Car Reviews

From the February 1991 issue of Car and Driver.Jackie Stewart, racing great, high-­pitched telecaster, and practical Scots­man, once told us that he would put any used car he was thinking about buying through a carwash. Why? To see if it leaks, of course. As a corollary to this sound advice, we’ve always felt that driv­ing a car, any car, in a rainstorm will re­veal that car’s capacity to please and com­fort the driver. Rain, and lots of it, fell on us when we took the new Volvo 940 se­ries car on a preview run. We had the opportunity to drive the new car back to back at Volvo’s high­-speed track in Sweden on the kind of cold, rainy day that doubtless inspired Ingmar Bergman to create the many laugh-riot films he made with his pal Charlie McCarthy. And we’re forced to admit that settling into a warm, welcoming Volvo interior had a tonic effect on us. You might say the 940 both pleased and comforted us. More Volvo Reviews From the ArchiveVolvo’s newest entry in the North American marketplace replaces its top­-rung 760 series introduced here in 1983, and the new line includes, as before, both sedans and wagons. Both body styles are available, reading from bottom to top, as a GLE, a Turbo, and an SE, with base prices ranging from $27,885 to $33,630. The most apparent change, logically enough, is a newly sculpted exterior on the sedans. The rear end has been thor­oughly overhauled, with a higher deck lid, a rear window that’s been raked more steeply, and more rounded rear fenders. This removes much of the boxlike aspect of the 760 but does nothing to diminish the distinctive Volvo stance, a look that continues to communicate the strength and safety that’s long been Volvo’s spe­cial pride and property. Appearances aside, the new exterior treatment also delivers a twelve-percent-­lower drag coefficient—helping the 940SE achieve an EPA highway mileage a high as 25 mpg—and less wind noise than we found in its predecessors. On a more practical note, the new design has also resulted in a lower lift-over when fill­ing the large trunk with luggage. Inside, the seats remain the large, comfortable, heated repositories that larger drivers have come to know and love. Leather is standard on the top-of-the-line SE, optional on the others. The SE’s power adjustments allow you to rap­idly achieve a responsible driving position—or riding position, in the case of the front-seat passenger. A driver’s-side air bag is standard throughout the line. Volvo’s plain-spoken dash treatment, re­strained and readable, keeps the driver fully informed without flash or fuss. The 940 series uses two engines, both four-cylinders, as are all Volvo engines for ’91. The GLE’s power derives from the B-234F engine, a 2.3-liter sixteen­-valve double-overhead-cam unit that produces a modest but adequate 153 horsepower at 5700 rpm. Peak torque is 150 pound-feet at 4450. The Turbo and the SE use the B-230FT turbocharged and intercooled four-cylinder, a single-over­head-cam engine that develops 162 horsepower at 4000 rpm (4800 in the Turbo) and 195 pound-feet of torque at a low and re­warding 3450 rpm. All 940s are available only with auto­matic transmissions. The GLE gets the AW-72L, a four-speed with lockup torque converter and a new Automatic Locking Differential, and the other two use the AW-71 four-speed with the new differential. This differential provides the normal function of allowing the wheels to turn at different speeds when the car goes around corners, but will also—at speeds under 25 mph or from a standstill—lock both wheels together if one has somehow lost traction. The ALD’s aim is to make foul-weather driv­ing less frightening. The suspensions on the three sedans hold no surprises; the GLE and the Tur­bo use struts in front and a live axle in back, positioned by a Panhard rod and four trailing links, two on a rubber-isolat­ed subframe. Both ends have coil springs and anti-roll bars. The SE has an identical setup in front but has Volvo’s multilink independent rear suspension: each rear wheel is locat­ed by one trailing link, two lateral links, and a trailing arm. Coil springs, self-­leveling shocks, and an anti-roll bar com­plete the rear suspension. The GLE has 6.0-by-15-inch alloy wheels with 185/65HR-15 tires; the sportier Turbo rides on 6.5-by-16-inch alloys with big 205/55VR-16 tire , and the SE has 6.0-by-15-inch twenty-spoke alloy wheels with 195/60HR-15 tires. Not surprisingly, the Turbo is the most aggressive handler of the trio, due in large part to the wider wheels and larger tires. None of the three will be mistaken for anything but Volvos, no bad thing where a roomy sedan is concerned. Un­der way, the cars are capable and con­trolled and able to negotiate surfaces rough and smooth, straight and twisting, without incident. For the kind of high-speed, bad-weath­er driving Europeans so often encounter, the 940 sedans are more at home than most. We can think of a great many sedans that do not respond well to being put on high banking at speeds in the 110-mph range, but Volvos are not among this number. The 940s just keep whis­tling on through the wet, wipers sweep­ing the big windshield, creating their own sunshine.On a short handling course, the Turbo and the SE were the most fun, the Turbo because of its sportier tires and the SE because of its multilink rear suspension. None of the cars are neck-snappers—or head-turners for that matter—but only the GLE left us feeling the least short-changed in the power-supply category. The other sedans and the Turbo wagon bordered on being fun, which is not to damn them with faint praise . . . remember we are dealing with pillars of establishment cars here, not up­start nickel rockets.The new 940 lineup will be followed next year by a line of 960s that will be powered by Volvo’s new B-6304F 24-valve, twin-cam 2.9-liter inline-six. We drove this car also, and can say that the engine’s 204 horsepower brought the big sedan to an easy gallop with all the right sensory elements. We were also treated to a run in a 273-hp twin-turbo version of the 960, an engine that may or may not ever see production. The 960 se­ries did not come to the U.S. ahead of or with the 940 series because production had not yet reached maximum output at the engine plant where the replacement for the venerable Peugeot/Renault/Volvo V-6 is being built. The 940 series, sedan and wagons, will give Volvo a fresh set of foils with which to fend off the growing number of infidels storming the barricades of the $30,000-sedan empire. Oddly, in a world where all too many shapes are similar, Volvo’s staid styling serves to set it apart and may well contribute heavily to the Swedish automaker’s efforts to maintain the solid sales it’s seen in recent times.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1991 Volvo 940SEVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICEAs Tested: $32,950
ENGINEturbocharged and intercooled SOHC inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 141 in3, 2316 cm3Power: 162 hp @ 4000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 109.1 inLength: 191.7 inCurb Weight: 3300 lb  
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity: 18 mpg Contributing EditorWilliam Jeanes is a former editor-in-chief and publisher of Car and Driver. He and his wife, Susan, a former art director at Car and Driver, are now living in Madison, Mississippi. More

From the February 1991 issue of Car and Driver.Mazda introduced the Protegé late in the summer of 1989, the same time the concept of “kansei engineering” and the tag line “It Just Feels Right” appeared in the company’s advertising. Rather than basking in its Miata and MPV successes, Mazda was moving and shaking, restructuring itself for more efficient decision-making. The goal was to recast its public image, from a maker of low-priced cars to a premium-quality specialty manufacturer. All of which has helped make the Protegé what it is: a slick and tidy four-door sedan that runs almost like crazy, welcomes four grown people, and looks shamelessly like a Mercedes 190. All for just a few dollars per month more than basic transportation.We previously drove this engine-chassis combination when we tested the new Escort GT (C/D, August 1990). Ford and Mazda jointly developed the Escort/323 platform, and Mazda supplies the sixteen-valve 1.8 used in both the Escort GT and the LX version of the Protegé. We liked the Escort GT, finding it quick, lively, responsive, and modern. But we did question its styling, wondering if so thoroughly improved a car should look so much like its predecessor and whether buyers in this category still appreciate the boy-racer look of aero tack-ons.More Archive Protegé ReviewsNo such misgivings apply to the Protegé. Its lines are clearly more elegant than the previous 323 sedan’s, and the finish is of a higher quality. A four-inch wheelbase extension (to 98.4) makes it markedly roomier than before and places it in the upper reaches of the class for sheer spaciousness. Obviously, Mazda is looking for an expensive-car feel to help distinguish its small sedan from the hordes of fine competitors crowding this market segment—a tactic that gives substance to Mazda’s stated intent to move its whole image a bit upmarket, thus staying in touch with the population’s baby-boom bubble as it moves into its peak-earning years. Viewed that way, the fact that the Protegé suggests a compact Mercedes (note the C-pillar area, including the back door, side glass, roofline, and fender contour) makes perfect sense. So does Mazda’s plea that the “323” designation—and its econohatch connotations—not be used in connection with the sedan. Climb into the Protegé and the im­pression of richness persists: except for a lack of polished-wood highlights (and, once under way, the lightness of the con­trols), you could almost be sitting in some scaled-down Stuttgarter. The molded plastic is all very good molded plastic, and the instrument panel’s lines and