Car Reviews

From the April 1974 issue of Car and Driver.Apparently nothing is sacred at Datsun, not even playing to a capacity crowd for four years with the same successful sports/GT car. Who knows, maybe those long lines of buyers really wouldn’t have lasted forever. Rumor has it you can ac­tually get the color of your choice now. And in some cities, the price has reportedly plummeted to what the sticker says. Not what you’d call a crash in the market, but Datsun is taking those signs seriously. As a result the 1974 Z-car has a new first name: 260. That bigger number means the factory is try­ing to put more into the car than the U.S. safety and emis­sions standards are draining out. Be forewarned: It’s an obvi­ous ploy to lengthen the waiting lines again.The new nameplate stands for a bigger engine: the same basic 240Z single overhead cam six with piston displacement upped by 171 cc (10.4 cubic inches) as a result of a 0.2-inch increase in stroke. Also, the exhaust valves are larger for bet­ter breathing, and a magnetic pulse generator has replaced breaker points in the distributor. Datsun engineers claim the new electronic ignition improves starting and forestalls misfir­ing with the 260Z’s emissions package (lean mixtures, an air pump, and heavy doses of recirculated exhaust gas). And since underhood temperatures have surged in the fight against air pollution, fuel lines are now heavily insulated for protection against vapor lock. The fuel system also benefits from a rear-mounted electric pump operating in tandem with the engine-driven mechanical pump. On the dyno, the new motor delivers 139 horsepower (net) at 5600 rpm, an increase of six hp over last year’s 2394-cc version. Torque is up by 12 pound-feet to 137 (net) at 4400 rpm. Unfortu­nately, the dynamometer only tells part of the story; the rest is unveiled at the test track. Our test car accelerated through the quarter-mile in 17.8 seconds with a trap speed of 81 mph. As a result of that test, we must sadly report that the big motor Z-car is slower than last year’s edition. The 1973 Z-car we tested went down the quarter-mile in 17.0 seconds at 81 mph. Part of that difference in acceleration can be attributed to extra weight: Our ’74 test car was heavier by 80 pounds with factory air conditioning (optional), with another 80-pound handi­cap added by the 5-mph front and rear bumpers. But weight in this incidence is not the primary cause of the 260Z’s perform­ance fall off. Our test car also had a serious drivability prob­lem that put a limp in its gait down the dragstrip. Halfway through the rev range in first gear, the engine simply ran out of fuel. It died like a fish out of water, with power coming back in gulps. Datsun engineers acknowledge the existence of the problem and are diligently searching for a solution. Their tests show that high underhood temperatures are boiling fuel in the carburetors, causing the temporary starvation during sus­tained flat-out acceleration. The old Hitachi-SU sidedraft carburetors may have come to the end of their rope. We’d sug­gest electronic fuel injection as a logical replacement. More on the ZThat won’t happen this year, but still, you should not expect the 260Z to struggle through the model year slower than the 1973 car. Datsun does a sizable amount of development work in this country—oftentimes after the cars go on sale. One whole shipload of early ’73s had to have carburetors replaced on the dock due to a design defect. And later in the model year, a service repair kit was issued to dealers to correct severe hot start problems. The kit included the insulated fuel lines and electric fuel pump now standard equipment for 1974. Unfortunately, the basic problem is still not solved. Emissions hardware has placed such a heavy burden on the engine, that it isn’t ready to make clean air and live up to its power potential at the same time. So at this point, the big motor is less an advantage and more a stop gap measure to meet the law. Any real performance gains over 1973 will de­pend on how successful the U.S.-based development pro­gram is. The Datsun engineers could stand to take a look at fuel economy as well since that has also slipped for 1974. Our tests show that mileage is down about two mpg from an aver­age of 20 mpg (for a 1973 car) to 18 mpg for the 260Z. Environ­mental Protection Agency tests, however, have revealed no sacrifice with the bigger engine; in its strictly city driving tests, both ’73 and ’74 models turned in an average of 16 mpg.Except for the fuel penalty and one serious flaw in drivability, the new engine is easy to get along with. With the new electronic ignition, it starts eagerly when cold if you use a lot of choke and pulls like a freight train at low speeds. That makes the Z-car more flexible in traffic because you can move out smartly ahead of the flow without resorting to the top half of the rev range. It’s just as well because the tachometer opti­mistically advertises a thousand revs that aren’t useful. The 260Z is really no different from its predecessor in this respect. The Z-car’s redline has stood at a lofty 7000 rpm from the beginning, and while the engine will wind that tight without bursting, only the noise level is still rising. Power noses down­ward after 5600 rpm and the useful rev range ends at 6000. Although the big motor is a mixed blessing, other changes for this year are strict improvements. Datsun has chosen 1974 to unload a fix for virtually every complaint owners have lodged over the years. That’s not to say the 240Z has been riddled with shortcomings. The fact is it has been one of the most popular cars in existence—at any price. Car and Driver readers selected it as the Overall Best Car for 1973, and Datsun is intent on preserving that stellar image. Handling is at the top of the 1974’s improvement list. In the past, directional stability at highway speeds had been the Dat­sun’s weak suit: Pre-’74 Z-cars wandered down a windy free­way as if they were piloted by inebriates. The problem cen­tered around a complicated interaction of aerodynamics, steering geometry, and rubber bushings locating the steering rack. For the solution, Datsun has taken no small pains. First of all, the body’s angle of attack into the wind is altered by raising the rear of the car slightly. That diminishes front-end lift at speed and at the same time reduces weight loss from the front tires. With a tighter grip on the road, the front of the car is not so easily swayed from its path by side winds. The steering gear mounting system has also been revised with special attention to eliminate lateral compliance. Side loads that might come from cornering or crosswinds can no longer deflect the steering rack or turn the front wheels. So now only the steering wheel guides the car, as it should. The road feel to the driver is much too damped for our liking, but the 260Z does track down the road with a solid respect for the straight and narrow. Spring rates are higher at both ends of the car largely to accommodate the extra weight of fortified bumpers and facto­ry air conditioning. Since that weight has favored the front end, there is a built-in tendency toward understeer. But Dat­sun engineers have wisely side-stepped that bed of quick­sand by adding a rear anti-roll bar as standard equipment. It shifts roll stiffness to the rear of the car to counteract the negative handling influence of a heavier front end. On the whole, the new suspension calibration works in a very commendable manner. The 260Z sweeps through turns with a new level of determination: Body roll is at a tight minimum and you can feel both ends of the car working right up to the limit. In the front, there is a gradual loss of response to the steering wheel, but the tires never yield to severe understeer. It’s the rear tires that actually signal the limit as they lose their side grip and begin to audibly scratch at the pavement. You feel the tail slowly creeping out, but the drift angle stabilizes at a perfectly manageable limit because the front end also begins to slide. And it all happens with no feeling of impending doom. In fact, the Datsun is so stable that normal interruptions—more throttle, less throttle, braking, and even wet surfaces—don’t shake its composure. It’s enough to make you bypass the freeway every time in search of a twisty back passage. Marc Madow|Car and DriverMarc Madow|Car and DriverNo matter what route you take, the Datsun’s interior will deliver you in fine style. None of the strong attributes have been tampered with—excellent instrumentation, wraparound seat backs, and a station wagon’s cargo hold under the hatch­back. But most of the shortcomings have been fixed. The hair-trigger gas pedal is gone. And all the rubbery vagueness is out of the shift lever with a new linkage this year. Even the old bamboo-colored steering wheel has been upgraded with padding and a leather cover. It’s not real hand-sewn cow skin, but a manmade facsimile accurate right down to the wrinkles, stitches, and pores, realistic enough to fool a glove manufacturer. Thankfully, the cheap-looking heat-stamped plastic coverings for the transmission and rear suspension towers are gone, replaced by vinyl with a richer texture and a finer pattern. Factory air conditioning is also a major upgrade this year. The hardware is a marvel of technology—lightweight alumi­num materials for the evaporator and condenser, and a compact swashplate compressor similar to the GM/Frigidaire design. The compressor is vibration free in operation, and there is no underhood clutter with the new system. Inside the car, the hardware is shrewdly interfaced with the instrument panel. The heater/AC control module is one of the simplest and most informative layouts we’ve seen. Three carefully marked levers reg­ulate the interior climate: one four-speed blower switch, one temperature selector, and one function knob. Since the latter is graphically coded with red and blue arrows, you know if the air has been heated or cooled and exactly where it’s going. At last cryptic labels like “Bi-Lev­el” take on a solid meaning. The air conditioning system is the only convenience Datsun doesn’t include with the base price. For $5125, you get tinted glass, intermittent wipers (new this year), a dead pedal for your left foot, and even an AM/FM radio complete with an electric antenna. True, it’s not the bargain it was in 1970 at $3526, but a serious competitor to the Z-car still hasn’t materialized. The opposition is slimmer by two cars this year with the demise of the Opel GT and Triumph’s GT6. The remaining field, the Alfa GTV, the Jensen-Healey, and the Porsche 914, may delight purists, but the technical fascination doesn’t seem to sway the masses shopping for a sports car at Datsun. Face value is the key: The 260Z offers a bigger engine at a lower price. Not to mention the com­fort of joining a crowd—a mass stronger by 54,000 happy customers in 1973. We don’t expect a downturn in popu­larity even with the drivability problems wrought by emission controls. The up­grade program has been too thorough for that to happen. And if the carburetor engineers can get their act together, they’ll wipe out the 260Z’s most menacing competitor—last year’s 240Z.