Car Reviews

From the May/June issue of Car and Driver.To all our beloved readers who’ve written to kvetch that we don’t cover affordable cars or vehicles that real people buy, this one’s for you.It doesn’t get any more mainstream than this group right here. The word “automobile” once conjured images of bestselling mid-size sedans such as the Toyota Camry, the Honda Accord, and the Ford Taurus, but now this is what we see on the road. The Toyota RAV4 overtook the Camry as the bestselling Toyota in 2017, one year after the Honda CR-V passed the Accord, and the Taurus quit the U.S. market in 2019. Today, Americans buy more compact SUVs than any other type of vehicle.The segment’s volume leader, the Toyota RAV4, is represented here by the tough-looking TRD Off-Road model. Next in ubiquity, as you probably could have guessed, is the Honda CR-V. We requested an EX-L, which is the highest trim with the turbocharged 1.5-liter inline-four, rather than the more powerful hybrid powertrain that enlivens the CR-V’s top trim levels. The Nissan Rogue also populates highways and byways just about everywhere, and here, it’s dolled up in the top Platinum trim. Rather than compare the sort-of-off-roader Bronco Sport, we requested the considerably more popular Escape, which arrived equipped to go after our fun-to-drive score with a 250-hp engine in the ST-Line Elite trim. The recently redesigned Kia Sportage seemingly couldn’t decide what to wear, so it combined rugged and fancy with its X-Pro Prestige duds. The Volkswagen Tiguan arrived carrying just a whiff of sportiness in the form of the SEL R-Line model. Mazda is represented by the newer CX-50 rather than the smaller CX-5, and it was a nattily attired Premium Plus, packing the turbocharged 2.5-liter inline-four under the hood. Finally, the relative newcomer Dodge Hornet appeared with its base powertrain (rather than the available plug-in hybrid) but with the Blacktop and Track Pack options bringing the signature Dodge ‘tude. Taking a lesson from the warmhearted television fare of our youth, we stopped at eight, because eight is enough. We realize some players in this vast field are missing, most notably the Chevrolet Equinox/GMC Terrain, the Hyundai Tucson, and the Subaru Forester. All are on the eve of redesigns or refreshes, so they sat out this round. And Mitsubishi wasn’t able to rustle up a non-plug-in Outlander. Excepting the mid-spec Honda, at $37,965, the vehicles on hand ended up in a fairly tight price range of $40,030 to $44,844—just below the most recent new-car average of $47,401. That’s keepin’ it real, people. Our herd assembled, we headed to the South of France. Ha! No. We went to the most real state we could think of: Ohio. Part of America’s Heartland, it also happens to be right next to Michigan. This is the true story . . . of what happened . . . when eight normcore SUVs . . . were let loose . . . in the real world.8th Place: Nissan RogueClimb into the Nissan Rogue Platinum for the first time, and you may be wowed. Caramel-colored leather—real and synthetic—appears on the instrument panel, the doors, and the sides of the center console. The seats have a quilted stitch pattern, and there’s an attractive mix of trim materials. Ultrawide-opening doors aid access to the roomy rear seat, which had the most amenities, with seat heaters, climate controls, A/C vents, and window shades. The infotainment looks good, retains a few buttons, and nestles into the dash, providing a padded rest for your hand.HIGHS: Interior looks like luxury, welcoming rear seat, lots of equipment.LOWS: Resistant to having fun, numb and aloof steering, falls far short of its EPA numbers.VERDICT: First impressions aren’t everything.We wish Nissan had put the same level of effort into the Rogue’s major controls. Several drivers called out the numb, woolly steering, and more objected to the spongy brake pedal. The comfort-biased suspension makes for smooth highway sailing, but don’t ask much more of this chassis. The Nissan suffers from significant body roll in faster corners and brake dive in hard stops, and it just seemed easily discombobulated. Then there’s the powertrain, where Nissan strays from the established formula, but the novel approach doesn’t bring much payoff. Nissan boldly employs only three cylinders, whereas the others in this contest rely on four. Granted, the Rogue’s turbocharged engine is no smaller than the Honda CR-V’s turbo at 1.5 liters, and it features Nissan’s variable-compression-ratio technology (it ranges from 8.0 to 14.0:1). The resulting output is 201 horsepower and 225 pound-feet of torque. When it comes to powertrains, this test was bifurcated into the fast group (Dodge, Ford, Mazda) and the slow group (everyone else). Of the latter, Nissan’s turbo three and CVT combo was—just barely—the quickest to 60 mph at 8.0 seconds. But once you’re cruising along at a steady speed, the turbo three suffers from sluggish throttle response—note the Rogue’s last-place showing in the 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph acceleration tests (the latter tied with the Sportage). At least this engine is well muted when giving its all—it’s the quietest of the group, in fact, so there’s no offensive droning.Andi Hedrick|Car and DriverWith the fewest cylinders to feed, the Nissan boasts the best EPA numbers, which look good on the window sticker. But this hardworking triple fell 5 mpg short of its EPA combined estimate in our hands, landing midpack at 26 mpg.Overall, the Rogue is just fine if you don’t look past the surface, but others here have more depth.2024 Nissan Rogue Platinum AWD201-hp turbocharged inline-3, continuously variable automatic, 3729 lbBase/As-Tested: $41,590/$43,375C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.0 sec1/4-Mile: 16.1 sec @ 87 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 177 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.83 g75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg7th Place: Kia SportageWill it surprise you to learn that, aside from the mid-trim Honda, this top-spec Kia had the lowest as-tested price? Or that it came with a raft of features and amenities? Those include heated and ventilated front seats, a heated steering wheel, a panoramic sunroof, a 360-degree camera, blind-spot monitoring, and Kia’s Highway Driving Assist—a luxury-grade haul for just a hair over $40,000.HIGHS: Wallet-friendly price, all the bells and whistles, quiet cruising.LOWS: Oh so slow, middling fuel economy, longest stopping distance.VERDICT: How slow can you go?The exterior is edgy, if polarizing, while the screentastic dash conveys a note of modernity inside. Once you get past the pointless home screen on the center display, you’ll find a pleasing array of audio and navigation information. But no one liked the ridiculous dual-mode haptic buttons and dial (also found in other Kias) that switch between controlling climate and audio functions, all but guaranteeing you’re always in the wrong mode. We did appreciate the plentiful stowage, and the sliding and reclining rear seats offer an extra measure of versatility. Splashes of piano black and the seats’ novel stitch pattern divert attention from the liberal use of hard and cheap-looking plastic elsewhere—perhaps the reason why this cabin smells like a dime-store shower curtain.None of us were overly impressed with the Sportage dynamically, with drivers calling it out for excessive body roll and brake dive. The X-Pro trim’s 17-inch wheels and 65-series all-terrain tires smother bad pavement, but they also cling to the skidpad with only 0.81 g and contribute to a 182-foot stop from 70 mph, the longest in this comparison test.The biggest issue, though, is in the engine room. Our Sportage had the base engine, and the naturally aspirated 2.5-liter four-cylinder struggled like an air-cooled VW bus on uphill grades. The gutless powertrain also requires a lot of planning for passes. Although the 187 horsepower and 178 pound-feet of torque are only three horsepower and one pound-foot in arrears of the CR-V’s engine, the Kia’s 9.1-second 60-mph time is a full second slower than the Honda’s. And since you have to work the engine so hard, there’s no payoff in fuel economy, with the Kia’s 25-mpg observed average trailing all, save for the much-quicker Mazda and Dodge. Relief for this biggest pain point, however, isn’t far away. We’d invite you to check out the quicker and more economical hybrid and plug-in-hybrid Sportage models.2024 Kia Sportage X-Pro Prestige AWD187-hp inline-4, 8-speed automatic, 3737 lbBase/As-Tested: $39,365/$40,030C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.1 sec1/4-Mile: 16.9 sec @ 84 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg6th Place: Toyota RAV4With a portfolio of off-road favorites such as the Tacoma, the 4Runner, and the Land Cruiser, it’s no wonder Toyota would want to spread some of that rugged image to the RAV4. Our test example was decked out in TRD Off-Road trim, which, in addition to a slightly tougher appearance, brought softer suspension tuning (springs and dampers), 18-inch wheels with Falken Wildpeak A/T Trail 01A tires, roof rails, and a front skid plate. HIGHS: 4Runner-wannabe rugged looks, plenty of space for people and their stuff, observed fuel economy tops the field.LOWS: Engine strains and sounds coarse doing so, off-road kit is a hindrance on-road, interior is more practical than pretty. VERDICT: A Toyota that will please people who like Toyotas.That equipment would likely give the RAV4 greater off-pavement capability than the rest of this bunch, a boon for those who go off-road. But most drivers don’t, and we didn’t either. And on asphalt, the all-terrain tires do the handling no favors, as steering feel is largely AWOL, and the Toyota posted the lowest skidpad grip at just 0.79 g. The tall sidewalls provide an extra measure of cushion over potholes, however, and the RAV4 also exhibits good body control, considering the TRD Off-Road setup. Superfluous running boards, $620 for the pair, were an obstacle to step over on each entry and exit (the TRD Off-Road’s ride height isn’t nearly great enough to require them, and they’d just be a hindrance on the trail). Inside, the rubberized vinyl, chunky HVAC knobs, and thick door pulls set the style tone. Copious storage space enhances the practical vibe, as does the straightforward switchgear. Our testers deemed the driver’s chair to be about average, while a low cushion hurt rear-seat comfort, although space is more than adequate.”Just adequate” describes the RAV4’s 2.5-liter engine, at least in city and suburban traffic. The farther you push the pedal, though, the more gutless the four-banger