Car Reviews

From the October 2023 issue of Car and Driver.On the family-car evolutionary chart, the station wagon slithered out of the primordial ooze to beget the minivan, which the body-on-frame SUV drove to the brink of extinction. Soon enough, car companies realized that all most people want from an SUV is the look, which led to another form of mass-market people-moving machinery: the three-row crossover.This genetic mutation combines a buff-truck attitude with a carlike driving experience, and just about everybody makes one—hell, even Bentley. Thus, the competition is ruthless, with a new crop of candidates arriving nearly annually. View PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverIndeed, there’s a slew of fresh competitors vying to oust the reigning champ of the segment, the four-time 10Best-winning Kia Telluride. Mazda’s CX-90 brings a new rear-drive platform with turbocharged inline-six power and an upmarket interior. The Honda Pilot is redesigned for 2023 with a new V-6 and a beefed-up torque-vectoring rear end. Toyota’s Grand Highlander Platinum is a hybrid powerhouse, putting 362 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque to the task of family schlepping. Jeep now has the stretched Grand Cherokee L, which adds a third row while avoiding wiener-dog proportions. And, of course, there’s the Telluride, aging gracefully in its fourth model year. Yes, there are plenty of other three-row crossovers—we know. If your favorite isn’t here, that’s because it’s due for an incipient overhaul, it posted a mediocre showing in a previous comparo, or we asked for one and couldn’t get it. We also aimed for a mid-$50,000s price point, give or take a few thousand bucks, so that rules out your Dodge Durango Hellcats and Bentley Bentaygas. Think of this like the Academy Awards: It’s an honor just to be nominated. Nonetheless, over three days of pounding pavement and crunching gravel around Michigan’s Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, a winner emerged. Try to avoid skipping ahead, because the results might surprise you.View PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and Driver5th Place: Honda PilotThe Pilot is chock full of typically clever Honda engineering. Consider its eight-passenger seating stat, which lends the Pilot people-moving capability on par with minivans and the largest of body-on-frame SUVs. The center seat in the second row is removable, so if you don’t need to accommodate a full Olympic rowing team, you can convert the second row to captain’s chairs and stow the center seat in a cubby under the rear cargo floor. HIGHS: Flexible seating for seven or eight, nice price, tail-happy torque-vectoring rear end.LOWS: Powertrain just wants to chill, interior materials won’t wow you, needs more steering heft.VERDICT: A three-row SUV that’s more of a mutant minivan.Like the off-road-oriented TrailSport, the Elite also gets Honda’s trick torque-vectoring rear differential. Its all-wheel-drive system can send up to 70 percent of the engine’s torque to the rear axle, where an electric motor powers a pair of hydraulic pumps and clutch packs that can then send 100 percent of that torque to either side. Translation: The Pilot was the only vehicle in the test that could hold a drift, howling its way to a first-place 0.84-g skidpad result. It was also the second-least-expensive machine, with an as-tested price of $53,755. Plus, its third row offers easy access. Push a button, and the second-row seat slides forward out of the way. So what gives with the last-place finish?Blame the lack of acceleration. The Pilot uses Honda’s new double-overhead-cam 3.5-liter V-6, which makes 285 horsepower and 262 pound-feet of torque—five more horsepower and identical torque relative to the old SOHC engine. That nominal power increase is up against significant weight gain (more than 300 pounds compared to a 2020 model we tested), with predictable results: The Pilot got poky. Whereas the 2020 Pilot hit 60 mph in 6.2 seconds, the 2023 needed 7.2 seconds, putting it in second-to-last place in that category here. It was the slowest to 30 mph, pointing to off-the-line sluggishness that never really improves as the revs rise. One tester noted, “When you floored it to pass, you had to hope a car wouldn’t come around the bend a half-mile ahead.” Mind you, this was all with a single human aboard, near sea level. Add a carload of passengers and a mountain grade, and the Pilot will need even more time. View PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverView PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverIf that lack of acceleration and the Pilot’s featherlight steering effort were compensated by a rock-star interior or a breakthrough exterior design, that would be nice. But the Pilot is merely fine on both counts. Compared with the previous generation, it didn’t make any huge leaps forward and took at least one step back. Honda obviously knows how to build fun cars, but this isn’t one of them. Paging Acura: Get that 355-hp turbocharged V-6 over to the Pilot production line, stat. 2023 Honda Pilot Elite AWD285-hp V-6, 10-speed automatic, 4670 lbBase/as-tested price: $53,755/$53,755C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.2 sec1/4-mile: 15.7 sec @ 90 mph100 mph: 20.1 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 189 ftRoadholding, 300-ft skidpad: 0.84 g C/D observed fuel economy: 22 mpgView PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and Driver4th Place: Jeep Grand Cherokee LThe Jeep is a bit of an anomaly here—it belongs, yet it doesn’t. On paper, the Grand Cherokee L aligns with this crowd, but in reality, it fancies itself a more serious luxury SUV. “I am America’s Range Rover,” it seems to say. “If you try to compare me to a transverse-engine anything, I will climb that dune over there and pout.”HIGHS: Sublime isolation and ride quality, stretch-out interior room, beefy towing ability.LOWS: Skinny on features at this price, not quick, seats only six. VERDICT: A slow but otherwise premium experience at a premium price.And a Grand Cherokee is an American Range Rover, if you spend enough money. That’s the challenge in this context—there are a lot of features you can tack on to a Grand Cherokee L that were absent on this one because its $61,000 as-tested price already pushed past our target budget. So: no sunroof, no front passenger’s-side display screen, no V-8. All of those things are available, and going wild with options can rocket the price beyond $80,000. At which point, you might start considering actual Range Rovers. View PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverView PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverThis Limited L seats only six passengers, but all of them hospitably. There’s enough legroom for six-footers to occupy each row comfortably (simultaneously, we should add), and the third row’s scooped-out headliner—sort of like SUV Gurney bubbles—ensures adequate headroom in the wayback. The balanced rear-drive platform and its longitudinally oriented engine pay dividends in both styling and handling, with the Grand Cherokee L notching a second-place showing on the skidpad at 0.82 g. The Jeep was in a dead heat with the Honda in almost every acceleration test, which means the same criticism applies here—needs more power. Although we did like the vocal nature of the Jeep’s 293-hp 3.6-liter V-6, and the Jeep’s 6200-pound tow rating far surpasses everyone else’s 5000-pound max. It also has a ride so frictionlessly serene that at least one of us crawled underneath to see whether it had air springs. Nope, steel coils at all four corners, but expertly dialed in (air springs are standard on the pricier Overland and Summit trims).This points to a philosophical problem for the Grand Cherokee L Limited 4×4: As nice as it is, you know what you’re missing by sticking to a budget. McIntosh audio, nappa leather, massage seats, and a Hemi under the hood could all be yours. But not for $61,000. 