Car Reviews

It seems like every mainstream SUV now offers a rugged-looking off-road variant. With its redesigned 2023 Pilot, Honda beefed up the TrailSport trim, giving this version of the three-row crossover additional equipment to enhance its off-pavement capabilities. But what if you’re not tackling trails? What if you’re just shuttling kids around, hauling cargo, and taking road trips? Then you might choose the Honda Pilot Elite. We tested that model to see how the normcore version differs from its tough-guy sibling.HIGHS: Well-packaged interior, unruffled ride, better fuel economy than the TrailSport.What we found is that it doesn’t—at least not by much. And that’s kind of surprising. Typically, we see that a mainstream model will beat the off-road specialist in several key areas, owing to more pavement-oriented tires and a more street-friendly suspension. We’d expect lower noise, better fuel economy, more cornering grip, and possibly a shorter braking distance. We saw some of these trends with the Ford Explorer Timberline and the Nissan Pathfinder Rock Creek as compared with their mainstream counterparts. But—with one major exception—results for the Pilot TrailSport were not surpassed by those of the Pilot Elite.All Pilots use a 3.5-liter V-6, which is heavily revised this year—switching from a single-overhead-cam setup to dual overhead cams—but sees only a token 5-hp increase to 285 horsepower. The naturally aspirated engine’s peak 262 lb-ft of torque arrives at 5000 rpm, so you need to rev this V-6 harder than most turbocharged engines. The Elite was 0.3 ticks behind the TrailSport in both the sprint to 60 mph (7.2 seconds) and the quarter-mile (15.7 seconds at 90 mph), and the Elite also ran 0.2 behind its brawnier sibling in the 50-to-70-mph passing acceleration test. Moreover, all of these results are toward the back of the class when looking at rival three-rows.This powertrain may not be an acceleration champ, but it need not make any apologies for its drivability, with silky tip-in. The smooth-shifting transmission doesn’t hesitate to shuffle through the 10 available forward ratios, keeping the engine from lugging up hills.All-wheel drive is standard on the Elite, as it is on the TrailSport (all other trims come standard with front-wheel drive). According to the EPA, the Pilot Elite’s 19-mpg city rating is 1 mpg better than the TrailSport’s, and the 25-mpg highway estimate is 2 mpg better than the more off-road-oriented model. We found the difference to be greater in our 75-mph highway fuel-economy test, however, where the Pilot Elite returned 27 mpg to the TrailSport’s 22 mpg. That’s about where the Elite superiority ended, though. It recorded the same, somewhat disappointing 189-foot stop from 70 mph, and it held no advantage on the skidpad, with a 0.84-g result lagging the TrailSport’s 0.85 g. Granted, that cornering grip is good for this segment, as the all-wheel-drive Pilot’s rear axle can apportion torque from side to side to aid agility. Too bad the numb, overboosted steering provides no incentive to explore that capability and also has little sense of on-center when you’re cruising down the highway.In such a scenario, you might engage Honda’s standard lane-keeping assist, which works well, even if it’s twitchier than a smooth human driver would be. The system does require a hand on the wheel but can be used independently of the adaptive cruise control. Adding to the road-trip bliss, the suspension does an excellent job of sopping up broken pavement, transmitting with minimal disturbance to the cabin, and yet ride motions are well controlled.LOWS: Numb steering, long 70-mph stopping distance, top trim could be fancier.Whereas the TrailSport dials up the ride height by 1.0 inch for extra ground clearance, other Pilots are slightly easier to climb into. All have easy access to the standard third row, as one push button scoots and tilts the second-row seat out of the way for access to the rearmost bench. Climb back there, and you discover it’s roomy enough for an average-size adult, provided the middle row isn’t set all the way back. It likely won’t be, since the second row is very spacious and also features a flat floor.Though the 2023 Pilot is nearly four inches longer than its predecessor, it’s still far from the biggest in its competitive set, and it certainly does not feel as massive from behind the wheel as, say, the Volkswagen Atlas or the Chevrolet Traverse. The pillars haven’t become super beefy, and the Pilot affords its pilot a decent view out. There’s also a multiview camera system that’s exclusive to the Elite and the TrailSport. Related StoriesThe new model’s extra length pays dividends in cargo space—we fit six carry-on-bag-sized boxes behind the third row. There’s also a fairly large bay under the floor, big enough to stow the removable center section of the second-row bench. (Some Pilots, with second-row captain’s chairs, have a smaller underfloor bay.)The driver enjoys a fairly straightforward interface, outside of the push-button shifting (which Honda has abandoned in the latest Accord), and we appreciate the physical climate controls. The 9.0-inch touchscreen infotainment system in the upper trims has wireless phone mirroring, although in our experience, Android Auto wouldn’t always pair wirelessly. The head-up display is an Elite exclusive, as is the screen-based instrument cluster.Console stowage is fairly typical, though it’s supplemented by a shelf in front of the front-seat passenger. The $53,755 Elite is the very fanciest Pilot, and our test vehicle had no-cost two-tone brown and black leather. The design and materials are pleasant enough, but there’s nothing here to worry the Hyundai Palisade Calligraphy.VERDICT: Either Pilot takes you on much the same journey.So, it turns out that either Honda Pilot variant delivers much the same experience. The pavement-focused version has a material advantage in fuel economy over the off-road model, but that’s about the extent of it. Choose your flight path accordingly.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Honda Pilot EliteVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 8-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $53,755/$53,755
ENGINE
DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 212 in3, 3471 cm3Power: 285 hp @ 6100 rpmTorque: 262 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
10-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 13.8-in vented disc/13.0-in discTires: Bridgestone Alenza Sport A/S255/50R-20 105H M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.8 inLength: 199.9 inWidth: 78.5 inHeight: 71.0 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 57/57/40 ft3Cargo Volume, behind F/M/R: 87/49/19 ft3Curb Weight: 4670 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.2 sec1/4-Mile: 15.7 sec @ 90 mph100 mph: 20.1 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.6 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.4 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 112 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 189 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.84 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 27 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 490 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 21/19/25 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDDeputy Editor, Reviews and FeaturesJoe Lorio has been obsessed with cars since his Matchbox days, and he got his first subscription to Car and Driver at age 11. Joe started his career at Automobile Magazine under David E. Davis Jr., and his work has also appeared on websites including Amazon Autos, Autoblog, AutoTrader, Hagerty, Hemmings, KBB, and TrueCar. More

