Reviews

While at dinner one evening during the media drives for the 2024 Range Rover Velar, the server informed us the chef had prepared a special dessert: popcorn soufflé. I believe one should try things if they sound interesting, no matter what they’re called. Dubious marketing occasionally hides mastery. The server brought the dessert, its delicate white cap poking out of the traditional French soufflé dish. I tasted a spoonful of cake and the creamy pink sauce inside that bore bits of popcorn like amber in some florid tar. I wasn’t prepared for the medley of flavors. It wasn’t bad, and I’m glad I tried it, but I didn’t have any more. It was a unique, perplexing confection, much like the Range Rover Velar.Let’s work backward with the SUV, starting with the confection. Look at the Velar, Range Rover’s first public entry into what it terms “reductionism.” We’ve called the car fetching, tailored, fine-looking, and dripping with curb appeal. It is without doubt more artfully modeled than its competitors, deftly nodding to its brand’s aspirational flagship. In fact, the Velar might be better proportioned than the Range Rover it encourages its buyers to yearn for. Tweaks for 2024For the new year, the Velar makes many of the same changes wrought upon the 2024 Range Rover Evoque. A new grille sits between slender pixel headlights, the 268 LEDs in each headlight adjusting their illumination to shine all available light on the road, not into the eyes of oncoming drivers. In back, reshaped LED taillight signatures sit above a new rear bumper and redrawn diffuser insert that eliminates openings for the exhaust finishers. The exterior color palette makes way for Metallic Varesine Blue and Premium Metallic Zadar Grey. Darker trim pieces provide increased contrast, and new wheel designs come in new finishes.The 2021 Velar introduced the dished steering wheel and palm shifter the Evoque just received for 2024, so cabin changes are even more reductive. The main change is the new 11.4-inch curved touchscreen replacing the previous dual screens, and the eradication of every knob and button. On the infotainment display, three ever-present shortcut menus line the sides and the bottom, doing their part to keep 80 percent of functions within two taps of the home screen.Leather interiors are offered in the new hues Cloud, Deep Garnet, and Raven Blue. Those who find hides distasteful can select a fabric substitute. Available only in Cloud Gray for the U.S. market, the wool blend on the seat uppers and door cards gets paired with a new ultrafiber polyurethane in more trafficked areas like seat bolsters and the steering wheel. Trim pieces come in either Shadow Gray Ash Veneer, dark anodized aluminum, or light anodized aluminum.Serenity takes a step up with new active noise-cancellation programming. Lastly, the Cabin Air Purification Plus option integrates a carbon-dioxide sensor to deter driver fatigue. As we said of the Evoque, this is a sensational-looking cabin, sure to appeal to shoppers who ogle homes fashioned from acres of blond wood, glass, and a T-square.Driving the 2024 VelarWhich brings us to the perplexing: The Velar is uninteresting to drive, its dynamics as reserved as its interior design. Powertrains carry over unchanged, the base Velar S and the Dynamic SE fitted standard with a turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder known as the P250, making 247 horsepower and 269 pound-feet of torque. The Dynamic SE can be optioned with a turbocharged and supercharged 3.0-liter inline-six supplemented by a 48-volt mild hybrid system, known as the P400 and producing 395 horsepower and 405 pound-feet. That’s the version we drove.Both engines are paired with an excellent ZF eight-speed automatic, but in the case of the P400 V-6 the powertrain engineers were able to improve the transmission’s refinement by using more of the mild-hybrid system’s electric torque to fill in gaps during shifts. Around town, you’d need a millimeter wave radar to detect the swapping of cogs. We’ve previously tested the P250 drivetrain (back in 2018), which took 7.2 seconds to hit 60 mph compared to Range Rover’s claimed time of 7.1 seconds. With the P400, the automaker claims a 60-mph time of 5.2 seconds. Adequate if true, but still 1.4 seconds behind our tested time for the Porsche Macan S and 1.1 behind the BMW X3 M40i. The also-luxury-focused Genesis GV70 3.5T is only 0.3 second ahead of the more powerful Velar, but the Genesis is markedly more involving to drive. The Velar’s steering feel, tendency to understeer, and quietude on the go were similar to what we experienced in the Evoque, and the brake pedal feel was just as spongy. However, the Velar’s ride on the standard steel springs was firmer and less pliant than the Evoque’s. Range Rover says that, against its rivals, the three pillars guiding the Velar’s development were: design leadership, the greatest refinement, and the most off-road capability. It succeeds at all of them. Note that none of these are concerned with performance or visceral reactions.Furthermore, because the Evoque and Velar use the same cabin design separated by roughly three inches of width and legroom, there’s no additional drama or sense of occasion in the Velar, which costs at least $10,000 more than its compact sibling. The Velar’s cargo hold, however, is much more commodious.Related storiesNone of this matters much, at least not in the U.S. and not for the moment. First, the Velar sells in paltry numbers here, 5283 units through the end of September 2023—compared to 21,290 units for the Porsche Macan over the same span. Range Rover’s volume sellers on our landmass are its two most expensive vehicles—we’re told that the No. 1 global market for the full-size Range Rover is the New York metro area, followed by L.A. at No. 2, and there’s a nine-month wait for the full-size flagship. Jaguar Land Rover reported its order backlog at the end of Q2 2024 financial year numbered 168,000 units, with the Range Rover, Range Rover Sport, and Land Rover Defender comprising 77 percent of that number. Second, and most importantly, the Velar is unlike anything else in the compact-luxury-SUV segment. It looks like art and is priced as such, ranging from $62,775 to $86,070 before options. Its medley of features makes it about as unique as popcorn soufflé. SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Land Rover Range Rover VelarVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICEBase: Velar P250 S, $62,775; P250 Dynamic SE, $64,875; P400 Dynamic SE, $71,875; P400 Dynamic HSE, $86,070
ENGINES
P250: turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.0-liter inline-4, 247 hp, 269 lb-ftP400: turbocharged, supercharged, and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter inline-6, 395 hp, 405 lb-ft
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.1 inLength: 188.9 inWidth: 76.0 inHeight: 66.3 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 51/45 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 60/30 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4150-4450 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.2-7.0 sec1/4-Mile: 13.8-15.7 secTop Speed: 135-155 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 21-23/19-22/25-26 mpg More

Not every comparison has a clear winner and loser. When driver engagement and other factors are virtually even, it’s down to intangibles like mission fulfillment to determine which vehicle best represents its future owners’ needs. Even then, as is the case with subcompact SUVs like the 2024 Hyundai Kona and 2024 Subaru Crosstrek, mere hairs can span the gap between first and second place. Their intended audiences might be radically different, but both of these cars are quite good at doing what they set out to.The Kona nameplate turns seven years old, while Crosstreks have littered REI parking lots for more than a decade. Each enters a new generation for 2024, with the Hyundai becoming bigger and more visually extroverted and the Subaru adding cladding and getting more refined. To compare models from both lineups with the mightiest engine and the closest base prices, we gathered a Crosstrek Limited and Kona N Line. The Hyundai cost $34,145 because of two-tone paint and floor mats, while the Subaru’s $35,030 as-tested price was inflated by $2840 worth of extra-cost paint and a package containing sunroof, stereo, and navigation add-ons. 2nd Place: Hyundai Kona N LineMore than any other small ute, the redesigned Hyundai Kona looks like it fell out of a Ridley Scott fever dream. The outgoing generation was boldly styled, but the new one goes even further—some of us called it good-looking; others said it looks goofy. The N Line guise is purely superficial, mainly replacing the gray fender surrounds with body-colored pieces and adopting