feels, as it makes more noise than thrust. At 78 decibels, the RAV4 tied the Mazda for loudest under acceleration, but its engine note is far more irritating. At least this engine is paired with an eight-speed automatic rather than a CVT. The Toyota’s 60-mph time (8.3 seconds) and quarter-mile effort (16.5 seconds at 87 mph) were slower than all but the Kia’s. Despite working hard, this naturally aspirated four-banger squeezes a lot of miles out of each tank of gas. At 29 mpg, the RAV4’s observed fuel economy led the field, and its 32 mpg in our 75-mph highway test was also the most efficient, tied with the Escape.Top-drawer fuel economy is historically a Toyota trait, as is a practical interior, and the trail-ready getup doesn’t seem like an artifice. Add presumed reliability, and the RAV4’s combination of virtues explains its popularity but doesn’t push it to the front of this pack.2024 Toyota RAV4 TRD Off-Road203-hp inline-4, 8-speed automatic, 3719 lbBase/As-Tested: $39,645/$44,844C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.3 sec1/4-Mile: 16.5 sec @ 87 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 176 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.79 g75-mph Highway Driving: 32 mpg5th Place: Dodge HornetStarting our drive on the cratered roads of southeast Michigan put the Hornet in the worst possible light. We hadn’t gone 1000 yards before slamming into a pothole that we feared might’ve bent a rim. All the way to our first driver-change point outside Toledo, the Dodge was repeatedly racked by broken pavement. Flicking through the stupefying amount of information available in the digital instrument cluster and the center display (which includes peak g, turbo psi, and torque output), we thought we might have found the cause: tire pressures that were 43–44 psi. It turns out that the recommended cold pressure is 42 psi, so we concluded that the Hornet is supposed to drive this way. HIGHS: Hemi-like acceleration, sporty interior environs, hot-hatch persona. LOWS: Hemi-like fuel consumption, painful over potholes, cramped back seat.VERDICT: The small crossover for those who really want a Challenger.It’s also supposed to drive lively, affecting the persona of a racy hot hatch rather than a workaday SUV. And it does. Look no further than its 268-hp turbo four, the most powerful here—and that’s the base engine. The Hornet took the checkered flag in the 60-mph sprint with a time of 5.7 seconds, and it also hustled through the quarter-mile in 14.5 seconds (just a tick behind the Escape) at 95 mph. Power delivery isn’t perfectly linear at low speeds, but that’s perhaps to be expected, as is the snarling exhaust note. It contributed to a 73-decibel din on the highway, where the speedy Dodge also had a greater-than-average thirst for unleaded.The steering is hyperresponsive, and the Hornet wants to dive through corners. Even with its dampers in Sport mode, the Hornet feels taller than a real hot hatch when the road gets twisty, but its 0.85 g of grip is the best here, aided by the most athletic footwear in the test (Z-rated Michelin Pilot Sport All Season 4 tires). The red-accented cabin features heavily bolstered, body-hugging seats that hold you in place for all the action. Most drivers praised them, although some found they had to adjust the seating position awkwardly high to see the gauges, putting their noggin close to the ceiling. There was unanimous agreement about the rear seat, which is seriously cramped. And the luggage compartment is the smallest in the test. The highly configurable infotainment looks great but can be laggy, and the tiny touchpoints are too small a target to hit when on the move. The cabin also has some ergonomic oddities, like an audio volume roller tucked behind the shifter and a wiper stalk whose logic is inscrutable. The Hornet, though, is unbothered by such mundane concerns. 2024 Dodge Hornet GT Plus AWD268-hp turbocharged inline-4, 9-speed automatic, 3844 lbBase/As-Tested: $37,995/$44,725C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 5.7 sec1/4-Mile: 14.5 sec @ 95 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 177 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.85 g75-mph Highway Driving: 28 mpgCar and Driver4th Place: Ford EscapeIn the 1973 film White Lightning, bootlegger Gator McKlusky (played by Burt Reynolds) pilots a specially prepared Ford Custom 500 whose plain brown wrapper conceals a hotted-up engine within. Our Ford Escape wore a similar cloak of anonymity with its almost intentionally anodyne styling, but it too was packing under the hood.HIGHS: Overachieving powertrain, surprising fuel economy, well-laid-out infotainment.LOWS: Depressing interior environs, wonky brake-pedal action, exterior is a style-free zone. VERDICT: All ate up with motor.Boasting the model’s top-of-the-food-chain engine, a turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four, this Ford has 250 horsepower and 280 pound-feet of torque. That was enough to vie with the high-strung Dodge in acceleration: The Escape was the quickest off the line (to 30 mph) and the quickest to triple digits—in between, its 5.8-second time to 60 is just 0.1 second in arrears of the Hornet. From 30 to 50 mph and again from 50 to 70 mph, the Ford is in front, besting all comers. Away from the drag strip, the Escape has plenty of easy oomph, and throttle response and power delivery are more linear here than in the Hornet. There is a Sport mode (buried three layers into the touchscreen), but it seemed only to lock out top gear, so it’s not something you’ll want to access anyway.Despite the powertrain’s hustle, the Ford is a suburban softy at heart, as it showed on the winding, diving, roller-coaster-like two-lanes in southern Ohio, where it gamely went along with the crowd but did so with a grimace and gritted teeth. Or maybe that was the driver. Either way, blame the weirdly springy steering effort and brakes that suffered from both a squishy pedal and grabby response. The convex-feeling seat cushion adds to the awkwardness.The Escape is far more at home in the suburban slog or motoring along bombed-out urban freeways. Its comfortable-riding suspension shrugged off the slings and arrows of northern Ohio’s and southeast Michigan’s most battered pavement. Oh, and over the course of our test, the Escape also posted the second-best gas mileage, just 1 mpg behind the far-slower RAV4.This generation of Escape has been around since 2020 but boasts plenty of screen acreage inside, part of a 2023 update. The digital instrument cluster is a basic affair with limited configurability, but the well-designed central infotainment display is able to show multiple functions on its home screen. Look away from glowing displays, however, and the Escape cabin could be something from the Big Three bankruptcy era, as Ford appears to have wrung every nickel of cost from this black-grained-plastic interior. The materials are starkly below the rest of the field, and this isn’t exactly a field of Bentleys. But call us Gator, because if we were chasing moonshiners in Arkansas, this low-key Ford might be our first choice.2023 Ford Escape ST-Line Elite AWD250-hp turbocharged inline-4, 8-speed automatic, 3697 lbBase/As-Tested (2024 model): $39,455/$43,355 C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 5.8 sec1/4-Mile: 14.4 sec @ 97 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 166 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g75-mph Highway Driving: 32 mpg3rd Place: Honda CR-VSitting in the Honda CR-V, there’s lots to like. Thin pillars and large windows enhance visibility and overall well-being. The driver’s seat earned the best score for comfort, and the rear seat took top honors for space and was judged the most comfortable. Additionally, the CR-V has the roomiest cargo hold with rear seats up or folded. Although our EX-L was far from top spec, the door panels and dash look rich, with interesting details. The steering wheel feels great, although the thinly padded door armrests do not. Three knurled-edge knobs look and feel like quality, but the Honda was not immune from minor fit issues. We don’t ding the CR-V for its physical gauges—we actually kind of prefer them—but there’s no charm in the puny infotainment screen and its small touchpoints. HIGHS: The ace of space, pleasing cabin, charming chassis. LOWS: The lack of pace, missing features, smallish infotainment display.VERDICT: Much of what we love about the Accord, in SUV form.Steering that’s absurdly light at parking-lot speeds quickly firms up once you’re on the move. When the road gets twisty, the helm’s natural feel makes guiding the Honda an almost unconscious exercise. The CR-V feels unflappable, even though its 0.82-g skidpad result was unremarkable. The brake pedal is similarly well tuned, and the brakes hauled the CR-V down from 70 mph in just 163 feet, the best in this test. The contrast with the Escape (from which our drivers migrated as we moved through the cars in alphabetical order) was striking.Accelerating onto the freeway, however, cues the sad trombone. A 5-to-60-mph charge down the on-ramp takes 9.0 seconds. Honda’s pint-size 1.5-liter musters 190 horsepower and 179 pound-feet of torque and is lashed to a CVT. The CVT’s faux shifts mitigate elastic throttle response somewhat, but this droning powertrain underserves this nicely tuned chassis. However, observed fuel economy, at 28 mpg, was just 1 mpg shy of the top-ranking Toyota.Honda doesn’t offer its top-drawer model with a nonhybrid powertrain, and that held the CR-V back a bit in the final tally, as the Honda’s missing features outweighed the $2065 savings compared to the richly equipped Kia.Of course, the CR-V offers more expensive models that are better equipped, and they feature a higher-achieving hybrid powertrain that both accelerates quicker and returns better fuel economy. But we wanted this test to focus on nonhybrids, so that’s not what we had here.2024 Honda CR-V EX-L AWD190-hp turbocharged inline-4, continuously variable automatic, 3614 lbBase/As-Tested (2024 model): $37,510/$37,965C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.1 sec1/4-Mile: 16.3 sec @ 89 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 163 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg2nd Place: Volkswagen TiguanTired of flailing in the U.S. market, Volkswagen finally decided to give the people what they want. And VW figured that what Americans want is really big SUVs. Therefore, the Tiguan—measured from nose to tail—is the biggest SUV here (just as the Atlas is among the biggest in its segment and the Taos in its). It’s big enough to squeeze in a third row; without that option, our