Reviews

From the May 1988 issue of Car and Driver.
We at Car and Driver don’t need a lot of encouragement to road-test a Corvette. As America’s highest-performance production car and one of the world’s great supercar bargains, the Corvette is a constant topic of discussion in our office. Which is not to say that the discussions are always friendly. The arguments between staff members who are smitten with the Corvette’s speed and those who are discouraged by its deficiencies never stop.

Tested: 2020 Corvette Z51 vs. Cayman GT4

Tested: Five-Way 1990 Sports Car Shootout

Complete History of the Chevy Corvette

Chevrolet has fueled the debate by continually honing, tuning, and otherwise improving the current-generation Corvette, which first appeared as a 1984 model. The 1985 version introduced a port fuel-injection system, which increased the engine’s power and responsiveness, and a thoroughly recalibrated suspension, which largely tamed the car’s buckboard ride. A lovely convertible edition and standard-equipment Bosch anti-lock brakes were the highlights of the 1986 lineup. Last year’s crop of improvements included the Z52 suspension package, which spanned the gap between the base calibration and the Z51 competition setup, and aluminum cylinder heads, which reduced weight and helped add ten horsepower to the engine’s power rating.
The 1988 Corvette continues the tradition of annual progress. This year’s news includes revised front and rear suspension geometry, bigger brakes, yet another engine upgrade, and optional seventeen-inch wheels and tires. There are a host of minor changes as well: a quieter and lighter air-conditioning compressor, an improved ventilation system, and the addition to the standard-equipment list of power locks, cruise control, and an AM/FM/cassette stereo system.
Of the running-gear changes, the most obvious are the larger wheels and tires, which are standard with the racetrack-oriented Z51 package or the similar Z52 street setup. Except for such boutique machines as the Porsche 959 and the Lamborghini LM002, the 1988 Corvette is the first car in modern times to be outfitted with seventeen-inch wheels and tires. The tires are 275/40ZR-17 Goodyear Eagles—a wider, lower-profile development of the 255/50ZR-16 gatorbacks that are still fitted to the base car.
Surprisingly, the racy-looking rubber does not—and was not intended to—improve the Corvette’s absolute cornering power. But the Corvette had plenty of grip already. Our Z52-equipped test car circled the skidpad at 0.87 g, a performance identical to that of the Z52 we tested last June, and as high as that of any production car we’ve ever tested. Corvette and Goodyear engineers developed the new tires not to increase the ultimate grip but to improve controllability at the limit and performance on wet pavement.
Sure enough, the 1988 Corvette with the Z52 option—a bargain at $970—handles more benignly than any other Corvette we’ve ever driven. The chassis’s moderate understeer and the tires’ gradual breakaway encourage flirting with the Corvette’s outstanding cornering limits. You can slide all four tires a bit, or flick the tail out with a touch of throttle if you prefer. You can play Mario Andretti all day long without fearing that the chassis will snap into oversteer the first time you make a little mistake.

