighties, when the company’s cash coffers were bare and the banks unwilling to extend loans. Chairman Lee Iacocca saved the day and made his reputation by fast-talking the federal government into guaranteeing loans for a billion-five. Chrysler paid back the money from profits it made on the 1981 K-car and its numerous derivatives. Unfortunately, over-reliance on aging and inbred K-car descendants brought the company again to its knees late in the decade. By 1988, Chrysler was in the process of remaking itself, but the new line of products was then years away.One particular K-car derivative—the most successful one—kept the company going through this age of anxiety. It was the minivan, and it was an instant hit when it was invented by Chrysler in 1983. Not too big, not too small, the minivan was easy to park, yet it offered room for passengers to stretch out and move around in ways that a station wagon, which it would virtually replace, never could. Chrysler’s two main minivans, the Plymouth Voyager and the Dodge Caravan, have for ten years dominated the market, at times grabbing almost half the minivan pie while 11 other competitors shared the other half. But, as the high-rolling Jim Bakker was chagrined to discover, nothing lasts for­ever. Ever-better entries like the sleek Ford Windstar and the Mercury Villager/Nissan Quest and the new Honda Odyssey could reslice that pie. Enter now the new 1996 Chrysler mini­van, the first ground-up redesign of the original. Taking no chance with this fam­ily jewel, Chrysler went straight to the world’s foremost minivan experts—cur­rent Chrysler owners. Clinics were held all around the country to evaluate new feature ideas and to listen to gripes, praise, and suggestions from these minivan cogno­scenti in the development of the new fam­ily hauler. Here’s what Chrysler heard and what was done. Don’t give us a smooth, slick jelly­bean—jellybeans look small, and small isn’t good. Chrysler’s response: a clean, fresh design that lowers the drag coefficient from 0.41 to 0.35, while retaining a familiar two-box design. In addition to looking big, it should be big. The van’s new interior is more than nine inches wider than before (exterior girth is up just five inches), three or four inches longer (long or short wheelbase), and 0.5 inch taller. As a result, the short minivan has more interior volume than last year’s long van (141 cubic feet), and the new long van can carry a class-leading 166 cubic feet of detritus. The space is also more practical: the rear hatch sill is lower, a full-sized Igloo cooler will now fit behind the rear seat in the short van, and the long van can swallow the requisite four-by-eight drywall with the rear seats folded. Versatility is king. Make the rear seats easy to move and remove. The weight of those rear seats has been reduced, thanks to light alloy construction. Unlatching the rearmost seat now deploys a set of rollers to facili­tate moving the seat between mounting locations inside the car, or around the garage. It’s not quite as innovative as the Honda Odyssey’s fold-into-the-floor seat or the Villager’s roller-track seat, but those approaches both compromise maximum cargo capacity. The optional buckets not only tilt and slide forward to permit access to the rear seat, but they also return to their previous setting. Four side doors would make it easier for my elderly relatives to get in and out. But also: A left­-side door opens into traffic and could put my kids in danger. A new left-side sliding door (with a child-protection latch) will be optional. Make the sliding doors easier to use. Now both sliding doors will ride on ball bearings in tracks that have not been through the paint shop. The track that guides the rear of the door is discreetly hid­den below the rear side windows. Very slick. It’d be nice to be able to make a U-turn in my own county. An added 3.1 inches of track shaves three feet from the turning­-circle diameter. There are other improvements. To increase driver comfort, the seat-track travel has been increased 1.2 inches to accommodate 98 percent of the popula­tion, and the seatbelt latch now moves with the seat. The steering wheel has been shifted to line up with the driver (it used to be an inch to the right). The cowl is 4.8 inches lower, the side-window beltline is an inch lower, and the upper edge of the windshield is moved up for a Panavision view of the road. The instrument panel wraps around the driver to put all buttons and switches within easy reach, but there’s still a clear pathway to the rear seats for tending the brood en route. To keep things cool back there, rear air-conditioning vents have been placed along both sides of the roof. Beneath the skin of this new S-body (NS in insider lingo), very few parts carry over from the current S-body van, the structure of which dates to the 1984 model year. Bumper and cooling requirements increase the overhangs, adding seven to eight inches in length, but weight gain was held to just 110 pounds for the short van and 175 pounds for the long van. The all-­new structure is 70 percent stiffer in tor­sional rigidity, despite being larger and offering a left-side door. Engine choices will include the new balance-shafted DOHC 2.4-liter four­-cylinder and slightly