Reviews

From the February 1995 issue of Car and Driver.Question: What do a practical hatch­back and a discotheque have in common? Answer: Most Ameri­cans won’t go near them. Now, this riddle would not apply in Europe, where neither disco nor hatch­back became dirty words. Nor does it apply to stateside hipsters, who were never afraid to be seen pulsating to Patrick Hernandez or KC and the Sunshine Band, or driving a CRX, Golf, or GTV6. For those on the A-list, in fact, the hatchback seems to be enjoying a bit of a resurgence, with the recent success of the trendy Saab 900 and Acura Integra. Soon, even swanky heavyweight BMW will be joining the hatchback huddle with one of its own: the 318ti. HIGHS: Bug-in-a-rug cuteness, 3-series stoutness, handling, and quality, gaping cargo hold.If you’re falling off your Recaro over the news of a BMW hatchback, perhaps you suffer from long-term memory loss or you haven’t been to Europe, where more than 50,000 BMW 316i Compacts—Europe’s version of this car—are already on the roads. The Compact was introduced only last spring. Its success is due in large part to its price—which is about $2500 less than the next-cheapest Euro BMW, the 316i sedan. When the 318ti arrives here next spring, its base price should be $20,370, undercutting our previous bot­tom-feeder BMW, the 318i sedan, by a whopping $5070. This will be the first time a BMW has been available for 20 big ones since 1985. Its price is low, but there’s flesh on these bones. BMW’s 1.8-liter DOHC four­-cylinder and a five-speed are standard, as are dual airbags, anti-lock-equipped disc brakes, air conditioning, and power steering, mirrors, windows, and locks. For another $2400, BMW will offer either of two upgrade packages—the semi­-loaded “Active” (BMW says that it couldn’t come up with a better name), or the athletically inclined “Sports.” The Active package includes cruise control, larger alloy wheels and tires, remote key­less entry, leather seats and door inserts, a trip computer, and a power sunroof. The Sports package includes firmer shocks and springs (which lower ride height by 0.4 inch), the Active’s wheels and tires, fog lights, and leather that covers more aggres­sively bolstered sports seats. Other options can be added individually, such as an auto­matic transmission and a CD player. The initial investment in this car wasn’t cheap either. The new rear sheetmetal, which lops 8.8 inches off the length of the coupe, necessitated a new, more compact rear suspension based on previous 3-series’ semi-trailing arms. Instead of shar­ing the notchback coupe’s doors, with their frameless window design, BMW designed yet another set of doors for the hatch­back, with framed win­dows, mated to the four­-door’s front fenders. Inside, there’s a new dashboard that will appeal to a younger crowd, says BMW. The rear seat that cor­dons off the 11-cubic-foot trunk is split 50-50 and folds forward (but not flat) to increase cargo space.Changes like these don’t come cheaply. Vic Doolan, president of BMW North America, figured this version of the car cost the company in the neighborhood of $500 million.Car companies don’t employ magi­cians. To keep the sticker down, BMW pruned costs in other areas. The simpler rear suspension saves BMW a few deutsche marks, as does the glovebox, which is no longer lined with mouse fur. Its little self-charging flashlight has disappeared, too. The air conditioning now has manual controls, without separate settings for driver and passenger. The headlight and wiper switches on the dash­board are pull-type units, instead of the rotary and steering-column-mounted switches from the rest of the line. And, for the first time in a BMW, there’s a compact spare instead of a full-sized spare tire, which is removed from under the trunk. LOWS: Merely adequate underhood motivation.Doolan insists that, despite this scrimp­ing, a 318ti is still true to the “driving machine” profile that BMW ads often boast. Based on a drive through the Bavar­ian countryside in a 318ti Active, it’s clear that BMW met most of those goals.From the moment you size up its mirror-smooth paint, you can see that BMW hasn’t lowered its quality standards for its little base car. Open the door and there’s the familiar BMW business-like interior. The other 3-series cars would be lucky to share the new dash, which looks lighter and seems to reduce the console “wall” that separates the driver and passenger in the other 3-series cars. (It will remain exclusive to the hatchback.) Aside from two new cupholders in the console, nearly everything else—from the seats and their controls to the carpeting, from the door panels to the shifter and pedals—is car­ried over from the 3-series. The 3-series car with three doors drives just like the other 3-series cars, too. The engine-speed-sensitive power steering maintains the sensitivity and progres­sion of the more expensive models. At the rear, the 318ti’s new lightweight suspension (it saves about 18 pounds) is eager to oversteer, although with a bit more nervousness than the sedan and coupe. The hatchback is about 130 pounds lighter than the sedan and coupe, and it offers the same excellent ride/handling compromise of its pricier relatives. Those sloughed-off pounds mean the 318ti responds more eagerly to the brakes and throttle than the coupe and sedan. Despite having slightly smaller rear discs than the 318is coupe we tested in August 1992, the hatchback can stop three feet shorter from 70 mph, at 175 feet. (We were unable to test for cornering grip, but it should be at least as good as the 0.84 g of the coupe.) Sprints to 60 miles per hour take 7.8 seconds, nearly a second quicker than the 318is. That sounds faster than it feels. BMW’s 1.8-liter four as installed in the 318ti is even-tempered from idle to its 6300-rpm redline, and it looks substantial in the neatly tailored engine bay. But it must be flogged before the torque (129 pound-feet at 4500 rpm) becomes noticeable, and it offers far less excitement than the simi­larly sized four-cylinder in the similarly priced Acura Integra GS-R. That engine, with its wild lunges to its 8200-rpm redline, makes the 318ti’s four-cylinder seem merely adequate by sporty-car standards. If that’s a problem, a fix is not on the way. Doolan says the company has no plans to fit either of the two muscular inline sixes that it offers in the 3-series. More BMW 3-series Reviews From the ArchiveIn many ways, though, the 318ti makes sense just the way it is. Its price allows BMW a foot in the door of a market chock­full of nameplates like Integra, Golf, Probe, and Celica—a market good for at least two million sales a year, by BMW’s estimate. Furthermore, BMW already offers no fewer than seven iterations of the 3-series. If your motive is speed, and you can’t find satisfaction in the 3-series, you’d best switch brands, or clear the fog from your forehead. VERDICT: BMW cooks up a morsel for the masses.The 318ti has another purpose: increasing the company’s bottom line. BMW’s assembly plant in Munich can easily turn out an additional 6000 or 7000 cars for American buyers. For those who question the notion of a high-volume BMW, Doolan has a quick reply. He says the income from this little BMW makes possible less-profitable performance cars like the recently introduced 540i six­-speed. We’ve driven that sweetheart. Enough said. SpecificationsSpecifications
1995 BMW 318tiVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 3-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $20,370/$22,770Options: Active package (power sunroof, leather seats, cruise control, alloy wheels with 205/60HR-15 tires, keyless entry with alarm, and trip computer), $2400
ENGINEDOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 110 in3, 1796 cm3Power: 138 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque: 129 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 11.3-in vented disc/10.7-in discTires: Michelin Pilot HX205/60VR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 106.3 inLength: 165.7 inWidth: 66.9 inHeight: 54.8 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 48/36 ft3Cargo Volume: 11 ft3Curb Weight: 2778 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.8 sec1/4-Mile: 16.1 sec @ 84 mph100 mph: 24.9 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.8 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 11.5 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 11.4 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 116 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 175 ft  