an angrier mug.HIGHS: Sci-fi-movie styling, airy interior with a big back seat, smart storage features.LOWS: Sci-fi-movie styling, extra size sacrifices driving verve, fuel economy takes a hit.VERDICT: The new Kona is a better people mover—physically, but not emotionally.The new Kona is up to 6.6 inches longer overall, and its wheelbase has been stretched 2.3 inches. It now closely mirrors the Crosstrek’s dimensions, but the slightly taller Kona has better interior packaging that makes it feel more spacious, and the back seat is now roomy enough to be considered Uber-grade. Along with superior passenger space, its dash looks more Space Age than the Subie’s, which still has analog gauges. Along with the Hyundai’s slick dual displays and physical switchgear, we admire the cabin’s many clever features, like the dashboard storage shelf and the shapeshifting center console.Sadly, the Kona’s growth spurt sapped some of its on-road charm. Blame the extra mass and longer wheelbase for its reduced nimbleness. At least it remains a dutiful—albeit comparatively dull—driving partner. Despite 19-inch wheels and narrow sidewalls, the Kona’s taut ride limits body roll without letting too many bumps reach our backsides. The thin-rimmed steering wheel is quick to respond, which is nice when darting around town but darty at highway speeds.The N Line packs a carryover turbocharged 1.6-liter inline-four making 190 horsepower, but it now bolts to a conventional eight-speed automatic transmission that fixes the clunkiness of the old seven-speed dual-clutch unit. Throwing an extra 200 pounds of curb weight into the equation, the 2024 Kona 1.6T AWD takes 7.5 seconds to hit 60 mph, nearly one second slower than a 2018 example we tested. The new Kona’s powertrain still feels sprightly thanks to eager throttle tip-in, and it outraces the 2.5L Crosstrek in every acceleration metric, but it’s still a bit of a downer to see acceleration take a hit.While the Kona beat its 29-mpg-highway EPA estimate during our 75-mph real-world test, its 31-mpg result trails both its predecessor by 1 mpg and the Crosstrek by 4 mpg. The Hyundai’s combined rating also drops from 29 to 26 mpg for this new generation. Ouch.Sure, the new Kona has lots of stretch-out space, but so do other subcompact SUVs like the Chevy Trax and VW Taos. Plus, despite packing more cargo volume than before, the Hyundai held the same seven carry-on suitcases behind its rear seats as the Crosstrek. Fold their seatbacks, and we fit two more suitcases in the Subaru (22 total) than the Kona. More on the KonaBesides a bigger back seat, the Hyundai’s peppier performance and prettier interior are its only advantages over the Crosstrek. It might look like a spaceship, bit the Kona now feels more appliance-like, satisfying most people but truly exciting very few—especially at the pump.1st Place: Subaru Crosstrek LimitedThe third-generation Subaru Crosstrek’s styling will invite little conversation. We needed a double take to recognize the new version, but a closer inspection revealed more prominent fenders and a tougher face atop the same 8.7 inches of ground clearance. Subie fans will find it comfortingly familiar, while newcomers can better distinguish it from the Impreza hatchback.HIGHS: All-day comfortable, great fuel economy, a lifestyle accessory that’s a useful tool too.LOWS: Far from speedy, shoddier interior fit and finish, archaic infotainment graphics.VERDICT: The Crosstrek checks all the important boxes without compromising its personality.Interior fit and finish falls short of the Kona’s quality, but the Subaru’s mix of materials makes it otherwise feel less drab. A portrait-style touchscreen takes center stage, but the brand’s infotainment graphics look 10 years old. Thankfully, you can largely avoid that with the now-standard wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. The rear seat isn’t a penalty box, but it’s not nearly as roomy as the Kona’s. More importantly, the Crosstrek’s front seats feel forever comfortable. They’re cushier and more supportive than the previous-gen ‘Trek’s—not to mention the current Kona’s—and Subaru now bolts the seat rails to the frame, which is claimed to reduce head toss and fatigue. Consider us awake and appeased.The Crosstrek’s driving demeanor is relaxed, but the low seating position and snappy steering give a rally-car vibe—albeit a woefully underpowered one. Its softly sprung suspension reinforces that sensation and smoothes rough terrain under our tester’s 18-inch all-season tires. Subaru also stiffened the new Crosstrek’s structure to reduce NVH, and its increased refinement is obvious whether executing highway passes or traversing washboard roads. The Limited’s 182-hp 2.5-liter flat-four is the larger of the Crosstrek’s two available engines. It pairs with a continuously variable automatic transmission and standard all-wheel drive. Drama-free but far from speedy, the Subie gets to 60 mph in 8.1 seconds and crosses the quarter-mile in 16.3 ticks at 88 mph. While the Crosstrek’s four-pot has little urgency, a lower torque peak helps it feel responsive enough to keep pace with highway traffic, and engine sounds don’t drone into the cabin.More on the CrosstrekThe Crosstrek is more impressive when it’s time to fuel up. Not only is its EPA combined estimate 3 mpg higher than the Kona’s, but its real-world results are even better. The Subaru beat the feds’ highway rating by 2 mpg, averaging 35 mpg on our 75-mph highway fuel-economy loop. As for the Subie’s range advantage, it’s even better than our 75-mph results suggest because its 16.6-gallon tank holds 3.4 gallons more than the Kona’s.Both the Crosstrek and Kona are well suited for their missions. This new Kona’s backsliding in fuel economy and driving vim diminish its position as an efficient commuter with character. The Crosstrek is no quicker, but it can carry more cargo, it’s more economical, and it’ll take Subaru owners down any road, paved or otherwise, in greater comfort. It wins this close contest by giving its buyers more of what matters.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Subaru Crosstrek LimitedVehicle Type: front-engine all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $32,190/$35,030Options: Option package 33 (Power moonroof, Subaru Starlink 11.6-inch Multimedia Navigation system, Harman/Kardon Surround Sound 10-speaker audio), $2445; Alpine Green paint, $395
ENGINE
DOHC 16-valve flat-4, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 152 in3, 2498 cm3Power: 182 hp @ 5800 rpmTorque: 178 lb-ft @ 3700 rpm
TRANSMISSION
continuously variable automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 12.4-in vented disc/11.2-in vented discTires: Falken Ziex ZE001A A/S225/55R-18 98V M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 105.1 inLength: 176.4 inWidth: 70.9 inHeight: 63.0 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 55/44 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 55/20 ft3Curb Weight: 3412 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.1 sec1/4-Mile: 16.3 sec @ 88 mph100 mph: 21.9 sec120 mph: 39.9 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.8 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.7 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.9 secTop Speed (mfr est): 129 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 172 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.81 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 23 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 35 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 580 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 29/26/33 mpg

Specifications
2024 Hyundai Kona N Line AWDVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $33,485/$34,145Options: Ultimate Red metallic paint w/ Black roof, $450; carpeted floor mats, $210
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 98 in3, 1598 cm3Power: 190 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque: 195 lb-ft @ 1700 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 12.0-in vented disc/11.2-in discTires: Kumho Majesty 9 Solus TA91235/45R-19 99V M+S Extra Load
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 104.7 inLength: 172.6 inWidth: 71.9 inHeight: 63.6 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 52/47 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 64/26 ft3Curb Weight: 3450 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.5 sec1/4-Mile: 15.8 sec @ 89 mph100 mph: 21.1 sec120 mph: 42.1 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.1 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.0 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 4.9 secTop Speed (C/D est): 124 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 172 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.82 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 22 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 400 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 26/24/29 mpg

