Car Reviews

Fun fact: A male hippopotamus can easily weigh 5000 pounds. Though they’re typically mild-tempered, when provoked their jaws can deliver a lethal bite that is said to be the strongest of all land-dwelling creatures. As it turns out, hippos have a lot in common with the Mercedes-AMG GT63 S E Performance. Not only does this two-door hatchback tip the scales at nearly two-and-a-half tons, the top-dog E Performance PHEV powertrain delivers one powerful bite. Sit Down. Shut Up. Hold On.The GT63 S E Performance’s extra mass is brought on by electrifying the powertrain. Just like the pure-gasser GT63, under the hood lies a twin-turbocharged 4.0-liter V-8; here, the eight-pot is tuned to 603 horsepower and 627 pound-feet of torque and pairs to the brand’s nine-speed automatic with a wet clutch in place of the traditional torque converter. At the rear axle is an electric drive unit that consists of a motor with 201 horses and 236 pound-feet, a two-speed transmission, an electronically controlled limited-slip differential, an inverter, and a 4.8-kWh liquid-cooled lithium-ion battery pack. Besides a few mounting points, this arrangement is identical to the hardware found at the back of the C63 S E Performance. Mercedes claims the e-unit adds nearly 500 pounds to the already porky platform. By our math, that places the GT63 S E Performance right around 4800 pounds. Staggering. But what’s more astounding is the powertrain’s combined outputs of 805 horsepower and 1047 pound-feet, routed to all four wheels. By now you’ve likely noticed the numbers don’t add up. The combined horsepower amounts to basically rounding errors. The combined torque, however, is more confusing. A long-winded explanation from Mercedes-AMG engineers—and an even more complex formula that would have Albert Einstein scratching his head—has us taking their word for it. But merging out onto Germany’s autobahn leaves no room for second-guessing. The electric motor puts out full thrust in 10-second doses before tapering off to deliver 94 horses in 60-second intervals. The acceleration is teeth-clenchingly relentless all the way to 190 mph. We have no doubt in this car’s ability to slam into its governed top speed of 199 mph. In fact, it feels like the car has an easy 220 mph in the bag, but engineering the rotating bits to work beyond 200 mph is a costly endeavor. Mercedes claims 60 mph arrives in 2.7 seconds with Race Start activated. The seats’ stitching patterns embedded in our back suggest something much quicker, maybe even a top-10 spot on our acceleration leaderboard. Like many of you, we were a bit put off by the second-generation GT resorting to an all-wheel-drive-only platform. For those who wish to try their luck, there’s a not-so-advertised Drift mode that decouples the front axle, sending all 805 horses to the the rear tires. You (and your tire budget) have been warned. Stop, Drop, and RollFor being such a portly fella, the GT63 S E Performance certainly doesn’t drive like it. This speed demon skips a conventional anti-roll-bar setup and instead uses a hydraulic anti-roll control system much like the ones found in McLarens and Rivians. The corners are hydropneumatically linked to mitigate body roll, and the system tuning varies in Comfort and Sport driving modes. Slithering through the twisty hillsides of southern Germany, the anti-roll system—and the standard 2.5-degree rear-axle steering—brilliantly masks the GT63’s weight, its body staying level through faster sweeping corners and rotating through tighter switchbacks. All of these helping hands add to the curb weight, but when you’re already a little chunky, a few extra calories won’t hurt. Though it’s hard to find any faults with the ride quality on Germany’s buttery road surfaces in any of the three suspension modes (Comfort, Sport, Race), the steering leaves us wanting a more. There’s not much feedback making its way up from the car’s Michelin Pilot Sport S5 rubber, and off-center inputs are awfully reactive, leading to frequent corrections while turning into a corner. Thankfully, the steering is slower to respond to inputs at triple-digit speeds, but there’s still an annoying learning curve to it. More AMG High-Powered HybridsNaturally, a heavy car capable of such intense velocities needs a big brake package, and the E Performance delivers the goods. Monster 16.5-inch carbon-ceramic rotors pinched by six-piston calipers live within the front wheels, while 15.0-inch units and an off-putting single-piston caliper reside out back. We can safely say that this system comes in handy when a clapped-out Opel decides it needs the autobahn’s left lane. We can also safely say that no one will enjoy the brake pedal’s varying pressure. Sometimes you push on it and it’s nice and firm, other times there’s travel to it. It’ll even move around underfoot during sustained pressure. It’s an extremely odd pedal strategy that no one in the world ever asked for.The Upside DownWhile the GT63 S E Performance’s mission is clearly eye-pain-inducing acceleration, its electric side has an air of sensibility. Surely, an estimated seven miles of electric-only driving is nothing to brag about, but it allows stealthy travel through a town or city, only to unleash exhaust-pipe hellfire on the other side. The GT63 is decidedly not quick in Electric mode, but considering 201 horsepower is responsible for pushing roughly 4800 pounds, forward momentum is adequate. With the nine-speed’s clutches open, Electric mode routes torque forward through the center differential to enable all-wheel drive. The rear gearbox executes its one-two upshift imperceptibly, but on more than one occasion the downshift arrived with an audible clunk. Its plug-in capabilities are clearly marketed for Europe’s gasoline-unfriendly city centers, but its 3.7-kWh onboard charger should replenish the battery in about two hours when connected to a 220-volt outlet. We suspect no one in the United States will actually plug in, as the V-8’s starter/generator is plenty capable of robbing Peter to pay Paul in Race mode. Four levels of regeneration are on tap too.The GT63 S E Performance’s lavish and technology-rich interior offers plenty of space for its front passengers, and while the back seat is optional, we’d call it mandatory. There’s only enough headroom in back for small children, but the rear seat is the only way to get the folding divider that unlocks more cargo space. And that’s critical in the E Performance, as the electric drive unit’s load-floor bulge eats up five cubic feet compared to the nonhybrid GT63. Yes, the GT63 S E Performance is a heavy car, but that’s just the way she goes these days. If horsepower—aided by the roar of a gas-fed V-8—can keep pace with weight gains, so be it. Just make sure there’s plenty of bite, which is definitely the case here. We expect pricing for this ultimate grand tourer to start in the neighborhood of $200,000 when it arrives later this year.SpecificationsSpecifications
2025 Mercedes-AMG GT63 S E PerformanceVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-motor, rear/all-wheel-drive, 2- or 2+2-passenger, 2-door hatchback
PRICE (C/D EST)
Base: $200,000
POWERTRAIN
twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 32-valve 4.0-liter V-8, 603 hp, 627 lb-ft + AC motor, 201 hp, 236 lb-ft (combined output: 805 hp, 1047 lb-ft; 4.8-kWh lithium-ion battery pack; 3.7-kW onboard charger)Transmissions: 9-speed automatic/2-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 106.3 inLength: 186.1 inWidth: 78.1 inHeight: 53.3 inCargo Volume, Behind F/R: 19/6 ft 3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4800 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 2.4 sec100 mph: 6.0 sec1/4-Mile: 10.1 secTop Speed: 199 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 14/12/19 mpgCombined Gasoline + Electricity: 45 MPGeEV Range: 7 miDavid Beard studies and reviews automotive related things and pushes fossil-fuel and electric-powered stuff to their limits. His passion for the Ford Pinto began at his conception, which took place in a Pinto. More

