Reviews

From the July 1992 issue of Car and Driver.Let’s agree from the outset that any car or truck is getting pretty grizzled after a production run of ten years or so. The Dodge Ramcharger full-size sport­ utility vehicle is now into its nineteenth model year. Sleekness, sophistication, and charm are, none of them, merits of the Ramcharger. This is a big, brutish truck: 4823 pounds, six feet tall, nearly seven feet wide. It’s available with or without four-wheel drive, it offers a choice of V-8 engines, and, when properly configured, it can tow up to 7500 pounds. It wears its massive, defiantly unaerodynarnic sheet­metal like armor—”Let me loose in the parking lot,” it seems to say, “and I’ll squash the antifreeze out of that puny Suzuki Sidekick in the corner.” Hoary it may be, but the ’92 Ramchar­ger is not without refinements. The news this year is a contemporary Canyon Sport appearance package and the addition of Dodge’s redesigned 5.2-liter V-8. The Canyon Sport option discards the jumbo ram’s-head hood ornament and a lot of chrome in favor of a clean-looking two-tone paint job with a body-colored front grille. The new V-8 moves the Ramcharger from 0 to 60 mph in 10.2 seconds—a reasonable accomplishment considering the vehicle’s mass.Of greater import is the revised engine. Enhanced with sequential port fuel injec­tion and treated to a thorough going-over (including redesigned cylinder heads and new intake and exhaust manifolds), the 5.2-liter V-8 now produces 230 horse­power at 4800 rpm and 280 pound-feet of torque at 3000—a substantial improve­ment over the old engine’s 170 horse­power and 260 pound-feet. Indeed, the new 5.2 produces 40 more horses than the Ramcharger’s optional 5.9-liter V-8— though the latter engine is torquier, grunt­ing out 292 pound-feet at just 2400 rpm. Mated to a four-speed automatic trans­mission (a five-speed manual is available), the new V-8 moves the Ramcharger from 0 to 60 mph in 10.2 seconds—a reasonable accomplishment considering the vehicle’s mass. No points for engine-note quality, however. In the Ramcharger’s case, “fuel econ­omy” sounds like an oxymoron: on the EPA city cycle, the V-8 sucks up a gallon of unleaded every 12 miles. A 34-gallon fuel tank helps minimize gas ­station visits. The cabin is plain but commodious. Big, simple gauges. No-frills seats. Not an organic curve or designer switch in sight. Those who need their space will applaud the cargo room (86 cubic feet with the rear seat folded down). But hedonists will need to look elsewhere: The sparse optional lux­uries include an AM/FM/cassette stereo and power windows, locks, and mirrors. More ram reviews from the archiveRear-wheel ABS is standard on all Ramchargers. Our Canyon Sport test vehicle with the 5.2-liter V-8, an auto­matic, four-wheel drive, air conditioning, and power options totaled $23,783. As more modern rivals, such as the new full-size Chevy Blazer, edge toward car-like response and feel, the Ramcharger remains steadfastly truck-like. Engine roar, heavy doors, numb steering, shudders from the body, a harsh broken-pavement ride—all conspire to expose the Ram­charger’s age. Yet the Ramcharger soldiers on, with its square-jawed shape, rugged construc­tion, and prodigious towing ability still winning hairy-armed fans. It’s a macho machine with a uniquely American cut and swagger. And it’s built in Lago Alberto, Mexico. SpecificationsSpecifications
1992 Dodge Ramcharger Canyon SportVehicle Type: front-engine, rear/4-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 3-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $20,190/$23,783
ENGINE
V-8, iron block and heads, Chrysler engine-control system with port fuel injectionDisplacement: 318 in3, 5210 cm3Power: 230 hp @ 4800 rpm
TRANSMISSION
4-speed automatic with lockup torque converter
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 106.0 inLength: 188.8 inCurb Weight: 4823 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 10.2 sec1/4-Mile: 17.7 sec @ 77 mph100 mph: 47.6 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 10.6 secTop Speed (C/D est): 107 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 214 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.73 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 12 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
City: 12 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the January 2005 issue of Car and Driver.What do Dodge Viper owners most frequently ask the company for? More refinement? A hardtop street model? An automatic transmission? Not even close.Dodge brass say the most frequent request is for a Viper-engined truck, something capable of towing the customers’ Vipers. Although the regular-cab Ram SRT-10 truck wasn’t up to the task of towing the 3400-pound Viper-towing wasn’t sanctioned due to the lowered ride height and Dodge’s worries about clutch abuse-this SRT-10 Quad Cab can tow up to 7500 pounds and has the most utility of any Viper-powered vehicle yet.When the folks at Dodge’s Street and Racing Technology (SRT) set out to build this more practical version of the Ram SRT-10, they took a half-step back from the goal of ultimate performance and instead focused on adding versatility while maintaining its ferocious performance. To that end, the Quad Cab has four real doors, seats a family-friendly six, and comes only with an anyone-can-drive-it automatic.The 8.3-liter V-10 Viper engine that pumps out 500 horsepower and 525 pound-feet of torque ensures that performance won’t be compromised. However, the Quad Cab, unlike the regular cab, uses Dodge’s 48RE four-speed and is automatic only. This tranny usually sees duty on the business end of the Cummins diesel engine in 2500- or 3500-series Ram trucks. Here it was tweaked to handle the V-10’s power delivery. But it’s still not a perfect match, as its excessively harsh shifts cause the SRT-10 to buck back and forth like a mechanical bull.All this powertrain excess catches up with you at the gas pump. We recorded 11 mpg over 1600 miles, and we didn’t even tow anything. (We may have done a couple of smoky burnouts, possibly. We’re human.)To accommodate the four-door configuration, the cargo box didn’t shrink, so the wheelbase had to be stretched-in this case 20.0 inches to 140.5-and the overall length similarly increased nearly 25 inches to 227.7.More on the Ram SRT-10 and Quickest PickupsDespite weighing in at 5618 pounds (479 more than the regular-cab SRT-10) and employing a power-robbing automatic, this truck’s performance still qualifies as exceptional. The Quad Cab’s 5.6-second 0-to-60 time was 0.7 second slower than the regular cab’s, and the quarter-mile was 0.6 second off at 14.2 seconds. The Quad Cab squealed its tires to a 0.83-g skidpad rating, 0.03 g less than its two-door sibling, and registered a lofty 147 mph top speed, just 6 mph slower.Both SRT-10 trucks have the same 15.0-inch front rotors, but for 2005, they each get slightly smaller 13.8-inch rear discs and a retuned three-channel anti-lock braking system. Our Quad Cab’s 180-foot stop from 70 mph was four feet shorter than that of its lighter regular-cab brother with the old, larger brakes, which points to more efficient ABS activity.Dodge invited us out to its proving ground in Chelsea, Michigan, to sample the SRT-10 Quad Cab in an autocross setting. After a few tire-spinning starts and a couple attempts to hang out the tail around an entire sweeping left-hander, we were left giggling like grade-school dorks who’d just successfully slipped a whoopee cushion on the teacher’s chair without his noticing.After a few tire-spinning starts and a couple attempts to hang out the tail around an entire sweeping left-hander, we were left giggling like grade-school dorks who’d just successfully slipped a whoopee cushion on the teacher’s chair without his noticing.Try as it might, however, this is still a truck, and although we appreciate the massive power, direct steering, sticky rubber, tough-guy looks, and firm seats, there are a couple noticeable areas that hold back its performance. This truck understeers, big time. The extra 20 inches in wheelbase only make it worse than the regular-cab SRT-10, and after thorough experimentation with absurd steering inputs, we concluded that the only oversteer possible is the power variety, and even that is tricky to dish out with the automatic as your mediator. Also, the brakes suffer from a condition known as knock-back. This occurs under hard cornering when a wheel (and pertinent brake rotor) moves slightly relative to the location of the brake caliper, causing the brake pad to be pushed back and giving the driver that sinking feeling when he goes for the brakes and- whoa!-the pedal goes nearly to the floor before the pads and rotors are reunited. Dodge hopes some Viper owners, who presumably have put down 85K for their superfast roadsters, will be willing to shell out another $50,850 ($5000 more than the regular-cab SRT-10) for an SRT-10 Quad Cab. In a year, we’ll see if there were enough of them out there to make this powerful truck a success. Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS2004 Dodge Ram SRT-10 Quad CabVehicle type: Front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 6-passenger, 4-door truckPRICE AS TESTEDBase/As-Tested: $50,850/$52,115ENGINE TYPE Pushrod 20-valve V-10, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 506 in3, 8285 cm3Power: 500 bhp @ 5600 rpmTorque: 525 lb-ft @ 4200 rpmTRANSMISSION4-speed automaticDIMENSIONSWheelbase: 140.5 in Length: 227.7 inWidth: 79.9 in Height: 74.7 inCurb weight: 5618 lbC/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 5.6 secZero to 100 mph: 14.3 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 6.0 secStanding ¼-mile: 14.2 sec @ 99 mphTop speed (drag limited): 147 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 180 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.83 gC/D FUEL ECONOMYObserved: 11 mpgEPA FUEL ECONOMYCity: 9 mpgC/D TESTING EXPLAINEDDirector, Vehicle TestingDave VanderWerp has spent more than 20 years in the automotive industry, in varied roles from engineering to product consulting, and now leading Car and Driver’s vehicle-testing efforts. Dave got his very lucky start at C/D by happening to submit an unsolicited resume at just the right time to land a part-time road warrior job when he was a student at the University of Michigan, where he immediately became enthralled with the world of automotive journalism. More

From the February 2004 issue of Car and Driver. Memo to: Csaba CsereFrom: John PhillipsCsaba, I’m not sure I should be the guy writing about this truck. Remember my Viper review (November 2002)? I recall a lot of hissing, some dark threats, a blanket apology or two. Didn’t you have to mail out pricey Xmas gifts to smooth that one over?Memo to: John PhillipsFrom: Csaba CsereEditors who are assigned a road test are expected to complete that road test. It’s not a difficult concept. If you didn’t get enough seat time, talk to Yates. I saw him driving the SRT-10, and I think he liked it. Don’t get me into trouble over this, okay?Memo to: Brock YatesFrom: John PhillipsHey, Brock, did you drive this brute? Moses in a muumuu, man. There’s a whole Viper driveline in there, did you know that? That’s insane. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a fabulous engine. Who’d complain about 500 horses, right? But why attach it to a 5139-pound rear-drive truck with the traction of a gravy boat? You know, a Saturn booster rocket is powerful and fast, too, but it’s not particularly useful in rush-hour traffic. I’m willing to accept the concept of a 153-mph hot-rod truck the day I see it carrying a load of drywall to a job site, you know? If a guy wants a two-seater that costs $45,795 and runs like a Corvette, why not buy a Corvette? John, you trembling liberal weenie. Actually, it has three seats, just like a McLaren F1. And let’s get this straight. I don’t like the SRT-10. I love the SRT-10. Any pickup that’ll suck the headlights out of your beloved tea-bagger roadsters is all right by me and the rest of us beer-drinking, smoke-’em-if-you-got-’em real Americans. The only thing the SRT-10 needs is a big “No. 3” on the back window and a gun rack inside. If that offends you and your weepy pals, I suggest you go back to Canada where your real roots are planted.Brock, you Heston-hugging hunk of hubris. I’ve warned you about calling me a weenie. My grandmother called me that. Also my mother. My girlfriend, too.Listen, I’ll admit to liking the SRT-10’s steering—accurate, even light, which is amazing, because those 22-inch Pirellis (what’s that, a “dub plus two”?) must each weigh about as much as Orson Welles. And the clutch is lighter than I expected, although I still can’t depress the pedal through an entire red light. The trick seats are fine, too—aggressive bolsters that aren’t intrusive. So, see, there’s that.But don’t tell me you enjoyed the spindly foot-long Hurst shift lever. You’d replace the knob with an eight ball, right? You ever try to find reverse in this thing at night? I’ll bet you even liked the pushbutton starter. Probably reminds you of the Eliminator. Well, pal, does the Eliminator also make 83 decibels of racket at wide-open whack? Shouldn’t we be considering a pair of OSHA-approved ear protectors, here? HIGHSBrock: Smoky burnouts on demand, intimidating styling, annoys Phillips.John: Zero to 60 mph in 4.9 seconds.John, you Twinkie-eating teat. The second-gen Eliminator is also Viper-powered, so, unlike you, I’m accustomed to the big-decibel sound of success. I’m almost deaf to prove it. Actually, I wish Dodge had sexed up the exhaust pipes, as Ford did with the SVT F-150 Lightning. You know, side pipes like a NASCAR Craftsman truck’s? Either that, or four straight exhausts out the back.Brock, you Limbaugh-loving lackey. Maybe you were drunk and didn’t notice that this truck rides like a truck. I don’t want to hyperbolize, but those mono-tube Bilsteins are so unyielding as to blur my vision. The bed shakes and shimmies like a wet hunting dog, and I noticed a nice collection of trim bits vibrating in a paint-shaker dance that’s sure to end in tears. You’ll need a caulking gun at every service interval. Don’t believe me? Take Pam for a ride and see if she makes it as far as the Cannonball Run Pub before she bails on you. You’ll wind up having to date women who first ask for a Visa imprint.John, you pathetic, punctilious pedant. I’ll admit that the shift lever rattles under hard acceleration but, hell, pumping out enough torque to overturn an M1A1 Abrams main battle tank doesn’t come without penalties. Try to be a man about it, okay?Brock, you beetle-brained, trough-feeding bloviator. Zero to 60 mph in 4.9 seconds is not the be-all and end-all, okay? Although, I’ll grant you, it did get my attention because it’s three-tenths quicker than the SVT Lightning. Still, it’s the same acceleration you could achieve by, say, jumping out your bedroom window some night. You should try it.All I’m saying is that the Chrysler guys got it right when they created the little Dodge SRT-4. Six fewer cylinders, an actual back seat, 2219 pounds more eco-friendly. The SRT-4 goes 153 mph, too, you know, and it stops 17 feet sooner. Nearly the same skidpad grip. Only 3 mph slower through the quarter-mile. Costs $25,800 less. See? What I’m suggesting is that we all try using a dentist’s pick instead of a jackhammer.With this truck, what are you supposed to do after you leave the drag strip?Do you know how much torque this V-10 makes? Well, okay, me either. But it’s probably enough to qualify as wasteful, okay? Shouldn’t we be using that energy to fund national health care? LOWSBrock: Shifty shifter, sticker price of a triple-axle double-wide.John: Cement-truck ride, cement-truck noise, fuel mileage worse than a cement truck’s.John, you granola-gutted gelatinous git. The only two important components of Newtonian physics are torque and recoil. Shifting the SRT-10 under power is like firing a Barrett M82 .50-caliber sniper rifle. As for the choppy ride, you need some stiffness in the rear springs if you’re gonna haul enough Bud for a full evening of demo-derby thrills. You city types pack a bottle of Chablis and some Brie—well, that ain’t the SRT-10’s mission, Mister Ballet-Butt.Brock, you bilious bard of bombast. In the rain, you can spin the SRT-10’s rear tires all the way through first and second gears, assuming you can keep the thing on the portion of highway that’s actually paved. What are you gonna do, write your initials in Pirelli script all over America? I bet this thing’s a real treat in the snow. Holy smokes, I used to think Sam Kinison was the definition of crudeness.John, you hand-wringing, bed-wetting hysteric. Some say Kinison died the true American way—driving like a maniac in an overpowered Pontiac Trans Am. Which is better than the fate you face—crashing your Segway scooter while heading for a Gordon Lightfoot concert. Get some starch in your shorts before Jimmy Spencer knocks you into next Thursday.Brock, you conservative-clucking crock of cottage cheese. Like the Opel Speedster and the original Hummer, this truck is a nice thing to drive as long as you don’t have to get anywhere. I have just two words for you, and one’s not “buzz” and the other’s not “off.” Fuel mileage, Brock. Fuel mileage. I’m warning you, Brock, this is the sort of thing that causes the French to hate us.John, you Francophile. Of course the French hate us! What better endorsement for the SRT-10? Maybe we can use one to batter down their embassy and run them off to the perfumed Parisian brothels where they belong. Fuel mileage? With high-test still less than $2 per gallon and OPEC on the ropes, who the hell cares? It’s reactionaries like you who keep screeching, “Power to the people.” Well, here it is, pal.Brock, you subcutaneous canker on the chapped lip of humanity. You notice the SRT-10 has a real hood scoop that isn’t attached to anything? Remind you of something? Your brain, perhaps?I’ll give you this: Hot-rod trucks are capable of transporting me to a