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 22/32 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

It’s a testament to the success of the RX that Lexus was able to dominate the luxury-crossover space for so long without a legitimate three-row option. The cobbled-together previous-generation RX L didn’t really count, and neither did the body-on-frame GX and full-size LX, but the new 2024 Lexus TX finally aims straight for the heart of the three-row luxury crossover market—and largely hits its target.Built on the same platform as the Toyota Grand Highlander, the TX is significantly bigger than the latest RX, with a nearly four-inch longer wheelbase, almost three inches of extra width, and just over a 203-inch overall length. There’s no swoopy roofline to be found here, as the squared-off rear end makes it clear the TX is a people hauler that places function over form.Spacious InteriorSpace for passengers and cargo is important in this segment, and that’s what the TX delivers. No matter whether you choose the seven-passenger configuration with a second-row bench or the six-passenger setup with captain’s chairs, all three rows are habitable for adults. The only real flaw in the rearmost seat is the low bottom cushion, but that’s true of most of the TX’s rivals, and at least Lexus offers a recline function along with armrests and USB ports.The environs up front will be familiar to anyone who has driven the new RX, with a large 14.0-inch touchscreen dominating the dash and a muted design without many flashy touches. Many premium vehicles have interiors that look better than they feel, but the latest Lexus cabins are the opposite, with lots of plush touch points and high-quality materials but little visual flair or panache. We found the touchscreen to be relatively clear and easy to use, but certain functions—such as the drive mode selector—are buried deeper in settings menus than we’d like. The touch-sensitive control pads on the steering wheel that display their selections on the head-up display are also not the most intuitive.Wide Range of PowertrainsWhile many competitors offer merely a turbo four or a V-6 engine, Lexus is offering a wide range of powertrain choices in the TX, including two hybrids. The base TX350 has a 275-hp turbocharged 2.4-liter inline-four that provides merely adequate grunt for a big vehicle like this. We expect a 60-mph time in the 7.0-second neighborhood, slightly quicker with the optional all-wheel drive, but both of which are not standout times for this class. The turbo four is relatively well isolated from the cabin, but its occasionally grumbly tone makes us miss the smoothness of Lexus’s naturally aspirated 3.5-liter V-6—though it was also a bit sluggish and didn’t provide great fuel economy.Things get more interesting with the 366-hp TX500h, a hybrid that comes exclusively with the F Sport Performance treatment. Its combination of the turbo four with front and rear electric motors is nearly identical to the Hybrid Max system available in the Grand Highlander, and it’s similarly impressive here. We enjoyed hustling the TX500h through corners, as the powertrain is quick and responsive and the F Sport’s standard adaptive dampers tighten up the body motions, making the TX a surprisingly eager handler for its size. The tradeoff is ride quality, as the F Sport model is a bit too firm for this vehicle’s mission.The final setup, which isn’t likely to make up a big portion of TX sales, is the plug-in-hybrid TX550h+ model that uses a naturally aspirated 3.5-liter V-6 gasoline engine (just like the old days) and is the most powerful choice in the lineup. It makes 404 horsepower in total but is also significantly heavier than the TX350 and TX500h due to its battery pack that enables a claimed electric driving range of 33 miles. We were impressed with the smoothness of this powertrain, and the TX550h+ also rides well due to its softer suspension tune compared with the F Sport. It’s likely to be expensive (Lexus hasn’t yet released pricing for the plug-in; we’re estimating $77,500) but is a solid option for those who are able to charge at home and make full use of the electric range in daily commuting.Worth the Money?Price could be somewhat of a hangup for the standard models too. The TX, which starts at $55,050 and rises to over $76,000 for a loaded TX500h, is a few thousand dollars more expensive than luxury SUV rivals including the Acura MDX, Cadillac XT6, and Infiniti QX60. (It’s worth mentioning, too, that the Grand Highlander offers a similar package for thousands less, though admittedly without the prestigious badge.)Other Lexus SUVsBut the Lexus has plenty of tricks up its sleeve to increase its appeal. Compared with those familiar three-row models, the TX has a generous list of standard and optional equipment, lots of interior space, and myriad powertrain choices to sweeten the deal. We don’t think it will have any problem establishing itself as a major player in this important segment, just as the RX did decades ago.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Lexus TXVehicle Type: front-engine, front- and rear-motor, front- or all-wheel-drive, 6–7-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: TX350, $55,050; TX350 AWD, $56,650; TX500h, $69,350; TX550h+, $77,500 (C/D est)
POWERTRAINS
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.4-liter inline-4, 275 hp, 317 lb-ft; turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve 2.4-liter inline-4, 271 hp, 339 lb-ft + 2 AC motors, 85 and 101 hp, 215 and 124 lb-ft (combined output: 366 hp, 406 lb-ft; 1.4-kWh nickel-metal hydride battery pack); DOHC 24-valve 3.5-liter V-6, 259 hp, 247 lb-ft + 3 AC motors, 179 and 101 hp, 199 and 124 lb-ft (combined output: 404 hp; 18.1-kWh lithium-ion battery pack; 7.0-kW onboard charger)Transmissions: 8-speed automatic, 6-speed automatic/direct drive, continuously variable automatic/direct-drive

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 116.1 inLength: 203.2–203.5 inWidth: 78.4 inHeight: 70.1 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 60/52–54/39 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/M/R: 97/57/20 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4450–5400 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 5.5–7.2 sec1/4-Mile: 14.3–15.5 secTop Speed: 112 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (MFR’s EST, TX350/TX500h)
Combined/City/Highway: 23–27/20–27/26–28 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST, TX550h+)
Combined/City/Highway: 29/28/29 mpgCombined Gasoline + Electricity: 60 MPGeEV Range: 33 miSenior EditorDespite being raised on a steady diet of base-model Hondas and Toyotas—or perhaps because of it—Joey Capparella nonetheless cultivated an obsession for the automotive industry throughout his childhood in Nashville, Tennessee. He found a way to write about cars for the school newspaper during his college years at Rice University, which eventually led him to move to Ann Arbor, Michigan, for his first professional auto-writing gig at Automobile Magazine. He has been part of the Car and Driver team since 2016 and now lives in New York City.   More