From the November 1997 issue of Car and Driver.Since its debut in Paris in 1975, the Giugiaro-penned Esprit, among the world’s supercars, has always been something of a red-headed stepchild. Not for its wedge­-of-Colby shape—which to­day, frankly, is beginning to look a little moldy—but for its four-cylinder engine. In Club Supercar, the price of admis­sion has always been at least twice that many pistons, though a turbo’d six might pass muster if it hailed from Stuttgart. Twenty-two years into the Esprit’s life, Lotus has finally fitted this cuneiform conun­drum with an alloy powerplant of appro­priate snootiness: four camshafts, 32 valves, eight cylinders, two Garrett T25 turbochargers, and a flat-plane crankshaft. Get all that hardware whirring harmo­niously and it whips up 350 horsepower—50 more than the raucous 2.2-liter four-­banger produced in the old Esprit S4S.More Lotus Reviews From the ArchiveOf course, flat cranks are prone to drone and emit hard­-edged metallic thrashing noises that are—and this must be a coincidence—remark­ably like the noises emanating from Lotus’s peaky old K­-car–ish 2.2. With the throttle wide open, the new V-8 con­jures 89 dBA of cacophony, which is within an aural hair of matching the trucklike din inside a Dodge Viper GTS.Partly because of the turbos, the V-8’s response isn’t particu­larly Viperish, either. Sub-3000-rpm torque—the sort of grunt you’d like while tootling around corners in second gear—is largely AWOL. In fact, the V-8 disap­points on almost every count until you’re really cuffing it hard, running to the 6900-rpm redline in each gear (where the vibra­tion, incidentally, sets interior trim bits to buzzing in sympathy). Which is also when you notice the countryside beginning to blur past in dizzying spurts, like an 8mm home movie that has vaulted its sprockets.Though the new V-8 may not sound Ferrari-esque, it certainly inspires the Esprit to supercar velocities. Sixty mph now manifests in a spine-straightening 4.1 seconds—three-tenths quicker than the old four-cylinder Esprit S4S and seven-tenths sooner than the still-older Esprit Turbo SE. In fact, that 0-to-60 time places this Lotus only a tenth of a second behind a Viper GTS, which, of course, has the advantage of two more cylinders and 100 extra horse­power. The Esprit V-8 decimates the quarter-mile in 12.7 seconds at 112 mph—three-tenths and 4 mph better than the old S4S. And it rushes to 150 mph 10.3 sec­onds sooner than the S4S, placing this Lotus only one second shy of the 0-to-150-mph time of, say, a Ferrari F355. HIGHS: Sheer velocity, as in 0 to 60 in 4.1 seconds and a 173-mph top speed.Top speed is up, too, from the S4S’s 162 mph to a more provocative 173 mph, which comes with the V-8 bawling and fuming at 6100 rpm. Running at that clip around our standard four-mile high-­banked oval, the Esprit was stable—not exactly a rock, but as confidently planted as a CS Corvette running at a like speed. What’s more, the Esprit V-8 would have logged even quicker results were its shifter not so diabolical. The linkage is stiff and imprecise and undergoes as many jerks and seizures between throws as Mark Fidrych. At random intervals, we were locked out of first and reverse. Helping not at all is a heavy clutch—with abrupt takeup in the last inch of travel, plus suf­ficient driveline windup that you soon learn never to jump too quickly out of the throttle lest you snap your passenger’s head. Around town, the Esprit resists being driven smoothly. Whether it’s the fault of the new 18-inch Michelin rear tires we can’t say, but this Esprit steered less confidently than previous examples. Although the steering is generally progressive and nicely weighted, it is hesitant to self-center and is not altogether diligent about seeking straight ahead, a nuisance on bumpy inter­states. Of course, what Lotuses do best is handle. Fortunately, the new V-8 increases the Esprit’s weight by only 98 pounds and exaggerates its rear bias by a mere two per­cent. Skidpad grip hangs steady at a tendon-popping 0.94 g, same as the S4S, same as a Porsche 911 Turbo S. Pitch this Esprit hard into an on-ramp and it’s as flat and vice-free as an Iowa councilman. In sharper turns, a steady throttle will induce benign understeer; provoke the pedal and you’ll trigger a couple of don’t-tread-on-me warning twitches, but the car remains less likely to swap ends than an Acura NSX. LOWS: Heavy clutch, balky shifter, thrashy idle, cramped cockpit.The ride is acceptable by current supercar standards, but if you live near truly rough roads, beware: The suspension condones approximately one inch of supple flex before the dampers stiffen into solid-steel I-beams. Fortunately, the narrow seats are comfortable for four-hour stints, though the skinny footwells taper inward so that the driver’s left foot has nowhere to rest except atop—sometimes behind—the clutch. The Esprit’s Brembo calipers—as big as individual loaves of pumpernickel—­look and act like racing brakes. They work better as friction builds. At first, pedal effort is high, but if you’re willing to flatten a Florsheim to engage the new Kelsey-Hayes ABS, you can dispose of 70 mph in only 165 feet. That’s not far off our supercar standard of 151 feet, set by a 911 Turbo S. Discriminating pedestrians still go berserk when they spy an Esprit, and they often guess at a sticker price twice the reality. Our car looked notably fetching and malevolent in Bat Masterson black, a shade that helps camouflage the tack-on wheel-well flares. Alas, peering out of an Esprit is still akin to peeking through a gun slit in a dark bunker, so you won’t see many passersby gesturing an appreciative thumbs up. You also won’t see concrete parking stanchions, one of which smote our test car’s wing a concussive lick. It’s nice that Lotus is holding the line on the Esprit’s price. The V-8’s base, including a $1300 guzzler tax (but before luxury tax), is $81,620. Compare that with the $80,645 sticker on the 1990 Turbo SE and you can see that the asking price, over the past seven years, has risen negligibly. Of course, the car has looked the same all those years, too. But that may not matter. Only 155 Esprit V-8s are earmarked for U.S. buyers this year. Heck, if you were to gather every Esprit ever built, you’d have only 9383 of the things—about the number of Explorers that Ford produced in one week last July. VERDICT: Though the V-8 places the Esprit foursquare in supercardom, the rest of the vehicle is showing its 22-year age.That this is the best-assembled and fastest Esprit in the model’s 22-year his­tory is undisputed. The paint on our raven bombshell, for instance, was the best we’ve seen on any Lotus. But the Esprit’s bizarre ergonomics—just try to operate the Alpine stereo, we dare you—plus its pan­cake-flat windscreen and its archaic archi­tecture conspire to advertise this car’s age a little too freely. We can’t help wondering what Lotus’s engineers, given the fiscal wherewithal, might accomplish given a clean sheet of foolscap. Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1998 Lotus Esprit V-8Vehicle Type: mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $85,270/$85,270
ENGINEtwin-turbocharged DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 214 in3, 3504 cm3Power: 350 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque: 295 lb-ft @ 4250 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 11.7-in vented disc/7.9-in vented discTires: Michelin Pilot SXF: 235/40ZR-17R: 285/35ZR-18
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 96.0 inLength: 172.0 inWidth: 73.5 inHeight: 45.3 inPassenger Volume: 49 ft3Trunk Volume: 8 ft3Curb Weight: 3067 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.1 sec100 mph: 10.2 sec1/4-Mile: 12.7 sec @ 112 mph130 mph: 18.6 sec150 mph: 29.7 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 8.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 6.7 secTop Speed (drag ltd): 173 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 165 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.94 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 14 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 15/23 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Lucid’s lead chassis engineer punched me in the face. It wasn’t on purpose. I’d asked David Lickfold to video the speedometer while I tried the launch control in the 2024 Air Sapphire, and even knowing what to expect, he couldn’t fight the forces of physics. The phone hit my cheekbone with a hard crack, and the rest of the video is just me laughing and Lickfold apologizing. It earned me an afternoon with an ice pack, but it’s a heck of a way to demonstrate the acceleration of Lucid Motors’ supersedan. The Air MaxFrom the get-go, Lucid knew it wanted to offer an all-out version of the Air. The Air Sapphire aims to establish Sapphire as a performance subbrand, like AMG or SVR, that could find its way to future models, such as the upcoming Lucid Gravity SUV. This was quite an engineering ask. Even one of the most laid-back of Lucid’s cars, the dual-motor Air Pure, will get to 60 mph in 3.5 seconds, which is already high-performance territory for most machines. The Lucid team had to not only make Sapphire stand out with unheard-of performance numbers but also give it daily drivability. They didn’t hold back. The three-motor Air Sapphire has 1234 peak horsepower, which is unleashed in its Track mode, and 1430 lb-ft of torque. It also has bragworthy claims of a top speed of 205 mph and a 0-to-60 time of 1.9 seconds, quick enough to knock the wind out of your chest and imprint your face on a phone screen. Our test drive was more of a teaser—full testing and track time will come later this year, although we already ran a Sapphire development prototype around Virginia International Raceway. There were enough turns and straightaways on our quick jaunt to get some sense of how madcap bonkers the Sapphire is. Not only will it slam your head back fast enough to emboss the Lucid