Chevy Corvette: A Brief History in Zero-to-60-MPH

Corvette Chronology 1980s

Tested: 1963 Chevrolet Corvette Reshapes the Icon

And when the weather turns against you, the Corvette won’t. Despite their steamroller width, the new Goodyears work amazingly well in the wet. Not only is their wet grip impressive, but they resist aquaplaning at any sensible speed. The new rubber even works well in the snow. You’ll never mistake the Z52 Corvette for a Jeep, but neither will a three-inch snowfall transform your drive to work into a nonstop skid-control session. In fact, the biggest problem with driving a Corvette in the snow is its sensitive throttle linkage, which translates the first tiny increment of pedal movement into a sizable fraction of the engine’s generous torque. An overaggressive throttle is usually intended to create the impression that a car has more power than it really has. The Corvette requires no such fakery.
Some of the credit for the improved handling belongs to the suspension changes. Although the components and their basic layout are unchanged, the new front geometry produces a scrub radius of zero, rather than the slightly negative figure of earlier Corvettes. This change eliminates the tendency of braking forces to steer the front tires, thus increasing stability during braking when the tires are on surfaces of different traction.
In the rear, the engineers repositioned several of the suspension pivots to reduce the camber change that occurs as the suspension moves up and down. The result is that the tires maintain better contact with the ground as the suspension reacts to bumps, improving straight-line stability on uneven pavement.
We can’t say we noticed more stable braking in the new car, though we didn’t try any hard stops on split-traction surfaces. The new geometry definitely improves steering feel, however, The Corvette’s overall steering effort is about perfect for a sports car, and the steering has a very positive on-center groove. And unlike some steering systems that have strong on-center feel, the Corvette’s doesn’t feel artificial. On the negative side, the meanderings of the front tires as they follow longitudinal grooves and ridges still come through unfiltered.
The revised rear suspension does help to settle the back end of the car on rough pavement. Road crowns and bumps now cause fewer disturbances in the rear, so the Corvette darts around less. Fast driving on back roads demands less attention than it did before.
Although these suspension changes sound like simple realignments, their implementation required redesigned control arms, hubs, pickup points, shock mounts, and spring and anti-roll-bar links.
Such extensive revision presented an ideal opportunity to upgrade the Corvette’s brakes, which were a little too small to resist fade during hard use. Part of the solution is two-piston front calipers instead of the single-piston design used before. The new calipers have larger pads, too; because they heat up more slowly, they are more resistant to fade and should last longer. The engineers also enlarged the 0.8-inch-thick brake rotors, from 11.5 to 12.0 inches in diameter, increasing their heat capacity as well. The Z51 competition package gets 13.0-by-1.1-inch rotors in front.
We know from racing experience that the Z51 binders are up to the hellish heat generated in a 24-hour endurance race, and even the standard brakes are now up to the hardest street driving. Formerly, a single hard stop from a triple-digit speed produced noticeable fade. Now, repeated hard use will not diminish the brakes’ effectiveness.
That’s a substantial benefit, because the 1988 Corvette is faster than ever. The latest version of the fuel-injected, 5.7-liter V-8 benefits from freer-flowing ports. Although the aluminum heads became standard equipment last year and were given credit (along with a new camshaft) for raising the engine’s output to 240 horsepower, the ’87 models were actually slower than earlier Corvettes with only 230 rated hp. This year’s upgrade has increased the rating to 245, for an engine that is demonstrably as strong as that of any Corvette we have ever tested.
Our test car, equipped with the four-speed automatic transmission and the optional 3.07:1 axle ratio (a 2.59 ratio is standard with the automatic), needed a mere 5.6 seconds to hit 60 mph and covered the quarter-mile in 14.3 seconds at 95 mph. Those figures set no Corvette records, but the 154-mph top speed we measured makes the new car at least 3 mph faster than any of its predecessors. The revised engine indeed seems to breathe more deeply at high rpm.
Complementing this performance are the perfect drivability and eager response we’ve come to expect from automatic-equipped Corvettes. The symbiosis of the automatic and the torquey V-8 sets a highwater mark for performance powertrains. No matter the circumstance or the speed, this combination translates pressure on the throttle into smooth, powerful thrust. The engine handles most demands from the accelerator with is own deep power reserves; and when it can’t answer the call, the transmission contributes a fast, firm, and extremely smooth kickdown. Upshifts are equally crisp and seamless. Few luxury cars shift so slickly. We far prefer this automatic to the Corvette’s manual transmission, with its intrusive, computerized overdrive and clunky linkage.
Although the changes for 1988 have strengthened the Corvette’s strengths and weakened its weaknesses, our office arguments rage on. We all agree that the Corvette has always been an outstanding performer on the racetrack, and that the new car is a more stunning road performer than ever. But those who want refinement with their performance remain troubled by the Corvette’s plasticky interior, its loud and rumbly exhaust, its numerous (though fewer) squeaks and rattles, and its less-than-stunning reliability record. Some of these shortcomings are inevitable results of the Corvette’s nature. As long as Chevrolet’s sports car is built with a separate fiberglass body, it’s unlikely to feel as solid as a Porsche.
Which brings up a final point: the Corvette doesn’t cost as much as a Porsche, either. The Z52 on these pages—equipped with power leather seats, a deluxe sound system, and other options—wore a sticker price of $33,593. A plain-Jane 924S, without an automatic transmission but otherwise comparably equipped, costs about $35,500—and for that extra two grand you get a car that does not offer anti-lock brakes and is about two seconds slower to 60 mph and 20 mph shy in top speed. For most of us on Hogback Road, that makes the Corvette an unbeatable bargain. To convince the office holdouts, we’ll just have to keep testing every new Corvette we can get our hands on.
Counterpoint
Don’t expect many Corvette criticisms from me. I adore Chevy’s plastic beauty. I’m not blind to its spotty reliability record or to its propensity for squeaks and rattles, but I am convinced that no other car on earth offers more raw performance or sculptured pulchritude for less than $50,000. The 1988 edition is the best year. Yes, the Corvette group has more work to do before its sports car is as tight and rattle-free as a Porsche. But then, to buy a Porsche that can run with a Vette, you’ll have to shell out at least $65,000. That ought to pay for a few trips to the Chevy service department. What’s more, with the exception of any Ferrari and maybe the new Lotus Esprit Turbo, there isn’t a better-looking sports car built. Standing tall on its new seventeen-inch wheels, the Corvette has never looked more stunning. Oh, one more thing. To all those highbrows who wouldn’t be caught dead in a Corvette because of its “image,” I say: Kiss my taillights! —Arthur St. Antoine
Because a beautiful woman once picked me up in a silver Corvette that belonged to her father, I’ve never been able to criticize these machines rationally. This seems altogether fair, however, given the Corvette’s record of continuing improvement. The red bahnstormer we’ve been driving for the past weeks showed me nothing but a good time. The staff spoke freely of ills that plagued earlier Corvettes, maladies best summed up by the words “quality control.” Or lack of same. Happily, I escaped such inconveniences and have only laurels to place on the Corvette’s roof. Well, almost. The more I think about it, I wonder why the Corvette has to be made from fiberglass. Were it bodied with aluminum or steel, it might not squeak like an old man’s knees when it gets old. There’s also a stone to be cast at having to use a wrench to get the removable hard top off, and no small amount of irritation attaches to having to get the car absolutely level before you can wrench the top back into place. That degree of flexibility has no place in a world-class grand-touring coupe. —William Jeanes
You might as well know my biases going into this counterpoint: I love Corvettes. I love winging them around road-racing circuits in endurance races, and I love zinging them around on public roads. I’m proud to say I backed the Vette in our Ten Best voting. I stop short of blind devotion, however. The Corvette’s faults are as obvious as its strengths. Building a sports car with a pop-off roof and a fiberglass skin makes as much sense as trying to dance in cement shoes. You can’t produce a rigid, tight-fitting car that way. So, despite a host of structural Band-Aids, the Corvette still shivers over bumps and creaks its way through life. This car deserves to be as solid as the Porsche 944s and Toyota Supra Turbos it trounces in performance. I’d settle for something close, even. There’s no excuse for a 30-grand car with less than a world-class body. That said, I’d like to answer the only question that really matters in a discussion like this: Make mine red. —Rich Ceppos