shapes, again, recall a 190- or 300-series Mercedes, in the angular hood over round dials and the horizontal band filled with rectangular vent outlets. Seeing the body contours from the driver’s seat also emphasizes an opportu­nity that the Ford guys apparently missed with the Escort: the Protegé’s lower cowl and beltline give it a much lighter, more contemporary feel. The Escort’s high windowsills seem unduly constrictive by comparison. Because we’re talking about a modern Japanese car from a major manufacturer, it almost goes without saying that the controls and switches are properly placed and satisfying to operate. Mazda has also done the right thing with steer­ing-wheel spokes and control stalks, al­lowing the former to hide the latter. How many wheels have we gripped whose spokes have been hopelessly mislocated, just so we could see switches whose oper­ation we’re going to learn by feel almost immediately anyway? We wish we could read the digital­-clock and radio-frequency readouts by feel, however, because broad daylight makes them all but invisible (the sole fail­ures of legibility in the Protegé’s other­wise excellent instrument layout). And we must also note that the seats, al­though generally well shaped and cor­rectly padded, have upper bolsters that create pressure points against some tor­sos. They are also covered with a cloth material that feels a little light-duty. “Light-duty” is definitely not a term to describe Mazda’s zesty 125-hp twin-cam engine. Though a bit clattery on start up, the 1840-cc four pulls the Protegé into motion with smooth, seamless urge. From a standing start, the light clutch en­gages positively and the tach needle then winds right around to the big numeral “7” with no obvious peaks or valleys in the torque trace. Snap the low-effort gear lever through redline upshifts and 60 mph comes and goes in 8.8 seconds. Af­ter 16.5 seconds, the car is a quarter-mile down the road, traveling 85 mph. Even­tually, it will settle into a 120-mph top speed. Even if those numbers don’t ex­actly represent stop-press headlines, they are at least the equal of the best Civ­ic’s and clearly superior to any Corolla’s. The engine’s flexibility stems in large part from its two-path intake tract, called “VISC,” for “Variable Inertia Charging System.” Intake air follows a long, curving route from the throttle to the valves, the length tuned for efficient cylinder fill­ing at moderate engine speeds. At 5500 rpm, a butterfly opens to produce a “shortcut” in the manifold, yielding the sort of high-volume, short-distance flow path that works effectively at higher rpm. And you are encouraged to make use of the entire operating range. The en­gine runs with that inviting, whip-me­-and-I’ll-rev-forever quality that makes engines of any power output delightful to work with. It gives out a nice, snarly ex­haust note when the revs are up and the pedal’s down, but it spins quite unobtru­sively the rest of the time. Our sole complaint about the powertrain concerns cradle rock: soft mounting bushings may get credit for the lack of engine harshness, but they also al­low so much wrap-up that on-off throttle action in the lower gears creates annoy­ing lurching. When it comes time to shut down the proceedings and get stopped, the Prote­gé’s brakes are up to the task. Vented discs, 10.1 inches in diameter, are fitted up front on all Protegés, and the LX (like the 4WD version) has 9.9-inch solid discs in back. (The SE uses 7.9-inch rear drums.) These brakes pull the 2550-pound car down from 70 mph in a long­ish 192 feet, but with exemplary feel and controllability. Even-shorter stopping distances may have been possible had our test car’s rear brakes not insisted on locking so readily. Variable-assist power rack-and-pinion steering helps the Protegé feel excep­tionally light and quick on its feet. But surely the principal contributor to that sensation is the suspension. Convention­al struts manage front-wheel action, but in back is Mazda’s Twin-Trapezoidal Link design: one trailing and two lateral links control the geometry of each strut, with the help of bushings that flex in carefully planned fashion. Some of the lessons learned from the second-genera­tion RX-7 suspension, which popular­ized the term “elastokinematics,” have now been incorporated to create a small degree of passive rear-wheel steering.Officially, the arrangement varies toe-in at the rear wheels in proportion to cor­nering loads. Near-zero toe-in at low lat­eral loadings is intended to enliven turn-­in response, and increasing toe-in as cornering force builds is supposed to aid stability by “steering” the heavily loaded outside rear wheel in the direction of the turn, keeping the car’s tail in line. Sounds sensible. In practice, the system has a noticeable effect, but its dynamics are a good bit more subtle and complex than the theory implies. Although the Protegé under­steers safely when cornering loads build up gently, very high speeds or sudden corner entry creates a liveliness in the tail that may or may not strike you as precisely what you want. Flick the steering wheel quickly and the outside rear wheel feels like it’s toeing out, as in the countersteer phase of active four-wheel steering. The back end leans around (though without exactly breaking loose) to immediately rotate the car onto its new heading. On playful mountain roads, we found this ersatz rear-steering quality useful. It neutralized a lot of understeer, and gave even this nose-heavy, front-drive car a surprisingly quick, lively, and neutral feel when tossed into bends with enthusiasm. And yet several staffers had moments when the little tail-wag caught them by surprise. On long freeway ramps with expansion strips or other sudden bumps, we often felt the rear of the car feint to the outside when we weren’t expecting it. Conceivably, an emergency evasive ma­neuver could give a driver just a little more to handle than they should have to worry about at such a time. The world today is awash in excellent little sedans, all of which offer—in vary­ing degrees and combinations—perfor­mance, quality, refinement, style, and value. But Mazda hopes buyers will think of the Protegé as an especially accommo­dating car that offers an unusually re­warding driving experience for $12,817.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1991 Mazda Protegé LXVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $11,598/$12,817Options: LX Value Package (includes air conditioning, power sunroof, and alloy wheels), $1160; floor mats, $59
ENGINEDOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 112 in3, 1840 cm3Power: 125 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque: 114 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arm/strutBrakes, F/R: 10.1-in vented disc/9.9-in discTires: Bridgestone Potenza RE92P185/60HR-14
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 98.4 inLength: 171.5 inWidth: 65.9 inHeight: 54.1 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 48/39 ft3Trunk Volume: 13 ft3Curb Weight: 2550 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.8 sec1/4-Mile: 16.5 sec @ 85 mph100 mph: 27.8 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 12.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 13.2 secTop Speed: 120 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 192 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.80 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 25 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 25/30 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Things are heating up in the electric pickup segment. Rivian’s R1T makes for a bold initial showing from the startup manufacturer, while Ford’s F-150 Lightning is a strong counteroffensive aimed at warming up customers to the idea of a traditional full-size truck powered by electrons. General Motors, on the other hand, went full send with the outrageous GMC Hummer EV SUT, which forms the basis for the latest player on the field, the 2024 Chevrolet Silverado EV. Although the bow-tie brand has only let us drive a fleet-specific 4WT model thus far, this relatively humble work truck serves as a primer for what we can expect when the first customer models go on sale later this year. More on Silverado EVCasting the silhouette of a born-again Chevy Avalanche, the Silverado EV is a clean-sheet design that shares virtually nothing in common with existing internal-combustion Silverados. Think of it as a more palatable version of the bonkers Hummer, with the simplified 4WT model outfitted for the roughly 350 fleet customers who’ve raised their hands for highly capable, long-range electric trucks they can integrate into their job sites. For Chevrolet, the benefits of this approach include a single initial build configuration, plus valuable feedback on how its new rig handles rigorous duty cycles, or so the thinking goes. A Compelling FoundationThe 4WT is a no-frills alternative to the Silverado EV RST First Edition that Chevy will release to the public this fall. That truck’s dual-motor, all-wheel-drive powertrain will produce up to 754 horsepower and at least 785 pound-feet of torque, and it will feature standard air springs, rear-wheel steering, a removable mid-gate bed extender behind the passenger compartment, and upscale interior furnishings that better reflect its $106,895 starting price. In contrast, the dual-motor 4WT is spartan inside, rides on conventional coil springs, and does without the mid-gate and rear-steering hardware. Output comes in at a tamer 510 horses and 615 pound-feet. However, both initial Silverado EV models feature the same Ultium battery pack—a 24-module, 2923-pound behemoth—shared with the Hummer EV pickup. Based on Chevy’s claim that it has slightly improved upon the estimated 205.0 kilowatt-hours of usable capacity in the GMC’s pack, we estimate the 4WT’s battery at 215.0 kilowatt-hours—enough to earn it a 450-mile range figure from the EPA (the RST is