Car Reviews

From the December 1993 issue of Car and Driver.What can you say about a car that weighs nearly 5000 pounds, costs almost $150,000, and barely seats four tall occupants? If you’re one of the more affluent members of our society, you can say, “I’ll have mine in smoke silver.” After all, if you have that kind of money to spend on an exclusive monument to over-engineered excess, that’s your prerogative.The rest of us will simply look at the car’s broad face with its weird lidless eyes and that giant star in its mouth and con­sole ourselves with the knowledge that this time perhaps Mercedes went too far. But we also must admit that this S-class coupe (to be rebadged as the S600 with no major changes from the 1994 model year onward) is no flabby barge with sloppy responses, and that there’s something very appealing about rolling down the highway in this solidly built chunk of German craftsmanship. Besides, with the thick end of 400 horsepower under your right foot, you can propel all 4960 pounds at consid­erable speed without losing any of the regal hauteur the car exudes when trolling through town. HIGHS: Comfort, luxury, prestige.The SEC’s substantial presence makes itself evident. To begin with, there’s the big profile it presents at curbside. Then, when you tug on a door handle, the long, heavy door yawns open like a bank vault. Everyone comments on the doors as they get in—first about the mass hanging on those hefty hinges, and then, if the doors have proved too heavy to close properly, about the automatic device that cinches them shut through the last few millimeters. Not many people notice that the frameless windows twitch down a hair as the doors open and shut, to form a better seal, but that’s what they do. High-tech gadgetry abounds inside the opulent wood and leather-lined interior, and it can’t be ignored. You’ll most likely take advantage of the three-position seat memory first, selecting your preset arrangement of seat, wheel, and mirror positions. Then, after you twist the match­box-sized key-cum-infrared transmitter and hear a very expensive-sounding starter motor pin the V-12 into action, a robot arm at your shoulder thrusts the seatbelt conspicuously into your peripheral field of vision. The seatbelt anchor point is behind the door, and having to twist around to reach it would put unendurable stress on the seam of your Armani jacket. LOWS: Extreme case of conspicuous consumption.Around you are arrayed the controls to more devices than you could shake a Dun­hill umbrella at. There are seat heating controls, dual climate controls, a switch to activate the electrostatic air filter (there’s also a carbon filter in there somewhere), a two-level traction-control switch, a button that raises and lowers the rear headrests, another one to raise and lower the rear sun­shade, and, oh, a whole lot more. The funny thing is, the layout still seems reasonably uncluttered, and the primary controls are as unambiguously arranged as in any Benz. You can get in, find all the major stuff immediately, and be sliding the transmission selector down its zigzag slot within seconds. The transmission selects second gear for starts, which the big Mercedes performs fairly leisurely and almost silently, wafting away as if under sail. If you stomp on the pedal, it initiates a smart downshift into first, producing a lunge so strong and steady it’s as if someone down the block had switched on a 50-ton electromagnet. Keep standing on it and the 6.0-liter V-12 almost defies physics in its race to its 155-mph limiter. The 600SEC is surprisingly quick for such a heavy car, but its refinement under­states the speed. Despite that, the car’s drivetrain communicates a clear mechan­ical presence. While transmission shifts are smooth, they’re evidently calibrated for deliberate engagements rather than the slurred ones that Lexus and Infiniti use to achieve smoothness, so you often feel them. At low revs the engine sound is a muted sweet hum. At higher revs the sound hardens to a mellifluous baritone that is clearly audible but not loud. In line with the company’s preoccupa­tion with damped responses, the 600SEC has a recirculating-ball steering mech­anism that is well-isolated from road shock. The same conservative priorities probably also explain the on-center slow­ness that some staffers here describe as mushy. A little hard cornering dispels any notions of mushy steering, because the big coupe turns in well and cleaves to the cho­sen line with pleasing accuracy. It’s not exactly nimble, and the fairly soft spring­ing (the automatic damping control notwithstanding) does allow some roll and a tiny amount of body wallow, but the 600SEC does a great job for a large, lux­urious vehicle. And, of course, its long-dis­tance cruising capabilities are sensational. Double-glazed windows put the fin­ishing touches to a well-insulated chassis, and the loudest sound you hear on the move is a steady tire hum. If you pay attention, you can even hear the sound frequency shift in corners as the wheel speeds vary. The ambience inside is always reassuring, restful, and comfort­able. Despite the reduction in rear-seat space that accompanied the metamorphosis from four-door to two-door, we seated a six-foot passenger behind a six-foot-five driver during short trips without much discomfort. More Mercedes ContentThe most difficult-to-describe aspect of 600SEC ownership is the subtle osmosis a driver undergoes as the innumerable engineering details that were sweated so obsessively in Stuttgart begin to insinuate themselves. It’s on this essence that a lot of the development money was spent. We won’t say that it justifies the car’s out­rageous price, but we think it’s a better rationalization for purchase than just the car’s obvious status value. Naturally, $146,710 takes care of that, too. VERDICT: Too much car for too much money.CounterpointWhere do you draw the line between opulent luxury and plain excess? With the S-class Benzes, it’s somewhere between two and four doors. As environmentally and politically incor­rect as it is, there is a pretense of func­tionality about the four-door 600SEL that underlies its frilly buttons and syrupy V-12. Not so the two-door 600SEC. Its only justification as the most expensive Benz is a mechanical valet that brings your seatbelt to arm’s reach. Theoretically, this bruising two­-door makes for a tidier package, but in practice it’s overkill. —Martin Padgett Jr.My problem with the 600SEC isn’t that it’s fat (it is) or that it has mushy steer­ing (it does). My problem is that I climbed into a BMW 850Ci the week­end after I drove the 600SEC. The BMW causes more pedestrians to gawk, smile, and applaud. It tracks down the Interstate more sure-footedly. Its cockpit isn’t too much smaller. And the 850Ci does $56,590 less injury to one’s savings account. This means I could own a German V-12-powered coupe plus, say, a Villager minivan and a Lexus ES300 sedan and still have enough left for a trip to Grand Cayman. —John PhillipsCertain staffers wring their hands when it comes to cars with as many digits in their prices as the 600SEC. What they overlook is that with all the high-qual­ity mass-produced items in the modern world, superiority isn’t cheap. I see 50 percent price hits for 10 percent product improvements all the time—in watches and stereos as well as in cars. If you evaluate the big coupe’s superb ride, uncanny silence, and effortless speed on that scale, it won’t disappoint those who can afford it. And despite their clucking, even the hand-wringers were scrambling to drive it overnight. —Csaba CsereSpecificationsSpecifications
1994 Mercedes-Benz 600SECVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $146,710/$146,710
ENGINEDOHC 48-valve V-12, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 365 in3, 5987 cm3Power: 389 hp @ 5200 rpmTorque: 420 lb-ft @ 3800 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 12.6-in vented disc/11.8-in vented discTire size: 235/60ZR-16
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 115.9 inLength: 199.2 inWidth: 74.6 inHeight: 56.2 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 54/41 ft3Trunk Volume: 14 ft3Curb Weight: 4960 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 6.3 sec1/4-Mile: 14.8 sec @ 98 mph100 mph: 15.4 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.5 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.6 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 155 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 189 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.75 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 18 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 12/16 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