bear logos from the headrest in the back of your skull, but it also turns and, thankfully, brakes, like a car half its size and weight. There’s a lot of wizardry going on under the Sapphire’s peaceful midnight-blue metalflake to make it go and stop like it does. Everything from the traction-control system to the suspension knuckles have been tweaked or, in some cases, completely redesigned with massive horsepower management in mind. Lucid Air Sapphire DesignThe Sapphire’s exterior isn’t race-car shouty like some of its winged and tunneled GT competitors. “I think we’re all big fans of what I would call ‘high performance under the radar,'” said Derek Jenkins, senior VP of design for Lucid. Don’t look for a big swan-neck wing or hollowed-out body panels. If you want to spot the Sapphire, note the extended front splitter etched with the Sapphire name and the taller rear ducktail for improved stability at high speed. The Sapphire also does away with the glass canopy roof, replacing it with aluminum, which weighs less and lowers the center of gravity. The whole car sits lower on larger, wider wheels and tires, 20 inches in the front and 21 in the rear, both wrapped in a just-for-Sapphire Michelin Pilot Sport 4S tire that uses a firmer compound in the center and a stickier rubber for the shoulders to optimize grip in the corners and traction in a straight line. The wheels are an open-spoke design specific to Sapphire and come with optional carbon-fiber aero covers. Although who would want to hide those massive carbon-ceramic rotors? They look like small planets orbiting behind the wheels—16.5-inch rotors with 10-piston calipers in the front and 15.4-inch rotors with four-piston calipers in the rear. Lickfold says that the team tested several variants of rotor before choosing discs from U.K.-based Surface Transforms, a company that specializes in carbon-ceramic made from longer strands of fiber for better thermal management. If you’re going to make a street car that runs a 9.0-second quarter-mile time, it’s a good feature if it can slow down at the finish line. Repeatedly. Inside, the Sapphire retains the large screen and minimalist layout of other Lucid Air models but adds bolstering to the front seats and some sporty flourishes, such as blue stitching on the dark-gray Alcantara seats and door panels. The same material covers the headliner, which would make the interior a dark, mousey cave in a smaller car, but looks lush in the Lucid’s large cabin. Unlike some high-performance variants, Lucid decided against de-contenting the interior for weight savings, so the sport seats still offer heating, ventilation, and massage functions. The rear seat remains fully padded for passengers. Jenkins says that while there are growing numbers of EV track clubs, the majority of buyers for the Sapphire are looking for a daily flex, not an all-out racer, so maintaining comfort and utility was crucial to a successful design. The Sapphire’s Engineering ChangesThe majority of changes in the Sapphire are really under the Sapphire, in its third motor, retuned suspension, and unnervingly quick chassis software. With one motor up front and two in the rear, the Sapphire needed to be able to control power delivery both front to rear and, in the back, left to right. Putting down more than 1000 horsepower, even to wide, sticky tires, requires ultraquick adjustments. Chassis engineer Lickfold says the available vendor-supplied traction-control systems could react every 20 milliseconds. The Sapphire’s in-house central vehicle control unit measures and responds in one millisecond. “It’s faster than humans can perceive,” he said, right before instructing me to floor the car in the apex of a left-hand turn. I did, and there was barely a chirp as the big sedan leaped forward into the appropriate lane. It’s unnatural. Drive this car for a few weeks, and it would be hard to go back to anything else again. Related StoriesThe new software isn’t just for terrifying passengers on corner exit. It can also be used to adjust the Sapphire’s handling characteristics, slowing or speeding the rear wheels independently of each other to mimic the sedate turning radius of a long luxury car or the sharp reactions of a rear-wheel-drive V-8 in a short-wheelbase vehicle. In addition to the existing models’ Smooth and Swift drive modes, there’s a Sapphire mode that feeds in more of the available 1234 horses, and a Track mode that relaxes the traction management and tightens up steering and suspension. Track mode opens a sub-menu that includes Dragstrip, Hot Lap, and Endurance programs, which condition the battery and energy management to offer the most for a short time, or enough to go a longer session. Think of them as Qualifying and Track Day settings. Air Sapphire Range and PriceWith such a short stint behind the wheel, we barely put a dent in the Sapphire’s promised 427 miles of range. The Sapphire uses a 118.0-kWh battery, and with a 900-volt architecture, it should be able to recharge at rates up to 300 kW at a DC fast-charger. The Sapphire is on sale now, with a starting price of $250,575, and deliveries should begin in September 2023. In the EV horsepower wars, Lucid may have just thrown a knockout punch. Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Lucid Air SapphireVehicle Type: front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base: $250,575
POWERTRAIN
Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous ACRear Motors: 2 permanent-magnet synchronous ACCombined Power: 1234 hpCombined Torque: 1430 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 118.0 kWhOnboard Charger: 19.2 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 300 kWTransmissions, F/R: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 116.5 inLength: 197.5 inWidth: 78.5 inHeight: 55.4 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 61/45 ft3Cargo Volume: 32 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 5400 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 1.9 sec100 mph: 3.8 sec1/4-Mile: 9.0 secTop Speed: 205 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 105/104/105 MPGeRange: 427 miSenior Editor, FeaturesLike a sleeper agent activated late in the game, Elana Scherr didn’t know her calling at a young age. Like many girls, she planned to be a vet-astronaut-artist, and came closest to that last one by attending UCLA art school. She painted images of cars, but did not own one. Elana reluctantly got a driver’s license at age 21 and discovered that she not only loved cars and wanted to drive them, but that other people loved cars and wanted to read about them, which meant somebody had to write about them. Since receiving activation codes, Elana has written for numerous car magazines and websites, covering classics, car culture, technology, motorsports, and new-car reviews.     More

Lotus is rightly proud of the chassis-tuning expertise that has created so many fine roadgoing sports cars over the decades. Yet the British company has long been agnostic when it comes to the question of where it gets its engines. The list of previous suppliers includes Ford, Renault, GM, Rover, Honda, and Toyota. Now that list has a new addition: Mercedes-AMG, which builds the turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder that powers the entry-level 2024 Lotus Emira.This is the M139 engine that is used in models including the CLA45 and GLA45, although Lotus is getting a lower state of tune. In the Emira hierarchy, it sits below the existing V-6—which uses a supercharged 3.5-liter engine from Toyota—but the gap in performance (also in price) between the two variants is small. The four-cylinder makes 360 horsepower, while the V-6 has 400 ponies, and the smaller engine produces slightly more torque—317 lb-ft versus 310. According to Lotus’s own claims, the 2.0-liter’s 4.3-second 60-mph time is just a tenth behind the V-6’s. Complicating that comparison is the fact that the two engines don’t share a transmission. The V-6 has a standard six-speed manual and the option of a six-speed torque-converter automatic. The four-cylinder is paired solely with the eight-speed dual-clutch automatic that’s familiar from transverse-mounted AMG powertrains. The mass of the new gearbox means the four-cylinder is barely lighter than the six, with Lotus claiming a 3187-pound curb weight for the 2.0-liter car and 3212 pounds for the 3.5. The company says a new cast-aluminum rear subframe is responsible for 26 pounds of weight reduction—or one pound less than the difference. Despite their proximity on paper, this second Emira variant possesses a very different personality. The AMG engine has huge muscle but feels less sophisticated than the supercharged V-6. At low rpm, there is noticeable turbo lag, and even at higher revs, it takes a couple of beats for boost to build in response to sudden accelerator inputs. The