rated for 400 miles, and a 3WT with a lesser pack and a 350-mile range launches later). It’s also enough juice to support the truck’s seven power outlets, including an array of hookups in the bed, which together provide up to 7.2 kilowatts of power to run a suite of tools and appliances—even your house for limited periods. Adding an accessory inverter increases those figures to 10 outlets and a heady 10.2 kilowatts. Unlike GMC with the Hummer, Chevy will print the Silverado’s not-great MPGe efficiency numbers (63 combined/67 city/59 highway) on its window sticker even though its weight is far above the 8500-pound GVW threshold where the company doesn’t have to.The Silverado EV employs a 400-volt architecture, but a neat trick that allows the two layers of its battery pack to switch from a parallel to series connection for fast-charging allows it to charge at 800 volts and gobble electrons at up 350 kilowatts. Chevy claims that 100 miles of range can be added in around 10 minutes. GM’s integrated charging network currently encompasses more than 130,000 locations. More will be added in the coming years as its EVs are adapted for compatibility with Tesla’s 12,000-unit network of U.S. fast chargers, with the eventual goal being GM’s full-scale switch to Tesla’s North American Charging Standard (NACS) plug. Perhaps just as important for those operating in remote areas, the Silverado EV also can be used to offload power to other EVs. ChevroletChevroletThe Silverado EV 4WT’s range, combined with an estimated 60-mph time of 5.4 seconds, is respectable considering the truck weighs around 8500 pounds—about half a ton less than the last Hummer EV pickup we tested yet still heavy enough to crush our scales, not to mention almost anything that gets in its way. But Chevy has made good use of the Silverado EV’s foundation: The 4WT is now rated to tow up to 10,000 pounds (up from Chevy’s early 8000-pound estimate) and is good to haul 1440 pounds (up from 1200) in its five-foot-11-inch cargo bed. It also can swallow several carry-on bags in its 11-cubic-foot frunk. For a rough comparison, Ford’s significantly lighter F-150 Lightning (by more than 1600 pounds) tops out at 320 miles of range, while its towing and hauling maximums stand at 10,000 and 2235 pounds, respectively. Form and FunctionAs a full-size truck, the 4WT EV is only marginally more massive than a conventional half-ton, crew-cab, short-bed Silverado. At 81.6 inches wide, it’s 5.1 inches narrower than the Hummer EV pickup, yet its 233.1-inch length stretches 16.3 inches longer. While the RST First Edition will sit on flashy 24-inch wheels, the 4WT trucks we drove had 18-inchers wrapped with LT265/70R-18 Bridgestone Alenza A/S 02 all-season tires. The EV’s futuristic design contributes to a slippery drag coefficient of 0.33, making it the most aerodynamic GM truck extant, but there’s no mistaking this rig for anything but a Silverado. Step inside the 4WT with its low door sills and flat, rubber-covered floor, and you’re greeted by a sea of dark, grained plastic that’s rather depressing considering this model’s $79,800 starting price (excluding the available $7500 tax credit). But durability and ease of cleaning are the goals here, as no work truck leads a glamorous life. A simple-to-read 8.0-inch digital instrument cluster is standard, as is an 11.0-inch center touchscreen that frustratingly incorporates the headlight controls and the settings for the truck’s regenerative braking, which range from a little to full one-pedal operation. Thankfully, a row of simple climate-control buttons and dials sit below it. The column-mounted shifter frees up space in the center console for spacious storage cubbies, including a seven-gallon main compartment. It’s the rear of the Silverado EV’s cabin that benefits the most from the truck’s cab-forward design and Chevy’s resulting decision to scoot the front seats forward. Stretch-out space in back is limousine-like, with the EV’s 44.3 inches of legroom extending about an inch farther than a regular Silverado crew cab’s. The rear seatbacks fold up to reveal additional storage. If this were a fancier model with the mid-gate feature, the rear bench could be folded down into the floor, effectively lengthening the cargo hold to a little over nine feet. A Refined WorkhorseCurrent GM truck owners will quickly acclimate to piloting the electrified Silverado. The 4WT moves along with the quiet refinement expected of an EV, with a synthesized hum playing through its stereo speakers only under hard acceleration. It feels as quick as any Silverado we’ve driven, with a responsiveness that makes short work of passing maneuvers on country roads. Even when hooked to a 9000-pound construction trailer, the truck shrugs off the extra weight like a diesel-powered heavy-duty pickup. Activating Tow/Haul mode revises the programming of the EV’s powertrain for maximum performance, while the strength of its regenerative-braking system meant we barely needed to use its friction brakes when bringing the almost fully loaded truck to a stop on flat ground. Aided by independent front and rear suspensions, plus a lower center of gravity compared to an internal-combustion Silverado, the 4WT’s driving experience is defined by its sorted composure. Say goodbye to the regular Silverado’s bump-induced wheel chatter from a primitive solid rear axle, and general maneuverability is quite good even without the help of rear-wheel steering. Though its soft suspension tuning and considerable body roll in corners keep you aware of its sheer size and mass, the Silverado’s steering is reasonably precise for a big truck, and its brake pedal is reassuringly firm. Add in the smoothness of the electric powertrain, and we often found ourselves traveling at higher speeds than we intended. Of course, the Silverado EV does have a few caveats: Working it hard will drastically reduce its range, and fully replenishing such a massive battery will require lengthy pit stops even at fast-chargers. For Level 2 charging, the Silverado can manage only 11.5 kilowatts rather than the 19.2 kilowatts available on the Hummer, which means a full charge will take more than 20 hours as opposed to just over 12. Also, Joe consumer can’t buy one yet. But the 4WT model is an impressive workhorse for fleet operators willing to pay the price for early adoption—and it’s an exciting teaser for what’s to come. Along with the RST, additional Silverado EV variants will join the lineup over the next 18 months, including an off-road-oriented Trail Boss trim with a lifted suspension, as well as shorter-range models with more approachable prices. Ram’s electric 1500 REV pickup also should hit the streets in that timeframe, at which point this bourgeoning segment will be ripe for its first proper comparison test. Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Chevrolet Silverado EV 4WTVehicle Type: front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door pickup
PRICE
Base: $79,800
POWERTRAIN
Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous ACRear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous ACCombined Power: 510 hpCombined Torque: 615 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 215.0 kWhOnboard Charger: 11.5 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 350 kWTransmissions: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 145.7 inLength: 233.1 inWidth: 81.6 inHeight: 78.0 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 71/65 ft3Front-Trunk Volume: 11 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 8500 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.4 sec100 mph: 10.8 sec1/4-Mile: 13.9 secTop Speed: 110 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 63/67/59 MPGeRange: 450 miTechnical EditorMike 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 July 1991 issue of Car and Driver.The late Andy Warhol predicted that everyone in the future would be famous for fifteen minutes, but time is running out and you still haven’t made the cover of People or even been a finalist on “America’s Most Stultifying Home Videos.”Say, would you pay 44 cents a minute to announce to the world who and what you are? The phone company charges half that, but sadly your message would only reach one listener at a time—not very cost-effective. You could try the television net­works, like Mr. Iacocca does, but for 60 seconds of air time they want the equiv­alent of what Roger Clemens gets for pitching an entire, exhausting nine in­nings of baseball against such formidables as the Seattle Mariners­: $200,000 or so. More Comparisons From the ArchiveMaybe you ought to consider an automobile, one that mirrors your style and image, not to mention your haircut, your cool élan. So our assembled players cost about $35,000 each. So what? If you drive one 15,000 miles a year for the next four years, averaging 45 miles an hour, it’ll cost you a measly 44 cents per minute to broadcast your tastes and means to everyone on the road, at the car wash, and in front of the most overpriced restaurant in town.Of course, this self-mirroring business, like fashionable dressing, can be risky—the message received is not always exactly the one the sender intend­ed. Is the owner of that smart little Kyongsang Pudhopper EX a brilliant consumer, or just an expedient skinflint? Does that grand Wellington-Ross HMS 6.5 carry a person of refined tastes, or of unchecked vanity? Consider the seven sedans we’ve col­lected here. They’re all relatively rare head-turners. Fleet of foot (they zip to 60 mph in less than ten seconds), all are ca­pable of more than 120 mph, which of course would be wrong, but who wants to broadcast the message, “Hey, I may not be fast, but I sure am low!” The names of our fast-lane foreigners fairly lilt off the tongue: Acura Legend LS, Alfa Romeo 164L, Audi 90 Quattro, BMW 525i, Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.6, Saab 9000CD Turbo, and Volvo 940 Turbo. Already it