More stories

  • in

    Tested: 2004 Chrysler Crossfire SRT-6

    View Photos
    Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

    From the August 2004 issue of Car and Driver.
    The blended DNA of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler Corporation produced its first offspring in 2003, and hairdressers rejoiced. The Crossfire is just the kind of florid prêt-à-porter that appeals to people in the look-good business. To be sure, the Crossfire does look good.

    Best Coupes of 2020

    $60K Sports Car Showdown

    The car’s name is also an unintentional pun about DaimlerChrysler; in the days since the 1998 merger, executives have been regularly mowed down by crossfire between Stuttgart and Detroit. The latest forced exit was Chrysler Group COO Wolfgang Bernhard, crossfired in May for being too vocal about problems at Mercedes and resisting a plan to spend $7 billion bailing out Mitsubishi.

    View Photos

    Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

    Maybe he thought the money should be used to induce more people to buy Crossfires. As of May 1, according to trade magazine Automotive News, enough of the torpedo-tailed coupes were sitting in stock that the Karmann factory in Osnabrück, Germany, could go on a five-month lunch break before Chrysler dealers would run short. The company believes the magic laxative may be pulling the base price below $30,000 for 2005 by yanking out some standard features such as heated seats.
    Meanwhile, the dandy-dressed Crossfire, which shares both skeleton and muscle with the first-generation Mercedes-Benz SLK roadster, is the first Chrysler product to attain the performance-enhancing SRT label, heretofore bestowed only on Dodges.

    Highs: Looks sweet on the street, supercharger dispels past power complaints, new legs love track work.

    The “street and racing technology” shtick—adding more horsepower, bigger tires, and big attitude—has already been done to a few Dodges, notably, the Ram SRT-10 and Neon-based SRT-4 (all Vipers carry an SRT-10 badge). Buyers who prefer a quick quarter-mile served with essence of tire smoke have approved of the 500-hp pickup and 230-hp subcompact (in fact, various Mopar bolt-on kits will bump the SRT-4’s horsepower all the way to 300). These first vehicles have given the SRT moniker a reputation for delivering the real deal. Anticipation runs high for the SRT versions of the Chrysler 300C sedan and Dodge Magnum wagon, now only months away, we are advised.
    While we wait, the Crossfire SRT-6 will blaze into dealerships this June as both the $45,695 automatic coupe pictured here and a $49,995 automatic convertible. Criminally, no manual is offered in the SRT-6.
    We have written that the base Crossfire has eye-snaring looks and pleasing handling but an engine at least 50 horsepower short of the boiling point. The SRT mods are substantial, as is the price increase. From base Crossfire coupe to SRT-6 coupe, the extra $11,200 buys first and foremost an intercooled supercharger that wrenches another 115 horses from the 3.2-liter, 18-valve V-6. Blown, the V-6 makes 330 horsepower and 310 pound-feet of torque, a twistability increase of 81 pound-feet. And there are only 109 more pounds of curb weight (3220 in all) for the coupe to haul.

    View Photos

    Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

    Shorn of its decorative plastic sombrero, this Mercedes engine would look more familiar. It rolls out of the AMG handicraft shop in Affalterbach, Germany, and previously found work in the SLK32 AMG and C32 AMG. Both of those models have since gone to V-8s, and Mercedes has developed a new 268-hp, twin-cam, four-valve naturally aspirated V-6 for its 2005 SLK350 ( C/D, June 2004). So the Crossfire SRT-6 is the last customer of a very nice hand-me-down.
    There’s been considerable pumping up of the Crossfire’s suspension as well. The spring rates have been stiffened almost 50 percent in the front and 42 percent in the rear, and jounce and rebound rates in the shocks have been firmed up to match. The front brake rotors grow 1.2 inches to 13.0, and the rear discs go vented and get another 0.9 inch of diameter.

    View Photos

    Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

    There’s more zoot in the Crossfire’s ’40s-streamline styling with special-to-SRT wheels, 18 inches in front, 19 in the rear. The spoke count in the wheels has been upped from seven to 15. Peeking over the rims is the thin trace of the new low-profile Michelin Pilot Sport PS2 multicompound summer rubber (Continental all-season tires are an option). You’ll find a jack and a can of tire sealer, but no spare.
    The square jaw gets a bit squarer with a revised front-bumper fascia. Replacing the base car’s motorized rear spoiler is a fixed wing that wraps around the fastback and is etched with the same boat-deck dimples as the hood. It clutters the tail and raises a question: If the base Crossfire’s deploying spoiler provides enough stability for its 151-mph top speed, why does the SRT need a gaudy whale fluke to go 154?

    View Photos

    Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

    The cockpit gets by with minimal changes, including a 200-mph speedo and Alcantara pseudo-suede trim on the buckets that is embroidered with an SRT-6 logo. Hence, a few complaints about the Crossfire cabin remain, including over-the-shoulder blind spots, a tight cabin for six-footers, no steering-wheel rake adjustment, and a dinky eight-cubic-foot trunk with nothing to tie down the goods.

    Lows: Vision-blurring ride, no manual available, blind spots will hide a Scenicruiser.

    The Japanese-made IHI supercharger does whack time off the Crossfire’s track numbers in big chunks. A 60-mph run now swiffs by in 5.1 seconds, a 1.4-second improvement over a six-speed manual Crossfire we tested in 2003. That car ran the quarter in 14.8 seconds at 96 mph. The SRT-6 posts a 13.5-second quarter, steaming through the trap at 107 mph. Whether it’s the next green light down the avenue or the gap between two rigs guarding the freeway merge lane, “up there” is “right here” much sooner in an SRT-6.
    Even so, polite manners govern the powertrain. The throttle response and the automatic gear selections are smoothly keyed to your pedal inputs. If you like, pilot the SRT-6 all day without ever getting into the fat end of the power–let the Starbucks get cold in the one cup holder, and it won’t slosh if you’re careful.
    More thrust doesn’t equate to more noise, either. The decibel measurements at idle and wide-open-throttle, 46 and 78, respectively, are not low by luxury-car standards, but they are virtually identical to those of the base Crossfire. A supercharger that is felt but not heard runs on sophisticated engineering.

    View Photos

    Bill Delaney

    Fancy multilink arrangements in the wheel wells strike a contrast to a medieval recirculating-ball steering box that deadens wheel feedback from the driver. The base Crossfire is no lubberly pig, but the SRT deckhands have pulled in any slack and reprogrammed the stability-control software to tolerate more friskiness. Some fast lapping at Southern California’s Willow Springs track proved that the SRT-6 is screwed down tight. Speedy steering reflexes, stable footing through the corners, and dependable reserves of grip from the monster tires (0.90 at the skidpad, about the same as the base car fitted with an older model of Pilot Sports) caused corner speeds to climb well past our expectations. Braking distances likewise shrank.
    Clamped into full ABS, the four discs supply a stop from 70 mph in 157 feet, a few feet shorter than the base Crossfire. Better yet, the brake-pedal swing is packed with adjustability, and it fades little, even with torturous use.

    View Photos

    Bill DelaneyCar and Driver

    We love cars that handle, but so much suspension resistance on such a short wheelbase means trouble. The SRT-6 hops its way up sectioned concrete freeways like a malfunctioning lowrider. It crashes heavily on railroad grades and fraying pavement. It shivers over the minutest cuts and crevices, the stout tire sidewalls transmitting all their energy through the stiff springs and into the rigid body. What works on track day makes life miserable every other day.
    And there the SRT-6 creates a conundrum. No doubt Chrysler’s hot-rod group has extracted a serious performance car from a fashion accessory. But with no manual transmission available and a reputation as a too-cute coupe, the Crossfire may never appeal to hard-cores who live for the next apex, especially when it’s priced in Corvette and BMW M3 territory. And the Crossfire’s current constituency may never put up with having their pompadours viciously rattled with every trip down the driveway.