inline-four is also louder than the V-6, with an exhaust note that turns gravelly at higher speeds and wider throttle openings, overlaid by plenty of induction noise and whistle from the turbocharger. All of this adds to the excitement, if not the sense of refinement. When we first drove the V-6 Emira, we reckoned that its engine lacked character. The inline-four may well have too much. As in its Mercedes applications, the dual-clutch gearbox shifts quickly and near seamlessly, changing gears much more quickly than is possible with the V-6’s manual (we have yet to experience the six-cylinder’s torque-converter auto). In drive, the gearbox alters its shifting strategy according to which of the Emira’s dynamic modes is selected. But even in the softest Tour setting, the system kicks down aggressively under modest throttle increases, presumably to help spin up the turbo. Sport mode brings an even more aggressive algorithm and a flat-out refusal to upshift into the tallest gears even when cruising. (And with eighth gear pulling 1500 rpm at an indicated 65 mph, the tallest gear is very tall.)Fortunately, manual gear selection is simple and enjoyable, with pleasingly solid-feeling metal shift paddles behind the steering wheel. When the gearbox’s electronic brain anticipates a shift, gearchanges are delivered almost seamlessly—shifting up when accelerating or down when braking. But we did notice foibles. It was easy to hit the rev limiter when upshifting at the prompt of the digital dashboard’s upshift warning, as if the display were lagging slightly. The transmission also often grew confused when asked to deliver multiple upshifts or downshifts close together, with a pause that was often long enough to trigger a second request and greater confusion. The main gear selector always defaults to a central position and requires double inputs to change gear. In drive, pushing it forward first engages neutral; a second push forward is needed to get into reverse. Going from reverse to drive is the same two-stage process, which was mildly irritating.When we finally get to run numbers on both variants, we would be unsurprised to discover that the four-cylinder is the quickest Emira, thanks to both its ultraquick transmission and a launch-control function. To activate launch control in Sport or Track modes, left-foot brake from a standstill, floor the accelerator, and release the brake to launch the car. Lotus says the four-cylinder Emira has a top speed of 171 mph, which is 9 mph in arrears of the V-6. Given the similarities in output, that claim may have more to do with marketing than engineering reality. The rest of the 2.0-liter’s driving experience remains similar to that of the V-6, delivering the sort of dynamic purity Lotus is most famous for. The Emira uses electrohydraulic steering rather than full electrical assistance and employs passive rather than adaptive dampers. Buyers of the First Edition car will be able to select from two different chassis tunes: the firmer Sport or the softer Tour. Our sample car was a Sport riding on the optional track-biased Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 tires in place of the standard Goodyear Eagle F1s. On Lotus’s Hethel test track, the combination was brilliant, delivering huge grip and minimal understeer. Lotus engineers are rightly proud of the stability-control tuning that has been jointly developed with Bosch. In the Sport mode, the system allows significant rear-end slip before intervention, yet still steps in before a slide turns into a spin. Unlike the V-6, the four-cylinder Emira doesn’t get a limited-slip differential, but it never felt short of traction or discipline even at circuit speeds. But most of our experience took place on normal U.K. roads, where we were soon wishing for the softer Tour chassis. The Sport setup feels very firm in the real world, impressively maintaining order over high-speed ridges and compressions but with ride quality becoming harsh at lower speeds over poor surfaces. Rougher roads also resulted in lots of steering kickback, the trade-off for the high-definition feedback offered by the hydraulic assistance. Given the pliancy that has characterized many of our favorite Lotus models over the years, the Sport chassis feels a little too uncompromising. Much else is worthy of praise. The Emira’s cabin is far classier than that of any earlier Lotus sports car, with quality materials and a nice-looking central display in addition to Volvo-sourced switchgear. The audio system is powerful and impressively crisp by sports-car standards, and the Emira’s seats stayed comfortable after several hours behind the wheel. Luggage space is scant, with a tiny four-cubic-foot compartment behind the engine plus a modest amount of space behind the seats. There is no front luggage compartment, although it looks as if there should be space for one, as there is in the Porsche 718 Cayman.More on the Lotus EmiraMention of the Emira’s most obvious rival brings us to the question of money. In truth, choosing the four-cylinder Lotus will not save much over the V-6. In the U.S., the fully loaded First Edition, as driven here, is set to cost $99,900 before the as-yet-undetermined destination cost is added; the corresponding V-6 First Edition is priced at $105,400. Both are significantly more expensive than an equivalent Porsche 718—those being the $81,950 Cayman S and the $96,850 Cayman GTS 4.0. A base Emira 2.0-liter will follow. We don’t know how much cheaper it will be, but will certainly cost more than the $77,100 we reported back in 2021, before production delays pushed back the Emira’s U.S. launch date. We can also anticipate more powerful four-cylinder versions to follow, with Lotus insiders admitting that the AMG engine will ultimately become the sole Emira powerplant. Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Lotus Emira i4Vehicle Type: mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE (C/D EST)
Base, $90,000; First Edition, $102,000
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1991 cm3Power: 360 hp @ 6600 rpmTorque: 317 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed dual-clutch automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 101.4 inLength: 173.7 inWidth: 74.6 inHeight: 48.3 inPassenger Volume: 46 ft3Trunk Volume: 4 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3300 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 4.2 sec100 mph: 10.4 sec1/4-Mile: 12.8 secTop Speed: 171 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 21/18/27 mpgSenior European CorrespondentRoad & Track’s 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

On paper, the Porsche 718 Spyder RS is a Cayman GT4 RS without a roof and without a wing, though it is hardly without. While it lacks the rollover protection desired for a racetrack and the downforce needed to increase apex speed, the Spyder RS has more driver engagement than an Army Surplus has OD green. But it’s light on fatigue because it also rides well.Will it excel on a racetrack, as implied by the RS suffix—for rennsport, German for motor racing? Absolutely. But Andreas Preuninger and his team, those responsible for all Porsche’s GT cars, didn’t even attempt a Nürburgring lap time. Which, if you ask us, is a little weird because even the Panamera and the Cayenne have laps on record.Less weight, more moneyThe result might very well be peak road car. With the 4.0-liter’s intake inches away from your left ear, every trip to 9000 rpm puts you in a valvetrain trance that’s only broken by the unwavering brakes. Iron rotors are standard, but opt for the carbon-ceramic stoppers ($8000) if unsprung and rotating mass are top concerns. The ceramic rotors save about 40 pounds, and once you’re there you might as well go for the magnesium wheels ($15,640) that shave another 22 pounds. But to get the wheels, you also have to check the box for the Weissach package ($14,730 with the required interior upgrades). The Weissach package is mainly an appearance kit consisting of exposed carbon-fiber components that are otherwise painted, a faux-suede dash, and a tiny carbon lip on the duck-like spoiler. Tacking nearly $40,000 onto a $163,650 Boxster that isn’t supposed to see track duty seems excessive unless you have a fetish for exposed carbon fiber. But we don’t judge.To make this Spyder RS extra harmonious with public roads, the GT team did something it has never done with an RS car: reduce spring rates. Compared to the GT4 RS, they’re down by 55 percent in front and 43 percent in the rear. There’s no wing, no underbody strakes, and a 2.0-inch shorter front splitter. The Spyder RS also rides 0.2 inch higher. But the engine is the same 493-hp 4.0-liter with individual throttle bodies (that’s one per cylinder) and dry-sump lubrication. A seven-speed dual-clutch is the sole transmission. Considering that Porsche