Specifications

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

From the September 2000 issue of Car and Driver.
Picture some future explorers digging up the preserved remains of a Dodge Durango R/T. They will have no problem dating the specimen to the height of an epoch when herds of behemoths with similar body-on-frame skeletons and voracious appetites roamed the continent of North America.

Most Powerful Crossovers and SUVs on Sale Today

Best SUVs and Crossovers of 2020

These Are the Quickest SUVs We’ve Ever Tested

Like most of them, the Durango R/T has five hinged orifices, a prodigious interior cavity, and a standard full-time four-wheel- drive system. That seems to slot it into a genus of docile leviathans known for nesting around soccer fields and shopping malls. However, the Durango also has 17-inch alloy wheels and a brooding 360-cubic-inch V-8 with a menacing snarl. Perhaps the Durango R/T was a predator that used its swiftness to run down the larger creatures of its habitat.
Either conclusion would be valid. The new-for-2000 R/T version of the Dodge Durango shares enough of its vital specs with Dodge’s more family-oriented Durango SLT to remain useful as a kiddy carpooler. But it also packs enough tweaks of both the shiny and dirty variety to inch up the Durango’s otherwise modest entertainment quotient.
Amazingly, the performance angle of the proletarian sport-utility segment is still largely untapped. Remember the bumptious GMC Typhoon of 1992-93, of which just 4601 were built? It reached 60 mph in less than six seconds and needed just 14.1 seconds to cover 1320 feet driving all four wheels (C/D, March 1992). Mercedes and BMW both build high-powered, high-dollar utes, but so far nobody in Detroit has dared step forward to fill the breach.

Highs: Slick duds, rumbly exhaust, proven DNA.

Unfortunately, nor is Dodge. It is using a fairly restrained formula in the latest attempts to leverage the historic R/T moniker. The equation behind the Durango R/T, Dakota R/T, Neon R/T, and Intrepid R/T goes like this: base vehicle plus top trim-level package plus largest available engine plus special R/T equipment group. The latter varies from car to car and includes some sporty interior and exterior trim plus a dash of spice sprinkled on the engine and suspension.
For the Durango, this means a snortier exhaust, a reprogrammed engine-control module, fatter tires, and revalved shock absorbers. It’s hardly 1967 all over again, and the factory mods won’t even make the R/T the hottest Durango ever to grace these pages. That title belongs to the Shelby SP360 Durango (C/D, October 1998), a $54,000, 360-horsepower tuner rocket with a Kenne Bell supercharger strapped to its iron block.
For those who prefer a factory warranty and a price south of a BMW’s, the Durango at least looks good in its R/T costume. It has handsome five-spoke alloy wheels ringed by bulky P275/60SR-17 Goodyear Wrangler HP street radials and chromelike embossed “Durango 5.9 R/T” logos on the front doors. Body-color running boards are part of the package.
The interior treatment is somewhat skimpy: R/Ts feature suede door-panel bolsters and two-tone front and rear leather-faced seats. The front buckets have suede inserts bearing a small, embroidered “R/T” logo. From behind the wheel, payment makers will be hard pressed to identify their Durango R/Ts from lesser models. One more bauble on the otherwise school-bus dash, such as off-color gauges or an R/T dash plaque, would nicely rein-force the message.

Lows: More sound than substance, swills gasoline.