There’s no such thing as too many tacos. That’s true of both the tasty handheld food and the new fourth-­generation Toyota Tacoma, with its buffet of bed, cab, and powertrain choices. While most mid-size trucks are limiting their menu, the 2024 Tacoma’s is more diverse than ever.We’ve driven most of the new Tacoma family, minus the Baja-style TRD Pro and overlanding Trailhunter. Those two, with a new hybrid system that produces 326 horsepower, will arrive later. The base Tacoma has a 228-hp turbo 2.4-liter four. The rest have mightier versions with up to 278 horses, matching the outgoing 3.5-liter V-6; their torque rises from 265 to up to 317 pound-feet and arrives as much as 3000 rpm sooner, making the Tacoma feel much more responsive. A manual transmission lives on, and a proficient eight-speed automatic replaces the clumsy six-speed unit. According to Toyota, fuel economy improves too.The cabin is better insulated from engine noise, and a higher seating position means you no longer feel like you’re sitting on the floor. With ­modern design and nicer textures, the interior offers flashy digital displays, power-­adjustable front seats (finally), and a JBL stereo with a portable speaker, all of which vanquish the old truck’s 2005 vibes.The new Tacoma cribs chiseled bodywork and a boxed ladder frame from the Tundra, along with an available coil-spring rear suspension that transforms the Tacoma’s ride from jittery to buttery. The swanky Limited has optional adaptive dampers that increase comfort or sportiness; the base and extended-cab models soldier on with leaf springs that lack the composure of the coils on rough roads. The Tacoma’s driving demeanor feels more cohesive than before. Electrically assisted power steering and rear disc brakes join the party, as well as lane-keeping assist and improved crawl control for off-roading.ToyotaBreaking trail is a Tacoma ­staple. The TRD Off-Road now has 33-inch BFGoodrich Trail-Terrain T/A tires, Bilstein external-reservoir dampers, and an optional front anti-roll bar disconnect for increased wheel articulation, which together aid in easily conquering off-road obstacles. The revived PreRunner trim—with two doors, two seats, and two-wheel drive—is a cheaper alternative with similar hardware.The lineup offers many configurations. Prices range from $32,995 for the SR to $53,595 for the Limited. And the more Tacos, the better.Extra Tacoma StoriesSpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Toyota TacomaVehicle Type: front-engine, rear- or rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2- or 4-door pickup
PRICE
Base: $32,995–$41,895 
ENGINEturbocharged and intercooled 16-valve 2.4-liter inline-4, 228 hp, 243 lb-ft; 270 hp, 310 lb-ft; 278 hp, 317 lb-ft
TRANSMISSIONS6-speed manual, 8-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 131.9–145.1 inLength: 213.0–226.2 inWidth: 76.9–77.9 inHeight: 73.8–74.7 inCurb Weight: 4200–4800 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 6.5–8.0 sec1/4-Mile: 14.9–16.4 secTop Speed: 110 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (MFR’S EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 20–23/18–21/23–26 mpg  Senior 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 journalism 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 December 2023 issue of Car and Driver.We’re living in an EV world. Electric vehicles are the glittery objects grabbing everyone’s attention, from the government to car manufacturers to consumers, who are on track to snap up more than a million EVs this year. To which we counter, “Not so fast.” Maybe you want a hybrid instead. Whether your goal is cutting your operating costs, saving the planet, virtue signaling your elevated social conscience, or some combination of the three, hybrids offer some advantages EVs can’t match. To make that point, we’ve pitted the Toyota Prius and the Honda Accord hybrid against each other. They’re two of the most up-to-date—and possibly the best—gas-electrics on the market.At first glance, this contest might appear to be between apples and cantaloupes, a hybrid-only Prius up against a conventional family sedan in the Accord that’s been implanted with a hybrid powertrain. In reality, though, this matchup is more like McIntosh versus Honeycrisp.Since both the Prius and the Accord hybrid were new for 2023, they represent their makers’ latest hybrid technologies. They’re also emblematic of why hybrids remain relevant. They deliver excellent fuel economy on the highway and transcendent fuel economy in town. And unlike EVs, hybrids don’t require you to plan road-trip routes that tie you to America’s less-than-reliable charging networks; you just gas and go.The Prius and the Accord hybrid share some technical similarities but also carry with them intriguing contrasts. Both cars, for instance, are powered by Atkinson-cycle 2.0-liter inline-four gas engines and store electrical energy in small lithium-ion batteries, a 1.1-kWh juicer in the Accord and a 0.9-kWh unit in the Prius. Here, both are front-drivers (the Prius is available with all-wheel drive), and both employ regenerative braking to recover energy. From there, things diverge. The Honda’s gas engine turns a generator that charges the battery or supplies energy to the traction motor that turns the Accord’s front wheels; the traction motor also recoups energy during deceleration events. The Accord features three direct-drive ratios, and at highway speeds, a clutch connects the Honda’s engine directly to the front axle, further improving fuel efficiency. Meanwhile, the Prius sends the output of its engine and two motor-generators through a planetary gearset, an arrangement that can continuously vary the gearing while powering the front wheels. Despite those engineering differences, the two cars’ propulsion systems spit out similar power: The Prius makes 194 combined horsepower, and the Accord 204. Both cars can drive on electricity alone for short distances at city speeds. The models we chose for this throwdown, the Prius Limited and the Accord Touring, are also close in other ways. They’re the well-equipped top trims in their respective lineups, as opposed to the models with the highest EPA fuel-economy estimates and fewest niceties. And they’re similarly priced: As tested, the Limited and the Touring are within $1500 of each other. To see which of these apples is sweeter, we put them through a four-part taste test. The driving regimen included urban streets, two-lane roads, interstates, and a separate 200-mile highway run at 75 mph to unearth each car’s real-world road-trip fuel economy. 2nd Place: Toyota PriusPassersby notice this car. The first night we had it, a neighbor pedaling by on his bike asked if he could shoot a photo of it. The next morning, a kid climbing off a Kawasaki Ninja asked, “Is that the new Prius? Sick!” We might have used a different descriptor at the time, but we quickly came to feel the same. The Prius finally looks every inch the high-tech, high-performance machine it is rather than like a science project gone awry. “High- performance,” of course, refers to its ability to squeeze the most miles from every drop of fuel. That hasn’t changed, but now there’s a lot more to this car.Not only does the new Prius look as sleek and fast as a racing greyhound, but it also sprints well enough that references to lethargic canines no longer apply. The hybrid system’s power is up by a combined 73 horses, a 60 percent increase, and it shows. The new Prius now hustles to 60 mph in a peppy 7.1 seconds rather than 10.5 and zips through the quarter-mile in 15.5 seconds at 92 mph—far quicker and a massive 13 mph faster than before. It matched the Honda’s 30-mph time and beat it to 100 mph by 1.0 second. In other acceleration tests, it trailed, but not by much. It’s now lively enough to be, dare we say, almost fun. The powertrain is refined, seamlessly blending gas and electric power. You can’t feel what’s going on behind the scenes, but you can hear it. There’s more engine presence in the Prius’s cabin than in the Honda’s, and the gearbox lets the engine drone at high rpm for brief periods, like when you’re merging onto a highway. Thankfully, those intervals no longer last as long. The chassis is now equally pleasant. It serves up a well-judged balance of agility and coordinated handling matched by a resilient ride that handily sponges up road imperfections. If the dampers were 10 percent firmer, we might even call it sporty. Its steering cuts cleanly and transmits some road feel, and the car corners at a very un-Prius-like 0.87 g on its 195-mm-wide Michelin Primacy All Season tires, providing plenty of grip to play with on back roads. Did we just put “back roads” and “Prius” in the same sentence? HIGHS: Head-turning looks, well stocked with features and amenities, mega real-world fuel economy.LOWS: Smallish rear seat, poor instrument-cluster placement, occasional engine droning.VERDICT: The tastiest way to get maximum fuel economy short of a plug-in hybrid.The biggest difference between the Prius and the Accord is size. This is a compact car, narrower and lower than the Honda