emphasizes this being a road car, a manual would have made more sense, but we’re told there isn’t a row-your-own gearbox available that can spin fast enough, that has enough torque capacity, and that will fit. The upside to the PDK is unflappable launch control. Porsche says the Spyder RS will hit 60 in 3.2 seconds, but we got 2.8 out of a GT4 RS, a number we fully expect the roofless model to compete with. In fact, most of the acceleration numbers will be similar. The Spyder RS is just 11 pounds lighter than the GT4 RS, per Porsche.Cropped TopFor those wanting to explore the upper limits of the Spyder’s speed, know that the 191-mph top speed is with the roof removed. Porsche says not to exceed 122 mph when the roof is in place—although calling the 18-pound top a roof is like calling a three-ounce poncho a jacket. The two-piece design is an assemble-it-yourself affair. If you’re versed in the Spyder ways, it can be done solo in under two minutes. Despite its loin-cloth appearance, the top functions more like modern compression shorts. It has a tension cable that eliminates buffeting. And you can run it without the rear glass portion, like a bikini top on a Jeep CJ7. It’s not as convenient as the manual Miata-like roof in the standard Spyder, though Porsche claims it to be 17 pounds lighter.Hammer on this car on a two-lane to reveal the magic. It isn’t just the more supple ride bestowed by softer springs. Despite the on-road focus, the suspension is devoid of rubber bushings—it’s all ball joints. There’s no downforce (or lift). It’s a neutral-lift car, so the steering doesn’t have that extra heft even when you’re going at a good clip. When the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2s load up in corners, it’s as if each unit of mechanical grip (the standard unit for this is “Bibendums,” or it should be) comes through the wheel, so much so that you can tell if the road stripers used Benjamin Moore or Sherwin-Williams.Related StoriesEvery car enthusiast should experience a modern Porsche GT car—we gush over them for good reason. Porsche says this is the last new 718 model with an internal-combustion engine, and we predict these GT cars will go down in history as the high point before electrification drains fun from the fleet. And with its on-road focus, the Spyder RS further distinguishes itself in a field of RS track-day specials.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Porsche 718 Spyder RSVehicle Type: mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door convertible
PRICE
Base: $163,650
ENGINE
DOHC 24-valve flat-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 244 in3, 3996 cm3Power: 493 hp @ 8400 rpmTorque: 331 lb-ft @ 6250 rpm
TRANSMISSION
7-speed dual-clutch automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 97.7 inLength: 174.0 inWidth: 71.8 inHeight: 49.3 inPassenger Volume: 49 ft3Trunk Volume: 4 ft3Front-Trunk Volume: 5 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3150–3200 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 2.9 sec100 mph: 6.9 sec1/4-Mile: 11.3 secTop Speed: 191 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 16/15/19 mpgExecutive EditorK.C. Colwell is Car and Driver’s executive editor, who covers new cars and technology with a keen eye for automotive nonsense and with what he considers to be great car sense, which is a humblebrag. On his first day at C/D in 2004, he was given the keys to a Porsche 911 by someone who didn’t even know if he had a driver’s license. He also is one of the drivers who set fast laps at C/D’s annual Lightning Lap track test. More

From the April 1995 issue of Car and Driver.If you crave a refined German sedan but have prayed for a price cut as deep as the Mariana Trench, salvation may be yours. Audi calls it the A6. Ours had Audi’s famed Quattro four-wheel-drive system, now attractively packaged as a stand-alone feature costing only $1500 over front drive. All told, our test car wore a base price of less than $33,000 delivered—a savings of $12,000 compared with the 100CS Quattro it replaces.The A6 badge tells us this is Audi’s “big” (okay, upper mid-size) sedan with the “small” engine. The 2.8-liter V-6 offers only single overhead cams, two valves per cylinder, and a modest 172 hp. For landed gentry requiring a substantially larger and more excitable herd of ponies, Audi’s alu­minum A8 with a 295-hp 4.2-liter V-8 may soon thunder over with a top speed of 155 mph and a price of, oooh, $70,000.More A6 Reviews From the ArchiveIn the early 1980s, the forebear of the A6 arrived as the slick 5000. The first digit stood for its five-cylinder engine, though the car was revered for its primary inno­vation, which was adding “aero” to the dynamics of a sedan. (Alas, in the late ’80s, Audis with automatic transmissions were wrongly accused of “unintended acceler­ation” by addled folk who just could not seem to drive and push pedals at the same time, hitting throttle instead of brake.)Audi, facing rivals with newer and less pricey models, has polished its products and pared prices. It’s done that with increased productivity and by juggling fea­tures. Along with standard power steering, air conditioning, and cruise control, base A6s get dual front airbags, anti-lock brakes, an adjustable steering wheel, power for the locks, windows, sunroof, and driver’s seat, plus rear defroster and wiper. So the A6 is substantially less expensive than the old 100CS Quattro, which admittedly came with more stan­dard luxury features.HIGHS: Handsomized aero envelope, blissful controls and manners, and added comforts despite a reduced price.Audi’s improvements look and feel more than sheetmetal deep. Sort of like liposuction and aerobics that zing the body electric but never buzz your bones. Begin­ning with the wedgy hood, fresh fold-over nose, aero lights, blended trim and bumpers in body color, and subtle fender flares, the body wears a brawnier yet slicker look—tricky to pull off.The ellipsoid headlights show Audi’s enlightenment. To cut drag, fog lights are fitted in the sleek headlight housings. The headlights are uniformly white. The low-beams have a crisp upper cutoff. High-beam coverage is now so vast and vivid that drivers coming up to pass often slow sharply when you switch to dim as they go on by, an eye-opening reminder that they’re probably overdriving their lights.For drivers who want a hand in the power delivery, Audi offers a choice between a four-speed automatic or the five-speed manual gearbox that we tested—and loved. Its feathery clutch and shifter make it as effortless as a deft automatic, just as good at flowing away from stoplights and slipping through city traffic and along interstates. Its buttery heel-and-toe action for matching revs while simulta­neously braking and downshift­ing makes it just as good for swooping along sinuous byways.To look at the V-6, you’d think it was a big-block V-8. It wears blocky cosmetic trim of the sort BMW popularized on its motorcycle and sports­-sedan engines. If the V-6 ran as big as it looks, Audi wouldn’t need the V-8. But Audi promotes its smooth V-6 for fuel economy. It averaged 20 mpg despite our throttle abuse, and even then provided a comfortable 400-mile range from the 21.1-gallon tank. LOWS: Unadventurous engine output, somber interior decor, lackluster stereo.The A6 Quattro, partly burdened by its extra driveline components, weighed 3627 pounds. Hampered by its innate reluctance to break the tires loose—its best feature on slithery roads—it turned in a modest 0-to-60-mph run of 8.3 seconds. Yet we blasted to a governor-limited peak of 127 mph (enough to make us wonder what it would do with two little turbos).Audi’s four-wheel discs and ABS pro­duce good braking feel, but all-out stops from 70 mph required a mediocre 191 feet. The A6’s all-independent suspension han­dles almost everything well, and the all­-weather treads of the smallish Goodyear Eagle GAs produce a reasonable 0.79 g on the skidpad. This sizable sedan can also turn in a circle of less than 35 feet, and its longish tail provides a 17-cubic-foot trunk that also contains a pass-through to the rear seat with a watertight ski bootie.The cabin looks surprisingly darker than we’ve come to expect from the warmer, lighter colors glowing within most recent Audis. Then again, maybe the more somber leather and wood suit the deep metallic green of its shell, which shows the best part of its reflective spectrum in soft sunlight. The sweeping dash­board and sizable console are triumphs of efficiency, and the seats are fine for cruis­ing and supportive enough for brisk romps. Footroom in the rear cabin, however, is still cut short by the front buckets’ low-­hanging position-adjustment motors. The A6’s optional sound system is a cooperative effort between Audi and Bose, which may not live up to much fanfare once you’ve heard it through the speakers. Because it costs $620 and the CD changer in the trunk adds another $790, you may want to listen before you leap at bumping the bottom line that much. Optional leather seats added another $1460, and a $1000 package of comfort and convenience items (see specs) plus associated luxury tax helped bloat the total to just under $37,000. That’s considerably more than the rela­tively low base price. But at this level of sophistication, the A6 Quattro’s talents qualify it as blissfully cost-effective.The Quattro issues a year-around invite to propel yourself almost anywhere far away because it’s prone to keeping its feet planted—a help to drivers who know what they’re doing, and a godsend for those who don’t but would like to hang around long enough to learn. VERDICT: To pronounce it benign is not to label it a vitamin, but its V-6 could use a few.If the beefy A6 looks less, um, “B9” than its predecessor, it is very benign in the way it drives. That’s a high compli­ment for a sleek sedan that, presuming you have a feel for subtle dynamics, is also a real sweetie to drive.