2023 Jeep Grand Cherokee L Limited 4×4293-hp V-6, 8-speed automatic, 4750 lbBase/as-tested price: $54,025/$61,000C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.3 sec1/4-mile: 15.6 sec @ 90 mph100 mph: 20.0 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 194 ftRoadholding, 300-ft skidpad: 0.82 gC/D observed fuel economy: 20 mpgView PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and Driver3rd Place: Kia TellurideThe Telluride has been such a smash hit for Kia that sometimes a civilian would infiltrate our comparo convoy and confuse us. Hey, which one of you put that Pearl Jam decal on the Telluride? Whoops, wrong white Telluride. But in this case, familiarity doesn’t breed contempt since we love the 10Best-winning Kia as much as we always have.HIGHS: All the goodies, magical packaging, refinement and value. LOWS: Lacks the Mazda’s showstopper interior, shorter drivers have a tough time getting comfortable, midpack acceleration. VERDICT: As good as ever and the best value, but the competition is eroding its supremacy.Again, we were amazed at the sheer amount of equipment the Telluride crams in while boasting the lowest price, both the SX Prestige’s base ($51,955) and as-tested ($52,970). The top-trim Telluride wants for nothing, with leather, a faux-suede headliner, heated and ventilated first- and second-row seats, and a panoramic roof. The Telluride is also much roomier inside than its exterior dimensions would imply. What black magic is at work when the shortest vehicle can fit the longest length of pipe—more than 12 feet!—inside? The Kia also tied for first place in front- and second-row passenger volume, as well as in cargo volume behind the third row. And, as we’ve raved ever since its 2020 introduction, the Telluride just feels good. The moment you put your hands on the wheel, you sense that this is a refined machine built by people who care. Among the gripes directed solely at the Telluride, one five-foot-three tester opined that the driving position is calibrated to NBA small forwards, saying, “It feels designed for taller people, longer-legged people, bigger-footed people. There’s no seating position where my arms and legs are both comfortable. I end up sort of tiptoeing the accelerator, and my knee starts to hurt.”View PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverView PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverBut mostly, critiques of the Telluride end up framed as juxtapositions against its fresher competitors. The 291-hp V-6 underhood returned only midpack acceleration. Its interior is nice, but some of the materials lack the richness of the CX-90’s.Ever since it came on the scene, we’ve maintained that you can’t do better than a Kia Telluride. We’re amending that statement slightly to say that you have to spend a little more to do better than the Kia Telluride. But the Telluride had a target on its liftgate, and eventually, somebody was going to score a direct hit. Or, as it turns out, two somebodies.2023 Kia Telluride SX Prestige AWD291-hp V-6, 8-speed automatic, 4490 lbBase/as-tested price: $51,955/$52,970C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.7 sec1/4-mile: 15.1 sec @ 93 mph100 mph: 17.6 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 176 ftRoadholding, 300-ft skidpad: 0.79 gC/D observed fuel economy: 22 mpgView PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and Driver2nd Place: Toyota Grand HighlanderIf you’ve driven a Toyota hybrid of the Prius ilk, the Grand Highlander will utterly destroy your expectations for a hybrid. There’s no CVT, no groaning naturally aspirated four-cylinder. This is the new hybrid system that debuted in the Crown, and it’s a riot. The gas engine is a turbocharged 2.4-liter four, the transmission is a six-speed automatic with a wet clutch, and the total output is a swole 362 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque, the latter attained at just 2000 rpm. HIGHS: Hauls ass and families, huge cargo space, best fuel economy. LOWS: Inhospitable third row, unrefined suspension noises, so-so interior finishes. VERDICT: A hulking speed demon with a few foibles.In our unscientific rolling drags on northern Michigan’s uphill passing lanes, the Toyota collected pink slips from all challengers. The subsequent test-track numbers confirmed its dominance, as the Toyota sprinted to 60 mph in 5.6 seconds and hit the quarter-mile in 14.3 seconds at 98 mph. At the same time, it delivered the best overall fuel economy, at 25 mpg. This powertrain makes good on the longtime hybrid promise of enhancements to both acceleration and fuel economy.The Grand Highlander’s gusto is even more impressive given its hugeness. Grand indeed, the Toyota took first place in nearly every cargo-volume metric and could swallow the largest flat panel (not quite the prototypical four-by-eight sheet of plywood, but not far off). If only it were a little more generous to cargo of the human variety. The third row would challenge the resilience of a Naked and Afraid contestant, with scant legroom unless the second row is all the way forward. And can we please stop trying to reinvent the shifter? The setup will be familiar to anyone coming from a Prius, but it might confound drivers graduating from the regular Highlander, which has a perfectly useful conventional shifter.View PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverView PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverOther than that, the interior design works well, although moving from the plushness of the CX-90 and Telluride back into the Grand Highlander makes it apparent that the Toyota is leaving the best materials for Lexus’s version, the TX. Supple ride quality does enhance interior comfort, but impacts resonate loudly through the suspension and into the structure. The Grand Highlander is big, fast, and efficient, but it’s not quite the complete package.2024 Toyota Grand Highlander Hybrid Max Platinum AWD362-hp inline-4, 6-speed automatic/direct drive, 4936 lbBase/as-tested price: $59,520/$59,520C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 5.6 sec1/4-mile: 14.3 sec @ 98 mph100 mph: 14.9 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 187 ftRoadholding, 300-ft skidpad: 0.80 gC/D observed fuel economy: 25 mpgView PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and Driver1st Place: Mazda CX-90You come at the king, you best not miss. It’s as if Mazda had a punch list of the Telluride’s best attributes and went right down, item by item, and surpassed them all. Smooth, powerful engine? The Mazda’s turbocharged 3.3-liter inline-six makes 340 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque, enabling a 6.4-second sprint to 60 mph, second only to the Toyota. (The Mazda does require premium fuel to make its full rated horsepower—on regular fuel, it’s 319 ponies.) The CX-90 was not only quickest to 130 mph, but it’s also one of only two vehicles here that even do 130 mph, which speaks to Mazda’s confidence in the CX-90’s high-speed composure.HIGHS: Gorgeous interior, powerful engine, refined manners. LOWS: Tightest cargo volume, needs premium fuel to hit its rated horsepower, it costs how much? VERDICT: A winning balance of luxury, performance, and practicality.When our testers opened the crossovers’ doors for the first time, only one interior consistently drew involuntary wows—the Mazda’s, with its quilted leather and swath of faux suede across the dash. And while Mazdas are known for pleasing the driver, the CX-90 is mighty fine for the passengers too. One logbook note read, “Feels the most business class of the second rows. Everything you’re looking at and touching is nice.”The rear-drive platform enables a rakish long hood and athletic proportions, which are enhanced by the biggest tires in the group—275/45R-21s. Pull out into traffic with an aggressive jab of the throttle, and the Mazda will bark the inside rear tire, reminding you of its rear-biased all-wheel-drive system. Sluggish steering with odd weighting makes the CX-90 seem ponderous on the interstate, but the rest of the experience is quiet and refined. View PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverView PhotosMichael Simari and Marc Urbano|Car and DriverAny demerits mainly boil down to price—the CX-90 in this test is expensive. While the 280-hp Turbo Select model starts at $40,970, our loaded-to-the-gunwales Turbo S Premium Plus carries a $61,920 as-tested price. And you know what? It’s worth it. 2024 Mazda CX-90 Turbo S Premium Plus AWD340-hp inline-6, 8-speed automatic, 4884 lbBase/as-tested price: $61,325/$61,920C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.4 sec1/4-mile: 14.9 sec @ 97 mph100 mph: 15.8 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 174 ftRoadholding, 300-ft skidpad: 0.81 gC/D observed fuel economy: 24 mpgCar and DriverSenior EditorEzra Dyer is a Car and Driver senior editor and columnist. He’s now based in North Carolina but still remembers how to turn right. He owns a 2009 GEM e4 and once drove 206 mph. Those facts are mutually exclusive. More