From the August 1989 issue of Car and Driver.Neither the United States nor the Unit­ed Kingdom has on its books a statute stipulating that only the wealthy are per­mitted to own Jaguars. Despite this omis­sion, Jaguars and the rich seek each other out as surely as the sun seeks high noon, and we must admit that the combination earns high marks for both proper appearance and the generation of envy. Like strawberries and cream or Moët and beluga, Jaguars and the well-to-do just seem to go together. The 1989 Vanden Plas continues this tradition. Jaguar, for that matter, takes enormous pride in its devotion to tradi­tion, and this latest offering suggests that the Coventry cavaliers have not lost their touch. The big sedan remains elegant, eccentric, evolutionary, and every inch a Jaguar motorcar. Being every inch a Jaguar is, in many ways, like being every inch a Rolls-Royce, but a Jaguar differs from a Roller in its availability to persons with incomes of somewhat less magnitude than Califor­nia’s sales-tax revenue. At just under $50,000 for the Vanden Plas version and just under $45,000 for the garden-vari­ety XJ6, this Jaguar confers more perceived status per penny than just about any car on the market. The Jaguar Vanden Plas also dis­tinguishes itself as a car that all enthusi­asts can appreciate—even if they can’t af­ford it. For a car with a 113-inch wheelbase and an interior that smacks more of a London club than of modern ergonomic design, the Vanden Plas is a marvelous combination of ride quality and handling competence. Jaguar, in fact, has enjoyed a close, mutually re­warding relationship with those who drive its cars for as long as any luxury-car maker you can name. Jaguar’s big news for 1989 can be summed up in two words: better perfor­mance. The inline six-cylinder engine has been spiffed up by an increase in the compression ratio from 8.2 to 9.6:1. This move raises the horsepower of the fine twin-cam, 24-valve engine from 181 to 195 and increases the torque from 221 pound-feet to 232. This, coupled with a rear-axle-ratio change (the economy-­minded 2.88:1 is replaced by the zoomy 3.58:1 Jaguar uses in Europe), results in a 0-to-60-mph time of 8.8 seconds, down a full two seconds from the XJ6 we tested two years ago (C/D, June 1987).Ever aware that the rich, however per­formance-minded they may be, are not loath to pinch the odd penny, Jaguar en­gineers saw to it that the sedan’s perfor­mance improvement came without an onerous mpg penalty, though the car now requires super unleaded instead of regular unleaded. The new sedan gets a 17/23-mpg EPA city/highway fuel-econ­omy rating, while the old version got 17/24. Your actual mileage may vary, of course, but our observed mileage during the time we spent as Jaguar drivers was a respectable 18 mpg. These figures are the same whether you select the superluxurious Vanden Plas model­—which brings such niceties to the rear­-seat occupants as veneered picnic tables and reading lamps—at $48,000 or the “standard” XJ6, at $44,000.The engine retains the smoothness and silence of Jacques Cousteau film footage and moves the big cat at a grace­ful, sure-footed lope. The four-speed automatic transmission, complete with lockup torque converter, contributes rather than detracts from the comforting atmosphere of smoothness and precision created by the engine. After the passage of a mere nineteen years, Jaguar totally redesigned the XJ6 for the 1987 model year. The new car’s skin didn’t generate raves from automo­tive critics, and it is unchanged for 1989. We remain less than awed by the car’s profile, but it’s undeniably a Jaguar. At rest, the Vanden Plas manages to look both refined and important—a pleasing blend of personality traits. The exterior has benefited from a pair of minor but useful tweaks. The outside mirrors have undergone aerodynamic surgery, and a new “finisher plate” spans the space between the hood and the windshield. These two fine-tunings are designed to reduce the level of wind noise discernible to the car’s occupants, making the car even more hospitable when it’s moving at freeway speeds. Entering a Jaguar is much like walking into some of the better-preserved public rooms at the Royal Geographic Society. You have the feeling that any number of important personages have been there before you and that none of them raised his voice or otherwise behaved badly. With the exception of a Rolls-Royce or a Bentley, a Jaguar is the only car that might get away with selling memberships to well-heeled harrumphers. There are some problems with the 1989 interior, however. Pushing past the shade of Joseph Lucas and into the elec­tronic age, Jaguar has fabricated an in­strument layout that is truly peculiar. Gone are the wonderful clock-sized in­struments, replaced by two dials about the diameter of a crumpet staring blankly back at you. A full complement of elec­tronic displays flanks the dials. Grafted onto the steering column are some more controls, looking every inch the add-ons they are. These are not terminally off­-putting, mind you, but they are anything but harmonious with the Jaguar’s overall aura of tasteful luxury. Our other objection to the interior is one we found ourselves sitting on. The seats, never overbolstered to begin with, were at least snugly comfortable before. The new editions are as flat as a park bench and just about as yielding—both beneath you and behind you. The seats are not uncomfortable, not at all, but they are discomfiting in that one never feels quite one with the car when sitting on them. That, in fact, sums up the situa­tion: one tends to sit on the seats rather than in them. Probably an owner would quickly get used to the seats, and if such an owner were not prone to unseemly hard cornering they would present no problems. But we were, to coin a phrase, more comfortable with the old ones. Otherwise, the quality of the materials inside remains as top­-notch as ever. The generous use of wood, fine hides, and cut-pile wool car­peting results in an environment that’s as rewarding to occupy as a $1500 custom­-built Harris Tweed jacket. Driving the Vanden Plas, with its new­found low-range punch, no longer sub­jects you to traffic-light embarrassment. And the Jaguar blend of luxurious ride and surprisingly competent handling continues to be among the better driving experiences the luxury-car world offers to the fiscally fortunate. The fully independent suspension maintains its composure under duress, while under nor­mal driving conditions it provides a ride that’s smooth without being overly soft. As noted, the Vanden Plas now gets out of its own way with considerable aplomb, and it will cruise effortlessly at speeds that have “ticket” written all over them. The brakes, four discs, are confidence-­inspiring to use. They will bring the Vanden Plas to a stop from 70 mph in a smart 182 feet and, in our experience, are fade-free. The Teves anti-lock brak­ing system also serves to make emergen­cy braking less stressful. More Jaguar Reviews From the ArchiveFor a luxury car—or any car, for that matter—the Vanden Plas communicates the same spirit of driver involvement that we suspect William Lyons had in mind when he introduced the Jaguar SS 2.7 sa­loon in 1935. Though the Jaguar Vanden Plas may not be at the cutting edge of sedan tech­nology—being light-years behind the BMW 750iL, to cite one bit of evidence—it nonetheless delivers traditional Jaguar luxury, more than adequate perfor­mance, and an indefinable aura of respectability. And it does so at what those for whom it is intended would consider a fair-enough price. SpecificationsSpecifications
1989 Jaguar Vanden PlasVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $48,500/$48,500
ENGINEDOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 219 in3, 3590 cm3Power: 195 hp @ 5000 rpmTorque: 232 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 11.6-in vented disc/10.9-in discTires: Pirelli P5 Cinturato205/70VR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.0 inLength: 196.4 inWidth: 78.9 inHeight: 54.3 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 51/40 ft3Trunk Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight: 3965 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.8 sec1/4-Mile: 16.6 sec @ 85 mph100 mph: 26.1 sec120 mph: 55.3 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.9 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.5 secTop Speed: 130 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.76 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 18 mpg 
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 17/23 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDContributing EditorWilliam Jeanes is a former editor-in-chief and publisher of Car and Driver. He and his wife, Susan, a former art director at Car and Driver, are now living in Madison, Mississippi. More