Whether you love technology’s ever-encroaching presence in our daily lives, some truths remain: People still have places to go, families still have things to do, and today’s tech-laden automobile is integral to both. That line of thinking was top of mind at Ford when it came to improving the Explorer three-row SUV, which benefits from a comprehensive interior-focused update for the 2025 model year. The current Ford Explorer was introduced for 2020 with a new rear-wheel-drive-based design that, while not game changing, made for meaningful improvements over the generation that it replaced. However, its cabin was quickly upstaged by rivals, both in content and finish, which did little to balance out the ho-hum driving dynamics the Explorer exhibited once you got moving. In a five-way comparison test of three-row SUVs back then, the then-new Ford finished fourth. Modernized AccommodationsFast-forward to today, and the Explorer’s innards garner the greatest attention. Unsurprisingly, the tech interface takes center stage, with all models getting a new 12.3-inch digital instrument cluster and a 13.2-inch center touchscreen. Though physical secondary controls are both small in size and limited in number (there is a volume knob at least), this marks the first Ford-branded model to feature the new Ford Digital Experience infotainment system that debuted on the 2024 Lincoln Nautilus. Climate controls are clearly labeled and always present at the bottom of the center display, and the whole system is crisply rendered and highly intuitive to operate. Based on the Android Automotive operating system, its features are many: Google Maps–based navigation can run on either display, and there’s access to the Google Play store, allowing numerous apps, from Waze to YouTube, to be directly downloaded. When parked, you can surf the web via the Vivaldi browser (and eventually Google Chrome), play games and videos, and even host meetings through Webex. Google Assistant or Amazon Alexa can be used for voice control, and the system fully supports over-the-air updates; a Ford Premium Connectivity subscription, the first year of which is free, includes a 5G connection and a Wi-Fi hotspot. And for those who’d rather just mirror their phone, wireless Android Auto and Apple CarPlay are standard. All this is housed in a redesigned six- or seven-passenger environment that enriches the Explorer’s ambiance with cleaner styling, nicer materials, and greater attention to detail. You won’t mistake it for a Lincoln, but it is a pronounced step up from before, particularly in the front row. The new dashboard’s highlight is a fabric-covered section that mimics a soundbar and integrates the front speakers, and we appreciate the handy center tray that doubles as an optional wireless charging pad. There’s good storage in the deep cubbies of the new center console, now flanked by softly padded rails. Again, features abound, from numerous power outlets and USB ports to available ambient lighting and heated, ventilated, and massaging front seats. Prominent contrast stitching and metallic-like trim that extend to the door panels nicely break up the forms, and most trims feature easier-to-maintain matte surface treatments instead of shiny piano-black bits. The top Platinum model is an exception, but it makes up for this with attractive model-specific trim and quilted leather upholstery in fetching light Salt Crystal Gray and purple-ish Mojave Dusk hues. The sportier ST-Line and ST trims continue with their red-accented dark interiors, but the base Active trim is arguably the most impressive, with plenty of upscale-looking finishes, plus fabric inserts within its vinyl seat coverings. While cheaper plastics are largely kept out of sight up front, they creep more into view the farther back you move in the cabin. The third row remains a rather unadorned space with uncomfortably low-mounted seat cushions and only a modest amount of legroom. Smarter Driver AssistanceThe Explorer’s other major update is the addition of Ford’s BlueCruise hands-free driving tech, which is available on all but the Active model and, in this latest iteration, rivals GM’s Super Cruise in terms of functionality. Operable on around 130,000 miles of limited-access divided highways, the system performed well on our test drive: Lane centering was quite good, automatic lane changes were executed smoothly, and the system only nudged us to retake control around the tightest of bends or when it got confused by convoluted lane markings near interchanges. A new feature is the SUV’s ability to automatically adjust its position within its lane if a vehicle in an adjacent lane starts to drift too close. Buyers can activate the system at purchase for $700 or sample it for a 90-day free trial, after which it costs $800 up front or $75 per month. Despite the myriad enhancements, you’ll probably need to see the 2025 Explorer parked next to last year’s version to spot the exterior differences. The new model’s head- and taillights have been subtly restyled, as have their model-specific grilles. But that’s about the extent of it. The greatest tells are the ST model’s new dark-finished 21-inch wheels, which also are available on the ST-Line (18s are standard on the Active model; 20s are standard on the ST-Line and Platinum). More on Ford ExplorerEven fewer changes come to the Explorer’s driving experience. Virtually none, in fact. Its seats are still flatter and less supportive than we like. Its steering is accurate if short on communication. And its over-the-road demeanor prioritizes comfort, with a composed-if-soft ride, satisfactory body control, and generally less-than-eager handling. The ST with its stiffer suspension tune is the most athletic of the bunch and is the only model with paddle shifters for the 10-speed automatic transmission. It’s also pretty quick, thanks to a standard 400-hp twin-turbo 3.0-liter V-6 that can punt it to 60 mph in around five seconds. That mill also is available in the Platinum (it was previously standard), with the alternative continuing to be a 300-hp turbocharged 2.3-liter four-cylinder, which should be more than adequate for most users. Regardless of engine, all models now feature the previously optional Trailer Tow package and a 5000-pound towing capacity. With its pared-down model lineup—Active, ST-Line, Platinum, ST—prices for the 2025 Explorer start at $41,350 and can approach $70K for a loaded ST model. Rear-wheel drive remains standard, with all-wheel drive being a $2000 upgrade on all trims save for the ST, where it costs $3695. Sharp eyes will notice the absence of the off-road-oriented Timberline model, which is currently off the roster but expected to make a return in the near future, likely with some additional upgrades. While these latest mid-cycle revisions don’t address all of the Explorer’s shortcomings, they do provide families with a more sophisticated and technologically convenient place to pass the miles.SpecificationsSpecifications
2025 Ford ExplorerVehicle Type: front-engine, rear- or all-wheel-drive, 6- or 7-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: Active, $41,350; ST-Line, $46,110; Platinum, $53,250; ST, $57,100
ENGINES
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.3-liter inline-4, 300 hp, 310 lb-ft; twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter V-6, 400 hp, 415 lb-ft
TRANSMISSION
10-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 119.1 inLength: 198.7 inWidth: 78.9 inHeight: 69.6–70.2 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 60–63/52–57/36 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/M/R: 85–86/46/16 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4500–4800 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.0–6.2 sec100 mph: 13.2–17.8 sec1/4-Mile: 13.6–14.9 secTop Speed: 125–145 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 21–24/18–20/25–29 mpgMike Sutton is an editor, writer, test driver, and general car nerd who has contributed to Car and Driver’s reverent and irreverent passion for the automobile since 2008. A native Michigander from suburban Detroit, he enjoys the outdoors and complaining about the weather, has an affection for off-road vehicles, and believes in federal protection for naturally aspirated engines. More