While the competition to sell EVs in the United States has long been a race to finish second behind Tesla, the Volkswagen ID.4 has been performing increasingly well after early supply problems were ironed out. In the first half of the year, VW sold nearly 16,500 here—more than 10 percent of its total volume, putting it just ahead of the Jetta. But the company hasn’t been deaf to criticism, recently announcing a package of revisions, including a power upgrade and improvements to the user interface.We will have to wait to test the 2024 car in the U.S., but we have had the chance to drive a European-spec car in Germany. This was actually an ID.5, the ID.4’s lower-roofed pseudo-coupe sibling, which isn’t available stateside, but all of the changes are common to both cars. Our Euro-spec GTX trim was broadly equivalent to the ID.4 S Plus.The most significant changes lie under the surface, with the ID.4 and ID.5 getting a more potent rear motor that will be offered exclusively with the larger 77.0-kWh battery in the U.S.; the lesser 58.0-kWh pack continues with the old one for now. Volkswagen’s new AP550 motor, which will also power the upcoming ID.7 sedan, uses a revised rotor and more efficient cooling system to allow for higher outputs and, VW says, more sustained high loads. In the rear-drive 77.0-kWh ID.4, this new motor makes 282 horsepower, while the all-wheel-drive version raises output to 335 horses in Europe with similar output for U.S. cars (officially: “more than 330 horsepower”). Although we don’t have any range claims, Volkswagen predicts that the new motor will boost EPA numbers in both the rear-wheel-drive and all-wheel-drive cars.There have been changes in the ID’s cabin as well, mostly aimed at improving the UI experience. The 77.0-kWh variant’s infotainment gets upgraded with a new 12.9-inch touchscreen. In addition to its greater size and higher resolution, the new screen debuts VW’s updated software, which includes shortcut icons at the top of the screen for easier passage between different functions. The new system certainly looks and works better than the old one did, but it is still awkwardly situated above the touch-sensitive control panel for temperature and audio volume, making it too easy to accidentally activate them when using the screen. On the plus side, Volkswagen has responded to criticism of the climate control’s invisibility at night by illuminating it. In addition, the forward/reverse selector has been moved from its slightly awkward position on the side of the gauge cluster to the steering column itself. Other than that, the cabin is unchanged. There remains generous space across its two rows of seats and 30 cubic feet of cargo volume behind. The interior is still functional rather than fancy, and it still features irksome driver window controls that must be toggled between front and rear. The various plastics feel chosen for durability rather than tactile delight, but the range-topping versions on both sides of the Atlantic will now come with a potent new Harman/Kardon audio system. The driving experience remains very similar, with the AWD version feeling effortless and short on drama, but some way removed from the performance of punchier segment rivals. Volkswagen says that the new car is quicker but hasn’t said how much. For reference, we ran a 2021 AWD ID.4 to the 60-mph benchmark in 5.4 seconds. Acceleration in the new car felt keen rather than spectacular—you’re conscious of the considerable weight the motors have to work against; there is no equivalent in the ID.4 range to EV hot rods like the Kia EV6 GT or Tesla Model Y Performance. One performance claim we were able to corroborate—for the European model—is a raised speed limiter. It has gone from 99 to 112 mph, which we confirmed on an unrestricted stretch of the German autobahn. Such atypical use sent the dashboard’s range prediction plummeting, but blowing past slower-moving traffic was huge fun.Related StoriesThe autobahn also proved that the Euro-spec ID.5 felt impressively stable at high speeds, with the adaptive dampers (optional in the U.S.) giving a comfortable and well-disciplined ride. It was equally pliant over urban bumps, too, even on the largest available 21-inch wheels. Volkswagen says that the steering has been given new software to improve feel and bring more forceful self-centering, but we still struggled to detect any feedback or sense of connection to the front wheels. The modest changes to the ID.5 have not radically transformed its appeal. This is a car that promises to be very easy to live with but also almost entirely unexciting—a mixture that has served Volkswagen well through much of its past. A senior VW executive recently told C/D that one of the big challenges for large automakers trying to boost EV sales is moving beyond early adopters and toward the mainstream consumers who make up a much bigger chunk of the market. The sensibleness of the ID.4 and ID.5 would seem to make them well suited to that task.Senior 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 April 1997 issue of Car and Driver.Right where you’d nor­mally rest your left foot atop a dead pedal, this firetruck is equipped with a 10-by-11-inch glass window. “The hell’s that?” I inquired, pointing at the floor. “Well, a person would look through that,” said Ted Henson, the director of sales of ARFF vehicles (Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting) at Oshkosh Truck Corporation in Wisconsin. “But at what? Anything you see in that window you’ll have already run over. It’s a porthole, right? When you ford a stream, you can view striped bass?” “Maybe,” he replied patiently. “But actually, this truck can climb a 60-percent grade. When you crest hills at that angle, you’ll be searching for the horizon. And you’ll find it by looking at the floor­—that’ll become your windshield.” Oh, as if, I thought. A human being must crawl on hands and knees to sur­mount a 60-percent grade. So an off-road firetruck, full of water, weighing 64,500 pounds? “You’ll need God’s own winch, plus the pope,” I explained to Henson.We required neither.The Oshkosh Truck Corporation, founded in 1917, specializes in “severe duty” all-wheel-drive vehicles. If you watch CNN, you’ve already seen its giant HEMTTs (“Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck”) pulling Patriot mis­siles, and you’ve probably also seen its 230,000-pound HETs (“Heavy Equipment Transporter”) humping M1 tanks over Kuwaiti dunes. Last year, Oshkosh built 2400 trucks, mostly for combat but also for New York City’s sanitation department, which, Henson says, “is roughly the same thing.” Having perfected the vagaries of eight­-wheel-drive jumbotrons, Oshkosh created the Phoenix, the $350,000 off-road firetruck you see here. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management will buy Phoenix trucks to quell wild­fires. And so will airports whose firemen sporadically invade inhospitable terrain—­”like a plane that goes down in the Everglades,” Hensen ex­plains, diplomatically avoiding brand names. Brandishing two water can­nons, the Phoenix lays down a wall of flame suppression, at least until it depletes the 2500 gallons stored in its stainless­-steel tank. And that might not take long. With both nozzles at full aperture, plus three under­belly sprays that inhibit the truck’s tires from turning into black torches as they rest atop scorched earth, the Phoenix can hose itself empty in only 3 minutes and 30 seconds. Naturally, we attempted this in the Wis­consin woods. The roof turret erupted with enough force to peel the bark off four ash trees. If more pressure is required, Oshkosh sells an optional cannon suffi­ciently vicious to pierce the alloy fuselage of a Boeing 737. “Course, for a wildfire, you wouldn’t spray at max flow,” Henson elucidates. “You’d spray compressed-air foam. It’s like Dawn dishwashing detergent mixed with water. Lands on the ground like a soggy quilt.” Two separate tanks hold 70 gallons of foam concentrate, which can quintuple the Phoenix’s on-fire time. Smother a house with this syrupy cocktail, Henson says, and a wildfire could lick at its foundation for two hours before flames would manifest.Once aboard the Phoenix, locating the conflagration is as much fun as extinguishing it. Each of the eight driven wheels (weighing 535 pounds apiece) can travel through 16 inches of deflec­tion—seven inches of droop, nine of compression. We were able to cruise at 20 mph, sans disruption, over