With an overabundance of power and near-silent operation, electric propulsion seems perfectly suited to ultraluxury vehicles. We’ve just had the opportunity to drive the latest demonstration: the 2024 Mercedes-Maybach EQS SUV. It joins the 2024 Rolls-Royce Spectre coupe as we await the debut of Bentley’s first EV in a year or two.As the name implies, the Mercedes-Maybach EQS SUV is based on the existing Mercedes-Benz EQS SUV and embellished heavily with every luxury touch the engineers and designers could muster. As with previous Maybach vehicles dating to the 2002 revival, one can see the Mercedes-Benz on which it is based, but there are also plenty of distinctive Maybach styling touches to set it apart.The closed-off grille features thin vertical chrome strakes that cascade down to the actual air inlet below. A Mercedes three-pointed star stands proudly on the fixed hood, with a subtle Maybach badge just underneath. Other Maybach logos are scattered about the exterior. A two-tone paint scheme adds some old-school presence, and there are also monotone choices for the less extroverted. Wheels play a major role in the visual impact. The substantial monoblock-type wheels will certainly be popular with some traditionalists, while a lacelike option made up of small Maybach logos could be a hit with new-money clients.The Maybach EQS SUV’s appearance is heavily dependent on how the client specs it. With more conservative colors and wheels, the Maybach easily plays the part of a chauffeur-driven conveyance for a wealthy industrialist. Get wilder with the choices, and it would be right at home in the latest hip-hop video. Inside, the Maybach continues its theme of embellished familiarity. The massive glass Hyperscreen dashboard is standard, with some Maybach-specific elements in the display. Elsewhere, the enhancements come by way of features and materials. Nearly every surface is covered in premium leather that is “sustainably processed,” with coffee-bean shells used as tanning agents. We actually had to hunt for exposed plastic and found it underneath the door armrest. Rich open-pore wood trim elements are a joy to the eyes, and even the pedals are finished in knurled metal.The rear compartment shows the greatest differentiation from the Mercedes version. The third rows of seats is jettisoned, and the luggage compartment walled off. Order the individual rear seats (a bench-seat configuration is also available), and they’re separated by sweeping center console that extends forward. The seats are generously cushioned to cradle riders. Our loaded Maybach with the available Executive Rear Seat Package Plus enhanced the experience with massaging calf rests, folding tray tables, and heated and cooled cupholders. There’s also a refrigerated compartment and optional silver champagne flutes that have their own special holders in the console.Each rear passenger has their own 11.6-inch entertainment screen mounted on the front seatback. The screens can be operated by touch, which can be a bit of a reach during reclining. A detachable mini tablet controller in the console solves that issue. Reclining the right rear seat is a one-touch affair: Just tap a button to set in motion a complex series of power actuators. The front seat slides and tilts all the way forward while the headrest tucks down; meanwhile, the rear seat is gracefully easing back as the footrests move into place.In full recline, you can bask in a bubble of calm, watching through the expansive panoramic sunroof as trees or skyscrapers file past. The cabin remains peacefully quiet, with no boominess or road noise thanks to the sound isolation the sealed-off cargo area provides. Related StoriesThis allows the standard 15-speaker Burmester audio system to demonstrate its full potential. With Dolby Atmos processing, the audio quality is noticeably clear and powerful, lending a new dimension to familiar songs. Built into the seats are two exciters that produce a thump with the subwoofer, allowing you to feel the music with intensity adjustable from subtle to strong.All of this points to the Mercedes-Maybach EQS SUV being a truly great limousine, but how is it from the driver’s seat? With 649 horsepower and 700 lb-ft of torque, you certainly won’t be wanting for power. Mercedes says the SUV flashes to 60 mph in 4.1 seconds, but given that Benz’s 536-hp EQS580 SUV model can hit that mark in 4.0 seconds, we reckon the Maybach will prove to be several tenths of a second quicker when we get it to the test track.That’s impressive for a big SUV that weighs more than 6000 pounds, and you definitely feel that mass. On a hard launch, the rear end squats, and the front lifts as if to exclaim “Giddyap!” With moderate to heavy braking, the nose dips significantly, but the vehicle remains very planted and stable.There’s also plenty of body roll in the curves, and you’ll occasionally feel some residual rebounds from larger bumps. This softness doesn’t encourage sporty driving, and selecting a stiffer suspension setting has only a minor effect. Granted, the Maybach EQS SUV isn’t intended to be sporty, and this pillowy ride seems appropriate for comfort-minded clients. The vehicle is thoroughly enjoyable to drive, and performing silky-smooth limo stops is easy. And like the standard EQS, it’s also unusually maneuverable thanks to rear-wheel steering with up to 10 degrees of deflection.Of course, for an EV, charging and range are vitally important. With its 107.8-kWh battery pack, the Maybach EQS SUV has a range estimated at 372 miles using the optimistic European WLTP standard. But using EPA methodology, that estimate should fall closer to the 285 miles that lesser EQS SUV 4Matic models are rated for. When you need replenishment midtrip, the Maybach is capable of DC fast-charging at up to 200 kW, which should get the from 10 to 80 percent capacity in 31 minutes.Altogether, the Maybach EQS SUV is one of the most luxurious EVs available. Like the Rolls-Royce Spectre, it demonstrates that electricity greatly enhances the luxury experience with silence and smoothness, but the Maybach offers much more interior space. And we estimate that the Maybach will start at around $200,000, making it about half the cost of the Rolls. The Maybach EQS SUV demonstrates that electric propulsion meshes perfectly with this brand’s ethos. SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Mercedes-Maybach EQS SUVVehicle Type: front- and mid-motor, all-wheel-drive, 4- or 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE (C/D EST)
Base: $200,000
POWERTRAIN
Motors: permanent-magnet synchronous AC Combined Power: 649 hpCombined Torque: 700 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 107.8 kWhOnboard Charger: 9.6 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 200 kWTransmissions, F/R: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 126.4 inLength: 201.8 inWidth: 80.1 inHeight: 67.8 inCargo Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 6700 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.5 sec100 mph: 9.2 sec1/4-Mile: 12.0 secTop Speed: 130 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 74/77/72 MPGeRange: 270 miContributing EditorWith a background in design and open-wheel racing, Mark Takahashi got his foot in the door as an art director on car and motorcycle magazines. He parlayed that into a career as an automotive journalist and has reviewed thousands of vehicles over the past few decades. More

From the February 1995 issue of Car and Driver.Please continue reading while we observe a moment of silence for the Nissan Sentra SE-R. At the thin-wallet end of the spectrum, the SE-R was rare metal. Cheap, with X­-Acto handling and an unadorned shape plain to the trained cop eye. It virtually reinvented the inexpensive sports sedan­—on BMW terms, in Japanese quality, at an American price. We gushed, foamed, and put it on five Ten Best lists. And most of you ignored it. You called and wrote “What’s a good car for under $15,000?” We answered with three letters: SE-R. You said, “What else?” HIGHS: Spirit-awakening four­-cylinder, five-speed joystick, smart and functional cockpit. As Sam Kinison would scream, “Thanks a lot, guys!” It’s gone. You might still find one, but Nissan built the last of the Sentra SE-Rs on a buggy June day in Tennessee. Or you might hold your collective breath—as we did—and hope that the replacement would be as lively and endearing and cheap as the Sentra SE-R. Lucky for you, the second act on Nissan’s Sentra-based playbill is nearly as enter­taining as the first one. The 200SX SE-R is the most sporting of the fourth generation of Sentras, filling the hole left by the dearly departed. The new name recalls the low-buck, high­-performance Nissan coupes from the mid-­Eighties, married to the glossy image of the recent SE-R. This palimony agreement neatly divorces two distinct models, allow­ing the two-door 200SX to get on with its life and go after younger, sportier buyers with minimal assets.You can’t deny roots, though. Like it or not, the SE-R remains based on the frugal Sentra, now in its fourth iteration. And for the fourth time around, Nissan has given more thought to increasing the Sentra’s rear-seat room and to reducing the