    The Verdict: Everything we wished for and some things we wish we hadn’t.

    Car magazines may howl, but Chrysler—having fixed the power deficit and added better brakes and styling—should rethink the SRT-6’s suspension and relax it for easier boulevard work. True, the company expects to build only a couple thousand SRT-6s a year. But the corporate crossfire may be a little less deadly if this model actually sells.
    COUNTERPOINT
    The local Mercedes salesmen must be doing a slow burn now that the SRT-6 version of the Crossfire is going to hit the streets. The Crossfire has always been rakishly good-looking, with taut, sporty handling, but it needed more power under the hood to make it truly exciting. That’s all been fixed by the supercharger and its extra 115 horsepower. The sales guys at the Chrysler store now have a great-looking coupe, or convertible, that runs like a sprinter and costs two to six grand less than the Benz products. One word of advice to Chrysler: Lose the big wing on the back. It’s tacky-looking, and it only muddles the Crossfire’s sleek and elegant profile. —André Idzikowski
    Cult-car alert! Twenty years from now, the SRT-6 will be one of those scarce machines that will command a prominent location at concours across the country. Just consider its exotic concept-car-derived styling, its Mercedes-based mechanical bones, and its outstanding acceleration, handling, and braking. Unfortunately, although the SRT-6’s performance neatly splits the difference between a 350Z and a Corvette C5, its sticker price is near the Vette’s. Furthermore, this performance comes only with an automatic gearbox. Customers attracted to this feature will not likely appreciate the SRT’s firm ride. In other words, the SRT-6 is destined to be a rare bird. —Csaba Csere
    I want to know what happened to the 19 horsepower that didn’t make the jump over to Chrysler’s SRT-6. Just because the engine isn’t in a Mercedes, it automatically has to lose power? I remember fondly the closely related full-powered, 349-hp SLK32 AMG, primarily because it was scary fast. The SRT-6’s 330 horsepower is nothing to sneeze at, but stomp on the accelerator through the kickdown switch, and it just doesn’t fly at other cars’ rear ends the way the SLK32 did. Perhaps it was the larger wheels, or the green engine in our test car, but with the rest of the vehicle so uncompromised, you don’t expect to make any concessions. —Tony Quiroga

    Specifications

    SPECIFICATIONS
    2004 Chrysler Crossfire SRT-6
    VEHICLE TYPE Front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 3-door coupe
    PRICE AS TESTED$45,695
    ENGINE TYPESupercharged and intercooled V-6,aluminum block and headsDisplacement: 195 cu in, 3199ccPower (SAE net): 330 bhp @ 6100 rpmTorque (SAE net): 310 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
    TRANSMISSION 5-speed automatic with manumatic shifting
    DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 94.5 inLength: 159.8 inWidth: 69.5 inHeight: 51.5 inCurb weight: 3220 lb
    C/D-TEST RESULTS Zero to 60 mph: 5.1 secZero to 100 mph: 12.4 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 5.5 secStanding ¼-mile: 13.5 sec @ 107 mphTop speed (governor limited): 154 mphBraking, 70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 157 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.90 g
    FUEL ECONOMYEPA fuel economy city/highway driving : 17/25 mpgC/D-observed: 19 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

  • in

    Tested: 2005 Saab 9-2X Aero

    From the July 2004 issue of Car and Driver.
    The 9-2X represents many firsts for Saab. It is the first Saab to feature all-wheel drive. The first to compete in the premium-compact segment. And the first to be built on the Swedish island known as Japan.
    Ex-squeeze me? Was that JAPAN?

    Obituary: Saab Automobile, 1947–2011

    Best Station Wagons of 2020

    Hai! The home of teriyaki, karate, and Nintendo is now home to a Scandinavian import. This blue-eyed, black-haired beauty is built by Fuji Heavy Industries, a.k.a. Subaru, in the Gunma Yajima plant and then exported to the U.S. and Canada for consumption by Saab’s North American faithful. The only things Swedish on the car are the badges, and we’re not so sure those aren’t made in Japan, too. Perhaps you’re curious as to why Saab took this circuitous route? Let us explain.
    Saab felt it direly needed to get a foot in the door to the premium-compact market, which the brand predicts will triple in size by 2006. Not only has Acura been thriving in the segment for years with the Integra and RSX, but the Euros are currently organizing a full assault as well. Volvo is already out with an all-new S40 sedan and the V50 wagon. Audi is only a year or so away from bringing over the five-door A3. And heck, it’s rumored that within a couple of years BMW will ship to the U.S. a form of its new five-door 1-series—possibly a two-door coupe, à la 2002—that could carry a 2-series title. The guns are being positioned.
    Well, Saab wasn’t thrilled at the thought of being left out in the cold once again, missing out on all the fun had by the other kids playing Battleship. Accordingly, Saab turned to the one entity that could quickly rally the troops—the General. As in General Motors.

    Highs: Handsome styling, versatile package, faster than an Audi S6 Avant.

    As you may know, GM has a 100-percent equity share in Saab and a 20-percent share in Subaru. So when Saab needed a small, quick leadoff hitter for its lineup, it was the General that nabbed the WRX wagon from Subaru’s squad and optioned it for Saab’s team. For Saab, the wagon made the most sense given the brand’s hatchback history. Plus, it’s a very functional design that can squeeze in five adults along with 28 cubic feet of gear. Had Saab attempted to build its own car from scratch, it would have taken up to five years to get it to market. Time equals money, not to mention competitive advantage, so Saab gladly accepted the General’s offer. Not a bad offer, mind you, given that the WRX made back-to-back appearances on our 10Best Cars list in 2002 and 2003.
    That this Saab is really a Subaru begs the question, How different are they? To sum it up: a lot and a little. “A lot” with respect to the extensive aesthetic changes Saab made to the WRX, yet “a little” when it comes to the disparity in overall driving experience, which we’ll get to later. First, the laundry list of alterations.
    The 9-2X is not a simple rebadge, evidenced by the myriad modifications inside and out. From the A-pillars forward, the 9-2X is completely unique, wearing new front fenders with distinctive cornering lamps, sleeker headlamps (with available xenon bulbs), a flusher hood scoop, and Saab’s signature three-hole grille. Only the doors, the roof, and the rear quarter-panels are shared with the Subaru. In profile, the Saab shows off more-aggressive rocker panels, an integrated rear roof spoiler, and a clean roofline unmarred by rails, which are standard on the WRX wagon. For the hind end, Saab nipped and tucked the Subie’s butt, fitting the 9-2X with fresh taillamps, a bumper with a black diffuser, and a new tailgate that houses the license plate.
    Inside, Saab has given the Subie a full IKEA makeover. The carpeting is now a richer, fuller weave. The door trim is improved, now more pleasing to the eye and hand. Gone are the Subie’s cheap dash-mounted cup holder and manual HVAC controls, replaced in our Aero model by two drink holders in the center console and a metallic-look center stack with knurled knobs for the radio and automatic climate controls. Our Aero also came with a standard in-dash six-CD changer and options not even available on the WRX wagon: a $1950 power sunroof and $1695 black-and-parchment leather-wrapped seats with front active head restraints (part of the Premium package, which also has the xenon headlights).
    Saab wanted—and needed—to enhance the WRX’s subpar NVH levels. Thus, it installed not only the upgraded carpet but also sealing for the rear quarter-trim and liftgate; a revised rear engine mount; acoustical treatment on the roof and rear floor; and new or improved insulation for the toe board, fenders, and shift boot. We told you it wasn’t a rebadge.
    Mechanically, our test 9-2X Aero is nearly identical to a WRX. It features the same 227-hp, 2.0-liter turbocharged flat-four, five-speed manual, and all-wheel-drive system as the Subie, but it attacks the road with quicker steering and a retuned suspension. Saab stiffened the steering-gear mounting for better feedback and response, and on the Aero, pitched the WRX’s standard rack in favor of the rally-bred STi’s, which lowers the ratio from 16.5:1 to 15.0:1. The Subaru’s strut suspension was reworked with firmer springs, softer dampers, 10mm-shorter rear bump stops, and stiffer front control-arm bushings. In addition, 1.8mm of toe-in was dialed into the front wheels for better on-center feel and straight-line stability.