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1995 Audi A6 QuattroVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $32,545/$36,802Options: leather seats, $1460; comfort and convenience package (power passenger’s seat, memory driver’s seat, remote locking, glass sunroof), $1000; CD changer, $790; Bose sound system, $620; luxury tax on options, $387
ENGINEDOHC 24-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 169 in3, 2771 cm3Power: 172 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque: 184 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: multilink/control armBrakes, F/R: 11.3-in vented disc/9.6-in discTires: Goodyear Eagle GA195/65HR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 105.8 inLength: 192.6 inWidth: 70.2 inHeight: 56.6 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 51/43 ft3Trunk Volume: 17 ft3Curb Weight: 3627 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.3 sec1/4-Mile: XX.X sec @ XXX mph100 mph: 24.0 sec120 mph: 43.1 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.9 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 11.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 10.2 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 127 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 191 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.79 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 18/24 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the April 2000 issue of Car and Driver.Have we got a deal for you: Write out a nice check for $100,300 and send it to the British manufacturer of this beauty, and he’ll send you the car all wrapped in a big shipping box—only there’s no engine.We hear you right now saying, “Great. That’s worse than those $75,000 Mustangs.” Wait, don’t throw the magazine across the room—you’re not going to believe this. After you’ve invested, oh, another $40,000 or so for an engine and transmission, you’re going to own a car that is quicker than the latest Porsche Turbo, any showroom Ferrari, even the fearsome Dodge Viper. To be fair, unlike the other cars, which are real cars, this British import is more a race car tuned for the streets since there are no airbags and there’s minuscule luggage space and it’s tricky to get into.The car, called the Ultima GTR, hails from the fertile race-car turf of Britain, the land where McLaren, Reynard, Williams, and Van Diemen build race cars that win with remarkable regularity. Lee Noble, a freelance car designer, designed and built the first Ultima in 1983 for a British kit­-car racing series. It used many Renault parts, including a 270-horsepower V-6 engine mounted amidships. It was a suc­cess at the track, so Noble went on to sell 40 race cars before 1988, when he updated it. One of the 13 new models was pur­chased for about $25,000 by a civil engi­neer named Ted Marlow.A weekend racer, Marlow did what most race-car owners do—he customized the Ultima to his liking. He swapped the V-6 for a 440-hp Chevy small-block V-8. In 1992, after four years of modifying and perfecting his car, Marlow, then 44, pur­chased Noble’s enterprise. His goal was to turn the Ultima into a civilized street car yet retain its prowess on the track. The pro­ject took 18 months. Marlow replaced the Renault parts with Ultima-specific units. He farmed out some bits and pieces but did most of the work himself. The brakes, for example, were designed by the well­-known firm AP Racing. Since 1995, Marlow’s small factory in Hinckley, England, has turned out about 200 Ultimas. And this year, in faraway California, a retired marketing executive named Mike Mullin has begun selling Ultima GTRs from his Costa Mesa shop. As an engineless kit car, the Ultima bypasses federal regulations. Once it’s in the States, Mullin will install whatever engine you wish to pay for, but currently, he has two options—an aftermarket small-block Chevy V-8 or a current-production LS1 V-8 from a C5 Corvette. Both engines use a late-model Porsche 911 transmission and differential. The small-block engine and the 911 transaxle cost $38,000; the LS1 engine with transaxle costs $42,000.If, however, you live in a state with strict emissions laws and annual smog tests—California, for one—you need the LS1 V-8. The beauty of its installation is that the stock engine-control system, the catalysts, and the OBD II diagnostics remain unchanged. The LS1 engine in the car we tested felt perfect. Pumping out 345 hp, the alu­minum V-8 is a proven, trouble-free, instantly responding gem. Our Ultima GTR weighed just 2314 pounds, so the Vette engine practically lifts the front wheels off the ground at full throttle. Zero to 60 mph flashes by in 3.3 seconds. It’ll hit 100 mph in 8.4 seconds, and that’s quicker than any current production car we’ve tested—it even outruns Warren Mosler’s Raptor, the other street-legal Group C wannabe. (But remember that the nearly $160,000 Raptor has passed federal crash standards, a feat the Ultima GTR has not attempted since it is, technically, a kit car.) At more than 150 mph, which comes in 26.3 seconds from standstill, the Ultima’s high-drag shape and optional $3700 rear wing slow things down a bit, but nonetheless, the 157-mph top speed occurs at the 6000-rpm redline in fifth gear. The car felt solid and didn’t play sen­sitive even once during our tough perfor­mance testing. And, there’s a 12-month warranty. There is nothing kit-carish about it in reality. Most kit cars borrow heavily from existing vehicles. Not so with the GTR. Other than the engine, transmission, and lights, it’s virtually all original.In England, race shops dot the countryside, and it’s apparent that skilled fabricators with talented hands have turned out this car. The fiberglass body of our test car had not a ripple across its curvy flanks. Every weld of the steel-­tube frame displayed nearly perfect beads. The doors didn’t hint of binding, and the interior displayed impeccable fit and finish. The Ultima’s suspension employs unequal-length control arms all around and big vented, cross-drilled disc brakes that performed without fade. We experienced some early rear lockup that lengthened the stopping distance from 70 to 0 mph to 199 feet, but Mullin said some brake tuning would shorten that distance quite a bit. Considering how well the car hooked up under acceleration and the excellent 0.98-g lateral-acceleration figure, we know the Ultima has plenty of grip. Scorching performance is all well and good on the track. The real test comes on public roads, and that’s where the Ultima really surprised us. The ride is certainly firm, and yes, we did drive the car on smooth California roads. But even when we could see a nasty patch of road ahead and braced ourselves for some kidney upset, the unpleasantness never came. On the highway, the Ultima didn’t wander a bit. Since Mullin retained the cats and muffler that come with the LS1 engine, the loudest noise we heard was some wind roar. Overall, the ride is acceptable and nonpunishing. The low ride height made us fear driveway ramps and parking lots, but the short overhangs prevented the front end from scraping. More Supercar Reviews from the ArchiveWe wouldn’t call the Ultima GTR a grocery getter, simply because it’s a bit difficult to get into and out of. You won’t need a gymnast’s license to obtain entry, but the wide, tall sill and the low seat will give pause to consider how you’re going to get in. Our test car came with the optional $2050 safety cage, which pro­vided some handholds for entry. Once in, you’re blessed with a low, snail’s-eye view of the road, a small steering wheel, a metal shifter emerging directly from the floor, and room for anyone as long as they are not much taller than six feet two. The interior is refreshingly simple, with five plain white gauges logically placed. The climate controls are another matter, however, since they’re under the dash and require memorization to use. Despite the large glass area, the $3100 optional A/C worked well, as did the heater (another $1000). For kicks, we took a few laps on a race­track and couldn’t believe how confident the Ultima GTR made us feel. It is simply a well-engineered and well-built car. In every corner, straight, and braking zone, our test car was rock solid, with absolutely no twitchiness despite our prodigious speeds. We could gush on forever, but the bottom line is we’d sacrifice plenty for a day of track time in the GTR. At $152,150, there are numerous cars that’ll give you a thrill, but we have to put the Ultima GTR in with the top five cars that push all the right auto-enthu­siast buttons. As of this writing, it’s been two months since we drove it, and we’re still smiling.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2000 Ultima GTRVehicle Type: mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $138,300/$152,150