From the May 1983 issue of Car and Driver.It could be argued—indeed, the prop­osition has been put forward numerous times in this journal—that the Chevrolet Monte Carlo is every bit as appealing to the car enthusiast as a Toyota Starlet is to Doug Fraser. From the enthusiast’s point of view, the Monte Carlo has aver­age handling, discernible performance, insipid manners, and simulated neoclas­sic styling reminiscent of a Singer Ga­zelle or something. In other words, it’s everything you never wanted in a car. But, heck, it wasn’t intended for you hot-bloods anyway. The average buyer is pushing 50 and has one foot on the golf course and one eye on a retirement condo in Florida.The plot thickens. Despite the EZ Listenin’ preferences of such buyers, the Carlo happens to be the sole surviv­ing front-engine, rear-drive, intermedi­ate-size, personal-luxury coupe in the whole Chevrolet lineup, and you know what that means: it’s the only Chevrolet on NASCAR’s eligibility list for Grand National competition. Sheeeit fire. Buick has been winning all kinds of GNs without ever admitting that there’s a Chevy engine under the Regal skin, Pontiac is playing to the fans with King Richard in a Grand Prix, and now Ford is flexing its fancy new aero Thunder­bird. Chevrolet has the choice of doing nothing, in which case the Carlo will just dodder off for another dose of Ar­thritis Pain Formula, or it can give the car a massive hormone injection in one last valiant attempt to restore its youth. Cut to the general manager’s office, where Bob Stempel is saying: “One thing we have to watch very closely is our competition. It became obvious to us as Ford proceeded with their Thun­derbird, and the shape on the front of that car, that it was quite aerodynami­cally clean. So we started an aero program on our current Monte Carlo to see what we could do in a similar vein to slick up the car. You know, with many aero experiments you end up with a front that looks like an old Burlington Zephyr streamliner. But this one started to look so good it just seemed a natural for us to introduce it as an SS package.” Meanwhile, over at the wind tunnel, the technicians have sculptured a new nose that accomplishes three significant feats: it eliminates the pseudo-neoclas­sic grille, pares back the drag coefficient to 0.375 (15 percent lower than the stock version’s), and trims front lift sig­nificantly. The Carlo’s basic construc­tion readily lends itself to such a nose job anyway because the fender and the hood all end at a single cut, as if the front sheetmetal had been assembled and then trimmed to size with one thwack of a giant bologna slicer. On the standard Carlo, the raw end is covered with a rubber-ducky frontispiece shaped to simulate yesteryear’s elegance; on the SS, it’s shaped to penetrate the air. In both cases, the headlights and the bumper attach to the structure behind, so what you see is merely a skin. In fact, the Carlo and a number of other Detroit models are designed with just a quick change in mind: a new look can be in­troduced without expensive and time­-consuming sheetmetal changes. Only two other aero aids are visible on the SS, and they are there primarily for appearance. First, a small skirt is at­tached to the bottom of each front fend­er just forward of the wheel. This con­tinues the line established by the nose and makes a minor contribution to directing air around the front tires. In back, of course, is a teeny NASCAR-­style spoiler fastened to the trailing edge of the deck with six man-sized bolts. That lip will never rip off, no mat­ter how many times it’s used as a handle to slam the lid.Interestingly—make that commendably as well—the aero mods on the SS are by far outnumbered by mechanical revisions to improve performance. With homologation specials like this, one de­cision has a way of leading to another in such a way that the final project is a lot more complicated than anybody would have imagined at first. Going in, all Chevy really wanted was to avoid being shut out at Daytona by the new Thun­derbird; a new nose is a relatively easy solution. For it to be allowed on the track, however, it must be sold on the street. And since your basic Carlo buyer doesn’t want a bullet nose messing up his K mart classicism, new buyers have to be found, which, in turn, means more and more changes until the package goes critical for some other group. Giv­en the purpose of the new shape, the idea of putting a motor under the hood and suffixing “SS” to the name is mere­ly the course of least resistance.Bob Stempel admits agonizing over the decision. The basic Carlo’s position in the market, while an important and proper one for Chevrolet, is not within radiotelescope range of the perfor­mance market. Would a racerized ver­sion turn off the regular buyers and at the same time extract yawns of indiffer­ence from the performance fringe? One overriding statistic is that the average buyer of domestic cars is now 47, a doz­en years older than the average Japa­nese-import buyer. If the Motor City doesn’t hurry up and find a younger au­dience, its steady customers are going to fade into the social-security ranks and then die off. The fact that young people buy the performance cars was a big fac­tor in the decision. And the fact that they might be predisposed to yawn if the SS didn’t deliver performance in full measure was a big factor in the thor­oughness of its transformation. The SS has been assigned a five-liter, four-barrel V-8 with 175 hp, up 25 from the standard Carlo V-8. It has a com­pression ratio of 9.5:1, the highest Chevrolet offers, backed up with elec­tronic spark advance and a knock detec­tor. Breathing is improved with a racier camshaft and a high-capacity exhaust system that uses a pair of two-inch stain­less-steel pipes feeding a wide-mouthed Corvette-style catalytic converter. Dual two-and-a-quarter-inch tailpipes and mufflers lead to an outlet at each corner of the back bumper, just like the real muscle cars of the old days. No wimpy pipe dumping under the side of the fender just behind the rear wheel; that’s for the old folks’ Carlo. The drivetrain is similarly biased to­ward performance. Only an automatic transmission is available, but it has a high-stall-speed (2025 rpm) converter that also includes the lockup feature. The axle ratio was raised to 3.42 from the stock Carlo’s 2.29. Chevrolet’s F41 sport-suspension op­tion is standard on the SS, with further tailoring that includes unique calibra­tions for the springs and shock absorb­ers, plus one-and-a-quarter-inch front and seven-eighths-inch rear anti-sway bars. Wide Goodyear Eagle GT tires, P215/65R-15s, are mounted on 7.0-by-15-inch styled steel wheels.The result of all this mechanical sub­stitution is way too much whoopee for even the Gray Panthers. The engine has genuine lunge, and the shocks are there to remind you that life is not all smooth roads. The exhaust makes a roar that is full-on by the time you get to the double-nickel—it actually sounds more like an exhaust-noise synthesizer than the real thing—and will drive anybody over the age of 27 crazy in about four minutes. Noise aside, the SS is rather fun. The trans kicks down hard enough to spin the tires if you catch it just right, and it will hold first gear right up to the 5500-rpm redline, dual exhausts blowing like crazed hair dryers all the way. The stiff­ish suspension allows enough axle hop to make fast driving over broken roads interesting, but not enough to worry you about getting sideways. The SS ac­tually seems quite nimble; with the big bars keeping the roll angle down and the quick (12.7:1) power-steering gear for snappy course corrections, you can pretend you’re a NASCAR good old boy trying to stay one lap ahead of the revenuers. As heavy-class performance cars go, this is the real thing.Chevrolet didn’t stop there, however. It’s fascinating to see how much effort was directed toward making the SS look like the real thing, as such would be de­fined in the middle Eighties. Most of the Carlo luxury cues have been stripped off the exterior. Gone is the stand-up hood ornament, the deck-lid script, the wheel-lip moldings, and the rocker-pan­el strips. Even the molding at the bot­tom of the rear glass is gone. Same with the rear-license-plate accent. Any chrome that’s left—door handles, win­dow surrounds, bumper inserts, etc.—has been blacked out. A narrow, multicolored tape circles the body at bumper height, and “Monte Carlo SS” logos stick to the doors and the deck lid. The plan was clearly to Porsche the glitz right out of the old Carlo. If they could just get the nose down about three inches—the spoiler wouldn’t be at half-mast then, and some of the daylight in the front fender openings would go away—they’d have a pretty convincing package. More on the Monte Carlo from the ArchiveAt least on the outside. Open the door and you’re confronted by the same blend of artificial blue and white that greets you when you lift the lid on blue­berry yogurt. Bench seat, door panel, dash, steering wheel, it’s everywhere. The SS does get gauges and a 6000-rpm tach, but otherwise the interior offers the same broad expanses of plastiwood and other high-performance fitments that make the standard Carlo such a hit.The interior seems to be the only as­pect of the SS that the target market doesn’t warm to. Just to check its intu­ition, Chevrolet sneak-previewed a pro­totype at the Miami Auto Show last fall and asked hard questions of 158 atten­dants selected for a survey. They gener­ally thought it was a man’s car, liked the blackout trim, and took a dim view of the interior colors. Most significant, those who said they would consider buying the SS had a median age of 29, compared with a median of 38 for show attendants who wouldn’t consider buying the car. To Chevrolet, that sounded like pay dirt. After seeing the survey results, Bob Stempel said: “We’re going to be watching very closely to see how popu­lar this car really is. If it goes, we might just do a few more things with it.”SpecificationsSpecifications