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1974 Datsun 260Z 2+2Vehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, 2-door hatchback coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $5200/$5610Options: air conditioning, $410
ENGINESOHC inline-6, iron block and aluminum headDisplacement: 156 in3, 2565 cm3Power: 139 hp @ 5600 rpmTorque: 137 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/strutsBrakes, F/R: 10.7-in disc/9.0-in drumTires: Toyo 2-1175 HR-14
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 90.7 inLength: 169.1 inWidth: 64.1 inHeight: 50.6 inCurb Weight: 2660 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS30 mph: 3.5 sec60 mph: 10.3 sec100 mph: 33.2 sec1/4-Mile: 17.8 sec @ 81 mphTop Speed (observed): 117 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 190 ftRoadholding: 0.86 g  
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 16/19 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

There it is again, that mix of affirmation and excitement. It’s what you feel when the steering, brakes, and accelerator of a brand-new car sync driver inputs and create a sensory revelation. This time, the source is the new i5 M60, the high-performance variant of the new eighth-generation 5-series, which lived up to its dynamic promise throughout our first half-day outing. If this early pre-production model is anything to go by, BMW has another winner on its hands. And this time, the achievement is not tainted by a disfigured front end with a beaver-tooth grille.Logistics dictated that we bypass the 335-hp i5 eDrive40 and go straight to the 590-hp i5 M60 xDrive. From our base near Marseille, France, we headed out onto a section of BMW’s official Research and Development evaluation loop, which stretches deep into the barren hinterland to the northwest, where the Bouches-du-Rhône and Vaucluse departments meet. Piloting a still fully camouflaged i5 prototype, we followed BMW driving dynamics expert Jürgen Metz, who led the way in an M340d wagon. The challenging route is the legacy of BMW’s recently retired chassis guru Jos van As.Driving the 2024 BMW i5 M60As soon as the last small village started to fade away in the rearview mirror, Jürgen’s voice came snarling over the radio: “It hasn’t rained here for weeks, so there will be plenty of sand and gravel on the road.” Squeak, pause, crackle. “Also, give cyclists a wide berth and keep an eye out for locals in a hurry, who are real experts at cutting corners.” Moments later, a quick thumbs-up signals attack mode, and our two-car convoy begins its speedy climb up the steely gray spiral staircase to the first summit of the Parc naturel régional des Alpilles. The i5 is a brand-new car from top to bottom, and yet it feels encouragingly familiar and confidence-inspiring from the word go. The motor’s massive 590 horsepower and 586 pound-feet of torque are distributed with sublime mastery.Related StoriesIn preparation for the total-immersion experience that was about to follow, the black disguise covers had to come off BMW’s curved display that spans two-thirds of the dash. Next, the annoying lane-departure warning chimes, lights, and vibrations were put to sleep. Locking all systems in Sport but leaving stability control on for the time being completed the initial preflight check. Although there is no gear lever or clutch pedal to worry about, the mind still takes a moment to adjust to the new driver environment. There is only one steering-wheel paddle, which is marked Boost. Why not install a second paddle to control the three energy-regeneration stages? “Because sticking the gear selector in B automatically triggers the one-pedal feel coveted by many EV users,” explains Herr Metz. Lift-off regen intensifies or decreases in sync with the selected drive mode.But today we’re not interested in coasting or in exploring the max range (estimated at up to 307 miles for the eDrive40 and 272 miles for the M60). Today is all about having fun with fully charged batteries, two motors giving their all, and wringing out a state-of-the-art chassis. The i5 didn’t simply swap its combustion engine for an electric drivetrain—instead, this is a genetically reprogrammed 5-series on high-tech steroids. Its key elements include a variable-ratio and variable-assist steering rack complemented by rear-axle steering with a 2.5-degree maximum angle, active anti-roll bars, rear air springs, and a multilink suspension configuration at the front and at the rear. And these are only the basic stats.The French grow award-winning wines and cook unforgettable meals, but most of the country’s rural roads are in a sorry state, which is why the European motor industry’s chassis experts, driving-dynamics wizards, and tire engineers come here to test and tune their wares. The bleached, porous, and broken tarmac certainly felt like home turf to the i5. It oozes compliance, cuts corners with uncanny precision, and the 245/40 front and 275/35 rear tires on 20-inch wheels feel Velcro-strapped to the surface as a cog railway is to its rack. Instrumental to this homogenous blend of agility and composure are numerous stiffening measures to the body and suspension and a spiderweb of links firming up the rear axle assembly.BMW i5 M60 Performance StatsThe flush underbody, a number of selectively blocked air intakes, aerodynamically conscious wheels, and lateral air curtains are key to the remarkable drag coefficient of 0.23. The top speed for efficiency reasons is restricted to 144 mph. The battery, motors, and inverters are largely shared with the i4 M50, so it’s to no surprise the claimed zero-to-62-mph time of 3.9 seconds matches that of the M50. At a charging rate of up to 200 kilowatts, a 10 to 80 percent recharge should take no more than 30 minutes, and over-the-air updates are likely to speed up the charge time. The only new driving program is dubbed MaxRange. It even eclipses Eco Pro by radically reducing the top speed to a tiptoeing 56 mph while limiting the power output to 136 horsepower and shutting off electric loads like the air conditioning for a 25 percent boost in range.BMWCompared to the lesser eDrive40, the M60 gets a firmer suspension setup and a lowered ride height, the widest available tires, and Executive Drive Pro, which is BMW-speak for active anti-roll bars plus the rear-axle steering system. As one would expect, the M-specific all-wheel-drive system prefers to split the torque in favor of the rear wheels. Are we having fun yet? You bet. Especially in Sport Boost, which frees an extra 18 pound-feet for up to 10 seconds. Doesn’t sound like a lot, but in combination with the wild in-dash countdown graphic and the shrill audio accompaniment (by German film composer Hans Zimmer), the paddle- or accelerator-induced kick-down certainly appeals to the child inside. Alternatively, one can scroll through the My Mode menu and check out different mood settings labeled Personal, Relax, and Expressive.These playful gimmicks are admittedly little more than the digital icing on a cake—which still relays all the essential brand values every self-proclaimed ultimate driving machine must have. Although the i5 M60 is a product of the Bavarian Motor Works, the motors are no longer the main discerning feature. Instead it’s the eerily intuitive and wonderfully involving driver interaction that makes the new sedan stand out. Take, for instance, the steering that allows not a trace of vagueness or uncertainty to seep through to the palms of the driver. The brake-by-wire system also performs with aplomb, as the brakes are easy to modulate and respond with reassuring clarity. Common vices such as delayed action, synthetic feel, excessive pedal travel, and the usual conflict between deceleration and regeneration are conspicuous in their absence.The day concluded with an about-face from letting it all hang out in the middle of nowhere to a no less impressive demonstration of semi-autonomous driving on a busy nearby highway. The new 5-series comes with the useful Highway Assistant we know from the 7-series that can perform automated hands-free lane changes, combines Active Cruise Control with traffic-light recognition, includes Active Lane Guiding and Urban Cruise features, and adds a trailer mode to its lane-change assist properties. Our sample car repeatedly performed fluent automated lane changes and passing maneuvers. No, it does not yet quite comply with all Level 3 requirements, although we’re told that getting there will only be a matter of months.But unlike so many EVs, the new i5 is more about engaging the driver than replacing the driver. Like the i4, it’s another hopeful indicator that the era of electrification doesn’t necessarily bring down the curtain on BMWs that are fun to drive.Contributing EditorAlthough I was born the only son of an ornithologist and a postal clerk, it was clear from the beginning that birdwatching and stamp collecting were not my thing. Had I known that God wanted me to grow to 6’8″, I also would have ruled out anything to do with cars, which are to blame for a couple of slipped discs, a torn ligament, and that stupid stooped posture behind the wheel. While working as a keeper in the Aberdeen Zoo, smuggling cheap cigarettes from Yugoslavia to Germany, and an embarrassing interlude with an amateur drama group also failed to yield fulfillment, driving and writing about cars became a much better option. And it still is now, many years later, as I approach my 70th birthday. I love every aspect of my job except long-haul travel on lousy airlines, and I hope it shows. More