Underneath the R/T’s styling lies a thin but noteworthy layer of substance. At the core is the familiar 5.9-liter Magnum V-8 puffed up in the R/T by 5 hp and 15 pound-feet of torque to 250 hp at 4200 rpm and 350 pound-feet at 3000 rpm. The power increase is due mainly to some software rewrites in the engine module with the end result being more aggressive ignition timing. It’s basically the same controller Jeep used on the ’98 Grand Cherokee 5.9 Limited (the one with the hood louvers). With this controller fitted, the Durango R/T demands premium fuel. It also comes with a freer-flowing muffler wearing a chrome tip.
The muffler plays a thumping concerto lifted directly from the Hemi gold album. Better like it, because the four-speed automatic transmission is one overdrive short of being able to quiet down the cabin on the highway. There, the 3.92:1 final drive forces the big pushrod motor to turn almost 2100 revs at 65 mph-enough so that the niblets in back are sure to whine if they’re trying to watch videos.
The R/T pounces off the line when all that torque is sluiced through the low-geared rear end, but forget hazing the spectators with tire smoke. The driveline, which doubles as the Jeep Grand Cherokee’s base Selec-Trac system with a lock-able low range, has a fixed 48 percent front and 52 percent rear torque split that keeps all the paws firmly planted on the bitumen.
The 5.9’s extra juice helped the R/T clip one full second off the 9.1-second 0-to-60 time of a Durango SLT tested with the base 5.9 engine and 3.92:1 axle ratio (C/D, January 1998). It also sheared 0.7 second off the quarter-mile, running it in 16.3 seconds at 84 mph, three more mph than the SLT’s trap speed.
The R/T handily outcircled the SLT on the skidpad, pulling 0.77 g to the SLT’s 0.69. By the way, that’s just a whisker off the hunkered-down Typhoon’s 0.79-g skidpad performance. Thank the R/T’s jumbo tires and firmer shock absorbers, which help eliminate any wild body mambo. Also give credit to the rack-and-pinion steering system new this year to four-wheel-drive Durangos. It telegraphs messages from the front tires more succinctly and helps place the Durango’s broad snout more confidently in turns.
It will also steer it confidently toward gas pumps. The EPA claims a Durango R/T averages 12 mpg in the city and 16 on the highway. Our 4926-pound test vehicle ingested a gallon of premium on average every 13 miles over 600.

The Archive: Steep price won’t make you the terror of Colorado Boulevard.

A loaded Durango SLT with most of the R/T’s equipment, including the un-modified 5.9 V-8 and full-time four-wheel drive, will vacuum $32,695 out of a bank account. The extra whiffs of R/T fairy dust run an additional $1645 and don’t include the optional third row of seats ($550) or four-wheel anti-lock brakes ($495–rear-wheel ABS is standard).
History will be the judge of whether this sporty ute was the start of a new species or just an evolutionary dead end.
Counterpoint
The major ingredient of this Durango 5.9 R/T is exclusivity. Sport-utes are every-where you look these days, so you’ve got to have something to separate you from the pack. In this case, a throaty exhaust, some suede on the seats and doors, some aggressively styled R/T labels, and a few other bits are what you get. Unfortunately, the performance promise behind the R/T tag isn’t as dramatic. Yes, it’s a few ticks quicker, but driving this macho sport-ute is still less than thrilling. The ride is smooth, and the R/T has a high level of quality, but “performance” and “sport-ute” are two terms I don’t see being happy next to each other. —Brad Nevin
The Durango’s mid-size-Dakota origins keep it compact compared with other SUVs in its class—it slots in size between an Explorer and an Expedition—yet it’s endowed with 5.9 liters of full-size-Ram power. Add a 5-hp boost and 15 more pound-feet of torque, as well as the rest of the R/T goodies, and power-hungry truck lovers may forget all about the 88-cubic-foot maximum cargo capacity—especially when under the influence of the rumbling exhaust and the flared fenders. That would be a good time to fork over the extra five grand for the R/T 5.9—before you can calculate how much it will cost to keep that 25-gallon tank full. —Cora Weber
I don’t advertise this around here, but I sort of enjoy muscled trucks because I’m frequently towing or hauling something and I like the added zip. If Ford’s SVT Lightning were available as a crew cab, I’d be begging to make one a longtermer. I’m no fan of the Durango R/T sport-ute, however. It holds the road better than the SLT model and it’s quicker in all acceleration tests, but it’s still not among the truck elite in its performance. And I found the booming exhaust note cool at first but tiring after 20 minutes. The R/T package needs to offer more of a performance gain before I’d degrade the base Durango’s comfy, refined manner. —Larry Webster

Specifications

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

AMG’s entry-level 302-hp A35 sedan fuels the urge to step up to one of its more powerful and expensive models. More

This isn’t Jeep’s first diesel-powered pickup. In fact, it’s the brand’s third oil burner with a bed. The 2021 Jeep Gladiator EcoDiesel follows the 1986 to 1987 Comanche, which was available with Renault’s unloved turbocharged 2.1-liter four-cylinder diesel that produced only 82 horsepower and 132 pound-feet of torque. Before that, in 1964, Jeep also sold the United States Marines two Forward Control models equipped with a two-stroke diesel. Supplied by the Cerlist Diesel Company of North Carolina, that supercharged 2.8-liter inline-3 delivered double the fuel economy of Jeep’s flathead-six but just 85 horses and 170 pound-feet. Less than 500 were produced, and fewer than 50 are known to exist.