test example swallowed 11 carry-on-sized boxes with the seats up (just one less than the CR-V) and 25 with the rear seats folded (tying the Rogue for third place behind the CR-V and the Sportage). Certainly, the cabin feels roomy, an impression bolstered by expansive glass. VW has also learned that Americans don’t always demand the finest materials, so there are lots of hard-edged surfaces in here, although the SEL does get real cowhide on the seats. VW has gone all in on screens, and while the central display works well, the new haptic climate controls are a step back ergonomically. There are more haptic buttons on the steering wheel. What we really wish, though, is that someone could snap Wolfsburg out of its obsession with touch sliders.HIGHS: American-size interior, Korean-level value, German-correct suspension tuning.LOWS: The lowest horsepower meets the highest curb weight, fussy touch controls. VERDICT: Designed for America, with just a hint of the Old World.The Tiguan is the only member of our octet to weigh in on the high side of two tons, against which Volkswagen’s turbo four brings the fewest ponies to bear (184). Its 221 pound-feet of torque, however, arrives at a low 1600 rpm. That helps the Tiguan move easily through traffic, albeit with some turbo lag. Still, an 8.2-second 60-mph time is the result of too many pounds and not enough horses. Despite its heft, the Volkswagen slightly overachieved in fuel economy, returning 30 mpg in our 75-mph test (against a 29-mg EPA highway rating) and 26 mpg overall (beating its EPA combined estimate by 2 mpg).If the Tiguan shows any evidence of VW’s roots, it’s in the chassis tuning. The suspension is taut and well controlled—dare we say Germanic? A vestige of old VW. And the Tiguan’s 0.84 g of skidpad grip tied the CX-50 for second place. Good sightlines and a chair with enough lateral support to hold you in place help the driver pilot this SUV confidently on winding roads. It’s too bad about the overboosted steering, which feels like another sop to our market.VW has also learned that we love a good bargain. The Tiguan’s as-tested price is within a few hundred dollars of the Kia’s, and that’s with a similarly deep roster of equipment. All of this combines for a well-rounded package, enough to give the Tiguan a podium finish.2024 Volkswagen Tiguan SEL R-Line AWD184-hp turbocharged inline-4, 8-speed automatic, 4003 lbBase/As-Tested: $40,305/$40,700C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.2 sec1/4-Mile: 16.3 sec @ 85 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 181 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.84 g75-mph Highway Driving: 30 mpg1st Place: Mazda CX-50The compact SUV isn’t typically a species that gets by on its looks, but the Mazda CX-50 almost could. Longer, lower, and wider than its CX-5 sibling, the CX-50 is model handsome with its scowling visage and long-hood profile that convincingly ape an upscale, rear-wheel-drive layout (it’s a ruse; the CX-50 has a transverse engine, just like the others here). Only the fake rear fascia vents and the thick band of black plastic along the lower body torpedo its invitation to the Museum of Modern Art. HIGHS: Fetchingly wagon-like proportions, robust turbo four, ride and handling in harmony. LOWS: Cavelike rear seat, not-so-great gas mileage, infotainment struggles. VERDICT: A top-tier powertrain meets a top-tier chassis.Whereas the others serve up a new-car smell that’s a mix of off-gassing plastics and glue, the smooth-grained hides on the CX-50’s dash and door panels give the Mazda’s high-design interior the aroma of a fine-shoe store. We’re also charmed by the physical switchgear and the real gearshift, but we just can’t follow the obtuse logic of Mazda’s rotary controller for the infotainment system. And despite being more than five inches longer than the CX-5, the Mazda’s dark rear seat was deemed cavelike and not particularly comfortable, and its luggage compartment was smaller than the group average.Start driving, though, and the CX-50 quickly elbows its way back to the front of the pack. The steering’s heft seems like an artificial concoction, but the three-spoke wheel is deliciously precise and the responses predictable. Skidpad grip, at 0.84 g, is just 0.01 g behind the Dodge. The tightly wound suspension manages to rein in body motions effectively without transmitting undue harshness over broken pavement. This is the best-realized chassis in the group, and it lends the Mazda an air of upmarket refinement that’s missing among the rest.With a relatively large 2.5-liter inline-four, the Mazda doesn’t rely heavily on turbo boost. Throttle response and power delivery are smooth and linear. Despite 256 horsepower and a best-in-test 320 pound-feet of torque, the Mazda trailed the Ford and the Dodge in most acceleration tests but was solidly in the upper echelon. Although they worked harmoniously together, the biggest-displacement engine and the transmission with the fewest ratios were not a winning pair at the gas pump; the CX-50’s 23-mpg average brought up the rear in this measure.Despite falling short in some practical measures, the Mazda’s combination of a solid powertrain and winning chassis made it the vehicle we most wanted to drive and live with. And the plush, high-quality interior is a fine place to spend time, even when sitting in traffic. The real world can often be unglamorous, but the Mazda proves that the right compact SUV can elevate the mundane.2024 Mazda CX-50 Turbo Premium Plus256-hp turbocharged inline-4, 6-speed automatic, 3864 lbBase/As-Tested: $44,675/$44,675C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.4 sec1/4-Mile: 14.9 sec @ 92 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 167 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.84 g75-mph Highway Driving: 29 mpgCar and DriverJoe Lorio has been obsessed with cars since his Matchbox days, and he got his first subscription to Car and Driver at age 11. Joe started his career at Automobile Magazine under David E. Davis Jr., and his work has also appeared on websites including Amazon Autos, Autoblog, AutoTrader, Hagerty, Hemmings, KBB, and TrueCar. More

Ultra-high-performance SUVs have never been more popular—think Aston Martin DBX (697 horsepower), Cadillac Escalade V (682 horses), Dodge Durango SRT Hellcat (710 horsepower), BMW XM Label Red (738 horses), and Ferrari Purosangue (715 horsepower), not to mention fully electric entrants such as the Rivian R1S (835 horses), Lotus Eletre R (905 horsepower), and the Tesla Model X Plaid (1020 horses). The latest addition to this elite group is the 789-hp Lamborghini Urus SE. This new plug-in-hybrid variant of the freshly facelifted Urus fuses a 612-hp twin-turbocharged 4.0-liter V-8 and a 189-hp electric motor sandwiched between it and the transmission. Maximum torque is restricted to 701 pound-feet in order to preserve the eight-speed automatic gearbox. This awesome punch of torque is spread evenly from 1750 rpm all the way to 5750 rpm.The PHEV drivetrain is closely related to the 729-hp Porsche Cayenne Turbo E-Hybrid, which costs $148,550 before options. For about $90K more, Lambo used to sell us the base 657-hp Urus S, but as of May, both the S and the even pricier, harder-core Performante will be replaced by the SE hybrid, which is expected to cost around $275,000. That’s a lot of coin, but bear in mind the V-12-engine rival from the other side of the Italian motor valley carries an even more outrageous $398,350 sticker.We drove the PHEV Lamborghini in minus-13-degree temperatures in Lapland, where pre-heating the battery overnight was a necessity. Due to space limitations, the lithium-ion battery sandwiched between the cargo floor and the electronically controlled limited-slip rear differential delivers a Car and Driver–estimated 21.8 kilowatt-hours, which should amount to roughly 30 miles of zero-emission driving range—in normal temperatures. (In contrast, the 31.8-kWh battery in the Range Rover Sport P550e should amount to a more useful 50 miles.)”The e-motor transforms the character of the car,” states chief project engineer Stefano Cossalter. “It speeds up the throttle response, and it provides that wow-effect immediate kick in the back we know from potent EVs.” Pumping up the action at the word go are 356 pound-feet of torque from the e-motor. A moment later, the feisty V-8 muscles in with even stronger dynamic empathy. Although the SE version carries a claimed substantial 661-pound weight burden, it can storm from zero to 62 mph in a claimed 3.4 seconds—gaining one-tenth over the Urus S but losing one-tenth to the Performante. The top speed is 194 mph. According to the Sant’Agata grapevine, in a couple of years, we can expect an even brawnier, more aggressively tuned, and allegedly marginally lighter 900-hp Urus Superveloce. This last-hurrah version should crack the 200-mph mark and shave a couple more tenths off the acceleration time. The fully electric Urus replacement based on the group’s same components set as the 2028 Lanzador was recently pushed back to late 2029.Since the Swedes don’t grit or salt their roads except on steep inclines, from October to April the whole country is a white and gray drifter’s paradise. Although traction control, stability control, and all-wheel drive have taken the edge off traditional lurid oversteer antics, cornering grip still is a tricky variable on winding roads glazed with black ice or dusted with fresh snow. Lock the Urus’s Tamburo drive-mode selector in EV Drive, and the e-motor integrated in the transmission will power the Urus quietly at up to 81 mph, operating both axles when required. “The SE is not a dedicated track weapon like the Performante,” says the chief technical officer, Rouven Mohr. “Instead, this vehicle is all about the flow. The smooth and seamless integration of mechanical and electric torque makes it easy to drive fast, easy to drift, and easy to control at all times.”Out of the grand total of 789 horsepower, more than 20 percent is generated by the e-motor. Although the mix keeps changing, every step on the loud pedal summons the underlying extra e-power, which is diligently vectored side to side and front to rear, depending on the drive mode. Flick the toggle to Corsa, and the most radical of four new Electric Performance Strategies will duly light up the rear tires while diverting just enough grunt to the fronts to help straighten the line past the apex. At least that’s the theory. On the curvy test track milled onto a frozen lake near Arvidsjaur, the longest slide would invariably turn into an even longer counterslide because when stability control is sound asleep, all four 23-inch Pirelli