ENGINEpushrod 16-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 346 in3, 5663 cm3Power: 345 hp @ 5600 rpmTorque: 350 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual 
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 100.0 inLength: 162.0 inCurb Weight: 2314 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 3.3 sec100 mph: 8.4 sec1/4-Mile: 11.9 sec @ 117 mph150 mph: 26.3 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 3.9 secTop Speed (redline ltd): 157 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 199 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.98 g  
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the September 2023 issue of Car and Driver.It’s no secret that new vehicles, especially pickups and SUVs, are suffering from ballooning prices, enlarged footprints, and swelling equipment lists. But the humble mid-size sedan soldiers on, much the same as it ever was. You probably hardly even notice these four-doors anymore. But they’re still here, serving as trusty steeds for commuters, parents, teenagers, and—perhaps most of all—the ride-share drivers and DoorDashers of America.With a new Honda Accord having hit the scene for 2023, it was time to pit our perennial favorite against its current cohort. Everyone likes to talk about the demise of passenger cars, but even though the family-sedan segment dwindled significantly several years ago, there’s still a healthy set of mainstays that have stuck around. For this test, we targeted a price point in the low $30,000s and avoided hybrid powertrains and flashy option packages in search of affordable sedans that deliver passenger-friendly practicality and the best driving experience.These plebeian sedans don’t exhibit the manic price inflation seen in much of the automotive market. The average as-tested price in this group is $32,550—far below the average transaction price of all new cars, which is sky-rocketing toward $50,000, making the four-door car look like a relative bargain.The 11th-generation Accord, already the recipient of a 10Best award for 2023, is here in EX form. With the top trims now available only as hybrids, this is the highest-spec version of the Accord you can get with the base turbocharged 1.5-liter inline-four. It stickers for $30,705, the lowest price in the test.Hyundai has already revealed a less piscatorial version of the Sonata for 2024, but it wasn’t available yet, so we tested a $33,600 2023 Sonata SEL Plus model with a turbocharged 1.6-liter inline-four.The Subaru Legacy, despite finishing last in our most recent comparison of this group, returns with a 2023 refresh that brings the turbocharged 2.4-liter flat-four to the Sport trim level. This time around, the Legacy is the most powerful but, at $34,915, also the most expensive.And naturally, we couldn’t leave out the bestselling Toyota Camry. It shows up as a sparsely equipped $30,981 SE model, with all-wheel drive as just about the only factory option.We invited some others, including the Chevrolet Malibu (the only American player remaining in this space), the Kia K5, and the Nissan Altima, but the automakers declined to participate, leaving us to decide a finishing order for this quartet. Unassuming as they are, the four sedans provide customers with an enticing combination of affordability and efficiency—some more than others, of course—that’s increasingly elusive among new cars these days.More on Mid-Size Sedans4th Place: Subaru LegacyIf you buy a Subaru without black plastic cladding on the sides, can you still go camping in it? The Legacy sedan doesn’t look particularly rugged, but it does feature classic brand tenets, including standard all-wheel drive and cleverly integrated roof-rack mounts. HIGHS: Potent engine, roomy rear seat, lots of features.LOWS: Loosey-goosey handling, dated screen graphics, high price.VERDICT: Subaru’s sedan acts too much like its high-riding Outback kin.The Legacy won points for its comfortable rear seat, generous list of features, and quick acceleration courtesy of the Sport’s 260-hp turbo four. But that was about it. While its sub-six-second sprint to 60 mph might appear to lend some credence to its Sport badge, one turn of the steering wheel puts the kibosh on that notion. With this much body roll, brake dive, and squat in play, maybe Subaru should just raise the Legacy and slap on a Wilderness badge like it has done with several other models. Remember the Sport Utility Sedan? Its spirit lives on here.The Legacy unsurprisingly was the thirstiest of the group, and the CVT automatic doesn’t do a good job of managing the engine’s torque curve, exaggerating the sensation of turbo lag. Plus, the Subaru’s highest-in-test price felt egregious given its unsatisfying mixture of interior materials and its dated and cartoonish infotainment graphics. The 11.6-inch portrait-style touchscreen is the largest here, but the design doesn’t use that real estate effectively, and the onscreen buttons and menus aren’t arranged logically.The Legacy ends up being far less than the sum of its parts. All the right elements appear to be present, but the mismatch between the engine power and the relaxed handling and chassis results in a sedan at odds with itself. 3rd Place: Toyota CamryWhen someone says “family sedan,” most people think of the Camry. And for good reason. It goes down the road purposefully, as the well-tuned damping and nicely weighted steering combine for a satisfying ride-and-handling balance.HIGHS: Composed chassis, good fuel economy, easy-to-use controls.LOWS: Sluggish, noisy cabin, sparsely equipped.VERDICT: An aging player that’s still in the game but not headed for the hall of fame.But the car built around this willing chassis is starting to show its age. We were shocked to find that our car still had a physical key that you insert into the ignition switch. The dashboard layout is also a throwback, with old-school analog gauges and a small 7.0-inch touchscreen that are straight out of 2012. At least the ergonomics are sound, thanks to plenty of hard buttons and knobs. And even though the Camry’s sheer ubiquity allows it to blend in with just about any landscape, the overly complex exterior design—especially the front end—hasn’t grown on us.With the only naturally aspirated engine here, the Camry’s powertrain always feels a step behind. The buzzy and peaky four-cylinder isn’t a good match for the eight-speed automatic transmission, which is reluctant to downshift. This, plus the extra weight of the all-wheel-drive system, means the Toyota struggles to keep up. Still, it did manage to tie the front-wheel-drive Accord in observed fuel economy.This generation of the Camry has soldiered on for six long years, and it still behaves like a mid-size sedan should. We’re eager to see what the upcoming next-gen model has in store.2nd Place: Hyundai SonataWith a crisp design and impressive attention to detail inside and out, the Hyundai is the only sedan here that looks more expensive than it is. Your ride-share passenger might think they accidentally booked an Uber Black. Unlike the Accord and the Camry, the Sonata provides rear-seat occupants with air vents and a USB port. Yes, even this higher-trim example has blank buttons and a few hard-plastic trim pieces, but it makes up for those deficiencies with an easy-to-use touchscreen, HVAC controls with an upscale look and feel, and a well-integrated digital gauge cluster. We also appreciated small, thoughtful touches such as the display in the gauge cluster that pops up when you activate the windshield-wiper switch or lets you know that the car in front has pulled away.HIGHS: Great to look at, upscale interior, strong performance.LOWS: Engine lacks refinement, chassis lacks composure, brake pedal lacks feel.VERDICT: The spiffiest sedan here comes up a tad short dynamically.But the Sonata’s pizazz