simpler era. Last night, this one made me want to jam cherry bombs into my neighbor’s mailbox and enter a college fart-lighting contest.John, you simpering softie. I’ve got a good notion where else you might want to jam those cherry bombs. You have Spencer’s number? I’m calling him right now.Brock, you pretentious pile of genetically engineered pork. Your defense of hulking trucks reminds me of Fay Wray when she said, “King Kong sure had nice fur for a giant stinking ape.” I’ll give you this: After you blow the clutch out of this baby while towing your speedboat up to the islands, you can always use the twin exhausts as eaves troughing. One other good thing about the SRT-10: It’s got a built-in compass so you shouldn’t have so much trouble finding your ass. John, you whiny, wet-eared wheat eater. If you love the French so much and have spent so much time in Canada, you already know where your ass is. All I can say is that the SRT-10 rocks. Of course, it could use an extra 100 horses for hauling my Donzi and towing the Eliminator and helping me run my new drywall business now that you probably got me fired. In the meantime, go back to Toronto with your draft-dodging buddies where I hope you overdose on Tim Hortons apple fritters. They’ll bury you in a vat of maple syrup beside Margaret Trudeau.VERDICTBrock: A Viper that hauls drywall. Plus, it annoys Phillips. John: Rude and crude, but it’s the current king of hot-rod trucks.Know what, Brock? Your breath stinks.Maybe so, but I’m not the guy knitting sweaters for Perry Como.You shave your legs before swimming.Your floral arrangements suck.Your lawn’s in poor repair.Your Haggars droop in the butt.Memo to: Csaba CsereFrom: John PhillipsCsaba, I think Yates fell into the Chivas again. He’s not talking to me anymore. You should fire him. Replace him with Norm Schwarzkopf, maybe. That’s my advice.Memo to: Csaba CsereFrom: Brock YatesCsaba, I think Phillips has been grazing too long inside NPR’s members-for-life lounge. His brain has turned to spätzle. You should fire him. Replace him with Arianna Huffington, maybe. That’s my advice.SpecificationsSpecifications
2004 Dodge Ram SRT-10Vehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 3-passenger, 2-door pickup
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $45,795/$45,795
ENGINEpushrod V-10, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 506 in3, 5600 cm3Power: 500 hp @ 5600 rpmTorque: 525 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm 
TRANSMISSION6-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/rigid axleBrakes, F/R: 15.0-in vented disc/14.0-in vented discTires: Pirelli Scorpion Zero305/40ZR-22
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 120.5 inLength: 211.6 inWidth: 79.9 inHeight: 74.4 inCurb Weight: 5139 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.9 sec100 mph: 11.9 sec1/4-Mile: 13.6 sec @ 105 mph130 mph: 22.6 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.7 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 12.5 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 12.3 secTop Speed (drag ltd): 153 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 184 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.86 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 12 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 10/15 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the May 1994 issue of Car and Driver.You won’t get this advice from “Donahue,” guys, so listen up: size matters.Face it, Pee-wee, Rosey Grier didn’t make the Pro Bowl because he learned how to cross-stitch. Wilford Brimley doesn’t work the commercial circuit because he’s a clotheshorse. And King Kong didn’t get lucky with Fay Wray because he had a hairy back.Granted, Dodge’s new Ram pickup can’t climb the Empire State Building, except maybe in the service elevator. But it is larger than life. And its size plays a big part in putting it at the top of the full-sized pickup class.The Ram’s immense measurements make their first impression when you open the door, because it requires a little leap to vault into the driver’s seat. Once you’re settled in, the echo of your low whistle will take a minute to quiet down. That’s because the Ram sports the biggest cab available on a full-size pickup. Headroom is about the same as in the Ford F150 and the Chevy C/K 1500, but the Ram boasts a 5.1-inch advantage in hiproom over the Chevy and a 3.6-inch edge over the Ford. (An early proposal, in fact, called for a fourth seatbelt on bench-seated models.) In overall length, the Ram also takes the crown. It’s 7.0 inches longer than the Ford and 10.2 inches longer than the Chevy. The short-bed Ram’s pickup box, how­ever, is marginally smaller than those of the competition.To fence in this real estate, the Chrysler styling team looked no further than the Unocal 76 rest stop for their inspiration. The designers at Freightliner must be impressed with the Dodge knockoff of their big rigs, maybe as and Rolex are with their imitators. In pro­file, the Ram’s fenders and the immense chrome grille look a little awkward—like a full-sizer trying to swallow a compact truck—but in the rear-view mirror the Ram looks as menacing as an 18-wheeler bear­ing down on your bumper.This kind of stage presence is guaran­teed to draw a crowd at Fingerle’s lum­beryard. But the Ram’s sheer mass does create some unique problems in situations where, say, a Nissan Altima would do the job. Addressing someone in the passenger seat over the somewhat hoarse powertrain might be better accomplished with a nine-digit zip code. You’ll need friends who know semaphore for parallel parking downtown, where they’ll flag you down into a space that could otherwise be occu­pied by two Ford Festivas.Otherwise, the Ram’s gargantuan girth doesn’t prevent it from performing like a pleasant mid-priced sedan. With the optional 5.2-liter V-8, the Ram we sam­pled would make any armchair trucker froth with envy. When coupled to a four-speed automatic with electric overdrive, the 220-horsepower V-8 sends the Ram scurrying to 60 mph in 8.7 seconds and forging on to a top speed of 113 mph. If you’re comparing apples to kiwi fruit, that’s the same top speed as a base Dodge Intrepid.The Ram also looks the family-sedan part, at least from the inside. Its simple dash contains all the gauges properly placed and clearly labeled. Two cupholders slide out from the dash above the radio. The rotary climate-control dials for temperature and fan speed are painlessly simple to use. And the largish steering wheel contains an airbag, a first in the class. Add the Laramie SLT trim pack­age, which gooses the sticker on the short-bed truck with the V-8 and an auto­matically shifted gearbox from $14,984 to $18,694, and the Ram gets the full-boat sedan treatment: a cloth interior, power windows and locks, and an AM/FM cas­sette radio. For construction foremen and anal-retentive urban cowboys, there’s a handy set of movable bins and netting behind the seats, plus storage space for a laptop computer in the fold-down center armrest.Anti-lock control is also included, but braking is nonetheless a sore point. Dodge claims best-in-class stopping distances and fade resistance, but we noted heavy fade during testing and recorded a mediocre stopping distance from 70 mph to stand­still of 214 feet. Still, the Ram does cor­ner in the car-like range at 0.73 g with min­imal understeer, and the rigid body shell and live-rear-axle suspension with longitudinal leaf springs handle all but the largest pavement pits without stepping sideways.So, don’t point and snicker at it because it buys from the big-and-tall rack. The Ram doesn’t carry its weight around its middle like its aging circle of full-sized friends. In size, look, and feel, the Ram is a barrel-chested gorilla of a truck, with enough muscle to elbow aside the chubby chimps at the top.Specifications

SPECIFICATIONS2004 Dodge Ram 1500Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 3-passenger, 2-door truckPRICEBase/As Tested: $14,984/$18,694ENGINE TYPE16-valve V-8, iron block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 318 cu in, 5210 ccPower: 220 hp @ 4400 rpmTRANSMISSION4-speed automaticDIMENSIONSWheelbase: 118.7 inLength: 204.1 inCurb weight: 4414 lbC/D TEST RESULTSZero to 60 mph: 8.7 secZero to 100 mph: 30.9 secStreet start, 5-60 mph: 9.0 secStanding ¼-mile: 16.8 sec @ 82 mphTop speed (governor limited): 113 mphBraking, 70-0 mph: 214 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.73 gC/D FUEL ECONOMYObserved: 14 mpg

EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity: 13 mpgC/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the October 1995 issue of Car and Driver.Anything weighing more than two tons and casting an 18-foot shadow ought to be a national monument. Or, at the very least, federal law should prevent it from being named after an African antelope that is svelte, lithe, and agile. As if to rectify GM’s reckless stabs at nomenclature, hot-rodders have attempted for 34 years to make the Impala SS at least quick, if not agile. The latest attempt is the Callaway SuperNatural SS. “We hadn’t thought about modifying this car,” says Callaway Cars marketing director Rick Carey, “until a guy dropped off his own Impala and said to us, ‘Do what’s right.’ We already had the SuperNatural V-8 [C/D, June, 1995], so that was a good start.” “Doing what’s right” in Callaway-­speak involves depositing your Impala SS—new or used—in Old Lyme, Con­necticut, for about a week. The stock 260-horsepower engine is yanked pronto, of course, and its iron heads are replaced with aluminum versions whose ports have been polished to a Bulgari-quality luster. Larger-diameter valves are fitted. The cylinders are bored out 0.03 inch and a Callies forged-steel crankshaft with a 3.75-inch stroke is dropped into place, swelling displacement by 33 cubic inches. Next, the engine is enriched by Carillo rods, a Chevy MTG camshaft with greater lift and duration, and a 52 mm throttle-body.Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverSo that the own­er will experience as much of the new­found oomph as possible, Callaway recommends that the engine inhale via the company’s inelegantly named “Honker”—a 3.5-inch-diameter fresh-air duct and low-restriction air cleaner. And the V-8 exhales through dual 2.5-inch-diam­eter stainless-steel exhausts. Twin exhaust tips poke curbward just aft of both rear wheel wells, a layout that shortcuts some three feet of superfluous pipes and increases ramp clearance. This means your dramatic entrance into the A&W drive-in no longer generates a hail of angry sparks.According to Callaway, these minis­trations result in 404 horsepower at 5750 rpm and 412 pound-feet of torque at 4500 rpm, all of it 50-state legal and none of it inexpen­sive. At this point, you will already have shelled out $14,403. For which princely sum, frankly, the increase in perfor­mance—at least on the first SS we mea­sured—was slim. Compared with the stock Impala SS (C/D, June 1994), the Callaway SuperNatural romped to 60 mph just 0.3 second quicker and blinked through the quarter-mile 0.2 second sooner. Hey, you slam-dunk an extra 144 hp into any vehicle—even one the size of a high-school gym—and it ought to lean more toward Mr. Hyde than that, right?Part of the disap­pointing accelera­tion we traced to the stock engine-man­agement system and its attendant shift program. Upshifts under full throttle occurred at 5400 rpm—350 rpm shy of the burly new V-8’s power peak. Equally annoying were full-throttle second-to-third upshifts, in which the driver had to lift off the gas briefly to keep the engine from performing a Mel Tillis impersonation as it stuttered under the whip of a dominatrix rev limiter. Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverCallaway hauled our test car away and pondered all of this. When the car returned, the Connecticut yankees had replaced what they claimed was a faulty engine­ management box. The new one instructed the V-8 to shift at 5950 rpm—now in the meaty portion of the power curve—before imposing rev-limiting discipline at a heady 6000 rpm. (Well, heady for so many cubes.) Overnight, we had ourselves a real street rod. Sixty mph loomed large in 5.5 seconds (1.0 second better than stock) and the quarter-mile was history in 14.1 seconds at 100 mph (0.9 second quicker, 8 mph faster than stock). The moral: Don’t leave Old Lyme without that trick black box.As it happens, there are other Callaway virtues to consider. A mild $1014 suspension make­over, for example, that includes four adjustable Koni shocks and a set of Eibach springs—the latter a half-inch lower “but not much stiffer than stock,” says Carey. The droop in ride height is obvious, lending the SS a “let’s-stomp­-everything” silhouette that causes bystanders to gush with adoration. The springs and shocks also reduce roll, should you be so brave as to pitch this condominium into a hairpin. Also, they ensure that you will crush the two-inch chin spoiler the first time you nose this W.C. Fields baby over a California speed bump.Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverAdding to the festivities are four steamroller BFGoodrich Comp T/As—275/40s in the front, 315/35s at the tail­—which are mounted on raceworthy Forge-line wheels. The rears are 11.0 inches wide, 2.5 inches wider than stock. The result—apart from another $4000 assault on your wallet—is a contact patch the size of a small refrigerator and very little wheelspin under even the most radical of brake-torqued launches. Ride quality is slightly degraded, how­ever, and the front tires are now prone to tramline. Skidpad grip, compared with stock, goes from a not-bad 0.86 g to, ah, a not­-bad 0.86 g. To be fair, the Callaway SS is easier to hold in a steady tail-out pose, assuming you’ve located an 18-foot-wide lane to accommodate its porcine rump. A major runway or half of New Jersey will do.Working far better are the big-daddy Brembo brakes installed at the front. (Cough up another $4000.) This modification includes four-piston calipers and Pagid semi-metallic pads, hugging cross-drilled 13.1-inch rotors. Here, we measured improvement. From 70 mph, the Callaway SS stops in only 164 feet, which is a mere two feet shy of what a Porsche 911 Turbo can achieve. Holy cats. More Callaway Cars and the Man Behind ThemWhat a 911 cannot achieve is an exhaust that bellows, “I am one evil mother V-8!” right into the next county. This is appropriate for street rods. Unfortunately, there’s a part-throttle resonance that, at 2500 rpm, ricochets into one ear, stomps a steel-drum tattoo on your cerebellum, then performs a pounding pasodoble as it exits your other ear at about 2800 rpm. Full-throttle din is up 6 dBA—the differ­ence between Mozart and Megadeth.It’s like having an old Grand National stock car—”whOP-wah-wah-WHOOP!”—only with better paint and worse seats. (Even the Callaway guys are weary of the poorly contoured chairs and the steering wheel aimed at your left shoulder. They plan later to install Recaros canted per­manently toward the transmission-tunnel hump.) Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverWith the taxes and all options, the price of your new Impala SS has more than doubled. We’re talking about a $50,966 car based on a Chevrolet that GM has just axed from its lineup, very much like the 405-hp Corvette ZR-1, of which I just saw a zero-mileage example for sale in Columbus, Ohio, for just $966 more than Callaway’s Impala. This is somewhat difficult to explain to my 70-year-old neighbor Martin, whose own Caprice Classic, he says, “cost $18,910 on the nose, pardner, plus she don’t need a new muf­fler yet, like yours.”You know, you could also lay all of these rod mods on a Buick Roadmaster wagon.SpecificationsSpecifications
1995 Callaway SuperNatural SSVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $48,674/$50,966
ENGINEpushrod 16-valve V-8, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 383 in3, 6271 cm3Power: 404 hp @ 5750 rpmTorque: 412 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic 
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 115.9 inLength: 214.1 inCurb Weight: 4224 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 5.5 sec100 mph: 14.1 sec1/4-Mile: 14.1 sec @ 100 mphRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.1 secTop Speed (drag ltd): 154 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 164 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.86 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 16 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity: 16 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

The EV segment is a fickle and sometimes mysterious beast. It’s easy to get lost in a sea of contortionist tax-rebate rules, evolving manufacturer product strategies, and advertising bluster. Volvo’s new 2025 EX30 EV compact crossover is positioned to transcend the hype and exist on its own as a simple and satisfying vehicle first and foremost, regardless of powertrain or income bracket. Leading the effort is its $36,245 base price for the entry-level EX30 Core model. The stateside 2025 Volvo EX30 will be available in two strengths: the EX30 Single Motor Extended Range and the EX30 Twin Motor Performance. The EX30 Single Motor features a 268-hp electric motor mounted on the rear axle and a claimed range of 275 miles. It’s offered in three trims: Core ($36,245), Plus ($40,195), and Ultra ($41,895). The EX30 Twin Motor adds a motor on the front axle for a combined output of 422 horsepower and 265 miles of range, and it comes in two trims: Plus ($46,195) and Ultra ($47,895). Both models use a floor-mounted lithium-ion battery with 64.0 kWh of usable capacity. Style (Volvo’s Version)The design certainly adheres to the simplicity edict, as the exterior’s aero-mandated anonymity is saved only by an interpretation of the familial Thor’s Hammer headlamps and a prominent Volvo badge on the nose. The only “EX30” badging on our sample car resided discreetly on the upper section of the C-pillar. There are some Chevy Bolt EUV vibes in the