Sottozeros are free to spin ferociously on the freshly roughened ice, while torque vectoring and the four-wheel steering are working overtime. Although we’re doing between 50 and 90 mph depending on radius, surface, and confidence, there is not a trace of angst bubbling under because the Urus SE keeps its balance with uncanny poise, panache, and precision.Structured like a Rolodex, the Tamburo in-dash selector now offers 10 dynamic modes. The new additions are the aforementioned EV Drive, along with Hybrid, Performance, and Recharge. Active in Strada, Sports, Corsa, and Neve, the latter pumps fresh energy into the battery until it is 80 percent full. There is, however, no boost button or downshift paddle. All it takes to tack your passenger to the backrest of the bucket seat is a hard hit on the accelerator in Performance or Corsa. Trying not to grin ain’t easy, because the effect is sensationally surreal and accompanied by the quad-tailpipe monster’s bellowing roar. First, the e-torque kicks butt without warning, then the V-8 takes over, spiraling past its 6000-rpm power peak to the 7000-rpm rev cut. Paddle-shifting through the gears is a lot of fun, but for maximum effect, check out the claimed 11.4-second time-warp launch-control-to-125-mph stunt. There is no doubt about it: This highly physical electro-mechanical go-faster SUV would deserve a 10 on the emotional-climax scale if it weren’t for that spoilsport overdose of mass and momentum.To mark the occasion, the Urus also receives its first facelift, which includes a redesigned cockpit. The most significant functional improvement concerns the addition of overdue adaptive matrix LED headlamps, which make a huge difference—we know, because Swedish winter nights stretch from 3:30 pm to 9:30 am. Also new are the power-dome hood, the available 23-inch Galanthus wheels shod with 285/35 and 325/30 Pirelli summer tires, a restyled liftgate sporting a pronounced center crease, more prominent hexagon-mesh diffusors front and rear, restyled bumpers, plenty more Y-pattern graphics, and a choice of over 100 different paint colors. “The Urus SE looks decidedly fresher and more modern,” claims chief designer Mitja Borkert, adding, “but it also is a notably more functional piece of kit. For instance, brake cooling was improved by 30 percent; bigger spoilers and air curtains increase the rear downforce by 35 percent; and the overall aerodynamic efficiency is up 15 percent.”The dashboard looks vaguely familiar, but the layout and most of the content are actually new. The bigger 12.3-inch touchscreen is now more intuitive to use, voice control is improved, new driver-assistance systems have been added, and while parent-company Audi has virtually banned knobs and buttons, Lamborghini remains loyal to its row of prominent toggle switches and caged starter button. The enlarged climate-control tableau looks rather busy and generic, but the center stack complete with the supportive handrail that runs below the main high-resolution interface is ergonomically a step in the right direction. Still present are the multicolored instruments, the hexagonal air vents, and the omnipresent matching graphics that are more than ever part of the brand’s DNA.More Lambo Hybrid ContentLike the Revuelto and the Huracán Sterrato, which were also part of our three-day, six-car epic journey close to the Arctic Circle, the Urus SE was a hoot to drive on the slippery Scandinavian turf. It takes off like a rocket before reeling in the horizon at warp speed, is enormously powerful yet always nicely controllable, and feels reassuringly stable and commendably compliant. Against that is the hefty extra mass and the limited EV driving range. Still, we’d welcome the chance to further explore the talents of this power hybrid in normal temperatures and on normal dry or wet roads, preferably in combination with a few extra corners and gradients. Although 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

From the May/June issue of Car and Driver.For most of us, scoring a good deal means snagging a two-for-one coupon on Cinnamon Toast Crunch at the grocery store or receiving a random check for $2.84 from a class-action lawsuit you forgot you joined. But for other people, a good deal looks like the Mercedes-Maybach S680 4Matic—a quarter-million-dollar V-12 limo that offers silver champagne flutes and a back-seat fridge. Step away from the guillotine for a moment, and we’ll explain.In the world of ultraluxury automobiles, as with mainstream vehicles, SUVs are the chic thing and command premium prices. The last V-8 Bentley Bentayga S we tested cost $302,910, and a V-12 Rolls-Royce Cullinan can easily cross the half-million-dollar mark. Against those yardsticks, the Maybach we drove looks like a steal. Consider what $245,650 gets you: a 621-hp twin-turbocharged 6.0-liter V-12, rear seats to shame the ones you might find on a private jet (complete with tray tables), and power rear doors you can control with hand gestures. Enjoy your glass of Louis Roederer, Jedi, as you use the Force to close your door.HIGHS: Truly decadent back seats, unexpected sports-sedan reflexes, actually a good value.Meanwhile, the high-dollar SUVs—even Mercedes-Maybach’s own GLS—tend to blend in with all the other body-on-frame behemoths on American roads. But a sedan the size of a giant SUV? Now we’re talking street presence, and the S680’s 133.7-inch wheelbase is within a half-inch of a Chevy Suburban’s. The effect is one of extravagant menace—like you want to meet whoever climbs out of the back, but also, maybe you don’t. And even though the S680 is a mutated strain of S-class, nobody mistakes it for an off-the-rack Benz. Should you need to teach onlookers how to pronounce it, here’s a handy mnemonic tool: It’s not your-bach, it’s my-bach. While the S680’s $6000 Executive Rear Seat Plus package brings two of the most luxurious chairs in a modern automobile, your chauffeur will have a pretty great time up front too. That V-12, with its 664 pound-feet of torque, simply shrugs off the S680’s 5301 pounds and rips this land yacht to 60 mph in 3.7 seconds. The S680 blows past the quarter-mile in 11.9 seconds at 120 mph, figures that put it roughly door to door with a C7 Corvette Stingray. Benz’s four-door leviathan serves up more body roll than a racing sloop but still posts an impressive 0.92 g of stick on the skidpad. A car this large doesn’t seem like it should move like this, but that’s part of the appeal—a few dozen layers beneath the genteel limousine, there’s a sports sedan awaiting an imprudent prod of the throttle. Rear-axle steering helps enable lively responses, with as much as 10.0 degrees of countersteer with the 19-inch wheels (Mercedes relegates the 21-inchers and staggered 20-inchers to 4.5 degrees).LOWS: Soft brake pedal, 14-mpg EPA combined rating, having to correct the hoi polloi’s mispronunciation of “Maybach.”So, back to price. The S680’s $232,750 base sticker puts it in rare air. Yet it seems like a bargain for a car offering so much luxury, performance, and V-12 star quality. Maybach exists in a weird space, a premium variation of an already upper-crust marque, but without quite the badge snobbery of a venerated stand-alone like Bentley or Rolls (the two companies Mercedes-Maybach overtly identifies as competitors). In other words, this nearly $250K car feels like it could justifiably cost $100K more. If you can write that check, the S680 is sedan writ large.View PhotosJames Lipman|Car and DriverThis supreme S-class would be suitable transport for the illuminati.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Mercedes-Maybach S680Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $232,750/$245,650Options: Executive Rear Seat Package Plus (includes First Class 4-seat configuration, folding rear tables), $6000; Maybach champagne flutes, $3200; Piano Lacquer Flowing Lines trim, $1300; 21-inch multispoke Champagne Flute wheels, $1300; rear refrigerator, $1100 
ENGINE
twin-turbocharged and intercooled SOHC 36-valve V-12, aluminum block and head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 365 in3, 5980 cm3Power: 621 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque: 664 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: multilink/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 15.4-in vented disc/14.4-in vented discTires: Pirelli P Zero PZ4F: 265/35R-21 101Y Extra Load MO-S PNCSR: 265/35R-21 101Y Extra Load MO-S PNCS
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 133.7 inLength: 215.3 inWidth: 75.6 inHeight: 59.4 inTrunk Volume: 12 ft3Curb Weight: 5301 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 3.7 sec100 mph: 8.3 sec1/4-Mile: 11.9 sec @ 120 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.2 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.6 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.2 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 129 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 165 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 331 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.92 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 17 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 14/12/20 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDEzra Dyer is a Car and Driver senior editor and columnist. He’s now based in North Carolina but still remembers how to turn right. He owns a 2009 GEM e4 and once drove 206 mph. Those facts are mutually exclusive. More