gush of cash it takes to pop out some 200,000 cars a year. Both of these goals have direct effects on the perfor­mance and handling of the related SE-R. The lovingly con­structed powertrain is nearly untouched. The SE-R is still propelled by an expensive-feeling, very-expensive-to-build 140-horsepower 2.0-liter four. (The base 200SX and the mid-line SE model host the likable 1.6-liter four from the last Sentra, pumped up to 115 horsepower.) We’re not sure that there has ever been another four-cylinder engine with as much verve and slickness as this one. It races ahead of you to reach the redline, waiting happily there until you realize it’s time to stop that mechanical childishness and shift.When you do, you engage a five-speed that might have been lifted intact from the best arcade games, so light and correct and intentional are its movement through its ratios. Swapping gears here is a fun job, much like being pool boy at the Playboy mansion cabana (minus the risk of finding Hef’s toupee in the skimmer, of course). If you choose not to shift, you will notice that the engine’s remarkable flexi­bility remains. If anything, the new appli­cation has quieted the last minor roar from the rhythmic beating of the four-cylinder. A stiffer body structure is responsible for the quietness—full throttle creates only 76 dBA of whining music, compared with the 82 dBA in the older car.LOWS: Off-the-rack styling, occasionally knotty ride. A whit of performance may have been lost somewhere between generations, kind of like William Shatner’s formerly virile physique. The 200SX SE-R we sampled­—one of eight in the country as we write—hit 60 mph in 8.0 seconds, four-tenths slower than the former SE-R. Odd, because the new car weighs 23 pounds less than last year’s model (even with standard dual airbags and side-impact protection). We have a hunch that the light dip in the numbers is due to both the prototype status of our tester and to the new model’s 7100-rpm redline, which is 400 rpm lower than before (for emissions reasons). Quite intentionally, top speed has plunged, despite the similar weight and the more favorable aerodynamics of the 200SX. Nissan and the insurance companies appar­ently agree that keeping things down to 109 mph (from 124 mph) is politically correct. It may be the only case of a Democratic gov­ernor picking up work this year.More noticeable is the evolution of the SE-R’s underpinnings, away from mechan­ical exactitude to a simpler, cost-effective solution. The front wheels are still con­trolled by MacPherson struts and an anti­-roll bar, but the pairs of links that guided the old SE-R’s rear wheels have been replaced. Borrowing from the new Maxima, Nissan engineers worked up a beam axle with trailing arms, a Panhard rod, and a unique sliding link that connects to the axle at its midpoint. This arrangement cancels the jacking effect common to Panhard-rod setups. Nissan calls the arrangement a “multilink beam” and claims that it’s a better compromise than a completely inde­pendent rear suspension because (a) it’s more compact, freeing up rear-seat and trunk room; (b) it’s lighter; and (c) it has fewer moving parts and mounting points, making it cheaper to build and quieter on the road. Is Camelot lost? The handling differ­ences between the former SE-R and the 200SX are evident but not too bother­some. The hybrid beam-axle rear suspen­sion doesn’t absorb one-wheel bumps as easily as the previous SE-R, but it does offer more grip. It rides softer because the uniform motion of the rear axle allowed engineers to put some slack back in the springs and bushings. But it seems more reluctant to turn in, which might be blamed on the four-inch increase in wheelbase.Except for the infrequent harsh motions induced by tar strips, the 200SX SE-R rides smoothly for a car of its size. And a magnitude jump to 15-inch, 55-series tires (with a little help from the flat cornering motions of the rear axle) boosts lateral grip to 0.85 g, versus the 0.80 g we measured for the previous SE-R. Some cornering transitions are less settled than in its rail-riding predecessor, but mostly the new SE-R is eager to attack favorite stretches of two-lane road. Along those same lines go the brakes­—although they feel softer, they deliver slightly more stopping power. The 200SX SE-R brought itself down from 70 mph in 182 feet, four feet shorter than before. Anti-lock control is optional on the SE-R and 200SX SE models but is unavailable on the base 200SX. You’ll recognize the new duds before you can catalog the dynamics, and it’s on that basis that Nissan thinks it can sell 40,000 200SXs a year. Agreed, the former Sentra two-doors were plainer than North Dakota, but they had a certain elemental, ascetic appeal. The 200SX is less plain but not necessarily more attractive. We see a lot of different cars in its me-too two-door form—Thunderbirds, Accords, even Infiniti’s G20 (no surprise, really, since the Nissan was styled in the same Japanese studio as the G20). From its corporate face to its sloping trunkline snatched from the Altima, the 200SX is in need of some styling inspiration. A little ’95 Fiat Coupe, perhaps. The interior is very little changed, with the same functional switches and gauges now nestled in finer-grain plastic surrounds. Somehow, the inside works better than the outside. It’s black and stark—not unlike how BMW might outfit a $16,500 sedan—with smooth but straight-edged forms, clearly arranged controls, and a well-placed four-spoke steering wheel. The front seats are comfortable and sup­portive, and the new passenger airbag hasn’t displaced the glovebox. More Nissan Reviews From the ArchiveThe more flowing look liberates a lit­tle more rear-seat room, but not as much as we expected. Headroom has actually dropped, by more than an inch, to give the stylists some freedom to drape the C-pil­lar artfully. The car has gained 4.1 inches of wheelbase, but only 0.5 inch goes to gapping out vital knee room in the back. In all, the rear seats don’t seem usefully larger than the old ones, although they split and fold to swallow large packages. But by the numbers for shoulder, leg, and hip room, the 200SX SE-R is roomier in back than two-door Civics, Saturns, and Integras. You might have assumed by now, what with all the constant comparison, that we adored the Sentra SE-R. You would be correct. Buckling into its sport seat was like tightening the laces on a runner’s shoe. VERDICT: A lively successor to the dearly departed. What Nissan has wrought with a rethunk suspension and (supposedly) sex­ier styling is more mainstream than that paragon. The 200SX’s appeal may be broader than the old SE-R’s, but it’s also less intense. Does a Nissan still reign atop the mid­-priced pack of sporting two-doors? We’ll let you know in next month’s compari­son test. SpecificationsSpecifications
1995 Nissan 200SX SE-RVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE (ESTIMATED)
Base/As Tested: $15,800/$17,400
ENGINEDOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1998 cm3Power: 140 hp @ 6400 rpmTorque: 132 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 9.9-in vented disc/9.3-in discTires: Goodyear Eagle RS-A M+S195/55VR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 99.8 inLength: 170.1 inWidth: 66.6 inHeight: 54.2 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 50/34 ft3Trunk Volume: 10 ft3Curb Weight: 2588 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.0 sec1/4-Mile: 16.1 sec @ 83 mph100 mph: 27.2 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.7 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 10.5 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 11.3 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 109 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.85 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 26 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 24/31 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