rear doors, C-pillar, and hatch, but that’s a product of aerodynamics, structural integrity, and interior practicality. The EX30’s back glass is shorter and more upright than the Bolt’s, and the rear section is a bit bulkier and more squared off. The taillamp treatment is from the Volvo playbook, softened slightly to blend with the design. A paragon of purposefulness, the EX30’s interior takes the form-follows-function concept to its core. A single center-mounted vertically oriented screen handles the driver display, infotainment, and vehicle setting functions. Though it runs native software, it incorporates Google hands-free assistant, Google Maps navigation, and Google Play; remarkably, it’s the first Volvo to feature wireless Apple CarPlay. Despite our best efforts, the mapping software, as well as the native functions, worked flawlessly. We did have a hiccup or two with the wireless Apple CarPlay and finally resorted to using a cable, although we’ll note that the cars were pre-production examples. A pair of vents bookend the screen with another pair at the far ends, the space below covered by a smooth renewable woven flax textile in the twin-motor model and a flecked, composite substrate in the lower trims that contains recycled PVC. The carpet is manufactured from recycled plastic bottles, and the Twin Motor seats are a blend of recycled polyester and “responsibly produced” wool, which, although we previously didn’t know was a thing, sounds virtuous. Though the fabrics are as pleasing to the touch—some might say even more plush—as the petrochemical vinyl upholstery currently in use across the industry, it’ll be interesting to see how they weather 100,000 miles of hard use. The goal of all of this resourcefulness, according to Volvo, is to have the smallest carbon footprint of any Volvo car to date, based on over 124,000 miles of use with the current EU-27 electricity mix. Volvo claims 95 percent of the vehicle will be recyclable at the end of its life cycle. Altruistic aspirations aside, the exterior and interior designs create an undeniably minimalist but satisfying vibe of the best consumer designs, whether it be electronics, furniture, or cookware—everything you need and little you don’t. Versatility is important regardless of size, and the EX30 provides plenty of room for a variety of drivers; the author’s six-foot-plus and wider-than-most frame slipped behind the wheel easily with two or three more notches of seat travel to go in both the manual- and powered-seat iterations. Specifically, there are 41.9 inches of front legroom, one inch more than in the Volvo XC40. Rear seating offers decent head and shoulder room, but legroom is tight at 32.3 inches. Window controls are on the center console, and a single control stalk on the right of the steering wheel selects the vehicle direction and functions as the on/off switch for the Pilot Assist (semi-autonomous) drive mode; everything else is accessed through the center screen. That includes opening the center-mounted glovebox, though its close proximity to the button on the screen makes it kind of superfluous. Despite the lack of a sun shield for the panoramic glass roof panel, the EX30’s air conditioning kept the cabin frosty even when we were mired in traffic; Volvo is aware of the American public’s need to chill and says a retractable cloth sunshade is under consideration for U.S.-bound models.Simple Doesn’t Always Mean BoringAcceleration is impressive, with our Cloud Blue single-motor EX30 stepping off abruptly enough for our passenger to discover there is no customary passenger grab handle. Guiding the EX30 through the crowded streets of Barcelona is a joy, as its 104.3-inch wheelbase and 166.7-inch overall length are tailor-made for dicing it up with the city cars and scooters that populate most of the Comital City’s traffic. (The EX30’s wheelbase and length are respectively 1.0 and 2.8 inches shorter than the Bolt EUV’s, and 2.1 and 8.1 inches shorter than the Volvo XC40’s.) Volvo claims a 5.1-second 60-mph time, but that’s largely irrelevant in urban traffic, where immediate access to the 253 lb-ft of torque is the key to victory. Top speed is limited to 112 mph. The ride on the Ultra trim’s 19-inch wheels (the Core gets 18-inch ones) is firm, but the car is solid and devoid of rattles or unnerving suspension noises, which encourages you to push it harder. Though the core chassis is provided by Volvo parent Geely, Volvo engineers tell us they spent a large amount of time tuning and tweaking all the moving parts for EX30 duty. Once free of city traffic, the EX30 gets a chance to display its agility on the tight, twisty roads that populate the mountainous regions adjacent to Barcelona. There, it displayed balanced dynamics, remaining neutral through all but the most hurried directional changes, where it starts to push wide. An approximately 30-mile highway slog reveals mild wind- and road-noise levels. It’s in the calmer downhill stretches where two additional concessions to simplicity reveal themselves. Unlike competitors that offer stepped levels of regeneration, the EX30 offers one-pedal driving as a single on/off option. Activated via the infotainment screen (Settings > Driving > Driving dynamics > One pedal drive), it’s calibrated nicely for urban settings, but we found leaving it off more efficient and fluid in mountainous and highway travel. You also won’t find any of the typical gee-whiz animations illustrating energy moving from the battery to the motors and wheels or the regeneration thereof. When asked about the absence, a Volvo rep said, “Why would we distract you from driving? That’s not us.” A creatively spun cost-cutting measure, perhaps, but it also jibes with EX30’s “This is not a novelty EV” character. One bit of innocuous tech is the black box behind the steering wheel. While you drive, it’s judging you, scanning your face and eyes and comparing data with the steering-wheel sensors to determine if you are drowsy, distracted, or just an epically bad driver. If using Pilot Assist (Volvo’s adaptive cruise control with steering function), it’ll let you know when it’s time for a coffee break or possibly a driver’s ed refresher course. The Twin Motor Performance version amps up the proceedings significantly, motivating the EX30 to 60 mph in a claimed 3.4 seconds. Activate its Performance All-Wheel Drive mode (via the same drive settings screen as the one-pedal driving), and it prioritizes acceleration by putting all 422 horsepower and 400 lb-ft of torque to work through all four wheels. In normal driving, it sends torque only to the front axle when it detects slip at the rear. The Twin Motor has an estimated range of 265 miles, only 10 less than the Single Motor version, which is curious as they share an identical battery. Given the Single Motor EX30’s rear-wheel-drive layout, however, the Twin Motor version’s all-wheel drive doesn’t radically alter the feel or dynamics during typical driving. There is more power on tap, obviously, but it’s a nice bonus, and it’s not like the dual-motor EX30 has an appetite for melting tires and cutting apexes with a precision that’ll have Porsche owners regretting their life choices. Buyers will have to determine whether the $6000 premium for the otherwise equivalent Twin Motor is worth the extra thrills. More on the Volvo EX30Both EX30 variants have a peak DC fast-charge rate of 153 kW. Volvo says a 50-kW DC fast-charger will take the battery from 10 to 80 percent in 56 minutes, while a 175-kW DC charger will do the same in as little as 27 minutes. AC charging to go from zero to 100 percent is optimistically quoted as “as low as eight hours,” which would require a dedicated 240-volt home charger. Plug into a standard 110-volt outlet and you’ll be waiting for over 24 hours for a full charge. Of note, the first EX30s will ship with an adapter to use Tesla Superchargers, while later cars will incorporate the Tesla NACS port directly into the vehicle. Hook ‘Em When They’re NewVolvo says that 80 percent of its EV customers are new to the brand. Volvo isn’t the first manufacturer to attract new buyers by walking the everyman’s-EV path. The Chevrolet Bolt, the Hyundai Ioniq 5, and the Volkswagen ID.4, among others, have fashioned themselves as affordable, practical cars that just happen to be EVs. Given the similarities in battery capacity, charging estimates, and identical range of the EX30 Single and Twin Motor versions, the primary decision facing buyers is, “How much am I willing to pay to go fast?” The EX30 is the second Volvo model to wear the “EX” nomenclature behind the flagship EX90 SUV EV; together they will bookend the automaker’s EV lineup. The EX30 is currently manufactured at parent company Geely’s facility in Zhangjiakou, China, and production will expand to Volvo’s Ghent plant in Belgium.Often, notions like “minimalist” or “pared back” tend to cover both a vehicle’s aesthetics and its on-road qualities. But that’s not the case with the Volvo EX30. While its design may err on the side of simplicity, the EX30 is not akin to driving a manila envelope. Its green cred, whether that means the sustainable materials in the cabin or the electrons powering its drivetrain, is bolstered only by its pleasant pavement demeanor.SpecificationsSpecifications