Porsche’s second electric car is aimed squarely at the jugular of the market. Be it affordable or luxurious, the compact SUV is stealing hearts and stealing sales from every vehicle segment. Since everyone seems to want to park one in their garage, it makes sense that Porsche’s second electric offering is a version of its compact SUV, the Macan. Product planners are probably still kicking themselves for sending out the Taycan as the leadoff hitter. Unimpressed with some of the decisions that were handed down on the shared platform of the original Macan—the height of the front seats for one—Porsche claims to have led the engineering and design of the hardware for the new electric Macan’s Premium Platform Electric (PPE) architecture. This is the sort of decision-making power that comes from having sold more than 850,000 Macans over the past 10 years. Porsche probably could have sold even more, but the Macan’s factory in Leipzig, Germany, has been banging against its three-shift redline for years. While we never found much wrong with the seating position of the gas-powered Macan, the electric versions, the Macan 4 and the Macan Turbo, sit 1.1 inches lower in front and 0.6 inch lower in the rear seat. Anyone familiar with the gas-powered Macan is unlikely to notice the seating-position difference, but they will likely suspect that they’re in an updated Macan. The gauge cluster is now a 12.6-inch screen, and there’s a 10.9-inch touchscreen in the middle of the instrument panel. For those who want more screens, another 10.9-inch unit in front of the passenger is a $1570 option that will keep your shotgun rider entertained if not carsick. As with all of these passenger-facing screens, the driver’s view of it is blacked out when the Macan is out of park, making it impossible to watch “Window Shop with Car and Driver” on YouTube while driving.There’s a simplicity to the rest of the interior, but, thankfully, a volume knob remains and there are physical HVAC controls below the touchscreen. The leather-wrapped dashboard is a rich touch, but the plainness of the design doesn’t look expensive, a view perhaps made worse by the black interior of our sample cars. A 3.4-inch wheelbase increase over the old Macan doesn’t add up to a vastly larger interior here. Rear-seat room is spacious enough for a six-footer and certainly won’t trigger claustrophobics, but the rear seat isn’t a cross-your-legs situation if you sit behind an average driver. Just like on a 911, there’s a front trunk (or frunk). There’s only three cubic feet of space up there, but it checks an electric-car box that the Germans had largely ignored. Most of your stuff will go under the hatch, where there’s up to 18 cubic feet of space. Some electric-car facts: The new platform has a 95.0-kWh battery pack living under the floor and provides a Car and Driver–estimated 250 to 300 miles of range. Like the Taycan, the electric Macan has an 800-volt architecture that enables fast-charging. Porsche says it’ll run from 10 to 80 percent charge in the time it takes to watch an episode of Seinfeld without commercials—actually, Porsche said about 21 minutes. On a slower AC connection, the onboard charger can take in as much as 11.0 kW, so figure on about 10 hours from empty to full.Those numbers out of the way, let’s discuss what a Macan without an engine is like to drive. First off, it’s quiet. The Macan 4 and the Macan Turbo we drove both were fitted with optional thermal and acoustic glass ($920), which helped keep sound levels low. For $490, you can select Electric Sport Sound, which offers a louder buzzy, wooshy soundtrack for the driving experience. We tried it, started to get a headache, took a couple of Advil, then switched it off. Save your money.Both the 402-hp Macan 4 and the Turbo share their 234-hp front motors. While the 4 gets by with a 375-hp rear motor, Porsche bolts in a more powerful 630-hp rear unit into the Turbo that confusingly never makes 630 horsepower on its own, but combined with the front unit makes 630 horsepower. Getting maximum power from either requires engaging launch control, which can be done only from a stop. Do so and you get 10 seconds of overboost. In normal driving, the 4 makes 382 horsepower with Turbo making 576 horses. Instant torque—479 lb-ft in the 4 and 811 in the Turbo—gives an immediate response to the slap of the accelerator, but the 4 doesn’t impress off the line. Porsche says the 4 is good for a 4.9-second time to 60 mph, and in a world of very quick EVs, that doesn’t feel very quick. The Turbo will snap necks with a claimed 3.1-second 60-mph time. Electric cars that accelerate as hard as sports cars or even supercars aren’t surprising anymore. What the Macan does that few, if any, other battery-powered SUVs can do is handle. Bend it into a corner, and, despite a curb weight on the wrong side of 5000 pounds, the 5.5-inch-lower center of gravity helps mitigate the mass. Both models have eager steering (electric Macans have a 15 percent quicker steering ratio) with natural weighting, and both try their best to unbend corners. Rear-axle steering is optional on both models, and the system works to stabilize the rear end at speed. At low speeds it cuts the turning circle down to a carlike 36.4 feet. Both the 4 and the Turbo will have adaptive dampers and adjustable air springs as standard. Body control is taut and contributes to the driver’s confidence to push toward the cornering limits. An active rear differential that allows for torque vectoring is standard on the Turbo.Ride quality is supple but not cushy. If you’re seeking isolation and a delicate ride, the much-larger BMW i7 will make you smile. If you’re about to comment that the i7 isn’t a direct competitor, well, what is? When it arrives at this fall, the electric Macan won’t face much competition. Mercedes’s EQE SUV perhaps comes closest in size and price, but it seems to have been designed to isolate rather than engage. A Tesla Model Y or even a Model X are the same shape, but again, they lack the driving joy that makes the Macan entertaining. Acura’s ZDX promises to challenge the battery-powered Macan, but we’re still a few weeks away from experiencing it. And then there’s BMW’s new iX3, which is still months away. For the first time, Porsche might find a direct competitor from Hyundai and its 641-hp Ioniq 5 N. More on the Macan EVIn Europe, the gas-powered Macan will no longer be sold, but U.S. customers will continue to have a choice of gas or electric Macans. The gas-fired ones will continue on the old platform, virtually unchanged. Anyone deciding between the two will look at the prices and notice that the electric Macan appears to command a major premium, but if you compare the Macan 4 to its gas equivalent, the 375-hp Macan S, the difference works out to be $6500. The 630-hp Turbo doesn’t line up with any of the gas versions and would be $18,500 more than the 434-hp V-6-powered GTS. We still love the sound and the experience of accelerating with a gas-engine Macan, but the new Macan works well as an electric. It looks more modern inside and out, and, like the Taycan, the Macan 4 and Turbo have more than just acceleration to make you smile. And that’s rare in today’s electric-car world.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Porsche Macan EVVehicle Type: front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: Macan 4, $80,450; Macan Turbo, $106,950
POWERTRAIN
Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 234 hp, 229 lb-ft Rear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 375 or 630 hp, 428 or 605 lb-ft Combined Power: 402 or 630 hpCombined Torque: 479 or 833 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 95.0 kWhOnboard Charger: 11.0 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 270 kWTransmissions: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.9 inLength: 188.4 inWidth: 76.3 inHeight: 63.8 inCargo Volume, behind F/R: 44–47/16–18 ft3Front-Trunk Volume: 3 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 5250–5400 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 2.9–4.7 sec100 mph: 10.6–12.4 sec1/4-Mile: 11.2–13.5 secTop Speed: 136–161 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined: 75–90 MPGeRange: 250–300 miTony Quiroga is a 20-year-veteran Car and Driver editor, writer, and car reviewer and the 19th editor-in-chief for the magazine since its founding in 1955. He has subscribed to Car and Driver since age six. “Growing up, I read every issue of Car and Driver cover to cover, sometimes three or more times. It’s the place I wanted to work since I could read,” Quiroga says. He moved from Automobile Magazine to an associate editor position at Car and Driver in 2004. Over the years, he has held nearly every editorial position in print and digital, edited several special issues, and also helped produce C/D’s early YouTube efforts. He is also the longest-tenured test driver for Lightning Lap, having lapped Virginia International Raceway’s Grand Course more than 2000 times over 12 years. More

Modern mid-size trucks may have grown to what not long ago would be considered full-size proportions, but they also can now package a lot more content—and handle a lot more power. Case in point is the redesigned 2024 Toyota Tacoma, which follows in its larger Tundra sibling’s footsteps in offering a hybrid powertrain as its top engine offering—a first for a mid-size pickup. As a result of that enhancement, plus some additions to its model lineup, the new Taco makes an even stronger statement in its revitalized segment.We’ve already written a fair amount about the latest Tacoma, including a comparison test that saw a crew-cab TRD Off-Road model beat the also-fresh Chevy Colorado ZR2. For that existing trim level, as well as the TRD Sport and the Limited, the hybrid option (i-Force Max in Toyota-speak) amounts to a performance enhancer that also brings a modest uptick in fuel economy; most versions increase from an EPA combined estimate of 20 mpg to 23 mpg. The Max powertrain also accompanies the introduction of the Tacoma’s top two trims, the hybrid-only TRD Pro and Trailhunter, which are even more focused on off-road performance. Driving ForceThe Tacoma’s Max setup is somewhat familiar in that it’s related to the top powertrain in the 10Best-winning Grand Highlander SUV, among other front-wheel-drive-based Toyota and Lexus models. However, the Tacoma’s application (and the new Land Cruiser’s and 4Runner’s) is a longitudinal, rear-drive-based arrangement, whereas other versions are configured transversely. At its heart is a turbocharged 2.4-liter inline-four making 278 horsepower and 317 pound-feet of torque—the same output as most nonhybrid Tacomas. This is backed by an eight-speed automatic transmission, with a 48-hp, 184-lb-ft electric motor sandwiched between the two. Stored energy comes from a nickel-metal hydride battery under the back seat that has 1.4 kilowatt-hours of estimated usable capacity (Max-equipped Tacomas are crew cab only and have a five-foot cargo bed, except the Trailhunter, which you can opt to get with a six-foot bed). Combined output is 326 horsepower and a class-leading 465 pound-feet of torque, which despite the several hundred pounds of hybrid hardware plus a standard part-time four-wheel-drive system, should be enough to scoot these rigs to 60 mph in under seven seconds. The sensation on the road is one of deliberate thrust, the hybrid trucks smoothly feeding in the low-rpm grunt of the electric motor to improve responsiveness and provide strong, steady acceleration. Changeovers from regenerative to friction braking are imperceptible, and toggling to Sport mode increases the heft of the steering and sharpens the mapping of the engine and drivetrain. Limited models with their available adaptive dampers (other trims make do with passive units) also feature Sport S+ and Comfort modes. But the