1983 Chevrolet Monte CarloVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 6-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $10,249/$12,091Options: air conditioning. $725; AM /FM-stereo radio, $198; power windows, $180; cruise control, $170; rear defroster, $135; power door locks, $120; tilt steering wheel, $105; tinted glass, $105; other options, $104
ENGINEpushrod V-8, iron block and headsDisplacement: 305 in3, 5001 cm3Power: 175 hp @ 4800 rpmTorque: 240 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm 
TRANSMISSION3-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/rigid axle, trailing linksBrakes, F/R: 10.5-in vented disc/9.5-in drumTires: Goodyear Eagle GTP215/65R-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 108.1 inLength: 200.4 inWidth: 71.8 inHeight: 54.3 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 52/44 ft3Trunk Volume: 17 ft3Curb Weight: 3480 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.2 sec1/4-Mile: 16.1 sec @ 88 mph100 mph: 23.3 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.6 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.2 secTop Speed: 120 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 210 ftRoadholding, 282-ft Skidpad: 0.81 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 13 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 21/18/26 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Just a few years back, the U.S. truck market enjoyed a brief golden age of diesel-powered half-ton pickups. Ford dropped a 3.0-liter Power Stroke into the F-150, Ram put its 3.0-liter EcoDiesel in the Ram 1500, Jeep borrowed its own version of that engine for the Gladiator, and GM offered its 3.0-liter Duramax in the GMC Sierra and Chevrolet Silverado. Oh, the bounties of low-end torque that were reaped, the magnificent highway fuel economy that was observed. With that kind of competition, GM evidently figured it ought to upgrade its compression-ignition inline-six, which it did—just in time for everyone else to abandon small diesels. For the 2023 model year, the baby Duramax got new fuel injectors and pistons, a retuned turbocharger compressor, and a redesigned combustion bowl. As a result, output increased from 277 hp to 305 hp, with torque improving from 460 lb-ft to 495 lb-ft. The latter figure makes the 3.0-liter Duramax the torque champ of the Silverado 1500 range—on the internal-combustion side, anyway. All of that power is delivered in stoic silence too. At both idle and wide-open throttle, the diesel Silverado is significantly quieter than its braggadocious 6.2-liter gas counterpart, recording 41 decibels at idle and 71 decibels at wide-open throttle. We drove both a Trail Boss and a ZR2 (our test numbers are for the latter), and in both cases their aggressive all-terrain tires made more noise than the engine. At least, that’s what we told the cop who pulled us over for speeding about 10 minutes into our first drive in the Trail Boss.Speaking of speed, the revised Duramax makes for a noticeably quicker Silverado. When we tested the first-generation engine in a 2020 Silverado LTZ, that truck hit 60 mph in 7.1 seconds and ran the quarter-mile in 15.5 seconds at 88 mph. The 2024 ZR2, despite weighing an extra 145 pounds and wearing Goodyear Wrangler Territory MT tires, dispatched 60 mph in 6.8 seconds and cleared the quarter in 15.3 seconds at 89 mph. The revised engine feels even more responsive than those numbers indicate—witness the huge improvement in 30-to-50-mph top-gear passing, which drops from 4.2 seconds to 3.6.The junior diesel also flaunts excellent-for-a-truck fuel economy, especially during highway trips, where the engine can settle in a constant rpm and keep the turbo out of the conversation. We didn’t retest highway fuel economy for the ZR2, but the LTZ returned 26 mpg at 75 mph, and it’s easy to coax 30-plus-mpg results on back roads. Given all the flavors of Silverado 1500, the EPA ratings are all over the place, but the diesel is rated as high as 29 mpg highway for two-wheel-drive models and as low as 22 mpg highway for the drag-happy ZR2. Even in that case, the ZR2’s 21-mpg EPA combined rating still beats its 6.2-liter gas sibling by 6 mpg.More on the SilveradoSo what do you pay for all this goodness? For the ZR2, nothing. The Silverado’s flagship off-road trim is available only with the Duramax and the 6.2-liter V-8, and Chevy’s product planners see the latter as the natural upgrade. Thus the diesel is the base model, priced $1500 below the V-8. So you’ll save money up front and then, barring some wild upset in fuel prices, continue your cost-of-ownership parsimony long after the final payment is made. That’s partly because of the diesel’s efficiency advantage and partly because the 6.2-liter V-8 requires premium fuel, which, at the time of this writing, costs at least 40 cents more per gallon than diesel nationally.Engine hierarchy and pricing vary by model, and in other trims the Duramax is the penultimate option. In the Trail Boss, the diesel costs $2590 more than the 2.7-liter four-cylinder gas engine and $795 more than the 5.3-liter V-8. In both cases, we would opine, money well spent.The full-size pickup market is so saturated that it’s difficult for any single truck to stand out as a singular offering with no direct competition. But, thanks to attrition, that’s exactly what the Silverado diesel represents. As the stereotypical unctuous car dealer might say, if you can find a better light-duty diesel pickup, buy it.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 ZR2 DuramaxVehicle Type: front engine, rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door pickup
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $71,895/$75,700 Options: Technology package (adaptive cruise control, head-up display, power tilt/telescope steering, rear camera mirror), $1970; power sunroof, $995; Multi-Flex tailgate, $445; Glacier Blue Metallic paint, $395
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve diesel inline-6, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 183 in3, 2992 cm3Power: 305 hp @ 3750 rpmTorque: 495 lb-ft @ 2750 rpm
TRANSMISSION
10-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/live axleBrakes, F/R: 13.0-in vented disc/13.6-in vented disc Tires: Goodyear Wrangler Territory MTLT275/70R-18 115/112O M+S TPC Spec 2806
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 147.5 inLength: 231.9 inWidth: 81.2 inHeight: 78.3 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 73/67 ft3Curb Weight: 5798 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 6.8 sec1/4-Mile: 15.3 sec @ 89 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.4 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.9 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.6 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.3 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 99 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 203 ft
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 21 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 21/20/22 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDEzra 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

From the April 1983 issue of Car and Driver.We refer to this mighty machine as the Atomic Blueberry. This seems entirely appropriate for a car of its capacity and coloring that will easily attain 139 mph. Its color is officially referred to by Mercedes-Benz as Lapis Blue, a deep, metallic shade that alters with the light, varying mystically from an almost bright blue to navy blue to royal purple. The bumpers and the lower body are paint­ed to match, and the trim is all black, laced around the gleaming body like the dark markings of a perfectly ripened blueberry.This Atomic Blueberry, however, is in no danger of being gobbled up. It is un­godly fast, more than a match for all but one or two of the most accomplished sports cars volume-sold in this country, and it maintains this superiority with all due composure. It is a Mercedes, so it has had a thorough upbringing in the social graces. It is, however, an AMG-­modified Mercedes, and capable of ex­ceptionally highhanded behavior. AMG is Germany’s preeminent Mercedes tun­ing firm, owned and operated by Hans­ Werner Aufrecht in the town of Affal­terbach, near Stuttgart, whence the almighty 5.0-liter motorcars emanate.As they come from Mercedes, the 500SELs, SECs, and SLs are already among the fastest big cars in the world, scions of dedication to the ideals of solidity, utility, and, particularly as em­bodied in the 5.0-liter flagships, perfor­mance. Unfortunately, their perfor­mance has remained the province of other markets, never reaching the States because of our tight emissions require­ments and Mercedes’s