All roads may lead to Rome, but that doesn’t mean each route is the same. Take, for example, the 2023 Jeep Compass and the 2024 Chevrolet Trax. These two subcompact SUVs are sized within a few of inches of one another, yet nearly every other aspect for comparison—from powertrain to price—highlights how wildly divergent the utes are.The Jeep Compass is hot off a mid-cycle refresh that extended into a second year, at which point its tired old 2.4-liter inline-four was rightfully jettisoned in favor of a perkier 2.0-liter turbo four. The Chevy Trax isn’t just refreshed, it’s brand spanking new, retooled from soup to nuts in pursuit of not being the rolling box of sadness it was in iterations prior. Is it still a stinker? Read on to find out.2nd Place: 2023 Jeep CompassWhen we first tested a well-equipped Compass Latitude model earlier this year, we walked away impressed with its newfound power and improved aesthetics. The base Sport variant you see here isn’t as well equipped, but the fundamentals are the same, and they’re still worthy of commendation.HIGHS: Standard AWD across the lineup, zippier than the Trax.LOWS: Piles on the poundage, big price penalty.VERDICT: Just because the Compass is better than before doesn’t mean it’s the best.Under the hood is a new turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four, making a solid 200 horsepower and 221 pound-feet of torque, urge that is sent to all four wheels through an eight-speed automatic no matter the trim. Against the stopwatch, the Latitude (we weren’t able to test the Sport) molly-whopped the three-cylinder Trax. The Compass needed 7.5 seconds to reach 60 mph, while the Trax required 8.8. At 15.8 seconds to the quarter-mile mark, the Jeep got to rest on its laurels for a whole second while the Chevy played catch-up. And the Compass’s responsive engine means that the leap from 5 to 60 mph takes only 0.4 second longer than a standing start.As for how the Compass drives, most editors opined, simply, “It’s fine.” Around our 10Best loop, the logbook entries remarked on the Jeep’s quiet practicality and decent, if uninspiring, handling. The base Sport model, perhaps ironically, lacked a Sport mode to firm up throttle response, leaving it in a perpetual commuter-oriented mood. Nearly everyone agreed it’d be happier in the dirt, where its all-wheel drive would be more of an advantage. If you don’t like the Trax’s wagon-ish silhouette, the Jeep’s more upright SUV form provides a nice counterbalance. The Compass roofline does lend an airier feeling for taller occupants, and we think the cabin is pleasant all around, with a clever use of warmer fabrics in place of the usual cheap-car piano-black plastic. The second row earned high marks for offering vents and outlets, which is not always a given at this price point. However, the all-wheel-drive hardware and lots of cabin features can pile on the pounds; despite having a shorter wheelbase and overall length than the Trax, at 3717 pounds the Compass is a whopping 648 pounds heavier than the Chevy. In spite of that porcine curb weight, the Compass proved surprisingly efficient. On our 200-mile, 75-mph highway fuel economy loop, the Compass returned 31 mpg—one mpg below its EPA estimate and one mpg above the lighter front-drive Trax.One arena where the Compass and Trax are far apart is price. A base Compass Sport demands no less than $29,995, $8500 more than a base Trax. That’s also $3310 more than our Activ-trim test car, which was nearly fully loaded.1st Place: 2024 Chevy TraxDespite being lower, longer, and wider than the old Trax, this new front-drive-only model aims to maximize thrift by downsizing its engine and—extremely uncommon for the industry—its price tag. That places this urban runabout atop a mountain of value that the Jeep simply cannot scale, even if the Compass leaves the Trax in its dust on the way up.Whether you want to ascribe it to the lack of available all-wheel drive, the missing cylinder underhood, or perhaps off-label Ozempic use, the Trax crossed our scales at a svelte 3069 pounds. That certainly helped its fleetness around our skidpad, where it achieved 0.84 g of stick, 0.03 g better than the Compass. It aided braking as well; the Chevy required 180 feet to clamp down from 70 mph, while the Jeep needed an additional 15 feet.HIGHS: Impressive bang for the buck, flat rear floor is a welcome addition, it’s giving tall-wagon vibes.LOWS: No hustle whatsoever, no back-seat climate vents.VERDICT: It may never win a race, but there’s no denying the Trax’s greatness on raw value alone.As you might expect, the Trax doesn’t have a whole lot of motivation underfoot. Its turbocharged 1.2-liter three-cylinder makes a paltry 137 horsepower and 162 pound-feet of torque, all of which is routed forward through a six-speed automatic transmission. Our testing revealed a 60-mph time of 8.8 seconds, with the quarter-mile requiring 16.8 seconds. Some drivers called the six-speed slushbox pokey, which tracks with the 9.5-second run from 5 to 60 mph. Passing maneuvers aren’t much better; going from 50 to 70 mph takes a chelonian 6.4 seconds.The Trax deserves some credit for its around-town quietness. At idle, we recorded just 37 decibels of clamor, well under the Compass’s 43-dBA result. Its logbook showed sufficiently high praise for its on-road demeanor. Technical editor Mike Sutton said the Trax is “[n]ever exciting but composed and competent all-around.”If you enjoy the Chevy’s carlike handling, you’ll probably also appreciate its wagon-ish aesthetic. The Trax’s top Activ trim doesn’t do much to the outside, other than adding black 18-inch wheels, but it throws some fun yellow accents into the cabin mix. We’re big fans of Chevy’s latest infotainment software, and the dashboard touchscreen looks good nestled against the gauge-display binnacle—it’s leagues prettier than the dashboard on its Buick Envista platform-mate. The Trax loses some points for lacking full rear-seat accouterments—namely, A/C vents—and some of its plastics are almost insultingly hard, but the lack of all-wheel drive means Chevy had no problem flattening the rear floor, which is a huge boon for running three-abreast.Most of the Trax’s issues are forgiven once price enters the conversation. The cheapest Trax will run you $21,495, but the $24,995 Activ trim throws a whole bunch of great equipment into the fray, including an 11.0-inch center touchscreen, keyless entry and start, and a heated steering wheel. Our test car added on a sunroof, inductive device charging, and a $795 Driver Confidence package that includes blind-spot monitoring and adaptive cruise control; yet, at $26,685, it’s still thousands cheaper than even the barest-boned Compass. That’s a tough deal to beat.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Chevrolet TraxVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $21,495/$26,685Options: Activ trim (keyless entry, push-button start, heated steering wheel, body-color grille insert, black mirror caps, 18-inch wheels, 11.0-inch infotainment touchscreen, six-speaker stereo, 8.0-inch digital instrument cluster, eight-way power driver’s seat), $3500; Sunroof package (power sliding sunroof and inductive phone charging), $895; Driver Confidence package (rear cross traffic, lane-change and blind-sport alert, adaptive cruise control), $795
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 12-valve inline-3, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 73 in3, 1193 cm3Power: 137 hp @ 5000 rpmTorque: 162 lb-ft @ 2500 rpm
TRANSMISSION
6-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/torsion beamBrakes, F/R: 11.8-in vented disc/10.6-in discTires: Goodyear Assurance Finesse225/55R-18 98H M+S TPC 3179MS
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 106.3 inLength: 178.6 inWidth: 71.8 inHeight: 61.4 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54/44 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 54/26 ft3Curb Weight: 3069 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.8 sec1/4-Mile: 16.8 sec @ 81 mph100 mph: 30.5 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.4 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 9.5 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.8 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 6.4 secTop Speed (C/D est): 115 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 180 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.84 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 25 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 30 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 390 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 30/28/32 mpg
—
2023 Jeep Compass 4X4Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $29,995/$41,270