sounds like you’ve mastered a foreign language. We tested the cars in the form most commonly chosen by their buyers. That means automatic transmissions, which Americans overwhelmingly prefer to manual gearboxes, even in cars like these. Among our contestants, only the Audi was fitted with a five-speed because, in fact, all 90 Quattros are. (An automatic is not available on any all-wheel-drive Audi except the flagship V-8.) We gathered our field in sunny South­ern California and spent a work week on the road—testing, measuring, pondering . . . and hunting for routes not closed by snow or mudslides. The Monsoons of March ended the drought (for a month anyway), but they didn’t dampen our enthusiasm to find out how these expressive automobiles stack up. Even cars intended to make a statement have to work as cars, and for the money these charge, they should work well indeed. After some hard driving and harder judging, we had our answers. And rankings that reflect our opinions. We discovered that all these cars are special, and that all are acceptable. But some are more acceptably special than others.7th Place: Volvo 940 Turbo From the logbook, a diary of driver impres­sions: “Doesn’t feel very spirited.” “It’s not a chore to drive, but it offers no real pleasure.” Few cars have the cult appeal that Volvos do. A loyal clientele has respond­ed for decades to this Swedish image of safety, reliability, durability, and sensibil­ity. Yet even the newest Volvo felt dated and overmatched in toe-to-toe compari­son with our half-dozen alternatives. The 940 series is the company’s new family of sedans and wagons, and the Turbo is its lustiest example. But our 940 failed to win many hearts, even though it had the lowest sticker price of the group, $29,813. HIGHS: Great seating comfort and visibility, quality appointments. LOWS: Thrashy engine, road manners of a much heavier car, dated feel. VERDICT: Loyalists won’t need to test-drive anything else.Oh, there was plenty to like about this Swede, starting with fine brakes and sheetmetal contours that are softer and rounder than its 740 parent’s. And the big, long-cushioned seats drew raves: supportive, comfy, upright, and mount­ed high in the car. (One driver tagged this “the king of Sweden driving posi­tion.”) The interior design retains the rectangles and straight lines of the 740, but everything is well executed in quality materials, creating a businesslike cockpit. The windows are tall, like looking out of a control tower. The new Volvo is a com­fortable, secure place to sit, for hours on end. But driving the 940 Turbo for those same hours isn’t a particularly rewarding experience. Though steering response is excellent and the suspension keeps the tires in good contact with the road, the body moves around quite a bit, creating a feeling of ponderousness. From the driv­er’s seat, you’d never guess the 940 tied for second-lightest curb weight. Also disappointing was the racket from the Volvo’s four-cylinder engine. The 162-hp turbocharged 2.3 turned in acceleration times that put it in mid-pack, but it also raised a decidedly agricultural din. It finished last in both the top-speed and fuel-economy derbies. So the Volvo pigeonholes itself in the cultist people-hauler slot: it works okay in its way, but that’s not a way that stands up to hard-nosed comparison shopping, in our view. Long may the Volvo faithful disagree with us. From the logbook: “It seems tall, old, sedate, stodgy.” And: “Stiff and jiggly on uneven blacktop; the wheels stay planted, but the driver is stirred in quite the wrong way.”1991 Volvo 940 Turbo162-hp turbocharged inline-4, 4-speed automatic, 3180 lbBase/as-tested price: $29,675/$29,813C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.4 sec1/4 mile: 16.6 sec @ 82 mph100 mph: 30.6 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 165 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.76 g C/D observed fuel economy: 18 mpg5th Place (tie): Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.6 From the logbook: “A lazy-feeling car. It’s re­luctant to get up and go, and when it finally does, it still doesn’t deliver much.” “Quality is excellent.” The little 190 Mercedes may have been in over its head here. We might have asked a 300 to carry the Benz ban­ner against a 5-series BMW and the big Saab, but the window sticker doesn’t lie: look for a Mercedes around $35,000 and this is what you find. In fact, the 190E, at $37,392, was the most expensive car in this group. Also the lightest, the most cramped, and the least powerful. Does that mean it’s simply overpriced? You might make a case. Still, the 190E 2.6 is beautifully put to­gether and feels solid as concrete. From the high-gloss wood trim to the firm seats and slightly scattered minor switch­es, it provides a true Mercedes-Benz experience. HIGHS: Top-quality construction and materials, great bad-road ride. LOWS: Lazy engine, outmoded transmission, high price. VERDICT: A real Benz, but not a great Benz.Would that it worked better in the bar­gain. We have no complaint with the ride, and the car’s handling poise seems to improve as the road surface deterio­rates. But in most other measures of dy­namic ability, the six-cylinder 190 just sort of lies there. Though smooth-running, the 158-hp engine generates only modest thrust. Exceptionally long throt­tle-pedal travel doesn’t help. Nor does an automatic transmission that lacks the smooth shifting, ready kickdown, and general refinement of today’s typical GM Hydra-matic. An over-exuberant trac­tion-control system cuts engine power in middling-hard cornering: it made tight mountain roads less fun and our skidpad test impossible to conduct properly. We expected the 190 to trail the field in rear-seat spaciousness but were sur­prised to find even the driver’s feet and knees competing with pads and trim pan­els for a place to be. Especially annoying was the under-dash cover that snagged the toe of the right shoe as the driver pivoted between throttle and brake. Somebody called this the Cadillac Cimarron of Mercedes’s line. That’s per­haps too harsh, but the 190 does risk coming off as an imitation of a prestige car. Or at least as a very old prestige car (the body dates from ’84, the engine from ’87). It’s a real Mercedes, though, no question. It just happens to be priced like bigger and better cars. From the logbook: “Too physical in all the wrong ways.” “Lovely ride, but seems to lumber along.” “This car feels virtually unchanged from the old 2.3.”1991 Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.6158-hp inline-6, 4-speed automatic, 3100 lbBase/as-tested price: $34,070/$37,392C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.4 sec1/4 mile: 17.4 sec @ 82 mph100 mph: 31.0 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 177 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.69 gC/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg5th Place (tie): Alfa Romeo 164L From the logbook: “I find myself thinking its failings are okay because this is, after all, an Alfa.” Though profoundly different in heri­tage, execution, and character from the Mercedes 190 (and more than $3200 cheaper), the Alfa 164 toted up and boiled down to a dead-heat finish with the baby Benz in our overall judgment. It also, despite some endearing traits, couldn’t rise above the competition arrayed against it. In our first test of a 164 (a top-of-the-­line S model in June 1990), we found the traditional Alfa quirkiness fairly well un­der control and the car’s performance brilliant. For this test, pricing and the lack of an automatic-transmission option on the S forced us into an L-model, and along the way the fire went out. The three-liter V-6 loses 17 hp between S and L trim, and that combined with the softer power delivery of an autobox dragged 0-to-60 times from 6.9 seconds to 9.8—a whole personality of difference.HIGHS: Unique styling treatment, lusty engine sounds. LOWS: The engine only sounds lusty, and steering weight feels odd. VERDICT: Nice, but nowhere near the faster, sportier S-model. Everyone liked the unconventional styling of the 164’s body. The combina­tion of a growly engine and high-feed­back suspension gives the car a gritty, mechanical feel that holds promise for the fan of the driving art. Turn up the in­tensity on the road, however, and that promise fades. The steering’s self-cen­tering forces are curiously strong and ar­tificial-feeling, giving little clue to how hard the front tires are working. And our slalom test turned up a darty instability in the rear suspension. The boldly designed interior of the Alfa, especially all the slatted panels and square buttons of the dashboard, look original. And it works well enough, after a suitable orientation period. The driv­ing position is arms-out but not arms-­stretched-out, and the seats are decently comfortable. So the 164 is an undeniably interesting car, one that is unusual but not so weird as to make it unlivable—as some Alfas have been. We wanted very much to like our 164 L. But in too many small ways, it let us down—something that didn’t hap­pen with other cars that its $34,142 price forced it to compete against. From the logbook: “Its sparkling-good looks are not aided and abetted by sparkling­-good performance.”1991 Alfa Romeo 164L183-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 3440 lbBase/as-tested price: $29,015/$34,142C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.8 sec1/4 mile: 17.5 sec @ 83 mph100 mph: 27.1 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 176 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.76 gC/D observed fuel economy: 20 mpg4th Place: BMW 525i From the logbook: “Good driver! Lacks power.” “Everything works so very well and with great confidence. Perhaps the best balanced car in the test.” This was our first time behind BMW’s new multivalve “small” six, and the re­sults tell all: the 525i finished in fourth place, but it nearly tied with the third­-place