Despite massive annual sales and ubiquitous status on U.S. streets, full-size pickup trucks remain a precious commodity in Car and Driver’s long-term fleet. Naturally, we wasted little time putting our newly acquired 2023 Toyota Tundra to work. With under 300 miles on the Tundra’s clock, senior technical editor Dave Beard loaded his 550-pound Ski-Doo into the crew cab’s standard five-foot-five-inch composite bed and pointed the Tundra’s enormous schnoz north on I-75 toward Michigan’s wintry Upper Peninsula.The roughly 800-mile roundtrip journey from C/D’s Ann Arbor headquarters provided a literal cold open to our hybrid Tundra Limited CrewMax’s 40,000-mile test. During the truck’s first snowstorm, the grille-mounted radar got blocked by debris, rendering the adaptive cruise control useless. The truck’s 20-inch all-season tires struggled in the silty lake-effect snow but handled packed powder better. Its spacious cabin also saved Beard money on a motel room one frigid night. “I shacked up in the back row in my sleeping bag and was quite comfortable,” he said. “I’d do it again.” Later on, he figured out the truck’s remote start takes five key-fob presses, which would’ve kept the cabin warmer for longer as he drifted off to dreamland. Like the start of most long-term relationships, learning each other’s quirks takes time.Marc Urbano|Car and DriverThis isn’t our first date with the redesigned Tundra—we’ve tested a nonhybrid Limited model and an off-road-focused TRD Pro, with the latter finishing behind fellow hybrids in the Ford F-150 and Ram 1500 in a comparo showdown—but it’s an extended opportunity to examine the truck that’s long been overshadowed by its domestic rivals. For perspective, Americans bought about 104,000 Tundras in 2022 but gobbled up nearly 654,000 Ford F-series models, about 513,000 Chevy Silverados, and over 468,000 Ram trucks. Still, Tundra sales rose 27 percent from 2021, suggesting Toyota’s loyal fanbase has renewed interest. Was their patience worth the wait? We aim to find out.The third-generation Tundra’s debut was a welcome one, as the better part of two decades had passed since the second generation debuted. Sure, a 2014 makeover attempted to keep things fresh, but the truck still felt dated—and that was almost 10 years ago. Toyota unwittingly benefits from the old truck overstaying its welcome as the new one appears extra, well, new. Now built on the TNGA-F body-on-frame platform, it trades rear leaf springs for a more sophisticated coil-spring configuration. “It’s not the best-riding truck, but it’s not terrible,” Beard quipped. “It’s a better Tundra.”Complementing its more chiseled body, including a face that could pass for a Peterbilt’s, the Tundra’s interior boasts a modern design, nicer materials, and desirable technology. Our midrange Limited trim has a 12.3-inch digital gauge cluster and a ginormous 14.0-inch touchscreen. While we wish the infotainment system had a tuning knob, we appreciate how well wireless Apple CarPlay works and how it fills the entire screen. Real leather isn’t part of the deal, but the Limited has standard soft-touch surfaces and power-adjustable front seats with heated and ventilated cushions. Besides the sturdy switchgear and respectable fit and finish, the flimsy center-console cover feels like it could be ripped off by an errant hand, triggering PTSD from the old Tundra’s rickety bits.Tons o’ TundraThe as-tested price of our Limited CrewMax is $64,093. If that sounds expensive, that’s because it is. A more luxurious 2023 Ram 1500 Longhorn costs about the same, as does a ritzy ’23 GMC Sierra Denali. Our Tundra piles up about $12K in options—$8450 alone for the crew cab, four-wheel drive, and i-Force Max hybrid combo. Other extras include a $150 heated leather steering wheel, $179 all-weather floor mats, $565 JBL audio system, $399 retractable bed step, $650 load-leveling rear air springs, and $710 running boards. Toss in the $1345 Premium package (towing upgrades, enhanced LED headlights, 360-degree camera system) and the $385 Power package (LED bed lights, dual 120-volt outlets, wireless charging pad), and our Limited trim costs as much as a luxury truck but doesn’t exactly feel like one.The Tundra’s obnoxious fake engine noise won’t convince anyone there’s a V-8 under the bulky hood. Toyota boldly chose to offer only a twin-turbocharged 3.4-liter V-6, either with or without hybrid assist. Although the Detroit Three will all soon sell an electric pickup, Toyota’s most electrified Tundra is the hybrid that adds an electric motor between the twin-turbo V-6 and the 10-speed automatic transmission. Along with a nickel-metal-hydride battery pack with roughly 1.0 kWh of usable energy that hogs space under the rear seats, the iForce Max provides peak output of 437 horsepower and 583 pound-feet of torque.Marc Urbano|Car and DriverThe hybrid Tundra is mightier than the F-150 PowerBoost hybrid, but our example is nearly 280 pounds heavier (6072 pounds total) than the Ford. That mass kneecaps the Toyota’s acceleration, requiring 5.6 seconds to reach 60 mph and passing the quarter-mile mark in 14.3 seconds at 94 mph. While we didn’t detect brake fade during its 192-foot stop from 70 mph, our tester noted a sensitivity to heat, which sent the truck into limp mode after multiple full-throttle takeoffs. The transmission temperature got dangerously high while backing a trailer up a short hill as well. The truck’s thirst for fuel is also worrisome. The hybrid Tundra gets an EPA-estimated 20 mpg combined, but our long-termer is only averaging an alarming 13 mpg at the moment. About one-third of its current 3023 miles were accumulated while towing a 3500-ish-pound enclosed trailer, but even ignoring those miles only increases that average to 16 mpg. Poor fuel economy plagued other models we’ve tested too, and it’s something we’ll monitor as the road ahead includes lots of towing and other truck stuff. By the end of its 40,000-mile stay, we hope to be able to say definitively whether Toyota shrunk the gap between the reinvented Tundra and America’s favorite pickups.Months in Fleet: 1 month Current Mileage: 3023 milesAverage Fuel Economy: 13 mpg Fuel Tank Size: 32.2 gal Observed Fuel Range: 410 milesService: $0 Normal Wear: $0 Repair:$0 Damage and Destruction: $0Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Toyota Tundra Limited Hybrid CrewMax 5.5-foot bedVehicle Type: front-engine, front-motor, rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door pickup
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $59,710/$64,093Options: panoramic view monitor, $950; black dual-step running boards, $710; load-leveling rear air suspension, $650; premium JBL audio system, $565; bed step, $399; Limited Premium package (LED headlights, Towing Technology package), $395; Limited Power package (Qi-compatible wireless charger, LED bed lighting, 400W/120V AC cabin and bed power outlets), $385; all-weather floor liners, $179; heated steering wheel, $150
POWERTRAIN
twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.4-liter V-6, 389 hp, 479 lb-ft + AC motor, 48 hp, 184 lb-ft (combined output: 437 hp, 583 lb-ft; 1.0-kWh (C/D est) nickel-metal hydride battery pack)Transmission: 10-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/live axleBrakes, F/R: 13.9-in vented disc/13.6-in vented discTires: Yokohama Geolander X-CV G057265/60R-20 112H M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 145.7 inLength: 233.6 inWidth: 80.2 inHeight: 78.0 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 64/58 ft3Curb Weight: 6072 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS: NEW
60 mph: 5.6 sec1/4-Mile: 14.3 sec @ 94 mph100 mph: 16.6 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.2 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.6 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 4.1 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 107 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 192 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.72 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 13 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 20/19/22 mpg
WARRANTY
3 years/36,000 miles bumper to bumper5 years/60,000 miles powertrain8 years/100,000 miles hybrid-related components10 years/150,000 miles hybrid battery5 years/unlimited miles corrosion protection2 years/25,000 miles roadside assistance2 years/25,000 miles scheduled maintenance
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDSenior EditorEric Stafford’s automobile addiction began before he could walk, and it has fueled his passion to write news, reviews, and more for Car and Driver since 2016. His aspiration growing up was to become a millionaire with a Jay Leno–like car collection. Apparently, getting rich is harder than social-media influencers make it seem, so he avoided financial success entirely to become an automotive journalist and drive new cars for a living. After earning a degree at Central Michigan University and working at a daily newspaper, the years of basically burning money on failed project cars and lemon-flavored jalopies finally paid off when Car and Driver hired him. His garage currently includes a 2010 Acura RDX, a manual ’97 Chevy Camaro Z/28, and a ’90 Honda CRX Si. More