C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDSenior EditorEric Stafford’s automobile addiction began before he could walk, and it has fueled his passion to write news, reviews, and more for Car and Driver since 2016. His aspiration growing up was to become a millionaire with a Jay Leno–like car collection. Apparently, getting rich is harder than social-media influencers make it seem, so he avoided financial success entirely to become an automotive journalist and drive new cars for a living. After earning a journalism degree at Central Michigan University and working at a daily newspaper, the years of basically burning money on failed project cars and lemon-flavored jalopies finally paid off when Car and Driver hired him. His garage currently includes a 2010 Acura RDX, a manual ’97 Chevy Camaro Z/28, and a ’90 Honda CRX Si. More

It’s tough enough when inflation and feature creep give us $40,000 Priuses and $80,000 pickups. But before we spray champagne praise all over the Ferrari 296GTS convertible—ooh, see how that Blu Corsa paint sparkles!—a sober drip must ping off a $500,300 as-driven price, from a base of $371,139. That base figure represents a $28,934 premium over the 296GTB coupe—a sum that repays itself the minute one retracts the roof panel on a sunny autumn day or moonlit night, as we did in New York’s Hudson Valley. But Ferrari is also asking nearly $45,000 more for its plug-in-hybrid V-6 convertible than its F8 Spider predecessor. You know, the supercar with the mid-engine V-8 that’s been Ferrari’s stock-in-trade since the 1975 308 GTB. After nearly a half-century, Ferrari’s V-8 bloodline has been broken. Yet instead of baying for blood, like Porsche 993 airheads, Ferrari fans are largely taking it in stride, or even celebrating the 296. Why? It doesn’t hurt that the Ferrari is gorgeous. Coupe or convertible, the 296 design seems certain to stand the test of time. Ferrari designers say their goal was authentic Italian forms, a silhouette that appears drawn with a single pencil stroke. A compact greenhouse sits low, bobbing in impossibly wavy fenders. Compact dimensions and a 1.9-inch-shorter wheelbase (versus recent mid-engine models) amplify the simplified charm in an era of relentless bloat. There’s nothing extraneous, no overcompensating wings or South Beach jewelry, or even stark color contrasts between body and trim to interrupt the flow.Then there’s the magic of electrification, which turns the V-6 Ferrari into an 819-hp superhero that even a plug-in skeptic might find hard to lob kryptonite at. Recall that the 296GTB coupe is the quickest rear-drive car C/D has ever tested, sprinting into record books with a 2.4-second blast to 60 mph and an insane 9.7-second quarter-mile at 150 mph. Beyond objective speed, Ferrari insists it can measure driving “fun” via five discrete factors, including steering response, engine sound, and brake feel. Using those metrics as goalposts, Ferrari designed the 296 to objectively be its most fun-to-drive model. After the top’s 14.0-second opening ceremony near Bear Mountain, the six-cylinder fanfare begins, set to the symmetrical firing order of a naturally aspirated Ferrari V-12. Easing through opening curves, we’ve got an unbroken connection between our noggins, a pair of whooshing 180,000-rpm turbos, and a patented “hot tube” exhaust resonator that channels the engine’s emotion into the cabin. Maintaining the coupe’s thrilling sound when the top is raised, including a wicked trebly register as the engine ascends to 8500 rpm, required redesigning the engine bay. Pro tip from a Ferrari technician: Lowering the rear glass and raising side windows further concentrates the delightfully layered sound.Flavio Manzoni and his design department took an entirely new company approach to chopping the GTB’s roof to deliver an appreciably better GTS convertible. The folding hardtop splits into two sections above the B-pillar that fold flush over the V-6, assuring proper thermal dissipation and a smooth roof appearance. The loss of the coupe’s engine-under-glass setup is the only trade-off, although the redesigned deck still makes room for a smaller tinted viewing window.An alluring tonneau cover design mimics the aerodynamic and cooling behavior of the coupe, including zero loss of downforce when the roof is lowered. The GTS can surge to a 205-mph top speed with roof up or down. The coupe’s bravura flying buttresses are still here but with sculptural extensions that smartly house the fuel filler and charging port for the lithium-ion battery. Cozied into a classic Kamm tail, inspired by the 1963 250LM, an active rear spoiler switches up the function of previous Ferrari aero tails. It rises to boost downforce rather than ease drag, adding 220 pounds of wind heft to the rear axle. Ferrari says the fancy-folding top adds 154 pounds to the 296GTB, that when equipped with lightweight Assetto Fiorano package weighed 3532 pounds on our scales. Ferrari also claims the GTS is 50 percent stiffer than the F8 Spider. Flying through colonnades of trees, the open roof amplifies every piney smell, streak of sun, and chirp from the Michelin Pilot Sport 4S tires. As for top-down turbulence, it’s not Dorothy-in-Kansas level, but there is buffeting as speeds climb toward triple digits. The cabin is a fantasy perch, from the instrument cluster’s starfighter-style structural supports to an expanded passenger display screen. Like the coupe, the GTS adopts the digital interface concept first seen in the SF90. The design is striking, but the infotainment system is a stubborn collection of haptic steering-wheel controls managed exclusively through the instrument cluster. On this model, optional carbon-fiber racing seats look like Picasso sculptures. Manually adjusting the backrests via a stiff crank and a fumbling rearward reach recalls an old VW. An analog high point is the lovely cloisonné key fob, enameled in Italian flag colors and a prancing cavallino, that snugs into a console holder. But the steering wheel’s haptic startup switch has all the drama of an ATM touchpad. With its efficient hot-vee twin-turbo layout, the V-6 makes 654 horsepower, threatening the 670-hp output of a Corvette Z06’s 5.5-liter V-8 that has nearly double the displacement. By itself, that might be enough. But consider the V-6 as 654 Trojan horses, with another 164 electric horses ready to spring a surprise attack. They’re housed in an axial-flux AC motor between the engine and the eight-speed dual-clutch transmission. A tag-team 819 horsepower sets a new record for specific output in a production convertible. A clutch allows decoupling in hybrid operation or all-electric driving for an EPA-estimated seven miles at speeds up to 83 mph. The electric motor fills any gaps with a peak 232 pound-feet of torque, and it’s also responsible for starting the V-6. Ferrari warns us that, though the 296 is a plug-in hybrid and not an electric vehicle, you can run out of electricity as well as premium unleaded. Leave the 296 in Hybrid mode for too long, and it may drain its battery low enough—especially if you’re sitting with power and accessories on—to resist a restart. The easy solution is to drive in Performance mode, one step below the maximum Qualify setting. Performance mode can fully recharge the small battery on the fly in 20 minutes or less. Speed the process by finding excuses to hammer the Herculean brakes to slurp up regenerative juice through the rear wheels. The brake-by-wire system is simply the best in the electrified game. You can stand on them like you’re coming down the Mulsanne, yet they work just as well in city traffic. And the electrically assisted steering brews up that signature Ferrari blend of lightness and clarity.The power feels, well, naturally unnatural. On Route 9W, a mini Highway 1 that clings to bluffs overlooking the Hudson River, the Ferrari blitzes a downhill chicane on the descent into West Point. Magnetorheological dampers ably suppresses pavement jitters, but the Bumpy Road setting still works best for compliance on virtually any public road. More on the Ferrari 296The Ferrari’s greatest trick is feeling serene at superhuman speeds, yet fully engaging for mortal pilots of any skill level. A pert wheelbase and epic rear-drive force might spell trouble, but the Ferrari never threatens to overwhelm its rear tires or pirouette under high-g lateral loads. Nor does it feel like it’s nannying or withholding max power. That’s a testament to a raft of F1-based chassis and powertrain tech. Driven hard, the GTS kept emitting strange little “whoops” in lower gears that we don’t recall hearing on another sports car: It’s the sound of wheelspin being stopped almost before it starts. Some may think that a six-cylinder model must be some “son of” Ferrari, akin to the Dino GT named for Enzo’s tragic scion. As it turned out, the 296 is more like the little brother who finally beats big brother in a game of one-on-one. Once that happens, baby bro will never lose again. Even in this Italian realm, the writing on the industry wall needs no translation. Like turbocharging before it, if your sports car isn’t electrified—in whatever form—in the next five years, it won’t stand a chance against the high-energy squirts. SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Ferrari 296GTS Vehicle Type: mid-engine, mid-motor, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door convertible