goes only so far. Most notably, it doesn’t extend to the driving experience. The 180-hp turbo four hits its marks on paper, achieving the second-quickest acceleration to 60 mph despite having the least horsepower in the group. But it’s not as refined as the Accord’s engine, emitting an agricultural growl under hard acceleration and sending vibrations into the cabin. The Hyundai also finishes significantly behind the Toyota and the Honda in observed fuel economy.Although the Sonata has the best skidpad and braking performance numbers of the group at the test track, we never got into a groove with it on our handling loop. Its structure feels less stiff than the others, and it lacks the quiet composure of the Accord and the Camry on bumpy roads. Plus, the brake pedal feels wooden, and the steering lacks feedback, meaning the Sonata is competent but not engaging.While these are hardly fatal flaws in a mainstream sedan, they prevent the Hyundai from feeling entirely coherent. As nice as it is, it’s not the sedan we’d choose.1st Place: Honda AccordThe new Accord is still on top, but not without caveats. Obvious cost cutting has come to this latest generation, especially in the nonhybrid models. The hybrid Sport, EX-L, Sport-L, and Touring trim levels appear to be Honda’s priority now, as the company is aiming to sell half of all Accords with the pricier hybrid setup. But the gas-only LX and EX by comparison seem to have gotten short shrift. The lack of a leather-wrapped steering wheel is the most obvious example of cheapness in this EX, but the abundance of hard plastics, the small 7.0-inch touchscreen, and the barren rear seat also give off rental-car vibes. Plus, even though we like the new Accord’s smooth shape and athletic proportions, its relatively small 17-inch wheels give away that you bought the poverty spec.HIGHS: Balanced ride and handling, smooth drivetrain.LOWS: Some rental-grade interior materials, short on features.VERDICT: Despite some decontenting, the Accord still does what the Accord does best.Fortunately, there’s real substance here to offset the low-budget touches. While the Sonata gives off a few luxury-car vibes, the Accord actually drives like it belongs in the next class up—and that’s what we care about more anyway. It simply does what it’s told and adapts to every situation beautifully: The highway ride is sublime, the steering weights up nicely in corners, and the continuously variable automatic transmission is a smooth operator, effectively taking advantage of the low-end torque from the near-silent turbo four.The Honda not only wins on its refined feel and manners but also achieves the best highway fuel economy and has the most spacious trunk in the test. Plus, it costs less than the rest, which partially excuses its lack of features and amenities. While $30,000 might buy you less than it used to, the Accord still manages to provide more car for the money than any of its competitors.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Honda Accord EXVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $30,705/$30,705
ENGINE
Turbocharged DOHC 16-valve inline-4Displacement: 91 in3, 1498 cm3Power: 192 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque: 192 lb-ft @ 1700 rpm
TRANSMISSION
continuously variable
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar/multilink, coil springs, anti-roll bar Brakes, F/R: 11.5-in vented disc/11.1-in discTires: Michelin Energy Saver A/S, 225/50R-17 94V M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 111.4 inLength: 195.7 inWidth: 73.3 inHeight: 57.1 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/50 ft3Trunk Volume: 17 ft3Curb Weight: 3239 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
0–30 mph: 3.0 sec0–60 mph: 7.3 sec0–100 mph: 18.2 sec1/4-Mile: 15.7 sec @ 93 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.2 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.0 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.1 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 118 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 184 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.85 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 36 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 40 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 590 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 32/29/37 mpg
— 
2023 Hyundai Sonata SEL PlusVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $33,390/$33,600
ENGINE
turbocharged DOHC 16-valve inline-4Displacement: 98 in3, 1598 cm3Power: 180 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque: 195 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar/multilink, coil springs, anti-roll barBrakes, F/R: 12.0-in vented disc/11.2-in vented discTires: Pirelli P Zero All Season 245/40R-19 94W M+S

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 111.8 inLength: 192.9 inWidth: 73.2 inHeight: 56.9 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 62/42 ft3Trunk Volume: 16 ft3Curb Weight: 3350 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
0–30 mph: 2.6 sec0–60 mph: 7.1 sec0–100 mph: 18.4 sec1/4-Mile: 15.5 sec @ 92 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.5 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.9 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 4.7 secTop Speed (C/D est): 140 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 175 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.86 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 30 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 36 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 570 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 31/27/37 mpg
— 
2023 Subaru Legacy SportVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $34,915/$34,915
ENGINE
turbocharged DOHC 16-valve flat-4Displacement: 146 in3, 2387 cm3Power: 260 hp @ 5600 rpmTorque: 277 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
continuously variable
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar/multilink, coil springs, anti-roll barBrakes, F/R: 12.4-in vented disc/11.8-in vented discTires: Yokohama Avid GT, 225/50R-18 95V M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 108.3 inLength: 191.1 inWidth: 72.4 inHeight: 59.1 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 55/49 ft3TrunkVolume: 15 ft3Curb Weight: 3719 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
0–30 mph: 2.3 sec0–60 mph: 5.7 sec0–100 mph: 14.5 sec0–130 mph: 29.8 sec1/4-Mile: 14.3 sec @ 99 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.0 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 4.2 secTop Speed (C/D est): 140 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 185 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.80 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 28 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 570 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 26/23/31 mpg
— 
2022 Toyota Camry SE AWDVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $30,355/$30,981
ENGINE
DOHC 16-valve inline-4Displacement: 152 in3, 2487 cm3Power: 202 hp @ 6600 rpmTorque: 182 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar/multilink, coil springs, anti-roll barBrakes, F/R: 12.0-in vented disc/11.1-in discTires: Hankook Kinergy GT, 235/45R-18 94V M+S

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 111.2 inLength: 192.7 inWidth: 72.4 inHeight: 57.1 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54/46 ft3Trunk Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight: 3528 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
0–30 mph: 2.6 sec0–60 mph: 7.6 sec0–100 mph: 19.7 sec0–130 mph: 42.0 sec1/4-Mile: 15.8 sec @ 90 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.1 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.7 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.1 secTop Speed (C/D est): 135 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 176 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.85 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 36 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 36 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 510 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 29/25/34 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDSenior EditorDespite being raised on a steady diet of base-model Hondas and Toyotas—or perhaps because of it—Joey Capparella nonetheless cultivated an obsession for the automotive industry throughout his childhood in Nashville, Tennessee. He found a way to write about cars for the school newspaper during his college years at Rice University, which eventually led him to move to Ann Arbor, Michigan, for his first professional auto-writing gig at Automobile Magazine. He has been part of the Car and Driver team since 2016 and now lives in New York City.   More