From the August 1986 issue of Car and Driver.Eleven years have passed since Jaguar’s last E-type two-seater ragtops were im­ported into this country. England’s famous maker of luxurious sports cars and sump­tuous sedans has since made do with steel roofs, and the grand-touring world has been the poorer.One way or another, ragtop Jags never shorted you on emotion. Even in the midst of mechanical and electrical travails, they left you longing for short nights and sunny days. Now comes the XJ-SC Cabriolet, a worthy addition to the long if sporadic line of open-air cats from Coventry. Stop at a light in the XJ-SC and people grin, whoop, and holler, “Hey, that’s a beautiful car!” When the roof is up, we agree. Surprisingly, though, onlookers of­ten blurt compliments even when the top’s panels and flaps are stowed away. Swivel two levers and the two canvas-covered, pop-off roof panels will unlatch and slip out, to be neatly pouched in the deep trunk. To lower the rear section of the roof, unlatch its round lock from the in­side, peel the Velcro-fastened edges of the fabric away from its framework, and fold the fabric and the plastic window down, snapping them beneath a snug boot. Un­fortunately, you are now left with an array of roof hoops rising starkly naked above the swoop of the lower body. (Pausing to change lenses, Aaron Kiley gazed at the framework and mused, “It looks like it’s under construction.”) The staff consensus is that the XJ-SC looks best with its toupee in place, yet none of us feels truly repelled by its aesthetics when everything is stripped down to let the outside in. And it does come in. Head for the country for grand touring after everyday life has tethered you for a while and you’ll feel the beauty of this striking device as dearly as others see it. Grand touring means different things to different people, but it always means something wonderful. In an XJ-SC, the pleasures of touring grandly are smooth and satisfying. Jaguar always skips the sharp aggression of such traditional rivals as the six-cylinder BMW coupe and the V-8 coupes from Mercedes and Porsche, not to mention the rowdy soft- and hard­-topped Corvettes. The XJ-SC offers not only open-air motoring but a very different accent on sporting transportation. Underneath, the usual Jaguar charms and drawbacks abide. The XJ-SC’s long, suggestive hoodline houses a huge V-12 engine whose horsepower proves a suit­able match for the motor’s broad-shoul­dered appearance. Just as important, though it is blessed with the bloodlines of its forebears, today’s XJ may be exhibiting new signs of civility and respectability. Ac­cording to the factory, quality control is vastly improved and great strides have been made in reliability. Maintenance re­quirements are lower than ever. The XJ’s fuel economy has never been much to write home about—we’re dealing with two tons of high performance here—but the Michael May lean-burn combustion cham­bers, introduced in 1982, do help advance the cause of efficiency. EPA city economy holds the fort at 13 mpg, and our own mixed use returned 14 mpg. Luckily for Jaguar’s reputation as a pro­ducer of road burners, Michael May’s sculpturing of the V-12’s heads returns much more than improved fuel economy. With a whopping 11.5:1 compression ratio burning beneath its single-overhead-cam heart, the 5.3-liter whirs out an ef­fortless 262 horsepower. Operating on super-unleaded fuel, the engine adroitly belies the mass of machinery within, never whimpering on the way to its impressive 6500-rpm redline. This V-12 remains the basis of Jaguar’s mid-engined IMSA GTP Batmobile, and every time you step into the throttle hard enough to force an auto­matic kickdown, you are reminded why the V-12 represented the ultimate roadgoing engine for so many years. When production of the old ragtop ceased, however, some of the wonder went out of Jaguars. We need not have worried, it turns out as long as there is an England, there will be ragtops on the horizon. Ragtops are Great Britain’s nose-thumb­ing gesture at the sodden skies that often sulk there. Logical people laboring under such murk would never fall in love with convertibles, but of course logic and the British are often at odds. Basically, Brits are tickled pink anytime their beloved ragtops are close at hand. Over the past few years, Americans have grown happier to have Jag at hand. As is often said, much of the credit goes to John Egan, Jaguar’s chairman and chief execu­tive officer, who signed on in 1980 and led the company’s resurgence. Sales in Ameri­ca alone soared from 3029 cars in 1980 to 18,000 in 1984. Publicly owned for the past two years, Jaguar enjoys continued sales-and-service success in the States. We snapped up more than half the 1985 pro­duction run of 38,000 cars, and the XJ-S coupe has broken sales records here for three years running. Mechanically, the Cabriolet is identical to the XJ-S coupe. Structurally, however, the convertible has been injected with new beef. The roof’s framework houses two sub­stantial steel rods that make a minor con­tribution to stiffness, but the major beefing comes from a boxed section that takes the place of the coupe’s rear seats. Intended primarily to offset the torsional stiff­ness lost when the full roof was eliminated, the box wears handsome carpeting and houses two lockable storage bins. Trimmed with luggage slats and a restraint bar, the box lands ready to support any traveling cases, haversacks, miniature steamer trunks, or other travel­ing caboodle carried in the cabin, but defi­nitely not any plus-two passengers. In terms of their structural contribution, the reinforcements don’t quite make up for the skylights in the roof. The lengthy Jag­uar exhibits a few shakes and shudders not found in, say, the stubby Porsche 911 Cab­riolet, though the Jag is certainly far from the shakiest pop-top around. We only wish it were as easy to open up as the others. In our test car, the knob intended to release the framed rear roof sec­tion almost didn’t: it proved nearly impos­sible to turn. And the trim, tight boot stubbornly resisted the snapping-down operation. Inside, the new roofline nips off a bit of the coupe’s headroom, but comfort seems to suffer little, if at all. The seat’s lum­bar padding has been improved, and the subtle shaping of their bolsters delivers better support than their flatness suggests. Delicious-smelling leather upholstery, al­though often a slippery hindrance to stay­ing behind the wheel, in this case has suffi­cient texture to assist the bolsters in keeping you in place. The steering wheel is also covered in reasonably grippy leather, but the rim is too skinny to provide a genuinely secure grip. Driver confidence also suffers because of the distraction created by the XJ’s scat­tered control layout. The main on/off/resume cruise-control button sits obtusely on the console just behind the shifter, while the “set” button is tucked in the lip of the turn-signal lever, far to the left. In another lapse of logic, the climate system’s controls are split by the radio. Worse, our SC’s ventilation fan quit, the oil-pressure gauge threw fits of erratic readings and the roof panels sprang a leak when we test­ed the weather sealing by running the car through an automatic wash—not good omens for Jaguar’s recently improved rep­utation. (Jaguar responds that our test car was built as a pilot model—even though the Cabriolet has been on the U.K. market for two years—and that the top panel should fit better in U.S. production models.) Having grumbled our gripes, a number of niceties stand out, too. A handy trip computer provides pertinent poop on time, distance, average speed, and fuel use. And beneath the computer sits the head unit of an Alpine sound system, whose sweet musicality, to our ears, ranks high among today’s factory-supplied au­dio systems. It is said that the British don’t like music, but they like the noise it makes. You could have fooled us: this system easi­ly and smoothly delivers music, not noise. The radio’s layout is good, the AM performance is better than most, and the FM sec­tion sounds fine. The cassette player’s performance, with tape recorded on a good deck from records or compact discs, abso­lutely caresses the ears. Given the XJ-SC’s lowish wind noise (for a convertible), Jag­uar should add a CD player, because plen­ty of musical detail comes through without strain even at high speeds.Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverWe’re talking 135-mph potential. T00 bad the three-speed automatic and the tall gearing take the sting out of the V-12 off the line. In this price category, a four- or five-speed gearbox should be aboard to liven things up. Moving off isn’t slow, but as our 8.4-second 0-to-60 time suggests, the beast doesn’t bust loose until the smooth, long-legged automatic finally lets the revs get up t0 business. The big four-wheel discs, ventilated in front, turn out to be strong points, smoothly snubbing this 4016-pound pil­grim’s progress without fade, though stops from 70 mph require a longish 213 feet. Squeezing down into tight corners from high speeds under hard braking creates no fuss whatever. As you feather of the pedal, unloading the nose, the steering takes up the transition as calmly as warm milk puts you to sleep. In the harsh light of skidpad testing, the XJ’s all-independent, coil-sprung suspen­sion and comparatively slim wheels and tire limit roadholding to 0.73 g. But the car’s behavior in the real world is satisfying enough to appeal to the buyers Jaguar has in mind. The shift lever looks delicate and feels clunky, and the throttle stiffly resists forays into downshift territory, but some­how the lasting impression is that of a basi­cally blissful drivetrain. Some testers, how­ever, feel it is too blissful and yearn for a more emhusiastic response from within. The XJ-SC’s handling follows British practice in providing light, benign rack­-and-pinion power steering, plus tire grip that feels more sporting than that of the typical American luxury sportster­—though not as sporting as the fine bite and firm bump-buffering provided by Germa­ny’s hard-running machines. On the other hand, the Jaguar provides levels of ride comfort that German engineers express little interest in supplying, and a degree of suspension control that is rare in Ameri­can-made machinery. Released by the throttle to do your bidding, the Jag hurls at your senses an orderly world, all veddy British, the V-12’s thunder insistent but distant, pleasantly muted even as you scis­sor across sweeping corners in a rush. The sensational engine gathers the car’s haunches to spew you onto the following straights in great, lubricious spendings of energy. If you have the patience to listen for the distant thunder, Jaguar rumbles the language of power, and you can hear it in your bones.What your gleeful senses total up may equal the perfect answer for the high-­dollar grand-touring market. The XJ-SC Cabriolet is just basic enough to provide deep thrills, but more than subtle enough to cuddle with. Its behavioral envelope will probably suit many of those concerned with finding proper conveyances for their golden years of grand touring. As long as their fingers are still strong enough to pop the top, that is. As a halfway step toward true open-air motoring, the XJ-SC Cabriolet proves two things: First, major amounts of sunshine can be admitted to the interior of the XJ without sacrificing any of the car’s basic goodness. And second, although the XJ­-SC is a noble and carefully engineered al­ternative to a steel-roofed coupe, it’s no substitute at all for a true convertible.CounterpointI’m afraid there’s nothing but disap­pointment in the new XJ-SC for a thrill seeker like myself. Aside from Jaguar’s unconventional means of letting the great outdoors in, time has stood still for this lowrider.I’ve long hoped that Jaguar would firm the XJ-S up into a real sports ma­chine, but, alas, that was not to be. The XJ-SC still uses the pillowy suspension settings that make the XJ6 such a joy­ous rider—but it’s way too loose­-jointed for a spirited two-seater. When I call on a hard corner, the body makes like a yo-yo. No change here. Then there’s the mighty V-12, which feels all bottled up at the low end. It’s needed a good four-speed automatic to set it free for ages. It’s been reported that Jaguar has im­proved its quality control. Unfortunate­ly, our test car suffered from a balky folding top, a climate control that went belly-up, and a bad case of the stalls. When I slide into a low-slung, broad-­shouldered V-12 sports car, I expect a kick in the pants. The XJ-SC may be fine for wealthy people twenty years my senior, but it’s far too much of a gentle­man for me. —Rich Ceppos It’s hard to rationalize a car like the Jag­uar XJ-SC. For far less money, there are any number of cars that perform as well as or better than this machine. Few, however, can match the Jag’s individ­uality and panache. In a time of look-alike car designs, the XJ-SC is a welcome break from the norm. It is leaner and swoopier than its photos suggest; at times its look is al­most exotic. Of course, as with almost any exotic car, one pays a price for good looks and distinction. The Jag’s seats are limited in their range of adjustment and offer little support, many of its er­gonomic features leave much to be de­sired, and our test car suffered a num­ber of nagging failures. In compensation, however, the XJ­-SC offers a smooth and strong engine, effortless cruising at any speed, and a ride that is almost unsurpassed in sup­pleness. Add to these virtues the car’s handsome shape, and this Jaguar be­comes an inviting alternative for some­one who can afford to indulge in its unique blend of individuality. —Arthur St. AntoineIf your idea of automotive luxury is cen­tered on a profligate use of the world’s resources, the Jaguar XJ-SC is the car for you. A mid-sixties, full-size Ameri­can sedan is a model of efficiency com­pared with the Coventry cat. I can’t think of another two-seater with such a large and massive body. Neither can I recall a car that extracts so little perfor­mance from such a large and lavishly conceived powerplant. To be sure, the XJ-SC goes about its business quietly and smoothly, leading one to conclude that passenger com­fort was the goal of its extravagant de­sign. However, the absence of such creature comforts as power-adjustable seats and a power-operated roof belies that conclusion. That leaves sheer con­spicuous consumption as the main thrust of this car, and that’s just too anachronistic a concept, even for a lux­ury cruiser, in 1986. —Csaba CsereArrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1986 Jaguar XJ-SC CabrioletVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door convertible
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $43,500/$43,500
ENGINESOHC V-12, aluminum block and heads, electronic fuel injectionDisplacement: 326 in3, 5344 cm3Power: 262 hp @ 5000 rpmTorque: 290 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION3-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/trailing armsBrakes, F/R: 11.1-in vented disc/10.3-in discTires: Pirelli P5215/70VR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 102.0 inLength: 191.7 inWidth: 70.6 inHeight: 47.8 inPassenger Volume: 51 ft3Trunk Volume: 16 ft3Curb Weight: 4016 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.4 sec100 mph: 22.0 sec1/4-Mile: 16.3 sec @ 88 mph120 mph: 39.8 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.8 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 6.1 secTop Speed: 135 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 213 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.73 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 14 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 13/17 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Rain pelted my face and the wind whipped through my jacket as I crouched on the frozen soil next to the Winnebago eRV2. The electric camper-van prototype was my home for the night at the Portage Lake State Campground in Michigan’s Waterloo Recreation Area, and the vehicle had just informed me that the 15.0-kWh “house” battery—which powers accessories such as the interior lighting, climate control, and refrigerator—had stopped charging. The system predicted that if I continued consuming energy at the current rate, the battery would be dead by the early morning. As I crawled around in the dark, checking the connections to the electrical hookup, my neighbor told me the power was out across the entire campsite. This was a problem. While other campers began using their gas-powered tow vehicles to run their appliances, I had no such luxury. The eRV2—which follows the 2022 e-RV concept and previews a production electric RV—is based on the Ford E-Transit and uses that vehicle’s stock 68.0-kWh battery. Michael Simari|Car and DriverRange ConstraintsWhile the chassis battery can transfer juice to the so-called house battery, the trip out to the campsite made me hesitant to sacrifice precious driving miles. Even sticking to 60 mph in the right lane, I still drained nearly half of the charge on the approximately 40-mile trip to the campsite. Ford quotes a 108-mile range for the high-roof E-Transit, and Winnebago says its testing revealed an average range of 120 miles. But the eRV2 traveled just 70 miles at 70 mph—we couldn’t do our standard highway test at 75 mph as the Winnebago tops out at 74 mph—and the dashboard readout never displayed more than 90 miles during our time with the vehicle, possibly due in part to the cold weather.Related StoriesWinnebago claims the eRV2 can boondock—run completely off the grid—for up to seven days, but that requires keeping the climate control off. With the overnight temperature dipping down to 30 degrees, that didn’t sound like a good option. The eRV2 also has roof-mounted solar panels—supplemented by foldable panels stowed in the cargo hold for a total output up to 900 watts—to help extend battery life, but the gloomy skies nullified their usefulness.Hoping to preserve the remaining driving range, I conserved energy by dimming the lights and lowering the heat, keeping a close eye on the charge monitor while cooking dinner on the eRV2’s portable induction cooktop. Those small adjustments eked out enough juice for at least an extra day, but luckily the campground’s power returned a few hours later and electrons began flowing back into both batteries through the E-Transit’s 11.3-kW onboard charger. By morning, the house battery was full, and the chassis battery was back to 75 percent. Still, the outage showed that the eRV2’s off-the-grid capabilities are severely limited by inclement weather and the disappointing range. Michael Simari|Car and DriverWinnebago acknowledges that last obstacle, which is a result of an electric van market that’s focused on local deliveries rather than long range. Customer surveys revealed a desire to break up their road trips into three-hour chunks—with half-hour stops to rest—and Winnebago believes it needs about 200 miles of range to achieve that. While the original e-RV concept used an aftermarket powertrain, Winnebago now appears committed to a factory setup, so production will likely wait until the next-generation E-Transit launches—reportedly late this year with a target of 175 miles of range.A new platform hopefully will bring quicker charge times too. We couldn’t perform our normal 10 to 90 percent charging test on the