2025 Volvo EX30Vehicle Type: rear- or front- and rear-motor, rear- or all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: Single Motor Extended Range, $36,245; Twin Motor Performance, $46,195
POWERTRAINS
Rear-Drive Single Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 268 hp, 253 lb-ftAll-Wheel-Drive Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 154 hpAll-Wheel-Drive Rear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 268 hpCombined Power: 422 hpCombined Torque: 400 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 64.0 kWhOnboard Charger: 11.0 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 153 kWTransmissions: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 104.3 inLength: 166.7 inWidth: 72.3 inHeight: 61.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54/37 ft3Cargo Volume, behind F/R: 32/14 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3900–4150 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.3–5.0 sec1/4-Mile: 12.0–13.0 secTop Speed: 112 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 130–139/140–145/120–125 MPGeRange: 265–275 miContributing EditorAndrew Wendler brings decades of wrenching, writing, and editorial experience with numerous outlets to Car and Driver. A rust-belt native and tireless promoter of the region, he once won a $5 bet by walking the entire length of the elevated People Mover track that encircles downtown Detroit. More

From the September 1991 issue of Car and Driver.The scene was right out of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Ten Car and Driver editors spritzing and lolling atop Brock Yates’s 38-foot-long charter boat, the Bluewater Challenger, which Yates—in true Hemingway style—calls “one big, tough fishing machine.” Yates was at the helm, somehow persuaded that we could hook fish at 40 mph and look­ing for all the world like Jack Nicholson shepherding a boatload of inmates across icy Lake Ontario. And the inmates were jabbering about cars, not lake trout, except for our managing editor, who felt compelled to troll with his face, which is why there is now 85 feet of Lake Ontario water between him and his eyeglasses. We had driven to upper New York state, to Yates’s sprawling real-estate empire in the village of Wyoming, to wring out a six­-pack of imported sports sedans that each cost $25,000 or less. The driving itinerary was a brute: street circuits through the Ann Arbor and Detroit minefields, ten hours of freeway droning to and from the Village That Yates Owns, a seven-hour thrash through the glacially gouged hills surround­ing the Finger Lakes, and even a few laps—in formation, no less—around Watkins Glen (the latter maneuver performed flaw­lessly in front of a bevy of understandably mystified students attending one of Bobby Rahal’s Track Time sessions). Twenty-five thousand bucks may sound like a bundle, but this is a wildly competi­tive and popular niche, and none of these cars even qualifies as a luxury sedan by today’s standards.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverOur six-pack challengers, in order of price (most expensive to least expensive) were: the Acura Vigor LS, the Audi 80, the Mitsubishi Galant VR4, the Nissan Maxima SE, the Subaru Legacy Sport Sedan, and the Infiniti G20. Each was already a winner, because before we got started, we studied and drove other contenders: cars such as the BMW 318i, the Mazda 929, the VW Passat GL, the Peugeot 405Mi 16, the Saab 900S, and the Volvo 740 Turbo. But those machines—for reasons of age, sloth, or other character quirks judged unsuitable in a stab-and-squirt sports-sedan outing—were culled early. Finally, the idea was to pit the winning import against America’s own star-span­gled banger, the $22,071 Ford Taurus SHO, which had been a decisive victor in our “Yankee Clippers” shoot-out in March. As our seven-car caravan got under way—CB radio squawking, map being sucked out of open windows, and the inex­plicable appearance of two sets of keys for which there existed no cars—Yates mut­tered, “My most fervent hope is that I’ll simply be thrown clear.” A cruel sentiment, really, because at that point in the proceed­ings, we had yet to touch his boat. View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver6th Place: Audi 80 Absolutely true: Audi builds no automo­bile that we don’t enjoy driving. Also abso­lutely true: In this group, the Audi 80, now even blessed with a much-needed five-­cylinder engine, took a beating that would have kept George Foreman off the David Letterman show for seven months.Although a manual is theoretically avail­able, Audi doesn’t want to sell this car with any transmission except a four-speed auto­matic, making it the only non-manual in our sextet. But even a five-speed stickshift wouldn’t have upended many votes. HIGHS: Modern styling, typically Teutonic fit and finish.LOWS: Thrashy engine and an unwilling transmission.VERDICT: Expertly built, but low on fun, short on utility.The Audi required the most time to attain 60 mph and to trip the lights through the quarter-mile. Requiring 203 feet to stop from 70 mph, it offered the least impressive braking. Shod with 175/70R-14 tires that looked like space-saver spares, it screeched its way around the skidpad with the most meager grip. Its narrow cabin and high cowl made for cramped seating and passengers muttering about impending panics of claustrophobia. And its ten-cubic-foot trunk is more accurately described as a storage slot for attaché cases. All of which makes it tricky to justify the Audi’s sticker, which is the second steepest in this test.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverWrote our editor, William Jeanes: “There may be adequate horsepower in there, but it obviously disagrees with the transmission.” He’s right. The automatic permits sloppy overrevs on many upshifts and a not-very-positive sense of manual control when you want it. Too much work, too much busyness to get at the power. The Audi averted outright ridicule because of its superb fit and finish, great freeway tracking, still-modern aero styling, and vault-like build quality—which made it another ingot from Ingolstadt. Alas, the little 80’s fate was sealed when, over the steamy Memorial Day weekend, its radiator fan “roared like a Channel hovercraft,” said Yates, and its AM radio was the only one in our group unable to lock onto the station broadcasting the Indy 500. Golly. 1991 Audi 80130-hp inline-5, 4-speed automatic, 2898 lbBase/as-tested price: $22,250/$24,395C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.7 sec1/4-mile: 17.5 sec @ 80 mph100 mph: 32.2 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 203 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.74 g C/D observed fuel economy: 24 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver5th Place: Infiniti G20 When you first clap eyes on the G20, with its Wonder Bread styling and compact dimensions, it is tempting to label it as some sort of Infiniti inventory tag-along. Big mistake. Go for a spin and here’s what you find: Maybe the best, most accurate five-speed shifter in the world, mated to a smooth and light clutch. Steering surpassed only by vehicles assembled in Zuff­enhausen. And a suspension that makes this car so inordinately pitchable and tossable that you’d swear the same guys designed the underbits on, say, the Nissan 300ZX. Which they did. HIGHS: Steering, shifter, and suspension of racing-car caliber.LOWS: Noisy engine, minimal low-rev power, Iowa styling.VERDICT: Can’t compete with its V-6-powered big brother.The G20 is the shortest and lightest car in this group, the fastest through the slalom, and the hands-down victor in fuel economy. What’s more, it is the least expensive car in our sextet. So how come it finished fifth? The all-alloy four-cylinder engine in the G20 is noisy. Extraordinarily smooth, mind you, with Tae Kwon Do–reflex throttle response. But noisy. And it is prone to drone, because to get at the power every­body keeps the tach twisted, as often as possible, somewhere north of 4000 rpm.