2020 Jeep Gladiator Is a More Functional Wrangler

We Test the Diesel-Powered Jeep Wrangler

Jeep is expecting more success this time around. It anticipates 15 percent of Gladiator buyers will choose the new EcoDiesel V-6, which is the same percentage of Wrangler Unlimited customers that have paid handsomely for the turbocharged 3.0-liter engine in 2020. Just as it is on the Wrangler, the diesel costs an additional $4000 and requires the $2000 eight-speed automatic transmission option.

View Photos

Jeep

Built by Fiat Chrysler’s Italian engine subsidiary VM Motori and now in its third generation, the engine features a compacted-graphite-iron block, aluminum cylinder heads, and a variable-geometry turbocharger that produces up to 31.9 pounds of boost. Although it makes 480 pound-feet of torque in the Ram 1500, where it has a slightly higher compression ratio, it isn’t quite as strong in the Jeeps. In the Wrangler and Gladiator, it’s rated at 260 horsepower at 3600 rpm and 442 pound-feet at just 1400 rpm. That’s still the highest torque rating in the mid-size pickup segment, and it’s substantially more than the 260 pound-feet that the standard 3.6-liter gas V-6 provides.
Pick your hackneyed cliché to describe the EcoDiesel’s low-down grunt and ultra-flat power curve, which makes it great for off-roading. Our Rubicon test vehicle chugged up steep hills and over frame-twisting obstacles with the engine lumbering at 2000 rpm or less. Its responses are snappy both around town and at higher speeds, and the transmission does a good job of keeping the V-6 on top of its torque plateau. Along with the more robust 8HP75 eight-speed automatic, the diesel also necessitates the Rubicon’s tougher Dana 44 axles with 3.73:1 gears. While the transmission generally upshifts early when accelerating hard, flicking the shifter over into its M position moves the shift points up to the diesel’s 4500-rpm redline. Despite weighing about 400 pounds more than the gas model, the EcoDiesel Gladiator feels just as quick and should hit 60 mph in the seven-second range.

View Photos

Jeep

Fitting the necessary 5.1-gallon diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) tank for emissions compliance meant Jeep had to shrink the pickup’s 21.5-gallon fuel tank down to 18.3 gallons. But the EcoDiesel still manages to offer a considerable improvement in range versus the gas V-6, which may be its most compelling selling point. The diesel carries a 24-mpg EPA combined rating versus 19 mpg for the gas V-6, and its potential highway range is more than 500 miles.
The EcoDiesel’s additional mass also meant retuning the Gladiator’s suspension without altering its articulation or ground clearance. Spring rates are up about 10 percent, and its dampers are stiffer, but the pickup’s ride quality hasn’t suffered enough to matter. Its towing capacity has, however. As a result of cooling restrictions imposed by Jeep’s signature seven-slot grille, the EcoDiesel can only tug 6500 pounds to the standard model’s 7650. A four-wheel-drive Chevrolet Colorado with its optional 2.8-liter inline-4 turbodiesel is rated to pull 7700 pounds, despite having 73 fewer foot-pounds of torque. The Jeep’s payload capacity also changes slightly depending on the configuration. On the Rubicon, it actually increases slightly from 1075 pounds with the gas V-6 and automatic transmission combination to 1160 pounds.

View Photos

Jeep

To reduce noise, diesel Wranglers get additional sound-deadening material on the hot side of the firewall and foam on the backside of the infotainment screen. The Gladiator gets the same treatment. The engine is still considerably louder than the gas V-6, but it doesn’t disturb the peace with big-rig levels of diesel rattle. Compared to the optional Cummins turbodiesel six found in Ram’s heavy-duty pickups, it’s practically silent. But dip into the throttle and you can hear the clatter over the wind noise, and that’s saying something considering our test vehicle had a soft top. There’s also a bit of vibration in the throttle pedal, which you don’t get with the standard gas V-6.
We’ll go out on a limb and proclaim this to be Jeep’s best diesel pickup ever. It isn’t without its drawbacks. The turbocharged V-6 adds considerable weight, cost, and complexity, as well as noise and vibration, to a truck that made our 2020 10Best List. But the EcoDiesel’s big torque, greater fuel economy, and additional range are real advantages over the standard gas V-6, especially for Gladiator buyers planning to trek deep into the wilderness with a load of gear.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Jeep Gladiator EcoDiesel
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door pickup
BASE PRICE Sport, $41,040; Overland, $47,890; Rubicon, $51,370
ENGINE TYPE turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve diesel V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement 182 in3, 2987 cm3Power 460 hp @ 3600 rpmTorque 442 lb-ft @ rpm
TRANSMISSION 8-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 137.3 inLength: 218.1 inWidth: 73.8 inHeight: 73.1–76.1 inPassenger volume: 104–109 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 5200–5500 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST) 60 mph: 7.2–8.0 sec1/4 mile: 15.5–16.0 secTop speed: 100–115 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY Combined/city/highway: 24/21–22/27–17 mpg