Audi and slotted in respectably close to the winner.This newly powered price-leader 5-series gives an enthusiast driver plenty to love, including balance and poise on twisty roads, superb seats and driving en­vironment, probably the best styling of this group, and faultless build quality. Some testers noted the numb spot in the steering around dead-ahead, but in every other way, the 525i actively approaches driving as a sport, a pastime, and a pas­sion. Your thighs, seat, torso, and shoul­ders are positively located by the deep buckets, your thumbs find perfectly formed rests on the wheel’s upper spokes, your eyes and right hand have the dash-center instruments and controls canted toward them. HIGHS: Beautifully made, beautifully shaped, beautiful to drive. LOWS: Engine needs revs—and a manual gearbox—to really work. VERDICT: A true driver’s car: solid, balanced, and integrated.Under way, the BMW feels willing and spirited, with velvety control response, ready maneuverability, and good corner­ing grip. But it isn’t particularly fast. This 189-hp 24-valve 2.5 represents a wel­come improvement over the 168-hp twelve-valver (C/D, July 1989), but it needs revs to make power. And that means the driver has to keep it spinning. More than any other autoshifter here, the BMW cried out for a manual box. And in one respect—top speed—what capability the engine does have is hobbled. The 525i is electronically limited to 128 mph, ostensibly because of tire ratings but also probably for marketing reasons: it mustn’t crowd the performance of the more expensive 535i.Cloth upholstery that looked a little downmarket was the only visible sugges­tion that we were in an “economy” BMW. That concept is relative. At $36,683, our 525i surpassed all as-tested prices here save the 190E’s. Yet no en­thusiast will question the BMW’s value. From the logbook: “Very sweet. No rocket but not bad, and the chassis offers wonderful give and take.” “Very solid, very secure, delightfully responsive.”1991 BMW 525i189-hp inline-6, 4-speed automatic, 3600 lbBase/as-tested price: $35,555/$36,683C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.6 sec1/4 mile: 17.5 sec @ 83 mph100 mph: 26.3 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 178 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.77 gC/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg3rd Place: Audi 90 Quattro From the logbook: “A marvelous machine. Light, supple, responsive, forgiving, and comfortable.” The Audi was a bit of a ringer due to its five-speed manual gearbox, but we didn’t want to leave the all-wheel-driver out of the test, especially because we had been impressed with the difference its 20-valve engine made when we first sam­pled it. As it turns out, the Audi would have taken the crown as sportiest sedan of this bunch no matter what transmis­sion it carried. HIGHS: Taut, direct feel; unmatched grip and foul-weather traction. LOWS: A small, noisy cabin, relatively speaking. VERDICT: The only clear sports sedan here, and a jewel anywhere.It’s a startlingly firm car, almost hard. From the seats to the steering-wheel rim to the ride quality, little in the way of pad­ding isolates the driver from the car or the road. Generally, that’s great. It gives the 90 a very positive feel. On rough pavement, though, the road rumble can assault your ears, and the five-cylinder engine can do the same at the elevated speeds it needs to deliver punch. But overall we enjoyed the Audi’s taut, direct manner and its firm feel.The 90 did come up short—and small—when called upon to do sedan­-type passenger duty. Its interior mea­sures tighter than all but the Mercedes 190’s—and it felt maybe snugger than that—and its trunk capacity was the smallest of all. None of which bothered the person fortunate enough to be at the wheel. The Audi drew praise from all quarters, even before the weather turned rotten.When the rain and snow fell, whoever had the 90 Quattro grew downright belligerent about stopping for a driver change. The CB radios crackled with challenges: “That’s it, I’m locking the doors, I’m here for the duration,” and “You can have my Audi when you pry my cold, dead fingers from its wheel.” Anyone needing more convincing that the $32,735 Audi 90 Quattro deserves the tag “sports sedan” can just look at two categories of testing where it racked up the big numbers: skidpad grip and in­terior noise. That may not constitute the definition of a sporting car, but it’s a fair guide. From the logbook: “An extremely silky car on smooth pavement. The ride is tight and controlled, the directional stability excellent.” “I’m in love. How much a month?”1991 Audi 90 Quattro164-hp inline-5, 5-speed manual, 3180 lbBase/as-tested price: $28,935/$32,735C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.2 sec1/4 mile: 16.3 sec @ 84 mph100 mph: 25.4 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 gC/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg2nd Place: Saab 9000CD Turbo From the logbook: “Maybe the best all around.” “This engine is a delight.” “Feels like a four-liter V-8.” Saab’s luxurious 9000CD, with the new balance-shaft 2.3-liter turbo four, set the pace for sheer speed and came within just two points of taking all the chips. Based on previous experience with a hatchback, five-speed 9000 Turbo, we had expected the notchback automatic to be big, comfy, and swift. But we had not anticipated its wide margin of victory in the speed contests. The 200-hp engine (with 222 pound-feet of torque at a low 2000 rpm) belted the car to 60 mph in 6.8 seconds and hurled it down our test straight at 141 mph. No other car here approached those feats. And the Saab four ran with an eerie, silky smoothness that rivaled the Acura’s V-6 and embar­rassed the Alfa’s. This is a remarkable engine. HIGHS: Unique combination of size, balance, and blistering speed. LOWS: A niggle here and there, but nothing seriously noteworthy. VERDICT: Nearly impossible to beat as an enthusiast’s sedan.The car it propels so energetically also leaves precious little to complain about. From the viewpoint of an enthusiast or a responsible head-of-household (realizing those can be one and the same per­son), the $34,853 CD Turbo is pleasing and effective. Tall, upright seats give good support, the controls work with precision (some testers would have liked an adjustable steering wheel), and the cavernous cabin keeps everyone com­fortable. The CD’s new walnut instru­ment panel adds an element of elegance. On almost any kind of road, the big Saab shows great composure. It under­steers when pushed, and the inside front wheel can easily spin exiting slow cor­ners. But the car tracks perfectly down straights and dances into and through turns with poise unexpected in such a large car. Big humps and dips create no excess body flop or suspension slop, just a nicely damped, hydraulic sensation. And any time mood and conditions dic­tate, a push on the right pedal can serve up a headlong rush into the distant scen­ery. It’s hard to imagine the driver who would not be impressed with this car. From the logbook: “Quick acceleration to 130 with no engine thrash. Amazing for a four-­cylinder engine. GM needs some of this for the Quad 4.”1991 Saab 9000CD Turbo200-hp turbocharged inline-4, 4-speed automatic, 3220 lbBase/as-tested price: $34,853/$34,853C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.8 sec1/4 mile: 15.2 sec @ 93 mph100 mph: 17.9 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 179 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.75 gC/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg1st Place: Acura Legend LS From the logbook: “Feels like the big car that it is. It responds pretty nicely, but I’m always aware that it’s a large, heavy piece.” “Great en­gine. All the torquiness of normal aspiration, but the power and smoothness of a turbo.” Curiously, our testers had a wider di­vergence of opinion on the victorious Acura than on the second-place Saab. But despite the mix of bravos and but-then-agains in the logbook, when the points were totaled, the Legend eked out the win. HIGHS: Engine power and refine­ment, build quality, control efforts. LOWS: Its excellence is sometimes too subtle to register. VERDICT: The winner, pure and simple. What else is there?Much of the debate about the latest big Acura hovers around the quality of sport­iness. One contingent within our merry cadre pointed out how hefty the car felt, and they considered its cornering poise a bit too waffly. Admitting it did nothing wrong, they also felt it didn’t seem com­pletely glued to the road in the twisties. Both steering and brakes lacked crisp feedback. The car’s supporters, meanwhile, seized upon the Legend’s light, delicate control efforts and its quick, predictable responses. That, they claimed, made for a sportier driving experience than, say, the BMW’s heavier helm. Everyone praised the 3.2-liter V-6, the biggest powerplant here and tied with the Saab for highest power rating at 200 hp. The Acura six is a gem: flexible at low speeds, lusty at high speeds, satin-smooth at all speeds.So is the rest of the car, but often it shines in a subtle, understated way. May­be too understated. Its styling, for in­stance, is unremarkable, yet clean and tasteful. If the car doesn’t scamper through bends like a jack rabbit, neither does it ever surprise you or put a wheel wrong. It is an excellent open-road cruis­er, with unmatched refinement. And for quality of fit and finish, the Legend scores among the best in the automotive world. The Acura Legend accomplishes its tasks smoothly and subtly, rather than with overt spirit and verve. Capable as it is, it can fail to make an impression. That may account for the boundless respect but qualified affection our drivers felt to­ward it. From the logbook (the comparison cleaned up somewhat): “The Acura is the Meryl Streep of automobiles. She acts flawlessly, but I wouldn’t care to get involved.”1991 Acura Legend LS200-hp V-6, 4-speed automatic, 3500 lbBase/as-tested price: $34,861/$34,861C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.8 sec1/4 mile: 16.3 sec @ 83 mph100 mph: 23.7 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 191 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.76 gC/D observed fuel economy: 19 mpgCar and DriverAs the Overall Rating scores illustrate, we had four cars here that made sense to us. The BMW, the Audi, the Saab, and the Acura spoke to us with a combination of competence and style. We would not look askance at someone choosing to pay the price for any of them. The 525i flattered us with its presump­tion that we were serious drivers. The Quattro entertained us with its racy de­meanor. The 9000 freed us from com­promising between utility and speed. But in the end, the Legend would sim­ply brook no challenge. Swift and silky, it happily took up any driving chore we threw at it. If the car left us little to re­mark on in the process, well, that may just be a measure of how unflappable it is. And who could deny, thinking ahead to matters of maintenance and reliability, that the Acura likely represented the lowest-risk purchase here? When it comes to expressing personal style, plus saying a thing or two about good family transport, the Acura Legend just has all the good lines. More