dozens of one-foot-high moguls at the company’s soggy off-road test track. You can watch each Michelin buckle as it absorbs the blows before there’s percep­tible suspension impact. When we buried the truck’s nose in a stream, the forward-most tires lost grip and began flinging buckets of muck. Yet the truck never lost momentum, because four other wheels—which, you know, were not even in the same area code as the water beneath the cockpit—­were still agitating dry earth.The Phoenix’s 736-cubic-inch Detroit Diesel produces 445 horse­power at 2100 rpm, flowing not very smoothly through a four-speed Allison automatic. During acceleration runs, the only tire we could smoke was the one parked in the brush fire. The Phoenix eventually plodded through the quarter­-mile in, ah, 32.0 seconds—that works out, in a protracted way, to one second per ton—at a speed of 43 mph. Later, we somehow surpassed the vehicle’s advertised top speed, attaining a giddy 62 mph before panicky pedestrians and paralyzing fear reined us in. For no good reason, we drove the Phoenix through downtown Oshkosh, halting for photos in front of bars: Herbie’s Acee Deucie and the 919 Club, Pinky Harvath, proprietor. I was twice restrained from activating the truck’s siren and red strobes—a Dairy State misdemeanor—although the truck’s Flaming Lemon paint (photographer official Kiley called it “phlegm”) was by itself separating Pinky’s patrons from their pints.Cockpit noise includes colossal tread roar and turbine-like whine from all four differentials. It sounds like a Beechcraft at rotation. Above 25 mph, you shout to be heard. The steering is light but as numb as day-old birthday cake. And it’s bizarre to have the steered wheels articulating behind your back. The driver feels like a tether­ball, observing directional changes more than initiating them. More From the ArchiveThe Phoenix’s eight-foot width ensures that the passenger hovers above the gutter, witnessing the ruination of rural mail­boxes. Even over such impediments, the ride is Town Car smooth. Potholes don’t even register. The brake pedal modulates nicely, although during panic stops, the stored water tends to migrate where it shouldn’t, creating an interesting weight transfer that induces lockup. Hard to tell which wheel; one of eight was my guess. After compacting considerable foliage around the off-road course, we braved the aforementioned 60-percent grade, which, at least when we began, was covered in loose sod. First, the Phoenix’s nose gouged a hole in the cliff face, then its rear bumper buried itself in an avalanche of sediment, this despite the truck’s 43- and 45-degree angles of approach and departure. Just before we crested the hill, with the truck reposing at an angle that would starve most engines of all lubricant, I noticed that the window on the floor was perfectly aligned with the horizon. Had I stepped out the door, I would have plunged 35 feet down the hillside. A groundbreaking truck, this. We know. We broke acres of the stuff. If your local fire department has col­lected 20 grand in code fines, it can equip the Phoenix with entertaining options. Our favorite was NightSight—forward-look­ing infrared radar, which enables the Phoenix to navigate dense, noxious smoke and sneak up on neighbors whose barbe­cued cube steaks are unattended. In 1997, Oshkosh Truck Corporation expects to build 30 to 40 Phoenix fire­trucks. We want one. With both water can­nons gushing, the Phoenix would work miracles as a crowd-control agent at Michigan–versus–Ohio State games. Or drive it to a domed stadium and watch it clean Bigfoot’s clock. Also Bigfoot’s tires, Bigfoot’s shock absorbers, and Pinky Har­vath in row 98.Arrow pointing downCompact arrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1997 Oshkosh PhoenixVehicle Type: mid-engine, eight-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door firetruck
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $265,000/$350,000
ENGINEsupercharged, turbocharged, and intercooled SOHC 16-valve 2-stroke diesel V-8, iron block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 736 in3, 12,054 cm3Power: 445 hp @ 2100 rpmTorque: 1250 lb-ft @ 1200 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic 
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 270.0 inLength: 412.5 inCurb Weight (with full water tanks): 64,500 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS50 mph: 42.4 sec1/4-Mile: 32.0 sec @ 43 mphTop Speed (drag ltd): 62 mph
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Estimated: 2 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Looking in the rearview mirror doesn’t reveal much about where things are headed. In the case of the 2024 Mercedes-Benz CLE Coupe, that trap is easy to fall into if you dwell on the outgoing C- and E-class coupes when attempting to make sense of the car that’s slated to replace both. The new one doesn’t seem to split any sort of difference, until you realize that the C- and E-class sedans that spawned those predecessor coupes are irrelevant. Both date to 2017.Since then, the C-class was redesigned and enlarged for 2022, entering its fifth generation. A new coupe was not part of the deal, so the two-door carried on with fourth-gen mechanicals. Meanwhile, the old E-class sedan persisted until a redesigned 2024 E-class was recently announced. Again, no coupe for you. With those developments in mind, the emergence of the 2024 CLE explains much about the shuffling going on behind the scenes.More C Than EThe CLE shares its 112.8-inch wheelbase with the new C-class sedan. It’s an inch longer than the outgoing C-class coupe, but well short of the gargantuan 116.6-inch wheelbase of the upcoming E-class. The CLE’s overall length of 191.0 inches falls roughly halfway between the two, while its 73.2-inch width hews a bit closer to the E-class. In short, the CLE’s dimensions make it a credible tweener, but it rides on the shorter C-class’s wheelbase, which makes more sense for a coupe.Fans of the pillarless E-class coupe will be saddened to learn that the CLE has a door pillar like the C-class coupe. But this doesn’t harsh the vibe, as its flanks are smooth and flowing, with subtle fender creases that further elongate the shape. In fact, the “cab backward” description of the fifth-gen C-class sedan is even more apparent here, as the CLE’s extra body length makes the hood look considerably longer. All told, there’s a hint of AMG GT coupe in the proportions, even though the CLE shares nothing with that high-performance two-seater.Instead, the underpinnings consist of the same sort of multilink front and rear suspension layouts as the C-class. This gave the CLE poise and balance on a sinuous drive route along the coastal roads of northern Spain. Unfortunately, the C-class similarities don’t end there, as it also displayed the same driving-simulator steering and brake feel that we bemoaned during our C300 road test. There’s accuracy and predictability in abundance, but the driver feedback loop isn’t adequately developed.We’d like to say the suspension filtered out the rough stuff and took the edge off when the 20-inch Continental tires encountered unpleasant pavement, but we can’t. It absolutely accomplished that, but the cars we tested had a Europe-spec calibration with adaptive dampers and rear-wheel steering that we won’t see. CLE300 base models in the United States will get passive dampers, while the CLE450 will come with position-sensitive passive dampers as part of a sport suspension setup. Theoretically, these should ride smoother than that sounds when you’re driving straight because they will develop less damping when the shocks are near mid-stroke. Time will tell.Two Engines, One Transmission, 4Matic Only Under the hood, the base CLE300 has the same uprated turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder first seen in the 2022 C300. It makes 255 horsepower and 295 pound-feet of torque, the latter representing a 22-lb-ft increase over the old C300. Step up to the CLE450 and you get a turbocharged 3.0-liter inline-six that makes a cool 375 horsepower and 369 pound-feet. Both engines feature an integrated starter-generator (ISG) that allows the 48-volt hybrid system to add as much as 23 horses and 151 pound-feet at opportune moments. The ISG doesn’t bolster either engine’s total output, but it does paper over turbo lag and make start-stop episodes virtually unnoticeable.Neither engine sounds particularly enthralling, but the 450’s inline-six motivates the car without