aversion to add­ing a gas-guzzler surcharge. Thus a mild 3.8-liter powerplant is the only fac­tory-offered V-8 here. Several U.S. emissions-and-safety-certification firms rectify this by bringing in 500-series cars and affixing the necessary hard­ware, thus enabling America’s well-­heeled to run neck and neck with their European counterparts. This does not make Mercedes-Benz particularly happy, since it is ever vigi­lant of its good name and thus predict­ably concerned with the modifications to its cars (though the company has enough pride in its products to provide a limited service-and-parts channel here for its big-engined models). Mercedes, along with Ferrari and BMW, philo­sophically supports pending congressio­nal legislation endorsed by Volkswagen that would effectively put an end to pipsqueak competitors by requiring them to meet exactly the same 50,000-mile certification standards set for ma­jor importers. One of the pipsqueak competitors is Classic Motors, a specialty import center run by Richard Buxbaum, who has re­cently entered into an agreement with O’Gara Coach Company that calls for O’Gara to handle business west of the Rockies. In addition to handling trick, Euro-version BMWs, Ferraris, Porsches, and the like, Classic and O’Gara are AMG’s exclusive U.S. distributors. They can provide fully certified but otherwise stock Mercedes, or they can boost per­formance from stirring to sensational. In support of the attendant expense, we offer up the Atomic Blueberry’s per­formance statistics: 0 to 60 mph in 7.4 seconds, the quarter-mile in 15.5 sec­onds at 93 mph, 0 to 100 mph in 18.3 seconds, and 70-to-0-mph braking in 185 feet. (The stellar braking perfor­mance is due to the vice-free ABS anti­lock four-wheel discs, not available here from the factory.) And above it all looms that monumental 139-mph top end, effortlessly provided by the excep­tional aerodynamic detailing, despite the big Merc’s hefty frontal area, mas­sive passenger compartment, and 3772-pound burden. More AMG contentAlas, a confession: this Atomic Blue­berry is not yet a certified car, and its performance might slip a little with the requisite hardware aboard. However, in its defense, it has already served 50,000 miles of duty as an AMG engineering mule (including several hundred laps at Hockenheim during the process of gain­ing Germany’s TUV type-approval for the new five-spoke, eight-by-sixteen-­inch AMG wheels) and as a press car, its only real concession to ill-treatment be­ing a touch of looseness in the steering. AMG has a selection of smaller steering wheels for customers at odds with Mercedes’s colossal wheel, but some of us prefer the big one for the ballistic, high-speed accuracy it lends (this being one of those inherently stable cars that feel even better as you go more quick­ly), and for the unimpeded view it pro­vides of M-B’s excellent instruments. The fuel gauge indicates that, even at our brutally applied 13 mpg, the 25.4-gallon tank has an impressive 300-plus­-mile range (an add-on AMG trunk tank increases capacity to 40 gallons). Once and only once we have endured the un­endurable, a sustained 55-mph doze-off, which produced over 20 mpg, no small accomplishment for a 139-mph limousine capable of carrying five nota­bly comfortable and relaxed occupants in quiet luxury amid velour upholstery, the restrained banding of wood veneer, and legroom adequate even for stilt walkers in full parade regalia. Moreover, the crudest gas we could dump down the filler was fine, though unleaded will be necessary once the catalysts go on. None of this tells you how sensation­ally exciting this car is to drive. It is un­commonly deceptive. Only when you toe into the throttle do you have an in­kling of what lies hidden within the sin­gle-overhead-cam V-8 and its AMG heads, valves, cams, and assorted detailing. No rocky idle gnashes back through the superb four-speed automatic drive­train. Instead, the monstrous output is entirely in concert with a most accom­plished chassis, thanks to AMG’s special Bilstein shocks and shorter, somewhat stiffer springs, which detract little from ride quality, even on the wide-set 225/50VR-16 Pirelli P7s. The monster is deceptively poised and agile, suggest­ing that a twist of the wrist is all that’s necessary for the accomplishment of any task. You will find that the mirrored world recedes with zoom-lens speed. Two unfortunates in Z28 and 924 thought they were racing across Ohio until the Atomic Blueberry rocketed silently past with a 30-mph cushion and disappeared. Stout stuff, this stuff of the real thing. We can only hope that pending legisla­tion to eliminate the importation of such machinery fails. It passage would be doubly sad, because not only would it eliminate a source of real automotive excitement, it would also eliminate pressure on the large importers to bet­ter their current offerings. Only free competition leads to the quickest possi­ble progress. For that reason alone, never mind the adrenaline adjunct that goes hand in hand, we all owe thanks to companies like Classic Motors and to the Atomic Blueberries of our world.SpecificationsSpecifications
1983 AMG Mercedes-Benz 500SELVehicle Type: front-engine, rear, all, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICEAs Tested: $75,000Options: AMG high-output engine, $8088; 16-inch AMG wheels and Pirelli P7 tires, $2614; blacked-out chrome, $1964; AMG suspension, $1128; front and rear spoilers, $691
ENGINESOHC 16-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 303 in3, 4973 cm3Power: 265 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque: 293 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/semi-trailing armsBrakes, F/R: 10.9-in vented disc/11.0-in discTires: Pirelli P7225/50VR-16
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 120.9 inLength: 202.0 inWidth: 73.6 inHeight: 56.7 inCurb Weight: 3772 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.4 sec1/4-Mile: 15.5 sec @ 93 mph100 mph: 18.3 sec130 mph: 44.9 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.2 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.1 secTop Speed: 139 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 185 ftRoadholding, 282-ft Skidpad: 0.74 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 13 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the July/August issue of Car and Driver.Hanksville (population 170 or so) is a tiny crossroads town in south-central Utah that looms large for area visitors. That’s been the case for some time, as it was a lonely supply outpost used by Butch Cassidy and his notorious Wild Bunch in the late 1800s. Cassidy, a local miscreant, established a well-concealed hideout to the east in what is now called Robbers Roost, a steeply walled canyon off the aptly named Dirty Devil River.Today handfuls of hardy tourists venture to those same impossibly sinuous canyons looking for extreme off-grid adventure, oftentimes involving rappelling but always supported by a four-by-four. Others stock supplies before they head farther east into Canyonlands National Park’s Maze district or south toward the waters of Lake Powell. It’s the perfect place to see what the new Toyota Land Cruiser is all about while also getting a sense of the fearsome topography that Cassidy used to his advantage.Toyota killed the North American Land Cruiser after the 2021 model year, but for 2024, the company has pulled a Frankenstein and brought it back to life. Land Cruiser purists are not convinced, however, because the apparent death and rebirth of the Cruiser was premeditated all along despite whatever “We heard you, so we’re bringing it back” nonsense the public-relations department spouted. What was really going on was a planned shunning of the new 300-series Land Cruiser (a.k.a. the “real” one) in favor of the 250-series Land Cruiser Prado that lagged two years in arrears. It was a course correction intended to avoid a likely base price north of $90,000 and bring the Cruiser back to earth and into the hands of more buyers.HIGHS: Excellent visibility, torquey hybrid powertrain, mighty articulation.It worked. The new Land Cruiser starts at $57,345 for the so-called 1958 base model and rises to $76,345 for the limited-run kitchen-sink First Edition. Most will gravitate toward the nicely equipped $63,345 mid-level trim simply called Land Cruiser, which is some $24,000 less than the deceased Cruiser’s final $87,030 base price. Say goodbye to the longstanding Cruiser-head lament in which off-roaders who knew the model’s off-piste potential agonized as new Land Cruisers were driven as “mall wagons” by their original owners until time and accumulated mileage put them within reach of those who would use them as intended.Still, Prado is a four-letter word in certain circles, but that reputation