Performance electric vehicles provide big horsepower numbers, and their torque-rich motors, capable of instantaneous delivery, make for blistering acceleration. But unlike their high-strung internal-combustion counterparts, electrics are lacking in two critical areas: the sound of an engine’s micro-explosions and the mechanical feedback that imparts a sense of speed. Hyundai’s N performance-tuning arm seeks to remedy that with its 2024 Ioniq 5 N.A blast down the front straight of the Nürburgring’s GP circuit reveals the Ioniq 5 N is just like any other performance electric. The grandstands blur around you, wind deflects around the bodywork, and though the Ioniq 5 N’s digital instrument cluster indicates serious speed, the brain says otherwise. Standing on the brakes into the GP circuit’s challenging Turn 1 brings only tire noise and no more. But Hyundai has a few tricks up its sleeve.Sound OnWith a press of one of the camouflaged, configurable buttons on what will likely be Hyundai’s most complicated steering wheel to date, N Active Sound + comes to life. There are three available sound profiles whose volume can be adjusted from distant to in-your-face: Evolution is the spacey noise we’ve grown to dislike in many EVs, Supersonic is another gimmick that emulates a fighter jet, and the most engaging profile is Ignition. Through the eight internal and two external speakers, it sounds like a turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four found in the Elantra N or the Kona N. It’s executed well enough that an untrained ear might even think there’s combustion happening under the hood. Sound system, check. With Ignition activated, the soundtrack drones along as if an N-tuned 2.0-liter were paired with a continuously variable automatic. Yuck. But with a push of yet another steering-wheel button, the Ioniq 5 N unleashes something that changes the game of how the brain processes EVs: simulated gearshifts. By briefly interrupting the motors’ torque delivery, N e-Shift mimics an eight-speed dual-clutch automatic. The 5 N jolts on upshifts. Downshifts are rev matched and accompanied by pops and bangs from the speakers during deceleration, just like the internal-combustion N cars. Hyundai is completely transparent that interrupting torque delivery with N e-Shift isn’t the quickest way around the circuit, but by only a slim margin. Based on our brief time behind the wheel, the trade-off might be worth it. N e-Shift alters the sense of speed the brain perceives. Many on-track cues come from noise: You might know that a braking zone occurs at the top of fourth gear, and that’s the feedback N e-Shift delivers that no other EV currently provides. If you take manual control with the shift paddles and miss a shift, you’ll hit a virtual fuel cutoff. Get caught out in too high of a gear, and the Ioniq 5 will even lug the powertrain by limiting the power delivery. Yes, it’s totally fake and unrelated to the mechanicals, but it’s a degree of engagement that until now has been lost in the electrified world.Siblings, Not TwinsThe car that hosts this sophisticated EV powertrain is not just a rebodied Kia EV6 GT. Although the Ioniq 5 N does share the same E-GMP platform and much of the same underpinnings—the three-position adaptive dampers, an electronically controlled limited-slip differential—it is a more track-focused tool. Its body has 40 more yet-to-be-revealed strengthening points than the standard Ioniq 5 and specific bushing tolerances. It’s safe to assume the 5 N will at least match the EV6 GT’s 576 horsepower and 545 lb-ft of torque, but we’re expecting Hyundai to turn it up a notch. With more than 6000 miles of development around the treacherous 12.9-mile Nürburgring Nordschleife, Hyundai is serious about the 5 N’s service life on track. The goal is for the Ioniq to be able to complete two laps with little performance degradation. To accomplish that, Hyundai has optimized the 5 N’s cooling package with more air entering the nose, more efficient radiator packaging, an improved oil cooler, and an upgraded battery chiller. To complete two laps around the Green Hell will likely require a different battery from the 77.4-kWh unit common to the Korean brands, and Hyundai isn’t willing to talk about the battery pack just yet.Many ModesLike the gas-powered N cars, the Ioniq 5 is replete with drive modes. N Race offers a Sprint mode to maximize performance and use all the available power. Endurance mode is set to help with the two-lap mission by managing the battery, motor output, and regeneration strategies for extended time spent on track. There are also two preconditioning modes, one for the track and another for drag racing. With a launch-control mode that preloads the motors, we expect the 5 N to beat the EV6 GT’s 3.1-second rip to 60 mph.Our previous explorations of the 5 N’s front-to-rear torque-distribution slider revealed that the car is a drift machine on a frozen lake. While we didn’t experiment with this feature on the asphalt, the thought of directing all the driving force to the front axle for a smoky front-tire fire amuses us almost as much as sending the torque to the rear for power-sliding shenanigans. Getting back on, ahem, track, the Ioniq 5 N is a delight around the 3.2-mile GP circuit. Up front, four-piston fixed calipers squeeze 15.7-inch rotors (0.7 inch larger than the EV6 GT’s), while a single-piston slider pinches a 14.2-inch rotor in the back. Throughout four flying laps, the brakes never relinquish stopping force, and the pedal remains firm and tidy. There’s an N Pedal mode button lurking in the infotainment, but Hyundai isn’t ready to talk about that. We suspect it adjusts the brake-pedal feel and even the regeneration mapping to help rotate the 5 N during braking. No fewer than three steering modes are available, ratcheting up the effort as they progress into the racier settings, but never to the point that you’re wrestling a grizzly bear. Over the GP circuit’s 15 turns, the Ioniq 5 N–specific steering rack delivers quick turn-in, though we’d prefer a bit more feel as the Hyundai-spec Pirelli P Zero Elect PNCS 275/35ZR-21 tires load up. With a low center of gravity and minimal body roll, there’s a false sense of grip when you’re divebombing an apex. Admittedly, we were probably overdriving a track we’re unfamiliar with, so overworking the Pirellis to the point of understeer is on us, but we suspect there’s some torque-vectoring software in the works that will take some guesswork out of it and keep the Hyundai on a tighter line. The 5 N is more than just a track attacker. On a brief road drive navigating the twisties linking the villages of western Germany’s rolling hillsides, the 5 N reveals its tamer side. Just like the 10Best-winning Hyundai Ioniq 5, the turned-up variant dialed back into its least aggressive settings and with all the noise generators silenced is a wonderful, well-isolated cruiser. In their softest setting, the adaptive dampers exhibit fantastic wheel control. On the unlimited sections of the autobahn, the 5 N cruises along at a drama-free 160 mph with near-perfect on-center steering calibration.It’ll be some time before we can experience a production version of the Ioniq 5 N, as production begins early in 2024. Even in this car’s development stages, Hyundai certainly has paved the for the 5 N to change the way we perceive an electric vehicle from behind the wheel. Whether making an EV sound and feel like an internal-combustion engine will win over enthusiasts remains to be seen, but it’s a movement heading in the right direction. Senior Testing EditorDavid 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