eRV2, but anecdotally, the DC fast-charging capability was a bit disappointing. We knew it would take a long time to top up from 80 percent all the way to 100 before heading to Portage Lake, but we needed all the juice, and that took an hour and 17 minutes. The next day it took half an hour to go from 49 to 80 percent, with the charge rate peaking around 73 kW. Ford claims a 115-kW peak fast-charge rate for the E-Transit and, as is typical, the peak is only achievable when the battery is at a low state of charge. For context, a 2022 Hyundai Ioniq 5—one of the fastest-charging EVs—took 33 minutes to complete the charging test, peaking at 231 kW, while a 2022 Chevy Bolt EUV—among the worst performers—needed an hour and 24 minutes to hit 90 percent, maxing out at 53 kW. Driving the eRV2While the range and charging need improvement, the rear-mounted electric motor’s 266 horsepower and 317 pound-feet of torque make the eRV2 perky enough to easily keep up with traffic. The high seating position, expansive windshield, and sizable mirrors provide excellent visibility, and the accurate steering and tight turning radius make maneuvering in tight spaces easier than expected.The ride is truck-like, with the semi-trailing-arm rear suspension dishing out harsh jolts over bumps, although it smooths out at a highway pace. The lack of an engine note makes wind and road noise more apparent, and big bumps produce loud rattles from the cabin behind. The eRV2 doesn’t feature one-pedal driving—energy regeneration on liftoff is minimal and cannot be adjusted. Michael Simari|Car and DriverComfy CampingUpon reaching camp, it was easy to settle into the smartly laid-out cabin, which packs many amenities into a small space. The refrigerator and sink are complemented by the portable cooktop that neatly stashes away in a pull-out side table, while another table folds up behind the driver’s seat, which swivels 180 degrees. The bathroom includes a removable cassette toilet and a shower. Setting up the bed takes minimal effort—a slatted wooden support slides out and the mattress simply unfolds. The production version will have Wi-Fi, but the router wasn’t operational in the prototype. Still, the well-lit cabin—the brightness and color of each bank of lights can be individually adjusted—allowed me to disconnect from screens and read a book. You can monitor the eRV2 via the center screen and an accompanying phone app. The display shows battery levels, freshwater and gray-water tank levels, and refrigerator and cabin temperature. It also allows control of functions such as lighting, the water heater, and climate control. Some issues arose with the app’s Bluetooth connectivity and the accuracy of the tank readouts, but Winnebago promises to iron out those kinks. In the morning I cooked breakfast outdoors, thanks to a table that lifts up when the side door is open, revealing strategically placed outlets to power the cooktop. The setup lets you enjoy the surrounding nature while still providing easy access to the fridge. Strangely, the eRV2 is missing a trash can, and the hooks behind the couches aren’t exactly in an ideal spot for hanging a trash bag. The water tanks could also use more capacity. One night of cooking, washing dishes, and a brief shower used nearly the entire freshwater tank. Winnebago aims to launch the production version next year. It will carry a price premium over the company’s gas-powered Class B RVs, which run between $140,000 and $245,000. Winnebago needs to extract more miles out of the powertrain, but the eRV2 otherwise nailed its mission by forcing me to disconnect, slow down, and appreciate the scenery with its comfortable cabin and relaxing driving experience.Michael Simari|Car and DriverAssociate News EditorCaleb Miller began blogging about cars at 13 years old, and he realized his dream of writing for a car magazine after graduating from Carnegie Mellon University and joining the Car and Driver team. He loves quirky and obscure autos, aiming to one day own something bizarre like a Nissan S-Cargo, and is an avid motorsports fan. More

From the June 1975 issue of Car and Driver.There is an excitement-generating quality about American Motors’ new Pacer that calls to mind the days when we spent most of the fall frothing at Detroit’s new cars as they appeared one by one in our hometown showrooms. The Pacer is lovable, and you feel an instinctive urge to take it home­—like a rubber ducky, to put in your bathtub to play with. Detroit has finally issued a car to which people are reacting.The Pacer was supposedly designed from the inside out, the theory being that claustrophobic Americans who have thus far resisted small cars with small interiors will go along with a car that is essentially an intermediate with the ends lopped off. If early indications are to be relied upon, the theory is sound. The car seems destined to sell well, if for no other reason than that the buying public seems ready for a new approach to motoring. This the Pacer is. Regarded as a be­ginning step in the proper direction, the Pacer is as encourag­ing an offering as Detroit has produced in some time. For once, an automobile advertising campaign is telling the unvarnished truth: A large man is completely comfortable in the driver’s seat or as a front-seat passenger. There is ample legroom, and were it not for the fact that your left knee comes to rest against the window crank, matters would leave little to be desired. The steering wheel is well placed and provides the driver with the proper amount of elbow crook; every con­trol is not only within reach but also visible and readable. The same big man can survive in a condition approaching comfort in the rear seat, too. Average-size people will find the rear seat at least as comfortable and roomy as those to be found in the new “precision-size” cars. Compared to the rear compartment of such cars as the Chevy Monza and Ford Mustang II, the Pacer appears to have the proportions of a ballroom. Headroom is the only dimension lacking, but in light of its other benefits, the rear area is still a minor triumph. More 1970s Cars and Automotive FailsInterior finish in the Pacer is attractive, if rather utilitarian, and consists largely of molded plastic panels. The dashboard sits well away from the seats, lending reinforcement to the already considerable atmosphere of spaciousness. The front seats are large, well-proportioned, and sturdy; the rear seats, like all rear seats, are certainly not as comfortable but are more than serviceable—certainly an improvement over the average small-car rear seat. With a body area that’s almost one-third glass, visibility is one of the car’s strongest suits. Looking at the innovative Pacer silhouette, it’s easy to con­jure up visions of scooting through traffic like a family-size Honda Civic. Sadly, this is not the case. There are two en­gines available in the Pacer, both inline-sixes (232 and 258 cubic inches). If you de­mand head-snapping acceleration, nei­ther is equal to the task. If, however, you are content to motor along in a sane and economical fashion, all is not lost. The Pacer will handle this kind of service easily, if unspectacularly. But it is slow enough to make it all too obvious that the fun, the outright enjoy­ment, its peppy appearance promises simply is not there. Certainly not with the larger engine and the Chrysler-built three-speed automatic. With this power­train, the Pacer took 20.4 seconds to ne­gotiate the quarter-mile, attaining a speed of only 65.8 mph. The Pacer’s steering, handling, and ride are traditionally American. Rack­-and-pinion steering has been made a part of the Pacer’s standard equipment, but it has been damped to the point of numbness. The car’s front cross-mem­ber is damped and insulated also, both from the body and from the engine, to help lower the noise level. If ride quality concerns you, you will find the Pacer ex­cellent. While there is admitted insulation from the road, the sensation is not at all like a wallowing full-size car with mushy suspension—it is like a good, well-ordered intermediate car. The Pacer’s handling suffers a bit from its weight (3432 pounds) and its high center of gravity, which contribute to the car’s pronounced understeer in low-speed cornering. The short wheel­base and wide track do, however, aid high-speed maneuvering. The Pacer’s braking could stand im­provement, again because of the car’s high gravity center and heaviness. There is an alarming amount of dive under hard braking, giving you the impression that the front bumper is about to tuck under and roll up. The Pacer required 205 feet to stop from 70 mph. By comparison, a Mazda stops in 192 feet while the Mus­tang II, another middleweight, takes 213 feet of pavement. The car appears set up for optimum braking with a full load, which ought to be reconsidered in light of prevailing motoring habits. With too much rear brake bias, the rear wheels tend to lock. More bias on the front discs would probably help. Here’s what to consider if the Pacer personality appeals to you: You’ll get a car made largely from proven compo­nents; a car that you can enter or exit without braining yourself; a car that you can sit in and see out of with ease and enjoyment; a car that is pleasing to oper­ate and offers reasonable economy. Granted, you will not get eye-popping acceleration and sports-car handling, but you will get a car that is a new design representing a new approach to Ameri­can motoring. The small car for the per­son who doesn’t like small cars may at last be in our midst. Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1975 AMC Pacer D/LVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $3404/$5233Options: air conditioning, $399.95; D/L package, $289; automatic transmission, $239.99; AM/FM stereo 8-track radio, $239; announcement package 2 (front sway bar, steel belted radial tires, power front disc brakes), $203.45; announcement package 1 (tinted windows, power steering), $139.00; styled road wheels, $85.05; 258-cubic inch 1-barrel engine; $69.00; rear window washer-wiper, $49.95; visibility group, $49.95; light group, $34.95; door vent window, $29.95