revised versions of the current crop of V-6s in 3.0-, 3.3-, and 3.8-liter displacements. (Europeans will also get two more four-cylinders: a 2.0-liter and a 2.5-liter turbodiesel.) The familiar MacPherson-strut front suspension bolts to new upper mounts and an isolated aluminum subframe. The tra­ditional space-saving rigid rear axle is now isolated from the leaf springs, which are themselves isolated from the body. More Minivans!A short drive in an early prototype indi­cates that great strides have been made in powertrain and road noise isolation in the new S. Power and acceleration are com­petitive but not outstanding relative to the current crop of minivans. Maneuvering in tight quarters is easier thanks to the improved visibility and the smaller turn­ing circle.Chrysler’s budget for the defense of its ten-year minivan domination was $2.3 billion. Based on our brief experience with the new secret weapon, it looks like that kind of money goes further at the Penta­star than it does at the Pentagon. We’ll find out if it goes far enough when the new minivan hits the streets this spring. Stay tuned to C/D and CNN for reports from the front. SpecificationsSpecifications
1996 Chrysler MinivansVehicle Type: front-engine, front- or all-wheel-drive, 5- or 7-passenger, 4- or 5-door van
BASE PRICES (ESTIMATED)$17,500–$31,000
ENGINESDOHC 16-valve 2.4-liter inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, 141 hp, 160 lb-ft; SOHC 3.0-liter 12-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, 148 hp, 172 lb-ft; pushrod 3.3-liter 12-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, 158 hp, 203 lb-ft; pushrod 3.8-liter 12-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, 166 hp, 227 lb-ft 
TRANSMISSIONS3- or 4-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.3–119.3 inLength: 186.3–199.6 inWidth: 75.0 inHeight: 68.5 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 58/54–58/46–52 ft3Cargo Volume, Seats in/out (SWB): 15/141 ft3 ; seats in/out (LWB): 23/166 ft3 >Curb Weight (C/D est): 3400–4150 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 9.0–12.0 sec1/4-Mile: 17.0–19.0 sec
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)City/Highway: 15–20/20–27 mpg  More

Mountain goats look unbalanced—they have goofy faces accented by a tuft of chin hair, and their heads look far too small for their bodies. Yet these large, oddly proportioned beasts possess extreme rock-climbing capability, able to navigate sheer cliff faces and perch on the narrowest of ledges. In the automotive kingdom, the new 2024 Subaru Crosstrek Wilderness is similarly deceptive. Compared to boxy body-on-frame off-roaders such as the Jeep Wrangler and Ford Bronco, the Crosstrek’s tall-boy hatchback stance and smallish size don’t suggest all-terrain competence, even with its acres of plastic body cladding. But our first drive of the Crosstrek Wilderness—which took place largely on trails through the desert surrounding Zion National Park in Utah— revealed a surprisingly spry and adept machine, one that was able to climb steeper hills and traverse more treacherous terrain than expected while maintaining the comfortable on-road demeanor of a standard Crosstrek.The Wilderness badge brings a host of upgrades. Copper accents on the exterior and interior spruce up the Crosstrek’s design, the comfortable seats are wrapped in Subaru’s water-resistant StarTex synthetic material, and there are standard rubber floor mats. There are substantive changes as well. A 0.6-inch lift courtesy of a revised suspension with taller springs gives the Wilderness 9.3 inches of ground clearance. That significantly outdoes other off-road-oriented crossovers including the Jeep Compass Trailhawk (8.6 inches) and the Ford Bronco Sport Badlands (up to 8.8 inches). The raised ride height improves approach and departure angles, from 18.0 degrees to 20.0 degrees and from 30.1 to 33.0 degrees, respectively. The breakover angle also increases, from 19.7 to 21.1 degrees. This was crucial on the surprisingly challenging off-road course Subaru set up, with its soft sand, slick mud, and steep hills. Despite ascending and descending at serious angles, we never heard any sickening scrapes from the Subie’s front end nor did we end up high-sided on a narrow peak. Had we misjudged the clearance, the Wilderness sports an aluminum skid plate that protects its vital powertrain components. At times, we wished for a front-facing camera—key for spotting obstacles in the road ahead and seeing where to go next when pointed skyward atop a hill—as found on off-road editions of the Forester and Outback. Unfortunately, it’s not offered here.The Wilderness uses the 2.5-liter flat-four that’s optional on the standard Crosstrek, and with 182 horsepower and 178 pound-feet of torque, it isn’t particularly quick. Acceleration is adequate around town, but short on-ramps can become nerve-racking. A Crosstrek Limited, which uses the same engine, needed 8.1 seconds to reach 60 mph in our testing. The Wilderness should fare about the same, though it does get a shorter final-drive ratio—4.11:1 versus 3.70:1—which allowed it to easily dash up steep inclines and trudge through deep sand with a determined driver behind the wheel. The trade-off is poorer fuel economy: The Wilderness’s 27-mpg EPA combined rating is 2 mpg less than the standard 2.5-liter Crosstrek’s estimate.Although the engine goes unchanged, the tow rating increases from 1500 to 3500 pounds, thanks to a more powerful radiator fan and a new oil cooler. That greater towing capacity sould allow drivers to haul a small boat or camper for outdoorsy excursions. More adventurous owners can also affix a roof-top tent, as the beefed-up roof rack provides a 700-pound static load capacity.Like all Crosstreks, the Wilderness gets a version of Subaru’s X-Mode, which reprograms the transmission, throttle, and torque distribution for varying terrain. On much of our journey we used the Deep Snow/Mud mode, which deftly allocated torque to the wheels with the most traction. Engaging X-Mode also activates hill-descent control when under 12 mph. The crossover’s computers confidently control the vehicle’s speed, adding a safety net on sharp descents and leaving the driver to focus on steering around pointy rocks and deep ruts. The Crosstrek’s steering feels vague on pavement—especially in long, sweeping corners—but the lighter effort was welcome off-road, minimizing fatigue over several hours of exploration.Much of the Wilderness’s off-road prowess likely can be attributed to its Yokohama Geolandar A/T tires. Mounted on black 17-inch wheels, the beefier treads provided sufficient traction on loose surfaces and withstood sharp impacts from rocks. Yet the all-terrain tires didn’t negatively impact the ride on-road or bring a noticeable increase in road noise. Like all Crosstrek trims, the Wilderness is a soft-riding machine, and the cushioned chassis helped it feel stable at high speeds on smoother dirt roads. Explore the Wilderness LineupThe Wilderness’s extra capability doesn’t send the Crosstrek’s price sky-high. At $33,290 to start, the Wilderness is only $1100 more than the Limited model and is cheaper than all-terrain competitors such as the Compass Trailhawk ($37,990) and the larger Bronco Sport Badlands ($39,985). The Crosstrek Wilderness may not climb rocks quite like a Wrangler or jump over dunes like a Bronco, and its 2.5-liter engine could stand a few more ponies, but the versatile crossover’s off-road performance proved that the Wilderness is not an appearance package. It’s more goat than sheep. SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Subaru Crosstrek WildernessVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: $33,290
ENGINE
DOHC 16-valve flat-4, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 152 in3, 2498 cm3Power: 182 hp @ 5800 rpmTorque: 178 lb-ft @ 3700 rpm
TRANSMISSION
continuously variable automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 104.9 inLength: 176.4 inWidth: 71.7 inHeight: 63.6 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 55/44 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 55/20 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3500 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 8.1 sec1/4-Mile: 16.3 secTop Speed: 120 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 27/25/29 mpgAssociate News EditorCaleb Miller began blogging about cars at 13 years old, and he realized his dream of writing for a car magazine after graduating from Carnegie Mellon University and joining the Car and Driver team. He loves quirky and obscure autos, aiming to one day own something bizarre like a Nissan S-Cargo, and is an avid motorsports fan. More

BMW and Mercedes-Benz are taking two wildly different approaches to the early stages of electrification. Mercedes chose to develop a parallel line of distinct EV models, resulting in the carton of battery-electric eggs known as EQ. BMW is taking the opposite tack, slotting its EVs into the same bodies as its bread-and-butter gas offerings. Munich rocked our world with the i4, the electric version of the 4-series and one of the few EVs ever to make our 10Best Cars list. The company then scaled it up to the also-impressive barge-bodied i7. Now it has taken everything it learned from that luxohammer and scaled it down for middle management. The result, the 2024 i5 electric sedan, is just as captivating. Keeping It in the FamilyIf you thought the i7’s split-headlight front end and call-an-orthodontist underbite rear were perhaps a bit too weird, you’ll likely find comfort in the i5’s vastly more traditional three-box shape. Single-piece headlights flank right-size kidney grilles. A couple of distinct character lines draw your eyes rearward and terminate at a bumper that doesn’t look like a pint of Cold Stone left in the sun. In person, the EV actually looks a bit tighter than the outgoing 5-series generation, despite being 3.8 inches longer, 1.3 inches wider, and over an inch1.4 inches taller.The cabin is much closer to a carbon copy of the i7’s, which is good because BMW nailed it with that model. A 12.3-inch digital gauge cluster pairs with a 14.9-inch infotainment touchscreen behind a single pane of glass spanning half the dashboard. Physical switchgear is limited to the stuff ahead of the center armrest. That sweet strip of ambient lighting is still here, ringing the front half of the cab in high-end crystalline glory.The plastics that make up the door panels and window switches may not be