dates to the mid-1990s, when Toyota switched it to the independent front suspension of a 4Runner while the 80-series Cruiser still had a live front axle. The line began to blur when the 100- and 200-series Cruisers gained an independent front suspension. Toyota’s new TNGA-F (Toyota Next Generation Architecture) platform further undermines haters’ arguments because it underpins not only the latest 300-series Land Cruiser (sold in the U.S. as the Lexus LX600) and the 250-series Land Cruiser but also the Lexus GX550 and the new 4Runner. The Sequoia, Tundra, and Tacoma use stretched versions of TNGA.Therefore, the 2024 Land Cruiser shares the same 112.2-inch wheelbase of the 300 and its forebears all the way back to the lionized 80-series. The 250’s track widths, independent front suspension, and live-axle rear suspension essentially match the 300 too. So, our First Edition has largely the same chassis with a narrower and more tightly drawn body plopped atop it. This is immediately apparent on the stunning trail to Angel Point, a high lookout above the confluence of the Dirty Devil River and Robbers Roost Canyon. A high roofline (all Cruiser trims are at least five inches taller than the new 4Runner) enables a commanding seating position that conspires with low-cut side windows, strategically creased fender tops, and a dished hood to make easy work of positioning this Land Cruiser in tight places. Recent Land Cruisers never felt so svelte and compatible with brush-lined trails. It pays dividends parking at Costco too.Passing back through town toward our next trailhead, the Land Cruiser impresses with a smooth ride and quiet Michelin LTX Trail tires. Neither the shocks nor the tires are especially remarkable from an off-road perspective, as the dampers are passive twin-tube units. That’s fine with us, because anyone who wants to step things up in the aftermarket won’t be tossing aside pricey hardware. The 265/70R-18 Michelins are inoffensive in daily use, and they stand the preferred 33 inches tall, meaning no reworking is necessary to fit alternate treads. Beyond that, the interior is as pleasing to the eye as it is to our sense of logic, with everything where you expect it to be. In fact, the 12.3-inch screen is a boon compared with the GX550’s larger 14.0-inch unit because the Cruiser gets physical HVAC switches below the display. The GX has virtual ones on the screen’s lower edge, resulting in a usable map area essentially no larger than the Toyota’s.LOWS: Battery creates high cargo floor, vulnerable (but removable) appendages, pedestrian tires.Descending into Poison Springs Canyon toward the Dirty Devil is like a semester in advanced geology, as the trail follows a tiny stream that has spent millennia carving an impressive copy of the Grand Canyon. One crucial squeeze along the route was more boulder strewn than we’d expected because of recent rain and rockfall of the sort that created what is, after all, a still-growing canyon. But healthy wheel articulation (made even healthier by our First Edition’s electronically disconnectable front anti-roll bar) and the lockable center and rear differentials got us through. At one point, we unlocked the center differential in low range—an impossibility before—to get a tighter turning radius so we could execute a crucial three-point turn (okay, it was more like 10) in tight quarters to try another path. Our First Edition’s trail-camera system paid for itself here, especially the side-view angle that made it possible to monitor rocks perilously close to sidewalls as we extricated ourselves.There were two insignificant casualties along the way that essentially amount to market research (you’re welcome). We unbolted the goofy First Edition mud flaps after two got pinched and bent between the tires and a rock ledge we were reversing onto. Later, one of the weird clipped-on aero wedges ahead of a front tire got “trail pruned” by another rock, an outcome we predicted before the truck saw any dirt.Dig deep into the specs and you’ll see differences that may make Prado doubters exclaim “Aha!” The new Land Cruiser has slightly smaller front and rear differentials than the 300-series LX600. But this isn’t 250 related, as it turns out, because the 250-based GX550 employs the LX’s larger diffs. The disparity comes down to the engines and how each one loads those differentials.Toyota’s i-Force Max turbo 2.4-liter four with a perky AC motor sandwiched upstream of the eight-speed automatic transmission motivates the Cruiser. This hybrid system kicks up the engine’s output of 278 horsepower and 317 pound-feet of torque to 326 horses and 465 pound-feet, but that boost is not continuous because the battery that supplies the energy has an estimated capacity of just 0.9 kilowatt-hour. Conversely, the GX utilizes a detuned version of the LX’s twin-turbo 3.4-liter V-6 that makes an always-available 349 horsepower, down from 409 ponies in the LX, but shares the LX’s peak torque of 479 pound-feet. This difference (and others) nets the GX a 9096-pound tow rating, while the Land Cruiser maxes out at 6000, and that towing prowess is why the GX gets beefier diffs.This hybrid boost issue never shows up on the trail or in town, where acceleration comes in bite-size doses interspersed with off-throttle events that feed energy back into the battery. Clambering over rocks or small dunes is nothing like a steady trailer-pull over Colorado’s Loveland Pass, so the i-Force Max never disappoints. In fact, the ready swell of electrically enhanced torque and the faint turbo whistle of the i-Force team up to make the Cruiser’s powerplant feel a bit like the mighty turbo-diesel straight-six of a JDM 80-series Cruiser that I once sampled (and still covet). It tiptoes over ledges with the barest nudge of throttle because its considerable combined torque is available from the jump.At the track, the Land Cruiser’s 7.7-second romp to 60 mph is neither impressive nor disappointing, but it does trail the more powerful GX550 Overtrail+’s 6.3-second effort. During passing maneuvers, however, the Land Cruiser is a tenth ahead from 30 to 50 mph and only a tenth behind from 50 to 70 mph because the instant-on nature of the hybrid system gets it going immediately, while the GX550’s 10-speed automatic sorts itself and kicks down. The Cruiser’s biggest payoff comes at the pump, where its 23-mpg EPA combined estimate (22 city/25 highway) trounces the GX’s 17-mpg figure. In our hands, the Land Cruiser returned 20 mpg. Unfortunately, Toyota used the extra mpg to justify a smaller 17.9-gallon fuel tank instead of using the GX’s 21.1-gallon unit, negating any potential range advantage.For our money, the new Land Cruiser is just the ticket. Toyota North America rightly turned away from an unsustainable bloated path and brought the Cruiser back within reach. It still does the business in rough and unpredictable terrain, and its new 250 roots seem less like a drawback and more like a logical move forward—or at least sideways. The burgeoning overlanding set is going to eat it up. Besides, the Land Cruiser is never going back to a live front axle. That Cruiser is dead. Long live the Land Cruiser.VERDICT: This downsized and right-priced Land Cruiser is worthy of the name.CounterpointsThe Land Cruiser’s two-tone Trail Dust paint job makes it look like a 4Runner wearing a Gus Chiggins costume. And like the old prospector from the cut-for-time Saturday Night Live sketch, it doesn’t take long to get a laugh out of you. Its compliant off-road ride is smooth no matter what surface it’s bouncing across. However, the Land Cruiser’s tech rains on the parade. Toyota’s safety suite beeps to warn distracted drivers and chimes to suggest a drowsy pilot take a break. It even alerted me to “sit up,” chiding my bad posture. Thankfully, you can turn off the driver monitor. What you can’t silence is the power liftgate’s jarring alarm, which warns the whole campground that the hatch is opening or closing. —Austin IrwinMove over, Jeep. Toyota has become the go-to brand for off-road-lovin’ enthusiasts. With the Land Cruiser’s return and TRD versions of every body-on-frame model, Toyota’s lineup is ready to hit the expert trails. But while the new Cruiser’s classically cool looks and notably lower price will help it outsell its predecessor, its commercialization lessens its specialness. Sure, the old 200-series Land Cruiser ended up an expensive dinosaur, but I wish the U.S. replacement wasn’t basically a retro-bodied 4Runner.I wanted something a little more special, more luxurious, and gloriously overbuilt. I realize that’s the Lexus LX, and I get why Toyota’s mainstream approach makes sense in America, but I still prefer a genuine Land Cruiser over this LC Lite. —Eric StaffordI have zero complaints about resisting bloat with slightly slimmer dimensions, mass, and price. Plus, Toyota nailed the design, with visual shoutouts to 40- and 80-series Cruisers from decades past that stir up warm fuzzies. This Land Cruiser is far quieter and thus more livable than the Bronco too. But the hybrid’s battery pack encroaching on the cargo area means breaking with tradition by dropping the third row. This powertrain is magic in the Grand Highlander, but acceleration and highway fuel economy are unremarkable here. The biggest letdown is flimsy sheetmetal that causes the doors to slam with a tinny resonance that undermines the otherwise tough mechanicals. —Dave VanderWerpSpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Toyota Land Cruiser First EditionVehicle Type: front-engine, front-motor, 4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $76,345/$76,825Options: Trail Dust and Grayscape two-tone pain, $350; all-weather cargo mat, $130 