and 14.6 inches shorter overall, and in the back seat, it feels every bit a size-class smaller than the Accord. There’s adequate legroom for six-footers in the rear, but just barely, and the severely sloping roofline squeezes rear headroom. Still, the Prius Limited has a welcoming cabin with interesting styling, average materials, and plenty of features, including heated and ventilated front seats, heated outboard rear seats, a JBL audio system, dual-zone climate control, and more. In fact, a Limited equipped like ours offers several extras the Accord doesn’t, including a heated steering wheel, a camera-based rearview mirror, a power liftgate, a 360-degree camera that scans the car’s periphery in a circular sweep (part of the $1085 Limited Premium package), and dual sunroofs to the Honda’s one. Curiously, the Prius’s steering wheel partially blocks the gauge cluster—the interior’s one significant ergonomic miscue.Of course, this is a matchup of fuel sippers, and here the Prius rules. Its smaller size and 296-pound-lighter weight contribute to its fuel-economy advantage, where it returned 48 mpg to the Honda’s 43 mpg on our road drive. It also delivered 49 mpg on our 200-mile, 75-mph highway run, while the Honda managed 39 mpg. The base Prius on 17-inch tires should do even better as its EPA combined fuel economy is 57 mpg, 5 mpg better than the Limited’s. And there’s also the plug-in Prius Prime, which in SE form offers 45 miles of electric driving range. So, if fuel economy is your priority, the Prius is your ride. It’s a slick-looking, well-executed, and surprisingly engaging automobile now. For us, though, the other car in this test was sweeter. 1st Place: Honda AccordThe Accord Touring is the stealth hybrid of this duo. In contrast to the Prius, there’s nothing about the Honda’s appearance indicating it mixes electricity and gasoline. In its dark business suit of Canyon River Blue Metallic paint, our test car looked every bit the tasteful and reserved executive-level sedan it turned out to be. It just happens to come with a hybrid powertrain. That seems to be Honda’s grand plan for propagating hybrid propulsion: Make it standard. The top four of the Accord’s six trim levels come only in hybrid form—no powertrain substitutions allowed. In almost every way, the Accord Touring is a class above the Prius. It’s much larger outside and, more important, inside. Its extra length and width give the cabin much more breathing room and an airy feel. Six-footers have space to stretch their legs from the heated outboard rear seats, which are higher off the ground than the Prius’s and more comfortable. The interior materials have a near-luxury feel, with plenty of well-padded surfaces, and most hard plastics are well hidden. The seats, steering wheel, and shifter are leather-covered. (The Prius sheathes those parts in synthetic leather.) The interior design is as conservative and conventional as the exterior, with an easy-to-see digital instrument cluster residing in a hooded binnacle. Like the Prius, the Accord rolls with a good-size infotainment screen that’s reasonably user-friendly, and there are hard buttons for the climate controls and a knob for audio volume. HIGHS: Roomy cabin, upscale interior appointments, the epitome of refinement.LOWS: Fewer extras for the price, less cargo room, fuel economy is second best.VERDICT: A delicious, luxurious, driver-friendly sedan that just happens to be a hybrid.The rich feel of the Accord hybrid is underscored by the way the car drives. We’ve long admired how Accords comport themselves over the road, and this newest generation holds to that tradition. It’s comfortable and poised yet nimble and responsive. That and its impressive 0.90-g cornering grip—from 19-inch Michelin Primacy MXM4 all-season tires—invite playing on twisty roads. In fact, this Accord has the handling and moves of a sports sedan. The Accord also has enough performance to be engaging, with a 6.5-second 60-mph time—0.6 second quicker than the Prius—and a 15.2-second, 91-mph quarter-mile run. In normal operation, the powertrain is a smooth runner, as well integrated as the Prius’s but considerably quieter. The Honda’s four-cylinder operates so silently at times that it can be hard to tell whether it’s even running. Full-throttle bursts are much more subdued here than in the Prius, and the adjustable regen is stronger. The Accord’s real-world fuel economy is impressive for a car this big and luxurious, but it pays for its greater size and weight on the highway, where it’s a whopping 10 mpg less parsimonious than the Prius. The laws of physics remain immutable, but the Accord’s combination of roominess, comfort, luxuriousness, driving chops, and exceptional overall refinement won us over. Like McIntoshes and Honeycrisps, the choice between the two is ultimately a matter of personal preference. The Toyota Prius is a great car and the best at the hybrid mission, but the Accord Touring is the hybrid we want most.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Honda Accord TouringVehicle Type: front-engine, front-motor, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $38,985/$38,985
POWERTRAIN
DOHC 16-valve Atkinson-cycle inline-4, 146 hp, 134 lb-ft + AC motor, 181 hp, 247 lb-ft (combined output: 204 hp, 247 lb-ft; 1.1-kWh lithium-ion battery pack)Transmission: direct-drive
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 12.3-in vented disc/11.1-in discTires: Michelin Primacy MXM4
235/40R-19 96V M+S DT1
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 111.4 inLength: 195.7 inWidth: 73.3 inHeight: 57.1 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/50 ft3Cargo Volume: 17 ft3Curb Weight: 3525 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 6.5 sec100 mph: 19.2 sec1/4-Mile: 15.2 sec @ 91 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 4.9 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 125 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 173 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.90 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 38 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 39 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 490 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 44/46/41 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED
2023 Toyota Prius Limited Vehicle Type: front-engine, front-motor, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $35,560/$37,494 POWERTRAIN
DOHC 16-valve 2.0-liter Atkinson-cycle inline-4, 150 hp, 139 lb-ft + 2 AC motors, (combined output: 194 hp, 0.9-kWh lithium-ion battery pack)Transmission: continuously variable automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 11.1-in vented disc/11.0-in discTires: Michelin Primacy All Season
195/50R-19 88H M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 108.3 inLength: 181.1 inWidth: 70.2 inHeight: 56.3 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/39 ft3Cargo Volume: 20 ft3Curb Weight: 3229 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.1 sec100 mph: 18.2 sec1/4-Mile: 15.5 sec @ 92 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.5 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.2 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 116 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 174 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.87 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 45 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 49 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 550 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 52/52/52 mpgDirector, 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