ENGINEpushrod inline-6, iron block and headDisplacement: 258 in3, 4230 cm3Power: 95 hp @ 3050 rpmTorque: 179 lb-ft @ 2100 rpm 
TRANSMISSION3-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arm/rigid axleBrakes, F/R: 10.8-in vented disc/9.0-in drumTires: Goodyear Custom polysteel radial
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 100.0 inLength: 171.5 inWidth: 77.0 inHeight: 53.6 inCurb Weight: 3432 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS30 mph: 4.4 sec60 mph: 16.2 sec1/4-Mile: 20.4 sec @ 66 mph80 mph: 37.7 secTop Speed (observed): 84 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 205 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.80 g  
EPA FUEL ECONOMY13-17 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDCar and driverCar and driver Lettermark logoContributing 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

“Reset your trip odometers when you get to the steer standing on the small hill next to the trail,” came the call over the radio. You’d think that using a potentially mobile animal as a waypoint would be an unwise move, but the longhorn was on his territory. He stood stock-still (as only stock can do) and stared balefully as the queue of 2023 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 pickups filed respectfully past.Once clear, we dialed our ZR2 into Baja mode, put the hammer down, and sent stones and dirt flying. This was our second day attacking the highly variable and uneven terrain of the Best in the Desert series’s Las Vegas-to-Reno off-road race course, and the new ZR2 was completely in its element. Plumes of dust erupted from the truck’s haunches as we careened along the various rocky, silty, and dusty two-track trails and wash-bottoms, and we found ourselves chortling when the lead truck called out the occasional “good graded road” that made us question the applicability of all three words.play iconThe triangle icon that indicates to playThe previous-generation Colorado ZR2 would not have fared nearly as well on this terrain, particularly at this pace. Sure, it also had off-road tires, decent clearance, front and rear locking differentials, and durable Multimatic DSSV spool-valve dampers, but the underlying Colorado on which it was based was not great source material. The new 2023 Chevrolet Colorado is demonstrably better in almost every respect, and that makes for a significantly more capable and credible ZR2 off-roader. More on the Colorado PickupAs it turns out, the Colorado’s 2.9-inch wheelbase stretch looms large here. GM essentially moved the front axle forward by that amount relative to the front door hinge line and nearby body mount, and that created space for much larger tires. The last-gen ZR2’s 31-inch rubber looks puny next to this year’s standard 33-inch Goodyear Wrangler Territory Mud Terrains, but the magnitude of this change will also allow for the fitment of 35-inch tires on the ZR2 Bison prototype that Chevy teased at trail’s end. It’s enough to bring a Tacoma owner to tears, because the dubious “body mount chop” is necessary to fit similar-size tires on that truck. Larger tires allow the new ZR2 to roll over cross-grain gullies that would snag smaller tires, and the extra inch of tire radius also amounts to one inch of the new truck’s 1.8 inches of extra ground clearance, now 10.7 inches instead of 8.9 inches. The rest comes from a suspension lift, but it’s more than rejiggered springs. There’s also a significant gain in suspension travel; the front’s total increases from 8.7 to 9.9 inches, and the entire surplus has been allocated to the compression side. In back, total travel increases from 9.8 to 11.6 inches, with compression and rebound sharing the bounty. Extra travel equals less bottoming out and an enhanced ability to progressively absorb uneven terrain, but it also leads to better crawling articulation on boulders—and our RTI ramp. Up front, the approach angle improves from 30.0 degrees to a healthy 38.3 degrees because the transformative wheelbase stretch was offset by a similar reduction in front overhang to keep the truck’s overall length in check. The front fascia retains the ZR2-signature cutouts ahead of the front tires to make the approach angle in that crucial area even more aggro, but they’re more cleanly integrated into the overall design because less cutting is necessary when you have a stubbier nose to work with.Additional significant changes are found in back. The last ZR2’s lower rear shock mounts were positioned extremely inboard and low down. You had to cope with three points of potential contact when straddling rocks, not just the differential in the middle. Normal 2023 Colorados position them closer to the leaf springs, but they’re still inboard. The wide-track ZR2 has the right answer: Its rear Multimatic DSSV dampers now live outboard of the leaf springs and the frame rails, and the lower mount is tucked up tight against the brake backing plate, like on a Tacoma. What’s more, the spare tire is positioned some 2.5 inches higher and no longer looks like someone forgot to crank it all the way up, letting it drag ass through ditches.The new-to-the-Colorado turbocharged 2.7-liter inline-four engine was a welcome surprise, because it pulls strong and sounds powerful–especially in Baja mode, where the eight-speed automatic transmission willingly holds onto gears under power and downshifts when braking. The ZR2’s high-output tune makes 310 horsepower versus the old V-6’s 308 horses, but torque is the big differentiator, with 430 pound-feet of the stuff on tap at 3000 rpm versus the old model’s measly 275 pound-feet at 4000 revs. No one should mourn the discontinued diesel, which only gave up 369 pound-feet and a meager 181 horsepower and saddled you with a six-speed automatic. This new singular ZR2 powertrain is miles better than both predecessors in all respects, and its EPA rating of 18 mpg combined (17 city/19 highway) is 1 mpg better across the board than last year’s V6.The Baja mode we relied on is exclusive to the ZR2, and you can engage it in two- or four-wheel drive. In addition to the more aggressive shift action, Baja also runs with traction and stability control off, which let us hang the tail out and rally the truck through tighter bends. The same aggressive approach in the more straightforward Off-Road mode leads to frequent ESC interventions, less fun, and stinky rear brakes. Terrain mode, which caps the truck’s speed at 50 mph, is an exceptional off-road creep mode with one-pedal drive action that seems more at home tiptoeing over rocks than it does on any EV. Tow/Haul mode is here, along with an integrated trailer brake controller, befitting a ZR2 good for 6000 pounds instead of last year’s 5000 pounds.Inside, the ZR2 is clearly better than its predecessor, looking more bespoke than parts-bin. Like the other trims, the ZR2 features the same 11.3-inch touchscreen with Google built-in, along with logically arrayed climate controls. Its stitched-dash treatment looks better than the Z71’s padding, and the faux-camo trim insert is attractive. The seats feel full-size, not seven-eighths scale. But the indoors is also where the ZR2’s biggest flaws reside. The rental-spec dash and door-panel graining and gloss make no attempt to hide the truck’s hard-plastic composition. The headlight controls are on the touchscreen, albeit with a clairvoyant “Auto” setting and ever-present access icon. Too much usable stuff is buried in said touchscreen, such as the trip-meter reset we went hunting for when we drew level with the bull. All told, the new Colorado ZR2 is something its predecessor was not: an extremely well-rounded and capable off-road mid-size truck that performs at a high level and wants for little. That it costs just $1600 more than last year’s model is frankly remarkable. The Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro is no longer a match, and the 2024 Tacoma is going to have to make a giant step of its own to keep up. What about Ford’s upcoming Ranger and Ranger Raptor? Time will tell, but there’s an even more capable ZR2 Bison waiting in the wings.Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2Vehicle Type: front-engine, rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door pickup
PRICE
Base ZR2, $48,295; Desert Boss Special Edition, $58,285
ENGINEturbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 166 in3, 2727 cm3Power: 310 hp @ 5600 rpmTorque: 430 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 131.4 inLength: 212.7 inWidth: 76.3 inHeight: 81.8 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 58/43 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 5000 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 6.5 sec1/4-Mile: 14.0 secTop Speed: 100 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 18/17/19 mpgTechnical EditorDan Edmunds was born into the world of automobiles, but not how you might think. His father was a retired racing driver who opened Autoresearch, a race-car-building shop, where Dan cut his teeth as a metal fabricator. Engineering school followed, then SCCA Showroom Stock racing, and that combination landed him suspension development jobs at two different automakers. His writing career began when he was picked up by Edmunds.com (no relation) to build a testing department. More