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverOther repeated observations in our log­book: The motorized belts are annoying, as are the trio of hard-to-reach knurled knobs on the side of the driver’s seat for cushion height, rake, and backrest angle. In this group, the G20 is our sedan of choice for slicing through knots of urban traffic, but its conservative appointments and modest performance squeeze it out of the niche occupied by elegant long-distance tourers like the Maxima and the Vigor. Frankly, the G20 ought to compete with, say, the Accord, where it would do some serious damage to Honda.When we were first shown the littlest Infiniti (known elsewhere in the world as a mere Nissan), we asked the marketing guys, “Haven’t you already built a great $20,000 sedan called the Maxima, with a standard V-6?” The Nissan guys replied, “Nobody will ever compare the two.”We just did.1991 Infiniti G20140-hp inline-4, 5-speed manual, 2865 lbBase/as-tested price: $18,135/$19,835C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.7 sec1/4 mile: 16.8 sec @ 83 mph100 mph: 27.7 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.78 gC/D observed fuel economy: 28 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver4th Place: Subaru Legacy Sport Sedan We once described the Subaru Legacy as a car we respect more than we desire, and that inscription remains apt. Four-wheel drive and anti-lock brakes are standard on the Sport Sedan—this on the second-least­-expensive automobile in the group—and neither is mere marketing gimmickry. The Legacy was an outright winner in braking from 70 mph. With the most favorable weight distribution of the bunch, it circulat­ed our 300-foot skidpad with the greatest grip. And its turbocharged four-cylinder boxer absolutely does not feel force-fed, delivering a seamless, if somewhat gritty-­sounding, flow of power from 2000 to 6000 rpm and carrying this car to 60 mph sooner than the Maxima’s V-6. HIGHS: Compliant ride, sharp steering, four-wheel drive.LOWS: Poor detailing, hit-and-miss styling, rubbery shifter.VERDICT: Good value, short in fire and finesse.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverDetails are the Legacy’s downfall. Nothing wrong with the car’s overall sil­houette, but it is spoiled by fussy cutlines and gratuitous chrome accents: a trio of strips around the taillights, for example, along with chrome door handles and that shiny logo at the base of the C-pillars. Same deal inside. Basically a sensible layout, whose logic and legibility are eroded by buttons and switch­es that don’t match and vast expanses of tacky plastic—on the doorsills, the instru­ment panel, the A-pillars, the sun visors, the headliner, and the center console. By the time you discover the ridiculously flimsy passenger-side air vent (is this maybe a part from Mattel?) and row through the gears­—only to find the linkage a little rubbery and insubstantial—you begin to wonder if any­one at Subaru has heard that expression “sweating the details.” More Subaru Reviews From the ArchiveWhat they have heard, fortunately, is the word “utility.” In this group, only the Legacy and the Maxima deliver a rear seat capable of accommodating three adults. The Subaru’s trunk is cavernous. And if this test had been conducted in icy February, the Legacy’s utility rating might well have clawed its way to triple digits. 1991 Subaru Legacy Sport Sedan160-hp flat-4, 5-speed manual, 3150 lbBase/as-tested price: $19,748/$20,702C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.9 sec1/4 mile: 16.4 sec @ 85 mph100 mph: 23.9 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 173 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 gC/D observed fuel economy: 22 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver3rd Place: Acura Vigor LS We try to approach these comparison tests with no festering notions about proba­ble winners. But a bunch of us who had yet to sit in a Vigor reckoned we could expect near-perfection. In short, a probable winner.Ha! Just goes to show that our editors really do fret over dollars. Because the Vigor’s big weakness is its vigorous price. At $23,575, it is the most expensive sedan in the six-pack, yet it is the cheapest version of the Vigor extant, with no leather, sunroof, or power seats. Of course, for this kind of money, what you do get is the fruit of Honda’s engineers, doing what Honda engi­neers do best. The Vigor emerged a victor in our fit-and-finish category and tied for first in both ergonomics and comfort. The feel, location, and movements of the switchgear are faultless. The shift linkage is as silky as the Infiniti G20’s but with shorter throws. The tactile sensations—abetted by the wood inserts on the dash and doors—create an interior as inviting as Orson Welles’s den. HIGHS: Ball-bearing shifter, silky switchgear, flawless ergonomics.LOWS: Price, numb steering, price, slalom manners, price.VERDICT: High-zoot evolution of a Honda Accord EX, but at a major cost.View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverSpeaking of which. The Vigor is clearly the one car in this group that makes you feel cretinous if you aren’t wearing a Ralph Lauren button-down shirt. Despite its 176-hp five-cylinder engine, the Vigor traveled through our 1000-foot slalom at the lowest speed, and its overassisted power steering rewards Wall Street deliberation, not high-­spiritedness. Said Jeanes, “It is almost, but not quite, as thrilling to drive as a riding lawn mower, though it is of course much quieter.” Moreover, the Vigor’s cockpit is cramped, this despite the car’s exterior bulk: It is the longest and widest car in this group, and it has the longest wheelbase. The vil­lain, of course, is the north/south engine installation, which requires a deep dash­board, insinuates a mammoth transmission between the front seats, and reduces the footwells to narrow, dark slots. We also wish the hood didn’t shake like a wet springer spaniel—an un-Honda-like touch.This is nonetheless an alluring car for the driver who wants to combine anonymity with quality. A class act all the way, posh and polished, but one that needs a lower sticker to earn our editorial thumbs-up.1991 Acura Vigor LS176-hp inline-5, 5-speed manual, 3104 lbBase/as-tested price: $23,575/$23,575C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.7 sec1/4 mile: 16.1 sec @ 88 mph100 mph: 21.7 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 198 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.76 gC/D observed fuel economy: 23 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver2nd Place: Mitsubishi Galant VR4Having just demonstrated editorial restraint—chiding Acura for the price of its Vigor—we now demonstrate irresponsibili­ty at its finest. The bribe we never fail to grab: horsepower.What we have here is the hot rod of the group (or, what Mitsubishi actually intend­ed, the rallyist of the group). This is the Hemi Cuda approach to sports-sedan motoring. Just look at the numbers: quickest 0-to-60-time (at 7.0 seconds, it’s as fast as a Ford Probe GT), best quarter-mile ET, and a 132-mph top speed, a velocity that even the V-6-powered Maxima cannot attain.HIGHS: Schwarzkopf-quality power and four-wheel steering.LOWS: Sloppy shifter, styling by, ah, Frigidaire?VERDICT: The sports sedan for PRO Rally Saturdays and NHRA Sundays.What’s more, in the Mitsubishi tradition, this car is loaded with, well, all of Mitsu­bishi’s stuff. Four-wheel independent sus­pension, four-wheel disc brakes, four-wheel steering, four-wheel ABS, four valves per cylinder. “It should say 4WGE on the rump,” opined editor-at-large Kevin Smith. “Four-Wheel Goddamn Everything.” View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverOf course, all that stuff makes the VR4 the heaviest sedan in the group, and all that stuff comes in a perversely angular wrap­per. “From the spectator’s seat,” said Jeanes, “the VR4 shows you the kind of exterior treatment that GM once thought represented zoominess incarnate. Now it just looks kind of silly.” Same deal inside, with a clunky shifter and a bizarre instru­ment panel buried under a jutting pod that could have been designed in the late 1970s. Saving the cockpit from brickbats are its front seats, which go a long way toward making the VR4’s racy demeanor tolerable. And racy it is, with the heaviest steering of our six sedans and a twitchy chassis that is sufficiently stiff (and loud) that you know everything about the road surfaces. Which, of course, made this our car of choice as we rocketed over hill and through Dale. (Dale, New York, that is, where Yates showed us this country’s smallest post office—the size of the Audi 80—complete with what Brock asserts is a zip code whose last digit is not a whole number.) The VR4 is not notably refined. We began calling it the Jack Klugman of the group. But you get a lot of stuff, you know? A hot rod, pure and simple. And, with only 2000 VR4s imported annually, a rare hot rod. We are such suckers for power. 