From the December 1995 issue of Car and Driver.The Viper is the New Chrysler Cor­poration’s attempt at atonement, at making up for the sins it committed against cars—all those bogus wire wheel covers and limp shock absorbers and padded-vinyl roofs—during the reign of Lee the Imperious. And by the precise calculations of our test department, each Viper built since the 1992 intro cancels out 817 K-car New Yorkers. HIGHS: The way other cars let you go first, prodigious g-forces, sunny days.A lot of “nice” Chryslers were inflicted on the market in those years (more than it could stand, in fact), but the Viper goes about the work of offsetting them with a swaggering gusto. There’s not a nice fiber in its glass body. It’s so ornery it won’t even cancel its own turn signals. “Knife-in-the-back handling,” we said in our last test (“The Supercar Olympics,” July 1995). “Big, crude, deafening, and something of a cartoon,” we said. “Villainous.” (We don’t hold back once we get the adjectives flowing.) Now we learn that particular Viper was having a bad suspension day—month, actually—during our last test. Wheel alignment was way wrong. High-grip tires don’t like being pointed in contradictory directions. For the record, when we phoned Chrysler before the test to say the suspension had passed through indepen­dent and was well on its way to defiant, we were told: “They’re all like that.” Anyway, that was then and this is 1996 and the Viper has undergone, for the new year, its first change of underwear since its 1992 introduction. It has a new frame, new suspension, new tires and, what it really needed all along, more horsepower. Surely the New Yorker cancellation rate will be much enhanced by such extensive reengi­neering. Knowing how you care about such things, we set up an all-Viper com­parison—the exact same test car of last summer, fresh from alignment therapy, versus a pre-production 1996 model. It’s easy to spot the model-year differ­ences on the outside. There are no side exhausts on the new car, racing stripes now appear on both white and black cars, and wheels are different—they’re painted an astonishing yellow on red cars. Inside, the black cockpits are spiced up with vividly colored leather on the wheel rim, shift knob, and brake handle—it’s bright blue on white cars, lipstick-red on red cars. “I won’t go into the politics on that,” said engineer Pete Gladysz, who is chassis and design manager on the Viper Project. From the driver’s seat, it’s easy to spot differences, too. The new car’s ride is less punishing, the cockpit is much quieter now that exhaust goes out behind, the steering doesn’t squirm as much on truck-worn pavement, and the brake feel is more con­ventional—it’s very good too, thanks to Chrysler ending its infatua­tion with a quirky booster that gave remarkably short pedal travel instead of good modu­lation. “We thought it felt like a Ferrari F40,” Gladysz explains. Gladysz says most of the 1996 changes were made in anticipation of future model needs and to comply with reg­ulations. The first of the future models is the coupe, due in late spring. Inevitably, it will be heavier. So the engineers went looking for offsetting weight reductions to build into the basic car, and they found enough to lighten the roadster by 90 pounds (our test car, a prototype, is about 60 pounds overweight). Logically, the less drafty, less leaky coupe will encourage driving on colder, wetter days, so new tires were sought. “I didn’t say all-weather tires,” Gladysz reminds. On the regulatory side, lower noise standards are coming in Europe, and new emissions requirements are coming in the U.S., occasioned by the on-board diag­nostics OBD II rule. For both noise and OBD II, the side exhausts had to go. Everybody wins: the new system pipes the noise far behind the cockpit and away from the occupants’ ears, and it improves the exhaust note while reducing back-pressure. Output rises 15 hp as a result. LOWS: Interior hospitality of a grizzly’s den, assembly details that look homemade, rainy days.Weight reduction also brings gains. The frame loses 60 pounds while improving 20 percent in torsional stiffness. New suspension arms and knuckles are now aluminum, and the wheels are slightly lighter. Together, those changes reduce unsprung weight substantially. Front-sus­pension geometry remains as before, but the rear roll center was lowered to reduce tire scrub—to cut down on self-steering in the truck ruts. At both ends, shocks are new and their attachments were moved closer to the lower ball joints for better control of small suspension movements. Powertrain changes are numerous as well. Cooling-system capacity is increased, and the clutch, differential, and half-shafts have been upsized for more torque (Gladysz alludes to a future need for this extra beef, without confirming the limited run of high-output Vipers we expect in time for racing season). A power­-steering cooler was added. Tire sizes remain as before, but the carcass construction, tread pattern, and compound reflect an entirely different approach to performance in these new-to­-the-U.S. Pilot SX Michelins. Contrary to Gladysz’s prediction, we find them slightly less grippy on the skidpad than the Michelin XGT Z tires of the 1995 car on hand for comparison: 0.97 g versus 1.00 g. They seem to understeer more, too—for sure, they require larger steering angles at any given lateral force. And they make a shrill howl at the limit.That’s the bad news. The good news is that the car behaves better on them in every other way. Along with the suspension changes, they vastly improve handling. When cornering at the limit, the new Viper no longer seems balanced on a knife edge. It’s more gradual. The tail now slips into a drift angle. Even with alignment prop­erly set, the 1995 car is still snappish—it’ll bite if you change power or steering imprudently near the limit. The new ver­sion is far more tolerant. You can work with it, make corrections, adjust your path, even as you approach the hairy edge. Proof of this new attitude shows up during hot laps. At the Chrysler proving grounds road course, our man Don Schroeder drove a six-lap ses­sion in each car. His best time in the ’96 was 1:17.47, with a best-­lap-to-worst-lap variation of only 0.08 second. In the old car, he managed one lap in 1:17.32, but the best-to-worst variation exceeded two seconds and cumulative time was far behind. Heard from trackside, the 1995 exhaust at full power hisses like a shot-down blimp, seriously uncool compared with the disci­plined roar of the new one. On the road, the difference between new and old is no less dramatic. Tire noise on textured roads used to be deafening; now it’s merely excessive (like everything else about the Viper). Ride is much improved too, enough for us to upgrade our rating from the previous “terrible” to “bad.” Perhaps because of the additional frame stiffness, the body is less clattery. Gladysz says the new tires are signifi­cantly better in braking. Certainly they team happily with the new booster to shorten stopping distances from 177 feet in the realigned ’95 car to 163 feet. Pedal feel is much better too, which is particularly important because the Viper does not offer ABS. More Viper Reviews From the ArchiveThe Viper’s boun­tiful torque “flat”­—the curve, like Nebraska, is flat as far as the eye can see—gives a peculiarly constant acceleration, sort of a civilian substi­tute for a Saturn booster. The extra 15 advertised horses were definitely on the job the day we tested the two cars back-­to-back—0 to 60 mph improves by a tenth of a second to 4.1 seconds, the quarter-mile quickens by a tenth of a second and 1 mph to 12.6 seconds at 113 mph, and top speed rises to 173 mph from 167. A down-to­-weight production car should be slightly quicker. VERDICT: A raw-meat roadster for the folks who don’t care what anybody says.While the changes for 1996 add up to a more powerful and less belligerent machine, the Viper remains outrageous by intent: the cockpit smells like fiberglass, and its weather protection stows in the trunk. The big hospitality breakthrough for 1996 is sliding-glass technology for the side curtains. That, together with the less obstreperous road behavior, adds up to a better Viper, but no one will confuse it with a “nice” car. SpecificationsSpecifications
1996 Dodge Viper RT/10Vehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door convertible
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $61,975/$66,045Options: hard top with sliding side curtains, $2500; air conditioning, $1200; luxury tax on options, $370
ENGINEpushrod 20-valve V-10, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 488 in3, 7990 cm3Power: 415 hp @ 5200 rpmTorque: 488 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm 
TRANSMISSION6-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/control armsBrakes, F/R: 13.0-in vented disc/13.0-in vented discTires: Michelin Pilot SXF: 275/40ZR-17R: 335/35ZR-17
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 96.2 inLength: 175.1 inWidth: 75.7 inHeight: 44.0 inPassenger Volume: 49 ft3Trunk Volume: 5 ft3Curb Weight: 3484 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.1 sec100 mph: 9.8 sec1/4-Mile: 12.6 sec @ 113 mph130 mph: 16.9 sec150 mph: 29.0 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 4.6 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 9.3 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 9.1 secTop Speed (drag ltd): 173 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 163 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.97 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 13 mpg 