If you want to know just how adept high-performance SUVs have become at bending the laws of physics, check out the BMW X3 M Competition’s test numbers. It would be easy to assume that they were produced by anything but a tall shoebox of a car. A high-end sports car, maybe? A thundering muscle car? A powerful sports sedan? A 60-mph time of 3.2 seconds, a quarter-mile of 11.5 seconds at 119 mph, and a 0.96-g fling around our skidpad are strong stats for any vehicle regardless of body style. Oh, and the X3 M Comp delivers them with one of the most forceful personalities in the compact-performance SUV class. More crazy-fast BWM SUVsBMW’s M performance doctors first turned their attention to the standard X3 SUV back in 2019. The fitness program they put it through was rigorous, comprising chassis reinforcements; a profoundly stiffer suspension tune; and fat, sticky summer rubber. And, of course, the patient received a heart transplant in the form of the then-new S58 twin-turbo 3.0-liter inline-six for its 2020 M debut. Shared with the M3, M4, and X4 M SUV, the engine boosted underhood muscle to 473 horses for the X3 M and 503 for the cherry-on-top Competition model. HIGHS: A turbo six for the ages, upscale cabin environs, thinks it’s an M3.The X3 M has changed little a few years into its life. That’s a mixed blessing. BMW refreshed the entire X3 line last year, and the M model received a few minor revisions: new front and rear fascias, a larger kidney grille, slimmer LED headlights, and revised taillights. The changes are almost too subtle to register. Updates inside the cabin included a new center console, a reconfigured 12.3-inch infotainment screen, revised ambient lighting, and improvements to the driver-assist systems. We would have loved to be in the meeting when the M engineers decided, “Hey, this thing needs more power.” The Competition was already one of the quickest compact SUVs, in league with rivals such as the Alfa Romeo Stelvio Quardrifoglio and Porsche Macan GTS for stoplight sprints. But more grunt is always a good selling point. Tuning changes to the S58 left horsepower unchanged but plumped up torque by 13 pound-feet in the X3 M and by 37 pound-feet in the Competition, bringing their totals up to 457 pound-feet and 479 pound-feet, respectively. That was enough reason for us to grab an X3 M Competition for testing. Four model years in now, the X3 M Competition’s in-your-face attitude remains intact. It’s still at its best playing oversized M3, ripping down straightaways, and charging corners on two-lanes. It’s the engine that imbues the X3 M Competition with its ready-to-lunge vibe, and we love the stout six here as much as we do in the M3 Competition sedan. It idles with a menacing bass boom through the standard Sport exhaust, yowls sweetly to its 7200-rpm redline, and pulls like it’s running from the devil. All-wheel drive provides stunning launches and shuttles power between all four wheels seamlessly. There’s a beat of boost lag if you mat the throttle at low revs, but the rush that follows always makes us grin. Though our backsides couldn’t discern the additional torque from the 2022 upgrade, the extra juice did manifest itself in our testing—barely. Our test car reached 60 mph a tenth of a second sooner than the 2020 model and grew that advantage to three-tenths of a second by 160 mph. It’s possible that the S58 will be the last great BMW inline-six, and if that’s so, we couldn’t think of a more fitting way for it to go out than lighting up other M cars and SUVs.LOWS: Distant steering feel, drive modes’ overwhelming combinations, a ride too raw to tame.We wish we could be as enthusiastic about the X3 M Competition’s aggressive chassis tuning, which carries over unchanged. Despite the multitudinous adjustments available within the Comp’s drive-mode menus, there’s no combination of settings that calms the arthritically stiff ride. Mottled pavement jostles it rudely. At city speeds, the sticky 40-series summer tires pound over tar strips that most other cars ignore, registering them with a bass-drum-like thud that reverberates through the cabin. The ride does relax on glassy-smooth roads, but who drives only on those?Trading off some of that chassis rawness for a more livable ride would make the X3 M Comp happier doing the mundane things that SUVs are enlisted for most of the time—like school drop-offs, grocery runs, and trips to Home Depot. Killer handling and ride comfort don’t have to be mutually exclusive, as performance vehicles ranging from Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing to Porsche Macan have proven. The Competition package adds $7000 to the base X3 M’s $75,395 price, and it includes the more powerful twin-turbo six, upsized 21-inch tires, the Sport exhaust, heavily bolstered M Sport front seats, your choice of two-tone Merino leather combos, and more. Our test car was also optioned up with the M Driver’s package that raises the top speed limiter from 155 mph to 177 ($2500); the Executive package’s head-up display, panoramic sunroof, and heated front and rear seats ($3650); special-order Le Mans Blue Metallic paint ($3750); the Driving Assistance Plus driver-assist package ($1700); wireless charging ($500); and tinted M Shadowline lights ($250)—all of which ran the tab up to $94,745. VERDICT: A ballistic missile that could stand to soften up just a bit.It’s an expensive suit of clothes, and dressed like this, the X3 M Competition is a thoroughly equipped and convincingly luxurious high-performance automobile. But as nice as the upscale furnishings are, they do nothing to leaven the X3 M Competition’s excitable demeanor. This ritzy hot rod might deliver great performance numbers, but we’d like it more if it wasn’t quite so raw.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2023 BMW X3 M CompetitionVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $82,395/$94,745 Options: Le Mans Blue Metallic paint, $3750; Executive package (head-up display, heated steering wheel, panoramic roof, gesture control, front and rear heated seats), $3650; M Driver’s package, $2500; Driving Assistance Professional package, $1700; wireless charging, $500; M Shadowline lights, $250
ENGINE
twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 183 in3, 2993 cm3Power: 503 hp @ 6250 rpmTorque: 479 lb-ft @ 2750 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 15.6-in vented, cross-drilled disc/14.6-in vented, cross-drilled discTires: Michelin Pilot Sport 4S F: 255/40ZR-21 (102Y) ★R: 265/40ZR-21 (105Y) ★
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 112.8 inLength: 186.0 inWidth: 74.7 inHeight: 65.7 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 55/45 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 63/29 ft3Curb Weight: 4560 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 3.2 sec100 mph: 8.0 sec1/4-Mile: 11.5 sec @ 119 mph130 mph: 14.3 sec150 mph: 21.8 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.2 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 4.5 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.6 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.1 secTop Speed (mfr’s claim): 177 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 152 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 301 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.96 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 19 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 25 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 430 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 17/15/20 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDDirector, Buyer’s GuideRich Ceppos has evaluated automobiles and automotive technology during a career that has encompassed 10 years at General Motors, two stints at Car and Driver totaling 19 years, and thousands of miles logged in racing cars. He was in music school when he realized what he really wanted to do in life and, somehow, it’s worked out. In between his two C/D postings he served as executive editor of Automobile Magazine; was an executive vice president at Campbell Marketing & Communications; worked in GM’s product-development area; and became publisher of Autoweek. He has raced continuously since college, held SCCA and IMSA pro racing licenses, and has competed in the 24 Hours of Daytona. He currently ministers to a 1999 Miata and a 1965 Corvette convertible and appreciates that none of his younger colleagues have yet uttered “Okay, Boomer” when he tells one of his stories about the crazy old days at C/D. More

When Jeep refreshed its subcompact Compass last year, we applauded its evolution. The exterior took the shape of a junior Grand Cherokee. Its interior, no longer a penalty box lined with inexpensive-looking materials, provided a ritzier feel and appeal. Despite that progress, the languid powertrain carried over, and thus the Compass failed to gain meaningful ground on the competition in the hotly contested segment.For 2023, Jeep has tossed the 2.4-liter inline-four in the dumpster where it belongs. In its place is a more desirable turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four, similar to that which can be had in the Jeep Wrangler. Here in the Compass, the turbo four makes 200 horses and 221 pound-feet, gains of 23 and 49, respectively, over the former naturally aspirated mill. More importantly, peak torque arrives at 1750 rpm compared to 3900 in the 2.4-liter. More on the Jeep CompassHIGHS: More power, attractive starting price, improved fuel economy.In other driveline news, the ratio-hunting nine-speed automatic is now in the rearview, and an eight-speed autobox manages the shifting duties. Torque is delivered to all four contact patches, as all-wheel drive is now standard. At the track, the turbocharged Jeep Compass runs all over its naturally aspirated predecessor. With a 7.5-second sprint to 60 mph, the 2023 Compass hits the mark 1.8 seconds quicker than before. Its quarter-mile performance is improved by 1.3 seconds, now taking 15.8 seconds and crossing the line at 89 mph. During more common driving scenarios, in both the 30-to-50-mph (4.4 seconds) and 50-to-70-mph (5.4 seconds) passing tests, improvements of 0.6 and 1.1 seconds, the 2.0-liter’s extra muscle paired with fewer ratios for the transmission to juggle gets the Compass around slower traffic with far less effort.During a cold start, the turbocharged 2.0-liter is a groaning little thing, settling into a 43-decibel thrum after it warms up—1 decibel louder than before. But mash the throttle and push the tachometer to the 6200 rpm redline and just 70 decibels enter the cabin, a marked improvement of 4 decibels over the old 2.4-liter.LOWS: The competition is quicker, long stopping distance, uninspired steering.Underway, the Compass remains relatively composed when leaned on, delivering a middling 0.81 g of grip from its 225/60R-17 Firestone Destination LE2 all-season rubber. On the open road, however, the Compass requires undue attention, owing to the steering’s spongey on-center feel. When it’s time to slow things down, the firm but overly sensitive brake pedal is difficult to smoothly modulate, and stops from 70 mph require a lengthy 195 feet.Despite the newfound power and quicker acceleration, fuel economy improves over the old powertrain. According to the EPA, the Compass earns ratings of 24 mpg city, 32 mpg highway, and 27 mpg combined, improvements of 2 mpg across the board. We observed 23 mpg in a mix of highway and city driving.While the pepped-up Compass still trails behind the 250-hp Ford Escape and the 256-hp Mazda CX-5 Turbo in both acceleration and cargo area, its attractive starting price of $29,995 is well below those two. Naturally, the price increases as you navigate up through the eight trim levels, topping out with the High Altitude for $40,930. No matter where in the lineup you settle, the powertrain is what puts the Compass back on the map.VERDICT: The turbocharged powertrain puts the Compass back on the map.