Options: Latitude trim, $3995; Sun and Sound group (Alpine stereo, panoramic roof), $2695; Convenience group (remote start system, auto dimming rearview mirror, heated steering wheel and front seats, wiper de-icer, eight-way power driver seat, power liftgate), $2095; Driver Assistance group (adaptive cruise control, surround-view camera system, inductive charging pad, automatic wipers), $1895; Sting-Gray Clearcoat paint, $595
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection
Displacement: 122 in3, 1995 cm3
Power: 200 hp @ 5000 rpm
Torque: 221 lb-ft @ 1750 rpm
TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilink
Brakes, F/R: 12.0-in vented disc/10.9-in disc
Tires: Firestone Destination LE2
225/60R-17 99T M+S
DIMENSIONSWheelbase: 103.8 in
Length: 173.4 in
Width: 73.8 inHeight: 64.6 in
Passenger Volume, F/R: 52/47 ft3
Cargo Volume, Behind F/R: 60/27 ft3
Curb Weight: 3717 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.5 sec
1/4-Mile: 15.8 sec @ 89 mph
100 mph: 20.8 sec
Results above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.9 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.4 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 5.4 sec
Top Speed (C/D est): 118 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 195 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.81 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 23 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 410 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 27/24/32 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 January 1996 issue of Car and Driver.After years of denial, the manage­ment at Cadillac has finally real­ized that baby boomers will not automatically mutate into Sedan De Ville buyers should they live long enough to become prosperous and middle-aged. Many of us born after WWII reached maturity at a time when size and ostenta­tion were replaced as automotive virtues by performance, technology, and refine­ment. In other words, we became import buyers. That’s why the average age of today’s Cadillac customers is 62. To help bring that average down, Cadillac will begin selling a new model this fall called the Catera—a genuine import based on Opel’s Omega, the largest and most expensive sedan produced by the German car company that General Motors purchased back in 1929. The Omega was introduced in Europe in 1994, and its size and specification put it in league with 5-series BMWs and E-class Mercedes—precisely the market segment where Cadillac is weakest.In proper Germanic fashion, the Catera employs a front-mounted engine driving its rear wheels, a configuration shunned by domestic sedans in this size and price class. It’s also rather compact by Amer­ican luxury-car standards, measuring 193.8 inches long and 70.3 inches wide. That splits the difference between the Infiniti J30 and the Lexus GS300. Under the Catera’s hood is the same double-overhead-cam, 24-valve 3.0-liter V-6 that has been propelling Saab 9000s since last year. It has an unconventional 54-degree cylinder-bank angle rather than the usual 60 degrees, so the engine fits in Opel’s smaller Vectra sedan. For use in the Catera, Opel and Cadillac engineers recal­ibrated this engine to produce more low-­end torque and to satisfy the latest emission and OBD II requirements. Output, however, is only slightly reduced from the European version, to 200 hp at 6000 rpm and 192 pound-feet of torque at 3600 rpm.The engine works in partnership with a GM THM Rl-AR35 electronically con­trolled four-speed automatic transmission. Dubbed the Strasbourg transmission in honor of the city in which it’s built, it is used not only by GM but also by BMW, which buys 90,000 of them every year. In the Catera, this gearbox comes with a choice of economy, performance, and winter shift schedules, and it coordinates with the engine-management system to modulate power as needed to provide smooth shifts. The Catera carries over the Omega’s four-wheel independent suspension, using struts in the front and semi-trailing arms upgraded with toe-control links in the rear. Rubber-isolated subframes, coil springs, and anti-roll bars are fitted at both ends, with automatic leveling in the rear to keep the Catera on an even keel regardless of load. Naturally enough for a car developed on Germany’s autobahns, the Catera has four-wheel disc brakes with anti-lock con­trol. It is also equipped with traction con­trol, though it can only reduce engine power to limit wheelspin. A more sophis­ticated system that can also apply the brakes is in the works. This collection of up-to-date hardware is clothed in the subdued bodywork indige­nous to European executive sedans. In Catera form, these lines are accented with a Cadillac-pattern grille (finished in black chrome and fitted with the classic wreath­-and-crest emblem), a new tail section with full-width taillights and a nicely integrated center brake light, revised rocker and body-side moldings, and new wheels mounted with 16-inch all-season tires. The overall visual effect is clean and tasteful, if not captivating. Inside, the Catera feels sumptuous and roomy. Front-seat occupants find a hand­some, well-organized dashboard with a sound system that looks to be custom-tai­lored to match the center console, just as the systems are in various Lexus models. Leather upholstery covers the door panels as well as the seats, and soft pockets cushion your elbows at the points at which they contact the doors. The supportive seats have dual-segment lumbar adjustment. And, of course, twin cupholders have been added for the U.S. market. The back seat is equally impressive. There’s plenty of head and leg room, including space to wiggle your feet under­neath the front seats. Passengers sit chair­-high with supportive cushions and can be separated by a nice fold-down central arm­rest. Climate-control vents open out of the back of the central console. This rear com­partment is very much in the mid-line BMW and Mercedes class. In keeping with the more active lifestyles of today’s boomers, the Catera has been designed to swallow a wide range of cargo. Extending the usefulness of its 17-cubic-foot trunk, the Catera is the first Cadillac with a fold-down rear seat; the left, right, and center sections deploy sep­arately to best match your people/cargo needs. The backrest of the right-front seat also folds forward until it is flat, leaving room for two-by-fours or windsurfer masts to stretch from the dashboard to the back of the trunk.Along with its talents as a beast of burden, the Catera has the European driving feel that we expect from a car engineered in the heart of Germany. The body seems tight and solid. The ride is well controlled and very firm. The steering has the precise and accurate action that makes carving up narrow European country roads so satisfying. At top speed on the autobahn, this Cadillac feels sub­limely secure and un­stressed.That top speed is only 125 mph, however—electroni­cally limited for the sake of the Catera’s all-season tires. Euro­pean Omegas can reach 140 mph. At the other end of the per­formance spectrum, Cadillac promises that the Catera will accel­erate from 0 to 60 mph in about 8.5 seconds, and that feels about right. Despite the 154 pounds added by its various modifications, the 3800-pound Catera feels reasonably peppy from rest, thanks to the V-6’s enhanced low-end torque and the shorter ratios in first and second gears. Even so, an aggressive driver will tend to work this smallish engine rather hard—­and when flogged, the V-6 doesn’t sing with quite the happy tones of a BMW six. But the transmission is quick to supply downshifts when needed, and it changes gears unobtrusively during mild driving. Customers not seeking a dedicated sports sedan will find little to fault in the Catera’s powertrain. The Catera will come well equipped, with all of the usual power options, including express down and up power windows, automatic climate control with separate temperature control for driver and passenger, and a remote keyless-­entry system—virtually mandatory because neither the passenger door nor the trunklid is fitted with a keyhole. Customers buying luxury cars tend to place a high value on their personal safety, so the Catera has dual airbags, devices to grab firmly and actually tighten the front belts in a collision, ratch­eting belts to secure child-safety seats, and a passing grade on federal side­impact standards. The Catera’s anticipated base price of $33,000 tells us Cadillac has learned from its Allanté experience that newcomers in a market should price aggressively. At this price, the Catera undercuts almost all comparably sized competitors.More Cadillac Reviews From the ArchiveThose attracted by the Catera’s value will likely find satisfaction in the driving experience it provides. And when the Catera replaces the Fleetwood in Cadillac’s lineup next fall, it will shift the division’s center of gravity a long way from traditional to contemporary. It’s about time.SpecificationsSpecifications