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 13/21 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the April 1998 issue of Car and Driver.Executive sedans at the $60,000-plus altitude cruise in rarefied atmosphere. Their owners are a demanding lot. They are obvi­ously well-to-do, but value still figures prominently in their purchase decision. More opulent and expensive sedans boasting V-12 engines, flying-lady hood ornaments, and stratospheric prices exist for the money’s-no-object status seekers. But within the automotive troposphere, an executive demands com­fortable accommodations, strong per­formance, driving pleasure, and a level of features and amenities that justify the car’s lofty price and set his or her car apart from the merely great mass-market automobiles. Only the world’s best automakers compete at this level. We rounded up four from the old world—the Audi A8, the BMW 740iL, the Jaguar XJ8, and the Mercedes-Benz S320—and pitted them against the best sedan available from Japan, the Lexus LS400. Sadly, no American sedans compete in this price range. It is on these flagship cars that man­ufacturers trot out their latest and greatest technological and safety advances, many of which eventually trickle down to bread-and-butter cars. Side airbags, sta­bility-enhancement systems, xenon headlamps, navigation systems, solar­-powered ventilation systems, and other high-tech hardware are among the fea­tures that adorn the five cars we’ve gath­ered for this test. Although most owners in this price class still drive themselves, the five vehi­cles appearing in this test are high enough on the demographic scale that they invite that very old-school badge of wealth: the chauffeur. As such, rear-seat space and amenities are of great importance at this price point. Of the five blue­-bloods we corralled for this test, three (the BMW, the Jaguar, and the Mer­cedes-Benz) have that limo look and ride on stretched wheelbases. The two other (the Audi and the Lexus) achieve their spaciousness without recourse to long-­waisted bodywork. Of the five, only the aluminum-­bodied Audi A8 4.2 Quattro is a real newcomer, bringing its novel body structure, four-wheel drivetrain, and lusty 4.2-liter V-8 engine to bear against the big­-buck players. Soldiering on in familiar sheetmetal, the Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas boasts a new V-8 powerplant inherited from the XK8 coupe, along with new suspension and electrical systems and all the wood and leather British craftsmen could fit into the longer-than-standard 202.7-inch body (which, by the way, makes it second only to the Benz in length). Just a few years into its latest remake, the 1998 Lexus LS400 flaunts new vari­able valve timing under the hood, which substantially improves engine perfor­mance. It also features a new vehicle skid-control system (called VSC), and a resculpted front end with optional high­-intensity-discharge xenon headlights. Various upgrades have attended the BMW 740iL since its 1995 redesign. The latest of these include an inflatable tubular head-protection system for front­-seat passengers, optional side airbags for rear-seat passengers, an improved dynamic stability-control system (a new yaw sensor greatly improves its ability to prevent a spin), and a navigation system. The Mercedes-Benz S320, which is now getting a little long in the tooth as well as in the body, joins this company by way of its lofty $70,128 base price. That price dictated that this car be the only non-V-8 in the group. (The V-8-powered S420 starts at $78,581.) For 1998, the Benz S320 acquires brake assist (which applies full braking when it senses fast pedal operation), an adap­tive service monitor to determine main­tenance intervals, and a passenger airbag that deactivates itself when a Benz baby seat is installed. Add these to the com­prehensive array of engineering innova­tions included in every S-class car, and they help offset the S320’s power deficit. Which of these super sedans is best able to meet the needs and caprices of the cap­tains of American industry? Read on and see. 5th Place: Mercedes-Benz S320 The Mercedes finished in fifth place largely because buyers on a $70,000 budget are stuck with just six cylinders’ worth of Mercedes-Benz S-class. As such, the S320 suffers a 54-to-72 horsepower deficit in this company. Our long-wheel­base test car also sports the largest and heaviest body, as well as the highest base price—$70,128. (The shorter model saves $3531 and 20 pounds.) We weren’t sur­prised to learn that the bestselling S-class model is the $93,561 S500. HIGHS: Stability, space, undoubted engineering excellence.LOWS: Modest engine power, dated styling, spartan interior appointments. VERDICT: Too expensive, and needs more motor to play in this band.Despite its price and power handicaps, the big Benz continued to impress us with its vaultlike structure and superb high-­speed behavior. The 3.2-liter engine produced the slowest test figures, lagging the pack by at least 1.3 seconds and 6 mph in the quarter-mile, but the short-geared, torque-optimized six tugs the car around town with surprising verve. Okay, attack a mountain road with it, and you’ll be revving the bollocks off it, and you’ll encounter a gaping gear-ratio canyon between second and third gears. Nonethe­less, the gear-selector strategy is still the best available, and the car performs ade­quately in settings appropriate to its role.The chassis also does an admirable job of keeping this 4400-pound behemoth on track. The big Benz steered accurately—­if somewhat numbly—and felt stable—if less than responsive—in all conditions we encountered. Hard cornering rolled the front tires so far over that we buffed the letters off the sidewalls, but in doing so, the S320 managed to score second best on the skidpad, registering 0.80 g. If it’s space you’re after, the Benz has it. Voluminous up front, it tied with the BMW for the greatest amount of rear-seat space with three seat testers aboard, although they declared it to be less com­fortable back there than in all but the Audi. The interior is less inviting than in some of the others because its big, bland planes and surfaces lack inter­esting detail and are scaled a little larger than life. Even Mer­cedes’s renowned ergonomics fall short of perfection. The seat adjustment “pictogram” switch, the standard of the industry, is partly obscured by the door handle. Although packed with such features as self-closing doors and a rain­-sensing wiper system, the S320 feels like a stripper. All of which leaves us hoping that the new-for-1999 S-class will be prettier and priced lower. 1998 Mercedes-Benz S320228-hp inline-6, 5-speed automatic, 4400 lbBase/as-tested price: $70,128/$70,128C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.7 sec1/4-mile: 16.7 sec @ 87 mph100 mph: 22.8 sec130 mph: 62.6 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 184 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.80 g C/D observed fuel economy: 16 mpg4th Place: Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas If it looks luxurious and it smells lux­urious, well, it probably is luxurious. Unless, of course, space is a necessary component of luxury. And in this com­pany, we think it is. Unfortunately, that’s the XJ8’s most glaring deficiency: It just isn’t quite big enough. Oh, sure, this is the Vanden Plas model, which has a wheel­base some five inches longer than that of the normal Jag and a rear door clearly longer than the original designer intended. Nonetheless, that low-slung and stylish roofline which stands the Jag three to five inches shorter than the others, dictates cramped packaging. So the driver’s position is tight for tall people, the front footwells are cramped, and headroom is at a premium. HIGHS: Styling and interior decor provide ample allure. LOWS: Poor space efficiency for a Jaguar on a stretch. VERDICT: The new engine and chassis give this cat another nine lives.Not surprisingly, the Jag scored lowest in the group in our two-passenger back-­seat test, although its wide, flat backrest accommodated three shoulders abreast without overlapping, helping it outscore both the Audi and the Benz for comfort. That’s the downside. The upside is a car with a great view down its sculpted hood and a clear view all around. Beau­tiful wood veneers, thick pile carpeting, and aromatic Connolly hides enfold the occupants as a melodic 4.0-liter V-8 wafts the car along on a soft, quiet suspension. So soft, in fact, that you detect the merest suggestion of float at the rear when driving alone in the car, causing one to wonder what that will mean in the corners.Well, the XJ8’s new spring and damping rates, its new vari­able-assist steering rack, and its superb Pirelli P4000 tires made it feel completely at home in the twisty, hilly bits. Its 60.0-mph speed through the lane change test was 2.1 mph faster than the next best, the Lexus. Endowed with steering that feels natural and organic, a transmission that is unconfused about its mission, and a sus­pension that is simultaneously supple and disciplined, the Jag inspires confidence. It is also more sensitive to transitions than the BMW or the Benz, and it will rotate more willingly than either of them. As long as you switch the automatic stability-control system off, that is. ASC controls wheelspin by retarding engine torque. We found that on dry roads it trims too much power, unbalancing the car into pronounced understeer. The brake pedal has unnecessarily long travel, as does the strange J-pattern gear selector, which man­ually selects gears in a counterintuitive for­ward-for-downshifts pattern. Ergonomics are improved in this-gen­eration Jaguar, but some functions remain inscrutable. How to toggle between the digital odometer and trip meter, for example. Also, it’s difficult to insert and turn the ignition key without triggering the windshield wiper/washer stalk. It’s not perfect, but the XJ8 has considerable charm and style, and it’s the next-to-least expensive car on offer in this group. That’s a seductive combination. 