1991 Mitsubishi Galant VR4195-hp inline-4, 5-speed manual, 3389 lbBase/as-tested price: $22,168/$23,652C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 7.0 sec1/4 mile: 15.6 sec @ 88 mph100 mph: 21.9 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 183 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.78 gC/D observed fuel economy: 23 mpgView PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and Driver1st Place: Nissan Maxima SE And the winner is . . . an old car. Well, old by today’s standards. We first climbed into the current-generation Maxima at Nissan’s Phoenix test track in the summer of ’88. That means this amazingly compe­tent and mature-feeling sedan is in the final year of its life. Spy photos of its replacement are already appearing. Which makes you wonder if Nissan is going to screw up a good thing, because there is a lot here to covet: a real sense of spaciousness in the cockpit, for example. Three adults fit in the back. And the trunk, in the words of James Thurber, “would be a wonderful place for a weekend or to learn to play the xylophone.” HIGHS: Perfect power delivery, great steering, room for five.LOWS: Excess body roll, cheap-and-noisy motorized belts.VERDICT: Sophistication and refinement beyond its price.What’s more, the Maxima offers the only V-6 in this six-pack, which is evident the moment you twist the ignition key. The idle is the smoothest here, and there is prodi­gious step-off torque. Power is on tap from as low as 1500 rpm—a real boon around town. And despite this engine’s post-4000-rpm growl, under normal conditions it is so unobtrusive—demonstrably the quietest at full throttle of the six cars tested—that on the Interstate we often found ourselves for­getting to upshift from fourth. Like the Vigor, the Maxima has uni­formly buttery controls. Shifter, throttle, steering, turn-signal indicator—all feel as though someone sat down and diligently struggled to obtain perfect weighting and an overtly expensive feel. Says a member of Nissan’s now-legendary “901” engineering team, “Yes, we did.” View PhotosJeffrey G. Russell and Susan Smith Jeanes|Car and DriverIf you had to point a shame-on-you fin­ger at the Maxima, that digit would surely wag first at the noisy motorized shoulder belts, which ought to be replaced by air bags. And it would wag next at the car’s excess body roll and underdamped ride motions. In fairness, those motions upset the driver more than they upset the car—as proof we offer the Maxima’s 0.79 g of skid­pad grip, second only to the Subaru. Still, one of our editors said he would shell out an extra $500 for stiffer struts if they were offered, and nobody laughed out loud. The Maxima SE was a winner in our ride and value categories. And it tied for first place—with the $2780-more-costly Vigor—for best ergonomics and driver comfort. “Difficult to fault,” added Jeanes. “It does everything you could ask from a rea­sonably priced sports sedan.”And by the way, Brock, you know the car keys you couldn’t find after our fishing soiree? The managing editor says you’ll find them next to his eyeglasses. About 85 feet down. 1991 Nissan Maxima SE160-hp V-6, 5-speed manual, 3178 lbBase/as-tested price: $20,795/$22,790C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.0 sec1/4 mile: 16.3 sec @ 85 mph100 mph: 24.7 secBraking, 70­–0 mph: 175 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.79 gC/D observed fuel economy: 21 mpg More

From the November 2023 issue of Car and Driver.The burrito artist issued a succinct two-word review of the 2023 Porsche 911 Sport Classic as we sat nearby. “Nice spec,” he said, nodding toward the haunchy machine we’d backed into a front-and-center parking spot. He had no idea how right he was, even though the editor in our head thought that “awesome,” “wicked,” or even “bitchin'” was more apt for the car’s heritage vibe.HIGHS: Amazing grip and balance, goes like stink, looks like a million bucks.The vibe harks back to the 2010 911 Sport Classic and beyond. This new car combines that 997 special’s ghostly skunk stripes, double-bubble roof, and Carrera RS 2.7–style ducktail spoiler with similar gray paint, an indented hood from the air-cooled era, Fuchs-inspired wheels, and chunky Porsche Turbo tires and fenders, but without air intakes marring their flanks.Power comes from the twin-turbocharged 3.7-liter flat-six found in the current Turbo. Adaptive dampers, rear-axle steering, and active anti-roll bars come from the Turbo S. It has the classic Turbo configuration: rear-wheel drive and a manual gearbox, a coveted 911 Turbo combination that disappeared nearly three decades ago, when the 993 Turbo launched. This setup dictated a software remap, so maximum power shrinks from 572 to 543 horses. The Sport Classic’s pounds-to-power ratio is marginally better than the Turbo’s, however, because it’s 199 pounds lighter.That makes this the most powerful Porsche 911 currently available with a manual. Instead of the six-speed GT3 gearbox we cherish, the Sport Classic uses Porsche’s seven-speed unit, which inspires a hearty golf clap. Neither can handle as much torque as Porsche’s PDK dual-clutch automatic, and the fat rear tires must go it alone, so the torque remap is more draconian. The Sport Classic’s torque, 442 pound-feet, represents a 111-pound-foot deduction from the Turbo, but that’s still 22 more than the GTS.LOWS: Superfluous seventh gear, hard to nail the launch, costs over a quarter-million bucks.This explains much about the car’s track performance, where these realities and a 3500-rpm rev limit while stationary make it hard to score the perfect launch. Our 3.7-second dash to 60 mph bests Porsche’s own prediction by two-tenths, but with all-wheel drive and PDK, the Turbo needs just 2.4 seconds. Of course, this misses a huge point, because a rear-drive manual was never going to rule the drag strip. The Sport Classic is more about winding roads, driver involvement, and a rollicking good time. On this front, the Sport Classic absolutely delivers.Turning in, the Sport Classic is tenacious. Its front tires deliver a surprising surplus of grip that can tighten the arc even when you think you’ve overcooked it. There is a lightness in this Porsche, an absence of front mass that allows the front end to skip gleefully into turns. The tires, Pirelli P Zero PZ4s in the standard Turbo size, stuck at 1.07 g’s on the skidpad. Balance remains steadfast through a corner even if you trail the brakes in deep. As you roll onto the throttle at exit and revs build, a satisfying wiggle makes clear that this is a rear-drive machine, but the ass end never hints at walking you tail-first toward the guardrail. When the next corner rushes up, the massive carbon-ceramic brakes haul the car down smartly, and the cycle repeats.The feel and feedback of it are all but impeccable—through the well-bolstered seats, nicely placed pedals, and ergonomically contoured steering wheel. The seven-speed’s shift action is a bit rubbery and the only element needing more polish. Also, seventh gear feels superfluous, too tall for sub-autobahn speeds.More on the 911 Sport ClassicZooming out, we admire the interior’s heritage Pepita houndstooth pattern and saddle-brown leather. And Porsche should bookmark the tech balance of this cockpit, which combines the best elements of the Taycan’s curved instrument panel and central touchscreen with a big tach, normal air-conditioning vents, and logical switchgear.VERDICT: The rear-drive, stick-shift 911 Turbo returns, and it was worth the wait.The most worrying aspects of the 2023 911 Sport Classic are its $274,750 cost of entry and its limited supply of just 1250 worldwide. If you miss out, you can console yourself with a 911 GTS in a “nice spec.” The burrito artist would approve.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Porsche 911 Sport ClassicVehicle Type: rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $274,750/$282,810 Options: Burmeister High-End Surround Sound system, $3980; Surround View, $1430; Lane Keep Assist with traffic sign recognition, $1220; Lane Change Assist, $1060; power folding exterior mirrors, $370
ENGINE
twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve flat-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 229 in3, 3745 cm3Power: 543 hp @ 6750 rpmTorque: 442 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
7-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 16.5-in carbon-ceramic disc/15.4-in carbon-ceramic discTires: Pirelli P Zero PZ4F: 255/35ZR-20 (93Y) NA1R: 315/30ZR-21 (105Y) NA1 Extra Load
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 96.5 inLength: 178.5 inWidth: 74.8 inHeight: 51.1 inTrunk Volume: 5 ft3Curb Weight: 3438 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 3.7 sec100 mph: 7.5 sec1/4-Mile: 11.7 sec @ 127 mph130 mph: 12.1 sec150 mph: 16.9 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 4.7 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 11.8 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 9.6 secTop Speed (mfr’s claim): 195 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 139 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 279 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 1.07 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 16 mpg 
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 17/15/21 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDTechnical EditorDan Edmunds was born into the world of automobiles, but not how you might think. His father was a retired racing driver who opened Autoresearch, a race-car-building shop, where Dan cut his teeth as a metal fabricator. Engineering school followed, then SCCA Showroom Stock racing, and that combination landed him suspension development jobs at two different automakers. His writing career began when he was picked up by Edmunds.com (no relation) to build a testing department. More