hesitation. Mercedes hasn’t disclosed the CLE’s curb weight or estimated acceleration times, but our test of a 2022 C300 provides a clue. We expect the CLE300’s 60-mph time to be no more than a tenth of a second off the 4044-pound C300’s 5.3-second effort. As for the CLE450, we reckon it’ll be a second quicker. Both varieties will top out at 130 mph, according to Mercedes.Downstream, there are no choices to make. Each mill comes paired with Benz’s nine-speed automatic transmission, and power flows from that into a standard 4Matic all-wheel-drive system. Rear-wheel-drive models have been on the coupe menu in the past, but Mercedes isn’t ready to say if they’ll return. They also won’t confirm or deny any subsequent AMG-branded models, but that seems inevitable. One look at AMG’s current C-sedan offerings is all it takes to imagine where that’s headed.A Familiar InteriorInside, the CLE is impressive in terms of design, materials, and the initial impression of the dual-screen layout. It’s a huge case of déjà vu, in fact, because the cockpit looks nearly indistinguishable from the 2022 C300 we tested. That car impressed us with its interior craftsmanship, and so does the CLE. But that utter similarity also leads to the same familiar consternation, as there are no switches or knobs in evidence. The central touchscreen is the go-to place for all manner of adjustments, from climate control to drive settings to you name it. Also, the numerous buttons on the steering wheel are all look-alike touch-sensitive zones.More on the CLE-classThe result is pure lunacy, to the point where we once asked the passenger to change the drive mode so we could keep our eyes on the road in the thick of driving. How’s that for voice control? Admittedly, there’s more capability in this new third-generation MBUX system than one could master in a day’s drive. There are personalization templates, automated AI-powered routines, and a sound and massage “revitalization” utility that pops up if some algorithm thinks you might be tired. Still, the fact that many basic control adjustments are far from self-evident tells you something. But, hey, when parked, it’ll let you do TikTok things or play 2009’s Angry Birds, so it’s all good, right?The CLE’s interior is spatially superior to the old C-class coupe, with more front and rear passenger volume. The biggest gains are a nearly one-inch gain in front legroom and shoulder room and over two inches of added rear legroom. Trunk volume is up too, but the extra back-seat space and luggage capacity still don’t make this a long-distance proposition for four.Mercedes won’t announce pricing information until closer to the car’s early-2024 release date, but our extrapolations suggest the 2024 CLE300 might start around $60,000, while the CLE450 could go for about $75,000. Is blending two coupes into one the right move? It would seem so, as the coupe market continues to shrink while the E-class sedan itself grows larger. But we’re not quite convinced that the CLE coupe has the right combination of ingredients. Ultimately, our take will depend on how well U.S.-spec models perform on familiar soil.Arrow pointing downCompact arrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications2024 Mercedes-Benz CLE 4Matic CoupeVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE (C/D EST)
Base: CLE300 4Matic, $60,000; CLE450 4Matic, $75,000
ENGINES
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.0-liter inline-4, 255 hp, 295 lb-ft; turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter inline-6, 375 hp, 369 lb-ft
TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 112.8 inLength: 191.0 inWidth: 73.2 inHeight: 56.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 55/37 ft3Trunk Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3900–4100 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 4.2–5.2 sec100 mph: 11.0–14.5 sec1/4-Mile: 12.9–13.9 secTop Speed: 130 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 26–27/22–23/32–33 mpgTechnical 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 recipe for a commuter car is simple. Take one part efficiency, mix in one part practicality, add two parts affordability, and garnish with a bit of style. Since its inception, the Hyundai Kona has stuck to that basic formula, even going so far as to inject some driving verve with the hopped-up N variant. For 2024, Hyundai redesigned the little runabout, adding about six inches to the body and nearly $2000 to the starting price. But at $25,435, the Kona is still one of the most approachable cars on the market, and it hasn’t lost the sense of what made it great in the first place, even if its new dimensions eat into acceleration and fuel economy.A Fresh New LookUp front, the 2024 Kona maintains the same basic shape but adopts a simplified and more modern look. A razor-thin running light spans the width of the car. The old grille is gone, and its replacement features active shutters to help with airflow. Changes to the back mirror those at the front, with a sleek red running light stretching from corner to corner. If those touches aren’t enough, the N Line model ramps it up with body-colored cladding and an eye-catching rear spoiler, as well as N Line–specific bumpers and wheels.Hyundai pulled out all the stops to make the cabin a nicer place to spend weekday mornings and evenings. Customers who experience actual weather will appreciate the optional heated and ventilated seats and the available heated steering wheel. The old model’s gauge-cluster and infotainment screens are out, replaced with Hyundai’s more modern pair of 12.3-inch displays combined inside a single-piece bezel. There are a handful of useful USB-C connections for front and rear passengers for easy charging.The shifter has migrated from the center console to the column, opening storage space between the front seats. The result is an unconventional yet practical center console, great for handbags or other large items. Strangely, the new stowage doesn’t actually close, so hiding items in a parked car is harder. Blissfully, physical climate controls made it through the redesign. In most trims, the Kona has grown by 5.7 inches from nose to tail, improving rear legroom while adding six cubic feet of cargo capacity. To maximize the amount of usable cabin space, Hyundai reduced the thickness of the front seats by 30 percent, further improving rear legroom. Most adults will find the back seat to be reasonably accommodating for a short commute (far better than before), though the rear seats lean awkwardly far back.Still Sufficiently SprightlyBoth previous-generation engines make their way back into the new Kona. The SE and the SEL rock a somewhat anemic 147-hp 2.0-liter four-cylinder connected to a continuously variable automatic transmission, while stepping up to the N Line and Limited trims brings the peppier 190-hp turbocharged 1.6-liter four-cylinder. The turbo four thankfully loses the last generation’s seven-speed dual-clutch transmission in favor of a much smoother eight-speed torque-converter automatic. The last turbocharged Kona we tested bustled to 60 mph in 7.3 seconds, but considering the addition of a slightly heavier transmission and the overall growth of the car, we expect the new model to add a tenth or two. While the redesigned Kona hasn’t exactly turned into a canyon carver, it’s more than capable of generating some fun. In the event that you’re running late for work, the Kona responds well to urging. The chassis behaves nicely, and the suspension does well to absorb the brunt of any road imperfections. The N Line and Limited test vehicles we drove were equipped with standard 19-inch wheels, and the lesser trims’ 17- and 18-inch rollers should be more competent at eating up bumps. Turning the rotary drive-mode dial into Sport pumps some extra weight through the steering wheel but doesn’t do much in the way of actual feel. More on the Hyundai KonaThe Kona comes standard with front-wheel drive, and all-wheel drive is optional across the board for just $1500. The last-generation Kona offered good fuel economy, although it was average among class rivals. Given its new dimensions, we expect our fuel-economy test results to slip for the new generation. Official estimates also hint at this possibility: In its front-wheel-drive guise, the new Kona has an EPA rating of 31 mpg combined with the 2.0-liter engine and 28 mpg combined with the turbo 1.6-liter. That represents a modest 1-mpg dip from last year’s base engine but a 4-mpg hit for the turbo. The 2024 Hyundai Kona is a slam-dunk for most commuters. The longer wheelbase adds to the practicality without dramatically altering the driving fun we fell in love with when this small SUV debuted. The addition of new convenience tech, including blind-spot and surround-view cameras, furthers the argument for the Kona. Despite its growth spurt and commensurate price bump, as well as small hits to acceleration and fuel economy, the Kona continues to bring an enjoyable and youthful attitude to the doldrums of city driving. Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Hyundai KonaVehicle Type: front-engine, front- or all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