POWERTRAIN turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, port and direct fuel injection, 278 hp, 317 lb-ft + 1 permanent-magnet synchronous AC motor, 48 hp, 184 lb-ft (combined output: 326 hp, 465 lb-ft; 0.9-kWh air-cooled nickel-metal hydride battery pack)Transmission: 8-speed automatic 
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/live axleBrakes, F/R: 13.4-in vented disc/12.3-in vented discTires: Michelin LTX Trail265/70R-18 116S M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 112.2 inLength: 196.5 inWidth: 78.0 inHeight: 76.2 inCargo Volume, Behind F/R: 82/38 ft3Curb Weight: 5639 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.7 sec1/4-Mile: 16.2 sec @ 86 mph100 mph: 22.8 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.1 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 4.7 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 109 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 190 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.69 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 21 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 370 mi 
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 23/22/25 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDDan 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

From the July 1987 issue of Car and Driver.We know that a lot of you would rather go ten rounds with Leon Spinks than slide behind the wheel of a van. Any van. And we know who you are, so don’t try to hide. We see you in the morning playing Nelson Piquet by weaving back and forth in your lane, warming your tires for the off-ramp. In your frame of reference, vans are for delivery geeks, teenagers overdosing on hormones, and young couples who haven’t learned the subtleties of birth con­trol. Forgive us if we call you insular and shortsighted. For a significant portion of the motoring public, vans are absolutely necessary. Not necessary evils, mind you, like high-fiber diets or strip mining, but just plain necessary. To a lot of people, vans are as much a staple of civilized life as napalm-grade chili verde or a clean video copy of Double Indemnity. And vans don’t exact as large a penalty on driving fun as you might think.We first learned that vans don’t have to be penalty boxes four years ago when Chrysler introduced the T-van twins, the Dodge Caravan and the Plymouth Voyag­er. We found that you could slide a T-van into a standard garage without rearrang­ing the ceiling, and that no major recalibration of your driving style was re­quired to feel comfortable behind the wheel. Aside from the fact that the trunk started at the back of your neck, the T-van gave the driver all the usual car cues: a soft ride, middle-of-the-pack steering feel, ex­cellent sound deadening, even adequate handling. Last January, in response to the V-6 of­fered in the Chevy Astro and the Ford Aerostar, Chrysler introduced a Mitsu­bishi-built 3.0-liter V-6 for the Cara­van/Voyager. With the newfound power and smoothness, the T-twins moved one step closer to passenger-car refinement. Now, taking a step in the other direction, toward traditional van virtue, Chrysler is offering a longer cabin as well. Sliding a V-6 into the same space occu­pied by an in-line four might sound like a shoehorn operation, but the T-van’s en­gine bay was in fact designed from the be­ginning to accept a larger powerplant. The addition of the V-6 adds only 50 pounds to the van’s overall weight: the en­gine itself weighs 30 pounds more than the Mitsubishi 2.6-liter four, which was the largest optional engine before the in­troduction of the six, and about 20 pounds of additional front structure comes with the new motor. The total weight penalty for the V-6 and the addi­tional cabin space is 300 pounds. The extended versions of the Caravan/Voyager carry a “Grand” prefix to distin­guish them from their standard-length stablemates. The overall length has in­creased to 190.5 inches, 14.6 inches long­er than the standard van. Of that extra length, 7.0 inches was gained by stretch­ing the wheelbase and the remainder came from adding bodywork behind the rear wheels. In the past when Chrysler needed to stretch its full-size vans, the al­teration was accomplished crudely, with extra flanges and a welded-on bustle. In the case of the Caravan/Voyager, the body engineers specified all-new exterior stampings. The base engine for the standard­-length van is still the ever-popular 2.2-liter four, producing 97 hp. Chrysler’s 100-hp, 2.5-liter four is optional in the standard van and base equipment in the stretched model. Either version can be or­dered with the new 3.0-liter V-6, which produces 140 hp. (The Mitsubishi 104-hp 2.6-liter is no longer available.) The V-6 comes only with a three-speed automatic transmission. The other two engines are available with either a five-speed manual or the automatic. The suspension of the Grand minivan is virtually identical to the standard van’s, though the rear longitudinal leaf springs had to be lengthened three inches when the wheelbase was stretched. The reason is that the mounting points for the rear­most bank of removable seats would have interfered with the springs’ mounting points in the floorpan. Rather than sacri­fice rear-passenger legroom, the engi­neers chose to design longer springs. The spring rates are slightly different, too, but the overall ride rates of the standard and Grand versions are identical. One of Chrysler’s criteria for determin­ing how much cargo space the longer van would offer was the ability to accommo­date the familiar four-by-eight-foot sheet of plywood. (Van guys consider plywood as much a staple of suburban life as Gro­Mulch and variable-rate mortgages.) Re­move the Grand van’s rear benches and the cargo hold can swallow as much plywood as an owner would care to haul. You can shut the rear door on it too, without the need of unsightly rope. With the rear seats removed, the stretched van’s cargo volume is 150 cubic feet, twenty percent greater than the standard van’s. In addi­tion, the V-6 increases towing capacity from 2000 to 2750 pounds. If carrying people rather than plywood is your priority, your rear passengers will find their lives measurably improved. Legroom for both second- and third-seat passengers has been increased. The only dimension that seems to have suffered is the second seat’s headroom, which is re­duced from 38.5 inches to 38.3, but this isn’t a major sacrifice unless one of your passengers is wearing a beehive hairdo. Every other critical dimension has either remained the same or improved. In addition to the extra room, the rear riders are treated to such ambassador-­class amenities as cup holders molded into the plastic bulkheads and ashtrays to keep them from parking their chewing gum under the seats. They are further coddled by fairly comfortable benches up­holstered in grippy fabric and by deep, living-room-grade carpeting. Wind and road noise is subdued, so it’s possible to converse at normal levels of speech. For ventilation, rear passengers can rely on the vehicle’s excellent climate-control sys­tem or pop the flip-out windows. And thanks to the extended cabin, there is now sufficient room behind the rearmost bench for most of their luggage. More Minivan Reviews From the ArchiveThe driver and the front-seat passenger are treated to first-cabin accommodations in the form of big, comfortable seats. Our fully optioned Grand Voyager LE test sample was equipped with six-way power adjustment for the driver’s seat, while the front passenger’s seat offered only fore­-and-aft travel and a reclining seatback, both manually controlled. Overall, the Grand Voyager provides a pleasant and comfortable environment, whether you’re slogging around town on plywood runs or trekking cross-country with the babies on board. Unless you have luggage stacked to the headliner, visibility