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

From the Archive: Cadillac’s upstart Allanté challenges the old guard of heavyweight convertibles, the Mercedes SL. More

Porsche’s stick-shift, all-wheel-drive Carrera 4S is a strange and wonderful derivative of the awesome 911. More

From the August 2002 Issue of Car and Driver.
All you need to know about this new Nissan 350Z is that when it comes to its price-and-performance quotient, it is a re-creation of the segment-busting Datsun 240Z that set the sports-car world on its ear in 1970.
[editoriallinks id=’30242d5f-823f-4352-a13e-34c4571afe4d’ align=’left’][/editoriallinks]
When that original Z-car appeared, sports-car aficionados basically had two choices. On the one hand, they could spend less than $4000 and choose from an assortment of Fiats, MGs, Opels, Triumphs, and the Porsche 914/4, all of which had about 100 horsepower and not enough performance to keep up with a Chevy Impala that didn’t know it was racing. On the other hand, if they wanted serious speed, they had to spend well over $5000 for a Corvette, Jaguar E-type, or Porsche 911. The 240Z, which came with a 150-hp, 2.4-liter inline six and a price of $3601, neatly split the difference and established a new category all its own.
[image id=’c7ff47fa-12fc-46db-820e-7a20846883be’ mediaId=’0f8b6080-3f64-4777-b89c-89f5f44adfce’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]
Fast forward to today. For $21,800 you can get a 142-hp Mazda Miata. For a couple more grand, there’s the similarly powerful Toyota MR2. But if you want serious grunt — over 250 horsepower these days—in a true sports car, you have to step up to the $42,420 Corvette.
The new Nissan 350Z completely fractures this horsepower hierarchy. With a base price of $26,809, the resurrected Z-car costs barely 10 percent more than a Mister Two, yet it has more than double that little Toyota’s power. In fact, the 350Z’s total of 287 horsepower is only a few ponies shy of what is offered in a Porsche 911 that costs two and half times as much as the Nissan.
[pullquote align=’center’]Highs: Excellent performance, terrific control feel, exciting styling inside and out.[/pullquote]
Even the top-of-the-line Track model tested here—with its front and rear spoilers (eliminating front and rear lift and cutting the drag coefficient from 0.30 to 0.29), Rays Engineering forged-aluminum 18-inch wheels (saving a total of almost 18 pounds of unsprung weight), Brembo brakes, viscous limited-slip differential, aluminum pedals, and raft of nonperformance upgrades—goes for only $34,619, $7810 more than a base Z.
[image id=’e65c7971-a500-4055-b769-0784c39c4fe6′ mediaId=’ae24bdba-c9bb-45cb-a494-af38cac5d3f2′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]
This remarkable bargain is possible because the Z employs mass-produced components from Nissan’s parts bins. The Z’s V-6, for example, is the ubiquitous 3.5-liter, 24-valve, quad-cam unit that sees duty in everything from the Altima to the Infiniti QX4 sport-utility. For use in the Z-car, Nissan engineers have retuned this engine with slightly hotter camshafts and freer-flowing intake and exhaust systems. The resulting 287 horsepower at 6200 rpm is about 10 percent more than the Infiniti G35 engine musters.
This engine resides in the nose of a version of Nissan’s FM platform that was recently introduced in the G35. The designation “FM” stands for “front mid-engine” and means that the engine sits fully behind the center line of the front wheels, providing decent weight distribution. For use with the Z-car, this platform has had about eight inches chopped out of its wheelbase, which at 104.3 inches is still on the long side, about the same as a Corvette’s.
As you’d expect from a brand-new design, the FM chassis employs a sophisticated independent suspension with multilink geometry front and rear. Except for the rear diagonal links, all the suspension components, including the rubber-isolated rear subframe, are made of forged aluminum. The FM platform also includes rack-and-pinion steering, anti-lock brakes, and on this Track model, electronic stability control incorporating a welcome “off” switch. Compared with the G35 application of this chassis, the ride height is set lower for the Z, with more negative camber all around.
[image id=’bbfac7c8-ac03-49ff-8595-dcbd54b3edb0′ mediaId=’31b877bb-25d0-4f36-8f07-3db1b0de3400′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]
We’re delighted to report that this hardware makes for more than an impressive spec sheet. How does this sound: 0 to 60 mph in 5.4 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 14.1 seconds at 101 mph? How about 0.88 g of cornering stick, a stopping distance from 70 mph to standstill in 164 feet, and a top speed of 156 mph? That’s essentially the same performance as a Porsche Boxster S, which has a base price of more than 50 grand.
Not only is the Z swift in a straight line and around corners, but it is effortlessly so. With a generous 3498cc under its hood and well-chosen ratios in the six-speed gearbox, healthy thrust is always just a twitch of your foot or a flick of your wrist away. There’s even plenty of poke in sixth gear, which drops engine revs comfortably on the highway. Both the 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear acceleration times are about nine seconds, indicating good flexibility.
Despite its performance, the 350Z does not feel as downy light as a Miata or MR2. Sure enough, at 3322 pounds it’s heavier than a Corvette. That said, the Z is a very satisfying drive with terrific control feel.
[image id=’ac120bdf-d2d2-488a-acac-d1c5ed2b62d5′ mediaId=’4360bb92-54e8-4055-b03b-fc5bb4fc758c’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]
The shifter is precise and accurate, with a direct mechanical feel. The brakes are firm, proportional, and easy to feather on and off. And the pedals are perfectly arrayed for heel-and-toe shifting.