change in character is subtle, and the ride on the Limited’s standard 18-inch wheels is conventional-pickup firm if well controlled. Compelling RefinementThe TRD Pro, on the other hand, is the hybrid Tacoma’s headline act. Some may be put off by the non-negotiable black finish of its roof and fender flares. Others may balk at its girth; both it and the Trailhunter are 2.0 inches taller, 3.0 inches wider, and have a 3.2-inch greater wheel track than a four-wheel-drive SR5 crew-cab model. But we were thoroughly impressed at how quiet and composed the Pro was when hurdling down challenging mountain roads, especially considering its off-road chops (more on that in minute).The cushioning of the Pro’s 33-inch Goodyear Wrangler Territory RT tires, which it shares with the Trailhunter, combined with its manually adjustable 2.5-inch Fox internal-bypass dampers, help it steamroll broken pavement with little kickback from its coil-sprung rear live axle (only the lowliest nonhybrid trim levels feature rear leaf springs). Body control is surprisingly good for a compliant off-roader, and its steering is quick and responsive with a progressive buildup of effort in corners, allowing the truck to change direction with confidence. The modest grip of the TRD Pro’s tires limited our pace on the sinewy two-lanes of our Southern California drive route, but exercising this desert-running pickup on blacktop was unexpectedly fun. Off-Road ProwessAlong with their big rubber and the Pro’s Fox dampers (Trailhunters get Old Man Emu units; both setups feature remote reservoirs at the rear), both models also bring a host of standard off-road gear: forged-aluminum upper control arms for their front suspensions, electronically locking rear differentials, a front anti-roll bar disconnect, a low-speed off-road cruise control system, a forward-facing terrain camera, off-road drive-mode settings, rocker-panel protectors, ARB steel rear bumpers, LED light bars in their grilles, and Rigid Industries fog lights. The Trailhunter also features a snorkel intake and additional underbody protection, while the Pro gets TRD intake and cat-back exhaust systems, secondary Fox hydraulic bump stops for its rear axle, and Toyota’s trick IsoDynamic suspension seats. The Tacoma’s off-road stats max out on the TRD Pro, which has 11.5 inches of ground clearance, as well as approach, departure, and breakover angles of 35.7, 25.3, and 27.4 degrees. Suspension travel is a solid 9.6 inches in front and 10.2 at the rear, which is less than you get on wider full-size trucks such as the Ford F-150 Raptor but enough to safely cover gnarly ground at high speeds. On an old motocross circuit that had been tamed to accommodate four-wheeled vehicles, the TRD Pro soaked up landings from a foot or two in the air and raced across undulating whoop-de-doos that highlighted the excellent bump absorption in the last few inches of its suspension travel. The poise that this Tacoma exhibits on the street also pays dividends here, where the Pro could be precisely positioned to arc around tight turns that would hang up larger rigs. Out of hairpins that demanded full steering lock, the extra boost from the hybrid system’s motor helped the truck dig for traction and wag its tail under full power as a deep, synthesized growl emanated from the audio system’s speakers (the sound modulation cannot be turned off but is less pronounced in other hybrid trims). Sadly, we didn’t get to drive the trucks on technical trails that would’ve favored the overlanding-oriented Trailhunter. But we can say that on the track, the Trailhunter gave up little to the TRD Pro, exhibiting similar handling characteristics but with a suspension package that’s not quite as adept at absorbing big impacts. Value ConsiderationsWhile the EPA says the hybrid Taco holds a fuel-economy advantage over its mid-size competition, the truck’s packaging does bring with it some drawbacks. Toyota has yet to release measurements for the TRD Pro’s unique (and bulky) front seats, but they significantly cut into the crew-cab Tacoma’s already-tight rear legroom; protruding hardware on the back of the seats is additional incentive for would-be riders to leave the Pro’s aft quarters vacant. The positioning of the hybrid battery also means you can’t fold up the rear seat, limiting the cab’s cargo-carrying flexibility. And for potential buyers planning to visit off-road venues that require a front-mounted safety flag, as many in Michigan do, know that the Pro and Trailhunter have deeply recessed front recovery hooks, making such an attachment difficult. The Max powertrain also comes with a slight reduction in the four-wheel-drive Tacoma crew cab’s maximum towing capacity, dropping it from 6400 pounds to 6000, though it does provide a standard 2400 watts of accessory power via 120-volt outlets in the bed and cabin. Most everything else inside is familiar Taco fare, which is a good thing, and the top trims dress things up further with additional red (TRD Pro) or gold (Trailhunter) accents. More Tacos!The upcharge for the Tacoma’s hybrid option is $3700, with the entry point being the $47,795 TRD Sport model. However, the pricey Trailhunter and TRD Pro—which start at $64,395 and $65,395, respectively—cost more than even the 35-inch-tired Colorado ZR2 Bison ($60,540) and the 405-hp Ford Ranger Raptor ($57,065). How the Taco’s hybrid elements play out in that company is a question for another comparison test. SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Toyota Tacoma HybridVehicle Type: front-engine, mid-motor, rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door pickup
PRICE
Base: TRD Sport, $47,795; TRD Off-Road, $48,095; Limited, $57,295; Trailhunter, $64,395; TRD Pro, $65,395
POWERTRAIN
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.4-liter inline-4, 278 hp, 317 lb-ft + AC motor, 48 hp, 184 lb-ft (combined output: 326 hp, 465 lb-ft; 1.4-kWh nickel-metal hydride battery pack [C/D est])Transmission: 8-speed automatic

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 131.9–145.1 inLength: 213.0–226.2 inWidth: 76.9–79.9 inHeight: 73.8–75.8 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54–56/43 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 5100–5400 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 6.5–6.8 sec1/4-Mile: 14.8–15.1 secTop Speed: 110 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 23–24/22–23/24 mpgMike Sutton is an editor, writer, test driver, and general car nerd who has contributed to Car and Driver’s reverent and irreverent passion for the automobile since 2008. A native Michigander from suburban Detroit, he enjoys the outdoors and complaining about the weather, has an affection for off-road vehicles, and believes in federal protection for naturally aspirated engines. More

From the April 1975 issue of Car and Driver.If you’re still interested in VW’s insect collection, you’ll find it off in some dark corner of the showroom. (Dealers have 1975 versions of the Beetle with fuel injection for both the stripped price-leader and the French-subtitle edition, La Grande Bug—alias Super Beetle.) Center stage has been commandeered by the marque’s latest species, the Rabbit. And take our word for it: For VW, this new machine is an evolutionary revolution. While the Beetle was basically a bad design cajoled into civility, the Rabbit bursts upon us optim­ized from inception, with almost all its rough edges filed off.It’s an example of the old clean-sheet-of-paper approach, for the Rabbit is practically the opposite of its aged forerun­ner. Instead of an aft-mounted, air-cooled engine driving the rear wheels, the Rabbit has a water-cooled, front engine powering the front wheels. The Rabbit and Scirocco share the 1471-cc engine with the Dasher, but it is mounted transversely instead of longitudinally in the former two. Efficiency in packaging is the payoff. Except for the Honda Civic, the Rabbit is the shortest sedan money will buy in the U.S. and a hefty eight inches shorter than that old small-car yardstick, the Beetle. Yet its interior is more expansive and a whole lot more usable. The biggest gains over the Beetle are in front legroom (plus two inches), rear kneeroom (plus four inches) and, most important, six inches of extra breathing space between the front doors. The Beetle’s narrow front seats give it that intimate feeling; take a deep breath and you touch elbows with your passenger. But now there is an inex­pensive VW with what amounts to a “precision-size” interior. In fact, the Rabbit is just as spacious inside as the Mercury Monarch in every dimension but one—width, where the Mon­arch has a five-inch advantage. (But remember, the Monarch is rated for five while the Rabbit is a four-seater.) Long before da Vinci’s time, the box was proven to be the optimum container shape. Centuries later, the Rabbit con­curs. Its sides are straight and its windows flat. The roof towers upward until every passenger is accommodated on some of the tallest seats available in any car. Luggage goes in an aft extension of the main module, while the propulsion/steer­ing unit gets an up-front box all its own. The single-overhead-cam four isn’t particularly innovative, with a belt-driven camshaft and non-crossflow head, but it is an eager beaver in a day of spineless emissions-controlled engines. The engine is a small 1471 cc (89.9 cubic inches) on the inside but a healthy 70 net horsepower on the outside. And with only 1970 pounds to lug around, 70 horsepower does quite nicely. Our test car was lumbered down with an automatic transmission and a tight torque convertor, which made it feel arthritic off the mark. But even so, the Rabbit trimmed 0.2 seconds from the quarter-mile time of the last Beetle we tested (a 1973 four-speed Sport Bug) while adding a healthy 5.7 mph to the trap speed. With a four-speed Rabbit, you should expect ac­celeration approaching the Scirocco’s 18.1-second and 75.4-mph quarter-mile time—which is quicker than the Honda Civ­ic, Toyota Corolla, Datsun B-210, or V-6 Mustang II. And all the while, the new VW delivers phenomenal fuel economy. Here again the C/D test car’s automatic revealed the sizable penalties of shift-free driving. We measured 20 mpg on the C/D Driving Cycle for the test Rabbit, while the EPA certification tests showed 24 mpg urban and 38 mpg highway economy for the four-speed version. That EPA rank­ing was second only to the Honda Civic and Datsun B-210, so it’s important to realize that the automatic costs more than its up-front price of $250. At least you get a good three-speed transmission for the money. Under part throttle, you pass from gear to gear with barely perceptible upshifts. But there