at all compass points is terrific. The op­tional roof console features individual map lights, a digital compass, an outside­-temperature gauge, and compartments for a garage-door opener and sunglasses. A fold-down tray in the center console of­fers two depressions for road drinks, but they’re too shallow to be truly useful; one good corner and you’ll be mopping Slurpees off that thick carpeting. In lieu of a glove box there is a slide-out bin under the front passenger’s seat (a feature intro­duced in the original T-vans), but it’s inac­cessible to the driver while on the fly. The instrument cluster houses an 85-mph speedo (13 mph short of true top end) and gauges for oil pressure, engine temp, fuel level, and voltage. Whether lightly or heavily laden, the V-6 provides enough smooth power and the suspension is competent enough that you almost forget you’re piloting a mini­bus. This maxi-minivan’s ride quality, steering feel, bump absorption, overall handling, and reassuring feel of being sol­idly planted on the road are without a doubt the best in its class. In fact, our Grand Voyager test van felt better in many ways than some of Chrysler’s convention­al passenger cars. Within limits, it was fun to drive—and definitely not a penalty box. Although we can’t point any accusing fingers at the new van’s mechanicals or ba­sic goodness, we must urge care during the ordering process. Our test unit, as you have no doubt noticed, was equipped with the rolling-coffee-table wood-grain side molding and wire wheel covers—a retina­-searing combination guaranteed to raise questions about your taste in motor vehi­cles. We’d like to see Chrysler scrap that whole ethic and opt for cleaner, simpler exterior decor. The Caravan/Voyager twins sit at the top of the minivan market, and they should look as slick as they are. SpecificationsSpecifications
1987 Plymouth Voyager LEVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 7-passenger, 4-door van
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $13,026/$17,415Options: luxury-equipment package (includes power win­dows, locks, mirrors, and driver’s seat, cruise control, tilt steering, forward and overhead consoles, remote fuel-filler door and liftgate releases), $1379; travel-equipment package (includes 3.0-liter V-6 engine, automatic transmission, and tinted glass), $1338; air conditioning, $840; deluxe stereo system, $458; luggage rack, $140; Eagle GT tires, $130; full-size spare, $104
ENGINESOHC 12-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 181 in3, 2972 cm3Power: 140 hp @ 4800 rpmTorque: 170 lb-ft @ 2800 rpm 
TRANSMISSION3-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/rigid axleBrakes, F/R: 10.1-in vented disc/9.0-in drumTires: Goodyear Eagle GT205/70R-14
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 119.1 inLength: 190.5 inWidth: 69.6 inHeight: 65.0 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 50/40/46 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind R: 16 ft3Curb Weight: 3620 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS30 mph: 4.460 mph: 13.4 sec1/4-Mile: 19.0 sec @ 74 mph80 mph: 30.0 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 5.6 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 9.8 secTop Speed: 98 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 220 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.67 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 17 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 19/23 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Mini’s Countryman SUV is new for 2025, and like the outgoing model, it’s being offered in both S and John Cooper Works guises, the latter of which we already drove in Portugal this past February. We just wrapped up a three-day stint of driving, following along with this year’s edition of the Mini Takes the States road rally, where we were able to sample the JCW again and also drive the new Countryman S for the first time. And the two feel more closely related than you might think. While the JCW sounds a bit ruder and moves with a bit more hurry, the Countryman S doesn’t feel too far off. Its 241-hp turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four makes 71 fewer horsepower than the JCW’s 312-hp unit, but the two share a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission and all-wheel drive system. Mini estimates the Countryman S will hit 60 mph in 6.2 seconds versus the JCW’s 5.2-second estimate, and that delta feels about right in our experience. Still, the S confidently charged up the winding mountain roads on our drive from Grand Junction, Colorado, to Salt Lake City, Utah. The Countryman has grown a fair bit for 2025. It’s over five inches longer, almost an inch wider, and close to four inches taller than the 2024 model. With its extra mass, the new Countryman feels far larger on the road than a Mini ought to. That was also evident when seeing it parked among the hundreds of previous-generation Coopers, Clubmans, and Countrymans that turned out for the rally.While it was possible to forget you were driving an SUV in the last-gen Countryman, the new model’s tall-in-the-saddle feeling never fades. You can sense the higher center of gravity more in the S than in the JCW, but you have to be moving quite briskly to notice. Steering is quick and fairly communicative, although neither of the SUVs satisfies quite like the new Cooper S hatchback in this metric. The ride is good though, and the Countryman S feels more compliant than the JCW and less antsy at highway cruising speeds. A comprehensive interior makeover has elevated the 2025 Countryman’s panache while still leaving some of Mini’s characteristic playfulness. The circular infotainment display, for example, lets you choose from a variety of themes, including one that emulates the gauge cluster of a vintage Cooper. Textile-covered panels on the dash and upper door panels look rich, and there’s more attention paid to storage cubbies and ergonomics this time around. There’s also a sizable cargo hold and a rear seat that can easily fit two adults for an extended road trip without complaints; we fit three abreast for a short commute back from dinner, but it was a squeeze.Earlier-generation Countryman Reviews:Of course, you get all that with the JCW too, and for some buyers, the extra horsepower will be a big draw to that top model. But the price difference is substantial, and those who choose to forgo the $8000 upcharge by sticking with the S aren’t compromising on fun.But perhaps prospective buyers would rather spend some of that difference on features instead of power. Our test car was a loaded Iconic-trim model with the Favoured appearance package, which added handsome 20-inch wheels and sport seats with driver-side massaging. It also had a Harman/Kardon stereo system and the Comfort Package Max, which includes a wireless smartphone charging pad, augmented-reality navigation, and adaptive cruise control with lane centering. At $44,295, that represents $4400 in options or just a little more than half the cost to upgrade to the base JCW.With its newfound refinement and extra interior space, the Countryman S also finds itself in a better position to compete with the likes of the BMW X1, the Mercedes-Benz GLB-class, and the Volvo XC40. The new Countryman is a more well-rounded product than before, and the effort and attention to detail that Mini has made during this latest redesign is obvious no matter which version you drive.SpecificationsSpecifications
2025 Mini Countryman S All4Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: Signature Plus, $39,895; Iconic, $43,095
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1998 cm3Power: 241 hp @ 4500 rpmTorque: 295 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm
TRANSMISSION
7-speed dual-clutch automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 106.0 inLength: 175.0 inWidth: 72.6 inHeight: 65.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/44 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 56/25 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3800 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 6.0 sec1/4-Mile: 14.4 secTop Speed: 130-150 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 27/24/32 mpgDrew Dorian is a lifelong car enthusiast who has also held a wide variety of consumer-focused positions throughout his career, ranging from financial counselor to auto salesperson. He has dreamed of becoming a Car and Driver editor since he was 11 years old—a dream that was realized when he joined the staff in April 2016. He’s a born-and-raised Michigander and learned to drive on a 1988 Pontiac Grand Am. His automotive interests run the gamut from convertibles and camper vans to sports cars and luxury SUVs.       More