PRICE
Base: $371,139
POWERTRAIN
twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve 3.0-liter V-6, 654 hp, 546 lb-ft + AC motor, 164 hp, 232 lb-ft (combined output: 819 hp, 546 lb-ft; 4.9-kWh lithium-ion battery pack [C/D est])Transmission: 8-speed dual-clutch automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 102.4 inLength: 179.7 inWidth: 77.1 inHeight: 46.9 inCurb Weight (C/D est): 3700 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 2.5 sec100 mph: 4.8 sec1/4-Mile: 9.8 secTop Speed: 205 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 18/15/21 mpgCombined Gasoline + Electricity: 47 MPGeEV Range: 7 mi More

From the December 1993 issue of Car and Driver.On first touch, this looked like one of those fantasies that might have been better left unfulfilled. You know how some experiences just don’t play as well in real time as they did in your imagination? Like winning the lottery or taking Michelle Pfeiffer to dinner, driving as legendary a car as a Daytona Spyder would almost have to be a letdown, considering the wildly inflated expectations going in. We had rounded up a 1973 365GTS/4 to serve as a historic touchstone in exam­ining Ferrari’s new 348 Spider, and for the first mile we weren’t sure it would live up to its reputation. The steering managed to be both loose and heavy, the car nosed into bends lazily on its tall, bagel-shaped tires, the shifter gating was vague, and the six Weber carburetors had the V-12 stumbling and staggering below 3000 rpm. HIGHS: The new 348 Spider has sex appeal, a clever top, great steering and brakes.”Well, it’s a period piece,” we thought charitably. But gradually something happened as we herded the bellowing beast over Ange­les Crest Highway high above L.A. The thing came alive. And we took root in it. Car and driver came to an understanding, like a hand and a new fielder’s glove. Barely thinking about it, we took to working just the bottom half of the sharply angled steering wheel, passing the rim from hand to hand. We learned to hold the throttle just so for starting and to coax the revs past three grand before rolling open all those Weber butterflies. We eventually had a mental map of the wide-gated shift pattern. And our corner-entry rhythm attuned itself to the Daytona’s deliberate, dead-predictable manners.Like every Ferrari we’ve driven, the Daytona came into its own as it went faster. As speed and cornering intensity increased, the car worked better and felt sweeter—the steering more alive, the chassis more nimble, the revs picking up cleanly. You could interpret this to mean a Ferrari is tuned for rapid running. But maybe the car just needs to know you’re serious before it decides to cooperate. What does this have to do with the 1994 348 Spider? Everything. Because Ferrari tradition both graces and burdens every product of the little Maranello factory. While a 1990 Ferrari must respect mod­ern standards of comfort, build quality, and driving ease and meet mandates for crashworthiness and emissions, it also must remain true to a flavor and a feel estab­lished in simpler days. Luca Cordero di Montezemolo, new chairman and chief executive officer of Ferrari SpA, put the dilemma succinctly: “I want Ferraris to be cars of the future, but with a long tradition.” Results have been mixed. The prevailing criticism—voiced as recently as our March 1993 test of a 348tb coupe—tend to be that the per­formance does not live up to the promise of the stratospheric price and that such bothersome eccentricities as stiff shift-lever movement through the traditional chromed gate are simply not worth the trouble. Through a combination, perhaps, of mechanical upgrades and closer-tolerance assembly, our fly-yellow 348 Spider was a much nicer, less idiosyncratic machine than the black 348tb we drove in March. Lighter to the touch yet more stable at sweaty-palm speeds, the Spider asked us to put up with much less. So we could better enjoy what it had to offer.Which includes, now, open-air motor­ing. The new convertible top is cleverly engineered, it looks good up or down, and it operates with a simple one-latch-and­-one-lever process that can be managed from the driver’s seat if you contort a bit. Wind buffeting in the open cockpit is quite tolerable. With the top up, wind noise does not seriously compete with that symphonic engine note until past 100 mph. At any speed approaching the car’s maximum of 154, wind roar does become deafening. For that reason, as well as struc­tural-rigidity concerns, we prefer solid-­roof bodies for really fast cars. (We’re hoping the Viper GTS sees production.) Yet for a choptop revision to an existing coupe design, the new 348 Spider is uncommonly successful. There is just the merest whiff of body flex over really bad bumps in fast turns, and this impressive rigidity comes with no weight penalty we can detect. Our Spider weighed 3290 pounds, compared with the 348tb’s 3292. LOWS: It’s no quicker than cars costing a third as much, shifter is a bit stiff.Various spec changes, introduced on 1993’s 348 Serie Speciale right after our test of the 348tb, are carried over to the Spi­der. Less restrictive muffling raises engine output from 300 hp at 7000 rpm to 310 at 7200, and slightly shorter overall gearing gives the engine a little more leverage (the transfer-gear ratio between the longitudi­nal engine and the transverse gearbox is lowered from 1.09:1 to 1.22:1). The fat Pirelli P Zero tires are set nearly two inches farther apart in back, and this track increase, plus some fiddling of suspension settings, may explain our Spider’s improved stability. The car’s performance is plenty strong: 5.3 seconds to 60 mph, 13.8 to 100, 14.0 seconds at 101 mph in the quarter-mile. But you will be disappointed if you need it to outrun certain cars that cost vastly less than its $131,090—a Corvette ZR1 or a Viper, for instance. And there are some quirks. The shifter is stiff, and in our car the lever scraped on the gate, making one-­two and three-four shifts go chi-kee-chank. But a familiar hand can live with it, and the action improves as miles accumulate. The motorized passive belts are also a nuisance, but an airbag would probably ruin the trademark three-spoke steering wheel with prancing-horse horn button. (Bags are promised for the American-market 456GT next year, and we’re curious to see how they’ll be done.) Beyond that, the 348 Spider needs no special allowances. The seats are firmly supportive and comfy enough, interior trimwork is clean and straight, and clam­bering in and out of the low, wide cockpit is not unduly challenging. There is even remarkably good outward visibility for a mid-engine design (though the inside mir­ror can block the driver’s view in a fast right-hander). By all these mundane mea­sures of refinement, the 348 scores well and represents vast improvement on its 308/328 forebears. More to the point, the car is loads of fun to drive. Stiff, low, and lively, the Spi­der feels crisp and sharply maneuverable on back roads yet quite compliant on the freeway and around town. Steering is mar­velously tight and positive. Routine course corrections are more a matter of pressure at the leather-covered rim than actual wheel movement. In the mountains, the car pivots around its centralized, mid-engine mass and snaps in and out of turns adroitly. Gentle, protective understeer is the prevailing cornering attitude, and though you can feel terminal oversteer out there waiting, you really need to be on a racetrack to explore that transition. The limit is high enough and the dividing line thin enough to make tail-swinging antics fool­hardy on public roads. Wherever you drive it, you have a friend in the 348’s spectacular brakes. They’re strong, firm at the pedal, and easily modulated. More Ferrari Reviews From the ArchiveThat 3405cc V-8 shrieking away behind your shoulder delivers smoothly building power and clean response, with­out a spit or stutter. And it happily uses all of the available 7500 rpm. At an indi­cated—if optimistic—60 mph, you