    Lows: Turbo lag, as Swedish as sumo.

    That’s the laundry list, but how does it all come out in the wash? Compared with the Subaru, the Saab is first and foremost a more refined machine. At idle, the rumbling from the engine that is so evident in the WRX has been hushed in the 9-2X, as if quelled with a down pillow. Our test car registered just 44 dBA on the sound meter, compared with 51 for the last WRX sedan we tested (“Two Against One,” October 2001). Since we never tested a WRX wagon, a direct comparison is a little tricky because a wagon has a cargo area that acts like a noise-enchancing echo chamber. As expected, then, the Saab wagon’s sound levels surpass the WRX sedan’s at both wide-open throttle (78 dBA versus 75) and 70-mph cruising (73 versus 71). In spite of that, the Saab somehow seems quieter, maybe in part because it has eliminated much of the Subaru’s tin-box effect, especially the cacophony of road pebbles ricocheting off the wheel wells and undercarriage. The leather-wrapped, three-spoke steering wheel relays minimal vibration, as does the gearshift–both weak spots in the WRX. Moreover, the interior, although still more economical than luxurious, is smart and inviting, with supple leather, higher-grade plastics, and metallic accents.
    Over Ann Arbor’s diverse landscape, the 9-2X exhibited a ride as firm as the Subie’s yet more compliant, better at absorbing the harsher impacts. Saab’s diligence paid off here, resulting in a ride more befitting of a “premium” car. The steering is superb, offering crisp turn-in, a firm on-center feel, and quick response that isn’t too quick. The overall feel is light yet amply communicative, rarely requiring adjustments to the wheel after taking a set.
    The precise steering only enhances the Aero’s impressive grip and scoot. Fitted with split-spoke 17-inch alloys wearing W-rated 215/45R-17 Bridgestone Potenza RE011s (included with the sunroof on Aero versions), our test 9-2X pulled 0.86 g on the skidpad, superior to the WRX’s 0.82 and on par with another premium, now discontinued all-wheel-drive wagon, the Audi S6 Avant Quattro (November 2001). Furthermore, the Saab not only shorted the S6 from 70 mph–171 feet versus 176–but also outgunned it in acceleration, posting a 0-to-60 time of 6.1 seconds (versus 6.3) and a quarter-mile sprint of 14.7 at 92 mph (versus 14.9 at 97). Wow. Plus, the 9-2X Aero beats the old 9-3 Viggen (February 2002) to 60 and the quarter. As with the Subie, our only real gripe is the Aero’s turbo lag, which stifles momentum below 3000 rpm. The WRX sedan is still quicker–we tested one that did 5.4 and 14.1, respectively–but it’s also carrying 164 fewer pounds than the 3256-pound 9-2X. Nonetheless, the Aero should prove to be plenty competitive in its class.
    The real beauty of the 9-2X Aero is that it retains the WRX’s core fun-to-drive factors–turbo power and the sure-footedness of all-wheel drive combined with eagerness to perform four-wheel drifts–without really diluting the Subie’s raw driving experience. It has only softened the edges while at the same time raising the quality bar. For that, Saab is asking $27,645, or $2975 more than a WRX wagon. If you want less for less, Saab is also offering a $23,685 Linear version with 165 horsepower.

    The Verdict: A swanky WRX that’s better in every way.

    Our tester, equipped with the Premium package, sunroof, and $600 heated seats, rang the register up to $31,890. Add another $1250 for an automatic. Premium cars equal premium pricing. But considering the Saab is the best all-around WRX to date, not to mention it includes no-charge maintenance for two years or 24,000 miles and a longer four-year/ 50,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty, it may garner another first for Saab in the new millennium–winning one of our comparos.
    Counterpoint
    Recommending a WRX to a friend is like setting him or her up with a potential mate who’s a bit on the homely side but a lot of fun, too. Needless to say, this matchmaking rarely works out. When people are investing their money or hearts, a physical attraction is necessary. The Saab version of the WRX addresses this issue with a makeover worthy of its own network show. It doesn’t go so far as to create a Swedish supermodel, but the improvements might sway status-conscious customers. Under the skin, subtle modifications make the 9-2X feel like a WRX with the volume turned down. If you tried to love a WRX but failed, you might find a match with the 9-2X. —Tony Quiroga
    I love the Subaru WRX, so of course I’m also enamored of Saab’s nearly identical version. But by adding a few luxury features and more sound deadening, Saab took the car in the wrong direction in weight, price, and performance. It’s slower and more expensive. In my opinion, Saab should have added the WRX STi’s 300-hp engine but kept the standard WRX’s softer suspension. Then we’d have something different enough to justify a loftier price. The only reason I could see popping for the Saab instead of the Subaru is that a Saab dealer typically throws in more perks, such as free loaner cars. I’d stick with the Subaru, however. —Larry Webster
    We’re on record as Subaru WRX love slaves, which makes questioning the bona fides of this badge job just a little awkward. Particularly since this car adds something to the Saab lineup–all-wheel drive–that’s overdue. Not to mention a high fun-to-drive quotient, augmented by small-wagon usefulness. Nevertheless, as a descendant of Vikings, it seems to me there’s a credibility question that’s gonna nag Saab faithful. Do a few suspension tweaks, a new grille, and leather morph this Japanese warrior into something the trolls of Trollhättan would bless? If it looks like a Subaru and drives like a Subaru, will it really make you say, “Yah, shoor”? —Tony Swan

    Specifications

    SPECIFICATIONS
    2005 Saab 9-2X Aero
    VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, 4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 5-door wagon
    PRICE AS TESTED: $31,890
    ENGINE TYPE: turbocharged and intercooled flat-4, aluminum block and heads
    Displacement: 197 cu in, 3222ccPower (SAE net): 227 bhp @ 6000 rpmTorque (SAE net): 217 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm
    TRANSMISSION: 5-speed manual
    DIMENSIONS:Wheelbase: 99.4 in Length: 175.6 inWidth: 66.7 in Height: 57.7 inCurb weight: 3256 lb
    C/D TEST RESULTS:Zero to 60 mph: 6.1 secZero to 100 mph: 18.3 secZero to 120 mph: 30.5 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 7.6 secStanding ¼-mile: 14.7 sec @ 92 mphTop speed (governor limited): 140 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 171 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
    FUEL ECONOMY:EPA fuel economy highway/city driving: 20/26 mpgC/D-observed: 21 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

  • in

    Tested: 2005 Subaru Outback 2.5XT Limited

    From the July 2004 issue of Car and Driver.
    Lake Tahoe, for those of you who’ve never been there, is solid Subaru country. You see the star-badged four-wheel-drive Subies everywhere you go. At a lunch stop during the company’s 2005 Outback introductory drive, most of the staff admitted to owning one Subaru or another.