as premium as the 7’s high-gloss stuff, but it all still feels very nice. The current Mercedes interiors, meanwhile, can feel constricting with their large center console. The Bimmer’s innards are about as claustrophobic as an empty warehouse. Horsepower, but Make It ComplicatedClearly there’s a missive somewhere within BMW that demands a car must have one aspect so convoluted, it sounds like it’s spoken in tongues. In the i5, it’s the output. Don’t have an engineering degree? Don’t worry; some of our staffers do, and we’re still waving smelling salts under their noses.The rear-wheel-drive i5 eDrive40’s single motor puts out 308 horsepower and 295 lb-ft of torque—unless it’s in Sport mode, where horsepower rises to 335. You can also boost torque, but only by pulling the Boost paddle or engaging launch control, at which point it rises to 317 lb-ft. We reckon the i5 eDrive40 will reach 60 mph in a comfortable 5.0 seconds.The all-wheel-drive M60 repeats this nonsense but with higher numbers; normal output is 510 horses and 586 lb-ft, and Sport mode bumps power to 593, while the Boost-or-launch-control shuffle increases twist to 605 lb-ft. Our 60-mph estimate drops to 3.3 seconds on this model.If someone asks you how much power your i5 makes, just give them the highest numbers. Confusing a stranger to death may incur civil liability.Two Models, Two Different VibesWe started our drive on the tight, anfractuous roads leading into the mountains from Lisbon, Portugal. Even on pavement whose quality is best described as “American,” the single-motor i5 eDrive40 proved serene. It’s clear that comfort is this model’s primary goal—mission accomplished. Air springs are standard in the back, with good ol’ coil springs up front. Our sample car was equipped with optional electronically controlled dampers. No matter the mode we chose, the ride quality hewed toward pillowy, but not so much that it felt loose or uncontrolled. It’s exactly the kind of ride you want from a luxury sedan for serious businessfolk.Switching over to the i5 M60 was like going from decaf to straight espresso. While the eDrive40’s acceleration was merely adequate, the M60’s was closer to unnecessary, befitting the M badges plastered all over the body. This model’s suspension includes M-specific tuning, so it rides just a bit more stiffly than the eDrive40, but it still remains compliant enough for daily driving. If you like a little (or, in Sport mode, more than a little) sportiness, this is the model to get. Provided you can stomach the upcharge, that is: The i5 eDrive40 starts at $67,795, but the M60 jacks that up to $85,095.We also had a chance to take a crack at the latest iteration of BMW’s Highway Assistant. Think of it as Teutonic Super Cruise—it permits hands-off driving with monitoring via an eye-tracking camera in the gauge cluster. Its latest parlor trick is that the driver can confirm system-suggested lane changes with a mere glance to the corresponding side-view mirror, a feature that works with impressive competence. The idea of changing lanes without first activating the turn signal should come naturally for many BMW owners. Two Models, One BatteryBoth i5 variants rely on the same battery. Under the body is a lithium-ion unit with 81.2 kWh of usable capacity. Plug it into the mains via a 240-volt Level 2 setup, and it will pull up to 11.0 kW through its onboard AC charger. On the DC side, the i5 charges with more gusto than its bigger brother, peaking at 205 kW versus the i7’s max of 195 kW. At full clip, that’ll send the battery’s state of charge from 10 to 80 percent in a half-hour. EPA range estimates for the i5 eDrive40 are from 270 to 295 miles per charge, with the zippier M60 lowering that to 240 to 256 miles, depending on tire choice. As with the i7 M70, the i5 has a new option that can help get you to the next plug if your mental math didn’t quite add up. Max Range mode scales back motor output, reduces the top speed to 56 mph, and disables the climate control. BMWBMW claims it has retooled its charging software to allow the battery to accept the highest rate of charging it can as quickly as possible and at states of charge higher than “damn near empty.” BMW claims to have benchmarked the i5’s 400-volt electrical architecture against 800-volt competitors, and it believes it’s close to reaching charge parity with those better-endowed rivals. We look forward to testing that for ourselves. These max charging rates are under ideal conditions, of course; considering that the current U.S. charging infrastructure is a patchwork of eldritch horrors, expect your results to vary.Five Alive!Down to Brass TacksOur early time with the i5 reinforces the notion that BMW is executing at a high level with its main-line EVs. Both variants of the i5 feel like a mid-size executive sedan should. By playing it closer to the familial chest with the i5, BMW can usher its buyers into the future without forcing them out of their comfort zone. SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 BMW i5Vehicle Type: rear- or front- and rear-motor, rear- or all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base: eDrive40, $67,795; M60 xDrive, $85,095
POWERTRAIN