can pick your revs and racket, depending on the output you want: 2900 rpm in fifth, 3800 in fourth, 5050 in third, or 7400 in second. Engine noise is a key part of the Ferrari presence, and even though the 348 lacks the harrowing banshee wail of the Daytona’s pipes, its busy, mechanized intensity makes the point. The eye-frying droptop 348 attracts attention like a high-rise fire. And that’s just one trait it shares with the twenty-year­-old Daytona. As different as the Spider and Spyder are—cylinder count, engine loca­tion, exhaust howl, weight and balance, tire and suspension technology, comput­erization, ergonomics, and so on—there is a thread of heredity running through them. The Pininfarina curves. The high-strung engine sounds. The steering that livens with speed. The gate-guided shifters that reward a practiced touch. VERDICT: A fine exotic that strikes that precarious balance between refinement and character.In the end, both of “our Ferraris”—the new Spider and the veteran Spyder­—enchanted us. Driving them did not fail to live up to the billing, despite our tall expec­tations. Would a lottery jackpot and sup­per with Ms. Pfeiffer do as well? Maybe. But “my check” and “my treat” still won’t resonate the way “my Ferrari” does.Daytona Spyder the Archetypal Ferrari Street RacerThe new 348 Spider represents the first two-seat Ferrari convertible since the 365GTS/4 Daytona Spyder of the early Seventies (the Mondial Cabriolet is a two­-plus-two). We wanted a Daytona along for perspective when we drove the new car, and Cris Vandagriff at Ferrari of Beverly Hills graciously arranged this beautiful, original, 25,000-mile 1973 customer car for us. The last of the front-engined Ferrari sports cars, the big, noisy, V-12-pow­ered Daytona holds a special place in the Ferrari pantheon. Nowhere is the Ferrari heritage—a torch the new car must carry—so vividly embodied.The Daytona’s journey to the U.S. was a difficult one. The federal government ruled that it wasn’t clean enough at the tailpipes. Its covered headlamps also ran afoul of U.S. laws and almost forced the Italian carbuilder to install shockingly ugly quad headlamps on the Daytona’s sleek snout.But by 1971, Ferrari had cooked up a U.S.-specification Daytona that was soothing to the eyes (its headlamps were covered) and acceptable to government pipe-sniffers (a sacrifice of about 10 hp). The detuning hardly muzzled the 4.4-liter V-12. Car and Driver tested a well-restored Daytona couple in April 1984 and found it could sprint through the quarter-mile in 13.4 seconds at 108 mph. The GTB/4 originally stickered at $19,500 with the Spyder selling at a $6000 premium.The Daytona competed in touring-car races with fair success, but one of its more famous exploits came at the hands of C/D’s ever-game Brock Yates. In 1971, teamed with Dan Gurney, Brock whipped a Daytona coupe across these United States—from Manhattan’s Red Ball garage to the Portofino Inn in Redondo Beach, California—in 35 hours and 54 minutes to win the second Cannonball Baker Sea-to-Shining-Sea Memorial Trophy Dash. Over 2876 miles, they averaged 80 miles per hour, got 12.2 miles per gallon, and showed vastly greater style per mile than any other competitor.Is It ‘Spyder’ or ‘Spider’?We wondered why Ferrari changed the spelling of “Spyder” to “Spider” for the new 348 roadster, but even people connected with the Italian automaker couldn’t provide an answer.In the process, someone here asked, “Why would anyone call a car a spider anyway?” Good question.In the 1700s, the phrase “spider phaeton” described a lightweight, horsedrawn passenger carriage with a folding fabric top to keep out the elements. The wheels were spindly, and in some other upscale, enclosed models the rear wheels arched almost to the carriage’s roofline. this presumably reminded passersby of spiders, whose legs often rise high above the insect’s body.So what’s that got to do with a two-seat roadster? Who knows? Expanding the use of the term “spider” to cars is said to have begun in the Thirties in Italy, where rough two-seat competition racers were called spiders. So the word must be English, since the Italian word for spider isn’t spider—it’s ragno. Italian automakers Cisitalia and Siata used the term to describe some of their cars, and in 1953 Siata switched to the “Spyder” spelling for unannounced reasons. This is confusing because the Italian language traditionally does not use the letter “y.” Maybe it just looks less repellent with a “y.”Meanwhile, Porsche in 1954 was about to export a zoomy race car which was stuck with this mouthful designation: “Type 550/1500RS.” American importer Max Hoffman politely suggested instead the simple name of “Spyder.”And that’s where the word comes from. We think. Maybe. SpecificationsSpecifications
1993 Ferrari 348 SpiderVehicle Type: mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $131,090/$131,090
ENGINEDOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 208 in3, 3405 cm3Power: 310 hp @ 7200 rpmTorque: 229 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/control armsBrakes, F/R: 11.8-in vented disc/12.0-in vented discTires: Pirelli P ZeroF: 215/50ZR-17R: 255/45ZR-17
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 96.5 inLength: 166.5 inWidth: 74.6 inHeight: 46.1 inPassenger Volume: 47 ft3Trunk Volume: 7 ft3Curb Weight: 3290 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 5.3 sec100 mph: 13.8 sec1/4-Mile: 14.0 sec @ 101 mph130 mph: 27.2 sec140 mph: 36.1 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 7.6 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 7.1 secTop Speed (redline ltd): 154 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 169 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.91 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 17 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 13/18 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

As Stanford University’s Rob Kapilow explains, British art critic Richard Wollheim in 1965 “coined the term ‘minimal art’ to describe art that reduced its materials and forms to fundamentals.” The phrase became the catchall “minimalism,” which became—and remains—a vital ethos of Western design and culture. You can hear it in composer John Cage’s “4:33,” which puts a pianist at a piano for four minutes and 33 seconds of silence. You can sit in it with Arne Jacobsen’s Egg Chair or anywhere at Ikea. You can sleep and shower in it, in modern hotel rooms that make Sphinxian riddles of turning off the lights and turning on the water. And you can drive it if you buy a Range Rover. Evoque’s Exterior DesignThe British SUV maker prefers the term “reductive” design to minimalism. The 2024 Range Rover Evoque shows the result is the same no matter the term—better execution than in that boutique hotel, albeit just as stingy with switches and buttons.Applied to the Evoque’s exterior, reductive is a warning to expect changes that need a jeweler’s loupe to identify. The grille swaps the previous hexagonal mesh for artful dashed lines, the Evoque now expressing the family genes as passed down by the paternoster Range Rover. On either side of the grille, slimmer adaptive headlights match the units used on the Velar. Each lamp houses four small lighting units, each unit housing 67 LEDs that can alter their light pattern so as not to blind drivers ahead. Arroios Grey, Corinthian Bronze, and Tribeca Blue join the exterior paint menu, Corinthian Bronze also available as a contrasting roof color alongside Narvik Black. Evoque’s Minimalist InteriorReductive design makes its real stand inside. In our review of the baby Range Rover from 2022, we wrote, “The Evoque’s interior mirrors the clean design of its exterior, which is unfortunate because that means most of the knobs and buttons were banished in favor of touchscreens and capacitive switches.” For 2024, touchscreen is now singular, the former infotainment and HVAC displays absorbed into an 11.4-inch unit higher up on the instrument panel. And the buttons and knobs? Mortal enemies of the reductive, erased as thoroughly as Leia’s Alderaan.Now that a single screen needs to lift the weight of two, there are two speed-dial menus along the sides of the 11.4-inch display and a quick menu for climate controls at the bottom. As before, Range Rover says approximately 80 percent of functions are within two taps of the home screen, but this really is a new smartphone interface: not exactly intuitive, easy enough to find what you want after pecking and swiping a bit, hiding heaps of shortcuts and functionality you’ll never unlock unless you read the owner’s manual. And, let’s be honest, you probably won’t.Even phones have buttons for volume, though. In the Evoque, the volume slider is on the right-side-screen menu farthest from the driver, a suboptimal