Most important, the steering is direct, linear, and beautifully weighted. The thick-rimmed, cast-magnesium three-spoke wheel provides a seductive combination of stability and immediate responsiveness. As you bend into a corner, the Z carves a smooth line with the exact radius that you command. Turn up the cornering speed, and the tires just bite harder into the pavement, with very little extra steering input required. As you approach the edge of the grip envelope, however, the Z will resolutely understeer. Only at low speeds, in the lower gears, can you use power to kick out the tail.
[pullquote align=’center’]Lows: Could stand to lose a couple hundred pounds and gain a more melodious engine note.[/pullquote]
On the give-and-take of bumpy Midwestern roads, this combination allows you to cover ground very rapidly. The Z’s structure is rock solid, never yielding so much as a creak or groan, even when the road surface is an endless series of cracks and pits. The firm suspension always takes the hard edge off the bumps, so you never endure any audible or physical pounding. For a firmly sprung high-performance car, the ride is impressively compliant.
Contributing to this comfort are the 350Z’s excellent seats. They’re supportive and well shaped, with plenty of lateral support, thanks to shoulder-level bolsters, grippy ersatz carbon-fiber upholstery, and an unusual hump — the “femoral support device” — on the driver’s-seat cushion between your thighs. This seat is even cut away slightly on the right to provide better access to the shifter, and the passenger seat has a generally less aggressive contour.
[image id=’b2240d99-53af-4cfc-96ca-5f8db8c55296′ mediaId=’d6bdac77-b592-4034-9ecf-008007d0b103′ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]
Although the 350Z’s interior is not fabricated from lavish materials, the overall mix of plastic panels, molded in various shades and textures of dark gray, is tasteful. And everywhere you look there are delightful details, such as the cast aluminum door handles, and the metallic trim on the steering wheel, instrument surrounds, shifter, various switches, and door-mounted ventilation registers.
We also like the instrument cluster that moves up and down with the steering wheel when you adjust its height. And when you look at the dash from outside the car, you appreciate that these dials are even finished on their backsides. The three instruments that are angled toward the driver atop the dash recall the original 240Z’s interior. And the damped motion of the lid on the central cubby as it flips up and retracts into the dashboard is positively seductive.
Interior space is plentiful for humans but less so for their trinkets and belongings. The adequately sized glove box is tucked into a panel behind the passenger seat. The cubby in the central console is small and well astern of the shifter. And the only power outlet is on the panel behind and between the seats, which means that your radar detector’s coil cord will be at shoulder level stretched as taut as a high-tension line.
[image id=’648654c1-bd25-4ce9-83b7-811927a181e1′ mediaId=’8f978c23-a792-4a36-a01a-689a2fe671cf’ align=’center’ size=’medium’ share=’false’ caption=” expand=” crop=’original’][/image]
In back, the luggage compartment is bisected by a stylized brace bolstering the upper suspension mounts . This device does not facilitate the accommodation of any large suitcases, although Nissan claims that two golf bags will fit on the inclined floor—if you stow the woods outside the bags. And should your cargo protrude too high, it will obscure the sightline of the rearview mirror, which is already restricted to a thin letter-box view, owing to the sheetmetal at the top and bottom of the rear hatch.
[pullquote align=’center’]The Verdict: A terrific sports-car value in a class all by itself.[/pullquote]
You will draw your own conclusions about the 350Z’s styling, but the editorial eye likes it very much. The lines are distinctive, muscular, and clean. But there’s just the right amount of visual jewelry in the form of the exotic headlights, the architectural door handles, and the taillights.
Overall, it’s a terrific combination of performance, practicality, style, and value.In other words, if you liked the original240Z, you’ll love the new 350.
Counterpoint
At less than 27 grand, the 350Z is a helluva car. At $35,000, I’m thinking I’d rather beg a Chevy dealer to cut me a sweetheart deal on a Vette. I should be gaga for this thing, but I’m not. Perhaps because the expectation of brilliance isn’t quite realized. The rear flanks are gorgeous, but the rectangular backup-light cluster and the front grille don’t fit, and an aggressive rev limiter steps in abruptly if one strays over the redline. The handling is crisp at turn-in, but then the Z resolutely plows the front end, forgoing any notion of an agile, tossable car. Some sedans are better balanced. I expect more from a sports car. —Larry Webster
Nissan has been trading on heritage in its publicity ramp-up for the Z-car revival, inventing words such as “Z-ness” and drawing parallels with the glory days of the 240Z. There are times when invoking images of past greatness is absurd; consider the current Chevy Malibu. But in this application, Nissan has a case. The as-tested price of this new car is almost 10 times that of the one we reviewed in June 1970, but it fits the same general parameters: eye-catching, thoroughly competent, reasonably brisk, and affordable compared with competitors. In 1970 we said, “For the money, the 240Z is an almost brilliant car.” My 2002 impression: ditto. —Tony Swan
I admit I was not initially taken by this new Z. Maybe it was the droopy, flabby-looking butt. Maybe it was the spectacularly space-inefficient interior and cargo areas. The plastic-encased structural support in the rear severely limits carrying capacity. There are 1002 covered cubbies scattered about the cabin, none of which is large enough to carry much. But three curves into our 10Best handling loop I actually uttered this phrase, “Dude, this car rules!” With its short shift throws, linear throttle response, excellent torque, excellent steering, and excellent ride and handling responses, this car totally books. —Daniel Pund
[vehicle type=’specpanel’ automotive-tagset-id=”][/vehicle]
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More