1998 Jaguar XJ8 Vanden Plas290-hp V-8, 5-speed automatic, 3980 lbBase/as-tested price: $66,367/$67,223C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.8 sec1/4-mile: 15.3 sec @ 93 mph100 mph: 17.8 sec130 mph: 42.0Braking, 70­–0 mph: 187 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.79 gC/D observed fuel economy: 15 mpg3rd Place: Audi A8 4.2 Quattro Now, here’s a car whose pedigree had us anticipating a strong finish in this con­test. Equipped with an all-aluminum body, an alloy V-8 of generous displacement, a five-speed automatic with Tiptronic, and an all-wheel-drive Quattro system to put the action down, we expected something spectacular. HIGHS: A buff new body, all-­wheel traction, and a sensational interior. LOWS: A little slower than we’d expected, less dry-pavement grip than we’d like. VERDICT: Very sweet in its sweet spot but doesn’t like to be hurried.What we discovered is that the Audi is a very nice car, but that it manifests some paradoxical elements. It’s a large car, almost as long as the BMW and almost as wide as the Benz, but its size is effectively camouflaged by its elegant styling. Alu­minum construction gives the A8 the second-lowest curb weight, at 3980 pounds (tied with the Jag). Inside the car, the occu­pants are surrounded by probably the most stylish trappings of the class, yet the ambi­ence for the driver is more sporty than lux­urious. It’s an extremely well-equipped car—the only one with four standard side airbags and sound-absorbing glass all around. Rear-seat comfort and space are on par with the Lexus (with two rear occu­pants), and the ride is quiet and smooth. The sound from the 300-horsepower V-8 is stirring; it’s burbly at low revs, hard and manic at high revs. But despite having the most advantageous power-to-weight ratio of any car here, tall gearing and fric­tion in the four-wheel-drive system slowed the A8 to fourth place at the drag strip. Other disappointments: Its skidpad per­formance, at 0.78 g, is the worst of the group, as is its 192-foot stopping distance from 70 mph. We blame the all-season Goodyear Eagle LS tires, which seem mis­matched to the car’s chassis.You see, whereas the A8 feels taut, lithe, and nimble at moderate speeds, it begins to feel less composed and less inte­grated as cornering speeds rise. Those Goodyears start howling early as under­steer sets in, and the car pushes relentlessly if you attempt to pick up the pace. The car also becomes increasingly difficult to drive smoothly. Whereas the BMW and Jaguar retain a fluidity of function even at their limits, the Audi becomes nebulous and discombobulated. In extremes, it seems to have neither the compliance nor the body-motion control of the best cars in this class. The A8 4.2 Quattro is a technological tour de force, and if you live where it snows a lot, this is probably the best choice. Drivers who spend all their time driving within the Audi’s “sweet spot,” below eight-tenths of its capacity, will think it’s a peach. At the limit on dry roads, however, we found the A8 to be a chore. Hence, its third-place ranking. 1998 Audi A8 4.2 Quattro300-hp V-8, 5-speed automatic, 3980 lbBase/as-tested price: $67,565/$71,032C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.1 sec1/4-mile: 15.4 sec @ 93 mph100 mph: 17.6 sec130 mph: 41.8Braking, 70­–0 mph: 192 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.78 gC/D observed fuel economy: 16 mpg2nd Place: BMW 740iL In the quest for the hearts and minds of the voters on this panel, the BMW easily cornered the hearts. The minds, however, had a tough time with a base price that is $13,562 higher than that of the Lexus. Equipped as they were for this test (both with expensive navigation systems), the BMW costs 10 grand more than the LS400. HIGHS: Beautifully integrated chassis, strong engine, communicative steering, loads of rear-seat space. LOWS: Shocking sticker price. VERDICT: One of the world’s best cars, and priced accordingly.What price excellence, readers? The BMW is probably the finest piece of chassis tuning you’ll ever encounter in a luxury car. This is a plush car that rides as quietly along the highway as the benchmark for these things, the LS400. Then it comes alive in your hands as you commit it to the canyon. The steering is firmly weighted, perhaps a touch too isolated, but it aims the nose with the precision of a vernier gauge, and its action is bionically linear. Even during hard driving, the new stability-con­trol system proved helpful and unobtrusive. The BMW’s ride motions are gracefully damped, and the car feels fluid and alive, even when you’re leaning hard on the 235/60HR-16 Michelins (which are the biggest tires in this group). The 4.4-liter V-8 waffles quietly most of the time, but it utters an awesome ripping snarl when working hard, and it propels the 4260-pound 740iL to 60 mph in the same time it takes the 3980-pound Jaguar to do it (6.8 seconds).Front passenger space is generous, and the rear passengers enjoy the best space and comfort in this group of cars. The rear cabin even has those little movable footrests, just like a Mercedes 600 Pullman. Our notebooks recorded few complaints: among them, grumbles about the lack of a center console box under the peculiar sliding armrest and an interior that feels more functional than luxurious. Fur­thermore, we thought its navigation system was less intuitively obvious to operate and less versatile than the one in the Lexus. Still, the imperfections are few, and the rewards to both driver and passengers are many. Only its price kept the big Bimmer out of the No. l spot. Then again, maybe you get what you pay for. 1998 BMW 740iL282-hp V-8, 5-speed automatic, 4260 lbBase/as-tested price: $68,175/$70,850C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.8 sec1/4-mile: 15.2 sec @ 94 mph100 mph: 17.3 sec130 mph: 35.0 secBraking, 70–0 mph: 183 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 gC/D observed fuel economy: 15 mpg1st Place: Lexus LS400What can you say about a car that turns in the best acceleration and braking num­bers, the second-quickest lane-change results, the quietest overall sound-meter performance, and is priced about 10 grand less than everything but the Jaguar? HIGHS: Incomparable refinement, impeccable build quality, unbeatable value. LOWS: Not very intimate in its tactile responses. VERDICT: An almost perfect recipe for the luxury car.You can say it’s the winner. You can also say it’s not everybody’s cup of tea, given that the levels of refinement and iso­lation are so good that its communication with the driver is subtle rather than sen­sual. Even there, Lexus has sought to improve matters. For 1998, the engineers made changes to the car’s steering to pro­vide a more positive interaction with the driver. They also modified the suspension to provide better body-motion control. There never was much wrong with the car’s suspension geometries and compo­nents, and it still attacks a winding road with surprising poise and ability. A new vehicle skid-control system works quite well, although it steps in a bit more officiously than the BMW’s system does. It’s also a pity the thing beeps at you when it’s working, as this encourages the driver to switch the system off. Most notable among the car’s new attributes is the response that greets the throttle at low- and mid-range engine speeds. Courtesy of Lexus’s VVT-i continuously variable valve-timing system, the 4.0-liter V-8 now pulls like a loco­motive without having to spin like a dervish. The controls are still lighter to the touch than those you find in the European com­petition, but this-generation LS400 has moved some way toward BMW in the way it has been sharpened and tightened. It would have been a mistake for Lexus to forsake the luxury-car attributes that so shocked the world’s premium car manu­facturers, so it hasn’t. The almost eerie quietness and relaxed, detached sense of isolation are still there. So are the quality materials and the meticulous fit and finish. The LS400’s drivetrain is silken and flawless, the brakes strong and fade-free, and the car even uses fuel at a more miserly rate than its rivals. As Frank Markus noted in the logbook: “This car checks all the boxes on most luxury-car buyers’ shopping lists.” Not surprisingly, therefore, it also checks into first place. 1998 Lexus LS400290-hp V-8, 5-speed automatic, 3960 lbBase/as-tested price: $54,613/$60,869C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.4 sec1/4-mile: 15.0 sec @ 96 mph100 mph: 16.4 sec130 mph: 31.9 secBraking, 70–0 mph: 172 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.79 gC/D observed fuel economy: 16 mpg More