SE, $25,435; SEL, $26,785; N-Line, $31,985; Limited, $32,985; AWD prices $1500 higher
ENGINES
SE, SEL: DOHC 16-valve 2.0-liter Atkinson-cycle inline-4, 147 hp, 132 lb-ft; N Line, Limited: turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 1.6-liter inline-4, 190 hp, 195 lb-ft
TRANSMISSIONS
SE, SEL: continuously variable automatic; N Line, Limited: 8-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 104.7 inLength: 171.3–172.6 inWidth: 71.9 inHeight: 62.4–63.6 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53–55/47 ft3Cargo Volume, behind F/R: 64/26 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3000–3500 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 7.5–8.6 sec1/4-Mile: 16.0–17.0 secTop Speed: 125 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 26–31/24–29/29–35 mpgAssociate News EditorJack Fitzgerald’s love for cars stems from his as yet unshakable addiction to Formula 1. After a brief stint as a detailer for a local dealership group in college, he knew he needed a more permanent way to drive all the new cars he couldn’t afford and decided to pursue a career in auto writing. By hounding his college professors at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, he was able to travel Wisconsin seeking out stories in the auto world before landing his dream job at Car and Driver. His new goal is to delay the inevitable demise of his 2010 Volkswagen Golf. More

You can argue long and hard whether the best cars are bought or built, and that debate is set to continue into the electric era. On one side is the increasing number of aftermarket options for converting classics to electric power, although often at the cost of butchering a genuine car. On the other are cars like this—an all-new EV inspired by an iconic original.Not that you are seeing the finished version of the E-Legend EL1. Rather, you’re looking at it through the equivalent of X-ray specs to see what lies beneath the surface. We first told you about E-Legend back in 2021 when the German startup announced plans to build an EV supercar inspired by the Audi Sport Quattro—the shortened version of the pioneering all-wheel-drive coupe that was created to go Group B rally racing. Work on the E-Legend EL1 has continued ever since, and the design for the production version is now finished, shown here in computer-rendered form. The company has also built a driveline test mule featuring the carbon-fiber structure that will lie at the heart of the production car, as well as an early version of its all-wheel-drive system. We were invited for an exclusive passenger ride in this test mule at the Flugplatz Oberschleissheim airfield near Munich. Shaping the Future from the PastThe EL1’s backstory is a rich one. E-Legend boss Marcus Holzinger is a former Volkswagen designer who left to work for Hote Design—the company established by his father—which specializes in building one-off auto-show cars. As an Audi modeler in the 1980s, the elder Holzinger worked on the original Sport Quattro, a shortened road car with a huge 12.5 inches taken out of its wheelbase to homologate Audi’s Group B rally car. The Sport Quattro looked both spectacular and cartoonish, although it wasn’t actually very successful as a rally car; even the mercurial talent of Walter Röhrl managed only a single World Rally Championship victory with it, at the 1985 Rallye Sanremo. But that didn’t matter to young Marcus, who spent his childhood around various competition Audis, as he took regular family trips to watch the rally cars in action. Thus, when his thoughts turned to creating an “inspired by” reinterpretation of a Group B car, the Sport Quattro was at the top of the list. Work on the project began during Germany’s first COVID lockdown in 2020, with Holzinger heading design and longtime friend Günter Riedl leading mechanical development. Riedl is an engineer whose company previously created a carbon-bodied sports car and also did much of the development work on the all-electric Wiesmann “Project Thunderball” roadster. The design is what Holzinger describes as “retro-fusion,” a tribute rather than a replica. Audi has seen the finished design and, according to Holzinger, has no issue with somebody else reinterpreting one of its famous cars. Under the SkinHolzinger’s original plan was to build the EL1 using an internal-combustion engine, but Riedl persuaded him to switch to an electric drivetrain. The first proposal utilized a triple-motor configuration, one powering the front axle and a pair turning the rear axle through a shared differential. That has since been reduced to a front motor and a single motor at the rear, combined with a gearbox and an inverter—all supplied by a well-known automaker, although Riedl won’t say which one. Power comes from a T-shaped 80.0-kWh battery pack that sits behind the passenger compartment and extends into the tunnel between the two seats. Peak output is claimed to be 804 horsepower, with the front motor delivering up to 268 horses and the rear up to 536, along with a combined torque peak of 774 pound-feet. E-Legend predicts a 2.8-second run to 62 mph, continuing to 124 mph in 7.5 seconds and topping out at 186 mph. But the prototype version isn’t quite there yet. According to Riedl, it’s currently putting out 603 horses with a fixed 35/65 front-rear torque split. It also has open differentials at each end; the production car will have a mechanical limited-slip differential at the rear and possibly also one at the front. But as well as having less power, there is also less mass in the prototype given its lack of bodywork and interior; E-Legend says the finished car is on target to weigh 3950 pounds.Although skeletal, the EL1 prototype’s carbon-fiber structure is beautifully finished when viewed up close. E-Legend plans to create a series of other Group B–inspired models using the same core architecture. The lower part of the carbon tub will be common to all variants, but the upper structure and bodywork will change for each model. (Riedl confirms there is more than enough structural strength in the naked tub to allow for open-topped vehicles as well.) Suspension and motors are then mounted to the tub on aluminum subframes, with unequal-length control arms and coil-over shocks at each corner. The EL1’s wheelbase is 96.3 inches, 9.5 inches longer than the original Sport Quattro.Rubber to the RunwayOur passenger ride is both breezy and exciting despite being conducted entirely on a concrete airfield. Even with reduced power, the naked EL1 felt unsurprisingly fast, and driver Mark Schefbauer—who races karts in addition to working for E-Legend—proved that the electric powertrain can deliver repeated bursts of hard acceleration without any hint of derating. The feeling of speed was certainly exacerbated by the lack of doors and the tendency of the front wheels to fling small stones into the cabin when the steering wheel is turned to full lock. Cornering forces were substantial, but Schefbauer had to work hard to manage what was a sudden transition between understeer and oversteer when the limits were breached. The lack of locking differentials was also obvious with frequent puffs of smoke from the unloaded inside tire when cornering under power. Related StoriesThere is much work to be done before the EL1 is finished, but the mechanical package already delivers what feels like a Group B–appropriate quantity of thrills. E-Legend plans to produce just 30 examples of the EL1, that exclusivity underlined by a price tag of 890,000 euros—$960,000 at current exchange rates. Holzinger says that several cars have already been sold and that the plan is for the fully finished version to make its U.S. debut at Monterey Car Week in 2024. Work on the next E-Legend model is also advancing, although Holzinger refused to divulge which Group B legend is