isn’t much tightening up for hard runs, so upshifts seem excessively soft and slippery. Another worthy refinement to the automatic would be the ad­dition of a part-throttle downshift. These are offered as icing-on-the-cake concerns rather than major gripes, because in general the Rabbit is a harmo­nious piece of machinery. Front-wheel drive usually means a handling vice-and-virtue trade-off, but not in the Rabbit. You get the good high-speed tracking that front-wheel drive usual­ly delivers, but you don’t have to put up with heavy torque­-steer, wheel fight, or crippling understeer in exchange. The steering remains sensitive—more to the wheel than the throt­tle—up to the limit of adhesion and it is primarily body roll that keeps you from pushing faster in the turns. Most of the car’s roll stiffness comes from what VW calls a stabilizer rear axle, which is actually one trailing link per wheel welded to a connecting T-section member. As the car heels over, body roll must twist against this member with its designed-in stiff­ness. There is no complementary anti-sway bar for the front, however, so when pushed the Rabbit corners like a boxer at a fire hydrant—with one rear wheel in the air. Because the rear brakes are prone to early lock-up even in a straight line, this also upsets the car’s braking/cornering manners. These foibles make the Rabbit only little less than a ball to drive. In fact, whole populations of drivers will live for years with this car, strongly impressed by its generally nimble disposition and its sensitive feel of the road through the steering wheel and brake pedal. It slips through city traffic like a bicy­cle and thrives on the parking-space remnants most cars pass by. You can stuff enough groceries for a football team through the rear hatch while the back seat folds and pivots forward out of the way. The only thing you’ll need a trailer for is objects too heavy to boost across the high lift-over. Convenience is not without its price, but that discussion should be prefaced by a listing of current Beetle tariffs: The stripped Bug will cost you $2895 these days, while the high­line La Grande Bug goes for an inflated $3395. Sandwiched neatly in between is the Rabbit, starting at an attractive $2999. But VW doesn’t want you to buy it like that. Base-car profit is paper thin, so just like Detroit, Volkswagen now has upgrades by the yard. You’ll of course need the $296 Per­formance Package to trade in the undesirable drum brakes for a front-disc setup, and it also includes steel-belted tires like the tight-gripping Semperits on the test car. Inside, you get vinyl seats instead of hair-shirt fabric upholstery and attractive carpeting to cover painted metal sidewalls in both the passen­ger compartment and trunk. Only after you’ve made that first $296 installment are you eligible for the next hit: $204 for the Deluxe Interior/Comfort Group. This adds a second level of heat and sound insulation over the first step you get with the $296 package. (Even with this double coverage, though, the Rabbit is noisy, with sub­stantial intake air boom whenever the engine is full-throttled.) The latter group also includes a few true desirables, such as full carpeting, a power booster for the brakes and adjustable seat backrests. Strangely enough, there are several items hidden among the options that one used to expect as stan­dard equipment: electric windshield washers, a two-stage blower in the heating/ventilating system (that didn’t generate noticeable ventilation air) and chrome bumpers. So the base Rabbit is a real stripper, meaning you have a $3499 car be­fore you get what used to be considered essential. One other option worth noting is the $30 passive restraint system. This replaces conventional lap/shoulder belts with but one diagonal belt with its outer end connected to the up­per rear corner of the door frame. As you open up the car, this webbing swings out of the way and you just slide in under­neath it with no buckling required. In place of a lap belt, there is a padded knee restraint that juts out a few inches from the instrument panel to prevent submarining on frontal impacts. VW tests with experimental safety vehicle prototypes show that the idea is indeed viable. The diagonal belt alone is suffi­cient for side impacts as well as roll-overs, and the thickly padded knee restraint is better at preventing certain injuries than a lap belt. The system should make seat belts a lot more palatable, and VW hopes to satisfy pending passive restraint (air bag) laws with this kind of approach. More VW Rabbit Reviews From the ArchiveWhile that is a near-future threat, the immediate concern for VW is selling cars. And with the Rabbit, that means generat­ing its own new reputation. It is obviously no Beetle—even the running boards are gone—so that cancels a fervent fan club. You can’t peel off its body and dress it up like a GT40, and it would make a terrible dune buggy, so the Rabbit is going to have to make it strictly on its virtues as a car. The sub-$3000 base sticker will help, but it’s hard to sell the public on just plain good transportation when for years they’ve thrived on a four-wheel institution.SpecificationsSpecifications
1975 Volkswagen RabbitVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $3099/$4166Options: performance package, $296; automatic transmission, $250; deluxe interior, $204; AM/FM radio, $120; tinted glass, $65; leatherette, $50; rear window defogger, $35; passive restraint, $30; emission control, $17
ENGINESOHC inline-4, iron block and aluminum headDisplacement: 90 in3, 1471 cm3Power: 70 hp @ 5800 rpmTorque: 81 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm 
TRANSMISSION3-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/trailing armBrakes, F/R: 9.4-in disc/7.1-in drumTires: Semperit Hi-Life M401
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 94.5 inLength: 155.3 inWidth: 63.4 inHeight: 55.5 inCurb Weight: 1970 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 13.1 sec1/4-Mile: 19.6 sec @ 72 mph90 mph: 43.0 secTop Speed (observed): 93 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 210 ftRoadholding: 0.78 g  
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the May/June issue of Car and Driver.Are any initials more misused than the G and T of a purported grand tourer? Most GTs are either sports cars with a smidge more seat cushion or luxury coaches with a string of extra ponies to pull the weight. Those variations have their charms, but a true grand tourer should combine comfort, performance, and practicality in a way that makes the driver—and passenger—want to extend every road trip. The 2024 Maserati GranTurismo Trofeo takes its moniker seriously, with a long and lean profile, an interior plush enough to spend days in, and 542 well-muscled horses to make short work of the long way. We’ll quickly pour out a tribute to the departed V-8 powerplants, because the GranTurismo’s curved hood covers a toned-down version of the Nettuno twin-turbo 3.0-liter V-6 from the Maserati MC20 supercar. Or, if you want to step it up, there’s the electric 818-hp three-motor GranTurismo Folgore. Don’t cry over spilled cylinders, though, because if any engine can make hexophiles out of octostans, it’s this smooth six-pack with bountiful low-end torque in every drive mode and a confident howl under throttle punctuated by sizzling-bacon pops at each upshift. Sure, it’s not quite as deep a song as Maserati’s outgoing eight-cylinder, but the tune it sings is a bop, and we’re feeling it. The Nettuno isn’t just a good-sounding engine; at the test track, it dug in with all 479 pound-feet of torque to lay down an 11.5-second quarter-mile, crossing the line at 121 mph after reaching 60 mph in just 3.2 seconds. For Joe Walsh fans who may be wondering, yes, it will do 185. Technical editor Dan Edmunds says he saw 189 before he ran out of straightaway, but “My Maserati does 189 and is still pulling” doesn’t rhyme as well with “Now I don’t drive.”The Trofeo’s engine is backed by ZF’s eight-speed automatic transmission and all-wheel drive. Around town, the ZF makes quick and painless gearchanges, and in manual mode, the paddles give instant response and those fun exhaust crackles. Maserati offers four wheel designs for the GranTurismo, all 20 inches in the front and 21 inches in the rear. Our test car wore the standard gloss-black Pegasos wrapped in Pirelli P Zero PZ4 summer tires. We kept those Pirellis in motion and saw 17 mpg. The EPA ratings for the Trofeo are 21 combined, 18 city, and 27 highway, but the feds don’t drive like we do. Although it’s a heavy car at 4207 pounds, the Trofeo makes tidy turns with minimal wallow and averaged 0.97 g on the skidpad. On big straightaways, it will tear forward or cruise politely, with enthusiasm tempered only by your ankle angle. Adaptive air springs make a noticeable change from Comfort mode’s breezy float to the lowered, more connected feel of Corsa. We found ourselves preferring the low-key charms of the in-between GT mode, which seems to make the car hover over small cracks and bumps in the road surface while still keeping body motions tight through corners. Passengers preferred it too, and we had plenty of willing riders. The exterior of the GranTurismo is gorgeous—a similar shape to previous models but with a more cheerful lift to its straked front grille and a profile that narrows and flares with the elegance of a bias-cut silk gown. Its broad flanks make room in the trunk for whatever you need to carry on your ideal road-trip adventure, and inside, the front seats are large and supportive, while the rears are . . . there. A small person would fit okay; a hatbox would fit better. The seats themselves are perfect, with an almost old-fashioned amount of padding that makes long drives in the Trofeo as comfortable as a couch nap, and the car’s sensible ride height means exiting is grunt-free. It was also a pleasant change from scrapey sports cars to be able to pull into gas stations and steep driveways without even thinking about the approach angle. Most of the interior layout is equally user-friendly. Although we worried about accidentally hitting the engine start/stop button on the steering wheel, that was never an issue. The 12.2-inch digital instrument cluster is clear and easy to navigate, as are the 12.3-inch infotainment screen and the digital climate controls below. The instrument display changes with drive-mode selection, and the center-mounted clock in the dash can switch to a compass or a g-meter in a clever melding of retro and modern. More Maserati GranTurismo ReviewsLife’s been good to the Trofeo so far, but we do have some complaints. The shifter buttons, which divide the top screen from the climate-control screen, feel cheap, and most gear selections took at least two attempts. As the whole panel moves with any action, it’s hardly a feeling you want to experience more than necessary. Maserati’s driver-aid tech is a pricey add-on, and while we can live without lane-keeping assist and drowsy-driver warnings, modern features like adaptive cruise control and 360-degree cameras really shouldn’t be a $4500 option. With the Trofeo’s $191,995 base sticker and this car’s $212,615 as-tested price, we’d expect Maserati to throw in adaptive cruise and some better-feeling switchgear. But when it comes to the GT initials, the GranTurismo wears them well. SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Maserati Gran Turismo TrofeoVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $191,995/$212,615Options: Grigio Maratea Matte paint, $4500; ADAS package 1 (active blind-spot assist and active lane-keeping assist, rear cross-traffic detection, 360-degree camera, adaptive cruise control, Drowsy Driver detection), $4500; 19-speaker Sonus Faber audio system, $4000; Technical Assistance package (head-up display, digital rearview mirror), $2600; carbon-fiber Macrotwill leather seat covering, $2500; Trofeo Sport Design package (lightweight aluminum sport pedals, illuminated stainless-steel door sills, Maserati logo), $1450; Trofeo Comfort package (power front seats, kick sensor for power trunk), $1070