Motors: 1 or 2 current-excited synchronous AC, 335 hp, 317 lb-ft or 258 and 335 hp, 269 and 317 lb-ftPower: 335 or 593 hpTorque: 317 or 605 lb-ft Battery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 81.2 kWhOnboard Charger: 11.0 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 205 kWTransmissions, F/R: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 117.9 inLength: 199.2 inWidth: 74.8 inHeight: 59.3–59.6 inTrunk Volume: 17 ft3Passenger Volume, F/R: 55/45 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4950–5250 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.3–5.0 sec100 mph: 8.0–12.1 sec1/4-Mile: 11.7–13.6 secTop Speed: 120–143 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 85–105/85–104/86–105 MPGeRange: 240–295 miSenior 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

From the February 1995 issue of Car and Driver.First, you should know that the road to Moose Factory, Ontario, is not a road. This is a fact of history and geography. And there were no roads to its neighboring village Moosonee, either, when the Hudson’s Bay Company settled there in 1673. Second, there exists maybe 15 miles of byways between these two villages, and only about a quarter-mile of them are paved (or were before freeze-up—the tarmac reverts to gravel slurry during spring thaw).Third, Moose Factory is so remote that it is excused from Ontario’s Highway Traffic Act. This means that neither drivers nor vehicles need be licensed. It is a local custom, however, to frown on permitting children less than three years old and three feet tall to use the family vehicle. These infants are, however, encouraged to pilot four-wheel all-terrain vehicles up and down Moose Factory’s mud-­slick streets, but only at wide-open throttle. To reach Moose Factory and Moosonee is not easy. From our lavish Hogback office complex, we drove 775 miles in the direction of the North Pole, at which point the road ceased being a road and began being spruce trees. Then we chained our four-wheel-drive trucks atop one-and-a-­half railroad cars (six chains per vehicle, each tightened with a “Johnson bar,” an item we somehow neglected to bring along) and allowed the Polar Bear Express (a train that runs from Cochrane, Ontario, and is anything but express) to carry us 200 miles farther north. Again, this distance was easy to gauge; the track stopped being a track and began being spruce trees. This causes the train to halt at the mouth of James Bay, which feeds Hudson Bay, which washes the edges of Arctic pack ice. 3rd Place: Ford ExplorerAlthough the Ford Explorer has been the best-selling sport­-utility vehicle since its inception in 1991, it brought up the rear in our last SUV test (March 1994). On the road and off, the Explorer was the least enjoyable to drive. For 1995, the Explorer has received its first major makeover, but it wasn’t enough to move it to the head of the class in Moosonee. HIGHS: Stylish dashboard with dual airbags, lots of elbow room.LOWS: Short-lived front-seat comfort, off-road clumsiness, leering chrome-plated front fascia.VERDICT: Works best as a foul-weather station wagon.The 1995 Explorer gets a new unequal-length control-arm front suspension, which replaces Ford’s famous ”twin I-beam” swing axles. The control arms add steering precision and straight-line stability that the Explorer did not have before. The suspension also allowed an impressive 57.3-mph clip in our emergency lane-change test, where we found we could not beat the power-steering pump as we could in past Explorers.The Ford’s off-road behavior is still its Achilles’ heel, despite a new ”Control Trac” four­-wheel-drive system with a computer-controlled multi-disc clutch that dials up automatic engagement of the front wheels when rear-wheel slip is sensed. On curving washboard surfaces, the steering goes numb with understeer that is difficult to predict, per­haps due to delay in the Control Trac system. Turn off those roads and into the woods and the Explorer lunges in and out of mud bogs and holes, tossing passengers (particularly their heads) abruptly from side to side. The Explorer’s new front fascia looks, well, controversial to our eyes. We didn’t find the Explorer’s complicated power seats very comfortable for long drives either, because of poor lumbar support. But the Explorer is fleshed out in other areas. It’s the only sport-utility at its price to offer dual airbags. Of the three vehicles tested here, it alone featured adjustable shoulder belts, rear-seat stereo controls, and separate head restraints. There’s even a tissue box in the console. And as the charts indicate, the Explorer is the most voluminous of the three, especially in the rear-seat and cargo areas. More Explorer!When used exclusively as an on-road station wagon—what the vast majority are used for—the roomy and feature-laden Explorer fights the good fight. Every Great White North inhabitant we spoke to thought this truck was the best thing since Tim Horton’s donuts, so it earned a perfect “10” in the “moose factor” column. If the Explorer wins you over similarly, just remember to buy a back-support pillow from Pep Boys, and stay away from the muskeg. —Don Schroeder1995 Ford Explorer XLT160-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 4442 lbBase/as-tested price: $23,915/$25,625Interior volume, front/rear/cargo: 