next in line. There is no shortage of candidates, from the Ford RS200 and Lancia Delta S4 to the Peugeot 205 T16 and even the obscure masterpiece that was the MG Metro 6R4. Place your bets!Senior 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 1997 issue of Car and Driver.When Audi introduced the A4 in 1995, we were impressed—so much so that we voted it a 10Best winner in January 1996 and consid­ered it a strong contender for the ’97 event a year later. Then, just as we were assem­bling the ’97 hopefuls last fall, a hot-off-the­-boat, “Cool Shades” Brilliant Yellow 1.8-liter turbo-powered ver­sion of the A4 arrived for our consideration. As you saw in our January 10Best issue, the 1.8T did not handicap the original 2.8-liter V-6-pow­ered model’s chances. On the contrary, it improved them, and the A4 was reelected to a 10Best seat for ’97.It was not clear at the start that this would be the case, however. The concept of lopping off two cylinders and a liter of displacement from a car that is not exactly overpowered did not sound that inspiring­—even with a turbocharger thrown in. We weren’t quite sure what to expect: a car with glacial lag down at low engine speeds, most likely, even if turbo boost lent enough power at high revs. And besides, the 1.8T has none of its sibling’s interior wood trim. HIGHS: Good looks, solid construction, torquey turbo performance, all-wheel traction, reasonable price, irresistible warranty.Turns out that the combination of a long-stroke, five-valve combustion chamber and a small, low-pressure turbo that spools up right off idle works just fine. Add that to a manual five-speed with a low first gear, and the car steps off just as will­ingly as its bigger brother. The A4 1.8T Quattro we tested kept pace with its 2.8-liter stablemate to 60 mph (taking 8.3 sec­onds versus 8.1), as well as through the quarter-mile, where it ran 16.3 seconds at 84 mph versus the 2.8’s 16.2 seconds at 85 mph. Of course, that’s no measure of a car’s all-around flexibility. For that we turn to the top-gear passing figures, where the A4 Turbo’s 10.1-second sprint from 30 to 50 mph bests the 2.8 model’s by 1.2 seconds. It comes close at 10.0 seconds to big brother’s 9.9-second surge from 50 to 70 mph. Not bad for a turbocharged 1.8-liter car, you must admit. And the reason behind this car’s elastic engine response is a torque curve whose peak of 155 pound­-feet occurs at just 1750 rpm and remains flat all the way to 4600 rpm. It’s not so much a curve as a plateau, and it makes the car relaxing and easy to drive, and not at all as peaky as you might expect a small, forced-induction engine to be. Adding to the enjoyment are a muted but pleasant engine note and well-inte­grated transmission components. The clutch is smooth and easy to read, and there’s little of that springy driveline bounce we’ve seen in earlier Audis as you start off. Showing no obvious sign of lag, the engine accelerates evenly through the range, but it sometimes hangs on to revs a little during shifts when spun to the red­line. Shifts are quick and clean, if a tiny bit more rubbery than those in a Honda or BMW. However, we never missed a shift or even mistimed a double-clutch down­shift. LOWS: Too softly sprung for real high-performance work, most desirable options add considerable expense.As we’d expect from an Audi, the handling is stable and the steering is linear and accurate. For most roadwork, the supple suspension calibrations are ade­quate, but our Steven Cole Smith reports that the car is too soft and sloppy for race­track exertions. Fine. Keep it on public roads, where the 1.8T is a pleasure to drive. It is also a great place to sit. Some of the interior design features are so pleasing to the eye and touch that you don’t have to go anywhere to appreciate the skill of the designers. You see it in the sweep of the dash molding, the way the tweeter enclo­sures are integrated into the door-handle molding, the band of gray mesh material that sweeps around the car (replacing the wood trim of the 2.8)—these are elements that feel both rich and chic. The 1.8T isn’t short of standard equip­ment either. Although the seats are man­ually adjusted units, the car is festooned with the usual luxury-segment items, such as climate control, central locking, and power mirrors. Among them are some very thoughtful touches, like locking retractors on the rear-seat safety belts to facilitate child-seat installation, prewiring for cell phones and CD changers, express-­down window controls all around (plus express up on the front windows), and a feature that allows all four windows to be opened or closed while the key is in the door lock. With a long list of standard-equipment items, the 1.8T is a complete package in base form. For $23,490, you can have a front-drive car replete with the kind of fea­tures you expect in the luxury segment. An equally impressive list of options—­including heated seats, a sunroof, a trip computer, and a five-speed automatic transmission—can swell the price of the 1.8T to more than $30,000. The four­-wheel-drive Quattro system adds $1600, which strikes us as a bargain. The new Cool Shades paint colors, variations on flu­orescent Kool-Aid colors—which may not tickle everybody’s retinas—add $460.Three attractive items make the argument for checking the Sport-package box on the order form: the charming three­-spoke steering wheel with its tiny airbag (the standard wheel is a four-spoke unit); the more-supportive sport seats covered in jacquard satin cloth; and the handsome 16-inch wheels with their grippy lower-pro­file 55-series tires (standard fitment is 15-inch wheels and 65-series rubber). The Sport package is $1000. More Reviews From the ArchiveOur fully loaded and brightly colored A4 is priced $30 above the base price for a rear-drive, normally aspirated BMW 318i sedan. More serious opposition might come from cars like Nissan’s Maxima, which offers more interior space and a V-6, as well as from the four-door Acura Integra GS-R, which doesn’t, and from the Subaru Legacy, which brings with it all­wheel drive as standard equipment. There are reasons for choosing these or other competing models, but the Audi A4 1.8T has a rather unique combination of virtues to tempt the buyer. Good looks, nimble handling, respectable performance, a lot of equipment, thoughtful engineering, and genuine character—all in a high-end German sedan that costs less than its coun­terparts from Munich and Stuttgart. VERDICT: A prestige bargain with real character.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1997 Audi A4 1.8 Turbo QuattroVehicle Type: front-engine, 4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $25,090/$26,550Options: Cool Shades paint, $460; Sport package (16-inch wheels and tires, sport steering wheel and front seats), $1000
ENGINEturbocharged and intercooled DOHC inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 107 in3, 1781 cm3Power: 150 hp @ 5700 rpmTorque: 155 lb-ft @ 1750 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/control armsBrakes, F/R: 10.9-in vented disc/9.6-in discTires: Goodyear Eagle RS-A205/55HR-16
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 102.6 inLength: 178.0 inWidth: 68.2 inHeight: 55.8 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 48/37 ft3Trunk Volume: 14 ft3Curb Weight: 3230 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.3 sec100 mph: 24.1 sec1/4-Mile: 16.3 sec @ 84 mph120 mph: 45.3 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 9.5 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 10.