    Six-Way Compact Crossover Battle

    Best SUVs and Crossovers of 2020

    Every 2020 Small SUV Ranked from Worst to Best

    Obviously, the snowy winter climate in the Sierra Nevada predisposes Tahoans to durable, four-wheel-drive vehicles, and interest in the fleet of new Outbacks was wholehearted. And when the faithful learn that the midrange 2.5XT tested here has a 250-hp turbocharged engine-based on the unit in the WRX STi-that shrugs off most of the effects of power-robbing altitude, these folks will be standing in line at the dealerships.
    There are three basic levels of the 2005 Outback, starting with the 2.5i and 2.5i Limited. A 168-hp naturally aspirated flat-four engine powers both of these, with the Limited offering a higher level of equipment.
    The 2.5XT and 2.5XT Limited are intercooled turbo versions of the flat-four engine, with 250 horsepower on tap.
    Most expensive are the top-dog Outback 3.0R and 3.0R sedan, powered by a 3.0-liter flat-six featuring variable intake-valve timing and lift. The 3.0R is also available in L.L.Bean livery and as the VDC Limited (for “vehicle dynamics control,” a system that integrates an all-speed, all-wheel traction-control system with variable-torque all-wheel drive). At about $33,000, it is Subaru’s most expensive Outback.

    Highs: Turbo performance, refinement, all-weather versatility.

    For 2005, the Outback has a slightly longer wheelbase and is 1.3 inches longer overall. It has a wider track, a lower center of gravity, and weighs less than the previous-generation car, despite being stiffer and stronger. Subaru used aluminum panels for the hood, front bumper assembly, and liftgate to reduce weight as well as decrease mass at the car’s extremities for better handling. In the drive toward centralized mass, even the battery was shifted rearward.
    At 3640 pounds, the 2.5XT Limited we tested isn’t exactly svelte, but it isn’t too bad for a fully equipped all-wheel-drive wagon, and it certainly performs and feels like a lighter car. A quarter-mile time of 15.6 seconds at 92 mph isn’t too shabby for a nearly two-ton wagon with an automatic transmission.
    The low center of gravity helps quell roll motions and reduce that tippy sensation you often get in heavy SUVs. And thanks to a steering rack bolted securely to the front suspension subframe, what Subaru calls a “cannon mount,” the Outback has very direct responses to the helm. To reduce kickback shock, the rack has an integral shock-damping valve that produces a decent compromise between wheel tremor and feel.

    Subaru engineers explained at length that horizontally opposed four-cylinder engines have perfect primary and second-order balance, and the new 2.5-liter engine is indeed amazingly smooth and quiet.

    Subaru engineers explained at length that horizontally opposed four-cylinder engines have perfect primary and second-order balance, and the new 2.5-liter engine is indeed amazingly smooth and quiet. The layout boasts other advantages, too, such as a crankshaft that is short and stiff and-since no heavy counterweights are needed -comparatively light.
    The engine is short, and its longitudinal location provides a straight shot for the transmission and driveshaft. The new five-speed automatic gearbox looks way long in comparison, but that’s because it also houses the front and center differentials, along with the computer-directed multi-disc clutch mechanism that apportions torque in Subaru’s so-called variable torque-distribution system. (Models with other engine-and-transmission configurations come with different center-differential systems.)
    The “symmetrical all-wheel-drive” mechanism—as Subaru calls it—is mostly utterly transparent, but you can sense its variable operation in certain conditions. Because the torque is directed to the axle with the most grip, you can alter the car’s handling characteristics in a corner on a gravel road by adding throttle and having the car transition from understeer to neutral or even mild oversteer simply by staying on the gas. For drivers accustomed to correcting slides, the process can be a little counterintuitive, but you soon become reliant on this useful handling tool.

    Lows: Slow transmission kickdown, all-season tires.

    We could feel the center diff manipulating torque during skidpad testing, too. In third gear, too low on the tach for serious boost, the Outback would squeal around with the front end pushing fairly resolutely. When we tried it again in second, the rapidly inflating boost levels would have the car up on its toes, ready to rotate.
    The fact that the 2.5XT only pulled a fairly unexceptional 0.74 g has more to do with its all-season Bridgestones. The Potenza RE92s are engineered to keep those Lake Tahoe residents slogging through the slush, not for cornering at high speeds. Despite that, the Outback handles well, feeling stable and secure in all circumstances, and summer tires would really optimize its act.
    In many ways the Subaru approach is paradoxical. The Outbacks (and Legacy siblings) have the necessary hardware, suspension geometry, and balance to be credible performance cars, but they’re tuned for the middle of the road. Although body-motion control is well restrained, the ride is supple and comfortable. A four-into-one-into-two exhaust system is pleasant-sounding but muted to the point of inaudibility in normal motoring.
    Control feedback in the cabin is clear but subtle, and you always get the impression that the cars are trying to please the largest possible audience. Yet lovers of high-performance machinery won’t be disappointed with the 2.5XT’s cockpit, which has the requisite instrumentation tidily presented by electroluminescent white-on-black gauges ringed by dimly glowing red circles. The seats in the 2.5XT are as firm and supportive as the furniture you’d find in reputable German sports sedans.

    Another thoughtful feature typical of the Subaru approach is that the rear wiper will automatically switch from intermediate to constant speed when the driver selects reverse gear.

    Even the Sportshift override system for the five-speed automatic caters to discerning drivers. Like other systems on the market, a sideways swipe of the console-mounted selector lever pops it over into the manual slot, where forward and backward movements provoke up- and downshifts. As in other cars, buttons on the steering wheel duplicate those selections. But in the Outback, you can thumb one of the buttons and get a response even when the center selector is in the normal drive position.
    Thus, if you’re dozing along in drive and suddenly spot a stationary car in your lane and a break in traffic, you can thumb the button for a downshift and scoot into the gap. You could also mash the gas pedal and wait for a downshift, but here you’d find a fairly deliberate pause while the computer thinks about the smoothest way to do that.
    The system reverts to normal automatic operation within a few seconds, but it’s nice to have the car standing by for further instruction, and we found ourselves taking advantage of the feature fairly often. Another thoughtful feature typical of the Subaru approach is that the rear wiper will automatically switch from intermediate to constant speed when the driver selects reverse gear. And here’s something for those Lake Tahoe drivers: The outside-temperature gauge flashes when the ambient conditions drop below 37 degrees.
    Most of what makes the Outback a convenient and pleasurable vehicle to use is less visible than obvious gadgetry. When they found that the previous brake booster was expanding under pressure, Subaru’s engineers used tie rods (like those holding a kettledrum together) to stop it. The result is a more predictable brake-pedal feel.

    The Verdict: High-end image and high performance in one package.

    Subarus have always had sashless windows, and the new Outback is no exception. If you ask a Subaru engineer, such as Martyn Harding, why, he’ll answer that it’s better to add that metal to the door-aperture surround, where it forms part of the body’s impact-absorbing cage structure. Not coincidentally, Subaru foresees a five-star rating in all the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s crash tests.
    We’re drawn strongly to the idea of a wagon that drives like a good car yet has nearly nine inches of ground clearance (along with pretty respectable approach and departure angles) and a four-wheel-drive system that will scramble up a rock-strewn grade like no leather-lined, quiet, smooth-riding luxury vehicle has a right to. We like that this Subaru is fast and stable on the road without ever suggesting its dual-purpose mechanicals. And we like very much that there is now a turbo Outback. Subarus were always cool. Now more of them are fast, too. That’s progress.