ENGINEtwin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 183 in3, 2992 cm3Power: 542 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque: 479 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION8-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 15.0-in vented disc/13.8-in vented discTires: Pirelli P Zero PZ4F: 265/30ZR-20 (94Y) XL MGTR: 295/30ZR-21 (102Y) XL MGT
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 115.3 inLength: 195.5 inWidth: 77.0 inHeight: 53.3 inCurb Weight: 4207 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 3.2 sec100 mph: 7.7 sec1/4-Mile: 11.5 sec @ 121 mph130 mph: 13.4 sec150 mph: 19.3 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.2 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 4.8 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.9 secTop Speed (mfr claim): 199 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 148 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 299 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.97 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 17 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 21/18/27 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDLike a sleeper agent activated late in the game, Elana Scherr didn’t know her calling at a young age. Like many girls, she planned to be a vet-astronaut-artist, and came closest to that last one by attending UCLA art school. She painted images of cars, but did not own one. Elana reluctantly got a driver’s license at age 21 and discovered that she not only loved cars and wanted to drive them, but that other people loved cars and wanted to read about them, which meant somebody had to write about them. Since receiving activation codes, Elana has written for numerous car magazines and websites, covering classics, car culture, technology, motorsports, and new-car reviews. In 2020, she received a Best Feature award from the Motor Press Guild for the C/D story “A Drive through Classic Americana in a Polestar 2.”  In 2023, her Car and Driver feature story More

Darker days may be on the horizon for combustion engines, but before they’re forced into retirement, they’re going out with—ahem­—a bang. In this golden era of combustion, there are many engines that will be forever venerated, such as Chevrolet’s naturally aspirated 670-hp 5.5-liter V-8, Porsche’s screaming 4.0-liter flat-six, and basically any modern twin-turbocharged V-8. But have we reached peak snowmobile? “We might be there,” says Ski-Doo media relations manager Steve Cowing. “But we thought we were there over a decade ago and look what we’ve done since then. So maybe we’re not done yet.”As with most of the typical frozen destinations in the United States, winter overlooked us this season at our Ann Arbor headquarters. So, we found ourselves in the higher elevations of West Yellowstone, Montana, to experience Ski-Doo’s latest and greatest trail rocket that packs all the latest technology into a single package, the MXZ X-RS 850 E-TEC Turbo R with Competition package. Methed-OutTurbocharging isn’t anything new from Bombardier Recreational Products’ (BRP) Rotax engine division. In 2019, they launched the turbocharged 899-cc four-stroke inline-three with 150 horsepower. A year later came the boosted variant of the naturally aspirated, 165-hp 849-cc two-stroke inline-two. Though it didn’t make any more power, it made all its available muscle up to the oxygen-deprived altitude of 8000 feet. Rotax evolves at a crazy pace, and in 2021 they revealed the Turbo R variant of the inline-three with 180 horsepower. Then in 2023, the Gen5 platform arrived with the two-stroke 850 Turbo R running 6 psi of boost—up two from the non-R—extracting its glorious 180 horses from a much lighter package. Ski-DooThe turbocharged four-strokes, which are designed for the trails, carry a significant weight disadvantage over the lighter two-stroke engines, and thus the boosted two-strokes were reserved for the mountain segment. That left the trail-riding flatlanders feeling left out—and loudly complaining. Ski-Doo listened, and thus the 2024 MXZ X-RS 850 E-TEC Turbo R with Competition package was born. Mechanically speaking, the 850 E-TEC Turbo R engine is the same in the Summit mountain sled as in MXZ trail platform. But how the two are ridden is a completely different game. In the mountains, wide-open throttle applications are far briefer than they might be on a trail sled riding on a retired railroad bed, where the throttle can be pinned to the handlebar for miles on end. These extended periods of fun generate elevated and power-robbing intake temperatures. But with the real estate under the hood of a modern snowmobile being so limited, and weight reduction such a high priority, plumbing an intercooler isn’t an option. Ski-Doo’s solution to keeping the intake charge cool? Methanol injection. Okay, so the Intake Cooling Enhancer (ICE) fluid is mainly water, and the methanol is present to kept it from freezing, but it’s just not as cool to say your sled has water injection. Nevertheless, when the sensors detect an above-normal intake temperature, injectors squirt microdoses of ICE to cool the charge and maintain peak power output. The ICE also removes heat from the the cylinders. How much boost juice is used depends on one’s riding style. Use lots of boost, use lots of juice. Keep out of the boost and, well, what fun is that?Ski-DooRide TimeSaddled up on the Competition, just one squeeze of the throttle is enough for a string of excited and expletive words to pour out. Thanks to Ski-Doo’s innovative airbox that breathes atmospheric conditions until it’s pressurized, there’s essentially no turbo lag (a spring-loaded valve in the airbox means that the throttle response is naturally aspirated snappy until the boost is ready). The boost rolls on with an ever-so-slight whistle from under the hood as pine trees begin to resemble lines of Morse code. We’re pretty sure we decoded “slow down.” And with a four-piston Brembo brake caliper, scrubbing speed is no issue. The on-and-off throttle responsiveness never ceases to impress, and after repeated hammering of the thumb throttle we never detected any falloff in acceleration, even well into indicated triple-digit speeds. When it comes to drag racing, the Competition has a trick up its sleeve: launch control. With the brake and throttle applied, the engine revs to just shy of the clutch’s 4100-rpm engagement point. Snow explodes from underneath as the engine spits and sputters from the exhaust as the boost builds up. With the brake released, the Competition rockets away, and the ligaments holding elbows and shoulders together stretch like Silly Putty. From the seat of our pants, 60 mph feels like it should arrive in less than 3.0 seconds. On frozen precipitation. From an out-of-the-box machine. The Competition isn’t all engine, though. When the trail coils up, Ski-Doo’s hot rod is ready to strike. For those in the know, Ski-Doo’s front end has lacked some of the precision of its competitors. For 2025, the performance models received a taller ski spindle and revised control arms that Ski-Doo claims reduce body roll by 20 percent. Paired with new skis, the Competition feels more surefooted through high-speed sweepers and less prone to being unsettled by midcorner humps and bumps. The speeds at which these machines can corner is truly impressive. Ski-DooWhile the Competition’s Kashima-coated, manually adjustable standard damper package is nothing to scoff at, the optional $1800 adaptive KYB Smart-Shox are transformational. Inputs from the body-control module are relayed to the three-position electronically controlled dampers that can adjust on the fly. When the cornering forces increase and the machine wants to lean through an apex, the outside damper firms up to keep body roll further in check. The bandwidth of the Smart-Shox is a boon for ridability as trail conditions change throughout the day. When set to Comfort, the ride is buttery smooth on a freshly groomed trail. Locked into Sport+, the ride firms up for attacking rough terrain as the trails deteriorate. With 10.4 inches of suspension travel up front and 11.5 inches in the rear, the Smart-Shox shrug off most any bump or jump. Just as magnetorheological dampers forever changed the ride quality of many General Motors products, KYB’s Smart-Shox take snowmobiling to the next level.More Snow MachinesAnd like so many things in life, even snowmobiles aren’t excluded from omnipresent connectivity. BRP’s 10.3-inch touchscreen—optional elsewhere in the model lineup—is standard on the Turbo R Competition. The crisply rendered screen keeps an eye on the machine’s vitals, features built-in GPS navigation, and can control your playlist, if listening to music out in the woods is your type of thing.With so much straight-line speed, corner-shredding capability, and a trick suspension, the MXZ X-RS 850 E-TEC Turbo R with Competition just may be peak snowmobile. And with a $22,549 starting point, it certainly should be.David Beard studies and reviews automotive related things and pushes fossil-fuel and electric-powered stuff to their limits. His passion for the Ford Pinto began at his conception, which took place in a Pinto. More