56/49/42 cu ftTowing, as tested: 4000 lb C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 10.7 sec1/4 mile: 17.9 sec @ 76 mph100 mph: 43.5 secBraking, 70­-0 mph: 199 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.67 g C/D observed fuel economy: 18 mpg The crude roads of Moosonee and Moose Factory are main­tained by the Swampy Cree Indians of the Moose Band Nation. Historically, the art of road maintenance has not come naturally to the Swampy Cree. Some members have developed a creative facility with the municipal road­grader, but you have to deploy a helicopter to appre­ciate their talents—which we did. In C/D’s quadrant of the North American tectonic plate, Moose Factory is as far north as we can travel in a Chevrolet Blazer, Ford Explorer, and Jeep Grand Cherokee. Well, actually, we might have made it a lit­tle farther if the muskeg (the “Northern Exposure” term for “bog”) and the half­-mile-wide Moose River had attained its annual frozen Dilly Bar countenance, but we were a week too early for that. In any event, northern Ontario historian John Milne warned: “Last winter, I destroyed my company Cherokee at the end of a long, long drift down the ice road across the Moose River. I hooked a pressure ridge [there’s four feet of tide here, so the ice is rarely smooth], setting a height and dis­tance record for sport-ute catapulting on ice.”Moosonee and Moose Factory are both tiny tracts carved out of an astoundingly flat landscape of 30-foot-tall trees. From the air, you can see the curvature of the Earth. The wet, incessant wind off James Bay makes this out­post damnably unpleasant dur­ing the six months of winter, when temperatures of minus 41 Fahrenheit are not unusual. But the annual 89-inch snowfall is not excessive by Arctic stan­dards. The place constantly reminds you how far north you have ven­tured. For example, although both villages are in Ontario, the map’s legend stipulates that nearby islands lie within the Dis­trict of Keewatin in the North­west Territories. In Moose Fac­tory, one of the streets is named Mook-I-June-I-Beg. Another reminder: We passed a store that sold ferrets for $29.99. Associate Editor Marty Padgett had to be restrained. “I want to be the first to claim a live ferret on my expense report,” he said. For the 1400 or so Cree Indians here, life is forlorn. The place used to be part of our Distant Early Warning Line, with six-­story radar domes aplenty, but the Russians no longer seem inclined to invade, and satellites monitor them better anyhow. The military thus withdrew, along with its money, leaving behind dented mobile homes and row after row of 1950s-era military-issue Cracker Jack houses with twisted propane spigots causing random concussive fireballs. Moosonee and Moose Factory have emerged as something of an artificially sustained movie set, with the Cree thriving not on what they can trap but on “moisturized chicken,” L.A. Raiders fashion wear, a daily trainload of tax-free Players cigarettes, and color TV beamed from Tor­onto. Sadly, the best-­looking building in Moosonee is an alco­hol rehab center. The ride up there on the Polar Bear Express is a five-hour trip, unless the engi­neer stops to pick up lost hunters, or stops to pick up eight loads of logs, or stops to examine the pieces of the locomotive engine that just blew up. Our engineer did all three. Nonetheless, there are many interesting sights, not counting the Labatt’s Ice in the bar car. There are, for example, remote-controlled dams belting out some 500,000 random volts to Ontario’s power grid. One of them, the Otter Rapids dam, is operated not by persons on site but by VHF and microwave signals tapped out 30 miles distant by gentlemen who, while attempting to pick up the adult Channel “J” on their satellite dishes, could inad­vertently unleash 400 million gallons of 34-degree water on unsuspecting down-stream beavers whose dams are not as sophisti­cated. There is also an end­less diorama of frost­-wracked black spruce, sphagnum moss, ground lichen, sedges, dwarf birch, and tangled tama­rack. And beyond that, one of the planet’s most panoramic views of nothing. Dick Kelley|Car and Driver2nd Place: Chevrolet Blazer LTAfter a twelve-year run, Chevy finally replaced its smaller Blazer (and the GMC Jimmy) with a new model that brings GM within a bumper-length of best-in-class.The Blazer’s attractive new clothes didn’t turn many heads during our 1350-mile enduro, but they hide substantial revi­sions to this truck’s platform. The Chevy’s body felt stout even on the roughest road , and its pushbutton four-wheel drive was nearly as adept as the Grand Cherokee’s system at tackling the quarry pits and muddy potholes of Moosonee.HIGHS: Stout but shapely new body, peppy but parsimonious V-6, polished ride.LOWS: Interior plastic, elfin-sized rear seats and cargo hold.VERDICT: After a lengthy hiatus, GM’s sport-utility is back in the big leagues.On the frost-weary roads to and from Cochrane, the LT model’s premium sus­pension, with its expen­sive deCarbon shock absorbers, provided the smoothest ride of the three trucks.The 195-hp Vortec V-6, now the standard Blazer powerplant, carries over unchanged. It propels the Blazer to 60 mph in a spir­ited 9.1 seconds. In every acceleration and