    Specifications

    SPECIFICATIONS
    2005 Subaru Outback 2.5XT Limited
    VEHICLE TYPE Front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 5-door wagon
    PRICE AS TESTED $32,470
    ENGINE TYPE Turbocharged and intercooled flat-4, aluminum block and headsDisplacement: 150 cu in, 2457ccPower (SAE net): 250 bhp @ 6000 rpmTorque (SAE net): 250 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
    TRANSMISSION 5-speed automatic with manumatic shifting
    DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 105.1 inLength: 188.7 inWidth: 69.7 inHeight: 61.6 inCurb weight: 3640 lb
    C/D-TEST RESULTS Zero to 60 mph: 7.1 secZero to 100 mph: 19.2 secZero to 120 mph: 32.0 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 7.8 secStanding ¼-mile: 15.6 sec @ 92 mphTop speed (governor limited): 130 mphBraking, 70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 204 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.74 g
    FUEL ECONOMYEPA fuel economy city/highway driving: 19/24 mpgC/D-observed: 19 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

  • in

    2021 Porsche 911 Targa 4/4S Borders on Spectacle

    View Photos
    Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

    In just the second year of the latest generation, Porsche already offers the 911 in 14 varieties, which is about halfway to where it will probably end up once they’ve rolled out every possible iteration. The latest mutation of 911 DNA spawns the 2021 911 Targa, which features a power-retractable targa panel, but it isn’t a full-on convertible. It does, however, cost just as much as the cabriolet, thus raising sound questions about the point of this roof reengineering exercise. To which the answer is: Don’t overthink this. We’ve got a new 911 Targa 4, and seemingly the whole back end of the car pops off to hide a little piece of roof. And if you don’t think that’s cool, you’re welcome to peruse one of the many other 911s or just go down to the nearest pond and yell at the ducks.

    2021 Porsche 911 Gets Targa 4 and 4S Models

    2021 Porsche 911 Targa 4S Heritage Design Edition

    The Targa’s top operates just as it did on the previous generation: The rear window cantilevers back as the top folds itself and tucks behind the rear seats, the glass then returning home on a 19-second round trip. On the previous Targa, it was possible to pop the top and smash that pricey piece of formed glassed into a brick wall or the Cayenne parked in the garage. In the newest generation, if the parking sensors detect any threats within 1.6 feet, the top will halt its disappearing act and alert the driver to the imminent danger. The Targa bar comes standard in silver and can be optioned in black. And be sure to keep this latest edition rubber side down or the two magnesium bars fitted to keep the targa panel taut would likely create a dazzling sparkler show.

    View Photos

    Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

    The Targa is propelled by a familiar powertrain, a twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter flat-six mated to Porsche’s magnificent eight-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission. Starting at $120,650, the Targa 4 cranks out 379 horsepower and 331 pound-feet of torque. Upgrading to the 4S will run an additional $15,900 but bumps the power output to 443 horses and 390 pound-feet. Sadly, the Targa is only offered with all-wheel drive, but there’s a little morsel of redemption. As with the other S variants, a seven-speed manual transmission is offered as a no-cost option. The do-it-yourself gearbox replaces the electronically controlled limited-slip differential with a conventional limited-slip unit and includes the otherwise optional Sport Chrono package, which adds drive modes and dynamic engine mounts. Curious how the Targa will perform? Check out these tests of the Carrera S, Carrera S with the manual, Carrera 4, Carrera 4S and Carrera S Cabriolet.

    View Photos

    Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

    Because it’s a Porsche, a plethora of performance goodies and dress-up items are available à la carte. The German-spec Targa 4S we drove had all the fixings, which, at $181,840, inflated the sticker price into capital-T 911 Turbo range. A 911 is beautiful to drive at any price point, but the Targa 4S’s extra performance gear certainly didn’t disappoint. The adaptive dampers (standard on both models) adeptly smooth the wrinkled pavement of old country roads, and the steering operates with impeccable precision and provides useful feedback. The brake pedal is perfect, and the optional carbon-ceramic rotors are unbothered by any abuse you can throw at them. The active anti-roll bars paired with rear-axle steering (both only available on the 4S) seemingly grant the Targa cornering superpowers and the driver instantaneous confidence. If launch-control starts don’t induce belly laughs, keep doing them until they do. The car won’t mind.
    Of course, even a $180,000 Targa comes with a few caveats. The 911 coupes are stiffer than the convertibles, and the Targa feels a little more like the latter. The structure trembles a touch more over high-frequency washboard, and the tremors are amplified through the steering column. With the top peeled back and the wind deflector deployed from windscreen frame, there’s a bit of booming wind buffeting that occurs around 50 mph. And then there’s the additional mass. This loaded Targa 4S tipped the scales at hefty 3765 pounds, nearly 250 pounds more than the last Carrera 4S coupe we tested.

    View Photos

    Marc UrbanoCar and Driver

    But all of those quibbles are rooted in logic, and the Targa is, at its core, an illogical machine. Sun worshippers are better off with a 911 Cabriolet; track rats will want a coupe. With so many models in the lineup, every 911 has a particular, focused mission—except this one. The Targa is the 911 that comes closest to whimsy. It’s here just for fun, to present an overly complex solution to a simple problem, and to deliver a throwback open-air experience without the hassle. If you don’t get it, don’t get it. The Targa and its audience will find each other, just as they always have.

    Specifications

    Specifications
    2021 Porsche 911 Targa 4/4S
    VEHICLE TYPE rear-engine, all-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, 2-door targa
    BASE PRICE 4, $120,650; 4S, $135,550
    ENGINES twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter flat-6, 379 hp, 331 lb-ft; twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter flat-6, 443 hp, 390 lb-ft
    TRANSMISSION 7-speed manual, 8-speed dual-clutch automatic
    DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 98.5 inLength: 177.9 inWidth: 72.9 inHeight: 51.1–51.2 inCargo volume: 5 ft3Curb weight (C/D est): 3650–3750 lb
    PERFORMANCE (C/D EST) 60 mph: 3.0–3.8 sec100 mph: 7.3–8.6 sec1/4 mile: 11.3–12.0 secTop speed: 179–188 mph
    EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST) Combined/city/highway: 19–20/17–18/23–24 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

  • in

    Tested: 2005 Nissan Altima SE-R

    From the September 2004 issue of Car and Driver.
    How much Altima is too much? Nissan dares to find out with the Altima SE-R, cranking up the butch by adding 10 horsepower, a rigid suspension, and forged 18-inch wheels wearing super-stick summer tires. The Altima 3.5SE with 250 horsepower is pleasantly sweet; the Altima SE-R wants to be two Hershey bars washed down with a Coke. Hope you like Nissan’s brand of sugar buzz.

    Compared: Accord, Camry, Altima, Sonata, Legacy

    The Best Sedans of 2020

    The Altima SE-R keeps company with the 270-hp Acura TL and 303-hp Pontiac Grand Prix GXP as one of a new generation of sedans whose power languishes in a front-drive cage. Bury the SE-R’s rubber-studded aluminum gas pedal, and the weight leans on the wrong set of tires, the right set of tires making smoke and painting stripes instead of providing traction. The steering wheel develops an urge-albeit less fervent than in some amped-up front-drivers-to seek out the nearest ditch.
    Granted, the SE-R’s output, 260 horses and 251 pound-feet of torque, won’t be remembered as a turning point at a time when it takes 500 horsepower to make a headline. But the SE-R lunges down the drag strip, putting 60 mph behind it in 6.1 seconds, rattling off a quarter-mile in 14.8 seconds at 97 mph. The 12.6-inch front discs and 11.5-inch rears bring it to a halt from 70 mph in 168 feet, and double-D soles get it around the skidpad pulling 0.86 g. That’s fairly rabid for a family car carrying 3380 pounds and a $29,930 base price. It is 0.2 second slower to 60 than the last 3.5SE we tested, but the SE-R also picked up 160 pounds.