controller in a suboptimal location. Of course, the driver is meant to use the capacitive switches on the new steering wheel. At least the new wheel is a pretty piece of work—three muscular, dished spokes replacing the utilitarian button pods and twin spars on the old tiller.Eliminating the bottom screen on the center console liberates space for a standard wireless phone charger and cubby. Below that, where once sat Range Rover’s version of a Hurst pistol-grip shifter on a large metallic plinth, designers downsized the gear selector to snug into a palm and nestled it into the gently ramped trim. Behind it, two larger, equally sized cupholders replace the asymmetric holders. Muted color palettes are an ancillary trend riding minimalism’s coattails of late—prosaic, inoffensive hues turning homes into greige boxes and children’s playsets into earth-tone Bauhaus mazes. The Evoque is attuned to the zeitgeist. Trim pieces come either in Shadow Gray Ash Veneer, dark anodized aluminum, or light anodized aluminum. The brightest available hue in the cabin is a light gray called Cloud, and even that is contrasted with Ebony.Driving the EvoqueThe reductive scythe took a swipe at the engine and trim choices too. Our market gets only the P250 powertrain, a turbocharged 2.0-liter Ingenium four-cylinder making 246 horsepower and mating to a nine-speed automatic. The pruned lineup counts only the S and Dynamic SE, as the HST and R-Dynamic variants have been dismissed, and with their departure goes the available 296-hp engine. Carryover front struts and a multilink rear axle connect the body to the wheels; front-biased all-wheel drive comes standard.Since the mechanicals haven’t changed, neither have our feelings about driving the Evoque: The enthusiasm here is more for fashion than handling. The turbo four has enough heart to survive the test of French highway on-ramps, which are so inexplicably short they require equal amounts of guts and timing to merge without catastrophe. When unstressed, the transmission executes shifts smooth enough to make gelato jealous. Even on the 20-inch wheels our sample Evoque wore, calm composure defines the on-road ride. Prodding the gearbox into sudden acceleration, however, means waiting for it to downshift from the tall fuel-economy-focused ratios and then for the turbo to hit the necessary rpm. Attempts at spirited driving, down the French secondary roads along our drive route, prove the automaker’s urban-focused mission for the Evoque. The vehicle’s propensity to understeer, and its accurate, indifferent steering were about what you’d expect for a two-ton urban crossover. The mushy, long-travel brake pedal, however, bled our confidence.The paradox of that squishy brake-pedal response is that it’s perfect for off-roading, and dirt work is the Evoque’s other defining feature after its fashion-runway styling. If challenged by competitors such as the Volvo XC40 or BMW X1 to race to the top of a snaking mountain pass, the Evoque would do best ignoring the road and driving straight up the hill.Related StoriesFrankly, that would be an instructive race, indicative of the Evoque’s refusal to engage in traditional competition with its segment rivals. With its unmistakable looks; its new interior that might not be out of place in the Tate Modern; the fact that its MSRP, starting at about $10,000 higher than rivals, buys less interior and cargo space; its subpar fuel economy; and its wildly overachieving off-road capabilities, the Evoque stands alone. Which, for a confirmed minimalist, surely would be its preference—it’s less crowded that way.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Land Rover Range Rover EvoqueVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICEBase: Core S, $51,075; Dynamic SE, $56,075
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1997 cm3Power: 246 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque: 269 lb-ft @ 1300 rpm
TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 105.6 inLength: 172.1 inWidth: 75.0 inHeight: 64.9 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 51/42 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 51/22 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4350 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 7.1 sec1/4-Mile: 15.5 secTop Speed: 143 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 22/20/27 mpg More

From the November 2023 issue of Car and Driver.Medium-rare steak. Gooey-soft chocolate chip cookies. There are benefits to taking things off the heat before they’ve fully cooked. However, some items should absolutely not come out any earlier than they need to. This includes chicken, cake, and the 2023 Mercedes-AMG C43.HIGHS: Looks the part, plenty agile, loaded with standard equipment.Returning from its hiatus, the C43 now inhabits the skin of the latest-generation C-class. The shrunken-down S-class looks suit it, and the cabin is more what you would expect from a Mercedes that’s no longer the entry-level model. The center tunnel sits a little high, but there’s plenty of usable storage space, and the interior rarely feels cramped. The materials above the center console are quite nice, although there’s plenty of hard plastic below that waterline.The old C43’s six-cylinder is gone, and in its place is a turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four that produces 402 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque. With all-wheel drive and a nine-speed automatic transmission, the new C43 is quick, ripping to 60 mph in just 3.9 seconds and passing the quarter-mile mark in 12.5 seconds at 111 mph. For the first time on a production car, an electric motor is integrated into the turbocharger, which should spool it up more quickly, resulting in better response. Still, it didn’t eliminate lag as much as we hoped (note the 5.0-second 5-to-60-mph time). A high-voltage hybrid system and powerful electric motor would do wonders, but you’d need a C63 for that. LOWS: Clumsy transmission programming, irritating stop-start, isn’t the Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing.Whereas the C43’s engine is mostly peachy, its transmission is more of a crab apple. The nine-speed kicks like a mule on random downshifts, regardless of drive mode, and other times, it will take upward of a second to call up a gear after a hefty press of the go pedal. It holds revs for weird amounts of time in Comfort and Sport, as if your passing maneuver signaled to the computer that it’s time to lap Watkins Glen. We wonder whether the engineers let ChatGPT do the final tune.The stop-start system is also frustrating. During deceleration, it kills the engine at around 5 mph, and there’s an awkwardly long pause before it kicks back in. That’s fine at stop signs, but in stop-and-go traffic, it makes for even more uncomfortable bucking and hesitations between inputs and expected outputs, and that’s after pressing through the brake pedal’s dead zone.The outgoing C43’s suspension had all the compliance of an I-beam, but things are better in 2023. Standard adaptive dampers are still a bit too stiff in Comfort, but the C43 at least attempts to be comfortable now, even with our test car’s optional 20-inch wheels and Michelin Pilot Sport 4S summer tires (245/35 front, 265/30 rear). The ride is appropriately firm in Sport and beyond, keeping things nice and orderly in corners. Rear-axle steering, up to 2.5 degrees, is standard, boosting agility in both chill and decidedly not-chill circumstances. The C43 is incapable of meeting a corner it can’t bend to its will. VERDICT: Throw it back on the heat for a bit.At $61,050 to start and $68,820 as tested, the C43’s price isn’t the hardest pill to swallow, and even the base model comes with loads of standard equipment, including keyless entry, parking sensors, a surround-view camera system, and blind-spot monitoring. However, the C43 is no Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing, which bests the Merc not only in the quarter-mile and around the skidpad but, most important, in tactility when tearing down a favorite road. Plus, the Caddy’s V-6 sounds better, is better suited to daily driving, and has an optional manual transmission that doesn’t even exist in the Mercedes-verse. All you have to sacrifice is two driven wheels and a stylish interior. Granted, the new C43 makes gains in some areas, but this powertrain isn’t quite ready to be served.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Mercedes-AMG C43Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $61,050/$68,820Options: AMG Carbon Fiber Package $1750; 20-inch AMG split 10-spoke wheels w/ black accents, $1650; black leather with red stitching, $1620; AMG Night Package, $750; navigation, $650; AMG Night Package II, $550; AMG Real Performance Sound, $550; AMG Track Pace, $250.