passing test, the Blazer dusts the Jeep and the Explorer­ and it beat them in observed fuel economy by 1 mpg.More Blazer!For $26,969—highest price of the three—the Blazer LT came nearly as well equipped as the Explorer. Although the Blazer does not offer the Explorer’s passenger-side airbag, its tab did include a CD player. After 14 hours of driving one day, nobody complained about the leather-clad power seats. Editors also liked the Blazer’s new simple and readable gauges. Unfortunately, this truck suffers from the same problems that plague many other recently introduced Chevys: over­-investment in cheap-looking hard plastic on the dashboard and door panels.The Blazer’s second-place finish was more a result of the Grand Cherokee’s superior off-road prowess, not to mention the Blazer’s lack of back-seat and cargo room. This truck’s split-fold rear seats sit less than a foot off the floor, and their size—the seatbacks are just 20 inches high—make them better suited for kids than adults. The Blazer’s cargo area is also the smallest of the three.If room in the rear is of less importance to you than power and a smooth ride, your next conversation should be with a Chevrolet dealer. —Don Schroeder1995 Chevrolet Blazer LT195-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 4146 lbBase/as-tested price: $25,975/$26,969Interior volume, front/rear/cargo: 56/46/16 cu ftTowing, as tested: 5500 lb C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.1 sec1/4 mile: 17.0 sec @ 80 mph100 mph: 30.0 secBraking, 70­-0 mph: 218 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.67 gC/D observed fuel economy: 19 mpg Moose Factory huddles on an island in the Moose River—a mile-long trip by water taxi, winding around sand bars. When the ice breaks up, the place some­times floods. This explains the drain holes in the floor of the 135-year-old St. Thomas Anglican church, which might otherwise float off its foundation and become a tourist attraction where not even the tod­dlers’ all-terrain vehicles could reach it.The Cree in Moose Factory are here because, well, be­cause their previ­ously nomadic forebears grew attached to the consumer goods and activity offered at the Hudson’s Bay store. It opened on this site 322 years ago. Back then, the enterprise was known as the “Company of Gentlemen Adventurers of England Trading Into Hud­son’s Bay,” but the more forward-think­ing of its employees realized that such a storefront sign would require a hellish amount of neon, hence the shortened ”The Bay” appellation Canadians know today. As it happened, Hudson’s camp became the first permanent English-speaking settlement in what we now call Ontario. Despite the intervening 322 winters, a few of the storekeepers’ structures still stand—40-foot-square white clapboard houses with red, steeply pitched roofs designed to shed snow. Standing big as you please nearby are graffiti-stained bronze cannons, dated 1843, littering the yard of the latest Company staff house, built 145 years ago. The arrangement back then was sim­ple. The Cree swapped animal pelts—fox, bear, badger, mink, marten, and “grizzle foxes”—for life’s necessities, at least if you count purple beads a necessity. Here is the barter schedule, as of 1774:1 beaver pelt= 3/4-pound colored beads1 beaver pelt= 12 dozen buttons1 beaver pelt= 20 fish hooks1 beaver pelt= 1 shirt (white or checked) For life’s real necessities, such as a gallon of brandy, more sacrifice was required: four beaver pelts. In addition to the Hudson’s Bay Com­pany (today called Northern Stores and selling not a single beaver pelt but a superb selection of TV dinners and toilet paper), Moosonee also attracted archrival Revîl­lon Fréres Trading Company. This firm eventually attained fame as Revlon, the musk peddlers who later afforded an F1 ride for Peter Revson and also supplied much-needed employment for Catherine Deneuve, who is not known to winter here.Both Moosonee and Moose Factory are knee-deep in wildlife. In the brackish bay are beluga whales, which we did not see, plus bald eagles and seals and the occasional polar bears who eat the seals, which we also did not see. There are moose, of course, one of which bolted before the Explorer and looked for all the world like a brown box­car on stilts. Plus timber wolves, a pack of whom not long ago loped into town and departed with a local pet. In this matter, the wolves acted as public servants. Both villages are awash in huskies, malamutes, and curs who howl incessantly. One blue-eyed husky, with the chest musculature of Arnold, leaped through our Ford’s window as the vehicle was moving toward Han­nah-Sailor Street. The beast landed on photographer Dick Kelley. He graciously exited a half-block later (the dog, not Dick). 