From the August 1994 issue of Car and Driver.The year 1969 was a long time ago. How long ago was it? It was so long ago that most cars cost less in dol­lars than they weighed in pounds. Think about that as you tool around in your 2500-pound Neon, considered a good buy today at $13,000. But a few verities from that long-gone era remain. Among them is the fact that a bright-white, blue-striped convertible with a big honking motor still is a slam-dunk head-turner wherever it goes. Pontiac knew it then, when the Trans Am model was launched as the high-sport Firebird. And it knows it today, as it celebrates 785,000 Trans Ams with this 25th Anniversary special. Then as now, the closed coupe will account for the vast majority of sales. (Only eight Trans Am convertibles were minted in 1969, making it one of the most collectible Pontiacs of all time.) But for grabbing attention, sparking conversations, and indulging adolescent impulses on sunny backroads, nothing beats a drop­top. So that’s the flavor we chose in sampling Pontiac’s 1994 25th Anniversary Trans Am GT. Dick Kelley|Car and DriverWe also chose to back up the 275-hp Corvette-derived LT1 gut-rumbler with the automatic transmission, a power team we had not tested since the Camaro and Firebird twins got their makeover last year. We still think the U-shift-it six-­speed manual box better suits the sharp and reactive nature of the F-cars, espe­cially in Z28 and Trans Am guise. But the four-speed 4L60-E autobox does its chores effectively too, and we wouldn’t try to dis­suade anyone wishing to—as the French might say—take the auto route. Electronic controls (that’s the “E” suf­fix in 4L60-E) are new this year on the wide-ratio automatic. They allow finer management and smoother shifting by enabling interaction with the engine-con­trol computer. They also give the driver a choice of running characteristics. Push a console button curiously labeled “Trans­mission Perform” and the upshifts become joltingly firm and quick. Part-throttle shift points climb a bit up the rev scale, and manual downshifts execute faster. Selecting this mode tells the transmis­sion to act more as if it were seeing full throttle, so everything happens with greater intensity. This was, frankly, a pain around town, where we much preferred the more seamless action of the transmission’s normal program. But we did like the way “Perform” upped the energy level in brisk curvy-road cruising. Dick Kelley|Car and DriverOf course, when you really do go to full throttle, this higher-intensity shift mode has no discernible effect. Shift points and shift action are optimized for WOT anyway. So the selectable shift mode doesn’t improve performance in any measurable way. Not that this automatic’s acceleration needs much help. It’s an honest six-seconds-to-60 car, and it gave up surpris­ingly little time to the six-speed manual Firebird Formula we tested in January 1993. Weighing nearly 200 pounds more than that coupe (3668 pounds to 3471), the 25th Anniversary convertible reached 60 mph in 6.1 seconds, compared with the six-speed car’s 5.4. Quarter-mile results were 14.6 seconds at 96 mph versus 14.2 seconds at 99. You won’t notice a differ­ence that small without a stopwatch. In most other ways, the 25th Anniver­sary Trans Am works and feels just like the other new V-8-powered F-cars we’ve tested. (In addition to the Formula in Jan­uary 1993, we compared that car and a Camaro Z28 with a Mustang Cobra in February ’93, ran a Camaro Z28 convertible in October ’93, and compared a Z28 with a Mustang GT in December ’93.) That means we have a few quib­bles—front seats with slop in their mounts and marginal rearward visibility with the convertible top up—but the story is overwhelmingly upbeat. Like its brethren, this Trans Am is bold, tough, noisy, and fast. Especially fast, because Pontiac saw fit to stay with the high-per­formance Goodyear GS-C tires on the convertible. (Base Firebird Formula and Z28 ragtops come with Eagle GAs and an embarrassing 104-mph governor.) This automatic-transmission TA convertible whistled around the test track at 153 mph, the same as we’ve seen from the six-­speed Formula coupe. Dick Kelley|Car and DriverIn less intense duty, the TA convertible is easy to live with, though it’s never exactly relaxing, what with the hollering engine, pounding chassis, and darty steer­ing. Plus constant, unashamed ogling from your fellow motorists. But all that aside, the car works fine—especially as a con­vertible, from the no-fuss power top to the effective draft protection of the close-up, sharply raked windshield. More Trans Am Reviews from the ArchiveA Trans Am GT convertible lists for $26,969 these days. Add $995 for the 25th Anniversary package, a collection of cos­metic and identity items including the white paint scheme with blue stripe and bird decal, matching white alloy wheels, white leather seat faces with blue embroi­dery, and “25th” badging. The result is a white-on-white-on­-white stunner of a car, with the highest profile in traffic this side of a presidential motorcade. But if the rubberneckers get to be a bother, just put the throttle on the carpet and they’re history. As long gone as 1969.SpecificationsSpecifications
1994 25th Anniversary Edition Pontiac Firebird Trans Am GTVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, 2-door convertible
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $27,964/$28,965
ENGINEpushrod 16-valve V-8, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 350 in3, 5733 cm3Power: 275 hp @ 5000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic 
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 101.1 inLength: 197.0 inCurb Weight: 3668 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 6.1 sec1/4-Mile: 14.6 sec @ 96 mph100 mph: 16.1 sec130 mph: 32.6 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.2 secTop Speed (drag ltd): 153 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 166 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.84 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 17 mpg 
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity: 17 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the December 2023 issue of Car and Driver.Ever since a wheezy 88-hp 2.3-liter four-banger appeared under the hood of the much-maligned Mustang II, a Pavlovian recoil occurs whenever someone says “four-cylinder Mustang.” But turbocharged 2.3-liter Mustangs are another matter—especially today. That formula got a rocky, carbureted 132-hp start in 1979, but things improved, and in 1986 the Mustang SVO made 200 horses. Cheap gas, better emissions controls, and stale CAFE targets put them to pasture as V-8s reasserted their dominance. But after almost 30 years on the bench, the turbo 2.3-liter four returned in the 2015 Mustang EcoBoost making a heady 310 horsepower.HIGHS: Goes like stink, stellar handling, impressive highway mpg.That engine carries on in today’s seventh-generation 2024 Ford Mustang EcoBoost, with a 10-speed automatic the only transmission available. Ford substantially revised the engine, which now features direct and port fuel injection, a smaller twin-scroll turbo, and an electronic wastegate. Output barely budges, with a small bump to 315 horsepower and the same 350 pound-feet of torque. At least fuel economy is up a tick despite a slightly heavier curb weight.The optional High Performance pack doesn’t net the slight horsepower increase it did last year but otherwise includes a similar list of desirable upgrades. Chief among the goodies are 19-inch Pirelli P Zero PZ4 summer tires, a 3.55:1 limited-slip differential of the Torsen variety, and a performance-tuned suspension. You also get sizable Brembo six-piston front calipers and four-pot rears, a strut-tower brace, and an electronic pull-up parking brake activator that can lock the rear wheels using the hydraulic brakes to make getting sideways easier. Ford markets it as a drift brake—as if we need more Cars & Coffee getaway mishaps. At $3475, this stuff comes cheaper than last year, when you had to buy the $1995 Handling package on top of the $6150 High Performance package to get the Torsen and the Brembos. To make this possible, two features are now stand-alone options: the active performance exhaust ($1225) and MagneRide adaptive dampers ($1750, but the $5525 Premium package is also required).This new EcoBoost is the quickest four-cylinder Mustang we’ve tested, with a 4.5-second 60-mph time that feeds into a 13.2-second, 103-mph quarter-mile. The Brembos and Pirellis do the business under braking, hauling the Mustang to a stop from 70 mph in 149 feet and from 100 mph in 293 feet. There’s also plenty