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 10.0 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 127 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 190 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.78 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 22/29 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the June 1997 issue of Car and Driver.Don’t look now, but the wood-and-leather-lined halls of luxury sport­-ute-dom have been invaded by a ruffian. It’s an ugly, uncul­tured, loud, smelly brute utterly lacking in social graces. This four-wheel-drive vehicle was not conceived as a shooting brake for swells on safari (although plenty of outgoing ordnance has been fired off its flanks). Nor does it wear a haughty German or Japanese nameplate. No, this social climber climbed right off the battlefield, hosed off, changed into civvies, and rolled onto Rodeo Drive. Of course, we’re talking about AM General’s Hummer, the vehicular star of the Gulf War, roughly 7000 of which have now been sold wearing civilian colors. The first two Hummers we tested (C/D, July 1992 and June 1995) were such unpleasant and unwieldy conveyances on pavement that we naturally assumed they would be sold primarily to folks who intended to use them to roam their 1000-acre estates or go exploring for oil or per­haps to invade weak neighboring counties. HIGHS: Torquey turbo-diesel, improved range, unparalleled off-road prowess in knowledgeable hands.But AM General’s own market research confirms that poseurs are buying the lion’s share of this sport-ute, too. Forty-two percent of its buyers are identified in market lingo by AM General as “discerners.” These connoisseurs of fine wine, art, and travel are least interested in taking the Hummer off-road. Another 28 percent—described as “conquerors”—value the exclusivity of the Hummer and the attention it gets over its tech­nical merits. Only 25 percent of owners—known as “realists” and “adventurers”—claim to have purchased the Hummer pri­marily for its off-road talents. (The remainder are sold for commercial duty.) Has the Hummer been thor­oughly domesticated in the past two years, or are most buyers just nuts? To find out, we spent a week in a 1997 Hummer.Once again, our test vehicle was a four-passenger hardtop model priced at $63,827 to start (that’s up from $44,000 in 1992). The most popular model is the wagon, which starts at $67,111. The basic two-passenger model is yours for as little as $52,597. Must-have options—like central tire inflation and deflation, a winch, and driveline skid plating—can add up quickly, as our $84,502 sticker attests. A new 6.5-liter turbo-diesel engine adapted from those that power GM’s new full-size vans has been added to the options list at a cost of $4523. It makes 195 horse­power at its 3400-rpm redline and 430 pound-feet of torque at 1800 rpm. A 170-horsepower, 290-pound-­foot, 6.5-liter normally aspirated diesel engine is standard. The 5.7-liter gas engine has been dropped. The turbocharger resides in the valley at the rear of the engine, which allows this turbo-diesel to fit between the Hum­mer’s narrow frame rails, unlike those diesels with side­-mounted turbos. The engine starts quickly (after a 10-second pause spent waiting for the glow plugs to warm the precham­bers) but clatters like a big rig. Getting to 60 mph takes 15.2 seconds, an improvement from 18.1 in the gasoline-powered Hummer and 21.7 in the old 6.2-liter diesel. Now, hurtling toward highway speed feels like it takes just a week instead of a month. Top speed has risen to a truly hair-raising 88 mph. We managed to get only nine miles to the gallon, but a new 17-gallon auxiliary fuel tank extends the range past 350 miles.Other improvements include the addi­tion of a fresh-air intake scoop and rear exhaust vents that improve climate-con­trol airflow by 15 percent, and a new electrically heated windshield. These upgrades were aimed at alleviating an interior fog­ging problem in winter driving. The problem remains. If the temperature drops below 40 degrees Fahrenheit, you must continually reset the timed electric defrosters and endure the din of the defroster blower on full blast to preserve front and rear visibility. The side windows will still fog up.LOWS: London-foggy interior in winter; poor on-road ride, handling, and braking.A new sound-insulation package re­duces interior noise a bit compared with previous diesel Hummers (the gas model was quieter), but conversation with the distant passengers over the 83-dBA racket at 70 mph still involves some hollering. Finally, the seats have been redesigned for improved durability and comfort, but they still produce saddle sores during long stints at the wheel, and lateral space is limited for those broad of beam. Nothing about driving a Hummer on the pavement is terribly pleasant other than its ability to intimidate fellow motorists. The steering wheel feels like a loop of steel rebar covered with foam rubber, and it transmits not a jot of information about the road surface. Turn the wheel at all quickly, and you are immediately reminded of Sir Isaac Newton’s theory on the resistance of a 7580-pound brick to change direction. Take to a freeway off-ramp at anything above the posted speed, and the tall truck tires—good for just 0.63 g—will first understeer like they were made of piano wire and then suddenly lean over, resulting in a queasy squirm off the intended line. Beefy suspension bits can always be heard clunking and banging around far beneath the driver’s seat, and they transmit plenty of pothole feel. One’s view of the right lane is never great, which makes passing and merging a bit tricky, and the flat side glass reflects disconcerting full-size vir­tual images of traffic passing on the oppo­site side of the vehicle. Similarly, the entire windshield becomes a rearview mirror at night.Having duly noted all these objective criticisms, we organized a special final test: a poseur’s evening out to dinner and the theater in the Hummer. One of our guests, wearing a De Wolfe original mink coat, grumbled about the undignified climb into the back seat, but once aboard she was quite happy. On the way to the restaurant, we spied some gentle rolling mounds of frozen earth in a subdivision that was under construction. “Let me show you what this thing is really designed to do,” I heard the “discerner/conqueror” in me boast. I mentally plotted a course across a small dry pile of dirt near the road and headed toward it, not listening to the “adventurer/realist” inside, counseling me to first reconnoiter the path on foot. More Hummer Reviews From the ArchiveAs soon as the front wheels left the curb, they plunged through what looked like terra firma from the driver’s perch into a little ice-crusted ditch. I gave it a little throttle, but the wheels just spun. We had traveled precisely one foot off the road and gotten stuck. I engaged low range, locking the center differential, and pressed a dash­-mounted switch to deflate the tires to 15 psi. Then I applied a bit of power in reverse. More mudslinging ensued, sans movement. The passengers were looking concerned. The rear tires couldn’t grip the snowy pavement, and the fronts were nearly hub-deep in wet mud. “I’m not pushing!” declared our nonplused mink-slung passenger. After five minutes spent gently rocking the mighty Hummer back and forth and sawing at the wheel to avoid deepening my ruts, the king of off-road vehicles managed to free itself. VERDICT: Still way too loud, large, uncomfortable, and impractical to be considered a viable alternative to mainstream luxury sport-utes.Our social climber spent the duration of the weekend conquering Michigan’s semi-pavement, and we had our answer: 70 percent of Hummer buyers are nuts. Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1997 AM General HummerVehicle Type: front-engine, 4-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door pickup
PRICEBase/As Tested: $63,827/$84,502Options: 1GC option package (includes central tire-inflation system and run-flat tires, air conditioning, brush guards, driveline and rocker-panel protection, trailer-towing package, power windows, locks, and mirrors, cruise control, keyless entry), $11,366; 6.5-liter turbo-diesel engine, $4523; 12,000-pound winch, $2347; premium sound system with CD changer, $1461; heated windshield, $594; rear defroster, $384
ENGINEturbocharged diesel V-8, iron block and aluminum headsDisplacement: 396 in3, 6478 cm3Power: 195 hp @ 3400 rpmTorque: 430 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/control armsBrakes, F/R: 10.5-in vented disc/10.5-in vented discTires: Goodyear Wrangler MT37 x 12.5R-16.5
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 130.0 inLength: 190.5 inWidth: 86.5 inHeight: 75.0 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 60/55 ft3Curb Weight: 7580 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS30 mph: 3.9 sec60 mph: 15.2 sec1/4-Mile: 19.9 sec @ 67 mph80 mph: 37.0 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 15.3 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 7.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 12.6 secTop Speed (drag ltd): 88 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 241 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.63 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 9 mpg 
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 13/17 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More