From the July 1982 issue of Car and Driver.When Volvos first rolled ashore in these United States just over 25 years ago, they were enthusiastically received because they reminded Americans of American cars. They looked like ’47 Fords, had the same sort of guts, and ran faster. There was an American temperament about the Volvo, albeit about 10 years behind what Detroit was doing in the marshmallow years of the late Fif­ties, and we Yanks welcomed Volvos in a way we never did the Saabs, Peugeots, English Fords, and Mercedes-Benzes of the time.With the new 760GLE, you might say that Volvo is returning to its American ways. From the sedan’s squarish appear­ance, you might even say it’s the Ameri­can car of the future, Volvo having tak­en GM’s creased-and-folded look one step further in the evolution. Could this be what GM will do next? And some would say it’s an improvement over the present A-body design because the Volvo is consistently sharp-cornered while the abruptness of the Celebrity-6000-Ciera-Century roofline is not faithfully continued in the lower body. In any case, if you turn the Volvo side­ways, you see the same ramp nose, stiff rear-window angle, and high tail of the GM intermediates, and this look is rap­idly becoming as familiar to Americans as the molded–Jell-O profile of the ’47 Ford was in Volvo’s early days. The new Volvo is also virtually identi­cal in size to the new GM A-body, which puts it right in the mainstream of Amer­ican automobiles. Its length and width are comparable to the A-body dimen­sions within about an inch, though the Volvo is 2.7 inches taller and has 4.1 inches more wheelbase. The extra dis­tance between the wheels keep the rear wheelhouses from biting into the cor­ners of the rear seat. This is a downsized Volvo, 4.0 inches shorter and approximately 75 pounds lighter than the GLE it replaces, yet it’s still as big as—and a bit heavier than—the lat­est American intermediates. Early Volvos were relatively small cars; to­day’s are not. Early Volvos made no pretension to luxury either. The 760GLE is a top-of­-the-line model, the best Volvo’s got, a direct competitor with the bottom end of the Mercedes spectrum in Europe. Here it’s meant to tiptoe right up to the $20,000 mark (prices have yet to be announced) with a full load of equipment, including leather seats, climate control, AM/FM/cassette stereo, power win­dows, power sunroof, cruise control, central locking system, bun-warmer seats, etc., etc. That may or may not be your idea of royal treatment, but it sure leaves the ersatz-Ford days behind. By the way, this new model replaces only the top-of-the-line CLE in the Volvo lineup, leaving the rest of the old­-style range intact. Significantly, the 760 is also the only Volvo bereft of mud flaps, which could limit its appeal to traditionalists. More on Volvos of the PastPeeling off the mud flaps is said to be an aerodynamic consideration. As a by­product, it further Americanizes (per­haps de-Swedes is more accurate) the appearance. But once you look under the skin, the 760 is still very much a Volvo. There has been no following of the Americans to front drive. A longitu­dinal engine and a solid rear axle make up the drivetrain, just as before. There are two engine choices for America: the all-aluminum 2.8-liter V-6 that Volvo has been sharing with Renault and Peugeot for years, and the 2.4-li­ter inline-six diesel from Volkswagen, used by Volvo since 1980 but newly turbocharged for the 760. The turbo pumps output to 106 horsepower at 4800 rpm, making this a peppy little unit and one of the quickest diesels going. Transmis­sion choices are limited to an automatic with the V-6, modernized with a button on the side of the shift handle to summon or reject the overdrive as the driv­er sees fit. The diesel can be backed up with either a three-speed automatic or a four-speed-plus-overdrive manual. We sampled some of each in our test­ing: a manual diesel camouflaged by the older 260GLE body, and a 760GLE with a Euro-spec V-6 and an automat­ic. The diesel was about the right weight for an American-spec 760, and it was a fine runner, clocking 60 mph in 11.8 seconds. First gear is on the short side for anything but drag racing or trailer pulling; starting in second works fine in normal driving. Also, the turbo has considerable lag in routine traffic unless you keep the engine buzzing. But you always know when to expect results, because you can hear the compressor spooling up like some old J-47 under the hood. The gas version was even quicker at 9.2 seconds to 60 mph, but this would be a very optimistic estimate of what to expect from a U.S.-spec version, since the car was down at least 60 pounds from the real thing and the engine was somewhat stronger. The automatic is sort of fun, however; it shifts firmly, both up and down, with none of the dithering between gears that we find on some of the allegedly more sophisticat­ed boxes. The O.D. button is really only a lockout, however, allowing the driver to prevent the transmission from auto­matically selecting cruising gear. For ef­ficiency’s sake it’s probably the best course to leave that button unpushed. A quick look at the suspension finds MacPherson struts in front and an axle with trailing arms in back, the usual Volvo stuff. But in fact there are many minor revisions. Positive camber has been reduced to zero from 0.8 degree in front, and caster has been increased to 5.0 from 3.5 degrees, which should give the front tires more cornering bite and more feel in the steering. Alloy wheels with greater offset (in the direction that narrows the track) reduce the scrub ra­dius to 28 mm from 37 mm. This still produces a positive radius (the tire con­tact patch outboard of a line through the upper and lower strut pivots), as op­posed to the negative radius now fash­ionable on front-drive cars, but it should improve stability when one side of the car brakes across a slipperier sur­face than the other. Other changes in­clude more accurate Ackermann angles and a rack-and-pinion gear mounted very low in the car. The payoff here is that the gear can be contained within the front crossmember for protection. Moreover, the slack that develops from wear in the gear will have minimal effect at the wheels. Notable in the rear are a pair of axle-­stabilizing torque links that attach to a huge bracket that, in turn, is rubber-iso­lated from the body. This is designed to improve ride without sacrificing control of the axle. There are also height-level­ing shock absorbers. How does all this reengineering feel to the driver? Fine. No problems. The 760 still acts like a Volvo, although it’s a bit crisper in the steering. And body-roll angles seem better managed. But this newest of Volvos is no Ford in the ride department. It’s decidedly direct in the way it transmits chuckholes, expansion strips, and individual pebbles to the seat of your pants. Real U.S.-spec cars will have low-rolling-resistance Pirelli P8s in the 185/65R-15 size; there were 195/60 P6s on the Euro car we drove. This will change the ride some, but there is little chance it will become plush. Any plushness that you feel will be a product of the interior. Very likely, you will not be disappointed. Leather has a way of winning over almost everyone, and the 760’s broad horizontal pleats give it a sumptuous appearance (velour is standard on the Euro model). The front seats are typically Volvo, with ad­justments for backrest angle, height, and lumbar stiffness. The cushions are somewhat softer and less supportive than those of the old GLE, which are as good as car seats come. Some of us liked the new seats less. The 760’s rear seats are magnificent by any standard. They are extremely high-chair-height without a doubt­ and remarkably firm. The fact that the gas tank and rear suspension are right underneath has a lot to do with this. Nonetheless, though you are positioned high, where you can see forward over the driver’s shoulder, you still have plenty of head and knee room even if you’re a six-footer. The undersides of the front buckets have been scooped out for shoe clearance, so you can put your feet well forward. Everything is copacetic back there. It’s not bad in front either. The low beltline eliminates the confining feeling of old Volvo interiors. The driving posi­tion is good. The dash is much like that of past Volvos, but more complex. Now there are five dials in the instrument cluster instead of three, and we are aware of more grilles in the vent system, creases in the molded padding, and knock-out panels for yet-to-be-added switches—more complex but not bewil­dering. There’s a continuity of style here that past Volvo owners will recog­nize immediately. We’d like to see a few improvements in the 760. The body of this particular car is a bit clattery, and wind rush is conspicuous around the A-pillars. The ride doesn’t quite seem up to 1983 stan­dards either. But perhaps these items will be less objectionable when the official U.S. models roll in this fall. In any case, this new Volvo is not a car of surprises. Like its predecessors, it eschews the trendy in favor of a com­mon-sense approach to car building. That theme has attracted a pretty sub­stantial throng of buyers over the years, and if any of them have $20,000, it should continue to work with the 760. Arrow pointing downArrow pointing downSpecificationsSpecifications
1982 Volvo 760GLEVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICEAs Tested: $20,000 (est.)
ENGINEturbocharged SOHC diesel inline-6, iron block and aluminum headDisplacement: 145 in3, 2383 cm3Power: 106 hp @ 4800 rpmTorque: 139 lb-ft @ 2400 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/trailing armsBrakes, F/R: 10.2-in disc/11.1-in discTires: Pirelli P6195/60R-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 109.1inLength: 188.0 inWidth: 68.9 inHeight: 55.5 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 50/43 ft3Trunk Volume: 17 ft3
C/D TEST RESULTS30 mph: 3.6 sec60 mph: 11.8 sec1/4-Mile: 18.3 sec @ 73 mph80 mph: 23.0 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 15.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 13.8 secBraking, 70–0 mph: 191 ft 
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 32/29/37 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More