of stick on the skidpad, with 0.95-g orbits easy to pull off.But 10 gears are too many. With narrow gear spacing and an eagerness to upshift, this gearbox acts like a wannabe continuously variable automatic transmission. Sport mode helps, but then the adaptive performance exhaust switches on too, turning the exhaust into an overactive kazoo. Get the High Performance pack, but skip the active performance exhaust to save yourself embarrassment and $1225.LOWS: Sounds like stink, CVT-wannabe 10-speed auto, incongruent digital dash.If you’re not trying to set lap times, the Mustang EcoBoost drives like a champ. It changes directions willingly, gives the driver useful steering feedback, and cruises the interstate serenely, with comfy leather-trimmed buckets courtesy of the $3000 201A equipment package. We beat the 29-mpg EPA highway rating in our 75-mph test, getting 32 mpg. With a 16.0-gallon tank, this Mustang has long highway legs that can outlast your bladder for 510 miles of range. As we cruised along, some other 2024 Mustang developments started to gnaw at us. The huge curving screen feels like a mistake. While it’s conceptually similar to those in newer BMWs we love, and we tolerate it there, this execution isn’t good enough. Response times are slow, some of the operational details are strange, and the menu logic is obtuse. The physical buttons and knobs that remain are stuffed down below the A/C vents in an arrangement that lacks the cohesion of the previous car.More on the Mustang EcoBoostThe digital cluster has a choice of five layouts, one of which is a reincarnation of the classic 1987–93 Fox-body gauges. We rolled our eyes when this Easter egg was announced, but sampling the options shows the imitation analog instruments are by far the best choice, likely because they come from a time when the design brief said: Be legible, day or night. It makes the contemporary idea of customizable gauges seem pointless.VERDICT: A fun Stang despite some imperfections.At one time, the sting of the four-cylinder Mustang was its lame performance, but the 2024 EcoBoost gallops at a hearty clip. Today’s drawbacks are the lack of a manual transmission, the automatic’s overeager upshifting, and the unsatisfying exhaust note. If those are deal breakers, well, just across the showroom, there’s a Mustang GT calling your name.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Ford Mustang EcoBoostVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $32,515/$48,085
ENGINE
Turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, port and direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 138 in3, 2261 cm3Power: 315 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque: 350 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
10-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 15.4-in vented disc/14.0-in vented discTires: Pirelli P Zero PZ4255/40R-19 96Y
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.0 inLength: 189.4 inWidth: 75.4 inHeight: 55.0 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 55/30 ft3Trunk Volume: 13 ft3Curb Weight: 3812 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.5 sec100 mph: 12.2 sec1/4-Mile: 13.2 sec @ 103 mph130 mph: 24.7 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.9 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.5 secTop Speed (mfr’s claim): 155 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 149 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 293 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.95 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 32 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 510 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 24/21/29 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDTechnical 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 December 2023 issue of Car and Driver.The Toyota GR Corolla’s assertive styling and trick all-wheel-drive system draw inspiration from rally cars, and the track-focused Morizo Edition, named for the pseudonym Akio Toyoda assumes when racing cars, commits to the motorsports bit. The rear jettisons some nonessentials: The seats, window motors, door speakers, and wiper all go (weirdly, the rear-seat floor mats stay). Weight-saving measures make the Morizo 84 pounds lighter than the Circuit trim. HIGHS: The quickest GR Corolla, sharp and agile handling, keeps the manual alive. The turbocharged 1.6-liter three-cylinder has 300 horsepower, as in other GR Corollas. The Morizo ekes out an extra 22 pound-feet of torque for a total of 295. The torque peak starts a bit higher in the rev range, at 3250 rpm (compared with 3000 rpm), and isn’t quite as broad, finishing at 4600 rpm (not 5500). In that rev range, the Morizo feels punchy and alert. While the smaller plateau might seem like a loss, you can feel an additional power surge as you run close to the 7000-rpm redline.Light and nimble through corners, the Morizo is fitted with grippier and wider Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 tires that replace Michelin Pilot Sport 4 rubber. The stickier tires lead to 1.02 g’s on the skidpad, way up from the Circuit’s 0.94.It also benefits from a close-ratio version of the six-speed manual and shorter overall gearing. The extra oomph, shorter gearing, and stickier rubber net the Morizo a half-second advantage in the ever-important sprint to 60 mph, which it dispatches in 4.4 seconds. The sprint to 100 mph is 0.8 second better, at 11.3. However, the extra boost (1.1 psi more) to make the midrange power comes with a bit more lag, as evidenced by the 30-to-50-mph top-gear acceleration growing by 0.7 second. Although, if you’re going wide-open throttle in top gear at 30 mph, you’re GRing wrong.LOWS: It’s a $50K Corolla, harsh ride for daily driving, you can only bring one friend.Like the Circuit, the Morizo’s standard front and rear Torsen limited-slip differentials deftly maximize traction, and the gearbox’s notchy shifter is a joy to work. The brake ducts are also revised, and the Morizo stops from 70 mph in 152 feet, 15 feet shorter than the Circuit, though most of the credit should go to the Cup 2 tires.Michael Simari|Car and DriverTo increase structural rigidity, the Morizo has additional bracing where the rear seat would usually reside. The suspension is retuned but remains on the hard side of firm. While this is welcome on the racetrack, the loud and teeth-clattering ride on Michigan’s pockmarked roads makes longer drives exhausting.More on the GR CorollaIt might cost $51,420, but when you sit behind the wheel and take in the interior, you can’t escape the fact that the Morizo has its basis in a $23K economy car. But the 200 lucky owners of a Morizo probably won’t notice the cheapness as they tear around a track. The GR Corolla Morizo is a hatchback, but its handling, steering feel, and power put it in the same class as two-seat sports cars, and that’s a good enough reason not to have a back seat. VERDICT: The GR Corolla is proof that when Toyota goes all-in, the results can be mighty impressive.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Toyota GR Corolla MorizoVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 4-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $51,420/$52,063 Options: Wind Chill Pearl exterior paint, $425; door sill protectors, $179; frameless HomeLink mirror, $175; carpet floor mats and cargo mat, $289
ENGINE
Turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 12-valve inline-3, aluminum block and head, port and direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 99 in3, 1618 cm3Power: 300 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque: 295 lb-ft @ 3250 rpm
TRANSMISSION
6-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 14.0-in vented disc/11.7-in vented discTires: Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 Connect245/40ZR-18 (97Y) Extra Load
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 103.9 inLength: 173.6 inWidth: 72.8 inHeight: 57.2 inCurb Weight: 3185 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.4 sec100 mph: 11.3 sec1/4-Mile: 13.0 sec @ 106 mph130 mph: 21.5 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.2 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.0 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 9.2 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 6.4 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 144 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 152 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 301 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 1.02 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 21 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 32 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 420 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 24/21/28 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDAssociate 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