It’s been more than 20 years since Audi introduced the S3, a high-performance version of the A3. Back then, its 20-valve 1.8-liter four-banger made 207 horsepower, a number that seems quaint today. While that original S3 never made it to the United States, we did get the 292-hp S3 in 2015, a punchy and attractive sports sedan capable of hitting 60 in 4.4 seconds. We were so smitten, we wondered why anyone would spend more for the slower S4 sedan.
A new S3 has arrived in Europe, and we took the first-to-market four-door Sportback hatchback for a drive. Audi won’t be bringing the Sportback stateside, like the last generation. We’ll only get the S3 sedan, and it’ll come sometime in 2021.

View Photos

Audi

2022 Audi S3 Has Over 300 Horsepower, Looks Sharp

2022 Audi A3 Prepares for Battle in the U.S.

The S3 has truly grown up. It weighs a bit more than before at about 3300 pounds, and power is up from the last-gen’s 292 horsepower to 306 from Audi and Volkswagen’s turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four. As smooth here as it was in the previous S3, the engine makes 295 pound-feet of torque from 2000 to 4750 rpm and maximum power from 5450 to 6500 rpm. Power is seemingly right there whenever you hit the accelerator, and there’s a lovely snarl that comes into the cabin. The S3 builds speed with ease and confidence.
Audi claims that the sprint from zero to 62 mph takes a mere 4.8 seconds. We’re guessing that estimate will prove to be a few tenths conservative than what we’ll extract from the sedan when we test it next year. Should you want more power, a new RS3 is in the works, and its turbocharged 2.5-liter five-cylinder will produce more than 400 horsepower.

View Photos

Audi

All-wheel drive and a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission are standard. The six-speed manual offered in the past is gone, even in Europe. The S3’s all-wheel-drive system uses a multi-plate clutch to manage the torque distribution between the front and rear axles.
On tight, curvy roads, the S3 shines. It is easy to go fast in this car. The electrically assisted power steering is crisp and on the slightly lighter side, turn-in is aggressive, and the limits of adhesion are extraordinarily high. An 18-inch wheel with 225/40R-18 tires is standard, and 235/35R-19 tires are optional. Our S3 wore the 19-inch wheel option, which offers a remarkably harmonious compromise between agility and comfort. The softness of the A3 is gone, although the Comfort setting turns even the S3 into a very comfortable long-distance cruiser.

View Photos

Audi

The interior of the new S3 is spacious, with ample room both up front and in the rear. We have praised the materials and workmanship in the A3, but the S3, which will start at about $45,000 when it hits the U.S., isn’t sufficiently differentiated from the less-expensive A3. While we like details such as the frameless mirrors and the stitching on the instrument panel, the hard plastic around the air vents looks out of place. And the shifter paddles on the steering wheel feel flimsy, with too little travel and a lack of feedback.
The exterior design is sporty and attractive, but the S3 is fitted with a number of faux air vents. The Audi S3’s segment is expanding. Mercedes-AMG offers two sedans, the A35 and the CLA35. BMW rolled out the M235i Gran Coupe this year. Cadillac’s excellent CT4-V’s longitudinal engine and rear-drive layout is a standout against this class of transversely mounted all-wheel-drive machines. If the lack of an S3 hatch is holding you back, a new VW Golf R should arrive stateside in late 2021 and is expected to share the new S3’s mechanicals. We’ll have to wait a bit longer to test out the S3 sedan, but our time with the Sportback leaves few doubts that another great S3 is on its way.

Specifications

Specifications
2021 Audi S3 Sportback
VEHICLE TYPE front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door hatchback
BASE PRICE (GERMANY) $47,500
ENGINE TYPE turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement 121 in3, 1984 cm3Power 306 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque 295 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
TRANSMISSION 7-speed dual-clutch automatic
DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 103.5 inLength: 171.3 inWidth: 71.5 inHeight: 56.6 inCargo volume: 12 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 355 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST) 60 mph: 4.5 sec100 mph: 11.9 sec1/4 mile: 13.2 secTop speed: 155 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST) Combined/city/highway: 24/22/28 mpg

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io More