ENGINE
Turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, and direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 121 in3, 1991 cm3Power: 402 hp @ 6750 rpmTorque: 369 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 14.2-in vented disc/12.6-in vented discTires: Michelin Pilot Sport 4SF: 245/35ZR-20 (95Y) MO1 Extra LoadR: 265/30ZR-20 (94Y) MO1 Extra Load
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 112.8 inLength: 188.6 inWidth: 74.4 inHeight: 57.1 inTrunk Volume: 8.8 ft3Curb Weight: 4090 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 3.9 sec100 mph: 9.8 sec1/4-Mile: 12.5 sec @ 111 mph130 mph: 17.8 sec150 mph: 26.4 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.0 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.9 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.6 secTop Speed (mfr’s claim): 165 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 149 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 306 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.92 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 33 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 570 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 22/19/26 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDSenior EditorCars are Andrew Krok’s jam, along with boysenberry. After graduating with a degree in English from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 2009, Andrew cut his teeth writing freelance magazine features, and now he has a decade of full-time review experience under his belt. A Chicagoan by birth, he has been a Detroit resident since 2015. Maybe one day he’ll do something about that half-finished engineering degree. More

From the September 1992 issue of Car and Driver.You’re looking at another stout German hitting our shores and making the case for full­-time four-wheel-drive machines. The latest Audi 90 marks the fourth generation of baby Audis. Baby, maybe, but not infan­tile. Over the years they’ve become ever more accomplished. Yet like many adults, even the lighter front-drive versions have put on a few pounds. In this all-wheel-drive 90CS Quattro Sport, it’s a few hundred pounds over last year’s 90 Quattro. So it is a ques­tion of stoutness: If a little goes a long way, how much does it take before the added load cuts down speed and fuel economy? And if you live in a fair-weather climate, is it worth lugging around a four-wheeled, full-time foul-weather kit to handle a few rainy, snowy, or icy days? HIGHS: Quality, stability, better looks, bigger trunk.On the other hand, if you live upstate in Alaska or high in the rainy Pacific North­west, boy, has Audi got a baby buggy for you! Don’t buy the hefty and pricey Quattro­ drive layout purely because you feel you must have more than two-wheel drive to put the power to the ground. The 90’s 172-hp 2.0-liter V-6 delivers less than an over­dose of performance, so traction on dry pavement poses little problem. Audi sends us three 90 models—a base S, a fancier CS, and the CS in Quattro trim—each with the V-6 developed for the bigger 100 sedan (C/D, December 1991). Although this engine is a fresh design, it lacks the technical tweaks that make you feel the difference between simply traveling well or truly thrilling to the journey. Audi’s chunky V-6 wears an electronic engine-­control system and port fuel injection but keeps a lid on the combustion process due to the single-overhead-cam layout that limits each cylinder bank to two valves per cylinder. That’s where it falls behind in today’s power parade. Audi itself pinpoints the 90’s prime competitors: Japan’s Acura Vigor, Infiniti J30, and Lexus ES300, plus Germany’s own BMW 325i and Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.6. The Quattro offers features these oth­ers don’t, but its power-to-weight ratio works against it. Compared with, say, BMW’s 325i—the very definition of a pocket-rocket sedan—the Audi lags. It produces 172 horsepower from 2.8 liters, whereas the BMW’s 24-valve six-cylinder whips up 189 horsepower from only 2.5 liters. And at 3404 pounds, the stolid Audi outweighs the BMW by 366 pounds. To be fair, the Audi, despite a wheel­base about four inches shorter, measures about six inches longer overall than the BMW. The 90’s wheelbase has actually been increased 2.3 inches in comparison with the previous 80’s. But wait—the Quattro’s wheelbase is six-tenths of an inch shorter than the regular 90’s because the four-wheel-drive model bears a differ­ent five-speed gearbox (no automatic available), plus a new independent rear suspension to cope with the power fed through the new rear half-shafts. The added hardware makes the Quattro weigh 200 pounds more than the front-drive version of the 90CS. The Audi’s slim cabin offers good comfort for four occupants and can carry five. But whoever gets wedged in the middle of the rear seat will feel as if he/she has been taken to the cleaners to have a few wrinkles pressed in. The Japanese competitors targeted by Audi offer slightly roomier accommoda­tions, yet, like the small BMW, they don’t provide four-wheel drive. And unlike the German entries, they generate less feed­back for the driver, especially under the duress of hard driving. In answer to the duress Audi faces in the market, Richard Mugg, vice president in charge of the company in America, says it will deliver “German engineering value at Japanese price points.” Mugg contends that the “90 offers the luxury of the Lexus ES300 and the sports flair of the BMW 325i, but is comparably priced with the Acura Vigor.” He adds: “Our prices will match those of our Japanese competitors and they will beat BMW and Mercedes.” The strategy is meeting with some success. Audi’s 1992 sales in the first five months are up more than 18 percent over the same period last year. LOWS: Heftiness, cost, and a lack of zip for this market segment.As long as we’re talking numbers, the revised 90 gains 23 percent in torsional rigidity (notable in a car structurally “opened up” for new folding rear seats with no bulkhead to back them up). A stretched deck helps provide 37 percent more trunk space in front-drive 90s, and 73 percent more room in the boot of the revised Quattro (though in comparison it still gives up some luggage space to its drive mechanism beneath).One thing you won’t find among the numbers is a two-door 90. Maybe the pre­vious version looked too much like a Ford Escort at three times the price. However, lots of people seem to like the new model’s taut look, beefcake stance, and striking wheels. The Quattro’s 205/60VR-15 performance tires replace the regular CS’s 195/65HR-15 all-weather tires (which are a “reverse” option on the Quattro for anybody who really needs them). Audi mounts the Quattro’s fatter tires on seven-inch aluminum rims instead of six-inchers. Fortunately, their simple spokes are easy to clean, because Audi’s four-wheel discs still puff out scads of clinging brake dust. Every car in this category showcases solid fit and finish. If there’s anything that’s too solid about the 90CS Quattro Sport, it’s the sport in its slightly lowered suspension. It jounces over sharp bumps. Yet the firm shocks, springs, and bushings don’t jell well enough with the big-boy tires to put the baby Audi quite on equal terms with the handling provided by more mature designs. The Quattro’s wheels pro­vide a wider track but also increase the 90’s tendency to follow truck ruts and the like. Although the overall stability of the Audi plays well, our track testing shows, for example, that it only matches the BMW 325i’s cornering grip at 0.80 g and leans harder on its front tires. And though both cars are equipped with ABS, Audi’s brakes take longer to stop and, as their load suggests, fade faster from higher speeds. This Audi has a smoothed nose copied from its big brothers, headlight washers, and aero headlights (among the better Audi lights in memory, others often falling, shall we say, short in the dark). The grille’s “quattro” badge reflects the only model message. There are also new front fender flares and a rear winglet. Inside, leather that should be grippier wraps a fine four-spoke wheel. Its hub houses an airbag, and beyond it are large tachometer and speedometer dials and smaller secondary gauges. The slim cabin leaves no place for more gauges except disconcertingly low on the console. A cli­mate-control system is sandwiched between those dials and an ill-marked but decent-sounding AM/FM/cassette stereo. A graphic row of controls above it switches fog lights, rear defroster, hazard flashers, and heated seats on or off. The 90’s headliner hangs low to clear the power sunroof, the pedals are spaced close, and the huge headrests—despite donut-hole centers—block the view to the rear. The narrow interior has a cozy immediacy, but the seats offer less imme­diacy than we’d like. They’re flatter, slicker, less grippy than needed in a car that grips the road more impressively. More Audi Reviews from the ArchiveWhen it comes to breaking that grip just for fun, the all-wheel-drive Audi falls behind the rear-drive BMW. The Quattro eats up 8.2 seconds going from a standstill to 60 mph; the 325i eats it alive in 6.9 seconds. In short, the Audi weighs hundreds of pounds more, sells for thousands of dollars more, and offers less power to boot (it around). The lower weight of Audi’s “lesser” front-drive 90CS promises more performance than the Quattro and higher fuel economy than the 20 mpg we aver­aged. So the regular CS won’t fall quite as far behind BMW’s wolverine in the days, weeks, and months between those pesky thunderstorms and snowfalls where the Quattro thrives. VERDICT: Welcome four-wheel-drive security, but with cost and weight penalties.All of which make us appreciate Audi’s bigger, sweeter 100CS all the more. It’s much roomier, weighs a few pounds less than the baby Quattro, feels much longer-legged despite having the same engine, covers an extra hundred miles or more on bigger tankfuls, and costs little more. That’s stout. SpecificationsSpecifications