    When squirting bend to bend under less-than-woolly throttle, the SE-R’s steering is delicate and precise.

    We said the SE-R is a sugar buzz. Take it to a picture-postcard road to unlock its best flavors. There, the 225/45 Bridgestone Potenza S-03 tires and hewn-from-oak suspension provide real cornering grip, a fierce turn-in response, and tight body control. When squirting bend to bend under less-than-woolly throttle, the SE-R’s steering is delicate and precise. Scribe your corner lines as steadily as your hands can hold the wheel.
    Changing gears is a long hand wave, thanks to the tall shifter, but the beanpole slides through its gates tightly if not with the sharpest and most satisfying metal-to-metal feel. This Altima wants to set your best lap time and just might if it had a limited-slip differential to plug all its power into the road. Instead, it relies on an optional $800 electronic traction-control system to suppress wheelspin, which isn’t quite the same thing.
    The 350Z cockpit has been reprised in the SE-R with three gauge nacelles, largely ornamental, parked on the center console: oil pressure, charge-system volts, and least useful of all, a twitching pointer indicating instantaneous fuel consumption represents the data points to be gleaned by turning your head 30 degrees to the right. You won’t very often, not until the car hits 100,000 miles and charge voltage becomes a worry.

    It doesn’t take many days behind the SE-R’s wheel to develop a detailed mental map of every pothole, frost heave, and pavement fissure in your town.

    Nissan offers four exterior colors: gray, silver, red, and black. The bolstered front buckets flare with an embroidered SE-R logo and your choice of red or gray perforated leather accents down the center and matching topstitching. As with the Z, the driver’s seat bulges with a sort of codpiece between your legs. No explanation or diagrams are given to explain its supportive function. Sound gushes from a standard Bose eight-speaker system with a six-CD changer.
    Nissan keeps it reserved on the outside. The raciest feature, aside from the blocky chin fascia, modest rump wing, and twin exhaust cans emitting a hearty snore reminiscent of the Z, is the snowflake-pattern 18-inch wheels. The spokes are forged aluminum rather than die-cast—it says so right on the rim—presumably lending extra strength. They need it, because the stiff, 45-series Bridgestones transmit bump energy to the suspension the way a bat transmits Johnny Damon’s swing into a baseball. It doesn’t take many days behind the SE-R’s wheel to develop a detailed mental map of every pothole, frost heave, and pavement fissure in your town.
    There are no eurekas! in the SE-R. It offers a more traditional ride-versus-handling trade-off than magazine favs such as the Acura TSX, which seems to do better combining both. The SE-R does offer big V-6 performance in a clean, nicely appointed, and commodious package that will entertain people who like to play. No more Altima is required.

    Specifications

    SPECIFICATIONS
    2005 Nissan Altima SE-R
    VEHICLE TYPEFront-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
    PRICE AS TESTED$30,890 (base price: $29,930)
    ENGINE TYPE DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 213 cu in, 3498ccPower (SAE net): 260 bhp @ 6000 rpmTorque (SAE net): 251 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
    TRANSMISSION6-speed manual
    DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 110.2 inLength: 192.5 inWidth: 70.4 inHeight: 57.4 inCurb weight: 3380 lb
    C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 6.1 secZero to 100 mph: 15.8 secZero to 120 mph: 25.1 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 6.4 secStanding ¼-mile: 14.8 sec @ 97 mphTop speed (governor limited): 141 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 168 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
    FUEL ECONOMYEPA fuel economy, city driving: 20 mpgC/D-observed fuel economy: 19 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

  • in

    Tested: 1990 Nissan 300ZX Aces Form and Function

    From the August 1989 Issue of Car and Driver.
    Nissan should rename itself “the Phoenix Motor Corporation.” Like the wondrous bird of ancient legend, the Japanese automaker has burned the weary persona of its past and arisen from the ashes bold, revitalized, and supremely competitive. Consider the sleek new 240SX, the rejuvenated Maxima, the daring Axxess minivan—all proof of Nissan’s newfound talent and awareness. Or scan these pages and drink in the most convincing evidence of all: the breathtaking, all-new 300ZX.

    My Fair Lady: A Visual History of the Nissan Z-Car

    Twin-Turbo 400Z Will Revive Nissan Z-Car’s Legacy

    This is not the flabby, disco-poseur’s 300ZX of old. That tawdry beast is gone, laid to rest in a special graveyard reserved for stretch slacks, musk colognes, and slap-on chest hair. In its place is a car created by designers who understand design, engineers who grasp the needs and wants of enthusiasts, and, perhaps most important, management with the guts and the savvy not to stand in the way of its creative corps. New from the ground up, the new 300ZX is, quite simply, one of the most alluring cars to appear on the United States market in years.
    But that’s obvious, isn’t it? Let your eyes wander over the Z’s sensuous form for a moment. The shape is lean, low, and provocative—and, unlike the previous edition, it’s restrained and sophisticated. This is not a flashy, boy racer’s strutmobile. Some viewers say the nose (which houses new flush headlights instead of the old model’s pop-up units) looks heavy, and others find the overall shape derivative and unoriginal. But we aren’t among the naysayers. The new 300ZX is stunning in the metal, a beautiful and exciting car that looks exotic without being quirky. That Nissan designed the car entirely in-house is further proof that it is a company with the resources and audacity to push bold programs into production.

    View Photos

    At present, Nissan offers the new Z only in naturally aspirated form; a twin-turbo version will appear this fall. Two body styles are available: the two-seater pictured here and a slightly longer two-plus-two. Both are shorter, wider, and lower than their respective predecessors. And both body styles are available in the U.S. only with T-tops. The Z’s T-roof is one of the best we’ve ever encountered—tight, leak-free, and easy to remove—but we’re still bewildered and bothered by Nissan’s decision not to offer the even-more-solid Japanese-market fixed-roof coupe in the States.
    Under the new Z’s T-roof glass sits perhaps the most beautiful and efficient cockpit in the sports-car kingdom. The instrument panel blends seductive curves and handsome materials. The gauges are clear, conspicuous analog dials. Ancillary controls nestle on easy-to-reach pods surrounding the wheel. The steering wheel itself is a meaty three spoke design that feels hefty and reassuring in your palms. The leather-wrapped shifter sits close at hand. Tasteful fabric trims the doors, the console, and the dash. And the seats are deeply sculptured, easy to adjust, and extremely comfortable. (Our test car’s thrones were covered in optional leather—part of a $1000 option package—but natty-looking cloth seats are standard.) Trust us: sports-car cockpits don’t get any better than this.
    We still have a couple of gripes, though. The first concerns the optional automatic climate control system. Designed to be a set-and-forget unit, this system instead behaves as a set-and-reset-and-override-and-get-annoyed unit. It offers only two manual fan speeds, and there is no way to channel the airflow where you want it. Although we didn’t have a chance to try the standard, manual climate-control system, which offers four fan speeds and five options for air routing, it should be far more accommodating.