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Jeep Compass 4x4Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $29,995/$41,270Options: Latitude trim, $3995; Sun and Sound group (Alpine stereo, panoramic roof), $2695; Convenience group (remote start system, auto dimming rearview mirror, heated steering wheel and front seats, wiper de-icer, eight-way power driver seat, power liftgate), $2095; Driver Assistance group (adaptive cruise control, surround-view camera system, inductive charging pad, automatic wipers), $1895; Sting-Gray Clearcoat paint, $595
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1995 cm3Power: 200 hp @ 5000 rpmTorque: 221 lb-ft @ 1750 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 12.0-in vented disc/10.9-in discTires: Firestone Destination LE2225/60R-17 99T M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 103.8 inLength: 173.4 inWidth: 73.8 inHeight: 64.6 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 52/47 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 60/27 ft3Curb Weight: 3717 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.5 sec1/4-Mile: 15.8 sec @ 89 mph100 mph: 20.8 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.9 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.4 secTop Speed (C/D est): 118 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 195 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.81 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 23 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 27/24/30 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDSenior Testing EditorDavid 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

The Mercedes-Benz GLC SUV and the swoopier GLC Coupe are more fraternal than identical twins. But after a quick spin in a revised 2024 GLC Coupe, one thing this slicked-back sport utility does share with the flattop is the fact that it’s a comfortable, safe choice.Related StoriesWhile the vehicles are very similar on a spec sheet, there are some key areas where these two differ. The GLC Coupe is definitely the more stylish of the pair, and that gulf widens further with this new model. The front ends are largely the same, but the rear end is vastly prettier, with the old model’s cartoonishly large taillights swapped out in favor of sleeker units that span the width of the rear end thanks to a piece of dark trim. The GLC Coupe also comes standard with the more aggressive AMG Line styling package, which includes 19-inch wheels (non-coupes start with 18s).A healthier dose of standard equipment helps the GLC Coupe exist as the more refined—and, once pricing is out, the undoubtedly more expensive—choice. There’s a whole bunch of kit on the coupe that longroof buyers have to shell out extra for, such as a panoramic sunroof, a Burmester surround-sound audio upgrade, and the “Transparent Hood” feature that uses surround-view cameras to show what’s beneath the front end when you’re off-roading. More traditional upgrades including navigation, a head-up display, and heated rear seats remain optional for both variants.Like the GLC SUV, the GLC Coupe is a bit bigger this year, but the dimensional shifts aren’t like for like. The coupe is just 1.2 inches longer, half the growth of the longroof, but like its sibling, all that extra length goes into front and rear overhangs. Cargo space rises by 1.6 cubic feet behind the second row to a net 19.2, just a couple cubes behind the non-coupe. Overall width holds at 74.4 inches, but the front track grows by 0.2 inch, and the rear by nearly an entire inch. The GLC Coupe rides 0.2 inch taller than before, but its overall aerodynamic profile is much better, as its 0.27 drag coefficient is a fair improvement over the old model’s 0.30. Thankfully, that slipperier metric doesn’t come at the cost of much rear headroom, which remains just suitable enough for a six-footer.The equipment may differ somewhat, but the GLC Coupe’s powertrain is a pure copy-paste job from the SUV—not that we’re complaining. The GLC300 relies on a turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four with an integrated starter-generator, producing a net 255 horsepower and 295 pound-feet of torque, with the e-motor (a new feature for both siblings) capable of adding up to 23 horsepower and 148 pound-feet to fill gaps in the powerband. A nine-speed automatic transmission remains standard as does all-wheel drive. Unsurprisingly, the GLC Coupe carries the same factory zero-to-60-mph estimate as the longroof: 6.2 seconds. Our actual test of said 2023 GLC300 4Matic SUV netted a 5.7-second result to 60 mph, so we’d be foolish to expect any less from the fastback.Our time behind the wheel was in a Euro-spec car, which only served to highlight that the Europeans get a better deal than we do. Euro-model GLC300s can be equipped with air springs and rear-axle steering, a package that will not be brought to the U.S. due to low take rates in past iterations. That’s a damn shame because these two features dramatically improve the GLC’s on-road performance. The air springs absolutely eliminate pavement inconsistencies, while the rear-axle steering boosts agility in both low- and high-speed maneuvering. When the GLC Coupe arrives in the U.S. later this year, it’ll come instead with a sport-tuned suspension that will likely provide a firmer ride.Nearly every other facet of the GLC Coupe’s driving experience is pretty close to that of the GLC SUV. The engine’s stop-start system is smooth to the point of being unnoticeable. The steering is responsive but dead below the belt. The pedals offer the right amount of sensitivity to prevent occupants’ heads from bobbing all over the place when accelerating or braking. The nine-speed transmission is more than happy to hold gears on particularly steep declines, but otherwise, it moves its way through the cogs with very little drama. The biggest differentiator comes when glancing through the rearview mirror, as all that style out back comes at the expense of rearward visibility.The GLC siblings also sport the same interiors, and again, that’s no bad thing. Everything feels appropriately premium, with some interesting knurling on the door armrests and a massive piano-black center console that slides open to reveal some pretty mediocre cupholders, a wireless device charger, and two USB-C ports. Mercedes-Benz’s twin-blade steering wheel design is here, too, and its touch-sensitive directional pads are still frustratingly easy to activate by accident.A pair of displays form the meat and potatoes of every GLC Coupe’s cabin tech. The 12.3-inch gauge display offers a variety of appearances and is capable of showing nearly any facet of vehicle information between the digital dials. The portrait-oriented 11.9-inch central touchscreen runs the latest version of the MBUX infotainment software, which is straightforward, responsive, and includes standard wireless smartphone mirroring. Automatic emergency braking, a surround-view camera system, parking sensors, and blind-spot monitoring are all standard; optional packages load ‘er up with the remaining pieces of modern safety tech, such as full-speed adaptive cruise control and lane-keep assist.Pricing isn’t yet available, but the generational increase was $3350 for a GLC300 with all-wheel drive when the 2023 SUV adopted this new architecture last year. Add that to the current 2023 GLC300 Coupe price of $55,850, and you arrive just north of $59,000 for this new 2024 GLC300 Coupe. With its higher level of standard equipment, the coupe has always commanded a steep price premium over the SUV. However, if you want a little more edge in your compact luxury crossover than the standard GLC provides, the coupe is a great way to accomplish that. Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Mercedes-Benz GLC300 CoupeVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door hatchback
PRICE (C/D EST)
Base: GLC300 4Matic, $59,000
ENGINE
Turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1999 cm3Power: 255 hp @ 6100 rpmTorque: 295 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm
TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.7 inLength: 187.5 inWidth: 74.4 inHeight: 64.0 inCargo Volume, Behind F/R: 53/19 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4450 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.7 sec1/4-Mile: 14.4 secTop Speed: 130 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 24/22/28 mpgSenior EditorCars are Andrew Krok’s jam, along with boysenberry. After graduating with a degree in English from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 2009, Andrew cut his teeth writing freelance magazine features, and now he has a decade of full-time review experience under his belt. A Chicagoan by birth, he has been a Detroit resident since 2015. Maybe one day he’ll do something about that half-finished engineering degree. More