1992 Audi 90CS Quattro SportVehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $32,679/$33,250 (est.)Options: all-weather package (headlamp washers and heated seats, washer nozzles, and door locks); ski sack
ENGINESOHC V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 169 in3, 2771 cm3Power: 172 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque: 184 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/control armsBrakes, F/R: 10.9-in vented disc/9.6-in discTires: Dunlop SP Sport D8 m2205/60VR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 102.2 inLength: 180.3 inWidth: 66.7 inHeight: 54.7 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 46/36 ft3Trunk Volume: 14 ft3Curb Weight: 3404 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.2 sec1/4-Mile: 16.4 sec @ 85 mph100 mph: 24.2 sec120 mph: 43.3 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.8 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 10.7 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 10.0 secTop Speed: 122 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 185 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.80 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 17/22 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

The 2024 Porsche Cayenne Turbo E-Hybrid is the hippopotamus of high-performance mid-size luxury SUVs. It’s big and heavy, incredibly powerful, and shockingly quick.As its name implies, the Cayenne’s Turbo trim doesn’t rely solely on a twin-turbocharged 4.0-liter V-8 engine for motivation. Rather it takes a page from the outgoing Cayenne Turbo S E-Hybrid, stuffing an electric motor in between its bi-turbo bent-eight and eight-speed automatic transmission. For now, it’s the most potent Cayenne hybrid, although we’d wager that Porsche will revive the Turbo S nameplate and pin it to an even more extreme version sometime soon. Punchy PowertrainThe specific badging Porsche affixes to its top Cayenne E-Hybrid model matters less than the output its powertrain produces, and the peak 729 horsepower the Turbo E-Hybrid cranks out betters last year’s Turbo S E-Hybrid by 59 horses. Tweaks to the V-8 engine add 50 ponies to its stable for a total of 591 horsepower, and a more powerful electric motor pumps out 174 horses—40 more than the old Turbo S E-Hybrid’s. Blame the gas engine’s 6000-rpm power peak for the 36 horses that get lost totaling up the Turbo E-Hybrid’s combined power figure.The electric motor does a reasonable job pushing the hefty Turbo E-Hybrid off the line or through low-speed city traffic. With a peak of 339 pound-feet of torque, it even has enough oomph to get the plug-in Porsche up to 84 mph without the aid of the gas engine.Range and Drive ModesEstimated electric-only range from the lithium-ion battery pack (22.0 kilowatt-hours of usable capacity) should top 30 miles once the EPA gets around to rating it. But driving the Turbo E-Hybrid in its default E-Power (EV) mode is akin to putting a wild animal in captivity. To free the beast within, you need to turn the steering-wheel-mounted drive-mode switch to Hybrid, Sport, or Sport Plus (or, if you’re venturing off pavement, to Offroad).Hybrid is something like a safari park; the electric motor is still the primary motivator, but just a small prod of the accelerator brings the gas engine into the mix. Sport and Sport Plus, meanwhile, open the park gates and let the Turbo E-Hybrid embrace its savage nature. They keep the gas engine at the ready for instant access to the SUV’s prodigious power. Whereas E-Power and Hybrid modes leave the standard two-chamber air springs in their Normal mode, Sport and Sport Plus place the suspension in its firmer settings. Lapping Spain’s 2.6-mile Parcmotor Castellolí (Circuit Parcmotor) near Barcelona, Sport mode kept the air springs taut enough to limit excess body motions while retaining just enough compliance to maintain composure over the most undulating stretches of pavement. Turbo E-Hybrid PerformanceBoth the $148,550 Turbo E-Hybrid SUV and $153,050 fastback Coupe models should weigh about 5700 pounds once we get them on our scales. Unsurprisingly, these big Porsches were at their best when pointed straight ahead. Although the Spanish track’s two straightaways were too short to confirm the claimed top speed of 183 mph, they were plenty long enough to indulge the seemingly endless wave of power produced by the electric motor and eager-revving twin-turbo V-8.Porsche claims the Turbo E-Hybrid will pummel its way to 60 mph in 3.5 seconds. But we recorded a 3.2-second run to 60 in a similarly heavy but less powerful 2020 Cayenne Turbo S E-Hybrid, so we think the Turbo E-Hybrid has the potential to be even quicker. Despite its mass, the Turbo E-Hybrid tore through Parcmotor Castellolí’s 11 turns with fervor. Credit the optional 22-inch wheels wrapped in grippy summer rubber, which stood in for the standard 21-inch wheels and all-season tires. Porsche also offers 21-inch summers as a no-cost option.Plentiful grip, light and direct steering that weighed up predictably as we added input, and a clairvoyant ZF eight-speed automatic gearbox that held gears through corners all came together to push the Turbo E-Hybrid around each apex. Turning in with just a bit of extra speed revealed some understeer at the limit. Goading the accelerator just past the apex was enough to gently push the tail out before the torque-vectoring rear-end and all-wheel-drive system brought the rear axle back in line.Braking the Turbo E-HybridPorsche fits a set of 16.5-inch front and 14.4-inch rear rotors clamped down by 10-piston front and four-piston rear calipers to the Turbo E-Hybrid, and the combination was more than up to the task of slowing the big SUV during our spirited drive on the mountain roads near Parc Natural de la Muntanya de Montserrat (Montserrat Mountain Natural Park). The Turbo E-Hybrid we drove on the track wore optional carbon-ceramic brakes with even larger rotors measuring 17.3 inches up front and 16.1 inches out back. The $9080 brake option showed no signs of fade even after multiple sessions. On surface streets, however, the carbon-ceramic brakes’ grabby nature at lower speeds made it difficult to come to a stop smoothly, exacerbated by the uncouth handoff between regenerative and mechanical braking. The standard cast-iron stoppers suffered from no such clumsiness.Related StoriesWith either setup, the Cayenne E-Hybrid now includes an electric brake booster. Though the left pedal sacrifices some tactility as a result, it still remains appropriately firm and—when not equipped with the carbon-ceramic units—predictable in its application during day-to-day and at-the-limit braking.Like a hippo lazily wading in the water, the Cayenne Turbo E-Hybrid seems relatively docile when puttering about strictly on electricity. Provoke it with a boot of the accelerator or a turn of the drive-mode switch, however, and this beast transforms into a violent powerhouse capable of achieving tremendous speed. It’s incongruous that something as heavy as the Cayenne Turbo E-Hybrid is so speedy and powerful, but the dual nature of Porsche’s flagship plug-in-hybrid SUV may be the key to this high-performance model’s survival in the era of electrification.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Porsche Cayenne Turbo E-HybridVehicle Type: front-engine, front-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door hatchback or wagon
PRICE
Base: SUV, $148,550; Coupe, $153,050
POWERTRAIN
twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 32-valve 4.0-liter V-8, 591 hp, 590 lb-ft + AC motor, 174 hp, 339 lb-ft (combined output: 729 hp, 701 lb-ft; 22.0-kWh lithium-ion battery pack; 11.0-kW onboard charger)Transmission: 8-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 114.0 inLength: 194.1 inWidth: 78.1 inHeight: 65.5–66.3 inCargo Volume, Behind F/R: 48–55/15–22 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 5700 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.0 sec100 mph: 7.5 sec1/4-Mile: 11.2 secTop Speed: 183 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 19/18/20 mpgCombined Gasoline + Electricity: 50 MPGeEV Range: 35 miSenior EditorDespite their shared last name, Greg Fink is not related to Ed “Big Daddy” Roth’s infamous Rat Fink. Both Finks, however, are known for their love of cars, car culture, and—strangely—monogrammed one-piece bathing suits. Greg’s career in the media industry goes back more than a decade. His previous experience includes stints as an editor at publications such as U.S. News & World Report, The Huffington Post, Motor1.com, and MotorTrend. More