    View Photos

    We also have a few complaints about the optional Bose sound system. We don’t claim to be audio experts, but we agree as a group that this system, like some other Bose units we’ve sampled, sounds undistinguished. And it has no fade or balance controls whatsoever, obviously implying that Bose knows better than the users of its systems how these parameters should be set. Happily, there is an easy solution to both of our cockpit gripes: skip the optional electronic power package. You’ll give up the heated rear-view mirrors and the power controls for the driver’s seat, but you’ll bypass the automatic climate-control system and the Bose stereo—and save $1600.
    Enough talk of sound systems and cabin accouterments. You want to know the serious stuff, the power and the glory, the fury and the dust.
    The power is provided by a version of Nissan’s fine 60-degree 3.0-liter V-6, but it’s been so thoroughly reworked that you wouldn’t recognize it. The new engine sports twin cams, 24 valves, pent roof combustion chambers with centrally located spark plugs, electronic fuel injection, new intake and exhaust manifolds, and a variable intake-valve-timing system for improved performance throughout the rev band. Horsepower is up to 222 at 6400 rpm—more than in last year’s Turbo—and torque is increased to 198 pound-feet at 4800 rpm.
    The power flows to the rear wheels via a short-throw five-speed manual transmission (a four-speed automatic is available as an option) and a viscous limited-slip differential. Does it ever flow. The 300ZX storms from zero to 60 mph in 6.7 seconds and rips through the quarter-mile in 15.0 seconds at 93 mph. It doesn’t feel that quick: the engine always sounds smooth and unstrained, even when tearing up to its 7000-rpm redline. And the big, solid body (the Z weighs s 3341 pounds) insulates the cabin from the furor. In fifth gear, the engine winds to 6100 rpm—good for 143 mph. That means that only a handful of dedicated competitors can outgun the new 300ZX. (Fewer still will measure up to the 300-hp twin-turbo edition when it arrives.)
    A new suspension puts that performance to good use. Each front corner sports unequal-length control arms and an additional articulating hub. At the back is a four-element multilink design based on the rear-suspension layout found in Nissan’s 240SX. Coil springs are used all around, and an anti-roll bar is fitted to each end.

    View Photos

    Thanks to clever tuning, this suspension combines stability, control, and a reasonably compliant ride. Shod with 225/5OVR-16 Michelin Sport XGTV tires mounted on attractive 16-inch alloy wheels, the Z turned in an outstanding 0.86-g skidpad performance. As you reach the limit the front tires slide first, but the rear end can be coaxed out with a sudden move on or off the throttle, making the Z easy to balance through turns. The fat Michelins offer progressive, predictable handling characteristics, but on some surfaces they howl out enough road noise to scare a Peterbilt pilot.
    Beefy four-wheel vented disc brakes with four-piston front calipers and standard ABS stop the Z from 70 mph in 171 feet. We observed no signs of fade during repeated hard trials.
    The test track numbers tell you plenty about the new 300ZX, but they don’t tell you nearly enough. Good as it looks to a stopwatch, the 300ZX is even more impressive from behind the wheel. No spec page figures, for instance, could describe the smooth, satisfying feel of the Z’s new variable assist electronic power-steering system. Nor could a bar graph express the sheer pleasure of running the stubby five-speed shifter up through the gears. Nor do we know of any data sheet that is able to convey the stirring sound of the 300ZX’s 24-valve V-6 in full-throttle crescendo.

    View Photos

    And so we arrive at the bottom line. The new 300ZX is not an entry-level GT. The base two-seater wears a $27,300 sticker, and our fully optioned test car carried a $30,160 price tag. But consider the returns on that investment:
    1. We can think of no other car that offers more style and sculptured, buttoned-down beauty for the money. The established automotive objects d’art—the Italian exotics—start at twice the price.
    2. The 300ZX offers standard amenities galore, decent luggage space, superb seats, and a cabin with an appeal quotient that is second to none.
    3. Even the naturally aspirated Z has enough brawn and handling prowess to hold most of the competition at bay. Granted, the 300ZX’s profile reads “performance GT” not “bare-bones sports car,” but only the most dedicated sportsters will be able to defeat it in a straight fight.
    4. Our 300ZX test car emitted nary a squeak or rattle during its extended stay with us. And past experience with other Nissans has convinced us that this car will stay tight and trouble-free for the long haul.
    Or look at it this way: $30,160 is an awfully small price to pay for a phoenix missile you guide yourself.

    Specifications

    1990 Nissan 300ZX
    VEHICLE TYPE Front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
    PRICE AS TESTED $30,160
    ENGINE TYPEV-6, iron block and aluminum headsDisplacement: 181 cu in, 2960ccPower: 222 hp @ 6400 rpmTorque: 198 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
    TRANSMISSION 5-speed manual
    DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 96.5 inLength: 169.5 inWidth: 70.5 inHeight: 49.2 inCurb weight: 3341 lb
    C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 6.7 secZero to 100 mph: 18.6 secStanding ¼-mile: 15.0 sec @ 93 mphTop speed: 143 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 171 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g
    FUEL ECONOMY:EPA city/highway: 18/24 mpgC/D observed: 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

  • in

    Tested: 2005 Jeep Liberty Sport 4×4 Diesel

    JEFFREY G. RUSSELLCar and Driver

    From the September 2005 issue of Car and Driver.
    During the ’80s, when the news section of this magazine was called FYI, it included a semi-regular subcategory called Diesel Clatter. In the era that followed the fuel hysteria of the ’70s, diesels were offered by a number of automakers, and we dutifully passed the info along to you. This included the first-ever Jeep smoker, a 2.1-liter Renault turbo-diesel option offered for the Jeep Cherokee from 1985 through ’87.
    Without wishing to be unkind, this latest Jeep Liberty engine option reminds us of that old FYI heading. In an era when most compression-ignition engines are almost as smooth and quiet as their gasoline counterparts, the Liberty’s 2.8-liter turbo-diesel four takes us back to those innocent days when exceptional fuel economy could make us overlook drawbacks, particularly the racket that went with any oil burner. Light up the Liberty’s engine, close your eyes, and suddenly you’re riding in a Mercedes diesel taxi, Stuttgart, circa 1985. Clatter spoken here, Dieter. Jawohl.

    Every 2020 Small SUV Ranked from Worst to Best

    Best SUVs and Crossovers of 2020

    A little background. With the development of common-rail fuel systems, diesels have changed dramatically in the past two decades. Thanks to massive system pressures-more than 20,000 psi is not uncommon, compared with 50 to 80 psi for gasoline port-injection systems-the fuel is more finely atomized, promoting a more complete and controlled burn, and that pays off with higher efficiency and reduced emissions. Supplied by DDC Cento (previously VM Motori), a subsidiary of Detroit Diesel in Cento, Italy (and 49 percent owned by DaimlerChrysler), the Liberty’s turbo-diesel is consistent with most of the common-rail parameters. The iron-block, aluminum-head DOHC 16-valve four has a compression ratio of 17.5:1, with fuel-rail pressure pegged at 1600 bar-about 23,000 psi. With its Garrett turbocharger blowing at max boost-26.5 psi-the engine develops 160 horsepower at 3800 rpm and 295 pound-feet of torque at 1800 rpm.

    No one would characterize this little Jeep as fast, but the turbo motor spools up quickly and holds its own in urban traffic.