1996 Cadillac CateraVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base (est.): $33,000
ENGINEDOHC 24-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 181 in3, 2962 cm3Power: 200 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque: 192 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.4 inLength: 193.8 inWidth: 70.3 inHeight: 57.4 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 52/45 ft3Trunk Volume: 17 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3800 lb
MANUFACTURER’S PERFORMANCE RATINGS
60 mph: 8.5 secTop Speed (governor limited): 125 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)City/Highway: 17/24 mpg Contributing EditorCsaba Csere joined Car and Driver in 1980 and never really left. After serving as Technical Editor and Director, he was Editor-in-Chief from 1993 until his retirement from active duty in 2008. He continues to dabble in automotive journalism and LeMons racing, as well as ministering to his 1965 Jaguar E-type, 2017 Porsche 911, and trio of motorcycles—when not skiing or hiking near his home in Colorado.  More

It’d be a mistake to write off the 2024 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 Bison as a regular ZR2 dressed up with special AEV wheels, fortified front and rear AEV bumpers, a plethora of boron-steel skidplates, and some AEV badges. But we wouldn’t fault you if you did. That was, after all, the formula for the first-generation Colorado ZR2, and that template was similarly applied to the Silverado 1500 ZR2 and 2500HD ZR2. There’s a shared reason for this: The ZR2 treatment was not part of the design brief when those trucks were initially conceived. The second generation of the Colorado ZR2 is different. It was developed with the full knowledge that a ZR2 was already wildly popular. That opened the door for the more foundational changes we saw when we first sampled the truck in a three-day blast across the Nevada desert: a front axle shifted forward relative to the cab to accommodate larger tires and the signature Multimatic DSSV shocks moved outboard of the leaf springs, where they rightfully belonged. But these tweaks didn’t just improve the Colorado ZR2’s performance, they also opened the door for a more extreme ZR2 Bison.A More Extreme BisonMassive 35-inch tires replace the ZR2’s already-embiggened 33-inch rubber, which proves that moving the front axle forward was done with the Bison in mind. But it took more to accommodate those big fellas, so Chevy resculpted the fender liners and jacked up the suspension a half-inch. That lift and the extra inch of tire radius increase ground clearance from 10.7 inches to 12.2 inches. The Bison’s LT315 tires are also 1.2 inches fatter, so the offset of its 17-by-8.5-inch wheels was shifted outward almost a half-inch to keep the insides from rubbing. Combine those facts and you get a 0.9 inch wider track and an outer sidewall-to-sidewall width increase of some 2.1 inches. Consequently, the ZR2 Bison is fitted with more protuberant fender flares that give it an 80.1-inch width that exceeds the ZR2 by 2.0 inches and imbues it with a meaner stance.Hidden behind those tires is a Colorado Bison exclusive: hydraulic jounce bumpers—or, as we might call them, “bump stops supreme”—at all four corners. They come from Multimatic, the same outfit that makes the ZR2’s spool-valve dampers. In normal circumstances, a shock retune would be recommended when larger and heavier tires are fitted, but the hydraulic jounce bumpers open new doors that make that a necessity. You essentially get an extra stage of dedicated compression damping, and both elements must be tuned to complement one another. The Bison’s Multimatics don’t offer any more overall suspension travel, but they also don’t have any less, and their midpoint was adjusted so the compression/rebound split was preserved.Driving the Colorado ZR2 BisonPounding across the wavy whoop-de-doos in the open California desert, the ZR2 Bison absolutely proves that it’s worth it. We could carry more speed into gnarlier whoop sections, and it gobbled them ravenously. Sure, the lack of extra travel ultimately limited how hard we could push, but the hydraulic jounce bumpers absolutely stuck the landings and soaked up bigger hits with much more progressive fluidity. The only downside—and it barely was one—was the slight click we could hear when the plungers of the front pair contacted the lower control arms, as they are meant to do in normal operation on abnormally harsh terrain.Out among the rocks, the Bison was equally beastly. The extra ground clearance was a boon on daunting trails that featured jagged cooler-sized rocks spanning every product in the Yeti catalog. Yes, the rock rails scraped a few times, but that’s what they’re there for. Ditto the five boron-steel skidplates protecting the underbelly and differential. The front and rear AEV bumpers are tightly sculpted, but the rear corners could stand to offer more lower bedside protection, as on the Jeep Gladiator.As big tires typically do, the 35s tended to roll over holes that smaller tires might’ve gotten hung up on. The standard front and rear lockers stood at the ready, but the point at which we considered them was ratcheted way up. Should we have needed to air down to an extreme level, the Bison’s standard 17-inch AEV beadlock-capable wheels would have let us deflate even more than we did—provided we had the accessory beadlock rings fitted. The spare is a full-size matching unit, and because it won’t fit underneath, it’s mounted vertically in the bed. That compromises bed volume, but it improves the departure angle over the ZR2.With more time spent in the rocks, our initial enthusiasm about Terrain mode’s one-pedal crawling experience has cooled. It still has its place, but that place is not boulder-strewn trails on which the truck might teeter or the boulders might shift beneath you and make your throttle foot move inadvertently. It made for a jerky ride at times because we couldn’t keep our foot steady, which turns out to be more crucial when you’re using a comparatively sensitive throttle to control the brakes. Better to use Off-Road mode for rock crawling and save Terrain mode for smoother off-road creeping conditions like sandy two-tracks or Moab slickrock.Baja mode remains a favorite when the trails open up, and the relaxed stability control program that comes with it can also be fully shut off with a few stabs at the touchscreen. But its taller tires are not offset by shorter gearing, so the Bison doesn’t feel as punchy as a regular ZR2. The Bison package might feel a bit more eager if it had 3.73:1 gearing instead of the 3.42:1 final drive ratio that all ZR2s share. That wouldn’t likely raise its tow rating above 5500 pounds (versus 6000 for the regular ZR2), because the Bison shortfall is more about the extra weight of the truck itself, which Chevy says is some 300 pounds heavier than a regular ZR2.More ZR2 Family ValuesWill the Bison maintain the regular ZR2’s EPA fuel economy of 18 mpg combined (17 city/19 highway)? We doubt it on account of the Bison’s extra weight and the increased air and rolling resistance that come with a wider truck on fatter tires. We’re betting on a 1-mpg decrease across the board.Colorado ZR2 Bison Cost and ValueBut price is the bigger question, and we don’t have an answer for that because 2024 Colorado pricing has not yet been released. All we know is the 2023 Colorado ZR2 went for $48,295, and the last-generation ZR2 Bison option that didn’t have 35-inch rubber and trick jounce bumpers was priced at $5750. This more legit setup will surely cost more than that. If we guess $49,500 for the 2024 Colorado ZR2 and $7500 on top of that for the fortified Bison option, we’re staring at an estimated $57,000 for a new Colorado ZR2 Bison. That’s starting to feel like a lot of money for a mid-size pickup, but from where we just sat, the 2024 Chevy Colorado ZR2 Bison now delivers the extra performance and grittier appearance that makes the Bison badge absolutely worth it.Technical 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