1st Place: Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo”The sports car of the bunch.” That was the unanimous opin­ion of the three editors who logged enough miles in the Grand Cherokee to know the difference between a real moose factory and a Boyd Coddington-style bovine chopshop. HIGHS: Appealing power, usefully compact dimensions.LOWS: Awkward part-time four-wheel drive, baggy front seats.VERDICT: Walks like a good sedan, can hike when it needs to.The most agreeable combination of power and size pro­pelled the Grand Cherokee Laredo to the No. 1 spot. Its 190 horsepower is just 5 hp shy of the benchmark Blazer and 30 ahead of the Explorer. Plus, it’s the lightweight of the group: its 3762-pound curb weight makes it significantly lighter than either the Chevy or the Ford.More on the Grand Cherokee From the ArchiveThough it can’t outrun the torquey Blazer to 60 mph, the Grand Chero­kee’s adequate power is delivered smartly through Jeep’s clean-shifting trans­mission. Add to this the best brakes and the high­est cornering numbers of the bunch, and the Jeep emerges as the most reasonable imitator of a pleas­ing sports sedan.The Cherokee’s interior is not as large as the Explorer’s, but four Jeep occupants will find plenty of space front and rear. The front seats feel like bags of flour, but the rear cushions are at least as shapely as the Ford’s, and they offer more foot and knee space than in the Blazer. At this price level, the Jeep comes not with the ritzier electronically actuated four-wheel drive of the Explorer and Blazer, but with the simplest Jeep four-wheel-drive system (not intended for dry-pavement use) called “Command Trac.” Power can be applied to all four wheels by pulling on a console-mounted lever. The other two SUVs in this test engage all-wheel drive with the simple push of a button on the dash. Nonetheless, the Jeep handled our light off-road­ing so easily that we mostly left it in rear-wheel drive and played tail-out games in the gravel.Dislikes? The optional full-size spare tire is mounted in the rear cargo area, taking up valuable stow space (dealers offer a tailgate-mount kit). There’s no passenger airbag. And the side defoggers need a fan-speed boost to do their job prop­erly. Still, even without the attractions of V-8 power and full-­time all-wheel drive, the Grand Cherokee earns its off-road­ing merit badge with a scout’s honor. —Martin Padgett Jr.1995 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo190-hp inline-6, 4-speed automatic, 3762 lbBase/as-tested price: $25,706/$26,193Interior volume, front/rear/cargo: 54/46/40 cu ftTowing, as tested: 2000 lb C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.7 sec1/4 mile: 17.3 sec @ 78 mph100 mph: 35.0 secBraking, 70­-0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.73 gC/D observed fuel economy: 18 mpg Some of the wildlife possesses neither genus nor species. We are talking sas­quatch, here. Its prints were photographed 24 miles from Moose Factory only a week before our arrival. Well, it might not have been a sasquatch. Maybe a bigfoot, or pos­sibly Shaquille O’Neal. Whatever it was, it left a spate of 17-inch-long footprints with humanoid toes, and it kept at least two Cree hunters up all night in anxious foment. An Ontario Ministry of Resources employee, who did not wish to be identi­fied, said the footprints were likely the handiwork of an Alaskan brown bear the size of Trump Plaza. However, Joe Craw­ford, the kindly Scot proprietor of Moosonee’s Osprey Inn, insisted it was the spoor of something far more dangerous. Namely, “a lunatic who fashions massive feet out of plywood and stomps around in the mud and snow so that tourists like you [he looked at me when he said this] have something pointless to discuss.”A food staple in Moosonee is french fries soaked in gravy, topped with melted Velveeta. This is probably not a Cree recipe. Actually, it turned out to taste good. But, just to be safe, we had earlier assigned Padgett to prepare retaliatory rations. Marty expended way too much energy on this project. Using a felt-tipped pen, he wrote on plastic Baggies the names of his creations. Here are three: -Turkey and swiss on white: Anna Nicole’s Twelve-Step. -Ham and swiss on pump: Rodney’s Hyundai. -Baloney on rye: The sandwich for­merly known as Prince. More Off-Road Adventures From the ArchivePadgett also customized our trail mix with mustard powder, pillow pretzels filled with peanut butter, and more raisins (“nature’s little earth movers,” he glowed). We scattered this amalgam near emaciated seagulls, who, not surprisingly, seemed to prefer the aforementioned french fries. In my survival pack, an unnamed mem­ber of our party deposited a selection of human-skull temporary tattoos and a but­ton that declared: “God grant me the seren­ity to know when to change my under­pants.” The latter is of some value, ace guide John Milne pointed out: “I know trappers nearby who wear the same under­wear all winter, but they don’t sweat much and they swap their T-shirts, long under­wear, pants, and wives at New Year’s.” Local ER medical technician Geoff Hutchison says: “A lot of folks here, they’re just saving a big enough nest egg so they can move south. But until you do, life can be hard, lonely, and boring. You sort of feel proud just to survive here.” Which is one reason that pinkish college­-boy tourists like us should not pose the question, “So, if this is Moose Factory, where are they assembled?” We made this mistake and learned only where moose are disassembled. This was at a hunting camp, where, mid-lunch, we had an all-too-inti­mate view of a 1200-pound moose whose legs were being cut off with a wood saw. You have to do this in order to haul the carcass home on your Ski-Doo trailer.Not many people know that. More