    This is considerably less horsepower than you get from the Liberty’s optional 210-hp, 3.7-liter V-6, but considerably more torque: 60 pound-feet, peaking 2200 rpm lower. And it’s this trait-low-down grunt-that makes this or any other diesel appealing: grunt, plus relatively high fuel economy. In the case of the Liberty diesel, you get distinctly higher EPA fuel-economy ratings than those of the gas V-6-21 mpg city, 26 highway versus 17/22 (or 18/22 with a manual transmission). Jeep expects the diesel will get about 25-percent-better fuel economy than the V-6 in real-world driving. We got 20 mpg with the diesel, which was exactly a 25-percent improvement over the 16 mpg we achieved with the V-6.
    You also get the same towing capacity as that of the 3.7 V-6-5000 pounds, heftiest of all the cute utes. And you get similar acceleration. Our turbo-diesel tester rattled to 60 mph in 10.1 seconds compared with 10 flat for the Liberty Limited Edition we tested in January 2002 (“Canyon Cubs”) and was quicker in the quarter-mile: 17.3 seconds versus 17.5.
    No one would characterize this little Jeep as fast, but the turbo motor spools up quickly and holds its own in urban traffic. The engine’s power traits match up well with the five-speed automatic transmission, the latter yielding smooth up- and downshifts, and it lopes along at freeway speeds without undue strain.

    There’s something uniquely appealing about the Liberty diesel—appealing, we should add, almost exclusively to guys, particularly guys living in the wide-open West, according to DaimlerChrysler.

    But there’s the clatter problem. From the moment of light-off, the Liberty’s four begins emitting a symphony of rattles and growls, richly varied, depending on throttle position, but incessant. We’ve seen numerous recent diesels that allowed us to ignore the nature of their ignition systems. This is not one of them. The Jeep folks cite a number of reasons for the extra racket, namely, the simple fact that the four-banger has large 694cc cylinders that create a lot of noise. Plus, the engine sits close to the Liberty’s passenger compartment, and the exhaust system exits from the back of the engine between the motor and fire wall.
    Like other sparkless engines, you pay a premium for this cheerfully raucous powerplant: $3695, including the required five-speed automatic and a more sophisticated four-wheel-drive system with a four-high open mode. The V-6 option in the same model costs only $850, and you don’t have to upgrade to the automatic. This, along with the fact that No. 2 diesel fuel is currently more expensive than gasoline, makes it hard to see an advantage to the diesel. On the other hand, for those who appreciate internal combustion, there’s something uniquely appealing about the Liberty diesel. Appealing, we should add, almost exclusively to guys, particularly guys living in the wide-open West, according to DaimlerChrysler. This probably proves, once again, that women have better sense. But there are enough of these guys to account for about 6000 sales per year, a little beyond DaimlerChrysler’s expectations.
    One cautionary note: If you find the notion of a Liberty diesel appealing, buy soon. Barring some dramatic change in technology, passenger-car diesels will disappear by 2007, when Tier 2 emissions regs come on in full force. No current passenger-car diesel meets this new standard.

    Specifications

    SPECIFICATIONS
    2005 Jeep Liberty Sport 4×4 Diesel
    VEHICLE TYPEFront-engine, rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 5-door wagon
    PRICE AS TESTED $26,675 (base price: $25,245)
    ENGINE TYPETurbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve diesel inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 169 cu in, 2776ccPower (SAE net): 160 bhp @ 3800 rpmTorque (SAE net): 295 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm
    TRANSMISSION5-speed automatic
    DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 104.3 inLength: 174.4 inWidth: 71.6 inHeight: 70.2 inCurb weight: 4324 lb
    C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 10.1 secZero to 100 mph: 39.1 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 11.3 secStanding ¼-mile: 17.3 sec @ 77 mphTop speed (drag limited): 111 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 206 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.71 g
    FUEL ECONOMYEPA fuel economy, city driving: 21 mpgC/D observed: 20 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

  • in

    Tested: 2003 Mercedes-Benz C230 Kompressor

    JEFFREY G. RUSSELLCar and Driver

    From the July 2003 issue of Car and Driver.
    You might have noticed that periodically we find occasion to be unkind to a vehicle. The introduction of the Mercedes-Benz C230 Kompressor “sports coupe” for the 2002 model year was one such occasion (C/D, October 2001).

    Best Sports Cars of 2020

    $60K Sports Car Showdown

    Forget for a moment our skepticism about the feasibility of any luxury automaker introducing a hatchback model to the small-car-phobic American public. BMW tried precisely the same thing with the 318ti between 1995 and 1999-with spectacularly poor results.
    Forget, too, that this Mercedes looked, with its bulging bum and two-pane glass backlight, like a modern Renault (a company that was shamed out of America after foisting the Alliance on our fair country).

    For the 2003 model of the C230, Mercedes has largely addressed our engine complaint with an all-new 1.8-liter, all-aluminum supercharged four-cylinder.

    No, we were not rude to Mercedes for these reasons. Our real concerns had to do with the function of the automobile: (1) The engine, a 2.3-liter iron-block supercharged four-cylinder, was a far ruder thing than your humble author is on his worst days; (2) the standard-issue six-speed manual transmission was described by us as ropy, rubbery, and uncertain, not to mention just plain poor; (3) despite its “sports coupe” moniker, the C230 was not very sporty.

    Even better, with this engine the C230 is, if not exactly transformed, at least a more pleasant thing to use.

    For the 2003 model of the C230, Mercedes has largely addressed our engine complaint with an all-new 1.8-liter, all-aluminum supercharged four-cylinder. On paper, this engine would seem to be a step backward for Mercedes. It’s down about a half-liter of displacement compared with the old engine, and it makes less peak horsepower and torque. And it makes those peaks at higher revs. The old 2.3-liter-still the base engine in the SLK hardtop roadster for 2003-makes 192 horsepower at 5500 rpm and 200 pound-feet of torque at 2500 rpm. The new 1.8-liter engine makes 189 horsepower at 5800 rpm and 192 pound-feet of torque at 3500 rpm. Indeed, the sprint to 60 mph for the 1.8-liter 2003 model is an unremarkable 8.1 seconds-more than a half-second slower than the 2002 model. We attribute this, in part, to an engine-management system that will not allow for abusive standing starts. Try as you might, the engine will not rev above 4000 rpm with the clutch pedal in. This is not something most owners-the majority of whom we don’t anticipate will go bracket drag racing-need worry about.
    On the other hand, the new motor allows the hatch to go another four or five miles on each gallon of gas, depending on whether you get the six-speed manual or the $1325 optional five-speed automatic.
    Even better, with this engine the C230 is, if not exactly transformed, at least a more pleasant thing to use. The previous engine felt weak at low revs, despite its power advantage and greater displacement. Higher in the rev range, the 2.3 was rough. Worse, it sounded as if it had an acute and chronic case of gastrointestinal distress.

    Specifications

    SPECIFICATIONS
    2003 Mercedes-Benz C230 Kompressor
    VEHICLE TYPE Front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 3-door sedan
    PRICE AS TESTED$27,860 (base price: $25,670)
    ENGINE TYPE Supercharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 4-in-line, aluminum block and heads, SIM 4 engine-control system with port fuel injectionDisplacement: 110 cu in, 1796ccPower (SAE net): 189 bhp @ 5800 rpmTorque (SAE net): 192 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
    TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual
    DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 106.9 inLength: 171.0 inCurb weight: 3290 lb
    C/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 8.1 secZero to 100 mph: 21.0 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 8.9 secStanding ¼-mile: 16.0 sec @ 88 mphTop speed (governor limited): 131 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 161 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.84 g
    FUEL ECONOMYEPA city driving: 21 mpgC/D observed: 22 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